Who should get the Heisman?

Hugh Green was a finalist I dont remember where he finished. He played on some great Pitt teams.

quote:

Originally posted by ClevelandDad:
I don't see Gerhart as having next level ability.

HUH??? Gerhart and Ingram were both outstanding college runners yet Gerhart gets compared to Tommy Vardell(an NFL bust) simply because they both went to Stanford(????) and Ingram gets compared to the leading rusher in NFL history(???). Gimme a break.

If you could be objective you would know that both runners have enough talent to excel at the next level.

Trust me you were not objective in your conclusion. Just like the USC coach who wanted to make Gerhart a linebacker if he went to USC.

quote:

Originally posted by Tx-Husker:
Very true...another Husker.

They used to have the rosters for the Saturday afternoon games in TV Guide. Buster Rhymes, Major Oglive, David Humm, Happy Feller... and I'll never forget the name 'Tommy Turnipseed'.

Which one of those Big 12 teams did he play for?
(they might have been the Big 8, back then)

How about Ray Rice out of Rutgers? Did anyone see this coming? The guy is a stud in the NFL already. I think Gerhart is every bit the player Rice was coming out of college.

quote:

Originally posted by Dear old Dad:

quote:

Originally posted by ClevelandDad:
I don't see Gerhart as having next level ability.

HUH??? Gerhart and Ingram were both outstanding college runners yet Gerhart gets compared to Tommy Vardell(an NFL bust) simply because they both went to Stanford(????) and Ingram gets compared to the leading rusher in NFL history(???). Gimme a break.

If you could be objective you would know that both runners have enough talent to excel at the next level.

Trust me you were not objective in your conclusion. Just like the USC coach who wanted to make Gerhart a linebacker if he went to USC.

Dear old Dad,
I could not agree with you more.
What are we to believe, Harbaugh is the best coach ever, or he has players with talent?
Gerhart is the kind of player posters rave about on this site. Huge heart, tough, never gives up, plays hard every down, unselfish, team guy, blue collar.
I guess his issue is he is that way in football?
By everyone who knows him, he is a terrific young man. He takes 21 units, leads the nation in rushing and TD's, leads his team from nowhere over Oregon, which will get everyone's attention in the Rose Bowl, and there are posts criticizing him???
I thought this site did not allow criticism of college players, but maybe Gerhart got some dispensation. Not sure why.
He is a player and person you want on your team.
As far as I am concerned, criticism of Gerhart is ridiculous. But, just like baseball, some find all the things they think a player cannot do, without giving him credit for all the things many posters on this site love...heart.
BTW, how do we think he might have done running behind the Bama line?

quote:

Originally posted by Coach_May:
How about Ray Rice out of Rutgers? Did anyone see this coming? The guy is a stud in the NFL already. I think Gerhart is every bit the player Rice was coming out of college.

They were very different runners in college. I watched Rice a lot since the Rutgers turnaround was a big regional story. Rice is much quicker and can get outside. The player Gerhart is being compared to in terms of pro potential is Rice's running mate Brian Leonard. Leonard was a between the tackles guy who was good in the flat on the screen pass. Leonard went in the second round, was cut after two years and is on his second team.

quote:

Typical east coast bias with Gerhart coming in 2nd.

Stanford wasn't on the broadcast radar screen early in the season. How many of their games started at 10pm Eastern time? It's not bias. It's lack of exposure.

Quickness is a big a factor for NFL running back success as speed. Running backs don't have to be the fastests guys on the field but some of the really goods ones are extremely quick. ie Rice, Westbrook, Tomlinson, Dunn. Not sure Gerhart has that type of quickness. Cutting and hitting holes in a flash are what seem to separate the great ones.

RJM I thought of Leonard also when I saw Gerhart, although I think Gerhart might be a stronger runner.

I don't get this east coast bias thing. Who has got more press than USC a few years ago with Reggie Bush, Matt Lineart and Pete Carroll.
Didn't Bush and Lineart both win Heismans. Lineart can't get on the field and Bush is a part time running back now.

According to what has been written out here, Gerhart told told his coach not to hype him and wanted to do it on his ability. I think that people look at him as not big enough (height) to be an NFL running back, by today's standard, but if you watch him he bowls over LB's and DB's by lowering his body and massive leg drive.
He reminds me of of old school running backs or fullbacks Like Czonka.

quote:

if you watch him he bowls over LB's and DB's by lowering his body and massive leg drive.

Most of the linebackers and defensive backs he's running over in college will not be playing in the NFL. A lot of great college players don't have the tools to succeed or excel in the NFL. It's just like every other college to pro sport. The funnel gets very narrow.

quote:

Originally posted by Tooldforthis:
According to what has been written out here, Gerhart told told his coach not to hype him and wanted to do it on his ability. I think that people look at him as not big enough (height) to be an NFL running back, by today's standard, but if you watch him he bowls over LB's and DB's by lowering his body and massive leg drive.
He reminds me of of old school running backs or fullbacks Like Czonka.

I agree with that - if he is as good as Czonka then he is one heck of a player.

Dear Old Dad - what makes your opinion any more objective than mine? In fact, why can't you just state your opinion without attacking mine? All opinions are subjective in some sense so I don't really understand your argument that yours is somehow based on "objectivty."

http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/2009/.../fbs_9games_cumm.pdf

The above is a link on strength of schedule. Alabama is ranked #2 and Stanford is #81. Maybe Stanford's offensive line is not as good as Alabama but I believe Alabama played against better defenses and I believe the defensive stats would objectively support my view. Notably they beat the defending National Champions and #4 Florida in the SEC title game and Ingram shined in that game.

Another poster in this thread noted that defense was not a strength of the Pac10 this year and I have to agree with him. I watched Oregon and Oregon State in the Pac10 championship game and I am not sure I saw any defense played in that game. Granted, those are both fine offensive teams but I don't believe Pac10 defenses are anything even remotely close to an NFL defense which brings me to my original point. Gerhart reminds me of Tommy Vardell who I saw up close and personal in the NFL. Making that comparison is no put down on Gerhart or "criticism" as 99% of all college players do not go on to the NFL. Moreover, Vardell was a first round draft choice. I think Gerhart looks like a great college player, with lots of heart, who can sometimes bowl Pac10 players over and often times break tackles from Pac10 players. I don't believe his ability translates to the NFL however. I guess we'll see what the NFL scouts think in April.

Maybe the USC coach was right in his "subjective" opinion that Gerhart had a better future as a linebacker.

We were really pulling for Toby to win the Heisman. Not only that, but I think he actually deserved it. However, the guy they picked also deserved it.

Why would he be considered too small for the NFL? I'm not sure that most people know how fast he is. I'm guessing he will really standout at the combines.

Maybe this is why we like him so much...
Toby Gerhart

quote:

Originally posted by RJM:

quote:

if you watch him he bowls over LB's and DB's by lowering his body and massive leg drive.

Most of the linebackers and defensive backs he's running over in college will not be playing in the NFL. A lot of great college players don't have the tools to succeed or excel in the NFL. It's just like every other college to pro sport. The funnel gets very narrow.

Do you have to post stuff like this in every thread?
How the heck do you know?
You already posted that Stanford's games didn't generate East Coast visibility because they started at 10pm Eastern time, which is completely false.
As his coach readily noted, the games when Gerhart came up the biggest were at the end. Consecutive weeks against Oregon, USC, Cal and Notre Dame.
USC has some of the best DB's and linebackers in the nation.

These comments have about as much credibility as your post and backtracking on Notre Dame academics.
Give it a rest...geez.
On the other hand, how about this aspect of what he did this semester?
"Gerhart took five courses this quarter. He chose Integral Calculus because the professor has a good reputation. He enrolled in Introduction to Prehistoric Archaeology because it sounded interesting. He also took Investment Science, Introduction to Optimization Engineering and High-Technology Entrepreneurship."

Pretty impressive... but I am sure RJM will be able to criticize this and the academics at Stanford.

Maybe when baseball season arrives, we will again start to see some positive dialogue that has always made the HSBBW such an attractive place to frequent.
It surely cannot come soon enough for me, at least, and hopefully some others who have stopped frequenting the site.

