Michigan State Football: Don’t count Jordon Simmons out in RB race
Just a year ago, Jordon Simmons was contemplating his future after Mark Dantonio had retired suddenly and he had to sign with a new coaching staff. He ultimately decided to place his trust in Mel Tucker and the new-look Michigan State football staff and it paid off.
Despite the pandemic affecting his first real preseason as a college running back, he still finished as the Spartans’ leading rusher with 219 yards on 56 carries.
The freshman actually out-rushed Connor Heyward and Elijah Collins who were both expected to lead the backfield as veterans, but Simmons looked like the best back all season long. He hit the few and far between holes hard and kept his legs churning to pick up extra yards when it looked like he was cooked.
Although his yards per carry was only 3.9, he was the most impressive rusher Michigan State fielded in 2020, especially since the offensive line was so poor.
But for some reason, he’s being counted out of the running back rotations for 2021.
Why is Simmons forgotten in the running back rotation?
The transfer portal has been a key contributor to Michigan State’s roster this offseason and the Spartans landed who Pro Football Focus called the fifth-best returning running back in the nation. Kenneth Walker III is the projected starter for 2021 after coming over from Wake Forest and a healthy Elijah Collins figures to back him up, or even split carries.
Then there’s Harold Joiner who could be more of a pass-catching running back and Connor Heyward who will be back for another season.
Where does that leave Simmons?
Well, if the staff is smart, they won’t let his talent go to waste just because of the depth at running back. Joiner can be utilized more in the passing game and outside of Collins and Walker III splitting carries, Simmons should be somewhere in that 50-100 carry range, at the very least.
While he might not be the projected starter despite being the lead returning rusher, he will be a valuable piece to the backfield puzzle.