re: For people who actually saw and remember both. Badger or Casanova?

quote:

---

Did he have the vision to run? Maybe. Could he take the pounding? No.

---

This isn’t 1970. Successful offensive threats don’t have to pound up the middle anymore. They are allowed to create mismatches in space. That’s how he would have been used on offense.

I barely remember him but you could be 70 and remember him well I guess

quote:

---

but you could be 70 and remember him well I guess

---

if you were 70, you'd have been a student when he played.

considering how many people here talk about remembering going see Pistol at the old Cow Palace, is it really that far fetched that people remember a football player that was here at the same time (and actually a year later too)?

I saw Cannon, Bert Jones, Casanova and the Honey Badger play in Tiger uniforms.

quote:

---

I barely remember him but you could be 70 and remember him well I guess

---

This might put it into proper perspective for that time period (what others were saying):

Just so different. It really depends on what you value, creating turnovers and play making or locking down you position. Return skills where probably a push. I think you could
say Casanova was better at their position but TM was more impactful. One thing that doesn’t get mentioned is that TM really needed to play next to really good cover comers. He needed that to free him up to play make. If he was forced into more coverage his star would have definitely been dimmed because he simply wasn’t that great in coverage. You could put Casanova on any defense and the lock down coverage skills play. To tough to call either way

quote:

---

So what you’re saying is you could plug a lot of players in the spot and they would have done what Honey Badger did?

---

I didn’t say that. I said he had a HELL OF A LOT more freedom to roam and make plays because he didn’t have to worry about coverage as much. Most of his strips etc. when he did have to cover, like against Bama in the championship game because they could hold up from an OLine, he was burned and not an impact. That is a fact.

quote:

---

He was a once in a generation game changing playmaker who made everyone else around him better. Everyone could see it except apparently you.

---

If you read all my other posts in this thread. IT NEVER WAS ABOUT PLAYMAKING ONLY. He was NOT a better return man than Casanova. Those of us that saw , know.
He was NOT FASTER. Not close. Casanova would have won state nearly every year since he graduated from high school in 5A. Run a 10.4 or lower on todays track you win a lot.
Casanova was a hell of a lot bigger and more physical with better coverage skills. See the post above on when Mathieu had to cover.

Casanova was a running back that berated 7 yards per touch.

Mathieu was better at creating turnovers.

I ABSOLUTELY LOVE MATHIEU and like I’ve said have an autographed helmet of his and didn’t miss a game. He was EXCITING of a player I’ve ever seen from that perspective. But he had a lot of great defensive players that allowed his skill set to be best utilized. He was GREAT. Top 3 for me all time and I’ve seen them all since the early to mid-60’s. That includes Jerry Stovall who should have won the Heisman.
Here are my top three of all time:
Casanova
Burrow
Mathieu


Stovall was really really great.

I never saw Cannon in college. Only heard him on the radio.

No shite, Sherlock. He's a damned good ophthalmologist at that.

Badger in my opinion. He had the best instincts of any LSU defensive player I’ve ever seen. Casanova was a great athlete and could have played any skilled position on the field. He played DB in an era that stressed the running game and simplified passing offenses.

Lot of old baws on message boards apparently