Started By
Message
Should Auburn RB Stats get the "System RB" Asterisk?
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:18 pm
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:18 pm
While in control of Auburn's offense, Gus Malzahn has provided the SEC leading rusher in 3/5 years and a top 3 rusher for every year of his tenure. All this despite having some poor OLs some years.
With the BEST scheming/IQ coach in CFB, should these crazy stats thrown up by these RBs have an asterisk similar to Graham Harrell or Case Keenum?
2009- Ben Tate #3
2010- Cam Newton #1
2011- Mike Dyer #2
2013- Tre Mason #1
2014 Cam Artis-Payne #1
With the BEST scheming/IQ coach in CFB, should these crazy stats thrown up by these RBs have an asterisk similar to Graham Harrell or Case Keenum?
2009- Ben Tate #3
2010- Cam Newton #1
2011- Mike Dyer #2
2013- Tre Mason #1
2014 Cam Artis-Payne #1
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 3:24 pm
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:21 pm to GenesChin
Probably. They have the benefit of having the best scheming coach in CFB.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:28 pm to GenesChin
I think there is a pretty good possibility all prove themselves independently, which would be a pretty strong record.
Tate and Cam have already, and Tre is well on his way.
Tate and Cam have already, and Tre is well on his way.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:28 pm to AA7
There success in the NFL is the reason the asterisk is never mentioned. Dyer's success at Louisville also factors into the equation.
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 3:29 pm
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:28 pm to GenesChin
Their stats should only count when they played 9+ winning team and when Auburn is good. Amidoingitrite?
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:32 pm to GenesChin
I think you could argue this about most running backs on most teams. Most of them are only as good as their offensive linemen and many benefit from a good QB (fewer stacked boxes, etc.).
Your Petersons, Sanders, Browns, and Paytons, who would be great on any team, are few and far between.
Your Petersons, Sanders, Browns, and Paytons, who would be great on any team, are few and far between.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:35 pm to Pettifogger
tate has had an ok career in the nfl at best i know he's had his fair share of 100 yard games but has he had a good season?
i dont think artis payne is anything special either
tre mason was a monster last yr and he's been really good his rookie yr
i dont think artis payne is anything special either
tre mason was a monster last yr and he's been really good his rookie yr
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 3:36 pm
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:38 pm to GenesChin
fair question, but as previously mentioned, tate, cam and mason have all proven themselves outside of gus. despite his numbers this year, i think cap was definitely the weakest of all those mentioned. au unfortunately upgrades next year at rb
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:38 pm to GenesChin
You can definitely apply it to Artis-Payne, but Tre Mason is the real deal. He would have put up monster numbers in Bama's offense as well.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:41 pm to gatortrav88
quote:
i dont think artis payne is anything special either
Artis Payne quite simply is not that good compared to the others on that list. Put him in a traditional pro style offense and he wouldn't sniff 1,000 yards.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:44 pm to gatortrav88
quote:
tate has had an ok career in the nfl at best i know he's had his fair share of 100 yard games but has he had a good season?
i dont think artis payne is anything special either
tre mason was a monster last yr and he's been really good his rookie yr
Any RB who puts together solid numbers in the NFL has made it IMO. Tate was, and potentially still could be, a solid NFL running back.
No idea on Artis-Payne, but he is a workman like back and sometimes guys like that excel in the league.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:47 pm to GenesChin
Probably fair, although Tre and Cam are having success in the NFL.
Being a "system RB" isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Being a "system RB" isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:52 pm to Sabear
You cannot "definitely" apply that label to CAP. You have to give him a chance to prove himself. CAP is sturdy and a workhorse of a power back with a good spin move like Lacey. He probably won't be a star at the next level but he could be a solid #2, change of pace or 3rd down back.
Remember a lot of people said Mason was average and a product of the system last season.
Remember a lot of people said Mason was average and a product of the system last season.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:55 pm to BowlJackson
quote:
Remember a lot of people said Mason was average and a product of the system last season.
Let's slow down on Mason. Remember Trent Richardson had better stats than Mason in his rookie season and look where he is now.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 3:58 pm to TheMightyTerrier
quote:
I think you could argue this about most running backs on most teams. Most of them are only as good as their offensive linemen.
There are very few RB's that put up great numbers that don't run behind great OL's.
I think you can apply this to Ingram and Richardson from bama. They both had fantastic college careers, but have struggled in the NFL, and the OL's they've been running behind haven't been bad by any means. Lacy is the best of all of the three in the NFL to date, and had the "worst" best year of all of them. They all ran behind some very strong bama OL's.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 4:08 pm to RangerRicky
In slight defense of TR, he is playing behind one of the worst OLs in the NFL. There is a good likely hood that Luck is going to get killed before the end of the season.
Having said that, Mason has always been legit. Barring injury he will have a long and successful career in the league. Tate is also a legit NFL back. CAP may be the only one who could possibly be called a system back.
Having said that, Mason has always been legit. Barring injury he will have a long and successful career in the league. Tate is also a legit NFL back. CAP may be the only one who could possibly be called a system back.
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News