Teams shouldn't even consider a RB (1 Viewer)

[Zigg]

There is no reason to draft a RB early in the draft. They are extremely inter-changeable, have short careers, can easily be found in later rounds/cheap vets and in today's passing league, simply aren't valuable enough to consider. AP is thought by some to be the best back in a while, and the only team success they had was when Favre had a monster season.

If I were the GM of a team like Cleveland, Trent wouldn't be on my board.

 

[rizzler]

There is no reason to draft a RB early in the draft. They are extremely inter-changeable, have short careers, can easily be found in later rounds/cheap vets and in today's passing league, simply aren't valuable enough to consider. AP is thought by some to be the best back in a while, and the only team success they had was when Favre had a monster season.If I were the GM of a team like Cleveland, Trent wouldn't be on my board.

Question: Would the Vikes be BETTER if they hadnt drafted AP?Answer: Are you defecating me?

 

[todisco1]

I disagree. Who cares if they have short careers? Are you really going to worry about 7 years from now during the draft? You take an amazing difference maker at the position and you ride him for a few years. One thing I definitely agree on is that you don't need an elite RB to win with, but I don't think someone like MJD or Adrian Peterson is interchangeable with Ryan Grant or Shonn Greene.

...and, stud RBs help sell tix, jerseys etc.

 

[Multiple Scores]

Blah Blah Blah

 

[Sweet Love]

Well, I guess you could just draft a QB and get the next Favre...that would solve things. While I agree RBs are interchangeable to a degree, there are elite prospects and Richardson is one. There are many factors that go into evaluating a successful franchise, and "wins" are just a part of it...Exhibit A: Since 2005, here are the regular season wins for two franchises...one is an "establishment" in the league and the other is on borrowed time in their own city.

Oakland wins - 36

Jacksonville wins - 56

If I am a GM, I pick the impact player and hope he sells jerseys and puts fannies in the seats...in fact, at #3 or #4, I expect he will do those things.

 

[B-Deep]

I think he gave the reasons to draft one

You are getting them young and cheap, you'll get the most out of them at the lowest possible price

 

[scrumptrulescent]

Blah Blah Blah

I knew when I read the OP that you'd be in here b/c your T-Rich feelings were hurt.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

You could make the argument that you don't really need any position if you make up for it elsewhere. Of course, having an elite QB helps, but outside of that there are good teams with holes at all the positions.

A lot of this is a perception thing. Left tackle is typically perceived as being one of the most important positions. Everyone wants that book-end franchise left tackle. Yet, all of the teams that have elite left tackles are bad. None of those left tackles turned those teams around. Here are ESPN's power rankings for top left tackles in the league and their team's record last year..

1. Joe Thomas - Browns (4-12)

2. Jake Long - Dolphins (6-10)

3. Ryan Clady - Broncos (8-8)

4. Jordan Gross - Panthers (6-10)

5. D'Brickashaw Ferguson - Jets (8-8)

It doesn't get any better after that. Up next we've got Michael Roos (Titans, 9-7), Jason Peters (Eagles, 8-8), Marcus Mcneill (Chargers, 8-8), and Donald Penn (Bucs, 4-12).

Outside of a quarterback, you'd be hard pressed to find a player at any position that's going to turn a team around on his own.

I think running backs are actually undervalued among the fan/analyst community right now. NFL GMs are still willing to spend high picks on them and still willing to give them big contracts. It's only the fans that think they're suddenly just plug and play nobodies.

Just because there have been quite a few good teams without good running backs and bad teams with good running backs lately doesn't mean the position is meaningless. Many of those good teams have been lacking at left tackle as well, and many of the bad teams have been very strong there. That doesn't make left tackle worthless either, right?

 

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

I agree except for Peterson and now Richardson. These guys are special. I didn't like McFadden etc.. early.

 

[Multiple Scores]

Blah Blah Blah

I knew when I read the OP that you'd be in here b/c your T-Rich feelings were hurt.

lol. No hurt feelings, this board is severely pro Richardson. It's comedic when some say Decastro, Barron, Keichley, Richardson should be drafted low but guys like Tannehill, Poe, Hill should go high. I like good players and am not a fan of drafting high profile positions and inflating guys like Tannehill based on position. The good teams like the Patriots, Packers, Ravens and Steelers get what I'm saying.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

In general, I agree.

If there are other quality players available at the pick I would never take the RB.

The Adrian Peterson example isn't a great one because that draft sucked and he was clearly the BPA at that point. In hindsight, Patrick Willis and Darrelle Revis would also have been worth it - but that wasn't obvious at the time.

 

[Zigg]

You could make the argument that you don't really need any position if you make up for it elsewhere. Of course, having an elite QB helps, but outside of that there are good teams with holes at all the positions.

A lot of this is a perception thing. Left tackle is typically perceived as being one of the most important positions. Everyone wants that book-end franchise left tackle. Yet, all of the teams that have elite left tackles are bad. None of those left tackles turned those teams around. Here are ESPN's power rankings for top left tackles in the league and their team's record last year..

1. Joe Thomas - Browns (4-12)

2. Jake Long - Dolphins (6-10)

3. Ryan Clady - Broncos (8-8)

4. Jordan Gross - Panthers (6-10)

5. D'Brickashaw Ferguson - Jets (8-8)

It doesn't get any better after that. Up next we've got Michael Roos (Titans, 9-7), Jason Peters (Eagles, 8-8), Marcus Mcneill (Chargers, 8-8), and Donald Penn (Bucs, 4-12).

Outside of a quarterback, you'd be hard pressed to find a player at any position that's going to turn a team around on his own.

I think running backs are actually undervalued among the fan/analyst community right now. NFL GMs are still willing to spend high picks on them and still willing to give them big contracts. It's only the fans that think they're suddenly just plug and play nobodies.

Just because there have been quite a few good teams without good running backs and bad teams with good running backs lately doesn't mean the position is meaningless. Many of those good teams have been lacking at left tackle as well, and many of the bad teams have been very strong there. That doesn't make left tackle worthless either, right?

But those left tackles will be around longer to allow you to build, or suck/luck your way into getting a QB. If you are drafting in the top 10, you aren't one player away from success in most cases. But a LT, LB, S, etc., is a much sounder building block then a RB.

 

[Despyzer]

I think Richardson also gets upgraded because of his versatility. He's not necessarily one of those guys who is going to just contribute to a multi-headed backfield. By all reports, he is an excellent blocker and receiver as well as an explosive runner. There aren't too many RBs in the league anymore who are asked to play all three downs in almost any scenario, but Richardson would be one of them.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Alternatively, if you look at the teams that are succeeding without a stud RB it's because they have a stud QB.

So, there are reasons to draft a stud RB...primarily to mask the deficiencies you have at QB.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

You could make the argument that you don't really need any position if you make up for it elsewhere. Of course, having an elite QB helps, but outside of that there are good teams with holes at all the positions.

A lot of this is a perception thing. Left tackle is typically perceived as being one of the most important positions. Everyone wants that book-end franchise left tackle. Yet, all of the teams that have elite left tackles are bad. None of those left tackles turned those teams around. Here are ESPN's power rankings for top left tackles in the league and their team's record last year..

1. Joe Thomas - Browns (4-12)

2. Jake Long - Dolphins (6-10)

3. Ryan Clady - Broncos (8-8)

4. Jordan Gross - Panthers (6-10)

5. D'Brickashaw Ferguson - Jets (8-8)

It doesn't get any better after that. Up next we've got Michael Roos (Titans, 9-7), Jason Peters (Eagles, 8-8), Marcus Mcneill (Chargers, 8-8), and Donald Penn (Bucs, 4-12).

Outside of a quarterback, you'd be hard pressed to find a player at any position that's going to turn a team around on his own.

I think running backs are actually undervalued among the fan/analyst community right now. NFL GMs are still willing to spend high picks on them and still willing to give them big contracts. It's only the fans that think they're suddenly just plug and play nobodies.

Just because there have been quite a few good teams without good running backs and bad teams with good running backs lately doesn't mean the position is meaningless. Many of those good teams have been lacking at left tackle as well, and many of the bad teams have been very strong there. That doesn't make left tackle worthless either, right?

But those left tackles will be around longer to allow you to build, or suck/luck your way into getting a QB. If you are drafting in the top 10, you aren't one player away from success in most cases. But a LT, LB, S, etc., is a much sounder building block then a RB.

As was mentioned before, do you really think teams are looking beyond 7 years when making a draft pick? The chances that the coach (who likely has a large say in the pick) will even still be there in 7 years are extremely small, so why would he care how good the guy is going to be 10 years from now?

