Coker

#26
#26
Travis Stephens single-handedly won games for us. Coker hasn't done that yet. Not that I expect him to, because he's only a freshman. Still, it's not like he's earned the comparison to Stephens at this point.
 
#27
#27
Travis Stephens was a great back. One of my favorites to ever play here. Not many backs would do what he did sitting out a year for the team. He ran as hard and got more out of the ability he had as any back who has worn orange.

But I think Lamarcus Coker can be twice the running back Travis Stephens was. I think he has that much ability. That being said. You are right , he has really only played agaist sub SEC competion so far. He also has to stay healthy. There are alot of things that could keep the kid from ever doing anything. All I am saying is he has something you can't coach. That is natural ability.
 
#28
#28
I think Coker will still start but they'll give AF some carries at Georgia. I also think Coker would have scored on the goal line somehow when Hardesty didn't. I also think it is O.K. to made comparisons to our former RB's if you are trying to describe what you see in our current RB's, it's just a comparison.
 
#29
#29
I did see at times on Saturday where Hardesty would simply hit the hole without doing the shake and bake. At least it looks like someone is trying to coach him. That being said though, it seems it takes him a lot lot longer to hit the hole than it does Coker, even when he is running straight at it.
 
#31
#31
I open up the sports page of the paper (I live in Morristown so I get the Morristown paper) and on the front page it says something about Tamming the Tigers or something and there a huge picture in the center of the front page of LaMarcus fumbling...just found that very odd out of all the big plays in the game they put 1 of the 3 worst ones:blink:
 
#32
#32
sickemsmokey10 said:
I open up the sports page of the paper (I live in Morristown so I get the Morristown paper) and on the front page it says something about Tamming the Tigers or something and there a huge picture in the center of the front page of LaMarcus fumbling...just found that very odd out of all the big plays in the game they put 1 of the 3 worst ones:blink:
Click to expand...

Strange, that doesn't seem to work with the title at all. :question:
 
#34
#34
VOL61 said:
I kind of agree with you on Hardesty and have a feeling before he leaves he may wind up of the other side of the ball. Don't get me wrong he is a good back and I believe he runs as hard and gives as much effort as anyone we have. But I don't think he sees the field like the special backs do.

But Coker, I don't really care who he has played agaist. You can watch the guy and tell he knows what to do with the football. He is lighting. You could tell the same thing with Chuck Webb or Jamal Lewis. You knew they were good running backs the first time you saw them play. I get that feeling with Coker. Maybe its just me.
Click to expand...

08-06-2005, 09:27 PM #64 (permalink) mikey vbmenu_register("postmenu_122012", true);
Senior Member
icon1.gif

Hardesty will eventually move to defense.

Last year I was told I was crazy by Vol67.




08-22-2006, 10:43 AM #13 (permalink) mikey vbmenu_register("postmenu_383445", true);
Senior Member
icon1.gif

You know...I spent a lot of time on here last year saying that the staff was doing the "break him down so we can build him up" routine on Coker and that they believed all along he was more than just a fast guy and that he would eventually outshine Hardesty and everyone said I was crazy, well.....:p

By the way, I also said that Hardesty very well may end up on defense...again, I was called crazy...well....don't be shocked if it happens.

This year I was called crazy by therickbol.




Thanks man...sounds like I may finally have an ally here. I think Coker and Foster are the two and Hardesty either stays 3 or moves. I'll be honest with you, I thought Yancey hit the hole and ran harder than Hardesty Sat.
 
#36
#36
utvol0427 said:
If Hardesty gets moved to Defense I will give you $100.
Click to expand...
I'll take it. :) Look at it this way...if Coker does beat him out right (which I believe he's well on his way to doing)...when Foster comes back that gives them two really good backs for, at least, the next couple of years...why leave him on O when there is no doubt he's physical enough to help on D? If there was no Foster...I agree...with Foster back, I think Hardesty is the clear #3.
 
#37
#37
mikey said:
I'll take it. :) Look at it this way...if Coker does beat him out right (which I believe he's well on his way to doing)...when Foster comes back that gives them two really good backs for, at least, the next couple of years...why leave him on O when there is no doubt he's physical enough to help on D? If there was no Foster...I agree...with Foster back, I think Hardesty is the clear #3.
Click to expand...
Things can change in a heart beat. A season ending injury to either Foster or Coker and Hardesty would be right back in the mix. Hardesty is still a redshirt Fr. He still has 3 1/2 years to develop. He will be a very good running back before he leaves UT.
 
