30 Year Old Backs: LdT and B.Westbrook

by BigOLinemen on Feb 23, 2010 6:16 PM EST

So, something that has really surprised me the past couple days is the release of LeDanian Tomlinson and Brian Westbrook. I wanted to start a debate here about 30 year old running backs, because I don't see why a team like SD or PHI would release either of these two when it is an immediate downgrade, when, if they wanted to get some more talent, they could just release a 3rd/4th string back. This pertains to us because of Portis, and he is probably the one guy on the Skins most likely to be cut before FA

What gets me is that there is an ever increasing trend of never giving a 30 year old back a legitimate chance. In so many cases, Shaun Alexander, Deuce McCalister, and Edgerrin James, the team that grabs them (or the teams that don't) expect a starter or a complete back-up, not a red-zone, or 3rd down back. Shaun Alexander and McCalister were two, strong power backs that, if given a proper chance, could have been a great red zone RB, and Edgerrin James was given a good shot with ARI, and he even looked great in the playoffs. I don't see why a guy like LdT couldn't come in for a team and be a red-zone RB; he ran for little yards, but scored many TDs, and why Westbrook (or Portis) couldn't be a 3rd down RB because they both do everything required of a RB VERY well. I'm curious to hear your opinions, and, before anything is said, this is in no way a campaign for these running backs, I am INDIFFERENT on LdT and Westbrook, but I do believe Portis should be retained.

Poll

Thirty-Year-Old Running Backs: What to do?

Give them a shot as a full-time starter

6 votes

Move them into a situation role

20 votes

Keep them as a solid, reliable back who will get only stray carries/plays

5 votes

31 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Cut them

You didn’t add the option to cut them which I think is needed in the poll.

by skinsnyankees on Feb 23, 2010 7:29 PM EST reply actions

Full Agree

At 30 these guys are spent. Especially high mileage backs like LT and Westbrook.

by williamhudsonlink on Feb 24, 2010 3:28 PM EST up reply actions

I think both of these guys are different.

LT can still catch and can give value coming out of the backfield. However I just don’t believe he has to explosion necessary to be a starter again. Westbrook still has something left in the tank. If he is still healthy I believe he still has another good year or two left in him.

by JeanBaptiste on Feb 23, 2010 7:34 PM EST reply actions

agreed

I really like Westbrook and am shocked that Phili have cut him (which I am assuming they have based on this post) I know they have that new guy now (whose name currently escapes me) but what if he gets injured, I mean going into this last season all the talk was that Phili needed a big season from Westbrook to win the Superbowl, well they didnt and they didnt

As for LT I can understand that one, purely because he would not accept being that 3rd down/red zone back in an organisation where he was the undoubted star. I think NE will pick him up anyway, just to use in them situations, gotta be an upgrade on Moroney fumbling every time he reaches for the goal line

Pommylee

by Pommylee on Feb 24, 2010 6:10 PM EST up reply actions

Not age but workload

Football Outsiders has had some articles dealing with something like workload durning a RB’s career. Without doing much work looking, check out – http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2007/370-carries-revisited – This is a 2007 article, but mentions a lot of factors involved. A lot of the players have since nose dived.

Adrian Peterson’s yards per carry has been dropping in the last few years and it has been in the media a number of times. It is starting to look like he only has a few years left.

I used the search term “number of running back carries” in Football Outsiders’ search routine.

An uncapped season is a big opportunity to dump the highly paid runners that have past their prime and to avoid cap hits in the future.

by Jefferson1935 on Feb 23, 2010 9:57 PM EST reply actions

A little more info - maybe overkill!

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/fo-goes-mainstream/2008/smarter-stats-curse-370
More links to other more recent articles on the topic – http://www.footballoutsiders.com/search/apachesolr_search/number+of+running+back+carries

by Jefferson1935 on Feb 23, 2010 10:14 PM EST up reply actions

Philly had a replacement

So they could afford to cut Westbrook and not be burned to badly

by washfan29 on Feb 23, 2010 10:21 PM EST via mobile reply actions

It's Simple

Runningbacks are easy to come by and what may look like a downgrade on paper is actually smart. i would have cut LT too and held on to my youngins, not to mention the Chargers have an excellent passing attack and play in a weak division. O and by the way, their going to have to give the lute up to Vincent Jackson. If i was the Texans though I would be drooling to get LT. As far as Westbrook, he doesn’t look as old as LT did but those concussions are tricky, if it wasn’t for that though, I believe Westbrook was still a pro bowler

by mr.snyderhireme on Feb 23, 2010 10:39 PM EST reply actions

jackson might b suspended

Jackson just got introuble for his repeated alcohal violations he just pled guilty to dui his second he might b suspended next year is he gets suspended he aint goin to get no huge contract. Plus he still has a court date for driving on a suspended license so he might b in even more trouble. Plus the chargers other back sproles is a restricted FA so they could loose his to so they probably should have kept LT they might need him next year.

by notta_fan_of_sissies on Feb 24, 2010 5:08 AM EST via mobile up reply actions

my poll answer is other

You cut them when they can’t perform to the level of their contract. LT has lost a step (or 2… kind of like CP) and Westbrook can’t stay healthy (like CP). RB is the position with the easiest transition from college to the NFL and there’s a never ending supply of them in every draft so getting a decent replacement isn’t that difficult.

by aFan4Life on Feb 24, 2010 8:06 AM EST reply actions

My sense is that economics

vs ability start to conflict once an RB gets to be around 30. They get their big contracts early on based on how the are producing in their prime. Towards the end of their contract, they are inevitably not producing at the same level and the Cap guys step in, kick the old girl friend out of bed and bring in the next available hottie.

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

by Scott E on Feb 24, 2010 8:49 AM EST reply actions

Agreed

If either of these guys had reasonable contracts coming into this year they likely wouldn’t have been cut. It costs so much to retain a running back in his prime, that when they start going downhill keeping them is tough to justify. At that point cutting them is only logical as their price goes up and their production goes down..
And it is hard to get rid of the old girlfriend who’s done so much, but it can also be quite exciting to get a new prospect in shape to play for the team…

by DoWork on Feb 24, 2010 8:57 AM EST up reply actions