To add to the idea of dual-threat QBs, the league is actively looking to protect the highest-paid player on the field at all times when a QB rushes. How many ticky-tack penalties are called for "late hits" when the QB is rushing versus when a running back has the ball? There is an institutional advantage for rushing QBs.
Also, the slide has given QBs a huge advantage as well. A QB can run and not worry about getting leveled, he’ll just slide. If he does gets hit? More yards. If he’s about to get hit running, pretend to slide and the defenseman, not wanting a flag, let’s up, allowing for even more yards.
This video just makes me appreciate the people who appreciate King Henry even more. Man is a generational talent, and no one at that size should be able to move that fast. Really hoping he can get a Super Bowl trophy before he calls it a career.
@@jjtheentonthey did get hopkins which means they are hopefully on par with the 2021 team that got the top seed. the only difference between 21 and 22 was aj brown
Him and Nick Chubb are the only pure runners in the league worth another contract imo, but i am biased. CMC obviously too but thats cause he's also a freakin slot receiver
It’s hard to not blame QBs and these new offensive schemes. QBs have always been the highest paid but back in day they needed a RB to pound the rock to set up the play action. These days every play has crazy pre snap motion that sets up a read option with a QB that’s often the top rusher. Young RBs in HS and college would be smart to get great at catching the ball.
@@kimyona9746 RB has a lot more in common with receiver than QB. Even if classified as an RB they still need to be able to run routes and deal with coverage, a QB has an entirely separate list of things to be concerned about.
@@kimyona9746 It is the closest in that their position on the field is, but the same is true of center. And while you have time to learn to pass a QB needs more than just an arm (or an arm and legs), he needs to read defences much more than most other players on the offense, he needs to quickly go through his reads. While if you want to switch over high school is a decent time to start, receiver is a much much better position to switch over to as a number of NFL receivers were other positions even in college (Edelman was a QB for example). Also it is a position that can fit a wide range of heights (body type is a bit more narrow but you can generally lose bulk more easily than gaining height) QBs are almost always tall and it is an explicit advantage for them to be tall, and although it's harder to explain the reasoning professional QBs have a narrower weight range than professional RBs despite having a wider height range. Ultimately if you want to switch to any position period receiver is almost always the best position and this goes double for an RB who is already a receiver with extra responsibilities. If you're an absolute unit maybe you could be a TE (modern TEs don't even block worth a damn, they're just fat receivers).
Never forget: Until he got hurt in Week 10 or 11 that year, Bell's backup, James Connor, put up nearly identical numbers to what Bell put up the year before, within like 50 yards and 1 touchdown on almost the same amount of carries. That opened a lot of teams' eyes, I think, to the fact that O-Lines and run schemes make the yards more than the big pricetag backs. Also, the short shelf life and 'frequent' injuries to Running Backs is linked to the fact that Full Backs are almost extinct in the league anymore. It's funny how taking the protection away makes guys get hurt more often. And I don't know exactly how it fits into the math, but Trent Richardson being picked 3rd overall and busting as hard as he did probably factors in to reluctance to take risks on "every down" backs.
...and then injuries ALSO ruined Conner's career Then the Colts traded for Richardson and then the Browns used their pick to select... Johnny Football. Both lost
In my opinion, running the ball is like a 2 point shot in basketball, whereas passing is like a 3 point shot. Both passing and 3 point shots have been more common over the past decade since even if it's a higher risk, it's also a higher reward
The similarities also include the improved efficiency. If you shoot well from 3, 2 pt shots become more efficient: if you pass the ball well running the ball becomes easier as there are fewer people in the box. The difference is that Basketball is less specialised.
Actually an apt comparison since the NBA started calling the lightest brush of the skin a penalty too. The 2 softest leagues in North America have always kinda lined up well tho in their gimmicks so it's nothing new
It's actually a comparison that makes a lot of sense. In fact, Ive believed for a while now that the Chiefs are essentially the NFL's version of the Warriors and that Mahomes and Curry have had similar impacts in both sports. While your comparison is on point, it also shows that the league and teams are going to be stupid enough to try and copy KC's style because "it works"despite the fact that it works for KC because it's THEIR style. It's like how suddenly, every team in the NBA started to try and shoot 3s all the time like the Warriors but were not as exciting or consistently efficient at it (looking at the small ball Rockets) or how everyone tried to copy the Patriots or hire former Belichick coaches in hopes to duplicate the Patriots' success......yet it failed spectacularly. That's why a team like the Giants, Raiders and Cowboys should pony up the dough to keep great RBs because they don't have an elite QB like Mahomes that can make do without one nor do they have an Andy Reid that can make chicken salad out of anything. Teams that NEED a great running back or a great running game to succeed because they have a mediocre QB should pay their RBs and not overpay their QB (like the Giants did). Just because the Chiefs and Patriots (the current and last dynasty) have won 5 SBs in the last 10 years without a major running game doesn't mean that every team is good enough to go without one.
It's funny cause I think if a team got a Bell Cow RB they'd do better than most would expect because defensive backs and linebackers have been slimmed down over the years to focus on QB rush and pass coverage. Hence why Henry is able to stiff arm twigs like Norman. If it was Brian Dawkins or Sean Taylor era DBs it would be a different story
@@crater044 Ironically, the teams that actually end up winning the NBA finals are teams with a multi-dimensional offense. Living and dying by the the 3 in NBA never truly works in high volume unless you have generational 3 shot making talent(Curry, Klay) in addition to good compimentary pieces(Draymond, KD, Barnes, Wiggins, etc.). The reason for this phenonmenon is because MoreyBall missed the obvious, yet often overlooked aspect of of blind analytics: Basketball, like many sports is not played in a vaccum. Basketball isn't math problem, where you just can solve for all the unknown factors by balancing out the equation. Basketball is moreso like and constantly evolving logic problem where you have to consider multiple avenues of team structure given your player's skillsets to mininimize your weaknesses and maximize your strengths. 80% of players don't fit the model of what Moreyball was trying to run, so you would often get far worse versions of what your players could be and when you need something else from them, they quite literally couldn't provide because of the hyperfocused role.
Not really touched on here is the way officiating has changed to coddle the QBs. The running game also used to be a way to save your franchise QB from taking more punishment and injury. These days they take far less contact by the way the game is called, so it is less important to try and protect them with a run game that can take pressure off them and even shorten games. Add to it the protections afforded to QBs that aren’t given to RBs, thus keeping their career primes on average brief, and it’s a double shot that’s hurt the RBs.
It feels like the number of rushes by QBs toward the sidelines on broken plays is way higher than it used to be too. Even dudes like Herbert and Burrow pick up a good number of 1st downs by just running to the outside when no defenders are there. Probably in part because QBs are just more athletic now.
You're also forgetting the added protections for Wide Receivers. It wasn't that long ago and receivers that ran slants or crossing routes were subject to getting lit up light a Christmas Tree. Helmet to Helmet evolved into targeting and receivers have a massive advantage because there's no fear of a big hit. Balls receivers wouldn't even try to make a play on, they're now catchable. Every rule change has benefitted the offense, either the QB or WR in a huge way.
@@deplorablepepe7576 right what used to be playing great defense is now "pass interference", guys like LT, Lott, rob gronkowski, are punished for doing their thing. A few here and their like Sean Taylor, or more recently Ndamukong Suh that'll make great plays despite the hefty fines they get. a few years ago making long catches was a way for QBs to get an earfull from wide recievers.
Exactly and it was proven last year in the playoffs. All you have to is have your qb take off towards a sideline and its an easy 5 yards because defenders are afraid to hit the qb. And if you do theres a good chance he gets another 15. And wr's are protected more and more too
I played RB in high school, and while this situation infuriates me I completely get it. The line makes the running game, and unless you have a generational talent like Barry Sanders to hand the ball to there's no reason to pay the big bucks. Saquon raised the question about the value of RBs in the modern age, and Zeke's contract reinforced it.
I agree zeke’s contract killed the running back market . And emphasized everything you just said . He came in the league with the best line and once that line got worse he fell off a cliff . I think the league will definitely go more of the committee route from now on and just churn out running backs in the draft . It doesn’t make sense to pay any of them long term deals .
What’s interesting is that RB by committee is actually maybe closer to the historical norm for football. If you go back to the 60s, the reason Jim Brown’s stats were so bonkers relative to his peers was that most teams divided up Carrie’s very, very often. RBs we’re still way more valued in that context because the running game was way more efficient relative to the pass when QBs were barely completing half of attempts and were throwing INTs all the time. The late 70s to the mid 00s might end up being the exception rather than the norm - the era of the feature back.
Yeah... Zeke's contract.... I love Zeke, but.... that just scares GM's to death.... and it's happened before.... It was years ago Mike Shanahan made every back look good.... It is what it is.... Plus, no one seems to want to bring this up, but, teams really want a back who can pass protect on 3rd & 7.... What teams really want is a back who can pass protect, who can run, and who can catch out of the backfield.... Like a Tony Pollard, except Dallas is still stinging from the Zeke contract..... I am all about Players getting paid... I am. Millionaire owners make piles of money... The players who destroy their own bodies, should be getting paid. But at the same time, a GM is committing career suicide if he overpays for a running back.....
Another big issue: modern rookie contracts. RBs spend what is often their prime years getting carries on their rookie deals. Imagine the kind of contract a Saquon or a McCaffrey could have gotten if they could have signed as a true free agent out of college.
Then they won’t get drafted as high and lose money in their rookie deal. Why draft a RB high in the draft with a 3 year contract when you can draft a WR/OL with a 4-5 year contract and has a higher positional value?
I think the best option is to restructure rookie deals for running backs 1. Increase the pay so they get compensated for their normally highest production. 2. Shorten the rookie contract to 2 years so they can get big boy contracts sooner. This won't be a perfect fit but I do think this solution will enable running backs to get paid when the market values them the most.
I think people will just have to accept that if the game doesn't require a big man in the back field, like Henry, then the amount of men that can play their will just increase, the supply goes up, the demand goes down, they would have to be donated money to compensate for the position as it is. Nfl teams will just take backs in late rounds and run them into the earth for 3 years, then draft a new one.
2 years sounds like a great idea actually, would make it fun because GMs would have to start getting more creative because they have less time to rely on rookie contracts, and we get more bad contracts to laugh at again
4:00 2013 Seahawks leading rusher is listed as Percy Harvin, who had 0 attempts and yards rushing that year. their leading rusher was actually Marshawn Lynch who had nearly 1300 yards and a salary of $7M
I wonder if, with the prevalence of passing in the offensive philosophy these days, running backs might actually become useful again due to the sheer amount of sub packages teams would need to run to contend with the amount of passing threats on the field at any given time. Or we'll see the emergence of more Nickel/LB hybrids that can both stop the run and cover speedy slot receivers
Agreed we have been here before in the league. They do need to fix the rules to allow defense though. But the one team that decides to go run heavy will plow through a pass defense.
We are starting to see FBs make a comeback......it's the old "what's old is new again" approach. Even College football might go back to a running game in a few years. These things come and go in phases.
