Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
EBF

Official Nick Chubb - RB Georgia, Dynasty

Recommended Posts

Love Chub, still think Fournette has way more upside than any rb in college right now and it's not even close.

How is it not close? Chubb beat Fournette in every statistical category in 2014. Chubb has a thicker build. Fournette is maybe a little faster and had more hype(that he didn't live up to)

A little? Fournette IMO has the most upside of any rb since AP as far as the combination of size, speed and power. He started off slow but the last half of the year he really started to come on. Like I said I love Chubb, I just don't see him on the same level as LF.

Hopefully they both stay healthy and we can revisit this debate in about 5-10 years. I think they both have stud potential but LF has uber stud potential.

Fournette doesn't have the cutting ability as Peterson and doesn't have the same type of tackle-breaking ability as Chubb.

How do you guys know so much about these players at this juncture? Youtube? A couple of games on national TV? I find these analysis hard to believe with confidence.

Because I watch a lot of football players on every level (NFL, college, high school) and compare physical talent and movement skills. There are times when I will watch video one frame at a time to discern specific movement skills. There are things you can easily miss when watching at normal speed or even live.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love Chub, still think Fournette has way more upside than any rb in college right now and it's not even close.

How is it not close? Chubb beat Fournette in every statistical category in 2014. Chubb has a thicker build. Fournette is maybe a little faster and had more hype(that he didn't live up to)

A little? Fournette IMO has the most upside of any rb since AP as far as the combination of size, speed and power. He started off slow but the last half of the year he really started to come on. Like I said I love Chubb, I just don't see him on the same level as LF.

Hopefully they both stay healthy and we can revisit this debate in about 5-10 years. I think they both have stud potential but LF has uber stud potential.

Fournette doesn't have the cutting ability as Peterson and doesn't have the same type of tackle-breaking ability as Chubb.

How do you guys know so much about these players at this juncture? Youtube? A couple of games on national TV? I find these analysis hard to believe with confidence.

Because I watch a lot of football players on every level (NFL, college, high school) and compare physical talent and movement skills. There are times when I will watch video one frame at a time to discern specific movement skills. There are things you can easily miss when watching at normal speed or even live.

If you watch film frame by frame on players and can discern their physical talent and movement skills based on that analysis, you should be working for an NFL team. Are you missing your calling?

Edited by JohnnyU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love Chub, still think Fournette has way more upside than any rb in college right now and it's not even close.

How is it not close? Chubb beat Fournette in every statistical category in 2014. Chubb has a thicker build. Fournette is maybe a little faster and had more hype(that he didn't live up to)

A little? Fournette IMO has the most upside of any rb since AP as far as the combination of size, speed and power. He started off slow but the last half of the year he really started to come on. Like I said I love Chubb, I just don't see him on the same level as LF.

Hopefully they both stay healthy and we can revisit this debate in about 5-10 years. I think they both have stud potential but LF has uber stud potential.

Fournette doesn't have the cutting ability as Peterson and doesn't have the same type of tackle-breaking ability as Chubb.

How do you guys know so much about these players at this juncture? Youtube? A couple of games on national TV? I find these analysis hard to believe with confidence.

You seem to want to discount anyone's analysis on here and you've done it multiple times. (All they do is watch youtube highlights). Many different ways to watch every play, carry, touch of their college games.

I'm not giving the analysis a discount :) Just saying there are plenty of factors that go into RB analysis and team OL seems to be ignored in this one and the sample size is pretty damn small for both runners. How big are those holes that Chubb is running through vs Fournette? Is it a coincidence that every single Georgia running back has great success? NFL scouts get it wrong too and they are the ones I pay most attention to, so it's hardly an exact science as some here seem to believe.

Lots of good RBs have good O-lines and Georgia does have good blocking. But much of my analysis is based on what I see on video.

Here is a meaningful stat for Chubb:

https://twitter.com/ClowESPN/status/544999133799792642

Chris Low @ClowESPN Dec 16

Lot of good freshman RBs, but Nick Chubb is averaging 3.3 yards after contact, 2nd best among Power 5 players with at least 100 carries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love Chub, still think Fournette has way more upside than any rb in college right now and it's not even close.

How is it not close? Chubb beat Fournette in every statistical category in 2014. Chubb has a thicker build. Fournette is maybe a little faster and had more hype(that he didn't live up to)

A little? Fournette IMO has the most upside of any rb since AP as far as the combination of size, speed and power. He started off slow but the last half of the year he really started to come on. Like I said I love Chubb, I just don't see him on the same level as LF.

Hopefully they both stay healthy and we can revisit this debate in about 5-10 years. I think they both have stud potential but LF has uber stud potential.

Fournette doesn't have the cutting ability as Peterson and doesn't have the same type of tackle-breaking ability as Chubb.

How do you guys know so much about these players at this juncture? Youtube? A couple of games on national TV? I find these analysis hard to believe with confidence.

You seem to want to discount anyone's analysis on here and you've done it multiple times. (All they do is watch youtube highlights). Many different ways to watch every play, carry, touch of their college games.

I'm not giving the analysis a discount :) Just saying there are plenty of factors that go into RB analysis and team OL seems to be ignored in this one and the sample size is pretty damn small for both runners. How big are those holes that Chubb is running through vs Fournette? Is it a coincidence that every single Georgia running back has great success? NFL scouts get it wrong too and they are the ones I pay most attention to, so it's hardly an exact science as some here seem to believe.

Lots of good RBs have good O-lines and Georgia does have good blocking. But much of my analysis is based on what I see on video.

Here is a meaningful stat for Chubb:

https://twitter.com/ClowESPN/status/544999133799792642

Chris Low ‏@ClowESPN Dec 16

Lot of good freshman RBs, but Nick Chubb is averaging 3.3 yards after contact, 2nd best among Power 5 players with at least 100 carries.

Now that is a stat I like.

