PDA

View Full Version : Gary Russell...



kennyes
06-30-2008, 04:46 AM
For yinz who are more familiar with Gary Russell's play on the collegiate level, who would you compare his running style to? I'm just curious after all the threads and posts about trading FWP, and now with the release of #2, that with the apparent interest in Jones via media source, etc. What do you Kids think about Russell's role and or promise in this season and beyond?


That and...

:bungalssuck


:ratsuck


:brownssuck

Oviedo
06-30-2008, 10:31 AM
Personally, IMO I think that Mendenhall and Russell are the tandem back of the future. If Mendenhall can translate his college skills to the Pro game he is able to both run and receive out of the backfield which may give the flexibility to eliminate the need to a "specialist third down back." By all indications, and right now speculation only, Russell seems to have the ability to come in a run hard between the tackles while RM would be resting. The two of them have the intriguing ability to beat down defenses for 4 quarters. Many unknowns, but you have to like what the possibilities are.

Shawn
06-30-2008, 12:14 PM
Russell actually compares really well to Mendenhall. They are VERY similar backs. Russell is a tough tougher between the tackles which is saying something. Mendenhall has more speed. But, both are tough runners. They both have terrific hands. Both are receiving threats. Russell teammates at Minnesota were noted as being very confident in Russells ability to move the chains.

Iron Shiek
06-30-2008, 12:48 PM
Haven't seen this posted yet surprisingly, so here goes:

Per Fanball.com and apparently the Pittsburgh Post Gazette:


Steelers praise Russell
The News
The Steelers have praised Gary Russell and believe he can develop into a "top notch" running back, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
Our View
Russell has a shot to make the team as a fourth running back behind Willie Parker, rookie Rashard Mendenhall, and Mewelde Moore. But he won't hold any fantasy value while fighting for scraps.


Exciting news.

Shawn
06-30-2008, 01:57 PM
Haven't seen this posted yet surprisingly, so here goes:

Per Fanball.com and apparently the Pittsburgh Post Gazette:


Steelers praise Russell
The News
The Steelers have praised Gary Russell and believe he can develop into a "top notch" running back, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
Our View
Russell has a shot to make the team as a fourth running back behind Willie Parker, rookie Rashard Mendenhall, and Mewelde Moore. But he won't hold any fantasy value while fighting for scraps.


Exciting news.

I think that's money. The problem...we have too much talent at RB. What a terrific problem to have. And let me tell you something...Moore is also a talented back. We have 4 guys that can flat out carry the rock. IMO...from a pure talent perspective...this is how the talent chart currently lies....

1) Mendenhall...complete package...can run. is fast, is powerful, terrific vision, gifted hands, the guy can also block...and is just a confident, smart guy. He can beat you inside, outside and teams will have to game plan around him. He is a true game changer.

2) Russell...yes I put him above Parker. He is a natural back, with possibly better instincts, and between the tackle running ability than Mendenhall. His vision, and patience reminds me very much of Maurice Clarett during that National Championship run.
He has the hands to make teams also respect him in the passing game. When you need 3 tough yards I would take him over anyone on the team. Problem? Lacks elite speed...won't make people respect the corners like Mendenhall. Because Mendenhall possess the complete game...no one can stack the middle on him.

3) Parker...crazy blazing speed and nothing else. Subpar vision, almost zero power running ability, outruns his blockers, lacks patience, doesn't make teams respect the middle, can't move the chains, and hands of freakin stone. The guy is a good change up back. He is a guy you put in the game when a D is tired. A pure home run hitter.

4) Moore...desceptively good...terrific quickness, very good hands, but lacks power, lacks ability to be a starter. He is the epitome of a third down back. He will keep our starters fresh by playing on third down.

Mr Smartmonies
06-30-2008, 02:02 PM
Haven't seen this posted yet surprisingly, so here goes:

Per Fanball.com and apparently the Pittsburgh Post Gazette:


Steelers praise Russell
The News
The Steelers have praised Gary Russell and believe he can develop into a "top notch" running back, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
Our View
Russell has a shot to make the team as a fourth running back behind Willie Parker, rookie Rashard Mendenhall, and Mewelde Moore. But he won't hold any fantasy value while fighting for scraps.


Exciting news.


