Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Perspective on our RB Situation


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#16 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 24,711 posts

Posted 04 January 2012 - 04:26 PM

Williams and Stewarts talent/production was there even when teams stacked 8-9 in the box when we had Fox as our coach.

That whole the league is trying to stop the pass more is bunk when referring to our backs. We have two special backs each of which IMO could attain a HOF career if they were feature backs.


but they aren't feature backs.

RBs are a dime a dozen. People are too in love with our duo. They don't get the workload to justify investing in the best RB duo in the NFL.

I mean, this is an exaggeration of the point, but what good would it do to give John Fox Graham and Gronkowski? I mean, Denver fans could brag about having great recieving options at TE but they wouldn't be used enough to justify the cost.

DeAngelo and Stewart while great....just don't get the reps to justify keeping them together. Money is better invested elsewhere. Goal is to have the best team.....not best backfield.

Edited by CRA, 04 January 2012 - 04:32 PM.


#17 adallastiger

adallastiger

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 134 posts

Posted 04 January 2012 - 04:27 PM

Green Bay is an exception. Saints have a very good running game, and New England is not bad either, though they don't have a big name back. Double Trouble will always be there.

#18 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,602 posts

Posted 04 January 2012 - 04:38 PM

you build your strengths to suit was is most effective.....

The rules are never going to go backwards and encourage more physical football. Look at the best offensive in the league right now. They have scrub running backs.

You can pay a RB like DeAngleo a huge contract to touch the ball 7 times a game or you can pay a WR/DE/TE etc. a big contract to lineup and play every snap. Makes no sense to pay Williams w/ multiple elite runners on your roster when the game is moving in a new direction.

if we can move forward and have as effective a passing game as the best teams in the league and we have the elite talent at RB that we have, then we are going to be better.

it's not moving the league backwards. the run game will be an important part of offenses going forward because of the attention that defenses are going to pay on passing games.

it';s just a matter of thinking ahead. not trying to catch up with teams that are the best right now, but anticipating what is going to be down the pike.

defenses are already compensating for a pass heavy league and are making it such that you will HAVE to have a very mobile QB or even a true dual threat QB like cam.

teams are going to be overlooking run games and that is going to work in favor of those teams who didn't essentially abandon the notion that you should have a talented RB corps.

i think the biggest hangup for you, though, is the effect of the contracts going towards our RBs, but i really don't think it's going to have the impact that you think it will long term.

also, i think that this team is more going to be setting the direction for offenses going forward rather than riding the wagon that many teams are.

if we have success with what we are doing, other teams will follow suit.

#19 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,602 posts

Posted 04 January 2012 - 04:40 PM

Goal is to have the best team.....not best backfield.

agreed.

you work to get everything up to that level.

we have an elite RB corps. let's let that be our starting point.

you build around that talent and try to let that be your standard all across the board.

#20 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 24,711 posts

Posted 04 January 2012 - 04:45 PM

Green Bay is an exception. Saints have a very good running game, and New England is not bad either, though they don't have a big name back. Double Trouble will always be there.


Green Bay isn't an exception.....

the teams you mentioned run well without heavily investing into a backfield.

New England can run with Danny Woodhead on you. The game is changing.

the biggest investment on the teams you mentioned is on IR and they won't miss him.

#21 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 24,711 posts

Posted 04 January 2012 - 04:49 PM

agreed.

you work to get everything up to that level.

we have an elite RB corps. let's let that be our starting point.

you build around that talent and try to let that be your standard all across the board.


we drafted 2 RBs in the 1st round in 3 years.....we should have an elite RB corp.

that is still the old Fox mindset though. You can't be elite everywhere. That is not where this team needs to be elite going forward.

