Who would have thought?
Almost like you shouldn't waste a #2 pick on an RB.
Before we start, a big shout out to Damien Williams and Raheem Mostert, but an even bigger shout out to the front offices of both teams that have built their teams in the correct manner.
One theme of this post season has been how RBs have somehow become overrated. It's crazy that not every team focuses on the run with an RB that runs a 4.5 40 at 6'4 and 240 LBs and one of the best run-blocking offensive lines in the NFL.
We even saw David Gettleman say this:
Analysts backed him up:
On the surface, Gettleman isn't wrong. The stat that the top 4 passing teams didn't make the playoffs does exist. However, it's a misleading stat. Using yards in 2019 as a casual fan shouldn't happen, let alone a GM. We aren't in the 1980s anymore.
The idea that the top four rushing teams were in the playoffs is like saying "x team is 11-0 when y player runs for z yards." A disgusting stat that for some reason we still need to explain to even the GMs of the world. Good teams lean towards a run-heavy approach because they'll be winning more times than not. When you are winning by 2 scores, you're more likely to run the ball in hope to bleed the clock.
The idea that running is back is just not true.
Now, to my original point on UDFA RBs starting in the Super Bowl, you could point at the fact that last year's Super Bowl had 2 first-round RBs. That's true, but those teams were not run-heavy and found themselves in the Super Bowl thanks to their QBs, coaching, etc.
Running Backs will always be important in the NFL, because they are one of the 11 players on the field at a given time. That being said, using significant capital (salary cap and draft) on them is a waste, especially when you're in a rebuilding stage. If you have a great passing game and a phenomenal offensive line, the running will take care of itself. That goes to the Giants and the Jets and all of the football guys out there that yell about esTaBLisHinG tHe RUn.