Rookie RBs, who are they most like? (1 Viewer)

[switz]

I think Jones is going to be used in a similar fashion to Metcalf. I'm thinking particularly of Metcalf's Cleveland years., not his post-Browns workload.

I LIKE Metcalf and I like Jones too.

And I still think you are seriously underselling him.

 

[EBF]

I don't see Holmes/Mendenhall. Holmes was very shifty and explosive. Mendenhall has some wiggle, but he's really more of a power back than an elusive type. The guy is a rock.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

I think Jones is going to be used in a similar fashion to Metcalf. I'm thinking particularly of Metcalf's Cleveland years., not his post-Browns workload.

I LIKE Metcalf and I like Jones too.

And I still think you are seriously underselling him.

Wow. Okay.

 

[EBF]

Peterson is like Dickerson. That's the guy they used to compare him to when he was a HS legend in TX. Steven Jackson also reminds me a bit of Dickerson.

I don't think the comparison to McFadden holds up. McFadden is neither shifty nor powerful.

Those were not Dickersons strengths either. ED was a skinny legged long strider who hit the holes hard and glided past defenders.

I totally disagree like I said above. It's not what he was famous for, but Dickerson was also a powerful runner who could break tackles. The guy was 6-3, 220 lbs, back at a time when 300 lb. linemen were a rarity. He was a big back.

Dickerson made his career by running past defenders, not through them. You also wont find many highlights of "sick jukes" from ED like you saw AD do multiple times last year.

That's where I disagree. Check out the moves in the video I linked to:
0:27 - Quick stutter step to shake the tackler

0:43 - Gears down at full speed and changes direction to shed a tackler

1:22 - Sudden plant and lateral cut to dodge the tackler

1:50 - Quick plant and cut to dodge a tackler

That's classic RB stuff. It's much more reminiscent of Peterson than McFadden.

McFadden is not a nifty runner. You really don't see him make moves like that very often. His real strength is running very fast in a straight line. One of my big gripes about him from the beginning is the absence of moves and evasion in his game. You'll see guys like Jamaal Charles, Felix Jones, and Ray Rice make nifty cuts pretty regularly. You won't see it very much from McFadden.

 

[T Bell]

Peterson is like Dickerson. That's the guy they used to compare him to when he was a HS legend in TX. Steven Jackson also reminds me a bit of Dickerson.

I don't think the comparison to McFadden holds up. McFadden is neither shifty nor powerful.

Those were not Dickersons strengths either. ED was a skinny legged long strider who hit the holes hard and glided past defenders.

I totally disagree like I said above. It's not what he was famous for, but Dickerson was also a powerful runner who could break tackles. The guy was 6-3, 220 lbs, back at a time when 300 lb. linemen were a rarity. He was a big back.

Dickerson made his career by running past defenders, not through them. You also wont find many highlights of "sick jukes" from ED like you saw AD do multiple times last year.

That's where I disagree. Check out the moves in the video I linked to:

The concern I have with McFadden, and the reason why I've steered clear of him given where you'd have to draft him, is that he reminds me most of Michael Bennett.

And yes, I recognize that Bennett is shorter and a tad stockier, but what I'm referring to is running style - incredible straight line speed, but not a lot of moves or tackle breaking ability.

 

[switz]

McFadden is not a nifty runner. You really don't see him make moves like that very often. His real strength is running very fast in a straight line. One of my big gripes about him from the beginning is the absence of moves and evasion in his game. You'll see guys like Jamaal Charles, Felix Jones, and Ray Rice make nifty cuts pretty regularly. You won't see it very much from McFadden.

Agreed. McFadden is a stronger Michael Bennett with some actual RB ability. But he's not a shifty runner at all. And I question whether in the NFL he will be able to run through guys like he did in college.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Peterson is like Dickerson. That's the guy they used to compare him to when he was a HS legend in TX. Steven Jackson also reminds me a bit of Dickerson.

I don't think the comparison to McFadden holds up. McFadden is neither shifty nor powerful.

Those were not Dickersons strengths either. ED was a skinny legged long strider who hit the holes hard and glided past defenders.

I don't buy it. Dickerson may have been tall, but he had a strong base and was elusive when he had to be. I don't see anything that reminds me of McFadden here:

I dont want to beat a horse you and i have beaten to death already, but Mcfaddens running style reminds me of Dickersons as closely as any one player has ever reminded me of anothers. The difference is Mcfadden was doing it in college and Dickerson was doing it in the pros. Will Mcfadden be able to keep it up in the NFL, im not sure, but i do like his upside.

 

[T Bell]

McFadden is not a nifty runner. You really don't see him make moves like that very often. His real strength is running very fast in a straight line. One of my big gripes about him from the beginning is the absence of moves and evasion in his game. You'll see guys like Jamaal Charles, Felix Jones, and Ray Rice make nifty cuts pretty regularly. You won't see it very much from McFadden.

Agreed. McFadden is a stronger Michael Bennett with some actual RB ability. But he's not a shifty runner at all. And I question whether in the NFL he will be able to run through guys like he did in college.

I didn't see him running though a lot of guys even in college. He (and Jones, for that matter) benefitted from some huge holes created by that o-line.

 

[EBF]

Peterson is like Dickerson. That's the guy they used to compare him to when he was a HS legend in TX. Steven Jackson also reminds me a bit of Dickerson.

I don't think the comparison to McFadden holds up. McFadden is neither shifty nor powerful.

Those were not Dickersons strengths either. ED was a skinny legged long strider who hit the holes hard and glided past defenders.

I don't buy it. Dickerson may have been tall, but he had a strong base and was elusive when he had to be. I don't see anything that reminds me of McFadden here:

I don't see it. I don't see the lateral moves or power of Dickerson when I watch DMC run.

 

[gregjcross]

Ray Rice - Maurice Jones Drew

I don't think Ray Rice is in the same league as MJD as far as physical talent goes.Jonathan Stewart - Pre-injuries Deuce Mcallister

Not in the same league? They practically mirror each other

MJD is faster and more of a home run threat. Otherwise it's not a bad comparison.Rice reminds me of a lot of successful backs, but he's not a mirror image of any of them.

Rice = Errict Rhett

Just because you can remember an obscure name like Rhett doesn't make it so. I can think of 8 other backs closer to Rice than Rhett. end of conversation.

 

[switz]

McFadden is not a nifty runner. You really don't see him make moves like that very often. His real strength is running very fast in a straight line. One of my big gripes about him from the beginning is the absence of moves and evasion in his game. You'll see guys like Jamaal Charles, Felix Jones, and Ray Rice make nifty cuts pretty regularly. You won't see it very much from McFadden.

Agreed. McFadden is a stronger Michael Bennett with some actual RB ability. But he's not a shifty runner at all. And I question whether in the NFL he will be able to run through guys like he did in college.

I didn't see him running though a lot of guys even in college. He (and Jones, for that matter) benefitted from some huge holes created by that o-line.

While the OL did a good job, McFadden always looked for contact when he broke into the secondary. I don't see him breaking tackles like that in the NFL. I'm not sure about his vision at the line, but I don't discount it simply because he was behind a good OL in college. I have seen games where the ARK OL looked worse than average, and both RBs still looked excellent.

 

[Burning Sensation]

McFadden is not a nifty runner. You really don't see him make moves like that very often. His real strength is running very fast in a straight line. One of my big gripes about him from the beginning is the absence of moves and evasion in his game. You'll see guys like Jamaal Charles, Felix Jones, and Ray Rice make nifty cuts pretty regularly. You won't see it very much from McFadden.

Agreed. McFadden is a stronger Michael Bennett with some actual RB ability. But he's not a shifty runner at all. And I question whether in the NFL he will be able to run through guys like he did in college.

I didn't see him running though a lot of guys even in college. He (and Jones, for that matter) benefitted from some huge holes created by that o-line.

