Drafting first round running backs is the NFL's favorite toxic relationship. You know the drill. Every January, draft experts get on TV and swear that taking a ball carrier in the first thirty-two picks is a cardinal sin of roster construction. They talk about positional value. They bring up "replacement level" players. They show charts about second contracts. Then, April rolls around, a guy like Bijan Robinson or Saquon Barkley starts flashing 4.4 speed on a 220-pound frame, and a General Manager somewhere loses his mind. They can't help themselves. It’s basically the ultimate "I can fix him" move for a struggling offense.
Is it actually a mistake, though?
Honestly, the "never draft a RB in the first round" crowd has some points. If you look at the career arc of most guys taken high, it’s a steep climb followed by a brutal cliff. But teams aren't drafting for year eight. They’re drafting for a three-year window where they can ride a blue-chip talent into the ground while he’s still cheap. It’s cold. It’s calculated. And depending on who you ask in an NFL front office, it’s either the smartest move you can make or a fireable offense.
The Math Behind the First Round Running Back Obsession
Let's look at the actual data because the numbers tell a weird story. Over the last decade, the success rate of first round running backs—meaning guys who actually make a Pro Bowl or provide elite "EPA" (Expected Points Added)—is surprisingly high compared to other positions. Think about it. If you draft a defensive end in the late first, you might get a rotational guy who disappears for three games at a time. If you draft a running back there, you're almost guaranteed a starter who touches the ball 25 times a game.
Complexity matters here.
When the Giants took Saquon Barkley at number two overall in 2018, the analytics community had a collective meltdown. They argued that the "opportunity cost" was too high. You could have had a franchise quarterback or a shutdown corner. Instead, the Giants got a guy who accounted for over 2,000 yards from scrimmage as a rookie. But then the injuries hit. An ankle here, a torn ACL there. By the time Saquon hit his second contract, the Giants were hesitant to pay him. This is the central paradox. You get elite production immediately, but the "tread on the tire" wears off faster than any other position in professional sports.
Why "Value" Is a Moving Target
Value isn't just a spreadsheet. It’s context.
Take a look at the 2023 NFL Draft. The Atlanta Falcons took Bijan Robinson at pick eight, and the Detroit Lions took Jahmyr Gibbs at twelve. Most people thought Detroit was reaching. They already had David Montgomery. Why spend a premium pick on a "luxury" item? Because Dan Campbell and Brad Holmes saw Gibbs not as a "running back," but as a generic "offensive weapon."
He catches passes. He lines up in the slot. He scares defensive coordinators into playing nickel personnel. When you start using first round running backs as chess pieces rather than just guys who run into the backs of their offensive linemen, the math changes.
The Rookie Wage Scale Trap
The 2011 CBA changed everything. Before that, top picks got massive, guaranteed contracts before they ever played a snap. Now, the rookie wage scale makes first rounders relatively affordable. For a running back, this is a double-edged sword. A team gets four years of control plus a fifth-year option.
Basically? They own your prime.
By the time a first round running back is eligible for a massive extension, he’s usually 25 or 26 years old. In RB years, that's middle-aged. Teams like the Dallas Cowboys learned this the hard way with Ezekiel Elliott. Zeke was a monster for the first three years. He was the engine of that offense. Then they paid him. Suddenly, they were stuck with a massive cap hit for a guy whose explosiveness was fading. It’s why you see teams like the 49ers or the Chiefs often wait until the later rounds—or just trade for an established star like Christian McCaffrey.
The Success Stories That Keep GMs Dreaming
- Christian McCaffrey: He’s the gold standard. Drafted 8th overall by Carolina, he proved that if a back is an elite receiver, he's worth the top-10 capital.
- Todd Gurley: For a three-year stretch, he was the most dangerous player in football. The Rams don't make that Super Bowl run without him, even if his knees gave out shortly after.
- Josh Jacobs: A late first-round pick who won a rushing title. He provided exactly what the Raiders needed: a high-floor interior presence.
The "Second Round Value" Argument
There is a loud group of scouts who believe the "Sweet Spot" for backs isn't the first round at all. It’s the second. Look at guys like Jonathan Taylor, Nick Chubb, or Breece Hall. These guys were all available after the first 32 picks. If you can get 90% of the production of a first-round back for a fraction of the draft capital, why wouldn't you?
It comes down to fear.
GMs are afraid of missing out on the "transcendent" talent. They see the next Adrian Peterson and they don't want to be the guy who passed on him for a guard. There’s also the "win now" pressure. Most GMs are on a three-year fuse. If you don't win, you're fired. A first round running back helps you win now. A raw offensive tackle might take two years to develop. GMs are selfish. They draft for their own job security, not for the team's cap health in 2029.
👉 See also: Eagles Belt to Ass: Why the Philadelphia Phrase Took Over Football Twitter
Evaluating the "Workhorse" Myth
We used to talk about "workhorse" backs like they were a different species. 300 carries a season was the benchmark. Now? That’s considered a death sentence. The league has moved toward a "committee" approach, which further devalues the individual runner. If you’re only going to play a guy on 60% of the snaps, is he really worth a top-20 pick?
Probably not.
Unless that guy is a touchdown machine. Look at the way the San Francisco 49ers use their backfield. They want versatility. They want speed. They want guys who can execute a wide-zone scheme without thinking. Often, those guys are found in the fourth round. But every once in a while, a freak of nature appears. Someone like Saquon or Bijan who transcends the scheme. That’s the "unicorn" factor that keeps the first-round dream alive.
The Scouting Perspective: What to Look For
If you're trying to figure out if a college prospect is a legitimate first-round candidate, stop looking at his rushing yards. That's a trap. Rushing yards are often a product of the offensive line. Instead, look at:
- Missed Tackles Forced: Can he create when the play breaks down?
- Yards After Contact: Does he fall forward, or does he go down at the first sign of a finger-tackle?
- Target Share: Is he a threat in the passing game? If he can't catch, he's a two-down player. Two-down players don't belong in the first round. Period.
- Pass Protection: If a rookie RB gets his quarterback killed because he can't pick up a blitz, he won't stay on the field.
Why the Media Gets It Wrong
The media loves to talk in extremes. It’s either "Drafting RBs is stupid" or "This guy is the next Barry Sanders." The truth is in the boring middle. A first round running back is a high-yield, short-term investment. It’s like buying a luxury sports car. It’s going to be incredible for a few years, but the resale value is non-existent and the maintenance costs get huge after 50,000 miles.
If your team is one piece away from a championship, take the back. If you’re rebuilding a 3-14 roster, drafting a running back in the first round is like putting a gold-plated spoiler on a car with no engine. It looks cool, but you aren't going anywhere.
The Future of the Position
As we head into future draft cycles, expect the "hybrid" trend to continue. You won't see many "down-and-distance" bruisers going on Day 1. You will see "space players." Guys who can line up in the slot, return punts, and catch 70 balls a year. The label "Running Back" is becoming a bit of a misnomer. We should probably start calling them "Backfield Disrupters."
Teams like the Eagles have shown you can build an elite run game using a rotating cast of mid-round picks and a mobile quarterback. Meanwhile, teams like the Niners showed that one elite, high-priced back can change the entire geometry of a defense. Both ways work. That's the nuance people miss. There isn't one "correct" way to build a team; there’s just the way that fits your specific window.
Actionable Insights for Fans and Analysts
When evaluating your team's draft strategy regarding first round running backs, keep these reality checks in mind:
- Check the Contract Window: A first round RB is most valuable between ages 21 and 24. If your team isn't ready to compete in that window, the pick is wasted.
- Analyze the "Out" Clause: Look at how the contract is structured. Smart teams build in an "out" after year three or four so they aren't stuck paying for a player's decline.
- Assess the Receiving Ceiling: If the prospect didn't have at least 30 catches in college, be very skeptical of a first-round grade. Modern NFL offenses require pass-catching ability to justify the draft slot.
- Watch the Offensive Line first: No running back, not even prime Eric Dickerson, can succeed behind a bottom-five offensive line. Build the trenches before you buy the "finishing piece."
- Don't Fear the Second Round: Historically, the "hit rate" on second-round backs is nearly identical to first-rounders, but the cost is significantly lower. If your team passes on a RB in the first, they aren't "missing out"—they're playing the odds.
The debate won't end anytime soon. Every year, a new "generational" talent will emerge, and every year, we'll argue about where he should go. Just remember that in the NFL, "value" is whatever a desperate GM is willing to pay on draft night.
Identify the specific offensive needs of your team's scheme. If they run a "power" system, a mid-round thumper is usually sufficient. If they run a "creative" system like Mike McDaniel or Kyle Shanahan, look for the elite athletes who can be moved around the formation, regardless of their official position. Keep an eye on the 2026 prospect class; the shift toward smaller, faster, "wide-back" archetypes is only accelerating. High-volume rushing is out; high-efficiency playmaking is in.