Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 62

Thread: Running back rotation moving forward

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    West Fargo
    Posts
    12,632

    Default Re: Running back rotation moving forward

    SLIGHTLY OFF-TOPIC..................but
    Really looking forward to seeing Purifoy next year.

  2. #32
    Snowgoose's Avatar
    Snowgoose is offline Senior Member Gets their mail at the West Parking Lot
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Bismarck
    Posts
    1,584

    Default Re: Running back rotation moving forward

    Quote Originally Posted by NDSUstudent View Post
    The offense absolutely needs to get more explosive, that is why Dunn and Anderson are getting carries. King isn't really an explosive runner, he is more of a workhorse. Chase can rumble kind of like Roehl, if he can get into the second level of the defense he is like a runaway freight train but like another poster said he needs a few steps to build up some steam.
    Sorry I have to disagree with you here. Roehl absolutely dominated from day one when the switch was made from fullback and he was significantly bigger than morlock by like 20 pounds if my old memory is correct. No one guy brought him down. Morlock is no Roehl at this point anyway. Roehl was one of the best this program has ever seen (especially for one year) he was just cut short by injuries his senior year.
    If it flies it dies.

    Long for the days of freezing in the south stands of Dacotah Field.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    27,257

    Default Re: Running back rotation moving forward

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowgoose View Post
    Sorry I have to disagree with you here. Roehl absolutely dominated from day one when the switch was made from fullback and he was significantly bigger than morlock by like 20 pounds if my old memory is correct. No one guy brought him down. Morlock is no Roehl at this point anyway. Roehl was one of the best this program has ever seen (especially for one year) he was just cut short by injuries his senior year.
    I only said he was kind of like Roehl, Morlock's running style reminds me a bit of Roehl that is all. If he was Roehl he would be our feature back and he would have gone for 200+ against the Griz.
    NDSU to the FBS always. In all ways.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Borup
    Posts
    21,320

    Default Re: Running back rotation moving forward

    Quote Originally Posted by NDSUstudent View Post
    I only said he was kind of like Roehl, Morlock's running style reminds me a bit of Roehl that is all. If he was Roehl he would be our feature back and he would have gone for 200+ against the Griz.
    U r correct. No comparison. We need to move on and or move Morlock. Time for change.


    Sent from my iPhone.
    Bisonville: Making football coaches out of arm-chair-QB's and jock sniffers for years!
    Today's CAS GASF = ZERO
    RELUCTANT MEMBER of the TOHBTC

    And, don’t believe everything you think—jussayin’.

    Liberals of BV need not respond to my posts. I don’t need to get any more dumb.


  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    West Fargo
    Posts
    7,728

    Default Re: Running back rotation moving forward

    I don't have a problem using the OOC games to come up with a 2 back system that works, but the problem is trying to get all 4 of them in there in the same game prevents any of them getting any rhythm going. They could have gone with combinations of backs like they have in the past with alternating series with the main 1st and 2nd backs with the 3rd coming in occasionally and used the three games to mix those combinations up between the four. Then evaluate. Morlock/Frazier/Dunn, Frazier/Anderson/Morlock, Morlock/Dunn/Frazier. It doesn't need to be complicated, just give guys a chance to get some rhythm and show what they have. There simply isn't enough plays in a game to get everybody to contribute equally. From what I have seen and heard, there is something to really like about all of them, but that doesn't mean all of them need to be playing.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    West Fargo
    Posts
    8,206

    Default Re: Running back rotation moving forward

    For sure the number of reps are limited, which limits the player to improve, IMO.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Fargo, ND
    Posts
    79

    Default Re: Running back rotation moving forward

    They should not have pulled Bruce Anderson's redshirt. With Frazier, Dunn and Morlock we have more than enough talent for this year.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    26,988

    Default Re: Running back rotation moving forward

    Quote Originally Posted by Bison4x View Post
    They should not have pulled Bruce Anderson's redshirt. With Frazier, Dunn and Morlock we have more than enough talent for this year.
    Maybe they needed him for a special teams player?

  9. #39
    wagsabison is offline Senior Member Gets their mail at the West Parking Lot
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    3,126

    Default Re: Running back rotation moving forward

    Quote Originally Posted by EC8CH View Post
    Maybe they needed him for a special teams player?
    That was my first thought too. As a RB it doesn't seem like he's needed, but much like Morlock (when his redshirt was pulled) could be a needed special teams player.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    from trunk of a car
    Posts
    8,592

    Default Re: Running back rotation moving forward

    Quote Originally Posted by EC8CH View Post
    Maybe they needed him for a special teams player?
    Coach said he would be used on special teams and also look to get him the ball in other ways.
    "Sometimes a concept is baffling not because it is profound but because it is wrong" E. O. Wilson

    "I'm not crazy my mother had me tested". Sheldon Cooper

    My boss hates it when I shorten his name to Dick, mainly because his name is Steven.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •