Draft: Running Backs
-
Mike, they all have TONS of misses, just like NFL GMs. You pick your favorites but I enjoy hearing from anybody who has the time and experience to actually watch all the prospects a lot and actively think about it, let alone have access to NFL scouts and such.
The CBS site is really useful, constantly updated, and I use it a lot. If Mayock had a free site that kept that up to date, or Greg Cosell, I'm sure I'd put some time in there, too. I like the DraftBrowns guy a lot (Higdon) and of course Alo (Draft Breakdown) and Sobo, all three following the Browns more than anybody else, understanding the needs.
-
Chris Rainey to sign with the Colts. Dirt cheap too. I posted a thread, I believe after his charges were dropped. 4.3 speed.. C'mon Man!
-
Chris Rainey to sign with the Colts. Dirt cheap too. I posted a thread, I believe after his charges were dropped. 4.3 speed.. C'mon Man!
Chris Rainey to sign with the Colts. Dirt cheap too. I posted a thread, I believe after his charges were dropped. 4.3 speed.. C'mon Man!
Chris Rainey? Not Bobby Rainey. I thought Chris Rainey was with the Steelers. Did they let him go? I did want this guy when he came out. If the Steelers couldn't use him then I guess he wasn't all that and a bag of chips. (but, apparently the Colts want him to do what they thought TR was there to do?)
-
The Steelers cut him INSTANTLY after his girlfriend and a witness said he hit her while arguing over a phone.
He had some violence in his history. But she ended up writing a letter claiming he didn't hit her, and the charges were dropped..
-
Early prediction: Dion Lewis is gonna be good. Very good.
the days of the 1 back backfield are done though. Peterson is the last prime. Dion cannot take the whole load so we need to get a power back who is guaranteed at least 3 yds every time he touches the ball. We have that and we have a running game that gives us play action options on 3rd and short.
the days of the 1 back backfield are done though. Peterson is the last prime. Dion cannot take the whole load so we need to get a power back who is guaranteed at least 3 yds every time he touches the ball. We have that and we have a running game that gives us play action options on 3rd and short.
I think the guy in Seattle might agrue that AP is the last primetime back in the league, and maybe the guy in Philly too
-
the days of the 1 back backfield are done though. Peterson is the last prime. Dion cannot take the whole load so we need to get a power back who is guaranteed at least 3 yds every time he touches the ball. We have that and we have a running game that gives us play action options on 3rd and short.
I think the guy in Seattle might agrue that AP is the last primetime back in the league, and maybe the guy in Philly too
I think the guy in Seattle might agrue that AP is the last primetime back in the league, and maybe the guy in Philly too
And they are both on pass happy teams.
Gone are the days of 35-40 runs a game for one back.
-
Agree with Couch. It's really tough to win in today's league with a run-based offense giving ANY back enough carries to gain 1,600 or 1,800 yards. For instance, the Niners can obviously run the ball but now that they don't have two QBs combining for a 104 passer rating, they're not so ominous anymore. AP's Vikings were only relevant the year Favre was throwing for 4,000 yards. Seattle runs a lot but they also have a terrific QB consistently in the 100 passer rating area (and the league's best defense).
If you run the ball a lot, it means you ain't passing a lot, which almost certainly means you don't have a great QB. Or you'd be passing more. Because that's what wins in today's league. As Aikman said, it's tough to keep up with the passing teams by grinding it out... because long drives are chock filled with peril. The more plays, the higher the likelihood of a false start, hold, fumble, whatever.
Adrian Peterson is the best running back of our generation, one of the best of all time. Truly an elite talent, a marvel... and what has it mean to the Vikings, really? What did Steven Jackson's billion yards mean to the Rams? Well, mostly it meant neither team had a great QB during their careers with the exception of Favre, the year the Vikings had to choke away their Super Bowl appearance so we could have a feelgood story in New Orleans (!).
Honestly, wouldn't you love to be the back taking handoffs from Peyton Manning? Like, the defense is really focused on you?
-
Agree with Couch. It's really tough to win in today's league with a run-based offense giving ANY back enough carries to gain 1,600 or 1,800 yards. For instance, the Niners can obviously run the ball but now that they don't have two QBs combining for a 104 passer rating, they're not so ominous anymore. AP's Vikings were only relevant the year Favre was throwing for 4,000 yards. Seattle runs a lot but they also have a terrific QB consistently in the 100 passer rating area (and the league's best defense).
If you run the ball a lot, it means you ain't passing a lot, which almost certainly means you don't have a great QB. Or you'd be passing more. Because that's what wins in today's league. As Aikman said, it's tough to keep up with the passing teams by grinding it out... because long drives are chock filled with peril. The more plays, the higher the likelihood of a false start, hold, fumble, whatever.
Adrian Peterson is the best running back of our generation, one of the best of all time. Truly an elite talent, a marvel... and what has it mean to the Vikings, really? What did Steven Jackson's billion yards mean to the Rams? Well, mostly it meant neither team had a great QB during their careers with the exception of Favre, the year the Vikings had to choke away their Super Bowl appearance so we could have a feelgood story in New Orleans (!).
Honestly, wouldn't you love to be the back taking handoffs from Peyton Manning? Like, the defense is really focused on you?
