Darren McFadden getting a pass on criticism. - Page 4

Paranoidmoonduck · 10-29-2009, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by *** Ork Wang

but that doesnt lead to any conclusion about oakland

Of course not. But it is relevant if the opening post of thread is comparing McFadden to Peterson while disregarding their respective situations. Which the OP of this thread is.

Gay Ork Wang · 10-29-2009, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paranoidmoonduck

Of course not. But it is relevant if the opening post of thread is comparing McFadden to Peterson while disregarding their respective situations. Which the OP of this thread is.

how is fargas explained then?

Paranoidmoonduck · 10-29-2009, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by *** Ork Wang

how is fargas explained then?

What about Fargas needs to be explained? He hasn't managed to hit 4+ YPC since 2007 and has only run for over 100 yards in a single game since then. He hasn't experienced any great amount of success while McFadden has struggled (in fact, McFadden was far more dangerous in 2008, if sporadically so).

I like Justin Fargas a lot, actually. He runs really hard and does a great job of throwing his body around for the extra yard. While McFadden is best suited for a ZBS (as is Bush, to a slightly lesser extent), Fargas is much better at creating yardage, which he needs to do in Oakland.

I'm very happy about having Fargas on the team, but I'm not sure what needs to be explained exactly.

J-Mike88 · 08-31-2010, 09:32 AM

Where is Raider Nation here?
I am watching the replay of the 49ers-Raiders game here.

I was, and still am, expecting big things from Darren McFadden.
What he did vs the SEC at Arkansas was spectacular. It was no mirage.

Has he just not been able to stay healthy? Was it Jamarcus Russell's fault as defenses didn't even need to cover WRs, or was/is the OL terrible?

I'm noticing here on NFL Network: 2 things. #1-Patrick Willis was in the backfield as soon as the handoff came, twice on McFadden runs. So that isn't his fault. #2-Jared Veldheer is starting? At center. Wow.

yourfavestoner · 08-31-2010, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paranoidmoonduck

What about Fargas needs to be explained? He hasn't managed to hit 4+ YPC since 2007 and has only run for over 100 yards in a single game since then. He hasn't experienced any great amount of success while McFadden has struggled (in fact, McFadden was far more dangerous in 2008, if sporadically so).

I like Justin Fargas a lot, actually. He runs really hard and does a great job of throwing his body around for the extra yard. While McFadden is best suited for a ZBS (as is Bush, to a slightly lesser extent), Fargas is much better at creating yardage, which he needs to do in Oakland.

I'm very happy about having Fargas on the team, but I'm not sure what needs to be explained exactly.

That's something I've never thought of, but makes perfect sense. I've said before that he struggles because he's not particularly dominant in any one facet (he's not a power back, not a speed back, not overly strong or elusive, etc). His biggest asset is his ability to make a cut and explode upfield, and the ZBS would really help him take advantage of that.

619 · 08-31-2010, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner

That's something I've never thought of, but makes perfect sense. I've said before that he struggles because he's not particularly dominant in any one facet (he's not a power back, not a speed back, not overly strong or elusive, etc). His biggest asset is his ability to make a cut and explode upfield, and the ZBS would really help him take advantage of that.

His best single game performance to date came whilst under Lane Kiffin's newly installed ZBS (which they finally scrapped this year), way back in his rookie year of '08. The ZBS is better suited for legitimate power backs, like Fargas when he was at his peak, and once he began to show signs of slowing down unsurprisingly so did the Raiders run game, going from 5th and 10th in rushing offense in '07 and '08 to a paltry 21st rank last season.

K Train · 08-31-2010, 10:45 AM

lol i liked stewart, mendenhall and felix more than mcfadden, he turned out to be exactly what most people thought he would be.....a fast guy that goes down on contact.

he wasnt nearly adrian peterson, he wasnt even nearly reggie bush. at least bush was a tremendous receiver since day one. and peterson comparisons are just silly, peterson might get dinged up but the man is made of raw steel.

not saying i hated mcfadden as a prospect, but i didnt think he was top 10 worthy. a good friend of mine had him as his 9th best RB that year, i wasnt quite THAT down on him since he was my 4th but not being able to stay on the field has made all the criticisms of him pretty accurate.

he can throw a pretty ball though, maybe they could try that out lol

yourfavestoner · 08-31-2010, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K Train

lol i liked stewart, mendenhall and felix more than mcfadden, he turned out to be exactly what most people thought he would be.....a fast guy that goes down on contact.

he wasnt nearly adrian peterson, he wasnt even nearly reggie bush. at least bush was a tremendous receiver since day one. and peterson comparisons are just silly, peterson might get dinged up but the man is made of raw steel.

not saying i hated mcfadden as a prospect, but i didnt think he was top 10 worthy. a good friend of mine had him as his 9th best RB that year, i wasnt quite THAT down on him since he was my 4th but not being able to stay on the field has made all the criticisms of him pretty accurate.

he can throw a pretty ball though, maybe they could try that out lol

Rule #1 for drafting runningbacks: if his arms are bigger than his legs, take a pass for at least a round or two.

scottyboy · 08-31-2010, 10:48 AM

is it sad I saw this thread bumped and I was subscribed to it and I thought "it's no doubt me talking about Ray Rice".
i'm so ******* predictable.

