Ron Dayne to get bigger workload? (1 Viewer)

[P Boy]

RMN Link

Dayne may carry on

Running back has chance to expand his role after injuries, strong showing

By Lee Rasizer, Rocky Mountain News September 20, 2005

…a bigger workload might also be headed Dayne's way, especially considering the nicks currently bothering fellow running backs Mike Anderson (ribs) and Tatum Bell (left ankle sprain).

"Everybody's going to get a chance to play some," Broncos coach Mike Shanahan said. "I can't tell you exactly what our plan is. We have to decide it ourselves."

Dayne at least put himself in the mix with six carries on the drive that set up Jason Elam's winning 41-yard field goal with 5 seconds to play.

Only 10 of Denver's first 34 carries by tailbacks this season had gone for 4 or more yards before Dayne recorded runs of 13, 8 and 10 yards in six attempts on the final possession. Anderson gained 2 or 3 yards on 10 of his 15 carries and Bell didn't get a carry.

Shanahan said Anderson remains the starter heading into the game against the Kansas City Chiefs at Invesco Field at Mile High on Monday night.

He also seemed to endorse Bell as the primary backup, if his left ankle heals quickly.

"He gives us a little bit of a different look," Shanahan said, referring to Bell's speed, adding, "I like having the combination of all three of those running backs."

Neither Anderson nor Dayne was sure how the carries will shake out in the immediate future.

 

[el-gato-grande]

Typical Shanahan. Lies, lies, and more lies.

 

[Banger]

It really is starting look like the Bronco backfield will be nothing but headaches all year regardless of which of the 3 guys you own.

 

[3C's]

It really is starting look like the Bronco backfield will be nothing but headaches all year regardless of which of the 3 guys you own.

Seems like we say that every year until about the 4th or 5th game.

 

[zamboni]

It really is starting look like the Bronco backfield will be nothing but headaches all year regardless of which of the 3 guys you own.

It might, but it also looked pretty muddled last year after Griffin faltered, and for at least several weeks, became clear once Droughns emerged.If one guy can truly separate himself from the rest, then it might not be a weekly headache. If not, we can get used to the incessant multiple threads on the first page discussing the situation.

I still don't buy the RBBC stuff - I think Shanahan is once again looking for his horse to ride, except none has distinctly left the stable yet.

 

[nygiants56]

It really is starting look like the Bronco backfield will be nothing but headaches all year regardless of which of the 3 guys you own.

Seems like we say that every year until about the 4th or 5th game.

its usually week 5 where a broncos rb comes from out of the woods and takes the league by storm..Olandis gary, droughns, portis, anderson..

dayne is no different..

 

[SSOG]

dayne is no different..

... except that he won't become the starting RB over a healthy Mike Anderson.If Anderson is healthy, Anderson is the starter. All season, unless Denver gets eliminated early and starts looking towards the future. Take it to the bank.

 

[JohnnyU]

He also seemed to endorse Bell as the primary backup, if his left ankle heals quickly.

 

[Tricktickler P. Shizzle]

I find it entirely believable that Ron Dayne will get bigger.

 

[Eagle Eye]

dayne is no different..

... except that he won't become the starting RB over a healthy Mike Anderson.If Anderson is healthy, Anderson is the starter. All season, unless Denver gets eliminated early and starts looking towards the future. Take it to the bank.

Maybe you should put this in your sig to save yourself from Carpel Tunnel Syndrome. I hope you're right, but I don't have nearly as much confidence in MA as you do.

 

[FF Thinker]

dayne is no different..

... except that he won't become the starting RB over a healthy Mike Anderson.If Anderson is healthy,

You can stop right there. 2 weeks in and he hasn't been healthy yet. Whey he shows he can stay healthy and productive for a full game than he might leave my bench.

 

[jafo]

It's a good week for Dayne to get a bigger workload, as he's facing KC at home in Denver. Anyone remember what little man Griffin did last year? This could be the cheapest the Dayne will be for the rest of the season. He is worth the gamble? Yes. Does that mean he will break out and replace Anderson as the starter? No, but it is possible....so possible in fact that I'm not going to miss out just in case.Edited to add - I was a Dayne hater last year, but I like his situation in Denver.

 

[Dope]

I think there are 2 camps.

The liberal tree hugging change mongers who are Daynocrats and the conservative, stay the course, the first way is the right way Andersonicans.

I am a Daynocrat...just so you know up front.