Lot of good freshman RBs, but Nick Chubb is averaging 3.3 yards after contact, 2nd best among Power 5 players with at least 100 carries.

Does anyone know what Trent Richardson's average after contact was in college?

Edited: Richardson averaged 2.8 rushing yards after contact his last season at Alabama.

Edited by JohnnyU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess I stirred the pot here. My reasoning for preferring Fournette is I don't concede that he is less powerfull than Chubb from what I have seen on the field. I think the two backs are very similar in many attributes but I believe Fournette has a gear that Chubb doesn't. They both are in run heavy offenses with passing games that are not worth a crap and face 8-10 man fronts on a consistent basis.

I think it is too early to make damning conclusions on either back at this point. I just don't think with Fournette he has even sniffed his potential. He hasn't filled out as much as he will from a physical stand point and that is scary with a guy 6'1" and already 230. He has the ability to run over defenders and his 4.35 forty time gives him the ability to pull away from many as well.

We are talking about two elite athletes here but I just see Fournette having the higher ceiling down the road. I don't think it's a stretch if given both stay healthy you are looking at two franchise type rb's in the NFL in 3-4 years. Who will have the better career may be based on a lot of factors including health, coaching, system and surrounding talent. The announcer in the bowl game who compared Chubb to Tiki Barber is an idiot as I see no similarity.

I'm just excited to see how this plays out down the road and hope both stay healthy. There is already an early buzz about them both being in the Heisman hunt in 2015.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess I stirred the pot here. My reasoning for preferring Fournette is I don't concede that he is less powerfull than Chubb from what I have seen on the field. I think the two backs are very similar in many attributes but I believe Fournette has a gear that Chubb doesn't. They both are in run heavy offenses with passing games that are not worth a crap and face 8-10 man fronts on a consistent basis.

I think it is too early to make damning conclusions on either back at this point. I just don't think with Fournette he has even sniffed his potential. He hasn't filled out as much as he will from a physical stand point and that is scary with a guy 6'1" and already 230. He has the ability to run over defenders and his 4.35 forty time gives him the ability to pull away from many as well.

Where are you getting that 4.35 figure for Fournette from?

Chubb has a faster 100m PR than Fournette.

This season Fournette had 10 runs of 20+ yards on 189 carries (5.3%). Chubb had 18 on 219 carries (8.2%).

Fournette had three runs of 40+ yards. Chubb had seven.

Considering all of that, I don't know if I buy speed/explosiveness as an advantage for Fournette, especially considering that he's a year older.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that both Gurley and Chubb were so good does give credence to the "great OL" philosophy.

The Trent Richardson comparison may be good, as in 2010, when he was with Mark Ingram, Alabama had 4 future NFL starters on their offensive line.

I might be looking at some Georgia OL players if I were a GM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that both Gurley and Chubb were so good does give credence to the "great OL" philosophy.

The Trent Richardson comparison may be good, as in 2010, when he was with Mark Ingram, Alabama had 4 future NFL starters on their offensive line.

I might be looking at some Georgia OL players if I were a GM.

If you're a lazy analyst sure, that must be the only reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that both Gurley and Chubb were so good does give credence to the "great OL" philosophy.

The Trent Richardson comparison may be good, as in 2010, when he was with Mark Ingram, Alabama had 4 future NFL starters on their offensive line.

I might be looking at some Georgia OL players if I were a GM.

There's plenty of reason to think Gurley and Chubb are special athletes independent of their team context. Both guys were clocked at around 10.70 in the 100m as high schoolers. That kind of speed is rare for anyone, but especially for two big power runners like these guys. Ingram and Lacy aren't nearly that fast or explosive. Richardson is a pretty great physical talent, but even he probably couldn't run with these two.

It's also worth pointing out that Chubb's freshman season was better than anything seen by any of those Alabama backs. He just did 1548 yards at 7.1 YPC. Ingram's best season was 1658 yards at 6.1 YPC. Richardson's best season was 1679 yards at 5.9 YPC. Lacy's best season was 1322 yards at 6.5 YPC. As good as those guys were, none of them were as good as Chubb. And we've only seen one season of Chubb. If he actually improves, it could be scary.

Beyond that, the "it's the system" scare tactic doesn't always work out. Sure, Alabama's friendly offense probably made Richardson and Ingram look a little better than they really were (though Ingram just finished a pretty decent season). I could just as easily point to the Miami teams of the early 00s for a counterargument. At one point in time they had Reggie Wayne, Santana Moss, and Andre Johnson at WR. They had Clinton Portis, Frank Gore, and Willis McGahee at RB. They had Jeremy Shockey and Kellen Winslow Jr. at TE. Just because a player's teammate is awesome doesn't mean that he isn't awesome too. For my money, Gurley and Chubb are first round talents who just happen to be on the same team. They're not creations of the system.

Bottom line is that every prospect is going to have his doubters. Reggie Bush did. Adrian Peterson did. Darren McFadden did. Knowshon Moreno did. Mark Ingram did. Trent Richardson did. You expect to get some pushback from the community, no matter how good the player actually is. What you have to ask yourself is whether or not the player in question is really legit. Personally, I don't see a flaw in Chubb's game. You name a quality and he has it. Vision. Balance. Agility. Speed. Power. Fast-twitch explosiveness. Character. Work ethic. Receiving skills.

Between high schoolers and college players, I look at probably 100+ prospects every year. Every time I turn over a new stone I hope to find an elite player, but the overwhelming majority of the time there is some glaring flaw that prevents me from going overboard with the hype. It probably happens 1-2 times per year that I see a player who instantly causes that "a-ha" moment. Chubb is one of those guys and if he can just stay healthy then I think we will see in due time that the skepticism isn't warranted with him. He ranks in the top 5-6 RB prospects that I've seen in the past decade.

Edited by EBF
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that both Gurley and Chubb were so good does give credence to the "great OL" philosophy.

The Trent Richardson comparison may be good, as in 2010, when he was with Mark Ingram, Alabama had 4 future NFL starters on their offensive line.

