We've seen guys like Eddie Lacy, Matt Forte, and LeSean McCoy all have bad games now. We like to excuse it by saying, "well they had tough match-ups", which is true. But wasn't the whole reason you spent a top 5 pick on an RB to get someone who was match-up proof? The "start your studs" theorem is not panning out. Do you expect it to even out or is it now reasonable to consider starting Spiller in a favorable matchup this week over McCoy or Jennings in brutal matchups?
I haven't done the statistical work on it, and there's always some gut work involved too, but I know that I can think of far more times where I really regretted not starting my stud than I can think of times when I really regretted starting him. For example, I started Le'Veon Bell this week despite a horrible matchup, and I started Montee Ball this week despite a horrible matchup. 50/50 based on my one week sample size.
I started Montee Ball (-1) and Matt Forte (+3) this past week; needless to say I fell to 0-3, despite being very happy with my team in the draft. My questions on this site heading into the week, and after the results have led me to ask the same question, and I've been scouring the web trying to get a good answer. The consensus seems to be that starting your studs is "almost always" the right "odds" play, though I've not been able to find anything remotely statistical to back this up. One site even lists "start your studs" as a "commandment".
The best chessplayers in the world routinely violate the supposed principles of the game, but more pedestrian players do best to follow them. I suspect that this case is similar- if you put in the time to watch a lot of game film and have the expertise to genuinely evaluate game-plans and match-ups, you can probably do better than to follow the general principles. Just knowing that Sherman is good or the Jets haven't been kind to runners is probably not sufficient to violate them and come out ahead in the long run. I think the advice to start Ball and Forte was correct, even though it didn't work out this time. Just my two cents.
If you look into the offensive line situation blocking for all of those backs, you will see that there have been significant injuries to all of them. I would say that is partly the reason as OC's and coaches have to make adjustments in game planning as well as opponent match ups. You have to take what the defense is giving you and sometimes that is the least path of resistance. The stud backs do not always have great games such as Beast Mode VS San Diego. Just did not work into the game plan to feed him the ball and when given the opportunity he did not get a great YPC.
