To me, a PPR RB is a guy that I know is a talented pass catcher that I feel strongly will get 40+ targets and secure 75%+ of them.Perhaps the issue is not IF they will get chances, but what your definition is of a Ppr Rb?
I don't deny Mixon will get SOME passes. I don't deny Hyde did well last year due to offense he is in. You are making assumptions. You assume Hyde is a bad ppr back because he has only been successful last year..... My point is, the same for all of them listed here. The offenses don't toss to Rbs a lot, and most are usually not considered ppr rbs. The other point you missed is...you say Hyde isn't a ppr back - which I agree with by the by..., but Mixon is, when Hyde out performed him.
Net, I agree to be a really good ppr back, you need ability AND opportunity. Kamara isn't Kamara in another offense, IMO, as N.O. really thrives using a back with his talent.
Cincy isn't a huge screen team to the Rbs, and they throw alot to TE and Wr. San Fran does throw to Rbs alot(now with Shanahan).
So, again, you are solid at Rb, but you are not loaded with alot of ppr rb talent.
CheersI will admit when I was wrong, it does seem like Cincinnati fully intends to make Dixon a 3 down back, he was clearly a passing target yesterday. Which is great for Dixon and Cincy, as they were easier to defend against when they put Bernard in.