VIDEO: Every Run By Fournette From The Shotgun

[C47]

5 minutes ago, cultclassiccat said:

Unpopular opinion of mine; I don't want him. Much rather trade back and pick up McCaffrey or a WR/TE and another pick. Would love Cook but that ain't happnin

Sent using the amazing CarolinaHuddle mobile app
 

Agree. McCaffrey is the Back I want in the first. He can be a complete RB and he might be an even better slot receiver. He's a special talent and a chess piece that makes our Offense more dynamic. 

[nctarheel0619]

34 minutes ago, Toomers said:

No. Saca is capable of something that 99% of people on here can't comprehend. There are many sides to every issue, and continued pursuit of knowledge on the subject can and will shape a final opinion. Which is why, for me at least, his opinion has as much respect as anyone on here. And I disagree with many things he has stated. Which is what we are here for. Discussion. Everyone else wants to draw a line in the sand and just say "I'm right no matter what the facts are". 

Yeah, but to say the best RB prospect since AP wouldn't fit our system because "he didn't run out of the shotgun much" was just stupidity.  You can have a opinion all you want.  But, to not take a player because of our shitty system was blasphemous.  

[SeoulPanther]

33 minutes ago, Toomers said:

No. Saca is capable of something that 99% of people on here can't comprehend. There are many sides to every issue, and continued pursuit of knowledge on the subject can and will shape a final opinion. Which is why, for me at least, his opinion has as much respect as anyone on here. And I disagree with many things he has stated. Which is what we are here for. Discussion. Everyone else wants to draw a line in the sand and just say "I'm right no matter what the facts are". 

This was an excellent, astute appreciation of a helpful thread. Then you spoiled it with a generalisation,

[nctarheel0619]

9 minutes ago, C47 said:

He can be a complete RB and he might be an even better slot receiver

Dude, we can line up Fournette anywhere on offense.  Dude is going to attract attention regardless.  He is a monster.  McCaffrey on the other hand?  Uh, underwhelming much?  

[C47]

4 minutes ago, nctarheel0619 said:

Dude, we can line up Fournette anywhere on offense.  Dude is going to attract attention regardless.  He is a monster.  McCaffrey on the other hand?  Uh, underwhelming much?  

Really? You can line up Fournette as a slot receiver and he can produce there?! 

[nctarheel0619]

5 minutes ago, C47 said:

Really? You can line up Fournette as a slot receiver and he can produce there?! 

I mean, do you think a CB wants to tackle that mother f ucker?  Fournette will be a better player than McCaffrey.  Bank on it.  

[C47]

Just now, nctarheel0619 said:

I mean, do you think a CB wants to tackle that mother f ucker?  Fournette will be a better player than McCaffrey.  Bank on it.  

He would have to get open & catch it first for anyone to need to tackle him... 

[SeoulPanther]

I'm not a Fournette groupie. That said you can argue that he did alright out of the shotgun on this breakdown. I struggled to find obvious flaws to his game and on the TFL he was swamped. Hes not elusive but he would have a better OL to run behind. However he would also face consistently better DL. There are lots of variables but NOBODY can be assured one way or another how his game will translate to NFL. I'm just not sold on him being a generational talent though. Didn't look like that to me.

[Toomers]

10 minutes ago, nctarheel0619 said:

Yeah, but to say the best RB prospect since AP wouldn't fit our system because "he didn't run out of the shotgun much" was just stupidity.  You can have a opinion all you want.  But, to not take a player because of our shitty system was blasphemous.  

   And although I didn't agree with that assessment either, I've learned that Saca will continue to pursue information and if it contradicts some of his original thoughts, he will be the first to say so. 

  Unlike some, who wouldn't change their opinion if God came down and told them they were wrong. You know anyone like that? Hmmm..... So there is really no point is discussing anything with them. And having an opinion of any players on field ability is never blasphemous. Some of the other opinions on here lately, now those are blasphemous. 

   In case you didn't get the "subtle" hints, you are a prime example of who I have no desire to converse with. You go your way, I'll go mine.

[nctarheel0619]

3 minutes ago, Toomers said:

   And although I didn't agree with that assessment either, I've learned that Saca will continue to pursue information and if it contradicts some of his original thoughts, he will be the first to say so. 

  Unlike some, who wouldn't change their opinion if God came down and told them they were wrong. You know anyone like that? Hmmm..... So there is really no point is discussing anything with them. And having an opinion of any players on field ability is never blasphemous. Some of the other opinions on here lately, now those are blasphemous. 

   In case you didn't get the "subtle" hints, you are a prime example of who I have no desire to converse with. You go your way, I'll go mine.

You contradicted yourself by quoting me the first time.  So, you're looking pretty stupid for stating that.  

[nctarheel0619]

13 minutes ago, C47 said:

He would have to get open & catch it first for anyone to need to tackle him... 

Fair enough.  Still, I would love to have Fournette on the team.  If they wanted him to catch it, I'm sure they would.  

[chbright]

1 hour ago, Saca312 said:

You realize I'm talking about Stew when I talk about elusive from the backfield. Fournette is nowhere near perfect at that.

Fournette thrives in a downhill system, but this video shows he can still be decent from the shotgun. We're likely going to bank on the downhill system moreso than shotgun, but he's not terribly bad from the shotgun whatsoever.

Multi quoting on mobile is a pain. 

 

The post I quoted erks me. While highlights if stew show him elusive at the line as the norm is a bit much. Pump the brakes there. He doe limit negative plays and knows how to get north south when there is nothing there. That's something Fournette needs to realize: he isn't Sanders, when your toast, get what's there and don't take a loss. 

 

As for original post, that's mostly what the prospect part was about. I agree, some have really pegged him low off 1 season and more predicable offense then Shula. That said I think he honestly belongs in the tier 3 group that includes McCaffrey. Both are great at quite a lot, but are not perfect and scheme will really dictate how effective they are. 

 

Garrett to me is the only true tier one guy. I think hooker and Lattimore are tier two. Adams might be tier two, but he just isn't the ballhawk. Think Allen and Thomas are as well. They are not going to be as productive as Garrett, but can fit too many places on the line while being effective.

 

Tier three to me are guys that need the scheme fitted to their skills to flourish. That's where a lot of guys live: Barnett (but he is close a two), Fournette, McCaffrey.......

 

[Toomers]

34 minutes ago, SeoulPanther said:

This was an excellent, astute appreciation of a helpful thread. Then you spoiled it with a generalisation,

You are absolutely correct. I actually thought I put almost in front of that (which I would stand by). But it was my mistake. 

[Man Strength]

55 minutes ago, stbugs said:

WTF is going on here? If Fournette can't dominate in college? What world are you living in that you can actually say something like that.

Geez, if you don't want to take a RB #8, no matter what, fine, but holy crap, do people really believe Fournette didn't dominate in college? This place amazes me sometimes.

From the shotgun dude. He didn't dominate from the shotgun. Very avg at best from shotgun.  Watch the video in the initial thread.