I think I still might have preferred Dwyer over McKnight, thinking back to the draft. He at least had the frame to just pound it up between the tackles. McKnight I don't see contributing much at all to our running game this season. Scary to think what our running game would look like, should Greene get injured...
Oh I agree 100% that we should keep him fresh for a playoff run I was just saying that LT could still play, maybe not at his highest level, but the man can still produce some TDs
I can see McKnight being focused on STs for the first 6 or 7 games if he is active, and maybe start getting 2-3-4 carries a game in the second half. I can also see him contributing some fumbles. And LT may be 31 and declining, but we're going to be depending on him heavily at some point in 2010. That is the gamble the FO and CS took to bring him in. If this was any young player that had the same level of all-around skills to perform the 3rd/backup RB role, we'd probably be happy. But since it's LT making Thomas Jones money, many people will be disappointed in his production - and only because it's LT.
McKnight is more dynamic and brings more to the table in regards to skillset/upside than Dwyer....by a country mile. The return game and receiving game alone was upgraded when we picked up McKnight.
I don't think its a matter of who's starting or who's the backup. I think the running back at the time is based on the situation. Greene will get more carries overall, but there may be times where LT gets more carries.....3rd down, red zone, etc. I don't really consider him the backup, its just that his situation comes up less often. To me, a backup is the guy that spells the starter when he's tired or when he is injured. That's not LT's only role.
There seems to be a misconception that our HB depth is suffering. We also have 2 FB's on the roster that could more than fill in if need be. Would it be an ideal situation? Certainly not......but I wouldn't mind seeing John Conner light up some defenders carrying the rock either.
I can't see McKnight being any value at all this year as a runner. If Shonn goes down LT isn't going to be good by himself either.
Tony Richardson is well past the point of being an effective runner. As far as Conner goes, while I do not know a ton about the guy aside from him looking like a bull, Rex pretty much said straight out that he wasn't much of a runner. LT is a gamble, we can't really get around that. Greene will get hurt at some point this season and McKnight is not going between the tackles when that happens - at least not in 2010. We can sit here and hope that Tomlinson's conditioning twice as hard will make up for the loss of speed that made him effective between the tackles, but the reality is that we have a lot of chips riding on him and he needs to perform at least as well as TJ would have in that role. I think he can do that well, but I don't think it will be good enough for a lot of people. And he will be far and away a better receiver out of the backfield than TJ ever was, even at this point in his career.
I don't know about that. Back in January, Dwyer was the 3rd or 4th back on many scouts' boards, well ahead of McKnight. Some were projecting him as a 2nd rounder early on. I'm not saying that makes him better/worse than McKnight. But I do think Dwyer better fits our ground 'n pound philosophy. If Greene goes down, we have LT and only LT. Dwyer would have been better in terms of RBBC insurance, than McKnight. We drafted McKnight thinking "we must replace Leon", but people forget those are some pretty big shoes to fill.
Bottom line. If Greene goes down for any extended period of time we will all really miss Leon. If he stays healthy for most of the season it will be "Leon who." LT can get us through a game or two, but anything more and defenses will wear him out.
that's just it....we drafted McKnight for his skillset. He fits a need in this offense. He's not going to instantly become Leon v2.0....but I'm assuming that IS the plan for him in the near future. Dwyer is road-grating between-the-tackles type HB....and we already have Greene to fill that role. I'm not as worried as most people on the board are about our HB depth.....it's an easier position to replace....compared to the Oline, QB or WR.
But this was my point. We need a RBBC insurance policy this year, not a 2011 replacement for Leon. You're confident Greene will stay healthy and/or that we can find a replacement if he doesn't. I'm not so confident.
Football is a violent sport, man.....you could use that argument for any position on the roster. What if Sanchez goes down? do we have a viable insurance policy for him?...or what about Mangold? I understand if Greene goes down...it wouldn't be the ideal situation. My counterpoint to that is....HB is a basically a plug n' play position. HB is the least of my worries.
im not worried about our rb situation mcknight is a severely underrated runner between the tackles ... in case of emergency, im pretty sure he could split time with l.t.
Richardson said that veterans get to select their roommates during training camp and that this summer he's chosen to room with Greene. After entering the league as an undrafted free agent, Richardson played 11 seasons with the Kansas City Chiefs, two with the Minnesota Vikings and is working on his third with the Jets. He played tailback at some points in his career and blocked for the likes of Adrian Peterson and Priest Holmes and paved the way for Marcus Allen’s 100th career touchdown. Wow, Marcus Allen is almost old enough to be my Father. I can't believe Richardson has been around that long. Thank god we picked up Connor to back up grandpa.
RBs take the worst beating of any position, so it's far more likely that one of our RBs would get injured than, say, our C. Additionally, our offense is projected to be focused on *running the football*, not passing. If Sanchez goes down, yes, we're in a world of hurt. But our passing game is *not* under the same kind of pressure that our running game is. Take the Tampa Bay game from last year, as an example of what I mean. We both agree that depth is important, I'm sure. But I am not confident in our RB depth, I question whether Greene can stay healthy (more so than the "average" back), and I don't believe RB is a plug 'n play position. ... which is why I would have preferred Dwyer (a potential contributor in '10 and insurance policy) over McKnight (a project, ATM, who won't help our running game in '11).
you must be a gt fan dwyer was essentially a fullback in that offense ... you have no idea what kind of vision he has as a runner, he's slow, and he showed up to the most important job interview of his life out of shape i rather have chauncey washington than dwyer ... oh yea, we do
Seeing him at the Applebees thing really made me nervous. He looked like he was about 130 pounds if he was holding a 50 pound weight while be weighed. It's hard to imagine him taking a hit from a LB or a safety running at him full speed. I sure hope he can run between the tackles, as long as T-rich and Mangold are leading the way. Lol
WTH is a "gt fan"? A fullback??? When did Dwyer ever lead block for anyone last season? And I've probably spent more time watching 2010 draft prospects than you did watching the Jets last season. In fact, I'd bet the house I did. Also, we don't need burners. Speed is great and would be a nice luxury, but in this style of offense you need guys who can pick up 3-5 yards and leave a cloud of dust. Milk the clock, and wear down defenses is what Rex has said this offense is about. If he sticks to that, Dwyer is the type of late round back that could easily fill that role. McKnight cannot. Oh yea, McKnight also showed up to the most important OTA/camp/anything of his football life and vomited all over the field, due to being wholly out of shape. So where's the difference?
