McShay hinting....

[ColtsBlueFL]

THAT would certainly be the thing that is far more concerning, for sure. Keep in mind, though, if he had been inactive for quite some time due to his being injured, then is it not fair to expect that of course he might not yet be back to elite condition? The question to be asked is how much time has he had to get back in condition since being green lighted to fully commence work outs and is that timeframe reasonable to expect a player coming off injury to be back in shape?

 

How did he get a hammy injury to nurse (and miss impotrtant combine/Pro days) AFTER his BCS natuiional championship game performance?

[Gavin]

It was predicted, but assumption was he was(hopefully) faster,but  he was even slower.  He will fall.  No clue to how good how will be on the field (better / worse than Ingram/Richardson). just know he has injury history building (Turf toe, hammy's etc) and no elite speed.

The lack of elite speed in my opinion is not such a big deal, Ballard does not have elite speed as well as some top Backs in the league, what I want to know when it comes to Backs is do they have the vision and shiftness to see a hole and burst through it? ya dont have to give me a home run on every carry . Just take care of the ball and be able to break a few tackles for some 10-20 yard gains here and there along with a consistent 4 ypc

[ColtsBlueFL]

The lack of elite speed in my opinion is not such a big deal, Ballard does not have elite speed as well as some top Backs in the league, what I want to know when it comes to Backs is do they have the vision and shiftness to see a hole and burst through it? ya dont have to give me a home run on every carry . Just take care of the ball and be able to break a few tackles for some 10-20 yard gains here and there along with a consistent 4 ypc

 

I do too, but not from a round 1 top RB talent I expect that if he can bust through, he can finish the job.  Otherwise give me Le'Veon Bell in rouind 3 or hopefully even 4.

[jshipp23]

If I had the choice between spending a 1st round pick on an elite pass rusher, offensive lineman, cornerback, etc etc versus an elite RB, the running back would be pretty low on the list. Remember, any first round pick you spend on a RB will be at cost of upgrading another position.

The real question is where you want to spend your limited resources. The smart teams have already figured out that RB isn't that spot.

The only elite O-linemen that has a chance to drop is Cooper and I highly doubt it and their are no elite CB's or pass rushers that will be their at 24 unless you take a risk on Hunt...Lacy on the other hand is THE TOP back and I'm not just basing it off what pundits say I'm basing it off what I've seen him do in the toughest conference by far in college football..We will never have the chance to get a back of his CALIBER as we will be picking from 28-32 for the next 10 years at least,,,,This is our chance and if we take advantage of it we will reap the benefits.

[rockywoj]

I do too, but not from a round 1 top RB talent I expect that if he can bust through, he can finish the job.  Otherwise give me Le'Veon Bell in rouind 3 or hopefully even 4.

For the record, I am not advocating for Lacy to be the Colts 1st round pick, in fact if you read my first post in this thread you'd see that, but what I am saying is that if you think .03 to .08 seconds off in the 40 yard dash is a measureable that makes a difference in determining the value of a runningback, then I think you are completely off base as a talent evaluator.  Like Superman said in agreeing with my premise, a .03 to .05 variance in the 40 is effectively meaningless. 

 

He may not have "elite" speed, but he is a big man and he is fast.  I'd say prudence would be to defer to the tape of how he is in actually playing the game of football.  As for how he measure up in THAT department, I cannot say as I have not evaluated him.

 

For my own draft strategy, if Warmack falls out of the top 10, I would try to trade up to get into position to take him.

[jshipp23]

For the record, I am not advocating for Lacy to be the Colts 1st round pick, in fact if you read my first post in this thread you'd see that, but what I am saying is that if you think .03 to .08 seconds off in the 40 yard dash is a measureable that makes a difference in determining the value of a runningback, then I think you are completely off base as a talent evaluator.  Like Superman said in agreeing with my premise, a .03 to .05 variance in the 40 is effectively meaningless. 

 

He may not have "elite" speed, but he is a big man and he is fast.  I'd say prudence would be to defer to the tape of how he is in actually playing the game of football.  As for how he measure up in THAT department, I cannot say as I have not evaluated him.

 

For my own draft strategy, if Warmack falls out of the top 10, I would try to trade up to get into position to take him.

People seem to have 1 mindset on here...O-LINE, O-LINE, O-LINE...I can understand having PTSD from watching Luck get killed last year, but if they reach on O-LINE that is just as likely to bust as any other position..I have said many times I'd take Cooper, Warmack, and wouldn't be upset if they took J.Jones or even Fluker. If they are gone however, I think Lacy could have a huge impact and we can find a comparable guard to anyone not named Cooper, Warmack, and Fluker in the 3rd..Frederick, Winters, Schwenke, or Barrett Jones all could be their and be very good guards or centers in the NFL...The 1 track mindset and inflexibilty is what bothers me most. There are many ways we could go, but the biggest mistake would be reaching in the 1st for need...I almost hope we do take Lacy just so some of these people can see the impact a thoroughbred back can have, he really reminds me of Jamal Lewis with his speed, power, and shiftiness and I don't think having Jamal Lewis would be a bad thing...

[ColtsBlueFL]

For the record, I am not advocating for Lacy to be the Colts 1st round pick, in fact if you read my first post in this thread you'd see that, but what I am saying is that if you think .03 to .08 seconds off in the 40 yard dash is a measureable that makes a difference in determining the value of a runningback, then I think you are completely off base as a talent evaluator.  Like Superman said in agreeing with my premise, a .03 to .05 variance in the 40 is effectively meaningless. 

 

He may not have "elite" speed, but he is a big man and he is fast.  I'd say prudence would be to defer to the tape of how he is in actually playing the game of football.  As for how he measure up in THAT department, I cannot say as I have not evaluated him.

 

For my own draft strategy, if Warmack falls out of the top 10, I would try to trade up to get into position to take him.

 

We are all free to form our own opinion.  They all will get scrutiny.  In the vein, here's but one site that does not agree with your opinion-

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/blog/rob-rang/22051749/2013-pro-days-bamas-eddie-lacy-clocked-at-458-462-

 

Yes, he is still the best back and likely the first off the board, but he hasn't impressed very much yet.  His 40 would have placed him at #15 at the combine for RB's. And I've seen many a interview of teams scouts/coaches/GM's and they often place a great deal of importance on those combine and pro day numbers and how those results could translate into what their program calls for.  The higher the draft choice, the more relevance is placed. Same can be said for interviews and off the field traits too.

 

Lacy is good, but I feel he should go in the second round.  But for 50 years at least 1 RB has been taken in round 1.  This year will be no different.  I think possibly Bengals or Packers take him if he is there for them.

[GoColts8818]

People seem to have 1 mindset on here...O-LINE, O-LINE, O-LINE...I can understand having PTSD from watching Luck get killed last year, but if they reach on O-LINE that is just as likely to bust as any other position..I have said many times I'd take Cooper, Warmack, and wouldn't be upset if they took J.Jones or even Fluker. If they are gone however, I think Lacy could have a huge impact and we can find a comparable guard to anyone not named Cooper, Warmack, and Fluker in the 3rd..Frederick, Winters, Schwenke, or Barrett Jones all could be their and be very good guards or centers in the NFL...The 1 track mindset and inflexibilty is what bothers me most. There are many ways we could go, but the biggest mistake would be reaching in the 1st for need...I almost hope we do take Lacy just so some of these people can see the impact a thoroughbred back can have, he really reminds me of Jamal Lewis with his speed, power, and shiftiness and I don't think having Jamal Lewis would be a bad thing...

You know I think the Colts have made the moves they are going to make for the o-line.  I think they like the tackle and Thomas that they signed.  I think they expect to find the other starter at guard from someone already on the roster.  As much as fans don't like him I think Satale is at least going to start the year at Center and while he might get yanked for Shipley I don't see the Colts adding another Center this year.  Castonzo is the other starting tackle so I think that's the starters.  With Link, Ijalana, McGlynn, Anderson and Reitz doing battle for the other starting spot at guard and the back up positions.  The good news is when you throw in Shipley all the would be back up linemen can or have the positional to play more than one position other than maybe Reitz, who could probably play tackle in a real pinch, and Anderson.  So unless a guy that is just a total steal for the Colts is sitting there at 24 I don't think they are going to go o-line high.  I think they are going to add depth to another position rather it be RB, WR, CB, Safety, DT, or Linebacker. 

[Mouthfire]

The only elite O-linemen that has a chance to drop is Cooper and I highly doubt it and their are no elite CB's or pass rushers that will be their at 24 unless you take a risk on Hunt...Lacy on the other hand is THE TOP back and I'm not just basing it off what pundits say I'm basing it off what I've seen him do in the toughest conference by far in college football..We will never have the chance to get a back of his CALIBER as we will be picking from 28-32 for the next 10 years at least,,,,This is our chance and if we take advantage of it we will reap the benefits.

 

That's not quite true.  The biggest theme of the draft is that it is incredibly deep in multiple positions, particularly positions that the Colts need.  John Elway said it himself: this draft is so deep, that picking at 28 will be like picking at 10. 

 

In other words, someone highly ranked will dropped.  It happens every year, and this year it will likely happen with multiple players. 

 

Also, Lacy may be the top ranked back, but he's the best of a mediocre group.  He's really not that good.  You could pick up Stephon Taylor in the 3rd or 4th round, and probably get fairly similar production in the pros.

[Mouthfire]

People seem to have 1 mindset on here...O-LINE, O-LINE, O-LINE...I can understand having PTSD from watching Luck get killed last year, but if they reach on O-LINE that is just as likely to bust as any other position..I have said many times I'd take Cooper, Warmack, and wouldn't be upset if they took J.Jones or even Fluker. If they are gone however, I think Lacy could have a huge impact and we can find a comparable guard to anyone not named Cooper, Warmack, and Fluker in the 3rd..Frederick, Winters, Schwenke, or Barrett Jones all could be their and be very good guards or centers in the NFL...The 1 track mindset and inflexibilty is what bothers me most. There are many ways we could go, but the biggest mistake would be reaching in the 1st for need...I almost hope we do take Lacy just so some of these people can see the impact a thoroughbred back can have, he really reminds me of Jamal Lewis with his speed, power, and shiftiness and I don't think having Jamal Lewis would be a bad thing...

 

Actually, the reason people keep harping about the O line around here, is because they know their football.

 

During last season, I did an in-depth statistical analysis of Donald Brown's performance from game to game, and compared it to other backs, such as Adrian Peterson and Arian Foster.  Unfortunately, the thread seems to have been taken down at the end of the season, but here is the gist:

 

________________________________________________________

 

When getting hit behind the line of scrimmage on a running play (ie poor offensive run blocking), Brown averaged around +0.5 YPC. 

 

When getting to the line of scrimmage untouched, Brown averaged around +4.9 YPC.

 

 

Adrian Peterson's and Arian Foster's numbers were virtually identical.

 

_________________________________________________________

 

 

What was the difference?  AP and Foster were hit behind the line of scrimmage 15-20% of the time.  Donald Brown was hit behind the line of scrimmage a blistering 35% of the time... essentially twice as much.  This was the only difference.

 

So when people keep saying that the offensive line needs to be fixed, not the running back... that's the reason.  It's hard to have a consistent running game when you get hit behind the line of scrimmage 1 out of every 3 times.  And you could see last season, when Donald had a good game, it was always because the offensive line got backfield penetration down to the more normal 15-20%.

[SteelCityColt]

Actually, the reason people keep harping about the O line around here, is because they know their football.

 

During last season, I did an in-depth statistical analysis of Donald Brown's performance from game to game, and compared it to other backs, such as Adrian Peterson and Arian Foster.  Unfortunately, the thread seems to have been taken down at the end of the season, but here is the gist:

 

________________________________________________________

 

When getting hit behind the line of scrimmage on a running play (ie poor offensive run blocking), Brown averaged around +0.5 YPC.

 

When getting to the line of scrimmage untouched, Brown averaged around +4.9 YPC.

 

 

Adrian Peterson's and Arian Foster's numbers were virtually identical.

 

_________________________________________________________

 

 

What was the difference?  AP and Foster were hit behind the line of scrimmage 15-20% of the time.  Donald Brown was hit behind the line of scrimmage a blistering 35% of the time... essentially twice as much.  This was the only difference.

 

So when people keep saying that the offensive line needs to be fixed, not the running back... that's the reason.  It's hard to have a consistent running game when you get hit behind the line of scrimmage 1 out of every 3 times.  And you could see last season, when Donald had a good game, it was always because the offensive line got backfield penetration down to the more normal 15-20%.

 

Shh don't you come on here with logic and facts, don't you know your just meant to SHOUT your opinion across a number of threads  

[Superman]

Actually, the reason people keep harping about the O line around here, is because they know their football.

 

During last season, I did an in-depth statistical analysis of Donald Brown's performance from game to game, and compared it to other backs, such as Adrian Peterson and Arian Foster.  Unfortunately, the thread seems to have been taken down at the end of the season, but here is the gist:

 

________________________________________________________

 

When getting hit behind the line of scrimmage on a running play (ie poor offensive run blocking), Brown averaged around +0.5 YPC.

 

When getting to the line of scrimmage untouched, Brown averaged around +4.9 YPC.

 

 

Adrian Peterson's and Arian Foster's numbers were virtually identical.

 

_________________________________________________________

 

 

What was the difference?  AP and Foster were hit behind the line of scrimmage 15-20% of the time.  Donald Brown was hit behind the line of scrimmage a blistering 35% of the time... essentially twice as much.  This was the only difference.

 

So when people keep saying that the offensive line needs to be fixed, not the running back... that's the reason.  It's hard to have a consistent running game when you get hit behind the line of scrimmage 1 out of every 3 times.  And you could see last season, when Donald had a good game, it was always because the offensive line got backfield penetration down to the more normal 15-20%.

 

I'm a big fan of your breakdowns, as you probably know. But I'd like to point out that one of the criticisms of Brown is that his poor anticipation and vision lead to him getting hit in the backfield more often. And I think that's a legitimate criticism. It's not the only factor, to be sure, but it does play a role. If I'm not mistaken, didn't Ballard get hit in the backfield less often than Brown? If so, that lends credence to the criticism.

[jshipp23]

I'm a big fan of your breakdowns, as you probably know. But I'd like to point out that one of the criticisms of Brown is that his poor anticipation and vision lead to him getting hit in the backfield more often. And I think that's a legitimate criticism. It's not the only factor, to be sure, but it does play a role. If I'm not mistaken, didn't Ballard get hit in the backfield less often than Brown? If so, that lends credence to the criticism.

Very good way of putting it...Brown is fool's gold and that's what frustrates me personally so much about him...I see his speed and what he could do once he hits the holes if he would just see them and do it..He just lacks the instincts and vision which Ballard has, but doesn't have the home-run speed...If Brown had Ballards instincts and vision he would be Marshall Faulk, but he doesn't and you can't develop those traits..You either have them or you don't, and after 4 years it's obvious by now he doesn't.

[Superman]

Very good way of putting it...Brown is fool's gold and that's what frustrates me personally so much about him...I see his speed and what he could do once he hits the holes if he would just see them and do it..He just lacks the instincts and vision which Ballard has, but doesn't have the home-run speed...If Brown had Ballards instincts and vision he would be Marshall Faulk, but he doesn't and you can't develop those traits..You either have them or you don't, and after 4 years it's obvious by now he doesn't.

 

It's fine if he doesn't have the innate characteristics that great backs have. He can still be serviceable as a part of a platoon. His speed and his pass blocking (which has become pretty good, contrary to popular opinion) make him a valuable tool for a balanced offense.

[jshipp23]

It's fine if he doesn't have the innate characteristics that great backs have. He can still be serviceable as a part of a platoon. His speed and his pass blocking (which has become pretty good, contrary to popular opinion) make him a valuable tool for a balanced offense.

I'm ok with him as a 3rd back or in packages that can get him in space...He gets paid too much $$$ for what he is though, and while they may keep him this year, this will be his swan song as a Colt.

[rockywoj]

  In the vein, here's but one site that does not agree with your opinion-

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/blog/rob-rang/22051749/2013-pro-days-bamas-eddie-lacy-clocked-at-458-462-

 

 

I read the article at the link, but I don't think I understand what premise of mine it is that you think the article disagreed with, for I read nothing that I am necessarily in disagreement with or that contradicts what I have said.

[jshipp23]

I read the article at the link, but I don't think I understand what premise of mine it is that you think the article disagreed with, for I read nothing that I am necessarily in disagreement with or that contradicts what I have said.

After watching the workout and listening to his interviews I think he just doesn't want it, and as talented as he is and could be he will be a waste if he doesn't have the drive...I looked into other backs and after watching Giovani Bernard I see the next Maurice Jones Drew sitting there just waiting to be a Colt...

[rockywoj]

People seem to have 1 mindset on here...O-LINE, O-LINE, O-LINE...I can understand having PTSD from watching Luck get killed last year, but if they reach on O-LINE that is just as likely to bust as any other position..I have said many times I'd take Cooper, Warmack, and wouldn't be upset if they took J.Jones or even Fluker. If they are gone however, I think Lacy could have a huge impact and we can find a comparable guard to anyone not named Cooper, Warmack, and Fluker in the 3rd..Frederick, Winters, Schwenke, or Barrett Jones all could be their and be very good guards or centers in the NFL...The 1 track mindset and inflexibilty is what bothers me most. There are many ways we could go, but the biggest mistake would be reaching in the 1st for need...I almost hope we do take Lacy just so some of these people can see the impact a thoroughbred back can have, he really reminds me of Jamal Lewis with his speed, power, and shiftiness and I don't think having Jamal Lewis would be a bad thing...

I hear what you're saying.  I don't think I have been singularly of 1 mindset O-Line.  That being said, I think that to build a super solid OL is of paramount importance in building a longer term, successful offense.  The Colts have decent weapons, but the OL to date has ben a HUGE drag on both running and passing success.  Until currently players show otherwise, I peg the OL as being two super solid players short of being a super solid OL.  Maybe some of the offseason signings will show to be adequate fills or maybe Ijilana can return from injury and emerge as the very solid OG that many talent evaluators had him pegged as developing into.  I know I am sure hoping that Ijilana can emerge.

 

Ultimately, though, to me a great OL will have two all-pro caliber OTs, an all-pro caliber C and an all-pro caliber OG.  I know that few OL's can boast such frontline talent, but to have such, with the rest of the talent that the Offense has, a super solid OL will translate into a super dangerous O.  As we saw during the Manning era, a super potent O can cover up a lot of defensive deficiency.  The OL has been a drag for a good 4 to 5 years and if one of the studs can be had at a reasonable price, unless a better player is available in a relative need position, then I would go OL.

 

What can I say, I believe dynasties are built from the trenches out. 

[Mouthfire]

I'm a big fan of your breakdowns, as you probably know. But I'd like to point out that one of the criticisms of Brown is that his poor anticipation and vision lead to him getting hit in the backfield more often. And I think that's a legitimate criticism. It's not the only factor, to be sure, but it does play a role. If I'm not mistaken, didn't Ballard get hit in the backfield less often than Brown? If so, that lends credence to the criticism.

I don't know if that's really true. Of course, I don't have the data from the thread available anymore, but as far as I recall, the rates of backfield penetration were pretty identical in the games that they played together.

I also don't think field vision had anything to do with it (i.e. getting hit in the backfield). It was pretty regular that Brown got hit in the backfield as soon as he got the ball, often by more than one defender at once. If he's contacted as soon as he gets the ball, I think that's much more likely a run blocking issue than a field vision issue. This happened to Ballard, too, so it's not really specific to Brown.

You could make the argument, though, that Brown was terrible at "finding the hole" once he did get the ball cleanly. From what I saw on tape, more often than not, the holes that were supposed to open up, just didn't open up at all. To me, that looked like a blocking issue, particularly from the interior. It was a really eye-opening experience, watching the Colts interior offensive line consistently get man-handled and pushed backward, play after play... and the then comparing it the Texan's offensive line, who pretty consistently drove the opposing defensive line 2 yards or so, down the field.

I've heard from other fans that Brown should have just "bounced it to the outside" in those cases. Maybe... maybe not. I don't know how he was instructed to handle the situation by the coaching. Perhaps he was told to hit the "supposed" hole as hard as he could to minimize loss of yardage. That would be my best guess, based on what I was seeing, but no one outside the Colts would know that answer for sure.

[jshipp23]

I don't know if that's really true. Of course, I don't have the data from the thread available anymore, but as far as I recall, the rates of backfield penetration were pretty identical in the games that they played together.

I also don't think field vision had anything to do with it (i.e. getting hit in the backfield). It was pretty regular that Brown got hit in the backfield as soon as he got the ball, often by more than one defender at once. If he's contacted as soon as he gets the ball, I think that's much more likely a run blocking issue than a field vision issue. This happened to Ballard, too, so it's not really specific to Brown.

You could make the argument, though, that Brown was terrible at "finding the hole" once he did get the ball cleanly. From what I saw on tape, more often than not, the holes that were supposed to open up, just didn't open up at all. To me, that looked like a blocking issue, particularly from the interior. It was a really eye-opening experience, watching the Colts interior offensive line consistently get man-handled and pushed backward, play after play... and the then comparing it the Texan's offensive line, who pretty consistently drove the opposing defensive line 2 yards or so, down the field.

I've heard from other fans that Brown should have just "bounced it to the outside" in those cases. Maybe... maybe not. I don't know how he was instructed to handle the situation by the coaching. Perhaps he was told to hit the "supposed" hole as hard as he could to minimize loss of yardage. That would be my best guess, based on what I was seeing, but no one outside the Colts would know that answer for sure.

He missed so many cut-backs and chances to bounce it out it wasn't even funny, it happened every game,

[Mouthfire]

Don't get me wrong. I'm not a Brown fan at all. Like Superman... I did not like the Brown pick, and several years out, I still don't like the Brown pick.

But at the same time, I don't think Brown is horrible. He's average. At worst, he's serviceable... and he's currently cheap. But if you were to ask me, objectively speaking, what would be the best way to fix the Colts running game... the answer would be to fix the offensive line. Number one priority. And I think the numbers bear this out.

[Superman]

I don't know if that's really true. Of course, I don't have the data from the thread available anymore, but as far as I recall, the rates of backfield penetration were pretty identical in the games that they played together.

I also don't think field vision had anything to do with it (i.e. getting hit in the backfield). It was pretty regular that Brown got hit in the backfield as soon as he got the ball, often by more than one defender at once. If he's contacted as soon as he gets the ball, I think that's much more likely a run blocking issue than a field vision issue. This happened to Ballard, too, so it's not really specific to Brown.

You could make the argument, though, that Brown was terrible at "finding the hole" once he did get the ball cleanly. From what I saw on tape, more often than not, the holes that were supposed to open up, just didn't open up at all. To me, that looked like a blocking issue, particularly from the interior. It was a really eye-opening experience, watching the Colts interior offensive line consistently get man-handled and pushed backward, play after play... and the then comparing it the Texan's offensive line, who pretty consistently drove the opposing defensive line 2 yards or so, down the field.

I've heard from other fans that Brown should have just "bounced it to the outside" in those cases. Maybe... maybe not. I don't know how he was instructed to handle the situation by the coaching. Perhaps he was told to hit the "supposed" hole as hard as he could to minimize loss of yardage. That would be my best guess, based on what I was seeing, but no one outside the Colts would know that answer for sure.

 

All fair points. I'm not arguing that Brown was the sole cause for his getting hit the backfield so frequently. But I am saying that I think he bears some of the responsibility. There is no question that our offensive line was pretty terrible at opening lanes for all of our backs. Until you see a back get consistent blocking, it's hard to be critical of him for getting hit in the backfield a third of the time he gets a carry.

[Mouthfire]

He missed so many cut-backs and chances to bounce it out it wasn't even funny, it happened every game,

Read the last part of that post. It depends on how he was coached by the staff. If he was coached to hit the hole, regardless of whether or not it opened, in order to minimize loss of yardage, that's not really his fault. But again, I'm not part of the Colts organization, so I can't tell you if that's true. But it looked like that was the case on tape.

[Mouthfire]

All fair points. I'm not arguing that Brown was the sole cause for his getting hit the backfield so frequently. But I am saying that I think he bears some of the responsibility. There is no question that our offensive line was pretty terrible at opening lanes for all of our backs. Until you see a back get consistent blocking, it's hard to be critical of him for getting hit in the backfield a third of the time he gets a carry.

No arguments there. Again, I don't think Brown is all that great. But I think you stand to gain a lot more ground by drafting a high-grade offensive lineman than another running back.

[rockywoj]

... But I think you stand to gain a lot more ground by drafting a high-grade offensive lineman than another running back.

Agreed.

[ColtsBlueFL]

I read the article at the link, but I don't think I understand what premise of mine it is that you think the article disagreed with, for I read nothing that I am necessarily in disagreement with or that contradicts what I have said.

 

"He ran slightly slower Thursday, confirming he lacks the home-run speed some scouts believe is critical to warrant selection in the first round."

 

I was just pointing out a few one hundredths did make a difference in many scouts minds whether he would fall to round 2 or not.  I'm thinking if he was in the low 4.5x ( few hundredths below estimated time) he might still be considered round 1 by most.  Now only some do.

[jshipp23]

No arguments there. Again, I don't think Brown is all that great. But I think you stand to gain a lot more ground by drafting a high-grade offensive lineman than another running back.

The only true high grade OL we have a remote shot at is Cooper and I would take him...I don't see much difference in Warford compared with  some 3rd round guys...If we get a true dynamic big play RB it's gonna open up the passing game that much more and will have just as big of an effect as a linemen..We added 2 starters to the line already, 1 or 2 of the young linemen  from last year will be much better for going through it and Iljalana may be healthy as well...

[Mouthfire]

The only true high grade OL we have a remote shot at is Cooper and I would take him...I don't see much difference in Warford compared with  some 3rd round guys...If we get a true dynamic big play RB it's gonna open up the passing game that much more and will have just as big of an effect as a linemen..We added 2 starters to the line already, 1 or 2 of the young linemen  from last year will be much better for going through it and Iljalana may be healthy as well...

 

No, that's kind of the point of the analysis. Unless it's Barry Sanders, it won't make a lick of a difference if whatever RB you pick keeps getting hit in the backfield 1 out of every 3 times.  Adrian Peterson didn't average more than +0.5 YPC in this scenario, so I'm pretty sure whichever back you pick, isn't going to do much better.  And I'm pretty sure Barry Sanders isn't anywhere in this draft.

 

 

 

So, in other words... fix the friggin' offensive line.... waaaay before you even think about drafting another running back.

[jshipp23]

No, that's kind of the point of the analysis. Unless it's Barry Sanders, it won't make a lick of a difference if whatever RB you pick keeps getting hit in the backfield 1 out of every 3 times.  Adrian Peterson didn't average more than +0.5 YPC in this scenario, so I'm pretty sure whichever back you pick, isn't going to do much better.  And I'm pretty sure Barry Sanders isn't anywhere in this draft.

 

 

 

So, in other words... fix the friggin' offensive line.... waaaay before you even think about drafting another running back.

We added 2 starters to the line via free agency, the young guys who struggled last year should be improved and we will pick up another guard through the draft...This line will already be significantly improved so the RB's will be getting hit in the backfield much less...You act like this will be the same line, it's already been upgraded.

[Superman]

We added 2 starters to the line via free agency, the young guys who struggled last year should be improved and we will pick up another guard through the draft...This line will already be significantly improved so the RB's will be getting hit in the backfield much less...You act like this will be the same line, it's already been upgraded.

 

The point is that you can't fairly evaluate a running back until you see said back behind a decent offensive line.

 

So if we've upgraded our line, let's now see what Brown looks like. He's not going to magically become the best back in the league, but perhaps our stable of backs will be upgraded with a better blocking unit in front of them. Doesn't that make sense.

 

And all that having been said, even if we have fixed our offensive line, even if it's the best in the league, there's still little reason for us to spend a high pick on back.

[Gavin]

The point is that you can't fairly evaluate a running back until you see said back behind a decent offensive line.

 

So if we've upgraded our line, let's now see what Brown looks like. He's not going to magically become the best back in the league, but perhaps our stable of backs will be upgraded with a better blocking unit in front of them. Doesn't that make sense.

 

And all that having been said, even if we have fixed our offensive line, even if it's the best in the league, there's still little reason for us to spend a high pick on back.

your wasting your time, he is as stuck on a rb as I WAS on the Corner/OLB debate 

[jshipp23]

The point is that you can't fairly evaluate a running back until you see said back behind a decent offensive line.

 

So if we've upgraded our line, let's now see what Brown looks like. He's not going to magically become the best back in the league, but perhaps our stable of backs will be upgraded with a better blocking unit in front of them. Doesn't that make sense.

 

And all that having been said, even if we have fixed our offensive line, even if it's the best in the league, there's still little reason for us to spend a high pick on back.

All depends on the type of offense and team your trying to create...I have visions of the Greatest Show on Turf 2.0 and that requires many weapons. 

[Superman]

All depends on the type of offense and team your trying to create...I have visions of the Greatest Show on Turf 2.0 and that requires many weapons. 

 

How does that depend on your offense? If you have an improved offensive line, under what circumstances won't that improve your rushing attack? I don't care what offense you run, a better offensive line equals a better rushing attack.

[AntonMcG]

All depends on the type of offense and team your trying to create...I have visions of the Greatest Show on Turf 2.0 and that requires many weapons. 

 

Weapons are only weapons because they're allowed to be weapons.

[Mouthfire]

We added 2 starters to the line via free agency, the young guys who struggled last year should be improved and we will pick up another guard through the draft...This line will already be significantly improved so the RB's will be getting hit in the backfield much less...You act like this will be the same line, it's already been upgraded.

 

Well, if the line is truly upgraded (and you really don't know until the season comes around), then you have to wait to see how your RBs do.

 

If the backfield penetration is really reduced, and Ballard and Brown end up averaging 4.7 YPC each, then you're wasting your time by drafting another RB.