Philosophical RB question

[DMD]

The recent arrest of Cedric Benson feeds into one of my late night ponderings as of late.

 

Should we always downgrade any RB who has been a headcase or at least is too egotistical or had behavioral problems?

 

I think of the best RBs that have ever been - Payton, Sanders, Brown, Smith, Bettis, Martin, Tomlinson, etc... and they all seem like nice guys you could have as friends and to my recollection, the best backs never come with any baggage or produce more in the NFL.

 

There have been so many RBs that come into the league who have the baggage (Lawrence Phillips a poster child perhaps) and they just never seem to pan out. Benson is a player that I have been aware of since he was in High School and who was wildly successful until the got to the pros. He has never reached his probable potential IMO because he alienated his teammates and even the fans in CHI and while he has had some success in CIN, it is not nearly commensurate with what his previous performances would have suggested.

 

Typically RBs seem to be guys with good attitudes for the most part (unlike perhaps many top WRs).

 

Every year there is a back or two that comes into the league with some troubled past and I cannot think of one that exceeded expectations. There are many variables that go into making up a RB performance to be sure, but I am wondering how much being a "Good Guy" versus guys with egos and/or baggage should factor in. WR's with attitudes seem to excel (Steve Smith, Owens, Moss, etc.) but never RBs?

[Jackass]

The recent arrest of Cedric Benson feeds into one of my late night ponderings as of late.

 

Should we always downgrade any RB who has been a headcase or at least is too egotistical or had behavioral problems?

 

I think of the best RBs that have ever been - Payton, Sanders, Brown, Smith, Bettis, Martin, Tomlinson, etc... and they all seem like nice guys you could have as friends and to my recollection, the best backs never come with any baggage or produce more in the NFL.

 

There have been so many RBs that come into the league who have the baggage (Lawrence Phillips a poster child perhaps) and they just never seem to pan out. Benson is a player that I have been aware of since he was in High School and who was wildly successful until the got to the pros. He has never reached his probable potential IMO because he alienated his teammates and even the fans in CHI and while he has had some success in CIN, it is not nearly commensurate with what his previous performances would have suggested.

Typically RBs seem to be guys with good attitudes for the most part (unlike perhaps many top WRs).

 

Every year there is a back or two that comes into the league with some troubled past and I cannot think of one that exceeded expectations. There are many variables that go into making up a RB performance to be sure, but I am wondering how much being a "Good Guy" versus guys with egos and/or baggage should factor in. WR's with attitudes seem to excel (Steve Smith, Owens, Moss, etc.) but never RBs?

 

The Juice

 

Travis Henry..

 

But yeah, i think overall you have a good thesis there.

[Bronco Billy]

FWIW - good RBs make their lines want to kill themselves for them, as well as WRs blocking downfield, etc. The guys who really don't give a ####? The other guys on O do their jobs but won't take that extra step, or move off their blocks to the next level - and that's all it takes in the NFL to turn 3 yd runs into 20 yd runs at times.

 

Look at the great RBs - the rest of their O just loved them, literally. They'd kill for those guys.

Edited July 18, 2011 by Bronco Billy

[Seahawks21]

I don't know that being a humble, always team first guy is necessarily essential to being a superstar RB. Sure seems like it helps, but there have to be some exceptions. Some oddball guys off the top of my head: Portis, Ricky, Jim Brown, Ricky Watters, Corey Dillon, OJ (although that may be post-career). Most of those guys weren't franchise killers, but aren't exactly Curtis Martin either.

 

I think the line liking the player certainly has a lot to do with it. There also might be an intelligence based inference in there somewhere. Also, I think a lot of it may be that we are talking about a handful of the greatest athletes in the history of the world. No offense to WR's, but there is a reason why they were put at WR instead of RB. Generally, when you talk about the best of the best athletes in the world, you're talking QB's, RB's, and elite basketball players (Jordan, Kobe, Magic). Guys that KNOW in their soul that they really are better than everybody else, and therefore have to be humble about it, to be leaders and to keep the rest of us from disliking them for jealousy reasons. Jerry Rice knew he was good enough that he didn't have to prove anything to anyone. There aren't many receivers you can truly say that about. Maybe Calvin and Andre Johnson, who both come off as the nice guys as well. Maybe a bit of a chicken/egg argument here.