Paying Running Backs Large Sums is Dumb

[pbmax]

Paying running backs a lot of money maybe foolish for the reasons listed, but I'm still a fan of drafting RB's in the early rounds of the draft. Running backs are one of the positions that tends to produce immediately if they'll produce at all. With most positions in football the first year or two of that dirt cheap 4 or 5 year rookie deal is spent learning on the bench.

The running game vs passing game analysis is a bit of a false dichotomy. Having the ability to run and run well opens up a lot of opportunities passing.

But given the drastically different returns, its a case of running to make passing more effective. Its a constraint play now, not the primary philosophy.

[run pMc]

But given the drastically different returns, its a case of running to make passing more effective. Its a constraint play now, not the primary philosophy.

Is that a bad thing? If all a team does is throw, or their RBs are crap, defenses will drop 8 and force the QB to make good choices and throws. We saw that with teams dropping extra men into coverage against Rodgers and he struggled. Imagine Bortles or Eli Manning in that scenario. Minnesota had a terrible running game and look at their offense. I'm not suggesting a return to 45 runs per game, but I think a running game that a defense has to respect is worth something.

I'm not a fan of 1st round RB picks but if Fournette or Dalvin Cook fell to them, I'm not sure I'd be mad if GB picked them. (FWIW, I'd rather they picked an OLB or CB in R1 and signed Lacy to a 1-2 year contract)

[pbmax]

Is that a bad thing? If all a team does is throw, or their RBs are crap, defenses will drop 8 and force the QB to make good choices and throws. We saw that with teams dropping extra men into coverage against Rodgers and he struggled. Imagine Bortles or Eli Manning in that scenario. Minnesota had a terrible running game and look at their offense. I'm not suggesting a return to 45 runs per game, but I think a running game that a defense has to respect is worth something.

Not a bad thing at all. Bobble's typical point, about the importance of being able to run well (forget balance for a minute), still holds.

You want to be able to run decently, even if the purpose of your run calls is not to dominate the LOS, nor shorten the game, nor make it a lower scoring affair. You might want to run to constrain how crazy the defense can get to stop your passing. To punish it occasionally for sticking a safety in as nickel backer, etc. Not to mention specific goal line/short yardage/end of game situations.

You just don't want to devote franchise level money to do it.

This is where the front office and coaches have to meet in the middle. You aren't going to get a League Top 10 run game when you devote a lot of resources to the pass (esp. with veteran Pro Bowl QB). So you need to devise a run game that works with talent that is young and vets that tend to be average.

[bobblehead]

Not a bad thing at all. Bobble's typical point, about the importance of being able to run well (forget balance for a minute), still holds.

You want to be able to run decently, even if the purpose of your run calls is not to dominate the LOS, nor shorten the game, nor make it a lower scoring affair. You might want to run to constrain how crazy the defense can get to stop your passing. To punish it occasionally for sticking a safety in as nickel backer, etc. Not to mention specific goal line/short yardage/end of game situations.

You just don't want to devote franchise level money to do it.

This is where the front office and coaches have to meet in the middle. You aren't going to get a League Top 10 run game when you devote a lot of resources to the pass (esp. with veteran Pro Bowl QB). So you need to devise a run game that works with talent that is young and vets that tend to be average.

And precisely what i am a fan of. Spend money on QB, one WR, and the OL. RB's need only be good enough to hit a normal hole or cutback lane. "other" wr need only be able to defeat man coverage. TE should be balanced...i.e. Block the ILBs that defend the pass well, and beat the ILB that play the run well.

[bobblehead]

But given the drastically different returns, its a case of running to make passing more effective. Its a constraint play now, not the primary philosophy.

But this has always been my point regarding running the ball. A team must run effectively or they won't be able to pass well. When a team realizes you are no threat to run the ball, they pin the ears back on first and second down. This makes the OL job impossible. Plus, running wears down a DL, passing wears down the OL.

If you have hopes of picking up 15-20 yard chunks to flip the field you have to run well. And if you are REALLY good at running you can eat up field position and wear down a D at the same time.

The flip is also true. You must be able to throw the ball at least well enough of a D will stack 8 in the box. If you can't audible to a pass and punish them you're done.