1K for Walton?

[The Franchise]

I don't think any of our RB's are elite so I don't hold them to elite standards. However, even the elite RB's disappear a couple times throughout a season.

Show me a RB with better numbers than Walton that's NOT playing behind a better O-line.

He's the 3rd ranked RB in the ACC in terms of rushing-yards-per-game while sharing carries with Yearby. Only RB's he's behind are Dalvin Cook (elite & plays behind a 5-star OL) and Matt Dayes (who carries the ball way more than him). He's 4th in the ACC in YPC among guys who have carried the ball over 100 times.

He's made some plays this year that none of our RB's could make on their best day. He may not be elite but some of his best runs this year have been elite plays. That run against FSU that got called back, the screen pass that was blown up against Virginia, the long run he had against Pitt, etc.

The problem is, even with his last 2 big games, his stats vs. the ACC are nothing special. Yes, all RB's don't look as good against stronger opponents, but they still look good. Walton has just looked bad against stronger opponents.

Yearby gained 1,000 yards last year and didn't even make 3rd team ACC. Barring 2 huge games to finish the season, I'd expect the same for Walton.

Walton will get 1,000 yards this year, but I feel the same about it as I do about Yearby's 1,000 last year - which is the fact that they're getting enough carries to get 1,000 yards is a big problem.


Of the Top 13 ACC RB's in ACC games - Walton is 8th in YPG and 10th in YPC


View attachment 40079

I'm a big YPC guy.

I don't think it's fair to compare Walton's YPC to guys who have barely carried the ball all year. Generally the more you carry the ball the further your YPC drops. Can't compare a guy with 94 carries to a guy with 78 or 55.

Cook is cook. He's elite and plays behind an elite OL.
Conner was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Mills plays for GT. My grandma would have good rushing stats in that offense.
Dayes has a terrible YPC.
Mizzell was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Radcliffe plays beside Lamar Jackson. Defenses barely pay attention to him.

See where I'm going?
I don't think stats tell the whole story. Some of those guys have better in-conference numbers than Walton but I think most of us will agree that not all of them are better than him.

He out-performed Hood, Mizzell and Conner in head-to-head battles.

LOL at head to head battles between RBs and outperforming other RBs. Additional LOL at their being a significant impact in ypc between 94 and 78 carries spread over several games.

Do you have a cold? Were you loopy on sizzurp when you made that post? Past your normal bedtime?

You're way too bright to be making such dopey arguments, so I'm going to chalk it up to one of the above-listed reasons and move on.

No, d!ck, I'm simply engaging this dude in a conversation while playing devil's advocate.

How the **** are head-to-head games not relevant? (but conference numbers are)

I'm your best friend on here, and you're calling me a dyck? That hurts.

It's totally irrelevant for a simple reason: They weren't facing the same defense. It's a ridiculous way to compare RBs.

 

[DiegoCane]

I don't think any of our RB's are elite so I don't hold them to elite standards. However, even the elite RB's disappear a couple times throughout a season.

Show me a RB with better numbers than Walton that's NOT playing behind a better O-line.

He's the 3rd ranked RB in the ACC in terms of rushing-yards-per-game while sharing carries with Yearby. Only RB's he's behind are Dalvin Cook (elite & plays behind a 5-star OL) and Matt Dayes (who carries the ball way more than him). He's 4th in the ACC in YPC among guys who have carried the ball over 100 times.

He's made some plays this year that none of our RB's could make on their best day. He may not be elite but some of his best runs this year have been elite plays. That run against FSU that got called back, the screen pass that was blown up against Virginia, the long run he had against Pitt, etc.

The problem is, even with his last 2 big games, his stats vs. the ACC are nothing special. Yes, all RB's don't look as good against stronger opponents, but they still look good. Walton has just looked bad against stronger opponents.

Yearby gained 1,000 yards last year and didn't even make 3rd team ACC. Barring 2 huge games to finish the season, I'd expect the same for Walton.

Walton will get 1,000 yards this year, but I feel the same about it as I do about Yearby's 1,000 last year - which is the fact that they're getting enough carries to get 1,000 yards is a big problem.


Of the Top 13 ACC RB's in ACC games - Walton is 8th in YPG and 10th in YPC


View attachment 40079

I'm a big YPC guy.

I don't think it's fair to compare Walton's YPC to guys who have barely carried the ball all year. Generally the more you carry the ball the further your YPC drops. Can't compare a guy with 94 carries to a guy with 78 or 55.

