Link: Trent's gone per Scout

Status
Not open for further replies.

IH8Orange

Hall of Fame
Aug 14, 2000
7,017
31
0
Trussville, AL, USA
His argument was that he was where Trent was drafted and a conversation with Mike Tomlin. He told Tomlin he was worried about the Browns potentially drafting Trent prior to the draft, and Tomlin said " I HOPE THEY DO". Ryan asked why and Tomlin told him " He absorbs too much contact and would be good for awhile, but wouldn't make in the NFL." he also told Ryan that he feared the Browns getting Blackman as a WR more than Trent. So aside from the opening statement by Clark I think its a pretty solid argument.
Well now I can hate the Steelers too. I hope Tomlin and his Neanderthal QB (who allegedly also likes to initiate contact) get scrapped.

As far as Trent being great his rookie season, and the Browns destroying his career. Do I need to remind you Jevaan Snead was a "good" qb his first year starting? One year doesn't make a player great, and if you look into some reports that were coming out of the gm's office about the Browns fears that he would be another Peyton Hillis situation in which you get stuck with a player no one wants after their splendor leaves them, you can see why the Browns wanted to cash in on Trent while they could.

I know everyone loves Trent, but at some point all these excuses some of you make need to either be proven by fact or just dropped.
i don't think anyone claimed that Trent was great his rookie season, just that he wasn't some obvious bust. Jevon Snead's fate should have nothing to do with judging Trent's career and this is my problem. Why don't one of you point to what Trent did, other than remind the front office of another player, to be scuttled in game 2 of year 2 of his career. Everyone knew his running style and the Browns claimed him. So then they get cold feet a year later and toss him like a used fast food wrapper? How is that Trent's fault? Once he was perceived as a bust, he was having to fight perception as well as the competition and that's really tough. Mark was at N.O. For years before he really took off. Eddie Lacy fell into the perfect situation. Trent was forsaken by his once-suitor and he's to blame? In a fight, the person throwing the first punch is usually blamed. We know that the Browns traded him, so what did HE do (forget perception... completely) to provoke their action? If someone can't show me something that he, not Peyton Hillis or some other NOT-Trent person did, to earn the "bust" label, then it is still the Browns that cracked the eggshell.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
Well now I can hate the Steelers too. I hope Tomlin and his Neanderthal QB (who allegedly also likes to initiate contact) get scrapped.



i don't think anyone claimed that Trent was great his rookie season, just that he wasn't some obvious bust. Jevon Snead's fate should have nothing to do with judging Trent's career and this is my problem. Why don't one of you point to what Trent did, other than remind the front office of another player, to be scuttled in game 2 of year 2 of his career. Everyone knew his running style and the Browns claimed him. So then they get cold feet a year later and toss him like a used fast food wrapper? How is that Trent's fault? Once he was perceived as a bust, he was having to fight perception as well as the competition and that's really tough. Mark was at N.O. For years before he really took off. Eddie Lacy fell into the perfect situation. Trent was forsaken by his once-suitor and he's to blame? In a fight, the person throwing the first punch is usually blamed. We know that the Browns traded him, so what did HE do (forget perception... completely) to provoke their action? If someone can't show me something that he, not Peyton Hillis or some other NOT-Trent person did, to earn the "bust" label, then it is still the Browns that cracked the eggshell.
This is what I categorize as an overally emotional fan that can't be reasoned with.

There are plenty of reasons to hate a team but hoping a player fails or gets hurt because of an alleged statement by their coach is just low.
 

IH8Orange

Hall of Fame
Aug 14, 2000
7,017
31
0
Trussville, AL, USA
This is what I categorize as an overally emotional fan that can't be reasoned with.

