Has an NFL Running Backs career ever been minimized by RBBC? (1 Viewer)

[Brewtown]

The question that I am throwing up for discussion is:

Has a HOF caliber RBs career been affected by Running Back By Committee? Or - has generally the cream risen to the top in the NFL and do coaches just play the best talent? I cannot think of too many RBs whose star has not shined due to RBBC. Maybe Marcus Allen when the Raiders had Bo, but there was more to that situation.

I tend to think that coaches roll with their best stallions at RB. If a young Terrell Davis was drafted this year by the Bengals who already have Giovanni Bernard would Davis still make a big impact? I say yes...

 

[Ditka Butkus]

The Saints use it so much that they don't even know what they have at RB.

 

[Brewtown]

The Saints use it so much that they don't even know what they have at RB.

Yeah, but they ran their entire offense through Ricky Williams a few years back...

 

[spider321]

RBBC is a fairly recent trend, so I don't think the question is valid.

 

[REDRUM26]

no its never happened ever.... sorry

 

[Insein]

The Saints use it so much that they don't even know what they have at RB.

Yeah, but they ran their entire offense through Ricky Williams a few years back...

And Deuce McCalister to a lesser extent.

 

[Xue]

The question that I am throwing up for discussion is:

Has a HOF caliber RBs career been affected by Running Back By Committee? Or - has generally the cream risen to the top in the NFL and do coaches just play the best talent? I cannot think of too many RBs whose star has not shined due to RBBC. Maybe Marcus Allen when the Raiders had Bo, but there was more to that situation.

I tend to think that coaches roll with their best stallions at RB. If a young Terrell Davis was drafted this year by the Bengals who already have Giovanni Bernard would Davis still make a big impact? I say yes...

DeAngelo Williams---had a huge 2009 season and then the Panthers drafted Jonathan Stewart the next year.

Thomas Jones---drafted 7th OVERALL and didn't get to be a feature back until his 6th season. He averaged 1,177 yards a season after age 26 over 7 seasons.

Terrell Davis was a 6th rounder, so I don't know how that helps him regardless.

 

[Brewtown]

The question that I am throwing up for discussion is:

Has a HOF caliber RBs career been affected by Running Back By Committee? Or - has generally the cream risen to the top in the NFL and do coaches just play the best talent? I cannot think of too many RBs whose star has not shined due to RBBC. Maybe Marcus Allen when the Raiders had Bo, but there was more to that situation.

I tend to think that coaches roll with their best stallions at RB. If a young Terrell Davis was drafted this year by the Bengals who already have Giovanni Bernard would Davis still make a big impact? I say yes...

DeAngelo Williams---had a huge 2009 season and then the Panthers drafted Jonathan Stewart the next year.

Thomas Jones---drafted 7th OVERALL and didn't get to be a feature back until his 6th season. He averaged 1,177 yards a season after age 26 over 7 seasons.

Terrell Davis was a 6th rounder, so I don't know how that helps him regardless.

Deangelo Williams is an interesting mention. I guess that one could argue that Stewart really has not been in the way too much because of injury... Actually Deangelo blew up in 2008, the year Stewart was drafted (Stewart's rookie year). You bring up a good point though - in the right situation (best team setup, avoids injury, consistent, and has a long career) a talent like DeAngelo probably could have been a HOFer. Maybe there are two types of HOF RBs or players - 1:ungodly talented players who had reasonably lengthy careers (sure fire HOFers who jump out at everyone on film) 2: decent or above average player who stayed away from injury for the most part and had a consistent career. One whose overall stats are HOF worthy and compiled over time.

So some HOF players can obviously be helped by their circumstances and other hurt by their circumstances and miss out because of them. RBBC could be something that hampers a situation.

The reason that I brought up this topic had to do with the fact that I could not think of a RB that had been really harmed by RBBC. RBBC is a fairly new concept - I get it - but looking historically my thought is that the best players played and were given a shot to shine.

In thinking of the situations of Tre Mason and Jeremy Hill my thought is that if these RBs are talented that they will have their chance to succeed and the cream will rise to the top. In other words, if these guys are HOF talents (not saying they are) like the number 1 mentioned above I don't see RBBC getting in the way. However if they are like (type 2 above) - maybe a RBBC situation gets in the way of being a HOF RB?

I guess HOFers can be both BORN and SOMEWHAT MADE...

Then again 20 years from now does the NFL HOF re-evaluate how they look at RB statistics in an era of RBBC (it looks like RBBC is here to stay with another strong crop of college RBs coming next year)?

I thought this was an interesting offseason discussion/thought...

 

[Nero]

Fred Taylor immediately came to mind. I think he is the best RB of his era, but the injuries early in his career and the drafting of Maurice Jones-Drew keep him out of the hall of fame.

And yes, he was better than LT IMO .

 

[mr roboto]

If they are in the HOFthen by definition they were featured long enough to show their talent and amass stats, so by definition, no.

DWill is the only one I can think of where I really think he would have been dominant. For a while he had the 2nd highest YPC of any RB in history.

 

[lod01]

1. If they are in the HOFthen by definition they were featured long enough to show their talent and amass stats, so by definition, no.
   
   DWill is the only one I can think of where I really think he would have been dominant. For a while he had the 2nd highest YPC of any RB in history.

   DWill is the prime example. The year that they had to use him he put up 273-1515-18 TDs at 5.5 ypc and 121 yards and 2 TDs receiving. He is easily the most wasted talent at RB.

 

[Pots]

The Saints use it so much that they don't even know what they have at RB.

Yeah, but they ran their entire offense through Ricky Williams a few years back...

A few years back? That was 13 years ago. Completely different team.

 

[Fariq]

Ernie Green was an excellent runner with the Browns, but his carries were limited because he played with Jim Brown. We can say a similar thing about Kenneth Davis playing behind Thurman Thomas.

 

[bostonfred]

I'm not sure if you're looking for guys who NEVER got their full time shot, or guys who had a (maybe long shot) chance at a HoF career but wasted years sitting behind or sharing time with other backs. Here's some of the latter

Marshawn Lynch couldn't beat out Fred Jackson. To be fair, Lynch might not have been ready to do what he's doing now, but it didn't help that they drafted tons of talent around him.

Ahman Green sat on the bench in Seattle because he was considered a fumbler. Then he emerged in a big way in Green Bay.

Thomas Jones was an early first round pick who played with some crappy running backs while dealing with undiagnosed pleurisy. Once he got better, he emerged as the talent people had seen at his draft date.

Darren Sproles has been mired in RBBC with Tomlinson, Mathews, the Saints crows and now McCoy. But you could make a case that he could have been even better. Not hall of fame caliber, but very good.

Warrick Dunn as part of the WD-40 backfield, and Michael Turner backing up Tomlinson, both showed that they were capable of being a lot better once they got a full time starting job in Atlanta. They weren't HoF caliber, but they were very good.

Shaun Alexander sat for a while behind Ricky, but when he emerged, he really emerged.

Marion the Barberian was stuck in a committee in Dallas, but for a couple years he was a legit stud.

 

[ldizzle]

Since drafting spiller, fred jackson has been decent. Mason is in a situation that the guy in front of him was in last year.

Others i was able to look up quick are julius jones marion barber felix jones demarco murray. Chester taylor and ap. Deshaun foster dwill stewart. Landwale white and cj2k. Jo addai donald brown. Jcharles and thomas jones

More recently bjge and gio. Ellington mendenhall. Moreno ball.

this list is just rbbcs i glance at. Not really hof. But situation where there the workload ended up being shared when the person in front of them was the guy

 

[Brewtown]

Fred Taylor immediately came to mind. I think he is the best RB of his era, but the injuries early in his career and the drafting of Maurice Jones-Drew keep him out of the hall of fame.

And yes, he was better than LT IMO .

I think that he may be a Hall of Famer...??? He was damn good!

 

[Brewtown]

If they are in the HOFthen by definition they were featured long enough to show their talent and amass stats, so by definition, no.

DWill is the only one I can think of where I really think he would have been dominant. For a while he had the 2nd highest YPC of any RB in history.

I do think that DeAngelo had his chances though - he has underperformed the past few years...

 

[Phenix]

Almost every team has some form of it now, very very few every down elite backs who do not share in some way.

Days of Emmitt and Barry are done.