Cook is cook. He's elite and plays behind an elite OL.
Conner was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Mills plays for GT. My grandma would have good rushing stats in that offense.
Dayes has a terrible YPC.
Mizzell was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Radcliffe plays beside Lamar Jackson. Defenses barely pay attention to him.

See where I'm going?
I don't think stats tell the whole story. Some of those guys have better in-conference numbers than Walton but I think most of us will agree that not all of them are better than him.

He out-performed Hood, Mizzell and Conner in head-to-head battles.

Not fair to compare YPC but you are talking about winning head-to-head battles? You sound ridiculous.

How the fvck does that sound ridiculous? You can't cite RB's that are supposedly better than Walton but not talk about who looked better when they were on the same field together.

And WTF is with you f*ggots not being able to disagree with someone without getting your panties in a bunch?

"You sound ridiculous!"

You sound like a d!ck eater.

You seem to be the one upset.

You claim it isn't fair to compare YPC but its fair to compare a RB vs another RB when they are facing different defenses. Also other factors like game flow, OL, etc.

That's like saying Damien Harris and Bo Scarbrough are better then Fournette because they performed better in the Bama/LSU game.

 

[Coach Macho]

The problem is, even with his last 2 big games, his stats vs. the ACC are nothing special. Yes, all RB's don't look as good against stronger opponents, but they still look good. Walton has just looked bad against stronger opponents.

Yearby gained 1,000 yards last year and didn't even make 3rd team ACC. Barring 2 huge games to finish the season, I'd expect the same for Walton.

Walton will get 1,000 yards this year, but I feel the same about it as I do about Yearby's 1,000 last year - which is the fact that they're getting enough carries to get 1,000 yards is a big problem.


Of the Top 13 ACC RB's in ACC games - Walton is 8th in YPG and 10th in YPC


View attachment 40079

I'm a big YPC guy.

I don't think it's fair to compare Walton's YPC to guys who have barely carried the ball all year. Generally the more you carry the ball the further your YPC drops. Can't compare a guy with 94 carries to a guy with 78 or 55.

Cook is cook. He's elite and plays behind an elite OL.
Conner was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Mills plays for GT. My grandma would have good rushing stats in that offense.
Dayes has a terrible YPC.
Mizzell was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Radcliffe plays beside Lamar Jackson. Defenses barely pay attention to him.

See where I'm going?
I don't think stats tell the whole story. Some of those guys have better in-conference numbers than Walton but I think most of us will agree that not all of them are better than him.

He out-performed Hood, Mizzell and Conner in head-to-head battles.

LOL at head to head battles between RBs and outperforming other RBs. Additional LOL at their being a significant impact in ypc between 94 and 78 carries spread over several games.

Do you have a cold? Were you loopy on sizzurp when you made that post? Past your normal bedtime?

You're way too bright to be making such dopey arguments, so I'm going to chalk it up to one of the above-listed reasons and move on.

No, d!ck, I'm simply engaging this dude in a conversation while playing devil's advocate.

How the **** are head-to-head games not relevant? (but conference numbers are)

I'm your best friend on here, and you're calling me a dyck? That hurts.

It's totally irrelevant for a simple reason: They weren't facing the same defense. It's a ridiculous way to compare RBs.

I wouldn't love you if I didn't call you names.

 

[Coach Macho]

The problem is, even with his last 2 big games, his stats vs. the ACC are nothing special. Yes, all RB's don't look as good against stronger opponents, but they still look good. Walton has just looked bad against stronger opponents.

Yearby gained 1,000 yards last year and didn't even make 3rd team ACC. Barring 2 huge games to finish the season, I'd expect the same for Walton.

Walton will get 1,000 yards this year, but I feel the same about it as I do about Yearby's 1,000 last year - which is the fact that they're getting enough carries to get 1,000 yards is a big problem.


Of the Top 13 ACC RB's in ACC games - Walton is 8th in YPG and 10th in YPC


View attachment 40079

I'm a big YPC guy.

I don't think it's fair to compare Walton's YPC to guys who have barely carried the ball all year. Generally the more you carry the ball the further your YPC drops. Can't compare a guy with 94 carries to a guy with 78 or 55.

Cook is cook. He's elite and plays behind an elite OL.
Conner was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Mills plays for GT. My grandma would have good rushing stats in that offense.
Dayes has a terrible YPC.
Mizzell was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Radcliffe plays beside Lamar Jackson. Defenses barely pay attention to him.

See where I'm going?
I don't think stats tell the whole story. Some of those guys have better in-conference numbers than Walton but I think most of us will agree that not all of them are better than him.

He out-performed Hood, Mizzell and Conner in head-to-head battles.

