The term RBBC gets overused in a negative connotation in FF IMO. So long as you are productive and get at least 50% of the snaps, you'll be an RB2.
Not totally true. I agree with much of this. I own RBBC guys as well. They can be quite valuable. But situational usage is important to consider.
not all RBBC guys put up RB2 numbers.
The ones who get GL carries are in non-PPR & the ones who dominate receptions tend to produce in PPR.
We cant all have rosters of Bell, Cook, Hunt, McCoy so yes - RBBC guys can be great assets in FFB.
And as it relates to the Lions RZ/GL situation, we're talking about a team that from 2015-2017 has 16 rushing TD's as a team. They haven't found a solution to who is going to be the guy down there. I'm not saying it's going to be Abdullah, but who is DeWayne Washington? He had 4 carries inside the 10 last year for 0 yards and 1 TD. If anything, it was ZZ who was the GL back for DET in 2016 8/10/4 and he wasn't active Sunday.
And that's part of AA's problem - that the Lions don't have a lot of scoring opportunities in the RZ. No argument there. It could also just be that's a byproduct of the offense they run. Some teams have lots (patriots) and some don't. Lions take a lot of shots deep.
I don't know if it'll be Washington. It just seems to not be a role that DET wants to use AA in.
Could that evolve as the season goes? Absolutely. But until I see it, I can't assume the usage.
After you get by the studs whose annual production you can set your watch to, it's about evaluating a balance of potential, production and opportunity. I didn't draft Dalvin Cook so much as I drafted the rookie RB for MIN. If that was Joe Mixon, I likely draft him. Not because I like either back better over the other, but because the MIN situation simply looked a lot better than the CIN one. More opportunity.
See, I was the opposite. I drafted Cook for what I saw his usage, along with his team. I avoided Mixon because Hill & Gio crowded up the backfield.
was a bit disappointed to see so much McKinnon last night, but overall I liked the fact that Cook dominated carries.
And in DET, there simply is greenfield related to the amount of opportunity for an RB to seize and at the very least Abdullah is in pole position. Will he squander it? TBD...but he hasn't done so yet as to be written off as a commodity we know to write off (i.e; Eddie Lacy).
.Absolutely - I cannot disagree with this. FFB players and DET fans have been waiting for someone to seize the role pretty much since Sanders retired.
I don't know if this OC has the desire to annoint a feature back though. I thought recalled reading someone's evaluation of him that he's a believer in RBBC and putting players in their best position to succeed for their skill set. Kind of the new NFL mindset that's made some RBs far less valuable in FFB.
Again, I believe AA can be that guy. I was high on his ability and remain high. He's a talented kid.
But if (and i'm not saying it's guaranteed) he only sees work between the 20s and gets ~50 targets in the season, there's not a ton of reason for optimism that he'll achieve RB2 numbers.
Things change fast. Riddick or Washington could go down. Ya never know when a guy's role will expand.
if it does it'll be fun to watch, and I wish AA owners well.
thanks for the respectful discussion - this isn't a hill i care enough to die on, but it is a subject I'm interested in. I actually targeted DET WRs more heavily due to what I perceived as them being a pass-heavy offense.
Whether or not that continues remains to be seen. It is only 1 week. They face a variety of opponents. Time will tell.