Teams like the Chiefs have even said they wanted to get Davis more involved. The Eagles went and got Sproles and paid him, I'm sure not to just sit behind McCoy. Lacy is the only guy where a coach has come forward and said they want to feed him and make him and every down back.

The game is different now. RBs are less valuable and the #3 WRs are much more valuable. That tells you the way the game is.

 

[Brewtown]

Almost every team has some form of it now, very very few every down elite backs who do not share in some way.

Days of Emmitt and Barry are done.

Teams like the Chiefs have even said they wanted to get Davis more involved. The Eagles went and got Sproles and paid him, I'm sure not to just sit behind McCoy. Lacy is the only guy where a coach has come forward and said they want to feed him and make him and every down back.

The game is different now. RBs are less valuable and the #3 WRs are much more valuable. That tells you the way the game is.

I agree - it's the way things are today.I've thought about what is the best fantasy football strategy in the RBBC world we live in today.

I actually think the best strategy is to "take more RBs". Fill your roster with RBs and play the matchup/injury game week to week. This may be one way to achieve Full-time RB1 fantasy points and give yourself an edge...

I prefer the above strategy to just selecting RBs later in your drafts.

 

[DawnBTVS]

I think one of the biggest factors is RBBC switching from splitting catches (e.g. utilizing the 3rd Down RB as a pass catcher) and now transforming that role into a dual threat ballcarrier and receiver or utilizing 2 backs as primary pass catchers and another as the change of pace ballcarrier.

Immediately after Barry left Detroit, the Lions utilized 2 RBs due to injuries but Sedrick Irvin led the RBs with 25 catches despite 0 starts. 2000 they went back to the bellcow with James Stewart but Mario Bates & Irvin still combined for 40 carries and 23 catches (compared to Stewart's 32 catches).

Even in 2004 with Dillon, New England still utilized their other backs in key roles: Kevin Faulk, Patrick Pass, Cedric Cobbs, & Rabih Abdullah all combined for 128 carries and 55 catches (compared to Dillon's 345 carries and 15 catches).

 

[Adam Harstad]

RBBC is a fairly recent trend, so I don't think the question is valid.

No it isn't. RBBC has been the norm for the majority of NFL history, we just went through a brief period in the late '90s and early '00s when workhorse backs were back in vogue. The huge workhorse like that is the aberration, though, not the return to committees that followed.

Consider: Jim Brown was probably the greatest RB the league has ever seen. He retired with every major rushing record, and he could have put them so much further out of reach if he'd really wanted to (he left in his prime to pursue acting). He led the league in rushing yards in 8 of his 9 seasons. He also never got 65% of his team's carries. Not once in his entire career. For about half of his career, he was below 60%.

In 1973, O.J. Simpson became the first back in history to rush for 2,000 yards, and the only one to do it during a 14-game season. He got 55% of his team's rushing attempts.

Walter Payton, the prototypical 3-down, do-everything RB? His career in Chicago spanned from 1975 to 1987. Over that span, he accounted for 54% of Chicago's carries.

Teams have been using a committee since forever, going back even before Glenn Davis and Doc Blanchard were trading off Heisman seasons as Mr. Inside and Mr. Outside for Army, even before Notre Dame was busy rolling out the Four Horsemen during the '20s.

 

[Adam Harstad]

If they are in the HOFthen by definition they were featured long enough to show their talent and amass stats, so by definition, no.

DWill is the only one I can think of where I really think he would have been dominant. For a while he had the 2nd highest YPC of any RB in history.

Jamaal Charles had a higher ypc and spent a good chunk of his career as a committee back.

Marcus Allen has already been mentioned. Starting at age 26, he played a remarkable 12 years without ever topping 225 carries, as Al Davis nursed a grudge and refused to feature him. Also, you can't mention Allen without also mentioning Bo, though it was injury and not RBBC that kept him out of the Hall.

Larry Csonka is in the Hall of Fame, and he spent the productive bulk of his career in an RBBC with Mercury Morris.

I already mentioned guys like Jim Brown and Walter Payton, who weren't in the stereotypical RBBCs that we think of when we hear the term, but who each saw their teammates receive a ton of carries for them.

 

[Fariq]

RBBC is a fairly recent trend, so I don't think the question is valid.

No it isn't. RBBC has been the norm for the majority of NFL history, we just went through a brief period in the late '90s and early '00s when workhorse backs were back in vogue. The huge workhorse like that is the aberration, though, not the return to committees that followed.

Consider: Jim Brown was probably the greatest RB the league has ever seen. He retired with every major rushing record, and he could have put them so much further out of reach if he'd really wanted to (he left in his prime to pursue acting). He led the league in rushing yards in 8 of his 9 seasons. He also never got 65% of his team's carries. Not once in his entire career. For about half of his career, he was below 60%.

In 1973, O.J. Simpson became the first back in history to rush for 2,000 yards, and the only one to do it during a 14-game season. He got 55% of his team's rushing attempts.

Walter Payton, the prototypical 3-down, do-everything RB? His career in Chicago spanned from 1975 to 1987. Over that span, he accounted for 54% of Chicago's carries.

Teams have been using a committee since forever, going back even before Glenn Davis and Doc Blanchard were trading off Heisman seasons as Mr. Inside and Mr. Outside for Army, even before Notre Dame was busy rolling out the Four Horsemen during the '20s.

Yeah, Payton was spelled enough that in one season his teammate had 992 rushing yards.

The ultimate backfield by committee may have been the 49ers of the mid 1950s.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Tiki Barber.

 

[Brewtown]

Tiki Barber.

I think that he was in the drivers seat a good portion of his time in NY. Is he a Hall of Famer? He would be behind Fred Taylor IMO...

 

[Phenix]

RBBC is a fairly recent trend, so I don't think the question is valid.

No it isn't. RBBC has been the norm for the majority of NFL history, we just went through a brief period in the late '90s and early '00s when workhorse backs were back in vogue. The huge workhorse like that is the aberration, though, not the return to committees that followed.

Consider: Jim Brown was probably the greatest RB the league has ever seen. He retired with every major rushing record, and he could have put them so much further out of reach if he'd really wanted to (he left in his prime to pursue acting). He led the league in rushing yards in 8 of his 9 seasons. He also never got 65% of his team's carries. Not once in his entire career. For about half of his career, he was below 60%.

In 1973, O.J. Simpson became the first back in history to rush for 2,000 yards, and the only one to do it during a 14-game season. He got 55% of his team's rushing attempts.

Walter Payton, the prototypical 3-down, do-everything RB? His career in Chicago spanned from 1975 to 1987. Over that span, he accounted for 54% of Chicago's carries.

Teams have been using a committee since forever, going back even before Glenn Davis and Doc Blanchard were trading off Heisman seasons as Mr. Inside and Mr. Outside for Army, even before Notre Dame was busy rolling out the Four Horsemen during the '20s.

Harstad just ended this thread with his

Good posting sir.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

The question that I am throwing up for discussion is:

Has a HOF caliber RBs career been affected by Running Back By Committee? Or - has generally the cream risen to the top in the NFL and do coaches just play the best talent? I cannot think of too many RBs whose star has not shined due to RBBC. Maybe Marcus Allen when the Raiders had Bo, but there was more to that situation.

I tend to think that coaches roll with their best stallions at RB. If a young Terrell Davis was drafted this year by the Bengals who already have Giovanni Bernard would Davis still make a big impact? I say yes...

Not a lot of HOF RBs as of late but lots of RBBC.

One recent HOF RB who did split time for a short spell was Marshall Faulk his last year or two in Indy before he got traded but that might prove your point. It might be impossible to prove a HOF RB didn't get in the hall due to RBBC.

An example of a guy who might qualify for what you asked for but did not get into the HOF yet had some HOF seasons after getting out of a RBBC is Priest Holmes but its tough to find a clear example.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Tiki Barber.

I think that he was in the drivers seat a good portion of his time in NY. Is he a Hall of Famer? He would be behind Fred Taylor IMO...

I'd put Barber in well before Taylor. Barber became a primary starter in 2002, and for the rest of his career he averaged 1529 rushing yards (at 4.8 ypa) and 2055 yards from scrimmage per year. Averaged! He led the league in yards from scrimmage twice, made two pro bowls, and was a first-team AP All Pro.

