Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: Props to lloydroid

  1. #21
    Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Inside Your Head
    Posts
    10,453
    I think many thought he was one of the top RBs (potential wise) in his draft class after Spiller and Matthews. But no one thought he was going to be a versaitle/dynamic back in the NFL. Maybe a Michael Turner type of back.

    But he also had his risks and weaknesses.

  2. #22
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,026
    Quote Originally Posted by flippy View Post
    I think many thought he was one of the top RBs (potential wise) in his draft class after Spiller and Matthews. But no one thought he was going to be a versaitle/dynamic back in the NFL. Maybe a Michael Turner type of back.

    But he also had his risks and weaknesses.
    I think a lot of teams would love to have a Mike Turner type back (especially the one of a few years ago, he's starting to get slow it seems.) Did you notice, that all of a sudden, announcers are saying things like "Dwyer just seems like a Steeler back" which is another way of saying that Mendenhall does not, which I agree with.

  3. #23
    Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Inside Your Head
    Posts
    10,453
    Quote Originally Posted by lloydroid View Post
    I think a lot of teams would love to have a Mike Turner type back (especially the one of a few years ago, he's starting to get slow it seems.) Did you notice, that all of a sudden, announcers are saying things like "Dwyer just seems like a Steeler back" which is another way of saying that Mendenhall does not, which I agree with.
    Absolutely, anyone would take a Turner in his prime. But Turner's one dimensional. He's gonna run it out of the backfield. He's gonna plow through for tough yards maybe making one cut and going north/south. And he's deceptively fast for his size if he breaks through a tackle. This type of runner is not easy to find. That's who I can see Dwyer being if he works hard.

    I do think Haley designed this offense for Mendy. Mendy's still the best athlete we have a RB. He's the most explosive. He can catch and make plays running in the open field. I say you can never have enough RBs. I say you go with the hot hand and roll with that guy. Keep everyone's touches low and keep everyone fresh for the long haul.

  4. #24
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,026
    Quote Originally Posted by flippy View Post
    Absolutely, anyone would take a Turner in his prime. But Turner's one dimensional. He's gonna run it out of the backfield. He's gonna plow through for tough yards maybe making one cut and going north/south. And he's deceptively fast for his size if he breaks through a tackle. This type of runner is not easy to find. That's who I can see Dwyer being if he works hard.

    I do think Haley designed this offense for Mendy. Mendy's still the best athlete we have a RB. He's the most explosive. He can catch and make plays running in the open field. I say you can never have enough RBs. I say you go with the hot hand and roll with that guy. Keep everyone's touches low and keep everyone fresh for the long haul.
    There are a ton of "best athletes" who don't end up being the best "players." That is what RM is to me; has all the measureables, but he just isn't a great player. He's good. He's not worthless, but I don't think he is deserving of getting the majority of carries. I'd like to see a 50% JD, 40% RM and 10% other mix. I think that would be a strong plan. Plus, I don't think JD is a natural 30 carry guy; he just doesn't want to grind that hard. He wants to go hard the plays he's in, but he doesn't have the endurance to go hard for 30 carries a game. And we don't need him to, so....imagine RM coming in after JD has the D gassed? He would have a chance to break off big gains.

  5. #25
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,427
    First, I'm not sold on him quite yet. These were 2 pretty soft defenses.
    Hopefully this sticks.
    Last edited by aggiebones; 10-30-2012 at 05:24 PM.

  6. #26
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,026
    Quote Originally Posted by aggiebones View Post
    First, I'm not sold on him quite yet. These were 2 pretty soft defenses.
    Hopefully this sticks.
    Why do some people refuse to acknowledge that the Skins were the #7 rushing D in the entire NFL?

  7. #27
    Pro Bowler BigRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Murfreesboro, TN
    Posts
    1,381
    Quote Originally Posted by lloydroid View Post
    Why do some people refuse to acknowledge that the Skins were the #7 rushing D in the entire NFL?
    Because its not that simple. Why run against the Skins when you can pass to your hearts content? Their #7 rushing D is partially an illusion.

    The Bengals were a good pass rushing team, but have struggled against the run all year.

    If Dwyer does it against a front like the Giants and JPP, colored me impressed. Of course, it also depends on the O-line.

  8. #28
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,026
    Quote Originally Posted by BigRob View Post
    Because its not that simple. Why run against the Skins when you can pass to your hearts content? Their #7 rushing D is partially an illusion.

    The Bengals were a good pass rushing team, but have struggled against the run all year.

    If Dwyer does it against a front like the Giants and JPP, colored me impressed. Of course, it also depends on the O-line.
    I realize there are "lies, damn lies and statistics" (meaning sometimes stats are the most dishonest to what is truly happening). But show me the 32nd ranked rush D and the Skins, and I bet the Skins are the better rush D. I bet the Bills and Saints are easier to run on than are the Skins.

    As far as running on NY, sure, it won't be easy. Their rushing D is only 19th ranked, but we know how they can cream QBs with their front 4, making it harder for Ben to convert on 3rd downs, giving JD less series to run the ball; can't rack up yards unless you are making first downs. They are the current SB Champs, with mostly the same players as when they won it, so, yea, my guess is they won't be easy to beat, unless they are unfocused (which sometimes they are, but I have a feeling they won't be looking past the Steelers, as they are a big time franchise, even if only 4-3. If anyone knows a win-loss stat can be deceiving, it is the New York Giants.)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •