No announcement yet.

Will the 18-game season affect RB draft stock?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Will the 18-game season affect RB draft stock?

    Now that the season is most likely going to be extended to 18 games, increasing the amount of wear and tear on players over the course of the year, it seems like a reasonable question to ask whether or not this is going to affect the draft stock of some players in this year's draft, specifically at running back. Backs usually go start going downhill after a few 300-carry seasons, so what's going to happen when a feature back is asked to carry the ball 400 times? Do you guys think the longer season (and thus increased roster sizes) are going to push more teams in the league towards running back committees rather than feature backs? If so, how is that going to affect the draft status of a bell cow like Mark Ingram?

  • #2
    I think it's a very legitimate point. Recently the trend has been towards running back by committee anyway but this could have big implications. I'm not sure if this increases or decreases a 'bell cow's' value though. There seems to be two ways of thinking in regards to this;

    1. Teams will now carry at least 4, maybe 5 RBs because of the added strain of the extra two competitive games. With the extra bodies it may mean teams will place less emphasis on taking the 'feature' back in the draft. Teams like the Patriots, Saints etc who have a stable of backs now will probably take this approach as they are not built around the one guy who will do it all. This will obviously cause some backs to fall in the draft. It will however increase the value of change of pace backs.

    2. Teams will see the added workload and place extra value on a RB who can carry the ball 350+ a year as it will free up a roster spot which can be filled by another position. The Rams, Vikings, Falcons etc who have a guy they can depend on to run the ball successfully 25 times a game will show that workhorse backs are extremely valuable. This may increase the value of a Mark Ingram say, but decrease the value of players like Jacquizz Rodgers who will only take a certain amount of snaps.

    BoneKrusher killing it with the sig


    • #3
      I'd rather they just didn't extend the season to 18 games... We already see too many good RBs have short careers. Now they'll play even fewer seasons or get less carries per game, because their team wants to limit the wear on them. If you're the coach of the Vikings or Titans, for example, would you still give AD or CJ the same number of carries per game, knowing how worn down they might be by playoff time?


      • #4
        I think you'd be crazy if you felt you could still give a RB 25+ carries a game with 2 extra games. I know certain teams have play-makers but you have to invest in a 2nd RB who can get carries also if you want these guys to last.

        Originally posted by Scott Wright
        I guarantee that if someone picks Cam Newton in the Top 5 they will regret it.


        • #5
          I think it could increase RB draft stock. There are only so many upper echelon running backs every year. Every team is going to look to load up on runningbacks. Draft the good ones early so the other teams are stuck with less. You can find RBs in every round of the draft but there is a reason guys go in the first. By the time games 17 and 18 roll around the teams with better RB talent early in the year are going to be in a better position to win.


          • #6
            I'd guess yes.


            • #7
              I don't think it would affect the draft in any way at all...


              • #8
                I think they'll expand the roster beyond 53 players, and so it will change how teams view some positions probably.



                Debug Information