I don't think so. In fact it seems more and more teams are finding productive RBs in the later rounds and even in UDFA. If you ask 10 teams would they rather have Richard Sherman or Marshawn Lynch in their primes 10 out of 10 teams would choose the position of more value. Its hard to find a shutdown CB. The Jags have had none in their history. A good RB is a different story. The Jags have already had a few of those.

Yet Sherman wasn't a first round pick.

---

Yet Sherman wasn't a first round pick.

True but because of guys like Shermans and Browners success teams are coveting bigger CBs now and drafting them earlier.


And some teams are experimenting with moving safeties that fit that mold to CB when usually it's been the other way around.

---

The NFL has relegated the running game to nothing more than a compliment to the passing game. Gone are the days when workhorse RBs could carry an offense and those players were rare and highly coveted. RBs no longer require the rare and freakish skill sets in order to have success, and their price tag reflects that.

 

Now a days, literally dozens of guys can find success running in these pass oriented offenses due to the fact that the defense is focused on the pass. Match these guys up with a poor passing offense and the defense shuts them down.

 

The value isn't going to go up because too many RBs can be successful in a good passing offense, and in the bad passing offenses, even the best RBs in the world can't create enough productivity to match a modern passing attack.

 

Great rushing seasons and feats no longer translates to the win/loss column in the modern game. Great rushers will rarely win an offensive shootout which is how the game has evolved.

 

Why would teams pay more when time and again cheap RBs are showing they can have nearly as much success in the modern passing offenses as big named and big price tag guys. With a good QB and a good line, RBs are a dime a dozen.

---

Yet Sherman wasn't a first round pick.

I think you missed the point

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

 

  If I were an NFL GM I wouldn't draft a RB before the 4th round unless I was drafting for a contender with a deep roster or had just acquired multiple early round picks in a trade. 

 

I remembered posting on this topic in a Gurley thread months ago.  Re-reading it makes me want to change the above to 3rd round instead of fourth.  Some good backs came out of the third round.  (second too - but I'd still reserve that round for other positions unless the roster was already deep)

 Still - I think it's possible to find very good RBs later and I think we have a GM capable of doing so. 

 

Here's the old post - thought it might be interesting  here because I listed where most of the best backs (at the time) were drafted: 

 

 In 2013 the first RB taken was Bernard at 37th.

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"> 

 

 

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">In 2014 the first RB taken was Sankey at 54th.

 

I expect this trend will continue with the exception of AP/Lynch type players.  And I think the RB selected inside the top ten is becoming extinct quickly. 

 

Here are the current top RB who are starting in the NFL currently and their draft rounds:

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">---------------------------

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">1st round RBs

 

AP

Lynch

Ryan Matthews

Doug Martin (31st pick)

CJ Spiller

Mark Ingram

------------------------

2nd rd.

 

McCoy

Lacy 

Forte

LeVeon Bell

---------------------------

3rd round

 

DeMarco Murray

Jamaal Charles

Frank Gore

-------------------------

6th rd  

 

Morris

Andre Ellington

 

-------------------------------

UDFA  - 

 

Foster

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"> 

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"> 

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">One could argue that only 3, maybe 4 of those guys taken in the first round have lived up to their draft position. I think the second or third round is the place to draft a (highly touted)  RB unless he's something really special.  

 

---

It depends on what you mean by value. If you mean paying a guy that's productive then that will always be around. We just recently saw guys such as Jamal Charles and Lasean McCoy get big deals.


If you mean getting drafted then I don't think that will every be restored. There are to many instances where later drafted players are making huge contributions. I think about the broncos about 5 years ago when all their running backs kept getting hurt and they got down to their 8th string running back. Everyone was putting up 100 yards games from Portis all the way down to Hillis.


Its just a position that naturally is easy to play and transition in the NFL and so many guys have done it that it just wouldn't make sense to draft anyone that high anymore.

---

Good question,  Jags32250.

 

The reason I have significant doubt that the current value system will change is eventual productive RB's like Jonas Gray,  that all 32 teams could have had,  are often available.   The Saints for example have a history of finding UDRFA type of RB's that make major contributions to winning teams.   

 

It can be argued that running backs are overvalued in college as well. It's the system (a dedication to running the ball). When you see Gurley go down for the Univ. of Georgia and his replacement (a freshman) go for 200 yards you start thinking it's really plug in and play.

 

People like Adrian Peterson will always be considered special, but short of a freak like him I don't think you'll see many teams use a high draft pick on a running back.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

The NFL has relegated the running game to nothing more than a compliment to the passing game.

 

I agree with the rest of your post, and while the above is statement is the general rule these days, there are a number of exceptions. 

 

The Seahawks have leaned on their run-game more than the pass when the match-up calls for it.  Just like KC did in beating the defending champs with 30 rush attempts to 16 passes on Sunday. Gray's 38 carries to Brady's 30 passes also stands out. 

 

Still  - the trend is clearly toward more and more passing  - and the rule changes will continue to ensure that.

 (For better or worse)

---

Thanks all for the input, good points all around.  It will be interesting to see how this goes, especially in the winter/playoff months when teams will rely more on running the ball.  It's such a different game recently with rule changes, it makes for a very dynamic drafts and front offices trying to be creative and get ahead of the curve.  I personally hope the game rebounds a little somehow, and we get back to a more smashmouth game.  Probably won't happen but we'll see.

---

You throw to score and run to win.


-Vic

---