NFL Week 11: When you play a game of football, you win or you lose.

[Kalbear]

I don't know, Joe Webb set a standard at LT.

Who?

[Jaime L]

That's not the point; the point is that you can find quite a few really good RBs in later rounds.

It's much harder to find really good tackles, DEs, CBs and QBs in later rounds.

Just for fun let me list out every non-RB taken in the 2nd round of that 2008 draft where teams went crazy drafting RBs in all rounds:. It's also 5 years in so it's a good benchmark period:

Phillip Merling

Donnie Avery

Devin Thomas

Brandon Flowers

Jordy Nelson

Curtis Lofton

John Carlson

Chilo Rachal

Tracy Porter

James Hardy

Eddie Royal

Tyrell Johnson

Jordan Dizon

Jerome Simpson

Trevor Laws

Fred Davis

DeSean Jackson

Calais Campbell

Malcolm Kelly

Quentin Groves

Limas Sweed

Jason Jones

Brian Brohm

Chad Henne

Dexter Jackson

Mike Pollak

Patrick Lee

Martellus Bennett

Terrence Wheatley

Terrell Thomas

Easily 80% or more of those guys are out of the league or just bad at what they do. Infact the only guys I'd want from that group are Flowers, Lofton, Nelson and Jackson.That's the core point. The goal is getting guys who are actually good at their jobs and in these debates people always over imply how many draft picks turn out to be decent to good players. At best 50% of round 1 picks can play in this league and it's a sliding scale down from there.

Sure some good RBs have emerged from the late rounds or from being undrafted. That doesn't mean just because you draft a guy in round 6, he's going to be Alfred Morris. The vast majority of these late round guys can't play at all, we just have selection bias to those few who succeed.

Everyone agrees Mike Shanahan is the famed RB whisperer, the guy most adept at turning late round guys into stars. Since he's gotten to Washington he's drafted 6 RBs 4th round or later. Only one turned into an impact guy. That's why if Matt Forte or a Gio Bernard is sitting there in round 2 with a skillset that simply isn't out there in later rounds you take him and you're absolutely correct to do so.

[Kalbear]

Sure some good RBs have emerged from the late rounds or from being undrafted. That doesn't mean just because you draft a guy in round 6, he's going to be Alfred Morris. The vast majority of these late round guys can't play at all, we just have selection bias to those few who succeed.

Kind of. But this still ignores the notion that your starting, highly productive RB can be from a later round without significant difficultly.

The other issue with RBs is that sadly they have the lowest career length in the NFL, so investing anything in them is potentially a poor choice. Ray Rice is a prime example of this - a year ago he was a star, and now at what, 28, he's essentially worn out. And he was a bonafide star, the kind of player you absolutely should invest a 1st round pick in. Done after 5 years.

I also think you really need to work on your fractions. Of just that list - which is obviously small sample size given that it's only one draft class - we have Avery, Nelson, DeSean Jackson, Jerome Simpson, Patrick Lee, Martellus Bennett, Calais Campbell, Porter and Royal as really strong to superstar players. That's 10 out of no more than 32, or more than 20%. And that's just the really good standouts! Most of those players ended up starting for a while. Very few were actual busts, in the sense that they got zero productivity. Most of them are still in the league. Certainly a lot more than 20%.

Ultimately, Jaime, here's my issue with RBs: there are so very many stories of teams being able to sign RBs from practice squad or from the street and those RBs end up contributing for that year. They may not have a multi-year success rate, but at that point who cares? You've invested nothing and gotten actual productivity from that position. There aren't many positions in the NFL you can say that about; the next one is probably LB (due to how many LBs there are available). Even if you get 20% more efficiency or output from the RB position by spending a 1st round pick - and that's a big if - you could have gotten a long-term starter (as almost no RBs are long term regardless) AND just chugged through RBs left and right and been okay. It works for the Packers, Pats, Denver and Washington.

[Jace, Extat]

Ben Roethlisberger might be the biggest rapist moron on the planet.

My personal favorite part:

"First of all, how does anybody know what I'm doing at home, when I'm watching film or I'm looking through my playbook at home, unless someone someone's got cameras set up in my house and they're spying on me?" Roethlisberger said. "But then they'd see the truth that I am doing that stuff."

[Mexal]

I also think you really need to work on your fractions. Of just that list - which is obviously small sample size given that it's only one draft class - we have Avery, Nelson, DeSean Jackson, Jerome Simpson, Patrick Lee, Martellus Bennett, Calais Campbell, Porter and Royal as really strong to superstar players. That's 10 out of no more than 32, or more than 20%. And that's just the really good standouts! Most of those players ended up starting for a while. Very few were actual busts, in the sense that they got zero productivity. Most of them are still in the league. Certainly a lot more than 20%.

