View Single Post
Old 08-25-2004   #46
eriadoc
Texan-American
 
eriadoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 18,626
Rep Power: 286663 eriadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respected
Send a message via ICQ to eriadoc Send a message via Yahoo to eriadoc
Default

Quote:
I don't know if I am in the minority, but Hollings sure seems unimpressive. If he's not fumbling, he is running straight ahead and leaning on D-linemen. He looks like as faster Wells.
I have not been very impressed with him, even last week, when he had holes. Perhaps it's a personal preference, but I'd rather have a back that has great field vision, hits the holes with authority, breaks tackles, has a low center of gravity, and is shifty and deceptive. Add in toughness and durability, and you've got a HOF-er, and Emmitt-type back. I may be in the minority, though, because a lot of folks seem to want that burner that can hit the outside and take it to the house. That's all well and good, but I prefer the former. They almost never are the same, unfortunately.

I don't see Hollings as having too many of those qualities, and I really don't see the vaunted speed. Honestly, I don't think he's really that much faster than Wells. I have no clue what their 40-yd. times were, so I am probably off-base, but it seems that Wells has as much game speed as Hollings, at least from what I've seen in practice and in the Dallas game. Hollings still has a lot to prove, IMO.
eriadoc is offline   Reply With Quote