As with most of your statements, this is blatantly false. Blaylock experienced one injury. Believe it or not, experiencing an injury does not continue in perpetuity. But even if it does, we don't havs all our eggs in 1 RB. There will be at least 5 or 6 on our roster, and they should have more holes to run through.
X has had elite quality games against Ole Miss, Alabama, and Tennessee already in his career, so it's obnoxious to pretend he's not capable of high quality play. He's literally proven it.
As for Blaylock not being a contributor, he was our leading rusher and all-SEC freshman team, so clearly he contributed. You even said multiple times he's our best back. I don't agree that he was better than X, but if he has more room to run with improved blocking, he has the potential to have an elite season.
He said this himself. Again, if all we get from Hatton is a November starter that gets 5 YPC like X did, we'll be just fine. I would be very surprised if both Blaylock and X went down before September was over. We also have Avant, who looks to be a quality change of pace back that should get more work than Ott and Tatum, whose fan club you seem to run free of charge.
Let's also stop trying to forget that Blaylock was ready from day 1 of the season as a true freshman.
Wow, three games in two seasons! I guess if you are satisfied with someone who has shown they can be really good once every few games, that's fine. I kind of prefer players who produce on a regular basis. I guess we should have all felt great about Sam Godwin since he showed against OSU that he was "capable of quality play."
Every team has a leading rusher. That doesn't mean that person is good, especially when his YPC numbers were terrible in games that were anything other than glorified scrimmages. Choosing between him and X is tough. They are both guys who should be battling it out to be RB2. On a team with a legit lead back, the two of them would ideally combine for about 10-12 carries per game to spell the starter. I don't consider either of them to be as bad a runner as Barnes, but I also don't think either of them has shown themselves remotely capable of being an above average starting SEC back.
And if you think I am a fan of Ott and Tatum, you obviously must have scored poorly on the reading comprehension portions of every standardized test you ever took. What I said was that there is no rational person who would argue that a change-of-pace G5 back and an incoming freshman are as talented as the two aforementioned guys. In other words, our room is less talented now than it was leading into this season. And yet even with that talent, through a combination of poor coaching, injuries, and poor performance, we were one of the worst teams in the nation running the ball. Better blocking will help. It will not make Blaylock suddenly able to make guys miss in space. It won't help us turn 5 yards into 10, or 10 into 20, the way all truly great backs do.
We have done very well (seemingly) at several positions the past two days. That doesn't mean we shouldn't also look to upgrade a position that has been terrible for two years.
While we are here, we should pour one out for Gibson now that he is in the portal. He joins a long line of OU offensive players who have been hyped beyond belief by every OU writer/podcast host the past few years, only to disappear once the games start. And like the other Gibson, Anderson, and several other guys the past three years, he seems to be evidence that at least for OU, injured guys rarely return to form. I don't know why that is. NFL players frequently return from devastating injuries and get back on track. Our guys get hurt, come back, and are a shell of what they were (or allegedly were in spring ball).
