Interesting article in the Athletic about why backs like Love aren't taken as high anymore

[Michael K.]

Four reasons why running backs like Jeremiyah Love are no longer drafted so early

Jacob Robinson

Dianna Russini
By Jacob Robinson and Dianna Russini
March 30, 2026Updated 12:18 pm PDT

This year, everyone agrees Jeremiyah Love is an excellent running back and one of the top prospects.

In 2025, he averaged 137.6 total yards and scored 21 touchdowns in just 12 games for Notre Dame, finishing third in Heisman voting. He’s Dane Brugler’s No. 3 prospect, and Nick Baumgardner has Love as the best player in this class. Here’s Nick:

“Love has a blend of power, balance and acceleration that is among the best we’ve seen in years. He is a more complete prospect than Ashton Jeanty was in 2025 and is at least as good (if not better) than Bijan Robinson and Jahmyr Gibbs were in 2023.”

Yet no one can agree on where Love should be drafted. Do you draft an elite running back in the top five? Among the first 10? In the first round at all? There are a few considerations.

Inside: Could Jeremiyah Love not be a top-10 pick? Plus: Why we might get replacement officials in 2026 and Dianna also shares what she’s hearing at league meetings.

This article is from The Athletic’s NFL newsletter. Sign up here to receive it directly in your inbox.

Four reasons running backs aren’t drafted early
NFL people rarely agree on much. The draft is no exception. Sure, top quarterbacks almost always go No. 1, and pass rushers often follow. But drafting a running back in the first round? That really depends. Here are four reasons why they’ve fallen out of favor.

1. Draft capital.
Teams don’t use first-round picks on running backs like they used to. In the 1970s, more backs were drafted in the first round than players at any other position. That trend mostly continued until a drop-off in the early ’90s, followed by another sharp decline in 2011. Draft stock has continued going downhill since.



The why behind this trend seems obvious — the modern NFL is a pass-first league — but is more nuanced. My colleague Dan Pompei explained the details here, as did ESPN’s Bill Barnwell here. At a high level, it’s because of evolved rules, schemes and committee approaches, plus poor results from second-contract running backs like Todd Gurley. Which brings me to the next point.

2. Longevity.
In 2011, the rookie wage scale was introduced as part of that year’s collective bargaining agreement between the players’ union and league. It decimated the value of running backs in particular. An example:

Prior to that CBA, the Saints drafted Reggie Bush with the No. 2 pick and signed him to a six-year, $62 million deal. Each team’s salary cap that season was $109 million. A large pizza cost me $10.
Eighteen years of inflation later and the price of pizza has doubled. The NFL salary cap nearly tripled. Yet Ashton Jeanty’s first-round rookie deal pays him 15 percent less than Bush got in 2007. Bush’s average still ranks among the 15 highest-paid running backs ever.
Every position was affected by that rookie discounting, sure. But not equally. Running backs took the biggest hit because their most productive years are their earliest — the point at which the CBA stripped their bargaining power. Other players peak around age 27 or later.


That could arguably make drafting certain running backs more valuable, since you’re likely getting their best years. But free agency further changes the math.

3. Free agency.
Imagine the quarterback equivalent of 2024 free agent Saquon Barkley. Drafted high, showed immense production and had injury concerns. That’d be … a free-agent Joe Burrow?! No team in its right mind would’ve let him hit the open market.

The same is true with other premium positions like pass rusher, receiver, tackle and cornerback, which is why we saw pricey trades (or attempted trades) for Maxx Crosby, Jaylen Waddle and Trent McDuffie. But running backs? Just find somebody in free agency, like Barkley or reigning Super Bowl MVP Kenneth Walker III.

Since you can add top running backs via the open market, their rookie-contract discount is less enticing. It’s more economical to use your draft picks on premium positions instead. This chart compares the average per-year pay for the top 10 veterans at each position to the pay a top-10 2026 draft pick would receive:

Those savings are significant. A rookie-contract quarterback frees up enough to pay a receiver like Ja’Marr Chase. Having the same at edge rusher could mean affording the league’s best tackle, Trent Williams.

Meanwhile, drafting Love in the top 10 would net you a measly $6.4 million in cap savings over signing one of the best veterans at his position. Only enough to sign a receiver like Tyquan Thornton or Olamide Zaccheaus. Oof.

4. Analytics.
A fourth reason for the sharp decline in RB draft status was the widespread acceptance of football math in the 2010s. Number-crunchers found the effectiveness of rushing offense to be largely scheme-dependent, which made the rushers themselves feel replaceable.

It also became obvious that the teams who were spending premium draft capital on running backs were not improving. Since 2010, nine running backs have been drafted in the top 10. Seven of those nine teams had losing records in the ensuing four years.

It gets worse. Look at who was still available when these running backs went off the board:

The Panthers took McCaffrey a few spots before the Chiefs drafted Patrick Mahomes.
The Giants drafted Barkley one slot ahead of Sam Darnold and five before Josh Allen.
Eagles defensive standout Jalen Carter went No. 9 in 2023, one pick after the Falcons took Robinson.
Would the 2026 Raiders rather have Jeanty or Jaxson Dart?
Which brings me to the original question — how early should you draft a running back?

Even if Love is as good as advertised, much like Barkley, McCaffrey, Robinson and Gibbs have been, the infrastructure matters. Outside the top 10 seems like a logical move. Our most recent beat reporter mock draft agrees; Love falls to the Ravens at No. 14.

But the Titans, holders of the No. 4 pick, desperately need weapons. It has to be tempting, given this draft lacks star power. Then again, that type of thinking is why bad teams stay bad. What should talent-needy Tennessee do?

I am just not sold that we need a top five back to win another ring.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/715853 ... dailyemail

[auroraave]

Well I would argue that picking the top rated back in the draft after losing the SB MVP at 32 is a move I would support. Is a rookie deal 4 or 5 years? We would have a pretty stacked backfield - and on a rookie salary. Would he be BPA at 32? It's all a calculated risk. It's definitely a move worth considering. That would make this offense very very hard to defend - take pressure of The Darnold, give DC's fits. Love and Charbs? Oh man, the potential.

[Donn Beach]

They could get Love in the second round, that's where I've seen him mocked, they drafted walker in the second. That seems quite reasonable to me.

Gonna say I think this speaks to the seahawks. JS commented about bringing Wilson into their culture.

A fourth reason for the sharp decline in RB draft status was the widespread acceptance of football math in the 2010s. Number-crunchers found the effectiveness of rushing offense to be largely scheme-dependent, which made the rushers themselves feel replaceable

[Michael K.]

Well I would argue that picking the top rated back in the draft after losing the SB MVP at 32 is a move I would support. Is a rookie deal 4 or 5 years? We would have a pretty stacked backfield - and on a rookie salary. Would he be BPA at 32? It's all a calculated risk. It's definitely a move worth considering. That would make this offense very very hard to defend - take pressure of The Darnold, give DC's fits. Love and Charbs? Oh man, the potential.

No argument. I don't think that guy is going to be available there though.

[Michael K.]

They could get Love in the second round, that's where I've seen him mocked, they drafted walker in the second. That seems quite reasonable to me.

Gonna say I think this speaks to the seahawks. JS commented about bringing Wilson into their culture.

A fourth reason for the sharp decline in RB draft status was the widespread acceptance of football math in the 2010s. Number-crunchers found the effectiveness of rushing offense to be largely scheme-dependent, which made the rushers themselves feel replaceable

I hope you are right, but I think someone takes him in the first. Too much buzz about him being so talented and one of the best prospects in the draft. But who knows? I mean, Prime's kid fell a lot farther than that! Maybe we'll find out Love has some over bearing parent that wants to turn the draft process and everything his kid does into a media circus and Love will fall! LOL

[Donn Beach]

I have no idea, my question is could JS rely on that? He can look for a rb in the draft but unless you have the top pick you can't really focus on a certain player

[douche]

I am just not sold that we need a top five back to win another ring.

I'm not, either. And you can bet that Schneider is all over the idea of picking up a solid RB beyond the first round. He may have learned his lesson with Penny.

But then, I've always understood that when it's Schneider's turn to pick, he takes the best player regardless of position. Does he still subscribe to that notion now that Pete is gone? Not sure.

[Donn Beach]

I am just not sold that we need a top five back to win another ring.

I'm not, either. And you can bet that Schneider is all over the idea of picking up a solid RB beyond the first round. He may have learned his lesson with Penny.

But then, I've always understood that when it's Schneider's turn to pick, he takes the best player regardless of position. Does he still subscribe to that notion now that Pete is gone? Not sure.

I don't know if he does subscribe to that. I once had an article where he discussed his draft philosophy. I wish I had kept it. I can't find it again. The one comment I remember was, he drafts to his team, not the league. To me he seemed to be saying drafting to need. And really if the best player available isn't needful you trade down don't you.

[douche]

I found this, from 2023. Makes sense. As you mentioned, he drafts to his team. Needs, plus chemistry.

strategy.jpg (164.62 KiB) Viewed 149 times

[Donn Beach]

Here's an AI assessment, sounds pretty reasonable to me in a generic sort of way. There is a really analytical side to him I think. That's like, best player available, then he also applies a more subjective aspect to it, like character assessment

Key elements of Schneider's draft strategy include:

Athleticism and "Fit": Prioritizing players with high athletic metrics (such as SPARQ scores) who fit specific positions in their defensive-heavy or offensive scheme.

Roster Churn and Value: Known for trading down to secure additional picks, reducing risks, and increasing the odds of finding talent, often identifying "hidden gems".

Draft Philosophy Evolution: He has moved toward a more flexible approach, sometimes addressing immediate needs (like offensive line) to avoid repeating past mistakes and recognizing the need for better player development.

Character Assessment: A strong emphasis on interviews and medical checks, particularly at the NFL Combine, to evaluate a player's mental toughness and fit for the team's culture.

Player Acquisition: Focuses on building a cost-effective roster by drafting and developing players, reducing the need for expensive free-agent acquisitions