Richard "Fig" Newton, 3* 2018 RB, Palmdale, CA (COMMITTED)
Comments
-
1. Your categories for big/small back are completely arbitrary.BallzDeep said:
Not when you get into big back weight range it isn't. Walter Payton was 215, Adrian Petersen 220, Marshawn Lynch 215-230, Steven Jackson 245, Eddie Lacy 260, Jerome Bettis 270. Once you get into big back territory 15 pounds doesn't matter much. I guy that weighs 220 can break just as many if not more tackles than a guy that weighs 15 more pounds. Then it becomes more about their skill set and mentality. However, the difference between 185 to 200 lbs is huge and 200 to 215 lbs. is big. After that a big back is a big back.Tequilla said:
My point is that he's 220 and by your definition a big backBallzDeep said:
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.Tequilla said:
Do you consider CJ Prosise a big back?BallzDeep said:
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.Tequilla said: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
Scarborough at 235+ is a big back
15 lbs for a RB is a big deal
2. Players change their bodies in college. Marshawn was listed at 5'11" 195# in his recruiting profile. So was he big or small? -
The NFL is completely meaningless to this conversation. Warren might have a better career than Gaskin at the next level. Might. Gaskin will unquestionably have a better career at this level.BallzDeep said:
Chris Warren is an NFL talent. Myles Gaskin is not. You clearly don't know shit about football and never played the game. UW would without a doubt be a better team and have a better chance of winning in the playoffs with Warren.dnc said:
You'd rather have Chris Warren than Myles Gaskin. Your a fucking moron.BallzDeep said:
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.NEsnake12 said: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.
Your opinions will no longer be needed.
TYFYS, but WDWYA.
Mark Brunell was a better NFL player than @billyjoecamaro was. Im sure you'd rather have him as your college QB too.
You should change your handle to @SteveSarkisian. -
Of all the dumbest things I've ever read on this board, even the political shit at the tug, this takes the cake.BallzDeep said:
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.NEsnake12 said: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.
Holy FUCK. -
JesusBallzDeep said:
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.Tequilla said:
My point is that he's 220 and by your definition a big backBallzDeep said:
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.Tequilla said:
Do you consider CJ Prosise a big back?BallzDeep said:
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.Tequilla said: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
Scarborough at 235+ is a big back
15 lbs for a RB is a big deal -
Polk was a WR when he was recruited. Ty lucked into him.BallzDeep said:
It's not that hard to find good power backs. Give me a Chris Polk or Lavon Coleman all damn day. We were close to getting Warren. Could have easily dropped Pleasant for Bisharat who will be good for Colorado IMO. We should have taken Cyrus Habibi-Likio who will be a good power back for Oregon IMO. It doesn't have to be some 5* Najee Harris type of guy.Neighbor2972 said:
How many elite power backs are there though? The few out there are all going to USC or SEC schools, they're not coming to fucking Washington. I think its just a lot easier to find smaller backs, and its not worth sacrificing the talent difference to go with the bigger back. Bo Scarbroughs don't grow on trees, especially not on the west coast.BallzDeep said:
No shit Sherlock. I want big backs that are also good.RoadDawg55 said:
The OL plays a much bigger part in wearing a defense down than a RB.BallzDeep said:
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.Tequilla said: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
Nobody has anything against power backs, but the real point is to get good RB's. It's not a hard concept to grasp.
Coleman was trash until he spent two full years with Socha. He was made, not found.
I'm not anti power backs at all. I'm pro good backs.
Myles Gaskin is one of the best backs in the nation. He's tiny. But he's damb good.
Recruit good RBs. Nothing else matters. -
Wake me up when Chris Warren does anything against a remotely good defense.BallzDeep said:
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.NEsnake12 said: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.
-
Why are you so angry all the time?BallzDeep said:
Chris Warren is an NFL talent. Myles Gaskin is not. You clearly don't know shit about football and never played the game. UW would without a doubt be a better team and have a better chance of winning in the playoffs with Warren.dnc said:
You'd rather have Chris Warren than Myles Gaskin. Your a fucking moron.BallzDeep said:
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.NEsnake12 said: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.
Your opinions will no longer be needed.
TYFYS, but WDWYA. -
The fact that this thread has devolved to you taking shots at Myles Gaskin is fucking fascinating. I hope Sean Mcgrew balls out just to spite you.BallzDeep said:
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.NEsnake12 said:
Wake me up when Chris Warren does anything against a remotely good defense.BallzDeep said:
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.NEsnake12 said: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.
-
You're missing the point. WHO THE FUCK CARES ABOUT THE NFL??? We're talking about college football. Gaskin is a better college back.BallzDeep said:
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.NEsnake12 said:
Wake me up when Chris Warren does anything against a remotely good defense.BallzDeep said:
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.NEsnake12 said: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.
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. -
Hey guys I think Ballz is talking about big backs like Dewayne Washington, Ty Eriks, Rich Alexis, Albert Tuipolutu and Johnnie Kirton. He's on to something.
