While working on the 2012 "All Bust" List I decided I could do an entire article on just the running back position, so I did. It's not that I necessarily think the running backs will be a bust, I just don't think they have the value anymore. Not only are relative unknowns having tremendous impact on the league, the NFL has also shifted to a "running back by committee approach", meaning touches, yards, touchdowns all go down and the overall impact of a single player continues to decline.
Before you read this, you should read the 2011 "All Bust" List so you know I'm legit and also check out the first 3 articles of Draft Busts already out there this year (1st is here, 2nd is here, 3rd is here)
1st Round Running Backs-Trent Richardson, Doug Martin, & David Wilson - Before I get ripped endlessly for this one, I'm not saying that these running backs will end up like Ki-Jana Carter or Lawrence Phillips, in fact Trent Richardson will probably end up as one of the best RB's in the league along with Wilson if he can fix his fumbling problem, while Martin will be a solid, just not spectacular RB. My reason for putting these guys up here is that the devaluation of the running back in the NFL means that not even a pre-blown out knee Adrian Peterson is worth a 1st round pick in my opinion.
 |
| He benched 475lbs & coaches wouldnt let him try more |
Not only is the running game as irrelevant as its ever been, teams and fantasy owners are discovering that relative unknowns and unheralded veterans and rookies are seemingly taking the league by storm each and every year. Not only do running back's transition from college to the professional level easier than most (if not all) other positions, I believe that the offensive line, passing game, and play calls have more to do with their success than pure talent.
-Trent Richardson-RB-Browns(1st Round) - I like, not love Richardson as an all-around back and believe he can and will be successful at the NFL level; unfortunately I believe his accomplishments will be overshadowed by the state of the Browns franchise, both current and future. I have massive respect for Browns fans, and I found out what happens when you anger them by objectively and honestly evaluating their former QB Colt McCoy who has been forgotten (and most of those guys that attacked me on Twitter are now grateful that Colt is no longer their QB) now that Weeden is the next savior.
My problem is that when you look at the teams in their division, and the potential for rapid wear down on Richardson, that by the time the Browns are ready to compete in the playoffs, Richardson will be worn out. I want the Browns to do well, I think their starving fan base deserves it, but for some reason that team is cursed, and it's only exagerated by the teams draft strategy which seems to always fail.
 |
| Better learn not to fumble |
One thing I like about this pick is that he is very similar to Ahmad Bradshaw, the incumbent Giants running back. Most people say that you need a "change of pace" back, someone with a different running style than the main ball carrier, you know like having a power back and quick scat back. Me? No, I like having 2 running backs that are similar, why make your offense learn how to block for more than one type of back? It doesn't make sense, have them master blocking for 1 type of runner.
 |
| Martin just being average |
Martin will probably be called upon to do more for the Buccaneers than Wilson as they only have LeGarrette Blount who is a 1-trick pony, but i don't think he does anything spectacular. He will put up good, but not great numbers, and his value will be seen more as a safety valve for quarterback Josh Freeman while also buying him more time by picking up the blitzes. While he will see a lot of action, he will not put up the jaw dropping numbers expected of a first round running back, and that is why he will under perform according to the precedent set by 1st round picks.
Wanna get the jump on fantasy football? Check out Fantasy Corner guaranteed to win or your money back!
Follow ReclinerQB on Twitter: @ReclinerQB
Don't Forget to Follow ReclinerQB.com's other contributors on Twitter: @amazingmattyp, @SonnyPrier, @CoreyDoiron, @mwyche2, @TCM_Revolver, @ChurchOfYoda
I say we talk about ObamaCare instead of football. I personally can't wait for all of the changes to take effect. Below are some of the awesome things about healthcare that we all can't wait for!
ReplyDeleteWhat people call "Obamacare" is actually the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. However, people were calling it "Obamacare" before everyone even hammered out what it would be. It's a term mostly used by people who don't like the PPACA, and it's become popularized in part because PPACA is a really long and awkward name, even when you turn it into an acronym like that.
Anyway, the PPACA made a bunch of new rules regarding health care, with the purpose of making health care more affordable for everyone. Opponents of the PPACA, on the other hand, feel that the rules it makes take away too many freedoms and force people (both individuals and businesses) to do things they shouldn't have to.
So what does it do? Well, here is everything, in the order of when it goes into effect (because some of it happens later than other parts of it):
Already in effect:
It allows the Food and Drug Administration to approve more generic drugs (making for more competition in the market to drive down prices)
It increases the rebates on drugs people get through Medicare (so drugs cost less)
It establishes a non-profit group, that the government doesn't directly control, PCORI, to study different kinds of treatments to see what works better and is the best use of money. ( Citation: Page 665, sec. 1181 )
It makes chain restaurants like McDonalds display how many calories are in all of their foods, so people can have an easier time making choices to eat healthy. ( Citation: Page 499, sec. 4205 )
It makes a "high-risk pool" for people with pre-existing conditions. Basically, this is a way to slowly ease into getting rid of "pre-existing conditions" altogether. For now, people who already have health issues that would be considered "pre-existing conditions" can still get insurance, but at different rates than people without them.
It renews some old policies, and calls for the appointment of various positions.
It creates a new 10% tax on indoor tanning booths. ( Citation: Page 923, sec. 5000B )
It says that health insurance companies can no longer tell customers that they won't get any more coverage because they have hit a "lifetime limit". Basically, if someone has paid for health insurance, that company can't tell that person that he's used that insurance too much throughout his life so they won't cover him any more. They can't do this for lifetime spending, and they're limited in how much they can do this for yearly spending. ( Citation: Page 14, sec. 2711 )
Kids can continue to be covered by their parents' health insurance until they're 26.
No more "pre-existing conditions" for kids under the age of 19.
Insurers have less ability to change the amount customers have to pay for their plans.
People in a "Medicare Gap" get a rebate to make up for the extra money they would otherwise have to spend.
Insurers can't just drop customers once they get sick. ( Citation: Page 14, sec. 2712 )
Insurers have to tell customers what they're spending money on. (Instead of just "administrative fee", they have to be more specific).
Insurers need to have an appeals process for when they turn down a claim, so customers have some manner of recourse other than a lawsuit when they're turned down.
ReplyDeleteNew ways to stop fraud are created.
Medicare extends to smaller hospitals.
Medicare patients with chronic illnesses must be monitored more thoroughly.
Reduces the costs for some companies that handle benefits for the elderly.
A new website is made to give people insurance and health information. (I think this is it: http://www.healthcare.gov/ ).
A credit program is made that will make it easier for business to invest in new ways to treat illness.
A limit is placed on just how much of a percentage of the money an insurer makes can be profit, to make sure they're not price-gouging customers.
A limit is placed on what type of insurance accounts can be used to pay for over-the-counter drugs without a prescription. Basically, your insurer isn't paying for the Aspirin you bought for that hangover.
Employers need to list the benefits they provided to employees on their tax forms.
8/1/2012
Any health plans sold after this date must provide preventative care (mammograms, colonoscopies, etc.) without requiring any sort of co-pay or charge.
1/1/2013
If you make over $200,000 a year, your taxes go up a tiny bit (0.9%). Edit: To address those who take issue with the word "tiny", a change of 0.9% is relatively tiny. Any look at how taxes have fluctuated over the years will reveal that a change of less than one percent is miniscule, especially when we're talking about people in the top 5% of earners.
1/1/2014
This is when a lot of the really big changes happen.
No more "pre-existing conditions". At all. People will be charged the same regardless of their medical history.
If you can afford insurance but do not get it, you will be charged a fee. This is the "mandate" that people are talking about. Basically, it's a trade-off for the "pre-existing conditions" bit, saying that since insurers now have to cover you regardless of what you have, you can't just wait to buy insurance until you get sick. Otherwise no one would buy insurance until they needed it. You can opt not to get insurance, but you'll have to pay the fee instead, unless of course you're not buying insurance because you just can't afford it.
Insurers now can't do annual spending caps. Their customers can get as much health care in a given year as they need. ( Citation: Page 14, sec. 2711 )
Make it so more poor people can get Medicaid by making the low-income cut-off higher.
Small businesses get some tax credits for two years.
Businesses with over 50 employees must offer health insurance to full-time employees, or pay a penalty.
Limits how high of an annual deductible insurers can charge customers.
Cut some Medicare spending
Place a $2500 limit on tax-free spending on FSAs (accounts for medical spending). Basically, people using these accounts now have to pay taxes on any money over $2500 they put into them.
Establish health insurance exchanges and rebates for the lower and middle-class, basically making it so they have an easier time getting affordable medical coverage.
Congress and Congressional staff will only be offered the same insurance offered to people in the insurance exchanges, rather than Federal Insurance. Basically, we won't be footing their health care bills any more than any other American citizen.
A new tax on pharmaceutical companies.
A new tax on the purchase of medical devices.
A new tax on insurance companies based on their market share. Basically, the more of the market they control, the more they'll get taxed.
The amount you can deduct from your taxes for medical expenses increases.
1/1/2015
ReplyDeleteDoctors' pay will be determined by the quality of their care, not how many people they treat. Edit: a_real_MD addresses questions regarding this one in far more detail and with far more expertise than I can offer in this post. If you're looking for a more in-depth explanation of this one (as many of you are), I highly recommend you give his post a read.
1/1/2017
If any state can come up with their own plan, one which gives citizens the same level of care at the same price as the PPACA, they can ask the Secretary of Health and Human Resources for permission to do their plan instead of the PPACA. So if they can get the same results without, say, the mandate, they can be allowed to do so. Vermont, for example, has expressed a desire to just go straight to single-payer (in simple terms, everyone is covered, and medical expenses are paid by taxpayers).
2018
All health care plans must now cover preventative care (not just the new ones).
A new tax on "Cadillac" health care plans (more expensive plans for rich people who want fancier coverage).
2020
The elimination of the "Medicare gap"