3) Parker...crazy blazing speed and nothing else. Subpar vision, almost zero power running ability, outruns his blockers, lacks patience, doesn't make teams respect the middle, can't move the chains, and hands of freakin stone. The guy is a good change up back. He is a guy you put in the game when a D is tired. A pure home run hitter.

.

BUT HE HAD 1300 YARDS :Hater :Hater :)

Oviedo
06-30-2008, 02:57 PM
Haven't seen this posted yet surprisingly, so here goes:

Per Fanball.com and apparently the Pittsburgh Post Gazette:


Steelers praise Russell
The News
The Steelers have praised Gary Russell and believe he can develop into a "top notch" running back, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
Our View
Russell has a shot to make the team as a fourth running back behind Willie Parker, rookie Rashard Mendenhall, and Mewelde Moore. But he won't hold any fantasy value while fighting for scraps.


Exciting news.

I think that's money. The problem...we have too much talent at RB. What a terrific problem to have. And let me tell you something...Moore is also a talented back. We have 4 guys that can flat out carry the rock. IMO...from a pure talent perspective...this is how the talent chart currently lies....

1) Mendenhall...complete package...can run. is fast, is powerful, terrific vision, gifted hands, the guy can also block...and is just a confident, smart guy. He can beat you inside, outside and teams will have to game plan around him. He is a true game changer.

2) Russell...yes I put him above Parker. He is a natural back, with possibly better instincts, and between the tackle running ability than Mendenhall. His vision, and patience reminds me very much of Maurice Clarett during that National Championship run.
He has the hands to make teams also respect him in the passing game. When you need 3 tough yards I would take him over anyone on the team. Problem? Lacks elite speed...won't make people respect the corners like Mendenhall. Because Mendenhall possess the complete game...no one can stack the middle on him.

3) Parker...crazy blazing speed and nothing else. Subpar vision, almost zero power running ability, outruns his blockers, lacks patience, doesn't make teams respect the middle, can't move the chains, and hands of freakin stone. The guy is a good change up back. He is a guy you put in the game when a D is tired. A pure home run hitter.

4) Moore...desceptively good...terrific quickness, very good hands, but lacks power, lacks ability to be a starter. He is the epitome of a third down back. He will keep our starters fresh by playing on third down.

I can see Moore losing his job to Mendenhall as third down back by the end of the season. He could find himself exclusively a returner by then. Next year the top 3 backs will be Mendenhall, Russell and then either Parker or Moore. I think Moore stays if he proves he is a top notch returner. Regardless, the odd man out may find himself traded.

birtikidis
06-30-2008, 06:33 PM
Parker right now is the BEST back we have.
the only reason RM gets the #2 is because of his draft position and potential.
then moore. we know what he can do in the NFL.
russell.. who knows. i'd love for him to be the #1 but it's a long shot at this point because too much copetition above him...

Ozey74
06-30-2008, 06:39 PM
I would love to see Parker get most of his work in the 4th quarter, after the opposing D spends the 1st three quarters taking a pounding from our other horses.

birtikidis
06-30-2008, 06:43 PM
i would like to see some change up. a rotation. i would love to see a backfield similar to Rocky and Franco. where both guys can carry the ball and they both offer something different.

stlrz d
06-30-2008, 07:04 PM
Haven't seen this posted yet surprisingly, so here goes:

Per Fanball.com and apparently the Pittsburgh Post Gazette:


Steelers praise Russell
The News
The Steelers have praised Gary Russell and believe he can develop into a "top notch" running back, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
Our View
Russell has a shot to make the team as a fourth running back behind Willie Parker, rookie Rashard Mendenhall, and Mewelde Moore. But he won't hold any fantasy value while fighting for scraps.


Exciting news.

I think that's money. The problem...we have too much talent at RB. What a terrific problem to have. And let me tell you something...Moore is also a talented back. We have 4 guys that can flat out carry the rock. IMO...from a pure talent perspective...this is how the talent chart currently lies....

1) Mendenhall...complete package...can run. is fast, is powerful, terrific vision, gifted hands, the guy can also block...and is just a confident, smart guy. He can beat you inside, outside and teams will have to game plan around him. He is a true game changer.

