Roschon Johnson is to Franco Harris as Bijan Robinson is to Lydell Mitchell.

[Chaos]

Lydell Mitchell and Franco Harris graduated together at Penn State.  During their senior season, Mitchell had twice as many carries, almost 900 more yards than Harris, and finished fifth in the Heisman voting.   Oddly, he lasted until pick 48 in the draft, while Harris was selected by the Steelers 13th overall as the start of his HOF career.  Never understood what the Steelers saw there.  But they were obviously right. 

Johnson is a huge back 6'2 225 with speed who the Bills should be looking at if he drops to third round.   (I am not putting Johnson in Canton yet)

[PBF81]

Interesting comment.  Different take though ...

 

Mitchell's career was shortened due to injuries.  He was a more versatile back, one of the most exciting in the NFL to watch at the time.  Harris was more bruiser and less finesse.

 

Mitchell was also a dual threat RB.  In twice the career starts Harris only had 50% more yards-from-scrimmage, or so.  Mitchell averaged 29 receiving yards-per-game, Harris only 13.  

 

Through 1978 Mitchell had nearly a thousand more yards from scrimmage.  Harris' overall numbers came from playing longer.   Mitchell was finished after that while Harris went on to play a bunch more seasons, he was only average at best after that tho.

 

It's more like comparing Thurman to Christian Okoye. 

 

 

Edited February 21, 2023 by PBF81

[BigAl2526]

Roschon Johnson is my sleeper RB for the Bills.  The question is, when do you take him.  Round one or two is obviously too high.  When I've seen him rated, it's normally been in rounds 5-7, but he has elite traits and just  might go earlier than the pundits think..  NFL Draft Scout estimates his 40 time at 4.34 (a low of 4.25 and a high of 4.42)  NFL Draft Buzz estimates his 40 time at 4.39).  Those are Saquon Barkley type numbers.  There are also a couple of other running back possibilities for the Bills after Round 1. Zach Charbonnet out of UCLA.  He's almost as big as Johnson and runs in the low 4.4s.  The downside is he'll take a 2nd round pick to get him, and he might be gone by the time the Bills pick at the bottom of the second round.  Zach Evans out of Old Miss is another one.  His speed is similar to Charbonnet's.  He's a little smaller, but still is a good sized back at 6' and 215.  The Bills could get him in the third, or possibly the fourth round.

[Solomon Grundy]

What good are any of them if they don't have good vision or contact balance. Moss was big and fast but often ran into the back of linemen because his vision was poor. The ability to find a hole and run through it is the value of a good RB.

[PBF81]

If the Bills don't take an Offensive Lineman in the first three rounds, under Beane the Bills will have selected only one (1) Offensive Lineman among the first 92 picks in 6 Drafts, once.  Cody Ford at 38th overall at the top of the 2nd.  

 

As it is, only three other teams have drafted only one Offensive Lineman in the first 92 picks over the past 5 Drafts.  One of them is the Rams who've, for whatever reason, only had three 2nd-round picks and no 1st-round picks in in those five years.  

 

The Chiefs' one OL was Creed Humphrey, who's one of the best interior OL-men in the league.  

The Rams got Joseph Noteboom, a decent OL-man. 

The Cards got Josh Jones, a very good tackle.  (The "Josh's" are lighting up the league.)  

 

They all start.  

 

We got Ford, who was horrible and has been a backup.  

 

Those three teams also spent more resources in the 50 or so picks after that than we have on the OL.  

 

In short, we've spent fewer resources on our OL than ANY team in the league during Beane's watch.  I think it's ridiculous to even hint at a notion that that's meaningless given our circumstances, which include that we can't run the ball and that Josh gets hammered at times and has to adjust his play as a rule to compensate for Beane's failures there.  

 

Drafting a RB at this point is to put the cart before the horse.  

 

 

Edited February 21, 2023 by PBF81

[Chaos]

26 minutes ago, Solomon Grundy said:

What good are any of them if they don't have good vision or contact balance. Moss was big and fast but often ran into the back of linemen because his vision was poor. The ability to find a hole and run through it is the value of a good RB.

