Jump to content

Paradigm Shift In NFL


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, KCartledge85 said:

If you look at Case and Blake stats, they actually did have darn good seasons.

Not the names you’re use to, but they had good seasons. It’s why their teams are where they are.

Great point. Keenum, who has the largest sampe size this season, is legitimately playing really well. The Vikings aren't winning with bad QB play; they're winning with good QB play from a QB people think is bad. You always need good QB play to win. It's just that sometimes you get it from players you don't expect it from. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 113
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Just now, Sidecar Falcon said:

The same could be said for QBs as well. The Draft, in and of itself, is typically a crap shoot. Difference is that drafting an RB early shouldn't set your franchise back 4 years, but a QB might.

I agree that there needs to be a scheme and need fit for an RB to be taken that high. Elliott and Fournette were both great picks, because they filled a need, they fit the scheme, and they were incredibly talented.

I agree that you can find great backs in the latter rounds but that still doesn't change how one perceives the top tier guys. Case in point, Sarquon Barkley, he's pretty much a lock as a top 10 pick (barring some sort of injury). This is based on his talent level and ability in college. If Browns were to select him first overall, I agree, bad pick. If the Giants select him 2nd overall, I think it's a significantly better pick, based on need and potential scheme.

 

See, this sort of thinking is dangerous, IMO. We can acknowledge that the draft is high variance and unpredictable (it is) without equating the prospects for any given QB with the prospects of any given RB. When you look at the bulk of QBs drafted in the last 30 years, you can find some non-1st round successes (including some HUGE ones) but those are outlier picks. Those are "one in fifty" type picks. 

With RBs, that isnt the case. Its literally every year that multiple teams get elite production out of non-1st round RBs. Every year. How many times does it have to happen before we draw a reasonably strong conclusion? 

I dont doubt that teams will keep drafting players they perceive to be "special talents" early in the first round. I think there are all sorts of identifiable mistakes that NFL teams make with regularity. And I dont doubt that Saquon Barkley will be drafted in the Top 10. Maybe even the Top 5. Ive only seen him a little bit but he appears to be very talented and had the "fortune" of playing behind a pretty poor OL and still being productive. 

What I'm pretty sure of is that EVEN IF Barkley is the best back in his class, there will be multiple backs that are 95% of Barkley that can be had for way way cheaper. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sidecar Falcon said:

I disagree they are not bad investments. Elliott and Fournette both have paid immediate dividends. Both selected with top 5 picks.

Lots of 1st round RBs have contributed to one championship run. A good 1st round pick needs to be able to play long enough and at a high enough level to contribute to more than one. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DoYouSeeWhatHappensLarry said:

See, this sort of thinking is dangerous, IMO. We can acknowledge that the draft is high variance and unpredictable (it is) without equating the prospects for any given QB with the prospects of any given RB. When you look at the bulk of QBs drafted in the last 30 years, you can find some non-1st round successes (including some HUGE ones) but those are outlier picks. Those are "one in fifty" type picks. 

With RBs, that isnt the case. Its literally every year that multiple teams get elite production out of non-1st round RBs. Every year. How many times does it have to happen before we draw a reasonably strong conclusion? 

I dont doubt that teams will keep drafting players they perceive to be "special talents" early in the first round. I think there are all sorts of identifiable mistakes that NFL teams make with regularity. And I dont doubt that Saquon Barkley will be drafted in the Top 10. Maybe even the Top 5. Ive only seen him a little bit but he appears to be very talented and had the "fortune" of playing behind a pretty poor OL and still being productive. 

What I'm pretty sure of is that EVEN IF Barkley is the best back in his class, there will be multiple backs that are 95% of Barkley that can be had for way way cheaper. 

Wasn't speculation on danger just making the comparison, just that every position you could draft is a crap shoot regardless. I do agree with your assessment though on the variances. The issue isn't that there aren't good RBs to find in later rounds, because there are. The issue was if it's a "bad pick" which I feel is determined by a number of factors rather than just by position.

I agree you may be able to find value in the later rounds without spending a 1st on an RB but if a franchise wants a player and believes they fit a need/scheme and draft them as such. More mitigating factors need to be looked at than the cost.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Summerhill said:

Lots of 1st round RBs have contributed to one championship run. A good 1st round pick needs to be able to play long enough and at a high enough level to contribute to more than one. 

