Welcome to Hogville!      Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Damarea Crockett, one of the 10 best rushers in CFB

Started by HawgTrough, August 10, 2017, 01:09:24 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ricepig


DEVIL DOG HOG

"I love college football. It's the time of the year you can walk down the street with a girl on one arm and a blanket on the other, and nobody thinks twice about it." DUFFY DAUGHERTY




GO GREEN!

 

PorkRinds

August 10, 2017, 04:32:16 pm #52 Last Edit: August 10, 2017, 04:52:12 pm by PorkRinds
Quote from: Wildhog on August 10, 2017, 03:55:13 pm
I just don't understand why some feel the need to diminish his accomplishments.  He didn't spurn us for Mizzou.  He would have been a Hog if he could.  He had a great freshman season and I'm happy for him.

Because some use his accomplishments to beat our coaching staff over the head.

tigerinhogtown

Quote from: Grizzlyfan on August 10, 2017, 01:38:26 pm
The important thing about this list is that our new 3-4 alignment must try to slow down 4 of the top 10 RB's in the country. And 3 of those 4 are going to have good OL's in front of them.  Don't know about Crockett's OL.

The MIZZOU OL gave up the fewest TFL (that includes sacks and rushes) in all of CF last year and they all return.  Should be a strong unit

tophawg19

Quote from: DEVIL DOG HOG on August 10, 2017, 04:31:53 pm
He even played in his street clothes.

he was so good against us that i couldn't even see him for the cloud of errr dust .... cloud of something anyway
if you ain't a hawg you ain't chitlins

Atlhogfan1

Quote from: tigerinhogtown on August 10, 2017, 04:41:47 pm
The MIZZOU OL gave up the fewest TFL (that includes sacks and rushes) in all of CF last year and they all return.  Should be a strong unit

Again scheme.  Not quality of the oline. 
Quote from: MaconBacon on March 22, 2018, 10:30:04 amWe had a good run in the 90's and one NC and now the whole state still laments that we are a top seed program and have kids standing in line to come to good ole Arkansas.  We're just a flash in the pan boys. 

aloha_kid

Quote from: Youngsta71701 on August 10, 2017, 02:17:55 pm
Are you serious? Crockett over Whaley is laughable. I want some of whatever you've been drinking or smoking. And like I said in an earlier post I like Whaley but as of right now Crockett seems to be the better running back. Maybe Whaley can change that narrative this coming season.

When he can stay eligible.  Cue the them from Cops.

PorkRinds


Atlhogfan1

Quote from: MaconBacon on March 22, 2018, 10:30:04 amWe had a good run in the 90's and one NC and now the whole state still laments that we are a top seed program and have kids standing in line to come to good ole Arkansas.  We're just a flash in the pan boys. 

PorkRinds


Atlhogfan1

Quote from: PorkRinds on August 10, 2017, 05:02:18 pm
How is that stat misleading?

Sacks are less frequent due to the offense being designed for the qb to get rid of the ball very quickly.  Stretching the field with formation takes potential rushers out of the box.  Stretching the field also helps the run blocking numbers.  The scheme led to the sack and TFL numbers.  It's Heupel/Big 12 finesse football.  It has its negative trade offs as do all offenses. 
Quote from: MaconBacon on March 22, 2018, 10:30:04 amWe had a good run in the 90's and one NC and now the whole state still laments that we are a top seed program and have kids standing in line to come to good ole Arkansas.  We're just a flash in the pan boys. 

hogman64

Missouri plays a weaker schedule than does Arkansas.........half of his yards against very, very weak teams and a lot of the remainder of  his yards in games in  which Mo was hopelessly out of the game..........it will be proven over time that Whaley is the better back.
you can in no way compare  results from last year for those two guys......

