glidinghawk
Well-Known Member
Sedrick Shaw needed 796 carries to get 31 rushing TDs.
Weisman has 26 TDs in 499 carries.
Weisman has 26 TDs in 499 carries.
Weisman and KMM watch
- Thread starter guffus
- Start date
DDStretch
Well-Known Member
50 percent of those scores are from the 2 or closer.
From 2010-2012, Mike Tolbert had 26 TDs on 357 carries (A touchdown every 13.7 carries.) Over the same span, Adrian Peterson had 36 TDs on 839 carries (A touchdown every 23.3 carries). Does this mean Mike Tolbert is better than Adrian Peterson, skill-wise as a running back? Or does it just mean Mike Tolbert took advantage of circumstances?
ArvadaHawk
Well-Known Member
The only reason that was true in'12 and '13 is because MW was always hurt, he doesn't have the durability. But he was the predominant back those seasons, so not rushing for 100 yards in B1G contests is a snapshot of his talents as a TB.
DDStretch
Well-Known Member
This could be the biggest problem. A walk-on fullback becomes a running back out of desperation, then is left there for the next two years ... and some fans actually believe this arrangement will allow the Hawkeyes to be offensively competitive in one of the biggest conferences in major college football.
ArvadaHawk
Well-Known Member
Eda
Well-Known Member
Actually I'd say the problem is people don't give the Hebrew Hammer any credit as being an effective back. If there were more certified routes and shots taken, the run game would open up even more.
ArvadaHawk
Well-Known Member
DD, apparently, you, me and others that don't believe MW is a true TB have stumbled onto a MW appreciation thread. We're getting all of the thumbs down. That's alright, the 2015 season will be here soon enough.
DDStretch
Well-Known Member
It's unreal. I don't understand how people can be so blind. I'm all for Mark Weisman running the ball in the 4th quarter when defenses are tired and slower. But, before defenses get worn out, Weisman simply doesn't have the speed or quickness to get into the second level with any frequency or to get through the holes before they close. He isn't a tailback. He's a fullback.
No, no, no. I gave the guy credit for putting together a nice season two years ago and filling in admirably when Iowa was desperate. But, when there are better options, you have to go with them.
Maybe it's just me (na, I know it isn't), but I don't want a running back who has to be a grinder every series of every game. I want a guy who can hit the home run every once in awhile. And, the Iowa Hawkeyes need that guy, too.
No worries. I appreciate it though.
You know what the funny thing is about this whole Mark Weisman debate is though? I've been sitting here thinking for the last week or so, "If Melvin Gordon would have come to Iowa, would he actually be getting carries over Weisman?"
It's just a total mind blow that I'm actually questioning this to myself and I can't say with any certainty what the answer would be.
rollingthunder
Banned
OK genius, who are these mythical better options that we supposedly have?
A
alexzelada
Guest
Weisman has been an inspirational Hawkeye walk-on story. He's had multiple 200+ yard games.
KMM was a pre-season AA special-teamer. Of course Kirk made sure he was removed from that duty.
I will miss both guys.
KMM was a pre-season AA special-teamer. Of course Kirk made sure he was removed from that duty.
I will miss both guys.
DDStretch
Well-Known Member
1st through 3rd quarters? LeShun Daniels, Jonathan Parker, Jordan Canzeri. I haven't seen much of Akrum Wadley or CJ Hilliard so I can't speak to that.
SamBrownlee48
Well-Known Member
What has LeShun Daniels ever done, or even flashed, to say he is a better RB than Weisman? Maybe he will be someday, but he's never shown it so far.
Johnathan Parker is kick ***, but he's still too small and fumble-prone to getting a ton of carries. I agree we should be getting him the ball more throughout the game. But he is not a 20+ carry guy right now.
I've never understood what people see in Canzeri. He's serviceable, but not an upgrade from Mark Weisman. He makes a decent change of pace from Weisman, but beyond that he's nothing special in my mind. I'd actually like to see Parker get more of his carries because then the change of pace becomes more pronounced and I think Parker's a better playmaker.
Weisman obviously has flaws as a RB. But he's reliable and effective. His highlight reel is chock full of badassery as well. He's not going to outrun the 2nd level, but he'll get there, break a few 10-20 yarders, and beat up the secondary while he's doing it. He should be getting more carries a game, because when we are running well with Weisman we are winning games. Like every other tool GD has, he's not being used very well.
DDStretch
Well-Known Member
12-yard touchdown on his first carry of the year? Better speed around the edge? Quicker burst through the hole?
Never said he was a 20+ carry guy, now or maybe ever. But, I do believe he is a 10-12 touch guy right now and a couple of fumbles in his second ever game as a collegiate doesn't scare me away from the potential home run threat that he provides.
I basically agree with you in this paragraph, especially the final sentence. I think Parker is a stud. Love his speed. As for Canzeri, I'm not overly high on him either, but I think he's much more of a big play threat than Weisman, and Iowa desperately needs some sort of a big play threat. Anybody.
