Donald Brown: A Legacy Maligned
In 1998 Barry Sanders did the unthinkable for a 30 year old Hall of Fame running back: he walked away from the game and never looked back. At the time media speculation rampantly suggested Sanders was simply disgruntled and would return possibly with another team.
In the fifteen years that have passed Sanders has not resurfaced content instead knowing he perhaps made the shiftiest move he could ever make: a clean retirement with his health in tact.
Today's NFL is a starkly different world than the one that put Sanders and others like Eric Dickerson, Lenny Moore, Marshall Faulk or even Edgerrin James on a pedestal. The average length of career for good NFL running backs is less than seven years. The average draft position for running backs is dropping which is bad news because draft position is the only solid predictor of earning potential. In short the league doesn't value running backs in the same way it once did.
Enter Donald Brown, one of the most productive collegiate rushers available in the 2009 NFL Draft and clearly one of the brightest players available at any position. Fans and pundits alike praised the Indianapolis Colts after selecting Brown in the first round. Two short years later those same people had labeled Brown a "bust."
Today Brown was put on the IR ending his year and likely his tenure in Indianapolis. In retrospect I decided to look at Brown's career in Indy in an attempt to reconcile his legacy with the widespread perception that he was a poor selection. Was he a bust or just a player trapped on a poor team in an era when NFL running backs became less important?
Below are stats for three modern NFL running backs. Can you spot Brown?
RB A
| Games Played | Rushing Avg | Long | Fumbles |
| 16 | 4.8 | 43 | 2 |
| 15 | 4.1 | 23 | 0 |
| 12 | 3.5 | 23 | 1 |
| 15 | 3.8 | 21 | 1 |
RB B
| Games Played | Rushing Avg | Long | Fumbles |
| 11 | 3.6 | 45 | 1 |
| 13 | 3.9 | 49 | 0 |
| 16 | 4.8 | 80 | 0 |
| 10 | 3.9 | 19 | 0 |
RB C
| Games Played | Rushing Avg | Long | Fumbles |
| 16 | 4.4 | 72 | 6 |
| 16 | 4.4 | 30 | 5 |
| 14 | 3.6 | 20 | 2 |
| 13 | 4.1 | 43 | 5 |
If you guessed B you'd be right. A was Joseph Addai's first four years while C was Edgerrin James's first four full years (without his abbreviated 2001 season). Are those seasons all that dissimilar? He was remarkably capable of holding onto the ball and pretty productive given two of Brown's seasons featured QBs not named "Manning." Further he split time with Addai and again this year the stable of backs the Colts have employed. He also got just over half of the carries that Addai got in his first four years and a third that James got during the quoted seasons. Addai played in 58 games, James in 59 and Brown in 50. If you consider the 2001 campaign Brown actually played in more games than Edgerrin James did in his first four years. In short, the initial stats seemingly indicate that Brown simply didn't get as many carries as his predecessors.
Was Brown just caught up in the league's transition to "passing league" as some have suggested? The problem with that argument is that the NFL has always been a passing league as ColdHardFootballFacts.com points out:
The passing game has NOT grown more important in recent years. It's simply grown more common, as teams pass more. But the reality is dominance on the field has always been the direct result of dominance in the passing game, at least since the dawn of the T-formation era in the NFL in 1940.
The problem isn't that the the league has become a "passing league" but rather that most teams have finally realized that it always was a league built to reward passing. As teams put their money into passing and defending the pass it became clear that running backs were no longer a major priority. Teams could platoon guys, cut back on the number of carries and be a little more liberal when dealing with injuries. Brown wasn't a victim of this trend anymore than Chris Johnson or Adrian Peterson yet his carries were a fraction of the league's best backs.
The travesty of Brown's career is not one of injuries, talent unused or even that of a league that doesn't value running backs. It's a fate much worse: Brown was the victim of a team that simply didn't use his talents.
I am done with Donald Brown.No more excuses,I know what a NFL running back looks like and Brown isn't one.No quickness,no power,can not adlib,gives up,etc. good speed is about it.good bye Brown !
The travesty of Brown's career was, though blessed with great speed, he could not block, or run in the middle against any contact, and always seemed to run east to west. But he was great. if nobody got in his way, Ah come on man!
@Blue Did you watch the 2011 season? (My guess is that you probably just gave it a passing look as the losses started piling up without Maanning.)
Well, being the glutton for punishment I am, I still watcched every single play of the 2011 season. (My hope at the time, was that if I inflicted myself to this pain and showed my loyality, the good karma created would induce the Colts to keep #18. Oh well, I digress.)
But if you watched the 2011 season, you just wouldn't make the comments you did. They are just the ol' Donald Brown talking points from his rookie year, none of which were true anymore.
@matt_has I forget the year, but the season opener against the Pats, where he lost two fumbles in the red zone...
But I still love the Edge. A couple of months ago, I was in a sports bar that on one of the TVs the NFL network was showing the 2005 playoff game against the Steelers. Like a damn rubbernecker at a car crash, I couldn't help but to glance at it from time to time. (But onlly when the Colts had the ball.)
And the one thing that stood out to me was the Edge. The way he ran and hit holes was just "different" and I mean that in a good way. In the seven or so years since he left the Colts, I had forgotten what a true "sperstar" running back looks like. They are very rare (especially in today's NFL) but you immediately know them when you see them.
Had DB been selected a round or two later, he wouldn't have had nearly the stigma attached to him. He was way too high on the Colts draft board - and that's not Brown's fault. Plus, why we drafted a RB in that spot still befuddles me. However, people expect a certain amount of production from a first round RB, and, at the end of the day, Donald Brown simply could not consistently produce.
@Mr. Indianapolis Colts You're right in saying if Brown was selected in later rounds, he might have avoided the criticism for his lack of production. Maybe he was too highly valued. I don't think we can say that given the situation of the Colts' offensive line since 2009 and how the Colts used Brown.
I don't care what "people" expect. The truth is that most people expect too much. And you can't lump all first round picks into one pile. Should we expect the same production from a Donald Brown as a Trent Richardson? I'll say this: Brown looks like a better choice so far to me.
At the end of the day, in my opinion, the Colts failed Donald Brown more than Donald Brown failed the Colts.
@bradicus18 This is the truest comment in regards to DB that I have ever seen. Watching him, I think he's a great back. Not elite, but better than average. To be honest, I would love if we kept him and Ballard and finally upgraded our line. Those two backs will never demand to much money, but I think they have a lot of value. Our line has been the problem for years. Not our running backs.
