PDA

View Full Version : Onterio McCalebb, RB, Auburn


Caulibflower
05-15-2012, 02:24 PM
I've been watching a bit of his tape lately, and he's a guy that has always stood out to me when watching Auburn games. Hasn't ever been the feature back, but seems like he's always a threat to break off a huge play when he's in the game. I've begun thinking there are an awful lot of similarities between him and CJ Spiller, but he doesn't seem to be getting nearly the press Spiller was going into his senior season. The guy's got great hands, he's super fast and smooth, and he's a legitimate return man. If he runs in the 4.3s, like a lot of people expect him to, could he break into the first round discussion? He's got Dyer there, and Spiller had James Davis, Reggie Bush had LenDale White. McCalebb seems to be that kind of player.

He's got a 6.46 career yards per attempt average in the SEC with 2016 rushing yards in three seasons - he's been a situational player, but he entered that role as soon as he stepped on campus. Was second on the team in receiving yards last year. 27.9 KR average over his career.

So let's say everything goes best-case scenario - weighs in at the combine at 185 or so, runs a 4.3... Could he break into the first round conversation? Is he a day-two pick? Again, just to be clear - I don't see him as a "starting running back" - but with the way offenses are continuing to evolve, there's definitely a demand for versatile, fast running backs with good hands, and McCalebb's demonstrated that against elite competition. To me, if Isaiah Pead, Ronnie Hillman and LaMichael James are going Day 2, McCalebb shouldn't go any lower. Thoughts?

(Video)
6aUrgtHkg-o

Don Vito
05-15-2012, 02:30 PM
Dyer is at Arkansas State now

Raiderz4Life
05-15-2012, 02:32 PM
I would say RD 3 or 4 would be appropriate for him.

BamaFalcon59
05-15-2012, 02:36 PM
More Chris Rainey than CJ Spiller.

Caulibflower
05-15-2012, 03:05 PM
Dyer is at Arkansas State now

Really? What happened there? First I've heard of this. :oops:

Caulibflower
05-15-2012, 03:06 PM
I would say RD 3 or 4 would be appropriate for him.

Yeah, and I mean, that's what a lot of people say this time of year, but there's always those players who shoot up. Especially if Dyer is gone, how high could he rise if, say, he runs for 1,000 yards and is a focal point of the offense? Maybe McCluster would be another relevant comparison.

Don Vito
05-15-2012, 03:15 PM
Really? What happened there? First I've heard of this. :oops:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1028396-michael-dyer-official-transfer-announcement-severely-damages-auburn

He was suspended for the bowl game, he and Chizik didn't get along, and he wanted to be closer to home.

Caulibflower
05-15-2012, 03:26 PM
Dyer's going to go nuts against Sun Belt defenses. Yeesh, that's gonna be nasty.

BamaFalcon59
05-15-2012, 04:19 PM
McCluster was on another level from McCalleb.

Caulibflower
05-15-2012, 08:12 PM
McCluster was on another level from McCalleb.

C'mon, man. There's always this hindsight bias where people want to say players whose college careers are over are on some different level than current players. "Nah, man, so-and-so was waaaaay better than so-and-other-so."

Really? They both played in the SEC. Here's their production Freshman-Junior years.

- McCluster -

2006: 8 att, 68 yds, 8.5 ypc, 31 lng, 1 TD - 15 rec, 232 yds, 15.5 avg, 49 lng, 1 TD.
2007: 6 att, 63 yds, 10.5 ypc, 29 lng, 0 TD - 27 rec, 326 yds, 12.1 avg, 46 lng, 2 TD.
2008: 109 att, 655 yds, 6.0 ypc, 40 lng, 6 TD - 44 rec, 625 yds, 14.2 avg, 56 lng, 1 TD.


