We've seen it the last several years--teams with so-so running games and mediocre O-Lines have found great success relying on the passing game and their defense. 4 of the past 5 SB teams have had unspectacular running games too. In Week 1 alone, there were 14 300-yd passers and only 7 100-yd rushers:
Tom Brady - 517
Cam Newton - 422
Drew Brees - 419
Chad Henne - 416
Tony Romo - 342
Philip Rivers - 335
Mark Sanchez - 335
Matt Ryan - 319
Aaron Rodgers - 312
Jay Cutler - 312
Kevin Kolb - 309
Rex Grossman - 305
Matthew Stafford - 305
Kyle Orton - 304
-------------------------------
Darren McFadden - 150
Shady McCoy - 122
Cedric Benson - 121
Ben Tate - 116
Fred Jackson - 112
Ray Rice - 107
Michael Turner - 100
A closer look at those passing #'s shows that the vast majority of those teams are either elite and/or playoff teams. Chris Johnson, Adrian Peterson, and Jamaal Charles all failed to reach 100 yds--and at least 2/3 lost games they had no business losing. I realize it's just a one-game sample size, but it looks like more and more teams are moving away from the ground game and taking to the air.
Is an elite RB really necessary anymore?...furthermore, do you think drafting a RB in the first round is now a thing of the past?
I think its common knowledge at this point. The rule changes in the last ten years or so have completely changed the game. Its almost not even football anymore at least not like the game I grew up with. The old adage of being able to run and stop the run to win is gone.
Totally overrated.
They have a short shelf life, get injured most of the time and easily replaceable.
I would invest big money on my Oline instead of a RB.
It's hard to say. It's obvious the NFL has become more of a spread league the last few years. That being said, when your team has a good game running the ball you almost always win. Look at the 100 yard rushers you listed. All but one of them (Michael Turner) got the win that week whereas a few of those QBs you listed got the loss.
Obviously not what it once was but still a solid running game can help you counter the great spread teams. Two years ago when the Cowboys beat the 13-0 Saints they ran for 145 yards
Being able to stop the run is still important, imo. The Steelers were #1 in rush D last year, and have been in the top 5 for their last 3 SB appearances--so there's gotta be at least some importance to it. As Bump said running the ball is still important, but I don't think it requires having a feature RB. You just need a decent ground game that's capable of chewing up clock.
Last 10 SB champs and their #1 RB's:
2001: Patriots - Antowain Smith
2002: Bucs - Michael Pittman
2003: Patriots - ???
2004: Patriots - Corey Dillon
2005: Steelers - Willie Parker
2006: Colts - Joseph Addai
2007: Giants - Brandon Jacobs
2008: Steelers - Willie Parker
2009: Saints - Pierre Thomas? (not sure)
2010: Packers - James Starks
Give me an elite RB if I'm playing FF, but they're not an early-round draft necessity in real life anymore, imo
Panthers have 2 great RBs and a running QB as well but they were easily stopped because their Oline is not good and its easier to gameplan against the run.
RBs usually averages 5-6 yds, screen plays to the WRs or a flats pass will average the same too.
The run was easily stopped because AZ stacked the box. I think Carolina's O-line is above average-to-very good, imo. Jordan Gross and Jeff Otah are a great tackle combo. Kalil is a damn good center too.
Both RBs and WRs are overrated IMO, but it doesn't really means that having elite players at those positions won't give you a significant advantage over opposing teams, obviously..
Jamaal Charles>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Fred Jackson
Dwayne Bowe>Stevie Johnson
Chiefs WR corps>>>Bills " "
Score: 41-7, Bills. Not always obvious. There are several other examples.
Btw, you can't tell me the Patriots are "elite" on offense anywhere other than QB. Brady is a boss, and the coaching is 2nd to none.
Which is why I said RBs and WRs are overrated..
That's not the part of your statement I'm disputing.
See Bears-Falcons game, for starters.
I meant that if you already have talent at the more important positions(QB, O-Line and D-Line), having talent at the RB and WR positions will obviously give you an even stronger advantage IMO, which many stacked le teams have proven(mostly dynasties and perennial contenders)..
Packers were 15th in rush defense. Two years ago they led the league and the Colts and Saints weren't even in the top twenty even though they blew so many teams out that their opponents were passing all game to catch up a lot of the time.
Its just a different game. I laugh when those Football Outsiders guys write articles showing how the age old adage "you have to be able to run and stop the run to win" is a myth and they'll use data from recent years...of course it is now, everyone knows that. It didn't used to be. It was one of the main reasons QBs like Marino and Elway could never win. Their teams sucked at one or both of those facets for years. Still having an elite level or Pro Bowl QB has always been the most important thing, but now its like that plus a solid/decent pass defense is the only thing that matters. QBs like Brady, Brees, Warner, Manning etc. can get you to the SB even if the rest of your team is average.
Me too.
I think this:
1. You have to have a high caliber QB to win a Super Bowl.
2. You don't need a high caliber RB to win a Super Bowl.
Guys like Adrian Peterson, Chris Johnson adn Jamaal Charles are obviously special players, but there's also this with running backs:
some teams/coaches have incredible running systems where you just plug in a running back and he rattles off 100 yards.
Shanahan always comes to mind, but even the Texans the other day, had a 3rd stringer go off. Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that Ben Tate could run for 1500+ yards if given a full healthy season?
In this case, Arian Foster seems extremely expendable.
Oline and WRs are more important than RBs, just look at the playbooks. Every team has an empty backfield play but none will try 2 backs, extra blockers with the WRs sitting.
I'd even trade RB Chris Johnson for LT Jake Long right now.
WRs more important than RBs?
don't think so.
I predict Cam throws for about a buck 75 this coming week.
having an elite QB is the best way to be able to win a superbowl, no question about it.
however, not all teams have the luxury of a Manning, Brady, Brees, or Rodgers. at that point, its more important to have stronger players at skill positions such as RB, WR, and TE as it can help out average QBs an awful lot, and still give you a chance to compete for a superbowl, as evidenced by decent, but certainly not elite QBs such as Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer, Eli Manning, and Ben Worthlessburger winning Superbowls.
so I won't say that RBs or WRs are neccesarily overrated, they just aren't nearly as neccesary if you have the luxury of a great QB.
Those guys weren't elite during their playoff runs, but they didn't make any mistakes.
They also had the luxury of having dominating defenses carry them.
If he throws for even 250 on those corners (and with that pass rush), I'll be impressed.
He wont go over 250 passing yards against the packers because they will run.
But they will still lose thus proving that RBs are overrated.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
