Effective Running Backs Come in all Shapes and Sizes

After decades of watching football I have come to the conclusion that effective running backs come in all shapes and sizes, and even speeds. I think most of us have a tendency to look for "prototypical" measureables in running backs, probably because we were influenced by certain events, or more particularly, certain players.

I used to think that running backs had to be 5' 8", 205 pounds, shifty, and fast as hell. Of course, that's because I grew up watching Barry Sanders. But since my days of watching Barry, I have seen effective running backs come in many shapes, sizes, and speeds.

At MSU we've had the "Barry" backs -- Ringer, Baker, Hill. We've also had outstanding power backs -- Bell, Duckett. And we've even had the in-between backs -- Jeremy Langford. Most of them were/are pretty fast, but not all of them. Bell and Duckett had wheels, but they didn't have elite speed. And while you can say that Duckett was effective in large part because of his power, I think Bell is more effective because of his intelligence. Bell is a powerful back, but the dominating performance he put on last night for Pittsburgh was more about his vision and the moves he's developed over the years. He displayed an amazing level of creativity.

The sad thing for recruiting is that it's tough to identify who is going to be a great running. In the first place, we are blinded by our biases, which develop when we watch our heroes. But it's also hard because many kids develop vision and creativity years after they commit -- look at Langford.

So what's the lesson? We and the coaches can't do much about the second problem, but we and they can do something about the first. They can consciously address their instinct to find the next Barry or the next Bell, and focus more on the kids that show good vision and creativity, regardless of their measureables.

Review of OSU Game: We're Going to Need Obsession

Well folks, this one hurt. No getting around it. It hurt because it obviously kills our dreams of a national championship. And it hurts because it shows you that in the long term MSU will have a tough path to the national championship and even the B10 title.


The good news is that at least MSU showed they can score on a very good OSU defense. The offense was not overwhelmed and actually won the battle against OSU's defense. But the bad news is that offenses have now figured out how to beat a Narduzzi defense. The Spartan D is clearly struggling against offenses that use a lot spread elements. The secondary has also just plain blown too many coverages.

In the long run, Ohio State and Urban Meyer are now clearly focused on (and probably obsessed with) MSU. They will not overlook MSU, again. They will prepare a full year to make sure they beat MSU. That's what we saw in this game. We saw the results of a year-long adjustment by Meyer and OSU. Of course, Meyer was helped by the fact that Barrett may be the best quarterback in the country. I actually do think that MSU could have beat OSU with Braxton Miller. But JT Barrett is too accurate. That's what you need to beat a Narduzzi D.

So, now MSU needs to embark on its year-long adjustment. They must find a way to deal with spread offenses and with JT Barrett. They may want to start by looking at how Alabama handles all the spread-ish offenses it faces. They may want to even look at what Rich Rodriguez does to slow down teams like Oregon.

The coaches will have a lot of work to do. This could be the start of a grueling rivalry.