`
Connect With Us!
IOS Store
Share Thread:
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Why do running backs have such a short shelf life?
#1

Why do running backs have such a short shelf life?
It puzzles me why we are seeing Runningbacks lasting 7-8 years in the league, and that's it, and those are on the higher side. The old guys used to carry the ball way more. Has the speed and strength of the players gotten to the point where it's that big of a jump from 10+ years ago?
Reply
#2

RE: Why do running backs have such a short shelf life?
Good question. When Robert Smith won the rushing title he retired the very next season. I was shocked but he said he did not want knee or hip trouble the rest of his life. Earl Campbell suffered a lot after he retired. Maybe that is the reason?
Or, maybe the young guys have more speed and resilience?
Reply
#3

RE: Why do running backs have such a short shelf life?
I think it's a combo of several things:

1) The bigger, stronger, faster players on defense. The sentiment used to be that every time someone gets tackled in an NFL game it's like a car crash at 30 mph ... and that's been around for a while, so I wouldn't be surprised if it's more like 40 or 50 mph these days.

2) Robert Smith was worried about hips and knees ... these days it's CTE and brain injuries. Walking is one thing, losing your faculties and potentially becoming suicidal is another.

3) Spread offenses - Everybody is chucking the ball up these days. Take a look at the AFC rushing leaders through this past weekend and nobody has even cracked 1,000 yards yet with only two games to play. Back in the day, the Marshall Faulks, the Curtis Martins, the Jerome Bettises and the Corey Dillons of the world would have passed 1,000 yards like three weeks ago.

3) Economics - look at what the Steelers paid LeVeon Bell $12.1 million for last year versus what they are paying James Conner $578,000 for this year.

Granted, that's an extreme example and Conner will obviously get a huge raise now that Bell is gone, but the point is, unless you are a "rarefied air" superstar like Brady, Brees, etc., there is almost always going to be a cheaper and equally productive replacement sooner rather than later.

Very, very few players actually see all of the money in their contracts.

It stinks but that's the reality of trying to figure out how to pay 52 players on a football team compared to 25 for baseball or 12 for basketball.

Plus, the injuries make it impossible to guarantee everybody a lot of money.

Personally I miss the RB era as a Lions fan ... we had a pretty decent one in Mr. Sanders!
Reply
#4

RE: Why do running backs have such a short shelf life?
Running backs, by far, take the most beatings on the field out of any position. QBs barely get touched these days. WRs can step out of bounds to avoid a hit (unless they are in the middle of the field). Kickers and punters rarely get hit. Linemen aren't getting hit as much as they just push each other around, for the most part.

Running backs, though, tend to get hit every time they touch the ball and even sometimes when they don't (fakes).

As rjcj2017 mentioned, too, football is more of a passing game now than it ever was. Before Drew Brees passed for 5k+ yards in 2008, the only QB to have over 5,000 yards in a season was Dan Marino in 1984.

Since 2008, it has been done seven more times and three of those times were in the same year (Brees, Brady, and Stafford in 2011)! Mahomes will probably do it this year, too, so you can add another one to the list.

The average NFL career is around 3.5 years. If you are a good/great QB or K/P, you can play until you are late 30s or even early 40s. You can probably count the number of RBs that have played into their late 30s on one hand.

(...and I love the run game, too, which makes this realization all the more disappointing. I'm STILL salty about Barry Sanders retiring so young.)
There is a God and his name is Billy Joel
Reply
#5

RE: Why do running backs have such a short shelf life?
Good points. I completely understand retiring before a major injury, or to prolong longevity in normal life, it's not like they need the money after a few years if they are good with it. But I can see too where the business side of things come into play. When you pay gazillions to a QB or DP, it makes it tough to pay a good running back what they are worth, leading to the younger, cheaper options. I just miss the bell cow days. I miss watching guys trucking each other! The chiefs offense can be a blast to watch, but I still miss the ground and pound game. Thanks for the thoughts!
Reply
#6

RE: Why do running backs have such a short shelf life?
go run into a wall every Sunday about 20 times, see how long that lasts LOL

but more to the point, in terms of the Hobby, everyone is a sell,
onlyo nes that current holds for me are Gurley and Zeke,
but the odds of them getting 10k plus odds are against them
Reply
#7

RE: Why do running backs have such a short shelf life?
(12-24-2018, 08:07 PM)wadevl Wrote: go run into a wall every Sunday about 20 times, see how long that lasts LOL

but more to the point, in terms of the Hobby, everyone is a sell,
onlyo nes that current holds for me are Gurley and Zeke,
but the odds of them getting 10k plus odds are against them
Yeah, I'm not sure we will be seeing any records, outside of passing records like McCaffrey set for catches for a running back, any time soon. When you only play 7 years, you just aren't going to get them. Peterson and Gore are the only two HOF playing right now, and they are hold overs from another era.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)