LegendatLegion 109 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 You guys have worn out that other post and a lot of folks have made valid points. What do you guys think is the best/ most important way to rate a RB? You can look at stats, or W's and L's, what's the most important! I have seen many good ones and several great ones, and i think YARDS PER CARRY is the most important! Look to the pro's, and that is where the emphasis is! What do you guys think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richlands8 10 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 I think it is all about the wins. i mean it doesnt mean anything to have a chunk of yards and your team be losing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegendatLegion 109 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 I definately agree it is important, but would you take an average RB from GC, Richland, or Bluefield over a kid that was 6'4" and 225 with 4.4 speed from an 0-10 team and he rushed for 1500 yds and lost to those three? Just some food for thought! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richlands8 10 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 i never thought about it that way...id prolly take the better kid, but id leave the rest of his team behind. man those numbers and no wins...horrible supporting cast..lmao Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance 228 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 I think you look at it all...what the RB brings to the team...and more so what the team would be without the RB...Graham is a good example without Bradshaw. yards per carry , total yards, and points scored are huge factors... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richlands8 10 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 speaking of bradshaw and graham...i figured that they would retire the 2 jersey and build some sort of shrine to it. but when we played them, some little white kid was wearin 2, it was very amusing...lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance 228 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 I noticed that to...lol. I dunno...they had AB day up there already...I think they are a long way from building a shrine, but they might name a fence after him or a flag pole if Paco Jones doesn't object...lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richlands8 10 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 that was nice lance...lmfao!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buzzsawBeaver 12 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 "but would you take an average RB from GC, Richland, or Bluefield over a kid that was 6'4" and 225 with 4.4 speed from an 0-10 team and he rushed for 1500 yds and lost to those three" depends completely on the attitude and work ethics of that player. I've seen a few players at bluefield, 1 in particular, who were nfl caliber physically, and had a lot of stats on good teams, but simply couldn't produce without a strong supporting cast and unless things went their way... Then their are lesser talented players who know the game, have exceptional work ethics, they listen, and play every play like "rudy", who can contribute a lot more to a team. It simply depends.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluefield_Rules 46 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 [ QUOTE ] I think it is all about the wins. i mean it doesnt mean anything to have a chunk of yards and your team be losing. [/ QUOTE ] So Barry Sanders shouldn't be considered a good back b/c he played on some woeful Detroit Lion teams? What about LaDainian Tomlinson and he playing on some even worse Charger teams? A lot of things go into determining how good a running back is and you cannot base it on a single area or aspect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegendatLegion 109 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 I agree, i think it is all about winning for a QB more so than a RB! Look how everyone views Tom Brady! In a recent pregame on Fox Bradshaw had Manning rated 5th behind Brady, Mcnabb, Farve,and McNair!(hmm...he may have been 4th in front of one of them) and that shows how winning is viewed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cola 10 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 Stats are used to rate the RB's just as everyone says, But the next level also looks at your opponants that you got those stats against. Example: Cain was 4 points away of breaking a Richlands single game scoring record against Lee High a couple of weeks ago. he wasnt given any more carries, he could have broken it easy and even the rushing record. but he didnt get the carries. A running back has to have a strong work ethic and talent, skill can be developed with either type of runner, a Cain or a Marcum, they both have good stats and a decent supporting cast. But I dont see either one of them going to a D-1A program, I would love it if they did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigD4VT 11 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 Stats like yards per carry are useful but I'm more interested in how the player gets those yards. Does he get 5 yards a pop consistently, or does he get 1-2 yards most of the time but breaks a few long ones to skew his average? I like a running back that gets low and hits the hole hard. The kind that wears a defense down. I like the break away guys too but only if they can also pound it inside. Catching passes and blocking out of the backfield is also important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.01bb665814ffc257795fe158cb2045c7.png.8a531ac878a82772b21014d7a6167582.png){kind=logo}
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.