While the OL did a good job, McFadden always looked for contact when he broke into the secondary. I don't see him breaking tackles like that in the NFL. I'm not sure about his vision at the line, but I don't discount it simply because he was behind a good OL in college. I have seen games where the ARK OL looked worse than average, and both RBs still looked excellent.

I think you and i were seeing two different things.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Ray Rice = Terry Allen

 

[UnknownCoach]

McFadden - Ricky Watters, Marcus Allen

Stewart - Ronnie Brown, Lamont Jordan

Mendenhall - Shaun Alexander, Deshaun Foster

Jones - Willie Parker, Julius Jones

Johnson - Charlie Garner, Reggie Bush

Forte - Ahman Green, Marion Barber

Rice - Kevin Faulk, Maurice Jones-Drew

Smith - Corey Dillon, Edgerrin James

Torain - Fred Taylor, Larry Johnson

Charles - Thurman Thomas, Jerious Norwood

 

[Wildman]

I don't see Holmes/Mendenhall. Holmes was very shifty and explosive. Mendenhall has some wiggle, but he's really more of a power back than an elusive type. The guy is a rock.

Mendenhall is a faster Terrell Davis. Holmes was excellent at making jump cuts and had excellent lateral movement despite being able to run economically. Mendenhall doesn't have that kind of lateral ability. He's strictly a one cut guy with just a little wiggle in the open field.

 

[Cookiemonster]

From Commish: "McFadden is going to prove the masses wrong. This guy gets no love. wink1.gif"

Certainly getting love from the Raiders so far in camp...everything you've said about his work ethic, the Raiders are praising.

It was interesting to me that an LB ran stride for stride with McFadden to intercept a pass in camp. At the same time, I would have to believe McFadden was waiting on the ball a bit more than the description implies.

[hijack]That LB was Thomas Howard, though, who is probably one of the 10-15 best pure athletes at LB in the NFL

Howard's combine:

Ht 6'3 1/4"

Wt 239

40: 4.42

Vert: 39"

Broad 10'04"

short shuttle: 4.29

3 cone: 6.98

Arguably as impressive as Hawk.

back to your regularly scheduled programming

[/hijack]

I'd say more impressive. For those not familiar w/ Howard, I don't blame you. If you don't live in NorCal, there hasn't been much reason to watch the Raiders, but Howard put up a very good season last year and is a Derrick Brooks type of animal.

 

[switz]

While the OL did a good job, McFadden always looked for contact when he broke into the secondary. I don't see him breaking tackles like that in the NFL.

I'm not sure about his vision at the line, but I don't discount it simply because he was behind a good OL in college. I have seen games where the ARK OL looked worse than average, and both RBs still looked excellent.

I think you and i were seeing two different things.

Apparently... between putting on a move and hitting a guy, McFadden far more frequently would hit a guy. He rarely put on moves.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

I do not see any similarities between Dickerson and McFadden. None.

 

[abhall]

Felix Jones 5-10 207 -------- Thurman Thomas 5-10 206

Metcalf weighed 188 Lbs. Jones will be more physical then Metcalf, but not quites as much as Thurman. Wade Phillips already has compared Jones to Thomas.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Felix Jones 5-10 207 -------- Thurman Thomas 5-10 206 Metcalf weighed 188 Lbs. Jones will be more physical then Metcalf, but not quites as much as Thurman. Wade Phillips already has compared Jones to Thomas.

That's a good comparison.

 

[switz]

Felix Jones 5-10 207 -------- Thurman Thomas 5-10 206 Metcalf weighed 188 Lbs. Jones will be more physical then Metcalf, but not quites as much as Thurman. Wade Phillips already has compared Jones to Thomas.

Jones is more like Thurman Thomas and Marshall Faulk than Metcalf by far. I don't know whether he can be as good as either of those guys, but I believe he has the work ethic and skill set. Jones also has room to put on weight on his frame.

 

[switz]

Felix Jones 5-10 207 -------- Thurman Thomas 5-10 206 Metcalf weighed 188 Lbs. Jones will be more physical then Metcalf, but not quites as much as Thurman. Wade Phillips already has compared Jones to Thomas.

