Joshua Kelley, RB, UCLA - Discussion

[jubei]

mg was a hard runner and he did become quite the pass catcher, though IMO not on the level of Ek. But as a runner he needed much larger holes than a normal RB and he couldnt cut on a dime if a hole opened up to another side of where he was running. and too many times the turf monster seemed to tackle him IME...but I COULD be blind.

[dmac_bolt]

mg was a hard runner and he did become quite the pass catcher, though IMO not on the level of Ek. But as a runner he needed much larger holes than a normal RB and he couldnt cut on a dime if a hole opened up to another side of where he was running. and too many times the turf monster seemed to tackle him IME...but I COULD be blind.

He didn’t have a shifty jump step or great cut move and he ran too upright. He does have some solid tools, just not all of them.

[jubei]

I remember Eric Dickerson ran pretty upright but that guy had a subtle shift that made guys miss...besides having the great vision. And for the most part if he was even he was leavin'. Only the great Darrell Green could catch him from behind in the heyday...by the way that was a BEAUTIFUL play to run down Eric DIckerson!,,, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Eg3RHKKbQU if the clip doesnt embed.

[Topcat]

He didn’t have a shifty jump step or great cut move and he ran too upright. He does have some solid tools, just not all of them.

That's like hiring a carpenter to do a job who has a hammer but no nails...

[Velo]

MGIII is not shifty, but he can deliver punishment, which wears down a defense like nothing else. In 2018 he had 14 total TDs, four receiving, with just shy of 1,400 yards from scrimmage. He averaged 5.1 ypc. He was in his prime going into 2019 and he blew it, and hurt the team. His style of runner, who delivers punishment, bouncing off defenders, tend to have short careers. Earl Campbell, for example, one of the most punishing RBs in league history, had only five productive seasons. His body started to break down after that. Dude is in a wheelchair today.

[Heatmiser]

MG has a bad combination of absorbing a lot of punishment with a tendency to get injured. Not many good years left for him. Agree with all of what is written. The scouting report on Gordon was that was not good in trash and had very poor lateral quickness. The Chargers provided him trash on pretty much every running play and we all saw how he struggled with it vs a guy with skills like Ekeler. I really liked Gordon in college and was pretty stoked when he was drafted. But I was wrong.

TG

[Steve]

Every time we had Watt and Gordon in there, we were telegraphing, "we're going to run the rock." Maybe it might help if we ran more passing plays with two rb's in there, at least on occasion. That would be at least an attempt to fool someone sometimes...

Maybe.

Sometimes it doesn't hurt to be predictable. You just have to run something so well that the other team has to sell out to stop it, and then it opens up the rest of the O. Lombardi and the GB packers did that. So did Joe Gibbs Redskins.

I keep hearing is that people want to use 2 RB as both run and pass options, but then they are looking at it as a way to put the 2 best RB on the field (both runners first), and neither can block. So, that makes it a pass only option, so now you have flipped the predictability thing to the other extreme. If they try to run it, the RB gets his ass kicked or whiffs and the running play gets blown up. A lot of people have tried it, and it just doesn't work. Someone will make it work to a limited degree at some point, but I don't think you can do it too much. There are just so few RB who can be lead blockers and runners. We certainly don't have any.

By the way, the 2 RB split backfield runs are pretty much going to look an awful lot like the FB dive. The RB is just going to dive into the line and hope the hole develops quickly. If the blocking is there, the play works, .... if not ....... It is all about hitting quickly and hoping things go well. That is why no NFL team has run the split backfield running game for the last 30 years (primary offense). It's just a change of pace thing, you won't get rich doing it.

[FoutsFan]

I remember Eric Dickerson ran pretty upright but that guy had a subtle shift that made guys miss...besides having the great vision. And for the most part if he was even he was leavin'. Only the great Darrell Green could catch him from behind in the heyday...by the way that was a BEAUTIFUL play to run down Eric DIckerson!,,, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Eg3RHKKbQU if the clip doesnt embed.

Darryl Green was the fastest man in the NFL every year he played. Dude was amazing.

[FoutsFan]

Maybe.

Sometimes it doesn't hurt to be predictable. You just have to run something so well that the other team has to sell out to stop it, and then it opens up the rest of the O. Lombardi and the GB packers did that. So did Joe Gibbs Redskins.

I keep hearing is that people want to use 2 RB as both run and pass options, but then they are looking at it as a way to put the 2 best RB on the field (both runners first), and neither can block. So, that makes it a pass only option, so now you have flipped the predictability thing to the other extreme. If they try to run it, the RB gets his ass kicked or whiffs and the running play gets blown up. A lot of people have tried it, and it just doesn't work. Someone will make it work to a limited degree at some point, but I don't think you can do it too much. There are just so few RB who can be lead blockers and runners. We certainly don't have any.

By the way, the 2 RB split backfield runs are pretty much going to look an awful lot like the FB dive. The RB is just going to dive into the line and hope the hole develops quickly. If the blocking is there, the play works, .... if not ....... It is all about hitting quickly and hoping things go well. That is why no NFL team has run the split backfield running game for the last 30 years (primary offense). It's just a change of pace thing, you won't get rich doing it.