King Kong


 

PorkRinds

Quote from: Atlhogfan1 on August 10, 2017, 05:11:40 pm
Sacks are less frequent due to the offense being designed for the qb to get rid of the ball very quickly.  Stretching the field with formation takes potential rushers out of the box.  Stretching the field also helps the run blocking numbers.  The scheme led to the sack and TFL numbers.  It's Heupel/Big 12 finesse football.  It has its negative trade offs as do all offenses.

So the stats aren't misleading. They're just better.

PorkRinds

Quote from: hawgfan4life on August 10, 2017, 02:57:06 pm
All I know is what I saw when AR played Missouri and what Crockett did to our defense.  No wonder he is on a top 10 list!

I really hope this is a joke. Please tell me it's a joke.

Atlhogfan1

Quote from: PorkRinds on August 10, 2017, 05:27:30 pm
So the stats aren't misleading. They're just better.

No. They are different. The sacks and tfl are a poor way to judge the quality of their oline.   
Quote from: MaconBacon on March 22, 2018, 10:30:04 amWe had a good run in the 90's and one NC and now the whole state still laments that we are a top seed program and have kids standing in line to come to good ole Arkansas.  We're just a flash in the pan boys. 

Arkansas Fan

If Arkansas offered Crockett, he'd be playing in an Arkansas uniform. No doubt about it. This thread is pointless as Crockett played a lot more for Missouri compared to Whaley for Arkansas.

I'll take Whaley all day over Crockett. Crockett or not, Arkansas is always fine at RB.

Atlhogfan1

Quote from: Arkansas Fan on August 10, 2017, 05:48:08 pm
If Arkansas offered Crockett, he'd be playing in an Arkansas uniform. No doubt about it. This thread is pointless as Crockett played a lot more for Missouri compared to Whaley for Arkansas.

I'll take Whaley all day over Crockett. Crockett or not, Arkansas is always fine at RB.

With Rawleigh retiring he would be nice to have for depth.  But this is hindsight.
Quote from: MaconBacon on March 22, 2018, 10:30:04 amWe had a good run in the 90's and one NC and now the whole state still laments that we are a top seed program and have kids standing in line to come to good ole Arkansas.  We're just a flash in the pan boys. 

greenie

Here's 10 in the SEC that are better
Alabama: Scarborough, Harris (and look out for Najee Harris)
Arkansas: Whaley
Auburn: Pettway
Florida: Scarlett
LSU: Guice
Georgia: Chubb, Michele
aTm: Williams
Vanderbilt: Webb

Here's a handful more from around the country
Penn State: Barkley
USCe: Jones II
Miami: Walton
FSU: Patrick
Oregon: Freeman
OSU: Weber

There's 16 that are far more proven and explosive, and I didn't even try hard.

Crockett is a decent back, but top 10?  No way.  I don't think he's top 30.

Bubba's Bruisers

Quote from: Wildhog on August 10, 2017, 03:55:13 pm
I just don't understand why some feel the need to diminish his accomplishments.  He didn't spurn us for Mizzou.  He would have been a Hog if he could.  He had a great freshman season and I'm happy for him.

It's called fandom.  We're idiots.
I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heal.

Genesis 3:15

Hogwild

QuoteThe MIZZOU OL gave up the fewest TFL (that includes sacks and rushes) in all of CF last year and they all return.  Should be a strong unit


Quote from: Atlhogfan1 on August 10, 2017, 04:48:42 pm
This piece does a decent job explaining why those stats are misleading due to Mizzou's offensive scheme:
https://www.seccountry.com/missouri/missouri-offensive-line-damarea-crockett

Again scheme.  Not quality of the oline.

Mizzou had the 2nd most passing yards in the SEC, with the third most passing attempts. While allowing the fewest sacks (14).
By comparison we allowed 150% more sacks(35) than Mizzou, despite them throwing 42 less passes.

While having 17 less rushing attempts, Mizzou still had 300+ yards more rushing for the season.
Mizzou had 4.9 yards per carry, while we had 4.1 yards per carry (12th in the SEC)

If their OLine is really that bad, and they still accomplished what they did, we need to looking into hiring their OL coach.




mizzouman


mizzouman

Quote from: Atlhogfan1 on August 10, 2017, 04:48:42 pm
Again scheme.  Not quality of the oline. 
It's always about the scheme.  Arkansas had a couple of decent running backs last year. Why?  Because of the scheme.  Stats are all about the scheme.

greenie

Quote from: mizzouman on August 10, 2017, 07:23:10 pm
It's always about the scheme.  Arkansas had a couple of decent running backs last year. Why?  Because of the scheme.  Stats are all about the scheme.

What kind of scheme would not be good for running backs?

 

mizzouman

Quote from: greenie on August 10, 2017, 07:29:57 pm
What kind of scheme would not be good for running backs?
That's my point. RW had great stats because of scheme as did Crockett. But so what?  Whether Crockett went to Arkansas or not is irrelevant. In fact demeaning Crockett is a pretty childish.

Just wish him the best and move on. You don't have to belittle a player to make you feel better.

Atlhogfan1

Quote from: mizzouman on August 10, 2017, 07:23:10 pm
It's always about the scheme.  Arkansas had a couple of decent running backs last year. Why?  Because of the scheme.  Stats are all about the scheme.

Wasn't talking about the running game.  Just the use of lack of negative plays to tout how good the Mizzou oline is.   
Quote from: MaconBacon on March 22, 2018, 10:30:04 amWe had a good run in the 90's and one NC and now the whole state still laments that we are a top seed program and have kids standing in line to come to good ole Arkansas.  We're just a flash in the pan boys. 

supersaint

Wish he could have played back in the day with Zac Tubbs.

We needed Crockett and Tubbs.
There's no sense in nonsense when the heat is hot.

Atlhogfan1

Quote from: Hogwild on August 10, 2017, 07:05:35 pm

Mizzou had the 2nd most passing yards in the SEC, with the third most passing attempts. While allowing the fewest sacks (14).
By comparison we allowed 150% more sacks(35) than Mizzou, despite them throwing 42 less passes.

While having 17 less rushing attempts, Mizzou still had 300+ yards more rushing for the season.
Mizzou had 4.9 yards per carry, while we had 4.1 yards per carry (12th in the SEC)

If their OLine is really that bad, and they still accomplished what they did, we need to looking into hiring their OL coach.

I didn't say they were bad.

Their offense is designed is to get the ball out quickly.  Do you really not understand?   

Are you making some argument about our oline or oline coach? 
Quote from: MaconBacon on March 22, 2018, 10:30:04 amWe had a good run in the 90's and one NC and now the whole state still laments that we are a top seed program and have kids standing in line to come to good ole Arkansas.  We're just a flash in the pan boys. 

mizzouman

Quote from: Atlhogfan1 on August 10, 2017, 07:48:59 pm
Wasn't talking about the running game.  Just the use of lack of negative plays to tout how good the Mizzou oline is.   
Lack of negative plays is entirely due to the scheme. But so is just about any stat.

Hoggish1

Quote from: hawgfan4life on August 10, 2017, 02:57:06 pm
All I know is what I saw when AR played Missouri and what Crockett did to our defense.  No wonder he is on a top 10 list!

Hugh?  Crockett did not play...

Hoggish1

Quote from: hawgfan4life on August 10, 2017, 02:57:06 pm
All I know is what I saw when AR played Missouri and what Crockett did to our defense.  No wonder he is on a top 10 list!

Hugh?  Crockett did not play...
Quote from: mizzouman on August 10, 2017, 03:00:54 pm
I think he was having nightmares of Tony Temple.

Obviously...LOL

greenie

Quote from: mizzouman on August 10, 2017, 07:40:52 pm
That's my point. RW had great stats because of scheme as did Crockett. But so what?  Whether Crockett went to Arkansas or not is irrelevant. In fact demeaning Crockett is a pretty childish.

