Running Backs and ESPN

by: Michael Steffes

I was tempted to write something about a list that is getting some attention over at ESPN.com. Scouts Inc has ranked the top 64 running backs. Normally I might care where the Seahawks new backs rank.

Instead I am going to say this. Out of all the rankings of teams, and positions, and whatever that goes on to stir conversation in the offseason, this is by far, in my opinion the worst. They ranked rookies. Guys who have never played a down in this league. How can you responsibly include them in any ranking? How many top tier draft picks have completely flopped in this league at this position?

Ced Benson was taken #4 over all, now he his 47th. Reggie Bush was taken #2, which everybody said was one pick too late by the way. Now he is ranked 25th. That should pretty much be enough to show that people have no idea how the rooks will turn out. Why rank them? Especially high on the list? How can Darren Mcfadden (23), Jonathan Stewart (29), or Rashard Mendenhall(30) really be in the top half of this list with ZERO career caries to judge them on. Silly!

For those of you who do care, Julius is 31, Morris is 55, and Duckett is 62. Sounds like Ruskell screwed us again... Shaun, I can't find a job, Alexander is 48, ranking higher than all but one of our current backs. Explain this idiocy ESPN. END