Randle's potential

[Deep_Freeze]

I agree they are 'average' although I'd use solid starters. I do think Randle has to prove that he is that but I think he'll do that. I don't think you need more than that anymore although it's great to have it. I just wouldn't spend a lot of assets to acquire a 'great' RB.

Yeah I'm not saying a first rounder necessarily unless BPA warrants it, but another 2nd or 3rd rounder would do the job. Randle is an ok fill-in for the time being but I don't want him to be the starter, he just doesn't have enough upside.

I do like that the team decided to go with 4 RBs with Murray on the roster, cause you know you might need them all. No matter how ol' schoolers look at it, the franchise RB is decreasing in its importance big time.

 

[hutch1254]

I mentioned in another thread how cool it would be to go after AP and that one way to look at it is that our window is 2-3 years with the current core. Again, as much as it would great to see AP here I think we stay the course, keep our picks, work on our cap and keep stocking bodies in as many positions as possible.

Now in regard to the RB position I see us trying to do what teams like New Orleans and New England are doing. They are not committed to one guy. They have three guys that play a role. Both teams have a guy that can tote the rock 20 plus times but if they do get that many touches its not always by design. New Orleans has Sproles, 3rd down / redzone guy, Thomas he can between the 20's, catch the ball and go goal line and Ingram up until recently was your meat and potatoes type guy.

New England currently is built in a similar fashion. Ridley meat and potatoes, Blount goal line, short yardage, battering ram, Bolden 3rd down, redzone, blitz pick up. All three could handle it 20 times if necessary.

It's not about one guy pounding it 25 carries anymore. It's about have a stable of horses that can run different types of races from the back field, creating more for the defense to think about. It also keeps your RBs fresh and maybe lessens some injury issues.

For our situation I think we're at least trying to do that, we just might not have the right bodies to do so. Dunbar (the Sproles type player) has been out and Randle is not where he needs to be yet, leaving Murray to pretty much do all. Tanner is not someone that I think any of us feel confident about being a consistent "battering ram" or goal line guy even though he did get that one TD this weekend.

I think Dunbar coming back helps spread it around but I think we can get better at the RB position going forward.

 

[Deep_Freeze]

I mentioned in another thread how cool it would be to go after AP and that one way to look at it is that our window is 2-3 years with the current core. Again, as much as it would great to see AP here I think we stay the course, keep our picks, work on our cap and keep stocking bodies in as many positions as possible.

Now in regard to the RB position I see us trying to do what teams like New Orleans and New England are doing. They are not committed to one guy. They have three guys that play a role. Both teams have a guy that can tote the rock 20 plus times but if they do get that many touches its not always by design. New Orleans has Sproles, 3rd down / redzone guy, Thomas he can between the 20's, catch the ball and go goal line and Ingram up until recently was your meat and potatoes type guy.

New England currently is built in a similar fashion. Ridley meat and potatoes, Blount goal line, short yardage, battering ram, Bolden 3rd down, redzone, blitz pick up. All three could handle it 20 times if necessary.

It's not about one guy pounding it 25 carries anymore. It's about have a stable of horses that can run different types of races from the back field, creating more for the defense to think about. It also keeps your RBs fresh and maybe lessens some injury issues.

For our situation I think we're at least trying to do that, we just might not have the right bodies to do so. Dunbar (the Sproles type player) has been out and Randle is not where he needs to be yet, leaving Murray to pretty much do all. Tanner is not someone that I think any of us feel confident about being a consistent "battering ram" or goal line guy even though he did get that one TD this weekend.

I think Dunbar coming back helps spread it around but I think we can get better at the RB position going forward.

Interesting that you mention AP and most here would immediately think of the Walker trade in reverse and be totally against it. I wouldn't be against it depending on the cost, this is the best player outside of QBs in our league today and I would have no problem adding him to our roster. It would take a 1st rounder, but he is that good and I would probably do it.....anymore than that and its a no.

If you want true greatness there it will cost you, but it shouldn't cost as much as in year's past cause there is less need at the position. I have no problem with trying to continue on our path of trying to use alot of guys, we will just have to put more resources in it cause as you say, we might not have the right bodies there at the moment. I actually think pretty much all of our backs are expendable if they want a new big contract, so more resources will be needed to improve the position. Not like we have the talent back there that say a Seattle or Houston has at the moment.