Just wish him the best and move on. You don't have to belittle a player to make you feel better.

I don't get your point, and thus the question (and it was an honest question).  If there isn't a scheme that benefits a running back's stats, then how can you say he has good stats because of the scheme?  It's not like we were an overwhelmingly run-first team last year.  We put up quite a few passing yards.  And I certainly didn't belittle Crockett.  As I said, he's a decent running back, but the #7 back in the nation?  I don't agree with that at all.
There was no mention of any Razorbacks in that article.  IMO, it was placed on this board to feed the belief that a mistake was made in not recruiting Crockett.  CBB chose TJ Hammonds instead, and at this point, I don't think it was a mistake.  Of course, being an MU guy, you probably think differently, and that's fine. 

Arkansas Fan

Quote from: mizzouman on August 10, 2017, 07:23:10 pm
It's always about the scheme.  Arkansas had a couple of decent running backs last year. Why?  Because of the scheme.  Stats are all about the scheme.

I wouldn't call a guy that ran for 1,360 yards as "decent." Once again, you show yourself as a clueless and idiotic Missouri troll.

mizzouman

Quote from: greenie on August 10, 2017, 08:23:10 pm
I don't get your point, and thus the question (and it was an honest question).  If there isn't a scheme that benefits a running back's stats, then how can you say he has good stats because of the scheme?  It's not like we were an overwhelmingly run-first team last year.  We put up quite a few passing yards.  And I certainly didn't belittle Crockett.  As I said, he's a decent running back, but the #7 back in the nation?  I don't agree with that at all.
There was no mention of any Razorbacks in that article.  IMO, it was placed on this board to feed the belief that a mistake was made in not recruiting Crockett.  CBB chose TJ Hammonds instead, and at this point, I don't think it was a mistake.  Of course, being an MU guy, you probably think differently, and that's fine. 
There are schemes that benefits the running back.

Anyway, all,this drivel doesn't matter. Crockett is a good back.  Number 7?  Maybe too high. We will see.

mizzouman

Quote from: Arkansas Fan on August 10, 2017, 08:52:05 pm
I wouldn't call a guy that ran for 1,360 yards as "decent." Once again, you show yourself as a clueless and idiotic Missouri troll.
Thank you for your kind words.

(notOM)Rebel123

Quote from: tophawg19 on August 10, 2017, 04:45:01 pm
he was so good against us that i couldn't even see him for the cloud of errr dust .... cloud of something anyway


Are you saying he is "Tanner English fast"....or vanished in a cloud of smoke?
"Knowledge is Good"....Emil Faber

bennyl08

Quote from: PorkRinds on August 10, 2017, 04:54:01 pm
Then we should use that scheme.

If we use that scheme then we won't be able to use power formations or throw the ball deep.

Every offensive scheme has strengths and weaknesses. For example, let's look at Oregon under Chip Kelley. That scheme was predicated on misdirection and speed, hoping the defense isn't fast enough to re-align themselves with motion, hoping the defense bites on the misdirection, and hoping that they can tire the defense out so that the defense starts making more mistakes. Their offense wasn't predicated on being better than the defense. It was designed to capitalize on mistakes. If the defense doesn't make mistakes, they are screwed. If the defensive line play is good, they get penetration and mess up the misdirection and timing of the plays. If the defense has quality depth, they sub in and don't get tired. And so on. It's an offensive scheme that works great against teams that are worse than you or on par with you, but not too good against teams that are better than you.

Contrast that with a more traditional, pro-style offense. Sure, the offense wants to trick and confuse the defense as well, but it isn't predicated on that. It doesn't hope the defense makes a mistake. A pro-style offense is designed to work even when the defense doesn't make any mistakes. However, it requires that you have players that can win their battles outright.