As always, you stretch things. Simpson is a strong to superstar player? Bennett? Lee? Avery? Come on man. Simpson is going to jail and has been a major bust with the Bengals and barely serviceable with the Vikings. Lee isn't even in the league anymore and Bennett, while good, had less than 300 yards receiving his first 4 years and topped out at just over 600. These aren't superstars or really strong players. Even Porter and Royal are no better than average and in Porters case, a fairly terrible now. So no, it's more like 4 of 32 that are really strong or superstars (Jackson, Campbell, Flowers and Nelson).

[Jaime L]

I also think you really need to work on your fractions. Of just that list - which is obviously small sample size given that it's only one draft class - we have Avery, Nelson, DeSean Jackson, Jerome Simpson, Patrick Lee, Martellus Bennett, Calais Campbell, Porter and Royal as really strong to superstar players. That's 10 out of no more than 32, or more than 20%. And that's just the really good standouts! Most of those players ended up starting for a while. Very few were actual busts, in the sense that they got zero productivity. Most of them are still in the league. Certainly a lot more than 20%.

I missed Calais Campbell, but here is no universe where Donnie Avery, Jerome Simpson, Patrick Lee, Martellus Bennett, Tracy Porter and Eddie Royal can be counted strong players. I think only Bennett is even scratching average at this point. Each of those guys is on their 3rd team five years into their career. For a reason. Well except Jerome Simpson unless he played penal league football during one of his many arrests and Eddie Royal who was a strong rookie and terrible every year after - those guys are only on their 2nd team, but still not exactly the value the teams that drafted them were hoping for.

But if just being a starter on an NFL roster is our standard then Trent Richardson 3.0 deserves a whole new lease on life!

ETA: Or what Mexal said.

Ultimately, Jaime, here's my issue with RBs: there are so very many stories of teams being able to sign RBs from practice squad or from the street and those RBs end up contributing for that year. They may not have a multi-year success rate, but at that point who cares? You've invested nothing and gotten actual productivity from that position. There aren't many positions in the NFL you can say that about; the next one is probably LB (due to how many LBs there are available). Even if you get 20% more efficiency or output from the RB position by spending a 1st round pick - and that's a big if - you could have gotten a long-term starter (as almost no RBs are long term regardless) AND just chugged through RBs left and right and been okay. It works for the Packers, Pats, Denver and Washington.

But that's just it - It didn't work for the Packers or Pats or they each wouldn't have invested 2nd and 3rd round picks on RBs in the same year. They tried the other way and kept losing to teams with inferior QBs in the playoffs when it counted most. What it's good enough for Bill Belichick and Ted Thompson but not for you? :P

Listen, I'll agree with you that you can get a mediocre RB in any round - the kind of guy who can get you 8 yards if it's blocked for 10. That may look competent and productive because he gets those yards attached to his name but it's replacement level.

What you can't get after round 3 is the elite speed/athletic talent who can hold up as a feature back. You can get plodders or you can tiny, quick guys that can only play on 3rd down.The closest to an exception among late round guys is Darren Sproles but I've seen only one of him in 20 years of watching the NFL. That kind of unique weapon doesn't exist in the later rounds but it does create the same kind of advantage elite playmakers at other positions do.

And the reason early round RBs get such a bad rap is that teams continue to overvalue Shonn Greene/Montee Ball/Ryan Williams types who aren't elite playmaking talents. They might've been super productive in college but who gives a fuck? That's the kind of guy you can get in the later rounds and should hold off on and hope that you hit the jackpot and end up with Alfred Morris. But Matt Fortes/Gio Bernards/LeSean McCoys/CJ Spillers/Chris Johnsons/Darren McFaddens/Jamaal Charles regardless of production this year were absolutely correct as early round picks because they provide their teams a potential dimension you simply can't get just whenever. Maybe some of those guys shouldn't have gone round 1 to properly price in their risk (especially durability) but some time in rounds 1-3? Absolutely.

[Jace, Extat]

Pat McAfee just tweeted the funniest thing:

I love ugly wins so much more than beautiful losses.. Cheers you beautiful folks #Colts #KickoffOutOfBounds #TheSunWasInMyEyes - Pat McAfee

I've never been a Tweeter, but I found this funnies.

[awesome possum]

Har, thought this was funny:

If Nick Foles' next 31 pass attempts are all intercepted, he would still have a higher passer rating than Eli Manning.

