Quote:Every RB will get tackled for losses, especially when the OL allows penetration. First off, let's skip the over exaggeration. Cook doesn't get tackled for loss "over and over". 

 

No RB will pop a 20 yard run every time they touch the football. What I personally notice from watching Cook vs. Fournette cutups is that Fournette left a lot of yards on the field. 

 

When the OL blasts a hole, both are equally dynamic (perhaps LF moreso because once he gets a full steam going, he's tough to stop at the 2nd level).

 

When the OL doesn't create a massive hole in which the RB can accelerate however, LF more often than not puts his shoulder down and picks up 2-3 yards and be done with it. Now there's definitely a fine line here, as sometimes you do want your RB to do that. But there were several plays where I saw (or felt) that the lanes would open up if LF showed more patience instead of simply bulldozing his way in.

 

On the other hand, I thought Cook did a much better job of taking those 2-3 yard gains if that's all there is. But at the same time, I thought he also did as good a job on runs that should have been -3 yards that he turned into 3 or 4 yard gains.

 

Also going back to "big plays". Majority of LF's big plays are when the OL blasts holes through for him and he basically bursts through it, maybe make one-cut, then explode into the secondary where he turns on his jets and does the rest.

 

While you see some of these with Cook, there were just as many runs where the run looks like a 3-4 yard gain for most normal backs, but his vision, patience, and burst turns it into a huge play.

It's give or take with both of them. Cook certainly has the shake to improvise more if nothing is there but I'm actually going to question whether he even can grind down for 3-4 yards when he is hit in the backfield. Like Jaggy said, 20% of his carries are for a loss, I wasn't exaggerating at all when I say that I see Cook tackled for a loss over and over. He lacks the power to push the pile at all. Once someone gets their mitts on him (admittabdly this is pretty darn tough), he's down. I think that if we get stuffed for a loss 20% of the time on first down, you are in a position that's 2nd and 10 or 12, that puts even more strain on your quarterback. We need to stay out of 2nd and 3rd and longs. Sometimes Fournette picks the wrong hole to hit, he isn't as patient a runner as I would like, but that can be taught. When he does pick the wrong hole or smashes up in there, he's going to push that pile for 3-4 yards even on a crap carry. There's a huge difference between 2nd and 6 and 2nd and 12. There are so many options in playcalling from there, especially with the play action. If we had an elite quarterback, I could see getting on board with Cook because you could use him in soooo many ways and you just fling it all over the field and create matchup nightmares all day like the Saints with Bush/Sproles. I think our qb is pretty bad though, and outside of Cook providing him a nice dumpoff, I don't think you can build an offensive identity around that kind of player. With a dominant defense, you need a running game that rarely goes 3 and out, that controls the clock, these are the kind of teams that Coughlin builds. He doesn't builld Colts or Saints teams that sling the ball all over the field, score in 2 minutes and wonder why the defense is gassed. He builds teams that grind out first downs, that march 16 plays over 8-10 minutes that wears the other teams defense out. He's old school and smash mouth, that's why I see Fournette anyways. Still a good chance they go defense depending on what the board looks like but I don't think Cook is a Coughlin man. Fournette seems to have good character for miles. I love his story. 

---