Dual Runningbacks? the way to go?
 

interesting thing i noticed that all 4 teams left run with 2 runningbacks that both play a good amount of time

addai/rhodes
dillen/maroney
jones/benson
mcalister/bush


i saw it work to perfection against the ravens..... addai started the game and played the 1st 3 quarters..... then when they needed to kill time, they brought in the veteran rhodes who was fresh and he got some key first downs......

is this a start of a trend maybe? because surley it has worked

anyway i wanted to post this but never did, but then i found an article that talks about this

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_yl...yhoo&type=lgns

I have really started to favor the 2 back system. I love what New England, Chicago, Indy, and New Orleans have done with the two backs. It seems as if the backs are fresher and less beat up on as the season goes on as their carries are lessened with the two back system. I think the key to the two back system is the fact that all four of the teams that are left have a vertern running back, and a rookie back with the exception of Benson in Chicago.

New England - Dillion (12 years)/ Maroney (Rookie)
Indianapolis - Rhodes (6 years)/ Addai (Rookie)
New Orleans - McAllister (6 years)/ Bush (Rookie)
Chicago - Jones (7 years)/ Benson (2 years)

I am definetly in favor of the two back system.

almost forgot that last year, the steelers had a semi combo running tandem of the bus and parker..... and they won the superbowl........

but like you implied... it works better if you have a veteran who can hold onto the ball and a talented young back

New England uses a 3 back system :)

Well look at the NFL rushing stats

At the top of the NFL we have

• Atlanta
  San Diego
  Jacksonville
  Washington
  Tennessee

At the bottom of the nfl we have

• Detroit
  Cleveland
  Arizona
  Oakland
  Tampa Bay

I would say the 2 back system is good. However if you have a chance to get an elite back like LT or LJ then you have to take him and don't worry about it.

Well you dont necessarily have to use a 2 back system where you have 2 backs of equal ability that get equal PT, but its very important to have a good backup at HB. Even if you have a pro-bowler at HB, its still important. Look at how effective Turner was behind LT this year.

I'd take guys like LT, LJ, Tiki, Westbrook or any star RB anyday over a 2 back system

i wouldnt, i would take maroney and dillon over those guys, maybe with the exception of LT

Well, its the trend right now. But it has yet to prove if it has staying power or not. I have yet to see the two back system effect the wins and losses of a team.
I suppose it depends on your personel. If you have an LT, LJ, or a guy of that stature, then I don't want to see them split carries. That would be stupid. If you have a few good guys and want to get the most from both, then the two back system would probably be the way to go.

The 2-back thing has been ok for Indy, but I believe the Colts' O is at its best when they have 1 feature RB.

That makes that play-action a more dangerous weapon.

No love for MBIII and JJ :(

When the Chiefs had both LJ and Priest it was not even fair for the other team.

Rudi Johnson/Chris Perry is a sweet combo... Too bad Perry is never healthy.

i was just mentioning teams that were in the championship round...... barber and jones make a great duo as well as jones-drew and taylor

It is the 'ideal' situation. If you can, you do a rotation.

It's not like San Diego and Kansas City don't have great backup RBs. Michael Turner is a future pro bowler and Michael Bennett is a starter quality RB (injuries denied that though).

LT/Turner and LJ/Bennett are both way better than Dillon/Maroney or McAllister/Bush. It's not like LJ and LT are the only backs on their teams, they share some carries (albeit not as much as in NE or NO)

Bennett did nothing when given a shot at starting in Minny. The only tihng he has proven is track speed. He hasn't proven anything in the run game.

The Jaguars had a great two-back set this year.

Fred Taylor was the undisputed starter, but he was spelled by Drew, a guy who could be a undisputed starter in the right offense (The West Coast Offense to be precise--- one that gives him enough touches, but doesn't overuse him in the running game while honing on his receiving talent) in his own right.

Better for the Team. Keeps guys healthier. Fresh Legs more often....

I think im going with the two back tandem. But if I got LT he'll touch the ball 25 times a game atleast....

I like marion barber III and JJ

I like Caddy and Michael Pittman :wink:

With the top 3 rhodes, maroney and benson weren't drafted to do a rotation but soon be the sole starter. In a couple of years all of those will be the starter and I doubt we'll see a balanced rotation, excluding Bush.

I think its important to have some kind of rotation, even if its very uneven like 3-1 or 4-1 so you don't end up with LJ running to death.

Like that would happen...

Wait...

i thought he just didnt play

perry is a real good pass catcher........ he deserves a shot to start somewhere