Stop with the Eddie Lacy talk.

[OSUfan]

Originally Posted by D's Nuts and Bolts

Yeah your right we have no need for a complete back here. What a wasted pick that would be.

I did not say that but nice attempt at spinning it. We do need a complete back he just isn't the one I would like to have. He is a north/south runner. He is not a guy that is going to cut it back with a lot od success or stretch the edge at the next level. Just my opinion not asking you to agree.

[RIPChrisHenry]

Originally Posted by pulses

I think Lacy will run around the 4.5 range at the combine.

my guy....lacy will run in the 4.4's

[RIPChrisHenry]

Originally Posted by dr1441

T Rich wasn't worth moving up to the top 5 to get and neither is Lacy. But if we are sitting there and he is on the board, depending on who else falls he should be in serious consideration in the first round.

100% agree. Lacy isnt richardson but he is better than david willson...both first rounders. somewhere between sounds right to me...and u know someone will reach just to take the best back in the draft.

[RIPChrisHenry]

Originally Posted by momadance02

T Rich was completely worth moving up to get. He's a stud.

no he wasnt. doug martin outplayed richardson in all aspects....

[momadance02]

Originally Posted by RIPChrisHenry

no he wasnt. doug martin outplayed richardson in all aspects....

I guess they can't both be good then, huh.


Some of you crack me up.

[D's Nuts and Bolts]

Originally Posted by OSUfan

I did not say that but nice attempt at spinning it. We do need a complete back he just isn't the one I would like to have. He is a north/south runner. He is not a guy that is going to cut it back with a lot od success or stretch the edge at the next level. Just my opinion not asking you to agree.

I know from your other postings your a Randle and Gilispee fan, do you see them as complete backs? Or are you thinking someone else?

[Stewee28]

Originally Posted by berserkerone88

At this stage in the draft, people look into guys who went to smaller or lesser known schools (Vandy isn't exactly a football powerhouse after all) and fall in love with a guy who is "under the radar" and gets the draftnik in us all geeked.
I've done it. We all do it. Just have to be reasonable about it.
Not lie about Lacy being slow like some have.

This is sooooo true. I dont know why everyone seems to want to steal an "under the radar" type player in the draft. I know everyone does it, but when its one of your biggest needs, you address it in the first two rounds with the TOP TALENT. I want someone to come in and start day one.

Lacy is the "complete package" (size, speed, strength, vision and hands) and their doesnt seem to be very many of those RBs in this years draft. Why pass on him?

[Stewee28]

Originally Posted by OSUfan

I did not say that but nice attempt at spinning it. We do need a complete back he just isn't the one I would like to have. He is a north/south runner. He is not a guy that is going to cut it back with a lot od success or stretch the edge at the next level. Just my opinion not asking you to agree.

Can you explain your reasoning behind this? Just an honest question. Id like to know your input on why you only view him as a North / South runner. His size?

[Hammerthis]

Originally Posted by Dmac18

No way in hell do i want him. He is a product of Alabama's Oline and great offense. Slow slow and did i say slow. Here come come a tackler wonder what Lacy is gona Hmmmm spin that's it. He may turn into a decent back but not a home run hitter.

First of all, Eddie will go too high in the draft for us to get him.
Secondly, what are you talking about? Any team in need of a RB with a chance to get Eddie will likely grab him.
Speed is a great thing for a RB to have but the ability to either break free-run over or juke a would be tackler is more valuable. Guess what? This kid can do all of that and he's smart.
He's a smarter version of Corey Dillon, just not as fast.
IMHO he'll be a highly successful RB in the NFL.

[OSUfan]

Originally Posted by D's Nuts and Bolts

I know from your other postings your a Randle and Gilispee fan, do you see them as complete backs? Or are you thinking someone else?

Absolutely see them as complete backs. However that term is relative to who is using the term. The age of the single back carry the ball 35 times a game is basically over. You will have a Peterson here or there. Even as good as Foster is they still use Tate a good bit.

What I am looking for in a back would be more relative. 15 to 20 carries a game with Ellis getting 10-15 as well. A guy that can make people miss, has outstanding vision, can pick up a blitz, great hands out of the backfield, and the ability to cutback and get to the edge consistently.

Randle and Gillislee have those things. I do not see Lacy as an edge or cutback runner. He does not have much make you miss to his game. A spin here or there other than that he is lower the shoulder and take you on. He is not nearly the receiver out of the backfield that either of these guys. Vision is hard to judge with him as he plays behind the line of the 33rd NFL team.

[OSUfan]

Originally Posted by Stewee28

Can you explain your reasoning behind this? Just an honest question. Id like to know your input on why you only view him as a North / South runner. His size?

Watching him. Size has zero to do with it. I do not judge runners by their stature.

[Brunz]

Originally Posted by Dmac18

No way in hell do i want him. He is a product of Alabama's Oline and great offense. Slow slow and did i say slow. Here come come a tackler wonder what Lacy is gona Hmmmm spin that's it. He may turn into a decent back but not a home run hitter.

Richardson MUST **** too, right?

[berserkerone88]

Originally Posted by OSUfan

Absolutely see them as complete backs. However that term is relative to who is using the term. The age of the single back carry the ball 35 times a game is basically over. You will have a Peterson here or there. Even as good as Foster is they still use Tate a good bit.

What I am looking for in a back would be more relative. 15 to 20 carries a game with Ellis getting 10-15 as well. A guy that can make people miss, has outstanding vision, can pick up a blitz, great hands out of the backfield, and the ability to cutback and get to the edge consistently.

Randle and Gillislee have those things. I do not see Lacy as an edge or cutback runner. He does not have much make you miss to his game. A spin here or there other than that he is lower the shoulder and take you on. He is not nearly the receiver out of the backfield that either of these guys. Vision is hard to judge with him as he plays behind the line of the 33rd NFL team.

Foster had more carries than Peterson.
Ponder, Gerhart and Harvin cancel out with Tate, Forsett and Schaub essentially.

As for the bolded, that is just wrong.
He GASHED Notre Dame on cut backs.
He uses the spin more than here or there.
Not too forget the sheer irony of you saying the here or there spin, when Randle is lucky to have the here or there broken tackle.

[berserkerone88]

Alfred Morris
Marshawn Lynch
Frank Gore
Jamaal Charles
Stevan Ridley
Reggie Bush
Doug Martin
Ahmad Bradshaw
BenJarvus Green-Ellis
Steven Jackson
Chris Johnson
Trent Richardson
Michael Turner

Excluding injuries as best I could, these are guys I would qualify as feature backs.
Meaning no one else on their teams had over 100 carries.

The RBBC theory is just that. A theory. Only teams that have EXCEPTIONAL QB play have been successful with it. If you look at the teams without a top QB and had multiple runners over 100 carries they all have one thing in common, they were watching at home in the playoffs.

[goalpost]

Originally Posted by berserkerone88

Alfred Morris
Marshawn Lynch
Frank Gore
Jamaal Charles
Stevan Ridley
Reggie Bush
Doug Martin
Ahmad Bradshaw
BenJarvus Green-Ellis
Steven Jackson
Chris Johnson
Trent Richardson
Michael Turner

Excluding injuries as best I could, these are guys I would qualify as feature backs.
.

I agree pretty much with this list assuming you add the aforementioned Peterson and Foster. I might add Rice but Baltimore seems at times not to overuse him at times

[dr1441]

Originally Posted by momadance02

T Rich was completely worth moving up to get. He's a stud.

He wasn't worth what it would have taken for us to move up.

Sure he is a stud and worth a top 5 pick, but he didn't make sense for us to give up 2 first for him.

[berserkerone88]

Originally Posted by goalpost

I agree pretty much with this list assuming you add the aforementioned Peterson and Foster. I might add Rice but Baltimore seems at times not to overuse him at times

I figured those were a given and believe it or not, Bernard Pierce had over 100 carries, so to be more than generous, I left Rice off.

Granted, no team without injury had two runners who averaged the 15-20/10-15 per game split like he suggests.

[Hammerthis]

[quote=OSUfan;2782195]Absolutely see them as complete backs. However that term is relative to who is using the term. The age of the single back carry the ball 35 times a game is basically over. You will have a Peterson here or there. Even as good as Foster is they still use Tate a good bit. What I am looking for in a back would be more relative. 15 to 20 carries a game with Ellis getting 10-15 as well. A guy that can make people miss, has outstanding vision, can pick up a blitz, great hands out of the backfield, and the ability to cutback and get to the edge consistently. Randle and Gillislee have those things. I do not see Lacy as an edge or cutback runner. He does not have much make you miss to his game. A spin here or there other than that he is lower the shoulder and take you on. He is not nearly the receiver out of the backfield that either of these guys. Vision is hard to judge with him as he plays behind the line of the 33rd NFL team.[/

Lacy can and does make defenders miss. He's a big back so picking up the blitz shouldn't be a problem.
We need a RB who can not only make defenders miss but also have the power to run you over. Lacy will flat run you over and he can juke with the best.
Also, IMHO we do need a RB that can carry the ball 30 to 35 X a game.
Having a RB like Lacy would cause Andy to be a little less involved and as a result a little less predictable.

