What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Shanahan Running Back Syndrome: An Explanation? (1 Viewer)

JohnnyU

Footballguy
Link

Shanahan Running Back Syndrome: An Explanation?

by Crackajg

created August 11, 2008, last edited February 10, 2009

2Vote

Presently, fantasy owners tend to stay away from Denver running backs as if they had Ebola. You know, the disease where you bleed from every orifice? Yeah, that one.

This is because in the past few years Mike Shanahan has decided that his team shall use a running back by committee, even when it does not make sense in the way it is being used. To be fair, Shanahan was the trend-setter in regards to the current committee running back situations we’re now faced with. Or shall I say, burdened with. Not that knowing the running back’s backup and backup’s backup is a bad thing. It’s just that if we didn’t need to, we could be spending that research time on other things like you know, our families.

Most of all that is common knowledge. What isn’t, is why it’s all happened in the first place. I’ve never heard an explanation, nor could I find one with specifically phrased searches through Google. So in the interests of fantasy owners who have been met their downfall thanks to a committee backfield in Denver, I embarked on a quest. I did not know where it would take me nor did I know what I would find. I just knew that it was a quest worth taking. I’m not promising an answer to the whole thing but as you’ll find at the end, a logical suggestion.

THE MILE HIGH RUNNING BACK FACTORY

In the wake of Terrell Davis’ retirement right before the 2002 season, the Denver Broncos became known as a running back factory. It seemed that no matter who the running back was, they would rack up at least 1200 yards and a half dozen TD’s. That stat mark, surprisingly was the minimum for that time and was set by Reuben Droughns in 2004. Yes, you read that correctly. Had you forgotten that Droughns was actually relevant once upon a time? It’s understandable.

Clinton Portis would alter Broncos fans‘ opinions that Davis could not be replaced rather quickly in 2002. At least the opinion that 1508 rushing yards 15 TD’s was a suitable replacement. Portis would follow his breakout rookie season with an even better one in 2003. He would rush for more yards (1591), but one less touchdown (14). Oh yeah, Portis also played in only 13 games in 2003 compared with all 16 the previous year. It puts the whole thing into better perspective, I think.

Following (what would soon come to be) an annual decimation of the team by the Indianapolis Colts 41-10 in the Wild Card round, Portis would be traded to the Washington Redskins straight-up for shut down corner Champ Bailey. The trade made sense because the passing game had needed help, but many wondered how the running game would fare now that Terrell Davis’ worthy successor had been traded away.

The answer to that question would lie in a Broncos fullback named Reuben Droughns. After rushing for 1240 yards and 6 TD’s, many declared Shanahan a genius in his scouting of running backs. Droughns would go onto Cleveland after just one year as a starter in Denver. There, he would put up another respectable season (1232 yards and 2 TD’s) in 2005 and then fall off the face of the earth. At least in terms of being a starting RB.

Once Droughns was shipped to Cleveland, that was it in terms of having just one starting RB. Over the next three years Shanahan’s approach to the running game would shift dramatically. He would use at least two but sometimes three different RB’s throughout the season.

A NEW PHILOSOPHY

While it’s impossible to pinpoint exactly where Shanahan shifted towards this new mentality, my best guess is Week 1 in 2005 at Dolphins Stadium. Anderson had gotten the start and was likely primed to be the starter for the rest of the year except that he got roughed up, bruised his ribs and effectively changed the landscape of fantasy football for the remainder of time. Way to go, Mike.

Into the game stepped Tatum Bell a rookie out of Oklahoma State. Although the team was shellacked 34-10 by the Dolphins and Bell only rushed for 47 yards on 13 carries with no TD’s, the teams backfield was never quite the same. Bell had to have done something.

Opinions here can vary. Either you can think Shanahan was going to use both Anderson and Bell from the get go or you can think Anderson’s injury and something about Bell’s performance in that game changed his perception somehow. One would make sense while the other would not. At least not as much.