2) Russell...yes I put him above Parker. He is a natural back, with possibly better instincts, and between the tackle running ability than Mendenhall. His vision, and patience reminds me very much of Maurice Clarett during that National Championship run.
He has the hands to make teams also respect him in the passing game. When you need 3 tough yards I would take him over anyone on the team. Problem? Lacks elite speed...won't make people respect the corners like Mendenhall. Because Mendenhall possess the complete game...no one can stack the middle on him.

3) Parker...crazy blazing speed and nothing else. Subpar vision, almost zero power running ability, outruns his blockers, lacks patience, doesn't make teams respect the middle, can't move the chains, and hands of freakin stone. The guy is a good change up back. He is a guy you put in the game when a D is tired. A pure home run hitter.

4) Moore...desceptively good...terrific quickness, very good hands, but lacks power, lacks ability to be a starter. He is the epitome of a third down back. He will keep our starters fresh by playing on third down.


http://www.rainbowkits.com/sun/OHST003-25.jpg

:stirpot :lol:

NKySteeler
06-30-2008, 07:13 PM
http://www.rainbowkits.com/sun/OHST003-25.jpg

:stirpot :lol:

:Clap :lol: :Clap :lol: :Clap :lol:
....Oh man!.... This is gonna be a fun season.... We need a "college sports" forum big time!!!

...Back to topic. I do want to see Russell succeed, but haven't seen the flash that some are referencing on this level just yet... Notice that I said "just yet". But for now, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to kick Parker to the curb. Personally, I just think he hasn't been used correctly. And for that, I blame Arians. (yes, I know... We had no one else... But Arians is still to blame because I view it that way and don't like him.... My opinion and I'm sticking with it. :wink: )

Either way, it's a good problem to have, if you ask me. Let the battle in camp begin!

Shawn
06-30-2008, 11:53 PM
http://www.rainbowkits.com/sun/OHST003-25.jpg

:stirpot :lol:

:Clap :lol: :Clap :lol: :Clap :lol:
....Oh man!.... This is gonna be a fun season.... We need a "college sports" forum big time!!!

...Back to topic. I do want to see Russell succeed, but haven't seen the flash that some are referencing on this level just yet... Notice that I said "just yet". But for now, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to kick Parker to the curb. Personally, I just think he hasn't been used correctly. And for that, I blame Arians. (yes, I know... We had no one else... But Arians is still to blame because I view it that way and don't like him.... My opinion and I'm sticking with it. :wink: )

Either way, it's a good problem to have, if you ask me. Let the battle in camp begin!

The college section suggestion was fowarded to J awhile ago...haven't heard back about it. huh. Anyways I think the people that like him base it mainly on his college play. Obviously, he hasn't proven jack at the pro level but I do like the fact that the coaches seem to like the kid.

fordfixer
07-01-2008, 02:08 AM
Parker was leading the NFL (before getting hurt) last year behind a oline that had some problems of it's own. That should count for somthing. :2c

stlrz d
07-01-2008, 07:16 AM
Parker was leading the NFL (before getting hurt) last year behind a oline that had some problems of it's own. That should count for somthing. :2c

Oh no...here it comes...you're in trouble now! :shock:

frankthetank1
07-01-2008, 08:14 AM
http://www.rainbowkits.com/sun/OHST003-25.jpg

:stirpot :lol:

:Clap :lol: :Clap :lol: :Clap :lol:
....Oh man!.... This is gonna be a fun season.... We need a "college sports" forum big time!!!

...Back to topic. I do want to see Russell succeed, but haven't seen the flash that some are referencing on this level just yet... Notice that I said "just yet". But for now, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to kick Parker to the curb. Personally, I just think he hasn't been used correctly. And for that, I blame Arians. (yes, I know... We had no one else... But Arians is still to blame because I view it that way and don't like him.... My opinion and I'm sticking with it. :wink: )

Either way, it's a good problem to have, if you ask me. Let the battle in camp begin!

The college section suggestion was fowarded to J awhile ago...haven't heard back about it. huh. Anyways I think the people that like him base it mainly on his college play. Obviously, he hasn't proven jack at the pro level but I do like the fact that the coaches seem to like the kid.

i agree. no one can evaluate russel just based on his play in the nfl. he is in the same situation parker was in. the only time you get to see him really is in the preseason, but i think he has a lot of potential. there is nothing wrong with keeping the guy for a few years and seeing if he progresses. the little i have seen of him i have liked. he is a big guy but needs to work on his foot work and get quicker.

ramblinjim
07-01-2008, 08:25 AM
I think SMG said it right....what a great problem to have! Three potentially great backs. :tt2

It's going to be a fun season.

steelblood
07-01-2008, 10:18 AM
3) Parker...crazy blazing speed and nothing else. Subpar vision, almost zero power running ability, outruns his blockers, lacks patience, doesn't make teams respect the middle, can't move the chains, and hands of freakin stone. The guy is a good change up back. He is a guy you put in the game when a D is tired. A pure home run hitter.



While I agree with much of this sentiment, I feel it is an unfair oversimplification. If it were true, you could replace Parker with any similarly sized division I sprinter and get the same results. Parker does a little more than pure speed. He has very nice stop and start moves and can change gears well to avoid tacklers. He has good change of direction ability. He also has some open field elusiveness. He's also very durable and for a smaller back.

frankthetank1
07-01-2008, 10:30 AM
3) Parker...crazy blazing speed and nothing else. Subpar vision, almost zero power running ability, outruns his blockers, lacks patience, doesn't make teams respect the middle, can't move the chains, and hands of freakin stone. The guy is a good change up back. He is a guy you put in the game when a D is tired. A pure home run hitter.



While I agree with much of this sentiment, I feel it is an unfair oversimplification. If it were true, you could replace Parker with any similarly sized division I sprinter and get the same results. Parker does a little more than pure speed. He has very nice stop and start moves and can change gears well to avoid tacklers. He has good change of direction ability. He also has some open field elusiveness. He's also very durable and for a smaller back.

that is a very fair assesment of parker's abilities. for all the "he dosent break tackles" comments its never brought up that he makes a lot of defenders miss so there is no chance to break a tackle and he is very durable. he hasnt had many injuries at all in his career.

Shawn
07-01-2008, 10:50 AM
Parker was leading the NFL (before getting hurt) last year behind a oline that had some problems of it's own. That should count for somthing. :2c

When you can't sustain a drive or run in the red zone...it doesn't mean a whole lot. What it does mean is Parker is a good change of pace back best used in late game situations.

Shawn
07-01-2008, 10:54 AM
3) Parker...crazy blazing speed and nothing else. Subpar vision, almost zero power running ability, outruns his blockers, lacks patience, doesn't make teams respect the middle, can't move the chains, and hands of freakin stone. The guy is a good change up back. He is a guy you put in the game when a D is tired. A pure home run hitter.



While I agree with much of this sentiment, I feel it is an unfair oversimplification. If it were true, you could replace Parker with any similarly sized division I sprinter and get the same results. Parker does a little more than pure speed. He has very nice stop and start moves and can change gears well to avoid tacklers. He has good change of direction ability. He also has some open field elusiveness. He's also very durable and for a smaller back.

Pretty much everything you described revolves around speed. Honestly his lateral movement is very average. He can be open field elusive mainly because he is so dayum fast. The comment about the sprinter doesn't really make sense because I didn't say he had no ability to run the ball. Obviously, he is a running back. But, his lack of natural running back skill is hidden by his freakish speed.

frankthetank1
07-01-2008, 11:18 AM
Parker was leading the NFL (before getting hurt) last year behind a oline that had some problems of it's own. That should count for somthing. :2c

When you can't sustain a drive or run in the red zone...it doesn't mean a whole lot. What it does mean is Parker is a good change of pace back best used in late game situations.

i dont think parker would be a bad goaline back. he never had a chance last season to prove one way or another. the o-line was awful in goaline situations so you cant fault parker for that. just about every goal line play the line got no push at all or the o-line would get pushed back a yard or so. also about fwp's ypc avg dropped off a bit last season. the o-line has to take some blame or a lot of the blame for that. how many runs did fwp have where a d-lineman hit him in the backfield. i remember there being a ton of plays with a d-lineman already in the backfield when he got the handoff

JUST-PLAIN-NASTY
07-01-2008, 12:04 PM
Parker was leading the NFL (before getting hurt) last year behind a oline that had some problems of it's own. That should count for somthing. :2c

When you can't sustain a drive or run in the red zone...it doesn't mean a whole lot. What it does mean is Parker is a good change of pace back best used in late game situations.

