forums

30 carries for Knighton. 4 for Franklin and Brown combined

streetja said:
100 times this. What we're seeing was totally to be expected and not really a reflection of Rooster's capabilities but a reflection of how **** poor Lashlee -- and everyone under Manny -- is with roster and personnel management.

Zero doubt that had Cam not gone down the title of this thread would be: Cam Harris 30 carries, Rooster, Franklin and Brown 4 carries.
Click to expand...
It use to be that. Not sure if noticed. Hickson or Lashlee dont sub rbs much at all. The back up rb on avg gets under 5 touches a game
 
Advertisement
SFbayCane said:
Correct but playing in one play counts as one game played. Again, why use one of the four games if you're only going to give him one play per game?

To me, it sort of comes off like the staff is trying to appease players (and maybe parents of players) here and there. Just a guess though.
Click to expand...
I don't think there's an in-game plan for how many more plays you plan on for a guy. So you put him in for a play and don't get to run any more plays you want him in, so what? If I thought we could win a game on a trick play, but it would only work if we played a kid and burned his redshirt, I'd do it in a heartbeat.
 
streetja said:
In Thad Franklin's one carry he got hit behind the LOS but managed to make it a three yard gain because he knows how to fall forward. But for Lashlee and his followers on here that was one carry too much for Franklin.

Look, all I'm going to say is that if you find yourself agreeing that Rooster should get 30 carries a game, please know that you are also agreeing with the two worst posters on this board: @GoCanes and @305to954
Click to expand...
I don’t think he should be getting 30 carries. My point is that we have to fix our OL issues and Lashlee needs to be more creative in short-yardage situations.

That’s first on the agenda. After that, yes….spread the wealth when it comes to carries.
 
Advertisement
If Franklin is as lazy as knowledgeable posters claim, how can you justify more playing time? He’s not an established star who has earned the benefit of the doubt he’ll produce in game. Can he pick up his blitz assignments? Can he catch out of the backfield? A one-skill back has minimal value. He’s not Earl Campbell.

All the Franklin crew would be ****ed if Franklin missed a blitz and TVD got knocked out of game, or worse.
 
streetja said:
In Thad Franklin's one carry he got hit behind the LOS but managed to make it a three yard gain because he knows how to fall forward. But for Lashlee and his followers on here that was one carry too much for Franklin.

Look, all I'm going to say is that if you find yourself agreeing that Rooster should get 30 carries a game, please know that you are also agreeing with the two worst posters on this board: @GoCanes and @305to954
Click to expand...

Lmao, who hurt you?
 
streetja said:
Terrible take.
Click to expand...
Well, I don't think it is. The two best backs on this team are Cheney and Knighton. None of the other RB's have the vision or speed of those two and its not even close. I think we can all agree that what we have seen from the other three is clearly a step below, if not two steps.
 
BS85 said:
This staff has proven that player health isn't taken into consideration
Click to expand...
But if they sit a guy, fans start screaming they're just trying to save their jobs by saying all their players are hurt. Then thay're just trying to save their jobs by playing freshmen. Or by not playing them. Whatever, the staff don't care about anything.
 
Advertisement
TemplarCane said:
If Franklin is as lazy as knowledgeable posters claim, how can you justify more playing time? He’s not an established star who has earned the benefit of the doubt he’ll produce in game. Can he pick up his blitz assignments? Can he catch out of the backfield? A one-skill back has minimal value. He’s not Earl Campbell.

All the Franklin crew would be ****ed if Franklin missed a blitz and TVD got knocked out of game, or worse.
Click to expand...

“Playing a known lazy freshman that got your QB taken out is a fireable offense “
 
SFbayCane said:
Correct but playing in one play counts as one game played. Again, why use one of the four games if you're only going to give him one play per game?

To me, it sort of comes off like the staff is trying to appease players (and maybe parents of players) here and there. Just a guess though.
Click to expand...
the plan was to have Brown and Thad RS..with cam and Don done 7 games still were remaining . That plan goes out the window. Especially for brown. So if 4 needs a blow for 3 snaps in a game it’s gotta be 24 or we go 10 personnel or get 12 in there and get creative (he’s lined up multiple time in the backfield)..bro we have 2 RBs rn..Thad needs to get his **** together and lose that **** weight. If a kid showed up to camp like that and also struggled in pass pro and drills I would play his *** either. Both Brown and Thad needed a Szn of S&C…if hickson was about appeasing players egos then Lingard would’ve gotten carries just cause. I don’t think that the case at all
 
gogeta4 said:
When u say occasional do you mean ...about 3 screens a year?
Click to expand...


Actually I mean on every 3rd and long on every drive that starts inside UM's own 30 yard line. We usually see it on the first 3rd down of the opening drive of the second half. lol
 
Advertisement
streetja said:
In Thad Franklin's one carry he got hit behind the LOS but managed to make it a three yard gain because he knows how to fall forward. But for Lashlee and his followers on here that was one carry too much for Franklin.

Look, all I'm going to say is that if you find yourself agreeing that Rooster should get 30 carries a game, please know that you are also agreeing with the two worst posters on this board: @GoCanes and @305to954
Click to expand...
These people saying Rooster should carry it 30 times a game should just STFU because they're just showing their ignorance about the game of football and what the hits do to the body over the course of a season. Rooster is not built to carry the ball 30 times a game. Even if he were, it would still be a bad idea.

Doing so on a weekly basis is counterproductive and will result in injuries.

The guys that have carried the ball 30 times a game over their careers now walk with a cane if they can walk at all. NFL teams don't do it anymore. Sure, here and there a guy may get 30+, but not a week-in week-out game plan to carry it 30+ times. Most teams have a "feature back" that may carry it 15-20 times and may get another 5-10 touches in the pass game.

There's only so many hits the body can take before things begin to break down.
 
gogeta4 said:
It use to be that. Not sure if noticed. Hickson or Lashlee dont sub rbs much at all. The back up rb on avg gets under 5 touches a game
Click to expand...
Lashlee always stated he’d prefer 1 guy to take over..4 is taking over that role. Never wish a kid getting hurt but the injury to 2 actually works out because rooster is a star and Don has a even higher overall ceiling ..it staggers their eligibility
 
gogeta4 said:
It use to be that. Not sure if noticed. Hickson or Lashlee dont sub rbs much at all. The back up rb on avg gets under 5 touches a game
Click to expand...
Lashlee said it prior to season he wasnt gonna rotate backs this season, he wanted a bellcow or some dumb oldschool football bs.. Recruit a ton of backs and only use one bs.. I dont get that part honestly..
 
Advertisement
305to954 said:
the plan was to have Brown and Thad RS..with cam and Don done 7 games still were remaining . That plan goes out the window. Especially for brown. So if 4 needs a blow for 3 snaps in a game it’s gotta be 24 or we go 10 personnel or get 12 in there and get creative (he’s lined up multiple time in the backfield)..bro we have 2 RBs rn..Thad needs to get his **** together and lose that **** weight. If a kid showed up to camp like that and also struggled in pass pro and drills I would play his *** either. Both Brown and Thad needed a Szn of S&C…if hickson was about appeasing players egos then Lingard would’ve gotten carries just cause. I don’t think that the case at all
Click to expand...

Power packed post there, 305. lol. Lots to unpack.

I agree with much of what you're saying. The injuries definitely changed the coaches' roster management plans. That said, as noted Cam Harris played every single snap for 6 consecutive quarters. How long was it going to take for the coaches to make the changes. They could have used Brown or Franklin for a handful of plays. Who knows, that overuse could have contributed to Harris getting injured.

I agree that Brown and Franklin need better conditioning before being considered a UM caliber back. They may not be. That said, that's who we have. Its incombent upon Lashlee to come up with ways to utilize Brown/Franklin enough to give Knighton the occasional rest. He has not done that IMO.

I do not share your opinion that the coaches would have given Lingard snaps for appeasement. His situation was likely much different than Brown's and Franklins.
 
Number1CanesFan said:
These people saying Rooster should carry it 30 times a game should just STFU because they're just showing their ignorance about the game of football and what the hits do to the body over the course of a season. Rooster is not built to carry the ball 30 times a game. Even if he were, it would still be a bad idea.

Doing so on a weekly basis is counterproductive and will result in injuries.

The guys that have carried the ball 30 times a game over their careers now walk with a cane if they can walk at all. NFL teams don't do it anymore. Sure, here and there a guy may get 30+, but not a week-in week-out game plan to carry it 30+ times. Most teams have a "feature back" that may carry it 15-20 times and may get another 5-10 touches in the pass game.

There's only so many hits the body can take before things begin to break down.
Click to expand...

Don’t listen to @streetja , literally no one is saying he SHOULD have 30 carries.
 
kryptonite said:
I don't think there's an in-game plan for how many more plays you plan on for a guy. So you put him in for a play and don't get to run any more plays you want him in, so what? If I thought we could win a game on a trick play, but it would only work if we played a kid and burned his redshirt, I'd do it in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...


Every coach in America is now showing your post to every one of the kid's he's recruiting against you for. lol. You just lost half of your roster by telling a kid that you're willing to trade one year of his eligibility for a single play. :weight-machine:
 
Advertisement
Back
Top