Ron Dayne article (1 Viewer)

[Yenrub]

Dayne was a serviceable RB his 1st 2 seasons. Sure he didn’t live up to the Heisman billing but he was serviceable in his 1st two seasons (both NFL and fantasy)

If your avatar indicates that you are a Giants fan, I'm surprised you would feel that way. Tiki was not supposed to be more than a punt returner/3rd down back, but became the guy only after Dayne's failures.

Yes I am a Giants fan and as I posted earlier in this thread I wasn't happy when the Giants drafted him. Don’t get me wrong I was never pleased with his production (lack thereof). Because of his size everyone sees him as a short yardage move the pile type of guy but I don’t think he was ever that type of RB on any level (High school or college). From reading the article posted earlier it seems like he has always been a RB who had quick feet and relied more on speed than power. Yes Dayne was brought in to be the guy but it turned out that Tiki was a better RB (probably better than even the Giants thought he was). Once the Giants realized this and that Tiki could actually carry the load, they tried (IMO) to turn Dayne into something that he wasn’t (short yardage power back) in order to salvage the draft pick.

 

[P Boy]

by Holy Schneikes:

This is hilarious. Do that same fancy arbitrary calculation to any other back in the league (taking only high-carry games) and THEN compare numbers and do rankings. If you do that consistently, you will find every back looks like an all-pro and they STILL put Dayne to shame.

So go ahead. Use every game with 19 or more carries for every RB and put Dayne to shame. ...I'll wait....

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Dayne was a serviceable RB his 1st 2 seasons. Sure he didn’t live up to the Heisman billing but he was serviceable in his 1st two seasons (both NFL and fantasy)

He finished 29th and 27th (fantasy) per the pro-football reference site his 1st two seasons

How did 29th get to be "servicable" from a fantasy perspective?As for the NFL perspective, I think the fact that he was replaced speaks for itself. The Giants sure didn't think he was servicable, that's why they benched him.

His 1st year he had a 3.4 average, 3 catches for 11 yards, and 5 TDs. That's isn't servicable, that's bad.

At #29 in a 12 team league that starts two RB's, Dayne would have been a servicable 3rd RB. Obviously not a #1 or #2 but a decent bye week fill in.

You could easily sum that statement up with:"bench warmer"

Seriously, I know you aren't claiming the guy was a stud, but at his best, he wasn't worth starting in the NFL OR in fantasy. There are a TON of guys who were at one time "servicable" #3 fantasy backs, and I'm not looking to draft many of them either.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

by Holy Schneikes:

This is hilarious. Do that same fancy arbitrary calculation to any other back in the league (taking only high-carry games) and THEN compare numbers and do rankings. If you do that consistently, you will find every back looks like an all-pro and they STILL put Dayne to shame.

So go ahead. Use every game with 19 or more carries for every RB and put Dayne to shame. ...I'll wait....

This is your stat, not mine. I don't have the inclination to do the work necessary for every back, but when you cherry-pick stats, you can make anyone look good.Couple examples:

Derrick Blalock 19+ carry games:

4.7 YPC

prorated 16 games: 27 TDs/season 1776 yards/season

Steven Jackson 19+ carry games:

4.6 YPC

2136 rush yards /season

Nick Goings:

1474 rush yard/season

14 TD/season

Woohoo, this is fun. I GUARANTEE that if you use the same set of stats for every back - using ONLY 19+ carry games, EVERYBODY's stats go up - a LOT - especially the pro-rated nonsense.

Again, if you want to use these stats for rankings, don't cherry-pick Dayne's stats and compare them to everyone else's NON-cherry picked stats. That's just silly.

 

[jwvdcw]

There are teams which don't match up well against a fat RB

I don't know why, but this made me

 

[jwvdcw]

Who am I?

I average 80 yds/gm, 0.81 rushing TDs/gm, and 3.82 ypc.  That equates to 1272 yds rushing and 13 rushing TDs in a 16 game season.  The 1272 rushing yards would put me in the top 10 in rushing every other year, while the 13 rushing TDs would put me in the top 6 every year since I joined the league.  I did this while rushing for a team that averaged being the 17th best rushing team in the NFL over the time that I performed, and now I'm with the team that averaged being the 5th best rushing team over the same time period.

This is hilarious. Do that same fancy arbitrary calculation to any other back in the league (taking only high-carry games) and THEN compare numbers and do rankings. If you do that consistently, you will find every back looks like an all-pro and they STILL put Dayne to shame.I've already shown with REAL statistics (as opposed to mangled ones) that Dayne gets WORSE as the game progresses. He is at his best in the 1st quarter, though he's no great shakes then either.

Since most #1 RBs do get 19 carries a game, you are wrong. Most RBs numbers wouldn't be all that different when doing this.

 

[mbuehner]

After that the Giants realized Tiki was not only a better receiver but also a better runner. Dayne got shafted for much of the same reason LaMont Jordan did - he was playing behind a great RB. That doesn't mean either one of them won't be successful on another team.

You name me a season that whatever Giants regime was in power didnt try to stuff Ron Dayne into that starting roll. Suggesting this shlub didnt have an opportunity is the height of silliness. I dont think the Giants got completely behind Tiki until he was leading the NFC in rushing last season. I wouldnt be remotely surprised if they found someone to try to dethrone him yet again.

 

[P Boy]

by Holy Scheikes:

Again, if you want to use these stats for rankings, don't cherry-pick Dayne's stats and compare them to everyone else's NON-cherry picked stats. That's just silly.

LOFL! You have the nards to call me down for cherry picking, and you back up your statement with 2 & 3 game samples?Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice....

 

[CalBear]

by Holy Scheikes:

Again, if you want to use these stats for rankings, don't cherry-pick Dayne's stats and compare them to everyone else's NON-cherry picked stats. That's just silly.

LOFL! You have the nards to call me down for cherry picking, and you back up your statement with 2 & 3 game samples?Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice....

Let's look at some poor fantasy backs from 2004:Emmitt Smith's 19-carry games, annualized (8 games): 1388 yards, 10 TD

Kevan Barlow (6 games): 1456 yards, 13.3 TD

Jerome Bettis (6 games): 1968 yards, 10.6 TD

Now let's look at some decent fantasy backs from 2004:

Michael Pittman (4 games): 1956 yards, 12 TD

Warrick Dunn (5 games): 1910 yards, 9.6 TD

Ruben Droughns (7 games): 2190 yards, 16 TD

Now, let's look at some top backs:

Shaun Alexander (12 games): 2146 yards, 26.6 TD

Tiki Barber (12 games): 2233 yards, 17.3 TD

Tomlinson (12 games): 1973 yards, 20 TD

So looking at these numbers, it becomes obvious that counting only 19+-carry games significantly overstates expected results, for all levels of running back. And perhaps Dayne could aspire to having as good a season as Emmitt did in his final year in the league; I hear there's a position open in Arizona.

 

[zamboni]

Dayne was a serviceable RB his 1st 2 seasons. Sure he didn’t live up to the Heisman billing but he was serviceable in his 1st two seasons (both NFL and fantasy)

If your avatar indicates that you are a Giants fan, I'm surprised you would feel that way. Tiki was not supposed to be more than a punt returner/3rd down back, but became the guy only after Dayne's failures.

I think it points a lot more to Tiki's success. Dayne was drafted because the Giants didn't have faith in Tiki, but he proved them wrong in 2000 (Dayne's rookie year). After that the Giants realized Tiki was not only a better receiver but also a better runner. Dayne got shafted for much of the same reason LaMont Jordan did - he was playing behind a great RB. That doesn't mean either one of them won't be successful on another team.

I don't think the Dayne and Jordan situations are all that comparable. When Tiki was drafted, the team brass never intended him to be the guy. Rather, Dayne was brought in to be that workhorse, and obviously didn't take advantage. Once Tiki got his chance after Dayne flopped, the rest is history.

Jordan, on the other hand, never had his chance since he was playing behind a consistently productive (notwithstanding early 2003) RB and a future Hall of Famer. But that's for another (or 100) thread.

Again, I'm not saying Dayne can't be successful elsewhere, but it's hard to envision after seeing every Giant game he's played in (not many to be sure).

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Who am I?

I average 80 yds/gm, 0.81 rushing TDs/gm, and 3.82 ypc.  That equates to 1272 yds rushing and 13 rushing TDs in a 16 game season.  The 1272 rushing yards would put me in the top 10 in rushing every other year, while the 13 rushing TDs would put me in the top 6 every year since I joined the league.  I did this while rushing for a team that averaged being the 17th best rushing team in the NFL over the time that I performed, and now I'm with the team that averaged being the 5th best rushing team over the same time period.

This is hilarious. Do that same fancy arbitrary calculation to any other back in the league (taking only high-carry games) and THEN compare numbers and do rankings. If you do that consistently, you will find every back looks like an all-pro and they STILL put Dayne to shame.I've already shown with REAL statistics (as opposed to mangled ones) that Dayne gets WORSE as the game progresses. He is at his best in the 1st quarter, though he's no great shakes then either.

Since most #1 RBs do get 19 carries a game, you are wrong. Most RBs numbers wouldn't be all that different when doing this.

Sure most backs get 19+ carries most games, but usually not ALL games, and guess what - the low carry games are ALMOST universally bad games when things aren't going right. If you don't believe me, see for yourself. When you drop bad games, your average goes up. It's really common sense. I looked at the top 10 or so guys from this year and nearly all of them had higher averages (and SHOCKINGLY, totals as well) when you throw out the low carry games. Dillon for some reason was an exception.

Then to make matters worse, when you look not at average, but throw out pro-rated numbers??? Gee I wonder what would happen to the pro-rated total yardage numbers of a back when you throw out all of the low carry games? Think it might go up a little bit?

Again, all I am saying is compare apples to apples. If you do that, you will see that the numbers Pony threw out there were utterly ridiculous.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

by Holy Scheikes:

Again, if you want to use these stats for rankings, don't cherry-pick Dayne's stats and compare them to everyone else's NON-cherry picked stats. That's just silly.

LOFL! You have the nards to call me down for cherry picking, and you back up your statement with 2 & 3 game samples?Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice....

Let's look at some poor fantasy backs from 2004:Emmitt Smith's 19-carry games, annualized (8 games): 1388 yards, 10 TD

Kevan Barlow (6 games): 1456 yards, 13.3 TD

Jerome Bettis (6 games): 1968 yards, 10.6 TD

Now let's look at some decent fantasy backs from 2004:

Michael Pittman (4 games): 1956 yards, 12 TD

Warrick Dunn (5 games): 1910 yards, 9.6 TD

Ruben Droughns (7 games): 2190 yards, 16 TD

Now, let's look at some top backs:

Shaun Alexander (12 games): 2146 yards, 26.6 TD

Tiki Barber (12 games): 2233 yards, 17.3 TD

Tomlinson (12 games): 1973 yards, 20 TD

So looking at these numbers, it becomes obvious that counting only 19+-carry games significantly overstates expected results, for all levels of running back. And perhaps Dayne could aspire to having as good a season as Emmitt did in his final year in the league; I hear there's a position open in Arizona.

Yup. Thanks for doing the work Pony was afraid to do. Throw Dayne's super-duper impressive numbers up against the ones listed above and they don't look all that impressive anymore do they?

 

[Holy Schneikes]

by Holy Scheikes:

Again, if you want to use these stats for rankings, don't cherry-pick Dayne's stats and compare them to everyone else's NON-cherry picked stats. That's just silly.

LOFL! You have the nards to call me down for cherry picking, and you back up your statement with 2 & 3 game samples?Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice....

I INTENTIONALLY cherry-picked (just like you did) to make a point. I guess you missed it.

 

[cstu]

Dayne was a serviceable RB his 1st 2 seasons. Sure he didn’t live up to the Heisman billing but he was serviceable in his 1st two seasons (both NFL and fantasy)

If your avatar indicates that you are a Giants fan, I'm surprised you would feel that way. Tiki was not supposed to be more than a punt returner/3rd down back, but became the guy only after Dayne's failures.

I think it points a lot more to Tiki's success. Dayne was drafted because the Giants didn't have faith in Tiki, but he proved them wrong in 2000 (Dayne's rookie year). After that the Giants realized Tiki was not only a better receiver but also a better runner. Dayne got shafted for much of the same reason LaMont Jordan did - he was playing behind a great RB. That doesn't mean either one of them won't be successful on another team.

I don't think the Dayne and Jordan situations are all that comparable. When Tiki was drafted, the team brass never intended him to be the guy. Rather, Dayne was brought in to be that workhorse, and obviously didn't take advantage. Once Tiki got his chance after Dayne flopped, the rest is history.

Jordan, on the other hand, never had his chance since he was playing behind a consistently productive (notwithstanding early 2003) RB and a future Hall of Famer. But that's for another (or 100) thread.

Again, I'm not saying Dayne can't be successful elsewhere, but it's hard to envision after seeing every Giant game he's played in (not many to be sure).

Dayne was an overrated RB to be sure, but the Giants system did not fit his game at all and was perfect for Barber. I'm not pumping up Dayne's skills, but rather the greatness of the Broncos system and how much better a fit it will be for Dayne that the Giants. He could still fail, but if there's a place where he can finally be successful, it's Denver.

 

[Bojang0301]

Dayne was a serviceable RB his 1st 2 seasons. Sure he didn’t live up to the Heisman billing but he was serviceable in his 1st two seasons (both NFL and fantasy)

If your avatar indicates that you are a Giants fan, I'm surprised you would feel that way. Tiki was not supposed to be more than a punt returner/3rd down back, but became the guy only after Dayne's failures.

I think it points a lot more to Tiki's success. Dayne was drafted because the Giants didn't have faith in Tiki, but he proved them wrong in 2000 (Dayne's rookie year). After that the Giants realized Tiki was not only a better receiver but also a better runner. Dayne got shafted for much of the same reason LaMont Jordan did - he was playing behind a great RB. That doesn't mean either one of them won't be successful on another team.

I don't think the Dayne and Jordan situations are all that comparable. When Tiki was drafted, the team brass never intended him to be the guy. Rather, Dayne was brought in to be that workhorse, and obviously didn't take advantage. Once Tiki got his chance after Dayne flopped, the rest is history.

Jordan, on the other hand, never had his chance since he was playing behind a consistently productive (notwithstanding early 2003) RB and a future Hall of Famer. But that's for another (or 100) thread.

Again, I'm not saying Dayne can't be successful elsewhere, but it's hard to envision after seeing every Giant game he's played in (not many to be sure).

Dayne was an overrated RB to be sure, but the Giants system did not fit his game at all and was perfect for Barber. I'm not pumping up Dayne's skills, but rather the greatness of the Broncos system and how much better a fit it will be for Dayne that the Giants. He could still fail, but if there's a place where he can finally be successful, it's Denver.

This is what I like to call common sense and I wish more FF'ers had it. With a 53 man roster I don't care that he rots on my bench as a Bronco cause if he gets a shot there who knows?

 

[GI-Dawgs]

Didn't Wisconsin use a zone blocking scheme when Dayne was there? I thinks so, but not certain. Now, I'm not saying Dayne will be out Bell, but Bell's durability is a concern. Given the opportunity Dayne could produce in this system. How many times have we seen this happen in Denver?

 

[P Boy]

FYI:

Link

Denver Broncos offensive coordinator Gary Kubiak, In a recent Internet chat for www.DenverBroncos.com told fans

Ron Dayne was "the type of back we like" coming out of college. "Ron Dayne is a one-cut, zone runner. That's what he was in college (at Wisconsin) and it's kind of what we do. We think he fits what we do and we're going to give him the opportunity to play the tailback position. What's going to happen? I don't know.''

 

[Family Matters]

FYI:

Link

Denver Broncos offensive coordinator Gary Kubiak, In a recent Internet chat for www.DenverBroncos.com told fans

Ron Dayne was "the type of back we like" coming out of college. "Ron Dayne is a one-cut, zone runner. That's what he was in college (at Wisconsin) and it's kind of what we do. We think he fits what we do and we're going to give him the opportunity to play the tailback position. What's going to happen? I don't know.''

Pony-what are your projections for Dayne? Where would you draft him based on what we know today?

 

[P Boy]

by Family Matters:

Pony-what are your projections for Dayne? Where would you draft him based on what we know today?

Man, I still don't have a feel for what is going on in the DEN backfield. I do think that there is a change in dynamics in the DEN O - they are starting to think large on the O-line, which makes me think they want to return to the late 1990's type offense, which was Terell Davis toting the rock a lot and not catching much out of the backfield, serious ball control to cover an average D, and the running game opening opportunities for the passing game.While I still have some significant problems with the way Shanahan coaches - and his ego is IMHO his very worst enemy - I freely admit that he is not a stupid man. He has to be feeling the heat of 3 playoff appearances in the past 6 years with all 3 showings being 1st round blowouts that were over by halftime.

He went away from what won for him in the B2B SB Ws - which was a crushing ground game that controlled the clock & demoralized oppenents. He got a taste for speed in the backfield & throwing the ball a lot when he drafted Portis - and it flat out has not been successful. He tried to reincarnate Portis with first Griffin & then Bell, but maybe he realized that even with Portis, Griffin, Bell, or whomever with blinding speed in the backfield that his offense wasn't getting it done and wasn't covering up the D's shortcomings by moving up & down the field so quickly. By scoring so quickly, the very weak D-line and the mediocre secondary got seriously exposed.

Maybe the success of Droughns has him thinking that he needs to get back to his roots. There can't be any question that he's feeling heat for his lack of success since the late 90's. If that's the case, I wouldn't rule out anything for Dayne.

In any case, I'm getting the impression that the DEN RB spot is going to be a 2 man race - either Bell or one other contender. Griffin has proven he can't get it done. Anderson has been hurt, has 2 strikes against him in the NFL drug program, and is relatively old considering his length of career, plus someone has to take over at FB, though Kyle Johnson looked pretty good last season. If Dayne has anything left in him, he may be the guy to challenge Bell, and if Bell stumbles he may get the opportunity. Dayne is exactly the type of runner that excels in the DEN system, IMO. Lots of carries, one cut at the line and then go upfield.

If Shanahan goes back to grinding out the running game & he has a committment to getting bigger on the O-line & backfield, Dayne could really surprise. Dayne certainly has more talent than some other guys who have succeeded in DEN's backfield - O. Gary, R. Droughns, & Anderson to name 3.

If I were drafting, yeah I take a late mid-round flyer on Dayne. Why not? He could end up being one of those pleasant unforeseen or scoffed at surprises that wins the FF league.

Just my 2 cents....

 

[Slash]

GD bless that Pony Boy for not being a messageboard sheep.

 

[Otis]

I took on Dayne this week in a new dynasty league after just missing out on him in the draft (I tried to play too coy and waited a round too long on him) - I was able to get him for a 2nd round pick in the rookie draft (the 17th pick). I'll happily take the upside of a heisman winning RB in the Denver backfield any day of the week, particularly when the blocking scheme under which he succeeded in college is the same blocking scheme used in Denver.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

GD bless that Pony Boy for not being a messageboard sheep.

And GB using ridiculously skewed "statistics" to support his point.I'll take the position opposite of public opinion quite frequently, but I won't do it in favor of a guy like Ron Dayne who is in his 5th year in the league and has done absolutely nothing to this point except look bad.

It is possible he will succeed in Denver. I will agree that if he can do it anywhere, Denver is where he could do it. But my bet is on him NOT succeeding anywhere. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he was beaten out by Cecil Sapp.

 

[Slash]

GD bless that Pony Boy for not being a messageboard sheep.

But my bet is on him NOT succeeding anywhere. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he was beaten out by Cecil Sapp.

First, Cecil Sapp is a FB and Shanahan is quite pleased with Sapp at FB. Second, just imagine this scenario......it's week 7 of the season, Tatum Bell has been on a tear and has already logged in four 100 yard games and 7 TD's, but suffers a high ankle sprain late in Week 7 and will be out 2-3 weeks. It looks like Dayne will get his shot to do something....how hot of a commodity will Dayne be then? Keep everything in perspective, Reuben Droughns went from rags to riches just that fast also.

 

[P Boy]

by Holy Schneikes:

And GB using ridiculously skewed "statistics" to support his point.

Says the guy who uses players that have 2-3 games of qualifying data to support his contrary viewpoint. Stones & glass houses, my friend.And since you are so big on statistics, why don't you look up the stats for Olandis Gary & his numbers when he played for DEN & then when he left DEN. Or Rueben Droughns' stats before he got to DEN and then after he took over the starting RB spot for DEN.

How exactly do those 2 players' stats when they weren't with DEN match up with Dayne's stats prior to this year?

As before, I'll wait....

post edit - BTW, Sapp is a FB. I don't see how he & Dayne are going to compete H2H for the same position. But I'd take your explanation on that also...

 

[Holy Schneikes]

GD bless that Pony Boy for not being a messageboard sheep.

But my bet is on him NOT succeeding anywhere. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he was beaten out by Cecil Sapp.

First, Cecil Sapp is a FB and Shanahan is quite pleased with Sapp at FB. Second, just imagine this scenario......it's week 7 of the season, Tatum Bell has been on a tear and has already logged in four 100 yard games and 7 TD's, but suffers a high ankle sprain late in Week 7 and will be out 2-3 weeks. It looks like Dayne will get his shot to do something....how hot of a commodity will Dayne be then? Keep everything in perspective, Reuben Droughns went from rags to riches just that fast also.

Sapp played has played FB, yes, but he was a tailback in college, and both Anderson and Droughns played FB at one point as well. I'm NOT saying Sapp is a great player or will ever amount to anything, but he's there and he hasn't looked terrible and may well be more valuable to the Broncos than Dayne when it comes time for roster decisions.Anyway, that's not the point. The point is that Dayne may very well not even make the team to get that chance you are talking about. He signed for the vet min a couple of months after he became a free agent. Denver did NOT go out of their way to get this guy. They picked him up on the cheap just to see what happens.

Denver has Bell, Griffin (who at this time last year was going to be the next Denver uber-stud according to Kubiak [can you say coach-speak?] and a good chunk of the message board), Sapp, and will very possibly draft another back this year. As of right now, Dayne is 3rd on that list and possibly even behind Sapp as well until training camp starts. If they do pick up another back and Dayne is 5th on the depth chart at the RB position, he won't even be on the team.

Edit: Geez, I even forgot to add Anderson. Dayne could be 6th on the ole' depth chart before it's all said and done.

 

[zamboni]

No matter how one feels about Dayne, I think one thing we all can universally agree:IF Tatum Bell wins the job (most likely) and IF Dayne makes the team and appears to be the backup (maybe), unless you're stacked at RB, you pretty much need to get Dayne.

 

[P Boy]

by Holy Schneikes:

Anyway, that's not the point. The point is that Dayne may very well not even make the team to get that chance you are talking about. He signed for the vet min a couple of months after he became a free agent. Denver did NOT go out of their way to get this guy. They picked him up on the cheap just to see what happens.

Let's not obscure the fact that Dayne was in direct competition with Anthony Thomas for the roster spot that Dayne now has, and the DEN coaching staff liked Dayne better for the spot than they did A-Train, who has a decent resume while playing for some incredibly crappy Bears' offenses.It appears to me that DEN was auditioning for the #2 RB slot. To suggest that Sapp might take over any meaningful time at RB or that Griffin is any kind of answer there demonstrates significant short-sightedness and misunderstanding of the situation by that opinion-giver.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

by Holy Schneikes:

And GB using ridiculously skewed "statistics" to support his point.

Says the guy who uses players that have 2-3 games of qualifying data to support his contrary viewpoint. Stones & glass houses, my friend.And since you are so big on statistics, why don't you look up the stats for Olandis Gary & his numbers when he played for DEN & then when he left DEN. Or Rueben Droughns' stats before he got to DEN and then after he took over the starting RB spot for DEN.

How exactly do those 2 players' stats when they weren't with DEN match up with Dayne's stats prior to this year?

As before, I'll wait....

You can wait until the cows come home. Better yet, wait until Dayne becomes a stud in the NFL.The stats you threw out there were ridiculous - AS WERE MINE, WHICH I HAVE ALREADY MENTIONED. The way you "compiled" those stats was seriously seriously flawed and you have yet to admit it even after being shown what happens to a HOST of other backs' numbers when you apply the same "technique".

I'm not doing any more work for you. You are COMPLETELY missing the point, and since I can't make it any clearer I'll just leave it at that.

Does Denver's system help a back's numbers? Hell yeah. Is Dayne likely to start for Denver at any point? Hell no. So IF Dayne became the starting back for Denver, I'd be interested because of the Droughns/Gary/Anderson factor. But he won't. He's simply not a good NFL RB.

 

[Slash]

Denver did NOT go out of their way to get this guy. They picked him up on the cheap just to see what happens.

Shanahan called you and told you this? There were no reports whatsoever that Dayne had even visited Denver. His signing was very much under the radar so nobody but the Broncos know what kind of contact they had been keeping with Dayne. Droughns resigned in Denver last year because Shanahan promised him a bigger role in the offense. He could have done the same for Dayne and promised him a chance to compete for the starting job. I'm a huge Bell fan and think he will explode next year, but I also feel Dayne wasn't brought in as a sympathy signing or as a training camp body. Dayne is there waiting for his shot.

 

[zamboni]

by Holy Schneikes:

Anyway, that's not the point. The point is that Dayne may very well not even make the team to get that chance you are talking about. He signed for the vet min a couple of months after he became a free agent. Denver did NOT go out of their way to get this guy. They picked him up on the cheap just to see what happens.

Let's not obscure the fact that Dayne was in direct competition with Anthony Thomas for the roster spot that Dayne now has, and the DEN coaching staff liked Dayne better for the spot than they did A-Train, who has a decent resume while playing for some incredibly crappy Bears' offenses.It appears to me that DEN was auditioning for the #2 RB slot. To suggest that Sapp might take over any meaningful time at RB or that Griffin is any kind of answer there demonstrates significant short-sightedness and misunderstanding of the situation by that opinion-giver.

You are a homer and may know better, but could they have also chosen Dayne since he was willing to take less money than perhaps what A-Train wanted.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

by Holy Schneikes:

Anyway, that's not the point. The point is that Dayne may very well not even make the team to get that chance you are talking about. He signed for the vet min a couple of months after he became a free agent. Denver did NOT go out of their way to get this guy. They picked him up on the cheap just to see what happens.

Let's not obscure the fact that Dayne was in direct competition with Anthony Thomas for the roster spot that Dayne now has, and the DEN coaching staff liked Dayne better for the spot than they did A-Train, who has a decent resume while playing for some incredibly crappy Bears' offenses.It appears to me that DEN was auditioning for the #2 RB slot. To suggest that Sapp might take over any meaningful time at RB or that Griffin is any kind of answer there demonstrates significant short-sightedness and misunderstanding of the situation by that opinion-giver.

Again, this is a joke. You completely ignore cost - a highly relavent factor. A guy who was a free agent and dirt-cheap was in direct competition with a guy who is on someone else's roster and would require a significant contract. Gee, I wonder why they went with Dayne? I guess it was strictly because of his impressive skills and had nothing to do with the fact that he was basicly free.You know what, I take the whole statistics thing back, you actually made more sense when you working with fake numbers.

 

[Family Matters]

by Family Matters:

Pony-what are your projections for Dayne? Where would you draft him based on what we know today?

Man, I still don't have a feel for what is going on in the DEN backfield. I do think that there is a change in dynamics in the DEN O - they are starting to think large on the O-line, which makes me think they want to return to the late 1990's type offense, which was Terell Davis toting the rock a lot and not catching much out of the backfield, serious ball control to cover an average D, and the running game opening opportunities for the passing game.While I still have some significant problems with the way Shanahan coaches - and his ego is IMHO his very worst enemy - I freely admit that he is not a stupid man. He has to be feeling the heat of 3 playoff appearances in the past 6 years with all 3 showings being 1st round blowouts that were over by halftime.

He went away from what won for him in the B2B SB Ws - which was a crushing ground game that controlled the clock & demoralized oppenents. He got a taste for speed in the backfield & throwing the ball a lot when he drafted Portis - and it flat out has not been successful. He tried to reincarnate Portis with first Griffin & then Bell, but maybe he realized that even with Portis, Griffin, Bell, or whomever with blinding speed in the backfield that his offense wasn't getting it done and wasn't covering up the D's shortcomings by moving up & down the field so quickly. By scoring so quickly, the very weak D-line and the mediocre secondary got seriously exposed.

Maybe the success of Droughns has him thinking that he needs to get back to his roots. There can't be any question that he's feeling heat for his lack of success since the late 90's. If that's the case, I wouldn't rule out anything for Dayne.

In any case, I'm getting the impression that the DEN RB spot is going to be a 2 man race - either Bell or one other contender. Griffin has proven he can't get it done. Anderson has been hurt, has 2 strikes against him in the NFL drug program, and is relatively old considering his length of career, plus someone has to take over at FB, though Kyle Johnson looked pretty good last season. If Dayne has anything left in him, he may be the guy to challenge Bell, and if Bell stumbles he may get the opportunity. Dayne is exactly the type of runner that excels in the DEN system, IMO. Lots of carries, one cut at the line and then go upfield.

If Shanahan goes back to grinding out the running game & he has a committment to getting bigger on the O-line & backfield, Dayne could really surprise. Dayne certainly has more talent than some other guys who have succeeded in DEN's backfield - O. Gary, R. Droughns, & Anderson to name 3.

If I were drafting, yeah I take a late mid-round flyer on Dayne. Why not? He could end up being one of those pleasant unforeseen or scoffed at surprises that wins the FF league.

Just my 2 cents....

Good post. Well thought out and logical. The only thing that jumps out regarding the "get bigger" thought and back to the power running game is that if that were his intention they why not keep Droughns? He already proved himself and he was cheap as well. Instead Shanny said you will not be the starter and go look for a trade. He and Bowlens went on to say they have confidence in Bell and he will get every opportunity to be the starter.Your thinking isn't unreasonable, it's just their actions suggest differently. I remember last year we had numerous discussions about the starter, Griffin. Many speculated that Shanny was blowing amoke and that Griffin would not be the starter. Shanny made it clear he was the man and it turned out to be true, until the injury.

Shanny has never mislead us with his intentions. At times he's not said anything but he does what he says he'll do. For anyone to think differently is avoiding the obvious. I think many paople overanalysed the Denver RB situation last year when the answer was right in front of us.

I agree that "if" Dayne gets the job he will certainly do well. Better than he's ever done. Where I disagree is that I'm not sure Dayne will even be on the team come Sept. Right now it's 50-50 at best. If Griffin & Anderson are not fully recovered then Dayne makes the team. Otherwise, there are only so many spots to go around.

 

[Family Matters]

Denver did NOT go out of their way to get this guy.  They picked him up on the cheap just to see what happens.

Shanahan called you and told you this? There were no reports whatsoever that Dayne had even visited Denver. His signing was very much under the radar so nobody but the Broncos know what kind of contact they had been keeping with Dayne. Droughns resigned in Denver last year because Shanahan promised him a bigger role in the offense. He could have done the same for Dayne and promised him a chance to compete for the starting job. I'm a huge Bell fan and think he will explode next year, but I also feel Dayne wasn't brought in as a sympathy signing or as a training camp body. Dayne is there waiting for his shot.

You may be right. Also consider that Denver may not want to use a draft pick on a RB. Also, they want to see how healthy Griffin & Anderson are. Dayne looks more like insurance than a credible threat to be a starter.

 

[P Boy]

He's simply not a good NFL RB.

You don't know that yet. What you do know is that he didn't perform very well in most games with a very mediocre Giants' running game with a suspect rush-blocking O-line - though when given enough carries he performed at an adequate level for a starting NFL RB.To state anything beyond that is pure conjecture, which you seem to be unwilling to admit.

 

[Slash]

Adding more fuel to the fire:

Brandon Hunt; Aurora, Colo.

I was little surprised with the signing of Ron Dayne. Was that move maybe made to try him at fullback and push the other backs since he's not a typical Broncos back?

Gary Kubiak

Well, I wouldn't say he's not a typical Broncos back. I don't think any of us know right now. What we saw in Ron Dayne, is a kid that when he came out of college was the type of back that we like. We weren't able to draft him, he went to another team. Ron Dayne is a one-cut, zone runner. That's what he was in college and it's kind of what we do. We think he fits what we do and we're going to give him the opportunity to play the tailback position. What's going to happen? I don't know. That's going to be up to Ron Dayne and how hard he works and the price he pays to be a part of this football team, but we kind of like his chances with what we do, so we'll see. We like the kid a lot. It's a fresh start for him, sometimes that's good for a lot of players in this league so hopefully it will be good for Ron Dayne.

LINK

 

[Holy Schneikes]

He's simply not a good NFL RB.

You don't know that yet. What you do know is that he didn't perform very well in most games with a very mediocre Giants' running game with a suspect rush-blocking O-line - though when given enough carries he performed at an adequate level for a starting NFL RB.To state anything beyond that is pure conjecture, which you seem to be unwilling to admit.

You mean the running game Tiki regularly runs for a 4.5 average in? The line he runs a 4.5 average behind? The line MIKE CLOUD ran for a 4.3 average (and 3 TDs to Dayne's one on less than half as many carries) behind? The only time the Giants running game looks horrible is when Ron Dayne is toting the rock. 4 years of that is enough to convince me that he isn't very good.

 

[P Boy]

Again, this is a joke. You completely ignore cost - a highly relavent factor. A guy who was a free agent and dirt-cheap was in direct competition with a guy who is on someone else's roster and would require a significant contract. Gee, I wonder why they went with Dayne? I guess it was strictly because of his impressive skills and had nothing to do with the fact that he was basicly free.

You know what, I take the whole statistics thing back, you actually made more sense when you working with fake numbers.

I find it interesting that someone who prides himself so much on his acumen & is so derisive of others regarding stats & numbers refuses to answer direct questions regarding his conclusions based upon stats. So you'll stand behind your 2 & 3 game samples? And you'll continue to ignore the success of Gary & Droughns at DEN simultaneously with their utter lack of success elsewhere?And to think that a team would sign a 5 year vet even at the minimum for a 5 year vet as camp fodder plainly doesn't understand the salary cap and the compensation agreement with the NFLPA, and especially doesn't understand DEN's cap position right now. If DEN wanted camp fodder, they would have signed a younger player, plain & simple.

Then you completely ignore Kubiak's comments.

I am beginning to think that you don't believe in stats & inside opinions at all, but rather believe only in your own emotions regarding a player and try to cloak your like or dislike of a player with some smattering of "expertise" & self-imposed special knowledge of numbers in an effort to bolster your credibility. Your arguments are certainly hollow, especially as they tend toward dismissiveness.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

As a Tater Bell owner who does not currently own Dayne I will be watching this situation closely. Dayne would not be the first player to wilt under the intense spotlight of the Big Apple only to rebound somewhat elsewhere. Certainly there is at least minimal reason to believe that running behind a zone blocking line might rejuvenate his career, as that's how he was successful at Wisconsin. Still, I have to question whether he will have an impact. Watching him run he tiptoes with very short strides and in an upright posture getting little lean north and south. He reminds me of those old films of Babe Ruth who also had a short stride. When you couple that with his upright style he seems to give away all of the advantage of his size. I would love to see him get more lean, have higher knee action and longer strides ala Okoye, Cambpell, Larry Brown, O.J. Anderson, Wilber Montgomery, Riggins, or Brockington. Unfortunately that's not his style, he wants to be a scatback, we'll see how that works out. If it does his value is going to go through the roof so as a Bell owner I will probably try to pick him up as insurance before his value is truly known. His upside to a Bell owner is certainly much greater than his downside given his current perceived value IMO.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Why does everyone think Quentin Griffin was done? Griffin's last year of college: 287/1884/15(6.6ypc); 35/264/3Dayne's last year of college: 303/1834/19(6.1ypc); 1/9/0If you're going to give Dayne another chance based on his college stats, I'd say a player that's:1) younger2) already knows the Broncos system3) already succeeded in the Broncos system

