CBD Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 And the lifetime of wonderment at the fact they traded up 1 spot with a team that had Adrian Peterson to draft a RB ???!! That definitely trumps Bills FO blunders. They were blocking another team from trading up for Trent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prissythecat Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 My blanket statement is that there is no correlation between a dominant running game and winning. I stand by that. The team that has been most dominant in this century - the Pats - is built almost entirely around passing. They do run it reasonably well, but that's because teams have to defend against the pass on any given play. Same goes for the teams Payton Manning has led. Chris Johnson ran for over 2000 yards and the team went 8-8. AP ran for 2000 and the team squeaked into the playoffs in the last minute of the final game of the season and then was bounced out quickly in the first round. Maurice Jones-Drew led the league in rushing in 2011, but the team went 5-11. Frank Gore had some great seasons before Harbaugh built a decent passing game, and in those years SF was mediocre at best. I would argue that those teams had other issues that dragged them down. AP's awesome running last season was neutralized by some pretty crappy QB play for instance. He kept them in games but Ponder often just gave the ball up. When CJ ran for over 2k, didn't the Titans have a revolving door QB issue? The Jags also have not had any acceptable QB play in recent memory. Maybe the real conclusion should be that you need a reasonably balanced team to do well. You can't just have one dominant aspect and expect to do well. Brees has had some huge passing seasons as of late but the Saints went no where since there was no defense or running game to speak of. When Rodgers had that record setting year two season ago , didn't the Pack exit the playoffs early because their defense couldn't do squat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 They were blocking another team from trading up for Trent. Which turned out to be a great move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 My blanket statement is that there is no correlation between a dominant running game and winning. I stand by that. The team that has been most dominant in this century - the Pats - is built almost entirely around passing. They do run it reasonably well, but that's because teams have to defend against the pass on any given play. Same goes for the teams Payton Manning has led. Chris Johnson ran for over 2000 yards and the team went 8-8. AP ran for 2000 and the team squeaked into the playoffs in the last minute of the final game of the season and then was bounced out quickly in the first round. Maurice Jones-Drew led the league in rushing in 2011, but the team went 5-11. Frank Gore had some great seasons before Harbaugh built a decent passing game, and in those years SF was mediocre at best. I think this piece is pretty much right: http://espn.go.com/n...n-game-changer. Also, one issue with Cleveland is that they do have a weak run blocking line - which is precisely why Richardson was useless to them. The Vikes should have went to the SB with 85 yo Brett Favre. The Titans with CJ went 13-3 QB by Kerry Collins. The Jags went 11-5 and beat Pitt on the road in the playoffs helped by MJD. IT goes both ways. #1 you need a QB. But are the Bills better or worse off for drafting Spiller over Tebow? Talent always should win out. It's also funny that you mention CLE has a weak blocking oline when they have a top 3 LT. Maybe LT is an overrated position? This is a crappy trade if you are a Browns fan but it makes sense. There's chance TRich's value goes down if he has a bad year. To grab a 1st for any player is good value. And if you are going to be bad, be real bad. The problem with the Bills is they rarely hit rock bottom. At the same time, I love this trade for the colts. P.S. There could be a very good chance that all Bama rbs might be completely overrated. Ingram, TRich, Lacey might just run behind dominant, NFL caliber olines that make them look way better than they actually are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 My blanket statement is that there is no correlation between a dominant running game and winning. I stand by that. The team that has been most dominant in this century - the Pats - is built almost entirely around passing. They do run it reasonably well, but that's because teams have to defend against the pass on any given play. Same goes for the teams Payton Manning has led. Chris Johnson ran for over 2000 yards and the team went 8-8. AP ran for 2000 and the team squeaked into the playoffs in the last minute of the final game of the season and then was bounced out quickly in the first round. Maurice Jones-Drew led the league in rushing in 2011, but the team went 5-11. Frank Gore had some great seasons before Harbaugh built a decent passing game, and in those years SF was mediocre at best. I think this piece is pretty much right: http://espn.go.com/n...n-game-changer. Also, one issue with Cleveland is that they do have a weak run blocking line - which is precisely why Richardson was useless to them. Winning a losing a game can be determined by a team's ability to run the ball. Running the ball effectively can be the difference in short yardage and red zone. The spread offenses tend to sputter when the field shrinks in the redzone. The Pats (Fred Taylor, BJGE, Woodhead, etc etc) Giants (Earth Wind and Fire), and Packers (Well If you count Rodgers and Kuhn's 4 Rushing TDS so maybe the Packers were the exception) all could pick up yardage on the ground and win games and or kill clock when necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) My blanket statement is that there is no correlation between a dominant running game and winning. I stand by that. The team that has been most dominant in this century - the Pats - is built almost entirely around passing. They do run it reasonably well, but that's because teams have to defend against the pass on any given play. Same goes for the teams Payton Manning has led. Chris Johnson ran for over 2000 yards and the team went 8-8. AP ran for 2000 and the team squeaked into the playoffs in the last minute of the final game of the season and then was bounced out quickly in the first round. Maurice Jones-Drew led the league in rushing in 2011, but the team went 5-11. Frank Gore had some great seasons before Harbaugh built a decent passing game, and in those years SF was mediocre at best. I think this piece is pretty much right: http://espn.go.com/n...n-game-changer. Also, one issue with Cleveland is that they do have a weak run blocking line - which is precisely why Richardson was useless to them. You actually prove my point. The Giants had the worst rushing stats in the league in 2011, and went 9-7 in the regular season. In the 2012 postseason though, their rushing game exploded.In the NFC wild-card round, against the Atlanta Falcons, Brandn Jacobs had 92 rushing yards on 14 carries. And, in three playoff games, heading into the Super Bowl, Ahmad Bradshaw had 46 carries for 200 yards. Similarly, Green Bay went 10-6 in the reg season in 2010 and in the 2011 playoffs, found James Starks and established a strong running game from the WC game through the Conf Championship. The Vikings only made the playoffs because of AP - so he was WAS the difference between winning and losing. They didn't have the QB and coach to go further. The Steelers and Giants both have SB-winning QBs and HCs. What don't they have? A decent RB. Both 0-2. The QB and HC are the biggest differences. But once you have those, you MUST have a running game. The only way play-action can work is to have a RB that is a threat to run the ball. Mo Jo Drew's team went 5-11 because they had neither a QB or a Coach. If they didn't have him, they may not have won those 5 games. EJ will be successful this year with the Bills IF Spiller and Jackson perform well. Has the NFL become more of a passing league? Yes. But in order to successfuly throw the ball consistently, a team must be able to force a defense to account for a running game. Who did the Packers draft this year with their 2nd pick? A RB. Edited September 19, 2013 by YoloInTheBlo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 your not winning without a qb, but once you have the qb the running game goes a loooong way towards winning it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitro Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Perspective from Indy...folks here are really geeked up over the trade. The Colts are building now for a long run. Looking at the roster they have Luck at QB, Hilton at WR, Allen and Fleener at TE and Richardson and Ballard at RB. They need to upgrade the interior Offensive line talent. The defense just needs to hold its own. Think a repeat on Tony Dungy's Colts. Big win for the Colts. I just look at the drafting history of Cleveland and that 1st round pick is not a given to be a stud. The locals are thinking a deep playoff run. Who can blame them for being excited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Perspective from Indy...folks here are really geeked up over the trade. The Colts are building now for a long run. Looking at the roster they have Luck at QB, Hilton at WR, Allen and Fleener at TE and Richardson and Ballard at RB. They need to upgrade the interior Offensive line talent. The defense just needs to hold its own. Think a repeat on Tony Dungy's Colts. Big win for the Colts. I just look at the drafting history of Cleveland and that 1st round pick is not a given to be a stud. The locals are thinking a deep playoff run. Who can blame them for being excited. This. Irsay wants happy fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 P.S. There could be a very good chance that all Bama rbs might be completely overrated. Ingram, TRich, Lacey might just run behind dominant, NFL caliber olines that make them look way better than they actually are. I agree. I'm also thinking the same thing about 'Bama QBs. Something tells me McCarron is going to be a huge bust in the NFL, when he is not surrounded by physically dominant teammates on offense and defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Perspective from Indy...folks here are really geeked up over the trade. The Colts are building now for a long run. Looking at the roster they have Luck at QB, Hilton at WR, Allen and Fleener at TE and Richardson and Ballard at RB. They need to upgrade the interior Offensive line talent. The defense just needs to hold its own. Think a repeat on Tony Dungy's Colts. Big win for the Colts. I just look at the drafting history of Cleveland and that 1st round pick is not a given to be a stud. The locals are thinking a deep playoff run. Who can blame them for being excited. Its this thinking that got the Colts only one SuperBowl win with perhaps the best QB to ever play. Having a defense that can just hold their own will not get them through the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 And the lifetime of wonderment at the fact they traded up 1 spot with a team that had Adrian Peterson to draft a RB ???!! That definitely trumps Bills FO blunders. It sure does. They were blocking another team from trading up for Trent. It's like tilting at windmills. I'm not sure who they were trying to jump ahead of but giving up a 4th, 5th, and 7th to move up one spot seems like a pretty bad move to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 In this thread we point to the Vikings wildly successful 10-6 season & the Packers colossal 15-1 failure to make our point about the importance of RB's. Also James Starks who was approximately the 103rd best RB in the league. Without him they might've had to settle for the Buff. St. RB to get them 3YPC after the Philly game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 (edited) You actually prove my point. The Giants had the worst rushing stats in the league in 2011, and went 9-7 in the regular season. In the 2012 postseason though, their rushing game exploded. In the NFC wild-card round, against the Atlanta Falcons, Brandn Jacobs had 92 rushing yards on 14 carries. And, in three playoff games, heading into the Super Bowl, Ahmad Bradshaw had 46 carries for 200 yards. Similarly, Green Bay went 10-6 in the reg season in 2010 and in the 2011 playoffs, found James Starks and established a strong running game from the WC game through the Conf Championship. The Vikings only made the playoffs because of AP - so he was WAS the difference between winning and losing. They didn't have the QB and coach to go further. The Steelers and Giants both have SB-winning QBs and HCs. What don't they have? A decent RB. Both 0-2. The QB and HC are the biggest differences. But once you have those, you MUST have a running game. The only way play-action can work is to have a RB that is a threat to run the ball. Mo Jo Drew's team went 5-11 because they had neither a QB or a Coach. If they didn't have him, they may not have won those 5 games. EJ will be successful this year with the Bills IF Spiller and Jackson perform well. Has the NFL become more of a passing league? Yes. But in order to successfuly throw the ball consistently, a team must be able to force a defense to account for a running game. Who did the Packers draft this year with their 2nd pick? A RB. The giants had 95 rushing yards in their playoff against green bay. They had 85 against SF. Gb had 147, and sf had 150. The giants and pats both ran relatively poorly in the sb, with the giants rushing for 114 yards at slightly under 4 yards per rush. The niners lost that game for one reason -- alex smith couldn't hit the broadside of a barn on his throws in the fourth quarter an ot. Edited September 20, 2013 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 The giants had 95 rushing yards in their playoff against green bay. They had 85 against SF. Gb had 147, and sf had 150. The giants and pats both ran relatively poorly in the sb, with the giants rushing for 114 yards at slightly under 4 yards per rush. The niners lost that game for one reason -- alex smith couldn't hit the broadside of a barn on his throws in the fourth quarter an ot. And muffing 2 punts and the lame Bradshaw "non-fumble". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 And muffing 2 punts and the lame Bradshaw "non-fumble". Yeah but if smith is remotely decent late the niners win. I actually think smith is ok, but he was bad late in that game. Guys were open, and he had enough time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 Harbaugh is the best for almost winning it all with this guy. He makes checkdown Trent look like Dan Fouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny33 Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 Richardson is 22-years-old and somehow has three kids, including a six-year-old. He hasn't been very productive in the league, especially for a running back drafted third overall. He strikes me as being an irresponsible, immature individual, even though he hasn't any publicized incidents. I'm amazed that the Browns were able to get a first round pick for him. It's a good trade on their end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaryPinC Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 Richardson is 22-years-old and somehow has three kids, including a six-year-old. He hasn't been very productive in the league, especially for a running back drafted third overall. He strikes me as being an irresponsible, immature individual, even though he hasn't any publicized incidents. I'm amazed that the Browns were able to get a first round pick for him. It's a good trade on their end. He's immature, but forget about the kids thing. It's the beginning of his second year. What was CJ Spiller doing his second year? Having fans declare him a bust, right? I think Trent will have a good year for the Colts. I've seen him play and I think he's got talent. He's had to learn two new offenses in two years and now 3 in less than 2 years. I'm less than impressed with Banner and the GM but will reserve judgment until after 2014 season. As far as Weeden, he threw some great balls in preseason and is also learning his second offense in two years. He has a sprained thumb and I don't get why all of a sudden he's a condemned man. Just me I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 And the lifetime of wonderment at the fact they traded up 1 spot with a team that had Adrian Peterson to draft a RB ???!! That definitely trumps Bills FO blunders. And that front office was run by Mike Holmgren to boot!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts