Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Broncos RB Dayne, FB Sapp Running With First Team (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter datonn
- Start date
. but i wouldn't want someone ranking Dayne high only because a Denver RB always finishes high.
joffer
Footballguy
didn't see this posted from the blogger
July 7, 2006, 21:49
Broncos :: RB
Broncos RB Dayne, RB T. Bell Likely To Split First Team Reps
Lee Rasizer, Rocky Mountain News, via The Sporting News - [Full Article]
Denver Broncos running backs Ron Dayne and Tatum Bell are likely to split reps with the first unit in Training Camp and the team's first two exhibition games, with the better performer to likely inherit the starting running back job with the team in 2006.
July 7, 2006, 21:49
Broncos :: RB
Broncos RB Dayne, RB T. Bell Likely To Split First Team Reps
Lee Rasizer, Rocky Mountain News, via The Sporting News - [Full Article]
Denver Broncos running backs Ron Dayne and Tatum Bell are likely to split reps with the first unit in Training Camp and the team's first two exhibition games, with the better performer to likely inherit the starting running back job with the team in 2006.
SSOG
Moderator
First off, I'd like to note that Lammey (the guy who has Dayne ranked the highest) is also the FBG staff member who covers the Denver Broncos. Just something I find interesting...Anyway, I raised this point last year, and have brought it up again this year. The reason why they're both so low is because of risk-adverse drafting. The FBGs are basically saying "Dayne has a good shot to finish top-12, but he also has such a good shot of finishing #30 overall that I would take 20 other backs before him".
I understand the concept behind it, I just think the Footballguys are focusing too much on the downsides and not enough on the upsides. As you noted, Denver's #2 RB finished 22nd last year in FBG scoring... but only 4 of the 13 staff members have even ONE of the Denver RBs ranked in the top 22. I think that's just wrong. I mean, even if you rank Bell in the top 22 based on the assumption that he'll be the #1 back, and he winds up being the #2 back again instead... there's still a great chance that he finishes in the top 22 anyway.
That's something I'll be very interested to see. I'm very intrigued if "split reps" necessarily means 50/50, or if it could be a 70/30 split (which is what Denver often does, anyway). I'll be very interested to see how the carries start breaking down in TC.
KnowledgeReignsSupreme
Footballguy
Football outsiders addressed a Bell v Anderson issue in their grab bag. Nice little chart showing what % of their runs were for negative yards, no gains, short gains etc.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2006/07/0...o-mailbag/3998/
If you just want to see the chart:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/images/AndersonBell2005.jpg
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2006/07/0...o-mailbag/3998/
If you just want to see the chart:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/images/AndersonBell2005.jpg
ConstruxBoy
Kate's Daddy
FWIW, I tracked injury status versus playing time last year for fantasy position starters and DEN had the second highest % of players playing (13 for 14) in the league behind NYG (7 for 7). I didn't see any evidence that Shanahan was being dishonest on the injury lists.
CalBear
Footballguy
It's possible to predict a huge downturn based on two facts: 1) There's a lot of noise about Ron Dayne being "the man."
2) Ron Dayne sucks.
The degree to which Denver's running game declines will depend on the degree to which #1 remains true. #2 is why most people have Bell ranked above Dayne.
It's not analagous to the Anderson/Bell situation last year, because Anderson is a good RB and Dayne is not.
ConstruxBoy
Kate's Daddy
BoltBacker
Footballguy
Is it analagous to the situation the year before when Droughns was not a good RB........ until he got a majority of DEN's carries?
zamboni
Footballguy
I wouldn't view his success rate based on TDs. Shanny seemed to like what he saw out of him.Believe me, I saw every game he played with the Giants, and I'm still a bit skeptical. But he seems to be running much more authoritatively now, so I'm also not going to entirely dismiss his chances based on what he did in NY.
Last edited by a moderator:
Couch Potato
Footballguy
I think you kinda missed the
on that one.
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
It's been a mighty off season for me in my own personal life and I have done very little to keep up with most of the NFL nonplaying season. I have maybe only opened a few of Joe's newsletters...but I am going to be drafting in some leagues soon. As I went to the Antsports site to simply get a feel for where the players were going I noticed the Denver RB were very much absent from the early rounds and it does make one step back and see if there is some value here.