You know, I'll be honest in that I havn't seen Toby Gerhart play other than the highlights they show on ESPN. Some of my bias toward him indeed comes from the disappointment we experienced here in Cleveland with Touchdown Tommy. I went back and reviewed the stats he put up against USC in 2008 and here they are:

RUSHING No. Gain Loss Net TD Lg Avg.
Gerhart, Toby 23 108 7 101 1 40 4.4

Those numbers basically were put up against an NFL defense in that Cushing, Mathews, Malaluga (sp), and others were/will be very high NFL picks. I am willing to give him a chance to see what he does at the next level. I am not backing down that I ought to be able to give my opinion without having it attacked however.

quote:

Originally posted by RJM:

quote:

Typical east coast bias with Gerhart coming in 2nd.

Stanford wasn't on the broadcast radar screen early in the season. How many of their games started at 10pm Eastern time? It's not bias. It's lack of exposure.

Kevin Kouzmanoff San Diego Padres 3rd baseman sets a record for fielding %. Not quite good enough for a Gold Glove. Apparently it was good enough for the HOF to request his glove. Probably not another example of east coast bias errrr, lack of exposure.

T'is the sesaon where it's " better to give than to recieve"

quote:

I am not backing down that I ought to be able to give my opinion without having it attacked however.

No disagreement.
I am getting tired of RJM who has an opinion on everything and maybe got things blurred in who said what.
Look, Gerhart came to Stanford and played on one of the worst teams in college football. When that team played USC, at the new Stanford Stadium, it was just a mismatch in terms of team speed, strength, quickness, skill and every other measurement of college football. USC pounded them something like 59-7 and it was not that close. There was talk Stanford did not belong in Division I football at the time.
This kid does not quit. He is much faster than people think(although the 6.35 60 in PG's link seems a little quicker than I would have guessed.) Locally, some coaches have also talked about his lateral speed and quickness being another key for him.
Against Cal, he outran some very fast DB's on a 70 yard touchdown and at the end of the game, ran right over them on a swing pass to get Stanford into scoring position.
Gerhart put an entire team on his back this year and every Stanford player and fan knows it.
Under Harbaugh, Stanford is completely different. They play tough, physical football in a pro-style offense...still a ways to go on defense. On the other hand, the Pac 10 offenses are like playing Florida every week, as the Rose Bowl is likely to show.
Remember also, those 200 plus yards this year was against a USC defense that completely shut down the Big 10 team in the Rose Bowl.
He is a B plus student, takes 21 units, and puts up those numbers on a team ranked in the bottom 3 in the Pac10 pre-season and is known to be just a regular guy.
He is part of a very funny video at Stanford that is a parody on his versatility.
Seems to me he has earned respect.
I will also state publicly what I read on another college baseball board I have started to frequent: a young man posted about trying to transfer from a JC to DI. He got referred to this site.
The very next post talked about this being a very unfriendly place. Over the years, that clearly has not been my experience.
On the other hand, perception very often makes reality.

"Can't we all just get along". I.M. Hipp

Thanks for the information on Gerhart infielddad. For me, I get suspicious when I see hype. The numbers he put up aginst USC last year (2008) are not hype however so I am backing down somewhat from my earlier statments. Read the following SI article on Vardell and you'll also see comparisons to Larry Csonka, Earl Campbell, and others:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c...MAG1003680/index.htm

quote:

Stanford running back Touchdown Tommy Vardell has emerged as one of the hottest topics of the NFL draft, which will be held on April 26 and 27. The buzz is that Vardell could be among the first 10 players chosen. Scouts already arc comparing him with John Riggins. Larry Csonka, Earl Campbell and Tom Rathman—all big, bruising, churn-it-out workhorses. Bruce Snyder, the coach at Stanford's archrival, Cal, for the past six seasons (and who recently left Berkeley for Arizona State), says, "A lot of people say he is like an old-time fullback, but I think he is a back of the past, present and future."

Vardell's numbers support that contention. When he held two workouts at Stanford last month, 26 of the 28 NFL teams came to look. What the scouts saw made them blink in unison. Mainly, they saw speed. There had been suspicions that Vardell might be too slow, but then he clocked a blazing 4.48 for the 40. Afterward one scout told him, "Son, you have moved up with the group that can run." Everything he did during those two workouts—lifting, broad jump, shuttle run, vertical jump—was at the top of the charts.

Absolutely. It seems unfair that a 23-year-old football player could be this big (he's 6'1", 238 pounds with only 7.7% body fat), this strong (he bench-presses 225 pounds 27 times) and this smart (an industrial engineering major with a 3.2 GPA. he'll graduate in May).

Vardell was also an engineering major and he was about the same size as Gerhart. The comparisons seem like fair ones to me. We'll see what he does at the next level. The young man has earned the chance imho.

CD,
My understanding is that Gerhart could have chosen from a lot of D1 schools coming out of high school for both football and baseball. He took the best education he could get which was Stanford. I don't know the list of schools, but, I would guess, coming out of southern California, I would assume USC, UCLA, UA, ASU and many others or any of the "football factory schools". Do I think playing football at Stanford hurt his chances, yes, but as I just stated he chose to get the best education he could get.
What he does if he chooses to play pro ball, we won't know until it happens, but, he was No.1 in all the top catagorties as a college player. This is not a knock on Ingram who had a great year and should have many more.
As to Tommy Vardell, you are right, he didn't have a great pro career, but in college he was great.
The Heisman is for the best COLLEGE player, not the one who will have the best pro career i.e. Johnny Rodgers from Neb. played ball in Canada.
Personally I wound have like to have seen how J. Best from Cal. would have done if he wasn't injured.

As for east coast bias, there is none, they just don't know that there is any other states west of Colorado. You can't blame them, they're still using the maps from the Louisana purchase.

CD,

Those comparisons are a bit scary they're so close. However, these type comparisons happen a lot with most every player. While one fails the other becomes a Hall of Famer in some cases.

I think there's such a fine line between failure and stardom, that often comparisons, even accurate comparisons, don't mean a whole lot. I remember hearing about runners that people compared to Gayle Sayers only to find out it didn't happen that way.

Here is something I copied... I'm sure going into the 2000 draft there were many who compared favorably to Tom Brady. I suppose most of those who compared did fail.

quote:

In 2000, the New England Patriots drafted Brady in the sixth round (199 overall) of the 2000 NFL Draft. Brady who had been expecting to be drafted in the third or forth was tremendously disappointed with being drafted so late in the draft. However, as disappointed as Brady was at getting drafted in the sixth round - he may have been luckily to have been drafted at all. One scout wrote about Brady prior to the draft in a scouting report that Tom had "Poor build, very skinny and narrow, lacks mobility and the ability to avoid the rush, lacks a really strong arm."[8] When Brady arrived at the Foxboro, Massachusetts in the summer of 2000, the Patriots at the time already had three quarterbacks on the roster so Brady didn't have a guarantee of even making the team, but he ended up playing well in preseason and training camp and won the third quarterback roster spot. He only appeared in one game as a rookie and completed one pass.

Predicting the future is impossible. Wonder just how badly Toby Gerhart wants to be a star in the NFL? BTW, Tom Brady was also a baseball player, even got drafted! I do know that professional sports needs more kids like Toby Gerhart.

quote:

I am getting tired of RJM who has an opinion on everything

I'm tired of posters who can't set aside personally feelings about a player and personally attack people with an opinion rather than debate them. The information I provided on Gerhart came from several NFL prospect scouting reports. They say he if he can't turn the corner in college there's no way he's going to outrun NFL linebackers. Relative to the NFL runing backs he's not considered to have the speed or moves. He's projected as a blocking fullback or H back. But then again, what do these people who scout college players for a living know? I guess you know more.

YOU CLAIM:

You already posted that Stanford's games didn't generate East Coast visibility because they started at 10pm Eastern time, which is completely false.

I POSTED:

Stanford wasn't on the broadcast radar screen early in the season. How many of their games started at 10pm Eastern time? It's not bias. It's lack of exposure.

I'll pardon your reading comprehension problem. It's fact Stanford was not on the radar screen early in the year based on previous lack of success. They weren't getting national games. I asked how many games were played at 7pm Pacific/10pm Eastern.

"These comments have about as much credibility as your post and backtracking on Notre Dame academics."

I know some very academically average academic kids from our area who attend Notre Dame. Maybe it's because they attended an academically overrated private Catholic high school. My son took the entrance exam for the school. He said it was a joke.

"I am sure RJM will be able to criticize this and the academics at Stanford."

Why would I question the academics at a top academic institution? But his academics have nothing to do with making the NFL.

You keep up the personal attacks. I'll debate the attacks. It will show who has character and who doesn't.

quote:

But then again, what do these people who scout college players for a living know?

See this from the post above yours.

quote:

One scout wrote about Brady prior to the draft in a scouting report that Tom had "Poor build, very skinny and narrow, lacks mobility and the ability to avoid the rush, lacks a really strong arm."

There are big surprises, both good and bad. Surely USC and Oregon had a lot of fast linebackers. Or did Stanford just have the best offensive line in college football? The NFL combine should be very revealing, either way. Big surprises in the combine every year, both ways.

PG - Tom Brady is a fascinating discussion imho and perhaps proves your fine line theory.

Last year, a quarterback who had not started a game since high school led New England to an 11-5 record. What is that same quarterback's record this year in Kansas City? I have always felt Tom Brady got more credit than he deserved but my two sons think I am nuts in that assessment as they both love Brady

I think Archie Manning had excellent talent but unfortunately was stuck on one of the worst teams of all time. I have seen running backs who were stuck on bad teams yet still manage to produce however. Where was Houston until Earl Campbell arrived? How many years were the Bears a bad team yet Walter Payton still managed to produce? Barry Sanders, Billy Sims, and OJ Simpson produced on bad teams.

Sometimes, the team defines how talented one appears to be. Other times, the player shows his talent despite his team. Sometimes the talent and the team arrive together like Joe Montana and Jerry Rice. One could certainly argue that Gerhart raised the level of play of his team.

CD,

I used to think Kurt Warner owed all his success to the team he was on. Now I'm not so sure about that.

Anyway, I really have no idea if Toby Gerhart will be a great NFL player or not. Same for Tim Tebow, Colt McCoy, or even Mark Ingram. I'm sure you remember Archie!

However, this Nebraska defensive player sure seems to be a fairly safe bet.

quote:

CD,

I used to think Kurt Warner owed all his success to the team he was on. Now I'm not so sure about that.

Another fascinating case study imho. Undrafted out of college and working at a grocery store when his number was finally called. I would argue both ways for Warner. When he had the greatest show on turf, he certainly did not disappoint. When he was with the Giants, it appeared his career might be over. Now, one could argue he has the two best recievers in the NFL at his dsiposal and he is productive again. The only thing that shoots that theory down is that Matt Leinart should be an all-pro in that offense and he has yet to achieve that.

Think about it, one guy is a grocery store employee and another guy is a Heisman trophy winner yet the grocery store employee is a better player. One could go crazy trying to figure it all out

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:

quote:

But then again, what do these people who scout college players for a living know?

See this from the post above yours.

quote:

One scout wrote about Brady prior to the draft in a scouting report that Tom had "Poor build, very skinny and narrow, lacks mobility and the ability to avoid the rush, lacks a really strong arm."

There are big surprises, both good and bad. Surely USC and Oregon had a lot of fast linebackers. Or did Stanford just have the best offensive line in college football? The NFL combine should be very revealing, either way. Big surprises in the combine every year, both ways.

Brady is a rare exception. For every player similar to Tom Brady how many others didn't make it. The answer would be most.

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:
CD,

I used to think Kurt Warner owed all his success to the team he was on. Now I'm not so sure about that.

Anyway, I really have no idea if Toby Gerhart will be a great NFL player or not. Same for Tim Tebow, Colt McCoy, or even Mark Ingram. I'm sure you remember Archie!

However, this Nebraska defensive player sure seems to be a fairly safe bet.

Warner, like Brady reads defenses well and has a quick release. Suh is projected as a possible top pick in the draft.

ClevelandDad,

Archie Manning was simply the most exciting QB I have ever seen. Easily the one of the top 2 or 3 most athletic QBs. One man wrecking crew in college...got raw end of the stick when drafted by N.O.

Tebow is exciting but in a bulldozer type way; Archie was mesmerizing. Even at Ole Miss it seemed at times like Archie against the 11 on defense.
But, if his teams had been better maybe Archie wouldn't have stood out so much. All I know is I saw him for 3 years in college and haven't seen a college QB since that left me amazed like Archie. Alot of SEC coaches were glad when he graduated.

Liked watching the "Tyler Rose" run also; actually thought he was even better in the NFL than in college.

quote:

Think about it, one guy is a grocery store employee and another guy is a Heisman trophy winner yet the grocery store employee is a better player. One could go crazy trying to figure it all out

When they got to the NFL one guy was hungry. One guy wanted to party. Being a college star doesn't mean a player is a pro prospect.

I was reading an article recently about success rates of pro QB's. The numbers showed for the most part selecting a QB in the top ten picks is a bad investment. It's based on the success rate and what it costs to sign a top ten pick.

Current top ten ranked QB's:

Brees - 2nd round
Favre - 2nd round
Rivers - 4th pick
Rogers - 24th pick
P Manning - 1st pick
Roethlisberger - 11th pick
Schaub - 3rd round
Romo - undrafted
Warner - undrafted
McNabb - 2nd pick

From the article the number of top ten picks over whatever the period of time was, who failed was large.

ClevelandDad, I am not trying to attack your opinion. I just wanted to show my total shock and confusion of it. It would be more accurate to say I was attacking Toby's attacker. It was obvious that no reseach went into the forming of your opinions so why put down an unbelievable talent like Gerhart with meaningless comparisons to past failures?

Your link to strength of schedule isn't relative. Here is something that is.

Did you know that Gerhart played against better defenses than Ingram? Here are the numbers of the teams they played and their defensive ranking:

I took Stanford's schedule, and found the statistical rankings for rushing defense for the 12 teams they played.

Team Rushing Defense Ranking

Washinton State 117

Wake Forest 82

San Jose State 119

Washington 67

UCLA 60

Oregon State 25

Arizona 22

Arizona State 18

Oregon 38

USC 42

California 27

Notre Dame 90

Ok, I took those numbers along with some elementary math, found the average rush defense Gerhart faced would be ranked 59.1 in the nation against the run.

I then did the same thing for Alabama, except I dropped the one FCS team, and kept the number of games at 12.

Team Rushing Defense Ranking

Virginia Tech 52

Florida Int. 116

North Texas 104

Arkansas 69

Kentucky 100

Mississippi 55

South Carolina 46

Tennessee 58

LSU 44

Miss. State 63

Auburn 80

Florida 13

The numbers show here that Ingram and Co. faced an average rush defense of 66.6.

Pretty mind numbing for the SEC homer isn't it.

Before you get ready to hit your next point in your argument, I'll take care of it for you.

What about just conference games then?

If you take Stanford's nine conference games, you get an average of 46.2.

Alabama's 9 conference games gives us an average of 58.6.

So either way you look at it Gerhart, by the numbers, faced better run defenses on the year.

Gerhart has all the tools necessary for the NFL. People, including scouts, refuse to give him credit for having speed, quickness, explosiveness, being elusive, loose-hipped and any other tool associated with tailbacks and not fullbacks. It is laughable! What is not laughable is Toby being slotted to the fullback position without being given the opportunity to play halfback.

Also, Toby chose Stanford because he insisted that whatever college he play for he had to be allowed to play tailback. He wanted to play for USC but they wouldn't let him run the ball.

But let me add that he still is not guaranteed success in the NFL, nobody is. Here is a list of the Heisman Trophy winners since 1990:

1990 Ty Detmer Brigham Young QB Jr.
1991 Desmond Howard Michigan WR Jr.
1992 Gino Torretta Miami (Fla) QB Sr.
1993 Charlie Ward Florida State QB Sr.
1994 Rashaan Salaam Colorado RB Jr.
1995 Eddie George Ohio State RB Sr.
1996 Danny Wuerffel Florida QB Sr.
1997 Charles Woodson Michigan CB Jr.
1998 Ricky Williams Texas RB Sr.
1999 Ron Dayne Wisconsin RB Sr.
2000 Chris Weinke Florida State QB Sr.
2001 Eric Crouch Nebraska QB Sr.
2002 Carson Palmer USC QB Sr.
2003 Jason White Oklahoma QB Jr.
2004 Matt Leinart USC QB Jr.
2005 Reggie Bush USC RB Jr.
2006 Troy Smith Ohio State QB Sr.
2007 Tim Tebow Florida QB Sop
2008 Sam Bradford Oklahoma QB Sop

Only Eddie George and Charles Woodson had truly distinguished careers(Woodson still active). A few others had some good moments but there is not a lot of sustained success on that list. So perhaps there will be less pressure on him by not winning.

If Gerhart is given the opportunity to play tailback in the NFL, everyone will see that he has all the talent in the world plus some to play the position. In my opinion, he will also be the most critcized tailback in the NFL next year as the people with their preconceived notions will try to move him back to his more racially acceptable position of fullback. I know this last line will get me in trouble with the moderators here but it needs to be mentioned as part of the overall picture of the reality of life in the NFL.

