Rank your RBs

[VACowboy]

I like his running just fine. But I'm not expecting someone who couldn't even crack a thousand yds in college to come in and replace the offensive player of the year.

Especially when he's fat

Expecting any RB to do what Murray did last year is unrealistic. IMO.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I like his running just fine. But I'm not expecting someone who couldn't even crack a thousand yds in college to come in and replace the offensive player of the year.

Especially when he's fat

I guess I don't understand what you mean when you say he has not run for a thousand yards. He ran for 1183 yards in Soph. year. He ran for 982 yards in his Jr. year.

 

[Gaede]

I guess I don't understand what you mean when you say he has not run for a thousand yards. He ran for 1183 yards in Soph. year. He ran for 982 yards in his Jr. year.

That's what I mean. Sorry I should clarify, couldn't crack a thousand yds in his last year

 

[Gaede]

Expecting any RB to do what Murray did last year is unrealistic. IMO.

Obviously. But some are more likely than others to give us the production that we need.

 

[Alexander]

Expecting any RB to do what Murray did last year is unrealistic. IMO.

Nonsense. There are people here than think it is just a piece of cake since the opposing defenses just fall down at the mere sight of our terrorizing OL and that we could just take the current group of backs and sleepwalk to 1800 yards.

 

[locked&loaded]

I like his running just fine. But I'm not expecting someone who couldn't even crack a thousand yds in college to come in and replace the offensive player of the year.

Especially when he's fat

He seriously looked much swifter two years ago. What are we supposed to take away from that? Just hope that he can not only return to his previous form but also improve on it?

 

[Gaede]

He seriously looked much swifter two years ago. What are we supposed to take away from that? Just hope that he can not only return to his previous form but also improve on it?

Yeah, I agree. He looked better in 2013 tape and still didn't produce that much. I don't really care what a player did two years ago, unless there was a position switch.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

That's what I mean. Sorry I should clarify, couldn't crack a thousand yds in his last year

I think you have to look at South Carolina's offense. He had 199 carries. That's really not a lot of carries, in comparison. I don't think it's a matter of his lack of production but instead, a product of opportunities and that's not a bad thing. You also have to remember that Conner Shaw helped keep defenses honest in 2013. He didn't have that last year.

 

[Gaede]

I think you have to look at South Carolina's offense. He had 199 carries. That's really not a lot of carries, in comparison. I don't think it's a matter of his lack of production but instead, a product of opportunities and that's not a bad thing. You also have to remember that Conner Shaw helped keep defenses honest in 2013. He didn't have that last year.

True. But these excuses can be applied to most players. Tevin Coleman had zero help on his team and put up 2k, averaging 40yds per TD.

I like Davis' running style a lot, I just have doubts because his relative lack of production.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

True. But these excuses can be applied to most players. Tevin Coleman had zero help on his team and put up 2k, averaging 40yds per TD.

I like Davis' running style a lot, I just have doubts because his relative lack of production.

That's true, to a point. I mean, this is why I like Coleman better but I think the point here is that you can't look at it in a vacuum. I think you have to look at these things whenever you are evaluating players. I also think you have to consider the fact that he is playing in the SEC. Defensively, SEC is the best conference in College Football over the last several years by a good margine IMO. I think the value proposition here is that he's good value at where you might get him.

You look at Eddie Lacy, who played for one of the most talented team in the country in 2012, if not the most talented, only rushed for 1322.

 

[Gaede]

That's true, to a point. I mean, this is why I like Coleman better but I think the point here is that you can't look at it in a vacuum. I think you have to look at these things whenever you are evaluating players. I also think you have to consider the fact that he is playing in the SEC. Defensively, SEC is the best conference in College Football over the last several years by a good margine IMO. I think the value proposition here is that he's good value at where you might get him.

You look at Eddie Lacy, who played for one of the most talented team in the country in 2012, if not the most talented, only rushed for 1322.

Good point.

 

[Sydla]

1) Gurley
2) Coleman
3) Gordon
4) Abdullah
5) Johnson - Miami
6) Johnson - Northern Iowa
7) Ajayi
8) Langford

Whoops. Yeldon should be around 5.

 

[xwalker]

True. But these excuses can be applied to most players. Tevin Coleman had zero help on his team and put up 2k, averaging 40yds per TD.

I like Davis' running style a lot, I just have doubts because his relative lack of production.

That's probably why I have a differing opinion.

College stats are of minimal value to me other than fumbles. There are so many variables like level of competition, OL talent, passing game threat, talent level of backup to share carries, etc.. When I watch Coleman, on may of his runs I think that just won't happen in the NFL because he was often just outrunning defenders. When I watch guys like Davis, their runs look like they would be good in college or the NFL. IMO vision and skill translate; whereas a pure speed running does not translate as well. When you have guys like Bruce Carter that run a 4.4 chasing you, it's a lot harder than having some 4.8 college LB chasing you.