That's a good comparison.

Glad we agree

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Felix Jones 5-10 207 -------- Thurman Thomas 5-10 206 Metcalf weighed 188 Lbs. Jones will be more physical then Metcalf, but not quites as much as Thurman. Wade Phillips already has compared Jones to Thomas.

That's a good comparison.

Glad we agree

Fifteen years ago, guys were about 10-15 lbs ligher on average league wide. So comparing sizes isn't always fair.Regardless, I know Jones is bigger but I think he'll be used in a very similar way; to great impact I'll add.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Felix Jones 5-10 207 -------- Thurman Thomas 5-10 206

Metcalf weighed 188 Lbs. Jones will be more physical then Metcalf, but not quites as much as Thurman. Wade Phillips already has compared Jones to Thomas.

Jones is more like Thurman Thomas and Marshall Faulk than Metcalf by far. I don't know whether he can be as good as either of those guys, but I believe he has the work ethic and skill set. Jones also has room to put on weight on his frame.

Can you name me one person this is not true about, not just a football player, but anyone, in the whole world?

 

[switz]

Felix Jones 5-10 207 -------- Thurman Thomas 5-10 206

Metcalf weighed 188 Lbs. Jones will be more physical then Metcalf, but not quites as much as Thurman. Wade Phillips already has compared Jones to Thomas.

Jones is more like Thurman Thomas and Marshall Faulk than Metcalf by far. I don't know whether he can be as good as either of those guys, but I believe he has the work ethic and skill set. Jones also has room to put on weight on his frame.

Can you name me one person this is not true about, not just a football player, but anyone, in the whole world?

LOL... well yes, it is true most people can put on weight... even 500 pound people can, but it's not the correct type of weight. Generally, when I make that point it's a frame that can hold more muscle without it having an adverse effect on the frame. We've seen players who have become injury risks due to too much muscle on a frame not meant to handle that weight. I don't see Jammal Charles or Chris Johnson putting on a ton of weight without it hurting their durablity.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Felix Jones 5-10 207 -------- Thurman Thomas 5-10 206

Metcalf weighed 188 Lbs. Jones will be more physical then Metcalf, but not quites as much as Thurman. Wade Phillips already has compared Jones to Thomas.

Jones is more like Thurman Thomas and Marshall Faulk than Metcalf by far. I don't know whether he can be as good as either of those guys, but I believe he has the work ethic and skill set. Jones also has room to put on weight on his frame.

Can you name me one person this is not true about, not just a football player, but anyone, in the whole world?

LOL... well yes, it is true most people can put on weight... even 500 pound people can, but it's not the correct type of weight. Generally, when I make that point it's a frame that can hold more muscle without it having an adverse effect on the frame. We've seen players who have become injury risks due to too much muscle on a frame not meant to handle that weight. I don't see Jammal Charles or Chris Johnson putting on a ton of weight without it hurting their durablity.

Boston could have gained some weight safely, he should have just stopped somewhere before hitting 270.

 

[switz]

Felix Jones 5-10 207 -------- Thurman Thomas 5-10 206

Metcalf weighed 188 Lbs. Jones will be more physical then Metcalf, but not quites as much as Thurman. Wade Phillips already has compared Jones to Thomas.

Jones is more like Thurman Thomas and Marshall Faulk than Metcalf by far. I don't know whether he can be as good as either of those guys, but I believe he has the work ethic and skill set. Jones also has room to put on weight on his frame.

Can you name me one person this is not true about, not just a football player, but anyone, in the whole world?

LOL... well yes, it is true most people can put on weight... even 500 pound people can, but it's not the correct type of weight. Generally, when I make that point it's a frame that can hold more muscle without it having an adverse effect on the frame. We've seen players who have become injury risks due to too much muscle on a frame not meant to handle that weight. I don't see Jammal Charles or Chris Johnson putting on a ton of weight without it hurting their durablity.

Boston could have gained some weight safely, he should have just stopped somewhere before hitting 270.

