Chuba Hubbard......

[Mage]

3 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah but that is how you control the pace of the game, wear them down and break up their rhythm.

Remember when Wilks did this? That should be what a lot of our gameplans against teams like Atlanta look like. They have bad run defense. Punish them for that.

poo, Atlanta wants to pass too but they were smart enough to keep punishing our bad rush defense.

There is no such thing as "controlling the pace" when you are giving up 21+ points in the first half every week.  This situation isn't comparable to what Wilks dealt with in the slightest.  

[t96]

4 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

What abundance do we have at WR??? 

Didn't word that the best but basically an abundance for our situation this season -- depending on how we want to invest in Diontae going forward. If we don't plan to keep Diontae long term there is absolutely zero need for him this year. Also Thielen is not a long term option for us and while I like the guy he's not some amazing leader we need to keep around to change the culture. He is an easy trade candidate. Coker is earning more reps/looks, and Diontae being a guy who wants the ball in his hands every play is impacting Legette's development as he should be getting more opportunity as well. JT Sanders while not a WR should be getting more looks too. Season is already over and it's time to look at the future.

No obviously we don't have an abundance of WR in general and going forward but if we don't plan to keep Diontae we have 2 WRs who we could get good assets for and probably should look at trading. 

[Gapanthersfan]

Chuba 100% deserves to be the feature guy. He now does everything well. Canales needs to scheme ways other than a screen to get him open in space. Defenses only respect Johnson in the passing game now that Thielen is out and we’re seeing things shrink up again. 

Dude is just a stud all around. Never goes down with first contact, impressive acceleration and better than average top end speed. Now that he’s added reliable hands… he’s very underutilized. If I see Sanders come in on another third down… omg why? 

I still think Canales wants accolades in his play calling and actually dislikes running. 

[45catfan]

9 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I disagree with almost all of this. Even at a reduced capacity on the OL, we were gashing them in the running game(5.18 ypc). 

Chuba is a very capable RB. He may not be Barkley but he isn't Miles Sanders, who is basically what you are describing.

Cool, we aren't going to agree all the time.  I'm fine if we re-sign Hubbard to be a backup.  My biggest fear is overpaying a backup to starter money at an already devalued position. If he's here next year, he will be Brooks' backup and should be paid accordingly.

I guess 15-20 carries a game will should suffice until Brooks comes back.  When Brooks finally returns, they should roughly split the carries and go from there.

[kungfoodude]

17 minutes ago, Mage said:

There is no such thing as "controlling the pace" when you are giving up 21+ points in the first half every week.  This situation isn't comparable to what Wilks dealt with in the slightest.  

Except that in yesterday's game we were within 1 score in the 4th quarter. The only point we got the doors blown off was that quarter. Which, that probably looks a lot different if we are running it down their throats in the 2nd half.

11 minutes ago, t96 said:

Didn't word that the best but basically an abundance for our situation this season -- depending on how we want to invest in Diontae going forward. If we don't plan to keep Diontae long term there is absolutely zero need for him this year. Also Thielen is not a long term option for us and while I like the guy he's not some amazing leader we need to keep around to change the culture. He is an easy trade candidate. Coker is earning more reps/looks, and Diontae being a guy who wants the ball in his hands every play is impacting Legette's development as he should be getting more opportunity as well. JT Sanders while not a WR should be getting more looks too. Season is already over and it's time to look at the future.

No obviously we don't have an abundance of WR in general and going forward but if we don't plan to keep Diontae we have 2 WRs who we could get good assets for and probably should look at trading. 

Diontae I would consider moving at above a 4th round pick. IF he isn't interested in staying here(or at a reasonable deal). Outside of that, you just make life very much more difficult for the entire rest of the offense.

AT is likely to have substantially less value than is even worth trading him for. Why take away a useable cog in the offense for a 6th/7th rounder? What purpose would that serve?

I am all for being sellers at the deadline but if all we are doing is making life a lot more difficult on our young players by ramping up the pressure on them and dramatically reducing their reps(a neverending stream of 3rd and outs will do that) then what end does that serve?

[kungfoodude]

3 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Cool, we aren't going to agree all the time.  I'm fine if we re-sign Hubbard to be a backup.  My biggest fear is overpaying a backup to starter money at an already devalued position. If he's here next year, he will be Brooks' backup and should be paid accordingly.

I guess 15-20 carries a game will should suffice until Brooks comes back.  When Brooks finally returns, they should roughly split the carries and go from there.

I would sign Hubbard as a backup, I would sign him as a starter.....IF the price is reasonable.

Brooks I basically view as a Sanders replacement at this point. If he is capable of elevating that role, fine, then you increase his usage.

We are fairly close to not seeing him this year. What do we have left, two weeks?

[Mage]

5 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Except that in yesterday's game we were within 1 score in the 4th quarter. The only point we got the doors blown off was that quarter. Which, that probably looks a lot different if we are running it down their throats in the 2nd half.

I mean, Hubbard ran the ball 18 times.  Sanders had 3 carries.  It isn't like we didn't try to run the ball.  

There is just only so much you can run when your defense lets the other team do whatever they want.  Running the ball more isn't going to make the other teams offense any less effective.  Not against this defense.

[45catfan]

1 minute ago, kungfoodude said:

I would sign Hubbard as a backup, I would sign him as a starter.....IF the price is reasonable.

Brooks I basically view as a Sanders replacement at this point. If he is capable of elevating that role, fine, then you increase his usage.

We are fairly close to not seeing him this year. What do we have left, two weeks?

Yup.  If the season keeps going down the toilet, they may just shelve Brooks for the rest of the season.  No need to risk re-injuring himself in a lost season.  Sanders is gone after this season, so in a sense he's is replacing Sanders.  If the O-line can avoid further serious injury and BC can anchor the center, I think any above average back can get similar production as Hubbard behind that line next season.  Chuba can re-sign here for a decent price or test the market.  I just hope Morgan isn't like Hurney in trying to keep guys in the fold.  If Hurney liked a player, he would overpay them just to keep that guy here.

[NorthTryon]

57 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Depends on the O-line. Seriously, three games ago I would have said 20, but now it's a crap shoot with the OL injuries.  They aren't as dominant.

Also, I'm still lukewarm on Hubbard.  A solid #2 RB, but he's not a #1.  When a hole is there, he can hit it.  He's gotten better at breaking tackles and pass catching, but still isn't stellar at either.  My biggest gripe is his lack of vision and shiftiness...a linear runner who needs defined lanes.

That's the thing for me. He is tough and runs hard when the o-line creates for him as well as not being a fumbler. But certain points in all of our games if you know what you are looking for, you see missed opportunities. Yesterday the line caved down on one particular play, he was one on one with Terrell the CB, and he only got two yards. A better back would have broke that tackle and it would've been off to the races. That is what having a game breaker at RB gives you. Everyone is so used to taking a RB high is a ancient way to run a team narrative, but Bijon ran wild all over us yesterday. Teams are going to start running the ball again as defenses are just small fast and rangy nowadays. That is why Derrick Henry is still doing what he is in Baltimore. 

[Khyber53]

4 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

I mean, we can put a TE back there, another RB, or even another OL. There are ways to get this accomplished but we have to want to do it.

The biggest issue I see is that Canales cares less about designing the most effective gameplan than largely running the scheme the way he wants it.

That could be problematic going forward. It's not that we aren't a decent enough offense in some ways but we sometimes ignore our strengths for long stretches. 

I disagree. 

We've been trying for about five years now to do it with a TE or another RB. We need to get back to smash mouth football and nothing fits the requirements like a classic fullback. We haven't tried to use one since Mike Tolbert and it shows. It has been one part of the softening of this team.

 

[t96]

13 minutes ago, Khyber53 said:

I disagree. 

We've been trying for about five years now to do it with a TE or another RB. We need to get back to smash mouth football and nothing fits the requirements like a classic fullback. We haven't tried to use one since Mike Tolbert and it shows. It has been one part of the softening of this team.

 

we had Alex Armah who actually was pretty solid for a FB these days. It's a dying position and hard to find an elite lead blocking FB; they don't come developed and polished out of college like the old days

[therealmjl]

You have to lock him up. He’s grown into a complete 3 down back and has improved every year.

[CRA]

5 hours ago, t96 said:

I do agree but it’s hard to commit to the run when you know the D is going to allow 30+ points a game

Running eats clocks and limits opportunities….should be a no brainer to commit to the run.  It would help the D to have them on the field less

[CRA]

25 minutes ago, therealmjl said:

You have to lock him up. He’s grown into a complete 3 down back and has improved every year.

We literally just drafted Brooks.  Why would you pay Hubbard. 

drafting cheap RBs on repeat should be the way.  Not paying 2nd contracts.