Legal Tampering period thread and Free agency 2021.

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Come on man, how can you think I believe average backs equals causation?

But when teams with average backs make the SB at a rate of 3 to 1 over those with bellcows what it does tell you is that you don't need superstar running backs to be a great team.

So we should not be concerned we don't have superstar running backs.

Eh I think Brady has proven over the years you don’t “need” anything other than a great QB, a great coach, and the right circumstances. All other Super Bowl contestants had such different makeups I don’t think you can make strong argument about much else being a constant.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

Have to pay me a lot of cheddar to go TO Houston right now.

 

[Solar7]

Come on man, how can you think I believe average backs equals causation?

But when teams with average backs make the SB at a rate of 3 to 1 over those with bellcows what it does tell you is that you don't need superstar running backs to be a great team.

So we should not be concerned we don't have superstar running backs.

60% of the past 10 years of Super Bowls included Tom Brady. That's skewing the discussion here. Remove him from the equation, and this becomes a very different scenario.

And even with that, you're underestimating the teams' primary backs that helped get many of these teams to the Super Bowl that weren't platoon players. These all had 1,000 yard seasons and the majority of the carries the year they went to the Super Bowl:

New York Giants - Ahmad Bradshaw
Baltimore - Ray Rice
San Francisco - Frank Gore
Seattle - Marshawn Lynch
Denver - Knowshon Moreno
Seattle (again) - Marshawn Lynch
Carolina - Jonathan Stewart*
New England - LeGarrette Blount
Atlanta - Devonta Freeman
New England - Sony Michel*
LA Rams - Todd Gurley
*Didn't have 1,000 yards, they fell just short due to games played but would have had 1,000 if they played one more game
**I didn't include CJ Anderson here because he didn't have 1,000 yards but he was the primary ball carrier and a Pro Bowler

And that's ignoring the hot hand the Bucs got out of Fournette in their playoff run this year, although the whole team was great.

That's over 50% of the Super Bowl participants in the past 10 years.

 

[Solar7]

If you ignore Foles won it without great backs, and the corpse of Manning won it without great backs. And Goff and Jimmy G got there without great backs.

Whether you think those teams were there because of great coaches, great QB's, great defenses or whatever thing they rode to the SB the one thing absolutely none of them rode to the SB was a great RB. Nobody in history as ever said that "Those guys only made the Super Bowl because of the RB".

So with that in mind, why would you treat the position with as much emphasis as you are?

3 things will win a SB for us. A good O line (we aren't far off that), a good QB (you don't need a great one and we have that) and a great defense. This we don't have and this is what we should be far more concerned about that RB.

Oh and a good head coach, this we certainly don't have.

I'm not going to call him a great RB, but as I said above, Manning got there with at least a 1,000 yard 1st round running back in Knowshon Moreno. And that wasn't the corpse of Peyton Manning, he had a record year and was still an all-time QB. I'm not counting the second Denver playoff run because Manning barely had any part in getting them there. Osweiler played.

And Goff? He had a 1200+ yard First-Team All-Pro RB in Gurley the year he went. So, huh?

It seems your argument is based mainly around a few teams getting hot or having amazing QB play, or Shanahan's system that we don't have.

Edit: Removed the Jimmy G section, was operating off of Kaep for some reason.

 

[BritCard]

60% of the past 10 years of Super Bowls included Tom Brady. That's skewing the discussion here. Remove him from the equation, and this becomes a very different scenario.

And even with that, you're underestimating the teams' primary backs that helped get many of these teams to the Super Bowl that weren't platoon players. These all had 1,000 yard seasons and the majority of the carries the year they went to the Super Bowl:

New York Giants - Ahmad Bradshaw
Baltimore - Ray Rice
San Francisco - Frank Gore
Seattle - Marshawn Lynch
Denver - Knowshon Moreno
Seattle (again) - Marshawn Lynch
Carolina - Jonathan Stewart*
New England - LeGarrette Blount
Atlanta - Devonta Freeman
New England - Sony Michel*
LA Rams - Todd Gurley
*Didn't have 1,000 yards, they fell just short due to games played but would have had 1,000 if they played one more game
**I didn't include CJ Anderson here because he didn't have 1,000 yards but he was the primary ball carrier and a Pro Bowler

And that's ignoring the hot hand the Bucs got out of Fournette in their playoff run this year, although the whole team was great.

That's over 50% of the Super Bowl participants in the past 10 years.

So now it's not important that they had 1000 yards in the actual season they made the Superbowl? Just that they had a 1000 yards at some point? Or got close to it save for injuries?

In that case we are good with Conner. He had 973 yards in a season he only played 13 games.

 

[Solar7]

So now it's not important that they had 1000 yards in the actual season they made the Superbowl? Just that they had a 1000 yards at some point? Or got close to it save for injuries?

In that case we are good with Conner. He had 973 yards in a season he only played 13 games.

I'm talking about the year they made the Super Bowl for all of them. I went back and looked at each player. Looks like I made a mistake on Ahmad Bradshaw though, his 1,000 yard seasons bracketed 2011 due to injury, but he was still a primary back. In fact, he ran for 272 yards and a 4.3 YPC in those playoffs, leading all players in the postseason.

Rice (*) - 1143
Gore (*) - 1214
Lynch (*) - 1257
Moreno - 1038
Lynch (*) - 1306
Stewart (*) - 989 (Only played in 13 games)
Blount - 1161 (18 TDs! And no Pro Bowl...)
Freeman (*) - 1079
Michel - 931 (Only played in 13 games, only started 8)
Gurley (*) - 1251 (17 TDs!)
* Pro Bowler

All the year they played in the Super Bowl.

Edit: And I wouldn't understand knocking Stewart whatsoever as he still made the Pro Bowl and was an absolutely dominant force, and the Panthers sat starters in week 17. Same kinda goes for Michel, who was understandably inactive for a few games as a rookie before they realized what they had and he proceeded to rip off 71.6 YPG and be their best player in the Super Bowl.

 

[BritCard]

I'm talking about the year they made the Super Bowl for all of them. I went back and looked at each player. Looks like I made a mistake on Ahmad Bradshaw though, his 1,000 yard seasons bracketed 2011 due to injury, but he was still a primary back. In fact, he ran for 272 yards and a 4.3 YPC in those playoffs, leading all players in the postseason.

Rice (*) - 1143
Gore (*) - 1214
Lynch (*) - 1257
Moreno - 1038
Lynch (*) - 1306
Stewart (*) - 989 (Only played in 13 games)
Blount - 1161 (18 TDs! And no Pro Bowl...)
Freeman (*) - 1079
Michel - 931 (Only played in 13 games, only started 8)
Gurley (*) - 1251 (17 TDs!)
* Pro Bowler

All the year they played in the Super Bowl.

Edit: And I wouldn't understand knocking Stewart whatsoever as he still made the Pro Bowl and was an absolutely dominant force, and the Panthers sat starters in week 17. Same kinda goes for Michel, who was understandably inactive for a few games as a rookie before they realized what they had and he proceeded to rip off 71.6 YPG and be their best player in the Super Bowl.

I genuinely missed Gurley. I thought he missed some with his knees.

More O and Freeman I forgot as they arely scraped 1000 and neither won. But still, neither of those guys was very good. Certainly no better than Conner who would have had a 1300 yard rushing season if healthy.

My overall point being of course that plenty of teams have won the ultimate prize with worse backs. All positions are important but running back 8s the least of them.

 

[BritCard]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

Hurst is good. 78 grade last year. Odd move.

Almost certainly claimed before 16.

 

[football karma]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

Hurst is good. 78 grade last year. Odd move.

Almost certainly claimed before 16.

decent interior pass rusher

can anyone figure out Jon Gruden?

 

[Solar7]

I genuinely missed Gurley. I thought he missed some with his knees.

More O and Freeman I forgot as they arely scraped 1000 and neither won. But still, neither of those guys was very good. Certainly no better than Conner who would have had a 1300 yard rushing season if healthy.

My overall point being of course that plenty of teams have won the ultimate prize with worse backs. All positions are important but running back 8s the least of them.

Freeman was good enough to make the Pro Bowl, add another 462 yards of passing game production, 13 overall TDs... I don't think it's fair at all to say he wasn't very good. For at least 2, maybe 3 years, he was a premier back in the league that you had to account for in all phases of the game. Good enough to consistently outplay Tevin Coleman, who wasn't bad either.

With Moreno, you're also overlooking his passing game production (548 yards), 13 TDs, and that Montee Ball was playing great too, adding in 559 rushing yards at a 4.7 YPC.

My overall point is, teams aren't scraping together the kind of duds you seem to think will be successful unless they have a superstar QB, and 60% of the past decade of QB starters have been filled up by the names Brady, Mahomes, Manning, and Wilson.

 

[BritCard]

decent interior pass rusher

can anyone figure out Jon Gruden?

I think he's more a run stuffer. He'd be a good Corey Peters replacement but he's on waivers. A whole bunch of teams above us will claim him.

 

[BritCard]

Freeman was good enough to make the Pro Bowl, add another 462 yards of passing game production, 13 overall TDs... I don't think it's fair at all to say he wasn't very good. For at least 2, maybe 3 years, he was a premier back in the league that you had to account for in all phases of the game. Good enough to consistently outplay Tevin Coleman, who wasn't bad either.

With Moreno, you're also overlooking his passing game production (548 yards), 13 TDs, and that Montee Ball was playing great too, adding in 559 rushing yards at a 4.7 YPC.

My overall point is, teams aren't scraping together the kind of duds you seem to think will be successful unless they have a superstar QB, and 60% of the past decade of QB starters have been filled up by the names Brady, Mahomes, Manning, and Wilson.

I don't think teams have been scraping together duds. I don't think Conner or Edmonds are duds.

I think many a good team have had no better.

 

[football karma]

I think he's more a run stuffer. He'd be a good Corey Peters replacement but he's on waivers. A whole bunch of teams above us will claim him.

PFF data fwiw -- top 20 IDL. again, curious why he was released

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[cardncubfan]

PFF data fwiw -- top 20 IDL. again, curious why he was released

You must be registered for see images attach

Looks like he's gotten better each year he's played.

 

[Solar7]

I don't think teams have been scraping together duds. I don't think Conner or Edmonds are duds.

I think many a good team have had no better.

Yeah, difference of opinion then. Like I said earlier in this thread or the other, I place our RB room bottom five, potentially worse if other teams in dire straits right now end up drafting the top RBs.

Probably nothing significant to change our opinions on this until the season begins, so like Stout and Ouchie I'll let it rest.

 

[oaken1]

I'm not sure how you can look at some of those backfields I listed for recent superbowl teams and be all that concerned.

If you are concerned our coaching, scheme and O line sucks and thus we need a miracle running back to make it work then fair enough, but then we should probably be more concerned about fixing those things than a running back.

I'm infinitely more concerned about Cornerback.

How many of those SB winners with weak running backs.... did so without a hall of fame quarterback?

it’s relevant

Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady can make up for a weak rushing attack...

right now Kyler Murray can’t.... maybe someday.... but not right now

 

[BritCard]

How many of those SB winners with weak running backs.... did so without a hall of fame quarterback?

it’s relevant

Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady can make up for a weak rushing attack...

right now Kyler Murray can’t.... maybe someday.... but not right now

I'm not so concerned about if they won or not. The point of using the SB is that we know both teams were very good and the stats are easy to find. If I dug deeper and looked at Championship games or deep playoff runs I'd find a whole bunch more.

But off the top of my head. Manning in '11. The corpse of Peyton Manning in '15. Foles in '18.

The whole point was to highlight you definitely don't need great backs to be a contender.

 

[oaken1]

I'm not so concerned about if they won or not. The point of using the SB is that we know both teams were very good and the stats are easy to find. If I dug deeper and looked at Championship games or deep playoff runs I'd find a whole bunch more.

But off the top of my head. Manning in '11. The corpse of Peyton Manning in '15. Foles in '18.

The whole point was to highlight you definitely don't need great backs to be a contender.

No.... you don’t need a “great” RB.... but it doesn’t hurt. Hard to judge recent RB’s from the draft because like young quarterbacks they often get drafted by teams that just ain’t very good.... saquon is an outstanding back.... but overall the giants would have been better off drafting an olineman.... but Barkly sells jerseys...

we need a guy... that when the play completely breaks down.... he can break a tackle or two in the backfield and lunge forward for three yards...
A dude that can move the pile on 3rd and 1....
a dude that can pass protect for 2.5 seconds....
A dude that K1 knows will be “ right there in that spot” when a pass play breaks down so he has a trusted outlet....

and we need all those guys to be the same dude...

it helps if he also averages 5 ypc but 4.3 will do

 

[BritCard]

No.... you don’t need a “great” RB.... but it doesn’t hurt. Hard to judge recent RB’s from the draft because like young quarterbacks they often get drafted by teams that just ain’t very good.... saquon is an outstanding back.... but overall the giants would have been better off drafting an olineman.... but Barkly sells jerseys...

we need a guy... that when the play completely breaks down.... he can break a tackle or two in the backfield and lunge forward for three yards...
A dude that can move the pile on 3rd and 1....
a dude that can pass protect for 2.5 seconds....
A dude that K1 knows will be “ right there in that spot” when a pass play breaks down so he has a trusted outlet....

and we need all those guys to be the same dude...

it helps if he also averages 5 ypc but 4.3 will do

Well that's kind of my point. You don't NEED that guy, as evidenced by all the very good teams who haven't had that guy. Including both of last years SB teams and the SB teams from the previous year.

It's a luxury. Something that's nice to have if you can afford it (either in cap space or draft capital). The same way it would be nice to own an Aston Martin one-77 but not if your living in a trailer.

All Elite players are nice to have, but if you were to rank them by position RB would be right down at the bottom of the list. And this isn't just my opinion, this is widely discussed regularly in the NFL media. It's why no RB has been picked inside the top #24 for the past 2 drafts and is unlikely to this year.

Here's a recent summary from an article in Lineups

"Teams can still find extreme value at the running back position. It is unfair to deem players at the position replaceable, but it’s just the truth. There are a few generational talents at the position once in a while, but there are always replacements in the college ranks waiting to take the place of backs with mileage on them in the NFL. Nowadays, it’s smart for teams to use running backs on their rookie deals while expending their significant dollars at other positions on the field, such as quarterback or the defensive side of the ball. We’ve seen contenders like Patriots and the newly crowned champions the Chiefs reach the Super Bowl without relying on a heavily paid star at the running back position. Recent champions have favored a running-back-by-committee type offense while relying on great quarterbacks and defense. The game has always been centered around the quarterback position, leaving running backs in the dust. Simply put, the shelf-life of the average NFL running back isn’t that long, nor will it ever be in the future."

 

[Solar7]

I'm not so concerned about if they won or not. The point of using the SB is that we know both teams were very good and the stats are easy to find. If I dug deeper and looked at Championship games or deep playoff runs I'd find a whole bunch more.

But off the top of my head. Manning in '11. The corpse of Peyton Manning in '15. Foles in '18.

The whole point was to highlight you definitely don't need great backs to be a contender.

Peyton Manning missed the entire 2011 season due to a neck injury. In 2010 he had an amazing year. In 2012 he had an amazing year. I'm not sure what you're getting at there. And in '15, he didn't even play until the Super Bowl.

 

[Solar7]

Well that's kind of my point. You don't NEED that guy, as evidenced by all the very good teams who haven't had that guy. Including both of last years SB teams and the SB teams from the previous year.

It's a luxury. Something that's nice to have if you can afford it (either in cap space or draft capital). The same way it would be nice to own an Aston Martin one-77 but not if your living in a trailer.

All Elite players are nice to have, but if you were to rank them by position RB would be right down at the bottom of the list. And this isn't just my opinion, this is widely discussed regularly in the NFL media. It's why no RB has been picked inside the top #24 for the past 2 drafts and is unlikely to this year.

Here's a recent summary from an article in Lineups

"Teams can still find extreme value at the running back position. It is unfair to deem players at the position replaceable, but it’s just the truth. There are a few generational talents at the position once in a while, but there are always replacements in the college ranks waiting to take the place of backs with mileage on them in the NFL. Nowadays, it’s smart for teams to use running backs on their rookie deals while expending their significant dollars at other positions on the field, such as quarterback or the defensive side of the ball. We’ve seen contenders like Patriots and the newly crowned champions the Chiefs reach the Super Bowl without relying on a heavily paid star at the running back position. Recent champions have favored a running-back-by-committee type offense while relying on great quarterbacks and defense. The game has always been centered around the quarterback position, leaving running backs in the dust. Simply put, the shelf-life of the average NFL running back isn’t that long, nor will it ever be in the future."

I know I said I was done, but again, we don't have a great quarterback and defense. You're ascribing traits of other teams onto ours when we don't have the luxury.

You're planting your feet when the numbers don't back you up. Yes, there are a few examples of teams making it with a mediocre platoon of backs combined with middling QBs, but it's the exception, not the rule.

 

[BritCard]

Peyton Manning missed the entire 2011 season due to a neck injury. In 2010 he had an amazing year. In 2012 he had an amazing year. I'm not sure what you're getting at there. And in '15, he didn't even play until the Super Bowl.

Did Denver win a Superbowl with a poor Peyton Manning at QB? Yes they did. Did he play 10 games that year, starting 9, and go 7-2. Yes he did. Did he have a passer rating of 67? Yes he did.

This isn't complicated. The question was how many of those teams that didn't have great running backs didn't have great QB's and one of those is the 2015 Broncos. Including Osweiler if you want to include playoffs.

 

[BritCard]

I know I said I was done, but again, we don't have a great quarterback and defense. You're ascribing traits of other teams onto ours when we don't have the luxury.

You're planting your feet when the numbers don't back you up. Yes, there are a few examples of teams making it with a mediocre platoon of backs combined with middling QBs, but it's the exception, not the rule.

What traits am I ascribing onto ours? Where have I said we have a great QB and defense? I have specifically said we have a good QB, you absolutely don't need a great one to win a SB, and that our focus should be on improving the defense because you absolutely do need a good defense.

To win a SB you need a decent QB and a great D or a great QB and a good D. there's no guarantee you win with those things as you need good coaching and a lot of luck, but you do need those things.

What you categorically don't need is a bellcow running back or even a very good one. As I've proven over and over again through the magic of NFL history and statistics.

Hell, WE went to the 2009 Superbowl with 399 yards from Hightower, 514 yards from James and 187 from Arrington. When the running game was more key. That's only 1100 between them.

So with that all said, why can't you drop the idea we need to improve running backs and focus that energy on the defense? Because we absolutely do need good CB's and a good D overall.

 

[slanidrac16]

Yeah, difference of opinion then. Like I said earlier in this thread or the other, I place our RB room bottom five, potentially worse if other teams in dire straits right now end up drafting the top RBs.

Probably nothing significant to change our opinions on this until the season begins, so like Stout and Ouchie I'll let it rest.

I’d be okay if we went out and signed Duke Johnson. Throw in TE Jesse James and we could go cb ( I’d take a chance on Fairley) and then Wr in round two.
An experienced backfield of Edmonds, Connors and Johnson would be a nice blend.

 

[slanidrac16]

I know I said I was done, but again, we don't have a great quarterback and defense. You're ascribing traits of other teams onto ours when we don't have the luxury.

You're planting your feet when the numbers don't back you up. Yes, there are a few examples of teams making it with a mediocre platoon of backs combined with middling QBs, but it's the exception, not the rule.

I think most of the argument against you is a bell cow running back is not going to be the key to a winning season. I do believe you need 3 solid backs. I still think there are free agent running backs that could round out this core.