Now let's see...Shanny had M.Anderson/T.Bell and the Broncos went all the way to the NFC Championship game last season, right? So Shanny has gotta be thinking about wanting to replicate/duplicate something close to last season. Mike Anderson is gone but that can easily be filled with Ron Dayne...if he stumbles and I don't think he will as the offense is close to what he was playing in at Wisconsin, he is slimmed down some, and he certainly does not have a lot of wear and tear over the past 3-4 seasons...Hmmmmm, why is this board so eager to want to embrace Cobbs/Sapp and the like? Mike Anderson went down with an injury in 2004 or else we never would have met Reuben...so the Sapp/RD comparisons to me are completely unwaranted at this point in time. I expect to see Tatum Bell get 10-15 carries a week depending on what kind of matchup the Broncos get and also when they are well ahead he will see a lot more carries in those games.
Bell has that burst we all like. I myself think if he could get 250 carries that 1,250 on the ground and 10-12 TD would be pretty doable...however he most likely will not get that. If the time is split between the two of them but Dayne gets 18-20 carries than you must start him. While this is not a Priest/LJ scenario from last season you could justify locking these 2 RB up within the 1st 5-6 rounds of the draft...assuming you got a really solid #1RB and want to use the Dayne/Bell combo as your #2/3 for the backfield. There is lots of upside and I think if need be you might take a flyer on someone like Cobb late in the draft...so what if you use 3 roster spots...almost all leagues give you 5-6 to use and you end up wasting them on people you never use anyways. For the folks that do not end up winning the lottery with picks 1,2 and 3...you need to get a plan B and this could be part of that.
As you were.
Now let's see...Shanny had M.Anderson/T.Bell and the Broncos went all the way to the NFC Championship game last season, right? So Shanny has gotta be thinking about wanting to replicate/duplicate something close to last season. Mike Anderson is gone but that can easily be filled with Ron Dayne...if he stumbles and I don't think he will as the offense is close to what he was playing in at Wisconsin, he is slimmed down some, and he certainly does not have a lot of wear and tear over the past 3-4 seasons...Hmmmmm, why is this board so eager to want to embrace Cobbs/Sapp and the like? Mike Anderson went down with an injury in 2004 or else we never would have met Reuben...so the Sapp/RD comparisons to me are completely unwaranted at this point in time. I expect to see Tatum Bell get 10-15 carries a week depending on what kind of matchup the Broncos get and also when they are well ahead he will see a lot more carries in those games.
Bell has that burst we all like. I myself think if he could get 250 carries that 1,250 on the ground and 10-12 TD would be pretty doable...however he most likely will not get that. If the time is split between the two of them but Dayne gets 18-20 carries than you must start him. While this is not a Priest/LJ scenario from last season you could justify locking these 2 RB up within the 1st 5-6 rounds of the draft...assuming you got a really solid #1RB and want to use the Dayne/Bell combo as your #2/3 for the backfield. There is lots of upside and I think if need be you might take a flyer on someone like Cobb late in the draft...so what if you use 3 roster spots...almost all leagues give you 5-6 to use and you end up wasting them on people you never use anyways. For the folks that do not end up winning the lottery with picks 1,2 and 3...you need to get a plan B and this could be part of that.
As you were.
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
Dayne was coming into the games generally to rest MA last season, right? He did pretty well in those appearances and now has a full grasp of the offense. Shanny has said he will be the starter most likely...very much like MA last season...Joffer you can discredit my whole post if you like but to say I lost you...I don't even give you points for a good 1 liner there...sorry.
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
OK Joffer but if he had 253 carries than we wouldn't be talking about a possible steal in the 4th/5th round with this guy would we? I see your points...I just think this thread has lost a little cabin pressure and some of us that have been watching from the sidelines the past couple of months are ready to jump in and start seperating fact form B.S.
Kit Fisto
Footballguy
The thing that kills me is this... if you want to hype Dayne, fine. But if Bell and Cobbs can't beat out Dayne, they suck. And if Dayne can't beat out Bell or Cobbs, he sucks. Get my logic here?
