Gettleman took Mccaffrey last year at #8, indicating he's willing to take a RB with a top 10 pick. The thing is, Mccaffrey was a bit of a disappointment and I'm wondering if Gettleman regretted the pick and therefore is less likely to take a RB early.
To me it says Gettleman values the position and the special skill position players and he's more likely than maybe some other GMs to take Barkley at 2.
What do others think?
Not to mention you cannot compare a Swiss army knife type guy to a true every down running ack with the measurables of Barkley....
2. I'm hoping it means that Getts understands that the NFL is moving to more multiple offensive looks. "Tweeners" are what you want. An RB that can play WR. A WR that can run from the backfield. A TE that can play WR. This is where we're heading on both sides of the ball.
But as a runner? He averaged 3.7 YPC and about 400 yards. Not horrible, but definitely not what they were hoping for.
If he's a glorified third down back, that's fine but not worthy of the 8th pick.
What makes you think any comments from DG qualify as insight? I'm not sure why anyone thinks the front office has an obligation to be open and honest with the media or fans, especially leading up to the draft.
But as a runner? He averaged 3.7 YPC and about 400 yards. Not horrible, but definitely not what they were hoping for.
If he's a glorified third down back, that's fine but not worthy of the 8th pick.
Exactly my point....you cannot compare the two backs....Barkley is the superior prospect and imo DG was looking to just add explosive players to the offense...he has said we want good football players and KMC is that as is Barkley. He was looking to add talent to offense...he will do same thing at 2 imo
The only complicating factor... and it's a big one is Gettleman's position with the selection of a QB. This QB class is about as good as it gets in the NFL draft. He has to know that he has other excellent options. Who really knows, but Gettleman and the Giants ownership may be thinking it would be great to grab a RB with the #2 pick, but the franchise needs to take advantage of the high draft pick and the excellent QB prospects. This is very similar to the situation that faced Ernie Accorsi and the Giants in 2004. It would have been great to grab a (at that time) top LT prospect in Robert Gallery, but the chance to draft a franchise QB in a strong QB class was too great of an opportunity.
Accorsi was pretty transparent about his thoughts that Manning was the top QB prospect. It wound up costing him and the Giants a lot to get their guy. Gettleman has not been as forthcoming with his preference and he doesn't need to be. If there's a lesson in all of this hype about the top 2018 draft pick, maybe it's the sounds of silence from the front office...
It could be that it would be kind of stupid to try to pin that on one player.
Quote:
Has stated multiple times that they are looking for "football players", and Barkley seems to be the best in this draft.
Seems? I know not seems.
Milton, I'm impressed! So much of our draft discussion these days is Hamlet-esque.
I see him as about what you would hope for in a runner. But since DG took him a lot higher than he was expected to go, I could see the pick as an argument in favor of the possibility that he might take Barkley.
Your comment seems to be that if their offensive line wasn't good, then how could Norwell be good, which is a weird comment to make.
What a fkin' loser he was...
The Rams are a perfect example of why you don't take a RB. Todd Gurley is awesome. He's a complete stud, but in his first 2 years they went 11 & 21. They get a franchise QB and went 11 & 5. QB is by far a more important position and also they play for much longer.
Just look at the 2004 draft. The top 3 QBs are still around and playing at a high level after 15 years. The top 3 RBs didn't come close. Steven Jackson played until 2015. His career was really done in 2012. Chris Perry retired in 2008 and Kevin Jones retired in 2009. So 2 of the top 3 RBs played for 1/3 the amount of time as Eli, Rivers & Ben.
Idk about disappointment, but he really wasn't that good last year. Definitely didn't live up to the hype of being a top 8 pick. He had 435 yards rushing at 3.7 YPC with a very good OL. The rookie RB we drafted with the 140th overall pick had 476 yards rushing at 4.3 YPC with a terrible OL.
