Browns trade Trent Richardson to Colts

LuckyLloyd

eagle eye wrote: »

Lol, here you go again. Lets see how it goes. He has spent most of his career with a horrible team who had no QB who could do anything so all they had to do was watch out for Richardson!

He didn't have a preseason with his current team. Wait and see how he does next year, your prediction is just a guess, its not based on any information worth a ****.

There are 23 NFL games worth of information available to review. My prediction is based on that. We will indeed see how he gets on next year. Will be interesting to see if he keeps the #1 RB spot through preseason.

Moist Bread

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

There are 23 NFL games worth of information available to review. My prediction is based on that. We will indeed see how he gets on next year. Will be interesting to see if he keeps the #1 RB spot through preseason.

I guess if you can judge Luck favorably based on roughly the same amount of games, you can judge T Rich harshly.

Silver-Tiger

There wasn't much hanging around the streets to replace him with mind you.

Mcgahee with a whopping 31 yards off 21 carries. He actually just runs into the nearest body he can find and the has a sleep on it.

Some flashy looking backs now coming out of last years draft. Gio and Lacy looking like deserved top 2 but Stacy, Ellington, Franklin (When he got the chance) Bell and others looking well.

Trent could be the last top 10 back we see for a long long time.

LuckyLloyd

Does anyone want to give me examples of 1st round NFL skill position players that were worse than replacement level during their first season and a half and turned it around to become the player they were originally predicted to be?

I'm struggling to think of examples off the top of my head. Beast Mode looked like hs was never going to be a star in the league when he was traded to Seattle I suppose, but even then his first two years - while unspectacular - weren't TRich levels awful.

nerd69

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Does anyone want to give me examples of 1st round NFL skill position players that were worse than replacement level during their first season and a half and turned it around to become the player they were originally predicted to be?

I'm struggling to think of examples off the top of my head. Beast Mode looked like hs was never going to be a star in the league when he was traded to Seattle I suppose, but even then his first two years - while unspectacular - weren't TRich levels awful.

if i remember correctly though beast mode still looked pretty good just a bit disinterested.

peyton manning didnt have a great first year but i think that was more down to the learning curve for qbs at the time it was pretty standard

rbs in particular tend to be pretty good there first year

LuckyLloyd

nerd69 wrote: »

if i remember correctly though beast mode still looked pretty good just a bit disinterested.

peyton manning didnt have a great first year but i think that was more down to the learning curve for qbs at the time it was pretty standard

rbs in particular tend to be pretty good there first year

Yep that was my recollection.

HigginsJ

To be fair Beast Mode went over 1,000 yards in both his 1st 2 seasons with the bills without playing in 16 games either year.

RB's tend to have the easiest transition to the NFL. Its hard to argue with people who think T-Rich is or is going to be a bust. I'd still think that he was so good in college that he will turn it around & that he has had a few valud.excuses (injuries, playing with Brandon Weedon, change of team)

Chucky the tree

HigginsJ wrote: »

To be fair Beast Mode went over 1,000 yards in both his 1st 2 seasons with the bills without playing in 16 games either year.

RB's tend to have the easiest transition to the NFL. Its hard to argue with people who think T-Rich is or is going to be a bust. I'd still think that he was so good in college that he will turn it around & that he has had a few valud.excuses (injuries, playing with Brandon Weedon, change of team)

I'd have looked pretty good in college behind that Oline.

HigginsJ

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I'd have looked pretty good in college behind that Oline.

Thats a fair point but he was still pretty spectacular. 2,000 rushing/receiving yards & 24tds.

Justin10

I said it before the draft and nothing has happened for me to change my mind, that he runs too slow with the ball.

I think he is going to be a complete bust.

davyjose

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I'd have looked pretty good in college behind that Oline.

That's just a lazy, nothing statement TBH.

The only hing I glean from it is that we're allowed criticize him for having a good Oline in college, but not defend him for having a sh!t Oline in the NFL.

This is an example of the standard of the Colts line (and yes that's the best defensive player in the league left completely unblocked.)

davyjose

HigginsJ wrote: »

Thats a fair point but he was still pretty spectacular. 2,000 rushing/receiving yards & 24tds.

Chucky would have got 2,001 yrds and 25 tds :rolleyes:

matthew8

davyjose wrote: »

That's just a lazy, nothing statement TBH.

The only hing I glean from it is that we're allowed criticize him for having a good Oline in college, but not defend him for having a sh!t Oline in the NFL.

Donald Brown is at 6.3 YPC behind that line, Bradshaw was at 4.5. He's clearly doing much worse than he should be doing. The great O-line in Alabama is simply an explanation for the big change in yards.

Chucky the tree

davyjose wrote: »

That's just a lazy, nothing statement TBH.

The only hing I glean from it is that we're allowed criticize him for having a good Oline in college, but not defend him for having a sh!t Oline in the NFL.

This is an example of the standard of the Colts line (and yes that's the best defensive player in the league left completely unblocked.)