Take a look at these numbers for Mike Anderson...in comparison to FF god Marshall Faulk:

Mike Anderson

2000 DEN 16 297 1487 5.0 80 15 76 4 3 age = 26

2001 DEN 16 175 678 3.9 62 4 32 1 1 age = 27

2002 DEN 15 84 386 4.6 32 2 24 2 1 age = 28

2003 DEN 12 70 257 3.7 44 3 15 2 0 age = 29

2004 DID NOT PLAY

2005 DEN 2 19 54 2.8 8 0 3 1 1 age = 31

Marshall Faulk

2000 STL 14 253 1359 5.4 36 18 78 0 0 age = 27

2001 STL 14 260 1382 5.3 71 12 70 2 2 age = 28

2002 STL 14 212 953 4.5 44 8 51 2 2 age = 29

2003 STL 11 209 818 3.9 52 10 49 0 0 age = 30

2004 STL 14 195 774 4.0 40 3 45 1 1 age = 31

2005 STL 2 6 27 4.5 14 0 1 0 0 age = 32

Interesting that FF god Marshall Faulk gets hit by the over 30 RB curse, but one year wonder Mike Anderson is immune.

That doesn't make sense to me.

 

[HULLOBUDMAN]

It's a good week for Dayne to get a bigger workload, as he's facing KC at home in Denver. Anyone remember what little man Griffin did last year?

This could be the cheapest the Dayne will be for the rest of the season. He is worth the gamble? Yes. Does that mean he will break out and replace Anderson as the starter? No, but it is possible....so possible in fact that I'm not going to miss out just in case.

Edited to add - I was a Dayne hater last year, but I like his situation in Denver.

I posted this in one of the other 20 Dayne threads. What in this stat line makes you think anyone will light up the Chiefs D?Curtis Martin 20-57 3-20

Lamont Jordan 15-59 6-32

 

[SSOG]

dayne is no different..

... except that he won't become the starting RB over a healthy Mike Anderson.If Anderson is healthy, Anderson is the starter. All season, unless Denver gets eliminated early and starts looking towards the future. Take it to the bank.

Maybe you should put this in your sig to save yourself from Carpel Tunnel Syndrome. I hope you're right, but I don't have nearly as much confidence in MA as you do.

That's why Anderson was available for so cheap in July/early August, and that's why this is the perfect time to trade for him on the cheap. Because nobody has as much confidence in Mike Anderson.

 

[AeroFANatic]

I think there are 2 camps.

The liberal tree hugging change mongers who are Daynocrats and the conservative, stay the course, the first way is the right way Andersonicans.

I am a Daynocrat...just so you know up front.

I see....But then again you have Green Party member Curtis Martin, who had a few good years AFTER 30 to buck your trend.

I feel Anderson is #1, Dayne #2, and Bell change of pace. If Anderson goes down, Its Daynes job. Tinker-Bell will stay as change of pace back all year.

 

[Paper Lions]

RMN Link

Dayne may carry on

Running back has chance to expand his role after injuries, strong showing

By Lee Rasizer, Rocky Mountain News September 20, 2005

…a bigger workload might also be headed Dayne's way, especially considering the nicks currently bothering fellow running backs Mike Anderson (ribs) and Tatum Bell (left ankle sprain).

"Everybody's going to get a chance to play some," Broncos coach Mike Shanahan said. "I can't tell you exactly what our plan is. We have to decide it ourselves."

Dayne at least put himself in the mix with six carries on the drive that set up Jason Elam's winning 41-yard field goal with 5 seconds to play.

Only 10 of Denver's first 34 carries by tailbacks this season had gone for 4 or more yards before Dayne recorded runs of 13, 8 and 10 yards in six attempts on the final possession. Anderson gained 2 or 3 yards on 10 of his 15 carries and Bell didn't get a carry.

Shanahan said Anderson remains the starter heading into the game against the Kansas City Chiefs at Invesco Field at Mile High on Monday night.

He also seemed to endorse Bell as the primary backup, if his left ankle heals quickly.

"He gives us a little bit of a different look," Shanahan said, referring to Bell's speed, adding, "I like having the combination of all three of those running backs."

Neither Anderson nor Dayne was sure how the carries will shake out in the immediate future.

dayne is no different..

... except that he won't become the starting RB over a healthy Mike Anderson.If Anderson is healthy, Anderson is the starter. All season, unless Denver gets eliminated early and starts looking towards the future. Take it to the bank.

Shanny, MA, and Dayne just need to check in with SSOG and then they'll know all the answers.

 

[SSOG]

dayne is no different..

... except that he won't become the starting RB over a healthy Mike Anderson.If Anderson is healthy,

You can stop right there. 2 weeks in and he hasn't been healthy yet. Whey he shows he can stay healthy and productive for a full game than he might leave my bench.

He played 15 carries against SD. Barring setbacks, I expect that number to increase this next week against KC. And KC plays a 4-3, rather than the 3-4 that Denver has played twice to open the season (and traditionally struggles running against).

I think there are 2 camps.

The liberal tree hugging change mongers who are Daynocrats and the conservative, stay the course, the first way is the right way Andersonicans.

I am a Daynocrat...just so you know up front.

Take a look at these numbers for Mike Anderson...in comparison to FF god Marshall Faulk:

Mike Anderson

2000 DEN 16 297 1487 5.0 80 15 76 4 3 age = 26

2001 DEN 16 175 678 3.9 62 4 32 1 1 age = 27

2002 DEN 15 84 386 4.6 32 2 24 2 1 age = 28

2003 DEN 12 70 257 3.7 44 3 15 2 0 age = 29

2004 DID NOT PLAY

2005 DEN 2 19 54 2.8 8 0 3 1 1 age = 31

Marshall Faulk

2000 STL 14 253 1359 5.4 36 18 78 0 0 age = 27

2001 STL 14 260 1382 5.3 71 12 70 2 2 age = 28

2002 STL 14 212 953 4.5 44 8 51 2 2 age = 29

2003 STL 11 209 818 3.9 52 10 49 0 0 age = 30

2004 STL 14 195 774 4.0 40 3 45 1 1 age = 31

2005 STL 2 6 27 4.5 14 0 1 0 0 age = 32

Interesting that FF god Marshall Faulk gets hit by the over 30 RB curse, but one year wonder Mike Anderson is immune.

That doesn't make sense to me.

Well, that's all well and good, but how about we compare their seasons based on NFL experience?Faulk- 252, 239, 144, 201, 283, 315.

I see no decline in production for him in his sixth season, so why should we assume that Anderson will fall off the face of the map in HIS sixth season?

What makes you so sure that it's the age that makes them fall off the map and not the years of experience, or the workload? Remember, Anderson may be 32, but he was 26 as a rookie.

 

[Dope]

I think there are 2 camps.

The liberal tree hugging change mongers who are Daynocrats and the conservative, stay the course, the first way is the right way Andersonicans.

I am a Daynocrat...just so you know up front.

I see....But then again you have Green Party member Curtis Martin, who had a few good years AFTER 30 to buck your trend.

I feel Anderson is #1, Dayne #2, and Bell change of pace. If Anderson goes down, Its Daynes job. Tinker-Bell will stay as change of pace back all year.

Curtis Martin, gawd bless him, is one of the rare exceptions to the rule.

 

[Eagle Eye]

dayne is no different..

... except that he won't become the starting RB over a healthy Mike Anderson.If Anderson is healthy, Anderson is the starter. All season, unless Denver gets eliminated early and starts looking towards the future. Take it to the bank.

Maybe you should put this in your sig to save yourself from Carpel Tunnel Syndrome. I hope you're right, but I don't have nearly as much confidence in MA as you do.

That's why Anderson was available for so cheap in July/early August, and that's why this is the perfect time to trade for him on the cheap. Because nobody has as much confidence in Mike Anderson.

You don't seem to be even considering the possibility that "they" may be right. He doesn't have Curtis Martin's track record in production or durability and that makes Anderson's back ups much more valuable than Blaylock, current CuMart injury aside.

 

[Dope]

dayne is no different..

... except that he won't become the starting RB over a healthy Mike Anderson.If Anderson is healthy,

You can stop right there. 2 weeks in and he hasn't been healthy yet. Whey he shows he can stay healthy and productive for a full game than he might leave my bench.

He played 15 carries against SD. Barring setbacks, I expect that number to increase this next week against KC. And KC plays a 4-3, rather than the 3-4 that Denver has played twice to open the season (and traditionally struggles running against).

I think there are 2 camps.

The liberal tree hugging change mongers who are Daynocrats and the conservative, stay the course, the first way is the right way Andersonicans.

I am a Daynocrat...just so you know up front.

Take a look at these numbers for Mike Anderson...in comparison to FF god Marshall Faulk:

Mike Anderson

2000 DEN 16 297 1487 5.0 80 15 76 4 3 age = 26

2001 DEN 16 175 678 3.9 62 4 32 1 1 age = 27

2002 DEN 15 84 386 4.6 32 2 24 2 1 age = 28

2003 DEN 12 70 257 3.7 44 3 15 2 0 age = 29

2004 DID NOT PLAY

2005 DEN 2 19 54 2.8 8 0 3 1 1 age = 31

Marshall Faulk

2000 STL 14 253 1359 5.4 36 18 78 0 0 age = 27

2001 STL 14 260 1382 5.3 71 12 70 2 2 age = 28

2002 STL 14 212 953 4.5 44 8 51 2 2 age = 29

2003 STL 11 209 818 3.9 52 10 49 0 0 age = 30

2004 STL 14 195 774 4.0 40 3 45 1 1 age = 31

2005 STL 2 6 27 4.5 14 0 1 0 0 age = 32

Interesting that FF god Marshall Faulk gets hit by the over 30 RB curse, but one year wonder Mike Anderson is immune.