i dont think parker would be a bad goaline back. he never had a chance last season to prove one way or another. the o-line was awful in goaline situations so you cant fault parker for that. just about every goal line play the line got no push at all or the o-line would get pushed back a yard or so. also about fwp's ypc avg dropped off a bit last season. the o-line has to take some blame or a lot of the blame for that. how many runs did fwp have where a d-lineman hit him in the backfield. i remember there being a ton of plays with a d-lineman already in the backfield when he got the handoff

Good goaline backs have great RB vision and good strength to break arm tackles/move the pile. Some of these guys are great at the goaline but average at best anywhere else. The only way Parker could be utilized as a GL back is with a "Sprint-Out" sweep to the cone. With todays game speed you see less & less of this. Works well in college though. Most of us probably noticed this evolution. LJ & Alexander were the most recent backs who had success with this. Defensive schemes adapted to this and now you see between the tackles and playaction inside the 5. Parker's speed actually works against him at the goaline because there isn't much push or holes opened. Parker runs up the back of a OL even before he could see something develop. Parker flat footed in the backfield at the goaline doesn't equal success. This skill isn't flashy and doesn't look good on paper...It is just something that comes naturally to some people. Parker is a gamebreaker and could pile up stats....He just doesn't have the complete RB skillset to be this type of back. His athleticism makes him what he is and when his athleticism starts to decline it will be noticed. I saw allot of Russell in college. I saw less of Mendenhall but saw enough to make this conclusion. Russell & Mendenhall seem to have better vision and the ability to break arm tackles and fall forward. There is no reason for Parker to be in the game inside the 5 this year. The Steelers have better RBs for that role. I wouldn't trade Parker for the world, he just has limitations.

RuthlessBurgher
07-01-2008, 12:08 PM
Parker was leading the NFL (before getting hurt) last year behind a oline that had some problems of it's own. That should count for somthing. :2c

When you can't sustain a drive or run in the red zone...it doesn't mean a whole lot. What it does mean is Parker is a good change of pace back best used in late game situations.

i dont think parker would be a bad goaline back. he never had a chance last season to prove one way or another. the o-line was awful in goaline situations so you cant fault parker for that. just about every goal line play the line got no push at all or the o-line would get pushed back a yard or so. also about fwp's ypc avg dropped off a bit last season. the o-line has to take some blame or a lot of the blame for that. how many runs did fwp have where a d-lineman hit him in the backfield. i remember there being a ton of plays with a d-lineman already in the backfield when he got the handoff

Much has been made of the fact that he scored only twice last year. You never hear that he put the rock in the end zone 16 times the previous season, including 13 rushing TD's. Jerome Bettis' career high for TD's in a season? 13. Just sayin'. :stirpot

birtikidis
07-01-2008, 12:18 PM
very good point Ruthless!

Shawn
07-01-2008, 01:26 PM
Parker was leading the NFL (before getting hurt) last year behind a oline that had some problems of it's own. That should count for somthing. :2c

When you can't sustain a drive or run in the red zone...it doesn't mean a whole lot. What it does mean is Parker is a good change of pace back best used in late game situations.

i dont think parker would be a bad goaline back. he never had a chance last season to prove one way or another. the o-line was awful in goaline situations so you cant fault parker for that. just about every goal line play the line got no push at all or the o-line would get pushed back a yard or so. also about fwp's ypc avg dropped off a bit last season. the o-line has to take some blame or a lot of the blame for that. how many runs did fwp have where a d-lineman hit him in the backfield. i remember there being a ton of plays with a d-lineman already in the backfield when he got the handoff

I refuse to pin Parkers lack of ability in the redzone on the OL. I want a back that falls foward for 3 yards. I want a guy who can move piles and create his own holes.

frankthetank1
07-01-2008, 03:16 PM
Parker was leading the NFL (before getting hurt) last year behind a oline that had some problems of it's own. That should count for somthing. :2c

When you can't sustain a drive or run in the red zone...it doesn't mean a whole lot. What it does mean is Parker is a good change of pace back best used in late game situations.

i dont think parker would be a bad goaline back. he never had a chance last season to prove one way or another. the o-line was awful in goaline situations so you cant fault parker for that. just about every goal line play the line got no push at all or the o-line would get pushed back a yard or so. also about fwp's ypc avg dropped off a bit last season. the o-line has to take some blame or a lot of the blame for that. how many runs did fwp have where a d-lineman hit him in the backfield. i remember there being a ton of plays with a d-lineman already in the backfield when he got the handoff

Good goaline backs have great RB vision and good strength to break arm tackles/move the pile. Some of these guys are great at the goaline but average at best anywhere else. The only way Parker could be utilized as a GL back is with a "Sprint-Out" sweep to the cone. With todays game speed you see less & less of this. Works well in college though. Most of us probably noticed this evolution. LJ & Alexander were the most recent backs who had success with this. Defensive schemes adapted to this and now you see between the tackles and playaction inside the 5. Parker's speed actually works against him at the goaline because there isn't much push or holes opened. Parker runs up the back of a OL even before he could see something develop. Parker flat footed in the backfield at the goaline doesn't equal success. This skill isn't flashy and doesn't look good on paper...It is just something that comes naturally to some people. Parker is a gamebreaker and could pile up stats....He just doesn't have the complete RB skillset to be this type of back. His athleticism makes him what he is and when his athleticism starts to decline it will be noticed. I saw allot of Russell in college. I saw less of Mendenhall but saw enough to make this conclusion. Russell & Mendenhall seem to have better vision and the ability to break arm tackles and fall forward. There is no reason for Parker to be in the game inside the 5 this year. The Steelers have better RBs for that role. I wouldn't trade Parker for the world, he just has limitations.

i agree parker should definetly never be in the game at the 5 yard line or under this season. parker hits holes pretty quickly he isnt a guy that dances around, but the only thing is there has to be a hole to run into. i bet bettis wouldnt of done a whole lot better if he had a oline like the steelers did last year. i dont blame it entirely on the o-line for the goaline play last year but i blame them mostly for it. i hate the sweep when you need only a yard or so. it hardly ever works in the nfl anymore. we better not see any end arounds this year in a goaline situation either, that was the dumbest call i have ever seen in an nfl game i think, definetly the dumbest in a steelers game

RuthlessBurgher
07-01-2008, 03:27 PM
we better not see any end arounds this year in a goaline situation either, that was the dumbest call i have ever seen in an nfl game i think, definetly the dumbest in a steelers game

How soon we forget the naked bootleg on 3rd and long...

or going for 2 from the 12 yard line...

JUST-PLAIN-NASTY
07-02-2008, 08:28 AM
Don't be surprised to see a goaline package including Sweed as the lone WR, Mendenhall, Davis, Miller, Spaeth, and ....Dixon! You know we will see that "Wrinkle" again!

steelblood
07-02-2008, 09:09 AM
3) Parker...crazy blazing speed and nothing else. Subpar vision, almost zero power running ability, outruns his blockers, lacks patience, doesn't make teams respect the middle, can't move the chains, and hands of freakin stone. The guy is a good change up back. He is a guy you put in the game when a D is tired. A pure home run hitter.



While I agree with much of this sentiment, I feel it is an unfair oversimplification. If it were true, you could replace Parker with any similarly sized division I sprinter and get the same results. Parker does a little more than pure speed. He has very nice stop and start moves and can change gears well to avoid tacklers. He has good change of direction ability. He also has some open field elusiveness. He's also very durable and for a smaller back.

Pretty much everything you described revolves around speed. Honestly his lateral movement is very average. He can be open field elusive mainly because he is so dayum fast. The comment about the sprinter doesn't really make sense because I didn't say he had no ability to run the ball. Obviously, he is a running back. But, his lack of natural running back skill is hidden by his freakish speed.

The comment about the sprinter applies. You said "crazy blazing speed and nothing else." It was an oversimplification. Again, I generally agree with you. Further, I agree his lateral agility isn't all that great.

All I'm saying is there is a lot to the running phase of the game. Some of it Parker does well and it isn't about pure speed. For example, other backs have survived in this league by being shifty (shifting gears) and not necessarily fast. This is a skill that Parker has which some fast runners don't.

Shawn
07-02-2008, 10:27 AM
3) Parker...crazy blazing speed and nothing else. Subpar vision, almost zero power running ability, outruns his blockers, lacks patience, doesn't make teams respect the middle, can't move the chains, and hands of freakin stone. The guy is a good change up back. He is a guy you put in the game when a D is tired. A pure home run hitter.



While I agree with much of this sentiment, I feel it is an unfair oversimplification. If it were true, you could replace Parker with any similarly sized division I sprinter and get the same results. Parker does a little more than pure speed. He has very nice stop and start moves and can change gears well to avoid tacklers. He has good change of direction ability. He also has some open field elusiveness. He's also very durable and for a smaller back.

Pretty much everything you described revolves around speed. Honestly his lateral movement is very average. He can be open field elusive mainly because he is so dayum fast. The comment about the sprinter doesn't really make sense because I didn't say he had no ability to run the ball. Obviously, he is a running back. But, his lack of natural running back skill is hidden by his freakish speed.

The comment about the sprinter applies. You said "crazy blazing speed and nothing else." It was an oversimplification. Again, I generally agree with you. Further, I agree his lateral agility isn't all that great.

All I'm saying is there is a lot to the running phase of the game. Some of it Parker does well and it isn't about pure speed. For example, other backs have survived in this league by being shifty (shifting gears) and not necessarily fast. This is a skill that Parker has which some fast runners don't.

I think you took me too literal. Obviously, I was being overdramatic for effect. He certainly has RB skills. He just doesn't have pro bowl RB skills. He has sub average RB skills....but he is not absent of rb skills.

Ozey74
07-02-2008, 11:52 AM
3) Parker...crazy blazing speed and nothing else. Subpar vision, almost zero power running ability, outruns his blockers, lacks patience, doesn't make teams respect the middle, can't move the chains, and hands of freakin stone. The guy is a good change up back. He is a guy you put in the game when a D is tired. A pure home run hitter.



While I agree with much of this sentiment, I feel it is an unfair oversimplification. If it were true, you could replace Parker with any similarly sized division I sprinter and get the same results. Parker does a little more than pure speed. He has very nice stop and start moves and can change gears well to avoid tacklers. He has good change of direction ability. He also has some open field elusiveness. He's also very durable and for a smaller back.

Pretty much everything you described revolves around speed. Honestly his lateral movement is very average. He can be open field elusive mainly because he is so dayum fast. The comment about the sprinter doesn't really make sense because I didn't say he had no ability to run the ball. Obviously, he is a running back. But, his lack of natural running back skill is hidden by his freakish speed.

The comment about the sprinter applies. You said "crazy blazing speed and nothing else." It was an oversimplification. Again, I generally agree with you. Further, I agree his lateral agility isn't all that great.

All I'm saying is there is a lot to the running phase of the game. Some of it Parker does well and it isn't about pure speed. For example, other backs have survived in this league by being shifty (shifting gears) and not necessarily fast. This is a skill that Parker has which some fast runners don't.

I think you took me too literal. Obviously, I was being overdramatic for effect. He certainly has RB skills. He just doesn't have pro bowl RB skills. He has sub average RB skills....but he is not absent of rb skills.


FWP can't be expected to carry the load year in & year out. I think is his better used when he has some help. I think FWP thinks so also. He's was happy when Mendenhall was drafted.....

steelblood
07-02-2008, 01:22 PM
3) Parker...crazy blazing speed and nothing else. Subpar vision, almost zero power running ability, outruns his blockers, lacks patience, doesn't make teams respect the middle, can't move the chains, and hands of freakin stone. The guy is a good change up back. He is a guy you put in the game when a D is tired. A pure home run hitter.



While I agree with much of this sentiment, I feel it is an unfair oversimplification. If it were true, you could replace Parker with any similarly sized division I sprinter and get the same results. Parker does a little more than pure speed. He has very nice stop and start moves and can change gears well to avoid tacklers. He has good change of direction ability. He also has some open field elusiveness. He's also very durable and for a smaller back.

Pretty much everything you described revolves around speed. Honestly his lateral movement is very average. He can be open field elusive mainly because he is so dayum fast. The comment about the sprinter doesn't really make sense because I didn't say he had no ability to run the ball. Obviously, he is a running back. But, his lack of natural running back skill is hidden by his freakish speed.

The comment about the sprinter applies. You said "crazy blazing speed and nothing else." It was an oversimplification. Again, I generally agree with you. Further, I agree his lateral agility isn't all that great.

All I'm saying is there is a lot to the running phase of the game. Some of it Parker does well and it isn't about pure speed. For example, other backs have survived in this league by being shifty (shifting gears) and not necessarily fast. This is a skill that Parker has which some fast runners don't.

I think you took me too literal. Obviously, I was being overdramatic for effect. He certainly has RB skills. He just doesn't have pro bowl RB skills. He has sub average RB skills....but he is not absent of rb skills.

From now on, please leave being "overdramatic for effect" to my daughter. She is much better at it than you. :lol:

Shawn
07-02-2008, 02:01 PM
While I agree with much of this sentiment, I feel it is an unfair oversimplification. If it were true, you could replace Parker with any similarly sized division I sprinter and get the same results. Parker does a little more than pure speed. He has very nice stop and start moves and can change gears well to avoid tacklers. He has good change of direction ability. He also has some open field elusiveness. He's also very durable and for a smaller back.[/quote]

Pretty much everything you described revolves around speed. Honestly his lateral movement is very average. He can be open field elusive mainly because he is so dayum fast. The comment about the sprinter doesn't really make sense because I didn't say he had no ability to run the ball. Obviously, he is a running back. But, his lack of natural running back skill is hidden by his freakish speed.[/quote]

The comment about the sprinter applies. You said "crazy blazing speed and nothing else." It was an oversimplification. Again, I generally agree with you. Further, I agree his lateral agility isn't all that great.

All I'm saying is there is a lot to the running phase of the game. Some of it Parker does well and it isn't about pure speed. For example, other backs have survived in this league by being shifty (shifting gears) and not necessarily fast. This is a skill that Parker has which some fast runners don't.[/quote]

I think you took me too literal. Obviously, I was being overdramatic for effect. He certainly has RB skills. He just doesn't have pro bowl RB skills. He has sub average RB skills....but he is not absent of rb skills.[/quote]

From now on, please leave being "overdramatic for effect" to my daughter. She is much better at it than you. :lol:[/quote]

STFU you POS!!!! You disagree with me??? Don't you know who I am???

Wait...that was a bit much. :lol:

eniparadoxgma
07-02-2008, 05:22 PM
Looking at the post counts of those involved I have come to 2 conclusions:

1. SMG is right.

2. steelblood is in dire need of a super atomic wedgie.

Carry on, folks.

Shawn
07-02-2008, 07:25 PM
Looking at the post counts of those involved I have come to 2 conclusions:

1. SMG is right.

2. steelblood is in dire need of a super atomic wedgie.

Carry on, folks.

:lol:

Exactly my thinking. :D

Slapstick
07-03-2008, 07:54 AM
Parker is definitely has "below average" skills...

Any RB would put up 1200 yards behind the Steelers stellar offensive line...

JUST-PLAIN-NASTY
07-03-2008, 01:43 PM
Some of you are just too tough on this OL. There were better OL in the league last year but maybe everything isn't on the OL. Just look at some of these number. You wouldn't think the last line about sacks is true with some of these. There are other parts of the equation to the sack numbers. Even though we watched the games and thought they were so horrible at run blocking, those numbers look good too!

AFC Offensive Ranking
Steelers
Totals
10th PLAYS FROM SCRIMMAGE
1st TIME OF POSESSION
6th POINTS PER GAME
8th TOTAL OFFENSE
8th FIRST DOWNS PER GAME
3rd THIRD DOWN %

Passing
9th YARDS PER GAME
2nd AVERAGE YARDS PER PLAY
2nd FIRST DOWN PERCENTAGE
2nd TD
5th COMPLETION PERCENTAGE
16th ATTEMPTS PER GAME

Rushing
3rd ATTEMPTS PER GAME
2nd YARDS PER GAME
4th YARDS PER CARRY

SACKS GIVEN UP - 3RD WORST


What do you see?
I see a ball control offense that is very good at running the ball and taking time off the clock. Very efficient on 3rd downs. Based on the passing numbers of ATTEMPS PER GAME/AVG YARDS PER PLAY/FIRST DOWN %/TDS...When the team does pass it is a vertical passing offense. Designed for down the field completions based on FIRST DOWN %. It seems to me that some of the sacks come from offensive design. Deeper paterns take more time & deeper drops. Add in the fact Ben is mobile and tries to buy time with his legs...The sack number isn't a total reflection of the OL play. The OL could use some improvement from 2007...But I'm not putting all the blame on them.

Shawn
07-03-2008, 01:44 PM
Parker is definitely has "below average" skills...

Any RB would put up 1200 yards behind the Steelers stellar offensive line...

Pffft.