Willis McGahee Is Coming Back
Willis McGahee and Todd Heap had very disappointing performances last year. Both of them are former Pro-Bowlers, but couldn't even manage to put up decent numbers, nor could they stay healthy.
But of the two, McGahee had an even more disappointing season. After a 1200 yard Pro-Bowl season, he barely mustered half of that yardage.
McGahee ran the ball 170 times for 641 yards, a career low, but managed to score seven touchdowns. He peaked late season, and scored a touchdown of a 77 yard run, his longest of his career.
Beside that one highlight, he had a dismal year, especially considering he went to the Pro-Bowl in 2007, just a few months earlier.
Following a scary neck injury in the AFC Championship, McGahee lost the starting job for the Ravens during the offseason to Ray Rice. Fortunately for McGahee, All-Pro Le'Ron McClain was moved to his natural position at fullback.
McGahee and Rice will be splitting carries this year, with McClain serving as a blocker and a receiver. While McClain did see some carries and scored a goal-line touchdown, he will not see as much running action as last year
The dual running back attack took form at Sunday's home opener against the Kansas City Chiefs. While all the talk is about Joe Flacco, McGahee was silently making a comeback.
While starter Ray Rice rushed for 108 yards, he didn't score any touchdowns. McGahee did though, in fact he had two, a rushing touchdown and a receiving one. He rushed for a total of 44 yards and scored on a fourth and goal to seal the game away.
McGahee also caught four passes for 31 yards and a touchdown. Showing versatility as a receiver really helps his look, stats, and performance. While he may not be posting Comeback Player of the Year numbers, he is certainty in contention for the award.
McGahee is most likely going to be the number two running back on the roster, but that won't stop him from coming back and sticking it to all his critics last year.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?