What to do with Brian Westbrook?

by JasonB on Apr 2, 2009 6:00 AM EDT in News Comment 20 comments

Everyone's favorite Eagles pundit G Cobb published an article on his site(not written by him) which asserts that Brian Westbrook should no longer be the "feature back" of the Eagles.

The writer suggests that the Eagles draft a top RB this year and limit Westbrook to only about 40% of the carries. In this scenario, the rookie RB would handle the majority of the carries.

The argument is that Westbrook is often banged up and getting older and limiting his touches will theoretically help to keep him healthier.

Here's the problem. Brian Westbrook is a threat to score on any play. Even last year where he missed some games and was slowed down with injuries at times he still was near the top of the NFL in total TDs. There are few guys in the NFL more dangerous with the football than Westbrook still is. If the Eagles lose a game where Westbrook was perfectly healthy and only carried the ball 40% of the time... has the team really tried its best to win? How could Andy Reid justify that? How would that be acceptable to the fans?

There's only one way to play in the NFL. All out, all the time. Every game matters and you do whatever you can to win every game. Unless home field advantage is already secured, the Eagles have to be putting their best lineup on the field at all times, and any combination of the Eagles best lineup includes Brian Westbrook.

If we're blowing teams out and don't need Westbrook to carry 20+ times a game then great... The idea of Westbrook healthy and fresh for the end of the season or the playoffs is nice... but we have to get there first. While I like some of the backs in this year's draft, it's highly unlikely that Moreno or Brown will be as productive next year as Brian Westbrook is likely to be. It's highly unlikely that either of those guys are going to win games like Westbrook does.

Now, I do agree that we need to draft a back and I'd like to see him get a bunch of touches... but not at the expense of Westbrook. Maybe the new RB could get some carries at the expense of McNabb's throws? Just a thought...

Bottom line is, this team is not better with Brian Westbrook as a part time player. It's not better with Brian Westbrook getting 40% of the running back touches. That's just a fact. I share the same concerns about his injuries as most fans. I'd be happy to see a young back come in here and take some of the load off Westbrook... but until he retires or falls apart Brian Westbrook should be the feature back, and the feature part of this offense.

The best way to ensure Brian Westbrook is less effective next year, is to put him on the bench for most of the game.

By the way, be sure to check out Westbrook's fancy new player page.

5 recs | Comment 20 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

So according to this article, Westbrook is more useful to us by not using him as much? That’s the definition of circular logic.

The fact of the matter is, you want your best weapon to be on the field in almost all scenarios, except when blowing out a team. You do not bench a player that has delivered as consistently as Westbrook has – you just don’t. You can legitimately bench a player when he has stopped producing at a high level, but clearly we aren’t even near that point with #36.

Sure, give the young RBs some carries to get used to the offense and playing at an elite level, but that doesn’t mean you should phase out a guy who is still a huge threat on the field.

"Nobody in football should be called a genius. A genius is a guy like Norman Einstein." -Joe Theismann

by southjersey89 on Apr 2, 2009 6:14 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I'd be OK with not having Westbrook see majority of touches

Westbrook is known to be a playmaker. Once he gets in open space he is lights out… as good as anyone else in the NFL. HOWEVER, Injuries have been a problem throughout his career. Instead of allowing him to pound the ball for a few yards and get all beat up, I’d be ok with taking carries away and allowing him to get into space and be a receiver more often. I can think of so many more times westbrook showed his magic as a receiver rather than a RB (all those screens that went for TD’s for example). Let him do what he is best at, and allow him to be more healthy while doing it. Westbrook is still an elite RB, and arguably the most versitile, in the NFL.

"I'd like to thank my hands for being so great."
-FredEx

by micah15 on Apr 2, 2009 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That is almost as dumb as saying McNabb and Kolb should split snaps so that they can both be rested for when we really need a big play. Pro-bowl caliber players should start and play the majority of the snaps. That’s how you increase their production. Put the ball in BWest’s hands as often as you can and you will be happy with the results.

by IgglesFanDeployd on Apr 2, 2009 6:37 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs

regarding westbrook’s production and health, it’s pretty hard to figure last year in the conversation. his fullback was a converted defensive tackle that was new to the team. plus, andy reid never used buck. so basically, westbrook took the majority of the handoffs and nobody to protect him. now we have a real fullback in weaver and the opportunity to draft a top tier rookie running back (hopefully knowshon, but brown would be okay). if we do draft a quality running back, we still need to give have westbrook in at least 65-75 percent of the plays. just having him on the field introduces a legit threat on the offense. andy would have an opportunity to design new plays and maybe… just maybe… we can have a running game.

by awd777 on Apr 2, 2009 7:03 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The writer suggests that the Eagles draft a top RB this year and limit Westbrook to only about 40% of the carries.

That’s a questionable term when talking about this guy.

"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel

by foos05 on Apr 2, 2009 7:48 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I love BWest, and believe he should get some help.

But limiting his touches hurts us more than it helps.

I think Andy would like to have another back like BWest. That is why we traded for Booker, the prospect of lining up BWest, Booker, Jackson, Curtis all at the same time was supposed to drive those safeties and LBs crazy. But Booker came up short, I think he is still our 3rd RB because he had a nice camp. Although he showed zero on game time.

I think Andy is drooling at the Idea of lining up BWest and Moreno at the same time. Imagine that, the linebackers would poop themselves figure out who to cover and how to defend screens and who is decoying, or if its a run.

Imagine this,

One day you have Moreno and BWest, You line up a split backfield with both backs and put DJax on the slot. You then send BWest on a screen pattern to the left and Moreno on a screen pattern to the right, the DEs and LBs jump both routes leaving DJax one on one on a MLB, He is taking that to the house all game.

We should bring in Moreno, if not just to use him as a Decoy. But he will get the rock, so he will contribute some how.

City of Champions!

by yophillybro on Apr 2, 2009 9:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just to play devil's advocate

Let’s say Westbrook gets 40% of the carries, Rookie gets 40% of the carries and some combination of Weaver, Eckle, etc. get the remaining 20%, BUT Westbrook gets more catches. Wouldn’t that make him more effective — or at least not less effective — without exposing him to quite so much risk of injury? This assumes the rookie is able to take on a big workload early on and means the rookie will fewer catches than what would be ideal unless Reid learns to love two-back sets, but it’s not an unreasonable position and if it means Westbrook is healthy and available late in the year, it might even be the smart way to play it.

by Tracer Bullet on Apr 2, 2009 9:03 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think in our system you can't really seperate catches and carries.

You are basically arguing the same point as everyone else I think. That is, Westbrook is still the feature back as he touches the ball more than any other back. My understanding of the article was that Westbrook should be off the field 60% of the time, which is would really be a mistake.

by NOLACuse on Apr 2, 2009 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I actually like the idea.

I really don’t think this is a bad idea. It says 40% of the carries not 40% of the plays. In my honest opinion, I don’t think Westbrook is the best between the tackles RB. With that said, getting a more downhill oriented back to carry atleast half the load isn’t a bad idea. Westbrook is so effective but I really do believe teams are getting better at containing him. He will always break loose at some point, no doubt, but I’ve said it before that we can’t just be limited to big plays and fast scores. And when we do need to grind it out and burn time off the clock, would you want Westbrook to be the majority of the beating by the defense or have it spread out?

While I don’t agree he should be off the field 60% of the time, I think another back brings more to the table and more for the defense to account for. I don’t think it should or will be as negative as people think because I’m just trying to compare the way we use westbrook to other teams. Prime example is Tomlinson. He was the center piece of that offense for many years and it sad to say but they literally ran him into the dirt. I’m not saying Westbrook should be considered a direct comparison since the two team’s styles of offense are completely different, but at the end of the season I’d like to have a relatively healthy Westbrook going into the postseason. I know, we should worry about the season before talking about the postseason but we saw what happened last post season when Westbrook was obviously not atleast 80% (1 play against the Vikings was all he could give us). A two back system isn’t the same thing as a supposed two qb offense (which makes no sense and is a different story). And there are examples around the NFL that show it can be real effective; just ask Smash and Dash, Identity and Theft, Earth and Fire (Wind is a Buc), and Purple Jesus…and Chester Taylor (no real nickname for them).

Whatever the case is, Andy Reid and the coaching staff need to update their playbooks and work on incorporating more fresh ideas in their version of the WCO. It was great when it was new but I think the NFL, more importantly the NFC East, have already understood and can read the Offense.

by soman319 on Apr 2, 2009 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Westbrook owns

with good blocking up front. Our O-Line sucked at run blocking last year. They couldnt even push 1 yard at the goal line. What happened when he had Shawn and Thomas Tapeh opening up holes in 2007. 1333 rushing yards 4.8 avg. If he had just 229 more receiving yards he would have been just the 3rd player in NFL HISTORY to have 1000 yards in both rushing and receiving. Roger Craig(1985), Marshall Faulk(1999). This year we got the Big Kid back and got The Weave!! lol Whoever our LT is gonna be will definitely be a better run blocker than Tra. Westbrook is gonna kill it again this year. All this talk will soon be gone. B-West for MVP!

Taking Route 36 will bring you to Touchdown,PHI

by Route36 on Apr 2, 2009 10:49 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I love the optimism

…but I’m a horrible pessimist when it comes to sports. I expect the worst and hope for the team to prove me wrong. But you are right, Andrews makes a huge difference. I just hope he is back into it mentally and emotionally as well as physically.

by soman319 on Apr 2, 2009 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

bwest

hey look someone agrees with me that hes not a feature back and is good but not a superstar .. since superstars get the lionshare of the carries .. i agree .. i think that back will be donald brown .. and i see this a realistic possibilty … i support it

by jack is better than asante on Apr 2, 2009 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Only Superstars

can be a top 5 fantasy pick which BW was in 2006 and 2007. When he is healthy he is as good there is. He averages 4.6 yards per carry for his career. Has over 400 receptions already as a RB. Averages over 10 total tds per year for his career. Like i said above, with a good O-line and FB in 2007, he had over 2000 yards for scrimmage. He was real close to being just the third player in NFL history to have 1000 yards rushing and receiving in same season. In every Eagles game he plays, the opposing team’s coach says we have to watch out for Westbrook. Spagnoulo’s quote “We need 22 eyes on no. 36 every play”. That’s a Superstar.

Taking Route 36 will bring you to Touchdown,PHI

by Route36 on Apr 2, 2009 7:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The best way to keep BWest healthy and something we have done a lot the last 2-3 years

is not practice him during the week, keep him rested until Sunday, it has been a successful strategy in the past when he was banged up and im sure AReid will try it to keep him healthy if hes not banged up

To me the Eagles are like that girlfriend that pisses u off, then u hate her, but the next morning you wake up and remember that thing u love so much about her

by XxBleedGreen5xX on Apr 2, 2009 12:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think we all agree if we were in a weak conference we might just rest him and suddenly unleash him in the playoffs…. but we need him.

Hopeflly a rookie RB might let us closeout games with the rook pounding the ball at the end of games, but westbrook means we can run/pass or whatever we want when he’s in the game… we need him to win and make the playoffs first

http://smallbugger.mybrute.com

by Smallbugger on Apr 2, 2009 3:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

limiting

BWest is dumb as can be. If we drafted a RB early, he should share carries, but BW should be on the field 80% of the time. Utilize them both properly with some 2 halfback sets, but dont limit his touches.

"Eagles fans are a passionate group who love their team," said McNabb, "if not the actual players. It's not like winning a Super Bowl before the first month of the season is the hardest thing they've ever asked of me. That'd be all those times they asked me to go kill myself."

by greenbean#twoOH on Apr 2, 2009 3:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

When the frak did the player pages start looking like that?

Me Gusta Mucho!
Well Done SBNation.

by cavortingEagle on Apr 2, 2009 4:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I can see where this is coming from..

but i strongly disagree. A lot of these comments talk about westbrook being injured, but it seems like people are forgetting how physical football is. Every “star” back has his fair share of injuries and gets scratched and dinged up, it’s inevitable. Westbrook is still very good and we all know that he was never too effective between tackles and pounding the line for short yards. He’s a tremendously gifted athlete with incredible speed and vision that’s shown best when he’s in the open field. Any screens, pitches to the side, or swing routes are potential scoring plays especially for 36.

I am not against another back, as it is imperative especially with the current backups to westbrook. But like some said before, even reducing his carries/touches to 50% of what they were would mean only using him for a handful of plays per game. A game-changer like him shouldn’t be limited to play such a small amount. Keeping him healthy and preserved should always be considered, but knee injuries are always nagging or lingering..

I would love to see another stellar year from westbrook, but if there’s no blocking (be it from weaver or the line) and reid’s predictable play calling i don’t think that’s ever going to happen.

by notfromphilly on Apr 3, 2009 1:07 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs