Why did San Diego drop LaDamian Tomlinson?

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Don't follow football...but seems weird they dropped him.

money thing?

 

[OSUBlazerfan]

Old, ran for like 800 yards last year, so not that great, and they have become a 70/30 passing team, plus he prob was owed a lot too

 

[Mamba]

Old, ran for like 800 yards last year, so not that great, and they have become a 70/30 passing team, plus he prob was owed a lot too

Bingo

 

[maxiep]

When running backs start slipping, they fall off a cliff. That half step lost around 30 makes a HUGE difference.

 

[Minstrel]

Brian Westbrook also released, also 30 years old.

30 years of age is a remarkably precise expiration date on primes of NFL running backs.

 

[Denny Crane]

I don't think age has anything to do with it. There have been plenty of great backs who play long past 30 and are productive.

For LT, the Bolts' problem was they never really put a great team around him and now they have a 13-3 team that is built around the QB and receivers. The trend in the NFL is to rely less on any one back.

The interesting question is where he's going to end up. He's got all sorts of achievements on the field but doesn't have a ring. The teams that are real contenders all have solid backfields already.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I don't think age has anything to do with it. There have been plenty of great backs who play long past 30 and are productive.

There have been some, but not in recent history. This past year, only 2 of the top 10 rushers (by yardage) were over 30, one of those being Ricky Williams (32) who basically took 3 years off. The other was Thomas Jones (31), who was also the only top 10 back from the previous year in his 30's.
'07, none
'06, Tiki Barber (31);
'05, Barber and Warrick Dunn (both 30).
'04, Curtis Martin (31).
'03, Priest Holmes (30).
'02, none
'01, Garrison Hearst (30)
'00, none

Tomlinson was being paid like a top-10 back, but the likelihood of him performing like one past age 30 in today's NFL is incredibly low. Saying age has nothing to do with it is ignoring the facts. These days 30-31 is the cut-off point for top-shelf RB's.

 

[maxiep]

I don't think age has anything to do with it. There have been plenty of great backs who play long past 30 and are productive.

For LT, the Bolts' problem was they never really put a great team around him and now they have a 13-3 team that is built around the QB and receivers. The trend in the NFL is to rely less on any one back.

The interesting question is where he's going to end up. He's got all sorts of achievements on the field but doesn't have a ring. The teams that are real contenders all have solid backfields already.

It doesn't have to do with age, it has to do with losing that half-step. Sometimes you can lose it because of injury, sometimes you can lose it because of wear and tear. If LT had the same burst he had two years ago, he wouldn't have been cut. He's too much of a game changer. However, he lost that burst that made him special. His production can be replaced by someone making 1/10th of what he makes.

 

[Wheels]

yep... victim of Hard Cap. But it had to be done. I'm just glad he wont be tearing up my Broncos anymore.

 

[Blazer_Hippie]

It doesn't have to do with age, it has to do with losing that half-step. Sometimes you can lose it because of injury, sometimes you can lose it because of wear and tear. If LT had the same burst he had two years ago, he wouldn't have been cut. He's too much of a game changer. However, he lost that burst that made him special. His production can be replaced by someone making 1/10th of what he makes.

But it is VERY common to lose that half step right at 30 years old...

 

[maxiep]

But it is VERY common to lose that half step right at 30 years old...

That's when it seems to happen to most running backs. Denny was making the point that it doesn't necessarily happens at 30, and I was making the point that performance was the biggest problem. As you pointed out--and I agree--30 does seem to be a magic number.

 

[drexlersdad]