3 starting RB's?

[chris98251]

Running backs get injured when they receive instead of deliver the hits, Walter Payton was not the biggest guy but always delivered a hit, Lynch did the same thing as did Curtis Martin and John Riggins, all had long careers, guys like Earl Campbell who was physical but took hits and rarely delivered had many injuries. Rawls had leg injuries that were freaky in nature but runs the right way, a little luck is needed as well.

 

[SeaChat]

I'm maybe one of the last really naive fans out here who believes this competition mantra the Seahawks coaching staff preaches. Every player being able to compete for his place on the field and getting it if he has earned it.

I flash back to 2016 and Troymaine Pope who clearly established himself as the number one running back for the Seattle Seahawks, and was subsequently cut from the team following their last preseason game where had a major impact on our wining that game.

If all things are equal this year and Troymaine gets his chance to compete for that position again, and again, earns it, I wonder what the coaches will do this time around. A repeat of last year? or will they actually let the guy have what he earned. If others are able to out perform him then so be it, give it to them, but don't ignore this guys hard work and accomplishments like they did last year.

I just want a good running game back on the field this year, and which ever player that can best deliver it to us, then yabba dabba doo! I just don't want to see a re-Pete of last years events, where Troymaine earns his shot at the big time ends up once again tossed aside, for what appeared to be some playing favorites, based upon pedigree and individual coaching preferences, of who they wanted to be be best and not necessarily who was best. It was a bad decision last year and it will be again this year if they repeat it.

Follow your own rules of competition and let the best man/men play at their positions that they have proved themselves to be superior at. I'm really happy to see Eddie Lacy in Seattle, he has great promise, but don't overlook players who might out perform him competing for the spot.

 

[The Breh]

I'm maybe one of the last really naive fans out here who believes this competition mantra the Seahawks coaching staff preaches. Every player being able to compete for his place on the field and getting it if he has earned it.

I flash back to 2016 and Troymaine Pope who clearly established himself as the number one running back for the Seattle Seahawks, and was subsequently cut from the team following their last preseason game where had a major impact on our wining that game.

If all things are equal this year and Troymaine gets his chance to compete for that position again, and again, earns it, I wonder what the coaches will do this time around. A repeat of last year? or will they actually let the guy have what he earned. If others are able to out perform him then so be it, give it to them, but don't ignore this guys hard work and accomplishments like they did last year.

I just want a good running game back on the field this year, and which ever player that can best deliver it to us, then yabba dabba doo! I just don't want to see a re-Pete of last years events, where Troymaine earns his shot at the big time ends up once again tossed aside, for what appeared to be some playing favorites, based upon pedigree and individual coaching preferences, of who they wanted to be be best and not necessarily who was best. It was a bad decision last year and it will be again this year if they repeat it.

Follow your own rules of competition and let the best man/men play at their positions that they have proved themselves to be superior at. I'm really happy to see Eddie Lacy in Seattle, he has great promise, but don't overlook players who might out perform him competing for the spot.

I thought the general consensus around here was that Collins got the nod over him because of where we drafted him.
And then in some strange work of fate he was the only one to not get injured. Pete lucked out on that one.
And now there's Carson this year who it seems folks are pulling for.
Either way the league will be watching us closely and snatching a few of them.
I'm guessing we keep the obvious 3 + Carson for the exact reason as last year. Collins stashed on the PS.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

I'm maybe one of the last really naive fans out here who believes this competition mantra the Seahawks coaching staff preaches. Every player being able to compete for his place on the field and getting it if he has earned it.

I flash back to 2016 and Troymaine Pope who clearly established himself as the number one running back for the Seattle Seahawks, and was subsequently cut from the team following their last preseason game where had a major impact on our wining that game.

If all things are equal this year and Troymaine gets his chance to compete for that position again, and again, earns it, I wonder what the coaches will do this time around. A repeat of last year? or will they actually let the guy have what he earned. If others are able to out perform him then so be it, give it to them, but don't ignore this guys hard work and accomplishments like they did last year.

I just want a good running game back on the field this year, and which ever player that can best deliver it to us, then yabba dabba doo! I just don't want to see a re-Pete of last years events, where Troymaine earns his shot at the big time ends up once again tossed aside, for what appeared to be some playing favorites, based upon pedigree and individual coaching preferences, of who they wanted to be be best and not necessarily who was best. It was a bad decision last year and it will be again this year if they repeat it.

Follow your own rules of competition and let the best man/men play at their positions that they have proved themselves to be superior at. I'm really happy to see Eddie Lacy in Seattle, he has great promise, but don't overlook players who might out perform him competing for the spot.

I thought the general consensus around here was that Collins got the nod over him because of where we drafted him.
And then in some strange work of fate he was the only one to not get injured. Pete lucked out on that one.
And now there's Carson this year who it seems folks are pulling for.
Either way the league will be watching us closely and snatching a few of them.
I'm guessing we keep the obvious 3 + Carson for the exact reason as last year. Collins stashed on the PS.

I think Coach Pete wanted Pope on the PS and when he was cut, the Vikes or Bills snagged him up. Now Pope is on the Colts. Would have been nice to see him here again as it would have created more competition.

On ACollins, He spread his balance out the last couple of games last season which gave him power and push instead of the baby step dancing. That is what I noticed when he made the TD. His balance was forward and strong. We may just see that in preseason...I hope so anyway.

 

[ACFan]

I thought the general consensus around here was that Collins got the nod over him because of where we drafted him.
And then in some strange work of fate he was the only one to not get injured. Pete lucked out on that one.
.

I wouldn't call it luck, AC has never missed a game due to injury since he started playing RB his Jr year in HS.

show me a RB who never gets hurt and I'll show you a great RB.

On ACollins, He spread his balance out the last couple of games last season which gave him power and push instead of the baby step dancing. That is what I noticed when he made the TD. His balance was forward and strong. We may just see that in preseason...I hope so anyway.

I credit that to finally getting a feel for the offense and knowing where he is going. Instincts and vision, his strongest attributes IMO, can't kick in until you are comfortable with the offense. He started running like he did in college, that's how I'd put it.

I think he'll have a big year this year, and expect him to establish himself as one of the top 2 running threats fairly quickly.

 

[c_hawkbob]

There's a difference between 3 starting quality RB's in a rotation and 3 starting RB's.

The first, while possible, is assuming the very best case scenario for all three backs; good for us if it happens but the odds are paper thin.

The second just ain't happening.

 

[ACFan]

There's a difference between 3 starting quality RB's in a rotation and 3 starting RB's.

The first, while possible, is assuming the very best case scenario for all three backs; good for us if it happens but the odds are paper thin.

The second just ain't happening.

well said

 

[IBleedBlueAndGreen]

I you have three starting running backs, then really it means that you don't have one starting running back.

 

[hawk45]

I thought the general consensus around here was that Collins got the nod over him because of where we drafted him.
And then in some strange work of fate he was the only one to not get injured. Pete lucked out on that one.
.

I wouldn't call it luck, AC has never missed a game due to injury since he started playing RB his Jr year in HS.

show me a RB who never gets hurt and I'll show you a great RB.

On ACollins, He spread his balance out the last couple of games last season which gave him power and push instead of the baby step dancing. That is what I noticed when he made the TD. His balance was forward and strong. We may just see that in preseason...I hope so anyway.

I credit that to finally getting a feel for the offense and knowing where he is going. Instincts and vision, his strongest attributes IMO, can't kick in until you are comfortable with the offense. He started running like he did in college, that's how I'd put it.

I think he'll have a big year this year, and expect him to establish himself as one of the top 2 running threats fairly quickly.

Christine Michael stayed healthy. Is he a great RB?

I thought Collins had the least to offer of the backs last year, but he did offer durability and that wasn't nothing (to me at least). And, he went from a guy who I never wanted to touch the ball ever being so slow out of the backfield, to a guy that showed a little bit of slash I thought towards the end.

With the annual OL reshuffle I expect it to take a while for us to find our run-blocking (and perhaps never find our pass-blocking) and given that, I have zero expectation that Rawls, Lacy, and Prosise will all remain healthy. I think Collins may very well find himself with some carries next year.

 

[The Breh]

I thought the general consensus around here was that Collins got the nod over him because of where we drafted him.
And then in some strange work of fate he was the only one to not get injured. Pete lucked out on that one.
.

I wouldn't call it luck, AC has never missed a game due to injury since he started playing RB his Jr year in HS.

show me a RB who never gets hurt and I'll show you a great RB.

So....you're calling Collins a "great" RB then ?
Word, that was why he was our last ditch effort.
Must be why we drafted Carson as well.....
Look-I'm not dissin the kid but I realize I'm replying to someone who's username is "ACFan"
He's gonna have to do something substantial to break out of that #4 spot. And Carson may take that too :rumble:

 

[ACFan]

So....you're calling Collins a "great" RB then ?
:

absolutely, but certainly not because he went one year in the NFL without getting hurt.

straight up serious, find me a RB who has not missed a game due to injury in 5 years. One who has played and produced for those 5 years, and I'll show you a great RB.

First off, you may not be able to find a another RB who's played and produced for 5 years who hasn't missed a game due to injury, but if you do, it'll likely be a household name.

I won't even bother looking it up, but I'm certain in the last 5 years, AC has much more carries and yards than Christine Micheal, and zero injuries.

Don't misunderstand me as saying AC has been great up to this point in the NFL, he had a typical rookie year.

I'm saying he has the attributes of a great RB, and it's a logical assumption that it will translate to this level.

******************

And it IS a logical projection, again, we researched this point last year, on the point of how many RBs had entered college at 18, had a 1,000 yards each year, never missed a game due to injury, and then entered the draft as a JR.

Not very many guys are on that list, and the two worst RBs we could find on that list were Monte Ball and Laurence Maroney, both former 1st round draft picks, who had successful NFL careers, everyone else on that list had hall of fame type careers.

 

[Hasselbeck]

I thought the general consensus around here was that Collins got the nod over him because of where we drafted him.
And then in some strange work of fate he was the only one to not get injured. Pete lucked out on that one.
.

I wouldn't call it luck, AC has never missed a game due to injury since he started playing RB his Jr year in HS.

show me a RB who never gets hurt and I'll show you a great RB.

So....you're calling Collins a "great" RB then ?

To be fair, Collins had more rushing yards than future HOF'er Troymaine Pope. So maybe its not so far fetched.

 

[Josea16]

I thought the general consensus around here was that Collins got the nod over him because of where we drafted him.
And then in some strange work of fate he was the only one to not get injured. Pete lucked out on that one.
.

I wouldn't call it luck, AC has never missed a game due to injury since he started playing RB his Jr year in HS.

show me a RB who never gets hurt and I'll show you a great RB.

So....you're calling Collins a "great" RB then ?

To be fair, Collins had more rushing yards than future HOF'er Troymaine Pope. So maybe its not so far fetched.

Is Troymaine Pope even in the league at this point?

 

[Jimjones0384]

I you have three starting running backs, then really it means that you don't have one starting running back.

That's fantasy football logic. You can never have too many good running backs.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I you have three starting running backs, then really it means that you don't have one starting running back.

That's fantasy football logic. You can never have too many good running backs.

Maybe on a pass heavy team you're right.

But Pete and John have SPECIFICALLY built this team, and especially this offense around a certain punishing run the ball first philosophy............and that philosophy only works if you have a Marshawn type back that wears out a defense.

IMO you can't be successful with this sort of philosophy with shuttling RB's in and out. You need that one guy to carry that rock 80% of the time. Hopefully we've found that in Lacy. If not, it's gonna be the same as last year where the offense is ineffective for long stretches of games.

 

[scutterhawk]

I you have three starting running backs, then really it means that you don't have one starting running back.

That's fantasy football logic. You can never have too many good running backs.

Maybe on a pass heavy team you're right.

But Pete and John have SPECIFICALLY built this team, and especially this offense around a certain punishing run the ball first philosophy............and that philosophy only works if you have a Marshawn type back that wears out a defense.

IMO you can't be successful with this sort of philosophy with shuttling RB's in and out. You need that one guy to carry that rock 80% of the time. Hopefully we've found that in Lacy. If not, it's gonna be the same as last year where the offense is ineffective for long stretches of games.

That's nonsensical....You're surmising that there is no possibility of having two starting caliber running backs on the same roster?
It goes without saying, durability will become an issue with ALL who carry the rock....EVEN MARSHAWN LYNCH.
There is indeed a wearing down of energy to Defenses that a good Back can deliver, but that's a two edged sword, as it also takes it's toll on that Backs energy.....Like I said before, If you have a Pounding Back like Lacey tearing it up for the first half of a game, you can't convince me that a fresh Back like a HEALTHY Rawls, AC, Carson, Brown or the like, wouldn't put a worn down Defense at a huge disadvantage.
RB by Committee is not a new concept, it has been successfully done for YEARS.
As I see it, RB by committee (sharing the load) is a great way of extending the careers of your RB's

 

[Sgt. Largent]

[
RB by Committee is not a new concept, it has been successfully done for YEARS.
As I see it, RB by committee (sharing the load) is a great way of extending the careers of your RB's

RB's need their touches, they need to get into the flow of the game, they need to work in tandem with the QB and line.

Yeah if you're the Patriots, you can go with the hot back for a week or two, then switch it up.

That's not who we are, we need that primary back to get into that rhythm and flow of the game. That requires 20-25 touches a game. Then if you want to use Prosise on 3rd down passing, or Rawls for a couple series a game to spell Lacy, that works.

I guarantee you that's what Pete wants, he wants Lacy to do what Marshawn did for us in his prime. He doesn't want a turnstyle of backs in and out, or RB by committee. That just doesn't fit Pete's philosophy.

 

[ACFan]

agree with the sarge.

heck, ideally you'd like to have one guy who could play every down and not wear out, like a Marshawn, or any number of great RBs you could name from the past.

We may not have that guy now, but should be closer to being able to emulate it this year by (ahem) committee.

Ask Wilson what that feeling of continuity does for his comfort level, always having the same guy back there who can pick up the bruising yards and provide protection.

I'd think a true RB by committee, with a bunch of RBs with different styles and experience levels, would be a QB"s worst nightmare.

This would be my committee, Lacy 1A and Collins 1B. Pretty close in styles, both capable of staying in the game on 3rd down and IMO the only two backs capable of holding up to a heavy workload, week in and week out.

Rawls would be 2A and Prosise would be 2B, change of pace and 3rd down guys.

But my goal would be to start Lacy and ride him until the game is secure every week.

Wilson's style is best coupled with a consistent, power run game. I think that's what Pete wants and what Sarge seemed to be suggesting Pete wanted too, we agree.

 

[Seymour]

[
RB by Committee is not a new concept, it has been successfully done for YEARS.
As I see it, RB by committee (sharing the load) is a great way of extending the careers of your RB's

RB's need their touches, they need to get into the flow of the game, they need to work in tandem with the QB and line.

Yeah if you're the Patriots, you can go with the hot back for a week or two, then switch it up.

That's not who we are, we need that primary back to get into that rhythm and flow of the game. That requires 20-25 touches a game. Then if you want to use Prosise on 3rd down passing, or Rawls for a couple series a game to spell Lacy, that works.

I guarantee you that's what Pete wants, he wants Lacy to do what Marshawn did for us in his prime. He doesn't want a turnstyle of backs in and out, or RB by committee. That just doesn't fit Pete's philosophy.

That is not what Bevell thinks! :twisted:

"We are going to be running back by committee," Bevell said at a Seahawks Town Hall event Wednesday night. "We really like what Christine Michael is doing right now. ... He has breakaway speed and power behind his pads."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000356154/article/darrell-bevell-seahawks-going-to-rb-committee

 

[scutterhawk]

agree with the sarge.

heck, ideally you'd like to have one guy who could play every down and not wear out, like a Marshawn, or any number of great RBs you could name from the past.

We may not have that guy now, but should be closer to being able to emulate it this year by (ahem) committee.


IF (ahem) we go with RB "By Committee", and it proves out, you wouldn't stay with it???
And too, if the Feature Back stays healthy because he isn't taking a constant pounding, that's a good thing.

Ask Wilson what that feeling of continuity does for his comfort level, always having the same guy back there who can pick up the bruising yards and provide protection.

I'd think a true RB by committee, with a bunch of RBs with different styles and experience levels, would be a QB"s worst nightmare.

Worst Nightmare, WTH?? the act of handing the ball off isn't any different from one Back to another... Run "Styles" wouldn't be on Russell Wilson's plate....Wilson's "Worst Nightmare" is seeing his O-Line being breeched time and again, and he has nowhere to escape to.

Pete's "Philosophy" is having a Run Game that works, and IF "RB By Committee" is working, I'd have to believe that he'd stay with it?
Also, Defenses studying game films, would have to prepare for not one, but two players breaking through, AND even if the O-Line is having some sporadic struggles, Wilson would still be the beneficiary of a working Run Game.
However it shakes out, I'll be here and ready to eat crow if I'm mistaken.