Um, DOD, I'd say that Carson Palmer and Ricky Williams have been very productive NFL players on mostly bad teams until recently, with Ricky's career being quite hazy along the way.

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:

quote:

But then again, what do these people who scout college players for a living know?

See this from the post above yours.

quote:

One scout wrote about Brady prior to the draft in a scouting report that Tom had "Poor build, very skinny and narrow, lacks mobility and the ability to avoid the rush, lacks a really strong arm."

There are big surprises, both good and bad. Surely USC and Oregon had a lot of fast linebackers. Or did Stanford just have the best offensive line in college football? The NFL combine should be very revealing, either way. Big surprises in the combine every year, both ways.

I may be biased since he is a family friend, but Stanford also had a fullback that did a terrific job of clearing the path for Gerhart.

quote:

preconceived notions will try to move him back to his more racially acceptable position of fullback.

Regardless of the numbers, it's about talent not color. Once the QB barrier was broken open color hasn't been an issue in the NFL. Wes Welker is one of the fastest wide receivers in football and has no fear going over the middle. It doesn't matter most receivers are black. He excels. He wasn't drafted because of his size. One thing is he has to play slot. He can't fight off the DB's who would get in his face at the line if he was an end due to his size.

I don't think any NFL evaluator is going to care about Gerhart's color. They will care about his lack of ability to turn the corner at the collegiate level.

Here is a link to some video on Gerhart runs this year.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOCKIwYzkV0


At about 3:20, there are a number of runs against USC.
Best I can tell,he is turning the corner, numerous times, against one of the pre-eminent schools in the Country in producing NFL defensive lineman, linebackers, DB's and safeties. Same defense that stuffed Ohio St.
Against Oregon St., he runs away from defensive backs.

Some of what happens at the next level involves the coaches and scheme. Bill Walsh took so many players in rounds 3-5 and they ended up with great NFL careers. Roger Craig, Tom Rathman, Dwight Clark, and many, many more, not to mention the Montana guy.
Al Davis takes perhaps even higher rated talents and we can see those results, since Gruden left.
Admittedly speed and quickness are issues as you move up, as they are in any sport. When you play against USC, Oregon, Oregon St, Arizona, Cal, etc, you play against teams with speed and quickness of the type that does well in the NFL. There sure isn't evidence in these video's that he does not have adequate speed.
It has been posted hundreds of times on the site, as it relates to baseball, that there are plenty of scouts in any sport who will find why a player cannot succeed. I doubt that is limited to baseball based on the examples CD and PG discussed above.

Gerhart is a fun kid.
I think the Heisman this year had 5, not one, terrific kids.
Heck, on Tuesday night, Tebow won the Campbell award, named in honor of one of my best friends.
I thought Ingram was terrific.
When you watched Gerhart over an entire season, in a conference known for speed, he excelled.
He's earned his opportunity.
Just like my son, and CD's son, and other son's on this site proved some scouting reports wrong, it seems to me that Gerhart deserves that chance, also, if the scouting reports that are being referenced truly come from NFL scouting boards, which would be a first, I expect.

I am a firm believer that many players get trapped in the system that they get drafted professionally into---a QB can be great but he cannot throw why lying on his back---a RB can be great but without a line opening holes for him he is nothing--the same happen in baseball--would you want your son to be a SS in the Yankee system during this decade

quote:

Originally posted by RJM:
[QUOTE]
I don't think any NFL evaluator is going to care about Gerhart's color. They will care about his lack of ability to turn the corner at the collegiate level.

Can Brandon Jacobs turn the corner, Michael Turner, Marion Barber, Jamal Lewis, Jonathon Stewart, Chris 'Beanie' Wells? No, they can't.

There are plenty of 'between the tackles' runners in the NFL. There always have been and there always will be. Why should Gerhart be moved to fullback without being given the chance to be a productive NFL running back?

Your saying he must 'turn the corner' is just double speak for your desire to deny him his deserved opportunity to earn a living carrying a football in the NFL. You searched for the weakest part of his game and are trying to discredit him with it. Only you can answer why you would do that.

Earl Campbell didn't 'turn the corner' either.

