Elite Running Back vs. Elite QB in today's NFL

HD MM

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 2, 2006
15,837
0
Believeland, Ohio
You have to have a running back. IMO Pittsburgh hasnt been what they could be since Betitis retired. The Colts have receivers. Install a bruising running back first and keep Manning. then bring in a reasonably priced 1st or 2nd rounder with the arm and a brain. You dont need Luck and you dont know what he is. No way would I throw that money away on a QB.

Disagree. The Colts and Pats have never had a premiere running back, but HAVE had a premiere QB. Think of team's the other way around: Minnesota (Peterson) and Jacksonville (Jones Drew). Both franchises of mediocrity.

In this day and age, RB's matter less and less. It's a QB driven league and has been for a few years now.
 

Jimbo

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 14, 2005
66,396
5,543
NW Ohio - Buckeye Country
Disagree. The Colts and Pats have never had a premiere running back, but HAVE had a premiere QB. Think of team's the other way around: Minnesota (Peterson) and Jacksonville (Jones Drew). Both franchises of mediocrity.

In this day and age, RB's matter less and less. It's a QB driven league and has been for a few years now.

I would consider Edgerrin James to be a Premier RB.
 

salsadancer7

SatelliteGuys Master
Jun 1, 2004
28,020
183
South Florida
I could go on if you'd like: Green Bay, New Orleans, etc. Premier teams don't "need" an elite running back to succeed any more.

Because they have replaced the premiere running attack with a west coast attack that instead use the short pass to replace the run. You STILL need to run the ball to keep the defenses honest.

You obviously forgot that Edggerin James WAS a premiere running.;)
 

HD MM

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 2, 2006
15,837
0
Believeland, Ohio
Because they have replaced the premiere running attack with a west coast attack that instead use the short pass to replace the run. You STILL need to run the ball to keep the defenses honest.

You obviously forgot that Edggerin James WAS a premiere running.;)

You obviously forgot the handful of other perennial playoff teams I used as an example to show that having an elite running back isn't directly related to a team's success anymore.

I'll give you a homework assignment:

List the top 5 RB's in the league. Now list the top 5 QB's in the league.

Which is more important these days to team's success?
 

salsadancer7

SatelliteGuys Master
Jun 1, 2004
28,020
183
South Florida
You obviously forgot the handful of other perennial playoff teams I used as an example to show that having an elite running back isn't directly related to a team's success anymore.

I'll give you a homework assignment:

List the top 5 RB's in the league. Now list the top 5 QB's in the league.

Which is more important these days to team's success?

I did see that example...but you forgot the Eddgerin WAS an elite RB.

And the question you pose has been around for as long time that needs no homework assignment. You need a GOOD quality QB to run your team to be successful.

NOW...I will ask you... seeing you are in this homework assignment mode... do you think a team can be successful without a running game? Not asking if they have elite running back..a running game...
 

HD MM

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 2, 2006
15,837
0
Believeland, Ohio
I did see that example...but you forgot the Eddgerin WAS an elite RB.

And the question you pose has been around for as long time that needs no homework assignment. You need a GOOD quality QB to run your team to be successful.

NOW...I will ask you... seeing you are in this homework assignment mode... do you think a team can be successful without a running game? Not asking if they have elite running back..a running game...

Yes I do.

Case and point: The New York Giants.

With only 1,427 rushing yards last year, the Giants ranked dead LAST in the entire NFL in rushing! And they won the Super Bowl!

Next homework assignment!? I'm pretty sure I've aced this discussion. POW!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :eek: ;) :D :p
 

HD MM

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 2, 2006
15,837
0
Believeland, Ohio
To recap:

The Peyton Manning thread has spun off-topic when someone suggested that an NFL team "has to have a running back" to be successful when actually giving a take that the Colts should draft Trent Richardson instead of Andrew Luck.

To which I vehemently disagreed and provided examples on why an NFL team no longer needs an elite running back and that the potential for an elite QB is of much more value to a team's success.

To which Salsa (how predictable) disagreed.


What are your thoughts???
 

salsadancer7

SatelliteGuys Master
Jun 1, 2004
28,020
183
South Florida
HD MM said:
Yes I do.

Case and point: The New York Giants.

With only 1,427 rushing yards last year, the Giants ranked dead LAST in the entire NFL in rushing! And they won the Super Bowl!

Next homework assignment!? I'm pretty sure I've aced this discussion. POW!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :eek: ;) :D :p

And your sample size is ONE TEAM in how many years of Super Bowls?

So your ONE team means A RARE case..NOT THE NORM as your excitement is indicating.

If you ask ANY coach if a running game is needed to be successful...99.99% will say yes.
 

Hart5150

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 27, 2004
3,272
157
Temple, Pa
HD MM said:
To recap:

The Peyton Manning thread has spun off-topic when someone suggested that an NFL team "has to have a running back" to be successful when actually giving a take that the Colts should draft Trent Richardson instead of Andrew Luck.

To which I vehemently disagreed and provided examples on why an NFL team no longer needs an elite running back and that the potential for an elite QB is of much more value to a team's success.

To which Salsa (how predictable) disagreed.


What are your thoughts???

As I mentioned in that thread the Colts won the Super Bowl the year after James left.

A stud running back is no longer needed in today's NFL, Trent Richardson will be a wasted pick this year just as Mark Ingram was last year.

A quaterback is the most important position in the NFL and its not even close.

Sent from my iPad using SatelliteGuys
 

HD MM

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 2, 2006
15,837
0
Believeland, Ohio
As I mentioned in that thread the Colts won the Super Bowl the year after James left.

A stud running back is no longer needed in today's NFL, Trent Richardson will be a wasted pick this year just as Mark Ingram was last year.

A quaterback is the most important position in the NFL and its not even close.

Sent from my iPad using SatelliteGuys

My thoughts exactly.
 

salsadancer7

SatelliteGuys Master
Jun 1, 2004
28,020
183
South Florida
HD MM said:
To recap:

The Peyton Manning thread has spun off-topic when someone suggested that an NFL team "has to have a running back" to be successful when actually giving a take that the Colts should draft Trent Richardson instead of Andrew Luck.

To which I vehemently disagreed and provided examples on why an NFL team no longer needs an elite running back and that the potential for an elite QB is of much more value to a team's success.

To which Salsa (how predictable) disagreed.


What are your thoughts???

What IS predictable is your lack of reading comprehension. I said...a running game. All coaches have stated that "you need to run the ball" to be successful.

At NO POINT did I mention you need a "elite running back". I mentioned that Edggerin James was an elite RB.

PLEASE, if you are going to call me out on what I said...at least get the #@%!?*¢^ quote correct.
 

Teehar

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Sep 29, 2010
8,355
174
WNC
There is no question in my mind that in today's NFL QB is the single most important position.Before all the changes to the passing game teams could win it all with great D.Thats no longer the case.The Giants,Saints,Packers,Colts,and even the Steelers the teams that have won in the last few years all have one thing in common.Great QB.
 

salsadancer7

SatelliteGuys Master
Jun 1, 2004
28,020
183
South Florida
HD MM said:
Whaaaaaaaaaaattttttttt??? :confused: :coffee

Please...go back..and cut and paste...exactly what I said. The only time the word "elite" came out is when I mentioned Edggerin James was an elite RB.

But please...go on with your rant...you may need now to not make yourself look foolish. ;-)
 

BillD1984

SatelliteGuys Master
Apr 9, 2008
15,836
904
MA
As I mentioned in that thread the Colts won the Super Bowl the year after James left.

A stud running back is no longer needed in today's NFL, Trent Richardson will be a wasted pick this year just as Mark Ingram was last year.

A quaterback is the most important position in the NFL and its not even close.

Sent from my iPad using SatelliteGuys



I agree it's not even close, BUT I now believe you need more than just a "servicable" RB to win the Super Bowl.

Just look at the Patriots (and I admittedly say this in hindsight). They won three SB's in four years with one of the greatest QB's in the history of the game. Since then: several near championships ('06, '07, '10 and '11) with the same HOF QB , but they weren't able to close the deal in any of those years. I now believe the difference was not having a "Mariano Rivera" RB to close out games. If they had Antowain Smith or (even better) clock killin' Corey Dillon in any of those years, IMO they win AT LEAST two more Super Bowls.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think you need an Earl Campbell when you have a Tom Brady, but I do think you need to do better than BenJarvus Green-Ellis as your FEATURE back to close out games.
 

Rey

@ your service
Supporting Founder
Feb 8, 2008
26,907
564
Florida
i believe in today's league that it is more important to have an elite Qb than an elite Rb. your example of the Giants is a good one. they did not have a good running game during the regular season although their two rb's did step it up for the playoffs. but at the end it was eli who with his elite play made those who surrounded him better. then when you look at the opposing team in the SB (pats) they did not have a running game either. yet they came close to winning the game as well.

then you have the packers who were 27th in rushing and yet had only one regular season loss. while they did fail in the playoffs,in the 2010-11 season they won the superbowl with a 24th ranked rushing offense.

would it help to at least have a good running game? yes of course but, a great passing offense with a good defense seems to be enough these days to win you a championship.

you can go back even further and for me closer to home when we got ricky williams. ricky his first few years here was one of the best if not the best RB in the NFL. our defense was either in the top 5 or top ten. ask me how many playoff games we won during that time.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts

Top