I might be looking at some Georgia OL players if I were a GM.

There's plenty of reason to think Gurley and Chubb are special athletes independent of their team context. Both guys were clocked at around 10.70 in the 100m as high schoolers. That kind of speed is rare for anyone, but especially for two big power runners like these guys. Ingram and Lacy aren't nearly that fast or explosive. Richardson is a pretty great physical talent, but even he probably couldn't run with these two.

It's also worth pointing out that Chubb's freshman season was better than anything seen by any of those Alabama backs. He just did 1548 yards at 7.1 YPC. Ingram's best season was 1658 yards at 6.1 YPC. Richardson's best season was 1679 yards at 5.9 YPC. Lacy's best season was 1322 yards at 6.5 YPC. As good as those guys were, none of them were as good as Chubb. And we've only seen one season of Chubb. If he actually improves, it could be scary.

Beyond that, the "it's the system" scare tactic doesn't always work out. Sure, Alabama's friendly offense probably made Richardson and Ingram look a little better than they really were (though Ingram just finished a pretty decent season). I could just as easily point to the Miami teams of the early 00s for a counterargument. At one point in time they had Reggie Wayne, Santana Moss, and Andre Johnson at WR. They had Clinton Portis, Frank Gore, and Willis McGahee at RB. They had Jeremy Shockey and Kellen Winslow Jr. at TE. Just because a player's teammate is awesome doesn't mean that he isn't awesome too. For my money, Gurley and Chubb are first round talents who just happen to be on the same team. They're not creations of the system.

Bottom line is that every prospect is going to have his doubters. Reggie Bush did. Adrian Peterson did. Darren McFadden did. Knowshon Moreno did. Mark Ingram did. Trent Richardson did. You expect to get some pushback from the community, no matter how good the player actually is. What you have to ask yourself is whether or not the player in question is really legit. Personally, I don't see a flaw in Chubb's game. You name a quality and he has it. Vision. Balance. Agility. Speed. Power. Fast-twitch explosiveness. Character. Work ethic. Receiving skills.

Between high schoolers and college players, I look at probably 100+ players every year. Every time I turn over a new stone I hope to find an elite player, but the overwhelming majority of the time there is some glaring flaw that prevents me from going overboard with the hype. It probably happens 1-2 times per year that I see a player who instantly causes that "a-ha" moment. Chubb is one of those guys and if he can just stay healthy then I think we will see in due time that the skepticism isn't warranted with him. He ranks in the top 5-6 RB prospects that I've seen in the past decade.

It's not necessarily skepticism, it's just early. It's not the first time people jump on a freshman like this, you included, me included, tdmills included. I believe the last one for you was Thomas Tyner and with just as much enthusiasm. I'm not saying Chubb won't be a stud, he probably will be, but..........

Edited by JohnnyU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess I stirred the pot here. My reasoning for preferring Fournette is I don't concede that he is less powerfull than Chubb from what I have seen on the field. I think the two backs are very similar in many attributes but I believe Fournette has a gear that Chubb doesn't. They both are in run heavy offenses with passing games that are not worth a crap and face 8-10 man fronts on a consistent basis.

I think it is too early to make damning conclusions on either back at this point. I just don't think with Fournette he has even sniffed his potential. He hasn't filled out as much as he will from a physical stand point and that is scary with a guy 6'1" and already 230. He has the ability to run over defenders and his 4.35 forty time gives him the ability to pull away from many as well.

We are talking about two elite athletes here but I just see Fournette having the higher ceiling down the road. I don't think it's a stretch if given both stay healthy you are looking at two franchise type rb's in the NFL in 3-4 years. Who will have the better career may be based on a lot of factors including health, coaching, system and surrounding talent. The announcer in the bowl game who compared Chubb to Tiki Barber is an idiot as I see no similarity.

I'm just excited to see how this plays out down the road and hope both stay healthy. There is already an early buzz about them both being in the Heisman hunt in 2015.

What makes Fournette have a higher ceiling? Can you quantify it? He can run over defenders when he has a head of steam. But he doesn't have the same type of tackle-breaking ability as Chubb. There have been numerous times when defenders have Chubb in full grasp with two hands and he just shakes them off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not necessarily skepticism, it's just early. It's not the first time people jump on a freshman like this, you included, me included, tdmills included. I believe the last one for you was Thomas Tyner and with just as much enthusiasm. I'm not saying Chubb won't be a stud, he probably will be, but..........

I loved Tyner's HIGH SCHOOL highlights and still rated him highly after his freshman year at Oregon, but already in December of 2013 I did not view him as a perfect slam dunk prospect.

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=666153&page=11#entry16274794

In terms of weaknesses, I think he has questionable ability in space. I've seen most of his carries this season and I can't recall too many times when he truly made a man miss in the second level of the defense. He doesn't seem to have those bouncy full speed east-west cuts in his arsenal. He's more of a north-south one cut slasher. He has good footwork behind the line of scrimmage, but when he gets into the second level he's less adept at evading. You see that occasionally in the game where he gets into space only to crash into the defenders rather than elude them. He seems to have really long legs relative to his height and while he still runs with some agility despite this (almost like Matt Forte), it pops up as a problem on screen passes or when he's asked to make really harsh cuts.

On the balance, I think he's a pretty compelling prospect though. I've looked at most of the obvious 2013 freshmen and I've yet to see anyone who's clearly and decisively better. So if you're in a dev draft with 2016 players eligible I would at least consider him as one of the top RB options.

Tyner is a pretty good prospect and I still expect him to be drafted (possibly pretty high), but I rate Chubb higher. After one full season in college I don't see any flaws in Chubb's game, which I couldn't have said about Tyner last year. If I did a "weaknesses" breakdown of Chubb right now it would be empty space. The only weakness is that he's going to get run into the ground over the next two college seasons, risking injury and taking tread off the tire. His game itself is flawless.

