Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Full Time RB vs RB By Committee

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

  • Full Time RB vs RB By Committee

    Which approach do you prefer and why?

  • #2
    For one game? Full time RB no doubt. One star is better than two good players for any one game.

    For a whole season? It's a wash. I don't prefer either system to one another. Players could get hurt or could stay healthy.

    For any more than 2+ seasons in a row? I prefer a RB by committee approach. Injuries definitely will happen over time. Players leave via FA, etc. Two good players are more versitile than 1 great one over the course of a couple of seasons or more.

    Designs by Thule



    Originally posted by DMWSackMachine
    I just wanna warn you guys not to take TNew41 too seriously. He's....let's just say, special. He's fairly harmless, though. He just needs several years of seasoning before he tries to make any more points, is all.

    Comment


    • #3
      Unless you have a guy like LT, then I definitely say committee. It is more reliable and economical. Not only do you have a capable guy if one is injured, but you are going to have games where a back will struggle and in a committee approach you have a better chance of somebody taking up their slack.

      Comment


      • #4
        I think ideally a team wants a single guy, but a competent backup to take the heat off, the way the Chargers do it. Turner is very good, and gets carries, but it isn't an RB by committee, he is LT's backup.


        Originally posted by Scott Wright
        Terrellezzzzzzzz Pryorzzzzzzzz!
        Originally posted by njx9
        do i tell you when to flip the burger?

        Comment


        • #5
          I, myself have always been a fan of that ONE feature back. A stud who can carry the team on his back and be counted on to be productive with his carries, catch out the backfield, pass block etc, and a good back who can spell him when needed. Ideally, that is what I want, but realistically I am more than happy with the way things are set up right now. The convenience of having two capable, and yes despite popular opinion JJ is capable, RB on your team gives you depth, security and fresh legs when it comes right down to it. So Committee for me right now.

          With that said, when Draft time comes around, there's going to be little part inside me that wants a D-Mac or a Jonathan Stewart. Just because I believe they could be great great RB in this league.

          Comment


          • #6
            Full time RB. I believe running backs can be better if you give them more carries. You really don't tap into their full potential/ talents until you let them carry the team on their shoulders. We've seen what Jones can do as the starter his first year and the year after that. Some assume Barber can't do it because he hasn't had the chance to do it. Seems pretty unfair to me. I will admit our RB committee does work. But how often does the same duo's in a committee stay together? Something has got to give.

            Comment


            • #7
              Antwain Smith / Kevin Faulk - 2001 Patriots
              Thomas Jones / Michael Pittman / Mike Alstott - 2002 Buccaneers
              Antwain Smith / Kevin Faulk - 2003 Patriots
              Corey Dillion / Kevin Faulk - 2004 Patriots
              Jerome Bettis / Willie Parker - 2005 Steelers
              Joseph Addai / Dominic Rhodes - 2006 Colts

              Other than the 04 Patriots who used Dillion as the workhorse, almost all the other SB winners have used committees pretty extensively.

              Designs by Thule



              Originally posted by DMWSackMachine
              I just wanna warn you guys not to take TNew41 too seriously. He's....let's just say, special. He's fairly harmless, though. He just needs several years of seasoning before he tries to make any more points, is all.

              Comment


              • #8
                There is an overabundance of talent at the RB position in general these days. There's no reason to rely solely on one guy unless he's LT. And you'll notice, they don't even use LT by himself.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I used to be a uncompromising fan of the sole back system. But having seen dual backs in Dallas. Im just of the opinion that whatever works... Should be used.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I agree with whatever works, look at the colts...


                    won the super bowl with RBBC, and this year could easily win with just addai as a feature back, i think teams realize that if a back can do it they will go with it, but if you end up with 2 talented backs then its almost crazy to not let them both see the field...as good as LT is, Turner is good enough to garner some playing time...





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

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think that it really depends on the team, but the trend for winning teams recently is to use a committee. Even look at the Chargers last year, they brought in Michael Turner who put up solid numbers.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I like the one back system. Spoiled by Emmitt I guess. Thats why I wanted A.D.(rookie of the year?) last year. As great as this Offense is, just imagine it with Adrian toting the rock.....AMAZING




                        The greastest team of all time...The OKLAHOMA SOONERS!!! http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3849468

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X

                        Debug Information