Taylor only had one season with 1500 rushing yards, never topped 2000 yards from scrimmage, and 4.8 ypc was his career best until (ironically enough) he got into an RBBC and MJD started gobbling up all of the short yardage carries (leaving Taylor with an inflated ypc, without those carries bringing down his average).

As a full-time starter, Barber had the 7th-most yards of any 27-year-old RB, the 18th-most of any 28-year-old, the 3rd-most of any 29-year-old, the most of any 30-year-old, and the most of any 31-year-old in history. Over the entire 5-year span, Tiki Barber's 10,273 yards are 1600 yards more than any other back in history (Walter Payton is in 2nd place with 8,622). In total yards per game over that age range, here's the leaderboard:

Jim Brown - 137.8

Tiki Barber - 128.4

Adrian Peterson - 125.0

Barry Sanders - 120.9

Priest Holmes - 120.8

Marshall Faulk - 119.7

Walter Payton - 118.1

O.J. Simpson - 114.9

That's one hell of a list that Tiki Barber finds himself on top of. Basically, once Tiki Barber became a full-time starter, he put up numbers practically unprecedented in NFL history. I would put him in the Hall of Fame tomorrow, if I could. I suspect that, had he played more when he was younger, more people would agree with me on that.

 

[Louche]

The question that I am throwing up for discussion is:

Has a HOF caliber RBs career been affected by Running Back By Committee?

Christine Michael.

 

[Eminence]

Tiki Barber.

I think that he was in the drivers seat a good portion of his time in NY. Is he a Hall of Famer? He would be behind Fred Taylor IMO...

I'd put Barber in well before Taylor. Barber became a primary starter in 2002, and for the rest of his career he averaged 1529 rushing yards (at 4.8 ypa) and 2055 yards from scrimmage per year. Averaged! He led the league in yards from scrimmage twice, made two pro bowls, and was a first-team AP All Pro.

Taylor only had one season with 1500 rushing yards, never topped 2000 yards from scrimmage, and 4.8 ypc was his career best until (ironically enough) he got into an RBBC and MJD started gobbling up all of the short yardage carries (leaving Taylor with an inflated ypc, without those carries bringing down his average).

As a full-time starter, Barber had the 7th-most yards of any 27-year-old RB, the 18th-most of any 28-year-old, the 3rd-most of any 29-year-old, the most of any 30-year-old, and the most of any 31-year-old in history. Over the entire 5-year span, Tiki Barber's 10,273 yards are 1600 yards more than any other back in history (Walter Payton is in 2nd place with 8,622). In total yards per game over that age range, here's the leaderboard:

Jim Brown - 137.8

Tiki Barber - 128.4

Adrian Peterson - 125.0

Barry Sanders - 120.9

Priest Holmes - 120.8

Marshall Faulk - 119.7

Walter Payton - 118.1

O.J. Simpson - 114.9

That's one hell of a list that Tiki Barber finds himself on top of. Basically, once Tiki Barber became a full-time starter, he put up numbers practically unprecedented in NFL history. I would put him in the Hall of Fame tomorrow, if I could. I suspect that, had he played more when he was younger, more people would agree with me on that.

...and then he retired and the Giants won a Super Bowl.

 

[Steed]

Didn't Marcus Allen have to contend with Al Davis' whims for most of his career. He ceded a lot of carries to Bo whenever he came back from baseball season.

 

[EBF]

JStew and DeAngelo come to mind immediately. Both were good enough to be among the top 10 RBs of their era, IMO.

Not many people talk about DeAngelo, but I think he could've been a perennial monster like a cross between Gore and McCoy.

 

[Steed]

Just checked his player page

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/A/AlleMa00.htm

He was a rockstar after his rookie year for 3 years running culminating in 380 carry/67 catch season. After that he hovered around 200 carries for the rest of his career.

 

[ZWK]

Gale Sayers clearly shined, but he was limited by RBBC. He was All-Pro for 5 straight years from 1965-1969, but during those 5 years he accounted for only 40% of the Bears' rushing attempts and averaged only 14.9 carries per game. Meanwhile he was rushing for 5.1 yards per carry vs. 3.8 yards per carry for the rest of the team. That's how the league was, though - he actually led the NFL in rushing attempts one of those years.

 

[Khy]

Tiki Barber.

I think that he was in the drivers seat a good portion of his time in NY. Is he a Hall of Famer? He would be behind Fred Taylor IMO...

I'd put Barber in well before Taylor. Barber became a primary starter in 2002, and for the rest of his career he averaged 1529 rushing yards (at 4.8 ypa) and 2055 yards from scrimmage per year. Averaged! He led the league in yards from scrimmage twice, made two pro bowls, and was a first-team AP All Pro.

Taylor only had one season with 1500 rushing yards, never topped 2000 yards from scrimmage, and 4.8 ypc was his career best until (ironically enough) he got into an RBBC and MJD started gobbling up all of the short yardage carries (leaving Taylor with an inflated ypc, without those carries bringing down his average).

As a full-time starter, Barber had the 7th-most yards of any 27-year-old RB, the 18th-most of any 28-year-old, the 3rd-most of any 29-year-old, the most of any 30-year-old, and the most of any 31-year-old in history. Over the entire 5-year span, Tiki Barber's 10,273 yards are 1600 yards more than any other back in history (Walter Payton is in 2nd place with 8,622). In total yards per game over that age range, here's the leaderboard:

Jim Brown - 137.8

Tiki Barber - 128.4

Adrian Peterson - 125.0

Barry Sanders - 120.9

Priest Holmes - 120.8

Marshall Faulk - 119.7

Walter Payton - 118.1

O.J. Simpson - 114.9

That's one hell of a list that Tiki Barber finds himself on top of. Basically, once Tiki Barber became a full-time starter, he put up numbers practically unprecedented in NFL history. I would put him in the Hall of Fame tomorrow, if I could. I suspect that, had he played more when he was younger, more people would agree with me on that.

...and then he retired and the Giants won a Super Bowl.

I fail to see how that's relevant. If he were there they probably win that game more easily then they did. The only difference would've likely been that they wouldn't have had the epic story leading up to that game. There wouldn't have been the missed Field Goal in the 4th quarter that would've won it for them in frozen Green Bay. Which also means there wouldn't have been the insanely tense finally winning field goal in OT. And we never have that photo of Grandpa Tom smiling on the sideline with his face looking like Rudolph's nose. There's also likely never a helmet catch as the game would've likely been a lot more locked down with Tiki there.

Would history have changed? Yeah

Would the Giants have still won the Super Bowl in 2007? Probably

 

[johnadams]

I don't think comparing Payton, Brown, etc. to the current crop of players is fair. In randomly checking, 1979 saw 29 pass plays per game vs. 34 rushes. 2013 almost reverses that with 35 pass plays vs 27 rushes. The real issue isn't RBBC per se as it has been around a long time. It's the dwindling number of touches to share between RBs.

 

[Khy]

I don't think comparing Payton, Brown, etc. to the current crop of players is fair. In randomly checking, 1979 saw 29 pass plays per game vs. 34 rushes. 2013 almost reverses that with 35 pass plays vs 27 rushes. The real issue isn't RBBC per se as it has been around a long time. It's the dwindling number of touches to share between RBs.

Sure... but with this new style of offenses we're seeing from places like Buffalo and Philly, we could start to see more plays in the range of a 35/35 split among most teams.

Buffalo 2013 - 32.63 Passing/34.13 Rushing

Philly 2013 - 31.75 Passing/31.25 Rushing

So sure, they're not quite at that 35/35 marker nor are they quite at 70 plays per game but they were averaging a lot last season. Philly averaged 63 plays per game and Buffalo averaged 66.8. And these are very new ideologies in the NFL. If this quick hitting no huddle thing really starts to take off, 70 plays isn't out of the ball park. And at worst I think with 70 plays you'll see a like 38/32 split. There's no way they can pass that heavy and run that many plays in a game. They're either be having WAY to many 3 and outs or way to many quick hitting TDs to ever reach the 70ppg mark. The reason these systems work is because they are so perfectly balanced in their attacks.

 

[Eminence]

Tiki Barber.

I think that he was in the drivers seat a good portion of his time in NY. Is he a Hall of Famer? He would be behind Fred Taylor IMO...

I'd put Barber in well before Taylor. Barber became a primary starter in 2002, and for the rest of his career he averaged 1529 rushing yards (at 4.8 ypa) and 2055 yards from scrimmage per year. Averaged! He led the league in yards from scrimmage twice, made two pro bowls, and was a first-team AP All Pro.

Taylor only had one season with 1500 rushing yards, never topped 2000 yards from scrimmage, and 4.8 ypc was his career best until (ironically enough) he got into an RBBC and MJD started gobbling up all of the short yardage carries (leaving Taylor with an inflated ypc, without those carries bringing down his average).

As a full-time starter, Barber had the 7th-most yards of any 27-year-old RB, the 18th-most of any 28-year-old, the 3rd-most of any 29-year-old, the most of any 30-year-old, and the most of any 31-year-old in history. Over the entire 5-year span, Tiki Barber's 10,273 yards are 1600 yards more than any other back in history (Walter Payton is in 2nd place with 8,622). In total yards per game over that age range, here's the leaderboard:

Jim Brown - 137.8

Tiki Barber - 128.4

Adrian Peterson - 125.0

Barry Sanders - 120.9

Priest Holmes - 120.8

Marshall Faulk - 119.7

Walter Payton - 118.1

O.J. Simpson - 114.9

That's one hell of a list that Tiki Barber finds himself on top of. Basically, once Tiki Barber became a full-time starter, he put up numbers practically unprecedented in NFL history. I would put him in the Hall of Fame tomorrow, if I could. I suspect that, had he played more when he was younger, more people would agree with me on that.

...and then he retired and the Giants won a Super Bowl.

I fail to see how that's relevant. If he were there they probably win that game more easily then they did. The only difference would've likely been that they wouldn't have had the epic story leading up to that game. There wouldn't have been the missed Field Goal in the 4th quarter that would've won it for them in frozen Green Bay. Which also means there wouldn't have been the insanely tense finally winning field goal in OT. And we never have that photo of Grandpa Tom smiling on the sideline with his face looking like Rudolph's nose. There's also likely never a helmet catch as the game would've likely been a lot more locked down with Tiki there.

Would history have changed? Yeah

Would the Giants have still won the Super Bowl in 2007? Probably

I was just having fun, I'm sure it's a correlation does not equal causation type of thing. It's something I've always found funny though.

 

[johnadams]

I don't think comparing Payton, Brown, etc. to the current crop of players is fair. In randomly checking, 1979 saw 29 pass plays per game vs. 34 rushes. 2013 almost reverses that with 35 pass plays vs 27 rushes. The real issue isn't RBBC per se as it has been around a long time. It's the dwindling number of touches to share between RBs.

Sure... but with this new style of offenses we're seeing from places like Buffalo and Philly, we could start to see more plays in the range of a 35/35 split among most teams.

Buffalo 2013 - 32.63 Passing/34.13 Rushing

Philly 2013 - 31.75 Passing/31.25 Rushing

So sure, they're not quite at that 35/35 marker nor are they quite at 70 plays per game but they were averaging a lot last season. Philly averaged 63 plays per game and Buffalo averaged 66.8. And these are very new ideologies in the NFL. If this quick hitting no huddle thing really starts to take off, 70 plays isn't out of the ball park. And at worst I think with 70 plays you'll see a like 38/32 split. There's no way they can pass that heavy and run that many plays in a game. They're either be having WAY to many 3 and outs or way to many quick hitting TDs to ever reach the 70ppg mark. The reason these systems work is because they are so perfectly balanced in their attacks.

An up-tempo offense is not new. It's just not been very successful and when it is, it's usually because of the QB. If we see more running plays, I'd suspect it's more to do with the success of SEA and SF, but that's largely dependent upon having a great D with a mobile QB who boosts your running plays so probably won't be the norm either. If PHI or BUF makes some serious noise in the playoffs, maybe, but I'm skeptical.

 

[Xue]

I'm not sure if you're looking for guys who NEVER got their full time shot, or guys who had a (maybe long shot) chance at a HoF career but wasted years sitting behind or sharing time with other backs. Here's some of the latter

Marshawn Lynch couldn't beat out Fred Jackson. To be fair, Lynch might not have been ready to do what he's doing now, but it didn't help that they drafted tons of talent around him.