Take into account the rest of what happened. In 2006, with Anderson gone and Bell poised to be the starter, Shanahan would give more than half of Tatum’s carries to an un-drafted rookie free agent named Mike Bell. The fact they both had the last name Bell only proved to further frustrate fantasy owners who had banked on Tatum, but not on this un-drafted Mike character. It was here that the legend of Mike Shanahan not being a big a fan of fantasy football would begin. It would only multiply exponentially in 2007.

With Tatum Bell gone, Mike Shanahan decided not to give his only remaining Bell any shot at the starting job at all. This is because the team had signed free agent Travis Henry and two more un-drafted rookie FA’s Selvin Young and Andre Hall. Hey, I never said this whole thing was going to make sense.

Although Henry and Young would split the majority of the carries, Shanahan designated Hall worthy of his own 44 carries. The ordeal was so traumatizing for some fantasy owners that many swore off Denver Broncos RB’s for the rest of their lives. Many have stayed true to that claim to this very day.

WHERE WE STAND CURRENTLY

With both Selvin Young and Andre Hall still on the team, Shanahan went ahead and gave the go-ahead to draft another rookie RB in the fifth round of the draft. He was out of Arizona State and his name is Ryan Torain.

Unfortunately for Ryan, he dislocated his elbow, did some ligament damage to it and will likely miss three months minimum. While I would not even think about suggesting that this injury was incurred due to the mass amount of karma directed at the Broncos RB situation from fantasy football owners who had put stake in them, I could go ahead and say that it may have opened up an opportunity for Shanahan to go back to a one-back system.

Or if you’ve already solved the mystery, will realize that 2008 will just become another chapter in the wondrous story that is Mike Shanahan’s running back depth chart management. Here’s a Scooby Snack for you.

THE THEORY THAT EXPLAINS IT ALL

When you read the history of the whole ordeal as I have so succinctly put it and then sit back and think about it, it will likely just dawn on you. It’s really the only thing that would make sense next to Mike Shanahan actually trying and enjoying his toying with the game of fantasy football. Since that reason has never really sat right with me, the new one I’ve come up with makes a lot more sense.

Think about it. What other possibility could there be for someone to go all-in on not one, but TWO un-drafted rookie RB’s? And then have it work for them? And THEN proceed to draft another rookie in the fifth round of the very next draft? Why on earth would someone do that? I don’t care how much he dislikes fantasy football, I don’t think he’s going to involve a whole draft selection in order to mess give in to his hatred.

We’ve all come to the conclusion that Mike Shanahan is a supreme evaluator of RB talent. That much is certain. But why would he just not use one back? Why use multiple ones year after year, especially after having had so many successful years with just one starting RB? The answer?

The can of Coke is always hall-full for Mike Shanahan.

He’s an optimist.

An optimist with a Hall of Fame eye for RB talent, but an optimist none-the-less

 
This article seems a bit confusing. I assume the net result is that he believes Shannahan is a pessimist, or just hedging his bets, when he goes into the season with two young, untested RBs?

 
This article seems a bit confusing. I assume the net result is that he believes Shannahan is a pessimist, or just hedging his bets, when he goes into the season with two young, untested RBs?
I think it shows optimist in the sense that he believes he can plug anyone in and they will be successful, because of his eye for RB talent. That's how I understand the meaning of optimist in this context.
 
