A question of style: Evan, Roy or Tim?

Here you go.

I'm more of a hybrid back, I have speed, but I will run someone over, whatever it takes to get those yards. Clinton Portis was a great back, but if I had to compare my game to anybody it would have to be an old school back, probably Walter Payton if anybody because he more so than anyone, not just when it came to blocking, but also running, was not afraid of contact, he loved it.

Just watching his clips, he refused to go down, which is the same mindset that I have. I refuse to go down, refuse to let one man tackle me, if you're going to tackle me, it's going to take you and a couple of your teammates. I guess because I'm not hitting anymore (he used to play LB) I like to do the hitting.

That might be what he meant but its not what you said that he said.
And comparing oneself to Walter Payton and admiring/emulating Walter Payton are worlds apart in meaning.

Take it easy, Francis...

I don't understand what you mean by 'that' model?

Those teams are just lucky enough to have elite talent at the RB position.
None of those teams (Vikings,Bears especially) really has a good OL yet those backs make those running games very good.
They have the type of RBs that can carry an offense.
And those backs are rare.
You can throw Arian Foster in the mix too.

The irony of your theory is that in our offense (when ran correctly) is driven by the running game.
For all the talk of Elway/Shanahan success Terrell Davis was the engine behind that offense the same way that Arian Foster/Ben Tate are the engine behind the Texan's offense.

Lets not forget that the Packers made Ryan Grant a rich man and Patriots paid Corey Dillon to fuel their Superbowl run/victory.


Well if our RBs become the best in the league we're gonna have to pay them market value or watch them walk, its just how the league works.
I don't think the Bears mismanagement is an example of how to run a franachise.
I'm embarrassed for the Bears that they're making they're best player go through this.
Forte's situation is a prime example of why a player shouldn't play under a bad contract in the hope of signing a "good faith" deal in the future. (which is what he did last year)
The Bears offense [was[/B] Cutler and Forte and without them they cannot/ did not win.

That seems to be the prevailing thought these days.
But football is a game of attrition, players are gonna get hurt regardless of position (QBs, RBs, WRs) happens every year.
I would agree that non-elite RBs are easily replaceable but so are most non-elite players.
But, an elite RB is just as irreplaceable as any other elite player.

This is where we disagree. In my opinion using a first round draft pick and then having close to 10 percent of your cap go to a running back is not a good business model for today's nfl. I would much rather have our situation of having multiple average or slightly above average backs that don't break the bank. If helu turns out to be Barry sanders I would rather trade him than pay top dollar for the position.

Take it easy, Francis...
Me? I'm easy like sunday morning.
What's got you in a tizzy?

This is where we disagree. In my opinion using a first round draft pick and then having close to 10 percent of your cap go to a running back is not a good business model for today's nfl.Neither Forte, Rice nor Foster were 1st round backs.
As far as cap space goes it is what it is you're gonna have to pay about market value for elite talent.
That's just the way the league works.
Also, I don't think there is a set 'model' that teams follow.
Team cannot predict what a player will become they have to be able to adjust their evaluations against the player's actual performance.
E.g. the Texans didn't draft/sign Foster with the intent to pay him X amount dollars.
Foster's performance dictated his contract.


I would much rather have our situation of having multiple average or slightly above average backs that don't break the bank.Its gonna be tough to hide talent.
If Helu and Royster turn out to be average to slighty above average backs; Allen is gonna have to pay them based on their production or let them walk, there's no way around that.
*our contract situation with our RBs is only sustainable if we find late round RBs that can be equally productive as Helu/Royster at least every other year

If helu turns out to be Barry sanders I would rather trade him than pay top dollar for the positionWow, your statement is a prime example how people have completely bought into this whole 'devaluation' of the RB position.
If Helu turns out to be Barry Sanders and a GM trades him that GM better win at least 1 Superbowl with those picks.

This is where we disagree. In my opinion using a first round draft pick and then having close to 10 percent of your cap go to a running back is not a good business model for today's nfl. I would much rather have our situation of having multiple average or slightly above average backs that don't break the bank. If helu turns out to be Barry sanders I would rather trade him than pay top dollar for the position.

ummm no. He is a hall of fame back, one of the greatest all time. You cant trade away HOF talent, you pay him and build your team around him. I rather have RG3 = Elway than Helu = Barry Sanders though...

Instead of claiming Tashard Choice from off of waivers last year, the Redskins should have promoted Tristian Davis from the practice squad to the active roster.

ummm no. He is a hall of fame back, one of the greatest all time. You cant trade away HOF talent, you pay him and build your team around him. I rather have RG3 = Elway than Helu = Barry Sanders though...

Barry Sanders in one of my favorite players, but it's just not smart money to invest at the position while taking money off the table for other positions. As great as a running back is, they don't impact the game enough to make the position a priority.

Just food for thought but Jim Brown Walter Payton, and Barry Sanders are in most peoples top 5 RBs of all time. They have two championships between the three of them. Of the top ten rushers of all time only 2 have won multiple superbowls with half of them not winning any. Arian Foster is a great example of what I don't want. He wasn't a high draft choice (think he went Undrafted but could be wrong) and played at a pro bowl level. Now he just got a contract that pays him 30 mil in the first three years.

Here are my problems with this. Tate did a pretty damn good job in his absence, they couldn't resign Mario Williams, and finally I don't remember them being a Super Bowl contender when foster lead the league in rushing.

So let's say Helu plays his ass off and turns all pro. Awesome. When his contract is up let him walk or trade him. Let the recent contracts of Peterson and Johnson be cautionary tale of what we don't want. Everybody loves to talk about how being able to run an stop the run wins championships. That's a flat out myth. Being able to pass and stop the pass is what wins. That's been true since the Super Bowl era.

Just food for thought but Jim Brown Walter Payton, and Barry Sanders are in most peoples top 5 RBs of all time. They have two championships between the three of them.they're my top 3 of all time, interesting thought. only sanders played in the modern free agency/salary cap days

For some statistical background on my statement about passing wins more so than running. I know some people are going I say that you need a running game to open up the passing game. To that I will ask you to prove it. Top three passing teams last year finished 6th, 20th, and 26th on rushing.

http://www.thesportjournal.org/article/controlling-rushing-or-passing-game-key-nfl-victories

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2010/08/passing-winning.html?m=1

http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2012/01/2011-nfl-regular-season-wins-and-stat.html?m=1

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_5326_Winners_and_losers%3A_beauty_runs_stat_dee p.html