• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

The Chubb-Hub Yardage Delivery Service

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
In the spirit of revising shit takes, I said after one pre-season game that Chubb obviously didn't have it.

I'm an idiot.
Eh, early on in Chubb's career, he was a different player. Even during that rookie season, he physically was getting back to form.

If he didn't have a chance of improving physically, I think your take was pretty valid. Luckily for us, he continued to improve (whether it was getting healthier after his injury, getting stronger, or getting more into game shape... or maybe some of all of the above) and now we have one of the best pure runners in the NFL.

I'm going to be very interested to see how his vision works in the ZBS. I've seen great vision in highlights, especially when we ran outside/inside zone plays last year. Now he'll get a chance to show if he can do it more consistently.
 
In the spirit of revising shit takes, I said after one pre-season game that Chubb obviously didn't have it.

I'm an idiot.

To give yourself an out, you never said what "it" was. It could have been bad vision. Then you would have been correct, Chubb obviously doesn't have bad vision.

Or maybe "it" is one "b" in his last name, clearly Chubb has 2.
 
To give yourself an out, you never said what "it" was. It could have been bad vision. Then you would have been correct, Chubb obviously doesn't have bad vision.

Or maybe "it" is one "b" in his last name, clearly Chubb has 2.

Lol - I think I was actually specific in my post. I think it was something along the lines of "having no shake". Perhaps even "plodding" or "hesitant"?

I'll have to dig it up :)
 
Lol - I think I was actually specific in my post. I think it was something along the lines of "having no shake". Perhaps even "plodding" or "hesitant"?

I'll have to dig it up :)

No need to dig it up, I was really just joking, we are all wrong a decent amount if we make definitive statements. I am still a bit torn on Chubb, he might be the best back in the NFL, but how much is that worth? We will see I guess, as I know we have a run first offense coming based upon Stefanski's play calling in the past, but also should have the type of line any good back can run behind...then again, it will be interesting to see what a great back can do.
 
Chubb is an elite runner. I don't think anyone would deny that. And an elite runner can look good in a bad system and great in a good system. The issue is that RB isn't as valuable relative to other positions. Overpaying a RB, even a stud RB, can set your team back because you could be using that money on positions that have a greater impact on your ability to win football games.

I'd also add that a good system can compensate for a mediocre RB, which is why the position matters less today than it did ten years ago. The NFL is smarter, and a lot more teams have decent to good coaching, which minimizes the talent level teams need at the position. Sure, it's always better to have a star than a non-star, but if your system is good enough to make non-stars look like studs, why would you overpay to keep a star? That's the problem NFL GMs have to solve.

But look at the Panthers last year. CMC shattered records and had one of the greatest individual seasons at the RB position of all time. The team went 5-11.

ETA: What it boils down to, I guess, is the saying that "RB doesn't matter," which I think is false. You still need talent at the position. The best system in the world isn't going to turn a shitty player into a superstar. Guys still need talent. You just don't necessarily need elite talent if you've got a smart coach and a good offensive line. So it should not be that RB doesn't matter, but rather that it matters significantly less than it did in the past, which is why so few of these guys are getting paid any more.

My opinion is RB > TE/WR, dollar-for-dollar under the current market.

A RB gives you a lot more ability to control the clock, and I prefer safe first downs over non-safe chance of a big splash downfield catch, in a case where most people would consider them "equal" or even prefer the second.

Now, the longevity odds make it closer, but there are plenty of WRs/TEs who drop off a cliff in their late 20s/early 30s as well, and some long-career RBs.

I still think edge rushers and tackles are the most valuable non-qb positions, but it's close between them and the RBs.
 
My opinion is RB > TE/WR, dollar-for-dollar under the current market.

A RB gives you a lot more ability to control the clock, and I prefer safe first downs over non-safe chance of a big splash downfield catch, in a case where most people would consider them "equal" or even prefer the second.

Now, the longevity odds make it closer, but there are plenty of WRs/TEs who drop off a cliff in their late 20s/early 30s as well, and some long-career RBs.

I still think edge rushers and tackles are the most valuable non-qb positions, but it's close between them and the RBs.
No need to get into it, but I think the problem is it is unwise to evaluate each position down the line. The QB and scheme provide so much to a team that every other position is like the cherry on top.

I play guitar. Electric guitars produce a sound based on pickups. The majority of their sound comes from the quality of your amplifier, your pickups, and the quality of wood. Everything else - density of wood, type of wood, type of tuners, quality of bridge, string size, how clean your guitar is, etc. - play a role, but the magnitude of difference is impossible to establish. I view football positions the same way.

After QB and the quality of your offensive and defensive schemes, I think it becomes difficult to compare value across positions.

I suppose my order after QB would involve positional groups. I think exterior offensive line(though I could be easily swayed to make this interior), cornerbacks, and interior defensive line are the next three most important groups to invest in. For our scheme, after that, I’d go interior offensive line, edge rusher, runningback, wide receiver, and tight end.

Ultimately, it comes down to how expensive a position is. An edge rush is going to cost you nearly as much as a quarterback - I just do not see the value there. Ditto for runningback (though, in our scheme, I may be wrong). Whereas a position like cornerback is fairly cheap, but provides the same ballpark’s worth of value as an edge rusher of similar quality.

This is why I’m always yelling about value. Is Myles Garrett better at his position than Denzel Ward is at his? Probably. But I would rather have Denzel at $12 million than Myles at $20 million. Similarly, I think the entirety of an offensive line is a more worthwhile investment than runningback, simply due to the long-term value (runningbacks peak at 26 years old, tackles around 29, and interior around 28).
 
No need to get into it, but I think the problem is it is unwise to evaluate each position down the line. The QB and scheme provide so much to a team that every other position is like the cherry on top.

I play guitar. Electric guitars produce a sound based on pickups. The majority of their sound comes from the quality of your amplifier, your pickups, and the quality of wood. Everything else - density of wood, type of wood, type of tuners, quality of bridge, string size, how clean your guitar is, etc. - play a role, but the magnitude of difference is impossible to establish. I view football positions the same way.

After QB and the quality of your offensive and defensive schemes, I think it becomes difficult to compare value across positions.

I suppose my order after QB would involve positional groups. I think exterior offensive line(though I could be easily swayed to make this interior), cornerbacks, and interior defensive line are the next three most important groups to invest in. For our scheme, after that, I’d go interior offensive line, edge rusher, runningback, wide receiver, and tight end.

Ultimately, it comes down to how expensive a position is. An edge rush is going to cost you nearly as much as a quarterback - I just do not see the value there. Ditto for runningback (though, in our scheme, I may be wrong). Whereas a position like cornerback is fairly cheap, but provides the same ballpark’s worth of value as an edge rusher of similar quality.

This is why I’m always yelling about value. Is Myles Garrett better at his position than Denzel Ward is at his? Probably. But I would rather have Denzel at $12 million than Myles at $20 million. Similarly, I think the entirety of an offensive line is a more worthwhile investment than runningback, simply due to the long-term value (runningbacks peak at 26 years old, tackles around 29, and interior around 28).

The problem with the "non-QBs don't matter/don't win you games" trope, or even the oft-stated "RBs don't matter," and I know that neither one is your argument, is that taken to the logical conclusion, every team should simply try to bid ~90%+ of their cap on the best FA QB every single offseason, and pull randoms off the street for the other 54 roster spots.

There absolutely is an analytics-focused art to determining the salary value you want to put into each other position, which you do seem to be getting at, and there are different levels of emphasis on the "cherries on top" or the tuners/bridge/string size/etc. for each team and scheme. I do think there is more value than merely a "cherry on top," and apparently NFL GMs and player agents agree with me, even if Vegas oddsmakers do not i.e. non-QBs almost never count more than 1 point.
 
Last edited:
The problem with the "non-QBs don't matter/don't win you games" trope, or even the oft-stated "RBs don't matter," and I know that neither one is your argument, is that taken to the logical conclusion, every team should simply try to bid ~90%+ of their cap on the best FA QB every single offseason, and pull randoms off the street for the other 54 roster spots.

