355

Turbin worth a look if Bush walks

Note: Meant to post this yesterday before signing off for a week but was derailed by a Southwest Airlines WiFi that was slower then the early days of dial-up . . .

The vibe I’m getting is that the Raiders have zero intention of franchising leading rusher Michael Bush, given their commitment to a normal salary structure and the presence of strong safety Tyvon Branch also as an unrestricted free agent. Coach Dennis Allen has talked up Darren McFadden, which means he’s the feature back, and there’s no way the Raiders commit more than $7 million to a complementary back.

And that’s probably what Bush is. He did an admirable job taking over when McFadden’s mid-foot sprain derailed his season, with one of the best games any Raiders’ running back (Marcus, Bo, Napoleon Kaufman, you name it) has ever had again the San Diego Chargers. While it’s conceivable Bush numbers tailed off toward the end of the season because the Raiders became more predictable or the line wasn’t blocking as well, the fact is it happened.

So maybe it’s possible other teams see this during the free agency period and Bush comes back at a reasonable price if there is no big bounty to be had. Usually, however, one of 31 teams will ante up.

If so, keep the name Robert Turbin in mind. He was the subject of my Monday story in Bay Area News Group papers and is a Bay Area product who has flown under the radar after helping two institutions without much of a reputation for football success into winners. He did it at Fremont’s Irvington High School, a perennial also-ran which won a league title and in consecutive years advanced to the North Coast Section finals and semifinals.

Turbin did it at Utah State, which went 7-6 in his junior year _ the first winning season for the school since 1993. After missing the previous season with a torn ACL, Turbin was the Western Athletic Conference Player of the Year after rushing for 1,517 yards and 19 touchdowns. Check him out on YouTube and you’ll find him leveling some tacklers and breaking into the open field and finishing some long runs as well. He can catch out of the backfield or downfield. He can block, and at 5-foot-10, 220 pounds has been called the best built back in the draft outside of Alabama’s Trent Richardson.

His high school coach, Bob Spain, called coaching Turbin a “once in a lifetime” experience and said, “he’s what happens when genetics meets work ethic.”

Despite his breakaway runs, which indicates he is faster on game day than in a track setup, Turbin’s 40-yard dash time was a concern. It’s not any longer, as he ran a respectable 4.5 flat at the combine. Whether that puts Turbin out of reach for the Raiders remains to be seen. They’ll pick No. 97 at the earliest after supplemental picks are awarded at the NFL owner’s meetings next month.

If Bush moves on, it seems awfully risky to leave their running game in the hands of McFadden and Taiwan Jones, given their recent injury history. As Allen noted, offensive coordinator Greg Knapp has gotten a lot of yards out of a lot of different runners with different styles.

Turbin is confident _ “A lot of people compare me to Marshall Faulk and Steven Jackson” _ without being cocky. He’s engaging and earnest, a player Spain said never took a day off and lifted the play of everyone around him. He was such a devastating defensive player in high school he was the MVAL defensive player of the year as a junior and Spain advised him to take a scholarship offer to Boise State to be a safety. That means he’d probably be a beast on special teams, a role Turbin said he would love.

The NFL is full of mid-round running backs who flourish in the right system. Keep in mind Bush was a fourth-round pick because of a severely broken ankle at Louisville.

Turbin could end up being that kind of story for somebody.

  • Share/Bookmark

Jerry McDonald - NFL Writer

  • Silverandblack666

    “Because, the first two years McFadden averaged only 3.94 yards per carry. That was under the Zone Blocking Scheme that “Any running back can handle” being run by Knapp the 1st year and Cable the 2nd year.

    The next 2 years under the Power scheme run by Hue Jackson and Al Saunders he averaged 5.3 yards per carry.

    What other difference is there?”

    That is easy to answer all you have to do is look at the number of times he got the ball in his hands. Under Hue Jackson (2 years) Hue gave the ball to McFadden more times and in many more situations (passing the ball to him, running the wildcat, trick plays etc.)