That doesn't make sense to me.

Well, that's all well and good, but how about we compare their seasons based on NFL experience?Faulk- 252, 239, 144, 201, 283, 315.

I see no decline in production for him in his sixth season, so why should we assume that Anderson will fall off the face of the map in HIS sixth season?

What makes you so sure that it's the age that makes them fall off the map and not the years of experience, or the workload? Remember, Anderson may be 32, but he was 26 as a rookie.

Those 1st 6 seasons I believe Mr Faulk was quite a bit better than a one year wonder...as Mike Anderson currently is.

 

[Twisted]

How is Bell doing?

 

[SSOG]

You don't seem to be even considering the possibility that "they" may be right. He doesn't have Curtis Martin's track record in production or durability and that makes Anderson's back ups much more valuable than Blaylock, current CuMart injury aside.

Of course I recognize the possibility that they're right. It's also possible that Joey Harrington will be the #1 fantasy QB in the league this year. I don't consider either a PROBABILITY, but I recognize that they're both POSSIBILITIES.I've been saying since July that Anderson was the starting RB in Denver, and he would be all season, and he's been proving me right since July. I don't see that changing any time soon. It's not like I just picked a name out of a hat and decided to champion his cause. I based my opinion on everything I have read about Denver's situation, as well as everything I know about Mike Shanahan's tendencies and Denver's offense. I would immodestly call it a very very educated guess. I'd also venture that it's a far more educated guess than most of the guesses being thrown out on the situation. Maybe not all, but most. Call me immodest if you wish, but I have been a Denver homer for a while, and have followed the entire Denver rushing saga in more detail than anyone else but a fellow Denver homer might have. I don't simply regurgitate all these adages and untruths that seem to abound around the Denver situation (Denver's offense is better suited for faster backs, for one. Completely untrue. Mike Shanahan likes doing things just to stroke his ego and prove he can, for another. Give me one good example, I say.)

As for the Curtis Martin comparison... sure, Anderson doesn't have the track record of production or durability. You know what else he doesn't have? 3298 career carries (including 400 last season).

 

[SSOG]

Those 1st 6 seasons I believe Mr Faulk was quite a bit better than a one year wonder...as Mike Anderson currently is.

Don't tell that to me. You're the one who saw fit to make the Faulk to Anderson comparison in the first place. You said that Marshall Faulk declined at age 32, so Anderson would, too. I said that, by the same logic, Marshall Faulk DIDN'T decline in year 6, so Anderson wouldn't, either. And now you decide that Marshall Faulk isn't a very good comparison for Mike Anderson? Well, then why did you make the comparison in the first place? Go ahead and give me a better one.Seriously, can anyone come up with another guy who became the featured back at age 32 with 626 carries to his name?

 

[KevT]

Mike Shanahan likes doing things just to stroke his ego and prove he can, for another.

Turning Dayne's career around would be huge for Shanny's ego.

 

[Righetti]

Those 1st 6 seasons I believe Mr Faulk was quite a bit better than a one year wonder...as Mike Anderson currently is.

Don't tell that to me. You're the one who saw fit to make the Faulk to Anderson comparison in the first place. You said that Marshall Faulk declined at age 32, so Anderson would, too. I said that, by the same logic, Marshall Faulk DIDN'T decline in year 6, so Anderson wouldn't, either. And now you decide that Marshall Faulk isn't a very good comparison for Mike Anderson? Well, then why did you make the comparison in the first place? Go ahead and give me a better one.Seriously, can anyone come up with another guy who became the featured back at age 32 with 626 carries to his name?

Tyrone Wheatley 2004?

 

[nortobc]

Interesting that FF god Marshall Faulk gets hit by the over 30 RB curse, but one year wonder Mike Anderson is immune.

That doesn't make sense to me.

It's not about age, it's about work load.

 

[Dope]

Those 1st 6 seasons I believe Mr Faulk was quite a bit better than a one year wonder...as Mike Anderson currently is.

Don't tell that to me. You're the one who saw fit to make the Faulk to Anderson comparison in the first place. You said that Marshall Faulk declined at age 32, so Anderson would, too. I said that, by the same logic, Marshall Faulk DIDN'T decline in year 6, so Anderson wouldn't, either. And now you decide that Marshall Faulk isn't a very good comparison for Mike Anderson? Well, then why did you make the comparison in the first place? Go ahead and give me a better one.Seriously, can anyone come up with another guy who became the featured back at age 32 with 626 carries to his name?

I'm looking for a better comparison...but I didn't invent the 30 year old wall for RB's...I just mention it.From Pro Football Reference in the "what did you do for me lately" column:

Fantasy Football Data

Year Value Pos. Rank Overall Rank

--------------------------------------------------

2000 98 4 13

2001 0 34 120

2002 0 43 240

2003 0 50 263

--------------------------------------------------

It's almost impossible to find a guy who did very well in his rookie season and then didn't have one ounce of FF value for the rest of hos career...I have a feeling though if something like that were to happen again...we'd have a name to compare it to.

 

[Righetti]

Tyronne Wheatley in 2004had 1185 carries4635 total yards3.9 ypcand 36 TD'sMike Anderson has626 carries2808 yards4.5 ypcand 24 TD'sI thought it might be.. but sorry, not such a great comparison there

 

[B-Deep]

I have to admit that before the season I would have thought any post about Dayne that contained the word "bigger" would have to contain some reference to doughnuts. But somehow it looks like he is doing well with Denver.If skeletor can make Dayne a good runningback I'll be beyond impressed.

 

[Dope]

Dorsey Levens.Dorsey was born in 1970.His 1st year with the Pack was 1994. he didn't do much. He would have been 23/24.In '95 he didn't do much either. 24/25In '96 a little more work. 25/26In '97 he blew up for 1800 total yards and 12 TD's. 26/27'98 injuries I guess. Not much happening. 27/28'99 another 1000 yard rushing season...28/292000...200 yards for the season. 29/302001-2004 never more than 100 carries in a season.

 

[Eagle Eye]

RMN Link

Dayne may carry on

Running back has chance to expand his role after injuries, strong showing

By Lee Rasizer, Rocky Mountain News September 20, 2005

…a bigger workload might also be headed Dayne's way, especially considering the nicks currently bothering fellow running backs Mike Anderson (ribs) and Tatum Bell (left ankle sprain).

"Everybody's going to get a chance to play some," Broncos coach Mike Shanahan said. "I can't tell you exactly what our plan is. We have to decide it ourselves."

Dayne at least put himself in the mix with six carries on the drive that set up Jason Elam's winning 41-yard field goal with 5 seconds to play.

Only 10 of Denver's first 34 carries by tailbacks this season had gone for 4 or more yards before Dayne recorded runs of 13, 8 and 10 yards in six attempts on the final possession. Anderson gained 2 or 3 yards on 10 of his 15 carries and Bell didn't get a carry.

Shanahan said Anderson remains the starter heading into the game against the Kansas City Chiefs at Invesco Field at Mile High on Monday night.

He also seemed to endorse Bell as the primary backup, if his left ankle heals quickly.

"He gives us a little bit of a different look," Shanahan said, referring to Bell's speed, adding, "I like having the combination of all three of those running backs."

Neither Anderson nor Dayne was sure how the carries will shake out in the immediate future.

SSOG,I don't think you've addressed this piece posted by pony boy. Don't you think this situation sounds more volatile than you've been describing it?

 

[Dope]

Charles White was a one year wonder too.His big year came when he was 28/29.

+--------------------------+-------------------------+                 |          Rushing         |        Receiving        |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year  TM |   G |   Att  Yards    Y/A   TD |   Rec  Yards   Y/R   TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 1980 cle |  14 |    86    279    3.2    5 |    17    153   9.0    1 || 1981 cle |  16 |    97    342    3.5    1 |    27    219   8.1    0 || 1982 cle |   9 |    69    259    3.8    3 |    34    283   8.3    0 || 1984 cle |  10 |    24     62    2.6    0 |     5     29   5.8    0 || 1985 ram |  16 |    70    310    4.4    3 |     1     12  12.0    0 || 1986 ram |  16 |    22    126    5.7    0 |     1      7   7.0    0 || 1987 ram |  15 |   324   1374    4.2   11 |    23    121   5.3    0 || 1988 ram |  12 |    88    323    3.7    0 |     6     36   6.0    0 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+|  TOTAL   | 108 |   780   3075    3.9   23 |   114    860   7.5    1 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

 

[3C's]

Tyronne Wheatley in 2004

had 1185 carries

4635 total yards

3.9 ypc

and 36 TD's

That would have to be some kind of a record

 

[jafo]

It's a good week for Dayne to get a bigger workload, as he's facing KC at home in Denver.  Anyone remember what little man Griffin did last year?

This could be the cheapest the Dayne will be for the rest of the season.  He is worth the gamble?  Yes.  Does that mean he will break out and replace Anderson as the starter?  No, but it is possible....so possible in fact that I'm not going to miss out just in case.

Edited to add - I was a Dayne hater last year, but I like his situation in Denver.

I posted this in one of the other 20 Dayne threads. What in this stat line makes you think anyone will light up the Chiefs D?Curtis Martin 20-57 3-20

Lamont Jordan 15-59 6-32

KC's Defense is looking much better, and believe me, I don't think they are a lock to repeat what they did last year. I do think it is very possible though that they get their running game going this week. For Dayne, it's about opportunity. 1. Denver has a good rushing history against the Chiefs.