@@reubensandwich9249Given that we see more statlines like that, one unacknowledged NFL record that I’d take it will never be broken: Larry Johnson in 2006 had 416 carries in a season for Kansas City. A list of unbreakable NFL records could be filled with volume rushing records because of how many running backs by committee there are.
Thanks for mentioning Chris Carson. Dude was a dark horse. That 1000 season he had was really amazing. And penny finally broke the code but couldn’t ever stay healthy. There are so many Seahawks running backs I miss, they were all dogs and looked up to lynch. Turning, Carson, Rawls, mckissac. It’s a shame that the position has devolved to what it is now.
@@AmirKhan-rh6jjDude had a very good career. The offensive line helped tremendously, and without it, he’s not an MVP, but he had a longer prime than quite a few running backs mentioned in this video did.
It’s sad to see running backs get abused and not get payed much but at the same time I can see why they don’t pay them they start to get older and you never wanna draft a Runningback in the first round unless he’s Walter Payton or sanders
@@Packerfan5827That’s fair if you want to use that scale. But could he have been considered a “hit” with no injuries and similar production in the time he missed?
The other thing to consider is that paying an O-lineman more/more on lineman depth benefits both the run and pass. Sure a good run game can take pressure off the pass but it has to be exceptionally good to make defences gameplan primarily against the run in the pass first era.
My thoughts exactly. I remember when McVay took over and the Rams revamped the O-line with better schemes. People were absolutely astounded with Todd Gurley, but at times I felt like Gurley was getting those massive yards per snap because of how big of a space he's getting in the blocks.
Josh Norman was always overrated. He had one decent year that was given more attention due to fighting OBJ for an entire game. That’s it. He was never good before or after that.
That play didn’t even stand because there was a penalty but the NFL thought it was cool and needed to use that highlight for marketing purposes repeatedly after that game. Derrick Henry did it again later in the season and nobody remembers it.
As a Chiefs fan, I feel blessed to have Pecheco and Jerick McKinnon. McKinnon in particular is a back who is a receiving threat. I think we're going to see RB evolve even more into a RPO option in the future, and RB will need to evolve multiple skillsets.
That’s pretty much what it is now for RBs. As an Eagles fan, I had to hear how great Miles Sanders is. He’s solid, but his production was more a byproduct of a great o-line and defenses more concern with the Pass and Option of Jalen Hurts.
They are the prime reason you don’t pay RB or draft them high. CEH became a first round bust, while the two flourished. I have to admit I have no idea who McKinnon was when he came to KC, but he instantly helped KC break the two high defense that bothered Mahomes and being a damn good blocker in addition. I am thankful for their contribution, glad that my team have them, but also feel like they deserve more on a personal level.
I remember 10 years ago when I got into fantasy football, you had to first pick a runningback. It was seen as incredibly risky to early pick a quarterback that wasn't called Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady or Peyton Manning, and wideouts were a second or third round luxury. Crazy to see how much the league has shifted in the past decade.
10 years ago the first round was RBs, Megatron, and Gronk Peyton, Jimmy Graham, and Co in the fourth (2013-2014) WRs not really a “luxury” in the 2nd/3rd But ye nowhere near as WR heavy early
@@bmbrowns1778 eh, most drafts I've done qb has gone quite early, don't get me wrong, there are still very good ones available, but usually in my experience, the best are gone by round 3, I usually do draft qb later tho, Jared Goff has been my fantasy qb 2 years running now, and I forget who the previous few
What's interesting is that the fifth year option for first round picks increases the opportunity for team control, allowing a team like the Giants to kick the can down the road a year with Saquon's contract negotiations instead of trying to work out this problem in 2022. That might explain the value that can come for teams like the Falcons and Lions, who just spent high draft capital at the position on backs with solid receiving ability.
They still don’t deserve the high first round pick until proven otherwise. It would be more reasonable to draft the RB late in first round, like CEH and Najee in that sense.
Been loving these videos a lot. It’s cool seeing more ‘sports industry’ related videos in recent weeks and you’ve got great analysis. Can’t wait to see more of this
As someone who played offensive line at the college level, I think the narrative around RBs has gotten a little crazy. It doesn't matter how well you block if the running back can't diagnose in a split second, cut and explode through the hole in time. A running back can also make his blockers look better with creativity and tackle breaking ability. On my high school team, our RB was our best player and he was the only reason we ever won any games. When he wasn't out there, we just weren't the same. Running (to set up the pass) will always be a part of the NFL. Teams still run on about 40-50% of plays depending on the team (and I would wager that this number rises and falls based on how good their lead back is). 40-50% of all plays is a huge number of touches, and when you count RB receptions this could easily exceed 50% of all offensive snaps. This means that a RB will likely touch the ball more than any non-QB player on most teams. Whatever the difference is between Derrick Henry and Dontrell Hilliard, or Marshawn Lynch and Robert Turbin, or Adrian Peterson and Toby Gerhart, that difference is magnified by the huge number of touches these lead backs are getting. This is why RB, when you get a great one, is very often the face of the franchise. As far as the recent devaluation of the RB position in terms of pay, I think this is for two reasons. The first is that for whatever reason, there has been a recent shortage of HoF worthy backs entering the NFL. I suspect this has something to do with the rise of mega-programs dominating, usually out of the SEC, where these mega teams have 3-4 elite RBs and none of them ever really get to develop as the "guy." And secondly, since prices in Free Agency are typically driven by the biggest stars, since the big star level backs have been lacking recently, that makes all the remaining backs look relatively same-ish, which creates a supply and demand problem. But this is not the same as it being the case that RBs are all the same or just a product of their offenses. A great back still makes a tremendous difference, it's just that there aren't very many of them right now.
You're not really wrong, a scrub running back will absolutely manage to get no production behind the best blocking in the league, but it's the NFL. College football produces like 10 totally serviceable RBs every single year. There's just a ton of supply, and while it's not impossible that we'll see this shift in 10-20 years as the middle schoolers with talent stop playing RB, at the moment it's true. Plus, RBs that are seen as special are still valued by GMs. Bijan Robinson just went 8th overall after all. The problem is that most RBs aren't special.
hof rb talent does have a great impact for the team but seeing how qb friendly the rule right now in the NFL and how injury risk the position is it's make a lot of sense, for the team to invest more on QB,OL & WR. so except you have hof qb on rookie contract paying hof RB is unlikely. and sure it's difficult to replace a great RB but it's not impossible to replace it to an acceptable level by group of RB. like le'veon bell, david johnson, or leveon bell or melvin gordon. there is cases like these in the past decade that make team believe RB is a lot more replaceable, compare to other offense position. so investing in RB is make a lot less sense for them.
It's a matter of moneyball analytics and value. The difference between 4 YPC and 5 YPC is 20 YPG if you carry the ball 20 times. A great LT who allows less sacks, pressures and hurries on passing plays than a replacement is worth more than that. So is a DE who will get extra pressures, or a CB who will have their man locked down more than replacement. The second problem for RBs is they miss the most time due to injury on average, and their skills seem to depreciate fastest. Giving a RB a big 4-5 year contract with a big bonus is as risky as giving that to a 32 year old player. When the cap limits your spending, it makes sense to invest more in more impactful positions and positions where a player who is paid 4 years 80 million is likely to produce to a level worthy of that money for all 4 years and likely to miss less games due to injury over those 4 years.
Short shelf life with high supply. Why would you pay big bucks to an RB when not only is there another back coming around the corner but the guy you might pay will be finished before the end of the contract
I think Derrick Henry has become one of my all time favorite players to watch since entering the NFL. Sometimes it's hard to even believe what you're seeing.
As a Giants fan and big Saquon fan, as talented as he is, the Gmen won two super bowls since 2007 with a fourth round and seventh round pick headlining their backfield. The giants having a bad o line the past ten years makes a guy like Saquon meaningless if he’s got no one blocking. I wish there could be an in between because Saquon is a generational talent and the giants o line has improved a lot.
There's a sort of parallel between running backs and big men in the NBA. They're just as injury prone and with the evolution of the three ball, they had a slump in value. But, as defenses shifted out to the perimeter to deal with the three, interior play became more viable and now we're seeing a resurgence in Big Man dominance (granted they also shoot a lot more threes than before). Hopefully something similar can happen to running backs in the next decade or so because damn do I love watching them pound turf.
I do agree with you, and Nikola Jokic to me is basically an enhanced version of Shaq since Jokic can shoot the 3 and is an excellent passer alongside good ball handling.
@@JahNuhThunDeeTheOneAndOnly Heck whenever Tom Brady had his surgery back in 2008 for his torn ACL, they even messed up his surgery and he had an infection which they had to clean out his knee for. If that happened to someone nowadays with something going wrong from a surgery like that, said athlete would’ve been suddenly called “injury prone” over it.
The other problem with running backs is that they're the only position in football to benefit from being short, as a result, they don't have much of a choice but to play that position
The disrespect towards runningbacks is why I’ve lost my love for football, it’s my favorite position and I always played with in games now that the league and owners don’t care about the position I’ve stopped caring about football. Dalvin cook was the last straw for me my favorite player on my team tossed away like he meant nothing
I agree with all of the points you brought up. It’s sucks for these guys who sacrifice their bodies as much as anyone on a football field but paying RBs doesn’t work out for the team. Also, you name dropping those running backs brought back nostalgia from the 2017 season of the NFL.
When Zeke held out, all NFL media and personalities were like PAY ZEKE! Jerry buckled under pressure and paid him, the Zeke went on to become the running back that was starting to show wear and tear. That contract became an albatross and until recently, Dallas cut their losses. Todd Gurley got paid but he developed arthritis in his knees, wasn’t the same and had to retire shortly. The game has changed, unfortunately running backs whom are the bell cow are not sought after anymore.
Im expecting an increase in running backs decoming dual threats as well. The shown decrease in wanting a running back is gonna make those that play the position become well-versed elsewhere like tight-end or wide receiver so they wont be shafted off as quickly
Tbh Taysom Hill is probably the future of what the RB position looks like in the NFL. Sturdy college dual-threat QBs that couldn’t actually hack it in the NFL at QB but can run hard and do a little bit of everything.
I think it will balance out eventually. The athletes who play runningback will play elsewhere, and eventually the demand for a good runningback will increase again. It’s just that the supply of good running backs is insanely high in todays game.
It is odd that teams will draft RBs high (1st and 2nd round) but will refuse to pay for them because of the flooded market and injury concerns, which just makes it look like they're wasting draft capital
They know elite backs are valuable, they just don't want to pay them. If they truly thought backs were replaceable then they wouldn't tag them, they would just let them walk
They get the best years out of them, then instead of paying you just repeat. It actually makes a lot of sense (although I'd agree that if you're drafting a RB in round 1, you are probably not maximizing your draft capital).
Dont forget Jonas Gray on that list of has beens. I know it was kinda self inflicted and he had one big game but still. The fact bill just disregarded that and still had a ok to above average ground game confirms everything you said
Potential solution to addressing the problem of RB’s having notoriously short careers compared to other positions: Have entry level contracts (ELC’s) for running backs reduced to 2 or 3 years rather than the standard 4 all while offering some sort of cap hit break. ELC’s ending earlier would give RB’s a chance to earn their first big deal right before their mid 20s while possibly getting a “respectable deal” by the end of that deal when the RB hits late 20s.
It’s a good idea, but I have no idea how the nflpa could possibly make this work without pissing off the other position groups. A stopgap solution that was suggested would be to have running backs on the tag or 5th year option be given likely to reach incentives, that would not count against the cap. Allowing teams to pay w/o the jeopardy
@@RD-wg9em yeah it would be challenging to convince non-RB union members on this idea. I personally am ok with “incentives outside the cap” but then that opens the door for some degree of unfairness since a financial juggernaut team could throw a lot more non-cap affected incentives to an RB. Smaller teams might not be able to do the same.
@@sabrethemoment6799yup, that is a major problem for my solution. I don’t think there’s a good solution for this, except for allowing defence to play the pass again
This can't work because the NFLPA has to represent all players, not just star RBs. No other position group would accept favoritism toward one position. If you were to make adjustments to the lengths of rookie contracts, you'd have to do it across the board. And if you shorten rookie contracts, you'd just expedite the rate at which star players break into their high-money second deals, which would have the knock-on effect of sucking up more money from fringe roster players and the practice squad, which the NFLPA also has to represent. The only thing I can think of to help would be to have some kind of incentive baked into contracts that pays out more money to players who put more wear and tear on their bodies, but I'm not smart enough to bang out the specifics of how this could actually work in practice.
@@Sixfortyfive yeah I can see the depth players getting impacted hard by such reform unless there’s a separate cap system for these kinds of players. And I’m sure this idea would get crapped on hard by most owners. Maybe the RB position needs to “adapt” to the current landscape of the game. Sure Zeke was grossly overpaid as a pure power runner but he makes for a great blocker who can get you 1-2 yards if need be. In hindsight, he could’ve extended his career a bit by embracing this blocker/short distance runner position earlier yet taking a less lucrative contract.
I think Atlanta is the perfect example of this. Bijan was the highest rb prospect in years yet he’s gonna be on a rotation with allgier (5th round 1k rusher) and Patterson (SB winning vet). It’s way easier to get multiple good cheap running backs than spending for one elite rb.
As a Falcons fan, this makes me question the Bijan pick even more. Not that I don't think hes good, but using a 7th overall pick on an RB seems like bad asset management.
Call me crazy, but I point the finger at Mike Shanahan. When his offense was clicking he was cycling through RBs like socks. That kinda opened eyes to the fact that any decent runner could be stuck there, & his scheme would get them to 1,000 yds. Feel like ever since then we’ve seen the “by committee” concept become more prevalent.
because he's not white. Josh Allen and Daniel Jones' successes come off of being able to run the ball and they were given their big contracts with no issues. people swear race doesnt play a factor in things like this but completely ignore this blatant example.
Just like you completely ignore Jalen hurts, Kyle Murphey, Russel Wilson, Dashon Watson, Patrick Mahomes, And Dak sign with no issue, And the 2 hold outs this year are Justin Herbert and Joe Burrow who are white. Stop being a racist and look at the facts
The whole O-line thing is so true. I remember the main reason why I drafted johnathan Taylor in 2021 wasn’t because he’s good at making his own yardage. It’s because he gets to run behind quinton Nelson. If you watched nfl top 100 even the rbs say that 90% of the time they just run behind him instead of their actual running lane
I think the biggest thing screwing them is rookie wage scale. Running backs have never had long shelf lives. Guys like Emmitt Smith and Adrian Peterson who could still have 1,000 yard seasons late into their careers are honestly the real unicorns. Every year there is a big, fast as hell feature back in the draft who can dominate for several years before fading. The rookie scale means they don’t get big money when they are young and by the time they can get a new contract they are cooked or close to being cooked. Passing becoming more prevalent and the supply of cheap solid but not great backs hurts too but that’s secondary
Take the running back out and we'll see how long the quarterbacks last running the ball it's easier to play the pass then play The Run if there's no running back you can stop the pass
"The success of the rushing game is mainly developed in the trenches" Me, a Rams fan who watched the team crumble when nearly the entire starting O-Line got injured: "YOU DON'T SAY"
I think that the RBs who will see success are guys like Christian Mccaffrey. The WR in running back clothing. If you can catch passes at a true WR level and not just be "good for a running back" the value is there.
I remember several years ago, an anonymous GM was quoted as saying, "I know this may sound cruel, but here's my personal philosophy regarding RBs -- draft one high, in the first round, and ride him until the wheels fall off. Then go get you another one. And because I know how much punishment and wear-and-tear they suffer, I do tend to open up the pocketbook a little more for RBs."
I wouldn't even draft a RB in the first round. 4th round or lower, or just a Street FA. Put that draft capital into your offensive and defensive lines, and see more impact.
As a Chiefs fan, I hope this lets dual threat RBs shine more and provide a service, like how TE's become more serviceable as catchers and not just blockers. Having someone in the backfield like McKinnon who is an obvious passing threat is so much better than just a flat runner. It's one of the big reasons Jamaal Charles was so good. I want RBs to adapt to the change so they can remain paid and in good service to their teams, because bell cows aren't doing it anymore and it's too risky to pay heavily into your only big runner when we're now paying heavily into o-linemen, QBs, and now secondaries.
Did you stop to wonder why "Beast Mode isn't even featured on this list"? Because he should be... the list is wrong. He made $7,000,000 in 2013 when the Seahawks won the super bowl. Instead they put Percy Harvin who isn't even a running back, he's a wide receiver.
It’s a hard philosophy to come to terms with. Take Seattle for example. Kenneth Walker coming out as a premiere back last year, and Seattle drafted another one in Zach Charbonnet to optimize the attack. If you saw Seattle make that pick 10 years ago, you would’ve been astounded at the idiocy of it. In the modern day, when backs are becoming less and less important as a single unit, it makes sense. It’s just sad to see that running backs are becoming less important, I always loved watching explosive runs.
Out of curiosity, he said Henry, Chubb and Barkley are still offensive focal points in their own ways. Would a player like Jerome Bettis (who was a focal point of a late 90’s and early 2000’s team) be seen as far less valuable today? Ergo: Someone who won’t give you a ton of yards per carry but was hard to tackle because of power, and was elite at moving the chains?
@@fortynights1513 Bettis is the type of RB who lost the most due to analytics. In today's NFL he'd be a short-yardage or goal line back. Nobody would think to give him 20 carries a game.
@@fortynights1513 Well like Tree said, excluding the Bears and Falcons, the NFL ran 57.5% of passing plays last year. In terms of the modern NFL offense, Bettis would probably be a less valuable asset in the modern day, but not tremendously so. As you said, Derrick Henry is a monster on the field. Henry and Bettis have the same kind of playstyle in the sense that they can run over anyone with power and they are very hard to tackle. Saquon and Chubb are extremely illusive and speedy runners which give them their individuality among the RB cesspit within the NFL. Though Saquon has had numerous injuries and his long term production is yet to be seen. I guess the question is how do you make yourself stand out as a top RB? Bettis in his prime probably would make it work within a scheme in the modern day just as Derrick Henry in Tennessee, but thats just my opinion.
@@howdareyouexist Especially with RB's not having a good life span in the NFL. Most who are great in the beginning make to 30 and are out soon after. Adrian Peterson a great example of this.
Bettis and Alstott both had surprisingly long careers (for RBs) considering how they ran. Those dudes were just built differently though, not the norm.
I just have to say, great video as always but I definitely appreciate the instrumentals you use. To see a UTree video over a J Dilla beat is pretty amazing. Keep it up sir!
The last time the team with the leading rusher won the Super Bowl was 25 years ago when Terrell Davis and the Broncos did it. The last team to lead the league in rushing AND win the Super Bowl were the 85 Bears.
Honorable mention in here: The 91 Skins won the Super Bowl and had the number one offense while passing the ball less often than anyone else in their year.
The rushing game is still important due to needing to keep the defense honest and the need to get yards in the compressed red zone. I hate to see running backs go through this. Those who can do a lot more than just run the ball will last the longest in the NFL henceforth.
I don't know much about football but I was thought that a good offensive line was the basic core of the team. It can make an average QB good and a good QB great. Im thinking about Andrew Luck getting beat up. This also applied to RB's. They got to be careful about who there traded to. They think that they can do it on your own. Considering the injuries maybe it should be a rotational like starting pitchers in base ball. Have a couple starting RB's. Having a good ground game is best when your ahead to burn time off the clock.
They aren’t required to win. Haven’t been for a decade+ If you are a great running back, after a contract, if you have the ability, switch to receiver. It’ll extend your career and get you more money.
They are required if you have an average to mediocre QB under center. Why should they switch to receiver when what the NFL could do is just pay RBs the same as receivers on the franchise tag or give RBs short term but big money contracts? There are ways to work around this without killing off the position.
@@crater044 it’s not killing off the position. Because it’s already killed off. It’s running back by committee or teams are doing it wrong. Simple as that. And they’ll get paid more as a receiver. Maybe not the very first guy who does it. But after it’s been proven they can switch position (all the guys I listed def can, and would have as much or more success next season doing so).
@@crater044 also, if you have an average to mediocre qb, doesn’t matter who your rb is, you aren’t winning anything. Titans with Henry is the perfect example of how far a running back can take you. And it’s no where close to a Super Bowl.
The running back as a position is caught in the in-between phase of American football's evolution and GMs aren't really sure how to address it. As the sport at the professional level becomes more and more like Canadian football like the collegiate game has (the Air Raid and nickel defense are practically CFL schemes retooled for 11-man, 4 down ball), running backs and tight ends will see their roles on the team and consequently their pay change as they, I predict, evolve into the Canadian slotback position
Another great video that REALLY needed to be made. You may not be the first one to cover this subject but the more videos there are saying it just drives the point home further that running backs deserve better. But Tree, bro, I know you're busy, but is NFL Sportsball 2022-2023 ever gonna have its own playlist?
I know you mentioned Lamar Jackson as one of the big dual threat QBs to really get the game shaken up but let's not forget the QB I think that started that trend - Michael Vick - whether on Atlanta or Philly, that guy all through his career was explosive and unpredictable. Could make plays whether ahead or behind including some of those responsible for the second miracle at the Meadowlands.
Vick did start the trend, but a lot of teams got scared away after the Redskins took a hatchet to RG3's knee. If he stayed healthy, he could've been special.
I wonder when this is going to impact collegiate players' decision on which position to play. Why beat yourself up becoming a star running back if you can switch to another position and make way more money in the NFL?
i understand that the game is very pass heavy as of late (until defenses adjust in the near future) but the RUN still sets up the pass. im ashamed the giants wont just pay up and keep saquon at least for 2 years.
The unfortunate truth is that the rookie contracts last longer than the average career for RB's and those first 3-5 years tend to be a RB's prime years. It just doesn't make sense to give out a second contract unless you're Derrick Henry or Nick Chubb.
I'll be interested to see 5-10 years from now if there's a shortage of runningbacks in the draft. I'd imagine the most talented high school football players see stuff like this and try to change positions. If you're a receiving back, screw that just be a receiver. If you've got any ability to throw a football, be a dual threat QB. If you can't do either or those, try being a linebacker.
you should remember that when Bell left the playoff game vs the Patriots the Steelers were cooked despite having AB and Ben. He was the best offensive player on that team.
I do get why teams act that way…HOWEVER some of these guys are way too good and way too important to there team to experience this level of disrespect. For example Henry ekeler and Saquon are way too valuable to their respective teams they suck without them.
No, they aren't. The reason they don't get paid is because it's easy to replace most of their production for a lot less. The NFL hasn't just conspired to bone RBs, it's basic economics (which I know is incredibly hard to grasp for a depressingly large portion of this country).
The only way to fix this is to either undo all the rules that made passing so much more efficienct (which the NFL will never do) or theres an offensive rennaissance throughout the league like when the West Coast offense was born. I thought we were seeing that with Todd Gurley and the Rams when McVay created an unstoppable juggernaut, but then Belichick met them in the super bowl and revealed to everyone exactly how to beat the system, and ever since it has gone away again.
I think Tree (and a lot of people) are mistaken when it comes to painting the passing revolution as a major reason why the RB market had fallen. Just 3 years ago RBs still were getting paid top dollar but now they aren't. It's the realization of high supply, high demand at a position that punishes you for sticking with a guy. So even if the game was still like how it was in the 80s, I'd think teams would still come to the same conclusion and we'd see RBBCs and RBs being dumped after their first 5-6 years.
@hemanthswarna2327 I can understand that, but I think what we really saw is that as the new rules, particularly around roughing the passer and pass interference, were implemented, teams started realizing that the analytics shifted toward not paying backs, and then a few high profile big money busts sealed the debate. Because it's not like the "don't pay running backs" idea was a myth 5 years ago. People already knew it was a bad idea but the only real counter-examples were teams that used the money somewhere else and won. We didn't have an elite running back completely go bust after signing a big money deal. Then we got Bell, Zeke, and Gurley all in the span of a few years and all of the sudden a big RB contract PAYING OFF was the exception, not the rule
@memeteam2692 I know, but that's my point. If running backs are largely interchangeable, then that shouldn't have matter much. And if running backs ARENT interchangeable, then the system should have worked when he came back. But what we saw was the next season, teams brought heavier packages in to counteract the wing backs and zone running instead of going nickel and dime to defend against the pass, which was the conventional wisdom before Super Bowl 53. And the system just collapsed. Belichick realized that the key to McVay's system was actually baiting the pass instead of trying to defend against it, and he used some weird 46 defense we hadn't seen in 30 years to do it, and everyone largely copied the strategy.
The only organic fix might just be to let more good young players play other positions, if you lower the supply of good running backs maybe the demand increases down the line.
Best solution to the issue I see is increasing RB rookie scale contracts and make the tag for RBs higher. If teams want to treat them as entirely replaceable, make the team pay the player while their still good. Teams benefit because they can still draft the old guys replacement every 4 years, RBs get the money they deserve while they are deserving of it.
Oh sure - that'll go over great with the rest of the players, who must sign off on it. Player get X% of the salary cap. That is divided amongst everyone one on the team. Making a special contract rule for RB's takes money out of the pockets of other positions. Not gonna happen
@@frankpinmtl yeah… it’s weird. People aren’t this passionate about full backs or long snappers or kickers lol I don’t understand it. RB’s don’t “deserve” anything. It’s a free market. Running backs are in low demand, so they’ll be paid less. That’s kind of where the convo ends.
@@Zlittlepenguin The American school system has stopped teaching any sort of economics to children, so they all grow up entitled and stupid. I'd wager that many of the people that have reactions like this, about it not being, "fair", for rbs, are too young to have really watched the NFL when full backs were a thing.
I completely understand the risk and why people are hesitant to pay Running Backs. However nowadays, the way people go out of their way to tell you how useless the RB position is, you'd think why even have the position at all at this point 🤨🤷🏾♂️
It isn’t useless but their success is heavily dependent on a good offensive line. Late round pick rbs can look world class with an elite offensive line. Likewise guys like Saquon, Mcaffery would look awful if their o lines are terrible.
The position is never useless. The ground game will forever be an essential part of football. But “Who” is generating those rushing yards is what’s changing. Before it’s one really, really good back(so you pay the one guy the big bucks). Now it’s 3-4 guys+the QB+maybe even some WRs (ala Deebo), the 10-15M that used to go to one guy is now going to 5 guys.
@@jack90054You do know that teams have always had more than back on their team even back in the day right? The RBs that got paid top money were the TOP backs. The TOP backs should get paid. That's what people aren't understanding. And considering they are playing for teams that NEED a great RB, those RBs should be paid for it. Teams that use RB committees have existed in the past and yea it's a little trickier but doable (just split the cost). But I don't see why QBs and WRs should get paid extra for encroaching on a RB's job when A) they aren't going to run the ball as often, B) there's only one real WR and only a handful of running QBs and C) it's actually a good idea to NOT overrely on your receivers and QBs running because they could get injured.
A lot of the great RBs hung around for 10+ years back in the day because they had FBs. Emmitt Smith being one of them. Maybe it's time to bring that position back. I'm also of the opinion of, get rid of RB position then, only use them for blocking sets, convert them to WRs. But let's be honest, that would cost teams MORE money, which we know owners don't want to pay that ticket. The RBs should get paid. They take some of the most punishment and they are overlooked when they keep drives alive.
It could happen that there might be an eb and flow back to full power RB's back into the NFL. It may take a few years, but the reason for this is simple, look at how bulky some of the second level guys are, they are athletic, but they are not powerful. If a RB can get to the second stage and they are a power back, they could run over most of the secondary due to their strength. If you get leaner and faster at the secondary, you won't be able to stop a powerful RB as efficiently, especially if that RB Is elusive and powerful
FBS are making a resurgence but they will probably never achieve their former glory because it removes a potential player from the pass blocking scheme
The running backs will come back when Patrick, Jason, and all the other dual Qbs start to break down faster combing with age. We seen this preview with Michale Vick. The running back will comeback as some sort of security position. Patrick, Jason and the others will either be more pocket qbs or relay more on the running backs. I think we're see a resurgences in the late 2020's of rbs.
The difference with Pat is that he’s not necessarily a running QB, he’s just a QB that happens to run. It’s not like he’s entirely reliant on it due to having a cannon of an arm
@@jay_1212 True he doesnt rely on it like Mike did however he still relies on it more often than not. He's better than Mike in he's more accurate and can balance the two. However as he gets older he cant run as he did early in his career. Plus wrs will come and go so that rb position as he gets older will be of equal of importance.
If I am a GM, I am taking a Running Back in the 5th or 6th round every year. I will always have fresh legs. It gives me 3-5 backs to choose from every off-season. All being on rookie contracts and prove-it camp contracts.
To add to the idea of dual-threat QBs, the league is actively looking to protect the highest-paid player on the field at all times when a QB rushes. How many ticky-tack penalties are called for "late hits" when the QB is rushing versus when a running back has the ball? There is an institutional advantage for rushing QBs.
Even goddamn Daniel Jones
This one kills me. In the past, a QB could have anyone blow him up and that's just how it was. Then they made all the BS rules.
Except Justin Fields
Bruh Justin Fields gets 0 protection
Also, the slide has given QBs a huge advantage as well. A QB can run and not worry about getting leveled, he’ll just slide. If he does gets hit? More yards. If he’s about to get hit running, pretend to slide and the defenseman, not wanting a flag, let’s up, allowing for even more yards.
This video just makes me appreciate the people who appreciate King Henry even more. Man is a generational talent, and no one at that size should be able to move that fast. Really hoping he can get a Super Bowl trophy before he calls it a career.
its sad that in order to do so, he'll probably have to go to another team, take a massive paycut and be part of a RB committee.
I feel like his window with the Titans has run out. 2019-2021 were the opportunities, and they blew it.
@@jjtheentonthey did get hopkins which means they are hopefully on par with the 2021 team that got the top seed. the only difference between 21 and 22 was aj brown
@@LordBurger LOL. jesus i didnt think fans as delusional as you exist.
Him and Nick Chubb are the only pure runners in the league worth another contract imo, but i am biased. CMC obviously too but thats cause he's also a freakin slot receiver
It’s hard to not blame QBs and these new offensive schemes. QBs have always been the highest paid but back in day they needed a RB to pound the rock to set up the play action. These days every play has crazy pre snap motion that sets up a read option with a QB that’s often the top rusher. Young RBs in HS and college would be smart to get great at catching the ball.
Or even passing the ball. RB is the closest position to QB so who knows lol
@@kimyona9746 RB has a lot more in common with receiver than QB. Even if classified as an RB they still need to be able to run routes and deal with coverage, a QB has an entirely separate list of things to be concerned about.
@@hawawah8671 of course. Just saying that RB is the closest position to QB and in high school you still have time to learn how to pass
@@kimyona9746 It is the closest in that their position on the field is, but the same is true of center. And while you have time to learn to pass a QB needs more than just an arm (or an arm and legs), he needs to read defences much more than most other players on the offense, he needs to quickly go through his reads. While if you want to switch over high school is a decent time to start, receiver is a much much better position to switch over to as a number of NFL receivers were other positions even in college (Edelman was a QB for example). Also it is a position that can fit a wide range of heights (body type is a bit more narrow but you can generally lose bulk more easily than gaining height) QBs are almost always tall and it is an explicit advantage for them to be tall, and although it's harder to explain the reasoning professional QBs have a narrower weight range than professional RBs despite having a wider height range.
Ultimately if you want to switch to any position period receiver is almost always the best position and this goes double for an RB who is already a receiver with extra responsibilities. If you're an absolute unit maybe you could be a TE (modern TEs don't even block worth a damn, they're just fat receivers).
Offensive Coordinators and Head Coaches have neglected the running game for a long time
Never forget: Until he got hurt in Week 10 or 11 that year, Bell's backup, James Connor, put up nearly identical numbers to what Bell put up the year before, within like 50 yards and 1 touchdown on almost the same amount of carries. That opened a lot of teams' eyes, I think, to the fact that O-Lines and run schemes make the yards more than the big pricetag backs.
Also, the short shelf life and 'frequent' injuries to Running Backs is linked to the fact that Full Backs are almost extinct in the league anymore. It's funny how taking the protection away makes guys get hurt more often.
And I don't know exactly how it fits into the math, but Trent Richardson being picked 3rd overall and busting as hard as he did probably factors in to reluctance to take risks on "every down" backs.
This is facts all around, Conner didn’t get the job in AZ for no reason
...and then injuries ALSO ruined Conner's career
Then the Colts traded for Richardson and then the Browns used their pick to select...
Johnny Football.
Both lost
"If, If, If." Don't forget that "IF" is usually followed by fiction and speculation......
Yeah I remembered James Connor
Don't forget about DeAngelo Williams
In my opinion, running the ball is like a 2 point shot in basketball, whereas passing is like a 3 point shot. Both passing and 3 point shots have been more common over the past decade since even if it's a higher risk, it's also a higher reward
The similarities also include the improved efficiency.
If you shoot well from 3, 2 pt shots become more efficient: if you pass the ball well running the ball becomes easier as there are fewer people in the box. The difference is that Basketball is less specialised.
Actually an apt comparison since the NBA started calling the lightest brush of the skin a penalty too. The 2 softest leagues in North America have always kinda lined up well tho in their gimmicks so it's nothing new
It's actually a comparison that makes a lot of sense. In fact, Ive believed for a while now that the Chiefs are essentially the NFL's version of the Warriors and that Mahomes and Curry have had similar impacts in both sports.
While your comparison is on point, it also shows that the league and teams are going to be stupid enough to try and copy KC's style because "it works"despite the fact that it works for KC because it's THEIR style.
It's like how suddenly, every team in the NBA started to try and shoot 3s all the time like the Warriors but were not as exciting or consistently efficient at it (looking at the small ball Rockets) or how everyone tried to copy the Patriots or hire former Belichick coaches in hopes to duplicate the Patriots' success......yet it failed spectacularly.
That's why a team like the Giants, Raiders and Cowboys should pony up the dough to keep great RBs because they don't have an elite QB like Mahomes that can make do without one nor do they have an Andy Reid that can make chicken salad out of anything. Teams that NEED a great running back or a great running game to succeed because they have a mediocre QB should pay their RBs and not overpay their QB (like the Giants did).
Just because the Chiefs and Patriots (the current and last dynasty) have won 5 SBs in the last 10 years without a major running game doesn't mean that every team is good enough to go without one.
It's funny cause I think if a team got a Bell Cow RB they'd do better than most would expect because defensive backs and linebackers have been slimmed down over the years to focus on QB rush and pass coverage. Hence why Henry is able to stiff arm twigs like Norman. If it was Brian Dawkins or Sean Taylor era DBs it would be a different story
@@crater044 Ironically, the teams that actually end up winning the NBA finals are teams with a multi-dimensional offense. Living and dying by the the 3 in NBA never truly works in high volume unless you have generational 3 shot making talent(Curry, Klay) in addition to good compimentary pieces(Draymond, KD, Barnes, Wiggins, etc.). The reason for this phenonmenon is because MoreyBall missed the obvious, yet often overlooked aspect of of blind analytics: Basketball, like many sports is not played in a vaccum. Basketball isn't math problem, where you just can solve for all the unknown factors by balancing out the equation. Basketball is moreso like and constantly evolving logic problem where you have to consider multiple avenues of team structure given your player's skillsets to mininimize your weaknesses and maximize your strengths. 80% of players don't fit the model of what Moreyball was trying to run, so you would often get far worse versions of what your players could be and when you need something else from them, they quite literally couldn't provide because of the hyperfocused role.
Not really touched on here is the way officiating has changed to coddle the QBs. The running game also used to be a way to save your franchise QB from taking more punishment and injury. These days they take far less contact by the way the game is called, so it is less important to try and protect them with a run game that can take pressure off them and even shorten games. Add to it the protections afforded to QBs that aren’t given to RBs, thus keeping their career primes on average brief, and it’s a double shot that’s hurt the RBs.
It feels like the number of rushes by QBs toward the sidelines on broken plays is way higher than it used to be too. Even dudes like Herbert and Burrow pick up a good number of 1st downs by just running to the outside when no defenders are there. Probably in part because QBs are just more athletic now.
You're also forgetting the added protections for Wide Receivers. It wasn't that long ago and receivers that ran slants or crossing routes were subject to getting lit up light a Christmas Tree. Helmet to Helmet evolved into targeting and receivers have a massive advantage because there's no fear of a big hit. Balls receivers wouldn't even try to make a play on, they're now catchable. Every rule change has benefitted the offense, either the QB or WR in a huge way.
@@deplorablepepe7576 right what used to be playing great defense is now "pass interference", guys like LT, Lott, rob gronkowski, are punished for doing their thing. A few here and their like Sean Taylor, or more recently Ndamukong Suh that'll make great plays despite the hefty fines they get. a few years ago making long catches was a way for QBs to get an earfull from wide recievers.
I just hate the way the QB is coddled and i always found it far more entertaining to see a running back go for 200 in a game than a wide receiver.
Exactly and it was proven last year in the playoffs. All you have to is have your qb take off towards a sideline and its an easy 5 yards because defenders are afraid to hit the qb. And if you do theres a good chance he gets another 15. And wr's are protected more and more too
I played RB in high school, and while this situation infuriates me I completely get it. The line makes the running game, and unless you have a generational talent like Barry Sanders to hand the ball to there's no reason to pay the big bucks. Saquon raised the question about the value of RBs in the modern age, and Zeke's contract reinforced it.
I agree zeke’s contract killed the running back market . And emphasized everything you just said . He came in the league with the best line and once that line got worse he fell off a cliff . I think the league will definitely go more of the committee route from now on and just churn out running backs in the draft . It doesn’t make sense to pay any of them long term deals .
What’s interesting is that RB by committee is actually maybe closer to the historical norm for football. If you go back to the 60s, the reason Jim Brown’s stats were so bonkers relative to his peers was that most teams divided up Carrie’s very, very often.
RBs we’re still way more valued in that context because the running game was way more efficient relative to the pass when QBs were barely completing half of attempts and were throwing INTs all the time.
The late 70s to the mid 00s might end up being the exception rather than the norm - the era of the feature back.
Yeah... Zeke's contract.... I love Zeke, but.... that just scares GM's to death.... and it's happened before.... It was years ago Mike Shanahan made every back look good.... It is what it is.... Plus, no one seems to want to bring this up, but, teams really want a back who can pass protect on 3rd & 7....
What teams really want is a back who can pass protect, who can run, and who can catch out of the backfield.... Like a Tony Pollard, except Dallas is still stinging from the Zeke contract.....
I am all about Players getting paid... I am. Millionaire owners make piles of money... The players who destroy their own bodies, should be getting paid. But at the same time, a GM is committing career suicide if he overpays for a running back.....
All amazing points, I didn't even touch on the ramifications on a GMs career regarding a bad RB contract which just adds to the case against RBs
The o line makes every position on the offense better, not just running back.
Another big issue: modern rookie contracts. RBs spend what is often their prime years getting carries on their rookie deals. Imagine the kind of contract a Saquon or a McCaffrey could have gotten if they could have signed as a true free agent out of college.
You might be on to something here! I say they make RBs rookie contracts shorter then
Then they won’t get drafted as high and lose money in their rookie deal. Why draft a RB high in the draft with a 3 year contract when you can draft a WR/OL with a 4-5 year contract and has a higher positional value?
I think the best option is to restructure rookie deals for running backs
1. Increase the pay so they get compensated for their normally highest production.
2. Shorten the rookie contract to 2 years so they can get big boy contracts sooner.
This won't be a perfect fit but I do think this solution will enable running backs to get paid when the market values them the most.
That would make things even worse for them
I think people will just have to accept that if the game doesn't require a big man in the back field, like Henry, then the amount of men that can play their will just increase, the supply goes up, the demand goes down, they would have to be donated money to compensate for the position as it is. Nfl teams will just take backs in late rounds and run them into the earth for 3 years, then draft a new one.
Wow, you must stump for the WNBA to be paid the same as the guys. HA! RB is NOT valuable.
That would just make it so RBs never get drafted as highly
2 years sounds like a great idea actually, would make it fun because GMs would have to start getting more creative because they have less time to rely on rookie contracts, and we get more bad contracts to laugh at again
4:00 2013 Seahawks leading rusher is listed as Percy Harvin, who had 0 attempts and yards rushing that year. their leading rusher was actually Marshawn Lynch who had nearly 1300 yards and a salary of $7M
I wonder if, with the prevalence of passing in the offensive philosophy these days, running backs might actually become useful again due to the sheer amount of sub packages teams would need to run to contend with the amount of passing threats on the field at any given time.
Or we'll see the emergence of more Nickel/LB hybrids that can both stop the run and cover speedy slot receivers
Agreed we have been here before in the league. They do need to fix the rules to allow defense though. But the one team that decides to go run heavy will plow through a pass defense.
We are starting to see FBs make a comeback......it's the old "what's old is new again" approach. Even College football might go back to a running game in a few years.
These things come and go in phases.
I think dbs or lbs should get buffed a bit.
It's why Kamara got his contract. Rushing 600-800 and receiving 500-700 yards a season.
@@reubensandwich9249Given that we see more statlines like that, one unacknowledged NFL record that I’d take it will never be broken:
Larry Johnson in 2006 had 416 carries in a season for Kansas City.
A list of unbreakable NFL records could be filled with volume rushing records because of how many running backs by committee there are.
Thanks for mentioning Chris Carson. Dude was a dark horse. That 1000 season he had was really amazing. And penny finally broke the code but couldn’t ever stay healthy. There are so many Seahawks running backs I miss, they were all dogs and looked up to lynch. Turning, Carson, Rawls, mckissac. It’s a shame that the position has devolved to what it is now.
If Chris Carson didn’t get hurt in 2017, the Seahawks could’ve made the playoffs.
They aren’t going far or anything, but I would argue that.
@@AmirKhan-rh6jjDude had a very good career.
The offensive line helped tremendously, and without it, he’s not an MVP, but he had a longer prime than quite a few running backs mentioned in this video did.
It’s sad to see running backs get abused and not get payed much but at the same time I can see why they don’t pay them they start to get older and you never wanna draft a Runningback in the first round unless he’s Walter Payton or sanders
Is Saquon Barkley the last running back to go as high as he did in an NFL draft (second overall)?
@@fortynights1513 yes and so far he’s been a meh
@@Packerfan5827That’s fair if you want to use that scale.
But could he have been considered a “hit” with no injuries and similar production in the time he missed?
@@fortynights1513 also the OL at the time was pretty bad so he kinda carried the team on his back before injuries hit him
Like declining when reaching 30?
The other thing to consider is that paying an O-lineman more/more on lineman depth benefits both the run and pass. Sure a good run game can take pressure off the pass but it has to be exceptionally good to make defences gameplan primarily against the run in the pass first era.
My thoughts exactly. I remember when McVay took over and the Rams revamped the O-line with better schemes. People were absolutely astounded with Todd Gurley, but at times I felt like Gurley was getting those massive yards per snap because of how big of a space he's getting in the blocks.
That Josh Norman stiff arm haunts the nightmares of all us bills fans
No losing to Mahomes in the playoffs then watching him win ring #2 Haunts Josh Allen fans more 😂😂
Some say he's still flying through the ether to this day.
Josh Norman was always overrated. He had one decent year that was given more attention due to fighting OBJ for an entire game. That’s it. He was never good before or after that.
I love my Hometown Bill's and I still laugh at this moment
That play didn’t even stand because there was a penalty but the NFL thought it was cool and needed to use that highlight for marketing purposes repeatedly after that game.