 

[Andy Dufresne]

As was mentioned before, do you really think teams are looking beyond 7 years when making a draft pick? The chances that the coach (who likely has a large say in the pick) will even still be there in 7 years are extremely small, so why would he care how good the guy is going to be 10 years from now?

Because GM's aren't coaches (usually).

 

[bucksoh]

Why do people keep calling Richardson special? He is a 5'9" rb(which is nothing special), his inflated 40 time is closer to 4.6(ditto),

he played behind an elite line. There is nothing special about him, not saying he is going to flop. But people need to stop comparing him to Peterson

and other special backs. T.R. is going to need a good to elite line just to put up 1000-1200 yards.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Alternatively, if you look at the teams that are succeeding without a stud RB it's because they have a stud QB.So, there are reasons to draft a stud RB...primarily to mask the deficiencies you have at QB.

Bingo.

 

[msommer]

agred.

Unless it's your only need.

But then you'd never be in a position to draft one

 

[sho nuff]

I disagree. Who cares if they have short careers? Are you really going to worry about 7 years from now during the draft? You take an amazing difference maker at the position and you ride him for a few years. One thing I definitely agree on is that you don't need an elite RB to win with, but I don't think someone like MJD or Adrian Peterson is interchangeable with Ryan Grant or Shonn Greene. ...and, stud RBs help sell tix, jerseys etc.

Of course MJD and Peterson are not interchangeable with Ryan Grant.Grant has a Super Bowl ring.

 

[Crippler]

MJD is not a top RB when drafted. He is the argument of why a team waits on a RB till round 2 and grabs one of them there instead of taking Richardson.

I personally feel Kahil and Claiborne should go ahead for sure and Cleveland should love to get Claiborne and than spend the 22 and 37 on O. The real question is though do they want Weeden because this should help with direction because if you get Claiborne than your looking at WR and RB with next 2 picks. If you get Richardson than your looking at WR and Weeden with next 2 picks. Which one is better for the Browns is the big question. I think Claiborne way is the way to go

 

[Despyzer]

MJD is not a top RB when drafted. He is the argument of why a team waits on a RB till round 2 and grabs one of them there instead of taking Richardson.

And of course Tom Brady is the argument why a team should wait until round 6 to take a QB instead of drafting Luck.

 

[Crippler]

Other than the numbers on QB. 1st round success is huge compared to outside round 1. So that is a blimp in the end. Rice, Forte, etc in round 2 prove that RB's can be gotten much easier than a QB can outside of round 1

 

[Despyzer]

So that is a blimp in the end.

?So draft nothing but QBs in the 1st round... got it. Thanks!

 

[Multiple Scores]

Why do people keep calling Richardson special? He is a 5'9" rb(which is nothing special), his inflated 40 time is closer to 4.6(ditto),he played behind an elite line. There is nothing special about him, not saying he is going to flop. But people need to stop comparing him to Petersonand other special backs. T.R. is going to need a good to elite line just to put up 1000-1200 yards.

Which guys on Bamas line are elite? How many are 1st round picks? Honestly can you even name one guy?

 

[Invictus~Bronte]

There is no reason to draft a RB early in the draft. They are extremely inter-changeable, have short careers, can easily be found in later rounds/cheap vets and in today's passing league, simply aren't valuable enough to consider. AP is thought by some to be the best back in a while, and the only team success they had was when Favre had a monster season.If I were the GM of a team like Cleveland, Trent wouldn't be on my board.

I happen to very much agree with this. Not only by NFL terms, which if fans choose to seek the track record, the folly of this is well documented it's a recipe for failure, but also how I build my Dynasty teams. I'd trade the pick 1.1 ( TR ) if I owned it. Unfortunately or maybe to your benefit, you will lose this argument usually vehemently in the court of public opinion.I'm actually surprised and impressed with how many in this thread are open to this thinking at minimum if not in agreement. More so then other places I've seen this discussion take place for sure

 

[hotboyz]

I agree whole heartily Rbs are a product of o-line and system while I like arian foster u take him out of Houston put him somewhere else he's not the same player I like Trent Richardson wouldn't draft him high u Guys may think I'm crazy but I think u can draft Lamichsel James in 3rd rd and put him in a zone run scheme and I think he can have just as big of a impact as t rich

 

[chinawildman]

Why limit it to RB? What about corners or OTs? Are they necessary for superbowl wins or even playoff success? Just because QB is the most important position, it doesn't mean the other positions aren't relevant. Or are you suggesting the the top 10 picks off the board should all be quarterbacks?

