- Thread starter
- #1
TobyTyler
New Member
4 for 4 on short yardage carries for first downs. That's what they got him for.
it was nice to see, our line was also very impressive. All our backs hand their share of monster holes to go through.
it was nice to see, our line was also very impressive. All our backs hand their share of monster holes to go through.
Yep, the offensive line was scary good. They just manhandled the Vikings.
I realize I'm nitpicking, but I didn't see him drop his pads a push the pile.
Conversely, he did show good vision and nimble feet. Also liked the 23yd scamper to the right.
Not nitpicking at all - Just expressing an intelligent and accurate observation. His true test will come where there isn't a hole.
but all RB's can run thru 'monster holes', so it appears our line was impressive? such a far cry from last year's game against New Orleans.
Very happy with his play as well thus far. He's a solid short yardage back. With Gore, Hunter, and James my only argument to keeping him on the roster would be that's about all he is going to do for us. Where else can he contribute? The benefit of Dixon is he can play RB as well as some ST's and FB if we need him to. Jacobs is definitely the better short yardage back though IMO.
I'm guessing Cartwright wins a spot based on his north-south running style coupled with his Pro Bowl calibur play on ST. Dixon is a great ST player but I would say his running skills are too Barlow-esque in that he does too much dancing and not enough leveling the pads and running hard.
If I were a betting man numone9er, I would bet Dixon doesn't make it to final cuts.
I agree with you. I just wish Jacobs could contribute more. He might be a good back up FB if we gave him the chance.
I agree with you. I just wish Jacobs could contribute more. He might be a good back up FB if we gave him the chance.