The Overdevaluation

Time and time again analysts argue that the RB spot on the gridiron is the most replaceable position on the field. This mindset has been taken to a whole new level as of late and some argue that it doesn't matter who you put in the backfield, if the line is solid and the scheme is right, the guy will produce." While to an extent I see the point, I think this has been extremely oversimplified the past few seasons and here are a few quick reasons why:


#1. Jack of all Trades - Running back by committee is pretty much par for the course these days. Like QB's though, my mindset is "If you have 2, you have none". If you have 1 guy that can run between the tackles, hit the edge, pass protect and catch out of the backfield, that is 100x more valuable than 4 guys that have their respective specialty. If you have the rare talent that is a quadruple threat (Matt Forte), the defense is forced to be a 1/2 step slower to react and at this level, that makes all the difference not only for the running game, but for the passing game and offensive line as well.

2. Trent Richardson Rule - The whole "Don't take a RB in the first round" mindset started seemingly after the Browns snagged Richardson with a 3rd pick in the 2012 draft. The guy has been more than a disappointment. Instead of just chalking this up to a bad pick (as we do for every other position), people are just making blanket statements that running backs are unworthy of that spot. Quite the contrary, if you can get a guy that is THAT much better than the next guy in line...why would you pass on him?? Of course there is no such thing as a "sure thing" and if, this year in particular, your eyes are on Gurley or Gordon, you would be a fool to pass it up and fall victim to a 3-year-old mindset that will soon be disproved.


3. Typically, if you're drafting in the Top 10-15, lets face it, your team sucks. While it could very well be that RB is a position of need, odds are that there are bigger holes elsewhere that should be addressed first. In no way does this imply RB's are not important, they are just secondary needs to what is the bigger issue all together. There is a reason why you were 4-12 last year, and it isn't JUST the lack of a home-run threat in the backfield.


My take, WR's are next. If your saying RB's are a product of the line, then you have to say WR's are a product of the QB to a similar extent. Once WR's make the fall from immortality (7 projected in the first round..7! Really??), RB's will once again crack the Top 10 on a regular basis.