Quote
zn
Quote
dzrams
Of course, this is an issue of what one thinks. Almost everything is and no one's opinion is gospel. It's interesting that you would try to paint it as that. Your opinion is noted. We disagree. I'm willing to go on record that we'll still have a top running attack. Good discussion!
Akers has more in his arsenal as a back than Henderson does. It's just there. It's visible.
Same with Gurley compared to Jackson. Gurley had more in his arsenal (before the knee).
Same with Faulk and Dickerson compared to Gurley. And of course quite visibly, Faulk and Dickerson were very different.
None of which makes Jackson a bad back. In fact Jackson's strengths allowed him to be productive in many bad seasons when he had no OL much of the time. But Gurley still had more in his arsenal as a back than SJ did.
Same with Akers and Henderson.
I hear you but it still seems to me that you're mixing up opinion with fact. What's visible to one may not be visible to another. Happens everyday. But we'll have to wait and see how things turn out.
I'm still willing to go on record that we'll have a top running attack even without Akers. IMO, it's the scheme and the OL that are largely responsible for that. McVay hasn't played one RB since he's been coach that hasn't been effective. Even Brown produced when he got starts.