Not fair to compare YPC but you are talking about winning head-to-head battles? You sound ridiculous.

How the fvck does that sound ridiculous? You can't cite RB's that are supposedly better than Walton but not talk about who looked better when they were on the same field together.

And WTF is with you f*ggots not being able to disagree with someone without getting your panties in a bunch?

"You sound ridiculous!"

You sound like a d!ck eater.

You seem to be the one upset.

You claim it isn't fair to compare YPC but its fair to compare a RB vs another RB when they are facing different defenses. Also other factors like game flow, OL, etc.

That's like saying Damien Harris and Bo Scarbrough are better then Fournette because they performed better in the Bama/LSU game.

All I'm saying is...

You watched the games, right?

Who looked like the best RB on the field?

 

[DiegoCane]

I'm a big YPC guy.

I don't think it's fair to compare Walton's YPC to guys who have barely carried the ball all year. Generally the more you carry the ball the further your YPC drops. Can't compare a guy with 94 carries to a guy with 78 or 55.

Cook is cook. He's elite and plays behind an elite OL.
Conner was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Mills plays for GT. My grandma would have good rushing stats in that offense.
Dayes has a terrible YPC.
Mizzell was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Radcliffe plays beside Lamar Jackson. Defenses barely pay attention to him.

See where I'm going?
I don't think stats tell the whole story. Some of those guys have better in-conference numbers than Walton but I think most of us will agree that not all of them are better than him.

He out-performed Hood, Mizzell and Conner in head-to-head battles.

Not fair to compare YPC but you are talking about winning head-to-head battles? You sound ridiculous.

How the fvck does that sound ridiculous? You can't cite RB's that are supposedly better than Walton but not talk about who looked better when they were on the same field together.

And WTF is with you f*ggots not being able to disagree with someone without getting your panties in a bunch?

"You sound ridiculous!"

You sound like a d!ck eater.

You seem to be the one upset.

You claim it isn't fair to compare YPC but its fair to compare a RB vs another RB when they are facing different defenses. Also other factors like game flow, OL, etc.

That's like saying Damien Harris and Bo Scarbrough are better then Fournette because they performed better in the Bama/LSU game.

All I'm saying is...

You watched the games, right?

Who looked like the best RB on the field?

Last game was the first time Walton ever really impressed me, played very well.

Hope it continues.

 

[bshaw28]

I don't think any of our RB's are elite so I don't hold them to elite standards. However, even the elite RB's disappear a couple times throughout a season.

Show me a RB with better numbers than Walton that's NOT playing behind a better O-line.

He's the 3rd ranked RB in the ACC in terms of rushing-yards-per-game while sharing carries with Yearby. Only RB's he's behind are Dalvin Cook (elite & plays behind a 5-star OL) and Matt Dayes (who carries the ball way more than him). He's 4th in the ACC in YPC among guys who have carried the ball over 100 times.

He's made some plays this year that none of our RB's could make on their best day. He may not be elite but some of his best runs this year have been elite plays. That run against FSU that got called back, the screen pass that was blown up against Virginia, the long run he had against Pitt, etc.

The problem is, even with his last 2 big games, his stats vs. the ACC are nothing special. Yes, all RB's don't look as good against stronger opponents, but they still look good. Walton has just looked bad against stronger opponents.

Yearby gained 1,000 yards last year and didn't even make 3rd team ACC. Barring 2 huge games to finish the season, I'd expect the same for Walton.

Walton will get 1,000 yards this year, but I feel the same about it as I do about Yearby's 1,000 last year - which is the fact that they're getting enough carries to get 1,000 yards is a big problem.


Of the Top 13 ACC RB's in ACC games - Walton is 8th in YPG and 10th in YPC


View attachment 40079

I'm a big YPC guy.

I don't think it's fair to compare Walton's YPC to guys who have barely carried the ball all year. Generally the more you carry the ball the further your YPC drops. Can't compare a guy with 94 carries to a guy with 78 or 55.

Cook is cook. He's elite and plays behind an elite OL.
Conner was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Mills plays for GT. My grandma would have good rushing stats in that offense.
Dayes has a terrible YPC.
Mizzell was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Radcliffe plays beside Lamar Jackson. Defenses barely pay attention to him.

See where I'm going?
I don't think stats tell the whole story. Some of those guys have better in-conference numbers than Walton but I think most of us will agree that not all of them are better than him.

He out-performed Hood, Mizzell and Conner in head-to-head battles.

