While some teams like that big bruising RB that can handle 30 carries a game, that bulk should be natural and not forced. The college game is more suited to quick and speedy backs so guys like Best, Forsett, Bush, J.Rodgers, Devine, etc all flourish. Of course big backs like Ricky Williams and Ron Dayne can also excel in college but my point is that any type of back can have success in NCAA. The pro game is more suited to the bigger backs but I think the NFL makes a big mistake when it asks kids to bulk up to handle the rigors of a long NFL season.
Many of these smaller RBs are special because of their quickness and speed. If they can only handle 15 touches a game so what? I'd rather have 15 good touches than 20-25 mediocre touches. More teams are realizing this now in the NFL as many of them now want two running backs to shoulder the load. Plus having two good backs will allow them to use different styles and protect against injuries.
Case #1: Steve Slaton. He had a great rookie year and rushed for over 1200 yards. He was always a quick and fast player and played at 199 pounds. He bulked up to 215 last year and sucked. He did have some injuries which hurt but he wasn't the same back. This year he's going back down to 199.
Case #2: Kevin Jones. He rushed for over 1100 yards his rookie year with the Lions with much of that coming in the second half of the year. He averaged 4.7 ypc. After that rookie year he never rushed for as much as 700 yards and his best ypc in any year since was 3.8. He currently weighs 228 pounds but he's not a bruiser. He went from being a big play guy in college to very average in the NFL as a bulked up back. He was listed at 209 in college and had great elusiveness. You would never know he was elusive watching him today. Here's a clip from his VT days.
I'm sure there are many examples of this. I'm just tired of hearing NFL coaches asking running backs to bulk up for the NFL. I'd rather have a RB that can do something good (like get outside) than bulk him up so he's not particularly good at anything. Why add that bulk to handle 25+ carries when it makes you lousy? The expression "Jack of all trades but master of none" applies here. When you see guys like Chris Johnson, Brian Westbrook and Warrick Dunn all excel despite their size, why change that?
I completely agree. Going with the NFL again, the Redskins, when they picked Clinton Portis up in 2005 asked him to bulk up which I think was a huge mistake as he's never been the same.
Under Nebraska HC Bill Callahan, our S&C coach Dave Kennedy (formerly of Pitt, now at Texas A&M) really worked on bulking players up as well as long-distance running. We had strong players who looked the part, but they lacked explosiveness which is essential in football and most sports. There comes a point where players are too muscle bound and they start losing athleticism. It's a fine balance, I'm sure.
Look at David Boston. He bulked up so much his muscles got too strong for his ligaments and he was constantly getting hurt. He also was too muscle bound and tipped the scales at 240-260. I know sprinters are muscle bound but I've never seen a fast sprinter weight anywhere close to that much. Adding weight, even good muscle weight, can slow you down.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks