Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Still need more RB depth


CRA
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Carl Spackler said:

That's literally all you do: complain about posters' complaints. I'm not sure what satisfaction you derive from  being so self-righteous all the time.

 

I'm not sure taking someone's words out of context is the best way to start a discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

I'm not sure taking someone's words out of context is the best way to start a discussion.

I'm far beyond expecting any sort of civil discussion with someone whose penchant for senseless optimism and condescending replies knows no bounds. Really just wanted to make it abundantly clear that many of us see a pattern in how you converse.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, poundaway said:

It has to do with the differential with your backup RB.  Rhule's and/or  Brady's mistake was thinking Chuba and CMC were interchangeable.  They weren't.  When CMC went down in 2020, we won our first game with Mike Davis.  There is a drop off from CMC to Davis but there is a cliff of cosmic proportions from CMC to Chuba.  We stopped targeting Chuba all together as the season dragged on. 

How was that O going to function without a reliable check down target?  It wasn't and it didn't. 

and maybe I could of articulated it better but the thread is also about your depth matching what you want to do (which that part is speculated but that is based on McAdoo's history as an OC and Corral's entire college career).    You could use a TE as an example.  A solid TE group would be dependent on what type offense you want to run and what you would ideally would be asking of that group.   So solid depth could mean run blockers or a cast of pass catchers.  It's not univerally good depth.  Same group might be sufficient for one O or too weak for another. 

The depth at this point, doesn't appear on face value to really match up as good as it could.  Both McAdoo and Corral ran heavy shotgun offenses.  You think of the asks of those offenses, you don't really think Hubbard and Foreman type RBs.  They IMO are more the hand it off and play D type RBs. 

Just seems like instead of waiting until CMC gets hurt to add an Abdullah type early instead of in season.  And if we did run a shotgun scheme it would allow CMC to rotate out and play WR a lot (which was been the talk and what most here want to see).   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Carl Spackler said:

I'm far beyond expecting any sort of civil discussion with someone whose penchant for senseless optimism and condescending replies knows no bounds. Really just wanted to make it abundantly clear that many of us see a pattern in how you converse.

 

Considering your posting history. You won't mind if I don't take posting advice from you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CRA said:

and maybe I could of articulated it better but the thread is also about your depth matching what you want to do (which that part is speculated but that is based on McAdoo's history as an OC and Corral's entire college career).    You could use a TE as an example.  A solid TE group would be dependent on what type offense you want to run and what you would ideally would be asking of that group.   So solid depth could mean run blockers or a cast of pass catchers.  It's not univerally good depth.  Same group might be sufficient for one O or too weak for another. 

The depth at this point, doesn't appear on face value to really match up as good as it could.  Both McAdoo and Corral ran heavy shotgun offenses.  You think of the asks of those offenses, you don't really think Hubbard and Foreman type RBs.  They IMO are more the hand it off and play D type RBs. 

Just seems like instead of waiting until CMC gets hurt to add an Abdullah type early instead of in season.  And if we did run a shotgun scheme it would allow CMC to rotate out and play WR a lot (which was been the talk and what most here want to see).   

 

1. We have no idea yet what that "Matt Corall centric Offense" is going to look like. 

 

2. The OC designs his Offense for everyone. Not just the QB.

 

3. How do you plan on adding this RB, whose skillset is still a question mark? Please no trades. And the FA market is rather sad.

 

4. Royce can catch, and Hubbard has had a whole offseason to work on his craft.

 

5. Counting on injuries is a fools errand.

 

If Corall works out, we have a roster that could make some noise. If he doesn't work out? The next QB has a pretty good team to work with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

1. We have no idea yet what that "Matt Corall centric Offense" is going to look like. 

2. The OC designs his Offense for everyone. Not just the QB.

3. How do you plan on adding this RB, whose skillset is still a question mark? Please no trades. And the FA market is rather sad.

4. Royce can catch, and Hubbard has had a whole offseason to work on his craft.

5. Counting on injuries is a fools errand.

 

1.  If you draft a QB like Corral in 2022 and install him into some old John Fox era pro style offense.  Then you shouldn't of drafted him.   Again, look at this college tape.  Look at other guys that have come out of similar offenses and what teams have done w/ them.  We do have a very good idea of what a Corral offense SHOULD look like. 

