Impact balance can have on a great offense.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Below is from McD's conference call today.

    http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4733459/mcdaniels-feels-good-to-see-smooth-offense

     

    "McDaniels stated that adjusting to what a defense presents and being able to react and execute for four quarters will be an emphasis going forward."

    "St. Louis presented us with some different challenges that we hadn’t necessarily seen before, but our guys followed their rules and reacted and executed even so and I think that’s a good thing and we need to do that on a consistent basis," he continued. "It’s something that we haven’t necessarily done each week for four quarters, and that has to be a focus for us going forward."

     

    McDaniels really summed up the problem of the offense for the past 3 years. Poor adjustments and guys not "following their rules". Sounds like an O.C issue to me.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    This is the most ridiculous conclusion I've ever read.  McDaniels is not saying anything at all about last year. It also points to the absolute absurdity of the subtext of this whole thread--that last year's offense was bad and this year's good.  The reality is that last year's offense (despite what you and Rusty and Wozzy like to say) was also very, very good.  Over 16 games it averaged 32.1 points per game.  Over eight so far, the 2012 offense is averaging 32.8 points per game.  It's practically the same.  All last year you guys said no stats matter but points.  Now you think every stat but points matters when comparing last year to this.  The fact is, so far, the offense this year has been very good.  It was very good last year as well.  In my opinon, there's better and more diverse talent this year, which is allowing McDaniels to add some new wrinkles.  But O'Brien did a very good job with the talent he had as well. 

     

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from nyjoseph. Show nyjoseph's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    The biggest difference between this year and last is Ridley.  We can say he was on the roster last year, and used at times, but I trust BB in his decision to sit him when he did.  It's not that we couldn't have used more production out of our RBs, but there had to be a reason (fumbles, pass protection, practice habits, etc.) that limited his playing time.

    I compare the situation to Bequette this year.  There have been many games where the pass rush has been non-existent.  That was one of Bequette's strengths in college.  So, why isn't he playing more?  I trust BB sees something that tells him he isn't ready for more PT just yet.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from CaptainZdeno33. Show CaptainZdeno33's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    This is the most ridiculous conclusion I've ever read.  McDaniels is not saying anything at all about last year. It also points to the absolute absurdity of the subtext of this whole thread--that last year's offense was bad and this year's good.  The reality is that last year's offense (despite what you and Rusty and Wozzy like to say) was also very, very good.  Over 16 games it averaged 32.1 points per game.  Over eight so far, the 2012 offense is averaging 32.8 points per game.  It's practically the same.  All last year you guys said no stats matter but points.  Now you think every stat but points matters when comparing last year to this.  The fact is, so far, the offense this year has been very good.  It was very good last year as well.  In my opinon, there's better and more diverse talent this year, which is allowing McDaniels to add some new wrinkles.  But O'Brien did a very good job with the talent he had as well. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Thats only when talking about the defense.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    Yeah that is all that matters, like zero points in the 4th quarter of last year's Super Bowl... something a well balanced offense shouldn't have the same problems with.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Below is from McD's conference call today.

    http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4733459/mcdaniels-feels-good-to-see-smooth-offense

     

    "McDaniels stated that adjusting to what a defense presents and being able to react and execute for four quarters will be an emphasis going forward."

    "St. Louis presented us with some different challenges that we hadn’t necessarily seen before, but our guys followed their rules and reacted and executed even so and I think that’s a good thing and we need to do that on a consistent basis," he continued. "It’s something that we haven’t necessarily done each week for four quarters, and that has to be a focus for us going forward."

     

    McDaniels really summed up the problem of the offense for the past 3 years. Poor adjustments and guys not "following their rules". Sounds like an O.C issue to me.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    This is the most ridiculous conclusion I've ever read.  McDaniels is not saying anything at all about last year. It also points to the absolute absurdity of the subtext of this whole thread--that last year's offense was bad and this year's good.  The reality is that last year's offense (despite what you and Rusty and Wozzy like to say) was also very, very good.  Over 16 games it averaged 32.1 points per game.  Over eight so far, the 2012 offense is averaging 32.8 points per game.  It's practically the same.  All last year you guys said no stats matter but points.  Now you think every stat but points matters when comparing last year to this.  The fact is, so far, the offense this year has been very good.  It was very good last year as well.  In my opinon, there's better and more diverse talent this year, which is allowing McDaniels to add some new wrinkles.  But O'Brien did a very good job with the talent he had as well. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    No he didn't do a good job. He scored 17 points on the biggest stage with a 1 dimensional attack, and 14 of that came in a 10 minute span while the offense was terrible the rest of the game.

    I am sure you are really ok with blowing out the bottom feeders in this league but then struggling to get 1st downs, eat clock and score points when you have to against any team with a half way decent record, but the rest of us are not.

    Getting blanked in the 4rth qtr of the biggest game when you have the best QB and a top 3 offensive roster is unacceptable. You can refuse to admit it all you want, but again it doesn't make it any less true.

    Our offensive philosophy is changing, and we will be a better team for it.

    Enjoy it!

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    LOL This just in.....

     

    Brady & shotgun tracker, Week 8 October, 31, 2012 Oct 31 9:15 AM ET By Mike Reiss | ESPNBoston.com It didn't matter if quarterback Tom Brady was under center or in the shotgun in Sunday's win over the Rams. He still received great protection, and was on the mark.

    The mix between being under center and in the shotgun helped the Patriots' offense strike the desired balance.

    Continuing to monitor the trend of Brady and the shotgun snap -- which has been utilized less this season than past years -- let's update the numbers after last Sunday's win over the Rams:

    Usage of the shotgun
    at Rams: 36 of 69 (4 runs, 32 passes)
    vs. Jets: 42 of 80 (6 runs, 36 passes)
    at Seahawks: 60 of 87 (7 runs, 52 passes, 1 false start)
    vs. Broncos:
    45 of 94 (7 runs, 37 passes, 1 false start)
    at Bills: 30 of 77 (6 runs, 24 passes)
    at Ravens: 41 of 82 (6 runs, 34 passes, 1 fumbled snap)
    vs. Cardinals: 47 of 82 (9 runs, 38 passes)
    at Titans: 13 of 67 (0 runs, 13 passes)

    On the season, when including penalties, the Patriots have been in the shotgun 49.2 percent of the time (314 of 638).
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from sporter81. Show sporter81's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    Yes, this years offense is MUCH better than last years one dimensional unit. They should be able to score on any defense now and can only stop themselves. Last years team was effective against the mediocre defenses but as we saw would struggle against the better units and late in the season once teams knew that they were going to throw short and over the middle every down. 

    The Rams game was nice but they're going to be even better than what we saw. Scarey for the rest of the league.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    Mike Reiss must also be a biased run happy poster... lol.

    Instant karma is great.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from sporter81. Show sporter81's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Mike Reiss must also be a biased run happy poster... lol.

    Instant karma is great.

    [/QUOTE]

    LOL , he must be!

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    For me the important part of this overall argument is going into the playoffs with a team that doesn't have to rely solely on Brady.  Great player, and he puts them in position to win most times, but I am all for making his job easier.

    Although both superbowls could have gone either way, the Giants did a great job making Brady's job very difficult and held a high powered offense in check by consistently pressuring him.   They tried to run to keep the Giants honest but I don't think it was in their DNA and I don't think it was effective.  We can speculate whether it was play calling or talent.  And yes, the D giving up leads didn't help, but the offense was spinning its wheels quite a bit too.   

    I am hopeful that having a running game that can keep the Pats' offense unpredicatable will mean that they are more effiecient come playoff time, or at least less reliant on Brady in the event that he is harried all day. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    Yeah, they've run more, it's been great to see. They've run more, because they've run more effectively. But it's had a nomimal impact on the games overall.

    32.8 ppg vs 32.1 ppg

    428 ypg vs 440 ypg

    They have the same record at this point that they did last season, if I recall correctly. 

    It still hasn't fixed the defense, which is the issue. The Patriots haven't won a single low scoring contest (~23 points scored).

    They still allow 21+ ppg (21.2 vs 21.4). 

     

    If you can't win with the offense this team has had the last five years, then you need to improve other areas. That mediocre unit is what needs to improve if you want a realistic shot at beating 3-4 great (playoff) teams in a row.

    The offense isn't going to score 30 points every single time they go out there. I don't care if they run it 100% of the time with Barry Sanders' clone.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    In response to nyjoseph's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The biggest difference between this year and last is Ridley.  We can say he was on the roster last year, and used at times, but I trust BB in his decision to sit him when he did.  It's not that we couldn't have used more production out of our RBs, but there had to be a reason (fumbles, pass protection, practice habits, etc.) that limited his playing time.

