i asked this question early last year, but it was still early in Wolfe's career. But now that we've seen what Wolfe is capable of, who would you rather have on your team? I for one like turner better because he can pound and wear down a defense.
huskiealum03 Wrote:i asked this question early last year, but it was still early in Wolfe's career. But now that we've seen what Wolfe is capable of, who would you rather have on your team? I for one like turner better because he can pound and wear down a defense.
Wolfe has missed way too many games this year to know what he is capable of.
Next year could change my mind but I beleive Turner is easily better, and I am a HUGE Wolfe fan!
1. Hammock
2. Johnson
3. Burner
4. Wolfe
Pound for pound, Wolfe is tough and talented and may even have better field vision. But Turner would either out run or run over people.
Not even close. Turner by a mile.
Turner was the complete package of power and speed....certainly not as shifty or elusive as Wolfe, and he did not have the same "turn a 7 yard gain into a 52 yard touchdown"ability as Wolfe, but better nonetheless.
Huskie359 Wrote:Turner was the complete package of power and speed....certainly not as shifty or elusive as Wolfe, and he did not have the same "turn a 7 yard gain into a 52 yard touchdown"ability as Wolfe, but better nonetheless.
Turner is FAST too....and yah, i think he had that turn a 7 yarder into a big one ability....absolutly.
I didn't say that he didn't ... I just think he doesn't to the same extent as Wolfe, but what the hell do I know...
I think Turner's size kept him from getting injured, like Wolfe.
Huskie_Jon Wrote:I think Turner's size kept him from getting injured, like Wolfe.
wholeheartedly agree.. he could take the hits as well as dish them out without too much strain on his body.
I would say Turner because he is more of an all-around back. He can do it all and he can take on 3 defenders and still gain yardage.
Wolfe is a very good player, but when it comes to the NFL he is gonna have to put on some serious muscle.
Wolfe's advantages of being slightly quicker and a hair faster (and even that is debateable) don't overcome Turner being a few inches taller, about 50 pounds heavier, stronger, and more versatile.
Once he gets out of SD, I firmly believe Turner is going to start and rush for over 1,000 yards for an NFL team.....so I vote for him.
I voted Wolfe. That's assuming he can stay healthy, though, which is a big 'IF'. I'm not considering who will be more successful at the next level. Wolfe is faster, I think, and way more elusive. He can accelerate faster, and also has better field vision, and for these reasons his yards per carry is generally higher, even though he can't run over people. I don't think his height is a negative at all, actually probably a positive. His weight is the only concern, regarding vulnerability to injury. He does seem to be able to block OK for someone his size, though he would be at a disadvantage vs. Turner there. I think Wolfe would be more dangerous on short dump-off passes than Turner because of his acceleration, though they don't use Wolfe much that way. But I'm not sure Wolfe has really played in enough games even now to compare them. I would like to see a few more games to be more sure about it.
I would add that the best of all time was probably LeShon. He was Roger Craig in a Huskie Uniform. He gained 200+ yards vs Iowa with an offensive line that is not as good as the lines Sam Pittman has assembled.. He would have had a great NFL career if he avoided injury.
NIU007 Wrote:I voted Wolfe. That's assuming he can stay healthy, though, which is a big 'IF'. I'm not considering who will be more successful at the next level. Wolfe is faster, I think, and way more elusive. He can accelerate faster, and also has better field vision, and for these reasons his yards per carry is generally higher, even though he can't run over people. I don't think his height is a negative at all, actually probably a positive. His weight is the only concern, regarding vulnerability to injury. He does seem to be able to block OK for someone his size, though he would be at a disadvantage vs. Turner there. I think Wolfe would be more dangerous on short dump-off passes than Turner because of his acceleration, though they don't use Wolfe much that way. But I'm not sure Wolfe has really played in enough games even now to compare them. I would like to see a few more games to be more sure about it.
Actually, I believe turner was faster.
Garrett Wolfe is a better natural RB. He's got far better vision, is more patient, faster thru his cuts and still manages to fall forward and/or knock a defender backwards every time, despite his size. Turner was a physical freak that is still learning the position. He worked very hard to get his pass blocking improved, and his vision is improving, but he's just not the natural at the position.
Wolfe's obvious disadvantage is his size. It's fine for college football, though he is now hurt presumably because of his size. To those that rip the coaches for not getting Garrett the ball more often immediately after being eligible (starting in 2004), this is the reservation they had about Garrett - that he would not be able to handle the pounding of 25-35 carries a game.
niuguy Wrote:NIU007 Wrote:I voted Wolfe. That's assuming he can stay healthy, though, which is a big 'IF'. I'm not considering who will be more successful at the next level. Wolfe is faster, I think, and way more elusive. He can accelerate faster, and also has better field vision, and for these reasons his yards per carry is generally higher, even though he can't run over people. I don't think his height is a negative at all, actually probably a positive. His weight is the only concern, regarding vulnerability to injury. He does seem to be able to block OK for someone his size, though he would be at a disadvantage vs. Turner there. I think Wolfe would be more dangerous on short dump-off passes than Turner because of his acceleration, though they don't use Wolfe much that way. But I'm not sure Wolfe has really played in enough games even now to compare them. I would like to see a few more games to be more sure about it.
Actually, I believe turner was faster.
Wasn't Wolfe timed at 4.45? I think Turner was maybe 4.5. Turner might have been faster earlier on. But I noticed that his listed weight went from 220 to 225 to 229 to 232 to 235, and I'm pretty sure he wasn't as fast as a senior as he was earlier on. When I watched him, he didn't look as fast as Wolfe does. A friend of mine noticed the same thing. Even Novak said he was fast in the 'second 50 yards', presumably because it took a little while to get going that fast.
HuskieDan Wrote:Garrett Wolfe is a better natural RB. He's got far better vision, is more patient, faster thru his cuts and still manages to fall forward and/or knock a defender backwards every time, despite his size. Turner was a physical freak that is still learning the position. He worked very hard to get his pass blocking improved, and his vision is improving, but he's just not the natural at the position.
Wolfe's obvious disadvantage is his size. It's fine for college football, though he is now hurt presumably because of his size. To those that rip the coaches for not getting Garrett the ball more often immediately after being eligible (starting in 2004), this is the reservation they had about Garrett - that he would not be able to handle the pounding of 25-35 carries a game.
I don't think it fair to say that Wolfe is injury prone due to his size...Right now he has a Knee injury that has absoloutley nothing to do with his size....
Cedric Benson is the prototypical NFL back in terms of size (just like Turner) but his size didn't prevent him from having a freak knee injury in Sunday's game...similar to Wolfe's injury (sprain of the MCL or ACL)
Wolfe has been injured twice, once due to stupidity or "wrong place, wrong time syndrome" and once because of a knee injury...nothing frail about this kid.
I say Ivory Bryant! Remember him?
RobertN Wrote:I say Ivory Bryant! Remember him?
Wasn't he the precursor to the Hammock era?