Paying Stud RBs....the new NFL "norm"?

[patfanken]

Here's the problem with RBs, especially in today's market.

1. The beating they take. If you are lucky enough to have an elite RB and are paying him elite money, he will need to touch the ball by run or pass around 250-300 times a season. That exposes him to the kind of punishment that limits the years you can reasonably expect so see a high level of production from the RB (usually 4-5 years). There ARE exceptions of course but by and large, even great RB's have short expiration dates

So you have a situation that after coming into the league and producing elite numbers for 3 or 4 years on their rookie contracts, when it comes time to get paid, these RB's are likely to be closer to the end of their best production period than the beginning of it. that's what makes it hard for teams to invest big money into players who will take such a beating.

I have long felt that the major reason Ricky Williams quit the Dolphins was simply to get away from Nick Saban who was literally beating him to death.with 2 seasons of over 330 carries.

2. As the reliance on the passing game has grown, so has the specialization of RBs. Now every team has a "3rd down specialist". So literally your main RB has lost about a 3rd of his snaps to the specialist. Then when you realize that most teams have at least 2 guys spitting the rest of the snaps, how much money can you spend on a RB who might be be taking only a third of the offensive snaps (like BJGE did last season) Its not real smart to pay a guy big money who will spend a majority of the time on the sidelines.

There was a time when most of the teams' #1 RB's would be getting 300+ carries. This past season there were only 2. In fact there were only 12 RBs who had 250+ carries. So not only are teams running the ball less, they are splitting those diminishing carries to a "committee" of RBs.

3. So if you are lucky enough to have a RB with a great combination of vision, speed toughness, strength and quickness you are caught in a corundum. If you pay him big money, then you have to justify that investment by making sure he gets the vast majority of the RB touches. But the down side is that when you do that, you are using him up faster. This is why team's are loath to invest big money on RBs who are going into years 5-10 in the league. They are never going to get value in the last years of that 2nd contract.

4. The Pats have proven over and over that you can be successful with just competent RBs who get what's there, can get that tough short yardage on third and short, and GL situations, and don't turn over the ball. And its not just the Pats, the Packers and Colts come quickly to mind in that they had elite offenses without having elite RBs

5. All that being said, if either Ridley or Vareen turn out to be top end RBs over the next 3 years. I think that guy will be in a great position to get big money from the Pats. I know it sounds contradictory from my other points, but its all about timing. Lets say Ridley is the guy who makes the great leap forward, and becomes an elite RB in the mode of Foster, Forte, AP or Rice. After the 2014 season the Pats will be forced to pay him since either Brady will be hanging them up or will be entering his dotage. Either way the running game will become more important to the offense in these transition year, thus justifying spending more money on the position.

 

[mayoclinic]

Here's the problem with RBs, especially in today's market.

1. The beating they take. If you are lucky enough to have an elite RB and are paying him elite money, he will need to touch the ball by run or pass around 250-300 times a season. That exposes him to the kind of punishment that limits the years you can reasonably expect so see a high level of production from the RB (usually 4-5 years). There ARE exceptions of course but by and large, even great RB's have short expiration dates

So you have a situation that after coming into the league and producing elite numbers for 3 or 4 years on their rookie contracts, when it comes time to get paid, these RB's are likely to be closer to the end of their best production period than the beginning of it. that's what makes it hard for teams to invest big money into players who will take such a beating.

I have long felt that the major reason Ricky Williams quit the Dolphins was simply to get away from Nick Saban who was literally beating him to death.with 2 seasons of over 330 carries.

2. As the reliance on the passing game has grown, so has the specialization of RBs. Now every team has a "3rd down specialist". So literally your main RB has lost about a 3rd of his snaps to the specialist. Then when you realize that most teams have at least 2 guys spitting the rest of the snaps, how much money can you spend on a RB who might be be taking only a third of the offensive snaps (like BJGE did last season) Its not real smart to pay a guy big money who will spend a majority of the time on the sidelines.

There was a time when most of the teams' #1 RB's would be getting 300+ carries. This past season there were only 2. In fact there were only 12 RBs who had 250+ carries. So not only are teams running the ball less, they are splitting those diminishing carries to a "committee" of RBs.

3. So if you are lucky enough to have a RB with a great combination of vision, speed toughness, strength and quickness you are caught in a corundum. If you pay him big money, then you have to justify that investment by making sure he gets the vast majority of the RB touches. But the down side is that when you do that, you are using him up faster. This is why team's are loath to invest big money on RBs who are going into years 5-10 in the league. They are never going to get value in the last years of that 2nd contract.

4. The Pats have proven over and over that you can be successful with just competent RBs who get what's there, can get that tough short yardage on third and short, and GL situations, and don't turn over the ball. And its not just the Pats, the Packers and Colts come quickly to mind in that they had elite offenses without having elite RBs

Nicely said.

I think that the top RBs are easily as valuable as the top WRs. Matt Forte carried the Bears' offense last year, and Ray Rice is by far the dominant weapon that you have to scheme against on the Ravens. I'd rather have Shady McCoy than DeSean Jackson as a skill player to build my team around any day. But, as you note, RBs take a pounding, their longevity is questionable, their skills tend to deteriorate rapidly once they go downhill, and you can often get solid production from a lesser back or with a RBBC approach. And it's a pass-oriented league. So they are the odd men out in some sense, and those that get paid are the fortunate ones. The market for 2nd and 3rd tier RBs is nowhere near what it is for WRs, so an elite RB is lucky to get a deal similar to what Pierre Garcon got from the Redskins.