- McCalebb -

2009: 105 att, 565 yds, 5.4 ypc, 62 lng, 4 TD - 6 rec, 58 yds, 9.7 avg, 0 TD.
2010: 95 att, 810 yds, 8.5 ypc, 70 lng, 9 TD - 7 rec, 86 yds, 12.3 avg, 23 lng, 1 TD.
2011: 112 att, 641 yds, 5.7 ypc, 60 lng, 5 TD - 32 rec, 344 yds, 10.8 avg, 51 lng, 2 TD.

And McCalebb has done more in the return game. McCluster's big year was his senior year, and McCalebb is going into his senior year without last year's starter, so I'd expect a similar increase in production. You might point to 2010 and say he was benefiting from Cam Newton, but he was averaging 8.5 yards per carry, and then last year without him, he became the team's second-leading receiver while still averaging 5.7 a pop on a much less dynamic team. Take those things in hand with their small statures, and I think they have a pretty similar playing style. And remember, McCluster didn't time very well - McCalebb is expected to be a 4.40-kind of guy. I'm not trying to say he's better than McCluster, but we're talking about second-round types of players here, and I'm not exactly sure what puts McCluster "on another level." I'm just wondering what would keep McCalebb out of the second round, given the other names that've been thrown out there. He's been a dynamic, explosive player in CFB's toughest conference... what's not to like, other than his size?

I suppose I'm bringing it up because I typically see him outside of the top ten in RB rankings, and that just seems low given precedent and what he offers.

Caulibflower
05-15-2012, 08:15 PM
^^^ Their stats are almost-inverted; McCluster became much more involved in the run game his junior year, while McCalebb really made an impact in the passing game his junior year. But their respective roles on their offenses were very similar - small, extremely quick big-play guys who you could get the ball to in a variety of ways. If anything, McCalebb has been a bigger part of his offense thus far than McCluster was at the same point in his career.

And McCalebb does a good job of hitting holes. Like any speed guy, there are going to be plays where you wish he wouldn't have danced and gotten down field faster, but I like that when I see footage against teams like LSU he'll just plant his foot when he sees a seam and stretch the defense through the middle; if the hole's there, he usually takes it.

cajuncorey
05-15-2012, 09:03 PM
a coward between the tackles not sufficent for the premier league, computer numbers are not enough for these types of backs. test them on the iron. if there lower half is real (ie darren sproles squating 800+) perhaps he can survive. beware of the scat back my friend.

critesy
05-15-2012, 09:59 PM
as a huge auburn fan i'll give the low down.

he's about 5'10 170 (highest i see him getting is 175)
he'll definitely run in the 4.3's.
he has no shiftiness what so ever, just runs really really fast.
trips over his feet when he does try to juke.
amazing hands.
tough guy for his size. takes huge hits and always gets up.
great vision. running and returning.

auburn has moved to a pro style offense this year with malzahn gone and it'll be interesting to see how he's used. im guessing the same as past years as a situational player.

im guessing he'll go 4th.

JHL6719
05-15-2012, 10:32 PM
as a huge auburn fan


my condolences

TACKLE
05-15-2012, 10:42 PM
Any chance he's asked to become a primary slot WR at the next level like McCluster?

critesy
05-15-2012, 11:27 PM
Any chance he's asked to become a primary slot WR at the next level like McCluster?

meh, i dont think so. i cant really see him do much other than returning, or special packages for him.

my condolences

ya ya good job, youre an alabama fan. since saban came the iron bowl is 3-2 in your favour. its not like youve been all superior.

Caulibflower
05-16-2012, 12:19 AM
a coward between the tackles not sufficent for the premier league, computer numbers are not enough for these types of backs. test them on the iron. if there lower half is real (ie darren sproles squating 800+) perhaps he can survive. beware of the scat back my friend.

One must not be too quick to associate a necessarily elusive running style with cowardice; featherweights must be judged on their willingness to be pulverized while utilizing their strengths, such as they are. Watch him pull through the middle of the Bayou Horde. Ever more, the premeir league covets speed, and the spindly Tiger can run.

cajuncorey
05-16-2012, 10:44 AM
One must not be too quick to associate a necessarily elusive running style with cowardice; featherweights must be judged on their willingness to be pulverized while utilizing their strengths, such as they are. Watch him pull through the middle of the Bayou Horde. Ever more, the premeir league covets speed, and the spindly Tiger can run.

In the real universe the Boxer position, as George Orwell would describe it, is reserved for those capable of not only recieveing punishment not on only on the exterior but on the interior as well. As well as there ability to move along the X axis. Speed would be placed 3rd, that is why Mark Ingram, of whoms computer numbers are ungodly yet he goes in the first despite that. He goes on to gain 4 yards a carry for the next 7 years boring yet sufficient.

As speaking for your spindly Tiger, Defenses in the premeir league do not open up as the proverbial red sea would. I am reminded of a time back in 2001 when we selected Michael Bennett in the first in the fake universe, in the real universe he goes in the 4th. His mind and body deteriorated as did the Id, ego and super ego.

To conclude the so called featherweights are purely gimmicks and wrinkles you may include but not worthey of day 1 or day 2 attention

Caulibflower
05-16-2012, 02:51 PM
That may be so. But the point is that in the fake universe, the spindly Tiger's peers have been routinely valued at a premium, even when it's clear that other Boxers, such as the Cowboy-Hat Province's Aryan galloper, can be found well beyond the most glorious, more critical, initial rounds of conscription.

BamaFalcon59
05-16-2012, 06:39 PM
C'mon, man. There's always this hindsight bias where people want to say players whose college careers are over are on some different level than current players. "Nah, man, so-and-so was waaaaay better than so-and-other-so."

Really? They both played in the SEC. Here's their production Freshman-Junior years.

- McCluster -

2006: 8 att, 68 yds, 8.5 ypc, 31 lng, 1 TD - 15 rec, 232 yds, 15.5 avg, 49 lng, 1 TD.
2007: 6 att, 63 yds, 10.5 ypc, 29 lng, 0 TD - 27 rec, 326 yds, 12.1 avg, 46 lng, 2 TD.
2008: 109 att, 655 yds, 6.0 ypc, 40 lng, 6 TD - 44 rec, 625 yds, 14.2 avg, 56 lng, 1 TD.


- McCalebb -

2009: 105 att, 565 yds, 5.4 ypc, 62 lng, 4 TD - 6 rec, 58 yds, 9.7 avg, 0 TD.
2010: 95 att, 810 yds, 8.5 ypc, 70 lng, 9 TD - 7 rec, 86 yds, 12.3 avg, 23 lng, 1 TD.
2011: 112 att, 641 yds, 5.7 ypc, 60 lng, 5 TD - 32 rec, 344 yds, 10.8 avg, 51 lng, 2 TD.

And McCalebb has done more in the return game. McCluster's big year was his senior year, and McCalebb is going into his senior year without last year's starter, so I'd expect a similar increase in production. You might point to 2010 and say he was benefiting from Cam Newton, but he was averaging 8.5 yards per carry, and then last year without him, he became the team's second-leading receiver while still averaging 5.7 a pop on a much less dynamic team. Take those things in hand with their small statures, and I think they have a pretty similar playing style. And remember, McCluster didn't time very well - McCalebb is expected to be a 4.40-kind of guy. I'm not trying to say he's better than McCluster, but we're talking about second-round types of players here, and I'm not exactly sure what puts McCluster "on another level." I'm just wondering what would keep McCalebb out of the second round, given the other names that've been thrown out there. He's been a dynamic, explosive player in CFB's toughest conference... what's not to like, other than his size?

I suppose I'm bringing it up because I typically see him outside of the top ten in RB rankings, and that just seems low given precedent and what he offers.

Well, McCluster was nothing before his senior year. Or, at most, a shadow of what he would become.

McCluster didn't become a viable prospect until he began to dominate SEC defenses his senior year, and not by simply running around them. McCalleb won't do that.

BaLLiN
05-16-2012, 10:35 PM
idk why, but kinda reminds me of ted ginn..

BamaFalcon59
05-17-2012, 09:56 AM
Hah, that's about right. Ginn was even faster and had more wiggle though.

villagewarrior
05-17-2012, 10:06 PM
McCalebb always seems to be making plays when I watch Auburn. I like play makers.

critesy
05-18-2012, 04:09 PM
ted ginn is a real good comparison. best one to come of mind.

BaLLiN
05-18-2012, 07:39 PM
Hah, that's about right. Ginn was even faster and had more wiggle though.

well we don't know for sure about the speed, but Ginn really doesn't have much wiggle either albeit he is more elusive. They both look like long striders that read defenses pretty well but won't do much without being in space to build up speed. I don't really know how good of a return man McCalebb is, but just from the stretch plays he seemed alot like Ginn.

Caulibflower
05-18-2012, 11:23 PM
I like the Ginn comparison a lot, too - question is:

Where would Ginn go in a re-draft? He was obviously pretty huge bust for where he was drafted, but it's not like he's bad. What's the value of a part-time offensive player with elite speed who could give you a return TD or two every year?

BaLLiN
05-21-2012, 12:47 PM
well the fact that he doesn't really offer an NFL position is what bothers me most. Ted Ginn isn't that much of a receiver, but he had a position to work at. McCalebb doesn't have the bulk to be a runningback in the NFL and isn't used as a traditional runningback much. We'll see, this season could be different.

Caulibflower
05-21-2012, 01:43 PM
...Does McCalebb have better hands than Ginn? It's probably not a stretch to suggest he may. Maybe he just moved to wide receiver. Maybe he plays a Percy Harvin role. Not as elusive (or strong) as Harvin, but that might be what we're looking at. I really don't see a "running back" either. I see a fast guy with good hands and vision. A broken field runner. Still trying to think if there's a guy in the NFL who McCalebb might play a similar role to, but Ted Ginn/Dexter McCluster/CJ Spiller seem the most similar to me. Jerrious Norwood, maybe? Maybe a destitute man's Chris Johnson? He's not real shifty; more of a field-stretcher like McCalebb. You wouldn't think so putting them side-by-side, but from a style and production standpoint, maybe Felix jones, too.

And obviously, all those guys are at least good enough that everyone knows who they are. Maybe a cross between Ginn and Norwood, or something.

BaLLiN
05-21-2012, 06:41 PM
I think you are giving him way too much credit at the moment at the running back position. He's not in any of those player's league at playing the traditional position. I hope he shows that he can at least be a slot receiver with his abilities, because with his size I don't see him being able to be anything in the backfield for more than a gadget play.

I thought about third down back, but he is too frail to pass protect while being lanky and doesn't look like he has a low center of gravity. Do I think he could play receiver? absolutely, the NFL coaches take players with average abilities and can turn them into very productive players. If he shows he has the consistent hands of a receiver, he could be a gadget player while running the ball, but actually have an NFL position in receiver.

Caulibflower
05-22-2012, 03:42 PM
This just popped into my head - would you rather have McCalebb or Denard Robinson?

cajuncorey
05-22-2012, 03:57 PM
This just popped into my head - would you rather have McCalebb or Denard Robinson?

Denard Robinson, pure prole genetics with wiggle. The fact he refuses to tie his shoes tells me he reserves his mentally capacity specifically for the motor cortex. He does not overwelm himself.

jentakins
02-26-2013, 01:58 AM
Hi All,
Onterio McCalebb is a college football running back for the Auburn Tigers.McCalebb, who measured at 5-10 and 168 pounds, was mostly a back-up running back and return specialist for the Tigers through college.

Caulibflower
02-26-2013, 04:23 AM
Hi All,
Onterio McCalebb is a college football running back for the Auburn Tigers.McCalebb, who measured at 5-10 and 168 pounds, was mostly a back-up running back and return specialist for the Tigers through college.

Wow, jentakins. What an insightful first post. College football?