If Clarett and Bell both succeed

[JoRo]

Or any other 2 running backs....

Do you think it would be possible for Shanny to split carries successfully? He hasnt really done it much in the past, unless forced to, so the question arises with an example

Could Shanny say give Clarett 10-15 carries a game, while Bell gets the other 10-15?

I think it would be great if we had two running backs to make it possible to keep the defense off guard. That would also keep both under a lot less wear and tear.

[topscribe]

Don't think that will happen, MoFo.
I see a trade coming, eventually . . .



-----

[JoRo]

Don't think that will happen, MoFo.
I see a trade coming, eventually . . .



-----

As do I, I am just wondering if anyone thinks that Mike is such a great offensive coach that he can utilize two very different backs?

[duaneok66]

Don't think that will happen, MoFo.
I see a trade coming, eventually . . .



-----

who do you think is more likely to get traded??? There isn't much of a market for Rbs right now . . .

Tennessee and Jacksonville are looking at Henry for RB insurance, but (unless Alexander is dealt, which is not likely) there doesn't appear to be any demand right now . . .

Of course, I just remembered, RBs often go down before the season starts . . .

[topscribe]

who do you think is more likely to get traded??? There isn't much of a market for Rbs right now . . .

Tennessee and Jacksonville are looking at Henry for RB insurance, but (unless Alexander is dealt, which is not likely) there doesn't appear to be any demand right now . . .

Of course, I just remembered, RBs often go down before the season starts . . .

Well, there might not be much demand for running backs at the time. However, there is always a market for exceptional running backs. For instance, I don't care how much of a glut exists, LaDanian Tomlinson would start a bidding war. Not to say that Bell or Clarett is the next Tomlinson, but who knows? They certainly do have talent. If we have two superstars in the backfield--which is entirely possible (in the "we'll see" category, of course)--one of them has to go. You don't put two superstars in a "running by committee" situation. In such a case, we would have teams climbing over each other to get one of them.

My guess in such a case--and, of course it is just a guess--is that Tater would go because Clarett would be more fitting to our downhill type running, is a better natural runner, and more durable in the downhill type scheme. In addition, I believe other teams would be enamored by a then proven back who can cover 40 yards in less than 4.3. In other words, Tater would likely return more value, which would be a mistake by other teams (putting more value on Tater), but that would be their problem, right?

IMHO.

-----

[broncosfan247]

Don't think that will happen, MoFo.
I see a trade coming, eventually . . .



-----

so do I...but not Clarrett. I think Mike Anderson is our trade bait.

[Cugel]

Don't think that will happen, MoFo.
I see a trade coming, eventually . . .


-----

Well, naturally in the long run all of them will be traded or cut. Shanahan isn't going to pay any RB in the Broncos system top $$. Portis tried and got traded. The next guy who rushes for 1500 yards will start thinking about how he should have an elite back contract for $20-$30 million. Then he'll be gone to some other team.

As long as Shanahan can keep finding backs who can start and do well in his system, he'd be a fool to pay big $ to a RB! Just keep drafting rookies every couple of years and keep plugging them in as the old ones leave.

He's done it successfully for the last 5 years, so why change? So who's ever the start this year (Bell, Anderson, Clarett, Dayne, Q, the ball-boy), there's a good chance they'll be gone in the next year or two.

[topscribe]

so do I...but not Clarrett. I think Mike Anderson is our trade bait.

But then, we're still stuck with two superstars (in the hypothetical case they do become so). And MA isn't good trade bait now. Too old. And, as Duane suggested, there is a glut of RBs right now.

-----

[broncosfan247]

But then, we're still stuck with two superstars (in the hypothetical case the do become so). And MA isn't good trade bait now. Too old. And, as Duane suggested, there is a glut of RBs right now.

-----

The reasoning behind my comment is I think Anderson costs too much for what his role might be if he doesn't start. You are correct that he might be too old, but he has the skills to play fullback & halfback, which I feel is definitely a plus. And I just can't see Shanny trading a guy away that was projected a year ago to be a high first round pick...that wound up making 4th round money. But if MC starts whining about his playing time and/or contract, I guess I could see him playing somewhere else.

[Jack Luminous]

Similar to

Or any other 2 running backs....

Do you think it would be possible for Shanny to split carries successfully? He hasnt really done it much in the past, unless forced to, so the question arises with an example

Could Shanny say give Clarett 10-15 carries a game, while Bell gets the other 10-15?

I think it would be great if we had two running backs to make it possible to keep the defense off guard. That would also keep both under a lot less wear and tear.

Shanahan has stated he likes to have a primary RB, because he believes very much in the concept that you ride a RB much like a horse. He has never been a Coach to go to the Runningback by Committee thing....

The closest thing you have seen to that effect was late last year with Tatum and Droughns splitting carries....

If Clarett has the goods, you might see something similar to that....


But I think it comes down to Tater....if he turns into a Portis-like back....Shanahan will ride him.

[topscribe]

The reasoning behind my comment is I think Anderson costs too much for what his role might be if he doesn't start. You are correct that he might be too old, but he has the skills to play fullback & halfback, which I feel is definitely a plus. And I just can't see Shanny trading a guy away that was projected a year ago to be a high first round pick...that wound up making 4th round money. But if MC starts whining about his playing time and/or contract, I guess I could see him playing somewhere else.

Oh, I agree with you on MC. I was playing on the hypothesis that both Bell and MC fulfill their respective potentials and become superstars (which is possible, IMO, else I wouldn't even bother to type this out). How would we then keep both? MC will no longer be making 4th round money at that point, that's for sure. One would have to go. At this point, under that assumption, I don't believe it would be MC. He is more of the downhill type runner that fits into the Broncos offensive schemes. (I would say just as TD was, but then someone would pop up and say I am crowning him the next TD. I will say though, that MC is faster than was TD.) MC, as I mentioned elsewhere, is a supremely gifted runner, and someone from camp said he may have the best hands among the RBs.

No, I think other teams would be looking at Bell's speed. That's fine. While Barry Sanders was piling up records, a much slower TD was simply leading us to the Super Bowl. I could live with that, couldn't you?

Does that make sense?

-----

[Bellthebest]

i dont think the splitting is gunna work either.......look what heppened last year with droughns and bell.....it worked, but not as well as one featuered back.... i say give it to just one of them

[BroncFanInPA]

Oh, I agree with you on MC. I was playing on the hypothesis that both Bell and MC fulfill their respective potentials and become superstars (which is possible, IMO, else I wouldn't even bother to type this out). How would we then keep both? MC will no longer be making 4th round money at that point, that's for sure. One would have to go. At this point, under that assumption, I don't believe it would be MC. He is more of the downhill type runner that fits into the Broncos offensive schemes.

That's my take as well. Another factor: assuming both develop into superstars, Shanny will look for the team player, I.E. if Tater pulls a threatened hold-out like his rookie year, the decision will be easy for Shanny. Likewise if MC forgets the lessons learned over the past two years, it's hasta la bye-bye. Let's hope they both don't go that route

[Ravage!!!]

Well, naturally in the long run all of them will be traded or cut. Shanahan isn't going to pay any RB in the Broncos system top $$. Portis tried and got traded. The next guy who rushes for 1500 yards will start thinking about how he should have an elite back contract for $20-$30 million. Then he'll be gone to some other team.

As long as Shanahan can keep finding backs who can start and do well in his system, he'd be a fool to pay big $ to a RB! Just keep drafting rookies every couple of years and keep plugging them in as the old ones leave.

He's done it successfully for the last 5 years, so why change? So who's ever the start this year (Bell, Anderson, Clarett, Dayne, Q, the ball-boy), there's a good chance they'll be gone in the next year or two.

Not true. He was willing, and DID give Davis a big contract. Portis is GONE because he threatened to hold out for TOP (best in the NFL money) while still under contract for two more years. If you find a super star RB, then you KEEP him. I think that coaching staff could easily compare portis to Davis, and saw that portis wasn't as good as HE thought he was. Knew his personality in the locker room and on the practice field... and could see that portis was NO class act. He was a punk that was demanding more money early. They didn't want that type of example and person in the locker room. If you find a "Terrell Davis" again.. I would BET they would reward him with contract.

[SixxGunz]

Or any other 2 running backs....

Do you think it would be possible for Shanny to split carries successfully? He hasnt really done it much in the past, unless forced to, so the question arises with an example

Could Shanny say give Clarett 10-15 carries a game, while Bell gets the other 10-15?

I think it would be great if we had two running backs to make it possible to keep the defense off guard. That would also keep both under a lot less wear and tear.

That is a great idea....and I would love to see it! And depending on the down, and the situation on the clock and score board....maybe we could have both backs in on the same play......confusing the "D" even more!