Why run Toussaint that late in the game?

Submitted by WichitanWolverine on September 25th, 2010 at 9:17 PM

Can somebody make sense of this for me?

If Toussaint is our number 1 guy (which we've read on this site recently) and healthy, it would make sense for the coaches to either start him or play him early.

If Toussaint is our number 1 guy but not healthy, he shouldn't be getting garbage time against an opponent we're throttling.  He should be rested until he's fully ready to go.

If Toussaint is truly behind Smith, Shaw, Hopkins, Cox, etc. then I am simply calling the coaching staff a bunch of dirty liars after the way he ran today.

I just don't understand playing Toussaint that late in the game when we obviously had things under control.  Either let him show that he's the impact player we've been reading about early in the game or rest him for another day.  Can someone provide a rational reason for playing him so late?

Comments

maizenblue92

September 25th, 2010 at 9:22 PM ^

IF you knew anything you would know that they want to get him in game shape before they give him a bigger workload. The only way to do that is to get him carries where ever they can.

bouje

September 25th, 2010 at 9:25 PM ^

WW what are you drunk as shit right now? You're better than this...
<br>
<br>I swear no matter what happens people will complain! It's ridiculous and stupid

ATLWolverine

September 25th, 2010 at 9:27 PM ^

probably because they didn't want him to re-aggravate his injury, BUT stil wanted to get him the chance to brush some rust off without giving away too much on tape or exposing him to danger. Also, if you think about it, he got a full drive-- that lasted all of 2 rushing plays, because that's how long it took for him to take it to the house.

1 drive for a recently injured RB seems reasonable. He didn't start because RR wanted to make sure Shaw/Smith established the run first.

JBE

September 25th, 2010 at 9:27 PM ^

Fitz is not our #1 guy, yet. The coaches wanted to get him some PT before the B10 schedule. Same as Hopkins, Cox and so on. You know, experience for a young player without much on the line.

pullin4blue

September 25th, 2010 at 9:27 PM ^

Toussaint was not listed at 100% prior to the game. He is our future (unless we see a Hello post from Dee Hart). He needs reps just like every other player. Realistically, how many games this season do you think we will have that we are playing our #3 or 4 RB? In my opinion, not very many. Get the guy as many reps in game situations that he can get. 

WichitanWolverine

September 25th, 2010 at 9:32 PM ^

Look, I'm not trashing the coaches' playcalling in any way.  I know they see a lot more in practice than I do.  I don't pretend to be a football coach...if I were I probably wouldn't be asking these types of questions.  It just didn't make sense to me to play our next standout RB (FormerWolv's words, not mine) that late in the game.  I appreciate the input from the above responses.

BiSB

September 25th, 2010 at 9:41 PM ^

When healthy, he may be a stud.  But he's not healthy, so the coaches wanted to get our healthy backs some work.  They decided to let Fitz go for a couple of series of a blow-out just to see how close to "game ready" he is and reward him for working as hard as he has. You could tell by the fact that he was caught from behind that he probably wasn't ready for a 20 carry afternoon.

However, I stand by my earlier Jesus-and-cracker-related analysis.

jonny_GoBlue

September 25th, 2010 at 9:28 PM ^

Please attach link to Rich Rod saying Fitz was the #1 RB.

Note that Coach Jackson saying that Toussaint is the greatest running back in the history of the universe does not mean that he is our starter.

clarkiefromcanada

September 25th, 2010 at 9:34 PM ^

So basically, the timing of when RichRod put in a rehabbing running back with mad skills wasn't okay?

What next? Is this the best the RR haters can come up with? "Those dirty liars...".

Come on now.

modaddy21

September 25th, 2010 at 9:40 PM ^

Question, why not run him, that is why he gets to go to school for free, no?  I mean he is a runningback..jeez  Maybe next time we get a lead we should send out say Kovacs to play QB since Devin is the future.  WTF the coaches don't have to justify anything to you.  We won the game, most everybody played good, what the hell else do you want?  Another defensive performance like last week?

jmblue

September 25th, 2010 at 9:44 PM ^

In Toussaint, you see the #1 back on the team.  I (and others, probably) see a redshirt freshman making his career debut.  Let him get his feet wet in a low-pressure situation.

Fresh Meat

September 25th, 2010 at 9:59 PM ^

After the way he ran today?  I mean, I liked what I saw, but he had HUGE holes on those two runs.  Nice run, but most of the credit for those goes to the O-line.  He may be the greatest running back of all time, but those runs don't prove it.  Those holes were generous

bronxblue

September 25th, 2010 at 10:40 PM ^

In what world was Fitz the #1 guy on this team?  Who said that?  I am being completely serious - what reputable source ever listed Fitz ahead of Shaw, Smith, Cox, etc.?  

TFish

September 25th, 2010 at 10:51 PM ^

We scored more points than any game in 24 years BUT WHY DID WE LET A 5TH BALLCARRIER GAIN 50+ YARDS WHEN WE DIDN'T HAVE TO LET HIM REALIZE HIS DREAMS THIS WEEK

 

...is what I'm hearing

Anonymosity

September 25th, 2010 at 10:57 PM ^

Who cares??

Maybe he's healthy enough to play, but not quite 100%, and at whatever percentage capability he's at, he's clearly not as good as Shaw and Smith?

I'm sure the coaches had SOME reason for setting the RB rotation the way they did.  I find it hard to believe that coming into the season they were like "Hey, u know what wud B funny? Lets tell every1 this Fitz guy is awesum even tho he sux and will only play like 5 snaps this year!!!11"

Or maybe he IS the best RB on the team, and the coaches just forgot about him?  Maybe Magee was heading over to grab a cub of Gatorade and he saw Fitz chilling on the bench over there and was like "O crap!  I 4got about u!  Go get in there, Fitzy!!!11"