The comment was:
(Bret) "Gumb will play football for Chadron State next year. Should work well with Woodhead, as Gumb can block as well as run the ball."

And no, I don't think he will crack the first string next year, or maybe not even the next. Maybe never. I'm reminded of a comment by a pro rodeo contractor about a young bull, "Yeah he looks good, but let's put him on the truck and see how he stands the ride."

Same thing with an athelete, you've got to first put them on the truck, or practice field. Then only time will tell.

I remember a similar discussion about Danny Woodhead a few years ago. Is he big enough? Is he strong enough? Will he last a season? Well, I guess he stood the ride in pretty darn good shape. I don't know of a more exciting running back now playing Nebraska footall than Danny Woodhead. And I don't know of a Nebraska football program more exciting, right now, than Chadron State.

I do think Gumb will work well with Woodhead. Not sharing the ball carrying duties, but by giving Chadron one more tool, one more block in certain situations to open a hole for Woodhead to run through. And it doesn't take much of a hole, does it?

Again, don't read more into this than I said. I don't look for Gumb to share time carrying the ball. That will remain Woodhead's job, period. But I wouldn't be surprised to see Gumb get an opportunity to throw his body, and speed, into the opposing line, in certain situations, as a blocker. After that, well, we'll see how he stands the ride.

Let me start another discussion. Does Woodhead merit a shot at the NFL? I think he does and I think he will get one after next season. But that's an entirely different truck ride, too and we'll just have to wait and see how he stands the ride.

Okay, men. Smack me down with your replies.

I have watched both Woodhead and Gumb play, please do not make a comparison between a back who has set numerous records at the Div II level and a high school back who hasnt logged a carry in college. Any athlete making the jump from HS to college has a great deal of work to do, and Gumb will have to work hard to see action as a primary back at Chadron.

Our school played Burwell this past season, and Gumb was not the best back we faced last year. He was hard working and hard to tackle, but was not elusive and didnt read holes particularly well. He is a fine C2 football player but will need to work hard to make it at Chadron.

No comparison between the two was intended any more than I'd try to compare Woodhead to Walter Peyton or Emmet Smith, two other "undersized" running backs.

All I'm saying is that Gumb should fit in well with the Chadron program as will 5'8, 180 pound Jeremiah Dotson (Las Vegas, Nev); and 5'8" 175 pound Evan Pilkington (Longmont, CO).

Their best new recruit in the backfield, however, may be 6'0", 235 pound Willie Pippen (Michigan transfer from Omaha, NE).

Jimmy Belville (Valentine, NE) is also going to be fun to watch as a linebacker recruit. That's where the action is, because as everyone knows DEFENSE stops the running game!

Defenses win championships. Offenses wear out the grass and entertain the alumni.

Great observation, Frank. I've been re-reading both "Offensive Football Strategy" and "Defensive Football Strategy" this winter and it's a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation. There is a good reason we don't have a statistical society of football fans similar to baseball (American Society of Baseball Research) in football. Football is more complex than baseball, or any other sport. Football statistics are facinating, perplexing, and just plain confusing. Football statistics are proof of the saying, "Lies, damn lies, and statistics", but isn't it great fun. It really doesn't matter how well a team has done in the previous one, two, or ten games, it's the next game that matters most, and we really won't know the results until the game is played. Until statistics are developed that measure the heart of a man, the outcome of a game; football, baseball, wrestling, or any sport, will be in doubt. I sincerely hope statistics never becomes that accurate, because it's the game, not the outcome, that is the great thrill in following sports. At least, that's my personal opinion and I'm sticking to it until someone proves me wrong. Then I'll die. Stay entertained, Frank. Good luck to your guys.

quote:

