Should More Teams Use 2 RB Sets?

[BleedTheClock]

I don't really like the idea unless one of those RB's can block like a boss. If you like the shotgun split back look, just put a WR back there and give him RB routes.

If you're talking about a traditional 2-back FB/RB combo, then yeah, that makes more sense. But I don't like the idea of bringing in another RB that can't block anyone. If anything, I'd be happier with a 2-back split look for max protection purposes, not for offensive firepower purposes.

[Kiwibrown]

The Browns would of been better last year playing our fullback or both crow and duke at the smaetime. They were all as good or better than our wr outside of Gordon and Coleman. 

Play your best 5 skill guys as much as possible is my theory. 

If I had Elliot Gurley and Barkley on my roster and average wr’s I’d use those guys over them.

[skywlker32]

Prime example of a team that could have used 2 RB sets effectively (I don't remember how much they did, or IF they did even) would be the mid-late 2000s Chargers with Tomlinson and Sproles. Both were versatile enough that you could split them out and be just as effective (maybe more) as the WRs on those teams.

[Shady Slim]

i've got to say no, they're used enough, but i do agree with that earlier post suggesting we should see more use of heavy sets with a lot of big TEs

[bucsfan333]

On 6/12/2018 at 11:41 AM, skywlker32 said:

Prime example of a team that could have used 2 RB sets effectively (I don't remember how much they did, or IF they did even) would be the mid-late 2000s Chargers with Tomlinson and Sproles. Both were versatile enough that you could split them out and be just as effective (maybe more) as the WRs on those teams.

Don't forget Michael Turner. They were stacked at RB.

[childofpudding]

On 6/1/2018 at 2:37 PM, cddolphin said:

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/2016-offensive-personnel-analysis

Data from 2016 but the most recent I could find.

Offensive Personnel Groupings
Personnel	2015 Pct	2016 Pct	Difference	2016 DVOA
11	54.7%	60.4%	+5.7%	7.5%
12	21.2%	16.9%	-4.3%	1.3%
21	8.0%	7.0%	-1.0%	-0.2%
6+ OL	3.7%	5.4%	+1.7%	-3.6%
13	3.5%	2.8%	-0.7%	8.6%
10	2.5%	2.6%	+0.1%	-15.2%
22	3.3%	1.8%	-1.5%	-5.3%
20	1.1%	1.3%	+0.2%	7.9%
Misc	1.9%	1.7%	-0.2%	22.1%

Looking at the DVOA, it seems to suggest 13 personnel may be the grouping to utilize more of.

13 personnel seems like a common-sense counterpoint to the more recent trends in the NFL: lighter, smaller, faster defensive personnel more suited to pass defense.

Or 20. Hard to say, the likely small sample sizes for 13 and 20 personnel probably make inferences about them more suspect.

Whenever you can get an offensive skill player with versatility, that should open up the playbook and lead to mismatches. TEs that can block and receive; RBs that can run, receive and block.

Then, like you said, defenses counter that with smaller, faster defensive personnel for pass defense. Perhaps we're seeing a slight counter in response to that light defensive personnel with the slight uptick in the 6 OL jumbo package.