hawaiiirish Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 One thing became clear to me as I was reading everything I could before I made my "Start Zaire" thread---the conventional wisdom--one that always is mentioned when speaking about REES and his limitations---is the popular opinion that we already HAVE A VERY STRONG RUNNING GAME! Is that really a given? Its one thing to add 500 yards from golson and give our inexperienced running backs the open lanes and unpredictability that comes from defenses playing against a WIDE OPEN PASSING ATTACK! But with tommy starting and teams loading up to stop the run a closer look makes me question the conventional wisdom. For the last two years we have watched Jonas Gray--Cierre Wood & Theo R do plenty of damage from the RB spot.----These were three very strong, talented and experienced RBs that could likely have gained over 1000 yards as the lead back for any top 25 team. But this year we have GA3 who despite a world of pop from that great speed is UNPROVEN as a complete back taking most of the snaps ----Amir has talent galore but is UNPROVEN as a durable back that can take a lot of snaps in any season. McDaniel is a back-up that we just don't know how much we can get there. Bryant & Folston have a BUNDLE OF POTENTIAL but are not even on campus yet. Clearly this is NOT the same running attack that we had last season going into it with TWO DYNAMIC players --TWO UPPERCLASSMAN that have done it before. This year we have rebuilt the interior of the line and we don't even have 1000 yards rushing by COMBINING THE CAREER RUSHING TOTALS OF EVERY BACK ON THE ROSTER.--OUCH!!-- Common sense tells me that to ASSUME as so many do that the offset to starting REES is that we have both a STRONG DEFENSE & A STRONG RUNNING GAME. Frankly we just don't know what kind of running attack we will have---and one thing is VERY CLEAR to me---if we take 400- 500 yards from the QB off the table & play 13 games against defenses that stack the line of scrimmage with the purpose of stopping our young backs---IT IS NOT AT ALL CERTAIN THAT WE WILL HAVE A STRONG RUNNING GAME---and its absolutely incorrect to just take it as a given that we currently DO HAVE A STRONG RUNNING GAME--- No Golson--no wide open passing--a slow tempo--no theo--no cierre--and teams dedicated to stop our running game---its IMHO totally PREMATURE to think that Tommy's limitations will be carried to a major degree by some STRONG RUNNING GAME that is mostly in our memories and not in the STATS ! I need to see the running game before I will feel confident to claim we actually have more then STRONG POTENTIAL for a running game. It is i'm afraid totally speculative ( although possible) but not at all fact that WE HAVE A STRONG RUNNING GAME coming up in 2013. aloha's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithInIrish Forever Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 as I pointed out a statistical thread I did last month we lost over 70 percent of our rush offense with Theo and Cierre, At that point you dismissed it because of Golson. Now you see what I was seeing ealier, but our line is good enough on the left, we'll hafta see on the right. If ND can Run behind Nick Martin, Lombard and Hanratty/Stanley/Elmer will be a factor that tells us if ND is BCS bound in 2013. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OklahomaIrish Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 It's all potential. Potentially our offensive line is better than last year. Our running backs are potentially more explosive, but the key is Malik. He will make it much more effective with the option read, timely pitches and taking off when all the receivers are covered. With Tommy at the helm our running game suffers greatly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarious Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 Hmm. Replacing 2/3 of your interior lineman, and 3/4 of your top rushers. I will go myth. Big question on who will get yards between the tackles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlabamaDuck Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 Hmm. Replacing 2/3 of your interior lineman, and 3/4 of your top rushers. I will go myth. Big question on who will get yards between the tackles. I think McDaniels will get some yards up the middle along with Bryant. The big question for me is GAIII. He has to get his pad level lower or he is going to spend a lot of time on the injury list. Amir is very good but more off tackle or outside. Cave is going to be missed and hard to replace in the middle. I doubt that Rees runs the option but if Zaire runs it, it will be to the left. Not many defenders on the left side have to defend against the option so that might be a small advantage. I don`t know who or how but we will have a good run game. If not, we are up the creek. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocketsan Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 There is a sh!tload of potential if kids develop and Amir can somehow find healthiness... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irishrb Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 There is a sh!tload of potential if kids develop and Amir can somehow find healthiness... This.... IF the Oline continues to progress, the backs should be there to make some noise. It would really be nice if Amir could get moving. GAIII isn't an every down type of back but he obviously has potential to be that change of pace home run threat. Cam is okay, and should get a couple of carries to help move the chains, but the key to me are the freshman. There is a TON of talent there and I will be quite excited to see what they bring to the table. I totally expect to see both of them involved this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly Gruene Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 There is a sh!tload of potential if kids develop and Amir can somehow find healthiness... Can someone explain to me the difference between a "sh!tload" and a "buttload"? Can they be used interchangeably? Would "buttload" have had the same meaning in this case? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeedsterX Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 Can someone explain to me the difference between a "sh!tload" and a "buttload"? Can they be used interchangeably? Would "buttload" have had the same meaning in this case? THIS would tell you,,, "A buttload is the amount of feces that will fit into a standard sized butt whereas a shitload is the amount of fecal matter that is combined from any number of buttloads..." http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090119013213AAftpEh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly Gruene Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 THIS would tell you,,, "A buttload is the amount of feces that will fit into a standard sized butt whereas a shitload is the amount of fecal matter that is combined from any number of buttloads..." http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090119013213AAftpEh Thanks for the clarification. I guess there's a lot of potential in that backfield. I hope Longo works them into shape so they're not gassed in the 4th quarters. If Amir doesn't crap out again their running game might be pretty smooth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VCDomer Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 Thanks for the clarification. I guess there's a lot of potential in that backfield. I hope Longo works them into shape so they're not gassed in the 4th quarters. If Amir doesn't crap out again their running game might be pretty smooth. If he we don't get a solid running game going this season will be as pleasant as a turd in the punch bowl....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
echo88 Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 If he we don't get a solid running game going this season will be as pleasant as a turd in the punch bowl....... Sure as shit won't have a passing game, so.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieAngel Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Sure as shit won't have a passing game, so.... If our passing game doesn't mature under Tommy you can bet people will be chanting Malik faster than crap through a goose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REMND Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 The OL is very good by most people's estimates and opinions. That reflects both talent and experience. The RBs have a lot of talent, mostly 4 stars and more, but only GAIII has a lot of experience. That means there is good potential but no certainty that we will have a good running attack. BK is really going to have to earn his salary offensively this year. Fortunately, he is really experienced in these matters and has a good sidekick in Martin. This is going to be tough. I really do not know who will start at QB and what kind of offense we will run. About the only thing we all agree on is that Rees is the safest choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockets Revenge Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 (edited) Can someone explain to me the difference between a "sh!tload" and a "buttload"? Can they be used interchangeably? Would "buttload" have had the same meaning in this case? a shitload=235.5cm³ Where x=(π)r²h, (h) = length of the average human rectum (12cm), ® = average radius (2.5cm). sh!tload = 4 buttloads. A sh!tload of f@cktons is a c@nt-haul. An assload is how much one healthy donkey can carry. Now a sh!tton is a whole different equation... Edited June 3, 2013 by Rocket's Revenge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocketsan Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 a shitload=235.5cm³ Where x=(π)r²h, (h) = length of the average human rectum (12cm), ® = average radius (2.5cm). sh!tload = 4 buttloads. A sh!tload of f@cktons is a c@nt-haul. An assload is how much one healthy donkey can carry. Now a sh!tton is a whole different equation... You left out Canadian conversion rates... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieAngel Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 You left out Canadian conversion rates... Aye. I get the math from an Imperial standpoint, can you convert that to the metric system? How many cm is the average rectum? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.