[OSUfan]

Originally Posted by berserkerone88

Foster had more carries than Peterson.
Ponder, Gerhart and Harvin cancel out with Tate, Forsett and Schaub essentially.

As for the bolded, that is just wrong.
He GASHED Notre Dame on cut backs.
He uses the spin more than here or there.
Not too forget the sheer irony of you saying the here or there spin, when Randle is lucky to have the here or there broken tackle.

I will absolutely concede broken tackles. Pretty much goes without saying as they are completely different backs in running style. That is the game of Lacy due to his body type.

Obviously, I would root for any player we selected. If Lacy was our first selection (for the record I would not hate the selection as we need to upgrade our running game) then I would hope that we would commit to the power running game.

I think the style of WC that we run could seriously thrive working off power running. It is something the staff is going to have to be committed to. Many times Alabama goes complete power lining up with 2 TEs and their TEs can block.

[OSUfan]

[quote=Hammerthis;2782401]

Originally Posted by OSUfan

Absolutely see them as complete backs. However that term is relative to who is using the term. The age of the single back carry the ball 35 times a game is basically over. You will have a Peterson here or there. Even as good as Foster is they still use Tate a good bit. What I am looking for in a back would be more relative. 15 to 20 carries a game with Ellis getting 10-15 as well. A guy that can make people miss, has outstanding vision, can pick up a blitz, great hands out of the backfield, and the ability to cutback and get to the edge consistently. Randle and Gillislee have those things. I do not see Lacy as an edge or cutback runner. He does not have much make you miss to his game. A spin here or there other than that he is lower the shoulder and take you on. He is not nearly the receiver out of the backfield that either of these guys. Vision is hard to judge with him as he plays behind the line of the 33rd NFL team.[/

Lacy can and does make defenders miss. He's a big back so picking up the blitz shouldn't be a problem.
We need a RB who can not only make defenders miss but also have the power to run you over. Lacy will flat run you over and he can juke with the best.
Also, IMHO we do need a RB that can carry the ball 30 to 35 X a game.
Having a RB like Lacy would cause Andy to be a little less involved and as a result a little less predictable.

I do not think with him that it is as much making them miss as difficulty tackling him. He is a runner that you certainly have to wrap up.

[berserkerone88]

Originally Posted by OSUfan

I will absolutely concede broken tackles. Pretty much goes without saying as they are completely different backs in running style. That is the game of Lacy due to his body type.

Obviously, I would root for any player we selected. If Lacy was our first selection (for the record I would not hate the selection as we need to upgrade our running game) then I would hope that we would commit to the power running game.

I think the style of WC that we run could seriously thrive working off power running. It is something the staff is going to have to be committed to.

If you cannot break tackles, you are not a complete back.
Long runs are really just bonuses.
Foster has a long of 74 in his career.
Three years ago. The last two years is 46 and 43.

[bfine32]

Originally Posted by Brunz

Richardson MUST **** too, right?

Well he did average 3.6 YPC this year and fumbled 3 times.

[dr1441]

Originally Posted by bfine32

Well he did average 3.6 YPC this year and fumbled 3 times.

2 of the 4 years Benson was here he averaged less yards per carry and also more fumbles. People still wanted him here.

[berserkerone88]

Originally Posted by dr1441

2 of the 4 years Benson was here he averaged less yards per carry and also more fumbles. People still wanted him here.

I believe bfine is/was one of them

[OSUfan]

Originally Posted by berserkerone88

If you cannot break tackles, you are not a complete back.
Long runs are really just bonuses.
Foster has a long of 74 in his career.
Three years ago. The last two years is 46 and 43.

Do you feel this staff would be committed to an offense that would work off of the strengths of a guy like Lacy. We all hear them talk about the run game but even when the run game is working they just seem reluctant to use it.