http://www.cincyjungle.com/2015/6/10/8754961/espn-jeremy-hill-ranked-5th-best-rb-in-the-nfl

Finally, Hill is getting some praise.

I know people felt like he didn't get enough credit in the rookie impact rankings a few weeks ago.

But calling him the 5th best RB in the NFL, ahead of the likes of Marshawn Lynch, DeMarco Murray, LeSean McCoy and Matt Forte is very, very high praise.

And he deserves every ounce o fit.

Lol @ Gurley being #7

(06-10-2015, 03:42 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Lol @ Gurley being #7

I think that is more an indictment on the RB situation in the NFL. 

They put Gurley ahead of McCoy, Forte, and Murray. Are. You. Kidding. Me.

But I wouldn't put Hill at #5 just yet. It's too early for that. Lynch is still a beast. McCoy still flourishes. As does Forte. I'd put Hill at #8 on that list right now.

(06-10-2015, 03:49 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: I think that is more an indictment on the RB situation in the NFL. 

There were 13 1,000 yard rushers last year and 9 of them did it with a 4.7 or higher YPC. A lot of these guys also added 200 - 800 yards of receiving as well and that's not even mentioning their TD totals.

There's no way a guy that hasn't rushed for a single yard at the professional level should be ranked above anyone with those credentials. There are still plenty of quality running backs in the NFL.

(06-10-2015, 03:55 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: They put Gurley ahead of McCoy, Forte, and Murray. Are. You. Kidding. Me.

But I wouldn't put Hill at #5 just yet. It's too early for that. Lynch is still a beast. McCoy still flourishes. As does Forte. I'd put Hill at #8 on that list right now.

(06-10-2015, 04:06 PM)djs7685 Wrote: There were 13 1,000 yard rushers last year and 9 of them did it with a 4.7 or higher YPC. A lot of these guys also added 200 - 800 yards of receiving as well and that's not even mentioning their TD totals.

There's no way a guy that hasn't rushed for a single yard at the professional level should be ranked above anyone with those credentials. There are still plenty of quality running backs in the NFL.

Aren't all of those guys closing in on the dreaded carry numbers though?

I'd have to look it up, but there's a clear drop off when RBs hit a certain number of carries for the season/career. 

That's some quality RB's that are listed under Hill. And listing Gurley at 7 is a laugher.

I will say that this is probably the first time since entering the 2006 season that I'm excited for our running game.

(06-10-2015, 04:59 PM)Bengal Dude Wrote: I will say that this is probably the first time since entering the 2006 season that I'm excited for our running game.

Definetly have more options for greater success this year.

Ranking Todd Gurley anywhere on the list is a joke. At least let him play some NFL football before he's ranked ahead of anyone. Just curious if anyone has the ranking from the year T-Rich was drafted? According to everyone not named Jim Brown, T-Rich was the best RB to come out since AP, and was a sure fire can't miss HOF running back. We see how well that has worked out.

Rankings mean nothing really. The NFL isn't played with rankings. everyone knows that. It's played inside TV sets.

(06-10-2015, 08:05 PM)Shepdawg Wrote: Ranking Todd Gurley anywhere on the list is a joke.  At least let him play some NFL football before he's ranked ahead of anyone.  Just curious if anyone has the ranking from the year T-Rich was drafted?  According to everyone not named Jim Brown, T-Rich was the best RB to come out since AP, and was a sure fire can't miss HOF running back.  We see how well that has worked out.

Rankings mean nothing really.  The NFL isn't played with rankings. everyone knows that.  It's played inside TV sets.

If he played the Bengals every game he'd be a HOFer.

So I should clarify, I read the full article and, while he didn't state it specifically as a reason for the rankings, he said this:

Quote:So despite the fact that Peterson is now 30 and coming off a year in which he played just one game, he'd be the running back I'd choose to build an offense around over the next three seasons.

So he's obviously ranking these guys based on who he'd want to build an offense around.

That's why some of those guys are a little low. Because he isn't just considering them for this year, but the next 3 years and beyond.

When you insert that sentence into the context of the rankings, they begin to make a lot more sense.

Although I agree Gurley being that high makes no sense. Here is the reasoning he gave in his article:

Quote:7. Todd Gurley, St. Louis Rams: Gurley hasn't taken a single snap in the NFL and continues to recover from a torn ACL suffered during his final college season, but in a recent interview on NFL Insiders, Rams coach Jeff Fisher noted that Gurley had a rare lower half. Gurley has virtually no holes in his game -- he's a power player with explosive skills, vision and burst. The fact that he went 10th overall to a team that has another promising young runner (Tre Mason) shows just how Gurley was perceived during the pre-draft process.

So take that for what it is. Putting a rookie with no NFL snaps in the top 10 is still absurd, but at least his reasoning is beyond "he was a high pick, so he's obviously awesome." We'll see if Gurley works out.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/insider/story/_/id/13043404/adrian-peterson-leads-ranking-top-10-running-backs-nfl

Once a RB hits around 1800 carries in their career and 27 years old there starts a steep trend downward.

Marshawn Lynch (29) has over 2000 carries.
LeSean McCoy (will be 27 when season starts) is within one season of that.
Matt Forte (29) is over it

Also, when a RB hits 370 carries in a season tend to face another sharp decline.

DeMarco Murray (27) had 392 last year.

Links: http://www.footballdocs.com/running_back_carries.html
http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/123542/inside-slant-running-back-cliff-after-age-27

Plenty of reasoning to expect fall offs for some if not all of these players.

(06-11-2015, 10:03 AM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Once a RB hits around 1800 carries in their career and 27 years old there starts a steep trend downward.

Marshawn Lynch (29) has over 2000 carries.
LeSean McCoy (will be 27 when season starts) is within one season of that.
Matt Forte (29) is over it  

Also, when a RB hits 370 carries in a season tend to face another sharp decline.

DeMarco Murray (27) had 392 last year.

Links: http://www.footballdocs.com/running_back_carries.html
http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/123542/inside-slant-running-back-cliff-after-age-27

Plenty of reasoning to expect fall offs for some if not all of these players.

I'd be willing to put money on Lynch still looking like the most physically dominant RB in the game this coming season and that Forte puts up a large amount of yards from scrimmage.

McCoy and Murray are tough calls, but if Murray was still behind the Dallas line I'd bet the house on him as well.

Regardless, even if those guys all fall of a cliff...

I still think it's absurd to put a guy that hasn't had 1 yard from scrimmage in the pros at #7. Most QBs don't play well into their late 30's where a lot of the elite guys are right now, and I'd think putting Mariota or Winston in the top 10 would be stupid as well. Rookies don't belong in the top 10 of positional rankings IMO.

Murray won't be as good without that Dallas line.

Im happy where Hill is ranked.

Hey, some respect for Hill, i like. He clearly should be on everyone's minds after last year.
He has all the tools, size, speed, vision, patience, hands and the biggest one that really
comes to mind with Hill is his deceptiveness. He is bigger and faster than he looks and is
slippery to boot. If you are looking to the future i would have to put Hill in the top 5.

It is ridiculous to put Gurley at #7, because he has not taken an NFL snap but a lot of
these older backs are bound to fall off and Gurley has tons of talent. For all we know he
could be similar to what Hill was as a rookie...

I also agree with YellowX, Murray will not be near as good this year without that great
O-line he had in Dallas and getting that many carries wears RB's out. Look for Bell to tire
out early if Pitt keeps using him the way they are.

I just hope we don't over use Hill.

(06-11-2015, 12:38 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I just hope we don't over use Hill.

Good point...the guy's YPC and overall style make you want to run him into the ground, but his injuries and fumbling issues make that seem prohibitive.  Sticky wickett, this.

This list should be tough for even the homerist of homers to get on board with.

Maybe I'm sleeping on Lacy, but where is all this love coming from? Sure he's had success.... Must be nice to run against 7 in the box all the time while opponents focus in on stopping the Hall of Fame Qb.. And Gurley. I hate when these lists have players who haven't even played. Hill is a beast, and deserving of the top 5 spot.

(06-11-2015, 01:19 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: This list should be tough for even the homerist of homers to get on board with.

Unless you are a Rams homer and think your RB who can't even practice yet is leaps and bounds better than Matt Forte who has carried an underachieving franchise on his back as a rusher and receiver for years.