So are you saying Rooster is more talented, less talented, or similarly talented compared to Cam?
forums
The Blue Chip Ratio - Running Back Edition
- Thread starter GojiraCane
- Start date
So are you saying Rooster is more talented, less talented, or similarly talented compared to Cam?
Advertisement
TruCane81
Senior
- Joined
- May 9, 2019
- Messages
- 3,742
Cam is better than Rooster right now and King was a much bigger threat on the keeper.
Run game was inconsistent with King and Cam too. Replace them with TVD and Rooster.
It’s never just one thing is what I’m usually trying to get at. Rooster is a different type of back than Cam. More all purpose than feature. I do believe Rooster fits a gap blocking scheme more than the zone blocking. Forget the double team, put hat on a hat immediately, and get line men on the second level quicker. He wouldn’t have to be as patient as the zone run requires.
As a team we haven’t done a good enough job adjusting to the strengths of individual players and it cost us a lot of wins. I think Gattis fixes that and has a system that can adjust to different types of quarterbacks, backs, linemen and so on.
Rooster has a ton of talent. To suggest he doesn’t based on numbers with no context is as off base in my opinion.
TruCane81
Senior
- Joined
- May 9, 2019
- Messages
- 3,742
They are different TYPES of backs with completely different strengths and styles. Cam’s strengths fit the limitations of Lashlee’s run game better. Rooster became much more productive in the pass game.
I believe Manny’s poor preparation of the team had a cumulative effect that had more of an impact on Rooster because all he knows is Manny’s way.
I believe in total value they are about equally talented but Cam’s experience and style fit make him the better runner RIGHT NOW. I don’t think this team is best served trying to make Rooster a 20 carry per game guy, but he IS more talented than his ypc from last year suggested.
Hopefully Chaney can get healthy and stay that way. I like Parrish and think he is the type of skilled runner who comes into his own third year. I want Rooster to get about 10 carries a game, 5 passing targets, and be moved and motioned all over the field. We can get creative with him and Brashard on field together.
I like the way you break down backs, but there is always context that tells the story the numbers don’t. I don’t look at talent as a black and white thing with upper tier 3 star and 4 four star players. I look at there strengths and ask “Did we use them correctly?” For the longest time, the answer for most of our players has been no. Then we wonder why guys won’t sign. You know the guys who can succeed under less ideal circumstances because of their outlandish talent.
Until we get more of the studs who can dominate no matter what, I would like to use the guys we do have to their strengths.
All these reasons for Knighton's numbers - Poor OL / Coaching / Scheme / Play Calling / Not Using RB's correctly - are the same reasons used when Yearby / Walton / Cam were underperforming. None of these reasons are new or unique to Knighton vs comparing him to any other Miami RB.
I 100% agree all these factors matter & I 100% think Yearby / Walton / Cam / Knighton are all talented RB's.
But the greatest OL & Scheme can only help so much. It can't fix a RB's limitations. Yearby/Walton were small & slow. Cam is a stiff runner that bounces outside too much. Knighton is small & continuously chooses to run straight ahead into a defender that's 5 yards away instead of making a move. Homer/Dallas put up much better numbers - not because their OL & Scheme were better, it's because they had less limitations. They were just better.
My point is Knighton's limitations are at least equal parts to blame as OL & Scheme for him only averaging 3.9 ypc. The numbers are bad - you can't just dismiss them. I agree that improved OL & Scheme will help Knighton's numbers. The question is how much? He may go from 3.9 ypc to 5.0 ypc - but 5.0 ypc still isn't good.
If we're giving 10 carries a game to a 5.0 ypc RB, then we're either not that talented a backfield, or we're using the wrong RB.
Knighton is definitely talented, but be open to the possibility he's not as talented as you think. The OL & Scheme need a lot of improvement, but be open to the possibility they're not holding our RB's back as much as you think.
Last edited:
Wait so now we’re saying despite having arguably the most talented RB room in the conference (according to recruit rankings) we actually don’t because everyone single one was significantly overrated?
The rankings are just that bad and we’re just that bad at evaluations that all of our blue chip RB’s actually make up the worst RB room in the ACC?
Lol miss me with that.
It's a sliding scale. Last year the 1st Team All-ACC RB's played at Syracuse & Duke.
Miami can have the most talented RB room in the ACC and still be "good not great" if all the other ACC backfields are average.
I don't want this to read me saying we don't have talent. We definitely have talent. But having the best RB's in the ACC doesn't necessarily mean we have multiple stud RB's.
Advertisement
TUSKtimes
BAMMER
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2021
- Messages
- 306
I readily said how much talent Najee Harris had. Josh Jacobs was 3rd in the pecking order during his career at BAMA and was still the first running back taken in the NFL draft. But for the record, Najee Harris and Josh Jacobs had years where we didn't finish in the red zone as we should have, we didn't grind out long drives because we didn't get the tough short yards. There were also times when we weren't balanced, meaning we couldn't run the ball, when we wanted to. Even though their average and other running back averages, per rush, looked just fine. It simply didn't tell the story of why we were struggling to stay balanced.
Brian rushed for about 4.8 yards on 36 carries for 171 yards vs Ole Miss. He also destroyed the Ole Miss defense in the red zone when we got down there and scored 4 TDs for the game. We were able to play keep away from Matt Corral all day with extremely long drives because Brian was able to keep the sticks moving on 3rd and 4th downs. Cold hard stats often tell no one how a game was won or lost. Try to read a scoreboard by looking up the stats on any particular player? B-Rob is a big back, and as a big back, got the tough yards all season and some of his best work for this team was when he was averaging 5 yards per carry. And guess what? We were balanced at 4.8 yards per carry in that game because we ran when we wanted for 4 quarters and Ole Miss couldn't do anything about it.
Simply comparing other backs with similar averages will say nothing about the way he is used at BAMA or when he got those carries or the success he had in scoring TDs in FINISHING drives, making tough first downs, and genuinely helping the team win games on the scoreboard.
motorcitycane
Senior
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2012
- Messages
- 8,590
TruCane81
Senior
- Joined
- May 9, 2019
- Messages
- 3,742
I agree with much of this. Your take that some backs are better than others is obvious. No one will argue this. My disagreement is with you on the claim that the room lacked talent at anytime. Since 2011, every starting Hurricane back has been drafted and made a final 53 man roster except one, Yearby. Lamar, Duke, Walton, Homer, DeeJay. Cam and Rooster will make rosters in the league too. That is talent.
Golden left us bereft on offensive line and we still have not recovered. But when I watch a team with way less overall talent on paper like Syracuse, be so creative manufacturing rush yards and then watch us flounder under flawed offensive coordinators like Richt, Enos, and Lashlee, I can’t blame a lack of talent as the primary reason for a lack of production.
Rooster loses yardage trying to punish the defense. Homer did the same thing. He is more explosive than Rooster, but he had a lot more room to run even with Richt’s predictable play calling. We were much more solid across the line in 2017 and 18 than now.
We will never see eye to eye on Walton. He struggled early and came on strong the second half of his sophomore year. He came out beasting in 2017 and ran for almost 400 yards the first wo games. Duke went all in to stop the run and make Rosier beat them and Rosier DID. He only went 17 for 51 but had four catches at twenty yards a catch. He got hurt against Florida State. Having him and Homer available would have changed the complexion of that season. Remember, Homer wore down by seasons end and had his own struggles. Walton would have had over 1200 yards. We moved Donaldson to guard and he was really good in the run game back then.
DeeJay had the misfortune of playing for an offensive coordinator who was fixated on outside with two freshman tackles who were not ready. We would question his talent but he made game breaking plays from the wildcat formation that countered Enos’ ineptitude. We should have been an inside zone team in 2019.
In 2020 and 2021, the tackles got better, but the interior got significantly worse.
I am not claiming all our guys are Barry Sanders or Jim Brown. Some of our guys are better than others. It’s undeniable. But I won’t claim that Rooster lacks “talent” because he struggled in the run game. He has plenty of “talent” he just needs to play better and he will.
TruCane81
Senior
- Joined
- May 9, 2019
- Messages
- 3,742
This is what I am talking about.
You have to provide context for the numbers.
Bshaw equates production with talent. That isn’t always the case.
Advertisement
TruCane81
Senior
- Joined
- May 9, 2019
- Messages
- 3,742
Switch him and Sean Tucker on Syracuse. Their numbers would be a lot different, even though I do believe Tucker is the better back right now.
You're saying I'm not taking into account how Robinson was used at Bama. Others are saying I'm not taking into account how Knighton was used at Miami.
