DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2013 NFL Season NFL Draft (2013) Rb's

I was thinking about our #4 pick and started thinking :should we take Richardson and if not what would our option be. I thought it might be nice to have a thread dedicated to the different positions. So I was going to try to post a Rb thread with my impressions of the top rb's but then found this article so thought I would start with it rather than my own. It is a long article so I am posting over several posts. The link will be at the end of the article. I hope others will start similar posts on different positions.

With just one running back selected in the first round of last year's draft, the positional value may have hit an all-time low. However, last year's weaker talent pool likely played a role, with many teams waiting to select a ball carrier until the draft's second day (seven top-73 selections).

This year's group is headlined by consensus top-five talent Trent Richardson, but questions remain as to whether value fits the price. 2012's potential three-down backs do not end with Richardson, as a handful of other talents have a legitimate chance at cracking the end of round one to complete playoff-caliber offenses. Factor in that many teams now employ zone-running schemes, and prospects with one-cut ability may be pushed back up the board. There are several of them.

Despite a drop-off in demand, the running back talent has not decreased this year. Let's take a look at the top prospects.

1. Trent Richardson, Alabama

Height/Weight: 5'9/228
College Experience: Third-year junior
Pro Day #s: 4.48 forty, 1.56 10-yd split, 25 x 225
Style Comparison: Steven Jackson
2011 Stats: 283 - 1679 (5.9) - 21 TD; 29 - 338 (11.7) - 3 TD
Draft Prediction: Browns, No. 4 overall.

Positives: He truly is the best running back prospect since Adrian Peterson. Richardson has a dominant yet subtle hop step that is incredibly effective when evading tacklers near the line of scrimmage. His lateral decisions are made without hesitation after recognizing obstructed lanes. Richardson's balance and low center of gravity may be his most impressive qualities, allowing him to consistently break arm tackles and accelerate quickly after his momentum has slowed. Richardson seemed to press the issue as a sophomore, frequently rushing his opportunities, hellbent on taking every handoff to the endzone. As a junior, Richardson showed improved patience behind blockers, waiting for a lane to open slightly before bursting through it. That perseverance continues at the second level, where Richardson stays inside the numbers without veering toward the sideline to avoid contact unless necessary. For a power back, Richardson is rarely caught from behind, and the way he holds the football high and tight through contact prevents fumbling despite relentlessly fighting for extra yardage. To complete his three-down status, Richardson is balanced in pass pro and delivers solid pop while mirroring oncoming rushers. His receiving talents are sometimes overlooked, but Richardson is comfortable on the edge and in space.

Negatives: At times Richardson tries too hard in the open field, attempting multiple cuts and fakes instead of plowing through smaller defenders or working upfield on a single cut. When facing immediate pressure after the handoff, Richardson struggles to accelerate, needing at least a step or two in the backfield to get his bearings. The thickly-built ball carrier does not have blazing long speed, but Richardson consistently wins by keeping that little separation with short bursts and lateral moves. He takes what the offense gives him, sticking to his assignment, but some may confuse this as lacking "home run" ability. Richardson's postseason work has been limited due to a knee scope.

Outlook: While most believe the position has lost value, it is tough to overlook that Richardson would significantly impact how a defense prepares for his team's offense. Richardson will soon become one of the NFL's top players at his position and produce in all phases from his first pro snap. The balance, burst, and reaction skills Richardson possesses make him an undeniably elite talent.

2. Doug Martin, Boise State

Height/Weight: 5'9/223
College Experience: Fifth-year senior
Combine #s: 4.55 forty, 1.64 10-yd split, 28 x 225, 36" vertical, 10' broad jump, 4.16 ss
Style Comparison: Jonathan Stewart
2011 Stats: 263 - 1,299 (4.9) - 16 TD; 28 - 255 (9.1) - 2 TD
Draft Prediction: Broncos, No. 25 overall.

Positives: Martin possesses a power-back frame but is quite nimble. His hip and lower-body flexibility along with a strong core help Martin formulate decisive, one-step cuts to weave in and out of lanes while avoiding tacklers. When faced with contact, Martin keeps his legs churning and refuses to go down on the first hit. It's Martin's best quality; his comfort in tight spaces with patience to work behind linemen and cut off of their blocks. Martin gets skinny through creases and prevents tacklers from taking direct angles. Along with his balance, Martin has ideal ball-carrying posture with his shoulders always over his toes in trash. He is fearless one-on-one and prefers to work back inside, a trait you don't see in most college backs, who typically favor the sideline. This is a major asset on outside runs when defenders maintain their edge responsibilities. Many backs will run laterally in these situations, but Martin puts his foot in the ground and locates a lane quickly with power. His open-field wiggle is subtle, but underrated.

Negatives: Martin does lack outstanding burst from a standstill, one that punishes a tackler instantly after his momentum is stopped. Although Martin is a reliable receiver, he loses momentum after the catch, especially when forced to adjust to throws. Other than tough running, lower-half balance, and occasional stiff arms, Martin lacks a wide array of moves and overall flash to his game. At times Martin seems to get too patient in the backfield, especially on counter plays when he is forced to outrun backside pressure. He has return experience, but straight-line speed is not his foundation. Instead of making multiple cuts, Martin prefers to stick with instinct and vision while grinding out tough yards.

Outlook: Only one running back was selected in last year's first round, and many believe that should remain the case this season. However, I firmly believe Martin is a first-round talent, and he is the No. 18 overall player on my big board. He is the only other guaranteed three-down back in this draft, and Broncos coach John Fox has a history of preferring those types of runners. The "Muscle Hamster" is poised to produce in multiple phases as an NFL rookie.

