Started By
Message
locked post

.

Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:39 am
Posted by DelU249
Austria
Member since Dec 2010
77625 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:39 am
(no message)
This post was edited on 11/10/23 at 5:04 am
Posted by Bama Bird
Member since Dec 2011
Member since Mar 2013
19023 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:40 am to
Turner had gotten to the point where he was 10 carries for 11 yards, and if we were lucky, a run for 20+ yards. Jackson is by far an improvement
Posted by Rickety Cricket
Premium Member
Member since Aug 2007
46883 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:41 am to
Nah, Mike Smith is just an airhead that refused to run the ball more.
Posted by TotesMcGotes
New York, New York
Member since Mar 2009
27872 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:41 am to
Absolutely not. Jackson is definitely a better option out of the backfield right now. Plus, despite what the second to last play would have you believe, he can catch much better than Turner ever could.
Posted by St Augustine
The Pauper of the Surf
Member since Mar 2006
64122 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:42 am to
I think it's the o line. And the fact that he played the best d in the league.
Posted by Michael J Cocks
Right Here
Member since Jun 2007
47153 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:43 am to
Not even close. Unless you consider acquiring a lighter, faster, more versatile threat, a lateral move.
Posted by DelU249
Austria
Member since Dec 2010
77625 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:44 am to
I just did not care when they signed him. I just had the feeling it was a lateral move. Another old RB who won't even get the opportunities anyway because of poor game management.

week 1 makes me feel the same. I think it was a good move in the sense that they were 13-3. They didn't get better, but the move keeps them at the same level.
Posted by beaver
The 755 Club
Member since Sep 2009
46861 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:45 am to
quote:

one big carry for 50


Turner averaged 50 yards per game last year...you can't just start throwing out long runs...especially based on one game...lots of RBs had shitty games...also the offensive line has gotten slightly worse
Posted by DelU249
Austria
Member since Dec 2010
77625 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:45 am to
yes, steven jackson is all of those things, but with running backs the tires can go out at any time, and at best...he doesn't have alot of tread on them.
Posted by beaver
The 755 Club
Member since Sep 2009
46861 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:47 am to
quote:

he doesn't have alot of tread on them


based upon what?
Posted by USMC Gators
Member since Oct 2011
14633 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:49 am to
No.
Posted by DelU249
Austria
Member since Dec 2010
77625 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:49 am to
based on his age and how many carries he has had in his career. He didn't impress anyone on SundaY.
Posted by St Augustine
The Pauper of the Surf
Member since Mar 2006
64122 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:50 am to
quote:

beaver


He made it!
Posted by Chadaristic
Member since Jan 2011
40783 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:51 am to
No
Posted by elprez00
Hammond, LA
Member since Sep 2011
29365 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:53 am to
quote:

Nah, Mike Smith is just an airhead that refused to run the ball more.



quote:

10 carries for 27 yards and then one big carry for 50


With the exception of the one big run, Jackson didn't get much else.
Posted by teke184
Zachary, LA
Member since Jan 2007
94877 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:53 am to
quote:

quote:

he doesn't have alot of tread on them




based upon what?


The average running back tends to last for about 5 years before the tires completely fall off, especially when they've put in a lot of carries in a single season.

He's on his 10th season and already has about 2,400 carries in his career and an additional 400 receptions.
Posted by AlexLSU
Member since Jan 2005
25341 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:53 am to
quote:

10 carries for 27 yards and then one big carry for 50


Why word it this way? You can manipulate any player's stats to make them look better or worse, so why not just say 11 carries for 77 yards?

That 50 yard run in game 1 is a pretty big deal considering Turner didn't have a rush that long all of last season. Also, it's not like it was just an open hole with no one around - Jackson made a couple of good cuts and showed an impressive burst for his age. He also brought in 5 catches for 45 yards, and he'll continue to be a big part of their passing game.

ETA: 1200 rushing yards is an attainable number for Jackson this season and a big upgrade from Turner's 800 yards last year.
This post was edited on 9/10/13 at 10:57 am
Posted by Billy Mays
Member since Jan 2009
25273 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:54 am to
Turner is still a free agent, so Jackson is obviously better.

The Falcons OL is mediocre and the Saints played over their heads on D.

Sjax will be fine.
Posted by Tigertown in ATL
Georgia foothills
Member since Sep 2009
29163 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:55 am to
quote:

And the fact that he played the best d in the league.


Posted by TTsTowel
RIP Bow9den/Coastie
Member since Feb 2010
91642 posts
Posted on 9/10/13 at 10:57 am to
quote:

Not even close. Unless you consider acquiring a lighter, faster, more versatile threat, a lateral move.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram