Started By
Message
re: Who is LSU’s Tailback next year?
Posted on 1/15/18 at 2:43 pm to lsufball19
Posted on 1/15/18 at 2:43 pm to lsufball19
Yea. We will use 3 backs this year my guess.
0
Posted on 1/15/18 at 2:47 pm to Tigerfan56
quote:
That's great. Guice is still better than either of them.
Based upon?
Posted on 1/15/18 at 2:49 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Clyde is a good back but he's 5'8" on a good day
There have been some very, very good backs that were small. Tiki Barber comes to my mind right off the bat.
He was tiny but could carry the load.
Posted on 1/15/18 at 2:49 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Clyde is a good back but he's 5'8" on a good day and I just don't think he's big enough to have the type of volume of Fournette and Guice in this league.
He looks pretty thick. You don't have to be all that tall to carry the load at RB.
Posted on 1/15/18 at 2:54 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
There have been some very, very good backs that were small. Tiki Barber comes to my mind right off the bat.
He was tiny but could carry the load.
that's a fair point, but I also don't know if CHE actally weighs 210. We've had small backs too. Kevin Faulk was 5'8" 200 for us and carried the load for 4 years here and had a long pro career with New England. Maybe our offense will change, and that's really why I'm saying what I did. I don't think CHE would make it through a season if we continue to let our RBs take a pounding like we have with Guice and Fournette. A multiple back system would be perfect for him.
Posted on 1/15/18 at 2:55 pm to Funky Tide 8
quote:
You don't have to be all that tall to carry the load at RB.
sure, but he's not Trent Richardson who was 5'9" 225. I think he's probably closer to 200 than the 210 he's listed.
Posted on 1/15/18 at 2:58 pm to lsufball19
quote:
We've had small backs too. Kevin Faulk was 5'8" 200 for us and carried the load for 4 years here and had a long pro career with New England.
I didn't know Faulk was that small. I mean, he had weight, but height. He was a really good one!
quote:It's tough in todays environment in the SEC. I'm glad we keep a lot of backs. Even Chubb and Michel (both around 5'11" 220-230LBS) only took around 15-20 carries a game. In the SEC a RB really takes a pounding.
I don't think CHE would make it through a season if we continue to let our RBs take a pounding like we have with Guice and Fournette. A multiple back system would be perfect for him.
Posted on 1/15/18 at 2:59 pm to lsufball19
quote:
sure, but he's not Trent Richardson who was 5'9" 225. I think he's probably closer to 200 than the 210 he's listed.
Not unusual for High Schools or colleges to fudge on size a little. It's more unusual for them not to.
Posted on 1/15/18 at 3:04 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
Based upon?
The consensus opinion of the 32 GM's and scouting teams who do this kind of thing for a living.
ETA- More successful =/= better player. It's a relatively easy concept to understand (for most).
This post was edited on 1/15/18 at 3:07 pm
Posted on 1/15/18 at 3:21 pm to Tigerfan56
quote:
ETA- More successful =/= better player. It's a relatively easy concept to understand (for most).
well Michele wasn't more successful than Guice either. Chubb was, but he was also at UGA for 4 years. Sure, he missed most of the 2015 season, but Guice had very limited carries in 2015 and wasn't the primary back for half of 2016. Additionally, and to reinforce your point, Michele is probably higher up on draft boards than is Chubb, yet had far lower production over his career than Chubb.
Posted on 1/15/18 at 3:24 pm to lsufball19
Im praying we add a graduate transfer RB in May to bridge the gap till 2019 talent gets here.
Posted on 1/15/18 at 3:27 pm to Tigerfan56
quote:
The consensus opinion of the 32 GM's and scouting teams who do this kind of thing for a living.
You mean, the guys who said Ryan Leaf was a top 2 pick? The guys who let Tom Brady fall to the 7th round?
quote:Fine. So how do you determine it, then> I am really anxious how anybody can determine it if performance does not enter into it.
ETA- More successful =/= better player. It's a relatively easy concept to understand (for most).
This post was edited on 1/15/18 at 3:29 pm
Posted on 1/15/18 at 3:30 pm to lsufball19
quote:
well Michele wasn't more successful than Guice either.
He was this year. Granted, Guice was injured. I get that.
But he had better stats this year. Not sure how they stacked up the other years, but he definitely took a back seat in carries to Chubb the earlier year. The carries were much more evenly split this year.
Posted on 1/15/18 at 3:32 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
Fine. So how do you determine it, then> I am really anxious how anybody can determine it if performance does not enter into it.
I mean, I'm sure you know this, but projecting a player in the NFL is an imperfect science just like grading players coming out of high school. There will be busts and there will be guys that flew under the radar and go on to become superstars. Production is certainly a factor but their arbitrary "potential" is more important, always has been. They'll look at Chubb and see he was very productive in college but has durability concerns and they'll also probably look at him compared to Michele and Guice and see that the latter are better athletes than Chubb. How each of them will perform at the next level, well that's to be determined. But I would be surprised if Chubb is drafted before either Michele or Guice.
This post was edited on 1/15/18 at 3:33 pm
Posted on 1/15/18 at 3:33 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Chubb was, but he was also at UGA for 4 years. Sure, he missed most of the 2015 season, but Guice had very limited carries in 2015 and wasn't the primary back for half of 2016.
You can take the best year for each. You can take the top 2 years. You can take best year, then next, then next. You can pretty much use your own standards and Chubb had better stats. (I said put best year, then next and so on, because each player was injured and/or recovering from injury part of the time.)
All thta said, they were both excellent backs, and I think they will both do well in the NFL. Honestly? Michel might have the best NFL career of the three. He has the size, speed and skills the NFL covets.
Posted on 1/15/18 at 3:38 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
He has the size, speed and skills the NFL covets.
I think Guice and Michel have similar attributes. Both are 5'11". Both weigh between 215-220. Both are fast, both hahve great lateral quickness. Both can catch the ball out of the backfield. Guice didn't have the receiving numbers Michel did, but that was more reflective of the offenses than skill sets. People forget Guice was a WR in high school. The do run differently. Guice runs like a bat out of hell and is always fighting. Michel seems more methodical in the way he carries the ball and doesn't run as, well, recklessly as does Guice. Quite frankly, I can't remember an LSU back running as hard as Guice does and that is able to continue to pick up yards after first contact. But I think as far as their athleticism and size are concerned, they're very comparable prospects.
This post was edited on 1/15/18 at 3:40 pm
Posted on 1/15/18 at 3:39 pm to lsufball19
quote:
I mean, I'm sure you know this, but projecting a player in the NFL is an imperfect science just like grading players coming out of high school.
Absolutely. That is why I said that to the poster above who said this:
The consensus opinion of the 32 GM's and scouting teams who do this kind of thing for a living.
You can't go by where a player is drafted. TYPICALLY, they will do close to it, but anybody who wants to say this is definitive is lazy. Draft spots can be determined by the amount of talent in the draft...the amount of talent at the particular position in the draft...the needs of the teams drafting high.....draft positions are horrible ways to determine a players greatness.
quote:He had one injury. It was such a horrific injury that he was out half a year, and it took another full year, as expected, to recover. He looked just fine this year.
They'll look at Chubb and see he was very productive in college but has durability concerns
While he catches the ball ok, he is not really a pass receiving threat, as such. Michel will do better in the NFL because of this, in my opinion. (Not sure how well Guice catches the ball)
This post was edited on 1/15/18 at 3:42 pm
Posted on 1/15/18 at 3:41 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Guice didn't have the receiving numbers Michel did, but that was more reflective of the offenses than skill sets.
Michel's numbers were suppressed because the coaches brought Swift in for pass receiving, and to spell Chubb and Michel. michel is an excellent receiver out of the backfield. I didn't know about Guice, but will take your word that he is very good, too. You are the expert on LSU players.
Posted on 1/15/18 at 3:44 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Quite frankly, I can't remember an LSU back running as hard as Guice does and that is able to continue to pick up yards after first contact.
I grew up a lSU fan and can remember some great LSU Running backs. There've been some good ones come through Baton Rouge, for sure.
Dalton Hilliard and Charles Alexander were two of my favorites.
Posted on 1/15/18 at 3:59 pm to DawgsLife
Dalton Hilliard is a great comparison with CEH size wise. Almost identical. The stereotype of a back needing to be 6+ 220+ is so overhyped.
Brossette will shine now that he’s finally getting his chance. There is a reason he is Louisiana’s all time leading rusher. The kid got stuck behind two great RBs.
Brossette will shine now that he’s finally getting his chance. There is a reason he is Louisiana’s all time leading rusher. The kid got stuck behind two great RBs.
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News