Cajuns not settled on RB starter

[NewsCopy]

  LAFAYETTE — When asked if he could name his starting tailback, University of Louisiana football coach Rickey Bustle declined after a 113-play Saturday morning scrimmage at Cajun Field.

That’s not necessarily a bad thing, said running backs coach Justin Lustig.

The rest of the story

By BOB ARDOIN
Special to The Advocate

[CajunRed]

I have not be able to make any of the scrimmages, so haven't seen any of the running backs. For those of you who have, how would you rank them if the season started tomorrow?

igeaux.mobi

[RaisingCajun08]

_ I have not be able to make any of the scrimmages, so haven't seen any of the running backs. For those of you who have, how would you rank them if the season started tomorrow?

igeaux.mobi _

Very tough to answer that question. We have some good talent at RB and all are pretty close to the same level, from what little I have seen. If I had to rank, this is what I would rank as.

1. Shankle - veteran of the group. Knows the system but better keep working hard because others are gunning for the starting possition
2. Spikes - he is living up to his hype. Great speed just needs to learn the position
3. Walker - has the potential but looks like he needs to get used to the speed of the college game. Needs to work on his hands.
3.1 Streeter - if he keeps working hard and gets his chance, he could shine. Another RB with good speed. I have seen little of him because of the others in front.

[RaginWaldo]

Shankle??? are you serious, the dude is clearly not as talented as the other 3 and just cause he "knows the system" he really isnt that experienced and with Bustle making a new gameplan to adjust to the talent he has in the backfield id say Shankle is definitely not first.

1. Spikes/Streeter
3. Walker
4. Shankle

imo

[cajunfan32]

_ Shankle??? are you serious, the dude is clearly not as talented as the other 3 and just cause he "knows the system" he really isnt that experienced and with Bustle making a new gameplan to adjust to the talent he has in the backfield id say Shankle is definitely not first.

1. Spikes/Streeter
3. Walker
4. Shankle

imo _

He's the only one who has seen time at the D-1 level. That is why he is first. I think the other guys can eventually pass him but right now he is #1 imo and will start at Georgia. He does have some talent though and i dont think he is last out of the 4 for sure.

[zephyr]

_ Shankle??? are you serious, the dude is clearly not as talented as the other 3 and just cause he "knows the system" he really isnt that experienced and with Bustle making a new gameplan to adjust to the talent he has in the backfield id say Shankle is definitely not first.

1. Spikes/Streeter
3. Walker
4. Shankle

imo _

Shankle doesn't have the pop that these other guys have but he's smart and dependable and able to make a play here and there. That's why he will remain the top guy for a few weeks. You will not see the others ahead of him until the coaches see them play in live action to determine where they stand. However, I think that by midseason, you will see the following order:

Spikes
Walker
Streeter
Shankle

Having said that, I don't think you will necessarily see one back emerge this season. I think you're going to see a committee approach for the entire season though. These backs are so similar in skill sets that I think you're going to see a lot of them average about 8-10 carries per game.

[CajunConnection]

Been to both scrimmages and I see it as :

Shankle
Walker,Spikes ,and Streeter in no particular order.

They will all play.

[Just1More]

_ Shankle doesn't have the pop that these other guys have but he's smart and dependable and able to make a play here and there. That's why he will remain the top guy for a few weeks. You will not see the others ahead of him until the coaches see them play in live action to determine where they stand. However, I think that by midseason, you will see the following order:

Spikes
Walker
Streeter
Shankle

Having said that, I don't think you will necessarily see one back emerge this season. I think you're going to see a committee approach for the entire season though. These backs are so similar in skill sets that I think you're going to see a lot of them average about 8-10 carries per game. _

I haven't been to the scrimmages so I've been relying on what you guys, BJ and Josh write. I'm not the least bit concerned that one guy hasn't overwhelmed yet. That can still come once the OL and the offensive rythmn clicks. I also believe it is near impossible for any back to shine in scrimmages for a variety of reasons.

I am a little concerned if we see more than two of these guys getting equal time for much of the season, by design. Just like the QB spot, it takes a back reps for the game to slow down for him, to be patient behind his blocks, see the holes and seams, hang onto the football, get his blocking assignments down, and so on.

I suspect we will have a clear lead RB by game 3 or 4 and a designated #2. I expect to see #3 when 1 or 2 come up hobbled, miss assignments, or put the ball on the ground one too many times. I see #4 riding the pine for all but special circumstances. If this does not happen by game 3 or 4. it will be a poor reflection on the entire offensive system. IMO

[zephyr]

_ I haven't been to the scrimmages so I've been relying on what you guys, BJ and Josh write. I'm not the least bit concerned that one guy hasn't overwhelmed yet. That can still come once the OL and the offensive rythmn clicks. I also believe it is near impossible for any back to shine in scrimmages for a variety of reasons.

I am a little concerned if we see more than two of these guys getting equal time for much of the season, by design. Just like the QB spot, it takes a back reps for the game to slow down for him, to be patient behind his blocks, see the holes and seams, hang onto the football, get his blocking assignments down, and so on.