    During 2008-2009 McFadden had 217 touches

    During 2010-2011 McFadden had 339 touches

    Pretty easy to answer your question of you look at that one single stat!!

  • Ricochet

    uh huh

  • Gdog

    Please explain in detail what that means. Why is he not as effective in a zone blocking scheme why is he effective in power blocking scheme, show real reasons as to why or why not. lets not just regurgitate what some derelict sports writer is telling you and run with it as there has to be a valid reason to support such theories.
    >>>>

    Yea, I don’t get that either. From what I remember about it when Terrel Davis was tearing up the league.. you run along the LOS until a hole opens up and then you explode through it, which was what TD excelled at.

    Exploding through a hole is what McF was doing so well the last two years… the early part of his career? Not so much. He SHOULD be fine with either…

  • Ricochet

    uh uh

  • Silverandblack666

    “I hope you’re right – but I haven’t seen Knapp adjust recently at all. He’s stuck with what he knew and when he hasn’t had the right personnel to run that system he’s struggled.”

    The main difference is that Cable and Kiffin coached the team and were clueless.

    Dennis Allen will make sure Knapp utilizes his talent correctly this time around where as Cable was clueless.

    This is my opinion of course.

  • RaiderLen

    I’d also add that McFadden IMPROVED from his rookie to 3rd and 4th yrs.

    He doesn’t run upright any longer.

    Because of improved leverage in His running style, and added strength, he breaks tackles that brought Him down in yrs 1 and 2.

  • Ricochet

    sha

  • raiderzmaverick

    Silverandblack666 Says:
    February 27th, 2012 at 1:36 pm

    “Because, the first two years McFadden averaged only 3.94 yards per carry. That was under the Zone Blocking Scheme that “Any running back can handle” being run by Knapp the 1st year and Cable the 2nd year.

    The next 2 years under the Power scheme run by Hue Jackson and Al Saunders he averaged 5.3 yards per carry.

    What other difference is there?”

    That is easy to answer all you have to do is look at the number of times he got the ball in his hands. Under Hue Jackson (2 years) Hue gave the ball to McFadden more times and in many more situations (passing the ball to him, running the wildcat, trick plays etc.)

    During 2008-2009 McFadden had 217 touches

    During 2010-2011 McFadden had 339 touches

    Pretty easy to answer your question of you look at that one single stat!!
    ==================
    If that made sense, than in 2011 it should’ve been Bush’s best YPC average not worst. He got way more touches than any other year, and his YPC was 3.8 last year.

  • Gdog

    Pretty easy to answer your question of you look at that one single stat!!
    >>>>

    Stats CAN lie. McF was hesitant, and easy to tackle his first two years. Everyone noticed how much harder he hit the hole, and how much better leveraged he was lately. He ran too upright before.

    There is no stat for that.

  • YoungAmerican

    lefty12 Says:
    February 27th, 2012 at 1:15 pm

    YA-you seem to blame the players for the terrible management by the previous HC.The problem was no backup plan in case he couldn’t go.The thing to do is formulate a better plan for when and if your lead RB goes down.As you say,you can fill that need with a low rd,undrafted,lowly paid backup.What is wrong with having both?

    —————-

    How do I blame the players? It’s absolutely the coaches. They have to know the kind of players they have on their roster. They have to know that Bush isn’t built to play every offensive snap, nor can he break outside runs. They have to know that Jones and McFadden are injury prone and can’t be relied on.

    The problem is that there’s very little need for a “lead” back in the NFL anymore. Even teams with “elite” players at the position rotate their running backs.

    Unless every other unit on your team is rock solid and you have cap room to burn, there’s no reason to pay a single running back $5 million +.

  • raiderzmaverick

    Silverandblack666 Says:
    February 27th, 2012 at 1:36 pm

    “Because, the first two years McFadden averaged only 3.94 yards per carry. That was under the Zone Blocking Scheme that “Any running back can handle” being run by Knapp the 1st year and Cable the 2nd year.

    The next 2 years under the Power scheme run by Hue Jackson and Al Saunders he averaged 5.3 yards per carry.

    What other difference is there?”

    That is easy to answer all you have to do is look at the number of times he got the ball in his hands. Under Hue Jackson (2 years) Hue gave the ball to McFadden more times and in many more situations (passing the ball to him, running the wildcat, trick plays etc.)

    During 2008-2009 McFadden had 217 touches

    During 2010-2011 McFadden had 339 touches

    Pretty easy to answer your question of you look at that one single stat!!
    =======================================
    Michael Bush –
    2009 123 touches 4.8 YPC
    2010 158 touches 4.1 YPC
    2011 256 touches 3.8 YPC

    So, explain exactly why you think that more touches will equal higher yards per carry?

    The only difference I see between year 1/2 and 3/4 is the system that was implemented. Obviously Bush didn’t respond as well as McFadden to the change in scheme.

  • YoungAmerican

    If that made sense, than in 2011 it should’ve been Bush’s best YPC average not worst. He got way more touches than any other year, and his YPC was 3.8 last year.

    —————-

    Seriously?

    Bush is a way, way different player than McFadden.

  • RaiderLen

    Gdog Says:
    February 27th, 2012 at 1:40 pm
    Pretty easy to answer your question of you look at that one single stat!!
    >>>>

    Stats CAN lie. McF was hesitant, and easy to tackle his first two years. Everyone noticed how much harder he hit the hole, and how much better leveraged he was lately. He ran too upright before.

    There is no stat for that.
    —————–
    Winner Winner….( your’e favorite)……..dinner.

  • raiderzmaverick

    Gdog Says:
    February 27th, 2012 at 1:40 pm

    Pretty easy to answer your question of you look at that one single stat!!
    >>>>

    Stats CAN lie. McF was hesitant, and easy to tackle his first two years. Everyone noticed how much harder he hit the hole, and how much better leveraged he was lately. He ran too upright before.

    There is no stat for that.
    ========================
    Yeah…but WHY was he hesitant? He wasn’t comfortable in the Scheme and the plays.

  • raiderzmaverick

    YoungAmerican Says:
    February 27th, 2012 at 1:42 pm

    If that made sense, than in 2011 it should’ve been Bush’s best YPC average not worst. He got way more touches than any other year, and his YPC was 3.8 last year.

    —————-

    Seriously?

    Bush is a way, way different player than McFadden.
    ===========================
    Exactly. It’s not the number of touches. It is the change in scheme and plays. McFadden did much better under the “Hue/Saunders” Power Blocking scheme than the “Knapp/Cable” Zone Blocking scheme.

    McFadden is a very different player than Bush. The change was for the better for McFadden. Not so much for Bush.

  • Silverandblack666

    “If that made sense, than in 2011 it should’ve been Bush’s best YPC average not worst. He got way more touches than any other year, and his YPC was 3.8 last year.”

    Bush wore down as the season progressed and he is to slow to run outside the tackles. Teams would key on Bush during our last few games and knew that he did not have the speed to get outside so they stacked the middle and that alone had a huge impact on his YPC.

    Now for this:

    “The only difference I see between year 1/2 and 3/4 is the system that was implemented. Obviously Bush didn’t respond as well as McFadden to the change in scheme.”

    Jackson was creative in getting the ball to McFadden much more so than Cable of Kiffin. Think of Wildcat or a trick play or McFadden hitting the edge in obvious passing situations. Bottom line Hue was more creative in how he utilized McFadden

  • raiderzmaverick

    What change aside from scheme would you attribute to McFadden looking so much more comfortable and running so much harder in years 3 and 4?

    He was still hurt a lot in all 4 years. But suddenly he went from a “total bust” to a “top 5 RB”. Believe me, 2 years ago NOONE in here thought that McFadden was good.

  • RaiderLen

    Yeah…but WHY was he hesitant? He wasn’t comfortable in the Scheme and the plays.
    ———————–
    I’ll bet DMAC isn’t hesitant this Season.

