Negative. You have to beat the man to be the man, and the Giants did that last year. Therefore, with their undefeated record, they are the best team. THEN the Cowboys.
Giants were 1-2 against the Cowboys last year. And just in case you didn't know, no team ever wins the Super Bowl two years in a row. They're still a good team, but not better than the Cowboys or Eagles.
ryan17wagner disregarding logic and history by acting like there's no comparison between Parker & Westbrook. You said it's debatable, he implied it's not close and that Westbrook is one of the best in the league. If that's his position that's comical.
They are two different backs though and many give Westbrook the edge. Versatility and elusiveness of Westbrook probably gives him the edge in many people's eyes. It really depends on what you're looking at. If you're looking at the running backs all-around, then I believe Westbrook wins with no contest. If you're looking in terms of running through and around tackles, I'll slightly give the nod to Parker. Maybe ryan is looking at the all-around game but who knows.
I'm still not sold on the Giants. They the combined record of the opponents they have faced so far is 2-7 and they have played two of the worst football teams in the league and probably the worst one in the division. Weeks 8-12 will really test them.
"All-around game" is hard to use in a comparison like this when their roles/coaching are different. Westbrook is the older, more proven version of Reggie Bush. A RB that's not your typical RB -- can't carry 20+ times but excels at pass catching and at times being much like a decoy. Not taking anything away with him but that's precisely the type of player he is: not quite your typical RB. He's not the type of RB that can carry 25-30 times a game, go for 100+ yards and ice games. That's what Parker does. He doesn't catch many passes because he's not asked to do that. Ben generally only looks to throw to RB's on third down. Sure, Westbrook is much better in that regard but what Willie lacks in the pass catching department is more than offset with his straight running advantage. It's close. I'm not saying it's not. Willie has the edge, IMO.
Brian Westbrook = 1st tier Willie Parker= 2nd tier Parker is nice but I wouldn't put him in the "elite" category .... yet. It''s Tomlinson, Westbrook, ADP and then everybody else with MBIII leading the rest of the pack. The only thing Willie does better than Westbrook is losing the football.
That's certainly a great and fair comparison......NOT. He is nothing like Reggie Bush, then you use a bunch of negative connotation when commenting on him such as older, can't, and decoy. Do you really want me to break down the stats?
One more thing.... Westbrook is only a year older than Parker. It just seems like he's so much "older" cause he (Westbrook) has been smokin defenses for years. Once again it's Westbrook and it ain't even close. PS I'm neither an Eagles or Steelers fan.
Sure, i'd love for you to. Better yet, let me do it for you: all-purpose yardage. That's all you're going to say. You're going to completely ignore the different playing and coaching styles. Completely ignore the "decoy" comment was meant as a compliment. Completely ignore Parker's beyond clear superiority on the ground -- where RB's tend to operate. Completely ignore the Reggie Bush comparison was meant as a compliment as well. You're just going to give me some snooze fest about being an "all-around RB". Let me just save you the time. If that argument flies for you, fine. All i'm saying is I prefer your typical 25-30 rush per game type of RB. It's the style of FB i've grown up watching and proven time & time again to be a winner. Asian Sensation -- Four years as a starter, on pace for four 1,000 yard rushing seasons. I must have missed how Westbrook rushing for 600 yards in a season somehow trumps a Curtis Martin type of pace by RB standards. Really?
He has been in the league 2 more years than Parker but remember his first 2 years he was more of a return guy and 2nd string running back, then he became a rotating back in the Eagles RB by committee. After finally getting the nod in 2004 the Eagles were still reluctant to put a heavy load on him and he didn't get his first 200 carry season until 2006 but he's averaged about 4-5 carries less per game than Parker, not too shabby for somebody who "can't" do it supposedly.
That would have been part of it but not the only thing. Thanks for assuming though. Nope, but with your comments below you completely ignore the different coaching styles, do you not? If you want to say it was a compliment then fine. Care to explain? Who's ignoring coaching styles and preferences because it is certainly not me with statements like this. Definitely don't see how that was a compliment. Care to explain? Again, who is ignoring coaching styles? Then you want to poke fun at Westbrook again. Then you compare Parker to Martin, which is fair. BTW, who have they compared Westbrook to again? Oh that right just somebody named Faulk who wasn't a winner I guess.
It's not Westbrook's fault that he is multi-talented and that he can catch passes and rack up multi-purpose yards. If he was delegated to carrying the ball 25-30 times I'm sure he is more than capable of racking up 1000+ rushing yards on a more consistent basis. speaking of 1000+ rushing seasons he did more than that the last 2 seasons in ADDITION to the 700+ receiving yards he's compiled along with the additional 4 and 5 touchdowns he respectively caught in 06 and 07. To put Parker in the same category as Westbrook is ridiculous. To give an edge to Parker overall is outlandish and goes beyond being a homer. A closer comparison to Parker is a guy like Frank Gore.
I'll go ahead and breakdown the stats for last year. Correct me if I am wrong but if you have the ball in football you're going to get hit, right? OK..... In 2007: Parker averaged about 22 carries per game and about 1 reception per game. Parker averaged 4.1 yards a carry. Parker had 2 total TDs. Parker had 49 first down runs. Westbrook averaged about 19 carries per game and 6 receptions per game. Westbrook averaged 4.8 yards per carry. Westbrook had 12 total TDs. Westbrook had 73 first down runs. Now that is there rushing comparison for last year. Shall I continue?
Enlighten me, please. Not that I want to see this thread get derailed anymore than it has been already (thanks to us ), but I really think if you had something important to add you would have here. Parker is better on the ground. How can you argue otherwise? Your gut feeling? A hunch? The statistics certainly aren't in your favor. It's precisely why I would never try to argue Parker being a better pass catcher. It's foolish. Asian Sensation's laughable comments discrediting and dismissing Parker warranted that little jab there. Acting like this discussion isn't close or Parker isn't a stud is ridiculous. Now, regarding Reggie Bush: [...hear me out...] I know the cool thing to do is make fun of him for who he is, not running between the tackles, not leading the league in rushing, not making the Saints elite, whatever. The fact of the matter is he's a very good football player and a dynamic, dangerous weapon. If you can't see that then you're either biased or blind. Despite their different running styles (bruiser vs. finesse) they still share similar roles in their respective offenses. Both, having great hands and the ability to catch passes out of the backfield. This is what makes them unique: their touches aren't shortened they're just redistributed through the passing game. How many RB's out there are legitimately a threat for 40-60/70/80 receiving yards nearly every game? Not many. Add to that their similar carry numbers their first years in the league then you have the basis for my comparison. Neither will get/want/usually get (whichever you find least offensive) the typical 20-25 or more carries a game that comes with your traditional power running football team. Being from Pittsburgh and growing up watching this style that is the measure I use. This is what I believe works best. It's a philosophical issue with your style making more sense to you and mine making more sense to me. Using this logic I like Parker best.