It kills me to see FBGs pimping all 3 of these guys! They ALL can't post 1,500 yd seasons with 12 TDs!
Until a starter has been named, I'm staying far, far away.
It kills me to see FBGs pimping all 3 of these guys! They ALL can't post 1,500 yd seasons with 12 TDs!
Until a starter has been named, I'm staying far, far away.
Gandalf
Footballguy
Agreed. What a mess! Shanny has always been a little insane in flipping RBs, but this is out of control. Is there any RB on the team that he hasn't talked up??? I'm sure one back will once again emerge, but trying to predict who or why is almost impossible. I'm done with this situation until greater clarity emerges, which hopefully will happen in the pre-season.
ConstruxBoy
Kate's Daddy
Haven't heard much about Mike Bell yet....
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
Oops...it was late when I wrote it...good catch. I'm leaving it as is.
ConstruxBoy
Kate's Daddy
Give it another a week.Haven't heard much about Mike Bell yet....
SSOG
Moderator
You're absolutely right. Once a chump, always a chump. Right, Thomas Jones?
Congratulations! You've successfully proven that the majority of Droughns' touches came at the goal-line!Droughns was a fullback. If a Fullback is getting touches, odds are Denver is in the red zone. Don't believe me? Let's look at the numbers from Kyle Johnson, Denver's FB last season. 21 touches, 6 TDs. Hmmm... not even BELL equaled that TD rate! Why isn't Denver starting JOHNSON at RB?! I mean, he scores every 3.5 touches! They'll be unstoppable!
That sound you hear is the sound of my eyes rolling.
You obviously have forgotten about how much crap people said about Mike Anderson last year. They were talking about how he was old, and horrible, pure crap. Oh, he sucked so much, he couldn't even beat out Quentin Griffin, what a crappy RB in general, he was old and slow and just sucked in general.Sound familiar? Because, to me, it sounds a lot like the things people are saying about Dayne. Only now, they're comparing him to Mike Anderson as if Anderson is actually a good RB. Funny, here I thought Anderson sucked...
Shanahan hasn't flipped RBs. He's just said good things about all of his RBs. If you followed Shanahan's tendencies, you'd see that he ALWAYS said good things about lots of RBs who will never see the field. He's not saying that they're going to be starters or that they'll even be a factor- he's just saying that he likes their hustle and rewarding them for giving him their best. It's non-news that somehow every year becomes this huge source of confusion and debate.Trust me. It's non-news.
CalBear
Footballguy
You missed my point. Droughns did not have a high YPC before he became the starter in Denver, because he was a fullback. Droughns was effective in his limited role, even before becoming Denver's starter. Dayne does not have a high YPC because he's a chump, and has been ineffective throughout his career.
SSOG,
Mike Anderson was the best(maybe better than TD +Olandis in that set too) in the single back set. Shanny played him there in spots in the redzone. I think that is confusing people in this discussion of FB and RB with TDs.
When Mike was thought of as a FB, he still played RB in the single back set on occasion and scored. So was he a FB or RB at that moment? It gets confusing.
Dayne can't move piles. I remember several threads and articles about his college stats being so great but for short yardage spots or GL spots. Also how he even struggled with this as "thunder" and it frustrated Giant fans. That's just not his thing. Shanny will either get burned or roll with someone else in short yardage situations. If you had to choose, who would it be? Sapp?
Mike Anderson was the best(maybe better than TD +Olandis in that set too) in the single back set. Shanny played him there in spots in the redzone. I think that is confusing people in this discussion of FB and RB with TDs.
When Mike was thought of as a FB, he still played RB in the single back set on occasion and scored. So was he a FB or RB at that moment? It gets confusing.
Dayne can't move piles. I remember several threads and articles about his college stats being so great but for short yardage spots or GL spots. Also how he even struggled with this as "thunder" and it frustrated Giant fans. That's just not his thing. Shanny will either get burned or roll with someone else in short yardage situations. If you had to choose, who would it be? Sapp?
