Should McCrary, the senior, start and play more?

Donate To GopherHole
M

march madness

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
2,939
Reaction score
198
Points
63
Would we have an easier time sustaining drives handing the ball off to McCrary as the starter than Smith? McCrary is the senior and he is playing better than Smith and he is running for a better average basically in killing the clock mode. Smith could become the 3rd down back as the pass receiver.
 


I love McCrary but TBF his big game came against Illinois. I do think he should be rotated in particularly on short downs and goal line and especially if Brooks isn't 100%. Looks like they're both Smith and Brooks getting nicked up pretty badly. Wouldn't mind McCrary to get the load for awhile and see what he can do.
 

Rotate all three. Fleck said McCrary will get more touches.
 

Play all three equally. They are all good RB and 3 styles of running is certainly harder to prepare for than 2, especially when one of them only has 2 games worth of footage to review. It also opens up the option to have all 3 of them on the field at once.
 


Taji34 said:
Play all three equally. They are all good RB and 3 styles of running is certainly harder to prepare for than 2, especially when one of them only has 2 games worth of footage to review. It also opens up the option to have all 3 of them on the field at once.
Click to expand...

Return of the Golden-I??? ;)
 


Taji34 said:
Play all three equally. They are all good RB and 3 styles of running is certainly harder to prepare for than 2, especially when one of them only has 2 games worth of footage to review. It also opens up the option to have all 3 of them on the field at once.
Click to expand...

Use them all. Distribute the load and keep them fresher. Use McCrary's size to pound the Hawkeye defense in the second half. If he can carry an Illini defender ten additional yards after contact, he's got to be part of the running attack more.
 




Perhaps my memory is selective, but it seems to me, whether last year or this year, whenever McCrary has been given the opportunity to carry the ball more than just a few times in a game, the guy dominates. All three of our backs seem to run with fury (very impressive), however, there is something different with McCrary. Maybe it's the type of play called, but he seems to get a full head of steam going by the time he hits the line. I would start him and feature him to see if it's "real", or just a function of the competition. It's sort of like the Streveler thing for me. How a coach could watch the energy, toughness, enthusiasm and running ability of Streveler and not give him more opportunity was hard for me to understand. I've felt the same way about McCrary for over a year. But I admit that I'm always thinking the coaches are missing something or too "close" to the situation to see when they may lose perspective. Perhaps I'm delusional like many of you have previously pointed out. Just waiting for dpodoll to call me an "idiot" again. Such a nice feeling.
 

hungan1 said:
Use them all. Distribute the load and keep them fresher. Use McCrary's size to pound the Hawkeye defense in the second half. If he can carry an Illini defender ten additional yards after contact, he's got to be part of the running attack more.
Click to expand...

This makes sense. I remember when MB3 played for the Dallas Cowboys, they had multiple backs on the roster, but they reserved Barber for the second half to finish off bruised-up defenses.
 

Why speculate? What does the depth chart say?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

I'm not ripping on the OP or anybody in particular, but it cracks me up how in one thread folks were wondering if Smith would declare for the NFL after this year and in another thread they are questioning whether he should be the starter. Again, not ripping on anyone, just kind of funny how things go.

Anyway, I really like what I've seen from McCrary, but he played against an AWFUL team. If he gets the majority of the snaps I certainly would not expect him to maintain the 5.3 yd/rush average. But whether he's out there for the first play or not, I would hope he gets several attempts. Then, whether it's him, Smith or Brooks, if one of them is effective start riding them, mixing in the other two to give the other a rest.

As much as I liked the Golden I in concept, I don't remember ever having much success with it, so I'm not among those that would like to see it return. I don't have nor do I know where to find numbers, but I don't remember getting more than 2-3 yards per attempt in that formation. I also remember them getting stuffed at the goal line several times in that formation.
 



Depth chart only has Brooks and Smith listed. But also has Winfield Jr. listed as starter, so . . . .
 

Goes both ways. by rotating three backs, you have a better chance of keeping them fresh.

But, on the other hand, some backs do better the more work they get. we've all seen guys who seem to run better in the 4th quarter than the 1st quarter, or are running harder on their 25th carry than they were running on their 2nd or 3rd carry of the game. some backs need a lot of carries to get into the groove.

Ultimately, the coaches need to make that call. they see them in practice every day, and they should know who thrives on a heavier work-load, as opposed to who does better if you limit their carries and they're fresher in the 2nd half.

Or, you just find another Kent Kitzmann and hand him the ball 57 times. Hey, it worked in 1977.
 

Lakeville Goldy said:
I'm not ripping on the OP or anybody in particular, but it cracks me up how in one thread folks were wondering if Smith would declare for the NFL after this year and in another thread they are questioning whether he should be the starter. Again, not ripping on anyone, just kind of funny how things go.

Anyway, I really like what I've seen from McCrary, but he played against an AWFUL team. If he gets the majority of the snaps I certainly would not expect him to maintain the 5.3 yd/rush average. But whether he's out there for the first play or not, I would hope he gets several attempts. Then, whether it's him, Smith or Brooks, if one of them is effective start riding them, mixing in the other two to give the other a rest.

As much as I liked the Golden I in concept, I don't remember ever having much success with it, so I'm not among those that would like to see it return. I don't have nor do I know where to find numbers, but I don't remember getting more than 2-3 yards per attempt in that formation. I also remember them getting stuffed at the goal line several times in that formation.
Click to expand...

It's worth throwing in the mix...

<iframe width="854" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/c_GvVMr7WWw" frameborder="0" gesture="media" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 

I like McCrary a lot. He's a north-south runner with an attitude. He should get more touches.
 

I'm just saying McCrary will be gone after this year. He has looked superb in two games against bad teams, Middle Tenn and Illinois, but that's the only games he has had more than two carries in.

Against Illinois he got a majority of his carries in kill the clock, 8 men in the box, and everyone in the stadium knowing we were running up the middle, they just couldn't stop it.

I would hate to waste a talent. Start him, give him the first few series and see what happens.
 

I think the answer is obvious - Shannon Brooks at QB. He has a career completion % of 100% and a career passer rating of 782.8 and 100% of the passes he's thrown have been touchdowns. If he can even be half that good in our next game, I like our odds.
 

Word said:
I think the answer is obvious - Shannon Brooks at QB. He has a career completion % of 100% and a career passer rating of 782.8 and 100% of the passes he's thrown have been touchdowns. If he can even be half that good in our next game, I like our odds.
Click to expand...

I mean we know the previous staff had QB problems s o... maybe they had the next Steve Montana at RB all along?
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Goes both ways. by rotating three backs, you have a better chance of keeping them fresh.

But, on the other hand, some backs do better the more work they get. we've all seen guys who seem to run better in the 4th quarter than the 1st quarter, or are running harder on their 25th carry than they were running on their 2nd or 3rd carry of the game. some backs need a lot of carries to get into the groove.

Ultimately, the coaches need to make that call. they see them in practice every day, and they should know who thrives on a heavier work-load, as opposed to who does better if you limit their carries and they're fresher in the 2nd half.

Or, you just find another Kent Kitzmann and hand him the ball 57 times. Hey, it worked in 1977.
Click to expand...

David Cobb in recent years.

To the second point this is true, but I often wonder with the reduced hitting/tackling in practices, and particularly under the current regime if they're getting as good look at guys as there used to be. Limited live hitting reps.
 

Utilize as many playmakers as you can. I would love to see a two back set and Smith in the slot.
 

WorkingMyTailOff said:
Utilize as many playmakers as you can. I would love to see a two back set and Smith in the slot.
Click to expand...

Yup, with motion. So, many things to defend, decisions to make for the defense. We have the talent to be so effective with this. Absolutely get McCrary more touches.
PJ hinted in his press conference this week he doesn't believe in riding one back for the majority of the carries...so David Cobb would have never happened under PJ and going back in history we would have missed a bowl game. Very impressed we rode Cobb all day in lots of games. He was amazing! Could McCrary be the same thing? For sure he needs more touches and has needed them all season...especially if it's your coaching philosophy anyway?
 

McCrary is the main man. Runs hard, falls forward. Smith on jet sweeps and catching passes. Brooks spelling McCrary; if he gets more than 7 carries, he'll be hurt and miss the next two games.
 

60's Guy said:
Yup, with motion. So, many things to defend, decisions to make for the defense. We have the talent to be so effective with this. Absolutely get McCrary more touches.
PJ hinted in his press conference this week he doesn't believe in riding one back for the majority of the carries...so David Cobb would have never happened under PJ and going back in history we would have missed a bowl game. Very impressed we rode Cobb all day in lots of games. He was amazing! Could McCrary be the same thing? For sure he needs more touches and has needed them all season...especially if it's your coaching philosophy anyway?
Click to expand...

This is a big claim to make. Cobb got the job off of an injury and a chance. Who's to say if he shared touches we wouldn't have had 2 or 3 good backs including him? Maybe we would have even won a few games where Cobb seemed to have difficulty running because the defenses we played would have played differently with 2 RBs on the field at a time. You never know.
 

Word said:
I think the answer is obvious - Shannon Brooks at QB. He has a career completion % of 100% and a career passer rating of 782.8 and 100% of the passes he's thrown have been touchdowns. If he can even be half that good in our next game, I like our odds.
Click to expand...

Word


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Could care less who the starter is. To me you go with the guy that is most effective that day. Against some teams a guy like McCrary is going to work best. Against others it might be Smith or Brooks. The good news is we have three quality options so hopefully at least one of them can take off on any given day. Ride the hot hand and figure out ways to get multiple backs on the field at the same time as they look like our most explosive offensive weapons outside of maybe TJ. Way too much emphasis gets put on who is the starter. Just because a particular back is out there on the first play doesn't mean he has to be the one to get the most carries.
 


A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
I mean we know the previous staff had QB problems s o... maybe they had the next Steve Montana at RB all along?
Click to expand...

This guy?

MV5BMTU0MjI1NjQyNV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMDUyMzI4NzE@._V1_.jpg
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom