Hackett on CJ Spiller's Role in the Offense

[microscopes]

Fixed.

 

Tennessee is not losing because Chris Johnson is putting up close to 1,500 yards a season. They're losing because they don't have a QB and their defense has been suspect at times.

 

Teams dont lose because star players get lots of yards.

 

and that year he was top 3 in the league and an MVP candidate

 

You have a serious Freddie obsession.

Edited August 7, 2013 by AvengedSevenfold

[Gugny]

yiu won't hear it from me bud. Love him here. Just hope people realize he's not Fred Jackson of 2010-11 anymore.

I was among the "don't give Fred more money" crowd before he got his raise. I still think it was a bad idea ... however ... I'm not upset that he's on the team. If someone could bottle guts/determination/dedication, Fred Jackson would be the main ingredient.

 

I hope he can stay healthy and I hope Hackett has a way to use both FJ and CJ effectively without burning either out.

 

Tennessee is not losing because Chris Johnson is putting up close to 1,500 yards a season. They're losing because they don't have a QB and their defense has been suspect at times.

 

Teams dont lose because star players get lots of yards.

 

 

Nor do teams win because star players get lots of yards.

[microscopes]

 

Nor do teams win because star players get lots of yards.

 

Well, actually, they do. More yards = more first downs = more points. As long as you have a decent QB and decent defense that is a recipe for winning.

 

Of the top 11 rushing teams last season, 8 of the 11 made then playoffs last season. One of them won the Superbowl. Another one was the opposing team in the SB. That says something.

[K-9]

This is great to hear. Would drive me nuts to see Spiller and his OLine CLEARLY establishing a rhythm, especially early in games, only to see him yanked. When an RB and his line start to see things in games against certain opponents and start "gaming" certain guys on defense, it's fun to watch. Gailey didn't seem to understand this very much.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[mrags]

and that year he was top 3 in the league and an MVP candidate

i get that. But he's 2 years older now. He was 30 then. He's also had 3-4 injuries over the past 3 years that have kept him out of quite a few games or ended his season early.

 

I'm not saying the guy isn't good. Just that we need to keep him fresh and not running the ball 15+ times a game. That and even in his wildest dreams he won't be as good as CJ. CJ is the future. And the future is now.

[C.Biscuit97]

 

AP

CJ

CJ2k

Arian Foster

MJD

Gore

McFadden

Charles

Lynch

Rice

Steven Jackson

Morris

McCoy

Deangelo Williams

Demarco Murray

Ingram

 

 

More than 10 RBs that are all better than FJ. Just saying.

 

I'd take FJax over Murray, Williams, & Ingram and think Morris is a creation of RG3 & the Shanhan system but I get your point. IMO, FJax is the best backup rb in the NFL.

 

And the key here is touches, not carries. RBs who log a lot carries will have short carries. But when you catch the ball as a back, you're in space & take way less punishment. So the ideal situation is to give Spiller about 15 carries & 5 receptions. And 2 or 3 Spiller series to FJax's one.

[mrags]

 

 

I'd take FJax over Murray, Williams, & Ingram and think Morris is a creation of RG3 & the Shanhan system but I get your point. IMO, FJax is the best backup rb in the NFL.

 

And the key here is touches, not carries. RBs who log a lot carries will have short carries. But when you catch the ball as a back, you're in space & take way less punishment. So the ideal situation is to give Spiller about 15 carries & 5 receptions. And 2 or 3 Spiller series to FJax's one.

id take a little more Spiller (mostly catches from what you say 2-3) and a little less Freddy than the 1:3 ratio but yes, I agree.

 

I love FJ on this team and think he will be exactly the perfect backup RB in the league (short of the Carolina situation). But I still think some need to curb their thoughts that he's the back he was 2-3 years ago. Even if he can be situationally (which I believe he can) he still needs to give up touches for CJ. CJ is the future of this team and there is no reason why we shouldn't try and emulate what the Chargers did with LT, the Chiefs with Holmes.

[C.Biscuit97]

id take a little more Spiller (mostly catches from what you say 2-3) and a little less Freddy than the 1:3 ratio but yes, I agree.

 

I love FJ on this team and think he will be exactly the perfect backup RB in the league (short of the Carolina situation). But I still think some need to curb their thoughts that he's the back he was 2-3 years ago. Even if he can be situationally (which I believe he can) he still needs to give up touches for CJ. CJ is the future of this team and there is no reason why we shouldn't try and emulate what the Chargers did with LT, the Chiefs with Holmes.

 

Totally agree. But FJax certainly will play a role this season.

 

Also being down in Charlotte, the Carolina rb situation is so idiotic. They locked up 3 rbs at good money & have zero idea how to use them. The Panthers old GM was awful.

[microscopes]

I'd take FJax over Murray, Williams, & Ingram and think Morris is a creation of RG3 & the Shanhan system but I get your point. IMO, FJax is the best backup rb in the NFL.

 

And the key here is touches, not carries. RBs who log a lot carries will have short carries. But when you catch the ball as a back, you're in space & take way less punishment. So the ideal situation is to give Spiller about 15 carries & 5 receptions. And 2 or 3 Spiller series to FJax's one.

 

Alfred Morris is a very good RB. He is no creation.

[C.Biscuit97]

 

 

Alfred Morris is a very good RB. He is no creation.

 

Hard to tell. Shanhan is a monster at creating rbs. Plus when you have a threat like RG3, it opens up huge holes. IMO, what Jackson & Spiller have done the past few seasons is way more impressive. You have a Qb who doesn't really scramble & can't throw 10 yards & have 2 guys averaging 5+ ypc.

[Dorkington]

yiu won't hear it from me bud. Love him here. Just hope people realize he's not Fred Jackson of 2010-11 anymore.

 

I think it's reasonable to expect that he won't be the Fred Jackson of 2012 either, as long as he's healthy.

[Gugny]

Well, actually, they do. More yards = more first downs = more points. As long as you have a decent QB and decent defense that is a recipe for winning.

 

Of the top 11 rushing teams last season, 8 of the 11 made then playoffs last season. One of them won the Superbowl. Another one was the opposing team in the SB. That says something.

So the fact that you listed those gaudy yards from Chris Johnson ... and I listed the number of wins for each of those years ... and the number of wins was very low ... that tells you that teams with lots of rushing yards win a lot of games?

 

Or are you saying that teams with good QBs, good defenses AND running backs that rush for a lot of yards win a lot of games? Because that's not what you originally claimed.

[Dorkington]

 

So the fact that you listed those gaudy yards from Chris Johnson ... and I listed the number of wins for each of those years ... and the number of wins was very low ... that tells you that teams with lots of rushing yards win a lot of games?

 

Or are you saying that teams with good QBs, good defenses AND running backs that rush for a lot of yards win a lot of games? Because that's not what you originally claimed.

 

I think it's reasonable to argue that a good running game is essential to being successful in the league, as the most successful teams are usually well rounded.

[Gugny]

I think it's reasonable to argue that a good running game is essential to being successful in the league, as the most successful teams are usually well rounded.

I agree. But I think it's unreasonable to argue that a team with a high-yardage-yielding RB will win. It's a no brainer to say that a team with a good QB, defense and running game will win a lot of games.

 

I also think it's worth noting that the O-line is the reason for rushing success more often, than not.

 

Not taking anything away from CJ or FJ, but that line deserves a lot of credit.

[Malazan]

I don't think they necessarily mean he's going to get more carries, but they want him on the field more. You can't leave a linebacker on spiller which means it needs to be a corner or safety. If you put a safety on him then you don't have coverage deep. I think the point is that CJ being on the field creates mismatches and if he's on the field, he can make teams pay if they leave a linebacker on him and helps keep defense honest since he can run and catch.

[Dorkington]

 

I agree. But I think it's unreasonable to argue that a team with a high-yardage-yielding RB will win. It's a no brainer to say that a team with a good QB, defense and running game will win a lot of games.

 

I also think it's worth noting that the O-line is the reason for rushing success more often, than not.

 

Not taking anything away from CJ or FJ, but that line deserves a lot of credit.

 

It's probably unreasonable to assume victory based on one facet of a team, period.

[microscopes]

 

So the fact that you listed those gaudy yards from Chris Johnson ... and I listed the number of wins for each of those years ... and the number of wins was very low ... that tells you that teams with lots of rushing yards win a lot of games?

 

Or are you saying that teams with good QBs, good defenses AND running backs that rush for a lot of yards win a lot of games? Because that's not what you originally claimed.

 

Wow, you're having an incredibly hard time following this conversation. What I'm saying is that a good RB who gains lots of yards NEVER hurts an offense. And as long as his QB and defense isn't awful, you can ride that RB to the playoffs. Just like Minnesota did last season. If you have a RB who gains lots of yardage plus a good QB plus a good defense, you're going to win the Super Bowl. There is a difference between having all those and just not having a QB and Defense that are crappy.

 

Problem is Chris Johnson is Tennessee's only threat and their QB and Defense is crappy.

 

I'm not sure what you're not understanding.

 

I'm also not sure what your point is in general.

[NoSaint]

 

 

Wow, you're having an incredibly hard time following this conversation. What I'm saying is that a good RB who gains lots of yards NEVER hurts an offense. And as long as his QB and defense isn't awful, you can ride that RB to the playoffs. Just like Minnesota did last season. If you have a RB who gains lots of yardage plus a good QB plus a good defense, you're going to win the Super Bowl. There is a difference between having all those and just not having a QB and Defense that are crappy.

 

Problem is Chris Johnson is Tennessee's only threat and their QB and Defense is crappy.

 

I'm not sure what you're not understanding.

 

I'm also not sure what your point is in general.

 

true story - teams that are good at everything tend to win. teams that are bad also tend not to run, as they play from behind.

Edited August 7, 2013 by NoSaint

[Gugny]

Wow, you're having an incredibly hard time following this conversation. What I'm saying is that a good RB who gains lots of yards NEVER hurts an offense. And as long as his QB and defense isn't awful, you can ride that RB to the playoffs. Just like Minnesota did last season. If you have a RB who gains lots of yardage plus a good QB plus a good defense, you're going to win the Super Bowl. There is a difference between having all those and just not having a QB and Defense that are crappy.

 

Problem is Chris Johnson is Tennessee's only threat and their QB and Defense is crappy.

 

I'm not sure what you're not understanding.

 

I'm also not sure what your point is in general.

I assure you I'm having no difficulties following anything you're writing.

[microscopes]

 

 

true story - teams that are good at everything tend to win. teams that are bad also tend not to run, as they play from behind.

 

Absolutely.

 

And also it's silly to say Chris Johnson is the reason Tennessee loses. Or even that Tennessee is better off without him. Or even that a good running game doesn't help a team, no matter how poor the rest of the team is.