Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Small Backs?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • golota
    started a topic Small Backs?

    Small Backs?

    Why the high ratings for these mini sized backs who will likely turn out to be just third down specialists?

    To me, the top backs should be guys like Mathews, Gerhart and Tate.

    If you look at the leading rushers in the NFL over the years, most of the leaders have been bigger guys. Eg. In 2003, ALL top ten rushers were 220+. And last year the only real small guy was Johnson. Even he is 200 pounds.
    All the other leading rushers are 210-240 range and generally stocky guys. Best and CJ are about 195-198 pumped up on weights, etc.

  • SKim172
    replied
    My guess - there's just no real complete big back in the draft. A complete smaller back is better than a one-dimensional big guy. It may seem like small backs are dominating, but there've been plenty of bigger backs drafted recently. There just isn't one amazing one this year.

    Leave a comment:


  • bigfreak314
    replied
    Every team needs a thunder/lightning backfield

    Leave a comment:


  • Bengalsrocket
    replied
    Originally posted by nepg View Post
    Outside of the Top 10, getting a backup RB in the first round is a bargain compared to free agency.

    The top carriers only averaged ~15 per game last year...
    in the NFL?

    Chris Johnson - 22.
    Thomas Jones - 20.
    Steven Jackson - 21.
    Adrian Peterson - 20.
    Maurice Jones-Drew - 19.

    (I rounded off their decimals and I did take into account games they missed due to injury etc.)

    These guys had the most carries in the season and all average ~20 per a game last year. I'm not nitpicking, but 5 more carries per a game is 80 more carries in a season.

    Leave a comment:


  • nepg
    replied
    Originally posted by golota View Post
    All experts pick Spiller as a first rounder and most project him to be a specialist on third down and as a returner. Scott Wright projects him going to SF as a backup to Gore and return man/3rd down back.

    why would a team in their right mind pay a guy first round money (millions) to be a backup or third down back even though I acknowledge his utility as a specialist.
    Outside of the Top 10, getting a backup RB in the first round is a bargain compared to free agency.

    The top carriers only averaged ~15 per game last year...

    Leave a comment:


  • villagewarrior
    replied
    The thing about running backs is that they are going to get hit on almost every play. My worry about players like Chris Johnson, Jamaal Charles, CJ Spiller and the like is that they may not have the bodies to last long term in the NFL, and while they may burn extremely bright for 3, 4, 5 years, is that as long as they will last? Of course, you probably shouldn't offer a running back more than one contract anyways, so the point is could be moot.

    Leave a comment:


  • ectuberider
    replied
    Small shifty backs are more effective against 34 fronts (which are quickly taking over the NFL) due to the large lineman and linebackers.

    If you watch any Jets games from the past few years in games against 34 fronts they would use Leon Washington more than usual and Thomas Jones less.

    The NFL today is a passing league but you also get more opportunities, to run draws, screens, and misdirection running plays since the defense is aggressively blitzing and trying to get to the quarterback giving the backs a chance to get the ball in space, so subsequently the value for shifty, speedy types of players increases while the big bodied power backs are less valuable.

    Leave a comment:


  • theMadStork
    replied
    I'd take Dave Meggett

    Leave a comment:


  • Halsey
    replied
    Originally posted by batsandgats View Post
    because of Chris Johnson, everybody is looking for a clone,
    That's not true at all. There were small, speedy, highly skilled RBs making their mark on the NFL long before Johnson. You're being a prisoner of the moment.

    Leave a comment:


  • BuddyCHRIST
    replied
    Because the one back teams are on their way out, so you need guys with various skill sets. Also guys who can be gamebreakers in any aspect are always wanted.

    Also don't completely rule out guys being able to put on weight. Portis was a small back when he came into the league.

    Leave a comment:


  • Saints-Tigers
    replied
    Originally posted by batsandgats View Post
    because of Chris Johnson, everybody is looking for a clone, but imo Chris Johnson is going to be a once in a decade type player and all of these other guys will be 3rd down specialists like Bush. At the end of the year, more successful runningbacks will be the bigger guys that can wear down defenses and the smaller scat backs will just be change of pace guys. While these are good, I dont think you build your run game around them.

    To be honest, what really separates Johnson from a few of these guys? Johnson is almost assured to get his big plays, because he stays on the field AND he doesn't cough the ball up. When you can give someone like Johnson, Bush, Jamaal Charles, Felix jones, etc 30 straight carries, 15 or so against a tired defense, they are going to start ripping off massive gains.

    Thing is, someone like Bush has had to have his carries split up because he can't stay healthy, and the more carries that come, there is chances for fumbles.... less carries=less big plays

    Johnson is the special guy here because he has held up, and secured the ball. You can feed him constantly with almost no worries of hurting the team.

    Bush needs to watch plenty of tape of Johnson this offseason, particularly securing the ball. His running took a huge leap forward this year, but he still hangs the ball out loosely, and if Chris Johnson can hang onto it that well, there is no reason Reggie shouldn't be able to, given his upper body strength.

    I'm curious to see how Johnson holds up from here on out, he's a unique guy and is totally amazing to watch.

    Leave a comment:


  • PoopSandwich
    replied
    I read this thread as ball sacks i have no idea why.

    Leave a comment:


  • batsandgats
    replied
    because of Chris Johnson, everybody is looking for a clone, but imo Chris Johnson is going to be a once in a decade type player and all of these other guys will be 3rd down specialists like Bush. At the end of the year, more successful runningbacks will be the bigger guys that can wear down defenses and the smaller scat backs will just be change of pace guys. While these are good, I dont think you build your run game around them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Halsey
    replied
    These days every NFL team wants a fast, explosive RB who's versatile. Many of these 'small backs' offer speed, return ability, pass catching ability, etc that 'big backs' don't. Often the small backs are also better pass blockers. They seem to be good at getting under pass rushers and cutting them down.Obviously, there are exceptions: big backs who are fast and highly skilled, small backs who are powerful runners.

    Leave a comment:


  • golota
    replied
    Bush not worth the money

    Originally posted by bitonti View Post
    why would a team pay #2 money to Reggie Bush? Cause he's a difference maker and now has a ring to prove it. On my board Spiller's a top 10 pick.
    IMO Bush has been way overpaid.

    In 4 years at NO, he has a total of ONE 100 yard rushing game. He has been a good backup and third down RB.

    I dont think they won the ring because of Bush. They could have won with a 3rd down back like Sproles or Leon washington or Chester Taylor, etc.
    IMO as far as their running game, Pierre Thomas was the guy that should have been getting Bush's money.

    HOw many titles did Clemson win because of Spiller or Cal because of Best? Best flopped against good defenses in big games against USC and Oregon. What does that tell you about his value in the pros?
    Last edited by golota; 03-04-2010, 05:16 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X

Debug Information