I'd guess 85% of fanbases would say their RB's could've been used better. So this isn't unique to Robinson or Knighton, it happens to every RB at every school.
That's why you look at the averages. Some play calls will be terrible and put the RB in a terrible position. Other play calls will be great and put the RB in a great position. Over the course of the year, it evens out for every RB.
If we say we don't know the circumstances for every single player - than there's no point in looking at stats at all, right?
Last edited:
A large % of the time better players put up better numbers, less talented players put up bad numbers. Do you disagree with that?
Since you keep bringing up context - you keep using "talent" like it doesn't have varying degrees. Derrick Henry is talented. Mark Walton is talented. You can't just say their both talented and they're both NFL RB's without giving the context that talent is on COMPLETELY different levels.
But you could point to their stats and it would be immediately obvious.
Last edited:
I don't think you understand how far apart Sean Tucker and Jaylan Knighton are stats wise.
- Knighton's 8 games this year were all against ACC opponents and he averaged 3.9 ypc
- Tucker averaged 5.9 ypc in his 8 ACC games. So a full 2.0 ypc more.
- So lets take away Tuckers longest run in all 8 games
- Let's add 10 carries for 100 yds for Knighton
Now both have 155 carries - Tucker 4.6 ypc & Knighton 4.3
And again - Miami had PFF's 90th run blocking OL & Syracuse was 112th OL
But your context is "Syracuse was MUCH better and more consistent getting hats on second level defenders than our line and THAT is the primary difference in production in this case"
The narrative that things at MIAMI are SO MUCH worse than anywhere else - including a 5 WIN SYRACUSE - it's just hard for me to wrap my head around.
Last edited:
Advertisement
Where have I said these RB's weren't talented? Can you point that out to me?
I'm saying all are talented - but there's different levels. You can't use "talent" as a blanket description. Lamar Miller who starts in the NFL and makes a Pro Bowl is different than Mark Walton who has 235 career rushing yds..
Same at the college level - If Homer/Deejay average 6.0 ypc vs P5 teams while Yearby/Walton/Knighton average 4.0 ypc - then it means Homer/Deejay are more talented. Please don't read it as me saying " Yearby/Walton/Knighton" suck and aren't talented. I'm saying their talented, just not AS talented as some other Miami RB's, and we should expect more out of a starting RB at Miami.
Knighton & Walton are on a very similar trajectory. Stats are similar - and they don't look good - and it's the same laundry list of excuses why it's not either of their faults.
People have it in their head that these guys are studs, so when their stats aren't good, they convince themselves it HAS to be all these other factors because there's a 100% chance these guys are the real deal. The fact they "might" not be as good as they think isn't even an option.
Walton & Knighton career vs P5 Teams
Almost the exact same right? Same problems held them back right? So what's the difference?
The difference is the INSANE amount of carries Walton had vs Non-P5 teams that padded his stats
Think of how crazy that is. We have 3 Non-P5 games next year & Knighton would have to avg 34 carries a game in them to have the same amount as Walton.
Last edited:
TruCane81
Senior
- Joined
- May 9, 2019
- Messages
- 3,742
Yawn. Pff blocking grades have always been questionable.
Syracuse’s run game is way more creative, versatile, and consistent than ours. When you bottle Tucker up, he goes down easy. Rooster isn’t patient to allow what little blocking is there to develop, so he runs fast into a crowd. Three yards and a cloud of dust. He doesn’t make guys miss but Tucker isn’t exactly Reggie Bush either. He just outruns guys WHEN THERE IS A HOLE.
Before you **** on a 5 win Syracuse team, remember we only won two more games than them with one of of the nation’s best young quarterbacks. Without that, we likely have the same record OR WORSE than them. Watching the tape, Syracuse was much less predictable, gave up much less penetration, and got their linemen to the second level and actually made a block more consistently. I don’t know how pff grades. I do know people have argued over the validity of those grades for a long time. They often leave me scratching my head too.
Like I said I think Tucker is better, but he wouldn’t have run for 1200 yards behind our line with Lashlee’s play calling. That’s for **** sure.
THANK YOU!
All I've been saying is - Knighton is talented, but he has a lot of improving to do as a runner.
The problems with Knighton's running style you just pointed out are contributing to his poor performance just as much as the OL & Scheme.
It was a long walk - but we got there!
Advertisement
Advertisement