I agree stats don't tell the whole story, but the stats give you a pretty good idea, and not all of your arguments makes sense:

Cook - different level
Gallman - You left him out, but more carries with a better ypc and 9 TD's to Walton's 3.
Conner - More carries than Walton with a better ypc. Has 8 TD's to Walton's 3.
Radcliffe - Averages 2.5 more in ypc. That's a HUGE difference. Saying defenses barley pay attention to Radcliffe is an exaggeration. With Coley, Richards & Njoku we've got plenty of weapons that open things up for Walton too.
Mills - Totally agree with you
Dayes - Has 120 carries to Walton's 94, so wouldn't be fair to compare ypc, right? And Dayes 4.18 ypc is terrible, but Walton's 4.67 ypc isn't? That guy really has no one else around him. Dayes has to carry their offense
Mizzell - More carries with better ypc, more receiving yards, more overall TD's

In regards to the Head to Head comparisons, wouldn't Yearby vs. Walton be a more fair comparison?

On 39 more carries, Walton only has 121 more yards, averages 1.1 less ypc, and has the same amount of TD's.

Yearby was better in 4 of the 6 ACC games Miami has played. Most ACC teams we've played probably don't think Walton is even the best RB on his own team.

You make very valid points.

Let me ask you this question.

After seeing Conner, Mizzell and Hood on the same field as Walton (and Walton putting up better numbers)...would you still rather have any of those 3 guys?

I'd definitely take Conner & Logan, and probably Mizzell. I wouldn't argue Mizzell is any better than Walton, but I'd argue Conner & Hood are.

It wouldn't be based on one game, though - it's based on their full seasons/careers/games I've seen them play.

Everyone has different tastes and opinions on players, so I respect your opinion and I'm not saying you're wrong, we just disagree. Walton's style just isn't what I'd look for in a RB. Even when the results are good, it just looks ugly to me.

But on the list I posted, IMO:

- RB's I'd definitely take over Walton - Cook, Conner, Gallman, Hood, Logan, Dayes, Yearby

- RB's I don't feel strongly about it, but I'd prefer them over Walton - Radcliffe, McMillan, Mizzell

 

[brock]

Walton may not be a polished back but he's still young. You can't teach what he can do with the ball. Look at the screen play, a lot of backs in college football can't do that. If he improves his vision and his speed then he would be one of the better backs in the country

 

[The Franchise]

I'm a big YPC guy.

I don't think it's fair to compare Walton's YPC to guys who have barely carried the ball all year. Generally the more you carry the ball the further your YPC drops. Can't compare a guy with 94 carries to a guy with 78 or 55.

Cook is cook. He's elite and plays behind an elite OL.
Conner was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Mills plays for GT. My grandma would have good rushing stats in that offense.
Dayes has a terrible YPC.
Mizzell was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Radcliffe plays beside Lamar Jackson. Defenses barely pay attention to him.

See where I'm going?
I don't think stats tell the whole story. Some of those guys have better in-conference numbers than Walton but I think most of us will agree that not all of them are better than him.

He out-performed Hood, Mizzell and Conner in head-to-head battles.

LOL at head to head battles between RBs and outperforming other RBs. Additional LOL at their being a significant impact in ypc between 94 and 78 carries spread over several games.

Do you have a cold? Were you loopy on sizzurp when you made that post? Past your normal bedtime?

You're way too bright to be making such dopey arguments, so I'm going to chalk it up to one of the above-listed reasons and move on.

No, d!ck, I'm simply engaging this dude in a conversation while playing devil's advocate.

How the **** are head-to-head games not relevant? (but conference numbers are)

I'm your best friend on here, and you're calling me a dyck? That hurts.

It's totally irrelevant for a simple reason: They weren't facing the same defense. It's a ridiculous way to compare RBs.

I wouldn't love you if I didn't call you names.

Next time the cops show up at our place on a domestic violence call I'm going to fight them and tell them you're a good man.

 

[MIATL]

I think Walton is very solid. He's not "special" or "elite", but he's the best back we have on the roster, IMO.

He's bigger, faster, and stronger than Yearby. He's better at pass protection, catching, and breaking tackles than Gus is.

I agree with people who say Yearby has better feet and vision. And I agree with people who say Gus has the prototypical size and speed combo.

If you combined the best of Yearby and Gus, you would have an elite back. But individually, I just don't think either is better than Walton.

I'll also throw this out for the guy who listed the conference stats. I get that your opinion is you would take those backs you selected over Walton, but the unanswerable hypothetical is; "What would those guys look like running in Miami's offense, behind Miami's OL?".

