Gurley and Saquon Working Out Together

[NateDawg122]

http://bleacherreport.com/post/los-angeles-rams/845d00dc-b844-4499-9649-0934532a89df

Guys are doing 315 pound deadlifts straight to 42" box jumps!

Watching both of them run at the end you can tell Gurley is a trained track star. He has great technique, especially with his upper body, that helps him generate speed. That's why the trainer was telling Saquon to run with "Big arms" like Todd.

 

[JonRam99]

Gosh Gurley is just so much bigger. I used to be jealous of other guys' RB's, but no more!!!
Not knocking Saquon, looking forward to seeing how much damage he can do to the Iggles. Knock 'em off their perch a bit.

 

[Legatron4]

Gurley looks a lot faster then Saquon.

 

[MrRiceGuyRJ]

Gurley does have great form running. I think Barkley will be much more difficult to tackle because he's so stout and strong, but Gurley will take more the distance. And who needs to break tackles if you can't get a finger on him?

 

[NateDawg122]

Gurley looks a lot faster then Saquon.

He is faster. Some of that has to do with technique. You can watch Gurley in the video and tell he's a trained track star. He's using great technique, especially in his upper body, to help him run faster. That's why the trainer was telling Barkley to run with "Big arms" like Todd.

Saquon is a more sudden athlete and has great burst, but he can't hang with Todd in the open field.

 

[NateDawg122]

Gurley does have great form running. I think Barkley will be much more difficult to tackle because he's so stout and strong, but Gurley will take more the distance. And who needs to break tackles if you can't get a finger on him?

I actually think Barkley has a long way to go in that area. Biggest knock on Saquon in college was that he didn't get nearly as many YAC as you would expect from someone his size and strength. Gurley was much better at consistently breaking tackles and getting YAC in college.

Here's a good write-up by NDT Scouting on some of the things Saquon needs to fix as a pro, downhill running mentality being one of them. The other being his vision and lack of decisiveness:

https://www.ndtscouting.com/ledyard-evaluating-beauty-saquon-barkleys-game-without-ignoring-warts/

 

[JonRam99]

Gurley does have great form running. I think Barkley will be much more difficult to tackle because he's so stout and strong, but Gurley will take more the distance. And who needs to break tackles if you can't get a finger on him?

LOL you'd think that by 1:55 in that video, that Gurley would be low on gas. He was just getting warmed up when he blew past them like they were standing still. WOW.

 

[MrRiceGuyRJ]

LOL you'd think that by 1:55 in that video, that Gurley would be low on gas. He was just getting warmed up when he blew past them like they were standing still. WOW.

Every time I watch the video it makes me full of joy how much he embarrassed the Seahawks. He was a man amongst boys that day

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I actually think Barkley has a long way to go in that area. Biggest knock on Saquon in college was that he didn't get nearly as many YAC as you would expect from someone his size and strength. Gurley was much better at consistently breaking tackles and getting YAC in college.

Here's a good write-up by NDT Scouting on some of the things Saquon needs to fix as a pro, downhill running mentality being one of them. The other being his vision and lack of decisiveness:

https://www.ndtscouting.com/ledyard-evaluating-beauty-saquon-barkleys-game-without-ignoring-warts/

Your dislike of Barkley is obvious. Because your critique of him is slanted and inaccurate. And this Western PA Pitt lover didn't say some of the things in his article that you claim.

Barkley breaks tackles while running the ball or catching the ball. He has great vision (even Ledyard said that), and is a very good pass protector. His offensive coordinator didn't line him up to get a head of steam when hitting an inside hole. Plus the holes were few and far between in his first year. The line slowly improved with better coaching and personnel. But, sure he had a tendency to bounce runs outside to more space. The scheme also had him bounce a lot of runs outside. . We will see how is with the Giants. Penn State didn't feature Barkley like most other schools would have. They spread the ball around. It definitely was not a poker run scheme, and Moorhead's schemes did not favor Barkley being the focus of the offense. I don't think he trusted his OLine combined with being so close to them before the snap. And this 'draft expert' prefers Guice and Michel over Barkley? Give me a break. NFL head coaches disagree with him. Most people with eyes do too.

 

[NateDawg122]

Your dislike of Barkley is obvious. Because your critique of him is slanted and inaccurate. And this Western PA Pitt lover didn't say some of the things in his article that you claim.

Barkley breaks tackles while running the ball or catching the ball. He has great vision (even Ledyard said that), and is a very good pass protector. His offensive coordinator didn't line him up to get a head of steam when hitting an inside hole. Plus the holes were few and far between in his first year. The line slowly improved with better coaching and personnel. But, sure he had a tendency to bounce runs outside to more space. The scheme also had him bounce a lot of runs outside. . We will see how is with the Giants. Penn State didn't feature Barkley like most other schools would have. They spread the ball around. It definitely was not a poker run scheme, and Moorhead's schemes did not favor Barkley being the focus of the offense. I don't think he trusted his OLine combined with being so close to them before the snap. And this 'draft expert' prefers Guice and Michel over Barkley? Give me a break. NFL head coaches disagree with him. Most people with eyes do too.

I know you're really into Barkley and everything, but you don't know more than Jon Ledyard about evaluating football players. Look at his record, the dude knows what he's talking about.

Contrary to what you believe, I like Barkley. Everything I've read indicates he's a great guy with a strong work ethic, he did everything the right way at PSU. He also has the ability to be an elite NFL RB for a long time. But he has legitimate flaws in his game. He doesn't have the vision or decisiveness of Guice and Michel nor does he have the same downhill mentality. He doesn't read blockers like those two nor has he developed the same nuance for setting up those blocks. As an athlete he's obviously superior, but Guice and Michel are both more refined backs.

And I don't care about him taking shotgun handoffs because you can see him still make poor decisions on tape in those formation. Running out of shotgun is not an excuse for running backwards when you have a perfectly good crease to hit up the middle. I know you think Saquon is perfect, but the flaws are there.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I know you're really into Barkley and everything, but you don't know more than Jon Ledyard about evaluating football players. Look at his record, the dude knows what he's talking about.

Contrary to what you believe, I like Barkley. Everything I've read indicates he's a great guy with a strong work ethic, he did everything the right way at PSU. He also has the ability to be an elite NFL RB for a long time. But he has legitimate flaws in his game. He doesn't have the vision or decisiveness of Guice and Michel nor does he have the same downhill mentality. He doesn't read blockers like those two nor has he developed the same nuance for setting up those blocks. As an athlete he's obviously superior, but Guice and Michel are both more refined backs.

And I don't care about him taking shotgun handoffs because you can see him still make poor decisions on tape in those formation. Running out of shotgun is not an excuse for running backwards when you have a perfectly good crease to hit up the middle. I know you think Saquon is perfect, but the flaws are there.

Barkley isn't an Earl Campbell style of runner. Some runners are North/South and others are East/West. Maybe Guice or Michel are more of the type that just pounds the ball up the gut all game (I don't think Michel is btw), but a smart player plays to his strengths. Similarly to Chris Johnson, Barkley likes to use his speed to get to the open field. He would rather hit the edges than trust a small hole up the gut. The goal of most offenses is to get the playmakers into space. We all saw what happened to Gurley in 2016 when holes closed quickly and then this year when Olinemen are blocking at the next level like Saffold was. Its the same thing. If Ledyard (who I think is a bum and has slanted opinions) desires Guice or Michel over Barkley in a passing league where running and catching is equally important. More power to him. It just proves to show that he is old school and would take a LeGarrett Blount over a Marshall Faulk type because he wants a runningback to be able to run between the tackles first and foremost. He sounds like just another opinionated fool that calls himself an expert. I guess I am supposed to follow the experts advice over my own eyes. I am certain that if I did, that the consensus would be that Barkley is worth a higher pick than Guice or Michel.

 

[NateDawg122]

Barkley isn't an Earl Campbell style of runner. Some runners are North/South and others are East/West. Maybe Guice or Michel are more of the type that just pounds the ball up the gut all game (I don't think Michel is btw), but a smart player plays to his strengths. Similarly to Chris Johnson, Barkley likes to use his speed to get to the open field. He would rather hit the edges than trust a small hole up the gut. The goal of most offenses is to get the playmakers into space. We all saw what happened to Gurley in 2016 when holes closed quickly and then this year when Olinemen are blocking at the next level like Saffold was. Its the same thing. If Ledyard (who I think is a bum and has slanted opinions) desires Guice or Michel over Barkley in a passing league where running and catching is equally important. More power to him. It just proves to show that he is old school and would take a LeGarrett Blount over a Marshall Faulk type because he wants a runningback to be able to run between the tackles first and foremost. He sounds like just another opinionated fool that calls himself an expert. I guess I am supposed to follow the experts advice over my own eyes. I am certain that if I did, that the consensus would be that Barkley is worth a higher pick than Guice or Michel.

If Barkley is playing to his strengths then I would like him to play like a 230 pound RB that set weight-room records at PSU. But he doesn't play like that. He runs more like a scat back where he relies on his superior athleticism to outrun guys. That doesn't work as well in the NFL, ask Melvin Gordon.

You equating Michel to LeGarrett Blount is honestly one of the most ridiculous things I've read regarding this class. They are completely different players who rely on two totally different methods of running. Michel is a zone runner who is very good out of the backfield, UGA just didn't use him as much last year because they had Swift. He is a balanced runner with good size and incredible vision and short-area quickness. He uses quick cuts and burst to beat the defense. Blount is a plodder who relies purely on size and physicality to beat people in a power-run scheme. This shows me that you haven't actually watched any footage of Michel and I'm betting the same goes for Guice.

Lastly, I'd love for you to explain your stance on Ledyard. Aside from the Barkley comments, what scouting information of his do you think is nonsense?

 

[NateDawg122]

Gurley does have great form running. I think Barkley will be much more difficult to tackle because he's so stout and strong, but Gurley will take more the distance.

Barkley isn't even the best power-runner in this class, let alone better than Todd.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

If Barkley is playing to his strengths then I would like him to play like a 230 pound RB that set weight-room records at PSU. But he doesn't play like that. He runs more like a scat back where he relies on his superior athleticism to outrun guys. That doesn't work as well in the NFL, ask Melvin Gordon.

You equating Michel to LeGarrett Blount is honestly one of the most ridiculous things I've read regarding this class. They are completely different players who rely on two totally different methods of running. Michel is a zone runner who is very good out of the backfield, UGA just didn't use him as much last year because they had Swift. He is a balanced runner with good size and incredible vision and short-area quickness. He uses quick cuts and burst to beat the defense. Blount is a plodder who relies purely on size and physicality to beat people in a power-run scheme. This shows me that you haven't actually watched any footage of Michel and I'm betting the same goes for Guice.

Lastly, I'd love for you to explain your stance on Ledyard. Aside from the Barkley comments, what scouting information of his do you think is nonsense?

I don't revere any draft analysts. They are all very hit and miss. And no I wasn't comparing Michel to Blount. I was suggesting Ledyard prefers a strong runner that hits the hole hard. Gets four yards a pop etc,..He seems to think every back should fit into a neat little box. He likes Guice and Michel better because they fit what he likes in a back. He isn't considering ability nor upside. He basically ignores the value of the pass catching back in present day offenses. Plus, it seems like he feels that Barkley won't run up the middle in the Pros, because he didn't do it in college. He has no idea why Barkley developed those tendencies. He only considers his narrow view of the player and mentions none of the reasons that I listed early as to why Barkley does what he does. Finally a homerun threat like Chris Johnson is a huge asset. Barkley could be considered a homerun threat. So, Ledyard isn't evaluating Barkley as much as he is comparing him to what he likes a back to be.


Yes Barkley is playing to his strengths. He prefers to rush the edge. His incredible leg strength and quickness allow him to make crazy cuts and gives him very good body control. In that regard, no back in this last draft can do the things he does. Turning him into a between the tackles back would be a waste of his talent. He isn't a one dimensional runner. He has run up the middle, around the end, and ran routes. He is versatile like Gurley, who wasn't as versatile in Fisher's offense.

You have always been defensive when it comes to Barkley. Are you afraid he will unseat Gurley as the top back in the NFL? Or angry that he was talked about as a possible #1 overall and was drafted #3, while Gurley was a surprise pick at ten? None of us know if Barkley will be great or average or stink. The fact that he was a successful runner despite an undermanned Oline, his first season, makes me think he will be pretty good with a good OLine. The fact that he's on the Giants, doesn't give me the feeling that he will be used to his fullest potential, but maybe Shurmur surprises me. I generally don't bash any rookie once he is drafted and before he plays. Some guys do more than expected and others do less. At this point the draft analysis is mute. Let's see what he can do now that he's an NFL player.

 

[NateDawg122]

I don't revere any draft analysts. They are all very hit and miss. And no I wasn't comparing Michel to Blount. I was suggesting Ledyard prefers a strong runner that hits the hole hard. Gets four yards a pop etc,..He seems to think every back should fit into a neat little box. He likes Guice and Michel better because they fit what he likes in a back. He isn't considering ability nor upside. He basically ignores the value of the pass catching back in present day offenses. Plus, it seems like he feels that Barkley won't run up the middle in the Pros, because he didn't do it in college. He has no idea why Barkley developed those tendencies. He only considers his narrow view of the player and mentions none of the reasons that I listed early as to why Barkley does what he does. Finally a homerun threat like Chris Johnson is a huge asset. Barkley could be considered a homerun threat. So, Ledyard isn't evaluating Barkley as much as he is comparing him to what he likes a back to be.


Yes Barkley is playing to his strengths. He prefers to rush the edge. His incredible leg strength and quickness allow him to make crazy cuts and gives him very good body control. In that regard, no back in this last draft can do the things he does. Turning him into a between the tackles back would be a waste of his talent. He isn't a one dimensional runner. He has run up the middle, around the end, and ran routes. He is versatile like Gurley, who wasn't as versatile in Fisher's offense.

You have always been defensive when it comes to Barkley. Are you afraid he will unseat Gurley as the top back in the NFL? Or angry that he was talked about as a possible #1 overall and was drafted #3, while Gurley was a surprise pick at ten? None of us know if Barkley will be great or average or stink. The fact that he was a successful runner despite an undermanned Oline, his first season, makes me think he will be pretty good with a good OLine. The fact that he's on the Giants, doesn't give me the feeling that he will be used to his fullest potential, but maybe Shurmur surprises me. I generally don't bash any rookie once he is drafted and before he plays. Some guys do more than expected and others do less. At this point the draft analysis is mute. Let's see what he can do now that he's an NFL player.

First of all, upside is literally the only reason Ledyard ranked Barkley AHEAD of Michel in his final rankings:

https://www.ndtscouting.com/ledyard-2018-nfl-draft-final-positional-rankings-running-back/

He also had Ronald Jones as #4 and most of that is because of his ability out of the backfield. Ledyard talks about that ability quite often actually and he values a Marshall Faulk type more than an Eric Dickerson type back. He also praised Barkley for his explosiveness and home-run ability. You really have no clue what you're talking about. Maybe you should actually do some research before you call a guy out on his scouting methods. Also, it really doesn't matter why Barkley developed those habits, for the same reason it doesn't matter why Trent Richardson developed terrible vision. What matters is if those issues will be corrected at the NFL level or not. By the way, Michel weighs 15 pounds less than Saquon yet he breaks more tackles and gets more YAC per run than Barkley.

You're acting like Saquon can't be good running inside and outside. You realize the best backs are the ones who do both, correct?? That's what makes guys like Todd, Zeke, AP, etc. so good as runners is they are excellent running inside and outside. There are going to be a lot of short-yardage situations where Barkley needs to just take what's there and move the chains. He has the all the physical ability to do it, it's a matter of developing that mentality.

First of all, Saquon went #2 not #3. With how much you've "studied" him I'm surprised you don't even know when he was drafted. Gurley was drafted at #10 with a torn ACL, so that's a dumb argument. And just from looking at the tape, I honestly don't think Saquon is on Gurley's level so that's really not a concern for me. And I already explained that I actually like Barkley and I want him to succeed. He's not a POS like Mixon. The main thing is I want him to run all over the Cowboys for a long time in that division. But whenever discussion about him comes up I'm not just going to sweep his flaws under the rug.

 

[Ramlock]

Barkley could be considered a homerun threat.

Gurley is already....