    I compare the situation to Bequette this year.  There have been many games where the pass rush has been non-existent.  That was one of Bequette's strengths in college.  So, why isn't he playing more?  I trust BB sees something that tells him he isn't ready for more PT just yet.

    [/QUOTE]

    Agree with that. Ridley has been fantastic, outside of the minor fumbling issue he carried over from college. In fact, he looks bigger and faster than he did in college. 

    He didn't start last year. But anyone who has watched BB knows what he doesn't usually start rookies, he doesn't tolerate people not knowing their assignments either. My guess is that we are talking about a combination of the two. It was evident, even early last season, he was streets ahead of BJGE as a ball carrier.  

    He'll be great to have down the stretch ... rain games in particular should be more navigable. I hope they don't lean on him too much and wear him down though. Keep the platoon as much as you can so you have a fresh stable later on. 

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    In response to sporter81's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yes, this years offense is MUCH better than last years one dimensional unit. They should be able to score on any defense now and can only stop themselves. Last years team was effective against the mediocre defenses but as we saw would struggle against the better units and late in the season once teams knew that they were going to throw short and over the middle every down. 

    The Rams game was nice but they're going to be even better than what we saw. Scarey for the rest of the league.

    [/QUOTE]


    Help me out here. Explain how last year's offense was "one dimensional" when two plays a game difference would put their ratio at about the same as this year's version?

     

    I'm just astonished that people simply ignore this fact and keep on rattling off the same old incorrect mantra.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yeah, they've run more, it's been great to see. They've run more, because they've run more effectively. But it's had a nomimal impact on the games overall.

    32.8 ppg vs 32.1 ppg

    428 ypg vs 440 ypg

    They have the same record at this point that they did last season, if I recall correctly. 

    It still hasn't fixed the defense, which is the issue. The Patriots haven't won a single low scoring contest (~23 points scored).

    They still allow 21+ ppg (21.2 vs 21.4). 

     

    If you can't win with the offense this team has had the last five years, then you need to improve other areas. That mediocre unit is what needs to improve if you want a realistic shot at beating 3-4 great (playoff) teams in a row.

    The offense isn't going to score 30 points every single time they go out there. I don't care if they run it 100% of the time with Barry Sanders' clone.

    [/QUOTE]


    What a min didn't Babe say the O would not score as much if they ran more? Also, could one reason they are more effective running the ball be because they commit to the run throughout the entire game and being more unpredictable in how they run or use play action (that funny balance thing we've been talking about)? Of course having Ridley over BGJE has an effect but I also think commiting to the run helps the OL when they actually have to run and keeps the RB's warm to run when they need to. Having a consistent commited running game hasn't hurt this O and I would argue come playoff time will only help them more then being 1 dimensional against elite D's. Heck I've seen teams bite harder on play action then I have seen in years with the Pats. Play action should be our bread and butter in the playoffs and once Gronk and Hern are 100% the mismatches it will create will make this team unstoppable (at least on O)

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yeah, they've run more, it's been great to see. They've run more, because they've run more effectively. But it's had a nomimal impact on the games overall.

    32.8 ppg vs 32.1 ppg

    428 ypg vs 440 ypg

    They have the same record at this point that they did last season, if I recall correctly. 

    It still hasn't fixed the defense, which is the issue. The Patriots haven't won a single low scoring contest (~23 points scored).

    They still allow 21+ ppg (21.2 vs 21.4). 

     

    If you can't win with the offense this team has had the last five years, then you need to improve other areas. That mediocre unit is what needs to improve if you want a realistic shot at beating 3-4 great (playoff) teams in a row.

    The offense isn't going to score 30 points every single time they go out there. I don't care if they run it 100% of the time with Barry Sanders' clone.

    [/QUOTE]


    What a min didn't Babe say the O would not score as much if they ran more? Also, could one reason they are more effective running the ball be because they commit to the run throughout the entire game and being more unpredictable in how they run or use play action (that funny balance thing we've been talking about)? Of course having Ridley over BGJE has an effect but I also think commiting to the run helps the OL when they actually have to run and keeps the RB's warm to run when they need to. Having a consistent commited running game hasn't hurt this O and I would argue come playoff time will only help them more then being 1 dimensional against elite D's. Heck I've seen teams bite harder on play action then I have seen in years with the Pats. Play action should be our bread and butter in the playoffs and once Gronk and Hern are 100% the mismatches it will create will make this team unstoppable (at least on O)

    [/QUOTE]


    No, Babe didn't say that. Do you just make this stuff up? I can count on you to dream up something I never said almost daily as of late.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from sporter81. Show sporter81's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to sporter81's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yes, this years offense is MUCH better than last years one dimensional unit. They should be able to score on any defense now and can only stop themselves. Last years team was effective against the mediocre defenses but as we saw would struggle against the better units and late in the season once teams knew that they were going to throw short and over the middle every down. 

    The Rams game was nice but they're going to be even better than what we saw. Scarey for the rest of the league.

    [/QUOTE]


    Help me out here. Explain how last year's offense was "one dimensional" when two plays a game difference would put their ratio at about the same as this year's version?

     

    I'm just astonished that people simply ignore this fact and keep on rattling off the same old incorrect mantra.

    [/QUOTE]

    Looks like you are still following me around and being critical when I say this years team is better than last. Look at last years offensive stats okay, now compare the run game of last year to this years 4th ranked running game. It's obvious, you are just looking to argue.

    You are either bashing Brady by saying he isn't as good as last year or you are saying BJGE is  better than Ridley.

    My view is that the passing game is as good or better than last year and the running game is far superior to Last year.. How does that not make it a better overall offense? Show us all where that is wrong! When a team can't run the football or doesn't run with effect they becomes one dimensional

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    In response to sporter81's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to sporter81's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yes, this years offense is MUCH better than last years one dimensional unit. They should be able to score on any defense now and can only stop themselves. Last years team was effective against the mediocre defenses but as we saw would struggle against the better units and late in the season once teams knew that they were going to throw short and over the middle every down. 

    The Rams game was nice but they're going to be even better than what we saw. Scarey for the rest of the league.

    [/QUOTE]


    Help me out here. Explain how last year's offense was "one dimensional" when two plays a game difference would put their ratio at about the same as this year's version?

     

    I'm just astonished that people simply ignore this fact and keep on rattling off the same old incorrect mantra.

    [/QUOTE]

    Looks like you are still following me around and being critical when I say this years team is better than last. Look at last years offensive stats okay, now compare the run game of last year to this years 4th ranked running game. It's obvious, you are just looking to argue.

    You are either bashing Brady by saying he isn't as good as last year or you are saying BJGE is  better than Ridley.

    My view is that the passing game is as good or better than last year and the running game is far superior to Last year.. How does that not make it a better overall offense? Show us all where that is wrong! When a team can't run the football or doesn't run with effect they becomes one dimensional

     

    [/QUOTE]


    First, I don't follow you around. Second, perhaps it's the terminology you were using that led to a misunderstanding of your point.

     

    When you say "one dimensional" I understand that as meaning doing one thing inordinately more than another. But it appears you didn't mean that, but rather that the effectiveness was more balanced. If that is the case I agree.

     

    I never argue with people when they are right.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from neinmd. Show neinmd's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    I don't get why this continues to be a religious argument in this forum.

    Are the Pats running more effectively this year vs last? Yes

    Is Brady far-and-away the best player on the team? Resounding yes

    Does a viable running game increase his effectiveness as a passer? How can it not?

    Does a balanced run-pass attack make it more difficult to shut down our offense? I would think most rational people would agree with that.

    Does our defense have a longer distance to go than our offense? Yes, especially the pass defense.

    Has the defense improved over last year? The run defense certainly has, the pass defense is till not where it needs to be.

    All in all, are we all blessed to be Patriots fans? You bet your ***, we are.

     

     



     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    In response to neinmd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't get why this continues to be a religious argument in this forum.

    Are the Pats running more effectively this year vs last? Yes

    Is Brady far-and-away the best player on the team? Resounding yes

    Does a viable running game increase his effectiveness as a passer? How can it not?

    Does a balanced run-pass attack make it more difficult to shut down our offense? I would think most rational people would agree with that.

    Does our defense have a longer distance to go than our offense? Yes, especially the pass defense.

    Has the defense improved over last year? The run defense certainly has, the pass defense is till not where it needs to be.

    All in all, are we all blessed to be Patriots fans? You bet your ***, we are.

