Tim Jordan - Mad Props

#26
#26
Hmm, I really like all our RBs at this point. Every one of them show promise. They all run "angry," they all have great energy and drive. Have seen that out of every one of them in the chances they've gotten. From John Kelly on down.

But this game was Carlin Fils-Aime's show as a backup RB. 3 touches for 41 yards (13.7 ypc) and 2 TDs was the primo performance of the unit in a backup role.

Ty Chandler's big moment was the kickoff return (91 yds for TD, a kick-six). His 4 touches for 14 yards (3.5 ypc) were fine, but nothing close to that return.

Trey Coleman's 4 carries for 9 yards (2.3 ypc), about the same.

Tim Jordan's 4 for 22 (6.5 ypc) were the best of the Ty-Trey-Tim trio, for sure.

But it was sill Fils-Aime's night, among the backups.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 7 people
#27
#27
If CFA would've gotten one more carry, might be a whole new scenario. Don't sleep on CFA, u only make him stronger
 
#28
#28
This kid has star written all over him. It's like watching the early days of John Kelly playing mop up duty all over again. Suit the kid up and start him. Kelly wasn't put to use soon enough in my opinion.

:good!:

You're saying we should start a younger version of Kelly over a more experienced version of Kelly? How drunk are you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#30
#30
Lies. When we score 7 points on Bama and run for 3.5 yards per carry they will be saying we GASHED them too.

GASHED...

ffs

We will at least score 10 vs Bama and run for 3.6 a carry. Quit selling us short.
 
#34
#34
He's not gonna be 4th string for long. I think CFA is the odd man out. Its Kelly then Chandler/Jordan.

Who looked better yesterday? CFA or Jordan? Come on man, just stop it. Jordan may wind up being a stud here since he evidently looks like he's made of steel when he's wearing shorts and a helmet. But we saw virtually nothing of him yesterday, while CFA showed strength, power, a great burst and some excellent top end speed. NOTHING we saw yesterday should lead anybody to think that Jordan is better than CFA or that he will leap over him on the depth chart anytime some.

And please keep in mind, that both of these guys were playing against freaking Indiana State yesterday. At the end of the day, Kelly is our starter and Chandler is his backup.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#36
#36
This kid has star written all over him. It's like watching the early days of John Kelly playing mop up duty all over again. Suit the kid up and start him. Kelly wasn't put to use soon enough in my opinion.

:good!:

I will have what you we were drinking
 
#37
#37
Who looked better yesterday? CFA or Jordan? Come on man, just stop it. Jordan may wind up being a stud here since he evidently looks like he's made of steel when he's wearing shorts and a helmet. But we saw virtually nothing of him yesterday, while CFA showed strength, power, a great burst and some excellent top end speed. NOTHING we saw yesterday should lead anybody to think that Jordan is better than CFA or that he will leap over him on the depth chart anytime some.

And please keep in mind, that both of these guys were playing against freaking Indiana State yesterday. At the end of the day, Kelly is our starter and Chandler is his backup.

CFA isn't built like an SEC back. Very skinny legs. And unlike Chandler (who also doesn't have an SEC build) he doesn't have blazing speed. CFA is nothing more than a placeholder on the depth/emergency back.

Kelly is our workhorse. After him, its Chandler and Jordan.
 
#39
#39
If CFA would've gotten one more carry, might be a whole new scenario. Don't sleep on CFA, u only make him stronger

He's very quick. I was worried about his weight/durability coming into the season. I think he'll do fine, but we won't really know until he's tested against Florida or UGA.
 
#41
#41
CFA isn't built like an SEC back. Very skinny legs. And unlike Chandler (who also doesn't have an SEC build) he doesn't have blazing speed. CFA is nothing more than a placeholder on the depth/emergency back.

Kelly is our workhorse. After him, its Chandler and Jordan.


Travis Stephens wasn't built like an SEC back either.
His heart was much bigger than most..........
 
#44
#44
CFA is a quality RB. He needed to add some muscle when he arrived, but most freshmen do. If you get a good look, I think you'll see he has added that muscle. CFA has the long thin muscles that contain more fast twitch muscle fibers. He is probably much stronger than he looks. CFA has a bit of a long stride that makes him look slow. Dobbs was similar.

It is always fun to think about what the new kids bring. The backup QB is always the best player on the team etc. I'm guessing CFA has his pass blocking ready, Chandler got blown up Saturday.

I wish the team would publish real 40 times, weight, height, strengths etc. for players.
 
#47
#47
Besides Travis Stephens, I don't remember Tony Thompson being a particularly big back. Think CFA may continue to surprise in a good way.
 
#48
#48
I wasn't big on CFA because he never seemed to have any extra in him.

Although it was ISU, he showed great acceleration and vision to bounce outside, not to mention he showed some deceiving power...which is Kellyesque. I think Chandler pushing him and mirroring Kelly might have rubbed him the right way.
 
#49
#49
CFA isn't built like an SEC back. Very skinny legs. And unlike Chandler (who also doesn't have an SEC build) he doesn't have blazing speed. CFA is nothing more than a placeholder on the depth/emergency back.

Kelly is our workhorse. After him, its Chandler and Jordan.

The SEC build your thinking of is typically for undercenter. Obviously, we would love a 230+ back with 4.4 speed but our scheme is suited for players that are around 200-215 with good quickness and acceleration.
 

Advertisement



Back
Top