Barkley or a QB??????
Look at the results then decide. Look at the drafts in super bowl era. In the first 5 picks of the first round, there were 48 QBs taken. Three of them made the hall of fame, Bradshaw, Elway and Aikman. Among the duds were Art Schlichter, Rick Mirer, Heath Shuler, Ryan Leaf, Akili Smith, Tim Couch, Joey Harrington, Vince Young, Jemarcus Russell, Mark Sanchez and Robert Griffin. Now look at the numbers 6 percent were hall of farmers and 23 percent were duds. Now as far as RBs there were 36 taken in the top 5 picks. Eight of them were hall of famers, Simpson,Payton,Dorsett,Campbell, Dickerson,Sanders,Faulk and Tomlinson. Duds included Trent Richardson,Ki-Jana Carter, Curtis Ennis, Blair Thomas, Alonzo Highsmith,Brent Fullwood and Bo Mathews. So 22 percent were hall of farmers vs 6 percent qbs. 19 percent were duds compared to 23 percent Qbs.......Also the RB s that made the hall had careers that lasted 10 years.
There is no debate for me TAKE BARKLEY!!!!!
I don't think it's something in the air there. More of a system and coaching thing which Barkley is far removed from.
I'm not saying he received the best coaching because I don't know, it's just a different staff all the way around. I don't see anything in common on the field with the "failed" RBs other than the uniform.
Well, is it still true that Penn State produces great LBs? Probably not. It's all ancient history. "Linebacker U" is a memory, same as Blair Thomas being a bust 28 years ago is. Irrelevant.
In that era, why am I not surprised? :-)
That's why you take the QB. A guy as great as Walter Payton was didn't win until his team had a freak defense.
The good QB provides balance. Balance is more important than HOF. Anyways Eli wasn't always super and he's going into the HOF.
That's why you take the QB. A guy as great as Walter Payton was didn't win until his team had a freak defense.
The good QB provides balance. Balance is more important than HOF. Anyways Eli wasn't always super and he's going into the HOF.
With our receiving weapons, please load up that line. Bring them see safeties down.
RB's have been devalued for a reason. A strong running game is vital to offensive success(for the most part), but a top tier RB in todays' NFL when there are a ton of RBC's isn't. It's just piss poor value when we need a franchise QB and we are sitting at the top of the draft with a few blue chip prospects. Don't overthink it.
An elite 3 down RB is absolute murder on a defebse, there's no way to stop them. Faulk is the obvious comparison, but to make it clearer to Giants fans, think of Westbrook and McCoy and how they would kill us and we can do little to stop it.
Imagine combining that with an OBJ and Engram.
RB's have been devalued for a reason. A strong running game is vital to offensive success(for the most part), but a top tier RB in todays' NFL when there are a ton of RBC's isn't. It's just piss poor value when we need a franchise QB and we are sitting at the top of the draft with a few blue chip prospects. Don't overthink it.
Your claim is missing one vital point: that the GM doesn't think the QBs are worthy of the pick. All this you said is true IF AND ONLY IF you have the 2 players rated equally. If so then you take the QB. If not you take the RB. And don't compare taking a QB un the 3rd, 4th and 6th rounds to taking one with the 2nd overall pick. That's a ridiculous comparison.
Lets say Barkley is rated as a 93 and the Giants have a QB rated at 88, I'm still taking the QB. The value of QB's in the NFL dwarfs the value of RB's by a massive margin.
Again Victor, please name me the NFL team in recent history that has had sustained success with a star RB and without a franchise QB? People are comparing RB to QB and thinking it's an equal value, it's not.
John Elway, 1st overall pick, Terrell Davis 196th overall.
Still, of course you want both, but the franchise QB is so much harder to find because teams value them more than any other position. When you are in a good position like this, you don't take the RB first.
This is so untrue. Do you not see how the NFL works? QB's aren't the same as other positions. Teams draft the QB position every single year. QB's get overdrafted because they are valued much higher. It's very common.
Quote:
We're not drafting a position, we're drafting a prospect. There is no guarantee that there will be a franchise QB among this group. Same for RB. The Giants are going to pick who they feel will help the team most.
This is so untrue. Do you not see how the NFL works? QB's aren't the same as other positions. Teams draft the QB position every single year. QB's get overdrafted because they are valued much higher. It's very common.
Yes, the road is littered with reaches like EJ Manuel, Christian Ponder, Ryan Tannehill, Mark Sanchez. The list is endless. Reaching can be as harmful as ignoring.
The #2 pick gives you the opportunity to grab the QB you covet and need to be a good team 5-10 years down the road. If that QB is not there . . . do what you need to do to regain control of the line of scrimmage.
The #2 pick gives you the opportunity to grab the QB you covet and need to be a good team 5-10 years down the road. If that QB is not there . . . do what you need to do to regain control of the line of scrimmage.
Thats how I see things too. QB is top priority only because it's the hardest thing to get, but OL is the next most important thing on a team, IMO.
Sure, if we already had our franchise QB. I've now asked this a number of times to the pro-Barkley camp and I've yet to get an answer or an example. Franchise QB's are the most valuable players in all of sports so teams will reach a little bit. The goal is to build a team thats geared for sustained success. Please name me the team in the NFL that has had sustained success with a star RB WITHOUT a franchise QB. I can't think of any.
Are you trying to suggest that franchise QB's are no longer more valuable than RB's? There are 3/4 guys at the top of this draft that other teams seem to be fighting themselves to draft. Isn't that enough of a recent history?
Quote:
If the RB doesn't have a good QB -- you load up the line and you're not going to win enough big games.
That's why you take the QB. A guy as great as Walter Payton was didn't win until his team had a freak defense.
The good QB provides balance. Balance is more important than HOF. Anyways Eli wasn't always super and he's going into the HOF.
With our receiving weapons, please load up that line. Bring them see safeties down.
SUre -- keep pretending Webb will deliver the ball as the defense blitzes him to hell.
Thee is a reason why the QB position is regarded as most important position. Thus it wouldn't make a difference if Barkley was better. The QB can affect the game much more. There are a lot of RB's that were better than Eli. But when ELi got hot for the 2 super bowls-- it's something most great RB's could never do in a series of playoff games leading up the title.