Look at my above post. That is just for 2007. 2006: Parker About 22 carries per carry, about 2 receptions per game, 4.4 avg. per carry, 16 total TDs (13 rush, 3 rec) 70 first down runs. Westbrook 16 carries per game, about 5 receptions per game, 5.1 avg per carry, 11 total TDs (7 rush, 4 rec), 60 first down run. This was Parker's best year and with almost 100 extra carries and an extra game played he still only beat Westbrook by about 200 yards rushing and 5 total TDs. Are you sure you want me to continue breaking it down or do you want to admit Parker isn't as superior as you may have assumed in the ground game? Like I said, I would give the edge to Parker in the ground game but he is not superior at all. I just showed you how I can argue otherwise. I gave you their last two seasons head to head. Does he look that much better? Superior? The year's before that were when the coaching staff was still reluctant to give Westbrook the carries he can handle but I can continue to break it down further and show you Parker does not dominate as you assume. Like I said, to some it may not be that close. I think I have pointed out some reasons why. I would say Reggie will be like Westbrook not the other way around but I see what you're saying and it's understood. It's all opinion anyway.
Dallas has beaten two of the top five better teams in the NFC. They are amazing, but still has some mistakes to solve before. The Giants, had played against bad teams, (who cant beat St. Louis ) and they almost blew it against Cincinnati. If the injuries of Mcnabb and Westbrook, are not serious, I see them very strong.
Let's just end this now since we've derailed this thread and I have to be up for work in five hours...... Philly's had one winning season in three years. During that period Pittsburgh won a Super Bowl. Parker was instrumental in getting the team there and ultimately sealing the deal on a championship season. That's another aspect that creates a small edge in my book. That, and as I mentioned my preference for the power running style of football that the Steelers employ. He's the type of workhorse you can ride you to victory. He's not the physical punisher Westbrook is but Parker's combination of speed, elusiveness and power is what's made him successful in this league. Granted, the Steelers run so much to that point where it's almost predictable. For that reason i'm not surprised Westbrook has a higher YPC average especially after new coaching last year. All the same, at no point was I ever attempting to insult Westbrook. I realize he's a very good player and makes the most of his touches. They're both accomplished but different breeds of players. Can Westbrook handle the carries Parker can? Is Parker's edge in the running game really enough to offset Westbrook's advantage through the air? This is all subjective and quite frankly i'm tired of arguing it. Both are great RB's that any team would kill to have. Goodnight.
2.Giants 3. Broncos 4. Eagles 5. Bills or Titans Don't see how you can put the Packers as the 2nd best team in the league. And with Al Harris now most likely out for the season they should not even be in consideration.
Oooops, looks like I hurt your feelings Westbrook is hands down a better back. It's not even close. Stats don't lie: Westbrook since a full-time starter: 2007-1,333 rush yards and 90 REC for 771 yards and 12 total TD's 2006-1,217 rush yards and 77 REC for 699 yards and 11 total TD's Those stats are sick. That's an all-around back and who doesn't want that. He can rush and catch. The most catches Parker has had in a season is 31. Parker is one dimensional, Westbrook beats him hands down. Sorry to get your panties in a wad, but the truth hurts.
I can't go against the defending super bowl champs until they play the cowboys. Then we will see what happens. Still NFC East as a whole is strong as hell this year. GO SKINS
This whole Willie Parker-Brian Westbrook debate is funny. Everyone knows that Felix Jones and his 8.2ypc is the bestest in the land...
The Steelers are 50-30 and the Eagles are 49-31 during the regular season over the past 5 seasons, basically identical records. I'll give Parker the Super Bowl nod but remember Marino never won a Super Bowl and Trent Dilfer did, is Dilfer a better QB than Marino or even better comparison Jeff Hostetler? Again, who is ignoring coaching styles? Westbrook plays in a West Coast offense, one that basically prefers the passing game to the running game and uses HB screen passes basically as running plays. I already showed you Westbrook gets more touches per game so obviously he can handle a nice load of work. You may not have been trying to insult Westbrook but you through in some slight jabs, from saying he is older, can't handle the workload, and then bringing up Philadelphia's record. You again mention carries and I have showed Westbrook touches the ball more than Parker. But as an all-around better running back and player, Westbrook it is. He can rush, receive, hell the guy can even return if given the chance. I've put up the stats, you asked for, their records are identical, the only edge Parker has is he is a Super Bowl champion but I even pointed out with facts that that does not make you elite.
The Titans don't have a really impressive win yet, so I'm going to say Pittsburgh followed by Tennessee and the Giants. I think the Steelers will get Willie Parker back and continue to rack up wins. Interestingly enough, Steelers and Giants will play next week.
LOL! As moes said, Tennessee is undefeated but they have not really beat anybody of significance. Unlike moes, I think Pittsburgh does not have a significant victory that would put them at 1. I'll have to go with NYG.
I'll take my medicine when it's deserved (see Missouri thread), but some of you need to read the phrase right now. After three weeks, the Cowboys were 3-0, including wins over contenders Philadelphia and Green Bay (dominating in the latter). They dominated the lines of scrimmage, made big plays, and were considered by far more people than just me (in fact, about 90+ percent of the football world) to be the best team. Are they the best team right now? Of course not. But the point of this thread, if you read the original post as well as the thread title, wasn't to make Super Bowl predictions or long-term predictions. It was simply a question of, after three weeks of the season, who was the best team at the time. Of course the Cowboys aren't one of the best teams now, but I'm kind of confused what that has to do with my post, or why the "LMAO."
I'd put the Steelers at #1 right now. I think they would beat Tennessee, Buffalo and the Giants. I don't see how Tennessee can be #1 with their QB situation. They don't have enough explosiveness on offense. Only the sorry Kansas City Chiefs would give up an 80-yard touchdown run to the fat tub of lard known as LenDale White.
I appreciate all the love for the Steelers. They easily have the toughest remaining schedule so it goes without saying if they take care of business this "Who is #1?" discussion isn't even worth having. Giants @Washington Indianapolis [The complete frauds known as the...] San Diego Chargers Cincy (bye week x2) @New England (Haven't won there in.....?) Dallas (with Romo back) @Baltimore @Tennessee Cleveland
I'd put the Washington Redskins #1 right now. Campbell is solid. Clinton Portis is running well again. Receiving core of Moss/Randle El/Cooley are decent. Defense is also pretty good and will continue to get healthy. Not really great at anything but don't lack anything really either. Very solid team and they find ways to win.
