Scouting Report: Ryan Williams And The All-22 Film

[Bullflop]

I think teams realize they can find really good backs in later rounds, but all the good corners, OT's, DE's, etc. go very early. So they grab that Tackle they need early on and worry about the back later.

True enough. Another reason that condition is said to exist is due to what I've described earlier. Routinely, teams have devalued the running game as well as pursuing the most elite linemen on both sides of the ball. In turn, lessening demand for RBs will only tend to increase supply in the later rounds. Maybe it's a matter of perspective to some degree as to where the cause lies. Granted, I've heard it interpreted both ways at times. If both happen simultaneously, the result would only be more probable.

 

[AsthmaField]

True enough. Another reason that condition is said to exist is due to what I've described earlier. Routinely, teams have devalued the running game as well as pursuing the most elite linemen on both sides of the ball. In turn, lessening demand for RBs will only tend to increase supply in the later rounds. Maybe it's a matter of perspective to some degree as to where the cause lies. Granted, I've heard it interpreted both ways at times. If both happen simultaneously, the result would only be more probable.

Yeah, its the chicken and the egg thing.

The only point that I was really trying to get out was that, IMO, you can find good RB's in the later rounds easier than you can any other position.

This year there were some really good backs going pretty late. In the 4th you had Andre Williams and Ka'Deem Carey being taken, and in the 6th a guy like Lache Seastrunk going.

Heck, Tre Mason going in the 3rd should be all the proof anyone needs that good RB prospects are being found later and later. That guy is a fantastic player. 20 years ago teams would have been fighting over him in the first round. As badly as Dallas needed defense, I would have been ok with taking him with a 3rd rounder (had we had one).

 

[JohnsKey19]

If Williams can remain healthy throughout camp, his talent will win out. Given his history, that is far from a given. I do think Malena will only further impress as time goes on given his versatility and overall makeup, and will grab a roster spot. Williams and Randle will be in a battle for the 4th RB spot.

 

[Crown Royal]

In other news

demarco Murray ran a 4.37?!?!? I never felt like he looked that fast A few times he's been fetched after breaking into the open field.

 

[NeonDeion21]

From the article: http://cover32.com/cowboys/2014/05/22/scouting-report-new-dallas-cowboys-running-back-ryan-williams/

 

[xwalker]

He was stupid talented at Tech. I just remember being blown away at the 4.60. He always looked so fast at Tech.

10 yard:

Ben Malena 1.52
Demarco Murray 1.52
Ryan Williams 1.53
Lance Dunbar 1.54
Joseph Randle 1.60/1.57

 

[CATCH17]

I like Ben Malena..


I really just want a guy that runs with better vision than Murray. IMO he leaves a lot of yards on the field. He's a good all around back but that vision is uggghhh

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I like Ben Malena..


I really just want a guy that runs with better vision than Murray. IMO he leaves a lot of yards on the field. He's a good all around back but that vision is uggghhh

Agreed. I'd sacrifice some 40-time for a little better vision.

Guys like Dorsett, OJ and Barry Sanders had speed and vision. Folks like Walter and Emmitt didn't have the fantastic 40-time but just incredible vision.

 

[jobberone]

In other news

demarco Murray ran a 4.37?!?!? I never felt like he looked that fast A few times he's been fetched after breaking into the open field.

He did at OU and I got a bit excited. He's a 4.5+ guy by my eye.

 

[CooterBrown]

Good running backs are pretty common. Great running backs are rare. A great running back is worthy of a first round draft pick because he will make an average oline look great. Emmitt being a perfect example: I've heard people say that he benefitted from a great offensive line, but three of those guys were considered scrubs until he came along. That was a different team without him. If you don't believe it, ask Charles Haley. My point is simply this: most years there are no great running backs available in the draft, but there are plenty of good ones. If Emmitt, or Barry Sanders, or Peterson were available in the draft, they would still be first rounders. Scouting is much better and teams won't spend first round picks on "good" running backs.

Another theory of mine is that the college game has changed significantly and had an effect on the NFL. It used to be that the best athletes on the team were the QB and the RB. Now the best athletes are corners and wide receivers. The result of that is that great running backs are becoming more rare, so the NFL teams put their emphasis on great olinemen and good running backs.

So, what does that have to do with Ryan Williams? Nothing. I just think he was a good running back drafted too high, and will be just fine behind a great offensive line, but isn't elite enough to make an average line better.

 

[Questfor6]

If I were Garrett Williams & Randle would see a lot of primary time behind my first team Oline this preseason. I'd let Murray rest and still get Dunbar some time but those 2 in preseason games would be worn out if I were coach. No need IMO to carry 4 RB's this year that's an extra DL guy to rotate in.

