Is Wandale the best duck-r, wingback, since..

Mavric said:
@Huskers93-97 I mean ... you're trying to play it off as if 4.49 is somehow slow (actually 4.48 per the link to follow).  Over the last 33 years, there is only about one RB per year that runs under 4.40 and half of those are lighter backs.  There are only about three per year that run 4.40-4.47 again many being lighter.  So McCaffrey would have been about the 5th faster RB in the entire Combine in an average year over that time with only a couple heavier backs being faster.  He was the sixth-fastest back in his draft class - none of the faster backs were drafted before the fourth round and two were undrafted.

He is a very fast RB.
Click to expand...
4.49 is very fast. But 4.54 is OK per your standards? I consider .05 difference almost a wash. I was not saying 4.49 was slow at all. My point is there are TONS of DB's who run sub 4.5 that should keep pace or chase down McCaffrey in the NFL but they dont. So 40 times dont tell all. 

Eye Test tells me McCaffrey is faster than a 4.49 in game speed. Just like I think Newcombe was faster game speed than 4.54- he rarely if ever got caught. But I am sure we played lots of kids who ran a faster 40 than him.

The whole point of this was that I dont think Wandale is as fast as Newcombe regardless of what his 40 says because he doesn't pull away at all. He has quick short burst but not great top end speed. That is probably what seperates him from Rondale Moore

 
Huskers93-97 said:
4.49 is very fast. But 4.54 is OK per your standards? I consider .05 difference almost a wash. I was not saying 4.49 was slow at all. My point is there are TONS of DB's who run sub 4.5 that should keep pace or chase down McCaffrey in the NFL but they dont. So 40 times dont tell all. 
Click to expand...


So you don't understand that there is a difference between WRs and RBs.   :facepalm:

 
Mavric said:
So you don't understand that there is a difference between WRs and RBs.   :facepalm:
Click to expand...
Oh hey the quote is back. So you don't understand that it doesn't matter what position you play. a 4.5 is a 4.5.  :facepalm:

You do realize DB's also tackle and chase RB's? They don't just follow WR's around. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Huskers93-97 said:
He has quick short burst but not great top end speed.
Click to expand...
A 4.22 40 isn't great top end speed?  https://kentucky.rivals.com/news/wandale-robinson-talks-top-three-offensive-styles-relationships#:~:text=It's important to remember that,Florida State%2C Nebraska and Northwestern.

NFL draftscout.com has him listed at 4.35.  http://draftscout.com/dsprofile.php?PlayerId=1030064&DraftYear=2023

Robinson has fantastic top end speed but rarely has the opportunity to showcase it because he is the defenses number 1 focus, every game.  I agree with the other takes above, once we have multiple weapons available that defenses have to account for, you will see #1 shine.  

 
Scarlet said:
That's kind of where the words "since" and "approaching" come in.   :)

Do you have anyone better since Newcombe?
Click to expand...


The wingback went the way of the dinosaur after Frank left, so no, probably not. And since most of the offenses since Frank have had interchangeable parts in terms of WRs playing each of the X, Y and Z, then no. 

 
Cdog923 said:
The wingback went the way of the dinosaur after Frank left, so no, probably not. And since most of the offenses since Frank have had interchangeable parts in terms of WRs playing each of the X, Y and Z, then no. 
Click to expand...
Ok how about slot receiver?  Or better yet, flanker...lol. Wingback.  We all get the point.

I agree though.  I can't come up with anyone either.

 
Scarlet said:
Ok how about slot receiver?  Or better yet, flanker...lol. Wingback.  We all get the point.

I agree though.  I can't come up with anyone either.
Click to expand...


Slot receiver is hard to define, because like I said, for the most part, a lot of the good WRs we've had in the last 20 years have played both on the outside and in the slot. If you want to define it by size, guys like Terrence Nunn, Jordan Westerkamp, Jamal Turner and certainly JD come to mind. 

 
Wan'dale is a baller. No doubt. Talent aside, they all played on much more dynamic teams that really allowed their abilities to shine.  If we got another receiver or 3 and a game changing RB, Wan'dale has the ability/potential to be one of the greatest to play at NU.  He is fun to watch.  Always smiling.  Love it.

 
No, but it has been nice seeing him utilized a bit more the last couple games.  I was wondering where he was all season.

 
Robinson is a great player, no question.  With others around him he would be even better.  Overall speed he might be as fast, but he is not the star of the college football season.  

The Jet was a generational player.  He was the best in college football, no one else close to what he could do.  Faster than everyone else and had moves that no one had seen at that time.  

And he played on a very talented team.  He stuck out like a sore thumb.  Greatest Husker of all time athletically and the old boy still has the flash.

He overcame his problems and has shown his dedication to Nebraska his whole life. 

 
In reality, we've been barely able to see what he can really do. What he has accomplished on this team has been incredible.  But imagine if we were able to spread the field and defenses couldn't afford to key on him.  It is hard to compare from different eras.  Newcombe, Fryar, Rogers had more talent around them which enabled them to more adequately display their abilities.  I'm not willing to put Wan'Dale at that high level yet, but he has the potential to eventually get there.

 
The fact that Wandale had 0 touchdowns coming into this game tells you all you need to know about this team and this season. 

 
Cdog923 said:
Look, I enjoy Wandale, but let's pump the brakes a bit before comparing him to one of the best athletes in program history, a #1 overall pick in the NFL Draft, and a Heisman Trophy winner, can we? 
Click to expand...


Cdog923 said:
Look, I enjoy Wandale, but let's pump the brakes a bit before comparing him to one of the best athletes in program history, a #1 overall pick in the NFL Draft, and a Heisman Trophy winner, can we? 
Click to expand...
Wan’dale is very good, but he is not Rodgers when it comes to making quick cuts and being spectacularly elusive. I can think of a number of WRs who have faster 40 times than Rodgers, but there have been none in Lincoln who have matched Johnny Rodgers’ shiftiness. He was one of a kind. It’s too darn bad that Johnny Rodgers’ son, Terry, got injured so early. He could had been a great player. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top