5. All that being said, if either Ridley or Vareen turn out to be top end RBs over the next 3 years. I think that guy will be in a great position to get big money from the Pats. I know it sounds contradictory from my other points, but its all about timing. Lets say Ridley is the guy who makes the great leap forward, and becomes an elite RB in the mode of Foster, Forte, AP or Rice. After the 2014 season the Pats will be forced to pay him since either Brady will be hanging them up or will be entering his dotage. Either way the running game will become more important to the offense in these transition year, thus justifying spending more money on the position.

If we're lucky, in 2 years we'll be debating about whether the Pats can afford to keep both Ridley and Vereen, and which one should be the higher priority.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I believe RB is a fairly interchangeable position, as I've pointed out a number of times we won 2 super bowls with Antowain Smith. That said, if I had a shot at having a weapon like Foster, Forte, or Rice for $8M per season I'd have to strongly consider that (especially on a short term deal). I think that's a fair number for the impact they could have have on this offense, especially after seeing the difference in our offense from 2003 to 2004.

Well, it definitely is in New England, and the league has gone the way of the stud QB for so long that the guys with the stud RBs are locking up their special talents. Maybe a ground & pound & sometimes reel-off-a-long-run teams can still make the SB, meh, who knows. But I wonder how many Vikings fans would swap their offensive production today w/Peterson leading the attack for the 98 or 99 team (I forget) that was a shanked Gary Anderson field goal away from the Super Bowl.

 

[sly24]

I know if I was a GM, I'd have a hard time spending money on a superstar runningback. Running backs fade so suddenly, you never know what can happen. I'd rather have two good running backs like BJGE than a superstar and an ok running back. Also, the last team to win the SB with a superstar was the rams in 99 with Faulk and before that the broncos in 98 with Davis. The last 13 years showed that you don't need an all star RB to win. I would pass on all of them.

 

[brdmaverick]

I suppose Stud RBs are making money because they are an endangered species today in pass-happy league.

 

[Kontradiction]

The majority of those teams mentioned either have question marks at QB or had them at the time that the big money contracts were offered. As of right now, Carolina's and Tennessee's offers look like horrible investments. Carolina's because they now have a budding franchise caliber quarterback in Cam Newton, Tennessee because it looked like the wheels fell off with Chris Johnson last season. Of all of those teams, Houston can be the only team with which you can argue did not have a question mark at franchise QB. However, it could just as easily be argued that Schaub's tendency for horrific, season ending injury presents a question mark at the position in and of itself.

 

[randomk1]

I'd honestly prefer that money going to a position with more longetivity.



Forte and Rice make up for like 70% of their teams offense so it's no wonder they get paid.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Bottom line is, teams with stud running backs like Adrian Peterson, Chris Johnson and MJD often finish 4-12. Teams with stud QBs always find a way to win.

Rice, McCoy, and Forte are also adept at catching passes out of the backfield and are three-down backs. I think the Pats would pay a premium if they had one of those elite players with versatility.

The most recent SB participant running backs were BJGE, Ahmad Bradshaw, Brandon Jacobs, Ryan Grant (or was he injured?), Rashard Mendenhaal, Pierre Thomas, Joe Addai, Tim Hightower, a beaten down Edgerrin James, Laurence Maroney, and Thomas Jones. Doesn't seem like an elite RB is needed to win your conference.

 

[patfanken]

Rice, McCoy, and Forte are also adept at catching passes out of the backfield and are three-down backs. I think the Pats would pay a premium if they had one of those elite players with versatility.
.

That's a key insight to what we will be seeing in this year's offense. Not only will we have a more explosive group of RBs, I feel strongly that they are going to be a much more integral part of the short passing game. All 4 of the prominent RB's on the roster have excellent receiving skills.

With teams needing to concentrate their efforts on covering Welker Gronk Hernandez, and Lloyd, there is going to be a LOT of room for the RB's to find wide open parts of the field. Not just in the screen game which hasn't been effective since McDaniel left, but in the general passing game as well. Its well over due to get our elusive RB's the ball in space.

 

[Kontradiction]

Bottom line is, teams with stud running backs like Adrian Peterson, Chris Johnson and MJD often finish 4-12. Teams with stud QBs always find a way to win.

Rice, McCoy, and Forte are also adept at catching passes out of the backfield and are three-down backs. I think the Pats would pay a premium if they had one of those elite players with versatility.

The most recent SB participant running backs were BJGE, Ahmad Bradshaw, Brandon Jacobs, Ryan Grant (or was he injured?), Rashard Mendenhaal, Pierre Thomas, Joe Addai, Tim Hightower, a beaten down Edgerrin James, Laurence Maroney, and Thomas Jones. Doesn't seem like an elite RB is needed to win your conference.

Grant was out for the season. James Starks was the premiere threat for the Packers during that postseason run.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Well the thing is that BJGE doesn't deserve a bigger contract than what he got from the Bengals 3/9. He's a solid guy who doesn't fumble but he's your typical 3 yards and a cloud of dust guy.

BB DOES pay the cornerstone guys and impact players, just take a look at Gronk's contract. If Ridley turns into a stud, we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. All I see is that we usually don't go crazy in free agency and that's fine with me. That flexibility in the money means we can make a move at the trading deadline or when the injury bug hits.