The only game you could say that Yearby out performed Walton out of those four would be UNC.
The second half of the season, Walton dominated.
Pitt - 14 for 125
UVA - 16 for 111
NCSt - 19 for 120
Duke - 13 for 60
But yeah, you guys are right. Yearby is clearly the better player and the coaching staff was purposely playing the worse player.
And every single NFL GM and scout cant' see it either.
Joe Yearby has a lot in common with Brad Kaaya. Both are good players. Both never really got better in college. Both are limited phisically except teams can work around a slow quarterback. It's tough to justify giving a little guy with no break away speed more than 5-10 carries a game in college.
You do realize the UNC game is the only one where Walton actually gained more yards than Yearby, right?
GT
Yearby - 9-65, 7.2 ypc
Walton - 15-44, 2.9 ypc
FSU
Yearby - 10-39, 3.2 ypc
Walton - 14-39, 2.8 ypc
UNC
Yearby - 10-74, 7.4 ypc
Walton - 24-82, 3.4 ypc
VT
Yearby - 9-59, 6.6 ypc
Walton - 11-38, 3.5 ypc
Yearby gained 34 more yards on 26 less carries. Walton's longest run in these 4 games was 14 yds. Yearby had a 25+ yd run in 3 of those 4 games.
For your "Dominated the 2nd Half of the Season", you left off WVU - 17 for 52. So his last 2 games he went 30 for 112. So I'd argue he played great for 3 games, no question, but didn't "dominate" all of those games, and was just average in the last 2.
For your statement -
It's tough to justify giving a little guy with no break away speed more than 5-10 carries a game in college. - I couldn't agree with you more!
Yearby = 5'9" 200, runs a 4.7
Walton = 5'9" 205, runs a 4.6
Neither of those guys should be what we expect as a workhorse RB at Miami. Both are similar talents, and both of their talent levels should be what we want in a backup/2nd string, not a starter.
We get it.
At minimum, you think they're even.
At most, you believe Yearby is better.
Fact is, Richt disagreed with you. Richt believes Walton to be the better back.
Fact is, Yearby didn't get drafted, wasn't signed as an UFA, and didn't make a 90-man roster after getting an invite to a team that has an abysmal situation at running back. So, if Walton gets drafted next year, gets signed as an UFA, or makes a 90-man roster, then the NFL will also believe he is the better back.
At what point will you acknowledge the folks paid to make these decisions might have better insight on this topic, than just taking a look at YPC?
NO QUESTION Richt & the staff have are ridiculously smarter than me, and way have better insight - I'd never argue against that.
I'm just a random fan with an opinion - like 95% of the posters on this board.
But ask yourself this - Do you agree with every decision made on offense this year? Does any fan on here just say to themselves "Richt knows more than me" and go along with everything Richt decides?
Richt preferred Walton. I would've preferred Yearby. I think they're similar, and it's a close call. My problem is when people act like the gap between Walton and Yearby is huge, so I make points that argue otherwise.
Richt preferred Berrios as a PR. I would've preferred Coley or Elder. I don't think either Richt or myself are wrong - it's just a preference.
Jarret Payton, Tyrone Moss, Damien Berry, Graig Cooper, Javarris James, Mike James - I'd say all were similar talents. Now some played a couple years in the NFL, some never did.
I'd lump Yearby & Walton in that group talent-wise. I think all are NFL journeyman at best. But I don't think JJ playing a couple years in the NFL necessarily makes him a better RB than Cooper. I think NFL journeyman is Walton's ceiling, but don't think that necessarily means he's the better RB than Yearby if he never plays a down in the NFL. It's a close call on all of those RB's - and just a preference on who you prefer IMO.
I get that you have a preference and opinion. No knock from me on that.
But it's hard for me to receive an argument in support of Yearby because of YPC stats, but then you dismiss the stats that suggest Walton is better.
Walton had the better season as a feature back ... More yards, more TDs, higher YPC. Walton also has the higher pro ceiling, in most everyone's opinion ... Even if that's "NFL journeyman running back" versus CFL or arena league player.
I'm one of the people who believes there is a pretty big gap between Walton and Yearby. Not saying I think Walton is elite today, but I think he still has room to touch his ceiling. And, IMO, I think Yearby maxed out who he could be as a player ... With his best not being as good as Walton is currently, IMO.
... And Walton still has room for growth/improvement.
This season will give us all a more clear picture of who Walton is as a college runner and pro prospect. We need him to be better than you believe him to be for us to reach expectations.
And maybe that hope/need is clouding perspectives?
But maybe your vision is holding on a little too closely to Walton's first season?
I agree with you, and the main points are:
1) I think Walton's ceiling is lower than what you most think it is, and that's the main disagreement.
I think for Walton to have a great year this year - Walton has to improve while Homer, Choc, etc. don't improve to the point where they eat into Walton's carries. The OL play has to get better. the Play calling has to get better. Perry/Herndon/Thomas have to be enough of a threat and play as well as Kaaya/NJoku/Coley to keep defenses honest and not stack the box, and keep drives alive.
I can see some of those things happening - but I think it's overly wishful to think all of it's going to happen.
For Walton's NFL prospects - he's 5'9" 205, and runs a 4.6. That's small and slow by NFL standards. No matter how much his vision or stats improve, his physical/athletic traits can't really get much better, so even with a great year his NFL potential is limited. Not saying small & slow RB's can't make it, but it's very rare.
2) The YPC argument
Totally agree that Walton's 2016 5.3 ypc is better than Yearby's 4.9 ypc, but I don't think that's the best comparison.
2015 - Yearby vs. Walton = 4.9 ypc vs. 3.5 ypc
2016 - Yearby vs. Walton = 6.0 ypc vs. 5.3 ypc
2015 - Golden was Head Coach, Coley was OC, OL was young
2016 - Richt is Head Coach/OC, and the OL was 1 year older & better
You'd expect an improvement based on the coaching alone. Walton's 1.8 ypc always cited as a reason for his showing improvement. But Yearby's ypc improved 1.1 yds. Do you think Yearby was significantly better in 2016 than he was in 2015? His ypc went up over a yard, which is a pretty big leap. Shouldn't the same logic being applied to Walton be applied to Yearby?
When it was a constant - same year, same team, same coaches, same offense - Yearby's ypc was 1.4 yds better in 2015, and 0.7 yds better in 2016. To me, how RB's perform in the same year is a better/more accurate comparison. And Yearby's ypc was significantly better in both years.
Walton's 3.5 ypc in 2016 was really, really bad while his 5.3 ypc in 2016 was just average.
I can understand that maybe I'm holding on to his Freshman year too much. But I haven't heard what I think is a good argument for dismissing his entire Freshman year like it didn't happen, and dismissing the 5 straight games in October this year where he averaged 3.5 or less in all of them.
Me personally - I see an average back who had a couple great games. He can put a big game here and there, but I just can't dismiss all the games where he hasn't played well, because there's too many of those.
How Walton played in the Pitt & NC St. games this year just aren't enough to make me forget how he played in the GT, FSU, UNC, VT, ND, and WVU games.
