Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Don't Cut DW!


  • Please log in to reply
156 replies to this topic

#151 X-Clown

X-Clown

    Positive Polly

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,353 posts

Posted 10 January 2013 - 10:51 AM

I dont feel like researching, but can anyone tell me how many other backs rushed for over 200 yards against them this season?


Only one other back and that was Jamaal Charles for 233 yards on 33 carries

#152 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 25,979 posts

Posted 10 January 2013 - 11:08 AM

If we're talking which back gives us the best bang for our buck you have to go with DWILL. Even though DWill is 29 he will last much longer than Stew as a feature back. It's well known Stew is injury prone and has been since we drafted him. He only has been healthy for as long as he has because he split carries with Dwill and Dwill got the majority over the years. The last time Dwill went on IR was because of a ankle sprain during a lame duck season. I'm pretty sure he could of came back later that year if the team was actually playing to win. I don't get why it's so hard for CRa and a few others to see that Dwill is way more explosive. The only reason his numbers are so low is because of his limited number of carries per game, dumb play calls and poor o-line. CRA acts like Jstew has been rushing over 100 yards a game all season. I also don't downplay Dwills last game because it was against the worst D in the league. I dont feel like researching, but can anyone tell me how many other backs rushed for over 200 yards against them this season?

from this point forward, you need to refer to him as 30. He will never play another snap at 29.

I simply act like paying 2 RBs is retarded. Retarded without a Tolbert and a running QB the league has never seen the likes of also on the roster. Doesn't matter which 2. Some people can't get past that and just want to launch into a why Williams is awesome and therefore overpaying RBs is cool arguement.

you don't want to discuss how DWill looked like X against the worst D in NFL history and Y against everyone else?

I am not sure how many 200 yard RBs there were....put they allowed more yard in general in NFL history. It means big yardage against them isn't much to brag about

#153 Panther17

Panther17

    HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,936 posts

Posted 10 January 2013 - 11:14 AM

So tired of this argument that I'm ready to drop them both and go with Smith, Poole, and Tolbert.

#154 Chimera

Chimera

    Membrane

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,999 posts

Posted 10 January 2013 - 11:57 AM

Okay...look at that same window minus the game against the worst D in the NFL history. 3.4 yards per carry....that ain't killin it.


You take the good with the bad, man. Why not take away the bad games and just say he averaged 10 yards a carry?

Despite people believing one RB is a power back and one is a finesse back, both do better in a power running game. We don't really use them to their strengths. Both struggle running from shotgun behind a poor OL who isn't always sure where to open a hole (due to the multitude of option plays).

I love the combo. They are great together. But we have to face facts: they are overpaid - ridiculously overpaid when you factor our offensive scheme. I would love to keep both, but we can't.

Both have their strengths - Stewart punishes defensive players. He can also get you consistent positive yardage better than Williams. DWill can break one off anytime. He also gets better as the game goes on - huge when you're known for blowing leads.

#155 MHS831

MHS831

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,104 posts

Posted 10 January 2013 - 01:43 PM

.(

If we're talking which back gives us the best bang for our buck you have to go with DWILL. Even though DWill is 29 he will last much longer than Stew as a feature back. It's well known Stew is injury prone and has been since we drafted him. He only has been healthy for as long as he has because he split carries with Dwill and Dwill got the majority over the years. The last time Dwill went on IR was because of a ankle sprain during a lame duck season. I'm pretty sure he could of came back later that year if the team was actually playing to win. I don't get why it's so hard for CRa and a few others to see that Dwill is way more explosive. The only reason his numbers are so low is because of his limited number of carries per game, dumb play calls and poor o-line. CRA acts like Jstew has been rushing over 100 yards a game all season. I also don't downplay Dwills last game because it was against the worst D in the league. I dont feel like researching, but can anyone tell me how many other backs rushed for over 200 yards against them this season?


Monzta, good points. My position is basically based on a few "stereotypes" by looking into NFL history.
DWill will be on the wrong side of 30 next year. I looked at some productivity charts for some of the biggest names in the NFL at RB--Edge James, and others like him. It was amazing how their numbers dropped after hitting 30. I think we need to look at RB productivity by not referring to what DW has done (he is one of my favorite Panthers all-time), but by what he might do.

I just have devalued the role of a RB in our offense. I think the QB is the primary piece and all 5 offensive linemen are next. Next, WR. I even think TE is more important than RB. Since we live in the era of the salary cap and we have been forced to choose (Marty Hurney), I think we are better off with a stud offensive line (protects Cam, better blocking for RB) and average, efficient RBs than stud RBs behind Hangarter and Bell. Heck, the Packers found a RB selling cars in Florida and he had a great game last week,

Thanks for responding. There is no right answer. While Edgerin James and many others hit the 30 wall, Emmit Smith and Marshall Faulk ran through it.

#156 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,963 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 10 January 2013 - 04:25 PM

.(

Monzta, good points. My position is basically based on a few "stereotypes" by looking into NFL history.
DWill will be on the wrong side of 30 next year. I looked at some productivity charts for some of the biggest names in the NFL at RB--Edge James, and others like him. It was amazing how their numbers dropped after hitting 30. I think we need to look at RB productivity by not referring to what DW has done (he is one of my favorite Panthers all-time), but by what he might do.

I just have devalued the role of a RB in our offense. I think the QB is the primary piece and all 5 offensive linemen are next. Next, WR. I even think TE is more important than RB. Since we live in the era of the salary cap and we have been forced to choose (Marty Hurney), I think we are better off with a stud offensive line (protects Cam, better blocking for RB) and average, efficient RBs than stud RBs behind Hangarter and Bell. Heck, the Packers found a RB selling cars in Florida and he had a great game last week,

Thanks for responding. There is no right answer. While Edgerin James and many others hit the 30 wall, Emmit Smith and Marshall Faulk ran through it.


Part of that is because usually only very good backs make it past 30 without being cut. There is really a decline in production beginning at 26 which for most backs is the same time they are coming off their rookie contracts are a number are not being retained or replaced by younger cheaper guys. Those that make it beyond that are in 2 categories, those who are heavily used and consistent and those who average less than 150 carries. The guys who average fewer carries are actually less productive. The reason is that most guys not productive never make it to 30. Guys who are actually have a history of being very productive end up playing to 32 or 33.

Problems with these studies include the fact that traditionally most teams had 1 back who got all the work meaning that we don't have much data on teams sharing backs like we do. Most teams who employ a 2 back system don't keep both of them beyond their rookie contracts. Secondly, the decline often starts earlier so the decline between 29-30 is not that precipitous. third, productive backs in their late 20s are most likely to stay productive into their early thirties.

#157 MHS831

MHS831

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,104 posts

Posted 10 January 2013 - 11:03 PM

Problems with these studies include the fact that traditionally most teams had 1 back who got all the work meaning that we don't have much data on teams sharing backs like we do. Most teams who employ a 2 back system don't keep both of them beyond their rookie contracts. Secondly, the decline often starts earlier so the decline between 29-30 is not that precipitous. third, productive backs in their late 20s are most likely to stay productive into their early thirties.

Yeah, I thought about the impact having two backs might have. The wear and tear of one back who gets 20 carries over 16 games is a lot of pounding.....Just saw the Chud hiring on TV... Shocker!!!


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com