Derrick Henry did it again later in the season and nobody remembers it.
As a Chiefs fan, I feel blessed to have Pecheco and Jerick McKinnon. McKinnon in particular is a back who is a receiving threat. I think we're going to see RB evolve even more into a RPO option in the future, and RB will need to evolve multiple skillsets.
That’s pretty much what it is now for RBs. As an Eagles fan, I had to hear how great Miles Sanders is. He’s solid, but his production was more a byproduct of a great o-line and defenses more concern with the Pass and Option of Jalen Hurts.
Or in KC's case the pass-pass option.
James White
They are the prime reason you don’t pay RB or draft them high. CEH became a first round bust, while the two flourished. I have to admit I have no idea who McKinnon was when he came to KC, but he instantly helped KC break the two high defense that bothered Mahomes and being a damn good blocker in addition. I am thankful for their contribution, glad that my team have them, but also feel like they deserve more on a personal level.
@@d9prawns429 Sanders was still a great back before Hurts entered the NFL. he was just so underused for some reason
I remember 10 years ago when I got into fantasy football, you had to first pick a runningback. It was seen as incredibly risky to early pick a quarterback that wasn't called Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady or Peyton Manning, and wideouts were a second or third round luxury. Crazy to see how much the league has shifted in the past decade.
as someone who hasn't played fantasy in like ten years, what do the first two rounds look like now?
10 years ago the first round was RBs, Megatron, and Gronk
Peyton, Jimmy Graham, and Co in the fourth (2013-2014)
WRs not really a “luxury” in the 2nd/3rd
But ye nowhere near as WR heavy early
@@ZachNarwhal lmfaoooo you tripping bruh
@@ZachNarwhal Nah Grab a WR first and then a RB. QB should be picked in the 5-8 range imo
@@bmbrowns1778 eh, most drafts I've done qb has gone quite early, don't get me wrong, there are still very good ones available, but usually in my experience, the best are gone by round 3, I usually do draft qb later tho, Jared Goff has been my fantasy qb 2 years running now, and I forget who the previous few
What's interesting is that the fifth year option for first round picks increases the opportunity for team control, allowing a team like the Giants to kick the can down the road a year with Saquon's contract negotiations instead of trying to work out this problem in 2022. That might explain the value that can come for teams like the Falcons and Lions, who just spent high draft capital at the position on backs with solid receiving ability.
They still don’t deserve the high first round pick until proven otherwise. It would be more reasonable to draft the RB late in first round, like CEH and Najee in that sense.
all fine and dandy until they hold out
@@jmacallan448if they hold out they’ll just get replaced by someone else
@@jmacallan448I don’t think anyone’s going to hold out any more lol
Been loving these videos a lot. It’s cool seeing more ‘sports industry’ related videos in recent weeks and you’ve got great analysis. Can’t wait to see more of this
It’s crazy how positions like running back can change so drastically in a small amount of time.
As someone who played offensive line at the college level, I think the narrative around RBs has gotten a little crazy. It doesn't matter how well you block if the running back can't diagnose in a split second, cut and explode through the hole in time. A running back can also make his blockers look better with creativity and tackle breaking ability. On my high school team, our RB was our best player and he was the only reason we ever won any games. When he wasn't out there, we just weren't the same.
Running (to set up the pass) will always be a part of the NFL. Teams still run on about 40-50% of plays depending on the team (and I would wager that this number rises and falls based on how good their lead back is). 40-50% of all plays is a huge number of touches, and when you count RB receptions this could easily exceed 50% of all offensive snaps. This means that a RB will likely touch the ball more than any non-QB player on most teams. Whatever the difference is between Derrick Henry and Dontrell Hilliard, or Marshawn Lynch and Robert Turbin, or Adrian Peterson and Toby Gerhart, that difference is magnified by the huge number of touches these lead backs are getting. This is why RB, when you get a great one, is very often the face of the franchise.
As far as the recent devaluation of the RB position in terms of pay, I think this is for two reasons. The first is that for whatever reason, there has been a recent shortage of HoF worthy backs entering the NFL. I suspect this has something to do with the rise of mega-programs dominating, usually out of the SEC, where these mega teams have 3-4 elite RBs and none of them ever really get to develop as the "guy." And secondly, since prices in Free Agency are typically driven by the biggest stars, since the big star level backs have been lacking recently, that makes all the remaining backs look relatively same-ish, which creates a supply and demand problem. But this is not the same as it being the case that RBs are all the same or just a product of their offenses. A great back still makes a tremendous difference, it's just that there aren't very many of them right now.
You're not really wrong, a scrub running back will absolutely manage to get no production behind the best blocking in the league, but it's the NFL. College football produces like 10 totally serviceable RBs every single year. There's just a ton of supply, and while it's not impossible that we'll see this shift in 10-20 years as the middle schoolers with talent stop playing RB, at the moment it's true. Plus, RBs that are seen as special are still valued by GMs. Bijan Robinson just went 8th overall after all. The problem is that most RBs aren't special.
hof rb talent does have a great impact for the team but seeing how qb friendly the rule right now in the NFL and how injury risk the position is it's make a lot of sense, for the team to invest more on QB,OL & WR. so except you have hof qb on rookie contract paying hof RB is unlikely.
and sure it's difficult to replace a great RB but it's not impossible to replace it to an acceptable level by group of RB. like le'veon bell, david johnson, or leveon bell or melvin gordon. there is cases like these in the past decade that make team believe RB is a lot more replaceable, compare to other offense position. so investing in RB is make a lot less sense for them.
The difference is that there is an abundance of totally serviceable running backs in the league.
It's a matter of moneyball analytics and value. The difference between 4 YPC and 5 YPC is 20 YPG if you carry the ball 20 times. A great LT who allows less sacks, pressures and hurries on passing plays than a replacement is worth more than that. So is a DE who will get extra pressures, or a CB who will have their man locked down more than replacement. The second problem for RBs is they miss the most time due to injury on average, and their skills seem to depreciate fastest. Giving a RB a big 4-5 year contract with a big bonus is as risky as giving that to a 32 year old player. When the cap limits your spending, it makes sense to invest more in more impactful positions and positions where a player who is paid 4 years 80 million is likely to produce to a level worthy of that money for all 4 years and likely to miss less games due to injury over those 4 years.
great insight as always tree. I could not agree with you more.
Short shelf life with high supply. Why would you pay big bucks to an RB when not only is there another back coming around the corner but the guy you might pay will be finished before the end of the contract
Really like this style of video, tree. I would love to see more stuff like this
I think Derrick Henry has become one of my all time favorite players to watch since entering the NFL. Sometimes it's hard to even believe what you're seeing.
As a Giants fan and big Saquon fan, as talented as he is, the Gmen won two super bowls since 2007 with a fourth round and seventh round pick headlining their backfield. The giants having a bad o line the past ten years makes a guy like Saquon meaningless if he’s got no one blocking. I wish there could be an in between because Saquon is a generational talent and the giants o line has improved a lot.
There's a sort of parallel between running backs and big men in the NBA. They're just as injury prone and with the evolution of the three ball, they had a slump in value. But, as defenses shifted out to the perimeter to deal with the three, interior play became more viable and now we're seeing a resurgence in Big Man dominance (granted they also shoot a lot more threes than before). Hopefully something similar can happen to running backs in the next decade or so because damn do I love watching them pound turf.
I do agree with you, and Nikola Jokic to me is basically an enhanced version of Shaq since Jokic can shoot the 3 and is an excellent passer alongside good ball handling.
If RBs are good receivers, then that is the equivalent of a big man who can shoot the 3. Passing is king, and RBs, can contribute in the passing game.
I have always mentioned this comparison for the past few years
@@JahNuhThunDeeTheOneAndOnly Heck whenever Tom Brady had his surgery back in 2008 for his torn ACL, they even messed up his surgery and he had an infection which they had to clean out his knee for. If that happened to someone nowadays with something going wrong from a surgery like that, said athlete would’ve been suddenly called “injury prone” over it.
@@lakerskid2013 Really The Jokic is involved in this conversation? NAh. He's 3 dimensions above in the sports world.
The other problem with running backs is that they're the only position in football to benefit from being short, as a result, they don't have much of a choice but to play that position
Wonder if we’ll start to see an exodus of short fast youngins to soccer
The disrespect towards runningbacks is why I’ve lost my love for football, it’s my favorite position and I always played with in games now that the league and owners don’t care about the position I’ve stopped caring about football. Dalvin cook was the last straw for me my favorite player on my team tossed away like he meant nothing
They care about the position. Just not as much as more valuable positions. I bet you aren't crying about fullbacks.
I agree with all of the points you brought up. It’s sucks for these guys who sacrifice their bodies as much as anyone on a football field but paying RBs doesn’t work out for the team. Also, you name dropping those running backs brought back nostalgia from the 2017 season of the NFL.
I don't feel sad for people getting paid millions. Period.
@@ELGUAPOIV"I'm not going to be happy for someone getting the bag because I want that bag. I'm gonna keep staying miserable."
@@gxngxbdu Project more.
When Zeke held out, all NFL media and personalities were like PAY ZEKE! Jerry buckled under pressure and paid him, the Zeke went on to become the running back that was starting to show wear and tear. That contract became an albatross and until recently, Dallas cut their losses. Todd Gurley got paid but he developed arthritis in his knees, wasn’t the same and had to retire shortly. The game has changed, unfortunately running backs whom are the bell cow are not sought after anymore.
Im expecting an increase in running backs decoming dual threats as well. The shown decrease in wanting a running back is gonna make those that play the position become well-versed elsewhere like tight-end or wide receiver so they wont be shafted off as quickly
Tbh Taysom Hill is probably the future of what the RB position looks like in the NFL. Sturdy college dual-threat QBs that couldn’t actually hack it in the NFL at QB but can run hard and do a little bit of everything.
Deebo Samuel to me is the future. A WR who can line up behind the QB.
Le’Veon Bell did a huge disservice to RB pay … his apology is not accepted
I think it will balance out eventually. The athletes who play runningback will play elsewhere, and eventually the demand for a good runningback will increase again. It’s just that the supply of good running backs is insanely high in todays game.
Or just die out completely
You are right
It is odd that teams will draft RBs high (1st and 2nd round) but will refuse to pay for them because of the flooded market and injury concerns, which just makes it look like they're wasting draft capital
They know elite backs are valuable, they just don't want to pay them. If they truly thought backs were replaceable then they wouldn't tag them, they would just let them walk
They get the best years out of them, then instead of paying you just repeat. It actually makes a lot of sense (although I'd agree that if you're drafting a RB in round 1, you are probably not maximizing your draft capital).
This is the best summarization I have seen about this entire ordeal and probably the most well-spoken opinion about it won't lie
Dont forget Jonas Gray on that list of has beens. I know it was kinda self inflicted and he had one big game but still. The fact bill just disregarded that and still had a ok to above average ground game confirms everything you said
Both you & FlemLo talking about this within hours of each other made my day.
