The Running Back Paradox (Analysis with Advanced Metrics)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 сен 2024
- Young stars such as Saquon Barkley, Josh Jacobs, and Tony Pollard haven’t received new deals and are subject to a franchise tag salary for Runningbacks that is lower than the tag salary for RBs in 2015. Ezekiel Elliot and Dalvin Cook, both aged 27, were cut from big deals. Aaron Jones and Joe Mixon took pay cuts to stay on their team. Kareem Hunt wasn’t resigned and Austin Ekeler’s trade request burned out. In the midst of the tweets, the zoom meetings, and the protests, the problem just recently got worse when Jonathan Taylor was refused an extension, causing him to request a trade. What’s going on? In this video, we’ll discuss why the RB position has become so heavily devalued in today’s NFL.
I do not claim ownership of the clips used in this video. The use of the clips, arranged in a particular manner in this video, constitutes a transformative fair use and is used for educational and noncommercial purposes.
Follow my Second Channel: / @themorejumbopackage
Follow me on Twitter: / jumbopackageyt
Follow me on TikTok: / thejumbopackage
Follow my Clips for Edits Channel: • Drake Maye High Qualit...
*Note: For full transparency, I began working on the research for this video on 7/28/2023. On 8/5/2023, the day before I posted this video, Brett Kollman released his RB video offering a solution to the problem. Brett is an awesome creator and is actually the first ever football youtuber I ever watched, increasing my love for the game, so I highly recommend you check out his video as well, which can be found here: • The Running Back Problem. . I still believe there is value in watching this video because I go a bit more in-depth on the problem itself, whereas Brett offers a real tangible solution. Either way, I just wanted to make sure no one thought I was copying Brett or was trying to capitalize on posting a similar video within a short time frame, it unfortunately just happened like that. Anyways, I hope you enjoy both videos!
Sources:
• Why Establishing the R...
nextgenstats.n...
overthecap.com...
rbsdm.com/stat...
www.footballou...
www.pff.com/ne...
www.footballou...
fivethirtyeigh...
www.theringer....
slate.com/cult...
ftw.usatoday.c...
atozsports.com...
www.footballou...
www.fieldgulls...
www.fantasypro...
fivethirtyeigh...
Ma...
www.pff.com/ne...
thepowerrank.c...
www.sportingne...
www.the33rdtea...
nextgenstats.n...
www.pro-footba...
/ @urinatingtree
chill out moneyball
Q
😂
thats a compliment if i've ever seen one
You know what happened in Moneyball, right?
Own that fraud
For full transparency, I began working on the research for this video on 7/28/2023. On 8/5/2023, the day before I posted this video, Brett Kollman released his RB video offering a solution to the problem. Brett is an awesome creator and is actually the first ever football youtuber I ever watched, increasing my love for the game, so I highly recommend you check out his video as well, which I've linked in the description. I still believe there is value in watching this video because I go a bit more in-depth on the problem itself, whereas Brett offers a real tangible solution. Either way, I just wanted to make sure no one thought I was copying Brett or was trying to capitalize on posting a similar video within a short time frame, it unfortunately just happened like that. Anyways, I hope you enjoy both videos!
I saw Brett's video. Yours is better. (SACRILEGE!!?!)?
@@choosecarefully408 Haha, I am definitely glad you think so, but I'd say its sacrilege! Brett is one of my favorite creators and has an objectively better production value than I do and way more football knowledge. I think our videos on this topic are just different rather than one being better than the other, but It is definitely an extremely high compliment to me that anyone considers one of my videos even close to Brett's!
@@TheJumboPackage He's knowledgeable, but your video is more dressed up than his. Also I make worse jokes than you, so there's that. & *no one is right 100% of the time,* not even me. (Although my rate is extremely high.
You have no means by which you can confirm this though, he said shifting his eyes back & forth)...
@@choosecarefully408 haha!
Also Bijan
This is an excellent analysis!! I’m a former NFL RB and was both a benefactor and victim of the way RB’s are treated in the league. You covered it all. 👍🏾👊🏾
Hey, you made it, at least. How many people can claim that? So good on you.
Thank you! I’m glad you enjoyed!
Another thing as well. Since the o-line is more responsible for ground gains, it just makes sense to invest more in the o-line because you will also probably have better pass protection as well.
True!
i think rb are going to die
@@jmgonzales7701they just gone evolve u going to see more rbs that can also line up at wr
Yeah after a few years then we'll see a team use a running back and then start the trend again just like happened wit passing. It's cyclical when all the teams become homogenous.
It doesn't matter how many holes the o-line opens if you don't hae a guy who can run through it.
There's a large amount of risk avoidance involved. RBs have tons of injuries. By having 3 guys on your roster for the price of 1 top guy, you protect yourself better from injuries in the sense that you don't have as much drop-off.