#38
#38
utvol0427 said:
Things can change in a heart beat. A season ending injury to either Foster or Coker and Hardesty would be right back in the mix. Hardesty is still a redshirt Fr. He still has 3 1/2 years to develop. He will be a very good running back before he leaves UT.
Click to expand...

Agreed . . . but he's starting to look a little like Derrick Tinsley.
 
#39
#39
utvol0427 said:
Things can change in a heart beat. A season ending injury to either Foster or Coker and Hardesty would be right back in the mix. Hardesty is still a redshirt Fr. He still has 3 1/2 years to develop. He will be a very good running back before he leaves UT.
Click to expand...
If that happens, then you can always move him back, but if he can help somwhere on defense more, then move him. You always want your best 11 on the field. You don't leave him wallowing at #3 if he can be a #1 or #2 somewhere else....and again, he can always come back.
 
#40
#40
GAVol said:
Agreed . . . but he's starting to look a little like Derrick Tinsley.
Click to expand...
Derrick Tinsley was a very good athlete that Tennessee didn't utilize. I hate to see wasted talent. I think if Hardesty remains at RB he will develop nicely. I know this may sound dumb, but I am still not sold on Foster. Everything he did last year were against some of the worst rushing defenses in the country. Against Cal, he played about even with Hardesty and Coker. I don't think that Foster is going to run away with the starting spot.
 
#41
#41
mikey said:
If that happens, then you can always move him back, but if he can help somwhere on defense more, then move him. You always want your best 11 on the field. You don't leave him wallowing at #3 if he can be a #1 or #2 somewhere else....and again, he can always come back.
Click to expand...

Exactly who would Hardesty be replacing on defense?
 
#42
#42
utvol0427 said:
I think if Hardesty remains at RB he will develop nicely. I know this may sound dumb, but I am still not sold on Foster. Everything he did last year were against some of the worst rushing defenses in the country. Against Cal, he played about even with Hardesty and Coker. I don't think that Foster is going to run away with the starting spot.
Click to expand...
I don't necessarily think he runs away with the #1 spot...I just think, in some order, he and Coker will be 1 and 2 and Hardesty falls to 3. He may, given time, develop "nicely"...I just think Foster and Coker develop more than "nicely".
 
#43
#43
allvol123 said:
Exactly who would Hardesty be replacing on defense?
Click to expand...
That is what I was wondering. Where is the depth so shallow on D that we would benefit from moving Hardesty there. It would take him a while to learn a new position. I think the idea of moving Hardesty to D is completely absurd.
 
#44
#44
allvol123 said:
Exactly who would Hardesty be replacing on defense?
Click to expand...
I'm not saying he "replaces" anyone. I'm just saying if he can go be a #2 on D, that's better than being a #3 on O (which is what, I believe, he becomes when Foster is healthy.)
 
#46
#46
utvol0427 said:
That is what I was wondering. Where is the depth so shallow on D that we would benefit from moving Hardesty there. It would take him a while to learn a new position. I think the idea of moving Hardesty to D is completely absurd.
Click to expand...

I would rather move Anderson back to DT. Thats a real need, and he's a disappointment at FB. He started out as DT at UT.
 
#47
#47
oklavol said:
I would rather move Anderson back to DT. Thats a real need, and he's a disappointment at FB. He started out as DT at UT.
Click to expand...
He is a Sr. There is no way that we could move him back to DT right now and him get any PT ahead of the other guys.
 
#49
#49
Watching the Memphis game, I was really impressed with how quickly Coker could change directions.
 
#50
#50
as much as i hate to say it, i don't know that i'd play Foster as the no. 1 right now...Hardesty and Coker have played their way in to the fold. Hardesty has more to learn....i like the way he runs, he just does it too long...he needs to make a move and go....too much of the lateral thing behind the line of scrimmage...make a cut, and go. Coker seems to have a lot better understanding of what's expected, and he can make that move and go.

I think Foster is still pretty good, but right now, i just don't know that i'd take the two that have shown the big play capability out of the mix as we head in to the meat of the schedule. Coker would be no. 1, Hardesty 2 and Foster 3 at this point.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top