Anyone ever thought that the amount of big backs in Natty games in the past few years is an artifact of Bama's CFB dominance?
Also anyone think that (as that is probably the case) looking at 'winning a Natty' may not be the right criteria to judge this by as that is one team per year and their success is not likely to be wholly mediated by their running back?
In the 2015 class UW went after both Chris Warren and Myles Gaskin. Warren was the higher rated recruit and undeniably a "power back" at 6'3 240. His highlights were more him just running over people while Gaskin's showcased his vision and elusiveness a bit more. I think everyone on this bored would rather have Gaskin than Warren and wouldn't think twice about it.
FUCK NO! Warren is a fucking beast! I would trade him for Gaskin in a heart beat. Congratulations, you just won Doog of the year with that one.
Wake me up when Chris Warren does anything against a remotely good defense.
Up until this season he was a back up to another NFL talent in Deonte Foreman. I'll be sure to bump this thread when Warren is drafted ahead of Gaskin if Gaskin gets drafted at all. And yeah, Gaskin is running all over great defenses in the Pac-12. Those defenses for Oregon, Cal, Oregon State, Arizona, Arizona State, and WSU were all so good last season.
You're missing the point. WHO THE FUCK CARES ABOUT THE NFL??? We're talking about college football. Gaskin is a better college back.
Warren ran over JV defenses in Texas Tech and Oklahoma St... then played decent against the Cal team you just trashed. Every other game was low YPC.
Like I said, wake me up when Chris Warren as a great performance against a legit defense like Gaskin did last year at Utah or in the Pac12 championship game against Colorado.
Like I said, Warren was a back up to an NFL draft pick and still managed to have a couple of big games. Texas was also a bad team last season overall. Gaskin was in a much better situation. Gaskin had a good game against Utah. I'll give him that. Colorado's front seven was trash. That's not all that impressive. Gaskin doesn't suck. He's a good, solid college back against Pac-12 competition. But he gets tripped up easily, doesn't break many tackles, doesn't have elite speed, and he's not gonna carry a team on his back against playoff competition. It won't happen. I would have rather had Warren against Bama for sure.
Colorado had the 44th best run defense in college football last year, was 6th in the Pac12 but still better than all but 1 Big12 team (Kansas St.). I'm sorry that you hate facts.
Doesn't matter. Warren actually tore his PCL the 4th game of the season last year and was out the rest of the season. Before that he was running wild on those Big12 defenses. Colorado's run defense was not stout and Coleman ran it down their throats as well. Nothing Chris Warren couldn't have done if he was on our roster. Sorry your such a fucking doog you can't admit when other players are better than UW players. I would take Ronald Jones over Gaskin as well.
Defense. Singular. Oklahoma St, who was ranked in the 80s overall for rush defense. Keep trying.
How many times to I have to fucking say it before you get it RETARD! He was a fucking back up behind an NFL draft pick. It's the equivalent of Lavon Coleman have a break out game against Arizona and then tearing his knee up soon after that. Warren is better than Gaskin. Fucking get OVER it bitch or go back to eating Kim's ass on Doogman.
The big back argument is vastly overrated to me as what is a big back and what's the purpose of one?
As with most things, all things being equal you take the size ... but I'd take talent ahead of size
I would consider a big back a RB that's 215+, a medium back is 200-215, and a small back less than 200. The purpose is having a big motherfucker that can break tackles, get yards after contact, and wear down defenses so that your team can finish strong in the fourth quarter against a defense that's tired of tackling a big motherfucker. But no I'm sure your right and every NFL coach is wrong and every college coach winning national championships is wrong. You guys are right. Big backs don't matter. What was I thinking.
Do you consider CJ Prosise a big back?
Big back in terms of size, yes. Power back in terms of physicality, no. He's more of a finesse back which is why he's a 3rd string back up and the starter is 250 lb Feast Mode.
My point is that he's 220 and by your definition a big back
Scarborough at 235+ is a big back
15 lbs for a RB is a big deal
And Scarborough is easily 250. Most coaches don't list their RB's as weighing more than 230. They like it when defenders are surprised by how heavy their RB is when they try to tackle him. Psychological war fare.
Jesus
It's the truth. Eddie Lacy was listed at 230 when he played for Bama but he was more like 245. Same with Trent Richardson at Bama. The Seahawks listed Marshawn at 215. But from his own mouth he plays at 225-230.
Lacy was 231 at the NFL combine. I'm gonna need more evidence than your opinion that he weighed 15 pounds more than that in college.
Deshawn Wynn was Florida's leading rusher in 2006 and his recruiting profile listed him at 215 pounds. So maybe he was a "power" back after all. His 699 yards that season were clearly a testament to the superiority of recruiting power backs.
Just stay down, dude.
Lol you're fucking pathetic. Pulling up their fucking recruiting profiles with their high school listed weights you dumbass. Florida had Tebow as their power back. Freeman was 200+ in college and like I said before the midgets can have power at only 200-210. Charles was exactly 200 lbs and is probably the best one you can find but then again Texas also supplemented their running game with Vince Young so it wasn't on Charles to put the team on his back. But good job trying to find all the outliers. Big backs win chips. The facts are on my side. I'm in the majority. You're trying to argue for the minority.
Seriously, the nerve of pulling up recruiting profiles to make a point on the recruiting bored as we discuss whether a specific running back recruit is too small to win a championship with. I haven't been a big fan of yours, but I have to admit this is an excellent point. @AIRWOLF owes all of us an apology for this shit.
Your uniformed opinion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @AIRWOLF's actual research.
Deshawn Wynn was Florida's leading rusher in 2006 and his recruiting profile listed him at 215 pounds. So maybe he was a "power" back after all. His 699 yards that season were clearly a testament to the superiority of recruiting power backs.
Just stay down, dude.
Lol you're fucking pathetic. Pulling up their fucking recruiting profiles with their high school listed weights you dumbass. Florida had Tebow as their power back. Freeman was 200+ in college and like I said before the midgets can have power at only 200-210. Charles was exactly 200 lbs and is probably the best one you can find but then again Texas also supplemented their running game with Vince Young so it wasn't on Charles to put the team on his back. But good job trying to find all the outliers. Big backs win chips. The facts are on my side. I'm in the majority. You're trying to argue for the minority.
I am beginning to appreciate the genius of your satire.
Comments
And no.
This thread, more than ever before.
Your uniformed opinion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @AIRWOLF's actual research.
Because nobody is as dumb as you are pretending to be.