Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
< Prev.  Page of 6  

Re: Joseph Randle vs. Roy Finch

Posted: 3/31/2011 10:32 AM

Re: Joseph Randle vs. Roy Finch 


Must be gubermnt cheeze day in norman, have not seen any of the brain dead goons post for a while. Bumpin  poor's bump... cool
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/12/2011 6:49 AM

Re: Joseph Randle vs. Roy Finch 



OState1951 wrote: Must be gubermnt cheeze day in norman, have not seen any of the brain dead goons post for a while. Bumpin  poor's bump... cool

There aren't all that many people responding at all for that matter, and this is probably why. When all of the dust settled:

2010 final stats:

Murray:  Total AP yards: 2067 (1294 rush, 594 rec, 249 KOR)
               Ypg: 147.6
                TD's: 20
                Fumbles: ZERO (In fact only 2 in his entire career 957 touches)
               Drafted: Rnd 3 (71)

Hunter: Total AP yards: 1736 (1548 rush, 101 rec, 87 KOR)
              Ypg:  133.5
               TD's 16
               Fumbles: 2 fumbles (8 in his career)
               Drafted Rnd 4 (115)


For all of you poke fans who were opining about how much better Hunter was than Murray, it doesn't look like it worked out that way, nor does it look like NFL scouts agreed.
In my humble opinion, they are both outstanding backs and had outstanding careers, and the differences between them come down to style and how they fit into an offense, I do believe Murray's flexibility when it comes to excellent recieving, size and blocking skills (blitz pick up) give him a tad more value at the next level but who knows.

Let the name calling begin....
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/12/2011 8:18 AM

Re: Joseph Randle vs. Roy Finch 



MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote: Must be gubermnt cheeze day in norman, have not seen any of the brain dead goons post for a while. Bumpin  poor's bump... cool

There aren't all that many people responding at all for that matter, and this is probably why. When all of the dust settled:

2010 final stats:

Murray:  Total AP yards: 2067 (1294 rush, 594 rec, 249 KOR)
               Ypg: 147.6
                TD's: 20
                Fumbles: ZERO (In fact only 2 in his entire career 957 touches)
               Drafted: Rnd 3 (71)

Hunter: Total AP yards: 1736 (1548 rush, 101 rec, 87 KOR)
              Ypg:  133.5
               TD's 16
               Fumbles: 2 fumbles (8 in his career)
               Drafted Rnd 4 (115)


For all of you poke fans who were opining about how much better Hunter was than Murray, it doesn't look like it worked out that way, nor does it look like NFL scouts agreed.
In my humble opinion, they are both outstanding backs and had outstanding careers, and the differences between them come down to style and how they fit into an offense, I do believe Murray's flexibility when it comes to excellent recieving, size and blocking skills (blitz pick up) give him a tad more value at the next level but who knows.

Let the name calling begin....
No need to call names, Hunter was a better back and here's the stats to show it. Hunter is smaller and was not used much to receive passes.

Let the excuses begin...

http://espn.go.com/college-foo...r/2010/group/80
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/12/2011 8:48 AM

Re: Joseph Randle vs. Roy Finch 



OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote: Must be gubermnt cheeze day in norman, have not seen any of the brain dead goons post for a while. Bumpin  poor's bump... cool

There aren't all that many people responding at all for that matter, and this is probably why. When all of the dust settled:

2010 final stats:

Murray:  Total AP yards: 2067 (1294 rush, 594 rec, 249 KOR)
               Ypg: 147.6
                TD's: 20
                Fumbles: ZERO (In fact only 2 in his entire career 957 touches)
               Drafted: Rnd 3 (71)

Hunter: Total AP yards: 1736 (1548 rush, 101 rec, 87 KOR)
              Ypg:  133.5
               TD's 16
               Fumbles: 2 fumbles (8 in his career)
               Drafted Rnd 4 (115)


For all of you poke fans who were opining about how much better Hunter was than Murray, it doesn't look like it worked out that way, nor does it look like NFL scouts agreed.
In my humble opinion, they are both outstanding backs and had outstanding careers, and the differences between them come down to style and how they fit into an offense, I do believe Murray's flexibility when it comes to excellent recieving, size and blocking skills (blitz pick up) give him a tad more value at the next level but who knows.

Let the name calling begin....
No need to call names, Hunter was a better back and here's the stats to show it. Hunter is smaller and was not used much to receive passes.

Let the excuses begin...

http://espn.go.com/college-foo...r/2010/group/80
Must be nice to live in such a world where one expects to arbitrarily state something and expect that it is hands down correct.
That nice little link shows part of the story, being a RB in college AND the pros is not simply about rushing yards, its about total production. You could say it was that Hunter was not asked to catch passes... OR it could be said he was not asked because the coaches knew that it was not a strength of his. Using your same statement I could say the same thing about Murray, OU did not ask him to be a one dimensional back, he was used as a pro-style back that catches the ball (again, coaches using him to his greatest ability) and giving the team better flexibility. 
The bottom line is, you used one facet of their work to make your point, I used THE TOTALITY of their work to make a point, and in the end, that totality is what counts, no matter how you delude yourself. And as I have pointed out, the experts (NFL talent evaluators) seem to agree. As I said before (and you seemed to ignore) they are both good backs, and my point was that people who back in November claimed Hunter was hands down better, were in fact, wrong, they do different things well.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/12/2011 1:39 PM

Re: Joseph Randle vs. Roy Finch 



MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote: Must be gubermnt cheeze day in norman, have not seen any of the brain dead goons post for a while. Bumpin  poor's bump... cool

There aren't all that many people responding at all for that matter, and this is probably why. When all of the dust settled:

2010 final stats:

Murray:  Total AP yards: 2067 (1294 rush, 594 rec, 249 KOR)
               Ypg: 147.6
                TD's: 20
                Fumbles: ZERO (In fact only 2 in his entire career 957 touches)
               Drafted: Rnd 3 (71)

Hunter: Total AP yards: 1736 (1548 rush, 101 rec, 87 KOR)
              Ypg:  133.5
               TD's 16
               Fumbles: 2 fumbles (8 in his career)
               Drafted Rnd 4 (115)


For all of you poke fans who were opining about how much better Hunter was than Murray, it doesn't look like it worked out that way, nor does it look like NFL scouts agreed.
In my humble opinion, they are both outstanding backs and had outstanding careers, and the differences between them come down to style and how they fit into an offense, I do believe Murray's flexibility when it comes to excellent recieving, size and blocking skills (blitz pick up) give him a tad more value at the next level but who knows.

Let the name calling begin....
No need to call names, Hunter was a better back and here's the stats to show it. Hunter is smaller and was not used much to receive passes.

Let the excuses begin...

http://espn.go.com/college-foo...r/2010/group/80
Must be nice to live in such a world where one expects to arbitrarily state something and expect that it is hands down correct.
That nice little link shows part of the story, being a RB in college AND the pros is not simply about rushing yards, its about total production. You could say it was that Hunter was not asked to catch passes... OR it could be said he was not asked because the coaches knew that it was not a strength of his. Using your same statement I could say the same thing about Murray, OU did not ask him to be a one dimensional back, he was used as a pro-style back that catches the ball (again, coaches using him to his greatest ability) and giving the team better flexibility. 
The bottom line is, you used one facet of their work to make your point, I used THE TOTALITY of their work to make a point, and in the end, that totality is what counts, no matter how you delude yourself. And as I have pointed out, the experts (NFL talent evaluators) seem to agree. As I said before (and you seemed to ignore) they are both good backs, and my point was that people who back in November claimed Hunter was hands down better, were in fact, wrong, they do different things well.
Funny, I guess in your world the "totality" is what you pick and choose as pertinent for your boy. The stats I provided were from ESPN and the same standards they used for every RB in the country. It's already been pointed out that since each team plays different schedules that comparisons are difficult and even when you compare stats of the same teams played there are reasons for the differences. To say I used "one facet" is simply stupid but if that's the sword you want to fall on don't let me get in the way. The question as to which was "better" in college is given on the link provided. What applies to being better in the pros is somewhat different. We can agree they were both very good backs in college, which excels in the pros remains to be seen.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/12/2011 6:26 PM

Re: Joseph Randle vs. Roy Finch 



OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote: Must be gubermnt cheeze day in norman, have not seen any of the brain dead goons post for a while. Bumpin  poor's bump... cool

There aren't all that many people responding at all for that matter, and this is probably why. When all of the dust settled:

2010 final stats:

Murray:  Total AP yards: 2067 (1294 rush, 594 rec, 249 KOR)
               Ypg: 147.6
                TD's: 20
                Fumbles: ZERO (In fact only 2 in his entire career 957 touches)
               Drafted: Rnd 3 (71)

Hunter: Total AP yards: 1736 (1548 rush, 101 rec, 87 KOR)
              Ypg:  133.5
               TD's 16
               Fumbles: 2 fumbles (8 in his career)
               Drafted Rnd 4 (115)


For all of you poke fans who were opining about how much better Hunter was than Murray, it doesn't look like it worked out that way, nor does it look like NFL scouts agreed.
In my humble opinion, they are both outstanding backs and had outstanding careers, and the differences between them come down to style and how they fit into an offense, I do believe Murray's flexibility when it comes to excellent recieving, size and blocking skills (blitz pick up) give him a tad more value at the next level but who knows.

Let the name calling begin....
No need to call names, Hunter was a better back and here's the stats to show it. Hunter is smaller and was not used much to receive passes.

Let the excuses begin...

http://espn.go.com/college-foo...r/2010/group/80
Must be nice to live in such a world where one expects to arbitrarily state something and expect that it is hands down correct.
That nice little link shows part of the story, being a RB in college AND the pros is not simply about rushing yards, its about total production. You could say it was that Hunter was not asked to catch passes... OR it could be said he was not asked because the coaches knew that it was not a strength of his. Using your same statement I could say the same thing about Murray, OU did not ask him to be a one dimensional back, he was used as a pro-style back that catches the ball (again, coaches using him to his greatest ability) and giving the team better flexibility. 
The bottom line is, you used one facet of their work to make your point, I used THE TOTALITY of their work to make a point, and in the end, that totality is what counts, no matter how you delude yourself. And as I have pointed out, the experts (NFL talent evaluators) seem to agree. As I said before (and you seemed to ignore) they are both good backs, and my point was that people who back in November claimed Hunter was hands down better, were in fact, wrong, they do different things well.
Funny, I guess in your world the "totality" is what you pick and choose as pertinent for your boy. The stats I provided were from ESPN and the same standards they used for every RB in the country. It's already been pointed out that since each team plays different schedules that comparisons are difficult and even when you compare stats of the same teams played there are reasons for the differences. To say I used "one facet" is simply stupid but if that's the sword you want to fall on don't let me get in the way. The question as to which was "better" in college is given on the link provided. What applies to being better in the pros is somewhat different. We can agree they were both very good backs in college, which excels in the pros remains to be seen.
spin it how you like, you are using "part" of the whole picture, rushing stats only, I am using all of the important stats, any way you slice it, YOU are cherry picking what you want to use because you are not using ALL of the stats, just what part you want.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/13/2011 9:33 AM

Re: Joseph Randle vs. Roy Finch 



MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote: Must be gubermnt cheeze day in norman, have not seen any of the brain dead goons post for a while. Bumpin  poor's bump... cool

There aren't all that many people responding at all for that matter, and this is probably why. When all of the dust settled:

2010 final stats:

Murray:  Total AP yards: 2067 (1294 rush, 594 rec, 249 KOR)
               Ypg: 147.6
                TD's: 20
                Fumbles: ZERO (In fact only 2 in his entire career 957 touches)
               Drafted: Rnd 3 (71)

Hunter: Total AP yards: 1736 (1548 rush, 101 rec, 87 KOR)
              Ypg:  133.5
               TD's 16
               Fumbles: 2 fumbles (8 in his career)
               Drafted Rnd 4 (115)


For all of you poke fans who were opining about how much better Hunter was than Murray, it doesn't look like it worked out that way, nor does it look like NFL scouts agreed.
In my humble opinion, they are both outstanding backs and had outstanding careers, and the differences between them come down to style and how they fit into an offense, I do believe Murray's flexibility when it comes to excellent recieving, size and blocking skills (blitz pick up) give him a tad more value at the next level but who knows.

Let the name calling begin....
No need to call names, Hunter was a better back and here's the stats to show it. Hunter is smaller and was not used much to receive passes.

Let the excuses begin...

http://espn.go.com/college-foo...r/2010/group/80
Must be nice to live in such a world where one expects to arbitrarily state something and expect that it is hands down correct.
That nice little link shows part of the story, being a RB in college AND the pros is not simply about rushing yards, its about total production. You could say it was that Hunter was not asked to catch passes... OR it could be said he was not asked because the coaches knew that it was not a strength of his. Using your same statement I could say the same thing about Murray, OU did not ask him to be a one dimensional back, he was used as a pro-style back that catches the ball (again, coaches using him to his greatest ability) and giving the team better flexibility. 
The bottom line is, you used one facet of their work to make your point, I used THE TOTALITY of their work to make a point, and in the end, that totality is what counts, no matter how you delude yourself. And as I have pointed out, the experts (NFL talent evaluators) seem to agree. As I said before (and you seemed to ignore) they are both good backs, and my point was that people who back in November claimed Hunter was hands down better, were in fact, wrong, they do different things well.
Funny, I guess in your world the "totality" is what you pick and choose as pertinent for your boy. The stats I provided were from ESPN and the same standards they used for every RB in the country. It's already been pointed out that since each team plays different schedules that comparisons are difficult and even when you compare stats of the same teams played there are reasons for the differences. To say I used "one facet" is simply stupid but if that's the sword you want to fall on don't let me get in the way. The question as to which was "better" in college is given on the link provided. What applies to being better in the pros is somewhat different. We can agree they were both very good backs in college, which excels in the pros remains to be seen.
spin it how you like, you are using "part" of the whole picture, rushing stats only, I am using all of the important stats, any way you slice it, YOU are cherry picking what you want to use because you are not using ALL of the stats, just what part you want.
Yeh, great cpme back...now I'm cherry picking because I posted ESPN's format. Shut up while most just think you're as stupid as you appear.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/13/2011 10:12 AM

Re: Joseph Randle vs. Roy Finch 



OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote: Must be gubermnt cheeze day in norman, have not seen any of the brain dead goons post for a while. Bumpin  poor's bump... cool

There aren't all that many people responding at all for that matter, and this is probably why. When all of the dust settled:

2010 final stats:

Murray:  Total AP yards: 2067 (1294 rush, 594 rec, 249 KOR)
               Ypg: 147.6
                TD's: 20
                Fumbles: ZERO (In fact only 2 in his entire career 957 touches)
               Drafted: Rnd 3 (71)

Hunter: Total AP yards: 1736 (1548 rush, 101 rec, 87 KOR)
              Ypg:  133.5
               TD's 16
               Fumbles: 2 fumbles (8 in his career)
               Drafted Rnd 4 (115)


For all of you poke fans who were opining about how much better Hunter was than Murray, it doesn't look like it worked out that way, nor does it look like NFL scouts agreed.
In my humble opinion, they are both outstanding backs and had outstanding careers, and the differences between them come down to style and how they fit into an offense, I do believe Murray's flexibility when it comes to excellent recieving, size and blocking skills (blitz pick up) give him a tad more value at the next level but who knows.

Let the name calling begin....
No need to call names, Hunter was a better back and here's the stats to show it. Hunter is smaller and was not used much to receive passes.

Let the excuses begin...

http://espn.go.com/college-foo...r/2010/group/80
Must be nice to live in such a world where one expects to arbitrarily state something and expect that it is hands down correct.
That nice little link shows part of the story, being a RB in college AND the pros is not simply about rushing yards, its about total production. You could say it was that Hunter was not asked to catch passes... OR it could be said he was not asked because the coaches knew that it was not a strength of his. Using your same statement I could say the same thing about Murray, OU did not ask him to be a one dimensional back, he was used as a pro-style back that catches the ball (again, coaches using him to his greatest ability) and giving the team better flexibility. 
The bottom line is, you used one facet of their work to make your point, I used THE TOTALITY of their work to make a point, and in the end, that totality is what counts, no matter how you delude yourself. And as I have pointed out, the experts (NFL talent evaluators) seem to agree. As I said before (and you seemed to ignore) they are both good backs, and my point was that people who back in November claimed Hunter was hands down better, were in fact, wrong, they do different things well.
Funny, I guess in your world the "totality" is what you pick and choose as pertinent for your boy. The stats I provided were from ESPN and the same standards they used for every RB in the country. It's already been pointed out that since each team plays different schedules that comparisons are difficult and even when you compare stats of the same teams played there are reasons for the differences. To say I used "one facet" is simply stupid but if that's the sword you want to fall on don't let me get in the way. The question as to which was "better" in college is given on the link provided. What applies to being better in the pros is somewhat different. We can agree they were both very good backs in college, which excels in the pros remains to be seen.
spin it how you like, you are using "part" of the whole picture, rushing stats only, I am using all of the important stats, any way you slice it, YOU are cherry picking what you want to use because you are not using ALL of the stats, just what part you want.
Yeh, great cpme back...now I'm cherry picking because I posted ESPN's format. Shut up while most just think you're as stupid as you appear.
You used ESPNs rushing category, you did not use ESPN's "format", I will assume you are smart enough to know that, and I dont want to start the name calling (which apparently is not a problem for you), so I will guess that you are purposefully spinning the information for your own end.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/13/2011 2:03 PM

Re: Joseph Randle vs. Roy Finch 



MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote: Must be gubermnt cheeze day in norman, have not seen any of the brain dead goons post for a while. Bumpin  poor's bump... cool

There aren't all that many people responding at all for that matter, and this is probably why. When all of the dust settled:

2010 final stats:

Murray:  Total AP yards: 2067 (1294 rush, 594 rec, 249 KOR)
               Ypg: 147.6
                TD's: 20
                Fumbles: ZERO (In fact only 2 in his entire career 957 touches)
               Drafted: Rnd 3 (71)

Hunter: Total AP yards: 1736 (1548 rush, 101 rec, 87 KOR)
              Ypg:  133.5
               TD's 16
               Fumbles: 2 fumbles (8 in his career)
               Drafted Rnd 4 (115)


For all of you poke fans who were opining about how much better Hunter was than Murray, it doesn't look like it worked out that way, nor does it look like NFL scouts agreed.
In my humble opinion, they are both outstanding backs and had outstanding careers, and the differences between them come down to style and how they fit into an offense, I do believe Murray's flexibility when it comes to excellent recieving, size and blocking skills (blitz pick up) give him a tad more value at the next level but who knows.

Let the name calling begin....
No need to call names, Hunter was a better back and here's the stats to show it. Hunter is smaller and was not used much to receive passes.

Let the excuses begin...

http://espn.go.com/college-foo...r/2010/group/80
Must be nice to live in such a world where one expects to arbitrarily state something and expect that it is hands down correct.
That nice little link shows part of the story, being a RB in college AND the pros is not simply about rushing yards, its about total production. You could say it was that Hunter was not asked to catch passes... OR it could be said he was not asked because the coaches knew that it was not a strength of his. Using your same statement I could say the same thing about Murray, OU did not ask him to be a one dimensional back, he was used as a pro-style back that catches the ball (again, coaches using him to his greatest ability) and giving the team better flexibility. 
The bottom line is, you used one facet of their work to make your point, I used THE TOTALITY of their work to make a point, and in the end, that totality is what counts, no matter how you delude yourself. And as I have pointed out, the experts (NFL talent evaluators) seem to agree. As I said before (and you seemed to ignore) they are both good backs, and my point was that people who back in November claimed Hunter was hands down better, were in fact, wrong, they do different things well.
Funny, I guess in your world the "totality" is what you pick and choose as pertinent for your boy. The stats I provided were from ESPN and the same standards they used for every RB in the country. It's already been pointed out that since each team plays different schedules that comparisons are difficult and even when you compare stats of the same teams played there are reasons for the differences. To say I used "one facet" is simply stupid but if that's the sword you want to fall on don't let me get in the way. The question as to which was "better" in college is given on the link provided. What applies to being better in the pros is somewhat different. We can agree they were both very good backs in college, which excels in the pros remains to be seen.
spin it how you like, you are using "part" of the whole picture, rushing stats only, I am using all of the important stats, any way you slice it, YOU are cherry picking what you want to use because you are not using ALL of the stats, just what part you want.
Yeh, great cpme back...now I'm cherry picking because I posted ESPN's format. Shut up while most just think you're as stupid as you appear.
You used ESPNs rushing category, you did not use ESPN's "format", I will assume you are smart enough to know that, and I dont want to start the name calling (which apparently is not a problem for you), so I will guess that you are purposefully spinning the information for your own end.
Considering we were speaking of RBs then that is the format ESPN set it up under. R referring to "running", not catches. Please, spin on.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/14/2011 5:23 AM

Re: Joseph Randle vs. Roy Finch 



OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote: Must be gubermnt cheeze day in norman, have not seen any of the brain dead goons post for a while. Bumpin  poor's bump... cool

There aren't all that many people responding at all for that matter, and this is probably why. When all of the dust settled:

2010 final stats:

Murray:  Total AP yards: 2067 (1294 rush, 594 rec, 249 KOR)
               Ypg: 147.6
                TD's: 20
                Fumbles: ZERO (In fact only 2 in his entire career 957 touches)
               Drafted: Rnd 3 (71)

Hunter: Total AP yards: 1736 (1548 rush, 101 rec, 87 KOR)
              Ypg:  133.5
               TD's 16
               Fumbles: 2 fumbles (8 in his career)
               Drafted Rnd 4 (115)


For all of you poke fans who were opining about how much better Hunter was than Murray, it doesn't look like it worked out that way, nor does it look like NFL scouts agreed.
In my humble opinion, they are both outstanding backs and had outstanding careers, and the differences between them come down to style and how they fit into an offense, I do believe Murray's flexibility when it comes to excellent recieving, size and blocking skills (blitz pick up) give him a tad more value at the next level but who knows.

Let the name calling begin....
No need to call names, Hunter was a better back and here's the stats to show it. Hunter is smaller and was not used much to receive passes.

Let the excuses begin...

http://espn.go.com/college-foo...r/2010/group/80
Must be nice to live in such a world where one expects to arbitrarily state something and expect that it is hands down correct.
That nice little link shows part of the story, being a RB in college AND the pros is not simply about rushing yards, its about total production. You could say it was that Hunter was not asked to catch passes... OR it could be said he was not asked because the coaches knew that it was not a strength of his. Using your same statement I could say the same thing about Murray, OU did not ask him to be a one dimensional back, he was used as a pro-style back that catches the ball (again, coaches using him to his greatest ability) and giving the team better flexibility. 
The bottom line is, you used one facet of their work to make your point, I used THE TOTALITY of their work to make a point, and in the end, that totality is what counts, no matter how you delude yourself. And as I have pointed out, the experts (NFL talent evaluators) seem to agree. As I said before (and you seemed to ignore) they are both good backs, and my point was that people who back in November claimed Hunter was hands down better, were in fact, wrong, they do different things well.
Funny, I guess in your world the "totality" is what you pick and choose as pertinent for your boy. The stats I provided were from ESPN and the same standards they used for every RB in the country. It's already been pointed out that since each team plays different schedules that comparisons are difficult and even when you compare stats of the same teams played there are reasons for the differences. To say I used "one facet" is simply stupid but if that's the sword you want to fall on don't let me get in the way. The question as to which was "better" in college is given on the link provided. What applies to being better in the pros is somewhat different. We can agree they were both very good backs in college, which excels in the pros remains to be seen.
spin it how you like, you are using "part" of the whole picture, rushing stats only, I am using all of the important stats, any way you slice it, YOU are cherry picking what you want to use because you are not using ALL of the stats, just what part you want.
Yeh, great cpme back...now I'm cherry picking because I posted ESPN's format. Shut up while most just think you're as stupid as you appear.
You used ESPNs rushing category, you did not use ESPN's "format", I will assume you are smart enough to know that, and I dont want to start the name calling (which apparently is not a problem for you), so I will guess that you are purposefully spinning the information for your own end.
Considering we were speaking of RBs then that is the format ESPN set it up under. R referring to "running", not catches. Please, spin on.
Hey, if you want to continue believing that running is the only aspect important in a running back go ahead, it just shows an amazing lack of knowledge of the game. The bottom line, which you have been desparately trying to avoid, and you can't, is that Murray, in doing the job of a running back in today's modern game, accounted for more yardage and TD's than Hunter. And was drafted higher because of that, again I state that they are both excellent backs, but was simply stating that the discussions in this thread before the season was over stating that Hunter was the much better back did not turn out to be the case when you looked at both back's body of work. That has been my point from the beginning, I have not said Murray is the "better" back, I simply said that the results clearly didnt show Hunter was.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/14/2011 8:27 AM

Re: Joseph Randle vs. Roy Finch 



MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote: Must be gubermnt cheeze day in norman, have not seen any of the brain dead goons post for a while. Bumpin  poor's bump... cool

There aren't all that many people responding at all for that matter, and this is probably why. When all of the dust settled:

2010 final stats:

Murray:  Total AP yards: 2067 (1294 rush, 594 rec, 249 KOR)
               Ypg: 147.6
                TD's: 20
                Fumbles: ZERO (In fact only 2 in his entire career 957 touches)
               Drafted: Rnd 3 (71)

Hunter: Total AP yards: 1736 (1548 rush, 101 rec, 87 KOR)
              Ypg:  133.5
               TD's 16
               Fumbles: 2 fumbles (8 in his career)
               Drafted Rnd 4 (115)


For all of you poke fans who were opining about how much better Hunter was than Murray, it doesn't look like it worked out that way, nor does it look like NFL scouts agreed.
In my humble opinion, they are both outstanding backs and had outstanding careers, and the differences between them come down to style and how they fit into an offense, I do believe Murray's flexibility when it comes to excellent recieving, size and blocking skills (blitz pick up) give him a tad more value at the next level but who knows.

Let the name calling begin....
No need to call names, Hunter was a better back and here's the stats to show it. Hunter is smaller and was not used much to receive passes.

Let the excuses begin...

http://espn.go.com/college-foo...r/2010/group/80
Must be nice to live in such a world where one expects to arbitrarily state something and expect that it is hands down correct.
That nice little link shows part of the story, being a RB in college AND the pros is not simply about rushing yards, its about total production. You could say it was that Hunter was not asked to catch passes... OR it could be said he was not asked because the coaches knew that it was not a strength of his. Using your same statement I could say the same thing about Murray, OU did not ask him to be a one dimensional back, he was used as a pro-style back that catches the ball (again, coaches using him to his greatest ability) and giving the team better flexibility. 
The bottom line is, you used one facet of their work to make your point, I used THE TOTALITY of their work to make a point, and in the end, that totality is what counts, no matter how you delude yourself. And as I have pointed out, the experts (NFL talent evaluators) seem to agree. As I said before (and you seemed to ignore) they are both good backs, and my point was that people who back in November claimed Hunter was hands down better, were in fact, wrong, they do different things well.
Funny, I guess in your world the "totality" is what you pick and choose as pertinent for your boy. The stats I provided were from ESPN and the same standards they used for every RB in the country. It's already been pointed out that since each team plays different schedules that comparisons are difficult and even when you compare stats of the same teams played there are reasons for the differences. To say I used "one facet" is simply stupid but if that's the sword you want to fall on don't let me get in the way. The question as to which was "better" in college is given on the link provided. What applies to being better in the pros is somewhat different. We can agree they were both very good backs in college, which excels in the pros remains to be seen.
spin it how you like, you are using "part" of the whole picture, rushing stats only, I am using all of the important stats, any way you slice it, YOU are cherry picking what you want to use because you are not using ALL of the stats, just what part you want.
Yeh, great cpme back...now I'm cherry picking because I posted ESPN's format. Shut up while most just think you're as stupid as you appear.
You used ESPNs rushing category, you did not use ESPN's "format", I will assume you are smart enough to know that, and I dont want to start the name calling (which apparently is not a problem for you), so I will guess that you are purposefully spinning the information for your own end.
Considering we were speaking of RBs then that is the format ESPN set it up under. R referring to "running", not catches. Please, spin on.
Hey, if you want to continue believing that running is the only aspect important in a running back go ahead, it just shows an amazing lack of knowledge of the game. The bottom line, which you have been desparately trying to avoid, and you can't, is that Murray, in doing the job of a running back in today's modern game, accounted for more yardage and TD's than Hunter. And was drafted higher because of that, again I state that they are both excellent backs, but was simply stating that the discussions in this thread before the season was over stating that Hunter was the much better back did not turn out to be the case when you looked at both back's body of work. That has been my point from the beginning, I have not said Murray is the "better" back, I simply said that the results clearly didnt show Hunter was.
The stats published by ESPN were not my choice, they were the stats ESPN felt were necessary so you can quit trying to spin it like I picked and chose...that's exactly what you did and are doing now. As far as college career, I like Hunter better and as a RUNNING BACK, he had better stats. murray will most likely be a more usable back in  the pros because his college experience of catching the ball should make him more versatile but that remains to be seen. Both great backs, I like ours better, you like yours better. I'm shocked. Spin on.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/14/2011 11:23 AM

Re: Joseph Randle vs. Roy Finch 



OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote:
MDS00NER68 wrote:
OState1951 wrote: Must be gubermnt cheeze day in norman, have not seen any of the brain dead goons post for a while. Bumpin  poor's bump... cool

There aren't all that many people responding at all for that matter, and this is probably why. When all of the dust settled:

2010 final stats:

Murray:  Total AP yards: 2067 (1294 rush, 594 rec, 249 KOR)
Ypg: 147.6
TD's: 20
Fumbles: ZERO (In fact only 2 in his entire career 957 touches)
Drafted: Rnd 3 (71)

Hunter: Total AP yards: 1736 (1548 rush, 101 rec, 87 KOR)
Ypg:  133.5
TD's 16
Fumbles: 2 fumbles (8 in his career)
Drafted Rnd 4 (115)


For all of you poke fans who were opining about how much better Hunter was than Murray, it doesn't look like it worked out that way, nor does it look like NFL scouts agreed.
In my humble opinion, they are both outstanding backs and had outstanding careers, and the differences between them come down to style and how they fit into an offense, I do believe Murray's flexibility when it comes to excellent recieving, size and blocking skills (blitz pick up) give him a tad more value at the next level but who knows.

