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!
Aren't they trading for Barlow?
Only last year Shanahan said in no uncertain terms Anderson was his starter. Just because few believed him. This year they've beat around the bush saying Dayne will start. Whether that's because they don't have any idea who's ready or they want to keep Dayne on his toes and off the ho-ho's, I can't tell you.
I agree that it's down to 2 guys for the starting job.I disagree that those two guys are Dayne and Bell. Shanahan was talking about his RBs recently and was raving on and on about how great Cobbs has been and how he's in love with Cedrick Cobbs. A couple of nice things about Dayne, too, and nothing positive about Bell.
any chance they trade with Chicago for TJ, he is now demanding a trade, and wants no part of a crowded chicago backfield..saw it on fantasy.sportsline.com yesterday..
I intend to handcuff Dayne with Cobbs.
Why? They're happy with the backs they have right now- if they weren't, they wouldn't have gotten out of the draft without addressing the position.
Why? They're happy with the backs they have right now- if they weren't, they wouldn't have gotten out of the draft without addressing the position.
I agree that Cobbs is the handcuff to get (although Bell has value, too, since he'll still be getting carries when Dayne is healthy), but the 1200 yards is, in my opinion, overly optimistic.A relevant quote on the situation...
Aaaaaaand the link.
why would Dayne be the front runner
If he is/was better then Bell why don't he play more last year. There where a fews game that Dayne was in active in 2005. Bell has to be the front-runner going in to training camp with his homerun hitting ability, not much upside in that Denver running system.
Two things.#1- Bell was a CHANGE OF PACE back. Shanahan has gone on record saying he doesn't like giving Bell more than a dozen carries a game, since Bell wears down. Look at his statistical splits- after he gets 8 carries he averages fewer and fewer ypc each time, and he averages fewer ypc late in the season than early in the season.why would Dayne be the front runner
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Was. You got that one right. But please replace wears with wore, and averages with averaged.
Portis down?Their system is designed around a blocking scheme and how the runner attacks it, not a particular set of physical attributes. To his credit, Dayne has proven to a certain extent that he can exploit this type of system (similar to what he had in Wisconsin).
Portis was very capable - in fact, very good - at running inside. He is an extremely powerful RB that gets good lean. Bell is not a very effective inside runner, from what I've seen so far - and I have to think that Shanahan sees the same thing. Bell is just too inconsistent to be DEN's featured RB, and really struggles running through trash. I said the same thing about Quentin Griffin a couple of off seasons ago & got scoffed at pretty well, but the simple fact is that while Bell offers the homerun threat, he also puts DEN in far too many 2nd/3rd & longs to allow the offense to function at maximum efficiency. Shanahan doesn't tolerate that well.Of the 2, Dayne seems to fit Shanahan's ideal of a featured RB better. Some here may hold his Giants' history against him, but those were probably the same people that held Rueben Droughns' DET history against him also. DEN is a different animal when it comes to the running game, and a very similar animal to what Wisconsin was when Dayne was there. The right guy in the backfield has an opportunity to rack up some sizable numbers.
Football Outsiders keeps track of a stat that measures precisely that. Your impression holds up well compared to their stats, but also is probably a bit of an exaggeration. They keep a stat that measures average value per play, but also a stat that measures the number of successful plays, determined by down and distance. The former would include big plays as part of its value, but also let those big plays cancel out 'small' plays, if there's enough of them. The latter would cancel out big plays, because picking up a 1st on 3rd and 1 would be considered equal to breaking a 80 yard run for a TD in that situation. So, Bell rates higher like you would expect in the former stat (DVOA) than he does in the latter (success rate), but at the same time Bell ranked 29 out of 54 RBs who had 75+ carries last year, pretty much right on the average and median. Anderson, on the other hand, ranked 3rd. Bell, however, ranked 2nd in this stat in 2004, while Griffin finished dead last.(you're probably familiar with FO, I just thought I should explain the stats for the benefit of anyone unfamiliar with the site, rather than just throw their terminology around)
After 6 years in the NFL Dayne is what he is, a back up RB.Two things.#1- Bell was a CHANGE OF PACE back. Shanahan has gone on record saying he doesn't like giving Bell more than a dozen carries a game, since Bell wears down. Look at his statistical splits- after he gets 8 carries he averages fewer and fewer ypc each time, and he averages fewer ypc late in the season than early in the season.why would Dayne be the front runner
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
#2- Denver's offense is designed around a bruising, between-the-tackles kind of RB. That's Mike Anderson... and that's also Ron Dayne.
Last year, Anderson got the between-the-tackles carries and Bell got the outside-the-tackles carries, and Dayne got left on the outside looking in. This season, Bell will still be getting the outside-the-tackles carries, but with Anderson gone, Dayne's looking at getting the between-the-tackles carries. In Denver, there will always be more between-the-tackles carries than outside-the-tackles carries.
Let's put it this way. Last year, Shanahan liked to give 18+ carries to a big between-the-tackles back (including the lion's share of the red zone work), and ~12 carries to the speedy go-the-distance back (mostly between the 20s). This season, we're expecting him to do the exact same thing. With Anderson out, that means Dayne is suddenly in line for the 18+ carries (including the red zone work), while Bell sits right at the ~12 carry role he had last year.
It's all speculation at this point... but educated speculation, fueled by Shanahan's comments. If he does anything differently, it sounds like he'll give MORE carries to Dayne and FEWER carries to Bell. From the sound bytes he's been giving recently he's very happy with Dayne and not that happy with Bell. He hasn't said anything negative about Bell yet... but just as telling, he hasn't said anything positive, either.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
For the most part i agree with what you've written on Bell, but can you please link to where Shanahan has gone on recored saying he doesn't like giving Bell many carries.I do think that is the case, but i've never heard Shanahan come out and overtly say that.
I don't even know why that would be relevant. Everything that comes out of Shananagan’s mouth is a smokescreen. Looks like an RBBC to me, and if I were to target one of them it would be the one with potential to hit 3 dirts with those 12 carries…Bell.
Yes, it's possible that Bell has changed his perceived deficiencies. I would not mind at all acquiring Bell to hedge my bets on Dayne, so long as the price was right (which it usually isn't, concerning Bell). Earlier this offseason (before the draft) I handicapped the race at 70% Dayne, 20% Bell, and 10% other, and I'll stick to that.I do know Shanahan's perception of Bell hasn't changed. That's abundantly clear from hearing everything he has to say about his 3 main RBs. He raves about Cobbs and Dayne, and says pretty much nothing at all about Bell. Historically, when Shanahan has nothing positive to say about you, then you're doomed.
Portis is drastically underrated as a between-the-tackles runner. As Pony mentioned, he has great leverage in traffic. I'd also like to add that he has incredible vision and can find (and fit through) smaller holes than any other back I've seen in the league. If he couldn't run between the tackles, he would have washed out in DC, where Gibbs keeps throwing him into the teeth of the defense.
Yes, I'll find the link for you. Give me a few minutes to run a search.
Everything that comes out of Shanahan's mouth is a smokescreen. Like last year before the draft when he said the team was perfectly happy with Mike Anderson as the starting tailback. Or last training camp when Darius Watts slipped behind Jerry Rice on the depth chart, and everyone assumed it was a motivational ploy, but Shanahan said that it was because of performance. That really was a motivational ploy, right? I mean, Darius Watts really was the #3 receiver, right? #4 at worst, right?Oh, and remember how Anderson had two straight poor games to start the season, and Shanahan went on and said that Anderson was still the starter? Pure smokescreen, right?
Alright, my Search Fu is a little bit rusty, so here's the best I can come up with.On this page I quote a post from another thread where Raiders Fan quoted something Shanny said in a press conference. I understand this is sort of a tenuous link, but searching both here and on Google has failed to turn up either the original thread OR the original article, so this is what we'll have to go on.
Notice that Shanahan only said the part in quotes- the rest was added by a FF analysis site.Here's my reaction to the quote:
In my opinion, Shanahan saying he doesn't want to overwork Bell means he tries to limit Bell's carries. I arrived at the dozen figure from looking at the game logs- that's what Bell tends to get. Bell's career high is 17 carries.Just for what it's worth.
Nice call.
