Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Could Richardson Be a Great Pick, After All? « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 9

blind melon

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 15689
Offline
#30 : March 21, 2012, 09:23:10 AM

RB is a must this draft...

Blounts running style is eventually going to put him on the bench due to injury IMO.

We need a viable runner in case that happens.   And by viable I mean no loss in RB production.

I can just imagine keeping Blount fresh and using him to close out games.    A thing of beauty.


Who knew how good it would feel as a fan when we now know what it\'s like for our team to have a direction, an attitude, and dare I say an offense?.  

Good time to be a Bucs fan.

bashear

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2434
Offline
#31 : March 21, 2012, 09:24:02 AM

You know what I picture with T-Rich in Buc backfield? I picture the Bucs offence running no-huddles and hurry-up with 1 personnel package against defences that will need to pick their poison in terms of how they choose to defend....so aside from the other obvious advantages of a great RB, he can also create advantages for his team that weren't previously available. Freeman's potential for this year would skyrocket as a result...

Great article by the way....thanks.
That does give the offense an advantage. I'm not saying that other backs in the draft couldn't provide the same thing, but TR is seen by many as the most pro-level ready back in the draft.

BucDaFackUp

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4368
Offline
#32 : March 21, 2012, 09:26:25 AM

You know what I picture with T-Rich in Buc backfield? I picture the Bucs offence running no-huddles and hurry-up with 1 personnel package against defences that will need to pick their poison in terms of how they choose to defend....so aside from the other obvious advantages of a great RB, he can also create advantages for his team that weren't previously available. Freeman's potential for this year would skyrocket as a result...

Great article by the way....thanks.
That does give the offense an advantage. I'm not saying that other backs in the draft couldn't provide the same thing, but TR is seen by many as the most pro-level ready back in the draft.

I think Doug Martin may be the closest to T-Rich so I could see him being an option as well.....the others, I don't have as much confidence in.

dalbuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 21569
Offline
#33 : March 21, 2012, 09:26:26 AM


Whole argument is just awful filled with the usual cliches about running the ball. Let's look:

"What do you do offensively if you do not have one of those quarterbacks? . " You throw the ball. Blaine Gabbert and MJD are as big a variance in quality as you can have. MJD averaged a spiffy 4.7 ypa. Blaine Gabbert averaged a net yards per attempt (yards passing - yards sacked / attempts) of 4.2. That is as bad as it gets in the NFL. Unless you have one of THOSE QB's you throw the ball. Now take a more mundane scenario: Reggie Bush and Matt Moore. Bush averaged 5.0 ypc which is great. Matt Moore still averaged nypa 5.9.  In other words Matt Moore on any given play is getting you almost a full yard more than Bush.

"Is there no correlation between a strong rushing attack and an explosive passing game? " <-- No, there isn't Greg. None, zero, zilch nada correlation. As I've said before if this argument were true then all good running teams should be good passing when usually great running teams are terrible passing teams.

"The tendency, in normal down and distance situations, will be for the defense to add that eighth player into the box." <-- Yes Greg this is true, it is true no matter who your RB is. The only time D's don't do this is if you are spread out. See the next argument he makes.

"He utilizes 21 personnel (2 backs and 1 tight end) and 12 personnel (1 back and 2 tight ends). He is outstanding manipulating the safety as an add-in run defender. The result was a high percentage of what we call single high safety coverages, which is one safety in the deep middle of the field. Almost always, in that alignment, the corners play off coverage. Rarely do they play aggressive press man-to-man with only one deep safety." <-- Again, that is the formation dictating the coverage and not the actual man in the backfield. The same things worked when Tolbert was their RB and he's no dynamic threat,

"What that does is shorten the game. The clock moves when you run the ball. The ancillary benefit is your defense is on the field for fewer plays. A back like Richardson therefore not only makes your passing game better, he helps your defense." <-- Also not true, ToP isn't won that way and really isn't won in the NFL at all. You just don't get massive spreads of time in the NFL and ToP in a passing driven league matters less and less. You need to score not play keep away. Plus, he misses the relationship, you need the defense to keep you in games to be able to run.

Give me a break. Next you'll be trying to sell the idea that it isn't any easier to convert a 3rd down and 2 than it is to convert a 3rd down and 6 and that it isn't easier to make plays passing the ball down the field when the opponent's safety comes up to the box.

Non-responsive at all. It is easier to convert 3rd and 2 compared to 3rd and 6. Thing is that the gap between an average RB and a great RB doesn't change what your 3rd down will be most of the time. As for the safety, read what the guy trying to defend Richardson claims - and he's right - formations drive alignments not personnel.

All posts are opinions in case you are too stupid to figure that out on your own without me saying it over and over.