It’s insane because not only is there contracts going down
But their draft stocks too
Tree you better preach.... Also major props for the Stakes Is High plug
Potential solution to addressing the problem of RB’s having notoriously short careers compared to other positions:
Have entry level contracts (ELC’s) for running backs reduced to 2 or 3 years rather than the standard 4 all while offering some sort of cap hit break. ELC’s ending earlier would give RB’s a chance to earn their first big deal right before their mid 20s while possibly getting a “respectable deal” by the end of that deal when the RB hits late 20s.
It’s a good idea, but I have no idea how the nflpa could possibly make this work without pissing off the other position groups.
A stopgap solution that was suggested would be to have running backs on the tag or 5th year option be given likely to reach incentives, that would not count against the cap. Allowing teams to pay w/o the jeopardy
@@RD-wg9em yeah it would be challenging to convince non-RB union members on this idea. I personally am ok with “incentives outside the cap” but then that opens the door for some degree of unfairness since a financial juggernaut team could throw a lot more non-cap affected incentives to an RB. Smaller teams might not be able to do the same.
@@sabrethemoment6799yup, that is a major problem for my solution. I don’t think there’s a good solution for this, except for allowing defence to play the pass again
This can't work because the NFLPA has to represent all players, not just star RBs.
No other position group would accept favoritism toward one position. If you were to make adjustments to the lengths of rookie contracts, you'd have to do it across the board. And if you shorten rookie contracts, you'd just expedite the rate at which star players break into their high-money second deals, which would have the knock-on effect of sucking up more money from fringe roster players and the practice squad, which the NFLPA also has to represent.
The only thing I can think of to help would be to have some kind of incentive baked into contracts that pays out more money to players who put more wear and tear on their bodies, but I'm not smart enough to bang out the specifics of how this could actually work in practice.
@@Sixfortyfive yeah I can see the depth players getting impacted hard by such reform unless there’s a separate cap system for these kinds of players. And I’m sure this idea would get crapped on hard by most owners.
Maybe the RB position needs to “adapt” to the current landscape of the game. Sure Zeke was grossly overpaid as a pure power runner but he makes for a great blocker who can get you 1-2 yards if need be. In hindsight, he could’ve extended his career a bit by embracing this blocker/short distance runner position earlier yet taking a less lucrative contract.
Insightful, thoughtful video. Great job.
I think Atlanta is the perfect example of this. Bijan was the highest rb prospect in years yet he’s gonna be on a rotation with allgier (5th round 1k rusher) and Patterson (SB winning vet). It’s way easier to get multiple good cheap running backs than spending for one elite rb.
As a Falcons fan, this makes me question the Bijan pick even more. Not that I don't think hes good, but using a 7th overall pick on an RB seems like bad asset management.
Call me crazy, but I point the finger at Mike Shanahan. When his offense was clicking he was cycling through RBs like socks. That kinda opened eyes to the fact that any decent runner could be stuck there, & his scheme would get them to 1,000 yds. Feel like ever since then we’ve seen the “by committee” concept become more prevalent.
The dual threat example is crazy because the ravens treated lamar like a running back during their negotiations.
because he's not white. Josh Allen and Daniel Jones' successes come off of being able to run the ball and they were given their big contracts with no issues. people swear race doesnt play a factor in things like this but completely ignore this blatant example.
Just like you completely ignore Jalen hurts, Kyle Murphey, Russel Wilson, Dashon Watson, Patrick Mahomes, And Dak sign with no issue, And the 2 hold outs this year are Justin Herbert and Joe Burrow who are white.
Stop being a racist and look at the facts
The whole O-line thing is so true. I remember the main reason why I drafted johnathan Taylor in 2021 wasn’t because he’s good at making his own yardage. It’s because he gets to run behind quinton Nelson. If you watched nfl top 100 even the rbs say that 90% of the time they just run behind him instead of their actual running lane
Same
Same reason why you draft Robinson this year, running behind Lindstrom
Also if you draft a great Olineman he's good for 15 years
as someone who doesn’t know much about football and the RB being my favorite position, this video did a great job
I think the biggest thing screwing them is rookie wage scale. Running backs have never had long shelf lives. Guys like Emmitt Smith and Adrian Peterson who could still have 1,000 yard seasons late into their careers are honestly the real unicorns. Every year there is a big, fast as hell feature back in the draft who can dominate for several years before fading. The rookie scale means they don’t get big money when they are young and by the time they can get a new contract they are cooked or close to being cooked. Passing becoming more prevalent and the supply of cheap solid but not great backs hurts too but that’s secondary
Take the running back out and we'll see how long the quarterbacks last running the ball it's easier to play the pass then play The Run if there's no running back you can stop the pass
"The success of the rushing game is mainly developed in the trenches"
Me, a Rams fan who watched the team crumble when nearly the entire starting O-Line got injured: "YOU DON'T SAY"
They should call it the ‘Ezekiel Elliot’ rule, running backs who get paid on big money contracts then absolutely flame out.
Quarterback success is also dependent on the o-line. Offense in general all comes down to blocking.
Another video where I learned a lot. Thank you. Well done.
The crazy thing is that if current Josh Jacobs played 20 years, he ago would simply be nothing special among the RBs of that time.
6:55
Heh, appreciate the beat switch going into the final stretch of the video, as with negotiations between RBs & GMs go... the Stakes Is High
I think that the RBs who will see success are guys like Christian Mccaffrey. The WR in running back clothing. If you can catch passes at a true WR level and not just be "good for a running back" the value is there.
I pray Chubb has a long and healthy career. Especially now that Kareem is gone and he'll be the one running the ball 80% of the time now.
Sadly he had that horrible injury.
At least some Runningbacks are being paid, we dont talk about the extinct Fullback.
Johnny Stanton IV hasn't retired yet
I remember several years ago, an anonymous GM was quoted as saying, "I know this may sound cruel, but here's my personal philosophy regarding RBs -- draft one high, in the first round, and ride him until the wheels fall off. Then go get you another one. And because I know how much punishment and wear-and-tear they suffer, I do tend to open up the pocketbook a little more for RBs."
I wouldn't even draft a RB in the first round. 4th round or lower, or just a Street FA. Put that draft capital into your offensive and defensive lines, and see more impact.
As a Chiefs fan, I hope this lets dual threat RBs shine more and provide a service, like how TE's become more serviceable as catchers and not just blockers. Having someone in the backfield like McKinnon who is an obvious passing threat is so much better than just a flat runner. It's one of the big reasons Jamaal Charles was so good. I want RBs to adapt to the change so they can remain paid and in good service to their teams, because bell cows aren't doing it anymore and it's too risky to pay heavily into your only big runner when we're now paying heavily into o-linemen, QBs, and now secondaries.
The local radio host in Detroit, Mike Valenti, is constantly saying “we don’t pay running backs.” Too bad it didn’t make it into the video.
Bill Belichick devalued the RB position and he also is also responsible for the TE position being valued so much now.
didn’t think about this … patriots had committees of receiving backs the whole time
Did you stop to wonder why "Beast Mode isn't even featured on this list"? Because he should be... the list is wrong. He made $7,000,000 in 2013 when the Seahawks won the super bowl. Instead they put Percy Harvin who isn't even a running back, he's a wide receiver.
It’s a hard philosophy to come to terms with. Take Seattle for example. Kenneth Walker coming out as a premiere back last year, and Seattle drafted another one in Zach Charbonnet to optimize the attack. If you saw Seattle make that pick 10 years ago, you would’ve been astounded at the idiocy of it. In the modern day, when backs are becoming less and less important as a single unit, it makes sense. It’s just sad to see that running backs are becoming less important, I always loved watching explosive runs.
Out of curiosity, he said Henry, Chubb and Barkley are still offensive focal points in their own ways.
Would a player like Jerome Bettis (who was a focal point of a late 90’s and early 2000’s team) be seen as far less valuable today?
Ergo: Someone who won’t give you a ton of yards per carry but was hard to tackle because of power, and was elite at moving the chains?
it is just more efficient to use a back on a rookie contract and then let them walk because the fact is rbs production falls hard after 6 years
@@fortynights1513 Bettis is the type of RB who lost the most due to analytics. In today's NFL he'd be a short-yardage or goal line back. Nobody would think to give him 20 carries a game.
@@fortynights1513 Well like Tree said, excluding the Bears and Falcons, the NFL ran 57.5% of passing plays last year. In terms of the modern NFL offense, Bettis would probably be a less valuable asset in the modern day, but not tremendously so. As you said, Derrick Henry is a monster on the field. Henry and Bettis have the same kind of playstyle in the sense that they can run over anyone with power and they are very hard to tackle. Saquon and Chubb are extremely illusive and speedy runners which give them their individuality among the RB cesspit within the NFL. Though Saquon has had numerous injuries and his long term production is yet to be seen. I guess the question is how do you make yourself stand out as a top RB? Bettis in his prime probably would make it work within a scheme in the modern day just as Derrick Henry in Tennessee, but thats just my opinion.
@@howdareyouexist Especially with RB's not having a good life span in the NFL. Most who are great in the beginning make to 30 and are out soon after. Adrian Peterson a great example of this.
Very nicely put. Couldn't agree with you more.
With great power, comes great injury’s and low career lifespan
Tell that to the 90s stealers who virtually never passed lol. Jerome Benett, or Roger Craig both had long carreers and doing well, as far as I know.
Bettis and Alstott both had surprisingly long careers (for RBs) considering how they ran. Those dudes were just built differently though, not the norm.
I just have to say, great video as always but I definitely appreciate the instrumentals you use. To see a UTree video over a J Dilla beat is pretty amazing. Keep it up sir!
A good offensive line is the most underrated part of football.
The last time the team with the leading rusher won the Super Bowl was 25 years ago when Terrell Davis and the Broncos did it.
The last team to lead the league in rushing AND win the Super Bowl were the 85 Bears.
Honorable mention in here:
The 91 Skins won the Super Bowl and had the number one offense while passing the ball less often than anyone else in their year.
The rushing game is still important due to needing to keep the defense honest and the need to get yards in the compressed red zone. I hate to see running backs go through this. Those who can do a lot more than just run the ball will last the longest in the NFL henceforth.
did he list percy harvin as a rb? wtf? he also listed him as the "leading rusher"
he didn't have one single rush in the reg season......
I don't know much about football but I was thought that a good offensive line was the basic core of the team. It can make an average QB good and a good QB great. Im thinking about Andrew Luck getting beat up. This also applied to RB's. They got to be careful about who there traded to. They think that they can do it on your own. Considering the injuries maybe it should be a rotational like starting pitchers in base ball. Have a couple starting RB's. Having a good ground game is best when your ahead to burn time off the clock.
Great video man!! Sub earned!! Your football intel is 💯 no bs. Respect
Better count my blessings now as a Giants fan that I got to see a healthy season for Saquon, because it’s definitely going to hurt once he walks.
This feels like the 3 point revolution in the NBA.
They aren’t required to win. Haven’t been for a decade+
If you are a great running back, after a contract, if you have the ability, switch to receiver. It’ll extend your career and get you more money.
They are required if you have an average to mediocre QB under center. Why should they switch to receiver when what the NFL could do is just pay RBs the same as receivers on the franchise tag or give RBs short term but big money contracts? There are ways to work around this without killing off the position.
@@crater044 it’s not killing off the position. Because it’s already killed off. It’s running back by committee or teams are doing it wrong. Simple as that. And they’ll get paid more as a receiver. Maybe not the very first guy who does it. But after it’s been proven they can switch position (all the guys I listed def can, and would have as much or more success next season doing so).
@@crater044 also, if you have an average to mediocre qb, doesn’t matter who your rb is, you aren’t winning anything. Titans with Henry is the perfect example of how far a running back can take you. And it’s no where close to a Super Bowl.
GREAT EXPLANATION OF WHAT'S GOING ON IN THIS VIDEO!! 💯👍🏾
The running back as a position is caught in the in-between phase of American football's evolution and GMs aren't really sure how to address it. As the sport at the professional level becomes more and more like Canadian football like the collegiate game has (the Air Raid and nickel defense are practically CFL schemes retooled for 11-man, 4 down ball), running backs and tight ends will see their roles on the team and consequently their pay change as they, I predict, evolve into the Canadian slotback position
Another great video that REALLY needed to be made. You may not be the first one to cover this subject but the more videos there are saying it just drives the point home further that running backs deserve better. But Tree, bro, I know you're busy, but is NFL Sportsball 2022-2023 ever gonna have its own playlist?
I know you mentioned Lamar Jackson as one of the big dual threat QBs to really get the game shaken up but let's not forget the QB I think that started that trend - Michael Vick - whether on Atlanta or Philly, that guy all through his career was explosive and unpredictable. Could make plays whether ahead or behind including some of those responsible for the second miracle at the Meadowlands.
Steve young started the dual threat Vick just made it popular
Vick was a chat code in Madden ‘04 in the same way Bo Jackson was in Tecmo Bowl.
Vick did start the trend, but a lot of teams got scared away after the Redskins took a hatchet to RG3's knee. If he stayed healthy, he could've been special.
@@UrinatingTree Steve young started the trend Vick made it popular
@@UrinatingTreeAnd Cam Newton got hurt, and Lamar can't finish seasons. I'm not sold it's a play style with longevity
I wonder when this is going to impact collegiate players' decision on which position to play. Why beat yourself up becoming a star running back if you can switch to another position and make way more money in the NFL?
^^^^^Nailed it!!
i understand that the game is very pass heavy as of late (until defenses adjust in the near future) but the RUN still sets up the pass. im ashamed the giants wont just pay up and keep saquon at least for 2 years.
The unfortunate truth is that the rookie contracts last longer than the average career for RB's and those first 3-5 years tend to be a RB's prime years. It just doesn't make sense to give out a second contract unless you're Derrick Henry or Nick Chubb.
I'll be interested to see 5-10 years from now if there's a shortage of runningbacks in the draft. I'd imagine the most talented high school football players see stuff like this and try to change positions. If you're a receiving back, screw that just be a receiver. If you've got any ability to throw a football, be a dual threat QB. If you can't do either or those, try being a linebacker.
There would be some really bulky QBs and wide receivers in the at case. A long with very fast linebackers.
The average running back is too short to play other positions.
you should remember that when Bell left the playoff game vs the Patriots the Steelers were cooked despite having AB and Ben. He was the best offensive player on that team.
I do get why teams act that way…HOWEVER some of these guys are way too good and way too important to there team to experience this level of disrespect. For example Henry ekeler and Saquon are way too valuable to their respective teams they suck without them.
No, they aren't. The reason they don't get paid is because it's easy to replace most of their production for a lot less. The NFL hasn't just conspired to bone RBs, it's basic economics (which I know is incredibly hard to grasp for a depressingly large portion of this country).
Ekeler was undrafted he's the poster boy for not paying running backs
Take out the running back and let's see how long the running quarterback will last😂😂😂😂😂
The only way to fix this is to either undo all the rules that made passing so much more efficienct (which the NFL will never do) or theres an offensive rennaissance throughout the league like when the West Coast offense was born.
I thought we were seeing that with Todd Gurley and the Rams when McVay created an unstoppable juggernaut, but then Belichick met them in the super bowl and revealed to everyone exactly how to beat the system, and ever since it has gone away again.
I think Tree (and a lot of people) are mistaken when it comes to painting the passing revolution as a major reason why the RB market had fallen. Just 3 years ago RBs still were getting paid top dollar but now they aren't. It's the realization of high supply, high demand at a position that punishes you for sticking with a guy. So even if the game was still like how it was in the 80s, I'd think teams would still come to the same conclusion and we'd see RBBCs and RBs being dumped after their first 5-6 years.
Gurley got hurt and was no longer effective more than anything. Other RB's can still dominate, it just happens way less with all the passing
you know Gurley barely played in that game right
@hemanthswarna2327 I can understand that, but I think what we really saw is that as the new rules, particularly around roughing the passer and pass interference, were implemented, teams started realizing that the analytics shifted toward not paying backs, and then a few high profile big money busts sealed the debate.
Because it's not like the "don't pay running backs" idea was a myth 5 years ago. People already knew it was a bad idea but the only real counter-examples were teams that used the money somewhere else and won. We didn't have an elite running back completely go bust after signing a big money deal. Then we got Bell, Zeke, and Gurley all in the span of a few years and all of the sudden a big RB contract PAYING OFF was the exception, not the rule
@memeteam2692 I know, but that's my point. If running backs are largely interchangeable, then that shouldn't have matter much. And if running backs ARENT interchangeable, then the system should have worked when he came back.
But what we saw was the next season, teams brought heavier packages in to counteract the wing backs and zone running instead of going nickel and dime to defend against the pass, which was the conventional wisdom before Super Bowl 53. And the system just collapsed. Belichick realized that the key to McVay's system was actually baiting the pass instead of trying to defend against it, and he used some weird 46 defense we hadn't seen in 30 years to do it, and everyone largely copied the strategy.
They should change NFL eligibility to two years in college, not three. Also fully guarantee RB contracts.
Pats win SBs without paying RBs every team is FINALLY catching on 🤣🤣
the one that lasted the most was Corey Dillon in the first three
The only organic fix might just be to let more good young players play other positions, if you lower the supply of good running backs maybe the demand increases down the line.
DeLaSoul's 'Stakes is High' was a very apt background track selection.
Best solution to the issue I see is increasing RB rookie scale contracts and make the tag for RBs higher. If teams want to treat them as entirely replaceable, make the team pay the player while their still good. Teams benefit because they can still draft the old guys replacement every 4 years, RBs get the money they deserve while they are deserving of it.
Oh sure - that'll go over great with the rest of the players, who must sign off on it. Player get X% of the salary cap. That is divided amongst everyone one on the team. Making a special contract rule for RB's takes money out of the pockets of other positions. Not gonna happen
@@frankpinmtl yeah… it’s weird. People aren’t this passionate about full backs or long snappers or kickers lol I don’t understand it. RB’s don’t “deserve” anything. It’s a free market. Running backs are in low demand, so they’ll be paid less. That’s kind of where the convo ends.
@@Zlittlepenguin The American school system has stopped teaching any sort of economics to children, so they all grow up entitled and stupid. I'd wager that many of the people that have reactions like this, about it not being, "fair", for rbs, are too young to have really watched the NFL when full backs were a thing.
Great video I really enjoyed watching.
I completely understand the risk and why people are hesitant to pay Running Backs. However nowadays, the way people go out of their way to tell you how useless the RB position is, you'd think why even have the position at all at this point 🤨🤷🏾♂️
It isn’t useless but their success is heavily dependent on a good offensive line. Late round pick rbs can look world class with an elite offensive line. Likewise guys like Saquon, Mcaffery would look awful if their o lines are terrible.
Least they aren't a extinct species like the FB
The position is never useless. The ground game will forever be an essential part of football. But “Who” is generating those rushing yards is what’s changing. Before it’s one really, really good back(so you pay the one guy the big bucks).
Now it’s 3-4 guys+the QB+maybe even some WRs (ala Deebo), the 10-15M that used to go to one guy is now going to 5 guys.
@@jack90054 good point on load distribution. It would mean that RBs could in theory have longer careers as they're taking less hits etc
@@jack90054You do know that teams have always had more than back on their team even back in the day right? The RBs that got paid top money were the TOP backs.
The TOP backs should get paid. That's what people aren't understanding. And considering they are playing for teams that NEED a great RB, those RBs should be paid for it.
Teams that use RB committees have existed in the past and yea it's a little trickier but doable (just split the cost). But I don't see why QBs and WRs should get paid extra for encroaching on a RB's job when A) they aren't going to run the ball as often, B) there's only one real WR and only a handful of running QBs and C) it's actually a good idea to NOT overrely on your receivers and QBs running because they could get injured.
7:43 Pretty much my point. Chance to fight this was in 2020 but the players fumbled it by voting for the new CBA.
A lot of the great RBs hung around for 10+ years back in the day because they had FBs. Emmitt Smith being one of them. Maybe it's time to bring that position back.
I'm also of the opinion of, get rid of RB position then, only use them for blocking sets, convert them to WRs. But let's be honest, that would cost teams MORE money, which we know owners don't want to pay that ticket.
The RBs should get paid. They take some of the most punishment and they are overlooked when they keep drives alive.
It could happen that there might be an eb and flow back to full power RB's back into the NFL. It may take a few years, but the reason for this is simple, look at how bulky some of the second level guys are, they are athletic, but they are not powerful. If a RB can get to the second stage and they are a power back, they could run over most of the secondary due to their strength. If you get leaner and faster at the secondary, you won't be able to stop a powerful RB as efficiently, especially if that RB Is elusive and powerful
FBS are making a resurgence but they will probably never achieve their former glory because it removes a potential player from the pass blocking scheme
Great video covering something I saw but didn't really notice, so busy marveling at the golden era of QBs, almost all of them incredibly mobile.
The running backs will come back when Patrick, Jason, and all the other dual Qbs start to break down faster combing with age. We seen this preview with Michale Vick. The running back will comeback as some sort of security position. Patrick, Jason and the others will either be more pocket qbs or relay more on the running backs. I think we're see a resurgences in the late 2020's of rbs.
The difference with Pat is that he’s not necessarily a running QB, he’s just a QB that happens to run. It’s not like he’s entirely reliant on it due to having a cannon of an arm
@@jay_1212 True he doesnt rely on it like Mike did however he still relies on it more often than not. He's better than Mike in he's more accurate and can balance the two. However as he gets older he cant run as he did early in his career. Plus wrs will come and go so that rb position as he gets older will be of equal of importance.
The NFL has changed the rules since then. If you actually hit a qb now, it's 15 yards (sometimes even if you don't hit them).
If I am a GM, I am taking a Running Back in the 5th or 6th round every year. I will always have fresh legs. It gives me 3-5 backs to choose from every off-season. All being on rookie contracts and prove-it camp contracts.