xhtdjhtdjmjhntsmhtdmhngd
2006-08-21 12:38:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by The Fantasy King 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Maroney and Rhodes are the best two. Maroney is gonna get a lot of playing time, because dillon is getting old. Rhodes is probably gonna get more carries than Addai.
2006-08-21 08:29:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by Ouchi 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
lets see.... Addai has extra dashing and receiving yards as well as touchdowns, and he's a superbowl up on Maroney. i imagine Addai may be the further constructive professional, yet Maroney will nevertheless be very good. both are in large circumstances as they have good offensive lines, large qbs, and intensely gifted wide receivers. Maroney would get extra constructive stats because he will be in a position to run the ball extra frequently because the Patriots protection is a lot extra constructive, and they are extra probably to play ball administration, conservative football. in the meanwhile, they if truth be told have equivalent probabilities of prevailing a superbowl, even with the undeniable fact that the patriots growing old protection will commence to interrupt interior of many years. because of Addai's superbowl victory, i am going to %. him.
2016-11-30 22:53:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by ag 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Maroney will be better and will have more carries then either Addai or Rhodes.
2006-08-21 08:49:17
·
answer #4
·
answered by OREO 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Im pretty sure that Rhodes has the starting job in Indianapolis, they might split carries though. Corey Dillion definately has the starting job in New England but maroney could take over if he doesnt meet expectations.
2006-08-21 08:15:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by Stargazer 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Rhodes
2006-08-21 08:08:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
addai but id get maoreny and wait till the season begins so you know the starter in indy and get the indy man
2006-08-21 08:35:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
addai
2006-08-21 08:08:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by Andrew S 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
maroney
2006-08-21 08:27:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by okole 3
·
0⤊
0⤋