That's why every NFL team uses a pro-style offense and Chip Kelley's offense didn't end up doing so hot. Defenses are well coached, aren't going to make mistakes. You can't make a living in the NFL off of trickery. Best you can do is have a variety of plays that keeps the defense guessing and maximize your matchup advantages.
Quote from: PorkSoda on May 05, 2016, 09:24:05 pm
damn I thought it was only a color, didn't realize it was named after a liqueur. leave it to benny to make me research the history of chartreuse

hawginbigd1

I thought it was a mistake when White and Porter fell through. It appears that is true, but still more needs to be seen. Arguing Whaley v. Crockett is a straw man argument. Nobody takes Crockett over Whaley.

PorkRinds

Hell the kid didn't even get to play at the end of the year for weed possession. He's a good RB but we got what we needed and didn't have a place for him.  With his off the field issues it doesn't seem like a bad deal for us.

gchamblee

Quote from: mizzouman on August 10, 2017, 07:40:52 pm
That's my point. RW had great stats because of scheme as did Crockett. But so what?  Whether Crockett went to Arkansas or not is irrelevant. In fact demeaning Crockett is a pretty childish.

Just wish him the best and move on. You don't have to belittle a player to make you feel better.

This thread was made as an attack on our current coaching staff, not a celebration of the players accomplishments. Once you realize that, the posts start to make sense.

rljjr

Quote from: daBoar on August 10, 2017, 02:51:25 pm
In hinds sight it's a recruiting bust.  I sure would have preferred him to a juco non-qualifier.

No, it's not. It was a choice and we got the guys we wanted and they're doing great.

Youngsta71701

Quote from: King Kong on August 10, 2017, 03:58:36 pm
Every recruiting several and P5 program thought Whaley over Crockett. Crockett has better Freshman stats l. Of course he wasn't playing behind the SEC's regular season rushed either
I agree. But he said Whaley over Crockett is laughable. Come on man...He act like it's not even close or something.
"The more things change the more they stay the same"

hawgfan4life

Quote from: 31to6 on August 10, 2017, 03:13:30 pm
Huh? Did you quote the wrong post?

I didn't use the words you are responding to and I think we actually agree.

I used your post as an example to ague other posters nonsense.  Sorry if that didn't come across to readers as plain as it was in my mind.

hawgfan4life

Quote from: RyanMallettsEgo on August 10, 2017, 02:57:59 pm
Is this a joke?

Absolutely!  Did I really need to clarify?  LOL

His number of yards against AR is the exact percentage of belief I have that we messed up recruiting RB with him and that recruiting class.

RME

Quote from: hawgfan4life on August 11, 2017, 08:12:53 am
Absolutely!  Did I really need to clarify?  LOL

His number of yards against AR is the exact percentage of belief I have that we messed up recruiting RB with him and that recruiting class.

Ha, I figured it was but with some of the posters on this board it's not out of the question

Youngsta71701

Quote from: hawginbigd1 on August 10, 2017, 10:25:02 pm
I thought it was a mistake when White and Porter fell through. It appears that is true, but still more needs to be seen.
This was my only point. I was thinking this when it happened. Hoping they offered him after White and Porter committed to LSU and Texas respectively but they didn't. Now it's water under the bridge but it still won't stop people from talking about it. We'll just have to wait and see how it all plays out before final judgment.
"The more things change the more they stay the same"

hawgfan4life

Quote from: DEVIL DOG HOG on August 10, 2017, 04:31:53 pm
He even played in his street clothes.


That was funny right there!  Best chuckle of the day so far!

Youngsta71701

Quote from: PorkRinds on August 11, 2017, 12:16:44 am
Hell the kid didn't even get to play at the end of the year for weed possession. He's a good RB but we got what we needed and didn't have a place for him.  With his off the field issues it doesn't seem like a bad deal for us.
I'm just curious. I haven't seen anyone specify this. What exactly are and were his off the field issues? Can we please stop making excuses for this coaching staff and just man up and say we didn't offer him but maybe we should have. Especially after the White and Porter deal fell through. We had room for them but we didn't have room for Crockett correct?
"The more things change the more they stay the same"

hawgfan4life

Quote from: hawginbigd1 on August 10, 2017, 10:25:02 pm
I thought it was a mistake when White and Porter fell through. It appears that is true, but still more needs to be seen. Arguing Whaley v. Crockett is a straw man argument. Nobody takes Crockett over Whaley.

Maybe they knew what they had at the time and what they had lined up for the next recruiting class, and they didn't want to burn the scholarship on a RB they evaluated as less than what they wanted priority wise at that time.  Based on the two true FR we have and the Grad Transfer we got, I still think DC would not be one of our top 2 RBs and he might be about 4th.  That said, if he would be about 3rd or 4th in talent and potential on this years team, we would likely be recruiting a higher talented RB in the next class as well.  Ty Story was a highly rated QB coming out of H.S. and even AL offered him.  He is struggling to get into the back-up spot and keep that spot and we already have QBs lined up to sign that may have more potential than he does.  That is with a QB that was being offered by AL.  Crockett was NOT anywhere close to being a high level rated RB coming out of H.S. 

AR evaluated, made their decision (which was clearly the right call based on their evaluation that was similar to EVERY other major program), and they are where they are.  Nothing wrong with wishing we had taken DC.  Nothing wrong with questioning the evaluation, but that should be hand-in-hand with perspective.  It is just unproductive negativism to bash the coaches for the recruiting that occurred and decisions made at that time.

Youngsta71701

Quote from: hawgfan4life on August 11, 2017, 08:28:54 am
Maybe they knew what they had at the time and what they had lined up for the next recruiting class, and they didn't want to burn the scholarship on a RB they evaluated as less than what they wanted priority wise at that time.  Based on the two true FR we have and the Grad Transfer we got, I still think DC would not be one of our top 2 RBs and he might be about 4th.  That said, if he would be about 3rd or 4th in talent and potential on this years team, we would likely be recruiting a higher talented RB in the next class as well.  Ty Story was a highly rated QB coming out of H.S. and even AL offered him.  He is struggling to get into the back-up spot and keep that spot and we already have QBs lined up to sign that may have more potential than he does.  That is with a QB that was being offered by AL.  Crockett was NOT anywhere close to being a high level rated RB coming out of H.S. 

AR evaluated, made their decision (which was clearly the right call based on their evaluation that was similar to EVERY other major program), and they are where they are.  Nothing wrong with wishing we had taken DC.  Nothing wrong with questioning the evaluation, but that should be hand-in-hand with perspective.  It is just unproductive negativism to bash the coaches for the recruiting that occurred and decisions made at that time.
Maybe, maybe, maybe...

I'm guessing you haven't seen this kid play :-\? He is big, fast, strong, explosive, smart, has good vision, and can blitz pick up. What else do you need from a running back. He's bigger, stronger, and just as fast than any back we have on our team right now. Period. Might not be as quick as say a TJ Hammonds or a Chase Hayden but he is fast. They missed out on a good one. Plain & simple. "A diamond in the rough" I guess you can say. But some will go to any lengths to try to protect coach B and his staff. I'm not criticizing his staff as a matter of fact I love Coach B and his staff but let's call a spade a spade.

Disclaimer: I will never be a Missouri fan but I am a Crockett fan. Have been since he grew up playing Pee Wee football and Junior High football in Magnolia. Not to mention he played a season for my alma mater the Camden Fairview Cardinals under Coach Buck James ;D. Yes, I know this kid personally and have never heard of him getting into any type of trouble when he was coming up through the school system. So until someone shows me some concrete evidence on that, that excuse is BS.

Here are some highlights just in case you need to see them. Carry on...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBJUERmHCog

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eC6gwvn07M
"The more things change the more they stay the same"