Theoretical RB Question

by Rob-Westside on Sep 17, 2008 5:52 PM EDT Comment 4 comments

In commenting on Adrian Peterson in one of the fanposts:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/rb
Looking at DVOA (though its early in the season so stats can get skewed) and Success rate you see that his Success Rate is not as high as his overall DVOA which tends to indicate that he gets more big runs but has a higher number o runs for ineffective yardage. Which as stated can lead to more frequent 3rd and long situations. Coupled wth a weak QB (Jackson) you get an inconsistent offense.

I realized that this brings up n interesting question. As a matter of football strategy (NOT fantasy football): Would you rather have a Boom/Bust RB (one who can break long plays on a semi-regular basis but who also generates lots of low to no yardage running plays) or a "Boring/Consistent" RB who consistently generates 3-6 yard runs but rarely has low or negative running plays but also rarely if ever breaks long running plays.

I think this argument is greatly affected by consistency and strength of your QB (i.e. Jackson kills the Vikings because Peterson's Boom/Bust tendencies frequently means that somewhere in a drive they are likely to face 3rd and long which more dramatically increases Jackson's influence on success).

I think with a Peyton Manning a Boom/Bust RB is the best option because it puts the most pressure on the defense and you still have Manning to bail you out of 3rd and long when needed.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Stampede Blue's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Stampede Blue's writers or editors.

0 recs | Comment 4 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I wanted to look at AP vs Edge in his (post injury)prime

to see if it was close enough to argue that they’d be better off with a back like that, but I don’t think FO has the previous seasons up on their redesigned page yet.

"I'm not racin', I'm just sprintin'
Cuz I don't wanna finish
they diminish, I replenish"
-Lil Wayne "Let the beat build"

by shake n bake on Sep 17, 2008 5:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I disagree

I think having a consistent QB is the best thing for a dynamic RB, but not vice versa. Having a back like Jonathan Stewart is great in Carolina, because they have a power running game backed with a consistent, strong armed QB. But when you have an elite QB in a pass-oriented offense, a consistent back is more important. It’s the threat of consistent yardage on the ground that makes teams respect the play action. If a back gets 3.5+ yards consistently(or a high success rate), but is still getting only about 3.5-4.0 YPC that is fine. On third and short, teams will have to respect that the run is a viable play call, and either bring safeties tight pack the line with backers. This will open the opportunity for either the deep ball or a quick slant off the play action.

I just don’t think that threat is there as much with one of the boom/bust backs. Besides with the more dynamic backs, it is smarter to leave defenders deeper in coverage to stop the big play. Notice it was Bob/Melvin stopping all the runs that got through the KO/Brackett tandem.

I also blog at Speed Blue Nation

by Bullard47 on Sep 17, 2008 7:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Ditto. I’d rather have a consistent back than a boom/bust back.

by TouchdownMonkey on Sep 17, 2008 9:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

running backs

I was a big JA fan his first year and last year, and I completely support the whole colts team,but seeing JA in interviews his affect seems dull. There doesnt seem to be that spark I like to see in a great running back. Get excited, your are behind one of the greatest QB in the game, who will give his all. I can imagine that its hard its the NFL, but your a first round draft pick and very lucky.

by sassyblue on Sep 20, 2008 8:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs