FB: Ohio Athletic Conference

[BashDad]

Since the Coppage and Beaver era, UWW hasn't had one great RB, but rather 2 or 3 really good backs each year since those two graduated.

It's hard to make the argument on having one great back or 2-3 really good backs by committee. Both have been successful for UWW.

You mean the past two years?

[BashDad]

RB ain't QB - and 2 are better than 1.

Two good backs are not as valuable as one great one. That's where I disagree with you. And so does football.

[jknezek]

RB ain't QB - and 2 are better than 1.

Two good backs are not as valuable as one great one. That's where I disagree with you. And so does football.

Actually I'm not sure football does anymore. At least not at the NFL level. The drop off in interest in paying big money for premium running backs is pretty well documented. At least for those guys, plugging in cheaper, younger, fresher RBs by committee is way more in vogue than spending to attract or keep a franchise level back.

[SaintsFAN]

I'd for sure take a great back over a couple good ones.  FWIW

I'm with HSCoach -- Moore and Pugh.  Wow.

[BashDad]

RB ain't QB - and 2 are better than 1.

Two good backs are not as valuable as one great one. That's where I disagree with you. And so does football.

Actually I'm not sure football does anymore. At least not at the NFL level. The drop off in interest in paying big money for premium running backs is pretty well documented. At least for those guys, plugging in cheaper, younger, fresher RBs by committee is way more in vogue than spending to attract or keep a franchise level back.

Motion to table the conversation, then, until D3 Football has similar parity.

[Desertraider]

I second the motion.

[02 Warhawk]

Since the Coppage and Beaver era, UWW hasn't had one great RB, but rather 2 or 3 really good backs each year since those two graduated.

It's hard to make the argument on having one great back or 2-3 really good backs by committee. Both have been successful for UWW.

You mean the past two years?

Kind of....this will be the 4th season since Coppage graduated, and UWW has won 2 in the past 3 years since moving to a RB by committee. Once you have a solid O-line it doesn't matter if you have a great RB or a solid 2-3 RBs. Results will be the same.

[BashDad]

Ratliffe is so pissed at your characterization. He just told me. He's right here and he's pissed.

[badgerwarhawk]

We are deep and talented at the running back position.

[Craft_Beermeister]

I just read a good article on Taurice Scott, Stepping Up: The Rise of Mount Union QB Taurice Scott

http://herosports.com/collegefootball/meet-mount-union-qb-taurice-scott/

[Craft_Beermeister]

I just found another good article and this one is about former voice of the Cleveland Cavaliers Joe Tait and his love affair with broadcasting televised games of Mount Union.  Joe's first TV broadcast of a Mount game was way back in 1985.  Heck Ken Wable's was still the head coach back then.  Joe always had a great voice for sports.

http://m.the-review.com/local%20news/2015/09/08/televised-mount-football-tradition-continues-with-tait-paidas-ballard

[Desertraider]

Since the Coppage and Beaver era, UWW hasn't had one great RB, but rather 2 or 3 really good backs each year since those two graduated.

It's hard to make the argument on having one great back or 2-3 really good backs by committee. Both have been successful for UWW.

You mean the past two years?

Kind of....this will be the 4th season since Coppage graduated, and UWW has won 2 in the past 3 years since moving to a RB by committee. Once you have a solid O-line it doesn't matter if you have a great RB or a solid 2-3 RBs. Results will be the same.

I know I agreed to table this.......however - I watched the Patriots last night and it occurred to me that NONE of their WR or RB's could be considered "great". Gronk is Gronk and he is great. But if you look at the Pats they have a history of Championships without greatness at RB and WR. They have a history of 4th, 5th, 6th round draft picks (overlooked by everybody) and undrafted free agents winning Championships. The years they had the best WR in the game, they didn't win titles. Not saying anything against Moss, but I will take 22 good guys driven to one goal any day.

[wally_wabash]

Since the Coppage and Beaver era, UWW hasn't had one great RB, but rather 2 or 3 really good backs each year since those two graduated.

It's hard to make the argument on having one great back or 2-3 really good backs by committee. Both have been successful for UWW.

You mean the past two years?

Kind of....this will be the 4th season since Coppage graduated, and UWW has won 2 in the past 3 years since moving to a RB by committee. Once you have a solid O-line it doesn't matter if you have a great RB or a solid 2-3 RBs. Results will be the same.

I know I agreed to table this.......however - I watched the Patriots last night and it occurred to me that NONE of their WR or RB's could be considered "great". Gronk is Gronk and he is great. But if you look at the Pats they have a history of Championships without greatness at RB and WR. They have a history of 4th, 5th, 6th round draft picks (overlooked by everybody) and undrafted free agents winning Championships. The years they had the best WR in the game, they didn't win titles. Not saying anything against Moss, but I will take 22 good guys driven to one goal any day.

The NFL and Division III are really very, very different things.  Like, almost not even the same game kind of different. 

[Desertraider]

Since the Coppage and Beaver era, UWW hasn't had one great RB, but rather 2 or 3 really good backs each year since those two graduated.

It's hard to make the argument on having one great back or 2-3 really good backs by committee. Both have been successful for UWW.

You mean the past two years?

Kind of....this will be the 4th season since Coppage graduated, and UWW has won 2 in the past 3 years since moving to a RB by committee. Once you have a solid O-line it doesn't matter if you have a great RB or a solid 2-3 RBs. Results will be the same.

I know I agreed to table this.......however - I watched the Patriots last night and it occurred to me that NONE of their WR or RB's could be considered "great". Gronk is Gronk and he is great. But if you look at the Pats they have a history of Championships without greatness at RB and WR. They have a history of 4th, 5th, 6th round draft picks (overlooked by everybody) and undrafted free agents winning Championships. The years they had the best WR in the game, they didn't win titles. Not saying anything against Moss, but I will take 22 good guys driven to one goal any day.

The NFL and Division III are really very, very different things.  Like, almost not even the same game kind of different.

Really? Huh, who knew My point was simply that a great player, at any level, doesn't necessarily mean success. It takes a team committed to a goal. That's all.

[wally_wabash]

Since the Coppage and Beaver era, UWW hasn't had one great RB, but rather 2 or 3 really good backs each year since those two graduated.

It's hard to make the argument on having one great back or 2-3 really good backs by committee. Both have been successful for UWW.

You mean the past two years?

Kind of....this will be the 4th season since Coppage graduated, and UWW has won 2 in the past 3 years since moving to a RB by committee. Once you have a solid O-line it doesn't matter if you have a great RB or a solid 2-3 RBs. Results will be the same.

I know I agreed to table this.......however - I watched the Patriots last night and it occurred to me that NONE of their WR or RB's could be considered "great". Gronk is Gronk and he is great. But if you look at the Pats they have a history of Championships without greatness at RB and WR. They have a history of 4th, 5th, 6th round draft picks (overlooked by everybody) and undrafted free agents winning Championships. The years they had the best WR in the game, they didn't win titles. Not saying anything against Moss, but I will take 22 good guys driven to one goal any day.

The NFL and Division III are really very, very different things.  Like, almost not even the same game kind of different.

Really? Huh, who knew My point was simply that a great player, at any level, doesn't necessarily mean success. It takes a team committed to a goal. That's all.

I know it does.  Particularly in the NFL where everybody is more or less the same.  In Division III it takes a team and all of that and a couple of guys who are generally light years better than anybody on the other team.  Mount Union is going to give up about 16 points through November.  Mount Union also has something like four first team preseason AAs.  These are not unrelated items.