I might have a reputation as a hype man, but if anything I consider myself to pretty selective with the really over-the-top effusive praise. At any given time there are maybe only 2-5 players in all of college football that I'll really go all in for. There have been a few that I overrated like Lache Seastrunk and Marqise Lee, but also plenty of times when I was right on the money, like with Andrew Luck and Trent Richardson. I had those guys pegged as elite prospects after their first college season. I feel like Chubb is that caliber of talent. If you want to argue for the sake of arguing then so be it, but I've yet to hear any detailed explanations about areas of his game or skill set that are lacking. Just hollow refrains amounting to, "well he might be a bust because X player busted." That isn't very convincing for me, considering that I have been monitoring him for about a year now and feel like I have a pretty good grasp on what he offers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not necessarily skepticism, it's just early. It's not the first time people jump on a freshman like this, you included, me included, tdmills included. I believe the last one for you was Thomas Tyner and with just as much enthusiasm. I'm not saying Chubb won't be a stud, he probably will be, but..........

I loved Tyner's HIGH SCHOOL highlights and still rated him highly after his freshman year at Oregon, but already in December of 2013 I did not view him as a perfect slam dunk prospect.

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=666153&page=11#entry16274794

In terms of weaknesses, I think he has questionable ability in space. I've seen most of his carries this season and I can't recall too many times when he truly made a man miss in the second level of the defense. He doesn't seem to have those bouncy full speed east-west cuts in his arsenal. He's more of a north-south one cut slasher. He has good footwork behind the line of scrimmage, but when he gets into the second level he's less adept at evading. You see that occasionally in the game where he gets into space only to crash into the defenders rather than elude them. He seems to have really long legs relative to his height and while he still runs with some agility despite this (almost like Matt Forte), it pops up as a problem on screen passes or when he's asked to make really harsh cuts.

On the balance, I think he's a pretty compelling prospect though. I've looked at most of the obvious 2013 freshmen and I've yet to see anyone who's clearly and decisively better. So if you're in a dev draft with 2016 players eligible I would at least consider him as one of the top RB options.

Tyner is a pretty good prospect and I still expect him to be drafted (possibly pretty high), but I rate Chubb higher. After one full season in college I don't see any flaws in Chubb's game, which I couldn't have said about Tyner last year. If I did a "weaknesses" breakdown of Chubb right now it would be empty space. The only weakness is that he's going to get run into the ground over the next two college seasons, risking injury and taking tread off the tire. His game itself is flawless.

I might have a reputation as a hype man, but if anything I consider myself to pretty selective with the really over-the-top effusive praise. At any given time there are maybe only 2-5 players in all of college football that I'll really go all in for. There have been a few that I overrated like Lache Seastrunk and Marqise Lee, but also plenty of times when I was right on the money, like with Andrew Luck and Trent Richardson. I had those guys pegged as elite prospects after their first college season. I feel like Chubb is that caliber of talent. If you want to argue for the sake of arguing then so be it, but I've yet to hear any detailed explanations about areas of his game or skill set that are lacking. Just hollow refrains amounting to, "well he might be a bust because X player busted." That isn't very convincing f

or me, considering that I have been monitoring him for about a year now and feel like I have a pretty good grasp on what he offers.

You had Trent Richardson pegged as an elite prospect? Exqueeze me, but hasn't he pretty much sucked? Edited by JohnnyU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You had Trent Richardson pegged as an elite prospect? Exqueeze me, but hasn't he pretty much sucked?

elite prospect ≠ elite NFL player

You don't get picked in the top 3 of a loaded draft if you aren't regarded as an elite prospect. What has happened since then is a different story.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You had Trent Richardson pegged as an elite prospect? Exqueeze me, but hasn't he pretty much sucked?

elite prospect ≠ elite NFL player

You don't get picked in the top 3 of a loaded draft if you aren't regarded as an elite prospect. What has happened since then is a different story.

EBF I think you are great and everyone missed on Trent. At the same time, I'm throwing the flag on this. You don't get a free pass on prospects who are drafted high and then bust. It's okay to be wrong. Even the best analysts and scouts are. So we all made an error on TRich. We can own it and move on to the next one I think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are all wrong on projecting players at the next level, no one is perfect. For what it matters with a simple google search you can find the forty times coming out of HS for Fournette and Chub 4.35 and 4.45 respectively. Both players are studs,

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and conjecture is cheap. We all have opinions and no one is right or wrong at this point. I like Fournettes ceiling over Chubb, so what? Is that so far-fetched?

The one player who I still am shaking my head over is Greg Jones from FSU. I thought that guy was the next coming of Earl Campbell, remember when he ran over Dexter Reid? HTF he never ended up being a stud is beyond me although most of the situations he ended up in were far from desirable. There are so many factors down the road that no one can predict .

Edited by ROCKET

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are all wrong on projecting players at the next level, no one is perfect. For what it matters with a simple google search you can find the forty times coming out of HS for Fournette and Chub 4.35 and 4.45 respectively. Both players are studs,

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and conjecture is cheap. We all have opinions and no one is right or wrong at this point. I like Fournettes ceiling over Chubb, so what? Is that so far-fetched?

The one player who I still am shaking my head over is Greg Jones from FSU. I thought that guy was the next coming of Earl Campbell, remember when he ran over Dexter Reid? HTF he never ended up being a stud is beyond me although most of the situations he ended up in were far from desirable. There are so many factors down the road that no one can predict .

If I believed everything I read on the Internet, I'd probably think Elvis was living in Tahiti with Bat Boy and Marilyn Monroe.

My point is that you can't believe everything you read. If you know how most high school football recruits are, 90% of them will claim to run a 4.4. Very few of them actually do. Unless there's a source for that 4.35, I'm not buying it.

We have concrete automatic times from major track meets that show Chubb running slightly faster in the 100m than Fournette. Fournette apparently participated in the Nike combines, but either sat out the 40 or scrubbed his times. Chubb also had more long runs, longer long runs, and a higher frequency of long runs. To me all of this indicates that this alleged speed gap is nonexistent, or at least very thin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You had Trent Richardson pegged as an elite prospect? Exqueeze me, but hasn't he pretty much sucked?

elite prospect ≠ elite NFL player

You don't get picked in the top 3 of a loaded draft if you aren't regarded as an elite prospect. What has happened since then is a different story.

EBF I think you are great and everyone missed on Trent. At the same time, I'm throwing the flag on this. You don't get a free pass on prospects who are drafted high and then bust. It's okay to be wrong. Even the best analysts and scouts are. So we all made an error on TRich. We can own it and move on to the next one I think

I think from a devy perspective when you're trying to find the right NCAA players to draft, there are two major hurdles that you have to clear.

When you pick a college player, you hope that he becomes an elite NFL prospect. Right now people who have guys like Cooper, Gordon, and Gurley on their devy rosters are patting themselves on the back for their picks. That's because just getting to this point where your guy is a first round pick in every mock is a big success when you consider how many of the hyped up prospects don't even clear that hurdle.

However, there's another step, and that's actually delivering in the NFL. I had Blackmon and Richardson in devy leagues a few years ago. Picked them up early in their NCAA careers. Felt like the king of the world after they each went in the top 5 of the draft. Doesn't feel so good now. Were they bad devy picks? From one perspective, yes. Neither player has delivered the consistent NFL results that I was hoping for. On the other hand, both players were vetted by the NFL draft process as elite talents.

I don't think I said in this thread that Chubb is a lock to dominate in the NFL. Maybe I did and just don't recall it, but mainly I am just saying that he's going to be an elite NFL draft prospect if he stays healthy. What happens after that will depend on his team situation, health, character, and other variables unrelated to his on-field ability. I would still back him to have a good career, but a lot can happen to derail it. When you think about a stacked first round like the 2008 draft (McFadden/Stewart/Felix/Mendy/CJ2K), it's a clear reminder of why elite devy prospects should not be valued on par with elite NFL producers. That's a different discussion though.

Edited by EBF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are all wrong on projecting players at the next level, no one is perfect. For what it matters with a simple google search you can find the forty times coming out of HS for Fournette and Chub 4.35 and 4.45 respectively. Both players are studs,

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and conjecture is cheap. We all have opinions and no one is right or wrong at this point. I like Fournettes ceiling over Chubb, so what? Is that so far-fetched?

The one player who I still am shaking my head over is Greg Jones from FSU. I thought that guy was the next coming of Earl Campbell, remember when he ran over Dexter Reid? HTF he never ended up being a stud is beyond me although most of the situations he ended up in were far from desirable. There are so many factors down the road that no one can predict .

You said "it's not close". That is far-fetched.

Fournette is only 5 months younger than Todd Gurley and you think he hasn't filled out yet? Fournette is a bit stiff and doesn't move laterally as well as Chubb.

Edited by Xue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are all wrong on projecting players at the next level, no one is perfect. For what it matters with a simple google search you can find the forty times coming out of HS for Fournette and Chub 4.35 and 4.45 respectively. Both players are studs,

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and conjecture is cheap. We all have opinions and no one is right or wrong at this point. I like Fournettes ceiling over Chubb, so what? Is that so far-fetched?

The one player who I still am shaking my head over is Greg Jones from FSU. I thought that guy was the next coming of Earl Campbell, remember when he ran over Dexter Reid? HTF he never ended up being a stud is beyond me although most of the situations he ended up in were far from desirable. There are so many factors down the road that no one can predict .

Let us know when Fournette can do this: http://gfycat.com/FlimsyGenuineKookaburra

Besides, Elliott > Fournette. And Elliott is 6 months younger than Fournette despite starting college a year earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are all wrong on projecting players at the next level, no one is perfect. For what it matters with a simple google search you can find the forty times coming out of HS for Fournette and Chub 4.35 and 4.45 respectively. Both players are studs,

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and conjecture is cheap. We all have opinions and no one is right or wrong at this point. I like Fournettes ceiling over Chubb, so what? Is that so far-fetched?

The one player who I still am shaking my head over is Greg Jones from FSU. I thought that guy was the next coming of Earl Campbell, remember when he ran over Dexter Reid? HTF he never ended up being a stud is beyond me although most of the situations he ended up in were far from desirable. There are so many factors down the road that no one can predict .

Let us know when Fournette can do this: http://gfycat.com/FlimsyGenuineKookaburra

Besides, Elliott > Fournette. And Elliott is 6 months younger than Fournette despite starting college a year earlier.

The biggest thing I like about Elliott is his yards after contact. I don't know what they are, but it must be pretty good. This guy has a nose for moving forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are the backs who ran for 1200+ yards in the SEC since 2000 with over 6 YPC, sorted by highest YPC:

        Player 	Year 	School 	Att 	Yds 	Avg 	TD1 	Nick Chubb 	2014 	Georgia 	219 	1547 	7.1 	142 	Jeremy Hill 	2013 	LSU      	189 	1258 	6.7 	143 	Knile Davis 	2010 	Arkansas 	204 	1322 	6.5 	134 	Eddie Lacy 	2012 	Alabama 	204 	1322 	6.5 	175 	Josh Robinson 	2014 	Miss. State 	190 	1203 	6.3 	116 	Todd Gurley 	2012 	Georgia 	222 	1385 	6.2 	177 	Mark Ingram 	2009 	Alabama 	271 	1658 	6.1 	178 	T.J. Yeldon 	2013 	Alabama 	207 	1235 	6.0 	14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fournette is faster in a straight line, but I'll take all of Chubb's other strengths over top speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calling it now. When Chubb finally declares, we will dissect him and scoff at the idea that he was ever compared to Adrian Peterson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fournette is faster in a straight line, but I'll take all of Chubb's other strengths over top speed.

Chubb's fastest 100m time is better than Fournette's fastest 100m time, so I don't think you can say Fournette has an edge there.

Would you guys take him over Parker in a rookie/devy draft?

It's hard to say you should take him over a guy who has already become a top 15 pick, but to me he's a better prospect. It will mainly come down to the wait time and staying healthy. All of the skills to be a high first rounder are there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calling it now. When Chubb finally declares, we will dissect him and scoff at the idea that he was ever compared to Adrian Peterson.

He's better than Peterson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calling it now. When Chubb finally declares, we will dissect him and scoff at the idea that he was ever compared to Adrian Peterson.

He's better than Peterson.

joking or serious?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calling it now. When Chubb finally declares, we will dissect him and scoff at the idea that he was ever compared to Adrian Peterson.

He's better than Peterson.

joking or serious?

I think Chubb is better than Gurley. AP? I don't about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rotoworld:

NFL Media ranks Georgia sophomore RB Nick Chubb as the No.3 returning offensive player for 2015.

With Todd Gurley off to the NFL, Chubb has a great opportunity to show that last year's productive season was no fluke. As a true freshman, Grubb recorded 1,547 yards and 14 touchdowns, with 1,323 yards and 12 touchdowns in the Bulldog's last eight games of the season. Chubb was named SEC Freshman of the Year and First Team Coaches All-SEC in 2014.
Source: NFL.com
May 21 - 3:11 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rams GM Les Snead on Gurley:

“One of the things we looked at was the team around him. I’m not sure about this, but it’s possible there might not be an offensive lineman who blocked for him at Georgia who will start at the next level, or play at the next level.

When we looked at him on tape, we saw him playing against a lot of seven- and eight-man fronts, which is what he’s going to be seeing when he lines up for us. We saw him playing against not a lot of air, which is what he’s going to be seeing when he plays for us. So that translates pretty well.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rams GM Les Snead on Gurley:

“One of the things we looked at was the team around him. I’m not sure about this, but it’s possible there might not be an offensive lineman who blocked for him at Georgia who will start at the next level, or play at the next level.

When we looked at him on tape, we saw him playing against a lot of seven- and eight-man fronts, which is what he’s going to be seeing when he lines up for us. We saw him playing against not a lot of air, which is what he’s going to be seeing when he plays for us. So that translates pretty well.”

If Snead knew anything they'd be a super bowl contender after all those RG3 picks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chubb is overrated and I dont see the Adrian Peterson comparisons at all. There, I said it. And I dont think he is better than Gurley either despite what Unreason says.

Edited by georg013

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chubb is overrated and I dont see the Adrian Peterson comparisons at all. There, I said it. And I dont think he is better than Gurley either despite what Unreason says.

Over 1500 yards and the highest YPC in the SEC in at least 15 years as a true freshman and he's over-rated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chubb is overrated and I dont see the Adrian Peterson comparisons at all. There, I said it. And I dont think he is better than Gurley either despite what Unreason says.

He cuts better than Gurley and has better hips. His tackle-breaking is also much more impressive. Who said he's Peterson? He's better. He's Jonathan Stewart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Jeremy Hill is overrated after posting a high ypc in the NFL, Chubb's accomplishments dont mean squat.

Hill had 2.8 Yards After Contact according to PFF. ESPN has him at 2.29. Chubb's ability in that area should translate well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chubb is overrated and I dont see the Adrian Peterson comparisons at all. There, I said it. And I dont think he is better than Gurley either despite what Unreason says.

He cuts better than Gurley and has better hips. His tackle-breaking is also much more impressive. Who said he's Peterson? He's better. He's Jonathan Stewart.

I don't think he breaks tackles better than Gurley. Can you verify that?

Based on this, Gurley was one of the best RBs in recent history in that metric. Chubb isn't included here so I'm not sure where he ranks. Based on watching g games, Gurely was more impressive to me. Both break a ton of tackles and both are going to be studs. Different runner, though.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/04/08/cff-sig-stats-running-backs-part-1/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chubb is overrated and I dont see the Adrian Peterson comparisons at all. There, I said it. And I dont think he is better than Gurley either despite what Unreason says.

He cuts better than Gurley and has better hips. His tackle-breaking is also much more impressive. Who said he's Peterson? He's better. He's Jonathan Stewart.

I don't think he breaks tackles better than Gurley. Can you verify that?

Based on this, Gurley was one of the best RBs in recent history in that metric. Chubb isn't included here so I'm not sure where he ranks. Based on watching g games, Gurely was more impressive to me. Both break a ton of tackles and both are going to be studs. Different runner, though.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/04/08/cff-sig-stats-running-backs-part-1/

ESPN Insider reported that Gurley led the nation in yards after contact per carry and Chubb came in 2nd (Josh Robinson was 3rd, Tevin Coleman 4th).

Chubb did this over a larger sample size (219 carries vs. 123 for Gurley), and I think he faced somewhat tougher defenses, which makes it a close call between them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chubb is overrated and I dont see the Adrian Peterson comparisons at all. There, I said it. And I dont think he is better than Gurley either despite what Unreason says.

He cuts better than Gurley and has better hips. His tackle-breaking is also much more impressive. Who said he's Peterson? He's better. He's Jonathan Stewart.

I don't think he breaks tackles better than Gurley. Can you verify that?

Based on this, Gurley was one of the best RBs in recent history in that metric. Chubb isn't included here so I'm not sure where he ranks. Based on watching g games, Gurely was more impressive to me. Both break a ton of tackles and both are going to be studs. Different runner, though.https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/04/08/cff-sig-stats-running-backs-part-1/

ESPN Insider reported that Gurley led the nation in yards after contact per carry and Chubb came in 2nd (Josh Robinson was 3rd, Tevin Coleman 4th).

Chubb did this over a larger sample size (219 carries vs. 123 for Gurley), and I think he faced somewhat tougher defenses, which makes it a close call between them.