Very true!
I think every high school RB, parent of RB and coach needs to see this. One way to make the market respect compensation expectations of talent is to cut out supply. Become a TE or defensive player kids. If you insist on being an RB, you can enjoy a lot of adoration from college fans, a sweet NIL deal and a free ride through college, then go do something else or become a college football commentator or a local celebrity. Save yourself from the CTE and being lowballed in a league that will chew you up and spit you out.
Just an idea that might nuance your analysis. Pure yards gained is not always the metric that’s most important to a football team. If it’s third and one, gaining one yard is critically important, in a way that skews the importance of yards so that the first yard is more important than any subsequent yards that the team might pick up on that play. With that being said, it might be interesting look at the pay of an RB vs their ability to consistently convert on 3rd and 4th down plays. I could imagine that the RB of today, rather than being expected to make big yards, might have a different role in keeping drives alive by consistently gaining short yardage.
I think your overall argument obviously still stands, and by looking at stats in team success vs rb salary, you’ve kinda already addressed my point; however, some stat on converting downs and keeping drives alive might make an argument value of an RB (and maybe even a highly skilled one vs an average player) in a game that is increasingly dominated by passing which is by nature, more all or nothing (completed pass vs incomplete pass) on individual downs. Just a thought!
What you’re describing is EPA. It gives you an efficiency number based on a play’s outcome in regards to your team’s scoring probability. Therefore, gaining the first down is a big EPA boost because it increased your likelihood of scoring points. That being said, EPA will give you the same story. Running the ball usually sucks (unless it’s short yardage) and passing is king.
I've said it before - I feel so bad for kids growing up as running backs right now. You outlined the issues with paying a running back perfectly. It would be nice to see RB rookie contracts a shorter length or franchise tags abolished for them.
They need to make a runningback exception rule or increase the average price for rookie runningback, just to protect them early.
This video is fucking amazing. You are the only football commentator I have seen so far use advanced statistical analysis to support his points. The overall community is super behind other sports which have switched to other stats (like FG% to TS%) while we still use the same basic inaccurate stats from decades ago. Thank you for helping get us caught up.
Thank you!
This channel deserves more subscribers. Insanely thorough data analysis.
Thank you!
It sure if this was mentioned as I don’t read through comments but, the rushing game’s importance isn’t just in yardage, it is also in time of possession and giving your defense a chance to rest. Your defense on average will play better when a team has a rushing attack that can keep the offense on the field for a longer amount of time. All in all though a fair assessment of the RB position today
That's true, but I think it's overrated by many. Sometimes people equate game clock time with real time. Defenses get more rest than is suggested by possession time.
Didn’t realize how small your channel was till you mentioned it. You’re gonna blow up brother this was a crazy good video!
Thank you!
I just wanna say this is an amazing video. Very impressed with the analysis man. Good work
😊 🏈 ❤
Thank you!
Awesome video! I wonder if we'll ever see another running back with the longevity of Adrian Peterson or Frank Gore. I also wonder if any current running backs will end up being given Hall of Fame consideration (McCaffrey, Chubb, and Henry would be on a short list in my estimation). Another thing that I think decreases running backs' value is the rise of the dual-threat quarterback, guys like Lamar Jackson, Josh Allen, Kyler Murray, or Justin Fields who can easily pick up yards with their legs without handing the ball off.
Thank you! I definitely think it'd be interesting to see. I feel like Henry will be able to get to that point... was hoping Chubb would get there, but his recent injury really hurts that prospect unfortunately :/
That is a point that I just made with someone, the need for a rushing game isn't necessarily the production from it but the threat of it being there to open up passing lanes. Running production can't come close to the production teams get from passing production so running becomes supplementary, however RBs aren't the only ones who can gain the running production necessary to obtain that threat. More often today are we seeing QBs using their skillset to obtain that rushing threat alongside their RBs. The need for a RB in this circumstance only comes in the form of diversifying who obtains the rushing production, raising the value of RBs but further devaluing individual RBs at the same time.
I get why it’s a dying position but it still sucks to see when I’ve always been a runningback/fullback growing up and been a fan of elite running backs😢
That's the discrepancy in lower level football to the top, RBs value is significant the lower you go and greatly diminishes (nearly to nothing) at the NFL level. Many teams as youth, middle schools, high schools, and even some college levels, just put their athletes at RB and they will provide the production necessary to just "out talent" the other team. In the NFL, the talent level of the rest of the players gets so curated that you can't just "out talent" them anymore. Which I think explains why we get so many talented enough RBs at that top level where they aren't nearly as needed or valued.
The days of the elite RB and FB will return Seth. Have no fear.
It’s only dying because the league wants it too. Its plain as day.
Love the video. Gotta respect a guy who uses numbers and facts to look at the NFL for what it is, a ruthless multimillion dollar business but to summarize the video in an easier way is just to say it doesn't sense or cents to pay the running back like other positions.
