Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

I've seen this idea bandied about and toyed with for quite a few years now, that almost all of a RB's value comes from the scheme, the talent of the offense around them (esp line), and the team's commitment to a feature back. I've resisted the concept for this long, but at this point I admit I'm probably wrong. This season has been a disaster all around for the league's "franchise" backs. All of our RB heroes from the past 5+ seasons are pretty much dead all at once, even though most of them are still in the league and not very old even in RB years. Bell was smoothly replaced by James Conner, got Adam Gased, and is now a backup, Gurley flamed out of LAR after looking unstoppable for what seemed like ages, and David Johnson was used as a pawn to hoodwink BOB into signing his own death warrant. Meanwhile, since the start of this season, Melvin Gordon can't stop fumbling and looks meh in Denver, CMC has seen his production almost replaced by known JAG Mike Davis, cut by five teams, until the latter fell off pace, while Zeke (and Saquon before he got hurt) can't get anything going behind a ravaged O-line and just doesn't look the same. Dalvin Cook, who looks godly now but is only a matter of time before he gets hurt again, is probably next. Gurley is the only one who's recovered to date, carving out what looks like a strong second career in Atlanta, but he hasn't been immune to the symptoms of RB expendability either; remember Rams legend Cortrelle Javon Anderson, anyone? In hindsight, it's easy to see where the seeds were sprouting, but it seems they've finally come into full bloom. But most notably, every guy here was either a first-round pick, signed to a massive contract, or both - things that the cognoscenti have warned against spending on running backs for quite a while now, and I'm starting to agree with them. And notably as well, injury luck has only been a direct contributor to some of their declines. Meanwhile, the backups often do a pretty good impression of the fallen stars, and make it seem like anyone who's physically capable of being an NFL RB just needs the perfect storm of team context to succeed. The difference in offensive potency from having an elite RB to a backup RB usually just feels minimal these days, whereas the effects of losing an elite QB, for example, can be seen vividly by beholding these Dallas Cowboys.

Having grown up watching the apparent greatness of generational talents like LaDainian Tomlinson and Adrian Peterson, I've been resistant to accept the notion that RBs are really just a product of their situation, but in light of these events, as recent history just continues to repeat itself, I think it's time to have a real discussion about it. Given the career trends that the modern elite RBs are undergoing, I'm not convinced there will ever be a HOFer at the position again once Peterson and Frank Gore get in; Zeke seemed like the one sure thing, but even that's slipping away on a godawful team. There are, of course, the Trent Richardsons of the world who are just a liability because they can't see holes, but is there really so little difference between an elite RB and a league average one, that the latter can simply become the former as long as the team commits to him and has the talent to support him? Is RB really the skill position it has historically been considered to be anymore? And if not, is it because the NFL has changed so much in the direction of volume passing, or were running backs never who we thought they were? Was, say, Jim Brown great because Jim Brown was great, or was Jim Brown great because any featured RB on the Browns from 1957-65 would have been great? The reality, of course, is probably that it's actually a measure of both, but that's still a sobering realization. I don't want to believe that Jim Brown's backup could have stepped in and been 90% of him, but I don't know what to believe anymore!

I am here to overreact and spew hot takes, y'all, so hear me out on this one: as this mentality takes hold around the league, I feel that there could be a coming crisis at the position. They will come to be seen basically like kickers, except even less important, because bad kickers are plenty and can easily cost you games. The two biggest things in danger are those I noted earlier: high draft picks and large contracts. Teams won't want to pay them, and won't want to spend marquee draft capital on them. Like kickers, except they're also the position at the biggest health risk and subject to the shortest careers. So you could begin to see something akin to a gradual labor strike at the position: basically, the only guys willing to play RB will be those who can't make it at any other position in the NFL, and have exhausted all of their other options beforehand. In 1-2 decades, every RB in the league could be a JAG on the level of a 1987 replacement player, which would probably lead to rushing being phased out of offenses as a regular component, reserved for running out clock and reinforcing the vicious cycle of teams throwing more and more with each passing year (unintentional punsmanship there). No one wants football to end up like this, but the current trends seem to be making it plausible. It already happened to the fullback; is the halfback next?

Anyone see an easy road out of this nightmare scenario? Am I swinging too far to the other side, and there's still a case to be made for RB as a true skill position? And if so, why are all of the modern stars having one or two world-beating seasons, getting inadvisably paid, and then, injury or not, never having it that good again?

The changes that have benefited the offense over the years have been focused on the passing game, which makes pass plays as good as running plays in many circumstances. These changes devalue the role of the running back AS A RUNNER, but running backs need to be measured by total offensive performance.

It's interesting to note that Kamara, probably the most receiving-skewed back in the league today, is one of the survivors... so far. But so is Derrick Henry, probably the most traditional back in the game. Meanwhile, Johnson was being used similarly before his fall, and there's of course McCaffrey, who we'll have to see about; I don't think the injury itself will hurt him long term, but the issue is with how good Davis looked. Kamara and CMC are also quite younger than most of the ones who've disappeared already. So I don't know if the pass-catching backs have better longevity yet or not. If Saquon rebounds vigorously, that will be a strong indicator in the affirmative.

The running backs with the most 1,000-yard all-purpose yard seasons are:

Emmitt Smith (14 seasons)
Frank Gore (12)
Marcus Allen (11)
Warrick Dunn (11)
Marshall Faulk (11)
Walter Payton (11)
Herschel Walker (11)
Curtis Martin (10)
Adrian Peterson (10)
Barry Sanders (10)

If all-purpose yards are the measuring stick for running backs, the pantheon looks a little different.

What you left out about Davis looking similarly as productive as McCaffrey, is Curtis Samuel (with respect to the smaller sample size) has looked even better between the tackles, they even used him inside the 5 to 'pound' it in -- and is obviously the better receiver.

Hypothetically, you could see more of that in the future. As opposed to RB's that are interchangeable, you could just get another WR on the field and hand it to them when teams want to do a token run play. Already have TE's that get occasional carries, and of course numerous WR's on jet sweeps, and of course all the screens which are glorified run plays. Which a majority of the top RB's now, someone like Henry aside, are considered at the top because of what they do receiving wise/screens&checkdowns&option routes -- that could just be a WR to start with.

If the premise is that 'anyone' can get the job done running then why even mess around with a traditional running back, or even worry about finding a RB that can catch, when you can instead have a WR that can run? Especially since an Amari Cooper type is rare (WR his entire life), most WR's were running the ball in youth football, middle school, and plenty in high school as well. Some even in college.

Antonio Gibson type's could be the next trend of draftable "RB's", and the evolution from there could just be full-on WR, and use the run-game that way. Lineup a WR in the backfield when you want to get him a touch.

Think SF, instead of the cavalcade of oft-injured RB's, in the future that could be 4-5 roster spots towards more WR's, and when you want to run you hand it to your future version of Deebo or Aiyuk (or Kittle for the misdirection run plays) since they're already WR's that can run the ball (and have and do, but on WR type run plays/sweeps), surely they can hit it between the tackles if we consider that the 4th and 5th string SF RB's can produce via good scheme, good blocking, and huge holes to run through.

That might be a better premise to go with.

RyanChristiansen wrote:The running backs with the most 1,000-yard all-purpose yard seasons are:

Emmitt Smith (14 seasons)
Frank Gore (12)
Marcus Allen (11)
Warrick Dunn (11)
Marshall Faulk (11)
Walter Payton (11)
Herschel Walker (11)
Curtis Martin (10)
Adrian Peterson (10)
Barry Sanders (10)

If all-purpose yards are the measuring stick for running backs, the pantheon looks a little different.

Great list. Herschel Walker is absolutely one of the most underrated players. HOVG first-ballot when eligible at least, and I would personally advise the voters to remember that it's called the Pro Football Hall of Fame, not the NFL Hall of Fame. But all he's remembered for is the stupid trade. That said, 1000 SY is kinda not that much; all you have to do is play the whole year and not share too much work. Wonder how it'd shake out if you take it up to 1200, or 1400?

Not disagreeing with the premise but one thing RBs do that WRs don't is pass protection.
Still, it wouldn't be difficult to teach a bulkier WR or TE to pass block.

It is, I suppose, just another inevitable step on the way to 11 man Arena Football...

JuggernautJ wrote:Not disagreeing with the premise but one thing RBs do that WRs don't is pass protection.
Still, it wouldn't be difficult to teach a bulkier WR or TE to pass block.

It is, I suppose, just another inevitable step on the way to 11 man Arena Football...

But some of the better RBs can't or won't block, which is why they're often replaced on 3rd down.

JameisLoseston wrote:I've seen this idea bandied about and toyed with for quite a few years now, that almost all of a RB's value comes from the scheme, the talent of the offense around them (esp line), and the team's commitment to a feature back. I've resisted the concept for this long, but at this point I admit I'm probably wrong. This season has been a disaster all around for the league's "franchise" backs. All of our RB heroes from the past 5+ seasons are pretty much dead all at once, even though most of them are still in the league and not very old even in RB years. Bell was smoothly replaced by James Conner, got Adam Gased, and is now a backup, Gurley flamed out of LAR after looking unstoppable for what seemed like ages, and David Johnson was used as a pawn to hoodwink BOB into signing his own death warrant. Meanwhile, since the start of this season, Melvin Gordon can't stop fumbling and looks meh in Denver, CMC has seen his production almost replaced by known JAG Mike Davis, cut by five teams, until the latter fell off pace, while Zeke (and Saquon before he got hurt) can't get anything going behind a ravaged O-line and just doesn't look the same. Dalvin Cook, who looks godly now but is only a matter of time before he gets hurt again, is probably next. Gurley is the only one who's recovered to date, carving out what looks like a strong second career in Atlanta, but he hasn't been immune to the symptoms of RB expendability either; remember Rams legend Cortrelle Javon Anderson, anyone? In hindsight, it's easy to see where the seeds were sprouting, but it seems they've finally come into full bloom. But most notably, every guy here was either a first-round pick, signed to a massive contract, or both - things that the cognoscenti have warned against spending on running backs for quite a while now, and I'm starting to agree with them. And notably as well, injury luck has only been a direct contributor to some of their declines. Meanwhile, the backups often do a pretty good impression of the fallen stars, and make it seem like anyone who's physically capable of being an NFL RB just needs the perfect storm of team context to succeed. The difference in offensive potency from having an elite RB to a backup RB usually just feels minimal these days, whereas the effects of losing an elite QB, for example, can be seen vividly by beholding these Dallas Cowboys.

Having grown up watching the apparent greatness of generational talents like LaDainian Tomlinson and Adrian Peterson, I've been resistant to accept the notion that RBs are really just a product of their situation, but in light of these events, as recent history just continues to repeat itself, I think it's time to have a real discussion about it. Given the career trends that the modern elite RBs are undergoing, I'm not convinced there will ever be a HOFer at the position again once Peterson and Frank Gore get in; Zeke seemed like the one sure thing, but even that's slipping away on a godawful team. There are, of course, the Trent Richardsons of the world who are just a liability because they can't see holes, but is there really so little difference between an elite RB and a league average one, that the latter can simply become the former as long as the team commits to him and has the talent to support him? Is RB really the skill position it has historically been considered to be anymore? And if not, is it because the NFL has changed so much in the direction of volume passing, or were running backs never who we thought they were? Was, say, Jim Brown great because Jim Brown was great, or was Jim Brown great because any featured RB on the Browns from 1957-65 would have been great? The reality, of course, is probably that it's actually a measure of both, but that's still a sobering realization. I don't want to believe that Jim Brown's backup could have stepped in and been 90% of him, but I don't know what to believe anymore!

I am here to overreact and spew hot takes, y'all, so hear me out on this one: as this mentality takes hold around the league, I feel that there could be a coming crisis at the position. They will come to be seen basically like kickers, except even less important, because bad kickers are plenty and can easily cost you games. The two biggest things in danger are those I noted earlier: high draft picks and large contracts. Teams won't want to pay them, and won't want to spend marquee draft capital on them. Like kickers, except they're also the position at the biggest health risk and subject to the shortest careers. So you could begin to see something akin to a gradual labor strike at the position: basically, the only guys willing to play RB will be those who can't make it at any other position in the NFL, and have exhausted all of their other options beforehand. In 1-2 decades, every RB in the league could be a JAG on the level of a 1987 replacement player, which would probably lead to rushing being phased out of offenses as a regular component, reserved for running out clock and reinforcing the vicious cycle of teams throwing more and more with each passing year (unintentional punsmanship there). No one wants football to end up like this, but the current trends seem to be making it plausible. It already happened to the fullback; is the halfback next?

Anyone see an easy road out of this nightmare scenario? Am I swinging too far to the other side, and there's still a case to be made for RB as a true skill position? And if so, why are all of the modern stars having one or two world-beating seasons, getting inadvisably paid, and then, injury or not, never having it that good again?

I really don't see how it's a "crisis" or a "nightmare scenario" any more than when NFL teams began to use so-called "third down backs" who could catch better and/or pick up blitzes better than the starting RB. That trend began at least 30 years ago.

My chief memory of Herschel Walker is of the time Adam Vinatieri caught him from behind to prevent a TD on a kickoff return