Started By
Message
2
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:22 pm to DBU
I'm still takin Hurd 
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:24 pm to Solo Cam
quote:
yards are 2 completely different stats. By your logic Derrius Guice was the best back in the SEC last year.
Guice didn't get enough carries for that to be a meaningful stat. Nc and lf did.
Yards per game undoubtedly includes every game such as the 12 you want to cherry pick.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:27 pm to djsdawg
I need Chubb to auction off a jersey to help with disaster relief. Fournette is winning the off-field stats for sure
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:27 pm to djsdawg
Fournette is better. He didn't get hurt last year. He played every game. Chubb did not. /thread
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:27 pm to djsdawg
Here are the stats for both in 2014:
LF 2014 Stats:
187 att, 1034 yards (5.5 average)
10 TDs
7 Rec for 127 yards and 0 Tds
NC 2014 Stats:
219 att, 1547 yards (7.1 average)
14 TDs
18 Rec for 213 yards and 2 Tds
Top 5 Rushing games in '14:
LF-
146 - aTm
143- ND
140- UF
122- NMSU
113- OM
NC-
266- UL
202- Ark
170- UK
156- UF
144- AU
In '14 NC also played tougher opponents and dominated the 5 games that both played the same opponent.
In 2015, even before NC got hurt and was performing at a high level, LF was performing at an even higher level. The of course the rest of the year chubb was out. The way I look at it:
14:
NC >>> LF
15 (when both healthy):
LF >> NC
Overall: who knows? When they've both been healthy at the same time (1 season plus about 4 games), Chubb has the nod. There's no real way to disprove that. He has better stats almost across the board and did it against similar competition. As for the infamous "eye test", you have to go with LF. He just LOOKS like he's the best in america. He also will be the MUCH better pro back, IMO. But if we're going simply on stats (when both were healthy) you kinda have to give the nod to chubb.
LF 2014 Stats:
187 att, 1034 yards (5.5 average)
10 TDs
7 Rec for 127 yards and 0 Tds
NC 2014 Stats:
219 att, 1547 yards (7.1 average)
14 TDs
18 Rec for 213 yards and 2 Tds
Top 5 Rushing games in '14:
LF-
146 - aTm
143- ND
140- UF
122- NMSU
113- OM
NC-
266- UL
202- Ark
170- UK
156- UF
144- AU
In '14 NC also played tougher opponents and dominated the 5 games that both played the same opponent.
In 2015, even before NC got hurt and was performing at a high level, LF was performing at an even higher level. The of course the rest of the year chubb was out. The way I look at it:
14:
NC >>> LF
15 (when both healthy):
LF >> NC
Overall: who knows? When they've both been healthy at the same time (1 season plus about 4 games), Chubb has the nod. There's no real way to disprove that. He has better stats almost across the board and did it against similar competition. As for the infamous "eye test", you have to go with LF. He just LOOKS like he's the best in america. He also will be the MUCH better pro back, IMO. But if we're going simply on stats (when both were healthy) you kinda have to give the nod to chubb.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:29 pm to DBU
quote:
Omg frick off with this seriously. Why is this necessary? Both are very good backs that's every team in the country would take as the starter without a second thought.
Please be civil
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:30 pm to Tigerpaul1969
quote:
better. He didn't get hurt last year. He played every game. Chubb did not. /thread
Irrelevant. Lf never had to play on the crap vol field, so we will never know if he could have walked off that field.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:32 pm to djsdawg
Field had 0 to do with Chubbs injury that would have happened in Athebs as well
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:32 pm to MrTwoBits
Just to put this shite to rest about tougher opponents.
Excluding FCS teams and Tennessee in 2015, for Chubb, here is the average rank of all rushing defenses faced:
Fournette:
2014 - 52.8
2015 - 68.4
Chubb:
2014 - 56.1
2015 - 62.3
Excluding FCS teams and Tennessee in 2015, for Chubb, here is the average rank of all rushing defenses faced:
Fournette:
2014 - 52.8
2015 - 68.4
Chubb:
2014 - 56.1
2015 - 62.3
This post was edited on 7/14/16 at 1:34 pm
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:33 pm to RB10
Can you do it with just SEC games now?
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:34 pm to rmnldr
quote:
Can you do it with just SEC games now?
No.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:37 pm to RB10
Okay.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:40 pm to RB10
Here were there stats against common opponents in 2014. Not sure about 15, since I'm just C&P this from somewhere else.
Lets use all four games vs common opponents...
LF vs UF...27 for 140... 5.2ypc & 2 td's... 0 rec's...
Chubb vs UF... 21 for 156...7.4ypc & 1 td...5 rec's... 59yds & 1 td...
LF vs AU... 10 for 42yds...4.2ypc & 0 td's...0 rec's
Chubb vs AU... 19 for 144... 2 td's...7.6ypc...2 rec's for 48yds...
LF vs UK...15 for 40yds...2.7ypc... 1 td's ... 0 rec's
Chubb vs UK...13 for 170yds...1 td...13.1...0 rec's
LF vs Ark... 5 for 9 yds...1.8ypc 0 td's.. 0 rec's
Chubb vs Ark...30 for 202yds...6.7 ypc...2 td's...1 rec for 8 yds
So... vs 4 common opponents...
LF... 57 for 231yds... 3 td's... 4.1ypc... 0 rec's no TD's....
Chubb...83 for 672yds...6 td's... 8.1ypc...8 rec's for 115yds & 1 td...
So basically, after the clear and irrefutable evidence that NC was far better in '14, it would essentially have taken a full year in '15 of LF being better to even out. Now, I will fully admit that even when chubb was healthy LF was still better last year. Don't see how anyone could argue. But NC only played in like 4 games. I think at this point you can call them even at worst.
Lets use all four games vs common opponents...
LF vs UF...27 for 140... 5.2ypc & 2 td's... 0 rec's...
Chubb vs UF... 21 for 156...7.4ypc & 1 td...5 rec's... 59yds & 1 td...
LF vs AU... 10 for 42yds...4.2ypc & 0 td's...0 rec's
Chubb vs AU... 19 for 144... 2 td's...7.6ypc...2 rec's for 48yds...
LF vs UK...15 for 40yds...2.7ypc... 1 td's ... 0 rec's
Chubb vs UK...13 for 170yds...1 td...13.1...0 rec's
LF vs Ark... 5 for 9 yds...1.8ypc 0 td's.. 0 rec's
Chubb vs Ark...30 for 202yds...6.7 ypc...2 td's...1 rec for 8 yds
So... vs 4 common opponents...
LF... 57 for 231yds... 3 td's... 4.1ypc... 0 rec's no TD's....
Chubb...83 for 672yds...6 td's... 8.1ypc...8 rec's for 115yds & 1 td...
So basically, after the clear and irrefutable evidence that NC was far better in '14, it would essentially have taken a full year in '15 of LF being better to even out. Now, I will fully admit that even when chubb was healthy LF was still better last year. Don't see how anyone could argue. But NC only played in like 4 games. I think at this point you can call them even at worst.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:43 pm to rmnldr
quote:
Can you do it with just SEC games now?
Why?Chubb faced 5 of the top 26 rushing defenses in the country in '14. Why wouldn't you want to include Clemson (18) and Lousville (14) in rushing defenses?
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:43 pm to RD Dawg
quote:
Why wouldn't you want to include Clemson (18) and Lousville (14) in rushing defenses?
because chubb did well against those teams includign beating the shite out of louisville.
We can't have stats that make chubb look good.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:46 pm to Piscinin
quote:
Field had 0 to do with Chubbs injury that would have happened in Athebs as well
His cleats wouldn't have stuck quite the same way on a better turf.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:46 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
because chubb did well against those teams includign beating the shite out of louisville.
We can't have stats that make chubb look good.
He only asked once the overall numbers didn't bear out the way he expected.
Most people already know that the rush defenses in the West are better, overall, than in the East for 2014 and 2015.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:47 pm to rmnldr
UGA, A&M, and some Bama fans will say Chubb. Everyone else will say Fournette.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News