Your defense of him is pretty comical at this stage tbh. Even claiming your Oline is terrible while your other running backs are doing far better than Trent should say it all. He had an elite Oline in alabama which was a huge help. He's average at the NFL level.

LuckyLloyd

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Your defense of him is pretty comical at this stage tbh. Even claiming your Oline is terrible while your other running backs are doing far better than Trent should say it all. He had an elite Oline in alabama which was a huge help. He's average at the NFL level.

TRich would be delighted to be average tbh!! He's one of the worst RBs in the NFL right now - probably the worst #1 anyway.

davyjose

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Your defense of him is pretty comical at this stage tbh. Even claiming your Oline is terrible while your other running backs are doing far better than Trent should say it all. He had an elite Oline in alabama which was a huge help. He's average at the NFL level.

Why because I use facts and examples. Rather than glib, nonsensical comments like yourself?I'm glad we're both getting a laugh out of each other's opinions anyway.

I've made it clear I'm disappointed so far in his performance. But there are certain mitigating circumstances. Most runners in the league have a few huge gains that inflate their stats. Richardson doesn't have any. Yes that's bad, but his 3rd down conversion rate is almost as good as Petersons (I've already stated that, but I'm not sure you've even bothered to read back that far). He's not nearly as far as other people suggest he is from being a very good back.
Donald Brown isn't the guy pounding it up the middle trying to let eat the clock with 8 in the box. Donald Brown is averaging maybe a third or a quarter the amount of carries as Trich. He's put in in much more favourable circumstances -- exclusively to his strengths. I'm not complaining; he's having a very good season.

Billy86

davyjose wrote: »

Chucky would have got 2,001 yrds and 25 tds :rolleyes:

Mark Ingram had nearly identical numbers to him to be fair though, and he's been kind of useless behind a pretty good offensive line:

2009 Ingram: 271 carries for 1,658yds (6.2 avg) and 17 TDs, 32 catches for 334yds (10.4 avg) and 3 TDs.
2011 Richardson: 283 carries for 1,679yds (5.9 avg) and 21 TDs, 29 catches for 338yds (11.7 avg) and 3 TDs.

Richardson has more TDs but Ingram has a higher per carry average and won the Heisman. The offensive line comments are true, but there is also the fact that in college they could use their size to simply just run over anyone that got near them if they didn't hit the hole in time - in the NFL that's just not the case. Lacy looks to have that extra bit of speed in his first few strides which really is all the difference, it's just not evident in the other two.

Personally I am still scratching my head at Richardson going #3 or the Saints trading up to take Ingram in the first (esp. when they had a solid running game already). But it is interesting that at the end of last year a lot of the media were fawning over Richardson despite his poor numbers for "carrying" his offense (no horrible pun intended ) yet now they are claiming he was always pedestrian there. Personally I did feel he was fairly pedestrian last year, but then I remember being confused when he got pretty regular mention in the offensive rookie of the year shortlists (even if it was always obviously going to a QB).

Chucky the tree

davyjose wrote: »

Why because I use facts and examples. Rather than glib, nonsensical comments like yourself?I'm glad we're both getting a laugh out of each other's opinions anyway.

I've made it clear I'm disappointed so far in his performance. But there are certain mitigating circumstances. Most runners in the league have a few huge gains that inflate their stats. Richardson doesn't have any. Yes that's bad, but his 3rd down conversion rate is almost as good as Petersons (I've already stated that, but I'm not sure you've even bothered to read back that far). He's not nearly as far as other people suggest he is from being a very good back.
Donald Brown isn't the guy pounding it up the middle trying to let eat the clock with 8 in the box. Donald Brown is averaging maybe a third or a quarter the amount of carries as Trich. He's put in in much more favourable circumstances -- exclusively to his strengths. I'm not complaining; he's having a very good season.

haha examples, good one. So a defender going unblocked on a passing play proves your Oline is one of the worst. It's not like every team in the NFL hasn't had the exact same thing happen to them. I read your the conversion rate. Having a third down conversion rate the same as Peterson doesn't make him a good player you know. I'm not sure what the point of it is either. When exactly s Trent Richardson trying to eat the clock with 8 in the box as well?

LuckyLloyd

This forum seems to have a problem letting go of college stars. You really need to forget what players might have been at NCAA level. It's a giant step up and so many don't pan out like the pre draft hype said they would.

davyjose

Chucky the tree wrote: »

haha examples, good one. So a defender going unblocked on a passing play proves your Oline is one of the worst. It's not like every team in the NFL hasn't had the exact same thing happen to them. I read your the conversion rate. Having a third down conversion rate the same as Peterson doesn't make him a good player you know. I'm not sure what the point of it is either. When exactly s Trent Richardson trying to eat the clock with 8 in the box as well?

As recently as last Sunday he was charged with running down the clock on the Colts last drive.

TBH, I'm sick of having to explain just how poor the Colts line is. People don't seem to believe me. I thought I'd show an example, but it'd be easier if people watched a game, rather than just checking the stat sheet each week and posting it up.

