Elite RBs are a waste of money· Page 5

macbob
Veteran Member

14 years ago

Rushing success doesn't equal rushing either.

Of course he was talking about success at an elite level. Which has proven to be a non factor. Specially if you look at recent trends.

Yes it was important 20 years ago. It isn't 20 years ago now though.

Were there any other changes in the Bronco's after they got Davis? If he was the only factor that changed including luck, who opponents are and they didn't change one bit, then people can say he was the reason they went from a super bowl team to a super bowl winning team. Otherwise it could easily be dismissed as coincidence. Statistically speaking.

"Dexter_Sinister" wrote:

Dexter--Zombie IS saying all running is irrelevant (even though he subsequently said he wasn't)

OR

Zombie is saying running IS relevant, but it's SUCCESSFUL running (e.g., running success) that is irrelevant.

Despite other comments in this thread, Zombie's not a COMPLETE moron :icon_smile: (smiley face = just kidding), so it can't be #2.

So, contrary to later disclaimers, I'm back to #1.

vikesrule
Registered

14 years ago

#42

...I think people enjoy fvcking with you just as much as me..

"DakotaT" wrote:

While screwing with Z2C has provided much pleasure and entertainment over the past 5 years or so,
when you showed up, it brought messin' with a cheesehead to a whole new level.

I mean, that in your case, there is such an unending amount of material to work with.
A dufus of your caliber is pretty much a once in a generation type thing.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

14 years ago

#43

Waiting to hear back to see if I'm approved for a car loan and went through some posts.

I think what's being said is that it's better to have an elite QB, rather than elite RB. Which is no secret. No one's ever said you NEED to have an elite RB to win a Super Bowl, at least, not in what I've read. A running game is needed, yes. As I've said countless times, I feel 10 carries for 30 yards is more efficient for the offense than 5 carries for 30 yards. My reasoning is that the more times you run, the more times the defense has to honor the run and it opens up play action passes.

Back to Barry Sanders @ 10mil vs Nance @450k. This is impossible to prove and anyone wanting facts to prove one way or the other is absurdly crazy go nuts. And since I fall into that category, I'll try to lay out why I think its difficult.

Barry + average QB = passing game a lot better.
Nance + elite QB = doesn't improve passing game, might hurt because there's no chance for Nance.
Barry + elite QB = pure offensive domination.

We also have to take into consideration the OL and WR... I mean there's just TOO many variables to even consider having an argument like this.

You give me an Matt Flynn, Barry Sanders, Greg Jennings and Jordy Nelson and I'll give you a feared offense.

A Barry Sanders or even LaDanian Tomlinson simply just helps your team. Assuming said players are in their hayday.

If anyone wants to hold it against Barry because the Lions didn't win a Super Bowl with him is ridiculous. This goes along with zombieslayers point, it's easier to STOP the run than it is to stop the pass. That's just logic. Load up the box, maintain gap discipline and you should stop the run.

IF a team CAN get good yards running the ball and passing the ball its makes BOTH phases that much better.

If one were to say it's better to have elite QB + Ryan Grant @1 million over Elite QB + Barry Sanders @ 10 million ... I'd agree with that because Ryan might run into his own guys, but at times he can break one deep.

macbob
Veteran Member

14 years ago

#44

I think what's being said is that it's better to have an elite QB, rather than elite RB. Which is no secret. No one's ever said you NEED to have an elite RB to win a Super Bowl, at least, not in what I've read.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

Zero, I'd like to agree with you that is what Zombie is saying. I originally thought that Zombie was just stating his argument poorly, but I don't think so anymore.

Through multiple threads this fall Zombie has had plenty of opportunity to clear it up, but he hasn't--he consistently phrases it as "running is irrelevant" or some variation.

If he truly meant that the passing game is more important than the running game, then he could have said that. And he'd have encountered very little disagreement.