There are plenty of reasons to hate a team but hoping a player fails or gets hurt because of an alleged statement by their coach is just low.
I can't be reasoned with? I presented my points and invited you to invalidate them and you apparently can't. It seems I'm the only one here that's reasoning at all.

if you think that I was seriously hoping for caveben to get hurt because of what his coach said, then you obviously have never read many of my posts. It was playing on my previous post wher I referred to him (and Andrew Luck) as a Neanderthal based on his scraggly beard and I loved the use of "Steelers" and "scrapped" because I once worked at a steel mill and "scrap" was a batch of steel that didn't turn out right. Satirical hyperbole and allegory aren't for everyone. If I did hope for him to get hurt it would be because I believe he'd be doing hard time if he were one of us instead of "CaveBen of the Three Rivers". You need to dismount from your steed, Oberleutnant Heiund Meitee. I am still waiting for a reason to blame Trent for being handled with the ex-post-facto strategy devised for Peyton Hillis because the Browns suddenly realized that a running back with a shoddy offensive line might not be a winning strategy and cashed him in for a new Johnny Football.

I wish Trent would have stayed another year because he deserved better than the incompetent organization to which he was shackled. I still hope Tomlin fails however, as one good turn deserves another.
 

rolltide_21

Hall of Fame
Dec 9, 2007
11,463
7,528
187
NW AL
The 4/5 of the top five picks of the 2012 NFL draft have been underwhelming and/or busts:

1) Luck- Only one that has panned out as an all pro type player. Barring injury he could be a HOF type player.
2) RG3- Unless something changes a bust.
3) TR- Unless something changes- Bust.
4) Matt Kalil- three year starter and a rookie pro bowl but has struggled with consistency and injuries since his rookie year.
5) Justin Blackmon- out of football

This has to be the one of the worse (if not the worst) top 5 picks in NFL draft history.
 

IH8Orange

Hall of Fame
Aug 14, 2000
7,017
31
0
Trussville, AL, USA
Look, I like Trent, and I don't want to be harsh with him or attack him. Lord knows he is a hard worker and has world's more talent than I'll ever have. But he's been cut by three different NFL teams, all that wanted him to succeed, all that took significant risks in taking him. He was essentially drafted in the first round twice. At some point, he has to prove himself, just like Mark did in New Orleans. I just hope he isn't listening to people making excuses for him, because irrationally blaming the Browns or the Colts or the Raiders for his lack of success won't do him one bit of good.
This is the salient point. Mark was GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO GROW and has panned out. Would he have met the same fate as Trent if the Saints had suddenly said "you know, we already have one Heisman winning but underachieving RB on this team and I think we could get a 6-5 Neanderthal QB to replace our shorty"? Different players, sure. Different situation, somewhat. But crediting Mark with eventually flourishing within his opportunity is inconsistent with faulting Trent for failing because he got three opportunities with different teams in four years. Mark only began to meet expectations AFTER four years with the same team, where they had the opportunity to experiment with his role over time. Players drafted by an organization are typically given a longer opportunity to prove themselves than a trade or free-agent, who are considered veterans and need to prove immediate value to stay with a team. The Browns swaddled him and then decided that he was going to be a colic baby like Peyton Hillis and left him shivering on the cold front step of the orphanage, taking their officially licensed NFL swaddle blanket with them. They've given Johnny B. Bad more time than that and he was much less deserving.
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,502
46,846
187
But crediting Mark with eventually flourishing within his opportunity is inconsistent with faulting Trent for failing because he got three opportunities with different teams in four years. Mark only began to meet expectations AFTER four years with the same team, .
Agree and disagree - Mark was clearly capable from day one in that offense when given a chance. His problem was that he was generally only given carries in short yardage situations, and the Saints were not a team capable of running the ball when the defense knew what was coming. When Mark got a chance to be a part of the entire offense, he proved his ability.

Trent, on the other hand, was given a chance to be a part of his teams' entire offenses with both the Browns and Colts. I wish he had been given a similar opportunity with the Raiders.
 