 

[jobberone]

Good running backs are pretty common. Great running backs are rare. A great running back is worthy of a first round draft pick because he will make an average oline look great. Emmitt being a perfect example: I've heard people say that he benefitted from a great offensive line, but three of those guys were considered scrubs until he came along. That was a different team without him. If you don't believe it, ask Charles Haley. My point is simply this: most years there are no great running backs available in the draft, but there are plenty of good ones. If Emmitt, or Barry Sanders, or Peterson were available in the draft, they would still be first rounders. Scouting is much better and teams won't spend first round picks on "good" running backs.

Another theory of mine is that the college game has changed significantly and had an effect on the NFL. It used to be that the best athletes on the team were the QB and the RB. Now the best athletes are corners and wide receivers. The result of that is that great running backs are becoming more rare, so the NFL teams put their emphasis on great olinemen and good running backs.

So, what does that have to do with Ryan Williams? Nothing. I just think he was a good running back drafted too high, and will be just fine behind a great offensive line, but isn't elite enough to make an average line better.

Nice post. I agree. There's still a place for great backs. They're more uncommon these days. Some of that is also due to the emphasis on great DTs and DL who have made it difficult to run up the middle and the speed of the overall defense now which also makes the field smaller and makes the edge more difficult as well. It's just harder to run these days.

It's also why you see the run to daylight and ZBS now. It's funny how the game cycles and evolves. The run to daylight game began in the 50s when Paul Brown started spreading the OL and using an early and more primitive form of zone blocking. Defenses adapted to it primarily with the 'invention' of the Mike and then the 4-3. Then you had Landry come along and give us the 4-3 variant with the Flex which was designed to stop the run up the middle and make that run to daylight play and OL blocking more difficult. Now we're back to the same ole game of running up the middle but not so much with power but with more sophisticated ZBSs and running backs taught to use that scheme to run to daylight. Making those cutbacks and slashes is not a new invention.

 

[jobberone]

If I were Garrett Williams & Randle would see a lot of primary time behind my first team Oline this preseason. I'd let Murray rest and still get Dunbar some time but those 2 in preseason games would be worn out if I were coach. No need IMO to carry 4 RB's this year that's an extra DL guy to rotate in.

It's difficult to keep RBs on the field due to the increased speed, mass and density of defensive players now. That's one reason to keep 4 RBs. If they are going to carry a true FB this year then they may have to play with 3 RBs and one FB. You just have to hope a player who you'd love to see on the roster can get to your PS so you call 'call them up' as necessary.

There may be enough depth at RB this year to make them cut players who will end up on rosters elsewhere. I know that always happens but it just may be more difficult this year and more may end up playing on another team. But that's a good thing, too.

 

[Zordon]

I like Ben Malena..


I really just want a guy that runs with better vision than Murray. IMO he leaves a lot of yards on the field. He's a good all around back but that vision is uggghhh

I think this is a little overrated on here.

The guy avg 5.2 ypc last season. Only 2 rbs had a better average and both of them had half the attempts.

He had 8 20+ runs in the league, which ranked him 3rd. The problem with him is his longest run (43 yds) isn't very good.

That being said, when you compare him to a lot of the elite running backs (particularly Lesean McCoy), the main difference is Demarco has 50-100 less attempts than the top guys. This is a direct reflection of Jason Garrett and his refusal to run the ball. A guy with a 5.2 ypc average should not only have a little over 200 attempts.

 

[CATCH17]

I think this is a little overrated on here.

The guy avg 5.2 ypc last season. Only 2 rbs had a better average and both of them had half the attempts.

He had 8 20+ runs in the league, which ranked him 3rd. The problem with him is his longest run (43 yds) isn't very good.

That being said, when you compare him to a lot of the elite running backs (particularly Lesean McCoy), the main difference is Demarco has 50-100 less attempts than the top guys. This is a direct reflection of Jason Garrett and his refusal to run the ball. A guy with a 5.2 ypc average should not only have a little over 200 attempts.

You could use those exact same numbers for Felix Jones at one point in his career. If there is an obvious flaw in their game the numbers can't hide it forever.


Murray is a awesome back because he imposes his will on other teams. That is also why he is missing so many football games as well.

Great back, use him while we got him, but IMO he leaves yards out there.

 

[jobberone]

I like Murray. Very good back. Catches and pass blocks well. Runs very well. He is getting better with the delayed handoff run to daylight

 

[Zimmy Lives]

I don't have a whole lot of confidence that he is going to make the team. Something about the guy just never has really impressed me, but I certainly could be wrong.

Something about his mental makeup that I'm just not crazy about.

We will see. Physically, the guy is good if healthy.

Given his competition, I think he has a good chance to make the team if he is healthy and stays that way.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Nice writeup.

I also agree that running backs are not a dying breed. Unfortunately the statistical people have gotten into coaching staff's heads that you must throw the ball early and often and that running the ball only 'closes out games.'