I suspect we will have a clear lead RB by game 3 or 4 and a designated #2. I expect to see #3 when 1 or 2 come up hobbled, miss assignments, or put the ball on the ground one too many times. I see #4 riding the pine for all but special circumstances. If this does not happen by game 3 or 4. it will be a poor reflection on the entire offensive system. IMO _

What you say makes sense. The reasons I think you will see some form of a committee approach for much of the season are due to several factors:

1. None of these backs, at least IMO, are built to carry the ball 20 times per game for an entire season, at least not yet.
2. They all seem to have matching skill sets with good quickness and speed and all are good runners in space versus interior backs like Fenroy was. If neither has distanced themselves from the others, the coaches are very liable to play each and find a combination and chemistry for that particular time and ride the hot hand. I'm not saying they're going to play all 4 every game but I think you will see 3 of the 4 get carries just about every game.
3. Streeter, Spikes and Walker seem to be 3 of our most talented offensive players all of which have big play ability. I see the coaches trying to get them all on the field as much as possible. Yesterday, Streeter took a long run to the house and is regarded as possibly the fastest player on the team. Walker took a nice screen and would have gone the distance had Pierre Hill not been flagged for holding. Spikes has had some really nice carries and made some tremendous plays in practice and has also carried the bulk of carries in both scrimmages.
4. I think you're going to see coach Bustle run the triple option again like when Babb was QB and I think this is a good idea. That allows you to possibly get two talented and shifty backs in the backfield at the same time and create some interesting separation on the field. There was a nice triple option play yesterday where Desormeaux took a pitch and got some nice yards. Had that been one of our tailbacks, they might have broken a bigger play.
5. We missed big play production last year. All of these guys give us that potential when they are on the field.

I could care less how we get it done. If it means giving all backs 10 carries per game and averaging 180-200 yards per game on the ground, how would you classify that as a dysfunctioning system? If it means more wins, I don't think many will care

[Just1More]

_ What you say makes sense. The reasons I think you will see some form of a committee approach for much of the season are due to several factors:

1. None of these backs, at least IMO, are built to carry the ball 20 times per game for an entire season, at least not yet.
2. They all seem to have matching skill sets with good quickness and speed and all are good runners in space versus interior backs like Fenroy was. If neither has distanced themselves from the others, the coaches are very liable to play each and find a combination and chemistry for that particular time and ride the hot hand. I'm not saying they're going to play all 4 every game but I think you will see 3 of the 4 get carries just about every game.
3. Streeter, Spikes and Walker seem to be 3 of our most talented offensive players all of which have big play ability. I see the coaches trying to get them all on the field as much as possible. Yesterday, Streeter took a long run to the house and is regarded as possibly the fastest player on the team. Walker took a nice screen and would have gone the distance had Pierre Hill not been flagged for holding. Spikes has had some really nice carries and made some tremendous plays in practice and has also carried the bulk of carries in both scrimmages.
4. I think you're going to see coach Bustle run the triple option again like when Babb was QB and I think this is a good idea. That allows you to possibly get two talented and shifty backs in the backfield at the same time and create some interesting separation on the field. There was a nice triple option play yesterday where Desormeaux took a pitch and got some nice yards. Had that been one of our tailbacks, they might have broken a bigger play.
5. We missed big play production last year. All of these guys give us that potential when they are on the field.

I could care less how we get it done. If it means giving all backs 10 carries per game and averaging 180-200 yards per game on the ground, how would you classify that as a dysfunctioning system? If it means more wins, I don't think many will care _

All good points. good point on their size and durability (I haven't sized them up - but height and body weight mean nothing in so far as durability. a fast brick is still a brick). good point on the triple option (and I too like it being utilized). And of course. I don't care what is done if it produces a full season of positive results. I still believe a lead RB will materialize and the coaches and even we will not consider all 4 as relative equals in a relatively short time.

It is quite often the norm to have 3 good "unfamiliar" RBs and one with a moderate amount of experience to not outclass each other in practice and scrimmages. That is not usually a good excuse for not picking a #1 that sees the field more frequently than the rest. I'm not saying a RB by committee will not happen at first. but if it goes on by design for the bulk of the season. I believe it will signify an odd coaching mentality.

If I had quadruplets for RBs. that I couldn't tell apart on or off the field. I'd put a different number on each and still announce a #1, 2, 3 and 4. I'd give extra ice cream to #4 and tell him how life isn't fair. never was. never will be. He'll probably end up happier and more successful than the other three. a little overweight. but happy. I'm just having fun Zephyr. We'll see how it all unfolds. I can't wait!

[JBO70538]

Does this remind any of you guys of the 2005 season when an unknown freshman running back emerged out of a group of backs that were supposed to be a “committee”? Fenroy turned out to be a great one. Could the football gods be so gracious a second time around? If so, who’s your favorite?

[RaginWaldo]

Just a random thought, but why not impose the 3 headed monster complex? I believe we have the backs and talent to do so. Something that resembled Pierre Thomas, Reggie Bush, and Mike Bell of last year. Keeps all the backs healthy and very useful as each weapon can be explosive and deadly at any moment. Streeter and or Spikes can be used as screens or pitches to the outside and Spikes and Walker could be the Hardnose runners straight up the gut or near the goal line.

[zephyr]

_ Just a random thought, but why not impose the 3 headed monster complex? I believe we have the backs and talent to do so. Something that resembled Pierre Thomas, Reggie Bush, and Mike Bell of last year. Keeps all the backs healthy and very useful as each weapon can be explosive and deadly at any moment. Streeter and or Spikes can be used as screens or pitches to the outside and Spikes and Walker could be the Hardnose runners straight up the gut or near the goal line. _

I think you will see something similar to this used for a while. I think you're going to see at least 2 backs and very possibly 3 used in some form of rotation for a while. I don't know if any of these guys are feature guys right now.

[RaisingCajun08]

_ Does this remind any of you guys of the 2005 season when an unknown freshman running back emerged out of a group of backs that were supposed to be a “committee”? Fenroy turned out to be a great one. Could the football gods be so gracious a second time around? If so, who’s your favorite? _

Spikes

[zephyr]

I think the coaches would secretly say that Spikes is the guy they see longterm at the position. I know they've been very impressed with his work ethic and desire to be "the guy". He has the tools they feel will give this team the production at the spot but Robert Walker is right behind him. They are both young and come with plenty of upside.