ckparrothead
Premium Member
There is a scouting angle that I believe deserves more of a look. Mackenzie asserts that Jordan is awful against the run. I didn't see it that way, but I also don't agree with the claims that Jordan is very good against the run. It's incomplete and undetermined at this point, IMO.
When Jordan is credited with excellence against the run, far too often it's simply a product of the system, not unlike Kenjon Barner exploding into wide open spaces. Who cares if Jordan takes an undisturbed slant and blows up a running play in the backfield? Oregon has done that with any number of guys since switching to this attacking mode. There are flash examples from Jordan in every game. Extreme kudos to Mackenzie for all but ignoring them.
How will Jordan hold up in traditional running plays in the NFL? I'm not sure. Stanford's tackles buckled him a few times and made him look bad. This is where the Heath Evans angle comes in, that Jordan lacks a powerful base. We'll be able to use Jordan in preferred roles more often than not but he's inevitably going to be out there in short yardage and red zone situations, if there's any hope of fulfilling #3 status.
Should be noted he had a torn labrum when Stanford's linemen buckled him those few times. Any game after the Colorado game = torn labrum.