In our last article, we dove into Chase Brown’s impressive Combine performance and tried to make some reconciliations between his athletic and physical traits and the efficiency numbers he put on wax as a multi-time 1000-yard rusher and the biggest workhorse in the Big Ten (he finished with a conference-leading 328 carries last year, including a four-game stretch in which he toted the rock 31, 41, 32, and 33 times in the meat of Illinois’ conference schedule). The results of that exploration left Brown looking a bit enigmatic, so we now turn to film study to connect the dots and fill in the gaps of our understanding of a player with a hypothetically interesting -- yet still unclear -- role to play in this running back class.

Whether on zone or gap concepts, Brown is one of the most effectively patient backs among this year’s crop of runners. Below are his net patience grades as well as his ratio of positively graded to negatively graded plays in the patience category (a complete breakdown of my film charting process can be found here):

Brown earned negative patience grades less often than any other back that I’ve studied so far in this class, showing high-level composure not just in being patient when doing so actively contributes to successful execution, but in not exhibiting patience when doing so would be detrimental to successful execution. Where some patient runners seem to just unnecessarily hang around in the backfield as the apparent byproduct of some misapplied Le’Veon Bell imitation, Brown is the real deal as a guy who knows when to slow and when to go and doesn’t overdo it to either extreme.

The know-when-to-go in Brown’s game also manifests as top-tier decisiveness on zone concepts, where his average vision (his net grade of 0.39 in that area is just below the class mean of 0.40) is buoyed by a quick trigger (combined with that explosiveness he showed at the Combine) that allows him to take advantage of fleeting creases at the line of scrimmage. Brown’s net decisiveness grade on zone runs is a class-leading 0.23, and he carries a ridiculous 14-to-1 ratio of positive-to-negative grades in that category (second in the class only to DeWayne McBride).

The following is a great example of the way Brown’s patience and decisiveness combine to make him effective on outside zone runs:

With nothing initially available, Brown slowly carries wide to avoid overrunning any potentially-developing gaps, and when a linebacker and interior defensive lineman over-pursue from each side, he diagnoses quickly and darts upfield. It doesn’t result in a big gain, but from a decision-making standpoint, Brown did much to maximize what was presented to him on the play.

Such composed and opportunistic execution is not uncommon from Brown, and his overall grades on zone runs compare to the rest of the class as follows:

Beyond his strong overall showing as a zone runner, Brown’s best (non-physical) skill is his ability to manipulate defenders at the line of scrimmage on gap concepts. His overall grade in this area (0.06) is just above the class average (0.05), but his ratio of positively to negatively graded runs is the best I’ve seen among 2023 runners.

Perhaps strangely, the part of Brown’s game that showed up worst on tape is his decisiveness on gap concepts. In a category that the average 2023 runner carries a net grade of 0.09 and a positive-to-negative ratio of 4.70 in, Brown is the only back I’ve charted with either a negative grade (-0.02) or a ratio below the 1.00-mark (0.67). In other words, Brown’s apprehensiveness on gap runs is a net negative on his overall performance, and to a unique degree. Such an effect is exemplified by the below run against Indiana:

Here, Brown carries the ball on duo, where he is tasked with reading the second level of the defense and committing to either bang on the inside or bounce to the playside edge (toward the bottom of the screen on this play). This is a short-yardage situation in which Brown is content to creep forward for a first down that technically qualifies as a “successful” play, but he really doesn’t ever commit to a legitimately viable path, which, on this play, is clearly the bounce opportunity that would put him in a one-on-one situation with tons of open space if he were able to make #44 miss. Instead, he goes nowhere, running into his own man before collapsing into the fetal position at a point where he’s lucky to have crossed the line to gain.

That amount of meat left on the bone of Brown’s rushing attempts is too common. While his ratio of positively to negatively graded plays in the vision category is fine on gap concepts (his 7.00 ranks sixth out of 14 and is just below the class average of 7.09), he lacks the creativity to add much value beyond what’s blocked for him on those carries, as shown by a net vision grade of 0.19 that ranks 10th in the class. He doesn’t make a ton of mistakes, but his rate of positively graded vision (22.6%) is in the bottom three among 2023 backs on gap runs. As a result of this combination of factors -- the lack of creativity, the indecisiveness, etc. -- Brown’s overall grade on gap concepts (0.44) ranks below the average (0.51) and in the bottom half of this class (9/14).

Beyond his suboptimal decision-making on those plays, though, the fly in the ointment of Brown’s comprehensive skill-set is his severe lack of play-strength. Along with his elusiveness numbers, here’s how his power stacks up to that of his classmates:

Essentially what the above scores mean is that despite receiving the least solid contact, Brown powers through that contact at the stone-worst rate among all 2023 runners, and it’s not particularly close.

These power metrics are on a -2-to-2 scale, with scores corresponding to average on-field outcomes as follows:

So, the average outcome for Brown in physical encounters with defenders is somewhere between a stalemate and a successful tackle attempt without extra yards added, making him one of only two backs in this class (along with Sean Tucker) to offer such little resistance through contact. We could double the rate at which Brown powers through attempted tackles from linebackers (giving him a -0.25 score) and he’d still go down more easily in those situations than all but one other 2023 runner (Tank Bigsby, -0.26).

Sean Tucker is the only back in this class who comes close to matching the lack of strength with which Chase Brown runs.

Such a feature of Brown’s game should call into question the utility of the explosiveness and strength he showed at the Combine. What do tree trunk legs that allow you to jump 40 inches matter when they don’t help you run through linebackers on the interior? What do 25 reps at 225 pounds on the bench matter when they don’t help you fight through arm-tackle reaches from defensive linemen near the line of scrimmage? What do washboard abs matter if they don’t contribute to the successful absorption of contact from head-hunting defensive backs in the open field? And what if Brown experiences a more difficult time in avoiding direct blows from defenders in the NFL? He’s not super elusive and he doesn’t have an extensive tool belt of cuts and jukes with which to evade tacklers, so it stands to reason that he could take cleaners shot from professionals than he did from college kids -- in that case, how is he going to break tackles when he already wasn’t doing so against a lot of indirect contact?

Let’s circle back to the analytically-generated pure runner comps that we explored at the end of that first Brown article:

With the positives and negatives from Brown’s film in mind, I think he most closely resembles the Eno Benjamin- or DeAndre Washington-type players on this list. He picks his spots well on zone concepts but does not create value on gap runs through either decision-making or physicality. Assuming he checks out as a receiver (I still have yet to do much work on him there), I think he’s somewhere on the change-of-pace spectrum at the next level, so I don’t believe we should be anticipating a significant or fantasy-friendly role for him despite the positive elements of his profile that are undeniably enticing on the surface. He’s an athletic and well-built role player, but a role player nonetheless, and that’s ok.