We're just going to have to agree to disagree on Weisman. Like I've said before, I appreciate what he did two years ago. Probably one of the studliest things I've seen in college football. It was an admirable job that he did filling a position that he didn't play. But, that's just the thing. He's not a running back. Certainly not a running back that any winning team in a major conference is going to go out and recruit and say, "Yep, that's the guy I want to anchor my running game for the next four years."
Look at it this way. Let's just say the SEC was forced to hold a draft where each team had to select a Big Ten starting running back to become their starting running back. Mark Weisman goes last in that draft. Anyone who doesn't believe that is only kidding themselves.
Eda
Well-Known Member
I'm not gonna belabor points that Sambrownlee touched on but I don't believe Daniels has shown enough of what you are talking about. Believe me... I'm just as excited as you about him, and hopefully it works out with him next year. Obviously this year it's not gonna happen. I also am really excited for what Parker can bring and would like to get him more touches, but we haven't seen enough of him up the middle to know how he'll stand up to the pounding. Hopefully when he gets Doyalized and packs on a little more muscle he'll be more durable. Canzeri durability is also a question mark. Seems he's been nicked up often. But I like his vision and cuts. I don't think he (or any of the other back) can get the yards that Weisman gets (the tough there's no hole there kind of yards), and that's why the Hammer is still getting the reps. I think Weisman will get a ton of carries down the stretch, so brace yourself for the grind it out football.
As for your mock draft... if memory serves, early in the year Jon and Deace ran a scenario on one of the podcast where they ran through all the B1G teams to see if Weisman would start for any teams. I wanna say they had him at least contributing on at least half of them. Take that for what is worth.
DDStretch
Well-Known Member
Starting or contributing? Big difference, in my opinion.
Contributing, but not starting means the Iowa Hawkeyes do not even have one of the ten best running backs in the conference. I'm not satisfied with that.
The fact that we're even discussing it, and the fact that Jon and Deace would dedicate any of their podcast time to questioning whether our starting running back would even start for the rest of the teams in the BIG TEN! is very telling and a HUGE problem in my eyes.
We are 9-3 when Weisman get 20+ carries. That's including 3-2 in terrible 2012 when we had almost no passing game. Even in 2012 I'm sure we beat Indiana and Purdue if he played instead of Bullock.
We are #1 in the Big Ten in 4th down conversions, mostly thanks to Weisman. It's no accident Weisman is approaching the rushing TDs record. He is extremely talented in short yardage and an all around good rb. He really isn't suited for the stretch play though. The coaches could have been more creative there.
We are #1 in the Big Ten in 4th down conversions, mostly thanks to Weisman. It's no accident Weisman is approaching the rushing TDs record. He is extremely talented in short yardage and an all around good rb. He really isn't suited for the stretch play though. The coaches could have been more creative there.
Last edited:
SamBrownlee48
Well-Known Member
It's like you don't know that AIRBHG exists.
Seriously though, the reason for the problem isn't that we aren't playing someone we should (granted that Parker should get more touches), it's that we've lost SOOOOOOOOO much talent at the RB position.
People that should be on the roster:
1. Coker
2. McCall
3. Garmon
4. Johnson
5. Hill
You don't have that kind of attrition and not end up with a top B1G back except outta sheer luck. We are pretty damn lucky to have "found" Weisman all things considered. He came up huge in some big games last year. He's not the best tool, but he is the best tool we have right now.
DDStretch
Well-Known Member
It's like you don't know that AIRBHG exists.
Seriously though, the reason for the problem isn't that we aren't playing someone we should (granted that Parker should get more touches), it's that we've lost SOOOOOOOOO much talent at the RB position.
People that should be on the roster:
1. Coker
2. McCall
3. Garmon
4. Johnson
5. Hill
You don't have that kind of attrition and not end up with a top B1G back except outta sheer luck. We are pretty damn lucky to have "found" Weisman all things considered. He came up huge in some big games last year. He's not the best tool, but he is the best tool we have right now.
Oh, I'm well aware of what we've lost. I especially would have loved to see what McCall could have become at Iowa. Or Coker and Wegher, for that matter, although I believe both would be gone at this point. Right/wrong? Can't remember for sure.
Your point is very well taken though.
I think everyone can admit I've given Mark Weisman some credit, and I have admitted that even I would use him at certain times if I were calling plays for the Hawkeyes. I simply won't apologize for not believing that a guy who came here as a walk-on fullback is the best Iowa can do for a feature back and that his name doesn't belong alongside some of the most dynamic backs to ever wear the black and gold. And, that isn't an indictment of Mark Weisman. It's an indictment of the state of the program in general. We simply don't give anyone else a chance to see if they're a better option so we can potentially move Weisman back to his natural position, where I think he would've been a true beast.