Compare how Cowboys played without Elliott, to with him.

 

4 minutes ago, DoYouSeeWhatHappensLarry said:

And yet....the Chiefs and Saints both got superior production from rookie RBs that cost them 3rd round picks. 

 

 

Superior in terms of what exactly? Yardage, TDs? Fournette played 3 games less than Hunt and didn't have a 9 game drought without a TD. Kamara played in an RBBC where both of thier RBs did extremely well. Not to mention both teams aforementioned have significantly better QBs than Bortles. Not saying that both of them aren't good RBs but let's put it in  perspective.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, DoYouSeeWhatHappensLarry said:

No, its because this characterization of how the OL has played isnt accurate. 

So the reality is that most fans "see" things that arent actually there. 

What I have not seen over the years is a line that can dominate when the Falcons are leading 17-0 or 28-3 in the playoffs against the better competition.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Sidecar Falcon said:

Compare how Cowboys played without Elliott, to with him.

 

Superior in terms of what exactly? Yardage, TDs? Fournette played 3 games less than Hunt and didn't have a 9 game drought without a TD. Kamara played in an RBBC where both of thier RBs did extremely well. Not to mention both teams aforementioned have significantly better QBs than Bortles. Not saying that both of them aren't good RBs but let's put it in  perspective.

 

Superior in pretty much every way. Per carry, per target, DVOA, DYAR, success rate. Just better all around. Fournette has been fine and admittedly isnt in the best imaginable situation. But its not like hes buried in some dumpster fire. But overall, he hasnt been as good as either of the two backs. Perhaps because of injury or situation, but I'm not positive thats a given. Fournette had 268 carries and produced 15% of his ground yardage on two plays. His share of 10+ and 20+ yard carries werent great and I think he has some serious "Gurley" potential in terms of possibly having an unproductive season next year. 

As for Zeke, comparing the Cowboys without him vs. with him isnt really the best way to look at it. Particularly because they had success and failures in both settings. If anything, the Cowboys success tracks better with Tyron Smith's health than Zeke's availability. 

And the idea wouldnt be Zeke vs. street FA, it would be Zeke vs. any of the other capable backs drafted that year. That Cowboys OL remains very good. Perhaps not at its full power of 3-4 years ago, but still very good. Thats doing much of the heavy lifting in the run game. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sidecar Falcon said:

I think there is something to it, but that's just me. There seems to be a number of fluke plays in the SB. I am thinking that it mainly has to do with adrenaline and nerves. Last SB we had the whiff block by Freeman and the insane catch by Edelman. That's true that the Steelers put up a lot of points. They also have the Brown and Bell. Not to mention some strong WRs that can play physical. 

I am hoping there are some good changes this season. I don't believe there will be a "big splash" acquisition this season. All in all if we clean up the offensive errors and get everyone on the offensive staff in sync we can be contenders again.

Hope you guys get it sorted out. I'd rather see the Falcons in the playoffs than the Panthers or any team in the NFCE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are people setting the bar at "OL/DL able to DOMINATE" other teams in the Conference championship games/Super Bowl? 

You really think this OL (or any OL for that matter) is going to "dominate" the Eagles Front 7? Or the Vikings front 7? or the Cowboys OL? 

If thats what you're waiting for, you might as well start building a permanent shelter on that hill. You're gonna be there for a minute....

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, DoYouSeeWhatHappensLarry said:

Superior in pretty much every way. Per carry, per target, DVOA, DYAR, success rate. Just better all around. Fournette has been fine and admittedly isnt in the best imaginable situation. But its not like hes buried in some dumpster fire. But overall, he hasnt been as good as either of the two backs. Perhaps because of injury or situation, but I'm not positive thats a given. Fournette had 268 carries and produced 15% of his ground yardage on two plays. His share of 10+ and 20+ yard carries werent great and I think he has some serious "Gurley" potential in terms of possibly having an unproductive season next year. 

As for Zeke, comparing the Cowboys without him vs. with him isnt really the best way to look at it. Particularly because they had success and failures in both settings. If anything, the Cowboys success tracks better with Tyron Smith's health than Zeke's availability. 