Even Portis lost some of the weight he had gained when going to Washington because he felt it impacted his playing ability. And it did cause him some durability issue IIRC.

 

[JamesTheScot]

While the OL did a good job, McFadden always looked for contact when he broke into the secondary. I don't see him breaking tackles like that in the NFL.

I'm not sure about his vision at the line, but I don't discount it simply because he was behind a good OL in college. I have seen games where the ARK OL looked worse than average, and both RBs still looked excellent.

I think you and i were seeing two different things.

Apparently... between putting on a move and hitting a guy, McFadden far more frequently would hit a guy. He rarely put on moves.

I think he's saying McFadden would just take an angle and try to blow past the guy while breaking an arm tackle.I was just running back through some of the highlights on youtube and I was suprised at how many of McFadden's highlights contain almost no contact and start with him lining up deep in the backfield.

I know the highlights aren't a great sample size, but I came away with even more conviction than before that he's more of a straightline, beat-you-to-the-corner speedster.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Felix Jones 5-10 207 -------- Thurman Thomas 5-10 206

Metcalf weighed 188 Lbs. Jones will be more physical then Metcalf, but not quites as much as Thurman. Wade Phillips already has compared Jones to Thomas.

Jones is more like Thurman Thomas and Marshall Faulk than Metcalf by far. I don't know whether he can be as good as either of those guys, but I believe he has the work ethic and skill set. Jones also has room to put on weight on his frame.

Can you name me one person this is not true about, not just a football player, but anyone, in the whole world?

LOL... well yes, it is true most people can put on weight... even 500 pound people can, but it's not the correct type of weight. Generally, when I make that point it's a frame that can hold more muscle without it having an adverse effect on the frame. We've seen players who have become injury risks due to too much muscle on a frame not meant to handle that weight. I don't see Jammal Charles or Chris Johnson putting on a ton of weight without it hurting their durablity.

Boston could have gained some weight safely, he should have just stopped somewhere before hitting 270.

Even Portis lost some of the weight he had gained when going to Washington because he felt it impacted his playing ability. And it did cause him some durability issue IIRC.

Not just durability, but players are also risking speed, flexibilty, etc. I think Jones, or any of the other "low BMI" guys can put on a few pounds without any sacrifice in other areas. Thats why i dont get the whole Mcfadden BMI argument. The guy dominated the best conference in college football from day one. Yet, some will draft a guy who had one good year, and was drafted at the end of round one, instead of in the top 5, because Mcfadden is 5 lbs from an ideal BMI? Cant say that i am complaining though, I had picks 2 and 3 in a rookie draft and the guy with the 1.1 took Mendenhall.

 

[EBF]

Felix Jones 5-10 207 -------- Thurman Thomas 5-10 206

Metcalf weighed 188 Lbs. Jones will be more physical then Metcalf, but not quites as much as Thurman. Wade Phillips already has compared Jones to Thomas.

Jones is more like Thurman Thomas and Marshall Faulk than Metcalf by far. I don't know whether he can be as good as either of those guys, but I believe he has the work ethic and skill set. Jones also has room to put on weight on his frame.

Can you name me one person this is not true about, not just a football player, but anyone, in the whole world?

LOL... well yes, it is true most people can put on weight... even 500 pound people can, but it's not the correct type of weight. Generally, when I make that point it's a frame that can hold more muscle without it having an adverse effect on the frame. We've seen players who have become injury risks due to too much muscle on a frame not meant to handle that weight. I don't see Jammal Charles or Chris Johnson putting on a ton of weight without it hurting their durablity.

Boston could have gained some weight safely, he should have just stopped somewhere before hitting 270.

Even Portis lost some of the weight he had gained when going to Washington because he felt it impacted his playing ability. And it did cause him some durability issue IIRC.