2. Anderson hasn't gotten the job done in the first two weeks.

3. Bell is dinged up.

4. Dayne is going to get a bigger workload.

Now, in no way am I saying Dayne is a lock for success this week, but the opportunity is there. If you are looking for a RB to take a risk with, Dayne is the man.

 

[SSOG]

Mike Shanahan likes doing things just to stroke his ego and prove he can, for another.

Turning Dayne's career around would be huge for Shanny's ego.

People keep saying this, but when has Shanahan EVER done ANYTHING just because it'd be good for his ego? I can give several examples of times he did something BAD for his ego because it was good for his team. Such as letting Maurice Clarett go and calling it a wasted draft pick. How is that good for Shanny's ego? If Shanny's concerned about his ego, why didn't he stash Clarett on the practice squad?I ran the historical data dominator to find all 30+ RBs who had over 100 carries, and sorted them by years in the NFL to try to find a good comparison. Here's a complete list of all RBs I found over the age of 30 with fewer than 1100 career carries who got 200+ carries in a season.

The best match seems to be Christian Okoye, who was 30 years old, in his 5th season, and with 877 career carries in 1991. He had only once before rushed for 1000 yards. His stats that year? 14 games, 225 carries, 1031 yards, and a career-high 4.6 yards per carry.

Floyd Little, in 1972, at age 30 and with 927 career carries, played 14 games (out of 14) and ran for 216/859/9, good for 4.0 ypc (above his career average). It's interesting to note that his 4 best seasons, statistically speaking, came at ages 28, 29, 30, and 31 (with a better season at 31 than he had at 30).

Lamar Smith, in 2000, at age 30, with 480 career carries, played 15 games and carried for 309/1139/14 and the best season of his professional career by far.

Antowain Smith, in 2002, at age 30 and with 1047 career carries, played 16 games and ran 252/982/6, which was a pretty good year by Antowain Smith standards (3rd best season as a pro).

Garrison Hearst barely misses the cutoff in 2001, with 1166 career carries, but he ran 252/1206/4 and played all 16 games.

Oh, and one last match. A guy by the name of Priest Holmes, with 1066 career carries in 2003, played 16 games and ran 320 times for 1420 yards and 27 TDs.

I think these numbers show that there is CERTAINLY a precedent for older backs to buck the 30-year-curse assuming they don't have much wear on the tires.

 

[SSOG]

RMN Link

Dayne may carry on

Running back has chance to expand his role after injuries, strong showing

By Lee Rasizer, Rocky Mountain News September 20, 2005

…a bigger workload might also be headed Dayne's way, especially considering the nicks currently bothering fellow running backs Mike Anderson (ribs) and Tatum Bell (left ankle sprain).

"Everybody's going to get a chance to play some," Broncos coach Mike Shanahan said. "I can't tell you exactly what our plan is. We have to decide it ourselves."

Dayne at least put himself in the mix with six carries on the drive that set up Jason Elam's winning 41-yard field goal with 5 seconds to play.

Only 10 of Denver's first 34 carries by tailbacks this season had gone for 4 or more yards before Dayne recorded runs of 13, 8 and 10 yards in six attempts on the final possession. Anderson gained 2 or 3 yards on 10 of his 15 carries and Bell didn't get a carry.

Shanahan said Anderson remains the starter heading into the game against the Kansas City Chiefs at Invesco Field at Mile High on Monday night.

He also seemed to endorse Bell as the primary backup, if his left ankle heals quickly.

"He gives us a little bit of a different look," Shanahan said, referring to Bell's speed, adding, "I like having the combination of all three of those running backs."

Neither Anderson nor Dayne was sure how the carries will shake out in the immediate future.

SSOG,I don't think you've addressed this piece posted by pony boy. Don't you think this situation sounds more volatile than you've been describing it?

Nope. It's been a certainty from day one that more than one guy will be getting carries. Denver runs the ball a LOT. Even if Anderson gets 300 carries, there are still around 150-160 carries for the rest of the RBs to grab a piece of. Dayne can get a bigger piece of the pie without necessarily cutting into Anderson's numbers.I mean, heck, Shanahan flat out said that Anderson is still the starter, and is basically saying that Bell and Dayne are duking it out for the #2 spot. And that Bell, if healthy, will remain a change of pace back, which means that Dayne might be Anderson's primary backup, but Bell will see more work because he's a change of pace. None of this is news.

 

[KevT]

Mike Shanahan likes doing things just to stroke his ego and prove he can, for another.

Turning Dayne's career around would be huge for Shanny's ego.

People keep saying this, but when has Shanahan EVER done ANYTHING just because it'd be good for his ego?

You're the one that said that "Shanahan likes doing things just to stroke his ego and prove he can, for another."I was just saying that turning Dayne around would be great for his ego, I didn't say that he should do it.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Dayne will be the starter by week 8 and get the majority of the carries from then on.