To me, Walton is the kind of guy who people on here would be griping about being "a South Florida talent who got away" if he was at Auburn or Arkansas if he had signed with any of those schools.

Instead, we critique the **** out of him because he did sign with Miami and isn't the next McGahee or Duke Johnson.

I think the kid is a player. And I think he cracks 1,000 this week.

 

[bshaw28]

Walton may not be a polished back but he's still young. You can't teach what he can do with the ball. Look at the screen play, a lot of backs in college football can't do that. If he improves his vision and his speed then he would be one of the better backs in the country

I will say Walton's greatest asset is balance, and he's a good receiver.

The UVA screen pass, the long App St. run, the long Pitt run - all 3 were made because the defense assumed he was going down, but he manages to stay on balance after getting hit.

But each of those 3 plays shows things he does I don't like - coming to stops instead of keeping forward momentum, jumping, giving himself up, stiffness, lack of speed. I'd put each play in the "lucky" category vs. seeing something great Walton did to make the runs happen, besides keeping his balance. Just to play devil's advocate - what did Walton do on the UVA screen pass that others RB's can't?

RB, to me, is mostly instinctual. Vision, instincts, speed - you either have them or you don't. I think Walton is a hard worker, and is a "does everything well, nothing great" type RB. But his lack of size, vision, instincts, speed, and athleticism means the ceiling for him to improve is pretty low.

 

[MIATL]

Walton may not be a polished back but he's still young. You can't teach what he can do with the ball. Look at the screen play, a lot of backs in college football can't do that. If he improves his vision and his speed then he would be one of the better backs in the country

I will say Walton's greatest asset is balance, and he's a good receiver.

The UVA screen pass, the long App St. run, the long Pitt run - all 3 were made because the defense assumed he was going down, but he manages to stay on balance after getting hit.

But each of those 3 plays shows things he does I don't like - coming to stops instead of keeping forward momentum, jumping, giving himself up, stiffness, lack of speed. I'd put each play in the "lucky" category vs. seeing something great Walton did to make the runs happen, besides keeping his balance. Just to play devil's advocate - what did Walton do on the UVA screen pass that others RB's can't?

RB, to me, is mostly instinctual. Vision, instincts, speed - you either have them or you don't. I think Walton is a hard worker, and is a "does everything well, nothing great" type RB. But his lack of size, vision, instincts, speed, and athleticism means the ceiling for him to improve is pretty low.

Agree, 100%.

And that may be why people feel so strongly about Yearby being the better/best back, because he is definitely the most instinctive.

But he's also the smallest and slowest RB we have in our top 3.

 

[MiamiVice7]

Not to threadjack, but I was just looking at the cfb stats and noticed that Richards is 4th in the country in yards-per-catch (21.5). Wow.

In the last few weeks I heard he was tops in that category for all freshmen, but I had no idea he was up that high among all players.

 

[bshaw28]

Walton may not be a polished back but he's still young. You can't teach what he can do with the ball. Look at the screen play, a lot of backs in college football can't do that. If he improves his vision and his speed then he would be one of the better backs in the country

I will say Walton's greatest asset is balance, and he's a good receiver.

The UVA screen pass, the long App St. run, the long Pitt run - all 3 were made because the defense assumed he was going down, but he manages to stay on balance after getting hit.

But each of those 3 plays shows things he does I don't like - coming to stops instead of keeping forward momentum, jumping, giving himself up, stiffness, lack of speed. I'd put each play in the "lucky" category vs. seeing something great Walton did to make the runs happen, besides keeping his balance. Just to play devil's advocate - what did Walton do on the UVA screen pass that others RB's can't?

RB, to me, is mostly instinctual. Vision, instincts, speed - you either have them or you don't. I think Walton is a hard worker, and is a "does everything well, nothing great" type RB. But his lack of size, vision, instincts, speed, and athleticism means the ceiling for him to improve is pretty low.

Agree, 100%.

And that may be why people feel so strongly about Yearby being the better/best back, because he is definitely the most instinctive.

But he's also the smallest and slowest RB we have in our top 3.

Walton looks brutally slow to me. To my eye, he's the slowest of the 3.

Maybe I missed it, but is there any testing results that show Walton is faster than Yearby? It would be great if someone could post it if there is

Walton's tested 40 times from when he was a recruit confirms he's slow, slower than Yearby and Gus, and nothing really indicates he's a better athlete.

Nike SPARQ combine rankings from The Opening 2014, topped by Kirk Merritt - SBNation.com


I can't get the pic bigger, but from the ESPN testing:

Walton 40 - 4.68
Yearby 40 - 4.58
Gus 40 - 4.58


Football Recruiting - Mark Walton - Player Profiles - ESPN
Football Recruiting - Joseph Yearby - Player Profiles - ESPN
Football Recruiting - Augustus Edwards - Player Profiles - ESPN

 

[westcoastcanes]

I don't think any of our RB's are elite so I don't hold them to elite standards. However, even the elite RB's disappear a couple times throughout a season.

Show me a RB with better numbers than Walton that's NOT playing behind a better O-line.

He's the 3rd ranked RB in the ACC in terms of rushing-yards-per-game while sharing carries with Yearby. Only RB's he's behind are Dalvin Cook (elite & plays behind a 5-star OL) and Matt Dayes (who carries the ball way more than him). He's 4th in the ACC in YPC among guys who have carried the ball over 100 times.

He's made some plays this year that none of our RB's could make on their best day. He may not be elite but some of his best runs this year have been elite plays. That run against FSU that got called back, the screen pass that was blown up against Virginia, the long run he had against Pitt, etc.

The problem is, even with his last 2 big games, his stats vs. the ACC are nothing special. Yes, all RB's don't look as good against stronger opponents, but they still look good. Walton has just looked bad against stronger opponents.

Yearby gained 1,000 yards last year and didn't even make 3rd team ACC. Barring 2 huge games to finish the season, I'd expect the same for Walton.

Walton will get 1,000 yards this year, but I feel the same about it as I do about Yearby's 1,000 last year - which is the fact that they're getting enough carries to get 1,000 yards is a big problem.


Of the Top 13 ACC RB's in ACC games - Walton is 8th in YPG and 10th in YPC


View attachment 40079

I'm a big YPC guy.

I don't think it's fair to compare Walton's YPC to guys who have barely carried the ball all year. Generally the more you carry the ball the further your YPC drops. Can't compare a guy with 94 carries to a guy with 78 or 55.

Cook is cook. He's elite and plays behind an elite OL.
Conner was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Mills plays for GT. My grandma would have good rushing stats in that offense.
Dayes has a terrible YPC.
Mizzell was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Radcliffe plays beside Lamar Jackson. Defenses barely pay attention to him.

See where I'm going?
I don't think stats tell the whole story. Some of those guys have better in-conference numbers than Walton but I think most of us will agree that not all of them are better than him.

He out-performed Hood, Mizzell and Conner in head-to-head battles.

LOL at head to head battles between RBs and outperforming other RBs. Additional LOL at their being a significant impact in ypc between 94 and 78 carries spread over several games.

Do you have a cold? Were you loopy on sizzurp when you made that post? Past your normal bedtime?

You're way too bright to be making such dopey arguments, so I'm going to chalk it up to one of the above-listed reasons and move on.

Also, lol at not comparing stats on guys with less carries, but comparing him to guys with more.

His whole post was an embarrassment. He needs to be band again.

 

[MIATL]

Weight gain does interesting things to speed. With some guys, they get bigger and get slower. Others get bigger and get faster.

My eyes tell me Walton is the faster guy. Just looks like he covers more ground when he opens up.

Yearby has a short stride, which means he has to have quick leg turnover to cover ground. So, when he's moving ... he does "look fast". But when I look at his stride length, it just doesn't look like he covers much ground.

I haven't seen any recent numbers for the guys, so I could be wrong. Maybe Yearby does/will test better in the 40.

And FWIW, I'm not trying to dump on the kid. I just think the coaches are right with the RB depth chart.

Also ... I appreciate the thoroughness of your responses. Solid posts.

Walton may not be a polished back but he's still young. You can't teach what he can do with the ball. Look at the screen play, a lot of backs in college football can't do that. If he improves his vision and his speed then he would be one of the better backs in the country

I will say Walton's greatest asset is balance, and he's a good receiver.

The UVA screen pass, the long App St. run, the long Pitt run - all 3 were made because the defense assumed he was going down, but he manages to stay on balance after getting hit.

But each of those 3 plays shows things he does I don't like - coming to stops instead of keeping forward momentum, jumping, giving himself up, stiffness, lack of speed. I'd put each play in the "lucky" category vs. seeing something great Walton did to make the runs happen, besides keeping his balance. Just to play devil's advocate - what did Walton do on the UVA screen pass that others RB's can't?

RB, to me, is mostly instinctual. Vision, instincts, speed - you either have them or you don't. I think Walton is a hard worker, and is a "does everything well, nothing great" type RB. But his lack of size, vision, instincts, speed, and athleticism means the ceiling for him to improve is pretty low.

Agree, 100%.

And that may be why people feel so strongly about Yearby being the better/best back, because he is definitely the most instinctive.

But he's also the smallest and slowest RB we have in our top 3.

Walton looks brutally slow to me. To my eye, he's the slowest of the 3.

Maybe I missed it, but is there any testing results that show Walton is faster than Yearby? It would be great if someone could post it if there is

Walton's tested 40 times from when he was a recruit confirms he's slow, slower than Yearby and Gus, and nothing really indicates he's a better athlete.

Nike SPARQ combine rankings from The Opening 2014, topped by Kirk Merritt - SBNation.com


I can't get the pic bigger, but from the ESPN testing:

Walton 40 - 4.68
Yearby 40 - 4.58
Gus 40 - 4.58


Football Recruiting - Mark Walton - Player Profiles - ESPN
Football Recruiting - Joseph Yearby - Player Profiles - ESPN
Football Recruiting - Augustus Edwards - Player Profiles - ESPN

 

[Coach Macho]

I don't think any of our RB's are elite so I don't hold them to elite standards. However, even the elite RB's disappear a couple times throughout a season.

Show me a RB with better numbers than Walton that's NOT playing behind a better O-line.

He's the 3rd ranked RB in the ACC in terms of rushing-yards-per-game while sharing carries with Yearby. Only RB's he's behind are Dalvin Cook (elite & plays behind a 5-star OL) and Matt Dayes (who carries the ball way more than him). He's 4th in the ACC in YPC among guys who have carried the ball over 100 times.

He's made some plays this year that none of our RB's could make on their best day. He may not be elite but some of his best runs this year have been elite plays. That run against FSU that got called back, the screen pass that was blown up against Virginia, the long run he had against Pitt, etc.

The problem is, even with his last 2 big games, his stats vs. the ACC are nothing special. Yes, all RB's don't look as good against stronger opponents, but they still look good. Walton has just looked bad against stronger opponents.

Yearby gained 1,000 yards last year and didn't even make 3rd team ACC. Barring 2 huge games to finish the season, I'd expect the same for Walton.

Walton will get 1,000 yards this year, but I feel the same about it as I do about Yearby's 1,000 last year - which is the fact that they're getting enough carries to get 1,000 yards is a big problem.


Of the Top 13 ACC RB's in ACC games - Walton is 8th in YPG and 10th in YPC


View attachment 40079

I'm a big YPC guy.

I don't think it's fair to compare Walton's YPC to guys who have barely carried the ball all year. Generally the more you carry the ball the further your YPC drops. Can't compare a guy with 94 carries to a guy with 78 or 55.

Cook is cook. He's elite and plays behind an elite OL.
Conner was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Mills plays for GT. My grandma would have good rushing stats in that offense.
Dayes has a terrible YPC.
Mizzell was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Radcliffe plays beside Lamar Jackson. Defenses barely pay attention to him.

See where I'm going?
I don't think stats tell the whole story. Some of those guys have better in-conference numbers than Walton but I think most of us will agree that not all of them are better than him.

He out-performed Hood, Mizzell and Conner in head-to-head battles.

LOL at head to head battles between RBs and outperforming other RBs. Additional LOL at their being a significant impact in ypc between 94 and 78 carries spread over several games.

Do you have a cold? Were you loopy on sizzurp when you made that post? Past your normal bedtime?

You're way too bright to be making such dopey arguments, so I'm going to chalk it up to one of the above-listed reasons and move on.

Also, lol at not comparing stats on guys with less carries, but comparing him to guys with more.

His whole post was an embarrassment. He needs to be band again.

And you need to stand in front of my right hook.

 

[Cane Dynasty]

The problem is, even with his last 2 big games, his stats vs. the ACC are nothing special. Yes, all RB's don't look as good against stronger opponents, but they still look good. Walton has just looked bad against stronger opponents.

Yearby gained 1,000 yards last year and didn't even make 3rd team ACC. Barring 2 huge games to finish the season, I'd expect the same for Walton.

Walton will get 1,000 yards this year, but I feel the same about it as I do about Yearby's 1,000 last year - which is the fact that they're getting enough carries to get 1,000 yards is a big problem.


Of the Top 13 ACC RB's in ACC games - Walton is 8th in YPG and 10th in YPC


View attachment 40079

I'm a big YPC guy.

I don't think it's fair to compare Walton's YPC to guys who have barely carried the ball all year. Generally the more you carry the ball the further your YPC drops. Can't compare a guy with 94 carries to a guy with 78 or 55.

Cook is cook. He's elite and plays behind an elite OL.
Conner was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Mills plays for GT. My grandma would have good rushing stats in that offense.
Dayes has a terrible YPC.
Mizzell was out-performed when he was on the same field as Walton.
Radcliffe plays beside Lamar Jackson. Defenses barely pay attention to him.

See where I'm going?
I don't think stats tell the whole story. Some of those guys have better in-conference numbers than Walton but I think most of us will agree that not all of them are better than him.

He out-performed Hood, Mizzell and Conner in head-to-head battles.

LOL at head to head battles between RBs and outperforming other RBs. Additional LOL at their being a significant impact in ypc between 94 and 78 carries spread over several games.

Do you have a cold? Were you loopy on sizzurp when you made that post? Past your normal bedtime?

You're way too bright to be making such dopey arguments, so I'm going to chalk it up to one of the above-listed reasons and move on.

No, d!ck, I'm simply engaging this dude in a conversation while playing devil's advocate.

How the **** are head-to-head games not relevant? (but conference numbers are)

I'm your best friend on here, and you're calling me a dyck? That hurts.

It's totally irrelevant for a simple reason: They weren't facing the same defense. It's a ridiculous way to compare RBs.

Now I'm really butthurt! I called dibs on Coach Macho's best friend position years ago!

 

[bshaw28]

Weight gain does interesting things to speed. With some guys, they get bigger and get slower. Others get bigger and get faster.

My eyes tell me Walton is the faster guy. Just looks like he covers more ground when he opens up.

Yearby has a short stride, which means he has to have quick leg turnover to cover ground. So, when he's moving ... he does "look fast". But when I look at his stride length, it just doesn't look like he covers much ground.

I haven't seen any recent numbers for the guys, so I could be wrong. Maybe Yearby does/will test better in the 40.

And FWIW, I'm not trying to dump on the kid. I just think the coaches are right with the RB depth chart.

Also ... I appreciate the thoroughness of your responses. Solid posts.

Walton may not be a polished back but he's still young. You can't teach what he can do with the ball. Look at the screen play, a lot of backs in college football can't do that. If he improves his vision and his speed then he would be one of the better backs in the country

I will say Walton's greatest asset is balance, and he's a good receiver.

The UVA screen pass, the long App St. run, the long Pitt run - all 3 were made because the defense assumed he was going down, but he manages to stay on balance after getting hit.

But each of those 3 plays shows things he does I don't like - coming to stops instead of keeping forward momentum, jumping, giving himself up, stiffness, lack of speed. I'd put each play in the "lucky" category vs. seeing something great Walton did to make the runs happen, besides keeping his balance. Just to play devil's advocate - what did Walton do on the UVA screen pass that others RB's can't?

RB, to me, is mostly instinctual. Vision, instincts, speed - you either have them or you don't. I think Walton is a hard worker, and is a "does everything well, nothing great" type RB. But his lack of size, vision, instincts, speed, and athleticism means the ceiling for him to improve is pretty low.

Agree, 100%.

And that may be why people feel so strongly about Yearby being the better/best back, because he is definitely the most instinctive.

But he's also the smallest and slowest RB we have in our top 3.

Walton looks brutally slow to me. To my eye, he's the slowest of the 3.

Maybe I missed it, but is there any testing results that show Walton is faster than Yearby? It would be great if someone could post it if there is

Walton's tested 40 times from when he was a recruit confirms he's slow, slower than Yearby and Gus, and nothing really indicates he's a better athlete.

Nike SPARQ combine rankings from The Opening 2014, topped by Kirk Merritt - SBNation.com


I can't get the pic bigger, but from the ESPN testing:

Walton 40 - 4.68
Yearby 40 - 4.58
Gus 40 - 4.58


Football Recruiting - Mark Walton - Player Profiles - ESPN
Football Recruiting - Joseph Yearby - Player Profiles - ESPN
Football Recruiting - Augustus Edwards - Player Profiles - ESPN

I totally agree that weight gain sometimes helps, but sometimes hurts your speed.

No matter who is faster between Yearby & Walton - it's probably a minimal difference. Neither have very much speed. But the popular posts seem to be "Yearby is slow, Walton is a great athlete" when I don't see anything that indicates Walton is fast or a great athlete.

I think on their best days they run in the mid 4.5's, but are more likely high 4.5 to low 4.6 guys.

 

[MIATL]

Walton got his 1,000 yard season. Kid is a player, and is only going to get better.

 

[Saviorcane]

He is becoming more patient and physical he has improved throughout the year.