The point of Richardson having a decent 3rd down completion rate is simple: that's exactly what his job is. He's our number 1 back in what is designed to be a power running game.

It boils down to this: he's having a lot of trouble making big gains, but the bread and butter stuff he is doing just fine. I certainly wish we hadn't traded away our first pick for him, but I'm not about to call him a bust yet either.

D3PO

davyjose wrote: »

The point of Richardson having a decent 3rd down completion rate is simple: that's exactly what his job is. .

that what his job should be. Hes an average 3rd down NFL back nothing more. Hes not the featured back you believe he deserves to be.

as for harping on over and over about the O Line of the Colts, look at the Seahawks see how they are getting owned game after game and the pressure on Wilson.

Beast mode still doing a serious job though.

Wait whats that their crap at pass protection but great at run blocking .... well when the Colts run block Bradshaw and brown can make the yards T Rich cant.

Richardson isn't a permier NFL RB hes never going to realize first round potential and the Colts overpayed for him this is how it is.

He cant pass protect
He cant break big runs

So without either in his armoury he cant be a top NFL RB

LuckyLloyd

D3PO telling it like it is.

taidghbaby

davyjose wrote: »

but it'd be easier if people watched a game, rather than just checking the stat sheet each week and posting it up.

Don't be silly

eagle eye

D3PO wrote: »

that what his job should be. Hes an average 3rd down NFL back nothing more. Hes not the featured back you believe he deserves to be.

as for harping on over and over about the O Line of the Colts, look at the Seahawks see how they are getting owned game after game and the pressure on Wilson.

Beast mode still doing a serious job though.

Wait whats that their crap at pass protection but great at run blocking .... well when the Colts run block Bradshaw and brown can make the yards T Rich cant.

Richardson isn't a permier NFL RB hes never going to realize first round potential and the Colts overpayed for him this is how it is.

He cant pass protect
He cant break big runs

So without either in his armoury he cant be a top NFL RB

What about the fact that Brown is running from the shotgun more often than not? What about the fact that he has very few carries? How can you give Bradshaw such credit when he only had 41 carries this season? How come you don't even mention that both those guys had a preseason with the Colts but Richardson did not? Since when can Richardson not pass protect? Please don't give me stats from his time with the Browns because they are so whacked out by having a QB who had nobody open. The time element of blocking is not taken into account. He is expected to block a big guy coming through for about a second and he seems to have almost always done that anytime I've watched him play.

D3PO

eagle eye wrote: »

Since when can Richardson not pass protect? .

are you blind, or do you just not watch the colts and previously the browns play ?

D3PO

eagle eye wrote: »

What about the fact that Brown is running from the shotgun more often than not?

and running from shotgun makes running lanes magically appear ?

D3PO

eagle eye wrote: »

The time element of blocking is not taken into account. He is expected to block a big guy coming through for about a second and he seems to have almost always done that anytime I've watched him play.

are you kidding me ive seen him whiff and completely miss the rusher at least a dozen times including twice last weekend. you must ballwatch a lot and actually not watch plays developing.

Billy86

D3PO wrote: »

and running from shotgun makes running lanes magically appear ?

If anything, I think the shotgun tends to make for less successful running plays on average (hence... the pistol).

And as a Packers fan, I know ALL about mediocre-at-best running backs being decent at pass protection, and how that does not a great running back make. That, and a history of poor run blocking. :pac:

If you can't get back to the line quick enough, the rest is irrelevant. Just ask Cedric Benson, or Alex Green, or John "I love you but you're overrated" Kuhn, or Brandon Saine, or James Starks as a #1 RB. Getting back to the line FAST and spotting the best hole is about as key to the RB position in the NFL as any skill is to any spot (Ryan Grant made a career on that and either making the first man miss or falling forward) - sadly, I just don't see it at all in Richardson.

Rock Lesnar

Billy86 wrote: »

Getting back to the line FAST and spotting the best hole is about as key to the RB position in the NFL as any skill is to any spot

I would agree with this, Brown has 244 yards from 39 carries, and Richardson has 248 yards from 83 carries.

I know people say the O Line is bad, but if its bad for Richardson, its bad for Brown, yet he still manages 6 yards a carry and the Colts are ranked 12th in rushing yards.

I also know RB's need to protect the QB at times to, and ive seen the Manning/Brown clip on the Colts forum, but ive seen alot of the Colts this season and Richardson has got caught out a couple of times. Like i said over on the Colts forum, I know Richardson is the main man, but if he's struggling, I think Brown should get more carries.

LuckyLloyd

davyjose wrote: »

I thought I'd show an example, but it'd be easier if people watched a game, rather than just checking the stat sheet each week and posting it up.

taidghbaby wrote: »

Don't be silly

3 yards a carry when your backup is running behind the same line for 6 yards a carry is a huge enough difference that context or 'eye test' isn't going to bridge. If TRich, the no.3 pick in the draft, winds up as a goalline specialist good for ramming into the pile and picking up short yardage conversions then he's BUST CITY.