Legal Tampering period thread and Free agency 2021.

[Chopper0080]

All of this info is great, yet it doesn't scream that we should be content with a poor RB room. All this talk about de-valuing the position doesn't mean you should be content with kitchen scraps. Right now, we have a poor RB room. It still needs move talent. Even if you're a fan of Chase and JC, which I'm meh to boo on both, what happens when one gets injured? Your season is over. Talk about what happens when a bell cow RB at doesn't equal a good RB room.

I feel this is an over-dramatic response. When your top end of talent is average at best, the ability to replace that level of talent and production is easier than if you have to replace more talented player. Replacing Chase or James is much easier than replacing Saquan.

I find it a bit two-sided to bemoan the level of talent we have and then base your argument on what will happen if those players get hurt.

 

[Chopper0080]

I also find it interesting that this team is so obviously being built around the passing game and Kyler (whether you agree with it or not) and many are focused so much about the RB position.

 

[BritCard]

I feel this is an over-dramatic response. When your top end of talent is average at best, the ability to replace that level of talent and production is easier than if you have to replace more talented player. Replacing Chase or James is much easier than replacing Saquan.

I find it a bit two-sided to bemoan the level of talent we have and then base your argument on what will happen if those players get hurt.

Exactly. One of the big advantages of having a stable of average running backs is how easy they are to replace.

 

[BritCard]

Just looking at some stats for the last 3 years regarding RB's who played all those years (excluding rookies and 2nd year players).

Edmonds average 4.42 YPC.
Zeke averages 4.44.
Kareem Hunt 4.37
Drake 4.36
James Conner 4.32
Joe Mixon 4.31
Gurley 4.13
White 4.13
Mike Davis 4.08
DJ 3.96
Fournette 3.96
Hines 3.95
Bernard 3.42

At the top you have

Mostert 5.65 - If you need proof a RB needs a system
Chubb - 5.23
Gus Edwards - 5.20 - More evidence of scheme over talent
Henry - 5.16
Breida 5.05 - Where's the eye's emoji? More proof of scheme
CMC - 4.80
Cook - 4.76
Barkley - 4.72
Ekeler - 4.64
Carson - 4.59
Gordon - 4.50

Both Conner and Edmonds are solid, decent, average RB's. Add another one of those and we will be fine.

If you look at what guys like Ekeler, Carson and Gordon are getting paid for a fraction more YPC compared to the $1.75 we pay Conner it's a steal.

 

[Krangodnzr]

All of this info is great, yet it doesn't scream that we should be content with a poor RB room. All this talk about de-valuing the position doesn't mean you should be content with kitchen scraps. Right now, we have a poor RB room. It still needs move talent. Even if you're a fan of Chase and JC, which I'm meh to boo on both, what happens when one gets injured? Your season is over. Talk about what happens when a bell cow RB gets injured? How bad is it when your season is over if a Chase or JC gets injured? That doesn't equal a good RB room.

Your season isn't over when a RB gets injured!

Your takes on RB are so 1984.

 

[BritCard]

Your season isn't over when a RB gets injured!

Your takes on RB are so 1984.

Only if it's a CMC or peak DJ because they are a major part of the passing game.

 

[Ronin]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[Ronin]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[Krangodnzr]

Only if it's a CMC or peak DJ because they are a major part of the passing game.

Or if you don't have a good QB to compensate.

 

[Stout]

Why am I not surprised that the usual suspects have reared their heads to tell me I'm talking nonsense? lol

I get it. You either are perfectly happy with our RB talent or don't care about the position in the least. I'm getting a lot of "Stout, you have NO REASON to feel this way" about my opinions. Yeah, 'cause that kind of argument has swayed me in the past lololol

We don't have good RBs. That is my opinion. We need better RBs to realistically have a shot at anything. Not world-beaters, but at least one starting-quality RB (we don't currently have any). Another opinion/couple opinions. Absolutely nothing I have read, including all the snide remarks and "don't you understand" condescension has or will sway me from those opinions. And there's nothing outlandish about those opinions. So white noise away, folks.

Bottom line: Yinz are happy with what's been done at RB, and I'm not. I'm sure you feel all I'm doing is throwing out white noise myself. Fair enough. All I ask is that the folks who don't rate the RB position/think Keim has done enough at the position stop acting like there's no other possible opinion. I am as optimistic that this will happen as I am about our RB room at this time

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I agree, they will be an improvement. I don't think any are the long term answer though and I wouldn't at all mind drafting at RG in round 2. There are some decent iOL guys expected to be around in the 2nd.

I wish we had three 2nd round picks this year. I think this draft is 12 very very good players/QBs and then a whole lot of very good players through 3/4ths of the second round.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

FYI I edited this today. One of the stats for Lynch was off by a year and I went back and did the last 10 SB's.

I think it's quite telling statistically.

Many more teams made it to the SB with a 600-700 yard back, a 400-500 yard back and a 100-200 yard back than those who had a bellcow.

I think super bowl is a poor selection criteria as it’s so limited and so many variables come into play. I would think playoffs is a better mark.

 

[BritCard]

I wish we had three 2nd round picks this year. I think this draft is 12 very very good players/QBs and then a whole lot of very good players through 3/4ths of the second round.

Same, in fact if I had a choice I'd take 3 2nd round picks for our 1st every year. Even if they were mid to late 2nds. I think there's always some good talent in the 2nd.

I think super bowl is a poor selection criteria as it’s so limited and so many variables come into play. I would think playoffs is a better mark.

These stats have nothing to do with the SB itself. I didn't look at stats from the game. But these are all teams in the last 10 years that went to the SB with RB by committee and without a 1000 yard rusher and they outnumber those with 3 to 1.

That would suggest that if you want to win a SB (which is the ONLY goal really) then your odds are better with a selection of average backs over a superstar.

Note, I added the 2nd quote/reply after Stout liked this so don't think he agrees with that part

 

[Solar7]

I'm not sure how you can look at some of those backfields I listed for recent superbowl teams and be all that concerned.

If you are concerned our coaching, scheme and O line sucks and thus we need a miracle running back to make it work then fair enough, but then we should probably be more concerned about fixing those things than a running back.

I'm infinitely more concerned about Cornerback.

I mean, I'd have fired Kliff and Keim months ago if it were my call, so...

I'm just trying to work within the parameters we have set. A more talented RB than Chase or Conner gives us a shot at taking the burden off of Kyler when we need to. I'd love a dominant OL, but we're desperate at CB and most likely won't take an AVT, and we're still meh at other positions on the line even if we do.

All of this caterwaul about amazing OLs and amazing schemes and teams winning Super Bowls with bad run games that either have great defenses or greatest of all time QBs is nearly pointless because we have none of the above.

 

[Stout]

I wish we had three 2nd round picks this year. I think this draft is 12 very very good players/QBs and then a whole lot of very good players through 3/4ths of the second round.

If we had 3 2nd-round picks this year, I'd be a LOT less worried about the RB position.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Interesting. However, I think it’s worth noting the teams mentioned above COULD run the ball when they HAD to.

In today’s NFL you have to be able to get chunk plays and score td’s. Very seldom is a team going to put together six 12-13 play drives in a game. Inevitably penalties will stall a drive which takes a “ great running attack” out of play because they can’t overcome first and 20.

I would rather have 3 guys with 700 yards than one guy with 1300. And when you have the bell cow rb miss playing time it destroys the offense.

It use to be run the ball to set up the pass. Not today.

This would seem to support the importance of the bell cow. It also usually doesn’t happen when the top wideout is out.

 

[BritCard]

I mean, I'd have fired Kliff and Keim months ago if it were my call, so...

I'm just trying to work within the parameters we have set. A more talented RB than Chase or Conner gives us a shot at taking the burden off of Kyler when we need to. I'd love a dominant OL, but we're desperate at CB and most likely won't take an AVT, and we're still meh at other positions on the line even if we do.

All of this caterwaul about amazing OLs and amazing schemes and teams winning Super Bowls with bad run games that either have great defenses or greatest of all time QBs is nearly pointless because we have none of the above.

Well, certainly no team has ever won a SB without a great QB or a good O line but were carried by a great running back. Whereas the reverse is much more common.

So wouldn't that the FO are right to not be too concerned about RB and focus on the things that do win you SB's?

I'm not even a little bit concerned about RB. I'm far more concerned about our defense as a whole, especially CB and the right side of our O line, specifically RG.

Other than RG I'm not at all worried about the offense. If we want to help Kyler and win more games we need a much better defense so Kyler isn't always having to play lights out to win.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Same, in fact if I had a choice I'd take 3 2nd round picks for our 1st every year. Even if they were mid to late 2nds. I think there's always some good talent in the 2nd.



These stats have nothing to do with the SB itself. I didn't look at stats from the game. But these are all teams in the last 10 years that went to the SB with RB by committee and without a 1000 yard rusher and they outnumber those with 3 to 1.

That would suggest that if you want to win a SB (which is the ONLY goal really) then your odds are better with a selection of average backs over a superstar.

Note, I added the 2nd quote/reply after Stout liked this so don't think he agrees with that part

I believe this is faulty reasoning. It’s not “selection of average backs = super bowl.” Its “greatest Qb of all time + defense=super bowl” or “hot squad=super bowl” and “btw they happened to have average rbs.” Your comment makes it seem like the average rbs were the causation, which they were not.

 

[Stout]

I believe this is faulty reasoning. It’s not “selection of average backs = super bowl.” Its “greatest Qb of all time + defense=super bowl” or “hot squad=super bowl” and “btw they happened to have average rbs.” Your comment makes it seem like the average rbs were the causation, which they were not.

Save your breath, or fingers. I think the sides and opinions are too entrenched. We're just chasing our tails here.

 

[Solar7]

Well, certainly no team has ever won a SB without a great QB or a good O line but were carried by a great running back. Whereas the reverse is much more common.

So wouldn't that the FO are right to not be too concerned about RB and focus on the things that do win you SB's?

I'm not even a little bit concerned about RB. I'm far more concerned about our defense as a whole, especially CB and the right side of our O line, specifically RG.

Other than RG I'm not at all worried about the offense. If we want to help Kyler and win more games we need a much better defense so Kyler isn't always having to play lights out to win.

I mean, all stats about great QBs winning the Super Bowl are going to be a bit skewed over the past two decades considering Tom Brady accounts for like 50% of them, haha. That's why using Super Bowl wins as an indicator is a bit sketchy, as Ouchie said, unless of course Mahomes picks up Brady's slack going forward, in which case, why are we even debating? We should all become eSports fans and start watching competitive Street Fighter.

The FO right now should be concerned about making the playoffs and even getting in the tournament, much less getting to the Super Bowl. Right now we have no reason to believe this is a playoff roster.

And I'm very concerned about our offense. AJ Green is a lackluster choice to solve our WR2 woes and still won't be here next year in all likelihood. RB is bad. The OL on the right side is a complete question mark. This team is built for the opposite of sustainability, so whatever happens this year isn't anything resembling a future to build towards.

 

[BritCard]

I believe this is faulty reasoning. It’s not “selection of average backs = super bowl.” Its “greatest Qb of all time + defense=super bowl” or “hot squad=super bowl” and “btw they happened to have average rbs.” Your comment makes it seem like the average rbs were the causation, which they were not.

Come on man, how can you think I believe average backs equals causation?

But when teams with average backs make the SB at a rate of 3 to 1 over those with bellcows what it does tell you is that you don't need superstar running backs to be a great team.

So we should not be concerned we don't have superstar running backs.

 

[BritCard]

I mean, all stats about great QBs winning the Super Bowl are going to be a bit skewed over the past two decades considering Tom Brady accounts for like 50% of them, haha. That's why using Super Bowl wins as an indicator is a bit sketchy, as Ouchie said, unless of course Mahomes picks up Brady's slack going forward, in which case, why are we even debating? We should all become eSports fans and start watching competitive Street Fighter.

The FO right now should be concerned about making the playoffs and even getting in the tournament, much less getting to the Super Bowl. Right now we have no reason to believe this is a playoff roster.

And I'm very concerned about our offense. AJ Green is a lackluster choice to solve our WR2 woes and still won't be here next year in all likelihood. RB is bad. The OL on the right side is a complete question mark. This team is built for the opposite of sustainability, so whatever happens this year isn't anything resembling a future to build towards.

If you ignore Foles won it without great backs, and the corpse of Manning won it without great backs. And Goff and Jimmy G got there without great backs.

Whether you think those teams were there because of great coaches, great QB's, great defenses or whatever thing they rode to the SB the one thing absolutely none of them rode to the SB was a great RB. Nobody in history as ever said that "Those guys only made the Super Bowl because of the RB".

So with that in mind, why would you treat the position with as much emphasis as you are?

3 things will win a SB for us. A good O line (we aren't far off that), a good QB (you don't need a great one and we have that) and a great defense. This we don't have and this is what we should be far more concerned about that RB.

Oh and a good head coach, this we certainly don't have.

 

[TRW]

Wow. This is like 50 ways to express your opinion. LOL

Can't wait until the draft is over and done with. Need some fresh material to debate on the board.

Carry on.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Wow. This is like 50 ways to express your opinion. LOL

Can't wait until the draft is over and done with. Need some fresh material to debate on the board.

Carry on.

This.

 

[Ronin]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media