Starting running back today per Horton

[gr82be 14,423]

40 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

Or, Gus has been at his worst when he's missing a key part of his offense (or multiple keys some years) and he doesn't have a back-up plan. The two seem to coincide.

Something we never discuss... Gus's 2 best years at Auburn... 2010 and 2013... we never lost a key player to injury. Gus didn't have to change the plan mid-season. We always fall apart when the guy that he built the offense around goes down.

Agree but I don't think he had to deal with an injury to a key player on 2014 but I could be mistaken. In '10, '13 and '14 he had a QB that could run and take the pressure off the RB. In '10 we were not too far from having three 1000 yard rushers. In '13 besides Mason and Marshall, CAP and Grant both shared the wealth with 600 yds each. Other than '14 the rest of the years no one really shared the load of carries which leads us back to Gus needing a true DT QB. He doesn't seem to know what to do without one. I know that's been rehashed time and again but it's the elephant in the room with Gus. And I like Gus but I will continue to be apprehensive about the offense. 

[bigbird 60,521]

27 minutes ago, Scotty2Hotty said:

We’re in trouble because of inexperience at OL and RB. 

Martin’s small size, which increases chances of injury, esp based on how many touches Gus’ bellcow gets, and decreases pass-blocking ability, plus his inability to break many tackles only thickens our problems on offense. 

You asked to tell you more. I gave you more. And then some. We will encounter many of the same offensive problems as 2017 FSU did. 

Oh wait. This isn’t a positive prediction. Queue the condescending gif/video in 3, 2, 1...

Quick questions

How did KJ's added size help him be more injury resilient?

How well did Pettways's added size help protect him more against injury?

Of the three, which RB (Johnson, Pettway, Martin) has spent less time on the injury list?

[lionheartkc 6,150]

Just now, gr82be said:

Agree but I don't think he had to deal with an injury to a key player on 2014 but I could be mistaken. In '10, '13 and '14 he had a QB that could run and take the pressure off the RB. In '10 we were not too far from having three 1000 yard rushers. In '13 besides Mason and Marshall, CAP and Grant both shared the wealth with 600 yds each. Other than '14 the rest of the years no one really shared the load of carries which leads us back to Gus needing a true DT QB. He doesn't seem to know what to do without one. I know that's been rehashed time and again but it's the elephant in the room with Gus. And I like Gus but I will continue to be apprehensive about the offense. 

No... in 2014 we had a defensive collapse. The offense never slowed down. They continued to put up huge numbers even in the games we lost, except the Georgia game, and the only thing I can chalk that up to is a failure to rebound from the huge emotional crash that was the bad officiating in the A&M game leading to sloppy play (3 turnovers and 78 yards in penalties).

No one shared the load of carries at running back after 14 because from 15-last year our top backs kept getting hurt and or kicked off the team. As Horton mentioned, he's going to be working to make sure we have more guys ready to go.

As for the whole dual threat QB discussion, we don't need to dredge that up again. I'll just say, based on his history, as well as a large percentage of the games we've played in the past 2 years, I disagree.

[Tiger 8,823]

Well....what is Gus' record with a DT QB vs a more traditional pocket passing QB?

 

He doesn't need at DT QB, but damn it increases his margin for error by so much because he's susceptible to predictable play calls.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

29 minutes ago, Tiger said:

Well....what is Gus' record with a DT QB vs a more traditional pocket passing QB?

 

He doesn't need at DT QB, but damn it increases his margin for error by so much because he's susceptible to predictable play calls.

Wouldn't you agree that a true dual threat QB improves EVERY coach's offense? I would go as far as to say that every coach would try to have one, if it weren't for the fact that they are so freaking rare.

[Tiger 8,823]

1 minute ago, lionheartkc said:

Wouldn't you agree that a true dual threat QB improves EVERY coach's offense? I would go as far as to say that every coach would try to have one, if it weren't for the fact that they are so freaking rare.

Yeah definitely. As far as Gus is concerned, he goes from the mediocre/average/good results to off the charts amazing offensive results when he has one of those running QBs. So I think there's something to the AU fans wanting him to go that route. And he has with Willis/Gatewood. Although, I'm not sure if Bo Nix is any more of a dual threat guy than Stidham is.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

5 minutes ago, Tiger said:

Yeah definitely. As far as Gus is concerned, he goes from the mediocre/average/good results to off the charts amazing offensive results when he has one of those running QBs. So I think there's something to the AU fans wanting him to go that route. And he has with Willis/Gatewood. Although, I'm not sure if Bo Nix is any more of a dual threat guy than Stidham is.

I wouldn't call Willis or Gatewood a true dual-threat, yet. They both have to show they can can be consistent with the passing game. Unlike 2013, we can't win just running the ball anymore. Defensive coaches have figured out how to defend that (and the extra emphasis on flagging lineman down field didn't help... thanks Saban), so we need someone back there who can punish a team when they take away the run.

[SumterAubie 3,031]

I"m gonna smirk at the outrage on the AUFamily game day thread when rb A rips off several nice runs on the way to an Auburn td, then sits the  bench when rb B rotates in on the very next series of downs that encompasses 3 run plays and a punt. The calls for Malzahn's head will be precious..

[McLoofus 35,182]

15 minutes ago, SumterAubie said:

I"m gonna smirk at the outrage on the AUFamily game day thread when rb A rips off several nice runs on the way to an Auburn td, then sits the  bench when rb B rotates in on the very next series of downs that encompasses 3 run plays and a punt. The calls for Malzahn's head will be precious..

I would smirk at that outrage, also.

I would not smirk at any outrage directed at any number of other scenarios where we have chosen not to rotate the backs in the past. 

[SumterAubie 3,031]

5 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

I would smirk at that outrage, also.

I would not smirk at any outrage directed at any number of other scenarios where we have chosen not to rotate the backs in the past. 

Oh, I agree. There is no reason not to spread the wealth of carries among the game ready tailbacks. But there will be those who question Malzahn should he sit the 'hot' tailback for a series or two

[around4ever 4,139]

56 minutes ago, SumterAubie said:

I"m gonna smirk at the outrage on the AUFamily game day thread when rb A rips off several nice runs on the way to an Auburn td, then sits the  bench when rb B rotates in on the very next series of downs that encompasses 3 run plays and a punt. The calls for Malzahn's head will be precious..

Outrage on a game tread... Never!!  

[SumterAubie 3,031]

8 minutes ago, around4ever said:

Outrage on a game tread... Never!!  

Hah.

[DAG 33,982]

1 hour ago, SumterAubie said:

I"m gonna smirk at the outrage on the AUFamily game day thread when rb A rips off several nice runs on the way to an Auburn td, then sits the  bench when rb B rotates in on the very next series of downs that encompasses 3 run plays and a punt. The calls for Malzahn's head will be precious..

You are being funny but I wouldn’t be the least bit suprise if Gus Malzahn would have something like that in his plan. What would be equally funny is when those same Gus fans retort with see “I told you so!” when in fact, most competent fans aren’t even asking him to do this and I would like to think most competent coaches wouldn’t even think to do this. But after 2016 Clemson where we used 4 QBs, I am all out of the element of surprise.

[Barnacle 9,064]

21 hours ago, bigbird said:

What a dumb statement

He's not wrong. That just wasn't a skill that Kam showed last season, either because of lack of opportunities or otherwise.

I'm embarrassed to admit this, but I just watched almost every one of his runs last season while eating lunch and I only saw 3 broken tackles, two of which came from one run. The truth is that most of Kam's yards came on big plays with good blocking. Once he's in space, he's very nimble with his feet. To that point, he does a very good job of avoiding contact. The problems I see with Kam are at the line of scrimmage. 

