Tuesday: Links with predictions

by Kevan Lee on Jul 29, 2008 7:00 AM PDT in Boise State football Comment 7 comments

Story of the day:

RB Ian Johnson tops in the WAC? [ESPN.com]

ESPN's Graham Watson posed an interesting question on her blog yesterday: Is Ian Johnson the WAC's best running back? If Watson knows, then she's not telling as her story politely skirted the issue with open-ended statements, facts, and Johnson quotes.

But is he the best running back in a stacked WAC?

"I've seen a lot of these guys and you look at (Nevada's Luke) Lippincott and all the guys from La Tech and even the guys from Fresno, these guys are very different running backs from myself," Johnson said during WAC Media Days last week.

Johnson was the best running back in the WAC during his glory year in 2006 and was even considered a darkhorse for the Heisman Trophy. But those numbers trailed off last season as Johnson was plagued with injuries.

We live in a black-and-white world, so this article, with all its grayness and ambiguity, was hard to deal with. The answer, in our opinion, is clear: Ian Johnson is not the WAC's best running back. He lost that title last year when he struggled with injuries and effectiveness. Let the angry emails fly.

Remember, Johnson was not very good at times last year, and Bronco Nation openly questioned what was wrong with him. Sure, he is saying all the right things and doing all the right things this offseason, and to be honest, we are confident that he will regain the mantle of WAC's top running back this season. But in the meantime, we feel he is no longer the top dog.

There, Graham Watson. We said it.

Other links:

Dan Gore cut by Dolphins [Scott Slant]

We guess Miami liked losing last year more than they thought

Utah State bringing down Utah's schedule [ESPN.com]

The Aggies get replaced by Notre Dame. Boise State would do the same if it could.

Another vote for Kellen Moore [Bleacher Report]

Bush Hamdan not available for comment.

Rivals' countdown reaches No. 3 [Rivals.com]

USC and Georgia still to come--most likely in that order.

Recap of rule changes [Rivals.com]

Clock changes may shorten games from 3 hours, 45 minutes to 3 hours, 40 minutes.

0 recs | Comment 7 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

So we aren’t looking at body of work for the WAC’s best back? Was Ian the best last year? Obviously not…he was 3rd, but was injury plagued again. If Ian had been healthy for all the games he would have had close to Lippincott’s numbers. Plus, he still led in TDs and destroyed everyone in 2006. Gonna disagree with OBNUG on this one…Ian is the WAC’s best back.

If he breaks some or all of Faulk and Tomlinson’s WAC records this year—he HAS to get that distinction.

by Drew on Jul 29, 2008 8:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

In my completely biased and unscientific method, (ie. letting NCAA Football 09 simulate the entire season) it came out like this. Johnson was 1st in yardage. Deonte Jackson was 2nd. Lippincott was third.

Good enough for me…

by Jason Haberman on Jul 29, 2008 9:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Drew, interesting discussion about Johnson. If he is the same back he was last year (tentative, grinding), then no he is not the best back in the WAC. If he is the guy we saw his sophomore year, then he should be #1 again. It’s up to him to prove last year was a fluke, but until he does, I don’t feel right saying he’s the best.

JH, I love that you simmed the season. Who was your starting QB?

by kevanlee on Jul 29, 2008 11:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The crux of the argument is this: would you not consider Ladainian Tomlinson to be the best back in the NFL if another back had more TDs in a given year…or more rushing yards? I would look at someone’s body of work to determine that. Of course, if Ian has another “down year” and is bested again by Lippincott, you can surely make that claim, but in a two year stretch, no WAC back has been better than Ian.

by Drew on Jul 29, 2008 11:47 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Well, I’m trying not to look at the numbers when I make this decision (which is probably against the rules of the argument). Ian Johnson did not run like the best back in the WAC last year. Therefore, I think it is hard to say he is the WAC’s best. Certainly, he has had the best career so far. And certainly, he will rain down fire and brimstone on opposing defenses this fall. But until he does, I feel like his performance last season has cost him the title of WAC’s best running back.

by kevanlee on Jul 29, 2008 2:51 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs