Taylor > Forte?

[jason]

I've seen mention of Taylor getting more carries than Forte, but I just don't see how that can be.

 

Taylor last year with a great OL got the same YPC as Forte got behind the paper mache OL. Actually, this is why I'm not all that impressed with the signing...aside from it being a minimal concern in regards to other needs.

 

On a semi-related note, does everyone think the prevailing theory that every team needs TWO top-line RBs is a load of crap? I believe a 30 carry RB is still feasible, and signing two starter-quality RBs is somewhat wasteful considering the team's performance and record last year which indicated glaring needs for multiple other positions.

[Wesson44]

I've seen mention of Taylor getting more carries than Forte, but I just don't see how that can be.

 

Taylor last year with a great OL got the same YPC as Forte got behind the paper mache OL. Actually, this is why I'm not all that impressed with the signing...aside from it being a minimal concern in regards to other needs.

 

On a semi-related note, does everyone think the prevailing theory that every team needs TWO top-line RBs is a load of crap? I believe a 30 carry RB is still feasible, and signing two starter-quality RBs is somewhat wasteful considering the team's performance and record last year which indicated glaring needs for multiple other positions.

IMHO Taylor won't get more carries the Forte he will be used like Benson was when we had him and Jones. We need two good backs to take us way into the playoff hunt late in Dec when we are running the ball and trying to control the clock. The Cowboys have three backs that could start on any team.It will only help us not hurt at all.

[defiantgiant]

I've seen mention of Taylor getting more carries than Forte, but I just don't see how that can be.

 

Taylor last year with a great OL got the same YPC as Forte got behind the paper mache OL. Actually, this is why I'm not all that impressed with the signing...aside from it being a minimal concern in regards to other needs.

Yeah, I think Forte's going to win out, but I like that they're having an open competition, and from a guy who has borderline-starter ability but doesn't mind being the #2 back. Like you said, Forte was a comparable rusher behind a worse o-line, and while playing through some considerable injuries. Also, I think Forte's the better pass-catching RB: while Taylor is a little bit more of a threat in the open field (Taylor's career YPC is 8.01 to Forte's 7.89) but Forte has a better catch percentage (Taylor has a career 76% catch rate, while Forte's sitting at 81%). If I had to choose between a receiving back being a little shiftier or a little more reliable, I'd go for reliable.

 

On a semi-related note, does everyone think the prevailing theory that every team needs TWO top-line RBs is a load of crap? I believe a 30 carry RB is still feasible, and signing two starter-quality RBs is somewhat wasteful considering the team's performance and record last year which indicated glaring needs for multiple other positions.

I actually think that the running back by committee approach is working pretty well across the league. There are certainly more teams having success with a platoon than there are successful teams with an old-school bell-cow runner. When you look at the best running games across the league last season (the Jets, the Titans, the Panthers, the Dolphins, the Ravens, the Saints, and the Cowboys, in order of yards per game) almost all of them were sharing the load between 2 or even 3 quality running backs. The only exception is the Titans, and they actually used to be a 2-back system, but Chris Johnson just turned into an animal this season. So even the exception on that list still has a borderline-starting back in their #2 spot, they just got lucky and didn't have to use him much.

 

The one thing about all these teams, though, is that they're in a position to ride the hot hand. Shonn Greene outproduced Thomas Jones at the end of the season, and the Jets started feeding him the ball more. Ray Rice outproduced Willis McGahee and nailed down the starting job. But if the starter gets hot, like Deangelo Williams on the Panthers or Chris Johnson on the Titans, they can just keep going to him until somebody behind him can do better.

 

Also, teams with a platoon are better insulated against injuries. When Ronnie Brown went down, Ricky Williams stepped up. Hell, the Cowboys lost Marion Barber AND Felix Jones, and they still had Tashard Choice waiting in the wings to step in, so their run game didn't miss a beat. Meanwhile, the Bears' run game tanked when Forte was dinged up last season, and it really hurt the team.

 

That's the situation I'd like to see the Bears in, and that's why I like the Taylor signing. It's way preferable to waste a little money on the #2 because your #1 guy is outproducing him and stays healthy. I mean, the other option is to have your #1 struggle or get hurt, and then find out you have a depth chart full of scrubs behind him. The players will work out who gets the carries by their production, and if Forte wants to keep carrying the load, all he has to do is hold off Taylor and stay healthy.

[nfoligno]

Agreed and agreed.

 

Agreed that we will allow a competition for Forte. He has never really had one since he was here. I mean, as a rookie he competed with AP. 2nd year there was no competition. Coming off a season like last year, I see nothing wrong w/ some competition.

 

With that said, I too think he wins the job and is the 1a back. I really think fans need to look back to last offseason. There were far greater expectations/plans for Kevin Jones than what fans today seem to remember. In Forte's rookie year, he ran the ball a lot, and the team was making a HUGE issue of lowering his number of carries and making KJ a bigger figure in the system. He was not just depth, but was supposed to play a legit role. So last year, we were supposed to have a form of a 1a/1b situation. Yea, 1a would have considerably more carries, but 1b was going to get plenty of carries regardless. Never happened, but today I think fans talk like the idea of Forte sharing carries is a new thing. It's not.

 

In Taylor, you have a player similar to how KJ was envisioned last year, only better and a better fit for Martz system.

 

Also agreed on workhorse back vs committee. I will say that to run a multi-back set, you need a coordinator capable of knowing how and when to rotate your backs, and you need backs that compliment each other. Just having two RBs doens't mean it will work. At the same time, I like this over the single back system. Sure, as a FF owner, I want that workhorse, but just look at what happens to those workhorses. Their careers seems to lessen by years. I mean, you have a great like Tomlinson who is done, and far sooner than many would have expected. This year, he fought with injuries all year, and I should point out many (including myself) predicted a bad year due to his high carries last year.

 

Something to think about, as you (Jason) said you still believe in a 30 carry RB. That is 480 carries if that player starts all 16 games. A bit of research was done a while back showing how much of a dropoff RBs see after a season w/ 380 carries on the year. Give or take a couple, but 380 seemed to be the indicator of a bad season to come. Its sort of like talk of hitting the 30 year old wall. Some like TJ do well after, but when you look at the whole, it is pretty scary just how fast a RB goes downhill at 30. Those who do well aftre 30, how much of the reason is due to few carries previously in their career, like with TJ.

 

By the way, for the record, 380 on the season is just under 22 carries per game. Just think about that. I think most would agree 380 is a really high number on the season, but I don't think many realize how little it takes to get there.

 

I love the idea of a RB who gets 18-20 carries a game, which is a lot, and a 2nd back who gets 8-10. You still have a #1 RB, but at the same time, you are doing a better job of keeping him fresh and not wearing him out.

 

Yeah, I think Forte's going to win out, but I like that they're having an open competition, and from a guy who has borderline-starter ability but doesn't mind being the #2 back. Like you said, Forte was a comparable rusher behind a worse o-line, and while playing through some considerable injuries. Also, I think Forte's the better pass-catching RB: while Taylor is a little bit more of a threat in the open field (Taylor's career YPC is 8.01 to Forte's 7.89) but Forte has a better catch percentage (Taylor has a career 76% catch rate, while Forte's sitting at 81%). If I had to choose between a receiving back being a little shiftier or a little more reliable, I'd go for reliable.

 

 

I actually think that the running back by committee approach is working pretty well across the league. There are certainly more teams having success with a platoon than there are successful teams with an old-school bell-cow runner. When you look at the best running games across the league last season (the Jets, the Titans, the Panthers, the Dolphins, the Ravens, the Saints, and the Cowboys, in order of yards per game) almost all of them were sharing the load between 2 or even 3 quality running backs. The only exception is the Titans, and they actually used to be a 2-back system, but Chris Johnson just turned into an animal this season. So even the exception on that list still has a borderline-starting back in their #2 spot, they just got lucky and didn't have to use him much.

 

The one thing about all these teams, though, is that they're in a position to ride the hot hand. Shonn Greene outproduced Thomas Jones at the end of the season, and the Jets started feeding him the ball more. Ray Rice outproduced Willis McGahee and nailed down the starting job. But if the starter gets hot, like Deangelo Williams on the Panthers or Chris Johnson on the Titans, they can just keep going to him until somebody behind him can do better.

 

Also, teams with a platoon are better insulated against injuries. When Ronnie Brown went down, Ricky Williams stepped up. Hell, the Cowboys lost Marion Barber AND Felix Jones, and they still had Tashard Choice waiting in the wings to step in, so their run game didn't miss a beat. Meanwhile, the Bears' run game tanked when Forte was dinged up last season, and it really hurt the team.

 

That's the situation I'd like to see the Bears in, and that's why I like the Taylor signing. It's way preferable to waste a little money on the #2 because your #1 guy is outproducing him and stays healthy. I mean, the other option is to have your #1 struggle or get hurt, and then find out you have a depth chart full of scrubs behind him. The players will work out who gets the carries by their production, and if Forte wants to keep carrying the load, all he has to do is hold off Taylor and stay healthy.

 

[bradjock]

Wouldn't it be a novel idea if we just played the best guy?

 

Agreed with NFO's comments that you need an oc who knows how and when to rotate guys. In his rookie year, Forte would sometimes look great and he gets yanked out of the game for a series or two in favor of Kevin Jones. Many times there would be a noticeable drop-off.

 

Heck, last year there were more times he should have been yanked. I was pissed last year when we yanked Forte for Bell. I'm sitting there wondering, "Who the hell is this guy?" Next thing I know he breaks off a 72 yard run.

 

I even liked the way Minny rotated Taylor and AP, using Taylor on 3rd downs.

[Guest TerraTor]

matt is our RunningBack and we'll go from there.

[AZ54]

The season is just too long for a single back to carry the load anymore. It's not just a question of 16 games either, the goal is to make the playoffs and that means 18 or 19 games. There will be exceptions to the rule but those exceptions haven't lasted long after their big season. Even the Vikings Adrian Peterson, who is still a beast, is slowing down already, that's obvious to me early in the year but especially in the playoffs when a LB ran him down from behind. You need at least two good RBs and they both need to share the load.

[nfoligno]

A look at the workhorses over the years.

 

In 2000, the top two rushing attempt backs were Eddie George (403) and Edgerrin James (387). The following year, George didn't even get to 1,000 yards and his ypc was down to 3 ypc. James was injured most of the following year.

 

In 2001, Stephen Davis led the league and had a career high of 356 carries. The following year he was hit with injuries and managed only 200 carries in a weak season.

 

In 2002, Ricky Williams led the league with 383 carries, and proved an exception to the rule carry for 392 the following year w/ another great season. LT was 2nd w/ 372 carries, and while he had a great year in 2003, his carries went down all the way to 313 as the team tried to better limit him.

 

In 2003, Ricky Williams led the league with 392, but was out of football in 2004.

Jamal Lewis had 383 carries and went over 2000 yards, but dealt w/ injuries the following year as his yardage was cut in half. Lewis was never the same RB again.

 

In 2004, Curtis Martin led the league with 371 carries, but this pretty much ended his career as he was injured part of the following year, managed only 220 carries with a 3.3 average and called it quits.

 

In 2005, Shaun Alexander led the league with 370 carries, but this was the final year he would break 1,000 as he was never the same back again w/ numerous injuries.

 

Edge James had 360 carries w/ a nice 4.2 avg, followed the next year w/ a 3.4 avg.

 

In 2006, Larry Johnson had a whopping 416 carries, but would suffer through injuries after this season and never again saw as much as 200 carries, and was never the same back.

 

In 2007, the top back only had a more managable 325 carries. No huge workhorses this yera.

 

In 2008, Turner had 378 carries, but would then suffer injuries and failed to hit 200 carries or 1,000 yards the following year.

 

AP had 363 carries, and while he did well in 2009, he worked through injuries and saw his carries drop to 313.

 

Over and over again, the stats show that RBs who have a high number of carries one season usually end up injured, or simply less effective the following year. 370 carries looks to be about the cutoff point. There are examples of backs who get 350 carries and do not see the immediate dropoff, but even then, their continued success seems short lived as they usually deal w/ injuries or a suffer in play w/ in a couple years after that point. There are exceptions to the rule, but not many, and not for long.

 

IMHO, having a back who can rack up around 300 carries in a season (18.75 per game) looks pretty solid. That still allows a RB to see plenty of carries, but also leaves enough carries for a 2nd back to rack up plenty. It just seems like the days of the work horse back have come and gone. If you push your RB to rack up the big carry seasons, you do so at the expense of the following year.

I've seen mention of Taylor getting more carries than Forte, but I just don't see how that can be.

 

Taylor last year with a great OL got the same YPC as Forte got behind the paper mache OL. Actually, this is why I'm not all that impressed with the signing...aside from it being a minimal concern in regards to other needs.

 

On a semi-related note, does everyone think the prevailing theory that every team needs TWO top-line RBs is a load of crap? I believe a 30 carry RB is still feasible, and signing two starter-quality RBs is somewhat wasteful considering the team's performance and record last year which indicated glaring needs for multiple other positions.

 

[madlithuanian]

I'm with you guys on this...

[defiantgiant]

Great stuff about the 370-carry barrier, nfo. I'd like to see a split like we had in 2006: the Bears ran it 503 times, with 296 going to Thomas Jones and 157 going to Benson (the other 50 were AP and McKie, I assume.) That seems like a good split: around 300 carries for your #1 back, and around half that for your change-of-pace. I'd be OK with 300 for Forte and 150-200 for Taylor.

[AZ54]

Yes, great work on the stats Nfol. We should put some perspective on the effort a RB puts in. If a WR gets 100 rec/seas they've had a great year yet that's just 6.25 rec/game. Of course they take hits on balls thrown their way so I could assume that puts an average thrown-to number at roughly 10 thrown at/game. While these guys do take some bruising hits from DBs they don't often deal with the pile ups and violent collisions with the interior lineman and linebackers like a RB does. All of football is a demanding sport on the body but RBs are more often than not at the center of it.

 

 

[DrunkBomber]

If we get 2008 Forte he will and if we get 2009 Forte than Taylor will. At least we know what we will get from Taylor whereas Forte will be a mystery.

[Bears4Ever_34]

Well if Forte is anything like he was last year he will be benched as a starter and Taylor will get more carries. If he improves greatly from last year he will get more carries with Taylor coming in to spar him like he did AP last year. That's atleast what I envision but I wouldn't be surprised that at the end of the year Chester Taylor was our starting running back.

[Guest TerraTor]

If we get 2008 Forte he will and if we get 2009 Forte than Taylor will. At least we know what we will get from Taylor whereas Forte will be a mystery.

 

Not a real fan of Taylor as a starter. I was always a believer of a guy beinga career backup for a reason, see Lamont Jordan, and of course Chester Taylor

[DrunkBomber]

Not a real fan of Taylor as a starter. I was always a believer of a guy beinga career backup for a reason, see Lamont Jordan, and of course Chester Taylor

Well he wouldnt be "the man." At minimum he would start and get 65% of carries but we would never use him as a feature back without having rb by committee.