    To think that this staff won’t figure out how to use Him is pretty funny.

    Systems are not rigid.

  • raiderzmaverick

    Silverandblack666 Says:
    February 27th, 2012 at 1:46 pm

    “If that made sense, than in 2011 it should’ve been Bush’s best YPC average not worst. He got way more touches than any other year, and his YPC was 3.8 last year.”

    Bush wore down as the season progressed and he is to slow to run outside the tackles. Teams would key on Bush during our last few games and knew that he did not have the speed to get outside so they stacked the middle and that alone had a huge impact on his YPC.

    Now for this:

    “The only difference I see between year 1/2 and 3/4 is the system that was implemented. Obviously Bush didn’t respond as well as McFadden to the change in scheme.”

    Jackson was creative in getting the ball to McFadden much more so than Cable of Kiffin. Think of Wildcat or a trick play or McFadden hitting the edge in obvious passing situations. Bottom line Hue was more creative in how he utilized McFadden
    ==================
    More creative than Knapp you mean?

  • Tired of being impersonated by a TROLL

    http://www.raidernationstation.com

    Sorry but this is the only way I can post now without being impersonated.

    The low life cyber stalking and impersonating me as RAIDER WEAPON X and later as RWX

    Clearly they hate RNS so I know posting or saying anything good about them everytime I post means there is NO WAY el dirt bag will do the same.

    Eat a bowl and live!

  • DutchRaider77

    You guys don’t think that McFadden doing better is there has been improvement in the quality of players on the oline?

  • RaiderLen

    Exactly. It’s not the number of touches. It is the change in scheme and plays. McFadden did much better under the “Hue/Saunders” Power Blocking scheme than the “Knapp/Cable” Zone Blocking scheme.

    McFadden is a very different player than Bush. The change was for the better for McFadden. Not so much for Bush.
    ————————
    In this observation you are leaving out the most critical components.

    DMAC got stronger, and improved his running style, by “running behind” his pads.

    DMAC was a better player primarily because of HIS improvement, not the scheme. imo

  • Silverandblack666

    “Exactly. It’s not the number of touches. It is the change in scheme and plays. McFadden did much better under the “Hue/Saunders” Power Blocking scheme than the “Knapp/Cable” Zone Blocking scheme.”

    I disagree if you look at the offensive total output during the Hue Jackson years and then look at total offensive output during the Cable Kiffin years its night and day.

    Thus any player will have better stats during the Hue Jackson era.

    A good back will excel in any situation look at Barry Sanders did he have an offensive line? Did OJ have an offense NO he was the offense and people get so caught up on scheme, its not the X’s and the O’s its the willies and Joes.

  • YoungAmerican

    Exactly. It’s not the number of touches. It is the change in scheme and plays. McFadden did much better under the “Hue/Saunders” Power Blocking scheme than the “Knapp/Cable” Zone Blocking scheme.

    McFadden is a very different player than Bush. The change was for the better for McFadden. Not so much for Bush.

    —————–

    The point is that Bush is not built to play every offensive snap. He needs to share his carries. Even McFadden shares his carries. The Raiders didn’t bring anyone in to share the load with Bush down the stretch.

    And McFadden has always been a player who benefits from seeing the ball a lot. He’s the kind of back who gets on a roll. He normally starts off slow. Short gains, even a loss here and there, balanced out by a couple 6-8 yard runs. The thing is, McFadden needs to see the ball a lot because eventually he breaks one off. That’s just his style of play. Lots of players are like that.

    The unfortunate thing for McFadden is that he’s not durable enough to see all the carries he needs to be that consistent threat for an entire season.

  • RaiderLen

    Tired Of Being Impersonated By A TROLL Says:
    February 27th, 2012 at 1:48 pm
    http://www.raidernationstation.com

    Sorry but this is the only way I can post now without being impersonated.

    The low life cyber stalking and impersonating me as RAIDER WEAPON X and later as RWX

    Clearly they hate RNS so I know posting or saying anything good about them everytime I post means there is NO WAY el dirt bag will do the same.