The last offense that worked like that was the 88' Bengals with Icky Woods and James Brooks.

Both averaged over 5 yards per carry, Brooks had 1066 yards while Woods had 931 yards. Its very rare indeed to see that work so well.

[Steve]

The last offense that worked like that was the 88' Bengals with Icky Woods and James Brooks.

Both averaged over 5 yards per carry, Brooks had 1066 yards while Woods had 931 yards. Its very rare indeed to see that work so well.

The 1988 Cinci team was a very much an I-formation team. They used 2 RB, but I don't recall them using split backfield, much if at all.

And while they did run a lot of 2 RB sets in 1998, their other FB was a guy named Stanley Wilson. And they had another RB named Stanford Jennings. All of them could do a bit of everything. You don't need just 2 guys who can do everything, you need the backups to be that way as well, otherwise the wheels come off the bus completely when someone gets hurt. Although that is exactly what happened in 1989 when Ickey blew out his knee in the 2nd game and never was every to come all the way back. In 1988 Cinci also used a lot of 2 TE sets (Holman and Riggs) with a single RB. And they got a lot of yardage with 3 WR sets too (Eddie Brown, TIm McGee and Cris Collinsworth), so they were very multiple in their offense personnel. They loved to pound the ball, then go play action and get chunk plays downfield.

And they got a lot of mileage splitting lining Brooks as an offset I FB, out into the slot, or as a slotback on the perimeter of the formation, forcing teams to split a LB out of the middle of the formation and weakening the middle of the D vs the run, and few ILB could run with Brooks in coverage. That would get Brooks isolated against an ILB in pass coverage.

That distinction of the last true split backfield offense in the NFL was the 1993 Bengals, as far as I can tell. They had Harold Green and Derrick Fenner at RB, and Jay Schroeder, David Klinger and Erik Wilhelm at QB. Neither Fenner or Green was that great a runner (solid, not great), and both were very good receivers, and solid blockers. As those forgettable names suggest, the Bengals went 3-13 and only scored 16 TD all season (https://www.pro-football-reference.c...s/cin/1993.htm).

[FoutsFan]

The 1988 Cinci team was a very much an I-formation team. They used 2 RB, but I don't recall them using split backfield, much if at all.

And while they did run a lot of 2 RB sets in 1998, their other FB was a guy named Stanley Wilson. And they had another RB named Stanford Jennings. All of them could do a bit of everything. You don't need just 2 guys who can do everything, you need the backups to be that way as well, otherwise the wheels come off the bus completely when someone gets hurt. Although that is exactly what happened in 1989 when Ickey blew out his knee in the 2nd game and never was every to come all the way back. In 1988 Cinci also used a lot of 2 TE sets (Holman and Riggs) with a single RB. And they got a lot of yardage with 3 WR sets too (Eddie Brown, TIm McGee and Cris Collinsworth), so they were very multiple in their offense personnel. They loved to pound the ball, then go play action and get chunk plays downfield.

And they got a lot of mileage splitting lining Brooks as an offset I FB, out into the slot, or as a slotback on the perimeter of the formation, forcing teams to split a LB out of the middle of the formation and weakening the middle of the D vs the run, and few ILB could run with Brooks in coverage. That would get Brooks isolated against an ILB in pass coverage.

That distinction of the last true split backfield offense in the NFL was the 1993 Bengals, as far as I can tell. They had Harold Green and Derrick Fenner at RB, and Jay Schroeder, David Klinger and Erik Wilhelm at QB. Neither Fenner or Green was that great a runner (solid, not great), and both were very good receivers, and solid blockers. As those forgettable names suggest, the Bengals went 3-13 and only scored 16 TD all season (https://www.pro-football-reference.c...s/cin/1993.htm).

The 88 Bengals had a hell of an offensive line as well. You are right they were not a dedicated split backfield but they ran everything. I, split, 3 wr they whole nine yards. I remember that well I have a friend that is a die hard Bengals fan and watched lots of the games that year with him. Weird to see that team which should have destroyed the 49'ers in the SB but Boomer fell in the shower around week 12 or so and injured his throwing shoulder and was never the same. Had he been healthy they would have been up by 21 or so at the end of the game. Oh well that is the kind of thing I am used to as a Charger fan.

[Steve]

The 88 Bengals had a hell of an offensive line as well. You are right they were not a dedicated split backfield but they ran everything. I, split, 3 wr they whole nine yards. I remember that well I have a friend that is a die hard Bengals fan and watched lots of the games that year with him. Weird to see that team which should have destroyed the 49'ers in the SB but Boomer fell in the shower around week 12 or so and injured his throwing shoulder and was never the same. Had he been healthy they would have been up by 21 or so at the end of the game. Oh well that is the kind of thing I am used to as a Charger fan.

I thought it really hurt them when Krumerie broke his leg in the 1st series. He was their best front 7 guy, and their D was solid, but really didn't have they weren't going to beat the 49ers without him, unless, as you point out, Boomer was really on his game, which he wasn't late in the year.

As far as Boomer went, he just never had the same long ball accuracy after that early/mid season stretch. he was still effective, but missing those rainbow shots downfield and then losing Ickey the next year really hurt them.