     

     



    [/QUOTE]


    Nothing to disagree with here, except perhaps that we are dramatically more balanced this year than last. We aren't. The running is better, but still inconsistent.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    Wozzy and Champ, where we're you guys after the Arizona, Seattle, and Jets games when the offense was actually performing a bit less effectively?  Don't get me wrong, I think this offense is very good and I like the emergence of some real talent at RB. But for all the improved running, the offense is not clearly better than it was last year. Nor is it clearly dominating against the better defenses it's faced (like Arizona and Seattle). A good running back will certainly help diversity and should improve the offense considerably. What is really amazing, though, is not how much better the offense has become with the addition of better running talent and more running in general, but that it was pretty much just as good last year with lesser talent. That speaks for what you guys are too biased to admit: that the coaches last year actually did a good job getting the most from imperfect talent. 

    From both a points and a yards, perspective last year's offense was just about equal to this year's. That is a fact. And last year's was just as good with lesser talent. That's a huge tribute to the coaches, both the head coach and his hand-picked coordinators. 

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from neinmd. Show neinmd's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    I would agree that the balance has not dramatically improved but it HAS improved. Hopefully, will get better as Solder continues to mature. Thomas has played well and is under-rated. The offensive line, in general, is under-rated and the running backs, as usual, are getting all the press.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to neinmd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't get why this continues to be a religious argument in this forum.

    Are the Pats running more effectively this year vs last? Yes

    Is Brady far-and-away the best player on the team? Resounding yes

    Does a viable running game increase his effectiveness as a passer? How can it not?

    Does a balanced run-pass attack make it more difficult to shut down our offense? I would think most rational people would agree with that.

    Does our defense have a longer distance to go than our offense? Yes, especially the pass defense.

    Has the defense improved over last year? The run defense certainly has, the pass defense is till not where it needs to be.

    All in all, are we all blessed to be Patriots fans? You bet your ***, we are.

     

     



    [/QUOTE]


    Nothing to disagree with here, except perhaps that we are dramatically more balanced this year than last. We aren't. The running is better, but still inconsistent.

    [/QUOTE]


     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    The offense, special teams and the defense weren't executing early in the season, this happens, especially with young teams.  I swear it's like you guys have never watched young players make mistakes, there was a time Ty Law and Lawyer Milloy were getting burned; they improved.

    You all ask what is the effect of a run game compared to last year?  How about Tom Brady working at peak efficiency.  A run game is a QB's best friend, especailly the best play action QB in football. 

    How about last year defensively we averaged 15 ppg allowed, currently we're at 12 ppg, getting better, plus lead the league in turnovers, a sign of a well rested attacking defense.

    Stubborn doesn't describe those in denial, we're substantially better off and to simply attribute it to Ridley (4.6 forty time?) being so talented and completely dismiss that the architect of the last record setting offense we had in 2007 being back has nothing to do with it, is plain silly. 

    Either meet us halfway or prepare to look more silly when this offense is held up for historical comparison at season's end?

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    In response to neinmd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    I would agree that the balance has not dramatically improved but it HAS improved. Hopefully, will get better as Solder continues to mature. Thomas has played well and is under-rated. The offensive line, in general, is under-rated and the running backs, as usual, are getting all the press.

    [/QUOTE]

    Two plays a game is virtually negligible and that's the difference from last year's balance. They are running nearly ten times more than the average team is now; within one attempt per game of the tops. I doubt you will see much more than that.

     

    As a matter of fact the trend the last 3 games has been pass weighted far in excess of the pass/run ratio of last season averaging 45/29 compared to last year's 38/27.

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to nyjoseph's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The biggest difference between this year and last is Ridley.  We can say he was on the roster last year, and used at times, but I trust BB in his decision to sit him when he did.  It's not that we couldn't have used more production out of our RBs, but there had to be a reason (fumbles, pass protection, practice habits, etc.) that limited his playing time.

    I compare the situation to Bequette this year.  There have been many games where the pass rush has been non-existent.  That was one of Bequette's strengths in college.  So, why isn't he playing more?  I trust BB sees something that tells him he isn't ready for more PT just yet.

    [/QUOTE]

    Agree with that. Ridley has been fantastic, outside of the minor fumbling issue he carried over from college. In fact, he looks bigger and faster than he did in college. 

    He didn't start last year. But anyone who has watched BB knows what he doesn't usually start rookies, he doesn't tolerate people not knowing their assignments either. My guess is that we are talking about a combination of the two. It was evident, even early last season, he was streets ahead of BJGE as a ball carrier.  

    He'll be great to have down the stretch ... rain games in particular should be more navigable. I hope they don't lean on him too much and wear him down though. Keep the platoon as much as you can so you have a fresh stable later on. 

    [/QUOTE]

    agreed

     

Share