Wow! What have I missed while I was banging heads with ND fans on other message boards over their hiring of my coach!

First, I am very happy for Mark Ingram. I saw his reaction to winning the award and it was very, very touching. While I never saw him play all year...it is clear from the numbers that he is indeed a deserving recipient of the Heisman.

But onto the next topic...Toby Gerhart.

I've seen a LOT of college football in my lifetime. I grew up on college campuses as both of my parents were college teachers. I've seen nearly all of 'em over the past 40 years. Jim Plunkett to Archie Manning to Joe Montana to Tim Tebow...OJ Simpson to Earl Campbell to Barry Sanders to Billy Simms to Archie Griffin to Tommy Vardell to....well, you get the idea.

All great ones.

Toby Gerhart had as good or better a year as any player I've ever seen over a full season. I'm not gonna debate that with anyone who wants too...its just a fact. I haven't seen a better year. Period.

If he would have played for Florida or Alabama or Ohio State...he woulda won the Heisman. Its not a ding on Ingram, its just the way I see it.

Many of us get frustrated with baseball scouts who get locked in on velocity or foot speed or arm strength from the left side of the infield. We wonder why production doesn't count for as much or more than raw metrics. I think Toby will surprise some of you with his 40-times in the combines...but I still wonder why a big part of a thread is spent debating this kid...of all kids.

I know him and his family...every single one of you would be thrilled to have this guy date your daughter...I can assure you of that. He's a great, GREAT kid...humble...friendly...smart...genuine...and talented. How about lets celebrate his remarkable season rather than debate what we amateurs imagine he will do or not do at the next level.

Peace!

quote:

Toby Gerhart had as good or better a year as any player I've ever seen over a full season. I'm not gonna debate that with anyone who wants too...its just a fact. I haven't seen a better year. Period.

Many of us get frustrated with baseball scouts who get locked in on velocity or foot speed or arm strength from the left side of the infield. We wonder why production doesn't count for as much or more than raw metrics. I think Toby will surprise some of you with his 40-times in the combines...but I still wonder why a big part of a thread is spent debating this kid...of all kids.

How about lets celebrate his remarkable season rather than debate what we amateurs imagine he will do or not do at the next level.

justbb - I know you don't like when your words are snipped out of context, but this time of year with little baseball to talk about, football always comes up on the hsbbweb. A couple of years ago, the "debate" raged over Vince Young and Reggie Bush.

I backed off my earlier assessment based off infielddad's and Dear Old Dad's points. What always gets me is hype however. I lived in Cleveland when Tommy Vardell was hyped and he reminds me of Gerhart (size, speed, smarts, toughness, and Stanford). In fact, as I posted the SI article above, the pro scouts were comparing Vardell favorably with Larry Csonka, Earl Campbell, and John Riggins. Now you say Gerhart had as good of a year as any you have ever seen but then say it shouldn't be open for debate what he'll do at the next level. That seems inconsistent to me as most of us are pro football fans and one of our cities may or may not wind up with Gerhart. That seems reasonable to debate (unless we collectively decide football is out-of-bounds this time of year). Nobody the best I can tell has questioned Gerhart's toughness, niceness, heart, teamwork, smarts, parents, and so forth.

The highlight video infielddad posted was very impressive so my mind has been opened even more. If Gerhart plays in the pros like he has played in college (at least from the highlight clips I have seen), he'll be a huge star at the next level imho.

quote:

Originally posted by Dear old Dad:

quote:

Originally posted by RJM:
[QUOTE]
I don't think any NFL evaluator is going to care about Gerhart's color. They will care about his lack of ability to turn the corner at the collegiate level.

Can Brandon Jacobs turn the corner, Michael Turner, Marion Barber, Jamal Lewis, Jonathon Stewart, Chris 'Beanie' Wells? No, they can't.

There are plenty of 'between the tackles' runners in the NFL. There always have been and there always will be. Why should Gerhart be moved to fullback without being given the chance to be a productive NFL running back?

Your saying he must 'turn the corner' is just double speak for your desire to deny him his deserved opportunity to earn a living carrying a football in the NFL. You searched for the weakest part of his game and are trying to discredit him with it. Only you can answer why you would do that.

Earl Campbell didn't 'turn the corner' either.

You can't compare what a running back can't do in the NFL to what Gerhart can't do in college.