Johnson has good vision and balance. He has the misfortune of being second string to the unquestionable best RB in the country. 

2 hours ago, PBF81 said:

Interesting comment.  Different take though ...

 

Mitchell's career was shortened due to injuries.  He was a more versatile back, one of the most exciting in the NFL to watch at the time.  Harris was more bruiser and less finesse.

 

Mitchell was also a dual threat RB.  In twice the career starts Harris only had 50% more yards-from-scrimmage, or so.  Mitchell averaged 29 receiving yards-per-game, Harris only 13.  

 

Through 1978 Mitchell had nearly a thousand more yards from scrimmage.  Harris' overall numbers came from playing longer.   Mitchell was finished after that while Harris went on to play a bunch more seasons, he was only average at best after that tho.

 

It's more like comparing Thurman to Christian Okoye. 

 

 

I made Mitchell Analogous to Bijan Robinson in my OP.  Is that offensive to Mitchell?

[PBF81]

12 minutes ago, Chaos said:

I made Mitchell Analogous to Bijan Robinson in my OP.  Is that offensive to Mitchell?

 

No, but I was responding to your comment below ... 

 

Quote

Never understood what the Steelers saw there.  But they were obviously right. 

My point was, while trying to be respectful, that that's entirely debatable.  Mitchell, by Yards-from-Scrimmage was the more productive player over the first 7 seasons.  His career was simply shortened due to injury, and Harris really wasn't all that afterwards.  In fact, his time in Seattle was an embarassment, he didn't even pretend that he was trying, averaging 2.5 YPC.  The moment he got the ball he headed for the sidelines just there to get his 12,000 yards.  He averaged a pedestrian 3.8 YPC in his last 5 seasons.  

 

Frankly, I'd rather have had Mitchell back then.  Had he not gotten hurt and had he been able to play longer, he'd have done better than Harris IMO.  

 

More importantly, as I said above, for us to draft a RB is to put the cart before the horse.  Apparently few Bills fans understand that Beane on his watch has devoted fewer top resources to OL-men than any other team in the league.  I simply don't see how that can continue to be overlooked if Beane is to keep his job.  

 

 

Edited February 21, 2023 by PBF81

[thenorthremembers]

They played in the same offense and Robinson averaged a yard more a carry and 6 yards more a reception.    Johnson is a fine college player but Robinson has the most potential of any running back in the draft to be a top 5 running back in the league immediately.   The kid is a blue chip prospect who would be a top five draft pick if he played any other position.

[Chaos]

1 hour ago, PBF81 said:

 

No, but I was responding to your comment below ... 

 

My point was, while trying to be respectful, that that's entirely debatable.  Mitchell, by Yards-from-Scrimmage was the more productive player over the first 7 seasons.  His career was simply shortened due to injury, and Harris really wasn't all that afterwards.  In fact, his time in Seattle was an embarassment, he didn't even pretend that he was trying, averaging 2.5 YPC.  The moment he got the ball he headed for the sidelines just there to get his 12,000 yards.  He averaged a pedestrian 3.8 YPC in his last 5 seasons.  

 

Frankly, I'd rather have had Mitchell back then.  Had he not gotten hurt and had he been able to play longer, he'd have done better than Harris IMO.  

 

More importantly, as I said above, for us to draft a RB is to put the cart before the horse.  Apparently few Bills fans understand that Beane on his watch has devoted fewer top resources to OL-men than any other team in the league.  I simply don't see how that can continue to be overlooked if Beane is to keep his job.  

 

 

Everyone I know would prefer the hall of famer who helped win four super bowls. 

[Doc]

Did Franco ever admit that he scooped the ball off the ground?

[C.Biscuit97]

Very modern takes

[GunnerBill]

3 hours ago, PBF81 said:

If the Bills don't take an Offensive Lineman in the first three rounds, under Beane the Bills will have selected only one (1) Offensive Lineman among the first 92 picks in 6 Drafts, once.  Cody Ford at 38th overall at the top of the 2nd.  

 

As it is, only three other teams have drafted only one Offensive Lineman in the first 92 picks over the past 5 Drafts.  One of them is the Rams who've, for whatever reason, only had three 2nd-round picks and no 1st-round picks in in those five years.  

 

The Chiefs' one OL was Creed Humphrey, who's one of the best interior OL-men in the league.  

The Rams got Joseph Noteboom, a decent OL-man. 

The Cards got Josh Jones, a very good tackle.  (The "Josh's" are lighting up the league.)  

 

They all start.  

 

We got Ford, who was horrible and has been a backup.  

 

Those three teams also spent more resources in the 50 or so picks after that than we have on the OL.  

 

In short, we've spent fewer resources on our OL than ANY team in the league during Beane's watch.  I think it's ridiculous to even hint at a notion that that's meaningless given our circumstances, which include that we can't run the ball and that Josh gets hammered at times and has to adjust his play as a rule to compensate for Beane's failures there.  

 

Drafting a RB at this point is to put the cart before the horse.  

 

 

 

Twice. Spencer Brown.

[PBF81]

2 hours ago, Chaos said:

Everyone I know would prefer the hall of famer who helped win four super bowls. 

 

OK, not sure what you want me to say at this point.  

 

Play for play for seven seasons until '78 Mitchell gained more yardage per game altogether than Harris did.  So if instead of 96.2 YPG on average YFS people would rather have 87.4 YPG on average, OK.  I have no problem with that.  

 

I can see the appeal the game was different back then with "3-Yards-and-a-Cloud-of-Dust" RBs being more valuable in general.  

 

I simply remember watching Mitchell and he was the overall more versatile RB, which back then was somewhat more novel than it became later on.  

 

Your reference to the Super Bowls is irrelevant.  Baltimore had Bert Jones at QB whose career was also plagued with injuries.  Bradshaw was far more reliable from an injury perspective.  Baltimore also didn't have nearly the talent at WR that Pittsburgh had with Swann, Stallworth, Grossman, etc.  Mitchell also didn't have the support that Harris got from Bleier either.  And comparing Defenses during those years is ridiculous.  

 

Sounds like you're saying that the Steelers won four Super Bowls primarily because of Harris, which would be ridiculous given the legendary Steel Curtain D with wall-to-wall talent, much of which is in the Hall of Fame, and Bradshaw/Swann/Stallworth also.  You say that as if Harris carried the Steelers to 4 SB wins on his back.  The reality is that he had a monster postseason in '74 and contributed heavily to that SB win, but in the other three not nearly as much rushing 67 times for 196 yards in the other three games, averaging a mere 65 rushing YPG on fewer than 3.0 YPC.  

 

If you want to engage there, let me know.  My point was very simply that Harris wasn't runaway better on an apples to apples comparison that you laid it out to be.  If you want to think differently, great, I'll respect that.  To each his own.  

 

Frankly, it also depends upon the team.  Harris IMO wouldn't have done as well as Mitchell in Baltimore for that very reason, the lack of support just mentioned, on both sides.  At the same time, the Steelers didn't really need a versatile RB that Mitchell was, they needed Harris, a bruiser.  They had all of the other components of a well-rounded offense, unlike Baltimore at the time.  

 

It was fun watching both of them at the time.  The more versatile of the two however was clearly Mitchell, even at PSU.  There's not much of an argument to the contrary, Harris simply wasn't the receiving RB that Mitchell was.  

 

 

19 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Twice. Spencer Brown.

 

First 92 picks ...  Brown (93rd and bottom of the 3rd round) hasn't been what the other three singular picks are either regardless.  

 

Beane has neglected our OL more than any other team in the NFL.  

 

 

Edited February 21, 2023 by PBF81

[GunnerBill]

5 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

 

First 92 picks ...  Brown (93rd and bottom of the 3rd round) hasn't been what the other three singular picks are either regardless.  

 

Beane has neglected our OL more than any other team in the NFL.  

 

What other 3 singular picks? He has spent two day 1 or 2 picks on OL. Cutting it off at 92 is arbitraty and makes no sense. Nor is it necessary to make your point (which I agree with) that the Bills have neglected the offensive line.