3. Chris Polk, Washington

Height/Weight: 5'11/215
College Experience: Fourth-year senior
Combine #s: 4.57 forty, 1.65 10-yd split, 31.5" vertical, 9'3" broad jump, 4.21 ss
Style Comparison: Frank Gore
2011 Stats: 293 - 1488 (5.1) - 12 TD; 31 - 332 (10.7) - 4 TD
Draft Prediction: Packers, No. 59 overall.

Positives: Richardson and Martin included, Polk possesses the best combination of patience and vision in this class. His comfort behind linemen is evident, as he hesitates in soft areas while weaving and gliding between lanes. This forces defenders off their angles, always adjusting to Polk's movements. Despite his smooth style, Polk can deliver pop, bulling through second-level tackles or in the open field. He has a power back's mentality in short yardage, keeping his eyes up to find slivers of space. Polk effectively maintains distance from defenders on long runs, rarely getting caught from behind and frequently cutting runs back inside for extra yards. He excels alongside the quarterback in the shotgun formation, with seamless cuts on draws or as an in-space receiver. Polk has reliable hands at every level and runs routes with more strength than many wideouts, staying on his line while absorbing physical defensive backs from the slot or the backfield. Even for his one-speed game, Polk breaks plenty of arm tackles while keeping a strong base and consistently falling forward.

Negatives: Polk would be a better back if he lowered his pad level. His upright style helps with vision, but his shoulders are rarely over his toes unless he is bracing for contact. Even through the hole Polk stays high, exposing the football and losing balance and strength to break more tackles. He is unable to make something out of nothing and needs space to work with. Polk's patience is largely an asset, but there are instances when it causes him to get caught from behind while waiting for his lane to appear. Despite being an excellent receiver, Polk whiffs on too many protection assignments. This was a glaring weakness at the Senior Bowl. Polk also showed up overweight in Mobile, but has since worked to change that, dropping nine pounds since January. The lighter frame may help Polk hit the edge more quickly and beat linebackers on stretch runs.

Outlook: Polk can be an NFL three-down back if he improves in pass protection. His silky-smooth running style is unique and may turn off evaluators that prefer quick-twitch runners with elite burst. But Polk makes it work. Some accused Polk of a poor Senior Bowl, but the fact is that is not the kind of situation in which he'd ever excel. The more comfortable Polk is with his blockers' timing, the more successful he will be. I expect Polk to take a bit longer to produce than other backs on this list, but his receiving skills will help him earn an early role.

4. David Wilson, Virginia Tech

Height/Weight: 5'10/206
College Experience: Third-year junior
Combine #s: 4.49 forty, 1.57 10-yd split, 41" vertical, 11' broad jump, 4.12 ss
Style Comparison: Ahmad Bradshaw
2011 Stats: 290 - 1,709 (5.9) - 9 TD; 22 - 129 (5.9) - 1 TD
Draft Prediction: Jets, No. 47 overall.

Positives: There is a lot to like about Wilson's punishing, old-school style. He hits to harm the tackler while pedaling his feet through contact. Wilson's burst from a standstill is among the best in this draft at any position, generating plenty of power even in the first few steps. He is always fighting, relentlessly refusing to go down while carrying multiple defenders. When a linebacker or safety is clearly blocked at the second level, Wilson surges through the lane with exceptional acceleration and has outstanding straight-line speed, especially for someone of his thickness. Wilson produced highlight-reel runs with tremendous improvisational skills when switching fields on stretch plays. All Wilson cares about is gaining extra yards, never worrying about what it takes to get them.

Negatives: As much as Wilson's game is easy to fall in love with, plenty of questions remain. He lacks instincts of a refined runner, meaning his choices on where and when to cut are often evident to defenders. These transitions are not seamless, sometimes requiring extra steps when breaking off his line or stretching runs out too far because of indecision. Wilson's improvisational skills show up in highlights, but there are just as many occasions that he loses yards due to running in an unintended lane or not trusting his blockers. With the clock winding down while trailing, Wilson tries to take every run to the house, forcing the issue rather than letting yards come to him. He frequently fails to hold the football in the proper arm, leading to fumbles. Wilson looks uncomfortable as a receiver in space without the ball and will likely be limited to quick-hitters in the passing game. He also lacks a true wiggle, utilizing a slow lateral hop but mostly winning on contact. I also worry that Wilson's battering-ram running style will wear him down more quickly than other backs. Wilson tends to drop his head on contact, and ultimately be may be too physical, if that is possible.

Outlook: I understand why some evaluators deem Wilson this year's No. 2 back. There is certainly a lot to like. However, too often I see Wilson running on his own terms, flowing to lanes of his choosing rather than where the play is designed. Wilson's decision making is not crisp, but his tremendous burst can make up for wasted steps. If Wilson can somehow improve his instincts through experience, he could be the total package of speed and brute force.

5. Lamar Miller, Miami

Height/Weight: 5'11/212
College Experience: Third-year sophomore
Combine #s: 4.40 forty, 1.53 10-yd split, 33" vertical
Style Comparison: Clinton Portis
2011 Stats: 227 - 1,272 (5.6) - 9 TD; 17 - 85 (5.0) - 1 TD
Draft Prediction: Buccaneers, No. 36 overall.

Positives: A one-cut homerun hitter, Miller burst onto the scene as a redshirt sophomore with electrifying breakaway runs. If a crease appears, Miller is off to the races and flashes wiggle in the lane in one-on-one situations. For a younger back, Miller rarely stretches runs to the sideline longer than he should, working back inside to find lanes. He shows patience at the second level when finding soft areas in trash, even dipping his shoulder to absorb punishment. Miller possesses impressive change-field ability with more than enough speed to start on one sideline and end up on the other with little wasted movement. Some may argue that it is natural awareness, but Miller knows when to run at a defender and when to run away. Once Miller breaks from the pack, he's gone.

Negatives: Miller leaves too many yards on the field, rarely gaining yardage once his momentum is stopped in the backfield. Not only does he lose behind the line of scrimmage, but Miller fails to beat first contact versus linebackers filling the open lane. Speed is Miller's best asset in the open field, but when he attempts to make a tackler miss his lateral hop is more of a jump than a subtle step. He possesses soft hands, even occasionally adjusting to back-shoulder throws downfield, but was rarely used in the passing game at Miami. Miller cannot pass protect and lacks instant fluidity after the reception.

Outlook: I dislike comparing players who attended the same college, but Miller's frame and running style mirror fellow former Hurricane Clinton Portis'. Miller will succeed most in a zone-heavy, clear-crease scheme that will hide his lack of wiggle due to successful blocks at the second level.

6. Isaiah Pead, Cincinnati

Height/Weight: 5'10/197
College Experience: Fourth-year senior
Combine #s: 4.47 forty, 1.55 10-yd split, 33" vertical, 9'8" broad jump, 4.32 ss
Style Comparison: Pierre Thomas
2011 Stats: 237 - 1,259 (5.3) - 12 TD; 39 - 319 (8.2) - 3 TD
Draft Prediction: Bengals, No. 83 overall.

Positives/Negatives: Pead was good for one big play per game at Cincinnati. His special quality is the fact that those plays all started in different ways. Pead runs comfortably between the tackles with multiple cuts off the backs of downfield linemen while keeping his distance from defenders by running into open areas. However, Pead does not possess enough of a burst or refined footwork from a slower pace for it to be a foundation of his game. He frequently split out wide as a receiver at the snap in college, adjusting to poor throws while flashing toughness to challenge tacklers head-on or utilizing lateral hops in trash to switch lanes. Even as a returner, Pead has deceiving long speed with an awareness to run to unoccupied portions of the field. This vision is a great asset in space or behind blockers, where Pead showcases a knack for cutback runs.

Outlook: My biggest question is whether Pead's style will translate to NFL competition because he doesn't play with tremendous explosion. Pead's skills did stand out during Senior Bowl week, and I will admit to having similar questions about DeMarco Murray last season. Pead shows effort in blitz pickup, but his wiry frame limits him. I doubt he will be a consistent every-down player, but Pead certainly looks capable of producing in a committee-type rotation.

7. Bernard Pierce, Temple

Height/Weight: 5'11/207
College Experience: Third-year junior
Combine #s: 4.49 forty, 1.60 10-yd split, 17 x 225, 36.5" vertical, 10'3" broad jump, 4.28 ss
Style Comparison: Ryan Grant
2011 Stats: 273 - 1,481 (5.4) - 27 TD; 3 - 52 (17.3) - 3 TD
Draft Prediction: Steelers, No. 86 overall.

Positives/Negatives: Pierce will be limited to a zone-style NFL scheme because he is a one-cut runner without agility, and requires a full head of steam before hitting the hole. Pierce's cuts are crisp and he breaks a high volume of tackles with exceptional lower-half balance, but he lacks wiggle thereafter. With the broken tackles come a lot of hits, and Pierce certainly has suffered his fair share of injuries. His cuts are sudden and he deflects off tackles even early in his runs, but there is no real burst to Pierce's game and his long runs in college came only when he reached full speed against weak competition. Low pad level certainly helps Pierce's cause and he played behind what was regarded as a fairly porous Temple offensive line, although his stat line might tell you otherwise.

Outlook: The Steelers run plenty of outside zone, so Pierce could be a middle-round fit in Pittsburgh. I was not expecting Pierce's high 4.4 forty time at the Combine, but it shows just how fast he can get after building speed. Injuries are a major question, Pierce lacks any hint of passing game value, and he is somewhat limited in his style, but he has a chance to shine in the right system.

8. Michael Smith, Utah State

Height/Weight: 5'9/207
College Experience: Fourth-year senior
Pro Day #s: 4.33 forty, 1.48 10-yd split, 23 x 225, 40.5" vertical, 10'6" broad jump
Style Comparison: Kendall Hunter
2011 Stats: 114 - 870 (7.6) - 9 TD; 16 - 181 (11.3) - 2 TD
Draft Prediction: Chargers, No. 149 overall.

Positives/Negatives: For a small runner, Smith stays between the tackles with confidence and maturity. He is always moving upfield, making decisive cuts in the style of a larger, straight-ahead runner. Despite a fearless approach that is uncommon for a back his size, Smith's momentum is often stuffed on first contact, but he spins away effectively for the extra yard. Smith regularly fights off contact downfield if tackled high, and even breaks a few, which is noteworthy for his stature. The best part of Smith's game is his lateral agility off of a single cut with excellent anticipation to stay away from a would-be tackler's grasp. His multiple slight hops in the lane help avoid contact but rarely does he overuse the move. Smith is a trustworthy runner, sticking to his blocks at all levels. He has plenty of speed and reaction quickness to work around backfield penetration, and lowers his shoulder on contact when necessary.

Outlook: Smith may never be a three-down NFL back and even played second fiddle to Robert Turbin in college, but his skills are certainly electric. For a compact runner with his outstanding workout numbers, Smith has a remarkably refined style. He will be a tremendous role player on third downs and dynamic change-of-pace back. Smith has a great opportunity to be one of the surprises of the draft a few years from now by outperforming his draft selection.

9. LaMichael James, Oregon

Height/Weight: 5'8/194
College Experience: Third-year junior
Combine #s: 4.45 forty, 1.57 10-yd split, 15 x 225, 35" vertical, 10'3" broad jump, 4.12 ss
Style Comparison: Danny Woodhead
2011 Stats: 247 - 1,805 (7.3) - 18 TD; 17 - 210 (12.4) - 1 TD
Draft Prediction: Rams, No. 96 overall.

Positives/Negatives: James had the ideal skill set for Oregon's fast-paced spread offense, but put up numbers that exceed his abilities that translate to the NFL. He can take a run all the way if given a clear lane, but often gave up on runs too early by heading immediately for the sideline when faced with trash in the middle of the field. James showed a willingness to stick his nose in contact early in games and an elusive style, but injuries and jarring hits pushed him farther and farther to the boundary. If you separate James' most explosive plays, many come from beating the defense to the edge and outrunning opponents down the sideline. Those types of runs are far more difficult in the NFL.

Outlook: James will be a return asset, but his offensive impact should be limited to a third-down receiving role. He certainly has plenty of quickness and long speed with experience in space to be an interesting weapon, but James' unwillingness to take punishment between the tackles will limit him in the pros.

10. Robert Turbin, Utah State

Height/Weight: 5'10/222
College Experience: Fourth-year junior
Combine #s: 4.50 forty, 1.60 10-yd split, 28 x 225, 36" vertical, 10'2" broad, 4.31 ss
Style Comparison: Marion Barber
2011 Stats: 249 - 1,517 (6.1) - 19 TD; 17 - 171 (10.1) - 4 TD
Draft Prediction: Giants, No. 94 overall.

Positives/Negatives: Turbin is muscle bound with a high posture and possesses little bend when lowering his shoulder on contact. He hesitates on every lateral movement to the left, likely due to a prior knee injury, taking multiple steps to plant and cut upfield. Turbin is the definition of a straight-line runner in short spaces, creating little on his own. But that can also be a positive since Turbin takes what the defense gives him. Turbin can move upfield with purpose in his first few steps, but if the lane is clogged he stretches runs out on the edge too far. I have yet to figure out if his slower speed behind the line of scrimmage is patience or uncertainty. For being built so thickly, it is surprising how many times he goes down on initial contact. It comes down to his lack of balance.

Outlook: Turbin sure looks good coming off the bus, but most of his weight-room abilities do not transfer to on-the-field skills. His lack of bend and flexibility limit his balance, forcing Turbin to go down frequently on low tackles. His best projection is a goal-line type back that can break high arm tackles, but Turbin needs to lower his pad level regardless of what situation he falls into.

11. Tauren Poole, Tennessee - 4.54 at 5'10/205 ... 4.49 career YPC ... 45 catches ... Best back during Shrine Week ... Little flash to his game, but a decisive style ... 1,000-yard season as a junior, only senior on offense in 2012 ... Good footwork but no real special quality ... Limited in the open field.

12. Vick Ballard, Mississippi State - 4.65 at 5'10/219 ... 5.69 career YPC ... 30 catches ... 31 TDs in two seasons after transferring from JUCO ... Goes down on first contact too often for a bigger back ... Little outside running ability ... Flashed more elusiveness and receiving ability during the Senior Bowl.

13. Ronnie Hillman, San Diego State - 4.45 at 5'9/200 ... 5.66 career YPC ... 33 catches ... Loves the jump cut/lateral hop, uses it far too often and almost on every run ... Declared after redshirt sophomore season ... Running style offers two outcomes: long runs due to creation of open space or tackles for loss ...Change-of-pace back that must improve pass pro.

14. Bobby Rainey, Western Kentucky - 4.51 at 5'7/205 ... 5.07 career YPC ... 80 catches ... Played behind dreadful OL but shined when given space at second level ... Compact runner tough to locate between tackles ... second in FBS in rushing yards per game... reliable receiver and carried the load often.

15. Cyrus Gray, Texas A&M - 4.47 at 5'10/206 ... 5.21 career YPC with 36 total TDs... 103 catches... Likely will fit best in a one-cut heavy offense... Shared time with 2013 prospect Christine Michael ... Missed significant time due to injury ... Dances in the backfield far too often and not a real natural runner.

Other RBs on the NFL draft radar - Edwin Baker (Michigan State), Terrance Ganaway (Baylor), Daniel Herron (Ohio State), Antwon Bailey (Syracuse), Adonis Thomas (Toledo), Marc Tyler (USC), Darrell Scott (USF), Davin Meggett (Maryland), Rodney Stewart (Colorado), Brandon Bolden (Ole Miss), Lennon Creer (Louisiana Tech), Derrick Coleman (UCLA), Fozzy Whittaker (Texas), Bryce Brown (Kansas State).




http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/40328/60/draft-2012-the-running-backs?pg=1

I like Richardson but have a couple questions. 1st is a rb worth the #4 pick? Specifically would we use him enough to make him a worthwhile pick. Also is he that much better than the rb we could get in the 2nd round. 2nd are his hands good enough. 3rd does he have enough long speed ?

If we do not take Richardson I like Wilson in the 2nd but worry about his fumbling. Martin Is a possibility but he seems like he is good at everything but not great at anything. The 2 Utah St guys are potential later round finds. From this write up I am a little intrigued by Pead.

I guess it comes down to: are we going to use Richardson in a way that makes the pick worth it. I seem to remember hearing that Shurmur said he would continue to pass on 3rd and 1 regardless of our Rb - or something to that effect. If he really believes that then it would be silly to take Trent at #4. But if we would use him the way Alexander was used in Seattle then I think Trent might be the way to go.