    Eat a bowl and live!
    ———————–
    How is it that you get hacked all the time.

    I’m skeptical.

  • Tired of being impersonated by a TROLL

    Hue WAS waaaay more creative with DMC than Cable. Cable was a damb O line coach filling interim after the Kiffin Jamarcus disaster.

    Hues one key to genius was actually asking players and watching highlight reels from their College days and simply recreating that HELLO!!!!!!

    Its called TIM TEBOW now.

    You get some of these “system” guys and they get mad cuz great players aren’t succeeding doing it according to THEIR system.

  • raiderzmaverick

    DutchRaider77 Says:
    February 27th, 2012 at 1:48 pm

    You guys don’t think that McFadden doing better is there has been improvement in the quality of players on the oline?
    =======================
    I would think our o-line was playing better sure. They did seem to do a better job overall after the Cable Era (many people in here were making fun of that).

    I don’t know about quality of players. I think they’re playing better as a unit. The middle and right side is basically the same for a few years.

  • Gdog

    “Knapp said what he liked about DMAC is that He is a one cut runner, and gets North / South fast.

    I agree with that assessment.

    Bush dances more than DMAC for crying out loud.”
    >>>>

    Not only does Bush dance too much, he takes forever to get that massive body going. He’s the WORST player for the ZBS. Which is another reason he will be gone. Fargas got all the carries because he hit the hole pretty well. His problem was AFTER… he’d try to run through people instead of around them. Which is also part of Bush’s problem.

  • raiderzmaverick

    Tired of being impersonated by a TROLL Says:
    February 27th, 2012 at 1:53 pm

    Hue WAS waaaay more creative with DMC than Cable. Cable was a damb O line coach filling interim after the Kiffin Jamarcus disaster.

    Hues one key to genius was actually asking players and watching highlight reels from their College days and simply recreating that HELLO!!!!!!

    Its called TIM TEBOW now.

    You get some of these “system” guys and they get mad cuz great players aren’t succeeding doing it according to THEIR system.
    =============================
    Exactly my point. The biggest weak point of our new coaching staff in my opinion is that exact statement.

    “You get some of these “system” guys and they get mad cuz great players aren’t succeeding doing it according to THEIR system.”

  • Silverandblack666

    More creative than Knapp you mean?

    Let me clarify….Dennis Allen will not let Knapp be the Knapp of old he has higher expectations then Cable of Kiffin.

    IMO Cale was clueless and had to lean on Knapp with a weaker roster and a horrible QB.

    This year Knapp will be a better OC because he has DA to lean on and a roster of better players.

    The O-Line has changed a lot since 2008 so we can all look to that area as well as to why McFadden has gotten better.

  • RaiderLen

    The unfortunate thing for McFadden is that he’s not durable enough to see all the carries he needs to be that consistent threat for an entire season.
    ——————-
    Mcffaden needs a lot of touches. And he should get them.

    Just motion Him out, or line Him up in the slot or out side.

    Put the ball in His hands as often as possible.

  • PurpleDrank81

    Im hoping that if Mychal Kendricks is around when we pick in the 3rd that we defintley pick him up…I mite be biased because Im a Cal fan and I have had the chance to mett him a couple times and chop it up..The kid can play the game very well he had a good workout today and he loves the game of football.

  • Raider Len

    RaiderLen Says:
    February 27th, 2012 at 1:53 pm

    How is it that you get hacked all the time.

    I’m skeptical.

    ——————–

    Hi! I’m now Raider Len.

    I love Raider Nation Station and read it all the time but thats pretty clear by the quality of information and insight I have on the Oakland Raiders.

    http://www.raidernationstation.com/

    Still skeptical?

  • Gdog

    Bush in the ZBS = Lamont Jordan in Knapps offense. It was a disaster.

  • Raider Weapon X

    I am reclaiming Rauider Weapon X as my own.

    If any idiots want to post as me they’ll have to post

    http://www.raidernationstation.com/

    too and say something complimentary.

    Guarantees my authenticity.

  • edward teach

    I have read in here that Bush is somehow a better fit for a ZBS scheme than McFadden, and how DMac is not suited to the new offense.

    Hogwash.

    Bush is not decisive enough to be an effective ZBS runner at this point in his career. Takes way too much time for him to figure out where he’s going. McFadden is an elite running back with a very quick first step; he gets up to speed and hits holes quickly, and makes yards after contact. Any “statistical analysis” of his first couple of years in Oakland with the ZBS is flawed if it doesn’t take into account injuries and Cable’s insistence on playing Fargas first. Elite running backs can thrive just about anywhere, and McFadden will have great success in the new offense barring further health problems. Count on it.

  • raiderzmaverick

    Silverandblack666 Says:
    February 27th, 2012 at 1:51 pm

    “Exactly. It’s not the number of touches. It is the change in scheme and plays. McFadden did much better under the “Hue/Saunders” Power Blocking scheme than the “Knapp/Cable” Zone Blocking scheme.”

    I disagree if you look at the offensive total output during the Hue Jackson years and then look at total offensive output during the Cable Kiffin years its night and day.

    Thus any player will have better stats during the Hue Jackson era.

    A good back will excel in any situation look at Barry Sanders did he have an offensive line? Did OJ have an offense NO he was the offense and people get so caught up on scheme, its not the X’s and the O’s its the willies and Joes.
    =====================
    If it’s not about the X’s and the O’s then why did the Raiders “O” shoot up so much 2 years ago?
    Or the Texans Defense this year?

  • RaidO

    Basically dmac does not like and did not do very well with the zone blocking scheme. Then we have CP who is not a wco qb. Should have let knapp with the texans.

  • Silverandblack666

    “Hogwash.

    Bush is not decisive enough to be an effective ZBS runner at this point in his career. Takes way too much time for him to figure out where he’s going. McFadden is an elite running back with a very quick first step; he gets up to speed and hits holes quickly, and makes yards after contact. Any “statistical analysis” of his first couple of years in Oakland with the ZBS is flawed if it doesn’t take into account injuries and Cable’s insistence on playing Fargas first. Elite running backs can thrive just about anywhere, and McFadden will have great success in the new offense barring further health problems. Count on it”

    Excellent post!!

    I agree 100%

  • Raider Weapon X

    334. Extenuating circumstance with Shell / Eaton who evers terrible O lone. One of the worst ever fielded but yeah, DMCs stats arent horrible under him in 2008 but they are deceiving.

    DMC as Jerry mac pointed out, didn’t flourish until they ditched the Knapp / Cable ZBS

    http://www.raidernationstation.com/

  • Raider Weapon X

    339. DMC was a liability and injured alot. Thats why Fartglass got used so much. DMCs pass protecting was MIA, he was injured and he fumbled too much.

    He has improved into one of the most well rounded RBs in the game but still gets dinged…

    If he can put one together healthy, whoa boy

    Raider nation Station rocks

  • YoungAmerican

    Remember – DMac was injured his rookie season and tried to play through it. Then he continued to struggle with injuries in his sophomore season.

    2010 has been his only healthy season thus far. Very hard to judge how much scheme has to do with any of his success.

  • Silverandblack666

    “If it’s not about the X’s and the O’s then why did the Raiders “O” shoot up so much 2 years ago?
    Or the Texans Defense this year?”

    Darnerius Moore, Jason Campbell, DHB coming of age, McFadden used in a more creative manner, Jared Veldheer made a huge difference as did WIZ.

    The Texans added 4 new starters to their already solid defense last year 2 in the secondary which was their weakness.

    If it was all about scheme like you claim then why have the scouting combine why care about how fast a WR can run or how much a MLB weighs. Hell why even have a draft just get a bunch of scrubs off the street and pay them the minimum salary and use your magical scheme to win a Super Bowl.

  • Raider Weapon X

    edward teach Says:
    February 27th, 2012 at 2:04 pm
    I have read in here that Bush is somehow a better fit for a ZBS scheme than McFadden, and how DMac is not suited to the new offense.

    Hogwash.

    Bush is not decisive enough to be an effective ZBS runner at this point in his career. Takes way too much time for him to figure out where he’s going. McFadden is an elite running back with a very quick first step; he gets up to speed and hits holes quickly, and makes yards after contact. Any “statistical analysis” of his first couple of years in Oakland with the ZBS is flawed if it doesn’t take into account injuries and Cable’s insistence on playing Fargas first. Elite running backs can thrive just about anywhere, and McFadden will have great success in the new offense barring further health problems. Count on it.

    =================

    Bush had solid stats and big games in the ZBS

    RNS rules

  • edward teach

    DMC as Jerry mac pointed out, didn’t flourish until they ditched the Knapp / Cable ZBS

    ********************************************************

    Oversimplification. Look at the game performances during that period, then look at his injuries during the same time frame. Then factor in Cable’s starting Fargas and giving him the bulk of the work, ostensibly because McFadden wasn’t up to speed with blocking assignments and so forth.

    I keep hearing that DMac isn’t a fit with the ZBS, but I have yet to see anyone post a quote from him or anyone else that supports that theory. He to my knowledge has said nothing negative about it, and the professional football coaches in Oakland seem to think he will do fine.

    Another blog wives’ tale bites the dust, as a good many do when subject to scrutiny.

  • raiderzmaverick

    Silverandblack666 Says:
    February 27th, 2012 at 1:55 pm

    More creative than Knapp you mean?

    Let me clarify….Dennis Allen will not let Knapp be the Knapp of old he has higher expectations then Cable of Kiffin.

    IMO Cale was clueless and had to lean on Knapp with a weaker roster and a horrible QB.

    This year Knapp will be a better OC because he has DA to lean on and a roster of better players.

    The O-Line has changed a lot since 2008 so we can all look to that area as well as to why McFadden has gotten better.
    ===============================
    I agree with you – we definitely have better players. I just hope to hell you’re right. A unit can go from looking pretty good to looking crummy with a change of scheme and people not being comfortable.

    Look how much worse our defense looked this year compared to last with the same players.

    Knapp likes to run certain types of offenses. Even if we didn’t have the personnel I think he’d still want to run those offenses. That’s the only thing I’m worried about. Will our offense look as good trying to run these things.

    Will our O-Line be as good switching back to a new scheme again.

    Will DMC play as decisive?

    Will our speed deamon WRs be able to run the precise timed routes?

    Will Palmer be able to be athletic like Knapp says he is and do a lot of throws on the run, boot legs etc?

    I always say if things are going well, don’t change everything. I don’t care if they switch the Defense to a 3-4, or if they change everything. It was horrible. It needs a huge change. But little things in scheme make a huge difference in the success or failure of a player. If that wasn’t the case than DeAngelo Hall (who’s very athletic) would’ve fit in our defense. Hall was a “Bust” in this scheme. He was a probowl player with the Falcons. Aso was a probowl player with us. He was suddenly lost with the Eagles.

    If you try to force an square peg (even a very athletic one) into a round hole it just ain’t gonna work. Thus, my observations about McFadden not being as comfortable in the Zone Blocking Scheme. Aso not being as comfortable in the Zone coverage schemes. And Hall not being as comfortable in the man-to-man full time. And thus suddenly all looking like busts and seeming “out of place, a step behind and lost”

  • DEATHROW 55

    I didn’t see any rbs in this draft that looks as electrifying dmac looked.

  • Marks hair

    Its time to add a d-lineman who can anchor us.

  • Marks hair

    Theres nothing to talk about with dmac. Low trade value, high potential if we play him…

  • Marks hair

    If we let bush go as a FA, we will probably get a compesatory pick at the end of the 3rd.. If we trade dmac we might get a 3rd or 4th rd pick.. Why in the world would you drade dmac for a throw away pick??