[Bill from NYC]

6 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

The more versatile of the two however was clearly Mitchell, even at PSU.  

So what? There were more "versatile" RBs than Earl Campbell or even Jim Brown. Who were better runners? Yes, Franco did play on a better team than Mitchell. He also was a better, stronger runner and a better blocker. In addition to that, he had good hands as a receiver. The man was a 225 pound runnig back with corner speed. 

 

I respect your opinion but vehemently disagree.

[PBF81]

21 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Twice. Spencer Brown.

 

BTW, Brown was taken at the tail end of the 3rd-Round, only 4 picks before the compensatory picks began.  That feeds into the point that I made as well.  

 

Also, the two picks immediately following Brown are better than he is.  Ben Cleveland and Robert Hainsey.  Also, two Centers taken afterwards, are better than he is.  Quinn Meinerz and Drew Dalman.  Numerous OL-men taken on day 3 are better too.  I'd take any of them over Brown.  Centers can always play G, an easier position.  

7 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

What other 3 singular picks? He has spent two day 1 or 2 picks on OL. Cutting it off at 92 is arbitraty and makes no sense. Nor is it necessary to make your point (which I agree with) that the Bills have neglected the offensive line.

 

It isn't necessary, but it emphasizes it.  Again, add Brown into the mix, per above, it doesn't help Beane, it actually makes him look even worse given that the two immediate OL picks behind Brown are both already playing at starting levels, well, it simply kept the analysis more simple.  Never good to complicate things here.  LOL  

 

As to the other three singular picks, per my post above, the only other three teams to have drafted only 1 OL-man in the first 92 picks.  They're all better than the one that we got, Ford.  

 

Quote

 

The Chiefs' one OL was Creed Humphrey, who's one of the best interior OL-men in the league.  

The Rams got Joseph Noteboom, a decent OL-man. 

The Cards got Josh Jones, a very good tackle.  (The "Josh's" are lighting up the league.)  

 

They all start.  

 

 

[Rigotz]

We drafted an RB in the 2nd round last year who has elite traits.

 

All we need now is a guy who can run between the tackles and pass block.

 

Sounds like Roschon is a good fit, not just because he can do the thing we actually need, but also because he doesn't cost an elite pick that can be used on other things we need.

[GunnerBill]

13 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

It isn't necessary, but it emphasizes it.  Again, add Brown into the mix, per above, it doesn't help Beane, it actually makes him look even worse given that the two immediate OL picks behind Brown are both already playing at starting levels, well, it simply kept the analysis more simple.  Never good to complicate things here.  LOL  

 

As to the other three singular picks, per my post above, the only other three teams to have drafted only 1 OL-man in the first 92 picks.  They're all better than the one that we got, Ford.  

 

 

It doesn't simplify. It does the opposite. Top 92 is an abitrary number. First two days is the standard recognised range for judging allocation of premium draft resource. 

 

Got ya on the other 3. And I agree with your overriding point completely. No need to present it in the way you did and personally I think it is a stronger point if you present as above.

[PBF81]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

It doesn't simplify. It does the opposite. Top 92 is an abitrary number. First two days is the standard recognised range for judging allocation of premium draft resource. 

 

Got ya on the other 3. And I agree with your overriding point completely. No need to present it in the way you did and personally I think it is a stronger point if you present as above.

 

I thought that it was simpler the other way, I could be amiss, ... apparently I was.  LOL  Either way, I try not to clutter up analyses with anything but the most pertinent points for reasons that you can imagine.  

 

BTW, there's "Metrics," as in the programs that the teams use, which IMO is putting faith almost exclusively into detailed analyses, but good analysis always  includes perspectives that the numbers don't always wash out in the numbers and that "DVOAs" don't always account for despite the perception otherwise.  

[John from Riverside]

6 hours ago, Solomon Grundy said:

What good are any of them if they don't have good vision or contact balance. Moss was big and fast but often ran into the back of linemen because his vision was poor. The ability to find a hole and run through it is the value of a good RB.

Just one thing on Maas he wasn’t fast. I agree with the rest of it.