Ranking the NFL backfields (Bengals #6)

[*PhilHos*]

(06-19-2015, 11:36 AM)djs7685 Wrote: It's just obnoxious to see the team getting some love from analysts and the media and people have to immediately put the foot down on the gas as quickly as they can. There's being reasonable and there's being ridiculous. IMO, calling them the best backfield or best duo in the NFL right now is ridiculous

While I may not agree that they're the best backfield, what's wrong with proclaiming they are when they're top 5-6? If someone wrote an article that claimed AJ was the 6th best WR, would you be just as upset if someone on here said they thought AJ was #1?

(06-19-2015, 11:36 AM)djs7685 Wrote:  You may disagree, but I'm still entitled to my very reasonable opinion that can be backed up with plenty of data.

You are most certainly entitled to that opinion whether it's backed up by data or not. Just as if someone thinks Hill and Gio are the top RB duo in the league is entitled to their opinion without you poo-pooing over it.

(06-19-2015, 11:36 AM)djs7685 Wrote: Over the top homerism annoys me (and I believe saying they're #1 is definitely homerism). It annoys you that I'm bothered by people acting like extreme homers. Different things annoy different people, such is life.

I agree saying they're #1 is homerism, but it's not over-the-top homerism is my point. Had this been a ranking of TEs and someone claimed ours was #1, I would have no problem with you trying to curtail their homerism. But, claiming a top 5 player(s)  (which you have admitted they are in your mind) to be #1 is NOT over-the-top homerism.

I'm not annoyed that you're bothered by people acting like extreme homers. I'm annoyed that you are bothered by ANY homerism.

[djs7685]

(06-19-2015, 11:52 AM)PhilHos Wrote: While I may not agree that they're the best backfield, what's wrong with proclaiming they are when they're top 5-6? If someone wrote an article that claimed AJ was the 6th best WR, would you be just as upset if someone on here said they thought AJ was #1?


You are most certainly entitled to that opinion whether it's backed up by data or not. Just as if someone thinks Hill and Gio are the top RB duo in the league is entitled to their opinion without you poo-pooing over it.


I agree saying they're #1 is homerism, but it's not over-the-top homerism is my point. Had this been a ranking of TEs and someone claimed ours was #1, I would have no problem with you trying to curtail their homerism. But, claiming a top 5 player(s)  (which you have admitted they are in your mind) to be #1 is NOT over-the-top homerism.

I'm not annoyed that you're bothered by people acting like extreme homers. I'm annoyed that you are bothered by ANY homerism.

Yes, A.J. is absolutely not the very best receiver in the league. It would definitely be what I would consider "over the top homerism" to claim that he is. Just like this, I think saying Hill/Bernard are #1 is over the top, you disagree, and that's fine.

It's a message board, if people are going to be upset about me "poo pooing" all over their opinion, then maybe they shouldn't post their opinion on a public forum. The internet is a crazy place, you aren't going to agree with everything that everybody says. You have a problem with me "poo pooing" and I think that's stupid, but you think it's stupid for me to be annoyed by blatant homerism. Again, around and around we go. Don't get all pissy about my poo-pooing without understanding that I have my own thoughts that differ from yours. Good job, you don't care about homerism, well I do. Get used to it.

You don't think it's over the top, but I do. Again, that's whatever you'd like to make of it, but I'm not going to change my stance because you say so.

I'm annoyed by homerism and you're not, congratulations. Don't you get annoyed by the "haters"?? Different strokes. I'm not a fan of people that I deem to be extremists in any way, whether it's homer or hater. We may have different definitions of what is extreme, but again, I'm not going to change my mind because Philhos said that I'm wrong about my opinions.

I feel that it's sort of ridiculous that I have to explain to adults why I'm putting my opinions on something on an internet message board that happen to differ with the opinions of another board member. You've been on message boards for how long? What I've said throughout this thread is very calm and rational compared to most forums on the web. I'd recommend staying around here if you don't want the big, mean internet monster to get you.

[*bfine32*]

Pittsburgh's Duo numbers last year:
Rushing: 352 carries for 1580 yards (4.49 YPC) and 8 TDs. Receiving: 88 catches 898 yards (10.2 YPC) 3 TDs

Cincy's Duo numbers last year:
Rushing: 390 carries for 1804 yards (4.62 YPC) and 14 TDs. Receiving: 70 catches 729 yards (10.4 YPC) 3 TDs

Why would one be an extreme homer to suggest Hill/Bernard were and will be a better Duo than an idiot Pothead and a 32 year old?

[djs7685]

(06-19-2015, 12:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Pittsburgh's Duo numbers last year:
Rushing: 352 carries for 1580 yards (4.49 YPC) and 8 TDs. Receiving: 88 catches 898 yards (10.2 YPC) 3 TDs

Cincy's Duo numbers last year:
Rushing: 390 carries for 1804 yards (4.62 YPC) and 14 TDs. Receiving: 70 catches 729 yards (10.4 YPC) 3 TDs

Why would one be an extreme homer to suggest Hill/Bernard were and will be a better Duo than an idiot Pothead and a 32 year old?

Lmfao, you just proved my point.

All of Pittsburgh's numbers minus about 200 rushing yards and 40 of the receiving yards come from Bell alone.

You're being foolish (and a homer) if you're going to pretend that's an apples to apples comparison when DeAngelo only had 60 carries last year.

That old man DeAngelo Williams posted 843 rushing and 333 receiving on 227 total touches in 2013, ya know, the last time he actually played instead of using his completely skewed 2014 numbers.

That "idiot pothead" is likely the best overall RB in the entire league, but nice try to downplay him because you don't agree with his recreational activities and he plays for the black and yellow.

[Brownshoe]

(06-19-2015, 01:13 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Lmfao, you just proved my point.

All of Pittsburgh's numbers minus about 200 rushing yards and 40 of the receiving yards come from Bell alone.

You're being foolish (and a homer) if you're going to pretend that's an apples to apples comparison when DeAngelo only had 60 carries last year.

That old man DeAngelo Williams posted 843 rushing and 333 receiving on 227 total touches in 2013, ya know, the last time he actually played instead of using his completely skewed 2014 numbers.

That "idiot pothead" is likely the best overall RB in the entire league, but nice try to downplay him because you don't agree with his recreational activities and he plays for the black and yellow.

So, you really believe that Williams is going to get that many attempts with Bell as their #1? If he is then that would cut down on Bell's #s. Yeah Bell is most likely better than Hill or Gio, but It's not about who has the best running back. It's about who has the best backfield. Plus Hill being our #1 will increase our yards even more.

[McC]

(06-19-2015, 01:13 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Lmfao, you just proved my point.

All of Pittsburgh's numbers minus about 200 rushing yards and 40 of the receiving yards come from Bell alone.

You're being foolish (and a homer) if you're going to pretend that's an apples to apples comparison when DeAngelo only had 60 carries last year.

That old man DeAngelo Williams posted 843 rushing and 333 receiving on 227 total touches in 2013, ya know, the last time he actually played instead of using his completely skewed 2014 numbers.

That "idiot pothead" is likely the best overall RB in the entire league, but nice try to downplay him because you don't agree with his recreational activities and he plays for the black and yellow.

Well, considering DeAngelo Williams is hurt basically every year and is now at the age where RB's fall off a cliff and Bell won't even play the first three games, it's not such a stretch. 

Also, I'm on board with having no problem with a little homerism.  What's the harm in it?

[djs7685]

(06-19-2015, 01:18 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: So, you really believe that Williams is going to get that many attempts with Bell as their #1? If he is then that would cut down on Bell's #s. Yeah Bell is most likely better than Hill or Gio, but It's not about who has the best running back. It's about who has the best backfield. Plus Hill being our #1 will increase our yards even more.

I never said that I think he's going to have that many attempts. I see that bfine was quick to have no issue using Williams extremely low numbers due to injury though.

I don't think a homer like bfine would like if I used that same logic when his favorite Bengals' players get injured.

(06-19-2015, 01:21 PM)McC Wrote: Well, considering DeAngelo Williams is hurt basically every year and is now at the age where RB's fall off a cliff and Bell won't even play the first three games, it's not such a stretch. 

Also, I'm on board with having no problem with a little homerism.  What's the harm in it?

Bell is still a better athlete and a better RB than almost anyone in the NFL, he just won't be compiling stats because he's a dumb dumb. For that reason, I'm glad Hill is on the team and not Bell. As a straight up who is better than who? Bell has the division on lockdown as of now, and probably the entire league as well. Homers can home about Hill and Bernard, but the throne isn't theirs quite yet.

Aaron Rodgers could be suspended for 16 straight games but that doesn't mean Johnny Manziel is a better QB because of it, does it?

[*bfine32*]

(06-19-2015, 01:13 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Lmfao, you just proved my point.

All of Pittsburgh's numbers minus about 200 rushing yards and 40 of the receiving yards come from Bell alone.

You're being foolish (and a homer) if you're going to pretend that's an apples to apples comparison when DeAngelo only had 60 carries last year.

That old man DeAngelo Williams posted 843 rushing and 333 receiving on 227 total touches in 2013, ya know, the last time he actually played instead of using his completely skewed 2014 numbers.

That "idiot pothead" is likely the best overall RB in the entire league, but nice try to downplay him because you don't agree with his recreational activities and he plays for the black and yellow.

Admittedly, I did a better job of proving your point than you did; even though it still falls far short.

So I am a "foolish homer" if I don't excuse that fact that a 32 year old RB might be breaking down?

I could have pointed to the uncertainy surrounding Bell by coming off a season ending injury and looming suspension, but I chose not to (must be the foolish homer in me)

Bell is not a idiot Pothead for smoking dope and I support the legalization of Marijuana. Bell is an idiot pothead for smoking dope while driving a vehicle, about an hour before having to be on a team flight, and then told the Officer he didn't know it was illegal to "drive high". But 'nice try' to show my bias.

[*bfine32*]

(06-19-2015, 01:34 PM)djs7685 Wrote: I don't think a homer like bfine would like if I used that same logic when his favorite Bengals' players get injured.

Bernard missed 3 games due to injury last year.

[djs7685]

(06-19-2015, 01:38 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Admittedly, I did a better job of proving your point than you did; even though it still falls far short.

So I am a "foolish homer" if I don't excuse that fact that a 32 year old RB might be breaking down?

I could have pointed to the uncertainy surrounding Bell by coming off a season ending injury and looming suspension, but I chose not to (must be the foolish homer in me)

Bell is not a idiot Pothead for smoking dope and I support the legalization of Marijuana. Bell is an idiot pothead for smoking dope while driving a vehicle, about an hour before having to be on a team flight, and then told the Officer he didn't know it was illegal to "drive high". But 'nice try' to show my bias.

You're a foolish homer for propping up every single player on the team that doesn't have red hair.

Not wasting my time with you. Go ahead and think you're "right" because I'm not willing to engage in debate with someone so condescending and stubborn.

(06-19-2015, 01:39 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Bernard missed 3 games due to injury last year.

Which is obviously the same as a guy having 60 total carries Good day.

[*bfine32*]

(06-19-2015, 01:43 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Not wasting my time with you. Go ahead and think you're "right" because I'm not willing to engage in debate with someone so condescending and stubborn.

Guy, I didn't even quote you in my OP; much less be condensending.
However, you did quote my OP and call he foolish and a homer.
No doubt you have been shown that Gio and Hill's numbers were better and that they have more upside and fewer question as a Duo; yet still assert anyone that thinks they are a better RB duo is being an extreme homer and stubborn.
Good job accepting other's opinions,  and not being stubborn and/or condesending.
 

[djs7685]

(06-19-2015, 01:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Guy, I didn't even quote you in my OP; much less be condensending.
However, you did quote my OP and call he foolish and a homer.
No doubt you have been shown that Gio and Hill's numbers were better and that they have more upside and fewer question as a Duo; yet still assert anyone that thinks they are a better RB duo is being an extreme homer and stubborn.
Good job accepting other's opinions,  and not being stubborn and/or condesending.
 

This post looks like every single other post you write on here.

Good job.

Another nice job ignoring how you constantly prop up everyone but Andy. Everybody sees it, no need to hide it.

[*bfine32*]

(06-19-2015, 01:53 PM)djs7685 Wrote: This post looks like every single other post you write on here.

Good job.

Another nice job ignoring how you constantly prop up everyone but Andy. Everybody sees it, no need to hide it.

No doubt my love for Hue Jackson, Rey Maualuga, and Domoata Peko is well known.

"Everybody' sees something here; I'm just not sure it's me being a foolish homer.

[Toy Cannon]

(06-19-2015, 01:43 PM)djs7685 Wrote: You're a foolish homer for propping up every single player on the team that doesn't have red hair.

Not wasting my time with you. Go ahead and think you're "right" because I'm not willing to engage in debate with someone so condescending and stubborn.


Which is obviously the same as a guy having 60 total carries Good day.

You probably should consider stepping outside for a few minutes and getting some fresh air.

[djs7685]

(06-19-2015, 01:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No doubt my love for Hue Jackson, Rey Maualuga, and Domoata Peko is well known.

"Everybody' sees something here; I'm just not sure it's me being a foolish homer.

Trust me, everybody sees it.

Keep on homin' bro, seems fun.

[djs7685]

(06-19-2015, 02:00 PM)Toy Cannon Wrote: You probably should consider stepping outside for a few minutes and getting some fresh air.

Yes, because telling somebody they're a homer on an internet message forum is detrimental to physical health.

Derrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrp.

[*bfine32*]

Here’s a Steeler Beat Writer being an extreme Bengal Homer, when he responded yesterday to DeAngelo Williams’ quote “We are one of the best backfields, if not the best backfield, in the National Football League,”
 

ExtremeBengalHomer Wrote:The Steelers are at least in the conversation when it comes to best duos. Cincinnati's Gio Bernard and Jeremy Hill, Buffalo's LeSean McCoy and Fred Jackson, and New Orleans' Mark Ingram and C.J. Spiller also would be in the conversation.

http://triblive.com/sports/steelers/8554489-74/steelers-williams-dupree#axzz3dWmXnN5S

[OSUfan]

(06-19-2015, 01:43 PM)djs7685 Wrote: You're a foolish homer for propping up every single player on the team that doesn't have red hair.

Not wasting my time with you. Go ahead and think you're "right" because I'm not willing to engage in debate with someone so condescending and stubborn.


 

[djs7685]

(06-19-2015, 02:43 PM)OSUfan Wrote:

Oh, hey, you got the link right this time, I saw you tried before and had to delete it

Stalking me from thread to thread is awfully flattering, thanks.................

[Chris]

(06-19-2015, 02:44 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Oh, hey, you got the link right this time, I saw you tried before and had to delete it

Stalking me from thread to thread is awfully flattering, thanks.................

How the hell did this total asshole get over 700 rep points so quickly????