2.  Again, Matt Corral played at Ole Miss.  He didn't play under center.  Go watch some of his games.  You think the Panthers would play him and not heavily utlizie the shotgun?  Then the McAdoo aspect on top of that?  His history of being shotgun heavy? So yeah, assumption would be McAdoo WOULD design an offense that most likely puts Corral in the shotgun.  

3.  Lot of well rounded vets get cut every year in camp.   You don't have to trade to add this caliber of depth. 

4. Royce isn't on our roster.  And Hubbard would have to make extreme progression to put him back there with a rookie QB in shotgun.  Hubbard's issues aren't just his hands but pass protection. 

5.  LOL.  Not planning for injuries is a fools errand.  Especially for a player that hasn't really seen the field hardly for years now.   

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CRA said:

1.  If you draft a QB like Corral in 2022 and install him into some old John Fox era pro style offense.  Then you shouldn't of drafted him.   Again, look at this college tape.  Look at other guys that have come out of similar offenses and what teams have done w/ them.  We do have a very good idea of what a Corral offense SHOULD look like. 

2.  Again, Matt Corral played at Ole Miss.  He didn't play under center.  Go watch some of his games.  You think the Panthers would play him and not heavily utlizie the shotgun?  Then the McAdoo aspect on top of that?  His history of being shotgun heavy? So yeah, assumption would be McAdoo WOULD design an offense that most likely puts Corral in the shotgun.  

3.  Lot of well rounded vets get cut every year in camp.   You don't have to trade to add this caliber of depth. 

4. Royce isn't on our roster.  And Hubbard would have to make extreme progression to put him back there with a rookie QB in shotgun.  Hubbard's issues aren't just his hands but pass protection. 

5.  LOL.  Not planning for injuries is a fools errand.  Especially for a player that hasn't really seen the field for years now.   


1. Everybody knows we didn't draft Matt to run a Fox Offense. And we may think we know what O they will run, and what type of RB they want. But we don't.

 

2. You just repeated #1.

 

3, Hoping a RB that fits what we want gets cut? Not sound strategy to me. But hey, if we need to we can.

 

4. You know I meant Foreman. Don't be obtuse. And Hubbard can improve. You know, like a lot of players do 

 

5. You build your roster the best you can. You do not plan on injuries. You don't have the roster space to stockpile players in case of injury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:


1. Everybody knows we didn't draft Matt to run a Fox Offense. And we may think we know what O they will run, and what type of RB they want. But we don't.

 

2. You just repeated #1.

 

3, Hoping a RB that fits what we want gets cut? Not sound strategy to me. But hey, if we need to we can.

 

4. You know I meant Foreman. Don't be obtuse. And Hubbard can improve. You know, like a lot of players do 

 

5. You build your roster the best you can. You do not plan on injuries. You don't have the roster space to stockpile players in case of injury.

1.  Cool, you don't want to speculate about our offense and what we will do w/ McAdoo or Corral.  Then don't.  Pretty easy.  

then that makes the rest pointless to respond to you about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CRA said:

 

1.  Cool, you don't want to speculate about our offense and what we will do w/ McAdoo or Corral.  Then don't.  Pretty easy.  

then that makes the rest pointless to respond to you about. 

 

McAdoo likes to throw the ball. Matt has said he wants to run the ball more. Corall is good at Play Action. So a blend of all that. 


If I'm not playing the game to your satisfaction. Then yeah, I concur, we done

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CRA said:

LOL.  Not planning for injuries is a fools errand.  Especially for a player that hasn't really seen the field hardly for years now.   

Spot on for all of your counterpoints, but especially this. The biggest reason you shouldn't give RBs second contracts or give up much draft capital for them is because they get beat up so bad and have a shorter shelf life than most positions. CMC's history...not preparing for or planning on him being injured is very much a fools path. 

The good thing is, like has been said many times, it's a lot easier to find a decent RB on the cheap than a lot of other skill positions. You don't have to give up the farm for them and you shouldn't have to trade for one. They are always floating around free agency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Smithers said:

I’d rather see what Spencer Brown has, as well as the other young guys on the camp roster.  No need to invest more money at the position when Foreman and Hubbard are both capable backups.  

Id see no no issue starting Foreman or Hubbard a few times this year if needed. Brown does need some reps in PS, even CMC said he learned a move or two from him. Darius Bradwell is name to watch for if RB is your main deal, he looks like a current NFL and had 2 years on chargers PS. 

Finally RB is one of the better spots to farm cuts, not even in my top 15 in depth worries. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...