 

[P Boy]

Why does everyone think Quentin Griffin was done? Griffin's last year of college: 287/1884/15(6.6ypc); 35/264/3Dayne's last year of college: 303/1834/19(6.1ypc); 1/9/0If you're going to give Dayne another chance based on his college stats, I'd say a player that's:1) younger2) already knows the Broncos system3) already succeeded in the Broncos system

I question point 3. I would hardly call Griffin's experience with DEN as a starting RB a "success", as I painfully documented last season before he got hurt.

 

[zamboni]

Adding more fuel to the fire:

Brandon Hunt; Aurora, Colo.

I was little surprised with the signing of Ron Dayne. Was that move maybe made to try him at fullback and push the other backs since he's not a typical Broncos back?

Gary Kubiak

Well, I wouldn't say he's not a typical Broncos back. I don't think any of us know right now. What we saw in Ron Dayne, is a kid that when he came out of college was the type of back that we like. We weren't able to draft him, he went to another team. Ron Dayne is a one-cut, zone runner. That's what he was in college and it's kind of what we do. We think he fits what we do and we're going to give him the opportunity to play the tailback position. What's going to happen? I don't know. That's going to be up to Ron Dayne and how hard he works and the price he pays to be a part of this football team, but we kind of like his chances with what we do, so we'll see. We like the kid a lot. It's a fresh start for him, sometimes that's good for a lot of players in this league so hopefully it will be good for Ron Dayne.

LINK

But he also says this in the same article:Steve Yniguez; Fullerton, Calif.

What do you think Tatum Bell's potential is?

Gary Kubiak

His potential is limitless. He's got tremendous speed and he's strong. The thing he has to do is stay in one piece; he's got to get through an offseason and training camp healthy. The mental part and things we do, those will be easier on him this year, but he has to stay in one piece and stay on that field. To be a great pro in this business you have to do it week in and week out, you can't do it every now and then. That's what he has to do. He has to become an every down player.



Count me among the Bell owners that will be watching the situation closely, and will indeed burn a pick on Dayne if he's the backup.

 

[zamboni]

Why does everyone think Quentin Griffin was done?

Griffin's last year of college: 287/1884/15(6.6ypc); 35/264/3

Dayne's last year of college: 303/1834/19(6.1ypc); 1/9/0

If you're going to give Dayne another chance based on his college stats, I'd say a player that's:

1) younger

2) already knows the Broncos system

3) already succeeded in the Broncos system

I question point 3. I would hardly call Griffin's experience with DEN as a starting RB a "success", as I painfully documented last season before he got hurt.

Perhaps even more importantly, he's also got a torn ACL injury that will still be less than a year rehabilitated by the time the season starts.

 

[mbuehner]

Lets not forget that Anthony Thomas is significantly more expensive than Ron Dayne.

Pony, your statistics are meaningless, end of story. You cant throw out bad games like that and apply the good games to a full season.

Here's the dagger in the heart, of the 14 games Dayne has started in his career, he only had 19 or more carries in 5 of them. That means that Dayne has only reached the illusive goal of 19 carries and 'hitting his stride' in 36% of his starts. So basically Dayne only has the good games you describe on one out of three outings. Statistically, and for whatever reason, Dayne simply doesnt get to 19 carries very often when he starts.

 

[Slash]

Adding more fuel to the fire:

Brandon Hunt; Aurora, Colo.

I was little surprised with the signing of Ron Dayne. Was that move maybe made to try him at fullback and push the other backs since he's not a typical Broncos back?

Gary Kubiak

Well, I wouldn't say he's not a typical Broncos back. I don't think any of us know right now.  What we saw in Ron Dayne, is a kid that when he came out of college was the type of back that we like. We weren't able to draft him, he went to another team. Ron Dayne is a one-cut, zone runner. That's what he was in college and it's kind of what we do. We think he fits what we do and we're going to give him the opportunity to play the tailback position.  What's going to happen?  I don't know.  That's going to be up to Ron Dayne and how hard he works and the price he pays to be a part of this football team, but we kind of like his chances with what we do, so we'll see.  We like the kid a lot. It's a fresh start for him, sometimes that's good for a lot of players in this league so hopefully it will be good for Ron Dayne.

LINK

But he also says this in the same article:Steve Yniguez; Fullerton, Calif.

What do you think Tatum Bell's potential is?

Gary Kubiak

His potential is limitless. He's got tremendous speed and he's strong. The thing he has to do is stay in one piece; he's got to get through an offseason and training camp healthy. The mental part and things we do, those will be easier on him this year, but he has to stay in one piece and stay on that field. To be a great pro in this business you have to do it week in and week out, you can't do it every now and then. That's what he has to do. He has to become an every down player.



Count me among the Bell owners that will be watching the situation closely, and will indeed burn a pick on Dayne if he's the backup.

I'm also a huge Bell fan and feel he will be ranked as a top 5 RB by this time next year if he stays healthy for 16 games. I also acknowledge injury can happen to anyone at any time, and that's where Dayne comes in. If Dayne were ever to be the starting RB for Denver, even as an injury fill-in for Bell, you can bet Dayne will be in my fantasy starting lineup.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Again, this is a joke.  You completely ignore cost - a highly relavent factor.  A guy who was a free agent and dirt-cheap was in direct competition with a guy who is on someone else's roster and would require a significant contract.  Gee, I wonder why they went with Dayne?  I guess it was strictly because of his impressive skills and had nothing to do with the fact that he was basicly free.

You know what, I take the whole statistics thing back, you actually made more sense when you working with fake numbers.