#22 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,602 posts

Posted 04 January 2012 - 05:12 PM

it's not a fox mindset.

it's a progressive mindset.

we have an elite RB corps and an elite run game largely because of that. yes, much of it has to do with cam and the scheme, but it's made better because of the talent we have there.

i just don't see any sense in dismantling that necessarily because it's not en vogue at the moment to have a RB corps like that.

you see it as being unnecessary at the moment because of what is happening now. i see it as an element that will help make this team better than any other as we build and improve our passing game. we can do that without taking away from the RB corps that we have and we should do just that.

i don't want us to go back to being a run heavy team. i don't want us to go back to foxball. i want us to have a dominant complete offense and the RB duo of williams and stewart are going to be a vital part of that.

i consider it overkill and i make no apologies. we can do alright with less. i;m not content with us settling for that, though.

we don't have stunt the growth of the passing game or any other part on offense or defense because we have both of those guys here. we can, will, and should build around them and their contracts.

#23 twylyght

twylyght

    The picture of how I care

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,337 posts

Posted 04 January 2012 - 06:20 PM

If you had Jerry Rice on your team with a run-heavy league, would you give him up? Of course not. Why then would you do the same with a Jim Brown or Barry Sanders?

It will become apparent in the playoffs that those teams with balanced offenses will be the matchup nightmares that defenses will struggle to handle.

Pass-heavy offenses with no running game will find capable D-Lines getting to the QB with increased frequency to cut off the passing attack at the head. Run-heavy offenses will find opponents that will stack the box to chop off their attack at the knees.

Balanced offenses will be able to consistently hit the defense where their personnel is most susceptible. RBs may be easier to replace in the league. However, elite and legendary RBs are few and far between as evidenced in the OP.

#24 The Huddler

The Huddler

    St. Thomas Aquinas

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,474 posts
  • LocationRadford University

Posted 04 January 2012 - 10:02 PM

Its really sad that some of you would prefer to move on without Stewart. What's wrong with you??

#25 Fiz

Fiz

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,981 posts

Posted 04 January 2012 - 10:06 PM

Does anyone else just roll their eyes when someone puts "perspective" in a thread title?

#26 The Huddler

The Huddler

    St. Thomas Aquinas

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,474 posts
  • LocationRadford University

Posted 04 January 2012 - 10:58 PM

we drafted 2 RBs in the 1st round in 3 years.....we should have an elite RB corp.

that is still the old Fox mindset though. You can't be elite everywhere. That is not where this team needs to be elite going forward.

Why the hell do you think we are destined to be one dimensional just because Foxy isn't here anymore. Ya think maybe we could be elite in both aspects of offense? Seriously bro. Taking away from the run game isn't going to enhance the passing game.. its only going to hinder it.

#27 pantherclaw

pantherclaw

    Wise Ass

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,587 posts
  • LocationGalveston

Posted 04 January 2012 - 11:18 PM

This thread shows how much fans think they know.

#28 twylyght

twylyght

    The picture of how I care

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,337 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 06:24 AM

Does anyone else just roll their eyes when someone puts "perspective" in a thread title?


Care to enlighten us then?

#29 unicar15

unicar15

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,615 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 07:50 AM

Nobody is arguing that Williams isn't a great RB in this league. A few years ago AP was probably the only back in the league that I would have taken over him. However, you can't spend 80 million bucks on running backs which is what we are going to have to do if we want to keep both Stewart and Williams. So, the logical thing to do is go one more season and decide which one we want to keep and which we want to cut loose. My money is with Stewart becuase he is 24 and Deangelo is 28.

#30 twylyght

twylyght

    The picture of how I care

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,337 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 07:55 AM

Nobody is arguing that Williams isn't a great RB in this league. A few years ago AP was probably the only back in the league that I would have taken over him. However, you can't spend 80 million bucks on running backs which is what we are going to have to do if we want to keep both Stewart and Williams. So, the logical thing to do is go one more season and decide which one we want to keep and which we want to cut loose. My money is with Stewart becuase he is 24 and Deangelo is 28.


What contracts are stated as being and what they end up being are almost always vastly different things. This is why you look at the guaranteed monies in these things. Signing bonus, roster bonus, participation, etc. are much closer to what the contract is actually worth as opposed to the initially touted numbers in the media (which is all about sensationalism)


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com