McCaffrey was good as a receiver though and still only had 400 more yards from scrimmage then Gallman. McCaffrey played behind an OL that had a Pro Bowler, 1st team All Pro & 2nd team All Pro. McCaffrey also played 746 snaps. While Gallman played 323. So the 8th overall pick and the 140th overall pick averaged a little over 2 yards per snap played.
The Rams are a perfect example of why you don't take a RB. Todd Gurley is awesome. He's a complete stud, but in his first 2 years they went 11 & 21. They get a franchise QB and went 11 & 5. QB is by far a more important position and also they play for much longer.
They actually went 15-17 the first two years after taking the QB.
They only went 11-5 in the 2nd year after taking the QB, or the 3rd after taking the RB.
I mean, one could point out that they picked the RB and went from 6-10 the previous year to 7-9. Then they picked the QB and went from 7-9 the previous year to 4-12. The 11-5 came when they were both in place with some experience under their belts (and a new coach, of course).
Quote:
The Rams are a perfect example of why you don't take a RB. Todd Gurley is awesome. He's a complete stud, but in his first 2 years they went 11 & 21. They get a franchise QB and went 11 & 5. QB is by far a more important position and also they play for much longer.
They actually went 15-17 the first two years after taking the QB.
They only went 11-5 in the 2nd year after taking the QB, or the 3rd after taking the RB.
I mean, one could point out that they picked the RB and went from 6-10 the previous year to 7-9. Then they picked the QB and went from 7-9 the previous year to 4-12. The 11-5 came when they were both in place with some experience under their belts (and a new coach, of course).
I'm obviously talking about Goff's first full year as a starter.
The only complicating factor... and it's a big one is Gettleman's position with the selection of a QB. This QB class is about as good as it gets in the NFL draft. He has to know that he has other excellent options. Who really knows, but Gettleman and the Giants ownership may be thinking it would be great to grab a RB with the #2 pick, but the franchise needs to take advantage of the high draft pick and the excellent QB prospects. This is very similar to the situation that faced Ernie Accorsi and the Giants in 2004. It would have been great to grab a (at that time) top LT prospect in Robert Gallery, but the chance to draft a franchise QB in a strong QB class was too great of an opportunity.
Accorsi was pretty transparent about his thoughts that Manning was the top QB prospect. It wound up costing him and the Giants a lot to get their guy. Gettleman has not been as forthcoming with his preference and he doesn't need to be. If there's a lesson in all of this hype about the top 2018 draft pick, maybe it's the sounds of silence from the front office...
Very true! I don’t see how you don’t grab a QB with this unbelievable opportunity. Eli is missing easy throws left and right. Everyone loves Eli, but how can you not realize that we hopefully will not be in this position again. These QBs are good. I did a lot of work on them this year and while I am definitely not a scout, I have heard some pretty knowledgeable people say how good they are. Eli has said a thousand times he doesn’t mind if they take a QB and he understands how it works.
Quote:
In comment 13870171 Big Rick in FL said:
Quote:
The Rams are a perfect example of why you don't take a RB. Todd Gurley is awesome. He's a complete stud, but in his first 2 years they went 11 & 21. They get a franchise QB and went 11 & 5. QB is by far a more important position and also they play for much longer.
They actually went 15-17 the first two years after taking the QB.
They only went 11-5 in the 2nd year after taking the QB, or the 3rd after taking the RB.
I mean, one could point out that they picked the RB and went from 6-10 the previous year to 7-9. Then they picked the QB and went from 7-9 the previous year to 4-12. The 11-5 came when they were both in place with some experience under their belts (and a new coach, of course).
I'm obviously talking about Goff's first full year as a starter.
That's fine, but you're taking the team's record when starting a rookie QB for 7 games and holding it against the RB but not the QB.
But regardless, I guess I just don't see it as a "perfect example of why you don't pick a RB," even if you see him as a transcendent talent. Maybe if Gurley was hurt this past season and the franchise QB went 11-5 without him, but as it was, Gurley was a HUGE reason for Goff's (and the team's) success this season.