I hear what you are saying, but you still haven't (and I don't think you can) addressed the issue of why Vincent outperformed the other backs by such a large margin. I only picked the Arkansas game because it was the last game of the season...and as you said, the line got better as the season went along. If all the backs had done so well, then you could attribute all of his success to the line. However, they didn't. They had good seasons, not great ones. Vincent had a great season. And, it's not like Addai wasn't getting carries too. If it had been a small sample size, you could maybe overlook it. I recognize that our line was good, but we're not talking about the Larry Allen and Nate Newton Dallas line of the early 90's here. Wilkerson went undrafted (although I think that was a mistake), Peterman was never able to crack Dallas' 2-deep depth chart, and I have no clue what Reed is doing now (med school?). Vincent was a Bluechip prospect who performed up to his ability. Injuries and complacency knocked him down a notch over the next couple of years. Hopefully he will be healthy and motivated this year. We'll see.
Whitworth, Livings, Wilkerson, Peterman, and Reed all played pro ball. This WAS a Dallas Cowboy type line. It didn't translate into NFL success for them, but it is VERY rare you have 5 NFL linemen who start. Peterman only didn't make it in Dallas because of injuries, and same for Wilkerson.
You still refuse to address the main issue. WHY DID VINCENT HAVE SO MUCH MORE SUCCESS THAN ADDAI WHEN THEY WERE RUNNING BEHIND THE SAME LINE? By your logic, Addai was the Walter Payton of college football because he got drafted. Why does Vincent outperform Walter Payton?
1st off, with the little Walter Payton thing, that makes no sense. All the Cowboy linemen were the best of their league. LSU's linemen were all the best of their league, thus they are similar. Where they were drafted is of no importance; they were all on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or honorable mention all sec teams; which can be compared to the pro-bowl in the NFL. And as far as that 1st question goes, it is a lot of reasons: 1. The line blocked far better at the end of the year; when JV was the primary guy 2. Running backs work on rhythm. The person with the most carries, normally does the best in average because: a. the more carries= the more chances the line would open up a hole 100 feet wide b. you aren't rushing yourself trying to do ''too much with what you're given 3. The other guys were all playing way less than 100% at some point in the season. 4. The other guys got 50% of their carries at the end of routes when the other teams knew the plays were runs, ala Hester. Hester looks like crap when he is the blowout back, but played real well as the starter.
"overrated" by definition implies a player who hasn't met expectations. So if someone is overrated, is it the player's fault or the fans/media who may have unrealistic expectations? That being said, I'll throw Early Doucet's name into the mix.
Peterman couldn't pass protect in the NFL was the conclusion the Cowboys reached after 2.5 years. They did think he was an excellent run blocker though. Disappointing because I was really hoping he would stick here.
Give me a break. Carter was a college success, the best trackster in the country, in fact. If he had stayed at LSU past his sophomore year hew would have shown hs stuff onthe fotball field too. You forget he was playing behind uperclassmen Bowe, Davis, Green and Brazell. All of those players were highly recruited, too. Third teamers just don't get much playing time.
The five stars given to Carter were indicative of football, not track talent. Yes, he was a "college success" if we're talking track, but as you can see, we are talking football here. Focus Red...focus...
It wouldn't matter if all of them went undrafted, that doesn't change the fact that they did what they had to do on the collegiate level to open those holes.
I think it can be both. We don't just create our expectations out of nothing. We base it on talent, ability & prior success. So sometimes it is the fault of the player for not doing what they could to be the best they can. But sometimes it is our fault for expecting what we have no reason to expect.