Let the name calling begin....
No need to call names, Hunter was a better back and here's the stats to show it. Hunter is smaller and was not used much to receive passes.

Let the excuses begin...

http://espn.go.com/college-foo...r/2010/group/80
Must be nice to live in such a world where one expects to arbitrarily state something and expect that it is hands down correct.
That nice little link shows part of the story, being a RB in college AND the pros is not simply about rushing yards, its about total production. You could say it was that Hunter was not asked to catch passes... OR it could be said he was not asked because the coaches knew that it was not a strength of his. Using your same statement I could say the same thing about Murray, OU did not ask him to be a one dimensional back, he was used as a pro-style back that catches the ball (again, coaches using him to his greatest ability) and giving the team better flexibility. 
The bottom line is, you used one facet of their work to make your point, I used THE TOTALITY of their work to make a point, and in the end, that totality is what counts, no matter how you delude yourself. And as I have pointed out, the experts (NFL talent evaluators) seem to agree. As I said before (and you seemed to ignore) they are both good backs, and my point was that people who back in November claimed Hunter was hands down better, were in fact, wrong, they do different things well.
Funny, I guess in your world the "totality" is what you pick and choose as pertinent for your boy. The stats I provided were from ESPN and the same standards they used for every RB in the country. It's already been pointed out that since each team plays different schedules that comparisons are difficult and even when you compare stats of the same teams played there are reasons for the differences. To say I used "one facet" is simply stupid but if that's the sword you want to fall on don't let me get in the way. The question as to which was "better" in college is given on the link provided. What applies to being better in the pros is somewhat different. We can agree they were both very good backs in college, which excels in the pros remains to be seen.
spin it how you like, you are using "part" of the whole picture, rushing stats only, I am using all of the important stats, any way you slice it, YOU are cherry picking what you want to use because you are not using ALL of the stats, just what part you want.
Yeh, great cpme back...now I'm cherry picking because I posted ESPN's format. Shut up while most just think you're as stupid as you appear.
You used ESPNs rushing category, you did not use ESPN's "format", I will assume you are smart enough to know that, and I dont want to start the name calling (which apparently is not a problem for you), so I will guess that you are purposefully spinning the information for your own end.
Considering we were speaking of RBs then that is the format ESPN set it up under. R referring to "running", not catches. Please, spin on.
Hey, if you want to continue believing that running is the only aspect important in a running back go ahead, it just shows an amazing lack of knowledge of the game. The bottom line, which you have been desparately trying to avoid, and you can't, is that Murray, in doing the job of a running back in today's modern game, accounted for more yardage and TD's than Hunter. And was drafted higher because of that, again I state that they are both excellent backs, but was simply stating that the discussions in this thread before the season was over stating that Hunter was the much better back did not turn out to be the case when you looked at both back's body of work. That has been my point from the beginning, I have not said Murray is the "better" back, I simply said that the results clearly didnt show Hunter was.
The stats published by ESPN were not my choice, they were the stats ESPN felt were necessary so you can quit trying to spin it like I picked and chose...that's exactly what you did and are doing now. As far as college career, I like Hunter better and as a RUNNING BACK, he had better stats. murray will most likely be a more usable back in  the pros because his college experience of catching the ball should make him more versatile but that remains to be seen. Both great backs, I like ours better, you like yours better. I'm shocked. Spin on.
Murray- Drafted higher (71 overall) - Most likely going to be an NFL starter this season for a good team
Hunter- Drafted later (115 overall) -   Going to be a back up on a struggling team
Spun


"I play real sports, not try to be the best at exercising"
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/15/2011 7:48 PM

Re: Joseph Randle vs. Roy Finch 


Kinda why  Randle was noted as one of the best run/rec.  fresh backs last year and up for national awards in pre season this yearwink
"For here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead"
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
< Prev.  Page of 6