I've made it clear through my posts that I think the Packers should be primarily a passing team, and running enough to attract the D's attention (and distracts them from the passing game, improving your passing). When Zombie said above he disagrees with me, what he is saying is he disagrees with that philosophy.

So, I am led to believe that Zombie truly believes all you need to do is pass, pass, pass. If running is irrelevant, why would you ever run??? If it's not irrelevant, why would you keep saying it is?

A running game is needed, yes. As I've said countless times, I feel 10 carries for 30 yards is more efficient for the offense than 5 carries for 30 yards. My reasoning is that the more times you run, the more times the defense has to honor the run and it opens up play action passes.

Zero2Cool wrote:

Agreed on the running 10 times attracts the D's attention more than 5, but running 10 times for 60 attracts the D's attention more than running 10 times for 30. The more effective your running game the more you'll attract the D's attention and open up your passing game.

zombieslayer
Registered Topic Starter

14 years ago

#45

And I'm perfectly fine with that, especially when it comes to Barry Sanders. I was just tying to tow the joking line, but guess I went to far.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

Dude - I don't mind you joking with me. What I do mind is that you don't have any facts. Macbob slights me all the time but he's backing up what he's saying. Personally, I think Macbob's a utopian. The game has changed.

Barry + average QB = passing game a lot better.
Nance + elite QB = doesn't improve passing game, might hurt because there's no chance for Nance.
Barry + elite QB = pure offensive domination.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

OK, thank you. Now you're finally giving me something to argue with. This is what I want.

An elite RB like Barry Sanders will take passes away from the offense. He'll also take money away from the team. So thus, I'll take Nance + elite QB. All Nance really has to do is rush 15 times for 60 yards. That's it. The pass will give him those opportunities as the pass nowadays opens up the run, not the other way around. Yes, I saw Pack93z posted examples of the latter but those are exceptions, not the rule.

Macbob - Maybe I'm not stating my point very well. Rushing success is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if you're the #1 rushing team or the #20. Your chances of winning the SB are exactly the same. Yes, you still need to hand the ball off. But you don't need to be good. Is that more clear?

Also, I went as far as saying an elite RB actually hurts the team by taking too many passes away from the offense. Also, he ends up asking for too much money where you're better off spending that money on a LB, DL, or DB.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

14 years ago

#46

And I'm perfectly fine with that, especially when it comes to Barry Sanders. I was just tying to tow the joking line, but guess I went to far.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

Barry + average QB = passing game a lot better.
Nance + elite QB = doesn't improve passing game, might hurt because there's no chance for Nance.
Barry + elite QB = pure offensive domination.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

Packers are paying Ryan Grant 5.5 million for 2011 and if he's on the roster on the 15th day, another million. You're telling me you can't afford to throw another million or two or three for a Barry Sanders?

If one were to say it's better to have
Elite QB + Ryan Grant @ 1 million
OVER
Elite QB + Barry Sanders @ 10 million ...
I'd agree with that because Ryan might run into his own guys, but at times he can break one deep.

I see you didn't mention that Barry Sanders doesn't need a fullback when discussing money being used for other players. FB's get paid big bucks ya know!

When you have a Barry Sanders on your team, he makes other aspects better. He makes your OL better, he makes your defense better because they are on the field less. He makes your WR and TE better because of the play action pass.

Therefore you do not need to pay those extra millions to acquire/keep high level talent.

You give me an Matt Flynn, Barry Sanders, Greg Jennings and Jordy Nelson and I'll give you a feared offense.

I think you're using Barry as a way to spite me. I mean, seriously, what GM would ever take Nance @600k over Barry Sanders @10million?

I do think Elite passing game > Elite running game. I've said this many times too.

I believe I get your point and concept and its something I've said far earlier and agree with, obviously, but again Nance over Barry, sorry, that's a mistake.

Barry Sanders makes others on your team better.
Nance does nothing for you, is no threat to take it the distance, does not put fear in anyone. A RB has to have SOME fear instilled in the defense, even if he rushes 10 times for 30 yards, he has to have that 'uh oh he can go all the way' or at least 30+ yards. Nance does not an will not offer that ever in his career, from what I've seen.

Packers_Finland
Registered

14 years ago

#47

I'm putting together QB, RB and Defense stats from the 2010 season which I'll put up when I'm finished. So far it's looking like the order of importance is DEF, QB, RB which is no surprise. But to say there's no correlation between running success and winning is hyperbole. The top 16 teams have clearly better RBs than the bottom 16.

In terms of running backs, the order is Teams 1-8 > Teams 17-24 > Teams 9-16 > Teams 25-32. (Ranked by reverse draft order and top RB fantasy points).

And even the fact that the 17-24 ranked teams have better RBs than the 9-16 ranked teams is very iffy, as the two most injury plagued running back situations in the league happen to be situated in the 9-16 range (Colts and Saints).

This is a placeholder

Cheesey
Preferred Member

14 years ago

#48

I think an elite QB can make up for a so-so running game. As we saw with the Packers this past season. A great QB can use short passes to get the gains a RB would get, and has the ability to go downfield for the big play.
If all you have is a great RB, a defense can key on that and stop your offense dead.
Barry Sanders.......he was awesome. But how many of you remember when the Packer D held him to i believe minus one yard for an entire game? The Lions did nothing that game, cause the Packers keyed on Sanders.
I can only imagine what Sanders could have done with a decent QB.

Packers_Finland
Registered

14 years ago

#49

Too damn tired to analyze will do it later. Numbers used for study are QB Rating for QBs, Fantasy Points for RBs, and Points Allowed for Defenses. Teams are in the draft order, so for the purposes of calculating success, the top teams are the worst and the bottom teams are the best.

This is a placeholder

zombieslayer
Registered Topic Starter

14 years ago

#50

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

For the record, I'm not using Barry Sanders to spite you. I'm using him because he's hands down the best RB I've ever seen. If you'd prefer, let's use Wallie instead, who I rank #2. Sorry Finny, Wallie's better than your beloved LT.

I'd take an offense of Aaron Rodgers, Nance, Gregorious, Finley, Jordy, JJ, and Driver over an offense of Aaron, Wallie, Gregorious, Finley, Jordy, JJ, & Driver + $10 million.

Why?

2 reasons:
1) $10 million can go to the D,
2) Wallie would take up too much of the O.

As I do believe you have to run, you don't want to run "too much." Too many teams with elite RBs run too much. If you look at a lot of the past recent SB winners, they didn't have elite RBs and passed to open up the run.

I actually think we are in agreement about several things but you're taking offense at the mention of Barry so I'll replace Barry with Wallie.

I do think that with Aaron scaring Ds, Nance could easily get 30 yards on 10 carries. He did get 32 yards on 9 carries against the Giants and we blew them away.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

beast (22-May) : Colts Owner Jim Irsay has passed away

Zero2Cool (21-May) : Well, emailing should work now. After not working for almost a year. Oops.

Zero2Cool (21-May) : Brotherly Shove did not get enough votes.

Zero2Cool (20-May) : lol our email hasn't worked in months. 7 pages of unverified users

Zero2Cool (20-May) : MySpace Screaming Lord Byron ... Brett Favre.

Zero2Cool (19-May) : Packers have signed first-round pick Matthew Golden, leaving second-round tackle Anthony Belton as their only unsigned draft pick

beast (19-May) : Supposedly he has to take his image, and name off of it... but otherwise could keep selling wine if he wanted to.

Zero2Cool (19-May) : he giving up his win business?

beast (19-May) : Speaking of Woodson, sounds like he'll be a minority owner (0.1%) of the Browns

Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Zero, regarding Woodson, that'd why I find the timing with Williams peculiar

dfosterf (15-May) : Ryan Hall y'all does a great job of tracking thesr

Zero2Cool (15-May) : Fear not!! I planned to do 33mi bike ride tomorrow morning, so ... yeah

Zero2Cool (15-May) : We got some dark clouds and nasty winds right bout now.

Zero2Cool (15-May) : Madison they had hail 4pm.

dfosterf (15-May) : Sure looks like these tornadoes are headed towards Green Bay

Zero2Cool (15-May) : Woodson of Charles fame was reluctant and then loved it. that didn't really come out until post career

Mucky Tundra (15-May) : IE "We bought into the Bears and they let us down, we have no choice to seek alternatives"

Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Or that Williams and his family are preparing an exit ramp if they don't like how things are going in a few years

Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Either Williams thought it would make him look good (reluctant but then embraces the city and franchise)

Mucky Tundra (15-May) : I can only assume that the Williams camp agreed to cooperate with that article tells me 2 things

dfosterf (15-May) : Ya. They are in a great mood

Zero2Cool (15-May) : I should visit again

dfosterf (15-May) : ChiCity Sports entering freakout mode due to Caleb and his dad not wanting him to go there

Zero2Cool (15-May) : "He's looking really good out there," Derrick Ansley said of Kalen King. Adds that he's been playing inside and out.

Zero2Cool (15-May) : Him saying he doesn't have one to give haha

Zero2Cool (15-May) : True, that was awesome. The whole F thing was great actually.

dfosterf (15-May) : I did like the Mark Murphy part, sorta

Zero2Cool (15-May) : Some comments on it saying it was great, amazing... I came away thinking... awkward.

dfosterf (15-May) : Packers schedule release video is "interesting" I guess.

Zero2Cool (15-May) : SOOO glad that tool still works. Saves from manually entering each game

Zero2Cool (15-May) : NFL Pick'em import was done last night.

Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Atlanta with 5 primetime games lol

Zero2Cool (15-May) : Week Five BYE?? NFL is hell.

wpr (14-May) : Vikings schedule leaked. Week 12 in GB. Week 18 in MN.

wpr (14-May) : CBS has GB @ NYG Week 11 Nov 16 and they will face MN in week 18 but don't say where. I think away

Zero2Cool (14-May) : W15: Packers at Broncos

Zero2Cool (14-May) : Ben Sirmans on MarShawn Lloyd: “Everything’s full go for him.”

Zero2Cool (14-May) : Luke Butkus says training camp will allow plenty of time to implement new center Elgton Jenkins

Zero2Cool (14-May) : wk 2 commanders at packers

Zero2Cool (14-May) : Ugh. Packers thanksgiving detroit ...boring

Zero2Cool (14-May) : Panthers at Green Bay in week 9, Nov 2nd

buckeyepackfan (14-May) : Week 1

buckeyepackfan (14-May) : Packers Host Detroit Week 1! ML finally gets a week home opener.

beast (13-May) : I was kind of hoping Douglas might come back to the Pack

beast (13-May) : My question is how much do we trust Jenkins? In bad weather, he seemed to struggle a bit with ball control snapping, though he started at OG

beast (13-May) : Well Jenkins probably knows he's not getting that 2026 salary number without a new contact... so just trying to get the new contact early

Zero2Cool (13-May) : CB Rasul Douglas is visiting the #Seahawks today, per source.

dfosterf (13-May) : He's a switch and baiter. Its the same as a bait and switcher except he agreed to the switch first lol

dfosterf (13-May) : 6.8 mil raise next year. Those are existing contract numbers

dfosterf (13-May) : 12.8 plus 4.8 pro rata signing bonus is 17.6 mil. Top center in the league at 18

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2025 Packers Schedule

Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM

COMMANDERS

Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM

Browns

Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM

Cowboys

Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM

BENGALS

Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM

Cardinals

Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM

Steelers

Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM

PANTHERS

Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM

EAGLES

Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM

Giants

Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM

Lions

Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM

Broncos

Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM

Bears

Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM

RAVENS

Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM

Vikings