The Impact of Great Running Backs
- Thread starter SuperMan28
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
You can try to game-plan for a HB. Doesn't mean it will succeed.
And yes, the HB is reliant to a degree on the OL. But so is the QB. So the WR is reliant on the QB who is also reliant on the OL. It's a team game but there are a lot less things that need to go right for a HB to have a major impact than a WR.
That's actually not accurate. The Lions made the playoffs in 1991 (with Erik Kramer and Rodney Peete at QB), 1993 (with Peete, Kramer, and Andre Ware), 1994 (with Scott Mitchell and Dave Krieg), 1995 (with Mitchell), and 1997 (with Mitchell). That's 5 out of Sanders' 10 years. And only once did they have quality QB play.
As far as Peterson goes, the Vikings made the playoffs in 2008 (with Gus Frerotte and Tarvaris Jackson at QB), 2009 (with Brett Favre at QB), and 2012 (with Christian Ponder at QB). That's 3 out of 7 years and only once did they have quality QB play.
Nope. They likely can't drag a mediocre team to a Super Bowl. But they can help average/mediocre teams to the playoffs. And the QB position is the only other position that can boast the same impact.(QBs can do it more consistently)
Yes but how much was that guy, and how much was the team, the coaching, the strength of schedule. We'll have to disagree on this, football is too much a team sport to say one guy pulled them into the playoffs. You get an elite player, or elite unit, and you build your team around them. If it's a RB you run the ball and so on. For us the RB would impact more because that's what we want to do.
Btw, 2008 Vikings were sixth in defense with 6 pro bowlers including an elite DE.
2009 sixth again, 10 pro bowlers same elite DE
2012 is about the only year for them that an argument can be made that AP was "elite" enough to will them into the playoffs.
2011 the Lions ran the least in the league and went to the playoffs with Megatron. Only one pro bowler. Wild card just like the Vikings. One and done like the Vikings. So for them that year they used the elite player they had and built around him.
Can it be said that AP had more of an impact on the Vikings than Ray Lewis did on the Ravens? I don't think it's as cut and dry as that.
JMO. There's a wealth of statistics to support whatever argument someone wants to make on this.
It's not a surprise that one player doesn't make a playoff team. We've even seen teams led by Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Drew Brees, etc. miss the playoffs. This is a team sport. So yes, even if you have a HB to carry the offense, you need a defense that can get some stops or some serious offensive talent around you to compensate for a defense that can't get stops.
But you want to talk coaching...both the Vikings and Lions had coaches that would be fired for ineffectiveness.
As far as the 2011 Lions go, their QB threw for 5000+ yards and 40+ TDs.
Yes, I do think it can be said that Peterson had a greater impact than Ray Lewis.
I imagine having an elite WR and an offense built around him helped with that.
Like I was saying, a person can argue this multiple ways. There's always going to be a "yes, but what about this" statement that can be made. There are going to be games where Aaron Donald is more important to our victory than Todd Gurley and vice versa. I simply don't think a blanket statement that an elite RB trumps an elite player in another position can be made, especially when we're a team built to highlight that position regardless of who's playing it.
It did. But it didn't account for anywhere near 100% of it. Stafford had a very good year.
Of course there will be games when AD has a bigger impact. But as a whole, if Gurley is an elite HB, he'll have a bigger overall impact on wins and losses than Donald. That's simply the nature of playing a position where you touch the ball around 300 times in a season.
Ram Quixote
Knight Errant
I disagree. The fact is we win or lose by our defense. And nobody has a bigger impact on that then Aaron Donald. IF Austin ever reaches his potential he could have just as big an impact as either Gurley or Donald. And he doesn't rely on Foles for his every play like a normal WR. I just do not agree that an elite RB always trumps another elite player. Especially without taking the team makeup and philosophy into account.
AD might have the biggest impact but that impact isn't the same as Gurley's impact on the offense if he ends up being elite.
So AD could turn out to be the most important person on our team, yet at the same time not be the most important person on our team if Gurley becomes elite? Because he plays defense? Wouldn't they have equal impact on their respective sides in that scenario? I don't think we are going to come to agreement on this.
Well, no. He wouldn't be the most important player on the team in that scenario.
The impact wouldn't be equal. Just like AD's impact wouldn't be equal to that of an elite QB.
AD has a major impact. And he's one of the most impactful defenders in the league. But even the most impactful defenders (like Watt) take a back-seat to elite HBs and franchise QBs in terms of impacts on Wins and Losses.
I've been saying that for a long time as well, not to be contrary either. So it's actually great to hear someone else say it.
Still no agreement. NFL teams have been relentless in their pursuit of pass rushers, QBs , etc and perfectly happy with mid round RBs. When's the last Super Bowl that New England won with a elite RB? Are RBs undervalued? Sure, but let's not overestimate their overall importance to the rest of the league just because our team is set up like that. Give me a choice between Donald and Gurley I'd take Donald every time. You can't find pass rushers very often mid round, you can't find pass rushing DT hardly anywhere. We've got a 1,000 yard rusher who plays behind Gurley. We gave another 1,000 yard guy to the Jets for practically nothing. Elite players are game changers regardless of position, and there's no way to say that one position is more valuable than another without taking into account team makeup and philosophy.
You're arguing supply and replacement value. You're not arguing on the field impact.
As far as New England goes, they won with Corey Dillon in 2004.
As for being a 1000+ yard rusher...don't you actually have to rush for 1000+ yards to be a 1000 yard guy?
I don't think it's hard to isolate the QB position as being clearly more valuable than other positions when it comes elite players. You can do the same with the HB position (aside from them being less valuable than QBs).
You're arguing supply and replacement value. You're not arguing on the field impact.
As far as New England goes, they won with Corey Dillon in 2004.
As for being a 1000+ yard rusher...don't you actually have to rush for 1000+ yards to be a 1000 yard guy?
I don't think it's hard to isolate the QB position as being clearly more valuable than other positions when it comes elite players. You can do the same with the HB position (aside from them being less valuable than QBs).
QBs yes. HB no. I'm sorry I don't agree with you. It's fine if you believe that, I do not.
And Mason and Stacy both got within a few yards of it with shortened seasons and we were all super jacked up about it. Why pretend like they weren't easily 1,000 yard guys playing 16 games?
Because Stacy hasn't seen the field consistently since and Mason is as much a 1000 yard HB as Chris Givens is a 1000 yard WR.(note that I am much higher on Mason than Givens but the point remains)
Yea, you can get a guy to 1000 yards if you give him enough carries. But that doesn't mean he's making a big impact.
Ram Quixote
Knight Errant
The scab strike season was '87. They just played fewer games in '82.
That was Malavasi's last season as Ram coach. Robinson was the HC in '83.