Derrick Green should be the starter next week against Notre Dame.
There is a serious case to be made here. While I agree that Green could use a little more time with Wellman to get things toned before he's an All American, he is still the best RB on the team. He led the team in rushing yesterday, and also looked the best doing it.
The Notre Dame defense is relatively small, and I believe we definitely could benefit greatly from having such a big option pounding the rock at all times. We definitely don't want to rely on the arm of Gardner this week(interceptions killed us last year against ND), and can easily win this game with an effective ground game.
September 2nd, 2013 at 11:03 AM ^
Because 7 and 11 carries are definitely viable sample sizes for determining the quality of a player.
September 1st, 2013 at 1:38 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 4:32 PM ^
What is with using 1 game vs. a MAC team as reasoning for forming an opinion? All of this computer coaches that have no idea what they're talking about.
September 2nd, 2013 at 9:08 AM ^
considering the debate is between a senior who has one darn good year and one subpar year as starter (which, if you notice, is still more than one game of work), and a true frosh who got some carries in a CMU game that was already at hand...I don't see the love affair. I see common sense.
September 2nd, 2013 at 11:04 AM ^
Yeah, stupid 1,000-yard runner coming off horrible injury not meeting your expectations.
September 1st, 2013 at 1:39 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 1:40 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 1:41 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 1:42 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 1:43 PM ^
... I forgot how idiotic threads could be during the season.
September 1st, 2013 at 1:47 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 1:58 PM ^
Grass is always greener....that or each OT/footbaw season becomes increasingly dumber...
September 1st, 2013 at 1:43 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 1:50 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 1:46 PM ^
Green looked pretty tired after being in a few plays in a row. Not sure he is ready for bethe full time back
September 1st, 2013 at 1:49 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 1:47 PM ^
Green played better than Fitz yesterday. I don't think it really matters who's running it with how good our 2013 OL looks.
September 1st, 2013 at 2:07 PM ^
You going to update that signature ever week or just the end of every season.
September 1st, 2013 at 1:48 PM ^
Somewhat related but OT: Did backups on the O-line play yesterday? If so, which ones, and did anyone notice anything good or bad?
September 1st, 2013 at 2:05 PM ^
The starters started leaving after Green's TD (about 5 minutes left in 3rd quarter). Pretty sure I saw Kalis stay out there for an extra series. Braden and Magnuson played tackle. Burzynski played center. Saw Gunderson in at guard and player participation chart says Bars and Bryant played (didn't notice them when searching for nameplates in the huddle). And some dude named Pliska, who I have never heard of apparently saw the field.
So they were in on the 80+ yard TD drive where Rawls scored and through the fourth quarter.
September 1st, 2013 at 2:06 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 2:06 PM ^
Magnuson got a crushing block on Rawls' TD, FWIW.
September 1st, 2013 at 2:08 PM ^
Using the OP's logic, because most of the rushing yards came after Magnuson and Braden came in, we should bench Lewan and Schofield!
September 1st, 2013 at 1:48 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 3:32 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 3:52 PM ^
Exactly right! How about this: If Fitz had the hole that Green had on that play, Fitz is in the end zone. Fitz is clearly faster, shiftier, and runs with power. I also thought Smith looked pretty good considering he was hit in the backfield or at the line of scrimmage on almost every carry. I think there is a very healthy problem here: a lot of good-looking backs.
September 2nd, 2013 at 12:25 AM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 1:49 PM ^
Didnt Green go against 2nd stringers? And he looked wiped out... he isnt ready yet... really... he looks good for five carries at full speed...
To me, Drake Johnson looked the best... he looked quick, fast, and tough.
Green definitely looks as if he will be the best of the group, when he gets into shape, however.
Rawls actually played violently, and I liked it.
Hayes looked great, and enough that I wanted to see more of him... I think they should play him alot vs ND who I recall, spurned him.
September 1st, 2013 at 1:55 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 2:07 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 5:23 PM ^
I agree with this guy. We can't rank the running backs based off of this puny sample size. Just be happy we have very quality depth at this position for once.
September 1st, 2013 at 2:55 PM ^
Are you a relative of Drake or something?
September 1st, 2013 at 1:49 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 1:52 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 7:41 PM ^
The starter will get 2/3 of the carries, so, yeah, the "semantics" matter.
Your idea that the coaches will be flip-flopping their decision on who the main back is throughout the game is unlikely. A back will get stuck in there and given the load, win or lose. The other backs will spell the starter and play in specific situations.
September 1st, 2013 at 1:53 PM ^
Nupe.
September 1st, 2013 at 1:53 PM ^
Green is huge but I didn't see him run angry. His legs stopped moving upon contact and I don't recall him getting hardly any yards after contact.
September 1st, 2013 at 2:09 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 1:54 PM ^
And Green may play when his presence is needed but not before. The die is cast, the results are in, and you don't play a freshman in a big game as a starter. You bring him him in as a change of pace back. And that is exactly what will happen.
More concerned at this point, about injury situation with Drake and Joe Reynolds. The heatlh of the receiving corps is more of an issue than running back. Green is a bowling ball but a straight line guy. He missed cutback holes and opportunities to make big plays yesterday. And he got gaps that Fitz didn't get.
September 1st, 2013 at 1:58 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 1:59 PM ^
Both for the pointless nature of this thread, and for all the evidently blind people who still think Smith is superior.
September 1st, 2013 at 2:00 PM ^
I was not all that impressed by Green. He goes down way too easily for a guy with his size and speed, and he almost never fought through the first contact. Poor balance and runs too high.
September 1st, 2013 at 2:12 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 2:50 PM ^
People are obviously overreacting, but did you think he looked particularly good? I thought he did a nice job finding the holes people opened up for him but also definitely noticed he usually went down immediately after first contact. Tough to understand for a 240lb supposed power back. I'm not saying get rid of him but the results weren't great for his debut
September 1st, 2013 at 2:52 PM ^
September 1st, 2013 at 2:57 PM ^
I am relaxed. I didn't see much from any of them that made them seem clearly better than the rest, Fitz included. We'll see as the year goes on I guess
September 1st, 2013 at 2:51 PM ^
+1 for you good sir lol
September 1st, 2013 at 3:49 PM ^
I think Green will be a great back. I just said he doesn't look great yet. How is that crazy talk?