Photo

Ravens.com: Late for Work: Insiders Expect Ravens to Pursue a 'Bell-Cow Back'


  • Please log in to reply
74 replies to this topic

#1 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 156,009 posts

Posted 26 February 2024 - 10:27 AM

Ravens.com: Late for Work: Insiders Expect Ravens to Pursue a 'Bell-Cow Back'

https://www.baltimor...k-late-for-work



#2 Slidemaster

Slidemaster

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,981 posts

Posted 26 February 2024 - 10:29 AM

It really would be great to have a single alpha dog runner that they could ignore in the playoffs.

#3 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 156,009 posts

Posted 26 February 2024 - 10:32 AM

RSR: OTL: Free Agent Running Backs Are A Bad Investment

https://russellstree...bad-investment/



#4 TwentyThirtyFive

TwentyThirtyFive

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,830 posts

Posted 26 February 2024 - 01:59 PM

I expect them to pursue a bell cow back as well. Have said that since the jump. 



#5 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,701 posts

Posted 26 February 2024 - 02:03 PM

Gotta have more bell cow!


  • Biggsy and PrimeTime like this

#6 jamesdean

jamesdean

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,177 posts

Posted 26 February 2024 - 02:30 PM

I doubt any running back goes in the 1st round but it's a deep class, so the Ravens should be able to get someone in the later rounds that has potential.  



#7 PrimeTime

PrimeTime

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,705 posts
  • LocationHampstead, MD

Posted 27 February 2024 - 07:56 AM

Do "bell cow" backs really exist anymore? Derrick Henry lead the league with 280 rushing attempts, which works out to a little more than 16 per game. It could be that my perspective is skewed by the late 90s and early 2000s where guys get 25-30 carries a game.

Jonathan Taylor got 14 mil/yr and averaged 16 plus carries per game. Does anyone really want us to invest even 10 million for 1 year in a RB that might get 13-15 carries a game?

As long as Lamar is still Lamar, he'll be the centerpiece of the rushing attack. And until this team proves they're not going to throw up all over themselves from a play calling standpoint in the playoffs, I'm not remotely interested in that kind of investment at RB.

I'd rather see us invest in Oline and/or CB.
@primetime667083

"Just remember, whether you think you can, or you think you can't, you're right." -Stewie Griffin

#8 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,701 posts

Posted 27 February 2024 - 08:04 AM

. And until this team proves they're not going to throw up all over themselves from a play calling standpoint in the playoffs, I'm not remotely interested in that kind of investment at RB.

 

I'm fine with not investing in a RB, but this part is completely illogical.  Fix both issues, if you think they are issues.  They aren't sequential or interdependent.



#9 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,860 posts

Posted 27 February 2024 - 08:28 AM

Do "bell cow" backs really exist anymore? Derrick Henry lead the league with 280 rushing attempts, which works out to a little more than 16 per game. It could be that my perspective is skewed by the late 90s and early 2000s where guys get 25-30 carries a game.

Jonathan Taylor got 14 mil/yr and averaged 16 plus carries per game. Does anyone really want us to invest even 10 million for 1 year in a RB that might get 13-15 carries a game?

As long as Lamar is still Lamar, he'll be the centerpiece of the rushing attack. And until this team proves they're not going to throw up all over themselves from a play calling standpoint in the playoffs, I'm not remotely interested in that kind of investment at RB.

I'd rather see us invest in Oline and/or CB.

Agreed



#10 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,860 posts

Posted 27 February 2024 - 08:32 AM

I'm fine with not investing in a RB, but this part is completely illogical.  Fix both issues, if you think they are issues.  They aren't sequential or interdependent.

We already have running backs that get the job done when utilized. The problem is the coaches don't use them when the playoffs start. That's not likely to change until Harbaugh is sent packing. 


  • PrimeTime likes this

#11 jamesdean

jamesdean

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,177 posts

Posted 27 February 2024 - 08:55 AM

Agreed

Also agree. OL is a major need going into 2024 and that should be the main emphasis in the first couple of picks.  It's a deep class for tackles. 



#12 NewMarketSean

NewMarketSean

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,552 posts

Posted 27 February 2024 - 09:00 AM

Do they exist anymore?


I never had friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?

#13 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,701 posts

Posted 27 February 2024 - 09:02 AM

We already have ruynning backs that get the job done when utilized. The problem is the coaches don't use them when the playoffs start. That's not likely to change until Harbaugh is sent packing. 

 

OK, like I said, then fix the issues that you perceive.  If you don't think RB is an issue and want to have only Justice Hill on the roster and healthy at the position in 2024, that's certainly an option. But like most people, if you think RB is an issue, you can fix that while also fixing the issue with gameplans in the playoffs.  Don't need to do one before the other.  Do both.



#14 Biggsy

Biggsy

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,259 posts

Posted 27 February 2024 - 09:09 AM

We already have ruynning backs that get the job done when utilized. The problem is the coaches don't use them when the playoffs start. That's not likely to change until Harbaugh is sent packing.



When your best playmakers are Lamar, Andrews, Likely and Flowers, it's a lot easier to justify trying to go to them in high pressure situations over Gus Edwards and Justice Hill. However, if your RB is also your top playmaker, it's a lot harder for the OC to simply avoid getting the ball in his hands.

I don't want Barkley, as talented as he is, we don't need another Uber talented RB on IR. Don't really want Henry or Eckler either. Both looked about done last season. If we go the FA route, I'd go with Jacobs. But I'd rather spend the money elsewhere on the roster.

Optimally, you bring Dobbins back cheap if you can. Then draft someone early on. Then hope Mitchell comes back with the same explosion he had before his injury. That would give you 3 very talented RB's on top of Hill on the depth chart, without breaking the bank.
  • PrimeTime likes this

#15 PrimeTime

PrimeTime

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,705 posts
  • LocationHampstead, MD

Posted 27 February 2024 - 09:20 AM

I'm fine with not investing in a RB, but this part is completely illogical. Fix both issues, if you think they are issues. They aren't sequential or interdependent.


I'm upset about not leaning on the running game in the playoffs. Particularly when the opponent struggles against the run and that's what got us where we were. Therefore, why invest in the position, if we're only going to abandon use of said position? How is that illogical?
@primetime667083

"Just remember, whether you think you can, or you think you can't, you're right." -Stewie Griffin

#16 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,701 posts

Posted 27 February 2024 - 09:33 AM

I'm upset about not leaning on the running game in the playoffs. Particularly when the opponent struggles against the run and that's what got us where we were. Therefore, why invest in the position, if we're only going to abandon use of said position? How is that illogical?

It's a bad thesis. You shouldn't intentionally ignore running backs because you think the OC/coach won't use them in the playoffs. You should fix both sides of the issue, not intentionally break one side because you think the coaching cannot be fixed.

Would be like not trying to improve your passrush because you think your secondary can't cover. Both are issues. Fix both if you can. Certainly don't refuse to even try fixing one because you're worried you can't fix the other.
  • Biggsy likes this

#17 Ravens2006

Ravens2006

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,032 posts

Posted 27 February 2024 - 09:38 AM

Yeah, the logic is in what we've seen with our own eyes come January. The running game gets basically abandoned once they trail. Or like in Cincy last year, they run the ball down to the goal line, then Edwards gets one touch and they call a pass to Ricard and a Huntley "Greatest American Hero" jump from 2 yards away.

I have zero confidence that any team under John's control will avoid panicking in the playoffs the moment they trail, or hell, even a couple rush attempts get stuffed for no or short gains.

#18 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,701 posts

Posted 27 February 2024 - 09:43 AM

So what...just have no running backs because you don't like the game plans in the postseason?

How about instead you fix the decision making however you go about doing that while also making sure you have a quality running back room?

#19 Biggsy

Biggsy

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,259 posts

Posted 27 February 2024 - 09:52 AM

So what...just have no running backs because you don't like the game plans in the postseason?

How about instead you fix the decision making however you go about doing that while also making sure you have a quality running back room?


Exactly. Make your RB the best playmaker, and I bet my annual salary he sees more than 6 touches in January.

#20 jamesdean

jamesdean

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,177 posts

Posted 27 February 2024 - 09:59 AM

I'm not worried about it. They'll draft at least one running back.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors


 width=