Why do small, fast backs NEVER work...

#26
#26
Uh no. TnT had his great season in 90. Really some poor recent Vol history knowledge on display in this thread.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#27
#27
Uh no. TnT had his great season in 90. Really some poor recent Vol history knowledge on display in this thread.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Happens after you turn 40. It all runs togeather. I will try to Google before I post from here on.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#31
#31
I'd rather have big and fast as opposed to small and fast.

Agility and quickness are different skill sets and the last back we had that excelled in those areas was Travis Stephens.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#32
#32
We don't run a predominant read-option offense. Which I never want to run, BTW...just give me a big back with a good O-line...
 
#33
#33
greg amsler and roland poles... very small backs
 
#36
#36
Honestly read the thread title wrong the first time and thought it was a racist thread.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#40
#40
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< This is a back we could use.
 
#45
#45
Shotgun formation has killed Tennessee's running game since we started running it on short/medium yardage in the late 2000's IMO
 
#48
#48
James "Little Man" Stewart played at 215lbs.
Charlie Garner was to the small side, but not as small as Oregon's James or Florida's Demps.
Tony Thompson is the only really small back we've had of any quality, but he was not in the same league as some of the small backs we've seen of late, such as Oregon's James.
 
#50
#50
LaMichael James didn't do that great last night. If oregon had a "power" back (which I know doesn't exist in the spead) would've probably won that game. Fairley looked exhausted in the middle of the 3rd quarter.
 
Advertisement



Back
Top