We all know Kam is fast. He's a potential home run hitter. However, its common for him to go down on arm tackles, and especially at the LOS. He lacks patience in the backfield. While hitting the hole quickly resulted in some big runs for him last season, it also resulted in some losses that would have been avoided had he showed some patience. Kam has a tendency to run right into his blockers, instead of using them to buy time. Kerryon was a genius at this. When blocking would break down in front of him, Kerryon always seemed to have an ability to create. Tre Mason did this well. 

I would wager that experience will help Kam in that regard more than anything else. The more opportunities he gets, the better he will play - that's just an opinion. Obviously, coaching will help, too.

Finally, he does needs to get stronger. And, forgive me, but he would benefit from 5-10 pounds of muscle. Kerryon did it and it paid huge dividends. I'm not particularly worried about that, though. It should happen naturally as he progresses through the off-season program.

 

 

[DAG 33,982]

15 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

He's not wrong. That just wasn't a skill that Kam showed last season, either because of lack of opportunities or otherwise.

I'm embarrassed to admit this, but I just watched almost every one of his runs last season while eating lunch and I only saw 3 broken tackles, two of which came from one run. The truth is that most of Kam's yards came on big plays with good blocking. Once he's in space, he's very nimble with his feet. To that point, he does a very good job of avoiding contact. The problems I see with Kam are at the line of scrimmage. 

We all know Kam is fast. He's a potential home run hitter. However, its common for him to go down on arm tackles, and especially at the LOS. He lacks patience in the backfield. While hitting the hole quickly resulted in some big runs for him last season, it also resulted in some losses that would have been avoided had he showed some patience. Kam has a tendency to run right into his blockers, instead of using them to buy time. Kerryon was a genius at this. When blocking would break down in front of him, Kerryon always seemed to have an ability to create. Tre Mason did this well. 

I would wager that experience will help Kam in that regard more than anything else. The more opportunities he gets, the better he will play - that's just an opinion. Obviously, coaching will help, too.

Finally, he does needs to get stronger. And, forgive me, but he would benefit from 5-10 pounds of muscle. Kerryon did it and it paid huge dividends. I'm not particularly worried about that, though. It should happen naturally as he progresses through the off-season program.

 

 

That is absolutely not why he called the statement dumb. But I digress.

[Barnacle 9,064]

1 minute ago, DAG said:

That is absolutely not why he called the statement dumb. But I digress.

"Dumb" as what he said may have been in the context of that conversation, he's not wrong. Better?

[DAG 33,982]

Just now, Barnacle said:

"Dumb" as what he said may have been in the context of that conversation, he's not wrong. Better?

Yes. Picking up on context of conversations saves room for the absolute need of clarification. You just wrote a thesis about something that I would think most people would agree with . You are telling me 170 pound Kam Martin isn’t the type of back to consistently break tackles?! No way. But again, I digress. 

[Barnacle 9,064]

9 minutes ago, DAG said:

Yes. Picking up on context of conversations saves room for the absolute need of clarification. You just wrote a thesis about something that I would think most people would agree with . You are telling me 170 pound Kam Martin isn’t the type of back to consistently break tackles?! No way. But again, I digress. 

Don't know what ruffled your feathers, but thanks for your condescension. 

Here's the post Scotty or whoever was responding to. 

On 4/20/2018 at 10:07 AM, Tiger said:

Also surprised at how many people are down on Kam Martin. I think he can be really good if he improves his pass protection.

I'm not down on Kam, but take my post as an explanation as the other things I think he needs to work on other than pass protection, including the yards after contact that Scotty2hotty brought up. 

Feel free to disagree with me. Or feel free not to respond to me at all, but don't quote me just to be a dick. 

[DAG 33,982]

7 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

Don't know what ruffled your feathers, but thanks for your condescension. 

Here's the post Scotty or whoever was responding to. 

I'm not down on Kam, but take my post as an explanation as the other things I think he needs to work on other than pass protection, including the yards after contact that Scotty2hotty brought up. 

Feel free to disagree with me. Or feel free not to respond to me at all, but don't quote me just to be a dick. 

My feathers aren’t ruffled . Just responding to bring clarifications as to why Big Bird said that was a dumb statement in the CONTEXT of the original discussion. Most logical people are not going to disagree with what you just said. But you can keep being triggered.

[Barnacle 9,064]

1 minute ago, DAG said:

My feathers aren’t ruffled . Just responding to bring clarifications as to why Big Bird said that was a dumb statement in the CONTEXT of the original discussion. Most logical people are not going to disagree with what you just said. But you can keep being triggered.

Well, thank you for your clarification, DAG. 

[Barnacle 9,064]

2 hours ago, SumterAubie said:

Oh, I agree. There is no reason not to spread the wealth of carries among the game ready tailbacks. But there will be those who question Malzahn should he sit the 'hot' tailback for a series or two

Inevitably. 

[bigbird 60,521]

2 hours ago, Barnacle said:

He's not wrong. That just wasn't a skill that Kam showed last season, either because of lack of opportunities or otherwise.

 

1:34 #36

2:02 #31

3:09 ?

4:00 #22 & ?

Kam's vision, speed and acceleration is what limits his opportunities to break tackles. To me, that's not a negative. BTW, I agree he needs 5-10 lbs, but all indications are that he has. It's also telling that most of the "arm" tackles on him seem to be diving from behind 6+ yards past the LOS.  Otherwise, I don't see many arm tackles.

 

And to say, "has he broken a tackle yet" is an uninformed, dumb statement.

 

[Barnacle 9,064]

3 minutes ago, bigbird said:

And to say, "has he broken any tackles yet" is an uninformed, dumb statement.

Taken at its face, I agree. For the sake of discussion I took "has he broken any tackles yet" more as a smart-ass statement meaning "he doesn't break many tackles." That's the perspective I was responding from. You and I both found instances of him breaking tackles. Clearly, he can and does, just not at the rate that I would hope to see from an every down back, and not at the rate that our feature backs have in the past. That being said, I like Kam for the same reasons you do.

I agree that his speed and acceleration are his biggest assets. I agree with vision to the extent that he has great vision in the open field, and I think I made note of the fact that he does a great job of avoiding contact in space. Generally, if he's getting to the second level, he's getting us ahead of the chains whether he's breaking tackles or not. He's just that fast. My concern is at the LOS, and developing the patience necessary to pick up yards where the blocking breaks down or is slow developing. That was a strength of Kerryon's, and I think it will be a necessary skill running behind an inexperienced line.

If he develops some patience at the LOS and improves his yards after contact, then I think you've got a more consistent, complete back who still possesses the ability to take it to the house on any given snap. 

[AU64 10,122]

49 minutes ago, bigbird said:

 

1:34 #36

2:02 #31

3:09 ?

4:00 #22 & ?

Kam's vision, speed and acceleration is what limits his opportunities to break tackles. To me, that's not a negative. BTW, I agree he needs 5-10 lbs, but all indications are that he has. It's also telling that most of the "arm" tackles on him seem to be diving from behind 6+ yards past the LOS.  Otherwise, I don't see many arm tackles.

 

And to say, "has he broken a tackle yet" is an uninformed, dumb statement.

 

Just noting that's he made most of his yards against second level teams and tired defenses late in games....therefore, it's hard to know how he will fare against the starting D of most SEC teams.    More weight and muscle would surely help.  The kid at Stanford who had about 2000 yards was pretty much the same size as Kam...but weighs about 195 ....and Gaskins at Washington is listed at 5-10 and 190 but does not look it.....so, it can be done....but might depend on where his strength is.  I guess they are out there but not many starting RBs in power 5 smaller than those two guys.

Looking at the draft list and the better RBs are all in the 215 and up range...no matter what their height. 

[bigbird 60,521]

15 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

Taken at its face, I agree. For the sake of discussion I took "has he broken any tackles yet" more as a smart-ass statement meaning "he doesn't break many tackles." That's the perspective I was responding from. 

That's the perspective I was responding from too.