This is the best video on all of RUclips on the topic. I was expecting you to have half a million subs...top quality work man. Keep it up!
Thank you so much, I really appreciate it!
Great video. I grew up in the era of Marshall Faulk. I was raised on running backs lol. It's weird how the position just doesn't work in the NFL anymore.
The modern D Line is so quick and agile that it can stop a RB.
Thank you!
Team learned that a 7th round RB on a rookie contract running behind an elite O-Line is a better use of limited money than a star RB running behind 7th round pick O-Linemen.
Possibly! OLine is definitely one of the more important positions. The argument for the OLine too would be that they provide more to pass game or to the game as a whole because they are playing every offensive snap (if healthy), rather than a RB who is hypothetically only impacting plays where they get the ball. That argument would fail to consider the RB's impact on defensive alignment tho, so anyone can always argue both sides.
As a ravens fan, we found Gus edwards as a undrafted free agent in 2018 and every year he's played for us, he's averaged an insane 5 or more ypc. That's crazy efficiency and it's hard to find that even among high draft pick backs. They can be found high or low and paying one 10+ mil a year seems to have been deemed silly nowadays
Watched the whole vid before you said you only had a little over 100 subscribers. Amazing video. Obvious amounts of effort and time put into it. I would’ve guessed you had well over 75k subs at the least.
Thank you!
Way too little subs, LOVE THE WORK PUT INTO THIS VID, felt like a class and there was a test at the end
Thanks!
I’d love to see RBs stats in the passing game. Receiving yards out of the back field, RBs that line up as a receiver and passing plays when RBs block. Also idk how to do stats for it but play action plays maybe resulting in more yards if the defense bites on the run. Great video overall though!
They’ve also determined that play action works very efficiently regardless of the success that your rushing offense has achieved. Receptions by running backs also tend to be some of the least efficient options in the game.
I thought that would be the case. Would still love to see the numbers to go with it I just like hearing about statistics. @@connorking3523
I do think that its a cycle. And its all about supply and demand. Running backs are valuable->they get paid a lot of money->a lot of people choose to play running back->the position becomes less valuable because there are so many people playing the position->running backs stop getting paid->less people choose to play that position->then the position becomes valuable again bc of the scarcity of running backs available and so on and so forth
Very possible; I'm interested to see how it develops!
It doesn't really matter. Yes having a good running back is important, but statistically throwing is always going to get you much more yards per play. Not to mention injury risks for RBs.
It just doesn't make any sense to pay a RB a lot of money. You much better off with a better Oline men or a better wide receiver then putting alot of money into your RB.
@Tofuey that's the whole argument. Right now it doesn't make sense to pay rbs bc they are so abundant and you can get decent production from a backup or a guy on a rookie contract. My theory is that bc of this, the best players are going to stop playing running back, starting in high school into college and eventually into the nfl. Then when there is not an abundant supply of rbs, the backups and rookie contract guys aren't gonna be good enough to produce what the teams need. This will create a huge demand for talent in the rb position. That along with a low supply of rbs will make the position valuable again.
@@martiansyrup4331 Certain people are going to keep getting shoehorned into rbs into high school and college because those teams need rbs, and certain players body types favor that position. your prediction has never come true despite RB pay having been plummeting for decades, and there's no reason to believe that will change.
@martiansyrup4331 It's not a cycle Pay Attention. RBs are not worth big money. You can literally get a RB from the trash heap so why would anyone pay big money for a RB? It just doesn't make any sense
Great work breaking down the reasoning. I was hoping you would touch on a few things but I didn't really catch it, so maybe we talk here about it. As a mechanic, or artist or anything, there is always that one tool that is way too expensive for how much you use it, but you absolutely can't do without it, and I am pretty sure this is kind of a factor in when they should pay for someone. Without a rungame, teams commit to the pass and I am sure that pulls down averages for that too. One of the things you can tell when a team is without is good pass blocking running backs. You can also tame blitzes with dump offs and screens originated from the back position. Then most importantly ball security. This ties into the other thing, an ability to disguise a play action run and or handle snaps properly, even with intense pressure. It doesn't allow teams to go two high considering 1 or the other will be in run support or opens up getting deep.
A lot of your examples were great, but also a lot of them came from San Fran. Even though they have a wealth of backs, like enough to just send them all over the league to starting positions, they still paid very well for McCaffery because of his elite abilities. The colts are absolute garbage and some of these other teams are too, which again is pointing back to the original points, that while it might not translate into overall success, just the presence alone dictates gameplans. This is especially true in the red zone, where little gains mean a whole lot more.