Agree with Couch. It's really tough to win in today's league with a run-based offense giving ANY back enough carries to gain 1,600 or 1,800 yards. For instance, the Niners can obviously run the ball but now that they don't have two QBs combining for a 104 passer rating, they're not so ominous anymore. AP's Vikings were only relevant the year Favre was throwing for 4,000 yards. Seattle runs a lot but they also have a terrific QB consistently in the 100 passer rating area (and the league's best defense).
If you run the ball a lot, it means you ain't passing a lot, which almost certainly means you don't have a great QB. Or you'd be passing more. Because that's what wins in today's league. As Aikman said, it's tough to keep up with the passing teams by grinding it out... because long drives are chock filled with peril. The more plays, the higher the likelihood of a false start, hold, fumble, whatever.
Adrian Peterson is the best running back of our generation, one of the best of all time. Truly an elite talent, a marvel... and what has it mean to the Vikings, really? What did Steven Jackson's billion yards mean to the Rams? Well, mostly it meant neither team had a great QB during their careers with the exception of Favre, the year the Vikings had to choke away their Super Bowl appearance so we could have a feelgood story in New Orleans (!).
Honestly, wouldn't you love to be the back taking handoffs from Peyton Manning? Like, the defense is really focused on you?
It's more simple than that- the rules are bent to favor passing attacks and big scores. You can't grind it out against the Broncos when Manning is putting up 35 points on your defense. However you do have to have enough semblance of a running game to make the other team respect play action, or else your quarterback is going to get killed.
-
Agree with Couch. It's really tough to win in today's league with a run-based offense giving ANY back enough carries to gain 1,600 or 1,800 yards. For instance, the Niners can obviously run the ball but now that they don't have two QBs combining for a 104 passer rating, they're not so ominous anymore. AP's Vikings were only relevant the year Favre was throwing for 4,000 yards. Seattle runs a lot but they also have a terrific QB consistently in the 100 passer rating area (and the league's best defense).
If you run the ball a lot, it means you ain't passing a lot, which almost certainly means you don't have a great QB. Or you'd be passing more. Because that's what wins in today's league. As Aikman said, it's tough to keep up with the passing teams by grinding it out... because long drives are chock filled with peril. The more plays, the higher the likelihood of a false start, hold, fumble, whatever.
Adrian Peterson is the best running back of our generation, one of the best of all time. Truly an elite talent, a marvel... and what has it mean to the Vikings, really? What did Steven Jackson's billion yards mean to the Rams? Well, mostly it meant neither team had a great QB during their careers with the exception of Favre, the year the Vikings had to choke away their Super Bowl appearance so we could have a feelgood story in New Orleans (!).
Honestly, wouldn't you love to be the back taking handoffs from Peyton Manning? Like, the defense is really focused on you?
It's more simple than that- the rules are bent to favor passing attacks and big scores. You can't grind it out against the Broncos when Manning is putting up 35 points on your defense. However you do have to have enough semblance of a running game to make the other team respect play action, or else your quarterback is going to get killed.
And that.
It's more simple than that- the rules are bent to favor passing attacks and big scores. You can't grind it out against the Broncos when Manning is putting up 35 points on your defense. However you do have to have enough semblance of a running game to make the other team respect play action, or else your quarterback is going to get killed.
-
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
I agree that OG should be a priority, but that should be something we address in FA. Interior offensive line is historically hard to come in immediately out of college and be good. My guess is if we drafted Yankey it would be 2-3 seasons before he's any better than what we have now. Should be some really good options this year in FA and we can draft a guy later to groom. I think G and CB will be addressed before the draft.
I guess if we could get an Eric Steinbach type, a FA pickup that played well for us for several years, that would be fine. But here is the list of OF FAs that will be available at the end of the season. Do you see an Eric Steinbach in this group? (or a David Yankey?):
Name/Current Team:
Kevin Boothe, Giants
Willie Colon, Jets
Richie Incognito, ????????
Richard Ohrnberger, Chargers
Alex Parsons, Raiders
Chad Rinehart, Chargers
Matt Slauson, Bears
Wade Smith, Texans
Chris Spencer, Titans
Brian Waters, Cowboys
Danny Watkins, Dolphins
Chris Williams, Rams
Except for Incognito.....who should have stayed In Cognito, there are no names you really recognize.....of course, that is the fate of being an OG. The least recognized position on the field.
Nevertheless....do you all know if any of these guys are worth picking up, over taking a highly rated OG in the draft?
I guess if we could get an Eric Steinbach type, a FA pickup that played well for us for several years, that would be fine. But here is the list of OF FAs that will be available at the end of the season. Do you see an Eric Steinbach in this group? (or a David Yankey?):
Kevin Boothe, Giants (31) - Willie Colon, Jets ( 31) - Matt Slauson, Bears (27) - Wade Smith, Texans (32) - Chris Spencer, Titans (31) - Brian Waters, Cowboys (36)
Except for Incognito.....who should have stayed In Cognito, there are no names you really recognize...
I edited out all the ones I did not recognize and... plus Uncogtouchable. Added ages to those left. Boothe and Colon stand out to me.
I was pissed when the 'Boys talked Waters out of retirement for only $1.5mm while we were struggling with Cousins. But he prolly doesn't come to us for twice the price.
Not sure I agree here. I don't think the Browns lack for individual talent on the OL and have committed a TON of resources to it over the past few years.
Watch the line play... It's not simply a matter of opposing D's stacking the box against to stop our run. Does not seem to matter whether we zone or drive block, it is rare that at least one of our O-line is not defeated. Remained surprisingly true even after Cousins was mercifully returned to the bench.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login