This RB class is so deep, I could realistically see us take a back in the 3rd and have him become a true NFL stud for years to come due to this big run blocking line. I would take 2 RBs.

LaMichael James or Turbin in the 3rd and come back in the 5th with one of those xtra picks and get Terrance Ganaway from Baylor for my Power back short yardage pile mover. Ganaway needs some coaching but he could be a good one for us long time in a limited role.

I was thinking about this as well. I think that we could easily see us taking 2 RB in this draft, given the depth of the draft and the number of draft picks we have.

He was worth the 4th up until the moment he had knee surgery. I just have a thing with backs having surgery right before the draft. It just never seems to work out well. Seems like it is a setup for 1 great year and then the next couple of IR rehabbing.

I just have a hard time taking Richardson that high when this is one of the deepest and most talented RB classes in a very long time. Martin, Miller, Wilson and James are all 1st round talent. 10 years ago none of these guys make it past 15.

Love Richardson he was my 2nd player at the end of the season but I just dont think I take him top 5. There just isn't that big of a drop off.

I wonder how much input Childress will have in picking his guys ? I say this because in an interview he gave few weeks ago about the "west coast" system and his offensive strategy came up. He said he still believes that in no matter what system you run, If you can run the ball effectively and stop the run.. you have a chance to win.

You won't convince me there are 8 rb's better than LaMichael James in this draft.


I don't remember the last time I saw a player and said, OH MY GOSH the Browns got to draft that guy, they Gotta draft that guy, and I learned it was his Freshman or sophmore year... Yes! I know exactly when!! It was Miss, or Miss st, Qb ELi Manning, way back when.

So what I'm saying is, LaMichael James, is, the best PLAYER, at any position, Since Eli Manning, AND,
WGGTG, We gotta Get this guy!!!!

Not that it matters at all but, I think L James comliments the other backs on the Browns and would allow them to continue to grow.
Put it this way, L James, can co exist with Hardesty, and Og, and B Jack,

But if they bring in Trent Richardson, does that mean the quick exit of Hardesty Or Ogbonnaya ( silent G) , or Both?

Well Hardesty did manage a whopping 3 yards/carry to go with his 6 or 7 drops .........

I'm pretty sure Obi-wan averaged over 4.5 yds/carry. I'll settle for that.

He did well against St Louis and Jacksonville.

I'm not sure that you want to put your running game in the hands of a guy like Ogbonnaya unless you absolutely have to.

In my opinion the most talented Rb in this draft is David Wilson Va Tech. I like his speed and big play capability. He can come in and be a 3 down back right off the bat. I don't understand the writers comment about lack of instinct. If the defenders can see his moves coming shouldn't they should be better at tackling him.

I would take him at #22 IF we think we can teach him not to fumble so much. That is something that really really bothers me. I think he averaged one fumble every other game. That was is college. In the NFL defenders are much much better at stripping the ball. How many Rb's with fumbling issues have corrected them? Tiki Barber. Anyone else? Were we able to fix Hillis' fumbling? I don't recall one way or the other.

If we are not confident that this is a correctable problem then I would hesitate to take him at all. I would probably do it in the 4th or possibly the 3rd because he is so talented but the fumbling really gives me pause.

I like Wilson's running better than Richardson's. He is just so explosive and a threat to take it to the house every time he touches the ball. We need guys who can make big plays. I like TRich because he is talented too but he doesn't fumble.

I think this is were I am having my issue about what to do at RB.

On 73 carries for a 4.58 yrd/carry average. And I did say for his skill level.

True.

He had 200 of those yards against the Rams and Jaguars ...... hardly a ringing endorsement of his talent and ability ......

Wilson has the highest upside of any back in the draft. That size speed combo is unreal.

From a PA and value standpoint ... I think that Polk is our best option at RB.

He has by far the best hands of any of the other (3) down prospects.

Is there no place for the running back high in the NFL draft? Analysis
Published: Saturday, April 14, 2012, 10:16 PM Updated: Saturday, April 14, 2012, 10:17 PM
Rich Exner and Bill Lubinger, The Plain Dealer By Rich Exner and Bill Lubinger, The Plain Dealer
Follow
Share Email Print
richardson-pro-day-2012-vert-ap.jpgView full sizeMark Arnold, Birmingham NewsThere's no doubt among NFL scouts and draftniks that Trent Richardson is easily the class of the incoming group of running backs. But in a league that covets the passing game, is it a smart move to spend a high draft pick on Richardson?

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The Browns approach the NFL Draft on April 26 with many holes to fill -- most of them on a Swiss-cheese offense. They need a wide receiver. They need a right tackle. Their quarterback is a question mark.

Plus, a franchise built on the shoulders of some of the game's greatest running backs needs someone to carry the ball.

This is, after all, the Cleveland Browns, who have seen Hall of Famers Marion Motley, Jim Brown, Bobby Mitchell and Leroy Kelly and later Mike and Greg Pruitt, Earnest Byner and Kevin Mack power running games that mushed to touchdowns through the slop and slush of Northeast Ohio.

This year, with the fourth pick in the draft, the Browns are in a prime position to take the universally top-ranked college running back, powerful, 228-pound Trent Richardson from national champion Alabama. But ask former Browns coach Sam Rutigliano if Cleveland should take Richardson at No. 4, and he will tell you: No way.

Rutigliano coached the Browns from 1978-84, and his teams were known for their run-pass balance. But they still relied heavily on the legs of Mike Pruitt, who finished as the Browns' third all-time leading rusher. But with the exception of his first season, his teams ranked in the bottom half of the NFL in total rushing yards.

His point is that in today's NFL, teams don't ride franchise running backs to the Super Bowl like Chicago once did with Walter Payton, Washington did with John Riggins and Dallas did with Tony Dorsett and, later, Emmitt Smith.

"Richardson would be the last guy I'd pick [that high]," said Rutigliano. "I wouldn't pick O.J. Simpson.

"I just think the game has changed."

Indispensable back? Hardly
backstrend.jpgView full size

NFL draft analysts generally praise Richardson for his quickness, power, agility and blocking and pass-catching ability -- ingredients craved by any offense, but especially a West Coast brand designed on high-percentage short passes and a double-threat running back.

With most draft projections have two quarterbacks (Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III) and a left offensive tackle (Matt Kalil) going with the first three picks, the Browns are left with a difficult decision of whether to take Richardson in an NFL that relies less and less on franchise running backs for success.

Statistics and recent draft history reflect that declining reliance on the running game -- and a single franchise running back -- as a path to success:

• Thirteen of the league's top 20 rushers last season played for teams that failed to reach the playoffs. Last season's Super Bowl teams -- the New York Giants and New England -- had no running backs among the top 20.

• Last season, the Giants ranked last in rushing yards gained as a percentage of total offense, and the Patriots ranked fourth from the bottom.

• Only eight of the last 20 Super Bowl opponents had 1,000-yard rushers. Of that total, only two of the last 10 Super Bowl teams had 1,000-yard running backs.

• The NFL's four top-scoring teams last year -- Detroit, Green Bay, New England and New Orleans -- ranked among the lowest in yards gained on the ground as a percentage of their total offense.

• The Patriots, Giants, Packers, Pittsburgh Steelers and Saints -- who have accounted for eight of the last nine Super Bowl champions -- haven't had a league-leading rusher in the last 30 years.

For comparison, two of the best Super Bowl champions in the post AFL-NFL merger era -- the undefeated 1972 Dolphins with Larry Csonka and Mercury Morris and the one-loss 1985 Chicago Bears with Payton -- ranked near the top of the league for depending on the run, with about half of their yards coming on the ground.

Mike Ditka, coach of those '85 Bears, said this week that in today's wide-open offenses, the running back doesn't have the star power and prominence of the past.

"When I had Walter, we were committed to run the ball 30 to 40 times a game," Ditka said. "It's a whole different animal now."



As NFL offenses have evolved, the role of the fullback -- Jim Brown's position, for heaven's sake -- has been relegated to pure blocker. A series of rules changes since 1974 have made it harder for defensive backs to cover receivers while also providing more protection for quarterbacks.

Reliance on the running game has continued to slip. In 1970, rushing yards as share of total offense throughout the NFL was about 43 percent; by last season, that number was 34 percent.

"It was always develop the running game first and the passing game came along," said Mike Pruitt, a first-round choice (seventh overall) in the 1976 draft who finished as the Browns' third all-time leading rusher. "Now teams come out throwing."

Since 1970, the Browns also made their first-round choice a running back in 1980 (Charles White, 27th overall), 1989 (Eric Metcalf, 13th), 1992 (Tommy Vardell, ninth) and 2002 (William Green, 16th).

For 60 percent to 70 percent of the plays in today's NFL game, Rutigliano said, defenses are facing offenses with a single running back and three or four wide receivers, or five receivers and no running back at all.

"The passing game is such a big part of it, even more so than it's ever been in the history of the league," said former Super Bowl-winning coach Jimmy Johnson, who was able to rebuild Dallas into a champion quickly by trading running back Herschel Walker to Minnesota for five players and six draft picks in 1989.

"On top of that," Johnson said, "the career of running backs is the shortest of any position on the team, so drafting one high can be risky."

Where have you gone Ricky Williams
williams-ditka-99-ap-horiz.jpgView full sizeAP fileMore than a decade later, Mike Ditka can laugh about being "that goofy coach in New Orleans who gave up the whole draft for Ricky Williams."

The redefinition -- devaluation actually -- of the NFL running back has been reflected in the draft. Running backs were the NFL's draft-day darlings in the league's post-merger era from the mid-1970s through the mid-'80s. Everyone had to have one. Some were even desperate, you might say.

"You mean," Ditka said, "that goofy coach in New Orleans who gave up the whole draft for Ricky Williams?"

Ditka's self-ribbing describes his failed swipe at trying to recapture the Payton magic in the Big Easy in 1999. As coach of the Saints, he traded eight draft picks -- the team's entire draft that year, plus first- and third-rounders in 2000 -- to Washington for the chance to pick Williams No. 5 overall.

That blunder went down in the lore of the NFL Draft.

From 1977-86, five of the 10 overall No. 1 picks were running backs. But there has been just one -- Ki-Jana Carter by Cincinnati in 1995 -- in the last 25 drafts. In that same period, only six running backs have been taken at No. 4, where the Browns could add a seventh in Richardson. The most recent was Oakland's Darren McFadden.

From 1970-90, five drafts saw eight running backs nabbed in the first 32 picks; one year there were nine. Since then, the most running backs chosen among the first 32 players drafted in any one year was five.

Last year, there was just one: Alabama's Mark Ingram at No. 28.

Support for Richardson

Which brings it all back to the Browns and Richardson. If Browns president Mike Holmgren goes with him at No. 4, it wouldn't be the first time he has taken a running back from Alabama in the first round.

In 2000, Holmgren, then coach of the Seattle Seahawks, made Alabama's Shaun Alexander the No. 19 overall pick. Over the next eight seasons, Alexander ran for more than 9,400 yards, was named the league MVP in 2005 and led the Seahawks to a 2006 Super Bowl appearance -- all without an elite quarterback.

Asked this week if the Browns should take an Alabama back at No. 4, Alexander, now retired from football, said with a laugh, "I think it works for coach Holmgren."

Former Indianapolis Colts executive Bill Polian, who built Super Bowl teams with the Colts, Buffalo and Carolina, said he "absolutely would" go with Richardson at No. 4. Polian, who spent first-round picks on running backs Edgerrin James and Joseph Addai at Indianapolis, is sold on Richardson's vision, ability to break tackles and versatility. "But I especially like his toughness," he said, "and his desire to play the game."

Polian believes the fans and media are missing the point -- oversimplifying, actually.

"The key, at least in my perspective, is a misperception among the public and among writers," he said. "The quality, the conventional running backs, the difference-makers, are worth their weight in gold. They just don't have long careers. They just don't sustain it over long periods of time."

But successful teams, such as the Giants, Patriots and Packers, have figured out that the way to keep them healthy and hopefully longer is to rotate two running backs, not just ride one workhorse.

"They're still very good buys," Polian said, "even in the first round."

With Richardson likely there for the taking at No. 4, the Browns will have to decide whether the price is right.

Running backs drafted by the Browns since 1970

The Cleveland Browns have selected 30 running backs in the NFL draft since the AFL-NFL merger in 1970. Here are those players:
Year Round Pick Player School
2011 4 124 Owen Marecic Stanford
2010 2 59 Montario Hardesty Tennessee
2009 6 195 James Davis Clemson
2006 5 145 Jerome Harrison Washington State
2006 6 180 Lawrence Vickers Colorado
2004 7 208 Adimchinobe Echemandu California
2003 4 115 Lee Suggs Virginia Tech
2002 1 16 William Green Boston College
2001 3 65 James Jackson Miami (Fla.)
2000 3 63 Travis Prentice Miami (Ohio)
1999 7 207 Madre Hill Arkansas
1992 1 9 Tommy Vardell Stanford
1990 2 45 Leroy Hoard Michigan
1989 1 13 Eric Metcalf Texas A&M-Kingsville
1987 3 80 Tim Manoa Penn State
1985 2 35 Greg Allen Florida State
1984 10 280 Earnest Byner East Carolina
1983 11 288 Boyce Green Carson-Newman
1982 4 87 Dwight Walker Nicholls State
1980 1 27 Charles White USC
1978 3 67 Larry Collins Texas A&M-Kingsville
1976 1 7 Mike Pruitt Purdue
1975 6 154 Henry Hynoski Temple
1975 9 213 Larry Poole Kent State
1974 6 146 Billy Pritchett West Texas A&M
1974 14 352 Bob Hunt Heidelberg
1973 2 30 Greg Pruitt Oklahoma
1972 8 201 Hugh McKinnis Arizona State
1972 9 230 Billy Lefear Henderson State
1970 5 125 Steve Engel Colorado

Source: NFL and The Plain Dealer
web page

"Detroit, Green Bay, New England and New Orleans -- ranked among the lowest in yards gained on the ground as a percentage of their total offense.

• The Patriots, Giants, Packers, Pittsburgh Steelers and Saints -- who have accounted for eight of the last nine Super Bowl champions -- haven't had a league-leading rusher in the last 30 years."


Ummm, wonder what they have and HAD that we don't ? These examples don't show why you don't need a stud RB, they show why you do need a stud QB. We don't have one right now. So does that mean we should pass on the best back to come out in years for a RT ? a WR that might touch the ball 4-8 times a game ? Maybe a CB that can stop a couple plays on the other side of the ball ?

If it's such a pass happy league and the teams are built to protect the pass first... you should be able to run the ball even better these days. Those LB's that use to have to be big, strong and tough against the run are now selected first to be able to drop back quickly and protect the passes over the middle. They are smaller and quicker than they use to be on purpose. Lets run them over 30 times a game and see if they can stand up to the pounding.

Yeah, and they were a great pass defense too .... at times ...... and so were we .... supposedly ..... until we had to stop a team's passing game to win a game.

When we played them they had just lost Mathis (starting CB) and IIRC, lost a OLB during the game.

There are always fluke games and exceptions. Ogbonnaya also had 11 carries for 37 yards against the Niners, and 13 for 28 against the Texans. The Browns really spotted him well, but he didn't do anything special on the year. He can easily be upgraded.

The Rams needed a MASH unit last year. They lost so many guys to injury that it was scary.

That teams lost their top 3 receivers, their top 2 tackles, 1 starting G IIRC, 2 or 3 QBs, and about half their starting defense. Ouch.

I agree there are fluke games and that Oggie can easily be upgraded and will probably struggle to make the team (assuming we draft a RB, he'll likely fall in 4th and be gone).

However, JAX did have a good rushing defense. You don't hold teams to 3.8YPC by luck in the NFL.

Pass defense is a bit trickier. Our YPA and overall yards were good. However, we only got 32 sacks (23rd), 9 INTs (28th), and allowed an 80 QBrating (9th - still good but not compared to the YPA, yards).

So, we had a defense that didn't do anything bad, but didn't do anything really good either. A "game manager" defense

Some facts from last year's draft for you Richardson lovers:

Top 5 selected RBs:

#28 Ingram...474yds, 3.9AVG
#38 R.Williams...IR
#56 Vereen...57yds, 3.8AVG
#57 Leshoure...IR
#62 D.Thomas....581yds, 3.5AVG

Top rookie RB performers:

#71 D.Murray....897yds, 5.5AVG
#105 Helu...640yds, 4.2AVG


In 2010 the top 2 rookie RBs were UDFAs Blount and Ivory...The Top 5 picks were: Spiller, Mathews, Best, Gerhart and Tate...what's the difference between Top 10 pick Spiller and Tate today?

