Marlin Lane

#78
#78
The O line didn't impress me at all last night. They were decent in pass protection, but couldn't get any push when in run blocking.

That said, Poole's performance last night is not all on the O line. There were a couple of times that a lane at least 10' wide was open, just a half a step to his left, and he turned it right into a crowd of bodies. A couple fo more times he could have easily bounced it outside for big gains, but it appeared as if he didn't trust his speed. He ran tennatively a number of times last night.
 
#79
#79
It appeared Bullard got the short end of the stick on quite a few plays. (not trying to bash the kid).

You guys think Jackson gets a look at guard this week in practice?
 
#80
#80
I think the issue is alot of fans always feel the "next guy" is better and will choose to look at things a certain way to support their ideas. Poole had a solid game and was right at 100 yards. Lane had 1/2 the carries and 1/2 the yards. Numbers wise, they were even or Poole was a bit better. Lane did NOTHING to show he is taking Pooles job anytime soon. Sometimes it's good to support the guy who your coach has put out there to start and not sit back trying to find a reason to drop him for the "next guy". JMO
 
#81
#81
volmsbd said:
Finally a sensible post. All of these people talking about the #'s and using that as their basis of who is a better running back, are laughable. I guess they have pocket protectors, and live in their mother's basement and proclaim, one is better than the other becuase the #'s support it! What a joke. Watch Lane move with the ball and you can see who is the better runner. Oh, but the #'s don't support it! Because football is played on paper, right???
Click to expand...

WTF?

Numbers are a better measure than feelings.
 
#82
#82
Considering Montana was playing the run for 90% of the game, I'd say you're acting childish
 
#83
#83
hixsonvol said:
It appeared Bullard got the short end of the stick on quite a few plays. (not trying to bash the kid).

You guys think Jackson gets a look at guard this week in practice?
Click to expand...

You have to remember, it was his first ever start. I could be wrong, but it might have been the first time he's ever got any significant playing time.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#84
#84
buffaloblue said:
So wait, you just demoted Poole to our number 4 back cause he rushed 24 times for 98 yards.

Listen, I am critical of his performance and think at worst him and Lane should split the carries, but your overreacting a bit.
Click to expand...

I would have to agree with the other guy. I have always thought he was a hard worker and good kid with good head on his shoulders, just not a good running back. Most any back on the team and a few from the stands could get his stats. A good back would of had way more yards, he can't see a hole if it was infront of him. If he plays though, i hope he does well.
 
#85
#85
PaceFLVol said:
Poole was right at 100 yards and 4 yards a carry. His YPC was higher than Lane. Everyone is spouting off about how Lane is the answer and the numbers just don't show it. The OLine has some issues. Was it just me or was Bullard getting blown up all game long?
Click to expand...

Heck were you watching? Poole is still running up linemen's back for no apparent reason. His 20 yard run had one really good cut on it(which was the first one). Lane is going to end up being our back come the Florida game. Poole got some okay blocking at times and he missed the holes a lot of times. If he had hit the holes that were there at times maybe the line would've blocked a bit different. Our line could never get in a good rhythm.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#87
#87
PaceFLVol said:
I think the issue is alot of fans always feel the "next guy" is better and will choose to look at things a certain way to support their ideas. Poole had a solid game and was right at 100 yards. Lane had 1/2 the carries and 1/2 the yards. Numbers wise, they were even or Poole was a bit better. Lane did NOTHING to show he is taking Pooles job anytime soon. Sometimes it's good to support the guy who your coach has put out there to start and not sit back trying to find a reason to drop him for the "next guy". JMO
Click to expand...

You can see the difference in the two easily. Lane has a lot more ability. The little TD catch he had showed a lot. I don't think Poole would've scored on that little dump off pass. Everybody cheers for Poole but when it's all said and done Lane will be our starter by midseason if not earlier. He's just a better football player.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#88
#88
PaceFLVol said:
I think the issue is alot of fans always feel the "next guy" is better and will choose to look at things a certain way to support their ideas. Poole had a solid game and was right at 100 yards. Lane had 1/2 the carries and 1/2 the yards. Numbers wise, they were even or Poole was a bit better. Lane did NOTHING to show he is taking Pooles job anytime soon. Sometimes it's good to support the guy who your coach has put out there to start and not sit back trying to find a reason to drop him for the "next guy". JMO
Click to expand...
If Poole keeps fumbling he wont have it long.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#90
#90
Witch Doctor still think Poole is the starter with Lane as the back getting experience, having said that Poole is impatient and abandons his blockers too early looking for the "cutback" constantly(i.e. Chris Johnson..looking for the homerun) Poole helped make the OL look bad. Witch Doctor believe they can fix this or Lane will be the starter by week 4.
BNL
PS. Montana isnt that bad of a team..really, very disciplined, well coached and fast. They'd beat every team we beat last year..minus maybe one
 
Last edited:
#91
#91
jasonvol18 said:
Lane didn't get as many carries and his ypc was 4 until he had that 1 yrd rd run. Plus lane returned punts and caught a td pass. Overall rd 1 to Lane.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Lane was under 4 ypc by a good bit if you actually look at the stats.
 
#92
#92
Now that's the kind of RB UT has been lacking for years.

Quick.
Fast.
Shifty.
Good Vision.

Reminds me of Alabama's Shaun Alexander.
 
#95
#95
PaceFLVol said:
Poole was right at 100 yards and 4 yards a carry. His YPC was higher than Lane. Everyone is spouting off about how Lane is the answer and the numbers just don't show it. The OLine has some issues. Was it just me or was Bullard getting blown up all game long?
Click to expand...

I noticed it when thry got the safety on us.
 
#97
#97
WiseOlVol said:
Now that's the kind of RB UT has been lacking for years.

Quick.
Fast.
Shifty.
Good Vision.

Reminds me of Alabama's Shaun Alexander.
Click to expand...

Shaun was as shifty as Lane. He's more like Hardesty as another poster stated. Shaun was a good back but he didn't have the flash that Lane has. He also didn't go over 100 yards on us. Go Vols!!!!
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#98
#98
Everyone always thinks the new guy is better. Lane may be better but Poole is a good SEC back with a 1,000 yard season under his belt. Lane is a freshman with 37 yards total for his career. Get real people.
 
#99
#99
If our O-Line could hold a block or keep from running into our RB's, Marlin and Tauren would have had a few long runs.
 
#100
#100
volmaniac5674 said:
Everyone always thinks the new guy is better. Lane may be better but Poole is a good SEC back with a 1,000 yard season under his belt. Lane is a freshman with 37 yards total for his career. Get real people.
Click to expand...

+1

It is funny how they mention Poole and a fumble...but forget that Lane fumbled one that was recovered by us and he muffed a punt as well. Selective amnesia I guess. :thumbsup:
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top