And the idea wouldnt be Zeke vs. street FA, it would be Zeke vs. any of the other capable backs drafted that year. That Cowboys OL remains very good. Perhaps not at its full power of 3-4 years ago, but still very good. Thats doing much of the heavy lifting in the run game. 

That's kind of the point I'm getting at. There are a number of mitigating factors to take into consideration when determining a players value. Both teams use their backs differently based on scheme. Both like to run but Fournette is basically a blunt force object to wear down the defense. His ability to have big plays shouldn't be a knock on him, but I get where you are coming from. I think it also needs to be taken into consideration the amount Fournette faced eight in the box. 

http://www.espn.com/blog/jacksonville-jaguars/post/_/id/22949/why-success-of-leonard-fournette-led-run-game-is-even-more-impressive

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/rushing#yards

According to these stats he faced 8 in the box 48.51% of the time as well. Considering the QB play and the injuries and dearth of weapons. That's pretty impressive.

I think blanketed statements that you shouldn't draft "X" position in the 1st round (Minus K/P) aren't realistic. Especially given the way the NFL is today.

Edited by Sidecar Falcon
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sidecar Falcon said:

That's kind of the point I'm getting at. There are a number of mitigating factors to take into consideration when determining a players value. Both teams use their backs differently based on scheme. Both like to run but Fournette is basically a blunt force object to wear down the defense. His ability to have big plays shouldn't be a knock on hi, but I get where you are coming from. I think it also needs to be taken into consideration the amount Fournette faced eight in the box. 

http://www.espn.com/blog/jacksonville-jaguars/post/_/id/22949/why-success-of-leonard-fournette-led-run-game-is-even-more-impressive

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/rushing#yards

According to these stats he faced 8 in the box 48.51% of the time as well. Considering the QB play and the injuries and dearth of weapons. That's pretty impressive.

I think blanketed statements that you shouldn't draft "X" position in the 1st round (Minus K/P) aren't realistic. Especially given the way the NFL is today.

I'm not knocking his ability to produce big plays...I'm saying that he created two legit big plays and without those two plays his season would look WAY worse. Yes, there are other situations at play. But that doesnt make him any cheaper or any less likely to get injured (if anything, it makes it MORE likely). And while this article is cool and all, its also from October and came on the heels of his "best performance" against Pittsburgh. 

I agree that we should be careful with hard and fast rules. But if ever there were any such rules, the first two should be 1) Dont draft RBs in the 1st Round/Top 15 and 2) Don't draft kickers, period. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/14/2018 at 5:13 PM, BLM said:

Bortles, Keenum, and Foles in Championship Games.  Have teams learned how to win without a solid QB? 

Are QBs no longer that important any more?  Pretty impressive IMO.

People are going to start drawing this conclusion: get a young creative mind at coach and you won't need an Elite QB to win it all...

Not sure if its Proven, but there are superbowls where game managers have won because of the other pieces.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/14/2018 at 8:13 PM, BLM said:

Bortles, Keenum, and Foles in Championship Games.  Have teams learned how to win without a solid QB? 

Are QBs no longer that important any more?  Pretty impressive IMO.

every team in the championship games was top 12 in passing efficiency, and top 10 in pass defense efficiency. Foles didn't get the Eagles into the playoffs, and he sure as **** didn't win them the game against us. Keenum has been legitimately great this year. Bortles isn't the reason Jacksonville is where they are, their #1 pass defense in the NFL is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DoYouSeeWhatHappensLarry said:

I'm not knocking his ability to produce big plays...I'm saying that he created two legit big plays and without those two plays his season would look WAY worse. Yes, there are other situations at play. But that doesnt make him any cheaper or any less likely to get injured (if anything, it makes it MORE likely). And while this article is cool and all, its also from October and came on the heels of his "best performance" against Pittsburgh. 

I agree that we should be careful with hard and fast rules. But if ever there were any such rules, the first two should be 1) Dont draft RBs in the 1st Round/Top 15 and 2) Don't draft kickers, period. 

 

There was also the nextgen stats I provided as well.I agree that it may be cheaper, not always necessarily better. Don't agree with rule #1 but definitely agree with rule two. Unless the K can make a 100 yard FG. lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...