In 2009: Moreno, D.Brown, B.Wells, L.McCoy, Greene...who likes Moreno 2 full rounds over Greene today?

In 2008: McFadden, J.Stewart, F.Jones, Mendenhall, C.Johnson, Forte, Rice...J.Charles was the 10th RB in that draft...McFadden at 4 or Forte/Rice late 2nd? What's better value today, huh?

I really don't get how people act as if this position can't be addressed in the 2nd to 4th round area...we don't need a Richardson to have a good running game

and there still are Addai, Benson and Grant in FA...do you see any similar level QBs, WRs, DEs and OTs still around? Me neither..but yeah, let's waste the 4th overall on a RB

First 2 selected QBs in 2011:
Code:

---

Name			Team	Att	Com	Pct	Yd	AVG	Long	TD	INT	Rat
Cam Newton, QB		CAR	517	310	60.0	4,051	7.84	91	21	17	84.5	  
Jake Locker, QB		TEN	66	34	51.5	542	8.21	54	4	0	99.4

---

3rd-selected and 4th-selected QB in 2011:
Code:

---

Name			Team	Att	Com	Pct	Yd	AVG	Long	TD	INT	Rat
Blaine Gabbert, QB	JAC	413	210	50.8	2,214	5.36	74	12	11	65.4
Christian Ponder, QB	MIN	291	158	54.3	1,853	6.37	72	13	13	70.1

---

*edit* Thanks Cob for pointing out my sloppiness

2011 draft went Newton, Locker, Gabbert, Ponder

thanks

point even better-made with the correct players

Quote:

---

Top 5 selected RBs:

#28 Ingram...474yds, 3.9AVG
#38 R.Williams...IR
#56 Vereen...57yds, 3.8AVG
#57 Leshoure...IR
#62 D.Thomas....581yds, 3.5AVG

Top rookie RB performers:

#71 D.Murray....897yds, 5.5AVG
#105 Helu...640yds, 4.2AVG

---

None of those guys are in the same class as Richardson.

You're talking apples to oranges.

Quote:

---

#71 D.Murray....897yds, 5.5AVG
#105 Helu...640yds, 4.2AVG

---

Murray fell because he couldn't stay healthy in college. Then he got hurt again in Dallas.

With Helu, if you're going to take a one-cut runner for Shanahan's system, he works, but he's never going to be a feature-back kinda guy. If you're not going to feature a guy, you don't waste a high pick on a RB. If you take Richardson, you plan on keeping him on the field all the time.

Big difference.

Quote:

---

I really don't get how people act as if this position can't be addressed in the 2nd to 4th round area...we don't need a Richardson to have a good running game

---

It can...if you can guarantee that you're going to get a winner, but as we've seen here throughout the years, you can't guarantee that.

I can't speak for every single person who wants Richardson, but I can speak of why most of us want him, and it goes FAR beyond just rushing yards. Richardson represents one of the two players who are virtual locks not to miss in this draft. Kalil is the other. When the equation involves the equation of risk, reward, production, and need, well, Richardson represents the best chance of all those things.

It goes WAY beyond rushing yards.

Tannehill is a better prospect than all of those guys. Much cleaner passer than Cam as well.

...and I've shown that it's pretty easy to find good RBs later in the draft...how many LTs, shutdown CBs and QBs are found in the 2nd to 4th round again? Oh, sorry...

It's still called value...no pick is in a vacuum, it's how you play an ENTIRE draft, picking low value positions early to get a "safe" player leaves you scrambling at high level positions LATER instead of collecting the better value, just ask Eric Mangini.....drafting not to bust is like coaching not to lose = you won't win with it anyway

and before you throw the "Richardson is special" argument back....sure, but you don't need an every down RB nowadays...2 or 3 specialty ones resulting in the same production is as good if not better since you're better protected in case your workhorse RB gets injured (and they do get injured the most, that's fact)...I'm pretty sure this is exactly WHY the league has moved from workhorse to RBBC

My mock is the best example of value picking: many criticized me for taking Claiborne over Richardson at 4....I have both players rated equally and so do many, so since RB is a more "urgent" need, most would "secure" Richardson and be done with it...but it's never only about that pick...what's the depth at RB and CB in that draft? What about league needs/depth charts?

I ended up with the best CB in the draft that most consider shutdown CB talented and got the 10th best RB in the late 4th...IF I would have taken Richardson at 4...I would have the best RB and something like the 17th best CB

Lookins at it another way: a 4th round RB can come in and be effective and even carry the bulk of the carries, heck even UDFAs did so as rookies...can a 4th round rookie come in though and play press across from Haden...would he be an upgrade day 1 over Sheldon Brown?

Exercise in value part 3: Is the "upgrade" from Richardson to Addai/Benson/rook Gray "worth" the downgrade from Claiborne to Sheldon Brown/rook 4th rounder (Menzie/Norman)? And that's just short term...what about long term? CBs tend to have longer careers than RBs...

Thankfully, Heckert gets it...picking size/speed TE/WR (Mitchell/Cameron), G (Pinkston), slot CB (Skrine) and S (Asante/Hagg) on the 3rd day...lower value positions or boom bust specs....in the top 50 he has selected outside CB, DT, DE and S...3 high value positions and just 1 lower (though value of S has gone up due to position scarcity in the league)....in the 3rd round he has mixed it up with QB, G/T and RB....I just don't see him going RB at 4 in ANY draft whoever the prospect....it's just not valuable