SSOG
Moderator
Throughout his career? Seemed pretty effective in limited action last season, no?So... your point is that Reuben Droughns was effective in limited action in Denver, so it wasn't a stretch to say he'd become a good RB, but Ron Dayne has been effective in limited action in Denver and clearly it IS a stretch to say he'd become a good RB?
Or is your point that Droughns didn't suck in Detroit as much as Dayne sucked in New York? Because if that's your arguement, I'd argue with that, as well. Droughns sucked so much in Detroit that he was *CUT* in favor of Aveion Cason, Rafael Cooper, Autrey Denson, Richard Huntley, Corey Schlesinger, James Stewart, Steven Trejo, and LaMont Warren. I mean, he was drafted by a team to play runningback, and couldn't even make a roster over that list of immortal RBs? That's some pretty heavy suck right there.
The thing is, I haven't seen all of these backs run more than once or twice. Mike Shanahan has. I can tell you that Bell is not good in short yardage sets, Kyle Johnson runs like a fullback (i.e. you don't want him to be the full-time short-yardage guy, although it won't kill you to use him for a couple dozen or so carries during the season), and that's about it. I don't recall ever seeing Cecil Sapp run. I don't recall Dayne doing any between-the-tackles running on short yardage. I know I've never seen Cobbs or Mike Bell or Brandon Miree run. I really can't say at all who I would choose in short yardage, because I haven't seen them play.You know who HAS seen them play? Mike Shanahan has. He seems to think that Dayne's the best fit for that role, so I tend to think that Shanahan's a lot more likely to be right than a bunch of Fantasy Football Fans who are sitting on a website discussing RBs who they have never seen take a single carry in their entire careers, be it regular season, preseason, or even training camps.
Also, comparing running in Denver in short yardage to running in New York in short yardage is very misleading. Both teams operate very differently in short yardage situations. Because of Denver's blocking scheme, they need an RB who can identify the hole extremely quickly and hit it hard enough to get the yards. New York, from what I've seen, is more likely to just plow the RB into the line and hope for something positive. It requires drastically different skill sets. I think Portis was a fantastic short-yardage back in Denver, really superb... but if you take him and put him on the Steelers, I think he'd be a below-average short yardage back. Denver's about moving people aside and hitting a hole. Pittsburgh's about moving people back and getting what you can. Portis is phenominal at finding the hole and hitting it hard, but wouldn't really be much of a pile-mover if it came down to it.
Just because Dayne failed in New York does not mean he'll fail in Denver. It doesn't mean he'll SUCCEED in Denver, either- but it doesn't automatically mean he'll fail.
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
With a big helping of all due respect to those who differ, I'm with SSOG and PB on this one. We all have to admit it will be partially hilarious if Dayne is the next stud RB in Denver. So many people have so much invested in hating on poor Ron. Haters and homers-- easily exploited in this hobby. I hope the haters are wrong just for the amusement it would bring. I don't care one way or the other, but while many have been fleeing Denver RBs, I've been reaping rewards. I started Q for his big opener against KC, but saw the writing on the walls and was a week ahead of the curve on Droughns. I pimped Anderson last year, sufferred through a slow start, but had four straight nice games from him that carried me through a rough spot of dings and byes. Sheesh, I picked him up at 5.02 and he was RB10. So, I sort of don't care who starts for Denver as long as I have the option of him starting for me... even if it's *cough* Ron Da... *sigh* Ron Dayne.
Something I've been pondering that I think we'll have the answer too soon is... maybe Denver makes RBs better players. You could say, "Duh," but bear with me here. I haven't tried to explain this yet (though SSOG may have). Maybe it isn't just the zone blocking system. Maybe they really understand how to coach up mediocre RBs and make them star performers. Would TD have been a superstar had he been drafted elsewhere? I think probably not. You could say it was the system, but what if after a few years in the system he found a new home in free agency. With good knees would he have still been a stud? Probably. He became really good at running the football. Anderson drafted elsewhere? No RoY for him, but would he ever have been good? Again, I think no. Will he be good in Baltimore? Probably if given a chance and good health. They've been improved. Droughns was nothing elsewhere. Something about how he's been coached/taught has turned out a nice RB for Cleveland. It's possibly more than a blocking system, but an understanding of training RBs that is way ahead of the curve. Portis would have been good any time anywhere, let's get that out of the way. But a bunch of these solid backs had the look of journeymen nobodies before eating the magic running beans in Denver.
Along comes the beloved Ron Dayne. Oy. Has he had the magic beans? Has he been "turned into" a much better player? I think Davis, Anderson and Droughns were. Really. So why not Dayne? I read a quote from a Houston back (iirc) about how amazing the coaching is and how he feels way improved as a back. It could be they make backs good, and Dayne is going to be another despite the legion of doubters. He didn't look like the Dayne I know and love against SD last year. He ran hard through holes, didn't hesitate, ran through tackles and moved the pile. Ah, but he had fresh legs late in a tough game so that didn't count. He tore my heart out against Dallas and put the dagger in the season with a nice run on Thanksgiving Day. It was a very nice 55 yard run, and with more ops there's no reason why their won't be more. He scored a short TD in that one early in the game too. It also didn't look like Dayne to me. It looked like a highly trained Denver RB running without hesitation.
If Bell wins the job, I'm all over him earlier than most. If Dayne keeps it, I'm IN too.
Something I've been pondering that I think we'll have the answer too soon is... maybe Denver makes RBs better players. You could say, "Duh," but bear with me here. I haven't tried to explain this yet (though SSOG may have). Maybe it isn't just the zone blocking system. Maybe they really understand how to coach up mediocre RBs and make them star performers. Would TD have been a superstar had he been drafted elsewhere? I think probably not. You could say it was the system, but what if after a few years in the system he found a new home in free agency. With good knees would he have still been a stud? Probably. He became really good at running the football. Anderson drafted elsewhere? No RoY for him, but would he ever have been good? Again, I think no. Will he be good in Baltimore? Probably if given a chance and good health. They've been improved. Droughns was nothing elsewhere. Something about how he's been coached/taught has turned out a nice RB for Cleveland. It's possibly more than a blocking system, but an understanding of training RBs that is way ahead of the curve. Portis would have been good any time anywhere, let's get that out of the way. But a bunch of these solid backs had the look of journeymen nobodies before eating the magic running beans in Denver.
Along comes the beloved Ron Dayne. Oy. Has he had the magic beans? Has he been "turned into" a much better player? I think Davis, Anderson and Droughns were. Really. So why not Dayne? I read a quote from a Houston back (iirc) about how amazing the coaching is and how he feels way improved as a back. It could be they make backs good, and Dayne is going to be another despite the legion of doubters. He didn't look like the Dayne I know and love against SD last year. He ran hard through holes, didn't hesitate, ran through tackles and moved the pile. Ah, but he had fresh legs late in a tough game so that didn't count. He tore my heart out against Dallas and put the dagger in the season with a nice run on Thanksgiving Day. It was a very nice 55 yard run, and with more ops there's no reason why their won't be more. He scored a short TD in that one early in the game too. It also didn't look like Dayne to me. It looked like a highly trained Denver RB running without hesitation.
If Bell wins the job, I'm all over him earlier than most. If Dayne keeps it, I'm IN too.
Last edited by a moderator:
SSOG,
I hear ya. It's just that it's been Dayne's "achilles heel" since "forever" even when he was great in college or had better days as a Giant. Fassel, Coughlin, and his college coach got burned. I'd guess they've seen him as much if not more than Shanny so I wonder about that. Not just FF fans but real NFL coaches. IMO Mack was a great short yardage back under Coughlin so he should know what to look for.
I'm not sure how much the O matters when it's 4th and 1 with the lines stacked up. From what I've read, I gather it's more mano y mano muscle to get that yard. It's also very hard for a FB to "blow someone up" at that point too. I've seen it done but it's not often.
IMO Faulk, Marcus Allen, and Earl Campbell were the 3 best GL runners. Allen being my fave. Few RBs could jump as high as Allen. He could also "get small" and sneak in or put his head down and barrel in. Earl, well he was a mack truck or bulldozer just daring guys to stand in his way. I've only seen him on highlights or ESPN classic but he was darn determinned. I don't see anything like this, not even Tiki's scoot to the corner of the endzone, from Dayne. Where's the heart guys like lil Joe used to run with? Gimme something....well so living in NY and watching Giant games, that makes me understand why those previous coaches were frustrated with him there. It stinks to get to the one yard line and fail. It can kill a team's spirit too so I just hope Shanny addresses this and doesn't have false confidence in him at the GL like the previous coaches did. Eventually the Giants let little Mike Cloud do the GL work instead of him, that's pretty bad.
I hear ya. It's just that it's been Dayne's "achilles heel" since "forever" even when he was great in college or had better days as a Giant. Fassel, Coughlin, and his college coach got burned. I'd guess they've seen him as much if not more than Shanny so I wonder about that. Not just FF fans but real NFL coaches. IMO Mack was a great short yardage back under Coughlin so he should know what to look for.
I'm not sure how much the O matters when it's 4th and 1 with the lines stacked up. From what I've read, I gather it's more mano y mano muscle to get that yard. It's also very hard for a FB to "blow someone up" at that point too. I've seen it done but it's not often.
IMO Faulk, Marcus Allen, and Earl Campbell were the 3 best GL runners. Allen being my fave. Few RBs could jump as high as Allen. He could also "get small" and sneak in or put his head down and barrel in. Earl, well he was a mack truck or bulldozer just daring guys to stand in his way. I've only seen him on highlights or ESPN classic but he was darn determinned. I don't see anything like this, not even Tiki's scoot to the corner of the endzone, from Dayne. Where's the heart guys like lil Joe used to run with? Gimme something....well so living in NY and watching Giant games, that makes me understand why those previous coaches were frustrated with him there. It stinks to get to the one yard line and fail. It can kill a team's spirit too so I just hope Shanny addresses this and doesn't have false confidence in him at the GL like the previous coaches did. Eventually the Giants let little Mike Cloud do the GL work instead of him, that's pretty bad.
Sounds like just what Dayne is known for! Er, wait no, I thought you said run and trip over the line of scrimmage when a cornerback puts his hand on your shoulder. If that is how Denver RBs find success, Dayne is looking at HOF numbers.
Yeh, because Tiki is known as a back who pushes the pile. Why do Tikis short yardage numbers beat the crap out of Dayne again?If I hear one more glowing review of Daynes astonishing 52 carries last season im going to throw up. Guy comes off the bench a few times and puts up some good (not great) numbers, we've never seen that before with backups! Of course Tatum Bell rushed the ball more than 3 times as much last season and put up better yards per carry, but so what?
Look, the bottom line is if you think Bell's late game and short yardage ability is not going to improve this season, obviously there is a big opportunity for somebody to step in and put up some numbers. Problem is short yardage and late game has never been Ron Dayne's specialty. You basically have 2 guys with the same weaknessness, and the stats you guys pimp to prove Dayne the better bet were exceeded by Bell. Name an aspect of the game Dayne does better than Bell?
Lets look at the numbers from Dayne 'breakout' 05 season compared to Bell:
On 3rd and 4th downs:
Bell 6.6 y/c, 46% first downs
Dayne 3.89 y/c, 44% first downs
Inside the opponents 5 yard line:
Bell: 9 rushes, 2 first downs, 2 TDs
Dayne: 1 rush, 0 first down, 0 td
In the fourth quarter (mind you more than half of Daynes carries came in 4th quarters, because he is a scrub):
Bell: 38 rushes, 4.97 y/c, 3 TDs
Dayne: 29 rushes, 5.83 y/c, 0 TDs
Over the course of his career, Dayne has never done well later in games when he has a large number of carries. The bottom line is these two guys dont compliment each other at all, and Bell is better at what both of them do. Dayne is currently at the top of the chart and Shanny has expressed support for him, that is the only argument for Dayne succeeding. You simply cant find support for it statistically. If you believe Shanny is right, believe in Dayne. If not, dont, because you wont find anything else to lead a reasonable person to believe Ron Dayne can succeed.
SSOG
Moderator
First off, I've always argued this. People like to say that it's the blocking scheme that makes the RBs, but that's not really the case. I mean, if that WAS the case, then why wouldn't everyone switch to zoneblocking schemes? As much as the blocking scheme, it is the coaching and the playcalling. Bobby Turner (Denver's RB coach) is, in my mind, the best position coach in the NFL. It's not like his genius is a secret, either- New Orleans last year tried to hire him and make him their OC. Mike Shanahan has called more runs than anyone in town since he became a head coach. He doesn't give up on the run when it's not working immediately, like some coaches do. A combination of those two guys, as well as the blocking and the Linemen (who, by the way, are all-pros- Denver spends more on its offensive line than any other team in the league)... THAT'S what makes Denver RBs good.Second, I don't think Portis would be this good if he had gotten drafted by another team. Once upon a time, he was a dancer and a fumbler. Now, he is authoritative and reliable. Once again, credit Bobby Turner.
I've already said my bit about DVOA and Success Rate- both stats that adjust for down, distance, and situation, and both stats that claim that Dayne was significantly better than Bell last year. I could also cite SCPD (Shanahan Compliments Per Day) or SoTS (Support of Ted Sundquist) as statistical reasons to like Dayne over Bell. You might have thought that Cedric Benson was the best thing since sliced bread last year, but Lovie said that Thomas Jones was his man, and as a result Thomas Jones was his man. In fact, statistically, there is a strong correlation between having the support of the coach and starting football games, and scoring fantasy points. I wonder why that is.Besides, Dayne's... what, 6 feet tall? Even if he trips over the line of scrimmage, he still gets 2 yards.
Yeh but with that extra inch its a wash.
Like I said, not just the best but the only argument for Dayne succeeding is the support of the coaches. And its a strong argument. The counterargument is that the Broncos have been wrong before on occasion (Clarett, Griffin).Im very sketchy on both Bell and certainly Dayne. The Denver backs that have dominated arent necessarilly speed guys, they tend to be tough guys that can break an arm tackle and read a block. People have misconceptions about zone blocking- it does not magically open holes that mac trucks can drive through. It usually leaves somebody unblocked at the LOS and chances are there will be contact in the backfield or at the line. If the back can break the contact, find the hole, and get to the next level, he will hopefully have somebody bouncing up and taking on linebackers or safeties and thats how Denvers gets those big runs. Reading blocks and not going down on first contact are what leads to success and these are the two things Dayne has always struggled with. Sure, if he gets into the secondary he is a horse, but he has to get there first.
Last edited by a moderator:
SSOG
Moderator
I don't think it's the ONLY arguement. There's also the coaches insistance that Bell can't carry the load, combined with the equally checkered histories of the other RBs on the roster (Cobbs got cut from a New England squad desperate so desperate for a young RB that they spent a 1st rounder to get one, and everyone else was, if I recall correctly, underafted, except for Brandon Miree who spent last year on IR). I mean, if Bell's not going to get the load, who is? Sure, Dayne must suck because he sucked in New York, but Cobbs must also suck because he sucked in NE, right? And Sapp and Mike Bell must both suck because neither was drafted.You can also make the arguement that Denver's staff has a good history with reclamation projects. Then, too, there's the arguement that Ron Dayne looked pretty darn good running in limited action last season. Finally, there's the whole arguement that, even if he really genuinely does suck as a runner, he's still a better blocker than Bell is. See, there are lots of arguements that you could make for Dayne succeeding next year, and the fact that he's currently the heir apparent is just one of them.Yeh but with that extra inch its a wash.
Im very sketchy on both Bell and certainly Dayne. The Denver backs that have dominated arent necessarilly speed guys, they tend to be tough guys that can break an arm tackle and read a block. People have misconceptions about zone blocking- it does not magically open holes that mac trucks can drive through. It usually leaves somebody unblocked at the LOS and chances are there will be contact in the backfield or at the line. If the back can break the contact, find the hole, and get to the next level, he will hopefully have somebody bouncing up and taking on linebackers or safeties and thats how Denvers gets those big runs. Reading blocks and not going down on first contact are what leads to success and these are the two things Dayne has always struggled with. Sure, if he gets into the secondary he is a horse, but he has to get there first.
