trents wrote:And in the meantime, Carson's taking a lot of hand offs and a lot of pounding because there is not a productive sub to spell him.
But I'm not sure I would agree with your assessment of Penny being a "second tier back." His numbers were quite impressive at SDS and there's that speed. But admittedly, SDS doesn't play against a lot of top tier teams.
NorthHawk wrote:I think the difference between Carson and Penny is pretty simple. Penny needs a seam to burst through while Carson often creates his own. Unfortunately, it means Carson will have a hard time lasting 16 games with that style of running and will have a short career.
idhawkman wrote:I like Penny. He tore up my Boise State Broncos when in college.
I am holding off judgement on Penny for this year until the year is over. One thing is for certain, He's a big back that delivers a punch with speed and most importantly, he's got fresh legs for the home stretch when defenders are all hurting in one way or another...
Not sure how much of a difference running style makes as far as making a player more susceptible to injuries. Beast wasn't anymore injury prone than any other running back, and no one had a more contact intensive running style than he did.
NorthHawk wrote:If you really watched Lynch when he played, he was rarely hit squarely. He was very subtle in traffic.
Carson is a different type of runner. It's almost like he looks for contact. Lynch didn't, but brought the wood if he had to.
There's a reason Carson has never played a full year without injury. I hope he gets through this year cleanly, but I think he's going to have a short career, like most RB's. If I were running the draft for us, I would be looking for another 'hammer' at RB and have Penny as the change of pace back. Maybe we have the next Carson already in Travis Homer, but he's a little smaller than Carson and Penny.
NorthHawk wrote:
If you really watched Lynch when he played, he was rarely hit squarely. He was very subtle in traffic.
Carson is a different type of runner. It's almost like he looks for contact. Lynch didn't, but brought the
wood if he had to.
There's a reason Carson has never played a full year without injury. I hope he gets through this year
cleanly, but I think he's going to have a short career, like most RB's. If I were running the draft for
us, I would be looking for another 'hammer' at RB and have Penny as the change of pace back. Maybe
we have the next Carson already in Travis Homer, but he's a little smaller than Carson and Penny.
NorthHawk wrote:I'm not saying Carson isn't a good RB, but that his career will be short with the punishment he takes (and gives).
jshawaii22 wrote:and soon we'll be having this discussion about LJ Collier. He's rarely active on game day for a team that has major issues at the end position. Ziggy failing and LJ not a choice to replace him... Teams choice to go with a 220lb Griffin. How can a GM who's so damn good in the later rounds be so damn poor at the top?
NorthHawk wrote:I'm not saying Carson isn't a good RB, but that his career will be short with the punishment he takes (and gives).
RiverDog wrote:Very true regarding it being too early to pass judgement on Collier. We haven't even passed the 3/4 mark in his rookie season.
However, considering what we've yielded out of our top picks in recent years, you have to forgive fans for a collective "uh oh, here we go again!" attitude when they see yet another top pick not producing.
Just to be fair, we need to recognize that our much maligned #1 draft pick, Germain Ifedi, is having his best year since joining the team. Even his penalty count is down.
NorthHawk wrote:We can't use the same scale of development for OL like we used to 5 or 10 years ago. For the most part they just don't get the training and development in a pro style Offense. With the exception of a few top players along the OL, most will take a few years to see what they have.
Maybe that's why JS went out and got Brown, Fluker and Iupati (last year it was Sweezy) to fill out the OL. Now that Ifedi has had a few years of proper coaching, he might end up being a decent RT.
RiverDog wrote:
Speaking of defensive end problems, Clowney is questionable tomorrow with a hip injury. If he can't go, it could be a long day for our secondary.
RiverDog wrote:Speaking of defensive end problems, Clowney is questionable tomorrow with a hip injury. If he can't go, it could be a long day for our secondary.
Hawktawk wrote:Yes I had heard that. Questionable usually means he will play but we dont need to lose that big dude. If the defense can bring the energy and aggression they did against the 9ers every week this team could win it all.
RiverDog wrote:I wouldn't hold my breath. Apparently Clowney didn't practice at all this week and Pete says it's going to be a game time decision.
NorthHawk wrote:Maybe not, but they may look at the market and think he’s worth more than what is available. After all they have seen steady improvement and locking up a veteran for 4 or 5 years might be attractive to them.
I’m not so sure that not picking up the 5th year option means a lot. It might have been more of an indication of a Salary Cap in transition than not wanting to extend him. They had to make some tough decisions and this might have been one of them.
NorthHawk wrote:We’re probably going to let Iupati go, or maybe even Fluker (less likely) when Haynes is ready, and Jones looked good at G, so that will impact depth. i doubt they want to go on another years long development project or search after finally stabilizing the line. even average OT’s are hard to get these days, and a good young one even harder.
It’s going to be a hard decision for them this off season.
obiken wrote:We should have won this by a boatload though River. We had so many penalties in the 2nd half, and couldn't put them away. No win is ugly but man, I would pay big money as a fan for our team to have a killer instinct. On to the Cheerleader side of me, I would have never predicted 9-2. SF almost has to win Monday given their schedule.
c_hawkbob wrote:how much we win by is totally irrelevant, unless you're betting the spread.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 42 guests