I think what it's getting at is that no matter how good the RB he might have currently is performing, Shanahan always feels he can draft a better one...although I could also see that as him being pessimistic as in his RB's are never good enough. I'm :confused:

 
re: Shanahan being a great RB talent evaluator, a lot of these RBs are mediocre talents who fit his ZBS system. Once they leave Denver (Mike Anderson, Olandis Gary, Reuben Droughns, Tatum Bell, Mike Bell, et al), they tend to fizzle out pretty quickly or take on diminished roles. Portis is obviously the exception. I tend to think his genius lies in his ZBS running scheme as opposed to his eye for talent. It's a plug and play system that has worked for years.

 
re: Shanahan being a great RB talent evaluator, a lot of these RBs are mediocre talents who fit his ZBS system. Once they leave Denver (Mike Anderson, Olandis Gary, Reuben Droughns, Tatum Bell, Mike Bell, et al), they tend to fizzle out pretty quickly or take on diminished roles. Portis is obviously the exception. I tend to think his genius lies in his ZBS running scheme as opposed to his eye for talent. It's a plug and play system that has worked for years.
I agree with this. Of course you will never convice FBG bushisdaman that Mike Bell doesn't have talent :confused:
 
However you slice it, as you mention here, Shannahan was ahead of the NFL curve. Today, there are more teams valuing the committee approach than ever before. You have ask youself then, why is increasingly popular to have several go to backs instead of one. Cuz this is not just a skeletor thing any more. One obvious reason is that NFL teams just don't want to be so succeptible to RB injury any more. Ironically, I think Portis has had for the past few years too big of stranglehold on all the carries in Washington. This simultaneously limited Washington's offensive game plan and wore Portis down to the point where he was a shell of the RB he used to be. They could have been spelling him this whole time with Betts, giving teams different looks, and keeping Portis fresher and more healthy. The only thing sacrificed would have been Portis' ego perhaps. The counter argument, I guess, is that some RBs like lots of carries to "get into a rhythm."

Still, it's unmistakeable that Shannahan was not simply an oddball in his RBBC approach but as you say, somewhat of a trend setter to the point where routinely talking head commentators say the stock, "You really have to have 2 RBs nowadays..."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the article, while factually accurate, misses the point - but 'Buffaloes' gets it. Good post!

Skeletor just believes, and with good reason, that in his system there is no reason to spend high draft picks or big salaries on RBs because almost anyone that can cut once, run down hill from there and hold on to the ball can make it work. Having watched a group of cheap plug-and-play guys handle it for a while, I think he'll continue to run a committee - probably working to go 3 deep with guys who can cover for and split up the skills needed - like at least 2 with short yardage strengths, 2 with top receiving skills ... in that regard, not so unlike the Pats. In short, much as we have come to expect from him, although he has ridden the top guy when he has had one.

The system is among the best for RBs and once in place, with guys blocking who understand it, will produce over 4.5 for RBs across the board. But although Shannie will still prefer to finish with at least 55% runs and be among the league leaders in rushing yards every year, I won't be building around a WAS RB any time soon.