The work-ethic rumors are a concern, but as a fan I don't know the details to know if it is true. I know that pre-draft rumors sometimes prove to be true but other times are proven false.

 

[locked&loaded]

That's probably why I have a differing opinion.

College stats are of minimal value to me other than fumbles. There are so many variables like level of competition, OL talent, passing game threat, talent level of backup to share carries, etc.. When I watch Coleman, on may of his runs I think that just won't happen in the NFL because he was often just outrunning defenders. When I watch guys like Davis, their runs look like they would be good in college or the NFL. IMO vision and skill translate; whereas a pure speed running does not translate as well. When you have guys like Bruce Carter that run a 4.4 chasing you, it's a lot harder than having some 4.8 college LB chasing you.

The work-ethic rumors are a concern, but as a fan I don't know the details to know if it is true. I know that pre-draft rumors sometimes prove to be true but other times are proven false.

Do you personally think that Davis looked slower this year (Lateral and straight) than previous years?

 

[Gaede]

That's probably why I have a differing opinion.

College stats are of minimal value to me other than fumbles. There are so many variables like level of competition, OL talent, passing game threat, talent level of backup to share carries, etc.. When I watch Coleman, on may of his runs I think that just won't happen in the NFL because he was often just outrunning defenders. When I watch guys like Davis, their runs look like they would be good in college or the NFL. IMO vision and skill translate; whereas a pure speed running does not translate as well. When you have guys like Bruce Carter that run a 4.4 chasing you, it's a lot harder than having some 4.8 college LB chasing you.

The work-ethic rumors are a concern, but as a fan I don't know the details to know if it is true. I know that pre-draft rumors sometimes prove to be true but other times are proven false.

I understand. Obviously I disagree. I am not sure why fumbles are the one stat you consider though. Seems like selection bias. Surely fumbles are also affected by variables, and are also a correctable issue. Fumbling is not an innate habit

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I understand. Obviously I disagree. I am not sure why fumbles are the one stat you consider though. Seems like selection bias. Surely fumbles are also affected by variables, and are also a correctable issue. Fumbling is not an innate habit

The problem with fumbles is that it's not always a correctable thing and when it does get corrected, it's usually not something that you see happen in a years time. It can be a few seasons before a player corrects it and there is no guarantee it ever happens.

 

[BlindFaith]

Just for fun I decided to rank the college offensive lines. I used Football Outsiders rankings.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaaol

I averaged together the 5 rushing categories to try and determine how effective a teams offensive line was when rushing. I also added in the number of Ranked OL the team has, based on CBS for this upcoming draft along with next years draft. I included an average OL ranking as well. This is to get a sense of how many offensive lineman are projected to go to the NFL. Or at least those that were ranked.

http://i1079.***BLOCKED***/albums/w506/blindfaith69/Oline%20Rankings.jpg

Wisconsin had the best run OL. They ranked 5th overall. They have 4 guys that are projected to the NFL with an average ranking of 19.25.
Tyler Marz OT 5.00
Rob Havenstein OT 12.00
Ray Ball OG 23.00
Dallas Lewallen OG 37.00

Followed by Alabama who was 11th and Nebraska who was 18th. Both teams projected to send 4 guys to the NFL.
PLAYER POS. POS. RANK SCHOOL
Isaac Luatua OG 6.00 Alabama
Arie Kouandjio OG 7.00 Alabama
Austin Shepherd OT 15.00 Alabama
Leon Brown OG 45.00 Alabama

PLAYER POS. POS. RANK SCHOOL
Alex Lewis OT 15.00 Nebraska
Ryne Reeves OG 18.00 Nebraska
Zach Sterup OT 31.00 Nebraska
Jake Cotton OG 51.00 Nebraska

This supports my contention that Coleman, Duke Johnson, Langford and Buck Allen all had inferior offensive lines to that of the top 2.

One thing that really stands out is Mike Davis. I've been back and forth on this guy, but with the offensive line that he has, he should have been much more productive.

 

[xwalker]

I understand. Obviously I disagree. I am not sure why fumbles are the one stat you consider though. Seems like selection bias. Surely fumbles are also affected by variables, and are also a correctable issue. Fumbling is not an innate habit

The sample size is fairly large with hundreds or carries. There have been talented runners that didn't do much in the NFL because they were fumblers and their coaches just would play them after awhile.

I'm not going to say a guy with a 1 in 80 rate is definitely going to be worse than a guy with a 1 in 90 rate, but Abdullah is 1 in 35 compared to 1 in 190 for Gurley. That is an incredible difference.