jakethompson said:
I could not disagree more Jake, you've been listening to Mike Shanahan too long.
Plus in college the level of great speed athletes all over the field is much different.
So if your theory were correct Oklahoma would have the same average rushing yards with or without Peterson?
too phyisical.Journeyman said:
Every extremely talented offensive line has an extremely productive RB. How many extremely talented RBs aren't productive because they don't have those huge holes to run though? Alot...
Ever wonder why Emmitt Smith and Edge James picked up like 4.5 yards a carry until they went to Arizona who totally ignores their offensive line and now they are horrible all of a sudden... it's all because the offensive line.
Another example is Boise St. Ian Johnson is looking like a Heisman contender, than he gets hurt. Brett Denton who is the backup who only gets a carry or two a game comes in and scores 3 TDs with like 180 yards. Is Brett Denton such an amazing hidden talent or did the offensive line give him holes?
Also as far as Adrian Peterson's stats versus the backup... Peterson is a great back and great backs can pick up .3 or .4 more per carry. I'll give him that.
Why his average is so big has to do with Oklahoma facing UAB, Washington, Oregon, Iowa St, and Middle Tennessee in their first few games. Peterson got the easy stat-padding matchups where the offensive line could dominate for the most part. The backup got the Big12 season.
Peterson's only tough matchup was Texas.
He ran 25 for 109 against Texas. Only averaged around 4 yards a carry which is what the backup did versus the Big12 schedule.
A RB is only as good as his offensive line. I've seen it happen over and over again where a "good" RB goes to a poor offensive line and folds. Or a "poor" RB goes to a nice offensive line and blossoms.
Look at Chester Taylor... career backup but goes to Minnesota who has focused on their line bigtime the last few years and all of a sudden he's leading the league? Or Willie Parker... who the hell was Willie Parker? Or how about the Broncos? You think they just have a knack for drafting late round RBs? No! It's because anyone can run behind their run schemes.
I'll listen if you have a counter argument but my mind is pretty made up on this one.
Why his average is so big has to do with Oklahoma facing UAB, Washington, Oregon, Iowa St, and Middle Tennessee in their first few games. Peterson got the easy stat-padding matchups where the offensive line could dominate for the most part. The backup got the Big12 season.
Peterson's only tough matchup was Texas.
He ran 25 for 109 against Texas. Only averaged around 4 yards a carry which is what the backup did versus the Big12 schedule.
A RB is only as good as his offensive line. I've seen it happen over and over again where a "good" RB goes to a poor offensive line and folds. Or a "poor" RB goes to a nice offensive line and blossoms.
Look at Chester Taylor... career backup but goes to Minnesota who has focused on their line bigtime the last few years and all of a sudden he's leading the league? Or Willie Parker... who the hell was Willie Parker? Or how about the Broncos? You think they just have a knack for drafting late round RBs? No! It's because anyone can run behind their run schemes.
I'll listen if you have a counter argument but my mind is pretty made up on this one.
Journeyman said:
Last thought for the day... Both Brian Brohm and Michael Bush (both predicted 1st rounders) got hurt. Hunter Caldwell came in at QB and had a higher QB rating and completion percentage. Kolby Smith and George Stripling came in at RB and average a higher YPC than Bush the year before.
It's not because Louisville is just packed with nothing but 1st rounders... it's because they have an excellent offensive line with great schemes.
We'll agree to disagree on this one though. Good luck on your bets today Journey. App St -7 baby!
