Derrick Green should be the starter next week against Notre Dame.

Submitted by aaamichfan on September 1st, 2013 at 1:31 PM

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. 

Comments

wolverine1987

September 1st, 2013 at 2:25 PM ^

He was good, and that's good. But he didn't do one thing to show that the coaches decision on Fitz was wrong, not one. His one long run was through a hole the size of an old cadillac that any decent RB would do well on. Don't get me wrong, he showed enough that he made a good argument for #2, but nothing at all to say he's #1.

Magnus

September 1st, 2013 at 3:24 PM ^

Take away Green's 30-yard run, and he still had 10 carries for 28 yards. Leave Smith's longest run in there, and he had 7 carries for 12 yards.

There's no question that Green looked better.

I think Smith was more ready to break a few tackles, but we've always known that. Unfortunately, Smith isn't very fast, and that one zone stretch (IIRC) to the left where he had his shoulders facing the sideline on contact was kind of pitiful.

Space Coyote

September 1st, 2013 at 4:29 PM ^

I think Smith is better at a role right now than any single role Green might provide. I think Green is better all-around. I think Smith can do some things as a power back, he keeps his legs churning and gets his knees high, lowers his shoulders, dips at the hips, and is hard to get a clean hit on. But he, plain and simple, should not be running outside zones yet. His a between the tackles guy all the way. Green can potentially do both.

squashman

September 1st, 2013 at 10:23 PM ^

The potential of the play rather than strictly looking at the numbers. Green has a great upside as soon as he tones up a little. Smith is a better back today. Other than his last run, he never goes down on the first hit and he always falls forward . Green goes down fast when they hit him low. Green had better blocking on his plays. Let's get off Fitzgerald. He is a senior and does a lot of the intangibles like blocking schemes that green and smith aren't ready to do.

Swazi

September 1st, 2013 at 1:35 PM ^

I think Green should get more carries than yeasterday, but Fitz is our best back right now.

 

Maybe Green gets more against ND and their big line, but overall, Fitz is our best back.

woomba

September 1st, 2013 at 1:37 PM ^

think he still need a bit more conditioning to be an every down back although he was in good in the reps that he did get.  I think Smith is ahead of him for now.

aaamichfan

September 1st, 2013 at 1:41 PM ^

Green definitely needs some time in a conditioning program, as it appears that he came into school at least 20 pounds overweight. However, you'd think that with him being in the program only a small amount of time, his conditioning should continue to get better each week during the season. 

 

I say make him the starter, and definitely have Fitz available as an option whenever Green gets gassed.

 

Rawls also looked better than I've ever seen him yesterday. He appears to be much improved from looking rather pedestrian last year.

BILG

September 1st, 2013 at 1:50 PM ^

We should make all personell decisions and evaluations based on the respective 15 or less carries each back had against an overmatched MAC team.  Forget the coaches opinions from the past 6 months... and do we really need to see these backs get carries against a quality opponent?.... I say no!  aaamichfan has assessed the situation based on the CMU game.  We should go with his clearly expert opinion. 

Mr. Yost

September 1st, 2013 at 4:30 PM ^

This thread is ridiculous and the comment that Green should be the starter is even more dumb. Do you know ANYthing about football? Honest question. Do you realize you have to know the plays? Do you realize a RB has to block? Do you realize that was one game? Do you realize it was CMU? Do you realize Fitz played vs. starters and Green played vs. CMU's 2nd team? I don't know where people get these snap judgements from and truly think they're right. It's a blog and it's opinion, but it at least should be debatable. Should we move Gardner back to WR and put Shane in at QB?

bronxblue

September 1st, 2013 at 8:07 PM ^

I'm all for evaluating players as they currently are, not necessarily on past biases (e.g. Rawls running better than last year, though MAC-cakes warnings everywhere).  But To suggest that 10-15 carries by a couple of backs in a game decided in the 1st quarter informs logical roster changes is just silly.