I find it interesting that someone who prides himself so much on his acumen & is so derisive of others regarding stats & numbers refuses to answer direct questions regarding his conclusions based upon stats. So you'll stand behind your 2 & 3 game samples? And you'll continue to ignore the success of Gary & Droughns at DEN simultaneously with their utter lack of success elsewhere?And to think that a team would sign a 5 year vet even at the minimum for a 5 year vet as camp fodder plainly doesn't understand the salary cap and the compensation agreement with the NFLPA, and especially doesn't understand DEN's cap position right now. If DEN wanted camp fodder, they would have signed a younger player, plain & simple.

Then you completely ignore Kubiak's comments.

I am beginning to think that you don't believe in stats & inside opinions at all, but rather believe only in your own emotions regarding a player and try to cloak your like or dislike of a player with some smattering of "expertise" & self-imposed special knowledge of numbers in an effort to bolster your credibility. Your arguments are certainly hollow, especially as they tend toward dismissiveness.

I don't pride myself on anything really (well, at least anything here). But again, I don't know how to be more clear about the stats thing. I LOVE stats, I just don't like comparing cherry-picked stats to real stats because I think it's extremely misleading. Just read the previous posts - you seem reasonably intelligent, I have trouble believing you haven't "gotten it" by now and I think you are just fishing on that front.Yes, I ignore Kubiak's comments, because they don't mean anything. Kubiak stated Griffin was going to be a great starter last year and was perfectly capable of carrying the load. He said great things about Hearst as well last year.

What do you guys expect him to say? They signed Dayne. IF they signed Dayne as insurance/to push the other guys/etc, do you really think he's going to come out and say that? Of course not. He's going to say they brought him to compete with the other guys and they think he's going to do well. There is nothing else he CAN say. It's called coach-speak. And the truth is, they DID bring him in to compete. I don't think they WANT him to fail, I just think they didn't pay much and they aren't expecting much. If it works out - great, they win the lottery, but it's not like they brought him in with a signing bonus or a large contract while competing with other teams for his services (like they would have for Thomas for example). He has NO bonus and will be very easy to cut if they need to when the time comes. It's quite possible he'll stick around in a backup role (with which he is very familiar by now), but it's also quite possible he just goes by the wayside.

Look this thing is pretty much done between us. I've said all I know to say, and you are starting to repeat yourself as well. We are just going to have to leave it at a difference of opinion on Dayne's skill/talent/fantasy potential.

 

[P Boy]

But he also says this in the same article:Steve Yniguez; Fullerton, Calif.What do you think Tatum Bell's potential is?Gary KubiakHis potential is limitless. He's got tremendous speed and he's strong. The thing he has to do is stay in one piece; he's got to get through an offseason and training camp healthy. The mental part and things we do, those will be easier on him this year, but he has to stay in one piece and stay on that field. To be a great pro in this business you have to do it week in and week out, you can't do it every now and then. That's what he has to do. He has to become an every down player.Count me among the Bell owners that will be watching the situation closely, and will indeed burn a pick on Dayne if he's the backup.

I agree this viewpoint. I do think what we are arguing about here most likley is who will be Bell's backup. However, there are some significant question marks surrounding Bell right now, which certainly stokes interest in whomever the backup will be, given the numbers that some relative unknowns or previous washed ups have put up in a backup role when they were called upon to take the reins.

 

[Bojang0301]

He's simply not a good NFL RB.

You don't know that yet. What you do know is that he didn't perform very well in most games with a very mediocre Giants' running game with a suspect rush-blocking O-line - though when given enough carries he performed at an adequate level for a starting NFL RB.To state anything beyond that is pure conjecture, which you seem to be unwilling to admit.

You mean the running game Tiki regularly runs for a 4.5 average in? The line he runs a 4.5 average behind? The line MIKE CLOUD ran for a 4.3 average (and 3 TDs to Dayne's one on less than half as many carries) behind? The only time the Giants running game looks horrible is when Ron Dayne is toting the rock. 4 years of that is enough to convince me that he isn't very good.

Actually I think they are talking about the bull#### patchwork line that Accorsi puts out there every year. Tiki is far greater than anyone will ever give him credit for.

 

[P Boy]

Pony, your statistics are meaningless, end of story. You cant throw out bad games like that and apply the good games to a full season.

If they are meaningless to you, sobeit. But 11 games of 19+ carries at least offers some insight into Dayne, as small as it might be. That the Giants didn't use him often could be explained by a myriad of reasons: the success of Barber, the lack of a decent O-line for a big RB to run behind, Dayne inability to take over the job because he is capable, coaching phiolosophy, etc, etc, etc.You don't like the stats, that's fine. But they do exist, and hence they aren't completely meaningless, IMO.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

He's simply not a good NFL RB.

You don't know that yet. What you do know is that he didn't perform very well in most games with a very mediocre Giants' running game with a suspect rush-blocking O-line - though when given enough carries he performed at an adequate level for a starting NFL RB.To state anything beyond that is pure conjecture, which you seem to be unwilling to admit.

You mean the running game Tiki regularly runs for a 4.5 average in? The line he runs a 4.5 average behind? The line MIKE CLOUD ran for a 4.3 average (and 3 TDs to Dayne's one on less than half as many carries) behind? The only time the Giants running game looks horrible is when Ron Dayne is toting the rock. 4 years of that is enough to convince me that he isn't very good.

Actually I think they are talking about the bull#### patchwork line that Accorsi puts out there every year. Tiki is far greater than anyone will ever give him credit for.

I agree with you on that point. I find Tiki's performance to be remarkable and I don't think he gets enough credit for whatever success the Giants have had.However, Tiki's (and Cloud's for that matter) performances do seem to indicate that it is POSSIBLE to succeed in the situations Dayne was put in, and Dayne just didn't do it. Maybe it's only because Tiki is ultra-talented, but I think it's a bit of that and a little bit that the offensive scheme actually works to some degree despite the line.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Oh, one last thing, #### you Shanahan, you ####sucking, little boy #######, ####aphobe. The last thing I needed this year was more of your damned runningback drama you #### eater.