Originally posted by moosehead:
Great observation, Frank. I've been re-reading both "Offensive Football Strategy" and "Defensive Football Strategy" this winter and it's a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation. There is a good reason we don't have a statistical society of football fans similar to baseball (American Society of Baseball Research) in football. Football is more complex than baseball, or any other sport. Football statistics are facinating, perplexing, and just plain confusing. Football statistics are proof of the saying, "Lies, damn lies, and statistics", but isn't it great fun. It really doesn't matter how well a team has done in the previous one, two, or ten games, it's the next game that matters most, and we really won't know the results until the game is played. Until statistics are developed that measure the heart of a man, the outcome of a game; football, baseball, wrestling, or any sport, will be in doubt. I sincerely hope statistics never becomes that accurate, because it's the game, not the outcome, that is the great thrill in following sports. At least, that's my personal opinion and I'm sticking to it until someone proves me wrong. Then I'll die. Stay entertained, Frank. Good luck to your guys.

I like defense better so I'm entertained by a 7-3 game when they have the ball on our 1 yard line with 10 seconds to go and we stop them at the 1 inch line. HOW SWEET IT IS!!
You are very right about statistics in football. They mean next to nothing. When people talk about statistics and averages I always tell them that if they sit with one foot in bucket of ice water and the other foot in a bucket of boiling water on average they should be quite comfortable.

Frank, who do you consider the greatest defense ever, college or pro? Just the most dominating defense of their time in your opinion. Yes I know this is a loaded question, open for discussion, but name one or two and we'll see if we attract anyone off the sidelines. My pick is the 1986 Chicago Bears. What's yours.

quote:

Originally posted by moosehead:
Frank, who do you consider the greatest defense ever, college or pro? Just the most dominating defense of their time in your opinion. Yes I know this is a loaded question, open for discussion, but name one or two and we'll see if we attract anyone off the sidelines. My pick is the 1986 Chicago Bears. What's yours.

That was a great defense, as were the Steelers Iron Curtain, the LA Fearsome Foursome, and the Vikings Purple People Eaters. I think the greatest individual defensive play I ever saw was by Alan Paige. I can't remember the year or who the Vikings were playing. Paige put on an awesome pass rush and was right in the QB's face, who dumped the ball out to a back in the flat. He was within a yard of the QB and I think put his hands on the QB as he released the ball. The camera swung out to the back in the flat who juked the linebacker and just got drilled in the back. It was Paige. The back caught the ball about 4 yards deep in the backfield and the play ended up about a two yard loss. When the QB throw the ball Paige turned around and nearly outran the ball to the back. If Randy Moss had been on that team I seriously doubt he would have said that he played when he felt like it. He might have said that but wouldn't have felt like playing for a long, long time. It's tough to pick up your teeth when all of your fingers are broken.

Two of my favorite defensive plays involved Steve Atwater of the Denver Broncos. #1 was the game where he met Christian Okoye in the hole. I don't remember the specific game, date or year, but I do remember watching the hit. It looked like two bighorn rams meeting head on. I thought they were both dead the way they simply stopped moving forward and dropped to the ground at the line of scrimmage. And I'll bet a steak and lobster supper that they both remember that particular hit also.

#2 also involved Atwater and a tight end I just can't remember. It was a series of plays wher the opposing team sent the tight end on a short route across the middle. Each play gained 4 to 8 yards, but Atwater met the poor reciever just as he caught the ball. They kept running the play with the same results, a catch and a yardage gain, over and over again. Each time, Atwater made the poor reciever pay a brutal price. This seemed to go on forever, but I'm sure it was only four or five plays. In any event, the reciever started to watch for Atwater instead of the ball and the drive ended. It was a great series of plays --- for Steve Atwater.

I'd like to see both again.

Next question. Pound for pound, who was the most viscous hitter in the NFL. My vote goes to Ronnie Lott.

quote:

Originally posted by moosehead: Pound for pound, who was the most viscous hitter in the NFL. My vote goes to Ronnie Lott.

I think anyone who has ever been hit by Lott would agree with you. Do you remember when Lott broke his little finger? He tried to play with a cast but it was too clumsy so he had the finger amputated? In addition to being the hardest hitter he was also one of the cleanest players of all time.

I have told players in various sports about the Ronnie Lott incident, but they never believed me until I found it for them. Here is a good article on the incident.

Lott and the Pinky Finger