Browns are garbo, and the fact they had to let chub do that much is reflecting more on poor team overall ability rather than anything. We are in a ball control era. People don't want huge gain plays. They want to grind away at the clock to win time of possession. They want to have the tools to move the chains in tight situations. I don't know what to call the cowboys, I mean they dominate regular seasons, but it don't add up to much when it really matters which might indicate that pollard isn't as cracked as his numbers show. Bengals weren't as effective without Mixon being effective.
Point is I think the better teams right now paid their guys and it will lead to further effectiveness. Chiefs are a great example, like off a super bowl win with Williams, they drafted O'laire and while he hasn't panned out exactly, the committee approach has. They need to pay them just enough, and I think that is probably more of what is going on than seeing them as expendable. Taylor wanted way too much from a really bad team.
As a casual fan who's about a hundred plays of running backs gaining one or two yards and only a tiny handful where they got more. Im glad you finally came to this conclusion
I’m gonna be doing a study on something similar so this was a good listen and helped me think of more variables to add to my regression. Thank you man!
Thanks for watching! I have a bunch of the sources in the description as well if that helps you at all!
this is a good video and lays out the reason why they aren't getting paid. I watch some rich eisen and other casual analysts they dont really understand whats going on so I wish they would watch a video like this.
It's unfortunately a very complex situation, which is why I wanted to make a video like this -- to make the information easily available to others! Hopefully, this video can make its way to the public discourse and the issues can be more thoroughly discussed. I'd love if you can share the video with others you think would be interested to help us get there! Thanks so much for watching 😃
What makes RBs value is not just their running ability, it is their pass blocking ability and their pass catching ability.
This why we see RBs like CMC, Ekeler, Pollard, and more who can catch, have a much larger impact than just normal ball carriers.
I fully believe in a 2rb set, 1 hard runner and 1 pass catching, like GB, LAC, DET, NE, and more.
Was looking for a comment like this! As a 9ers fan, CMC is not paid for his running alone! He's paid for his overall impact! He's a YAC monster and a prime example of dual threat!
So Nick Chubb and Jonathan Taylor are the only backs worth their money on rushing stats. McCaffery probably adds enough value in the pass game to compensate
Right- Chubb is a fantastic runner of the football, but doesn’t provide a whole lot in the pass game; CMC is not as talented as a pure runner, but brings a lot of extra value in the pass game!
Bad timing bro 😭
@@roanotoole3631 I was honestly just thinking of that last night. Praying for Chubb
Your deep dive analysis was great man. Glad your channel growing
Thank you!
I wonder if this cycle will continue. For example, let’s say running backs become less and less utilised, therefore the passing game will be a lot more prominent. To combat this, teams will draft players with the skill set to purely combat pure passing situations (like Deion Sanders - amazing in coverage but tackling left room to be desired). Then eventually a player will come around and absolutely dominate because the defenders they are going up against just aren’t built to stop the run. Purely sceptical and most likely won’t happen but just a thought.
Definitely a possibility
My team, the steelers have a top 5-8D for one reason only, teams keep trying to pass on them. Our Pass D isn't even all that great, but they'll sack you/get pressure and force a bad throw and end the drive. Meanwhile over the past few years good-very good RBs (McCaffery, Chubb, Dobbins) have taken their lunch money.
Bills fans often say, its OK we don't have a RB, [insert journeyman here] gets 4.2yd/carry. Did you ever watch teams play the Bills, they just ignore the RB and send 5-7 guys straight at Allen. Sure its fine against the Raiders, but its also the reason why Allen often looks like a## against a real D.
still listening. so far my counterpoints (don't necessarily disagree totally) are:
1: football isn't a math game. it's extremely emotional and physical. a great or terrible running game totally changes the tone of the game and has a big impact on the fatigue of the opposing players
2: there are situations where running the ball is objectively better regardless of overall effeciency
3: offenses need balance. we'll see what happens if someone decides to just throw on every play in the nfl
4: a lot of the Super Bowl winning teams had rbs that played well. Pacheco was really good last year and holding the Eagles' RBs down was key for KC. flip that and Philly almost certainly wins
Akers' inability to get anything going seriously hampered the Rams' offense
Fournette was bruising and efficient
Damien Williams dramatically outperformed Mostert. swap that and the Niners win. actually the inability to run was a huge deal in that game since they had a double digit lead in the 4th
i think we've come back around to underestimating the impact running backs have on football
finishing the video this isn't necessarily a counterargument but just additional context. i'd agree that paying RBs big $ is generally a bad idea but the position is still important
the Niners are a good example this year of a team that would go from contender to not without their superstar RB
Hey! I just discovered your channel! Keep up the good work. Your heart (and brain) is in a good place,just keep working on improving the video's quality and you'll get there!
Best of luck
Thank you!
Didnt realize you were in the legal field! Im in law school now but my background is in stats. Loved this breakdown!
Thank you! Feel free to reach out for any help or advice with law school!
Here when you have 600 subs. Because you’re about to blow up
Thank you!
There is one thing that rules football. Points. Put points on the board and keep points off.
The fact that an average passing game is more productive than a great running game, it is far easier to move the ball and score throwing than rushing.
One thing that pads the rushing stats, teams that are winning, run more to burn clock. Teams that are losing, throw more to try and score quickly and save clock. That is the point where slowing down the game is a winning strategy. So any stat in the 4th quarter will depend more on the score than on what is actually important to get a lead in the first place.
Production matters and running helps the offense in being productive. The short yardage first downs and keeping the D off balance. However, if a D focuses on the pass, they will not have great run stopping stats, but they will have the one stat that matters. Points.
It isn’t that RBs and the running game aren’t important. It is that passing is so much more important.
Great vid. Surprised this was a low sub account, better research quality than a lot of bigger ones.
Thank you, that really means a lot! Definitely was a ton of research, but I enjoyed it!
I was floored when you said you only had 100 followers man…this video is so well thought out and edited. Add me to the sub list because I love content like this!
Thank you, I appreciate it!
Love the analysis. One thing i didnt see you address when comparing the money and stats was the receiving impact some of the RBs have. Derrick Henry would fit this analysis perfectly because he doesn't contribute much in the passing game. However, Jonathan Taylor and Christian McCaffrey are very good receivers as well as RBs. All of Henry's salary is being used for rushing. Only part of Taylor's and McCaffrey's salaries are being used for rushing. You addressed the 4 areas RBs contribute, but allocated all of their salary to 1 area.
Probably need to do something like 'Salary*Rushing attemtps/total snaps on field' to figure out what part of the RBs salary is being used for rushing. I dont think this will change your overall conclusion, but i think it will show the top RBs aren't as inefficient money-wise as your analysis shows, with the exception of Henry.
This was a very interesting breakdown of why passing is more efficient. I wonder if you could do an analysis to determine the best ratio of run-to-pass? In other words, the data shows that passing is generally more efficient, but the value in running (aside from gaining yards) is that it 1) keeps the clock running, thereby decreasing the opponent's # of offensive plays, 2) it sets up the passing game for success by tempering the defense's expectations, and 3) is *perhaps* more efficient in pivotal situations such as 4th & short or goal line.
To that end, what is the ideal % of run/pass plays in any given game plan?
Great thoughts - I've added it to my list of things to look into! Thank you for your suggestion, I'll see if I can find anything!
Excellent video... earned my subscription
Thank you!
Sounds like RB rookie salary should be a sliding salary based on the full price of the franchise tag for pick 1, and like 20% for mr irrelevant.
They should be the second highest paid position on their rookie contract.
How are you such a small chanel whaaaat. Subscribed keep it up bro
Thank you, I appreciate it!
the best part of running is that it distracts from passing
Great high quality vid bro
Thank you!
Very impressive work. Easy subscribe for the thorough research and great display of it. Can’t wait to watch the page grow and see what content you’ll put out next!
Thank you, much appreciated!
Awesome video man, great work
Thank you!
Liked and subscribed for the efforts put forth to create this content.
Thank you!
New England is the perfect example. They had almost never pay high for RB, other teams started catching on and slowly fading out high paying star runningback.
Solid video, you obviously put a ton of work into it. Keep it up!
Thank you!
Wow dude,,,, this information has never been more clear that the beginning of this season…… very interesting stuff here, and I suspect will influence how I draft my teams moving forward 🤯
Thank you!
Franchises undervalue valuable running backs. The running game is still very important in Football, but teams won't act like it. Paying bank for an Elite Running back IS worth it.
I love Nick Chubb he’s my favorite offensive player and he rules, I’m glad he’s gonna be ok. That injury looked horrible
He’s the best pure rusher of the football in the game and one of the best players in the NFL. I’m glad to hear he’s going to be okay as well and I’m praying for him to have a speedy recovery!
I knew something was off when Saquon’s negotiations were slowing down. Seeing Jones get super paid without Saquon was wild
Great video jumbo package man
Thank you!
Same conclusion I came to after digging into this, you not only hit on everything but provided even better data. Great job!
Thank you!
This was awesome. If I were a GM, I could get a Darren Sproles type, and two pass-blocking full backs, mix a bunch of packages for them, pay less than $10 mil for all three of them, and get 95% of one elite RB.
Great video. I personally think they could make some carve outs either for the position or for players as a whole. One idea I had was based on number of touches or number of hits taken, so you'd be getting paid as a RB/WR/TE for every time you are getting the ball. This could be based on a pool of money each team has to set aside that's not part of the salary cap and you basically get a % of that pool based on the number of touches you had during the season. You could limit to RBs or to players on rookie contracts. How large this pool is, I'm not sure. Perhaps $20 to $30 million. This would ideally be new money on top of the salary cap. Yes, that would require a big push by the NFLPA, but the money is absolutely there.
I'm uncertain that there is a perfect solution but I think it's a decent fix. In particular, the thing I like about this idea vs some others is it's aimed more at helping make sure the guys are getting money while they are young and productive vs trying to make sure the few elite guys are getting paid closer to WRs or something.
There is still the issue of well "is a player a WR or RB?" but few guys truly blur that line. And amongst the guys that do, I think that the issue might be best left to the agents and NFLPA to work out the semantics of those situations.
If implemented properly, though, this system would be heavily rewarding the younger, productive RBs. Another thing I love about it is that those random young RBs that come in as UDFAs could make some really good money in the short year or two or three they might be in the spotlight. There are so many guys that will be a backup thrust into starting for a year or two and then next thing you know, it's on to the next guy. And if that's the case then I think this would help make sure they're getting paid because even if you're the guy filling in for Derrick Henry for three games and you get 90 touches, this would adapt to that and make sure you got paid for it.
If you make a video discussing various ideas for how to fix this issue, I'd love if you mentioned my idea (assuming there's not someone more prominent that's already mentioned this idea). Just say that it was from Jojo.
Really interesting idea! I think (not 100% sure) that they do something similar right now based on number of snaps, so if a player is very low paid, but takes a starter’s amount of snaps they get paid more and it doesn’t count towards cap. I heard something similar to this, but haven’t looked into it much so I admittedly could be completely wrong, but your idea sounds really interesting!
the salary cap literally exists to ensure owners get 52% of the revenue and players get no more than 48% of the revenue. they are not adding more money to the salary cap because some running backs cry lol
Good job. I hope this helps with the algorithm
Thank you, I appreciate it!
Amazing video how do u have < 1k subs? Keep grinding u got a new fan
Thank you!
Fascinating video. Subscribed
Thank you!
How do you factor in the value of play action passes based on the ground game, seems like that’s almost impossible to factor in without a host of much more complex analysis
Honestly, I agree. Football is one of those games in general where it's so hard to take into account player's presence in general. For example, Tyreek Hill dramatically changes what a defense will scheme up. To your point, the "threat" of the RB running the ball, requiring LBs to respect them in the play action game or requiring teams to stack the box has a large impact that may or may not be captured in these stats. I think the box stacking portion is captured in advanced metrics such as RYOE, but not so much the PA impact as you stated. Good point!
Using Alvin Kamaras mug shot… 😅
If advanced metrics suggest RB add more value with passing, it's reasonable to predict that the league will increasingly use RBs who are capable in route running, catching, and pass protection. As long as that RB can run at a below average-to-average level as well, teams can still line them up in the backfield as a credible option. This way, you force defenses to at least leave enough in the box that the line can't just win hat on hat + extra blocker for free, but the RB can pick up yards on routes.
We've already seen teams do it with backs in the past and present to a degree.
There is currently tremendous selective pressure in the league to make RBs more valuable, and QBs less. If a team could figure out a way to do so w/o sacrificing offensive production, they could field equal to better quality offensive rosters for less money. However, it's easier to say that than to do it. We've seen a little bit with offenses using designed QB runs + threat of that to make the passing game easier. Lamar Jackson is only above average if you only let him drop back in the pocket and pretend he's Brady. Still a viable starter, but it's leaving a lot of value he can give off the field when used that way. When you add the read option, RPO, designed runs to the mix and force the defense to always take them seriously, his job is easier. Not only does he have an easier time throwing, but they get solid production on those run plays too. Jalen Hurts was similar last year.
I expect the coaches on the front of that cutting edge will select for RBs that can function like lesser WRs too. Running looks like it will be a "constraint" option for a long time under current NFL rules, but constraint plays have value. The forced honesty makes your more often called plays more valuable.
Plus, you draft a guy in late rounds like Tyler Allgeier who can break 1000 yards for cheap.
Its a shame how the rule changes & evolution of the game has done a huge disservice to the RB position, & before that the FB position. Really glad i got to witness the last 2 truly legendary RBs in L.T. & A.P.
You would think that the "running back by committee" approach would get really popular in the next few years. Three (maybe even four) RBs, none of whom get more than say 150 carries per year. Not just one featured back who, like Jumbo mentioned, if he was lost it would derail the whole season.
Fewer touches, lowered chance of getting injured, trained to excel at pass blocking, good at being checkdown options. Less chance of getting into the "rhythm" of the game (but that's probably a really tough thing to quantify), but a coach could ride a guy who's gashing the defense until he rotates the next guys in.
I think the running game still has value. It's a means of advancing the ball, and totally cutting that out of your game plan makes a team predictable. But it doesn't have as much value as it used to. It's a position that used to generate stars, but is heading toward a position that doesn't gain much respect. Look at the moves to incorporate WRs into the running game (Deebo Samuel and Cordarelle Patterson). How long until we see WRs with upwards of 75 carries in a season?
On some teams they’d be best friends and some teams they’d resent each other lol it would be wild
@@MrGoodeats I think you're more right on the second than the first. For most of these guys, they have to be top dog. They've been alpha all their life, and sharing the spotlight to help a team win is just anathema to them.
But if a team could find three guys, maybe draft them all out of Division 2, tell them how many touches to expect and that they'd all see good playing time and that team had a chance, that success would be convincing, no?
@@VinceLyle2161 i think so too. i like the taking the D2 guy. or even take guys who are solid but doesn’t star and we’re team guys on solid teams with good recruiting history so you know they’re talented
@@MrGoodeats It only has to happen once, then every coach will copy it like the Tampa 2 defense or the RPO.
Very methodical, and concise, insightful video , thanks
Thank you!
love this video man keep it up
Thank you!
Alvin pictures! Bro dirty 😅 8:15
I think the position will evolve between half slot receiver half rb, kind of like how te evolved being hybrid receivers.
Kinda like how Ben Johnson says he wants to use Jahmyr Gibbs, right? Thats interesting, almost like an H-back or F-TE, that could line up in the backfield, inline alongside the trenches, or out in the open field on scrimmage.
I appreciate the deep dive but I don’t think we need to look at all the numbers to see why RBs are being devalued. And the league has changed in a lot of ways (ie. rules that benefit the offense and more specifically the passing game). If you watch old games you see a trend that most teams ran the ball to set up the pass and now it’s flopped to teams have to pass to set up the run. I still think running the ball will be vitally important to the success of a team but I’m not sure that will be reflected in the RB market.
I've long been under the impression that the running game has diminished at least in part due to rule changes that benefit the passing game with the reason being that the NFL thinks the passing game sells more tickets. I can't point to any rule changes off the top of my head though, but I have a vague memory of the NFL encouraging the enforcement of pass defensive interference in the last 10-20 years.
How replaceable are WR? Lots of them not living up to their contacts, which are larger than RB.
Great video. I know you touched on the O line a bit but do you think the diminishing value of the position is due to smaller and faster o/d-lines accounting for mobile QBs?
Thank you! To answer you question, I’d say yes. I think, the explosion of the pass game and dynamic QBs have made it such that defenses don’t use true nose tackles anymore and try to use more hybrid inside/outside players which makes it easier to run, thus making it easier to just plug and play RBs
I guess the value comes with having the defense on their toes always double guessing if it’s a play action or run
Perhaps! Definitely difficult to pick up on stuff like that in these advanced stats, so you could be on to something!
you did a great job with this
Thank you!
A good running game will allow you to shorten a game, and let you hang with a team that is more talented or better coached than you.
It also helps keep an elite opposing quarterback on the sideline where he’s completely harmless and rests your defense and keeps those d linemen quick, whereas it allows your offense to keep momentum and it exhausts and demoralizes the opposing defense.
I don’t know if the full story of the run game can be told with statistics alone.
Loved it, you got a new sub
Thank you!
The only two solutions I see are 1)Having RBs take more snaps at the WR position to increase longevity(works for some, not for all)
2)Shortening rookie contracts: While some players are gonna get overpaid, it forces RBs to get paid in their prime(also this should be true across the board as rookie contracts cover the average NFL career and after it’s like okay you’re 24 figure it out)
I mean, the easy first solution is that running backs aren't a position when franchise tagging, they're simply receivers. Gets around teams using a franchise tag to underpay someone, in just flat opposition to the entire argument of teams being able to use the tag.
It's a common trend amongst all the pro sports leagues to favor offense over defense utilizing rule changes and various other means. The RB position and it's decreased value is an indirect consequence of such.
Great video. The CBA really does a poor job of taking care of players on their rookie contract. I think they could help them out with some sort of workhorse clause in rookie contracts so they can make a bit more in the early-stage in the career since they don't have a late-stage of their career. Acknowledge that a tackle in the NFL is practically a car wreck and doing it a lot is bad for your longevity. Doing it more than X times in a year gets a bonus, or a year of service time toward the pension or something. Mostly it would be RBs who can get it, but Justin Fields or some LBs might grab it occasionally was well. Wouldn't solve the problem, but a bandaid is better than nothing.
I didn’t realize the Patriots had LeGarrette Blount on such a cheap deal
Same!
2:14 as a Bucs fan that was hillarious! Fuck the 'Aints.
Glad you enjoyed!
A shift is happening with how rushing offense is conducted. More NFL teams are favoring the zone run, to the point it's becoming the standard. Zone run requires a different skill set than conventional running schemes. All the jukes, spins, hurdles, and nifty moves are useless. Rather, vision, patience, acceleration, and the ability to maintain momentum while metering speed are the prime skills. Why pay someone like Barkely for his skills when any RB1 from college who is proficient in zone run can out produce him when paired with a good 0-line? Value for RBs will come up as college is going zone run and producing better zone run backs. A high skilled zone runner will demand a high salary in the future as the position becomes better defined.
Yeah I agree. I think the devaluation of running backs is less about the run game not mattering and how about how easily replaceable running backs are. Why pay a guy $12-15 million a year when a guy on a rookie deal can give you basically the same production.
LOL POSTING AKs MUGSHOT IS HILARIOUS.
I think there are only 2 real counter arguments to the notion that the running game is completely unimportant. 1.) it keeps the defense honest and allows for more efficiency when they do throw. 2.) It allows for better clock management once you obtain the lead. As such, you can't have a horrendous running game and better is always better, but optimizing the limited salary resource likely does not weight the expenditure on RBs heavily beyond some basic minimum.
As someone who played running back, I hate to hear this. As someone who has played ncaa and madden for years, i have been doing this for ablong time with RBs.
Great video! subscribed
Thank you!
Very fascinating video
Thank you!
Is the dropback epa independent of rush epa though? I'm not that big of a stats nerd, but does this argument take into account how the threat of a run game sets up the passing game? If teams could only pass the ball, defenses would always set up in formation to cover the pass. In other words I dont know that one can argue that passing/running the ball is more valuable because they arent independent of each other.
The problem with only using stats without looking into game tape and game situations is that the numbers make it seem like the best offense will only pass 100% of the time, when intuitively this does not make sense.
The benefits of a good running back are providing balance to the offense, provide lower chance of turning the ball over, and (possibly) higher chance of success in short yardage situations. Also, the salary numbers on yards/attempt included guys like Ekeler who are huge for their teams passing games as well.
I think the main point is that individual RBs are completely replaceable, not that the running game as a whole needs to be phased out. I agree with your second point, not sure why receiving numbers for RBs weren’t discussed
@@smalldesklampthe entire beginning of the video was about yards per attempt without mentioning the increased chance of turnovers by passing (picks and fumbles vs only fumbles) not to mention sacks are not attempts and the increased chance of success at third and short by running with a good back.
The biggest factor is that a team with a good running back has to be feared of a running the ball. If you have a terrible running back, but great wideouts the defense can drop 7 into coverage and not worry Abt the run. The Oline and rb are just as important as a qb and a wr just look at the bears a mid qb mid wr below avg run game below average rb and they’re 0-4 meanwhile the Vikings who have the opposite spectrum okay line great wideouts ok-great qb and they are 1-4 so at the end of the day scheme is most important and getting pieces that fit the scheme
The only issue I have is the comparison to the Quaterback no position in football is close to the comparison of high end vs low end talent like the Qb position. Do RB vs WR or something if you can.
I agree. Some others in the comments had raised this same point and I think it’s a fair criticism of this video. I’ll keep this in mind for my next similar video!
O line seems way more valuable
The thing that the analytics doesn’t seem to account for is that the running game makes the passing game more effective. So when you say “a run makes you less likely to score on the drive than a pass,” that may be true, but it makes your passes more efficient for the rest of the game and therefore you could be gaining net EPA over the course of the game, season, etc. even if in the vacuum of that drive it is less efficient. Until analytics can model all of this, the argument is insufficient. No sane football mind thinks that running is not worthwhile. So if analytics disagrees with the consensus, there is a flaw in the algorithms.
Great essay. This is something I had been suspecting after getting heavily into fantasy football. I love running backs but the position really only seems to be an accessory to a strong passing came. The most useful plays outside of 3rd and short conversions are check downs and crack blocks. I would suspect that teams will be moving toward RBs that look more like tight ends and who do more to protect the QB in the pocket than to get the ball directly.
Joe Gibbs invented the H-back in the 80's
The Steelers are a great example of a team turning rb’s into stars.
I don't think the value of the running game has diminished because many teams are running far more than they did 10 years ago. They're just running the ball differently now. What's not shown in the statistics is that the screen game is bigger than ever, as well as jet sweeps which register as passes but are basically just runs.
I think the problem for running backs boils down to analytics, scheme, and supply. Analytics shows that even the best running backs only contribute maybe a third to the average yards per carry compared to the oline. Coaches are also relying on scheme, misdirection, formations, and motions to run the ball rather than running downhill. There are also very many quality runners that can do the job, including WRs that can take some carries as well. The running back skill set is simply too flooded with talent. More and more teams are realizing that you can just pick up a journeyman and get the same out of them.
How is it now different now than the days of Tony Dorsett with 1,000+ yards for 9 seasons? Emmit Smith for 12 seasons? Marcus Allen, Walter Payton, Roger Craig, etc. who played for a long time?