[Kalbear]

I don't think you're disagreeing with me, Jaime. You're suggesting that unless you can get a particular talent - and note all of those RBs you named are good in the passing game - don't bother. That's pretty much what I said. And of those you named two are essentially wasted on their team( spiller and McFadden) and another is hugely inconsistent.

Heck, all the guys you named save forte have another thing in common - their teams have largely sucked. They're all speedsters too, but them being awesome hasn't elevated their team. Sproles is the best of the lot, but he wasn't even valuable enough to keep on the bolts.

I also don't think gb lost because of a lack of RBs. They won a superbowl with that same lack of rb. The pats went to one without them too.

[Jaime L]

Har, thought this was funny:

That's great. And heck, let's try it this week and see!

I don't think you're disagreeing with me, Jaime. You're suggesting that unless you can get a particular talent - and note all of those RBs you named are good in the passing game - don't bother. That's pretty much what I said. And of those you named two are essentially wasted on their team( spiller and McFadden) and another is hugely inconsistent.

Heck, all the guys you named save forte have another thing in common - their teams have largely sucked. They're all speedsters too, but them being awesome hasn't elevated their team. Sproles is the best of the lot, but he wasn't even valuable enough to keep on the bolts.

I also don't think gb lost because of a lack of RBs. They won a superbowl with that same lack of rb. The pats went to one without them too.

Then I'm cool. Felt like you were saying there's never a time to draft RBs in the first couple rounds because you can get them later, but if you're open to the possibility of an exception for those unique talents then we're basically in the same place.

As for the second and third part, well, we shouldn't attach winning to the RB position any more than we do any other non-QB position. We wouldn't say that Joe Haden couldn't make the Browns a winner. We'd just say he's 1 guy out of 22. RB is the same way. It alone doesn't get you over the top, but an above average one could have been that close game edge for, say, NE in their most recent Superbowl or Denver last year vs. Baltimore. Of course so could have better safety play. it all factors in. That's what makes football so awesome - any play has 11 reasons why it succeeded or failed and in a close game that one position you're weak could bury you.

[fuseprime]

If this game had anything like that drama, it will be an instant classic.

If I were making a list of best postseason games of the past five years, I'd go with:

Ravens-Broncos 2013

Niners-Giants 2012

Niners-Saints 2012

Saints-Vikings 2010

Steelers-Cardinals 2009

I know this is a bit biased, but I'd say Jets-Patriots 2011 Divisional Playoff game.

[Kalbear]

I don't normally link Bill Simmons, but this part made me laugh (on Trent Richardson):

SG: Move over, Greg Oden, there's a new sheriff in Putthatthingaway Town! I might break my vow of never watching a male athlete's sex tape just to see this one. I mean, OF COURSE Trent Richardson's sex tape was going to be an orgy! Nobody has more experience having three people on top of him at all times. Do you think the tape starts with Trent seeing a pile of naked people, running into it and falling down? Did they have to stop filming because Trent couldn't find any holes? Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week.

[Xray the Enforcer]

:lol:

[Jace, Extat]

The Beautiful Mind of Andrew Luck.

I think I'm even more in love than the love I was already in.

It's a relatively mellow article, but a good read I think.

Matt Hasselbeck on Andrew Luck "He's very good at saying things like 'Umm... Coach, would you mind if we never run that play again?'... "

[thewingedwolf]

The Beautiful Mind of Andrew Luck.

I think I'm even more in love than the love I was already in.

It's a relatively mellow article, but a good read I think.

Matt Hasselbeck on Andrew Luck "He's very good at saying things like 'Umm... Coach, would you mind if we never run that play again?'... "

The moral of the story is, you should drink at every Colts game :cheers:

[Jace, Extat]

I actually didn't drink until after the Colts game last night. The Pacers game is over, and as I just got out of the shower, I'm getting started on my liter of Jack right now... It's Buffy time!

[thewingedwolf]

That's my girl

[Jace, Extat]

:D

[Rhom]

I don't normally link Bill Simmons, but this part made me laugh (on Trent Richardson):

:rofl:

I actually didn't drink until after the Colts game last night. The Pacers game is over, and as I just got out of the shower, I'm getting started on my liter of Jack right now... It's Buffy time!

Gotta be Jack... because lord knows you wouldn't want something distilled in Kentucky like Beam or Woodford.

[Howdyphillip]

Were is everyone today? Did anyone see Mother Nature block Nick Folk's field goal in Buffalo? That was amazing. I love outdoor games in the late fall.