Gainwell

Good for you, but the decline in rushing production despite the improved threat in the passing game backs my opinion, not yours. The Steelers had three or four monster games running the ball, but they couldn't sustain it. Some of those were impressive, like the game against the Vikings. Some were the product of a weak or weakened opponent, such as both games against the Bengals and the win over Detroit, which had disastrous safety play that allowed Warren to turn two very good plays into long touchdowns. (Seriously, watch a safety take himself completely out of the play on both of them.)

 

Dowdle is a good option. It is certainly hard to argue with his overall numbers the past two seasons, but keep in mind that he got nearly 400 yards in two games early last season, then faded significantly from Nov. 9 on.

I'm not sure how good Dowdle is in the passing game. His receiving numbers don't measure up to Gainwell's.

 

The only QB in the NFL throwing shorter than Rodgers was Brady Cook on the NYJ. The passing game wasn't all that threatening. And I don't see it changing if Rodgers returns.

 

What you think is a comparison is an example of how long runs skew the mean higher. Which is the entire point. If it was a comparison, you wouldn't have to pretend that Najee got long runs.

I 100% agree that the degree to which long runs skew YPC is dependent on (1) how long the long runs are and (2) how frequent the long runs are.

The reason Najee's YPC is ****ty is becuase (1) he doesn't get long runs as long as other RBs get and (2) the frequency at which he gets 15+ yard runs doesn't make up for the fact that he never gets 38+ yard runs.

So Najee has a low because he runs short a lot and doesn't ever run really long.

There was an argument that "those short runs were good runs because they were short runs on 3rd and short where the D loaded up the box". But that argument fails when we look at succ%. Because a 2 yard run on 2nd and 2 / 3rd and 2 and 4th and 2 is a "successful" run. But his success rate is also not good. Just because a stat tells you something you don't want to believe doesn't mean it's bad...from a "scientific" perspective, it actually means it's good because it allows you to disprove your hypothesis and let go of a bad idea that you're holding on to.

Sadly, in science that's not usually how it works...instead, bad ideas in science tend to die one funeral at a time.

You can also see this pretty clearly in Bubba's table above. Notice how all of the RBs have a median carry of either 3 or 4? It's also very, very likely that the first mode for every RB in the league with an appreciable number of carries is also going to be 3 or 4. Because the majority of carries are going to be for 3-4 yards. So everyone's YPC is going to be basically the same if you filter out the long runs. Because it's the frequency and distance of the long runs that determine YPC.

 

I'd be fine with this if the price is reasonable.

I'd rather have a cheaper rookie (ideally Johnson can make a big jump in year 2). But I'd take either one of these guys if they don't cost too much. They appear to be pretty similar IMO.

Interestingly, despite the similar YPCs Gainwell had a much higher succ% last year (55.3%) than Dowdle (47.9%).

I think that means that Gainwell was more consistent and Dowdle had a higher frequency of longer runs (they both had similar longs KG 55 RD 53).

In a backup role (i.e. smaller number of carries / touches), I'd probably rather have the more consistent guy vs. the bigger hitter when the YPCs are about the same. But I tend to be more conservative. Dowdle looks like the riskier bet with lower carries. Maybe you hit big. Or maybe you get a bunch of below-average results.

Maybe a positive here is that Dowdle had a succ% of 53.6% and the same YPC in 2024 in DAL. Was McCarthy the coach that year? Or has he been off for 2 seasons?

 

This.

Passing game was good in the red zone.

Outside...not so much.

But maybe I'm a little more optimistic about the potential for improvement than you? We'll likely have more than 1 NFL WR next year. And probably a more passing friendly scheme too.

The question if we have Rodgers back will be whether or not taking more risks in the passing game == more mistakes. Historically, he's been pretty good at avoiding interceptions. Even with the Jets, he wasn't terrible on this front (1.9% INT% vs. 1.4% with us).

 

That has been a problem for the Steelers for years, but the passing game was still an improvement over the previous few seasons.

 

You lost me when you falsely claimed that I pretended Harris had long runs. He did have more runs of at least 20 yards in 2024 than Warren had in 2025, but that's a different thing. If your argument truly held up, you wouldn't have to misrepresent the other side that way.

 

Not sure if he was hurt but I know he was upset with sharing carries with Hubbard.

 

Agree on both counts. The passing game decreased substantially when Ben injured his elbow in 2019 and has been substandard ever since. Looking at the 7 seasons before 2019 average Y/A and average total passing yards - 7.64 and 4204, last 7 seasons - 6.48 and 3487.

 

heheh.. NB loves to do the “so what you are implying” instead of just using the words on the screen.

 

Not a team player. Nix.

 

A big issue with a lower number of carries is time of possession.


2022 6th
2023 20th
2024 15th
2025 29th

 

Nix was definitely a team player when he was here.

 

Can you quote back where I said you claimed Harris had long runs?

If you're talking about the part where I said you were not doing an actual comparison because you pretended than Najee had the long runs Warren had, I was referring to this:

This isn't a actual comparison. Or if it is, it's a comparison between reality and make believe.

One thing happened (Warren's YPC skewed up because of these two long runs).

The other side of this "comparison" is what would have happened if we pretended that Najee also had 2x 45 yard runs (when he's never had a 39 yard run in 1000+ carries).

As stated above, I agree that it's obvious that the length and frequency of big runs are what skew up YPC. This is also the reason that Najee's YPC is low. Because he didn't have the really big runs that skew YPC the most. And the 15+ yards runs that he was getting didn't come frequently enough to skew his average up as high as RBs that would hit on those ~ 40+ yard run. Again, as Bubba posted...Najee and Warren have the same median yards per carry. My guess is that something like 80% of all RBs (e.g., vast majority) will have a median YPC of 3. Because guys who aren't getting more than 2 yards on most of their carries aren't going to last in the league. And very few guys are going to have a median as high as 4 (though there are some).

 

What's the age difference??

 

Dowdle is 27
Gainwell is 26

So pretty close to the same, but Dowdle is older.

On a 1 year deal (or a longer deal with a team-friendly structure), it probably doesn't matter all that much here IMO.

But if it's a 3 year deal with a bunch of guarantees, I'd probably want Gainwell. Younger

On a similar note:

Dowdle: 567 carries, 95 rec = 662 touches
Gainwell: 394 carries, 175 rec = 569 touches

So in addition to being older, Dowdle has a more carries. More touches too. My guess is that neither is "over the cliff" on this number. But more wear and tear on Dowdle vs. Gainwell.

 

Bring in both. Warren, Gainwell, and Dowdle, that's a pretty serious backfield. Maybe KJ will learn something.

 

If they draft a WR don't look for Rodgers to throw to him. That's just his nature.

 

Cowboys to sign Dowdle

Panthers to sign Dowdle

Steelers to sign Dowdle

They aren’t rumors they are clickbait

 

Rodgers does throw to receivers your comment is not correct

 

Too much money for part time players

 

IMO, this is the biggest reason not to bring Rodgers back.

I'd much rather have a young WR to develop than bringing in people like Lazard and Theilen (out of retirement) because they're AR approved.

But I'd prefer a rebuild. And Rooney has said that's off the table.