Two-back model popular but not essential

[scpanther22]

Although most clubs possess a pretty well-defined feature back, the perception in recent seasons is that success comes principally from having a complementary runner and sharing the load.

But as the 2009 season demonstrated, and the Super Bowl validated, that is only partly true.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=5188040

[OneBadassCat]

All we needed was Matt Moore starting for the entire season last year and we would have competed. We were running on teams at will, despite the 8th man and Jake Delhomme ******* poo up.

[Khyber53]

How exactly did the Super Bowl validate that hypothesis? The story is a bit wishy-washy, but I think he's missed one of the selling points of having two stand-out running backs -- durability.

It's all about having someone who is still a first stringer available to run the ball in December and January. We fell short last year, but it had nothing to do with our running game -- our defense couldn't stop people and our passing offense was generous to our opponents.

I think I like our system just fine, even if it might not make much sense when you are stuck coming up with a story in the off season.

[CRA]

Superbowl winner - Saints.

6th ranked rushing attack. They had 3 Rbs. 2 of the 3 averaged over 5 yards a pop and all 3 had different running styles (Bush, Thomas, Bell).

Pretty sure the Saints validated the perception in recent seasons is that success comes principally from having a complementary runner and sharing the load.

[nosuchthingasapanther]

how many teams in the nfl have 2 true stand out starting caliber running backs?

2? maybe 3?

durabilty has nothing to do with performance.

it's a luxury, not a necessity.

[MadHatter]

The Superbowl proved one thing.....an avg set of RB's can have a high YPC when you have a passing game that is lighting it up.

Defenses are so focused on stopping the pass agaisnt teh Saints and Colts, that they give up some on stopping the run.

The articles assumption is nothing more than finding stats to make your arguement. Even if the stats are not a result of the position you are argueing.

[SorthNarolina]

The fact that we went 8-8 is a testament to our 2 back system. Think about how horrible we would have done without them. Leaky D and Jake giving the ball away just killed us.

[panthers55]

The issue isn't just this year but the next one. Look at Turner and how he was a stud in 2008 and fell way back in 2009. Lets see how Chris Johnson does when he finally shows up after so many carries last year.

As for the article look at Minnesota and New Orleans in the NFC. Both had 2 back systems. Or as someone mentioned, actually NO used 3 backs during the year.

[CRA]

The Superbowl proved one thing.....an avg set of RB's can have a high YPC when you have a passing game that is lighting it up.

Defenses are so focused on stopping the pass agaisnt teh Saints and Colts, that they give up some on stopping the run.

The articles assumption is nothing more than finding stats to make your arguement. Even if the stats are not a result of the position you are argueing.

I think we do have to give the Saints some more credit for 2009. They didn't have the 6th ranked rush attack just b/c of Brees.

I mean the Colts had the 32nd ranked rush attack in 09, 31st in 08.

[TerriblePizza]

He used us as an example of why its not essential. We were VERY one dimensional last year with Jake starting the majority of the season. You saw how explosive our offense became when we had a QB that could actually produce.

[panthers55]

He used us as an example of why its not essential. We were VERY one dimensional last year with Jake starting the majority of the season. You saw how explosive our offense became when we had a QB that could actually produce.

How effective would we have been when Williams was hurt if we didn't have Stewart to come in?? And the fact we went 8-8 as you mentioned was due to poor quarterback play over the first 11 games.

So what he seems to be saying is that if you have an all pro quarterback like Peyton Manning you don't need a running game. Or if your quarterback sucks, it doesn't matter if you have 1 or 2 great running backs. Still NO showed that even a great offense is better with a running game..

And I thought it took two to tango not tangle.

[Brooklyn Bully]

"Whatever works best for you," said Saints coach Sean Payton, who clearly believed in spreading the wealth and the carries. "There's really no right or wrong way."

This. There is no one way in the NFL. If you have a high caliber QB, you mayyyy want to lean on him; if you have Double Trouble, use them; if you're the Jets D...you'll make other teams whimper, etc.

That said, I'd prefer us to pass more...hopefully we can this year and see if we improve.

[Wither]

Two back... one back... whatever gets it done.

However, I believe the two back system works better over multiple seasons.

[TerriblePizza]

How effective would we have been when Williams was hurt if we didn't have Stewart to come in?? And the fact we went 8-8 as you mentioned was due to poor quarterback play over the first 11 games.

So what he seems to be saying is that if you have an all pro quarterback like Peyton Manning you don't need a running game. Or if your quarterback sucks, it doesn't matter if you have 1 or 2 great running backs. Still NO showed that even a great offense is better with a running game..

And I thought it took two to tango not tangle.

I'm not saying you two backs and an all pro quarterback, two good backs in our offense with an average QB was very good.