🚀 go-pugleaf

Ptacek (ptac@iag.net) wrote:
: mfester@pge.com (Michael Fester) writes:
: > jaymar (jaymar@discover-net.net) wrote:

: > : >That's funny, because one of the things that was harped on before the
: > : >NFCCG was that Green Bay *did* have a running game  - how was it put,
: > : >a 1,000 yard rusher in a passing offense?  Sure, he's no Emmitt Smith,
: > : >but the claims were that Bennett was the threat to run that GB needed
: > : >to keep the passing game going, and his 1,000 yards was proof of his
: > : >ability.

: > : >Are you saying now that a 1,000 rusher is not that big a deal?

: > : Of course--especially when the rusher averaged less than 4 yards a carry.

: > It should be noted that, of the 1,000 yard rushers in the NFC, only *3* had
: > a greater than 4 yds/carry average.


: Rickey waters had a rushing average of less than 4 yards per carry during his
: Superbowl year with the 49ers. (230 attempts for 877 yards..3.7 avg).

Yep, one reason I think he was vastly overrated.

: You can not judge a back in this type of offense by his average alone.
: I would not give up Edgar's excellant reception ability and his ability to run
: on that shoddy surface at home for a back that gains .5 more yards a carry, unless
: that back could also catch and have sure footing up in GB.

I would take Edgar over Waters as well; he picks up the blitz, runs both the
downfield and the outlet pattern well, is a solid lead blocker, and has no
real fear. He quietly goes about doing a very good job. If he had Waters'
speed, he'd be in the Sanders category as a runner.

The point of the previous post was simply to show that MOST backs in the
NFC are not as imposing as people think.

Mike