Hookem72 Posted 48 minutes ago Posted 48 minutes ago 2 minutes ago, Alex Butler said: Which of these would’ve been better behind our line? What do we give up to get them? All of them Quote
SchoolColors Posted 47 minutes ago Posted 47 minutes ago 3 minutes ago, Alex Butler said: Which of these would’ve been better behind our line? What do we give up to get them? I believe any of those 5 would have performed better behind this OL that what we currently have. Quote
Alex Butler Posted 46 minutes ago Posted 46 minutes ago Just now, SchoolColors said: I believe any of those 5 would have performed better behind this OL that what we currently have. Maybe, maybe not. Quote
SchoolColors Posted 39 minutes ago Posted 39 minutes ago 3 minutes ago, Alex Butler said: Maybe, maybe not. Rush TDs By RBs this season Lacy 19 Hardy 15 Haynes 10 Donaldson 10 Parker 6 Texas Football 5, 1 of those is already in the transfer portal Quote
AusMOJO Posted 27 minutes ago Posted 27 minutes ago (edited) 1 RB 2-3 IOL 1 DT/NT 1 Edge or LB 1 CB 1-2 S 1 K 1 P Edited 26 minutes ago by AusMOJO Quote
Alex Butler Posted 16 minutes ago Posted 16 minutes ago 17 minutes ago, SchoolColors said: Rush TDs By RBs this season Lacy 19 Hardy 15 Haynes 10 Donaldson 10 Parker 6 Texas Football 5, 1 of those is already in the transfer portal Ok, we’re not comparing apples to apples. Different teams, different lines, different skill players, different QB, different opponents, different scheme, and different play callers. Not to mention ton which of these guys would’ve really been interested in coming into a RB room already crowded with a team leader, program guy, 1000 yard back, and. 5 star coming back strong (we were told) from an injury. Not to mention the requirements of backs in this offense also knowing they weren’t ever going to be the guy. That title always will be Arch’s. Let’s deal in what we have not what might could have happened if. My guess is those guys would’ve played poorly too then y’all would be complaining how much we spent on a back we didn’t need and can’t use and we should’ve spent it on a receiver or defensive tackle. Quote
SchoolColors Posted 14 minutes ago Posted 14 minutes ago 1 minute ago, Alex Butler said: Ok, we’re not comparing apples to apples. Different teams, different lines, different skill players, different QB, different opponents, different scheme, and different play callers. Not to mention ton which of these guys would’ve really been interested in coming into a RB room already crowded with a team leader, program guy, 1000 yard back, and. 5 star coming back strong (we were told) from an injury. Not to mention the requirements of backs in this offense also knowing they weren’t ever going to be the guy. That title always will be Arch’s. Let’s deal in what we have not what might could have happened if. My guess is those guys would’ve played poorly too then y’all would be complaining how much we spent on a back we didn’t need and can’t use and we should’ve spent it on a receiver or defensive tackle. Better backs would net better results, period. By your theory Bijan would be terrible behind this line. Quote
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.