Working as a statistician for a living and applying this statistical knowledge and research competency along with having read 'Moneyball' style analysis for over the past 25 years...the idea that you should run the ball only to help close out a game is missing a big part of the story. With statistics, you are not likely to get a perfect understanding of the game. But, you hope to get a more accurate understanding of the game. I think too many statisticians have uncovered that the passing game was much more important than traditional football wisdom suggests and thought they had the most accurate understanding of the game instead of delving much further into how running and passing the ball work towards success and offensive and defensive efficiency.

Anyway, during the draft I started to think What is the next big schematic and/or personnel change that will shape the NFL.

What we are seeing today is that most of the offenses are very shotgun and pass happy. Using very short pass patterns, particularly outside the hashmarks. There are some offenses still using a form of the read-option, although I think it's going to feature less and less QB running.

Defenses are starting to counter that by going to a 4-3 scheme and having plenty of speed on defense. Using FO.com's Defensive Rankings, 6 of the top 8 teams were 4-3 teams almost exclusively, with 1 of them not being the Cardinals, who use a mix of 3-4 and 4-3.

And with the Seahawks success and this being a copycat league, I think we'll see more of the same idea....Big DB's and a small, fast front 7. Your DB's may not be fast for DB's, but they are still fast as football players, being able to run 4.6 or better. And now with a small, but fast front 7, you have a lot of team speed.

I believe we'll continue to see most of the league using the shotgun, spread 'em out and throw-throw-throw style or the read-option scheme for years to come and teams will slowly integrate more of a Seahawks style of personnel and get out of the 3-4 scheme. Or if they stick with the 3-4...they'll make it very diminutive in nature.

And the next style of offense will counter that change to the defensive scheme. It leaves the running game, particularly if you have a fairly large and punishing tailback. I also believe that teams will go to larger WR's to help counter those bigger cornerbacks and help with blocking for the run. They'll probably try to get WR's with good speed and we'll eventually start to see less bubble screens from some coach looking to beat the changes we are seeing on defense. But again, I think it starts with the tailback first.





YR

 

[jobberone]

Nice writeup.

I also agree that running backs are not a dying breed. Unfortunately the statistical people have gotten into coaching staff's heads that you must throw the ball early and often and that running the ball only 'closes out games.'

Working as a statistician for a living and applying this statistical knowledge and research competency along with having read 'Moneyball' style analysis for over the past 25 years...the idea that you should run the ball only to help close out a game is missing a big part of the story. With statistics, you are not likely to get a perfect understanding of the game. But, you hope to get a more accurate understanding of the game. I think too many statisticians have uncovered that the passing game was much more important than traditional football wisdom suggests and thought they had the most accurate understanding of the game instead of delving much further into how running and passing the ball work towards success and offensive and defensive efficiency.

Anyway, during the draft I started to think What is the next big schematic and/or personnel change that will shape the NFL.

What we are seeing today is that most of the offenses are very shotgun and pass happy. Using very short pass patterns, particularly outside the hashmarks. There are some offenses still using a form of the read-option, although I think it's going to feature less and less QB running.

Defenses are starting to counter that by going to a 4-3 scheme and having plenty of speed on defense. Using FO.com's Defensive Rankings, 6 of the top 8 teams were 4-3 teams almost exclusively, with 1 of them not being the Cardinals, who use a mix of 3-4 and 4-3.

And with the Seahawks success and this being a copycat league, I think we'll see more of the same idea....Big DB's and a small, fast front 7. Your DB's may not be fast for DB's, but they are still fast as football players, being able to run 4.6 or better. And now with a small, but fast front 7, you have a lot of team speed.

I believe we'll continue to see most of the league using the shotgun, spread 'em out and throw-throw-throw style or the read-option scheme for years to come and teams will slowly integrate more of a Seahawks style of personnel and get out of the 3-4 scheme. Or if they stick with the 3-4...they'll make it very diminutive in nature.

And the next style of offense will counter that change to the defensive scheme. It leaves the running game, particularly if you have a fairly large and punishing tailback. I also believe that teams will go to larger WR's to help counter those bigger cornerbacks and help with blocking for the run. They'll probably try to get WR's with good speed and we'll eventually start to see less bubble screens from some coach looking to beat the changes we are seeing on defense. But again, I think it starts with the tailback first.





YR

Couldn't agree more. Defenses have to respect the run or you are too restricted and predictable. I do think Seattle has a fast front 7 but I think they are big in the interior although still quick. I don't see teams getting smaller at DT although I see them working hard to find big and quick DTs even a quick 1/3 DT. You have to be fast up front are you will die. You still have to stop the run and part of that is big and quick but also fast LBers.

 

[lkelly]

Williams reminds me of a back who rushed for a few yards and wore the number 22

George Peoples?