RTR91

Super Moderator
Nov 23, 2007
39,407
6
0
Prattville
This is the salient point. Mark was GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO GROW and has panned out. Would he have met the same fate as Trent if the Saints had suddenly said "you know, we already have one Heisman winning but underachieving RB on this team and I think we could get a 6-5 Neanderthal QB to replace our shorty"? Different players, sure. Different situation, somewhat. But crediting Mark with eventually flourishing within his opportunity is inconsistent with faulting Trent for failing because he got three opportunities with different teams in four years. Mark only began to meet expectations AFTER four years with the same team, where they had the opportunity to experiment with his role over time. Players drafted by an organization are typically given a longer opportunity to prove themselves than a trade or free-agent, who are considered veterans and need to prove immediate value to stay with a team. The Browns swaddled him and then decided that he was going to be a colic baby like Peyton Hillis and left him shivering on the cold front step of the orphanage, taking their officially licensed NFL swaddle blanket with them. They've given Johnny B. Bad more time than that and he was much less deserving.
I posted this in the other thread on Trent...

In 2012, Trent led the Browns in rushing with 950 yards. He didn't have the best yards per carry, though; Brandon Weeden and Montario Hardesty both averaged over 4 yards a carry compared to Trent's 3.6

Behind the same offensive line, Donald Brown rushed for 79 more yards than Trent on 55 less carries in 2013. Brown averaged 2.4 more yards per carry than Trent.

In 2014, the Colts had four players rush the ball at least 50 times during the regular season. Trent was the only one that did not average at least 4 yards per carry. Trent did lead the Colts rushing attack in one thing - attempts. He had 159 compared to Ahmad Bradshaw's 90, Daniel Herron's 78, and Andrew Luck's 60. He tied Luck for the most rushing touchdowns on the team with 3.

Trent has consistently under-performed every season other than his first. The 2013 season can be blamed on being in a new system. What's the reason for the 2014 season?
Want to continue to say Trent wasn't given an opportunity?
 

imauafan

All-American
Mar 3, 2004
3,620
982
232
Huntsville, AL
Some people get too emotionally attached to Bama players. I probably did that when I was younger. The NFL is no different from college in that some players will look like they are sure-thing superstars but they fail when others that aren't as highly thought will succeed. There is a very fine line between most of the players in the NFL in terms of talent. There are a few that are a cut above but most of the players are at roughly the same level so the margin of error is razor thin. The very best OL in the NFL is not that much better than the worst OL. Same for the DL. As a RB you have be able to make your OL look good at times and other times they will make you look good. It works both ways. It is not reasonable to expect an NFL OL to open up gaping holes and blow the DL several yards downfield. If that were the case then there are literally hundred's of RB's that could look good in the NFL. The fact is Trent was given many opportunities and he failed. I don't know the reason why. I do know that he looks slow. Perhaps he could line up and run the 40 and it would be an impressive time but when has the football in his hands he looks slow and that won't cut it in the NFL.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
Ok maybe I should make it more detailed. I posted an abridged Ryan Clark statement of an ALLEDGED conversation with Mike Tomlin. You could've said " oh I don't agree with Tomlin and hope it backfires on him" but you posted this
Well now I can hate the Steelers too. I hope Tomlin and his Neanderthal QB (who allegedly also likes to initiate contact) get scrapped.

.
That sounds a little uncalled for, and also why are you bringing Ben into the argument? Ben has nothing to do with what Tomlin says about Trent vs the Steelers defense. Also Tomlin was more talking in terms of the wear and tear that Trent would most likely suffer against the physical defenses that reside in the AFC north. I just felt your statement went a little too far. but maybe it was me not being used to your rhetoric like you are saying, but its whatever

As far as the Browns trading him, there was an interview with a person in the GM's office that said the coaches were worried that if he didn't change his mechanics or improve his field vision then he would either be figured out or hurt. He went on to say that they tried to get him to adjust to what they were trying to make him do but he was either unable to comprehend or was too stubborn to do it. They said Hillis was more or less the same way so instead of going down the same path they decided to try to get a first round pick back.

