Let the RB controversy begin!

#1
molsen81

molsen81

San Francisco Bay Area Vol!
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
5,290
Likes
2,388
#1
Well, all three looked great to me although I know we have yet to see the full potential. Coker looked pretty consistant. Arian did his thing slapping defenders off of him. We finally saw what all the hoopla over Hardesty was about. I like AF and he's due, but something tells me MH will be on the field a lot. By the way, I think that there would have been less fair catching on PRs if Hefney or Taylor had the duty over Rogers. I was thinking Hefney could take a few back for 6 this season. That's just my opinion.
 
#2
#2
we could have a dynamic duo on our hands before long. hardesty looked more impressive than foster (and that's saying a lot, because foster ran very hard and looked good). coker looked solid; he could be something special in the making. wasn't impressed with yancey. he fumbled and danced around too much in the backfield.

at least rogers didn't fumble any of his punts. his calls for fair catches were smart and when he had room to run he just took the 5-7 yards cal gave him. hefney has a history of muffing punts along with lucas taylor. i think taylor had about 4 or 5 fumbles last season on punts and kickoffs. i'd keep him off the special teams unit.
 
#3
#3
05_never_again said:
we could have a dynamic duo on our hands before long. hardesty looked more impressive than foster (and that's saying a lot, because foster ran very hard and looked good). coker looked solid; he could be something special in the making. wasn't impressed with yancey. he fumbled and danced around too much in the backfield.

at least rogers didn't fumble any of his punts. his calls for fair catches were smart and when he had room to run he just took the 5-7 yards cal gave him. hefney has a history of muffing punts along with lucas taylor. i think taylor had about 4 or 5 fumbles last season on punts and kickoffs. i'd keep him off the special teams unit.
Click to expand...
Ya know, I forgot about Taylor's fumbles last season because after Saturday I forgot about last season all together!
 
#4
#4
I think we should go for the three-headed beast. The line proved capable of blocking for all three. Switch it up, keep the legs fresh.
 
#5
#5
molsen81 said:
Ya know, I forgot about Taylor's fumbles last season because after Saturday I forgot about last season all together!
Click to expand...

as negative as this may sound and as much as i would like to, i will never forget about last season and i hope the team doesn't either. they need to remember how bad that felt and how embarrassing it was so it will never happen again (notice the username).

it was really cool to watch the game last night and notice the little things (meachem's block that helped hardesty go all the way, etc.) that would have never happened last season happening so far this year. let's keep this up!!
 
#6
#6
I think all three looked good. However, if Coker's big asset is his speed then I am disappointed. He finally hit a seem on a run in the 4th quarter and he should have hit pay dirt if he is as fast as advertised. He hit the seem with nothing but green in front of him and got ran down from behind. Hardesty is going to be insane if he stays healthy. He straight up ran over and through a guy that had him completely wrapped up. Geez!
 
#7
#7
I think Foster remains starter but Hardesty is on his heels.
 
#8
#8
The Three back monster is a much better approach. Trooper's work with the receivers was displayed. All I can say is that we're back !
 
#9
#9
I think the biggest difference in all the backs was pass protection. AF was on the button and did a great job picking up his blocks. I also think that they were focused on and even spying AF a little. Now with the other backs showing what they can do and EA and the WR playing so well I think AF will be able to pick up his production big time.
 
#11
#11
I'm with LetMeStay....Bring them all 3 in and let them work....Foster is a power running and so is Hardesty....Foster is better at making people miss and Hardesty can fly if he hits the hole.....Coker looked real good...He looked to have the most speed out of the 3 backs we saw.....We could have a 3 headed monster at tail back...I would say that at least 2 of those 3 backs (if not all 3) could have 1000 yards rushing this season with the way Cutcliffe calls plays
 
#12
#12
#10_Ainge_#10 said:
I'm with LetMeStay....Bring them all 3 in and let them work....Foster is a power running and so is Hardesty....Foster is better at making people miss and Hardesty can fly if he hits the hole.....Coker looked real good...He looked to have the most speed out of the 3 backs we saw.....We could have a 3 headed monster at tail back...I would say that at least 2 of those 3 backs (if not all 3) could have 1000 yards rushing this season with the way Cutcliffe calls plays
Click to expand...

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. Three backs with 1000 yards would be insane. I can't recall that ever happening. If we pull off something that impressive, along with our good defense, I'd say we'd definitely be in the hunt for the national title.
 
#13
#13
kptvol said:
Let's not get ahead of ourselves. Three backs with 1000 yards would be insane. I can't recall that ever happening. If we pull off something that impressive, along with our good defense, I'd say we'd definitely be in the hunt for the national title.
Click to expand...
I don't think we would do it but that would be nice, I know teams have done it.....I mean I'd say there isn't enough carries to get all 3 a 1000 yards rushing....but I know Riggs and Houston could do it, surely Foster and Hardesty could....I believe Foster is way better than Riggs, he makes more people miss than Riggs did
 
#14
#14
I don't think there is any such thing as a RB controversey. You can never have too much depth at tailback. After seeing the effects of the way we abused Foster last year, I think it would be great to limit his carries to 18-20 a game and give 10-12 apiece to Hardesty and Coker.
 
#15
#15
We need a Travis Henry type power back....other than Hardesty's great run... I saw a lot of "dancing" around the holes instead of hitting them hard. Foster is "probably" the better overall back...but he needs to run harder.....just my lame opinion. Don't get me wrong everyone played great Sat vs Cal...I'm just splitting hairs mostly.:good!:
 
#16
#16
#10_Ainge_#10 said:
I believe Foster is way better than Riggs, he makes more people miss than Riggs did
Click to expand...

All 3 of them are a lot shiftier looking than Houston/Riggs. When they get the ball in space, they look a lot more dynamic than anything we've lined up with in the past few years.
 
#17
#17
tuxman said:
We need a Travis Henry type power back....other than Hardesty's great run... I saw a lot of "dancing" around the holes instead of hitting them hard.
Click to expand...

I agree with that somewhat. Foster played well, but I would have liked to have seen him "run it up in there" with a little more authority. It's tough to criticize him though since he got a lot of his yards on his own. The o-line played well, but they weren't exactly blowing Cal away.
 
#18
#18
Cal was stacking up to stop the run, thank goodness our WR's learned to catch and block over the summer!
 
#19
#19
This is Cut we're talking about here. I think there will be more passing than running. If that's the case, then what's the point of having multiple RBs? I remember one featured RB in a Cut offense and that was Jay Graham. My main concern is rhythm. AF needs to constantly get the ball or does anyone disagree?
 
#20
#20
Hardesty had the better game, but injuries have kept him off the field. Foster is still the more proven, experienced back. Great 1, 2 punch though.
 
#21
#21
Waht about Travis Henry and Jamal Lewis ? They weren't featured backs?
 
#22
#22
i think their would be far less fair catching on punts if we actually would block he would have gotten killed and fumbled if he tried to return those
 
#23
#23
molsen81 said:
This is Cut we're talking about here. I think there will be more passing than running. If that's the case, then what's the point of having multiple RBs? I remember one featured RB in a Cut offense and that was Jay Graham. My main concern is rhythm. AF needs to constantly get the ball or does anyone disagree?
Click to expand...

I've said this before . . . IMO the notion that Cutcliffe is a gunslinger is wrong. He's always going to run the ball as much as the opposing team will let him.
 
#24
#24
Yeah, Foster is clearly better than Riggs. All Riggs did was run for 1100 yards and beat out Foster in direct competition. Also, I don't know that any of these guys are better in the open field than Cedric Houston. Are they better overall backs than Ced? Probably. But if you got Cedric in the open field on a screen pass or something, you could bank on him taking it all the way. The problem was that we only tried to use him to pound the rock. Gerald Riggs was the bruiser, Cedric had the moves. They should have used Ced more like how the Eagles use Brian Westbrook. I think with a better offensive strategy, Houston could have been pretty special. We just didn't put him in positions to use his best skills.
 
#25
#25
mattvols said:
i think their would be far less fair catching on kick offs if we actually would block he would have gotten killed and fumbled if he tried to return those
Click to expand...

There's just not much you can do when the opposing punter is hanging the ball up high. I was happy that Special Teams weren't even slightly eventful. That is an improvement.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top