Ok
I guess we'll wait and see
I hope that our running game is effective otherwise we are in trouble
We'll see, as you say. One, I think it's going to be effective enough, because we block well and put a lot of pressure on defenses with our weapons in the passing game. Two, Even if we're not effective in the running game, as long as we can pass protect, we're good enough to keep the chains moving with the passing game alone. We've seen that for years already.
What I really think is going to happen, though, is you're going to see a modernized version of what we did in the 90's, where we convert early by taking advantage of matchups with the RBs, TEs, and WRs who can legitimately play in multiple positions. Two TE sets where a TE splits out and you end up with a LB covering him or Beasley in the slot. Or splitting Dunbar out when they're playing run and throwing at it. We'll get leads early, apply a lot more pressure than we could last year along the DL, get up by two or more scores, and then run it with the athletic line taking advantage of the ZBS. That can be Randle just taking what's there behind the blockers--which he's good at--or McFadden stretching the defense and then exploding upfield when the DL is tired later in games.
Either way, as long as we pass protect, I see no reason why that won't be effective. Where we had trouble in the past is that we could score points relying heavily on the passing offense, but we couldn't keep teams from doing the same because the defensive personnel was awful (and thin). So it kept us passing aggressively all game long, which eventually led to low-percentage football. It's why we beat bad teams and lost to good ones. But with a good DL rotation with good players, there's looking like there's going to be a lot less time to throw it this year. We're already good at taking the ball away, and ought to be better at that with more pressure, too. When you're up on teams like that and they have to throw to keep up, good things happen eventually.
Anyway, that's why I'm not worried too much about the RBs. And the versatility is why I don't think we're looking to replace Dunbar on the roster. Coaches love him because of what they think they can do with him in the passing game, and we haven't seen it yet because we haven't been able to get him on the field and because they're not going to do anything exotic in preseason, but that doesn't mean that Linehan and Garrett don't have ideas how to use him.
So, if we believe we're not carrying four RBs--and I don't think there's any way we're carrying four RBs on the active roster--then anybody we pick up necessarily goes on the practice squad, or has to beat out Dunbar or McFadden in terms of both their big play ability and their schematic value. And I just don't think a guy like that is going to shake loose. What might shake loose is a solid all around RB who is young and who plays ST and who would be more likely to stay healthy. Somebody better than Gus that we can stash on the PS in case any of the top 3 backs go down during the season.
