Life and Death of the Warrick Dunn's

[A Perfect Score]

Originally Posted by jrdrylie

How has no one mentioned Maurice Jones-Drew? That guy is 5'6 in high heels I know he was a second rounder. But he is proof that Dunn sized guys can be featured backs.

Because he isn't a Dunn sized back, nor is he remotely similar as a runner. Neither is Ray Rice. Both of those guys are power runners who are built like minitanks and utilize their low center of gravity to their advantage. Mojo probably has 25 pounds on Dunn. Dunn was a slashing, speed runner who would occasionally show some break tackle ability. Mojo is already a much better football player then Dunn ever was.

[jrdrylie]

Originally Posted by Calubflower

Really? He easily has 30 pounds on Warrick. If not 40. I think there were reports of him being 220 at some point. I know I've heard him on NFLN and such talking about dropping weight over the course of his career.

He is 208. I know MJD is a more powerful runner. I'm talking more about his height.

[Caulibflower]

Originally Posted by jrdrylie

He is 208. I know MJD is a more powerful runner. I'm talking more about his height.

I know he's listed at 208. But I've also seen him on TV, talking to Rich Eisen or somebody, talking about nutrition and how he was at like 215 during the offseason or some ****. At any rate, I think this discussion is more about skinny running backs than short ones. MJD just isn't built like Warrick Dunn, and doesn't run like him, either.

[jrdrylie]

Originally Posted by A Perfect Score

Because he isn't a Dunn sized back, nor is he remotely similar as a runner. Neither is Ray Rice. Both of those guys are power runners who are built like minitanks and utilize their low center of gravity to their advantage. Mojo probably has 25 pounds on Dunn. Dunn was a slashing, speed runner who would occasionally show some break tackle ability. Mojo is already a much better football player then Dunn ever was.

So I can't mention MJD but you can mention McFadden, who is 6'2? Jones-Drew is a hell of a lot closer to being a Dunn-sized player than McFadden is.

[A Perfect Score]

Originally Posted by jrdrylie

So I can't mention MJD but you can mention McFadden, who is 6'2? Jones-Drew is a hell of a lot closer to being a Dunn-sized player than McFadden is.

I was going more for playing style, but sure, get all bent out of shape about it. And McFadden is definitely closer to Dunn's weight then Mojo is, not to mention the fact that he's actually quite similar to Dunn in his ability to identify and explode through lanes rather then run through people, like MJD. But sure, get all bent out of shape over it pal.

[norcalgsr]

Teams don't trust smaller backs in a feature role and most are going with a committee now anyway. RB just aren't as valuable as they once were.

Garrett Wolfe was suppose to be the next Dunn. Right now Jacquizz Rodgers has the best chance to be a smurf feature back. Kendall Hunter? Dion Lewis? Maybe?

Keep your eye on John White, Utah next year. He's 5'8", 186lbs and can run between the tackles.

Don't know why small backs don't get featured more. Look at all those 6'+, 200lb+ backs who can't stay healthy. If a guy is talented, give him the rock until he drops.

[Abaddon]

Originally Posted by A Perfect Score

I was going more for playing style...

Then you failed miserably. McFadden is a scatback until he reaches the second level. Then, he pretty much operates like a FB. That's one of the reason the putz can't stay healthy.

[ImBrotherCain]

How about we all just agree to disagree and call this thread a fail.

[ATLDirtyBirds]

Originally Posted by Vox Populi

Nice revisionist history going on in here. Dunn was okay between the tackles, and wasn't a really physical runner at all. Once he started playing with Mike Vick he just made the most out of the opportunity of seeing teams completely forget about the middle of the field while they were in the process of ******** their pants making sure that Vick was contained. The reason Dunn was viewed as a good inside runner is because teams didn't actually defend the middle of the field like they normally did against teams that didn't have a run-first QB with 4.3 speed. The only team that didn't completely sell out to stop Vick and fail at it on a consistent basis was the Bucs because they actually managed to build a good tampa-2 defense before all of Dungy's disciples spread it all over the place. Warrick Dunn was a good player, but he got running lanes that no one other than Priest Holmes and Larry Johnson had the opportunity of benefiting from for an extended period of time.

Warrick's more physical and was a better player than you are making him out to be, but you correct about how much Michael Vick aided our running attack. I still miss our awesome ZBS with Vick at the helm.


Warrick was one of my favorites. Tremendous person off the field too.

[Miaoww]

Chris Rainey reminds me of Warrick Dunn. Very fast, good change of direction, slight build yet breaks some tackles.

[Saints-Tigers]

This thread sort of implies that there were guys like Warrick Dunn and it's a dying breed, when Dunn was basically one of a kind.

I still never understood the reason why short running backs seem to drop, due to size concerns, when they are clearly built powerfully(Mojo, etc).

[shylo3716]

Originally Posted by Miaoww

Chris Rainey reminds me of Warrick Dunn. Very fast, good change of direction, slight build yet breaks some tackles.

Love this comparison!

[OSUGiants17]

Originally Posted by shylo3716

When I said Warrick Dunn types, again I'm referring to the 5'8''-5'9'' 180-185lb guys.

You realize how specific you're trying to get, right? In a era filled with steroids, HGH, and all sorts of other stuff to make you big it's tough to find guys like that who can even succeed due to being small. So maybe it is the "death of the Warrick Dunns", but is it really for the worse? The smaller backs now-a-days are a little bit bigger than Dunn and are much better because of that. Speed backs are much more well rounded and I have no problem with that at all. Look at the bigger backs too, even they aren't what they used to be, they are much faster and less bowl you over. The game is changing ever so rapidly and gone are the days of the backs with one skill, you need to be big, fast and strong. I would much rather have an average height and weight back who is well rounded in all facets of the game over a small, under-sized speedster or a big-lug who is only going to bowl you over and never outrun you.

[BaLLiN]

wasn't Clinton Portis like 185 when he first entered the league?

[Saints-Tigers]

Originally Posted by BaLLiN

wasn't Clinton Portis like 185 when he first entered the league?

He was 204 at the combine...

[norcalgsr]

Originally Posted by Saints-Tigers

This thread sort of implies that there were guys like Warrick Dunn and it's a dying breed, when Dunn was basically one of a kind.

I still never understood the reason why short running backs seem to drop, due to size concerns, when they are clearly built powerfully(Mojo, etc).

It's not about being short. It's being short AND lightweight.

And Dunn isn't one of a kind. For his career, he only averaged 14.7 rushes and 2.8 receptions per game. He never topped 200 carries in any college season.

[shylo3716]

Originally Posted by norcalgsr

It's not about being short. It's being short AND lightweight.

And Dunn isn't one of a kind. For his career, he only averaged 14.7 rushes and 2.8 receptions per game. He never topped 200 carries in any college season.

Finally!!!!! Someone sees where I was going with this.

[Powerhouse22112]

Danny Woodhead to some degree??? Woodhead is listed between 5'7"-5'9" depending on what site you look on and is probably in the 180-190 lb. range. He can run between the tackles and has some degree of power.