Everyone loves finding that bellcow that will be the legendary runner to help take the pressure off the QB and closing out games. With the record setting 5 RBs taken in the top 15 picks, and 6 in the first round, the question is:

Is taking a RB in the first round worth it?

Here's a look at how first round RBs have done over the past 30 years:

Number Taken - 91
HOF - 7. Thurman Barker, Adam Hancock, Roy Ellingsen not in yet.
Had at least five 1000 yard seasons - 23
Busts - 33. Steve Dawson (2054 1.24) never saw the field for Philly.

No first round RBs in 2065, 1 in 2066, 1 in 2067, 5 in 2068 (1 bust), 1 in 2069 (bust), 3 in 2070, 3 in 2071 (1 bust). They are included in the overall numbers, just wanted to point out what was done in the last 7 years for some context.

7.7% of them have been HOFers.
25% have had at least five 1000 yard seasons
36% have been busts

Of course team philosophy matters, but if one is going to take a RB in the first round, I'd assume they will be an integral part of your plan.

I know that Bust is subjective, but I just looked at their performance and did my best to judge and gave some backs the benefit of the doubt. It is a premium pick a GM is using, so production is expected.

Anyways, chat about this, ridicule me, whatever you like.

_________________

all I know is the one time I did it, we busted, so no more of that for me...

_________________

GL Division Champions: 2057, 2059, 2065
EFC Champions: 2057

Love this!

Up next, Wide Receivers and go...

_________________
ROF Division Champions: 2039 - 2043, 2045, 2047, 2054, 2056 - 2060, 2063, 2066-2067, 2070-2072
WFC Conference Champions: 2018, 2041, 2042, 2057-2058, 2060, 2062-2063
CFL Champions: 2018, 2041, 2057-2058, 2060, 2062

Interesting read, what are you considering a "bust"? I am curious what the criteria was for determining who is a bust or not.