Easley still our leading rusher

[p_phelps]

I think the problem with the offense is the loss of Easley. He remains our top rusher even after 3 games since he went down, also he didn't play the ICW game. Tough to win when someone doesn't step up at the RB position.

[southsideguy]

we always had great running backs when we were a run first and second team.  The RB knew they get a lot of carries but we didnt get great recievers or qb who could throw.  Now we got a qb and recieivers but no running back.  There has to be a running back out there is looking to tranfer with the new NCAA rule.  One of those guys could easliy be our starting running back.  Maybe a help wanted on Craigs list in in near the crimison tide or OK, or Austin etc etc.  Maybe a offense tackle or two.

[risinggreen]

With our OL, we need a RB powerful enough to break arm tackles and take on LB's. We don't seem to have that much anymore. Based on last year's performance, I don't know why we haven't settled on Nic Smith as the go to guy. I'm also a little surprised that we haven't tried utilizing a FB occasionally in certain situations. A bigger body could at least provide a little more protection for Fine.

[GreenBacker]

7 hours ago, p_phelps said:

I think the problem with the offense is the loss of Easley. He remains our top rusher even after 3 games since he went down, also he didn't play the ICW game. Tough to win when someone doesn't step up at the RB position.

I still believe we are undefeated if Easley doesn't go down.  I think he gets the 1st down on 3rd and short late in the LA Tech game, or at the very least gets enough for Seth to be confident enough to go for and get the 4th down instead of kicking the long/low field goal.  Same thing for 3rd and 4th down on our drive coming out of the half at UAB.  That's not considering any other benefits that he would certainly give us throughout the game.  Just a handful of plays that go differently with him playing and we are undefeated.