 

[SSOG]

Mike Shanahan likes doing things just to stroke his ego and prove he can, for another.

Turning Dayne's career around would be huge for Shanny's ego.

People keep saying this, but when has Shanahan EVER done ANYTHING just because it'd be good for his ego?

You're the one that said that "Shanahan likes doing things just to stroke his ego and prove he can, for another."I was just saying that turning Dayne around would be great for his ego, I didn't say that he should do it.

Right. I did. The "for another" was indicating that this was another myth that people keep mindlessly regurgitating. That's the problem with taking quotes out of context.

 

[KevT]

Right. I did. The "for another" was indicating that this was another myth that people keep mindlessly regurgitating. That's the problem with taking quotes out of context.

And not reading the whole thread.

 

[P Boy]

People keep saying this, but when has Shanahan EVER done ANYTHING just because it'd be good for his ego?

How about refusing to acknowledge that he's a terrible GM and stepping down from the responsibility? In 10 years of evaluating talent, he has yet to draft & develop 1 viable QB still with the team, a WR capable of replacing R Smith, he can't draft a decent CB to save his life over that span (unless you count Deltha O'Neal, whom he send packing in a snit of anger), and every time he gets a decent pass rushing DE he refuses to re-up them & instead hires yet one more over-the-hill DE who ends up be waiver wire material in a year or two.Shanahan is ALL about his ego.

 

[Raiders Fan]

Tyronne Wheatley in 2004

had 1185 carries

4635 total yards

3.9 ypc

and 36 TD's

That would have to be some kind of a record

You didn't know Wheatley was a total stud last year.. How did you miss the 50PPG avg he had?? Were you all asleep?

 

[j3r3m3y]

People keep saying this, but when has Shanahan EVER done ANYTHING just because it'd be good for his ego?

How about refusing to acknowledge that he's a terrible GM and stepping down from the responsibility? In 10 years of evaluating talent, he has yet to draft & develop 1 viable QB still with the team, a WR capable of replacing R Smith, he can't draft a decent CB to save his life over that span (unless you count Deltha O'Neal, whom he send packing in a snit of anger), and every time he gets a decent pass rushing DE he refuses to re-up them & instead hires yet one more over-the-hill DE who ends up be waiver wire material in a year or two.Shanahan is ALL about his ego.

Your point about his ineptitude as a GM are valid, but they don't support the arguement that he is all about ego.He is a very good coach on game day 95% of the time, but he has shown to be horrible at evaluating talent. The one thing he has done, IMHO, based on his ego is refuse to step down as GM and just be the HC. And that will haunt the franchise for a long time to come.

 

[Judge Smails]

dayne is no different..

... except that he won't become the starting RB over a healthy Mike Anderson.If Anderson is healthy, Anderson is the starter. All season, unless Denver gets eliminated early and starts looking towards the future. Take it to the bank.

Dude, you freakin' kill me. Again? One of your many adamanat, close minded posts yesterday stated something to the effect that one of the only 2 Bronco insiders you would consider valid is Pony Boy. So he posts something that shows Shanahan himself is unsure of what the situation is, yet you are sure. I'm done playing tag with you on this. It's simple. You are the all knowing regarding Anderson and the Bronco RB situation, and others, including Shanahan, don't know squat. Don't bother to reply to this.

 

[Paper Lions]

dayne is no different..

... except that he won't become the starting RB over a healthy Mike Anderson.If Anderson is healthy, Anderson is the starter. All season, unless Denver gets eliminated early and starts looking towards the future. Take it to the bank.

Dude, you freakin' kill me. Again? One of your many adamanat, close minded posts yesterday stated something to the effect that one of the only 2 Bronco insiders you would consider valid is Pony Boy. So he posts something that shows Shanahan himself is unsure of what the situation is, yet you are sure. I'm done playing tag with you on this. It's simple. You are the all knowing regarding Anderson and the Bronco RB situation, and others, including Shanahan, don't know squat. Don't bother to reply to this.

You are looking at this all wrong. This is plenty entertaining. Embrace it!

 

[SSOG]

People keep saying this, but when has Shanahan EVER done ANYTHING just because it'd be good for his ego?

How about refusing to acknowledge that he's a terrible GM and stepping down from the responsibility? In 10 years of evaluating talent, he has yet to draft & develop 1 viable QB still with the team, a WR capable of replacing R Smith, he can't draft a decent CB to save his life over that span (unless you count Deltha O'Neal, whom he send packing in a snit of anger), and every time he gets a decent pass rushing DE he refuses to re-up them & instead hires yet one more over-the-hill DE who ends up be waiver wire material in a year or two.Shanahan is ALL about his ego.

Your point about his ineptitude as a GM are valid, but they don't support the arguement that he is all about ego.He is a very good coach on game day 95% of the time, but he has shown to be horrible at evaluating talent. The one thing he has done, IMHO, based on his ego is refuse to step down as GM and just be the HC. And that will haunt the franchise for a long time to come.

Another example of a myth about Shanahan.Ted Sundquist has held the GM title in Denver since 2001. Coincidentally, Denver's success rate in the draft and free agency prior to 2001 is ASTRONOMICALLY higher than Denver's success rate in the draft and free agency since 2001. Are we all so sure that Shanny's such a bad GM?

I wouldn't call him the best in the league, but he's certainly in the top 50%. I mean, Denver has only had one losing season under him- and in the NFL, that doesn't happen unless you have a talented team. He has routinely had more talent than the majority of the NFL, and that doesn't happen unless you've got a good GM. Again, is he the best in the business? HECK NO. That's Ozzie Newsome, by a landslide. But is he bottom 50%? Again, HECK NO.

As for Pony's original post... I think Ashley Lelie is capable of replacing Rod Smith. Will he be top 10 in the NFL? Maybe not, but you can't criticise a guy for his failure to draft a WR that will be one of the top 10 in the NFL. There are 22 teams every single season that don't have one of the top 10 WRs in the NFL.

Has Shanny had trouble hitting on a CB? Yup. Then again, he also acquired Champ Bailey, and this Darrent Williams kid looks pretty good. Plus he picked up Lenny Walls and Kelly Herndon as undrafted free agents. Again, some misses (Carter, O'Neal, Middlebrooks), and some hits (Bailey, Walls, Herndon, maybe Williams). Welcome to the world of the NFL.

Has Shanny not reupped with his decent DE's? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Flat out untruth. Look at Trevor Pryce. Shanny drafted him, and Shanny re-upped with him. Has there been a revolving door at the other DE spot? Sure, but it's been a successful revolving door. Berry, Hayward, now Courtney Brown, maybe next year John Engleberger. Who cares if they're locked up for a long term deal? This way is drastically cheaper, leaving more salary cap for elsewhere, and doesn't make a bit of difference as long as the second DE produces... which it does, in no small part due to the double teams that Pryce commands.

I'm *GLAD* we let Hayward go. All 4 Cleveland Browns cost about as much as Hayward did alone.

 

[SSOG]

dayne is no different..

... except that he won't become the starting RB over a healthy Mike Anderson.If Anderson is healthy, Anderson is the starter. All season, unless Denver gets eliminated early and starts looking towards the future. Take it to the bank.

Dude, you freakin' kill me. Again? One of your many adamanat, close minded posts yesterday stated something to the effect that one of the only 2 Bronco insiders you would consider valid is Pony Boy. So he posts something that shows Shanahan himself is unsure of what the situation is, yet you are sure. I'm done playing tag with you on this. It's simple. You are the all knowing regarding Anderson and the Bronco RB situation, and others, including Shanahan, don't know squat. Don't bother to reply to this.

Oh darn, I bothered replying. I hate when that happens.Read again. I said that I LISTEN to Pony Boy's posts. I don't take them as the gospel truth. I still assimilate all information and make up my own mind. I'm not being closeminded, because I actually listen to every piece of information before I make up my mind... but I have made up my mind on the matter. Every piece of information I have assimilated leads me to believe what I believe.

You guys should do me the same courtesy. Listen to my opinion, assimilate it, and then make up your own mind based on the information that you receive. If you disagree with me, that's just fine. Make up your own mind. I've already made up mine. Does that suit everyone quite nicely?

Edit: Besides, where on earth does it say that Shanahan himself is unsure of the situation? I see Shanahan saying that Anderson is still the starter... I guess that's what you mean by Shanahan being unsure. You know, the fact that he says one guy is still the starter clearly demonstrates that he doesn't know where everything stands.

 

[el-gato-grande]

I hate to be the voice of reason in all this, but the bottom line in all this is there isn't a stud runningback in Denver this season. None of these guys are franchise back material and so nobody will get star treatment or unquestioned loyalty from the coaching staff based on past performance. It's a crap shoot from a fantasy perspective and the back that plays the best over the next few games will probably be named the starter. Place a bet on your favorite player, but this is going to be decided on the field of play and nothing Pony Boy, SSOG, or anybody on this board says will matter until that plays itself out.

 

[Paper Lions]

Edit: Besides, where on earth does it say that Shanahan himself is unsure of the situation? ...

Right here:

...

"Everybody's going to get a chance to play some," Broncos coach Mike Shanahan said. "I can't tell you exactly what our plan is. We have to decide it ourselves."

...

Neither Anderson nor Dayne was sure how the carries will shake out in the immediate future.

...I'm not being closeminded...