Started By
Message
re: Tide's Richardson has few peers physically
Posted on 5/19/11 at 5:28 pm to WDE24
Posted on 5/19/11 at 5:28 pm to WDE24
quote:
Anyone claiming that OMac is greater than TR is hanging their hat on the YPC argument. However, I don't think anyone is seriously arguing that, they were just countering your earlier emphasis of the YPC stat. JMO, I have no dog in the fight. I just stuck my nose in where it didn't belo
and I am not trying to say he is better as the no. 1 running back, but oMac does look better on paper, with all hype put aside
Again, we hear about TR did all this despite being no. 2, well Omac did this as no. 3
This post was edited on 5/19/11 at 5:30 pm
4
Posted on 5/19/11 at 5:30 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:True, but I think, as much as we love OMac, any AU fan would trade him for TR in a heartbeat. Especially with our lack of depth at all purpose back.
oMac does look better on paper, with all hype put aside
They serve different roles and OMac excels in his role, but he isn't a work horse, 20 carries a game type back.
ETA: I agree with the point you are making, BTW.
This post was edited on 5/19/11 at 5:31 pm
Posted on 5/19/11 at 5:36 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
and I am not trying to say he is better as the no. 1 running back, but oMac does look better on paper, with all hype put aside
On paper, Andrew Luck was an average QB in 2009, but that didn't stop people from lauding him as one of the best QBs in the nation coming into 2010 did it?
quote:
Again, we hear about TR did all this despite being no. 2, well Omac did this as no. 3
If you can't watch them and tell the difference, there is no hope.
And don't say I need to, I watched every play OM was involved with in 2010. I know what he's capable of...
This post was edited on 5/19/11 at 5:37 pm
Posted on 5/19/11 at 5:44 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
and I am not trying to say he is better as the no. 1 running back, but oMac does look better on paper, with all hype put aside
Again, we hear about TR did all this despite being no. 2, well Omac did this as no. 3
Again, this doesn't take into account the HUGE difference in offensive schemes these two are operating in. For example, having your "No. 1" back on the field at the same time as your "No. 2" or "No. 3" backs almost every play. My question earlier was, in this situation where TR gets the benefit of defenses having to account for a dual threat such as Cam Newton on the field at the same time, do you think TR would perform better or worse than the Auburn backs in this discussion?
This post was edited on 5/19/11 at 5:45 pm
Posted on 5/19/11 at 7:08 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
and I am not trying to say he is better as the no. 1 running back, but oMac does look better on paper, with all hype put aside
OMac is too damn skinny. If he tried the shite that TR does, he'd get broke.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News