Ahman Green sat on the bench in Seattle because he was considered a fumbler. Then he emerged in a big way in Green Bay.

Thomas Jones was an early first round pick who played with some crappy running backs while dealing with undiagnosed pleurisy. Once he got better, he emerged as the talent people had seen at his draft date.

Darren Sproles has been mired in RBBC with Tomlinson, Mathews, the Saints crows and now McCoy. But you could make a case that he could have been even better. Not hall of fame caliber, but very good.

Warrick Dunn as part of the WD-40 backfield, and Michael Turner backing up Tomlinson, both showed that they were capable of being a lot better once they got a full time starting job in Atlanta. They weren't HoF caliber, but they were very good.

Shaun Alexander sat for a while behind Ricky, but when he emerged, he really emerged.

Marion the Barberian was stuck in a committee in Dallas, but for a couple years he was a legit stud.

In cases of two smaller guys in Sproles and Dunn, you could argue that RBBC may have led to prolonging their careers.

 

[elguapo07]

Herschel Walker, maybe James Brooks.

 

[cstu]

Since drafting spiller, fred jackson has been decent. Mason is in a situation that the guy in front of him was in last year.

Spiller was the one to came to mind.

 

[cstu]

Michael Turner could have been a borderline HOF'er if he had started from his rookie year.

 

[Brewtown]

Michael Turner could have been a borderline HOF'er if he had started from his rookie year.

This is a pretty good mention. Stuck behind a HOFer for many years to begin his career...

 

[mr roboto]

If Gerhart emerges in Jax we may be saying this about him in a few years.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Michael Turner could have been a borderline HOF'er if he had started from his rookie year.

Disagreed. Turner clearly wasn't as talented as the HoFers. I don't think he was as good as the borderline guys like Portis, Watters, or Corey Dillon, either. I think if he'd started his whole career, Turner would have settled more into the Jamal Lewis / Stephen Davis range. Even just looking at his pre-decline Atlanta numbers and projecting them over a whole career doesn't build anywhere near enough of a resume, and that's assuming that Turner could have kept it up over a full career.

Actually, looking at Stephen Davis, the comp is really strong. From age 26-29, Turner averaged 89.5 per game rushing (4.4 ypc) and 5.6 ypg receiving. From age 25-29, Davis averaged 90.4 (4.3 ypc) and 13.1, respectively. Turner put up more touchdowns, but Davis played for two different teams and his stretch spanned one year more. Plus Davis made a superbowl. Jamaal Lewis also put up comparable stats over a longer timeline. Turner's big advantage is always going to be the TDs (13.6 per 16 games), but that's partly aided by the fact that Turner played his entire productive career for a team that never had a losing record and averaged a 67% winning percentage.

 

[Brewtown]

Michael Turner could have been a borderline HOF'er if he had started from his rookie year.

Disagreed. Turner clearly wasn't as talented as the HoFers. I don't think he was as good as the borderline guys like Portis, Watters, or Corey Dillon, either. I think if he'd started his whole career, Turner would have settled more into the Jamal Lewis / Stephen Davis range. Even just looking at his pre-decline Atlanta numbers and projecting them over a whole career doesn't build anywhere near enough of a resume, and that's assuming that Turner could have kept it up over a full career.

Actually, looking at Stephen Davis, the comp is really strong. From age 26-29, Turner averaged 89.5 per game rushing (4.4 ypc) and 5.6 ypg receiving. From age 25-29, Davis averaged 90.4 (4.3 ypc) and 13.1, respectively. Turner put up more touchdowns, but Davis played for two different teams and his stretch spanned one year more. Plus Davis made a superbowl. Jamaal Lewis also put up comparable stats over a longer timeline. Turner's big advantage is always going to be the TDs (13.6 per 16 games), but that's partly aided by the fact that Turner played his entire productive career for a team that never had a losing record and averaged a 67% winning percentage.

Turner had a great size/speed combo. I would have rather had him than Portis - and I liked Portis.....

 

[ratbast]

I'll chime in for Marcus Allen. A great RB, good enough to relegate most to the bench, but Bo Jackson, was not most. Imagine them today on our squads.