As far as Trent's perception, it started because he was with a team that really only lacked either a slightly better oline or a dominating back. the colts thought they got the latter with trent. Trent just couldn't cut it there, but the nail in the coffin was when the colts let a running back that was drafted 100+ picks after Trent got less than half of the carries trent had but had only 100 yards less than Trent. So if that doesn't justify the perception then what does

Ifvyou
I can't be reasoned with? I presented my points and invited you to invalidate them and you apparently can't. It seems I'm the only one here that's reasoning at all.

if you think that I was seriously hoping for caveben to get hurt because of what his coach said, then you obviously have never read many of my posts. It was playing on my previous post wher I referred to him (and Andrew Luck) as a Neanderthal based on his scraggly beard and I loved the use of "Steelers" and "scrapped" because I once worked at a steel mill and "scrap" was a batch of steel that didn't turn out right. Satirical hyperbole and allegory aren't for everyone. If I did hope for him to get hurt it would be because I believe he'd be doing hard time if he were one of us instead of "CaveBen of the Three Rivers". You need to dismount from your steed, Oberleutnant Heiund Meitee. I am still waiting for a reason to blame Trent for being handled with the ex-post-facto strategy devised for Peyton Hillis because the Browns suddenly realized that a running back with a shoddy offensive line might not be a winning strategy and cashed him in for a new Johnny Football.

I wish Trent would have stayed another year because he deserved better than the incompetent organization to which he was shackled. I still hope Tomlin fails however, as one good turn deserves another.
 

twofbyc

Hall of Fame
Oct 14, 2009
12,195
3,329
187
Probably why they cut him.

Richardson was due to make nearly $2,000,000 this year with $600,000 guaranteed.
Dyer is due to make about $500,000 this year.
Murray is due to make just over $500,000 this year.
Helu is due $2,000,000 but over $1,000,000 of that is guaranteed.

Given the fact that no RB looks to be head and shoulders above the rest, financially, you cut the most expensive, and unfortunately that's Richardson.
^^^^ Oakland's line couldn't have done well against many college teams - they are bad at run blocking. Trent might get a shot if some team has major RB injuries early. Otherwise he can wait and try again next year. Or find another career.
IMO his was bad luck as much as anything - like signing Cooper to a team with a QB who can't throw. He didn't play for any team that had anything like a decent running game before he joined them, I don't think. He does have vision issues and he did miss that TD in a previous game (I know it wasn't where he was supposed to go but it was there and wide open). If he can't improve that even with another chance he probably won't make it.
Good luck to him though. He was always a class act.
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,502
46,846
187
If he doesn't catch on with anyone this season, he can still try and get it back together for the Veteran's Combine next spring. All 32 teams show up, with far fewer player to analyze. Lots of time to work on his weight and mobility.
 

IH8Orange

Hall of Fame
Aug 14, 2000
7,017
31
0
Trussville, AL, USA
I just hope he isn't listening to people making excuses for him, because irrationally blaming the Browns or the Colts or the Raiders for his lack of success won't do him one bit of good.
What will do him good at this point? He's basically been deemed a "bust" by three teams. I don't fault the Colts or Raiders, because I believe that his confidence and trust may have been irreparably shattered by the Browns infidelity. There's nothing irrational about blaming the Browns. Can you argue that taking a player very early, putting him into an offense that ranked 31st out of 32 teams in rushing the prior season at a 3.7 ypc average, giving him more carries (267) than the leading two rushers combined (249) from the prior season, getting approximately the same ypc average (3.6) with three times the TD production (10 TDs vs. 3 TDs), and then giving up on him in the second game of his second season is rational? Reasonable?

I remember the entire episode and it wasn't presented to the world as Indianapolis chooses with their first draft pick -- Trent Richardson. It was presented as "another running back BUST from Alabama to join Glen Coffee and Mark Ingram" because at that time people did consider Ingram to be a BUST. The Browns fans were ecstatic to have another high draft pick since they considered their two gunslingers from the Big12 (Weeden and McCoy) as busts. Indianapolis' fanbase was split on whether he was worth it -- half said that it would "help the passing game" to have a legitimate running game and half saying that the pick could have been saved for better value. Some pointed to Donald Brown's statistics and argued that he was a better back while some said that the team seemed to purposely block better for him. Who knows what gets into the locker room, but there were some hints that there might have been some division within the team over the RB position.

At Cleveland, Richardson was the Brown's baby -- fresh from the stork and full of promise (for fans not named Jim Brown). When he got to Indy, he was basically an outside contractor brought in to meet a need and when you are the #3 pick tossed to the next team, you are either a savior or "the first round ego with seventh round production".

Excuse the TAB character craziness here.

Mark Ingram first year stats:
GP Carries Yards Avg. Long TD 1st Dwns FUM
10 122 474 3.9 35 5 30 1

Trent Richardson first year stats:
GP Carries Yards Avg. Long TD 1st Dwns FUM
152679503.63211363

I'm looking at these numbers and one doesn't scream BUST and one scream KEEP HIM ANOTHER 3 YEARS, but yet that's what happened. Mark was blessed with the opportunity to grow into the role and Trent was blessed with the OLine from the 31st ranked rushing team in 2011. Then his stats are compared to backs that are taking less than half the punishment with the inquisition "why aren't you equaling their production on a higher scale proportional to the increased number of carries?" Because, we know that pounding the ball on 3rd and short always gets the same yardage as a carry on 1st and 10 or 2nd and 6, right?

It's history now. The Browns got basically the same YPC production from a single back that they got with two backs the previous season, but tripled TD production. It was basically the same offensive line, shell game at QB, I assume that they had receivers on the roster although I can't remember any names, and they got similar production from one guy compared with two. That spells B-U-S-T to anyone who's listening, I suppose. Listening for an opportunity to correct their QB problem? Maybe. I am still trying to find where Trent is at fault here.

C'mon guys. It is apparently as obvious as my nose in front of my face since you all say that I'm just too emotionally involved with Trent. I want to see the fault. Please. Don't allow me to continue to suffer as Trent's collegiate message board emotional blanket. I really do want to see what he did wrong to be unceremoniously dumped with foster parents in a new city and called a "bust". Am I ever going to be informed or just continued to be labeled as that poor, emotional soul who can't let it go?

I'll let you know right now. I'm not emotional at all. I'm an engineer. I look at numbers and make judgement accordingly. If you (impersonal you, as if I were addressing a Programmable Logic Controller, since you could be misconstrued as an emotional attachment to my audience) aren't producing reasonably within the proper context, then I have no problem with shutting you down. If Trent was given a reasonable chance at success before being given up for adoption, I have no problem with that. If that's the case, I IMPLORE YOU to show me the numbers that justify it. I haven't seen anything yet that tells me that his production wasn't cutting muster. I have seen where a lot of people apparently made comparisons between him and "that running back couple of years ago" and then decided that he was obviously targeted for premature retirement and decided to take preemptive action. If that is the case, then I have no problem with someone saying, "Yes, that is the case." I do have a problem with someone prejudging someone, taking preemptive action, and then saying that the person so prejudged was deserving of that preemptive action unless they can prove to me that the person had done something to justify the action. If anyone calls me emotional again, I will hack your account and replace all of your images with Kristi Malzahn.

Now, give me some metrics of culpability for Trent Richardson, preferably in metric units.
 
Last edited:

IH8Orange

Hall of Fame
Aug 14, 2000
7,017
31
0
Trussville, AL, USA
Ok maybe I should make it more detailed. I posted an abridged Ryan Clark statement of an ALLEDGED conversation with Mike Tomlin. You could've said " oh I don't agree with Tomlin and hope it backfires on him" but you posted this

That sounds a little uncalled for, and also why are you bringing Ben into the argument? Ben has nothing to do with what Tomlin says about Trent vs the Steelers defense.
I brought Ben into it because I was building on a little joke that I made about QBs being Neanderthal and inserted a picture of Big Ben and Andrew Luck with scraggly beards along with the infamous courtroom sketch of Tom Brady. He ties everything together because he is the QB of the Steelers and I was talking about Tomlin and he is the coach of the Steelers and I don't know why I even bother anymore.

If you were a Navy guy, I'd think you were reading the stabilizer of an FA-18 in a mirror, but I'm not sure what the designations are for Air Force squadrons.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
What will do him good at this point? He's basically been deemed a "bust" by three teams. I don't fault the Colts or Raiders, because I believe that his confidence and trust may have been irreparably shattered by the Browns infidelity. There's nothing irrational about blaming the Browns. Can you argue that taking a player very early, putting him into an offense that ranked 31st out of 32 teams in rushing the prior season at a 3.7 ypc average, giving him more carries (267) than the leading two rushers combined (249) from the prior season, getting approximately the same ypc average (3.6) with three times the TD production (10 TDs vs. 3 TDs), and then giving up on him in the second game of his second season is rational? Reasonable?

I remember the entire episode and it wasn't presented to the world as Indianapolis chooses with their first draft pick -- Trent Richardson. It was presented as "another running back BUST from Alabama to join Glen Coffee and Mark Ingram" because at that time people did consider Ingram to be a BUST. The Browns fans were ecstatic to have another high draft pick since they considered their two gunslingers from the Big12 (Weeden and McCoy) as busts. Indianapolis' fanbase was split on whether he was worth it -- half said that it would "help the passing game" to have a legitimate running game and half saying that the pick could have been saved for better value. Some pointed to Donald Brown's statistics and argued that he was a better back while some said that the team seemed to purposely block better for him. Who knows what gets into the locker room, but there were some hints that there might have been some division within the team over the RB position.

At Cleveland, Richardson was the Brown's baby -- fresh from the stork and full of promise (for fans not named Jim Brown). When he got to Indy, he was basically an outside contractor brought in to meet a need and when you are the #3 pick tossed to the next team, you are either a savior or "the first round ego with seventh round production".

Excuse the TAB character craziness here.

Mark Ingram first year stats:
GP Carries Yards Avg. Long TD 1st Dwns FUM
10
122
474
3.9
35
5
30
1

Trent Richardson first year stats:
GP Carries Yards Avg. Long TD 1st Dwns FUM
15
267
950
3.6
32
11
36
3

I'm looking at these numbers and one doesn't scream BUST and one scream KEEP HIM ANOTHER 3 YEARS, but yet that's what happened. Mark was blessed with the opportunity to grow into the role and Trent was blessed with the OLine from the 31st ranked rushing team in 2011. Then his stats are compared to backs that are taking less than half the punishment with the inquisition "why aren't you equaling their production on a higher scale proportional to the increased number of carries?" Because, we know that pounding the ball on 3rd and short always gets the same yardage as a carry on 1st and 10 or 2nd and 6, right?

It's history now. The Browns got basically the same YPC production from a single back that they got with two backs the previous season, but tripled TD production. It was basically the same offensive line, shell game at QB, I assume that they had receivers on the roster although I can't remember any names, and they got similar production from one guy compared with two. That spells B-U-S-T to anyone who's listening, I suppose. Listening for an opportunity to correct their QB problem? Maybe. I am still trying to find where Trent is at fault here.

C'mon guys. It is apparently as obvious as my nose in front of my face since you all say that I'm just too emotionally involved with Trent. I want to see the fault. Please. Don't allow me to continue to suffer as Trent's collegiate message board emotional blanket. I really do want to see what he did wrong to be unceremoniously dumped with foster parents in a new city and called a "bust". Am I ever going to be informed or just continued to be labeled as that poor, emotional soul who can't let it go?

I'll let you know right now. I'm not emotional at all. I'm an engineer. I look at numbers and make judgement accordingly. If you (impersonal you, as if I were addressing a Programmable Logic Controller, since you could be misconstrued as an emotional attachment to my audience) aren't producing reasonably within the proper context, then I have no problem with shutting you down. If Trent was given a reasonable chance at success before being given up for adoption, I have no problem with that. If that's the case, I IMPLORE YOU to show me the numbers that justify it. I haven't seen anything yet that tells me that his production wasn't cutting muster. I have seen where a lot of people apparently made comparisons between him and "that running back couple of years ago" and then decided that he was obviously targeted for premature retirement and decided to take preemptive action. If that is the case, then I have no problem with someone saying, "Yes, that is the case." I do have a problem with someone prejudging someone, taking preemptive action, and then saying that the person so prejudged was deserving of that preemptive action unless they can prove to me that the person had done something to justify the action. If anyone calls me emotional again, I will hack your account and replace all of your images with Kristi Malzahn.

Now, give me some metrics of culpability for Trent Richardson, preferably in metric units.
Stats are overhyped. If Stats were everything then Peyton Manning would have 7 SBs by now, but he is behind 3 active qbs in sb titles. Its not how many yards or Tds you produce in one year its how well you fit the philosophy of the team you play with. The Browns wanted him to play one way because the AFC North defenses would eventually catch on, but Trent for whatever wasn't able to do that. Also I believe RTR's stats about Yards per carry clearly back up that statement.
 

CoolBreeze

Hall of Fame
Sep 18, 2002
8,598
7,754
287
57
Hoover
I don't think we've seen the last of Trent in the NFL. Give it a minute. Dude is a gamer and will figure it out somewhere. If he works hard and earns a spot somewhere then even the league minimum ($600K) is worth doing what you love. We'll see him again soon and not soon enough for this Trent fan.
 

IH8Orange

Hall of Fame
Aug 14, 2000
7,017
31
0
Trussville, AL, USA
I posted this in the other thread on Trent...



In 2012, Trent led the Browns in rushing with 950 yards. He didn't have the best yards per carry, though; Brandon Weeden and Montario Hardesty both averaged over 4 yards a carry compared to Trent's 3.6

Behind the same offensive line, Donald Brown rushed for 79 more yards than Trent on 55 less carries in 2013. Brown averaged 2.4 more yards per carry than Trent.

In 2014, the Colts had four players rush the ball at least 50 times during the regular season. Trent was the only one that did not average at least 4 yards per carry. Trent did lead the Colts rushing attack in one thing - attempts. He had 159 compared to Ahmad Bradshaw's 90, Daniel Herron's 78, and Andrew Luck's 60. He tied Luck for the most rushing touchdowns on the team with 3.

Trent has consistently under-performed every season other than his first. The 2013 season can be blamed on being in a new system. What's the reason for the 2014 season?


Want to continue to say Trent wasn't given an opportunity?
Let's look closely at that last line:
Trent has consistently under-performed every season other than his first.


...other than his first...

[QUOTE by "your clink-a-dink, gold-bedazzled, yet humble, sports agent"] You just got a call from the Cleveland Browns and they want to draft you third overall. Now I know that they had the next-to-worst rushing stats last year and their QB, who lost his arm when he played against your Alabama team, is their fourth leading rusher because he is always running for his life, and that collecting syringes from the bottom of Lake Erie with your bare feet is safer than being the RB at Cleveland, but they WANT YOU BADLY.

Look at what they have now, the expectations can't be very high unless the front office is... ha. ha. you know, high. Anyway Trent, can I call you Trent, Mr. Richardson? It's not like you're replacing Shaun Alexander in Seattle or something. Low expectations.

If I were crazy, I'd say that they draft that dude from Okie State to replace the real gunslinger with the gunslinger name, Colt McCoy, maam. They'll only have to break in one rookie at the main skill positions. Now, I know there are questions about your mechanics, but it isn't like you set the Alabama single season rushing record with those mechanics.

WAIT. YOU DID!!! If you haven't corrected those by now, why do they think you will this year? Tim Tebow still has his mechanics and he beat CaveBen in the playoffs, RIGHT?

If they weren't serious about making you their bellcow, would they waste a #3 pick on you? That would be crazy. So, is it a GO? WE ARE GOING TO CLEVELAND, YEAH!!! YOU WON'T REGRET IT TRENT! [/quote]

Yeah, he got an opportunity. One season behind a shoddy line. What did he do with that opportunity? He matched the performance in yardage per carry while carrying more than the two leading backs from the previous season. He tripled their TD production. I don't know what went on behind the scenes, but his on-field performance in year one was more than reasonable in my opinion. Then he started season two with basically the same per carry statistics and suddenly he is traded away and viewed as a "bust". I'm not sure what conditions were set for him to continue with the Browns or if that was even his call. Not having the privilege of knowing what went on between him and the Browns allows me to ONLY employ public knowledge such as statistics in figuring out why they chose to trade him so quickly. I have continually asked if anyone has anything otherwise that is qualified that would explain their decision because I don't see this huge FAIL that everyone else seems to see. Doesn't matter how many other opportunities you get, if you have your mental state affected by any incident like that, you may not be able to overcome that. As you have said, "every other season than his first". What happened between his first season and his second FULL season? Anything? Nothing? I don't know who initiated the trade, it could have been Trent himself, but that was never clarified. The trade is the only transition point on which one can focus. If he wasn't traded, he might still have underperformed. No-one knows, but when you have a line indicating a trend and it has been fairly consistent and an event occurs that directly involves the variable shown by the line and the trend changes, it is pretty reasonable to assume that, even without direct evidence of causation, there is a correlation between the two. I have to believe that being traded did affect Trent negatively and if he didn't initiate the trade, then the Browns are responsible for the event that began the EVIDENT degradation of his performance. I'm not sure how much clearer I can be about this. This particular entity is producing at a rate of X, an event that directly affects the entity occurs, and the entity no longer is producing at a rate of X. So everyone's theory is that the entity would have stopped producing at the rate of X even if the event never occurred, but there's no way to know, so the entity was never meant to produce at the rate of X? :conf3:

I'm not going to continue this exercise in futility. Believe what you want to believe, but I'm going to rely on the empirical data I have to deduce who failed whom here. Perhaps the Browns tried to get Trent to change his mechanics and he refused and they traded him. If that happened, then it seems puzzling that Indy would have given up a first round pick for a RB with a hitch in his giddy-up. Maybe the Browns got one over on the Colts and conveniently failed to mention that. Every way I look at it, the Browns just don't look kosher in this whole thing. I'm smelling the Cuyahoga here and it's not on the clean end of the river.
 

IH8Orange

Hall of Fame
Aug 14, 2000
7,017
31
0
Trussville, AL, USA
Stats are overhyped. If Stats were everything then Peyton Manning would have 7 SBs by now, but he is behind 3 active qbs in sb titles. Its not how many yards or Tds you produce in one year its how well you fit the philosophy of the team you play with. The Browns wanted him to play one way because the AFC North defenses would eventually catch on, but Trent for whatever wasn't able to do that. Also I believe RTR's stats about Yards per carry clearly back up that statement.
So first I'm too emotionally attached and now stats are overhyped? Unfortunately, in the game of football, performance is measured by statistics. The fantasy leagues are run on statistics. No one says the day after their fantasy RB underperforms, "I'm sure there was a good reason. Stats aren't everything."

Here's the thing about ratios, the quantity of the ratio is dependent on both the output and the input. Here's where your stats are overhyped point is perhaps valid: the THREAT of a rushing attack is it's real value in a passing-heavy team. There are plenty of carries given in a game that are intended to influence how the defense deploys itself. If the defense does not fear your ability to run the ball, they drop their safety into coverage to mitigate the passing threat. If they do, however, fear your ability to run the ball they will put the safety "into the box" bringing him up behind the LBs to be the stop-gap and that typically forces single-coverage onto some poor DB. I don't know how many times I have heard someone bemoan, "another run up the middle... why do they keep doing that, " and then see a play-action pass deep on a subsequent play once the offense has effectively manipulated the numbers into their favor for a particular shot. The running back often, VERY OFTEN, doesn't get anything out of those carries, but if he has the ability to occasionally bust a long run, the defense MUST respect that possibility and protect against it.

Like I said, when he went to Indy, most of the talk was about how his presence would help the passing game by forcing the defenses to keep their safety in check on most plays. This is his value to a passing team and he also had the ability to pass protect and run screens. In 2011, the Browns passing offense ranked 30th in net yards/attempt while in 2012, it improved to 25th. In 2013, it fell back to 27th and then it improved to 16th last season with a three-headed rushing attack. A running back on a team that primarily passes has to put the team goals ahead of his own and take a lot of punishment on inside plays that don't net a lot of yards, but keep the defense from playing only the pass. This appears to be how Trent was being used and I would think that he knew it. Then the stats are turned against you when it is convenient to do so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.