 

[Chase Stuart]

You could make the argument that you don't really need any position if you make up for it elsewhere. Of course, having an elite QB helps, but outside of that there are good teams with holes at all the positions.

A lot of this is a perception thing. Left tackle is typically perceived as being one of the most important positions. Everyone wants that book-end franchise left tackle. Yet, all of the teams that have elite left tackles are bad. None of those left tackles turned those teams around. Here are ESPN's power rankings for top left tackles in the league and their team's record last year..

1. Joe Thomas - Browns (4-12)

2. Jake Long - Dolphins (6-10)

3. Ryan Clady - Broncos (8-8)

4. Jordan Gross - Panthers (6-10)

5. D'Brickashaw Ferguson - Jets (8-8)

It doesn't get any better after that. Up next we've got Michael Roos (Titans, 9-7), Jason Peters (Eagles, 8-8), Marcus Mcneill (Chargers, 8-8), and Donald Penn (Bucs, 4-12).

Outside of a quarterback, you'd be hard pressed to find a player at any position that's going to turn a team around on his own.

I think running backs are actually undervalued among the fan/analyst community right now. NFL GMs are still willing to spend high picks on them and still willing to give them big contracts. It's only the fans that think they're suddenly just plug and play nobodies.

Just because there have been quite a few good teams without good running backs and bad teams with good running backs lately doesn't mean the position is meaningless. Many of those good teams have been lacking at left tackle as well, and many of the bad teams have been very strong there. That doesn't make left tackle worthless either, right?

But those left tackles will be around longer to allow you to build, or suck/luck your way into getting a QB. If you are drafting in the top 10, you aren't one player away from success in most cases. But a LT, LB, S, etc., is a much sounder building block then a RB.

Safety and linebacker have very short shelf lives, arguably shorter than RBs.

 

[Truman]

Rookie contracts are 5 years. If the guy is really good you Forte him for a couple seasons then let someone go overpay him. You can't get the kind of instant impact a RB brings at other positions.

 

[johnadams]

Quality can be found in round 2, but not at the rate in round 1. And after round 2, it's a diamond in the proverbial rough. I looked at all RBs drafted from 1999 to 2009 (thought being that it's too early to call 2010 and 2011 drafts). By my debatable calculations, bust rate in round one is about 20% for that time period. Round 2 is at 50%, round 3 at 75%, and round 4+ is at 80%+ each round. Nine elite RBs are 8 from round 1 (26% of RBs taken in round one), four in round 2, two in round three, and none afterwards.

Looked at another way, 57% of elite RBs from that period were drafted in the first round.

For the record, I called the following RBs as elite (with round selected):

McCoy(2), Rice (2), Forte (2), Chris Johnson (1), Peterson(1), MJD (2), Gore (3), SJax (1), LJ (1), Westy (3), LT (1), Edge (1), Ricky Williams (1), Shaun Alexander (1).

 

[GregR]

Quality can be found in round 2, but not at the rate in round 1. And after round 2, it's a diamond in the proverbial rough. I looked at all RBs drafted from 1999 to 2009 (thought being that it's too early to call 2010 and 2011 drafts). By my debatable calculations, bust rate in round one is about 20% for that time period. Round 2 is at 50%, round 3 at 75%, and round 4+ is at 80%+ each round. Nine elite RBs are 8 from round 1 (26% of RBs taken in round one), four in round 2, two in round three, and none afterwards.Looked at another way, 57% of elite RBs from that period were drafted in the first round.For the record, I called the following RBs as elite (with round selected): McCoy(2), Rice (2), Forte (2), Chris Johnson (1), Peterson(1), MJD (2), Gore (3), SJax (1), LJ (1), Westy (3), LT (1), Edge (1), Ricky Williams (1), Shaun Alexander (1).

Just so the "no elite RBs after round 3" statement isn't misleading I'd add that there are elite RBs after round 3, but they went undrafted.

 

[Village Idiot]

Why do people keep calling Richardson special? He is a 5'9" rb(which is nothing special), his inflated 40 time is closer to 4.6(ditto),he played behind an elite line. There is nothing special about him, not saying he is going to flop. But people need to stop comparing him to Petersonand other special backs. T.R. is going to need a good to elite line just to put up 1000-1200 yards.

What elite line?Name the Alabama offensive line without looking up there names.How many of them were All Americans let alone all SEC? The answers are 0 and 1. Barrett Jones.How is that an elite line?

 

[Hoosier16]

Why do people keep calling Richardson special? He is a 5'9" rb(which is nothing special), his inflated 40 time is closer to 4.6(ditto),he played behind an elite line. There is nothing special about him, not saying he is going to flop. But people need to stop comparing him to Petersonand other special backs. T.R. is going to need a good to elite line just to put up 1000-1200 yards.

Which guys on Bamas line are elite? How many are 1st round picks? Honestly can you even name one guy?

Barrett Jones was the Outland Trophy winner and has played guard, left tackle, and will play center next year. He's pretty good. Fluker played right tackle and is listed as the #3 tackle for 2014 by NFLDraftScout. Warmack is the #3 ranked guard in the 2013 class.They have the #1 ranked tackle (a non-starter) from the 2015 class (Kouandjio). So 3 of the 5 starters are ranked in the top 3 of their class and 1 reserve ranked #1 in his class. I think that qualifies as elite.

 

[Hoosier16]

Why do people keep calling Richardson special? He is a 5'9" rb(which is nothing special), his inflated 40 time is closer to 4.6(ditto),he played behind an elite line. There is nothing special about him, not saying he is going to flop. But people need to stop comparing him to Petersonand other special backs. T.R. is going to need a good to elite line just to put up 1000-1200 yards.

What elite line?Name the Alabama offensive line without looking up there names.How many of them were All Americans let alone all SEC? The answers are 0 and 1. Barrett Jones.How is that an elite line?

You should have looked up their names.

 

[Tanner9919]

Why do people keep calling Richardson special? He is a 5'9" rb(which is nothing special), his inflated 40 time is closer to 4.6(ditto),he played behind an elite line. There is nothing special about him, not saying he is going to flop. But people need to stop comparing him to Petersonand other special backs. T.R. is going to need a good to elite line just to put up 1000-1200 yards.

Even if he is the next great RB he's going to need all the help he can get just to put up 1200 yards, now that we know he will be playing in the Afc North, six games against Ravens, Steeelers, Bengals stingy run defenses. Tough landing spot for him.

 

[Zigg]

You could make the argument that you don't really need any position if you make up for it elsewhere. Of course, having an elite QB helps, but outside of that there are good teams with holes at all the positions.

A lot of this is a perception thing. Left tackle is typically perceived as being one of the most important positions. Everyone wants that book-end franchise left tackle. Yet, all of the teams that have elite left tackles are bad. None of those left tackles turned those teams around. Here are ESPN's power rankings for top left tackles in the league and their team's record last year..

1. Joe Thomas - Browns (4-12)

2. Jake Long - Dolphins (6-10)

3. Ryan Clady - Broncos (8-8)

4. Jordan Gross - Panthers (6-10)

5. D'Brickashaw Ferguson - Jets (8-8)

It doesn't get any better after that. Up next we've got Michael Roos (Titans, 9-7), Jason Peters (Eagles, 8-8), Marcus Mcneill (Chargers, 8-8), and Donald Penn (Bucs, 4-12).

Outside of a quarterback, you'd be hard pressed to find a player at any position that's going to turn a team around on his own.

I think running backs are actually undervalued among the fan/analyst community right now. NFL GMs are still willing to spend high picks on them and still willing to give them big contracts. It's only the fans that think they're suddenly just plug and play nobodies.

Just because there have been quite a few good teams without good running backs and bad teams with good running backs lately doesn't mean the position is meaningless. Many of those good teams have been lacking at left tackle as well, and many of the bad teams have been very strong there. That doesn't make left tackle worthless either, right?

But those left tackles will be around longer to allow you to build, or suck/luck your way into getting a QB. If you are drafting in the top 10, you aren't one player away from success in most cases. But a LT, LB, S, etc., is a much sounder building block then a RB.

Safety and linebacker have very short shelf lives, arguably shorter than RBs.

Are you talking in general, or elite players.