Quote:
Originally Posted by The Zimmermans
Denver is desparate for a quaility back right now like portis. If they had portis I think they would have at least 1 or 2 more wins. I really would like to hold on to both portis and betts considering how much of a "running team" the redskins are supposed to be. Running the ball 30+ times a game is gonna require more than one QUALITY back.
|
I think you've hit on something really big here. The "success" of the Denver running scheme may be the biggest crock in professional sports. Basically, the theroy is that you can put anyone in there and get production from him.
But how is this production being measured? If the metric is 1000 yard seasons, that's 62.5 yards per game, not anything special. Originally, the system started getting recognition when Terrell Davis, Olandis Gary, and Mike Anderson posted 1000 yard seasons in 1998, 1999, and 2000 respectively. Then in 2001, they didn't even get a 1000 yard back. Terrell Davis is a HOF talent, Olandis Gary was never ever good (including his 1999 season--Denver went from the league's top rushing attack in 98 to below average YPC in 99), and Mike Anderson was and is a good player.
The talk of the almighty system died down after that 2001 flop, only to reemerge when Clinton Portis went for 1500+ in two consecutive seasons. Since the Portis trade, the Denver rushing attack has been rather mediocre, exception to last year when Mike Anderson was back at tailback, and all of a sudden, it was really good again.
Olandis Gary, Reuben Droughns, Tatum Bell, Ron Dayne, Mike Bell. If anyone tries to tell you that the Denver running scheme is great because it made players out of these guys, turn around and punch them in the nose. Denver found sucess with good players like Terrell Davis, Mike Anderson, and Clinton Portis, and the numbers show a significant drop in production in the last 10 years when one of these guys isn't running the football.
Is Shanahan a good talent evalutator of RBs? Yeah, I'd say he's done a great job at finding guys who can play. But this great "running scheme" was and is nothing more than an above average offensive line who has been together for years playing with very good running backs. Now as the line starts to age and they start to replace their players on it, it's going to become increasingly obvious that neither Bell is any Clinton Portis.
In the near future, Portis and Betts will be churning out yards for us, and the Broncos running game will be getting stuffed by the defenses that they play 2 times a year in the AFC West, Oakland, KC, and San Diego.
Then it will be obvious that the loss of Portis hurt the Broncos.