 
thatguy said:
Pretty underwhelming read IMO.
Definitely. Huge case of not seeing the forest for the trees. The author could have just saved himself 8 hours and asked a Denver fan what was behind the rotating runningbacks. Heck, I can sum it up in 10 minutes:
1995-1999 Terrell Davis is a stud. Terrell Davis gets like all the carries.
1999 Terrell Davis gets hurt. Olandis Gary is the top backup. Olandis Gary gets all the carries.
2000 Terrell Davis and Olandis Gary get hurt. Mike Anderson is the top backup. Mike Anderson gets all the carries.
2001 Terrell Davis is the starter, Mike Anderson is the top backup. In every game where Terrell Davis is healthy, he gets all the carries. In every game where he's not, Mike Anderson does. Some people see the alternating games (Davis in, Davis out, Davis in, etc) and think that there's some sort of conspiracy, but it was really quite simple. When Davis played, he got the carries. When he didn't, Anderson did.
2002 There's an open competition for the starting job. Clinton Portis is the best RB, but has fumble problems, so Shanahan brings him along slowly until he demonstrates he's past his fumble problems. In every game after that (week 4 or so), Clinton Portis gets all the carries.
2003 Clinton Portis is a stud. Clinton Portis gets all the carries.
2004 Portis is traded, Tatum Bell is hurt in training camps, Anderson is promoted to the starting job. Anderson gets hurt, so Griffin is promoted to the starting job. Griffin gets all the carries. Griffin is absolutely terrible and then gets hurt, so Droughns is promoted to the starting job. Droughns gets all the carries. At the end of the season, Tatum Bell gets healthy, so Shanahan works him into the gameplan in a limited role.
2005 Anderson is the starter. Anderson gets the majority of the carries, but Bell keeps his CoP role.
2006 Anderson is gone. Shanahan has decided that Tatum is best suited for his CoP role, so he promotes Mike Bell to be the blue-collar back to keep Tatum fresh. This is not, in fact, a ploy to motivate Tatum.
2007 Bell is gone, and so is Denver's desire to use a CoP back. Travis Henry is the starter. Travis Henry gets all the carries. Travis Henry gets hurt, so Selvin Young is the starter. Selvin Young gets all the carries.
2008 Michael Pittman is the starter. Michael Pittman gets all the carries. Pittman gets hurt, so Selvin Young is the starter. Selvin gets all the carries. Selvin gets hurt so Ryan Torain is the starter. Torain gets all the carries. Ryan Torain is hurt so Peyton Hillis is the starter. Hillis gets all the carries. Hillis gets hurt, so Denver brings back Tatum Bell. Bell is the starter, Bell gets all the carries.Shanahan's pretty simple to read when it comes to Runningbacks. If you're the starter, you'll get all the carries. There was only ONE exception in 13 years in Denver: Tatum Bell. The only time Shanny has ever used anything resembling an RBBC was when Tatum Bell was one of his top two RBs, because he believed that Tatum was very valuable as a CoP back. Outside of Tatum Bell, it's a simple case of "______ is the starter. ________ gets all the carries". The reason why it looks so muddy is because Denver suffered an extremely high rate of injuries, which was constantly shuffling the starter, and because Denver is one of the few teams that had true honest-to-goodness open competitions in TCs, meaning the best back would start regardless of his pedigree or the fantasy community's opinion of him coming in. The fantasy community thought that they knew who the best back in Denver was, they drafted him, Shanny decided otherwise, and the fantasy community hated him for it.

 
That's a good write up SSOG, but I remember the backfield being a bit of a timeshare between Andre Hall, Selvin Young and Pittman to begin 2008. I think the plan that year was RBBC based on the mediocrity of the RBs on the roster.

2008 box scores

 
Buffaloes said:
re: Shanahan being a great RB talent evaluator, a lot of these RBs are mediocre talents who fit his ZBS system. Once they leave Denver (Mike Anderson, Olandis Gary, Reuben Droughns, Tatum Bell, Mike Bell, et al), they tend to fizzle out pretty quickly or take on diminished roles. Portis is obviously the exception. I tend to think his genius lies in his ZBS running scheme as opposed to his eye for talent. It's a plug and play system that has worked for years.
Even Portis never really achieved the same level once he moved to Washington. He has cranked out a couple more 1,500 yard seasons, but his best season in Washington he still averaged a full 1.2 YPC less than his average the first two years in Denver. He's been a workhorse in DC, but not the same electric player he was under Shanahan.
 
Even Portis never really achieved the same level once he moved to Washington. He has cranked out a couple more 1,500 yard seasons, but his best season in Washington he still averaged a full 1.2 YPC less than his average the first two years in Denver. He's been a workhorse in DC, but not the same electric player he was under Shanahan.
The running scheme in Washington was different. They basically sent him running into the same wall over and over.
 
Even Portis never really achieved the same level once he moved to Washington. He has cranked out a couple more 1,500 yard seasons, but his best season in Washington he still averaged a full 1.2 YPC less than his average the first two years in Denver. He's been a workhorse in DC, but not the same electric player he was under Shanahan.
The running scheme in Washington was different. They basically sent him running into the same wall over and over.
This. At first, Washington didn't vary it up or give Portis any help, and then by the time that they started to develop a passing game, Portis's knees were shot. Portis was still a stud in Washington.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top