There absolutely is an analytics-focused art to determining the salary value you want to put into each other position, which you do seem to be getting at, and there are different levels of emphasis on the "cherries on top" or the tuners/bridge/string size/etc. for each team and scheme. I do think there is more value than merely a "cherry on top," and apparently NFL GMs and player agents agree with me, even if Vegas oddsmakers do not i.e. non-QBs almost never count more than 1 point.

I think we need to be thinking of it as less of a "RBs don't matter" situation and more that it's usually not worth paying them big money. Just keep investing in the position in the draft on day two/three and use free agency to sign competent, cheap backups.

Chubb may be an exception because he is potentially a generational back, but for the most part I think your best bet is to cycle rookie contract backs.
 
Eh, early on in Chubb's career, he was a different player. Even during that rookie season, he physically was getting back to form.

If he didn't have a chance of improving physically, I think your take was pretty valid. Luckily for us, he continued to improve (whether it was getting healthier after his injury, getting stronger, or getting more into game shape... or maybe some of all of the above) and now we have one of the best pure runners in the NFL.

I'm going to be very interested to see how his vision works in the ZBS. I've seen great vision in highlights, especially when we ran outside/inside zone plays last year. Now he'll get a chance to show if he can do it more consistently.

Assuming the NFL plays a full season this year, I believe Chubb is about to post one of the greatest seasons in franchise history and I could even see him pushing the 2,000 yd mark.

We added a top level run blocker at RT, a new LT who should be great in a zone run scheme, a strong run-blocking TE, and a coach who wants to take pressure off his young QB by running the ball. The only thing that could hold Chubb back at this point is an injury.
 
Last edited:
Personally, assuming the NFL plays a full season this year, I believe Chubb is about to post one of the greatest seasons in franchise history and I could even see him pushing the 2,000 yd mark.

We added a top level run blocker at RT, a new LT who should be great in a zone run scheme, a strong run-blocking TE, and a coach who wants to take pressure off his young QB by running the ball. The only thing that could hold Chubb back at this point is an injury.
Last year I said that offensive playcalling was the area I was concerned about. Well, I had no idea it would be the worst abuse of offensive talent I've witnessed in my lifetime, but this year I have two areas of concern on offense.

First and foremost, I'm concerned about our right guard. I know we have options. I know there's reason for cautious optimism. But, I just feel that both offensive and defensive lines are areas where you actually get increasing returns, rather than decreasing returns. I think Wills and Conklin are a special tackle duo, Bitonio is one of the best in the game, and I think Tretter still has some good time left in him, but his wear and tear is concerning. I remember the years of Shaun Lauvao ruining our Sundays. I know that pressure up the middle is the one thing you can't scheme against in the passing game. I am worried that none of the guys on our roster is good enough to fill that one question mark on the line.

The second one, which is a smaller concern, is the way Baker jives with Van Pelt and Stefanski. I'm only seeing "all the right things" right now, but I wonder what Baker is going to do the first time he throws a pick, or makes a bad play, or stumbles. Is he going to abandon the new footwork Van Pelt has asked him to use? Is he going to show frustration and blame coaching for not letting him do things his way? I think he'll be great, and handle everything in stride--but it's a question that's going to have to be answered.
 
Assuming the NFL plays a full season this year, I believe Chubb is about to post one of the greatest seasons in franchise history and I could even see him pushing the 2,000 yd mark.

We added a top level run blocker at RT, a new LT who should be great in a zone run scheme, a strong run-blocking TE, and a coach who wants to take pressure off his young QB by running the ball. The only thing that could hold Chubb back at this point is an injury.

Don't forget the hot new fullback.
 
I’m sorry for posting this in here but since we are discussing paying Chubb (at least a little bit but not a ton) did anyone see how the NFLPA kind of allowed RBs to get kind of dicked by neutering holdouts? I feel like there’s even less motivation to pay them after their rookie deal.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top