13 SEC running backs to watch and zero Vols??!!

[butchna]

I always wanted to see Barry Sanders with Emmit Smiths OL. My God....

Wouldn't have had better results IMO. Emmitt's line was grouped together by a master personnel guy in Jimmy Johnson. You had free agents, other team castoffs and both higher round and bottom round draft picks. Jimmy used his Psychology degree in melding their coaching to Emmitt's talent...and that talent has been somewhat lessened by the perception that all he had to do was take handoffs and run to daylight... he was a perfect workhorse back who never tired, carry after carry. And Jimmy's plan was to gradually beat you into submission and the OL was crafted to do just that. Sanders was an artist and sometimes overran his blockers but was so gifted at freelancing, that he'd craft a brilliant run all on his own. Lomas Brown, Mike Utley and others on that line were as physically talented as the Cowboys version (cepting Larry Allen and healthy Erik Williams), just at a disadvantage with an inferior coaching vision and complicated back to block for.

 

[Crazy Ivan]

That's a fair point for some, but not all.

Which is why I said several rather than all.

 

[bamawriter]

Which is why I said several rather than all.

Fair enough.

Here's why I'm critical of Butch's decision to keep riding Hurd despite diminishing returns:

There were 180 backs that had 100 or more carries in 2016. Hurd's 3.7 ranks him 173rd on that list in terms of yards per carry. Of the 7 that matched him or did worse, here's how their teams' overall rushing offenses ranked:

Boone (3.7 ypc) - Cincinnati #117
Catalon (3.64) - Houston #99
Hamilton (3.56) - UCF #104
Strickland (3.49) - Syracuse #115
Hayes (3.38) - CMU #120
James (3.35) - Fresno St #119
Hilliman (2.95) - Boston College #96

And now for the one thing that's not like the others

Hurd (3.7) - Tennessee #37

Of the schools that kept feeding non-performing backs, all but Tennessee simply sucked at running the ball in general. They had no other options. That was clearly not the case in Knoxville, as the other backs did just fine (Kamara was a very respectable 49th out of 180).

You can continue to beat your head against the wall, or you can figure out a way to go around it. Those other schools had no way around the wall. And Tennessee didn't figure out a way around; the wall simply removed itself.

 

[hndog609]

Wouldn't have had better results IMO. Emmitt's line was grouped together by a master personnel guy in Jimmy Johnson. You had free agents, other team castoffs and both higher round and bottom round draft picks. Jimmy used his Psychology degree in melding their coaching to Emmitt's talent...and that talent has been somewhat lessened by the perception that all he had to do was take handoffs and run to daylight... he was a perfect workhorse back who never tired, carry after carry. And Jimmy's plan was to gradually beat you into submission and the OL was crafted to do just that. Sanders was an artist and sometimes overran his blockers but was so gifted at freelancing, that he'd craft a brilliant run all on his own. Lomas Brown, Mike Utley and others on that line were as physically talented as the Cowboys version (cepting Larry Allen and healthy Erik Williams), just at a disadvantage with an inferior coaching vision and complicated back to block for.

Have to disagree, at least to an extent. For one thing while it's one thing to say Detroit's line totally sucked it's another to say it was in the class of the line Smith ran behind. Once that is in consideration you have to mention that Smith shared the backfield with a HOF QB as well. Life get much easier for QB or RB when the defense has to honor both. During Sander's 10yr career Detroit's average passer rating was 75.4 and they topped 80 twice. During Smith's first 10 the Cowboys average passer rating 83.2 and was only under 80 3 times. That's the kind of thing that matters.

It's lunacy to diss Smith. He was successful at every level of play from HS to the HOF. He was a great RB. I've never been able to convince myself that had Sanders been on those teams he'd have accomplished even more, perhaps a lot more, though that's purely speculative.

If you get bored at any point this is a pretty serious statistical comparison between the two.

Sportatistics :: Barry vs Emmitt: who's the Greatest of All Time; GOAT??? (and the stats to prove it)

 

[KBVol]

And that's the problem. There was no reason to wait until that point, unless one was hoping Jalen Hurd would magically transform into someone other than Jalen Hurd.



There were plenty of chances. Not taking a chance doesn't mean the chance didn't exist.



True. But if the 5* guy isn't performing he should give the 3* guy more carries so that the running game might perform better.

Agree. Or, and this is a crazy idea that evidently never crossed Butch's mind, he couldve even just let his other, more talented 5 star play rather than rot on the sideline.....both he and the 3 star were better than the guy that got the lionshare of carries.

 

[butchna]

Have to disagree, at least to an extent. For one thing while it's one thing to say Detroit's line totally sucked it's another to say it was in the class of the line Smith ran behind. Once that is in consideration you have to mention that Smith shared the backfield with a HOF QB as well. Life get much easier for QB or RB when the defense has to honor both. During Sander's 10yr career Detroit's average passer rating was 75.4 and they topped 80 twice. During Smith's first 10 the Cowboys average passer rating 83.2 and was only under 80 3 times. That's the kind of thing that matters.

It's lunacy to diss Smith. He was successful at every level of play from HS to the HOF. He was a great RB. I've never been able to convince myself that had Sanders been on those teams he'd have accomplished even more, perhaps a lot more, though that's purely speculative.

If you get bored at any point this is a pretty serious statistical comparison between the two.

Sportatistics :: Barry vs Emmitt: who's the Greatest of All Time; GOAT??? (and the stats to prove it)

Troy was a deserved HOFer and on another team most likely would have had loftier numbers but his and the team's greatness was welded to the team wide mission to physically wear down the other team. The OL was a prime piece of that but they couldn't make Derric Lassic or Sherman Williams great backs. When Troy was dinged up in his 3rd season, a young airman in Albuquerque had to argue down the Dallas fans in his dorm clamoring for Steve Buerlein as the team rolled along. That airman insisted that yes, they could win a SB with Buerlein...but Aikman was a STAR. Ironically that year's playoffs had the Detroit Lions defeat (soundly) the recently returned Aikman and his Cowboys for Barry Sanders only playoff win. Next season the loudmouths had to enjoy the beginning of a dynasty with said QB recently dismissed by them. Point is they could WIN with QBs other than Aikman. They won important games with Bernie Kosar,Rodney Peete and....current coach Jason Garrett. But when Emmitt held out the beginning of that second SB season, they dropped the first two games in pitiful fashion before Jerry ponied up. Same OL, same QB, same Michael Irvin, same Jay Novacek, same dominant defense...minus the ENGINE. Being a Bears fan, I'm the furtherest from an Emmitt Smith worshipper. I didn't cotton to his unabashed dogged pursuit of Sweetness's record. Would've preferred it have gone to Sanders who professed to not care about the record. No doubt if he hadn't up and retired, he would have put that record out of reach but no RB has ever maximized his team's OL better than the guy who ended up as the NFL's all time leading rusher. Those guys were great as a unit but they were legendary because of the RB they blocked for. You cobble that lineup and splat it on another team and they would not be distinguished as they are.

 

[DawgInterloper]

They keep on dreaming that Chubb will return to his freshman form and it's never going to happen. Any injury that tramatic isn't going to return back to normal, no matter who the surgeon or the therapist. Ask M. Lattimore

I won't deny that Chubb wasn't as explosive in 2016, but I think he did pretty well coming off a mid-season 2015 injury. Keep in mind that he spent a lot of the offseason rehabbing and getting back into shape. It was a new offensive staff and Nick didn't get any live carries in the spring. He also seem to have some soreness in the first half of the year, but I didn't notice any limping in the latter part of the season. Looked a bit more tentative at times too, maybe some confidence issues but that should improve with time.

There were other factors too. The 2016 offensive line missed a lot of assignments, maybe because they were adjusting to changes by the new staff. And with a freshman qb who struggled a lot, opposing defenses mostly set up to stop the run first. If Eason improves, not a guarantee I know, that should help Georgia's running game.

In other words, I'm not taking it for granted, but do think Nick has a chance to improve, maybe even get back to his pre-injury form in 2017.

 

[Stacks Robinson]

I love John Kelly, but as a back up running back in two season he hasn't reached 800 yards. Most of us here think Kelly will do great things for us. Lets not overreact because ESPN isn't gushing over a mediocre team. Every back they listed is a proven asset. Have a good season this season and we will be back in the headlines.

He won't be a household name, but give it a year and watch the Kelly/Chandler tandem come to life.

 

[TNnative]

Where did I mention any yards I expected? I said don't expect people to gush over a running back that hasn't proven anything. In simple terms, we all know what we have in Kelly, why are we talking about this?

IMO, boredom and a basic need to argue about something.