619 · 08-31-2010, 10:51 AM

McFadden is a tremendous down-the-field weapon as a receiver, whereas Bush is a better receiver behind the LOS. That's about the only facet of McFadden's game that I've been extremely pleased with, as I don't recall him being used that way in the "Wild Hog" offense.

Splat · 08-31-2010, 10:54 AM

He has pretty much been a bust, he could still turn it around but it hasn't been pretty so far.

xxxxxxxx · 08-31-2010, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner

That's something I've never thought of, but makes perfect sense. I've said before that he struggles because he's not particularly dominant in any one facet (he's not a power back, not a speed back, not overly strong or elusive, etc). His biggest asset is his ability to make a cut and explode upfield, and the ZBS would really help him take advantage of that.

He trucks the **** out of people and he ran in the 4.3s.... not fast or powerful? what?

If he gets daylight hes gone.

K Train · 08-31-2010, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDCB14

He trucks the **** out of people and he ran in the 4.3s.... not fast or powerful? what?

If he gets daylight hes gone.

he goes down instantly on contact. if he "trucks the **** out of someone" thats showing that hes not afraid to get dirty (despite always being injured), but i have yet to see him actually steam roll someone in the pros.

hes fast but he is by no means powerful

J-Mike88 · 08-31-2010, 11:05 AM

I still see the ability/talent there for him to be a star, but on the right team and in the right system.

If they had Carolina's OL, I think McFadden & Bush could rival DeAngelo & Stewart. Or am I overrating Bush & McFadden? I have seen some greatness in each guy, just not enough which I believe is due to the offense/OL/QB.

619 · 08-31-2010, 11:07 AM

He does have a filthy stiffarm, I'll give him that, but in my two years of watching him I have NEVER seen him "truck the **** out of people".

xxxxxxxx · 08-31-2010, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K Train

he goes down instantly on contact. if he "trucks the **** out of someone" thats showing that hes not afraid to get dirty (despite always being injured), but i have yet to see him actually steam roll someone in the pros.

hes fast but he is by no means powerful

i was talking about at arkansas. oakland just ruined him. put him on a decent team, and people will see. he's legit. and his legs are only small looking cause the dude is like 6'3''

Splat · 08-31-2010, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDCB14

He trucks the **** out of people and he ran in the 4.3s.... not fast or powerful? what?

If he gets daylight hes gone.

Maybe on Madden.

619 · 08-31-2010, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-Mike88

I still see the ability/talent there for him to be a star, but on the right team and in the right system.

If they had Carolina's OL, I think McFadden & Bush could rival DeAngelo & Stewart. Or am I overrating Bush & McFadden? I have seen some greatness in each guy, just not enough which I believe is due to the offense/OL/QB.

You're slightly overrating them. Put either back in the ZBS with a much, much better O-Line and then we're talking about two 1000+ yard rushers. If McFadden is cut/traded this offseason, then for his own good I hope he goes to Houston, assuming their tailback situation doesn't get any better. Shanahan could do wonders with him in DC. Anywhere but Denver, really. :)

619 · 08-31-2010, 11:15 AM

McFadden is a boss in Madden, still. Madden always finds a way of overrating "speed" backs.

Splat · 08-31-2010, 11:17 AM

I actually really like Bush and feel he is by far the Raiders best back, with just a little better QB play he should top 1000 yards rushing.

K Train · 08-31-2010, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 619

McFadden is a boss in Madden, still. Madden always finds a way of overrating "speed" backs.

speed everything, give me heyward bey in madden over fitz anyday

yourfavestoner · 08-31-2010, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDCB14

He trucks the **** out of people and he ran in the 4.3s.... not fast or powerful? what?

If he gets daylight hes gone.

Never said that he wasn't fast, I said that he's not a pure speed back and he's not overly elusive. There is a huge difference.

And truck the **** out of people, he does not.

In his two year career, he has two carries of over 20 yards. That's downright sad.

And how on earth can you say that the dude doesn't have chicken legs? He doesn't even have calves.

yourfavestoner · 08-31-2010, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splat

I actually really like Bush and feel he is by far the Raiders best back, with just a little better QB play he should top 1000 yards rushing.

I've never been a Bush fan, but I read a stat somewhere that said in the three games Oakland has given him fifteen touches or more, he's averaged like 140 yards from scrimmage or something ridiculous like that.

K Train · 08-31-2010, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner

Never said that he wasn't fast, I said that he's not a pure speed back and he's not overly elusive. There is a huge difference.

And truck the **** out of people, he does not.

In his two year career, he has two carries of over 20 yards. That's downright sad.

And how on earth can you say that the dude doesn't have chicken legs? He doesn't even have calves.

big time chicken legs. hes got willie parker syndrome. blazing straight line speed, not enough elusiveness or top notch vision, pretty poor receiver and knee/ankle problems

K Train · 08-31-2010, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner

I've never been a Bush fan, but I read a stat somewhere that said in the three games Oakland has given him fifteen touches or more, he's averaged like 140 yards from scrimmage or something ridiculous like that.

pre broken leg i had bush over peterson.....seems foolish now and i moved him down to a second round guy after the injury but i was pretty high on bush.