That's an impressive stat for both guys and a good find. I don't think it tells the entire story though. 1 long run with and early broken tackle can greatly impact the outcome. I'm more looking for the raw broken tackle totals, which is why I like the broken tackle per touch number a great bit more.

For example, Colman doesn't fair nearly as well in that number vs. where he finished in Yds after contact.

I expect Chubb did well in both areas, but watching games, I think Gurley would be better. I watch a lot of UGA football, too.

Edited by jurb26

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gurley also looks faster to me. I tell you. The suspension and injury have really worked together to depress Gurley's value a bit. Im not complaining. Had he been healthy for the combine, no way I get my hands on him at 1.02.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chubb is overrated and I dont see the Adrian Peterson comparisons at all. There, I said it. And I dont think he is better than Gurley either despite what Unreason says.

He cuts better than Gurley and has better hips. His tackle-breaking is also much more impressive. Who said he's Peterson? He's better. He's Jonathan Stewart.

I don't think he breaks tackles better than Gurley. Can you verify that?

Based on this, Gurley was one of the best RBs in recent history in that metric. Chubb isn't included here so I'm not sure where he ranks. Based on watching g games, Gurely was more impressive to me. Both break a ton of tackles and both are going to be studs. Different runner, though.https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/04/08/cff-sig-stats-running-backs-part-1/

ESPN Insider reported that Gurley led the nation in yards after contact per carry and Chubb came in 2nd (Josh Robinson was 3rd, Tevin Coleman 4th).

Chubb did this over a larger sample size (219 carries vs. 123 for Gurley), and I think he faced somewhat tougher defenses, which makes it a close call between them.

That's an impressive stat for both guys and a good find. I don't think it tells the entire story though. 1 long run with and early broken tackle can greatly impact the outcome. I'm more looking for the raw broken tackle totals, which is why I like the broken tackle per touch number a great bit more.

For example, Colman doesn't fair nearly as well in that number vs. where he finished in Yds after contact.

I expect Chubb did well in both areas, but watching games, I think Gurley would be better. I watch a lot of UGA football, too.

I track missed tackles, as well as a capped version of yards after contact (which makes long runs have much less impact), for the game cutups that I watch. Chubb does extremely well by both metrics (though that's only based on 2 games from him, 45 touches). Gurley was good but not spectacular across the 7 games of his that I watched (but he was very good in the 4 of those games that were in 2014).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gurley also looks faster to me. I tell you. The suspension and injury have really worked together to depress Gurley's value a bit. Im not complaining. Had he been healthy for the combine, no way I get my hands on him at 1.02.

They have basically the same PR in the 100m. 10.69s for Chubb compared with 10.70s for Gurley.

Last season Gurley had 10 runs of 20+ yards on 123 carries (8.1%). Chubb had 18 runs of 20+ yards on 219 carries (8.2%).

There's not much difference in any of that, but bear in mind that we're comparing Chubb as a freshman with Gurley as a junior. If you put their freshman years side by side, Chubb is better by almost any reasonable metric. If you project a similar improvement curve over the course of his college career, you'd expect Chubb's peak to be higher than Gurley's. He was certainly better as a freshman than Gurley was as a freshman.

Personally, I think Chubb is already better than Gurley and I can't think of a category where Gurley has an advantage. On the other hand, Gurley has already been vetted by the NFL draft process as a top 10 talent despite a torn up knee. That's a pretty strong endorsement. I think Chubb can get there and he's a slam dunk first round back in terms of his physical talent, but all the same Gurley is a "bird in hand" if you're choosing between the two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chubb is overrated and I dont see the Adrian Peterson comparisons at all. There, I said it. And I dont think he is better than Gurley either despite what Unreason says.

He cuts better than Gurley and has better hips. His tackle-breaking is also much more impressive. Who said he's Peterson? He's better. He's Jonathan Stewart.

I don't think he breaks tackles better than Gurley. Can you verify that?

Based on this, Gurley was one of the best RBs in recent history in that metric. Chubb isn't included here so I'm not sure where he ranks. Based on watching g games, Gurely was more impressive to me. Both break a ton of tackles and both are going to be studs. Different runner, though.https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/04/08/cff-sig-stats-running-backs-part-1/

ESPN Insider reported that Gurley led the nation in yards after contact per carry and Chubb came in 2nd (Josh Robinson was 3rd, Tevin Coleman 4th).

Chubb did this over a larger sample size (219 carries vs. 123 for Gurley), and I think he faced somewhat tougher defenses, which makes it a close call between them.

That's an impressive stat for both guys and a good find. I don't think it tells the entire story though. 1 long run with and early broken tackle can greatly impact the outcome. I'm more looking for the raw broken tackle totals, which is why I like the broken tackle per touch number a great bit more.

For example, Colman doesn't fair nearly as well in that number vs. where he finished in Yds after contact.

I expect Chubb did well in both areas, but watching games, I think Gurley would be better. I watch a lot of UGA football, too.

I track missed tackles, as well as a capped version of yards after contact (which makes long runs have much less impact), for the game cutups that I watch. Chubb does extremely well by both metrics (though that's only based on 2 games from him, 45 touches). Gurley was good but not spectacular across the 7 games of his that I watched (but he was very good in the 4 of those games that were in 2014).
Gurley was good but not spectacular in your metric but he was insanity good in PFF's, as well as every other tackle breaking metric I've seen?

I mean the gap between Gurley and anyone else is astoundingly high in PFF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gurley also looks faster to me. I tell you. The suspension and injury have really worked together to depress Gurley's value a bit. Im not complaining. Had he been healthy for the combine, no way I get my hands on him at 1.02.

They have basically the same PR in the 100m. 10.69s for Chubb compared with 10.70s for Gurley.

Last season Gurley had 10 runs of 20+ yards on 123 carries (8.1%). Chubb had 18 runs of 20+ yards on 219 carries (8.2%).

There's not much difference in any of that, but bear in mind that we're comparing Chubb as a freshman with Gurley as a junior. If you put their freshman years side by side, Chubb is better by almost any reasonable metric. If you project a similar improvement curve over the course of his college career, you'd expect Chubb's peak to be higher than Gurley's. He was certainly better as a freshman than Gurley was as a freshman.

Personally, I think Chubb is already better than Gurley and I can't think of a category where Gurley has an advantage. On the other hand, Gurley has already been vetted by the NFL draft process as a top 10 talent despite a torn up knee. That's a pretty strong endorsement. I think Chubb can get there and he's a slam dunk first round back in terms of his physical talent, but all the same Gurley is a "bird in hand" if you're choosing between the two.

I'm just curious but is there any merit in the fact a freshman gets by completely on athleticism instead of developing their craft and becoming a better football player? Is there any sort of correlation to that? I mean Gurley is no slouch when it comes to athleticism or his football playing ability, I'm just pointing it out because it seems like it could be a case where Chubb got by with it, missed some holes/reads/assignments or something but still made an outstanding play. I'd say that doesn't happen very often in the NFL and actual football playing matters the most. I guess the real question is if Chubb is more football player or more athlete, and if he's the latter he's more likely to bust when he gets to the NFL.

Just to be clear, I am a big fan of both Gurley and Chubb, I'm just curious to see if there is some reflection of that where some of you might believe in that philosophy or not. I put a lot of weight into what I see when I watch the guys, and Chubb looks fantastic but I can't help but wonder. T-rich, like what was talked about before, is a great athlete and a top prospect but turned out to be not much of an actual football player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just curious but is there any merit in the fact a freshman gets by completely on athleticism instead of developing their craft and becoming a better football player? Is there any sort of correlation to that?

Probably not much. Obviously it helps to be a physical freak of nature because the player doesn't need the 1-2 years of weight training and development to get on the field that a lot of HS kids would need, but I don't think early impact says anything negative about a player's football skills. I didn't see Chubb missing a lot of holes/blocks last year or doing any things that would indicate deficient skills/vision. Football isn't that complicated from a technique/skills standpoint compared to a lot of sports and RB is one of the simplest positions on the field. I don't see anything to worry about here.

Trent Richardson is a different case. I can't explain why he busted, but there are signs that he doesn't have the best work ethic and his vision/instincts seem to have gone haywire. I'm not sure how predictable any of that was. When he entered the draft, he looked like a bulletproof prospect and that's why he went #3 overall in a strong draft. Sometimes good prospects are going to bust. The fail rate on first round picks is like 30-40%. It's likely that a couple of guys from this year's group will flop as well. Can we predict that right now? Maybe, but often times it's just surprising. Three years ago people wouldn't have thought that RG3/Trent/Blackmon would flame out like they have. It's just part of the process and a good reason why you need to be very careful about valuing rookies/dev prospects on par with established elite NFL players. Only a fraction of even the best prospects actually have the consistently great careers that you envision for them when they jump into the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chubb is overrated and I dont see the Adrian Peterson comparisons at all. There, I said it. And I dont think he is better than Gurley either despite what Unreason says.

He cuts better than Gurley and has better hips. His tackle-breaking is also much more impressive. Who said he's Peterson? He's better. He's Jonathan Stewart.

I don't think he breaks tackles better than Gurley. Can you verify that?

Based on this, Gurley was one of the best RBs in recent history in that metric. Chubb isn't included here so I'm not sure where he ranks. Based on watching g games, Gurely was more impressive to me. Both break a ton of tackles and both are going to be studs. Different runner, though.https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/04/08/cff-sig-stats-running-backs-part-1/

ESPN Insider reported that Gurley led the nation in yards after contact per carry and Chubb came in 2nd (Josh Robinson was 3rd, Tevin Coleman 4th).

Chubb did this over a larger sample size (219 carries vs. 123 for Gurley), and I think he faced somewhat tougher defenses, which makes it a close call between them.

That's an impressive stat for both guys and a good find. I don't think it tells the entire story though. 1 long run with and early broken tackle can greatly impact the outcome. I'm more looking for the raw broken tackle totals, which is why I like the broken tackle per touch number a great bit more.

For example, Colman doesn't fair nearly as well in that number vs. where he finished in Yds after contact.

I expect Chubb did well in both areas, but watching games, I think Gurley would be better. I watch a lot of UGA football, too.

I track missed tackles, as well as a capped version of yards after contact (which makes long runs have much less impact), for the game cutups that I watch. Chubb does extremely well by both metrics (though that's only based on 2 games from him, 45 touches). Gurley was good but not spectacular across the 7 games of his that I watched (but he was very good in the 4 of those games that were in 2014).
Gurley was good but not spectacular in your metric but he was insanity good in PFF's, as well as every other tackle breaking metric I've seen?

I mean the gap between Gurley and anyone else is astoundingly high in PFF.

You and I discussed this for awhile in another thread (starting here). A big part of the difference is that other sources were calculating his numbers for the 6 games that he played in 2014, while I was calculating his numbers for the 7 games that have cutups on Draft Breakdown (4 of the games he played in 2014 plus 3 of the games he played in 2013).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are all wrong on projecting players at the next level, no one is perfect. For what it matters with a simple google search you can find the forty times coming out of HS for Fournette and Chub 4.35 and 4.45 respectively. Both players are studs,

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and conjecture is cheap. We all have opinions and no one is right or wrong at this point. I like Fournettes ceiling over Chubb, so what? Is that so far-fetched?

The one player who I still am shaking my head over is Greg Jones from FSU. I thought that guy was the next coming of Earl Campbell, remember when he ran over Dexter Reid? HTF he never ended up being a stud is beyond me although most of the situations he ended up in were far from desirable. There are so many factors down the road that no one can predict .

If I believed everything I read on the Internet, I'd probably think Elvis was living in Tahiti with Bat Boy and Marilyn Monroe.

Literally laughed out loud at this line. Fantastic!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.