Vick Ballard: Solid Performance Doesn't Make RB a Must-Add in Fantasy
You were good, kid, real good. But as long as Donald Brown is around, you'll always be second best, see?
Indianapolis Colts rookie running back Vick Ballard left Sunday's game against the Tennessee Titans as the hero. He racked up 55 rushing yards on just 14 carries and added one reception, which ended in the game-winning touchdown.
And he did it in style:
Combine that with his 103 total yards from last week's game against the Cleveland Browns, and fantasy owners will undoubtedly be ready to claw some eyes out in order to acquire the running back who they were likely quick to let go of.
But there's a little bit of a problem: The Colts asked what Donald Brown can do for them, and he answered emphatically.
In his first game back from a knee scope, Brown racked up 80 yards on just 14 carries, giving him a healthy 5.7 YPC average. Add that to his season numbers, and he quietly has 319 yards (63.8 per game) on 4.3 yards per tote.
The rookie from Mississippi State is getting better by the week, and if he had a full-time job, he would be a vital fantasy asset. But Brown isn't chopped liver. His return—and the fact that he looked so good right away—means a time-share is likely coming.
Who will be more productive in the second half of the season?
And, as you know, time-share is code for "fantasy hell."
Both players are ownable in deep leagues, especially as the Colts find a way to balance the offense behind Andrew Luck. But the uncertainty of the workload makes Brown, who will continue to see the majority of the touches, a fringe starter and Ballard unreliable in smaller leagues with limited bench spots.
Nonetheless, this guy is quickly becoming the best Vick in fantasy football and is someone to keep an eye on.
If he continues to score twisting, spiraling, barrel-roll touchdowns, the Colts won't be able to keep him off the field. In the fake game, however, he belongs on the sidelines.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?