I saw this on NFL Total AccessIm adjusting it a little thoughSize: Rudi JohnsonSpeed: Michael BennettBreak Tackling: Jamal LewisVision: LaDainian TomlinsonOverall: LaDainian TomlinsonPut yours on here
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (His Greatness @ Sep 6 2005, 05:09 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>Size: Rudi JohnsonSpeed: Michael BennettBreak Tackling: Jamal LewisVision: LaDainian TomlinsonOverall: LaDainian Tomlinson</div> Cant argue with that.
i'll try to argue that..Size: Steven jacksonSpeed: Bennet Break Tackling:the BUSVision: Priest HolmesQuickness(making cuts)- LToverall - LT
Size: Jerome Bettis(why not?)Speed: Michael BennetBreak Tackling: Jamal LewisVision: Curtis Martin how could you forget him?Quickness: LDTOvrl: LDT
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Guest @ Sep 9 2005, 05:08 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>Size: Jerome Bettis(why not?)Speed: Michael BennetBreak Tackling: Jamal LewisVision: Curtis Martin how could you forget him?Quickness: LDTOvrl: LDT</div> Sorry, that was me...
Size: Jerome BettisSpeed: Sultan McCulloughBreak Tackling: Jamal LewisVision: Priest HolmesQuickness: Brian WestbrookOvrl: Clinton Portis
dont u guys think bettis is just a tad too big? and he's only 5-11... he can';t squeeze thru the smallest wholes.. i still steven jackson at 6-2 and 232 is the perfect size
whatever you say man..bettis doesnt need to squeeze through the tiny holes HE USES HIS BIG ASS BODY to burst thru them. there arent many guys who have an easy time tackling him.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (JHair @ Sep 9 2005, 06:33 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>whatever you say man..bettis doesnt need to squeeze through the tiny holes HE USES HIS BIG ASS BODY to burst thru them. there arent many guys who have an easy time tackling him.</div> Thats why I have Jamal Lewis at break tackling
but this is just hid size.. ugh nvm..i guess ur right.. but i prefer jackson.. i'm a little biased on that tho.. and he is taller..and how bout recieing wouldnt that be one of the imporant abilities.. and it deff would be marshal faulk..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (European-Star @ Sep 9 2005, 02:46 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>but this is just hid size.. ugh nvm..i guess ur right.. but i prefer jackson.. i'm a little biased on that tho.. and he is taller..and how bout recieing wouldnt that be one of the imporant abilities.. and it deff would be marshal faulk..</div> Tomlinson, Westbrook, and Barber are all better recievers nowadays then Faulk is.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (European-Star @ Sep 9 2005, 02:46 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>and how bout recieing wouldnt that be one of the imporant abilities.. and it deff would be marshal faulk..</div>Disagreed, Faulk is kinda washed up and old, the best recieving RB in the league is without a doubt Brian Westbrook, and in 2nd place LT. maybe in the past faulk was good but he ADMITTED hes too old to start and he WANTS jackson to replace him. thats a good point though, recieving should of been included
yeah but it all depends on where the QB puts the ball, Westbrook has more ability as a receiver than does LT, just watch the 2 and compare sometime, Westbrook could be an all out little reciever and be more productive than most WRs in the league
How can you guys(other than His Greatness) not mention LT in receiving? He had 100 receptions 2 seasons ago!
not mention? I said he was #2like i said, the QB has to put the ball somewhere, and its my opinion that westbrook beats out LT when it comes to recieving. anyone who has watched at least 1 eagles game has to agree, westbrook is a backfeild MACHINE. he is a complete threat.Trust me, if the eagles didnt have TO, Westbrook would KILL LT in receiving numbersthe only reason LT had 100 catches is because the only other guy on the team who you can throw to who CAN CATCH is antonio gates
Well maybe but LT has the ability for more YAC more than Westbrook can, if you can catch the ball and not run anywhere with it it doesn't really matter at all.