Not just durability, but players are also risking speed, flexibilty, etc. I think Jones, or any of the other "low BMI" guys can put on a few pounds without any sacrifice in other areas. Thats why i dont get the whole Mcfadden BMI argument. The guy dominated the best conference in college football from day one. Yet, some will draft a guy who had one good year, and was drafted at the end of round one, instead of in the top 5, because Mcfadden is 5 lbs from an ideal BMI? Cant say that i am complaining though, I had picks 2 and 3 in a rookie draft and the guy with the 1.1 took Mendenhall.

The "one good year" argument doesn't hold any weight. Larry Johnson and Joseph Addai were also one year wonders in college. The fact that the Steelers were willing to take Mendenhall in the first round is much more significant than the fact that he split carries with an NFL back in college. I won't bother to rehash my arguments recommending a skeptical view of McFadden, but I think his flaws are much more significant than you realize.

 

[T Bell]

While the OL did a good job, McFadden always looked for contact when he broke into the secondary. I don't see him breaking tackles like that in the NFL.

I'm not sure about his vision at the line, but I don't discount it simply because he was behind a good OL in college. I have seen games where the ARK OL looked worse than average, and both RBs still looked excellent.

I think you and i were seeing two different things.

Apparently... between putting on a move and hitting a guy, McFadden far more frequently would hit a guy. He rarely put on moves.

I think he's saying McFadden would just take an angle and try to blow past the guy while breaking an arm tackle.I was just running back through some of the highlights on youtube and I was suprised at how many of McFadden's highlights contain almost no contact and start with him lining up deep in the backfield.

I know the highlights aren't a great sample size, but I came away with even more conviction than before that he's more of a straightline, beat-you-to-the-corner speedster.

That impression is even more dramatic with Jones, but it's true for both.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Felix Jones 5-10 207 -------- Thurman Thomas 5-10 206

Metcalf weighed 188 Lbs. Jones will be more physical then Metcalf, but not quites as much as Thurman. Wade Phillips already has compared Jones to Thomas.

Jones is more like Thurman Thomas and Marshall Faulk than Metcalf by far. I don't know whether he can be as good as either of those guys, but I believe he has the work ethic and skill set. Jones also has room to put on weight on his frame.

Can you name me one person this is not true about, not just a football player, but anyone, in the whole world?

LOL... well yes, it is true most people can put on weight... even 500 pound people can, but it's not the correct type of weight. Generally, when I make that point it's a frame that can hold more muscle without it having an adverse effect on the frame. We've seen players who have become injury risks due to too much muscle on a frame not meant to handle that weight. I don't see Jammal Charles or Chris Johnson putting on a ton of weight without it hurting their durablity.

Boston could have gained some weight safely, he should have just stopped somewhere before hitting 270.

Even Portis lost some of the weight he had gained when going to Washington because he felt it impacted his playing ability. And it did cause him some durability issue IIRC.

Not just durability, but players are also risking speed, flexibilty, etc. I think Jones, or any of the other "low BMI" guys can put on a few pounds without any sacrifice in other areas. Thats why i dont get the whole Mcfadden BMI argument. The guy dominated the best conference in college football from day one. Yet, some will draft a guy who had one good year, and was drafted at the end of round one, instead of in the top 5, because Mcfadden is 5 lbs from an ideal BMI? Cant say that i am complaining though, I had picks 2 and 3 in a rookie draft and the guy with the 1.1 took Mendenhall.

The "one good year" argument doesn't hold any weight. Larry Johnson and Joseph Addai were also one year wonders in college. The fact that the Steelers were willing to take Mendenhall in the first round is much more significant than the fact that he split carries with an NFL back in college. I won't bother to rehash my arguments recommending a skeptical view of McFadden, but I think his flaws are much more significant than you realize.

Given the choice, which RB do you think the Steelers would prefer, assuming they had their choice of any of the RB's from the 2008 draft class?For the record, i dont dislike Mendenhall, but RB's taken in the top five are going to be better than RB's taken at the end of the draft alot more often than not.

 

[Burning Sensation]

While the OL did a good job, McFadden always looked for contact when he broke into the secondary. I don't see him breaking tackles like that in the NFL.

