Christian McCaffrey Workload in 2021

[L-TownCat]

49 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah, my fear is that we continue running the wheels off him. I would like to see Hubbard get maybe 10-20% of the load(if he is capable) and maybe save some of this wear wnd tear on our most expensive offensive asset(and best offensive player).

I know RB's have short shelf lives anyway but I would like to see him preserved at least until the end of his current contract.

I don’t think you’ll find many that would argue with what you just said.  I would hope that’s the way most of us see it.

[kungfoodude]

35 minutes ago, L-TownCat said:

I don’t think you’ll find many that would argue with what you just said.  I would hope that’s the way most of us see it.

If it doesn't happen(splitting the load at least somewhat) I guess I just am not going to be able to philosophically understand why we as a franchise(with multiple head coaches and front offices) don't generally view that position the way the majority of the NFL does and at least have some sort of "by committee" approach. 

Maybe I should look at the long term consequences of those big RB contracts. Do teams tend to use those backs more on average(which you would expect) but also tend to do it when they aren't nearly as productive? IE, is it more of a contract based usage or a skill based usage?

With the investment we have in him, I would like to see him be productive without much drop off over the course of that time here. I just can wrap my head around why you would want him to have 90+% of the workload/snaps if you are thinking about his future.

[Catsfan69]

30 to 44 touches per game should be his minimum unless we are blowing someone out. 

[kungfoodude]

4 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

30 to 44 touches per game should be his minimum unless we are blowing someone out. 

So you want to increase his workload by 5-40% over his highest ever???! That is completely unreasonable. 

Do you want him to out of the league in two seasons??

[L-TownCat]

31 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

If it doesn't happen(splitting the load at least somewhat) I guess I just am not going to be able to philosophically understand why we as a franchise(with multiple head coaches and front offices) don't generally view that position the way the majority of the NFL does and at least have some sort of "by committee" approach. 

Maybe I should look at the long term consequences of those big RB contracts. Do teams tend to use those backs more on average(which you would expect) but also tend to do it when they aren't nearly as productive? IE, is it more of a contract based usage or a skill based usage?

With the investment we have in him, I would like to see him be productive without much drop off over the course of that time here. I just can wrap my head around why you would want him to have 90+% of the workload/snaps if you are thinking about his future.

Competing interests, cognitive dissonance, whatever you want to name it.  The thing that can not be reconciled is the cost/responsibility ratio.  If he costs “x” then he must take  “x” amount of responsibility to make the transaction work for the team.  Conversely it benefits the team long term to be conservative with its stars, but coaching tenures are short term at best.  You hope everyone can be altruistic and work towards a common shared goal, but business is business. The game be damned.

…..basically I don’t fuggin know.  

 

[kungfoodude]

1 minute ago, L-TownCat said:

Competing interests, cognitive dissonance, whatever you want to name it.  The thing that can not be reconciled is the cost/responsibility ratio.  If he costs “x” then he must take  “x” amount of responsibility to make the transaction work for the team.  Conversely it benefits the team long term to be conservative with its stars, but coaching tenures are short term at best.  You hope everyone can be altruistic and work towards a common shared goal, but business is business. The game be damned.

…..basically I don’t fuggin know.  

 

Yeah and coaches don't look long term, they need to win now.

[PootieNunu]

14 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

30 to 44 touches per game should be his minimum unless we are blowing someone out. 

We have enough weapons to avoid that, 15-20 touches a game max.

[Catsfan69]

7 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

So you want to increase his workload by 5-40% over his highest ever???! That is completely unreasonable. 

Do you want him to out of the league in two seasons??

I want 20 to 25 runs and 10 to 14 receptions a game.

The standard for a dominant back over the history of the game is

25 runs at 4.0 per equals 100 yds.

He is only the 2nd player we have ever had that can score on any play he touches the ball. Steve was the other.

A weapon can't help you if it isn't used.

He could get hurt getting out of the bed or hit by a drunk driver. The only times I want him shut down are blowouts and when we are eliminated from postseason play.

[kungfoodude]

Just now, Catsfan69 said:

I want 20 to 25 runs and 10 to 14 receptions a game.

The standard for a dominant back over the history of the game is

25 runs at 4.0 per equals 100 yds.

He is only the 2nd player we have ever had that can score on any play he touches the ball. Steve was the other.

A weapon can't help you if it isn't used.

He could get hurt getting out of the bed or hit by a drunk driver. The only times I want him shut down are blowouts and when we are eliminated from postseason play.

You need to check the last decade+.

That doesn't happen anymore. 

[Moo Daeng]

8 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

I want 20 to 25 runs and 10 to 14 receptions a game.

The standard for a dominant back over the history of the game is

25 runs at 4.0 per equals 100 yds.

He is only the 2nd player we have ever had that can score on any play he touches the ball. Steve was the other.

A weapon can't help you if it isn't used.

He could get hurt getting out of the bed or hit by a drunk driver. The only times I want him shut down are blowouts and when we are eliminated from postseason play.

You want something that's absurdly unrealistic. 200+ receptions.....lol.

Edited May 30, 2021 by Moo Daeng

[kungfoodude]

1 minute ago, Moo Daeng said:

You want something that's absurdly unrealistic. 200+ receptions.....lol.

Apparently that is the "standard."

[Moo Daeng]

400+ carries. Lololol

[Catsfan69]

6 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Apparently that is the "standard."

20 runs and 14 passing targets a game are well within reason.

Or 25 runs and 8 targets.

33 to 44 touches.

 

I don't want my best back in history only running the ball 12 to 15 times a game. That's literally throwing points away.

[beo]

25 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah and coaches don't look long term, they need to win now.

While this is true in almost all cases, Rhule is under contract with us for 6 more years and it seems he has a considerably longer leash from Tepper than most other coaches in the league would have. I think this is somewhat reflected in our drafting of athletic but less polished prospects as well. Just something to consider. I personally hope that we do scale his workload back and if possible try to save him for key parts of the game (3rd downs, 4th quarter, etc.); but as a coach when you have a weapon of that caliber out there I imagine it's very hard to fight the urge to spam him touches.