So, yes, you're saying you believe we'll be better without Barkley. I get your logic I just find it laughable that anyone thinks defenses are going to stop Trace first. Trace is a good runner but not a game changer on the ground. If Miles is as good as most believe he'll be the one they take away. If he doesn't live up to the hype (or another back) we're in a world of trouble
OT: Q. Henderson leaving pitt for NFL (?)
- Thread starter GregInPitt
- Start date
So, yes, you're saying you believe we'll be better without Barkley. I get your logic I just find it laughable that anyone thinks defenses are going to stop Trace first. Trace is a good runner but not a game changer on the ground. If Miles is as good as most believe he'll be the one they take away. If he doesn't live up to the hype (or another back) we're in a world of trouble
Why? If they key on Sanders then we'll be in the same situation we were in this year. McSorley will eat them alive. Sanders has already shown he can run. Recruiting is the key and everyone knows Franklin can recruit.
McSorley ran for 431 yards this year. He didn't eat teams alive. He'll be productive and pick up yards but he's not Lamar Jackson. He doesn't scare teams with his running. He does hurt teams obviously but there's no way he's the key.
Where did I ever say he would hurt teams with his running? If teams sell out to stop the run, he will pass the ball. If they try to stop him from passing, the team will run. That's the point of my argument.
Exactly the point. We will be as good next year without Barkley....the same thing you scoffed at. Keep up with your own trolling.
You said could be better because teams won't be keying on Barkley. It doesn't make any sense. If it is the same as now with a less talented back it won't be AS good and certainly not better
How about this...I think Sanders will have more yards next year than Barkley had this year....does that clarify it for you? Not because Sanders is better, but because he won't have the attention paid to him that Barkley did. And because the RB is more productive, the offense could be more productive. Why is this so hard for you to comprehend?
What is allowing him to get more yards? Why wouldn't defenses continue to take away the back? It worked. We have to adapt. If you think we'll be able to adapt and the offense will be different under Rahne I can go along with it even if I disagree and think losing Barkley will be huge. But that's not what you're saying
Just like Millen said when he announced the game...McSorley will hurt you but Barkley will kill you. If you think teams are going to sell out to stop Sanders like they did Barkley you're crazy. Defenses will play more like Iowa did against PSU....where Barkley gained a ton. I also don't think McSorely will have as many passing yards, but he won't need as many.
Quoting Millen...never good but I get the point. I'm still lost on how it's going to be better. Miles runs for more than Barkley but we don't throw for as many yards?
Because we can close out games running the ball. Longer more sustained drives would have helped us this year and we will have that next year. Have you really never seen a team lose a guy that was supposed to be irreplaceable and they end up being as good or better (hello DeShaun Watson and Clemson)?
Is Clemson really as good or better? I guess we'll find out. I don't think anyone is as good as Bama and Clemson were last year to be honest.
Wouldn't teams, regardless, key on the run game in that spot?
If you're right I'll give you credit. If I'm right you'll probably call me a Pitt or an Ohio State fan. lol
If you're not a troll, then you're the worst fan in the history of PSU. But I still think we have too many weapons on offense to be ruined by Barkley leaving. My concern is on the defensive side of the ball. I just don't think PSU should be written off next year because Barkley leaves...that's what Pitt fans are hoping. I'll bet Oklahoma is still ranked in the top 10 even though Mayfield is graduating.
I don't understand why being a fan means you have to agree with masses. I think we should still be ranked 8-12 to start next year. I don't think the offense will be AS good but the defense should improve. Though losing Allen is worrisome
No reason we should be ranked behind Oklahoma. Mayfield is way more important to their offense than Barkley is to ours. And we have our QB back. But I guarantee they're ranked ahead of us. How about OSU losing Barrett? Those teams don't get down graded for losing one player just like I don't think PSU should get downgraded for losing one player. Look at the RB's Oklahoma lost last year but they were fine this year because they had Mayfield back. We will be fine with Trace coming back.
We will be fine. No question about it. That kid that played for Ohio State against Michigan when Barrett went out impressed me with his arm but he's not a great runner (limited sample size) so Ohio State may actually be better without Barrett. Does anyone here think Barrett is great? We made him look elite but he's not. Oklahoma has Kyler Murray waiting in the wings. They won't fall far. We know our roster better than other teams so we don't believe our loss will be as bad. The reality is Saquon is better than Mayfield and infinitely better than JT. I'd personally feel better if s certain RB at Georgia was on our roster but you can't get them all
Which one has a better ring to it? #VolDuzzi or #NoleDuzzi
Maybe this guy will come yo the BWI and critique a players futures.
KanePAFreshman
More proof Barkley isn’t as good as most make him out to be. He may be one of those guys good at workouts and fast but woefully short when push comes to shove
9 Yesterday at 8:17 PM
Latest posts
-
-
-
Wrestling Could Penn State be hosting a wrestling dual at Beaver Stadium this fall?- Latest: The Spin Meister