Pteranodon

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1285
Offline
#34 : March 21, 2012, 09:28:56 AM

Nice article, but rather draft Claiborne still for blah blah reasons, another month of these threads so I'm pacing myself at least until his pro day if he works out at that.

Skull and Bones

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 23246
Offline
#35 : March 21, 2012, 09:33:36 AM

James gave the colts 7 really good years.  Taylor played 12 years for the Jags.  Dunn gave the Bucs 6 years and the Falcons 5.  He would have been worth resigning absolutely.  Played his best ball with the Falcons.  Lewis gave the Ravens 7 years and had two 1,000+ years with Cleveland afterwards.  Jackson has been with the Rams his entire career.  Tomlinson gave the Chargers 9 years.


jerseybucsfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 13626
Offline
#36 : March 21, 2012, 09:34:05 AM

Spoolios, that's true. You're even being kind to Portis. His positive impact was limited. Bailey is overrated IMHO, not one of the all-time great CBs and no longer an elite CB. But he's still worth a lot more than Portis by almost any definition. A very good CB (which he is still) is still worth more than a very good RB.
As for this thread, we may be boxed in as I've noted in other threads. You have two QBs gone. It's possible we may not be able to trade down and both Kalil and Claiborne may be gone. So the argument becomes this: Do you go Oline (Reiff), reach for a LB (Kuechly), really reach for the next CB (Gilmore?), add to your WR group (Blackmon) or take Richardson? Eliminate Reiff for a moment and then consider the following four: Kuechly, Gilmore, Blackmon, Richardson. Who do you want?
They'll all be gone by the time we pick in the second round.

In Verner We Trust

blind melon

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 15689
Offline
#37 : March 21, 2012, 09:35:27 AM

in that scenario jersey, the pick has to Richardson or trade out of the spot.

Who knew how good it would feel as a fan when we now know what it\'s like for our team to have a direction, an attitude, and dare I say an offense?.  

Good time to be a Bucs fan.

jerseybucsfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 13626
Offline
#38 : March 21, 2012, 09:35:49 AM

Skull, the longevity question aside, the question becomes this: Do really good RBs help you win more often? If you're averaging 4.5 YPR and you can pass for 7.0, does a big running game even make sense?

In Verner We Trust

BucDaFackUp

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4368
Offline
#39 : March 21, 2012, 09:36:04 AM

Spoolios, that's true. You're even being kind to Portis. His positive impact was limited. Bailey is overrated IMHO, not one of the all-time great CBs and no longer an elite CB. But he's still worth a lot more than Portis by almost any definition. A very good CB (which he is still) is still worth more than a very good RB.
As for this thread, we may be boxed in as I've noted in other threads. You have two QBs gone. It's possible we may not be able to trade down and both Kalil and Claiborne may be gone. So the argument becomes this: Do you go Oline (Reiff), reach for a LB (Kuechly), really reach for the next CB (Gilmore?), add to your WR group (Blackmon) or take Richardson? Eliminate Reiff for a moment and then consider the following four: Kuechly, Gilmore, Blackmon, Richardson. Who do you want?
They'll all be gone by the time we pick in the second round.

I think that convo comes down to who is rated higher on your board between Blackmon and Richardson....

Skull and Bones

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 23246
Offline
#40 : March 21, 2012, 09:38:52 AM

Skull, the longevity question aside, the question becomes this: Do really good RBs help you win more often? If you're averaging 4.5 YPR and you can pass for 7.0, does a big running game even make sense?
when your QB leads the league in interceptions it does.


blind melon

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 15689
Offline
#41 : March 21, 2012, 09:41:07 AM

A one dimensional offense isn't going to do anyone any good...

Blount isn't enough.

Who knew how good it would feel as a fan when we now know what it\'s like for our team to have a direction, an attitude, and dare I say an offense?.  

Good time to be a Bucs fan.

jerseybucsfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 13626
Offline
#42 : March 21, 2012, 09:42:33 AM

Blind, if Claiborne's not there, I would LOVE to trade out of the spot. But I'll mark you down for Richardson if we can't.
The other thing I was thinking was to engineer a trade and draft Blackmon. That could work out in a number of ways.

In Verner We Trust

djrobbied530

***
Second String

Posts : 163
Offline
#43 : March 21, 2012, 09:43:33 AM

Honestly, if we get either Claiborne or Richardson I'll be happy.

Skull and Bones

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 23246
Offline
#44 : March 21, 2012, 09:46:16 AM

A one dimensional offense isn't going to do anyone any good...

Blount isn't enough.
our new HC has said he wants to be a play action offense.  a good RB is needed to pull it off.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 9
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Could Richardson Be a Great Pick, After All? « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools