More 2020 Hype: "If You Need A RB or WR, this is the draft for you."

[murphysxm]

it's been proven that the college mileage factor isnt a factor in the NFL

Proven? How would that even be possible? Heavy college workload doesn't doom a prospect, but to say it isn't a fatcor is silly.

[bjd5211]

it's been proven that the college mileage factor isnt a factor in the NFL

Proven? How would that even be possible? Heavy college workload doesn't doom a prospect, but to say it isn't a fatcor is silly.

It isn't a factor, college or pro, each human body reacts to it differently and experiences different luck with injuries. Some guys hold up to it, some don't, but there is no way of knowing how an indivdual will react to that workload until they've been through it. Taylor's college workload is more of a positive than a negative in my eyes, because it shows how durable he is and how he can handle the physicality of the position at a high level.

[stoneghost28]

If we're talking RB scouting, the biggest red flags from watching film that I've noted that anyone can easily see (not this pseudo-science nitpicky mumbo jumbo) is a combination of being awful in pass blocking (not that they can't learn it but I believe it's insight into work ethic) and not looking like a dynamic player. By dynamic player I mean some combination of contact balance, burst, power, fluid agility. Basically, you know it when you see it. For example, if you were looking at Guice and Penny coming out of college, I liked both players but Guice was clearly dynamic and Penny was not. Guice showed a willingness to pass block and Penny did not. Clearly they were concerns at the time, but in hindsight and going forward they will be even bigger concerns for me personally. Penny's career YPC is 5.3 so not saying he couldn't have been/won't be successful given a full workload, just that I've seen this with several players now (Foreman was very much the same way as Penny) and in the future i'm going with the more dynamic player 10/10 times. Henry also had these flaws to some extent which is maybe why he took so long to break out in the NFL, but he also has a trump card in that he's just a monster of a human being so...

I've heard more than once that bell cow RB's at some college's receive little to no work whatsoever in pass blocking due to time constraints. Basically some colleges/teams, give serious concern and time to that craft for most or all of their backs, and some do not. This is similar to the issue I'm having w/a poster in a redskins forum who has issues with Reagor, but all of the issues are connected to intangibles, things that he may or may not been taught at all, or asked to do within the scheme that he plays. He regards him as soft, doesn't like that he doesn't sell out on all routes regardless of play design, that he's weak over the middle, that he doesn't run block etc. None of this taking into account what his team actually asks him to do on pass plays (or that he's interpreting what he's seeing correctly), much like w/RB's, play design doesn't always ask of players what seems sensible to us, and sometimes we're not even seeing what we think we're seeing (for instance, is a player tougher for running through tacklers, or an idiot?).

You certainly have nailed things w/Guice and Penny thus far, though to be fair, I don't think anyone was rating Penny ahead of Guice two years ago. I was certainly one of those crazy people that thought Guice might be better than Fournette, then again, I also liked Penny, just not as much as Guice, or Barkley or Chubb. Still think he's a good back, he just landed in a situation where draft capital is less valuable than pretty much anywhere else. But the early returns are certainly disappointing at best.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

If we're talking RB scouting, the biggest red flags from watching film that I've noted that anyone can easily see (not this pseudo-science nitpicky mumbo jumbo) is a combination of being awful in pass blocking (not that they can't learn it but I believe it's insight into work ethic) and not looking like a dynamic player. By dynamic player I mean some combination of contact balance, burst, power, fluid agility. Basically, you know it when you see it. For example, if you were looking at Guice and Penny coming out of college, I liked both players but Guice was clearly dynamic and Penny was not. Guice showed a willingness to pass block and Penny did not. Clearly they were concerns at the time, but in hindsight and going forward they will be even bigger concerns for me personally. Penny's career YPC is 5.3 so not saying he couldn't have been/won't be successful given a full workload, just that I've seen this with several players now (Foreman was very much the same way as Penny) and in the future i'm going with the more dynamic player 10/10 times. Henry also had these flaws to some extent which is maybe why he took so long to break out in the NFL, but he also has a trump card in that he's just a monster of a human being so...

I've heard more than once that bell cow RB's at some college's receive little to no work whatsoever in pass blocking due to time constraints. Basically some colleges/teams, give serious concern and time to that craft for most or all of their backs, and some do not. This is similar to the issue I'm having w/a poster in a redskins forum who has issues with Reagor, but all of the issues are connected to intangibles, things that he may or may not been taught at all, or asked to do within the scheme that he plays. He regards him as soft, doesn't like that he doesn't sell out on all routes regardless of play design, that he's weak over the middle, that he doesn't run block etc. None of this taking into account what his team actually asks him to do on pass plays (or that he's interpreting what he's seeing correctly), much like w/RB's, play design doesn't always ask of players what seems sensible to us, and sometimes we're not even seeing what we think we're seeing (for instance, is a player tougher for running through tacklers, or an idiot?).

Yeah, I learned that when I was wondering why Corey Coleman was never blocking anyone. Corey Coleman was also a body catcher though, whereas from what I hear Raeger is a hands catcher. But as for the pass blocking thing, I know they don't really teach it which is why I said I believe it's an insight into their work ethic. How much motivation do they have to get better at their craft. How much work are they going to put in when nobody is watching. It may just be a coincidence but both Penny and Foreman had issues with their weight. Both just dreadful at pass blocking, and both were big guys so it's not like they didn't have the size to be capable at it.

[stoneghost28]

1000x this. People said the same about USC receivers before JuJu, Big 12 QBs before Mahomes and Baker, and they said it about Wisconsin RBs before Melvin Gordon, which makes this take extra weird.

Also, for all of you pointing out that we forgot Melvin Gordon, keep that same energy for James White!

Those aren’t analogous comparisons. The USC WR curse wasn’t related to system, the Wisconsin curse was.

What's the system? You can't punish an RB for playing behind a great offensive line. Sure, they may not play behind a line that talented in the NFL, but it doesn't necessarily mean the RB is fool's gold.

It's not punishing, it's simply recognizing that sometimes, marginal talents are made to look great because they play with superior elite talents, or in elite systems. Spurrier made a lot of crappy QB's look fantastic. Alabama destroys teams, but it's never been about the QB's (Tua being an exception). There are systems, teams, and conferences that make players look better or worse than they are because of the situation. The Big-10 has been lagging athletically for decades which is why the more successful teams started recruiting nationally much more aggressively (my pet theory is that with the collapse of the rust belt, and so many of those jobs moving to the south because of the tax breaks, anti-union laws, and paucity of regulations, a great many of the elite athletes that used to play in the Big-10 moved w/the migration of the jobs-it's just a theory, but it makes some economics sense). The sense I have had is that Wisconsin has tailored their scheme for decades based upon the fact that if they can build a mega OL, and get adequate RB's in house, they can run through the slow, unathletic defenses that have littered the Big-10 for the past three decades, and its worked. They have done exactly that, but once those guys have gotten to the NFL, while a good chunk of the OL's delivered, the RB's haven't. It's always been my opinion that the OL's featured NFL caliber talent throughout the decades (not every class, but a healthy amount), but the RB's have not been as good, and that fact was masked by the fact that the OL's were so good and the bulk of the defenses in the conference were so bad.

You still need to evaluate the guys on an individual basis, I don't disagree there, but you also need to take into account their situation. A guy like Akers is playing behind a horse ---- line, fighting for his life before the LOS on most plays. A guy playing behind Wisconsin's line doesn't have ANY of those problems to concern themselves with, the system prevents it in the vast bulk of their games. Looking at his game logs, it's pretty scary, he's pounding nobody, week after week, season after season. He did kick Michigan in the teeth three years running, but so does pretty much every team worth a damn. He did well against Penn State, not sure what to think of Penn State. Ohio State shut him down in 2 of 3 games, but in his last, and most important game against them, he showed up: 156 yards rushing and receiving and a TD, the best game of his college career against quality opposition in the biggest moment of his college career and after a huge disappointment in that first game earlier in the fall against Ohio State.

I think he's legit, and if I have a top 3 pick, I'll seriously consider him at any slot, I haven't decided how to order these guys for sure yet. Honestly, it's hard to see why one shouldn't just trade down from 1.01 or 1.02 to 1.03 if at all possible, I'm not sure what one can get, but I would love to do that because I can honestly see any of the three, and even Akers, potentially, ending up the best RB in the class much like '17 has had McCaffrey, Fournette, Mixon, and Cook all looking like the best RB of '17 depending upon when you chose to determine their ranking over the past three years. Could definitely see that happening again with all four or five of these guys (3 for most).

[Johnny B. Goode]

it's been proven that the college mileage factor isnt a factor in the NFL

Proven? How would that even be possible? Heavy college workload doesn't doom a prospect, but to say it isn't a fatcor is silly.

proven in a research study
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... kK59Qv4R_7

Unless you find peer reviewed studies to be silly...

[esloan35]

it's been proven that the college mileage factor isnt a factor in the NFL

Proven? How would that even be possible? Heavy college workload doesn't doom a prospect, but to say it isn't a fatcor is silly.

proven in a research study
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... kK59Qv4R_7

Unless you find peer reviewed studies to be silly...

Drop this mic... lol!

[Tvols]

Good to see a health debate on the “cursed Wisconsin backs “ thanks for debating it. But best I can remember montee was in the same consideration as Taylor as 1-01 but I assume the partying is what doomed him dayne not sure Melvin has had a decent to good career not lights out

[stoneghost28]

Brent Moss: '95: Undrafted. 1 year in the NFL, had a 1637 yard 16 TD season in '93 with Wisconsin.

Terrell Fletcher: '95 2nd Round Pick, 1476 yard 13 TD season in '94 and 20+ catches. Had an eight year career in NFL, but never produced more than 500+ yards rushing in a season. Was a solid satellite back (246 catches in the six seasons sandwiched around his rookie year and career finale seasons (so 40+ catches a year in that window)), but at that 2nd round cost, yikes. Not exactly a bust, or a hit.

Ron Dayne '00: Nearly 7500 yards rushing and receiving in four years, w/two 2,000 years rushing. The ultimate Wisconsin OL back. Just SLOW. Megabust (11th overall pick, never topped 773 yards in a season), but oddly did have a 7 year career, and rather interesting to note that like he was a reverse Fletcher, in his rookie and career finale season's he combined for more than 1500 rushing yards and 11 TD's. In-between those two seasons, in his five remaining years, he combined for a touch more than 2,000 years. So rather odd career, especially considering he was actually quite productive for Houston in that final season. Don't remember what happened after that (why he'd be done after his second best career season).

Michael Bennett '01: Another guy with that classic 1600 yards rushing, double digit TD season. He was a first round draft pick of the Vikes in '01, and had that famed '02 season (1600+ yards from scrimmage, 37 catches, an absurdly low 6 TDs. After that his career was derailed by injury. I always include him as a hit, along with Gordon, but it's not exactly true. Michael Bennett was a legit talent, not a bust in terms of talent, but he never, ever could stay healthy, and so he was a health, rather than a talent (see Dayne) related bust.

Anthony Davis: '05: Exploded in his first two years (3,000+ yards rushing, and 24 TD's) before fading badly in his final two (injury I imagine). Was drafted in the 7th round and quickly kicked to the curb. Played for two years in the CFL before retiring.

Brian Calhoun: '06: Transfer from Colorado, put together yet another 1600 double digit season in his one year with Wisconsin following the transfer. Third round pick of the lines. Played two years and then was done perhaps due to a torn ACL.

P.J. Hill: '09: Exploded for nearly 1,600 yards and double digit TD's in his first season, rushed for a 1000+ in his final two years. Tried to make it in the NFL, it did not happen. Zero career carries.

John Clay: Rushed for nearly 1600 yards in his second season as a starter, like Hill, he'd top off at more than 3000 career rushing yards and a gigantic pile of TD's. Went undrafted, played a tiny bit for the Steelers as an undrafted free agent before vanishing.

Montee Ball '13: After sitting behind Clay for two years he rushed for nearly 4,000 total yards combined his final two years with an additional 55 TD's (55?!?!?!). Drafted w/a 2nd rounder in 2013, he did little with Denver, got injured, bounced around and was gone w/only two years worth of actual carries.

James White: '14: 1700 yards rushing and receiving (39 catches) in his one season out of Ball's shadow. Parlayed that into a fourth round deal with the Patriots, and a long career as one of their Swiss army knife rib's.

Melvin Gordon '15: More than 4200 yards from scrimmage and 40+ TD's his final two seasons. 1st round selection of the Chargers in '15. Quite productive, if uneven, with the Chargers.

Corey Clement: '17: Rushed for 1375 yards in his one season as a full time starter. Day 3 selection for the Eagles, saw some run as a rookie Swiss army knife, but has faded badly since and missed most of '19 due to injury.


To me, if you look through this list of RB's over the past 25 years, it's essentially a horror show of massive college production and total doggy doo careers in the NFL. Compare that to the litany of All American OL's they all played with (many of whom built legit NFL careers as starters, or rotational depth guys, and or pro bowlers), it's no contest and this is why there rightfully is some skepticism of Wisconsin backs. What you see over and over and over across three decades and more than 25 years of RB's is monster OL's, and monster production no matter who the starter is/was, and then post college careers that time and again flopped over and over and over again (while the OL's hit at the normal expected rate). Probably the one thing I can say in fairness is that generally, the NFL has sniffed this out, there have been some bad misses (Dayne, and Ball in particular), but by and large, the NFL wasn't buying the mad #'s these backs were producing year after year after year, but it still isn't very pretty, only Bennett, White, and Gordon really played like NFL caliber stud RB's, and only Gordon was ever a bell cow, Bennett was derailed by injury, White may not be built for it (like T. Fletcher two decades earlier), and plays with a team that would never use him that way and the Chargers are ready to move on from Gordon after a good career so far. I will likely buy Jonathan Taylor as a prospect, but I want to see an incredible athletic profile at the combine. I have every reason to believe I will, but in general, there's a very good reason to be a bit gun shy with these guys, there's decades of evidence that Wisconsin RB's are system backs in the same way Big-12 WR's and QB's were system guys as well. But like those Big-12 QB's and WR's, you need to be able to smoke out which one's would be great anywhere, regardless of team, and Taylor seems like one of those exceptions (I don't feel about him the way I felt about Dayne, and Ball, whom I never drafted, ever, and laughed at the Giants (in the former case) for drafting, very hard).

[FantasyFreak]

I just saw the comp for JT by Lance Zuerlein, and I actually had this comp myself a while back. Ryan Mathews with durability. Interesting. Jeudy and Lamb with the same grade.

Feel like whoever put the pages together had a JT weakness for Swift. Said he had a high fumble rate, but I looked and can't see that Swift ever fumbled, at least as a runner. Which is impressive.

[cantguardjake]

Sounds like with the exception of Dayne pretty much all of the backs drafted in the first 2 rounds were at least servicable for a period, so the “Wisconsin O Line” narrative only applies to guys with average draft capital to begin with.

Edit: Monte Ball was way worse than I thought, I recall him with a second / third round adp in redraft one year so assume he was servicable for a season but nope he was terrible.

[FantasyFreak]

I'm curious to see if Baltimore grabs someone who could be a legit alpha WR to pair with Lamar, given the depth of the class.

[bjd5211]

I think the only truly high end talents Wisconsin has produced at RB are Gordon and Taylor, then there have been some solid guys like Dayne, Ball, Bennett and James White who went on to have varying levels of success in the NFL. Wisconsin is kind of similar to the Broncos of the late 90's and early 2000's where they were churning out productive running games and RBs with great stats, but it wasn't that hard to see thst Terrell Davis was easily the best RB they had during that run, just like Taylor is fairly clearly better most if not all of those guys that have put up numbers there.

[Jigga94]

I'm curious to see if Baltimore grabs someone who could be a legit alpha WR to pair with Lamar, given the depth of the class.

I could see it in the 2nd/3rd. Think they go LB in the 1st, or maybe pass rush if they don't resign Judon. They could use OL as well, especially if Yanda retires. But it looks like most of the secondary will be back and I wouldn't be taking a RB/TE early if I were them. So WR is definitely in play for them

I wanted DK over Hollywood last year personally

[skinfanjon]

it's been proven that the college mileage factor isnt a factor in the NFL

Proven? How would that even be possible? Heavy college workload doesn't doom a prospect, but to say it isn't a fatcor is silly.

proven in a research study
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... kK59Qv4R_7

Unless you find peer reviewed studies to be silly...

As usual, you take one tiny scrap of information that is somewhat adjacent to an opinion you had and decide to make it a law that rules everything moving forward.

This study separates runners in ONLY their final college season and groups them by 100-200 carries or 250+. That's it. The concern expressed was about heavy workloads over entire collegiate careers. It does about as good a job of answering that question as if you were to instead apply the ratio of Schrute Bucks to Stanley Nickels to running backs post combine.