I'm not sure about his vision at the line, but I don't discount it simply because he was behind a good OL in college. I have seen games where the ARK OL looked worse than average, and both RBs still looked excellent.

I think you and i were seeing two different things.

Apparently... between putting on a move and hitting a guy, McFadden far more frequently would hit a guy. He rarely put on moves.

I think he's saying McFadden would just take an angle and try to blow past the guy while breaking an arm tackle.I was just running back through some of the highlights on youtube and I was suprised at how many of McFadden's highlights contain almost no contact and start with him lining up deep in the backfield.

I know the highlights aren't a great sample size, but I came away with even more conviction than before that he's more of a straightline, beat-you-to-the-corner speedster.

Pretty much my point. It seemed that when DMac made it to the secondary, he was usually just running by the DB's, he didnt need to juke, or run them over. I actually think Mcfaddens straight ahead running style might benefit him in the NFL.

 

[switz]

I know the highlights aren't a great sample size, but I came away with even more conviction than before that he's more of a straightline, beat-you-to-the-corner speedster.

That impression is even more dramatic with Jones, but it's true for both.

Have you seen Felix play? He has way more moves than McFadden!!Yes, both are fast backs whose games are based on speed. But there is a vast difference between the two RBs and how they run. McFadden just runs straight, very little lateral movement, he'll use a stiff arm or lower the shoulder when he is near a defender.Jones on the other hand is extremely shifty. He'll put a move on before initiating contact. He gets much lower to the ground in his cuts, and appears to have better vision, better ability to set up blockers (maybe due to KR experience?)

 

[switz]

While the OL did a good job, McFadden always looked for contact when he broke into the secondary. I don't see him breaking tackles like that in the NFL.

I'm not sure about his vision at the line, but I don't discount it simply because he was behind a good OL in college. I have seen games where the ARK OL looked worse than average, and both RBs still looked excellent.

I think you and i were seeing two different things.

Apparently... between putting on a move and hitting a guy, McFadden far more frequently would hit a guy. He rarely put on moves.

I think he's saying McFadden would just take an angle and try to blow past the guy while breaking an arm tackle.I was just running back through some of the highlights on youtube and I was suprised at how many of McFadden's highlights contain almost no contact and start with him lining up deep in the backfield.

I know the highlights aren't a great sample size, but I came away with even more conviction than before that he's more of a straightline, beat-you-to-the-corner speedster.

Pretty much my point. It seemed that when DMac made it to the secondary, he was usually just running by the DB's, he didnt need to juke, or run them over. I actually think Mcfaddens straight ahead running style might benefit him in the NFL.

NFL players are faster and take better angles.

 

[Burning Sensation]

While the OL did a good job, McFadden always looked for contact when he broke into the secondary. I don't see him breaking tackles like that in the NFL.

I'm not sure about his vision at the line, but I don't discount it simply because he was behind a good OL in college. I have seen games where the ARK OL looked worse than average, and both RBs still looked excellent.

I think you and i were seeing two different things.

Apparently... between putting on a move and hitting a guy, McFadden far more frequently would hit a guy. He rarely put on moves.

I think he's saying McFadden would just take an angle and try to blow past the guy while breaking an arm tackle.I was just running back through some of the highlights on youtube and I was suprised at how many of McFadden's highlights contain almost no contact and start with him lining up deep in the backfield.

I know the highlights aren't a great sample size, but I came away with even more conviction than before that he's more of a straightline, beat-you-to-the-corner speedster.

Pretty much my point. It seemed that when DMac made it to the secondary, he was usually just running by the DB's, he didnt need to juke, or run them over. I actually think Mcfaddens straight ahead running style might benefit him in the NFL.

NFL players are faster and take better angles.

Agreed, which also makes them harder to juke. They are also bigger and stronger, making them harder to run through.

 

[Cookiemonster]

Given the choice, which RB do you think the Steelers would prefer, assuming they had their choice of any of the RB's from the 2008 draft class?For the record, i dont dislike Mendenhall, but RB's taken in the top five are going to be better than RB's taken at the end of the draft alot more often than not.

Stewart.