I know many think we need Canzeri to get more touches at rb but it seems to me he can't lower his head and get one or two if there is no hole. That is what Weismann and L Daniels bring. bullock runs hard and is ok but I think he and Canzeri would be better in the slot and let our two big backs pound the rock. I think Daniels has a burst too but that's only talk. Any other thoughts?
Running back thoughts
- Thread starter clim
- Start date
ibahawkeye
Well-Known Member
I think Weisman may be the most under appreciated back in hawk history. When he has been healthy he's been a beast and puts up 100 + yds per game. I was disappointed to not see Daniels get any touches. I would prefer to see him take the bullock touches.
Tfunkhawkeye
Well-Known Member
I thought #45 was gassed late in the game at times(understandable)
I thought #5 ran with burst into contact late in the game. Something I don't think he showed the first 2 games.
Seriously, I'd like a little more rest for Weisman and a few for Canzeri and Daniels.
I thought #5 ran with burst into contact late in the game. Something I don't think he showed the first 2 games.
Seriously, I'd like a little more rest for Weisman and a few for Canzeri and Daniels.
Need someone who can break one. That isnt Weisman and it isnt Bullock. Canzeri maybe or maybe one of the younger kids. Probably not Daniels either. Not saying Weisman or Daniels shouldnt get a lot of carries, but we need someone who can break one as a change up. Its not Bullock as he doesnt have great quickness or speed and seems to be "tripped" up easily
HawkeyeDenis
Well-Known Member
Canzeri hasn't done a lot to improve his position. He not that hard to bring down. With his size he isn't much of a blocking help. The coaching staff seems to think enough of him to get him in a few plays every game. Same with Bullock.
The few times that Daniels has been in I thought he was a positive impact. Easily more of a threat than Canzeri. If Daniels is a faster Shawn Greene he needs to be getting up to speed quickly. If Weisman goes down, there's going to be a big drop off to Bullock.
The few times that Daniels has been in I thought he was a positive impact. Easily more of a threat than Canzeri. If Daniels is a faster Shawn Greene he needs to be getting up to speed quickly. If Weisman goes down, there's going to be a big drop off to Bullock.
I noticed this as well. Either the coaching staff or a teammate pointed out his tentative running in the first 2 games. Credit goes to #5 for accepting the critique and making himself a better back. Let's hope it continues.
STILLBUSTER
Well-Known Member
Sorry to repeat from the other RB thread but it works here ...
Too often, this staff worries so much about perfecting player technique and all-around development that they overlook (a.k.a. squander) raw talent / power / athleticism by forcing square pegs into round holes. Too often, they worry about what the player can't do, in the general game of football, instead of focusing on what they can do, even if it's a limited skill set or role. The result, a 235# athletic, fast RB, that would perfectly fit your evolving identity of a punishing rushing team and greatly contribute to your team's success via that means, sits idle because he can't master the blitz pick-up. Meanwhile, you continue to use average, yet well-rounded, guys in your rushing game for average / below-average results. But hey, IF we decide to pass, that guy will probably be better at blocking.
How about you let your best RB's run, you let your best blocking RB's pick up the blitz (less and less of a need because your strategy shifts to power-rushing), you let your fastest RB's play in space, etc. Stop worrying about "the tell" and just let those guys that are really good at what they do and are really good at what your strategy says you're going to do, do it in situations that call for it.
Going forward, as Iowa continues (finally) to actually play to it's strength and Badgerfy it's identity -- an overpowering OL followed by enormous RB's that simply pound you into submission -- it would be a complete coaching crock if Daniels doesn't take more and more of Bullock's carries and some of Weisman's. The ONLY reason Daniels should not play more is if he tends to fumble. Otherwise, if Iowa truly plays to it's strength, they will be rushing the ball at least 65% (50 carries) of the time with Weisman and Daniels getting some combination of 40+ of those carries. (Ruddock will probably get 3 or 4 and that leaves a handfull to give to Bullock and Canzeri, for a change-up and taking a shot at a maybe breaking a home run.)
Too often, this staff worries so much about perfecting player technique and all-around development that they overlook (a.k.a. squander) raw talent / power / athleticism by forcing square pegs into round holes. Too often, they worry about what the player can't do, in the general game of football, instead of focusing on what they can do, even if it's a limited skill set or role. The result, a 235# athletic, fast RB, that would perfectly fit your evolving identity of a punishing rushing team and greatly contribute to your team's success via that means, sits idle because he can't master the blitz pick-up. Meanwhile, you continue to use average, yet well-rounded, guys in your rushing game for average / below-average results. But hey, IF we decide to pass, that guy will probably be better at blocking.
How about you let your best RB's run, you let your best blocking RB's pick up the blitz (less and less of a need because your strategy shifts to power-rushing), you let your fastest RB's play in space, etc. Stop worrying about "the tell" and just let those guys that are really good at what they do and are really good at what your strategy says you're going to do, do it in situations that call for it.
Going forward, as Iowa continues (finally) to actually play to it's strength and Badgerfy it's identity -- an overpowering OL followed by enormous RB's that simply pound you into submission -- it would be a complete coaching crock if Daniels doesn't take more and more of Bullock's carries and some of Weisman's. The ONLY reason Daniels should not play more is if he tends to fumble. Otherwise, if Iowa truly plays to it's strength, they will be rushing the ball at least 65% (50 carries) of the time with Weisman and Daniels getting some combination of 40+ of those carries. (Ruddock will probably get 3 or 4 and that leaves a handfull to give to Bullock and Canzeri, for a change-up and taking a shot at a maybe breaking a home run.)
mrolympia
Well-Known Member
weisman needs his carries limited to around 25 per game. this will keep him fresh and healthy all year instead of beaten to a pulp halfway through it. Iowa has 3 other backs should they choose to use them. so far, they've only really used two of them. Ruddock could also get 5 planned QB runs a game as well as the zone read if Iowa even has that in their playbook.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Examples please. I mean besides internet legends, that never even get sniffed by the NFL. I'd like to know all the raw and super athletic players that once unleashed performed in the NFL better than they did at Iowa being shackled.
