Browns continue to keep the decision on their No. 1 pick a secret, but there is a mounting belief from HCs and GMs around the league that Cleveland will take Baker Mayfield.
with the recent Allen news...does this make the #2 pick so valuable with Darnold still on the board @ #2?
But how could anyone believe that he clearly is? We all...myself very much included...have been waffling back and forth for a couple months on what to do at this pick BECAUSE it isn't clear who is the best player.
But how could anyone believe that he clearly is? We all...myself very much included...have been waffling back and forth for a couple months on what to do at this pick BECAUSE it isn't clear who is the best player.
So, if Gettleman truly believes Barkley is the best player in this entire draft and has conviction on that - isn't that a good enough reason to take him?
I'd love a QB - I think it's better for the franchise long term.
But my take is that if the Giants truly believe Barkley is the consensus best player in this class and that's why they take him - I can live with that and get behind it.
How could you sit there with a straight face and say you wouldn't want the best player in the draft because he's a running back?
Some of you make it sound like we're taking a punter.
If the choice is between a RB or a QB, I’m taking the QB, full stop. How many times do you have to see teams win without a “name” at RB before the value of the position should change? It happened here twice right in front of us. We’ve gotten 1100 yard rushers without needing to spend a top2 pick on a RB. We’ve had TWO 1000+ rushers on the same team in the same year with the right roster set up to make that happen.
How much more production would one expect to get if you draft one that much higher? It’s not like a guy that’s drafted 2 overall is going to challenge for 2000 yards every year.
But if we stay at 2, I want Barkley. The “no first round RB” thing has swung too far, as if that isn’t an important position itself. If I had more faith in the QBs in this draft I’d be fine with it. But I’m not a believer.
How could you sit there with a straight face and say you wouldn't want the best player in the draft because he's a running back?
Some of you make it sound like we're taking a punter.
If the choice is between a RB or a QB, I’m taking the QB, full stop. How many times do you have to see teams win without a “name” at RB before the value of the position should change? It happened here twice right in front of us. We’ve gotten 1100 yard rushers without needing to spend a top2 pick on a RB. We’ve had TWO 1000+ rushers on the same team in the same year with the right roster set up to make that happen.
How much more production would one expect to get if you draft one that much higher? It’s not like a guy that’s drafted 2 overall is going to challenge for 2000 yards every year.
Carson Wentz is done for the year - so are the Eagles. Teams don't win Super Bowls without great QB's. Nick Foles? Please. They have no shot. That trophy case is staying empty!
How could you sit there with a straight face and say you wouldn't want the best player in the draft because he's a running back?
Some of you make it sound like we're taking a punter.
If the choice is between a RB or a QB, I’m taking the QB, full stop. How many times do you have to see teams win without a “name” at RB before the value of the position should change? It happened here twice right in front of us. We’ve gotten 1100 yard rushers without needing to spend a top2 pick on a RB. We’ve had TWO 1000+ rushers on the same team in the same year with the right roster set up to make that happen.
How much more production would one expect to get if you draft one that much higher? It’s not like a guy that’s drafted 2 overall is going to challenge for 2000 yards every year.
Past results don't guarantee future outcomes.
Nothing guarantees anything. But it continues to happen. The best, highest drafted RB wasn’t even the best rookie RB last year.
Nick Foles beat Tom Brady in the Super Bowl last year and Case Keenum was a game away from the Super Bowl. Blake Bortles' Jaguars were in the AFC title game.
There isn't one limited formula and only one. The league evolves and things change. The rookie RB's last year made huge differences for their teams.
Kamara, Fournette, Cook (before he was hurt), Hunt, etc. were all HUGE assets to their teams last year.
People are devaluing the RB position too much because it's a "passing league" - that logic sucks .
Nick Foles beat Tom Brady in the Super Bowl last year and Case Keenum was a game away from the Super Bowl. Blake Bortles' Jaguars were in the AFC title game.
There isn't one limited formula and only one. The league evolves and things change. The rookie RB's last year made huge differences for their teams.
Kamara, Fournette, Cook (before he was hurt), Hunt, etc. were all HUGE assets to their teams last year.
People are devaluing the RB position too much because it's a "passing league" - that logic sucks .
So, if Gettleman truly believes Barkley is the best player in this entire draft and has conviction on that - isn't that a good enough reason to take him?
I'd love a QB - I think it's better for the franchise long term.
But my take is that if the Giants truly believe Barkley is the consensus best player in this class and that's why they take him - I can live with that and get behind it.
Yeah, no shit. But we don't get to come back in 5 years and redo the draft.
Hopefully we can do this rumored trade down with Denver.
if we could move down to 5 and collect extra picks, that's the sweet spot for me.
How could you sit there with a straight face and say you wouldn't want the best player in the draft because he's a running back?
Some of you make it sound like we're taking a punter.
If the choice is between a RB or a QB, I’m taking the QB, full stop. How many times do you have to see teams win without a “name” at RB before the value of the position should change? It happened here twice right in front of us. We’ve gotten 1100 yard rushers without needing to spend a top2 pick on a RB. We’ve had TWO 1000+ rushers on the same team in the same year with the right roster set up to make that happen.
How much more production would one expect to get if you draft one that much higher? It’s not like a guy that’s drafted 2 overall is going to challenge for 2000 yards every year.
Take the best player, that’s Barkley
Quote:
You guys are too fixated on the position.
How could you sit there with a straight face and say you wouldn't want the best player in the draft because he's a running back?
Some of you make it sound like we're taking a punter.
If the choice is between a RB or a QB, I’m taking the QB, full stop. How many times do you have to see teams win without a “name” at RB before the value of the position should change? It happened here twice right in front of us. We’ve gotten 1100 yard rushers without needing to spend a top2 pick on a RB. We’ve had TWO 1000+ rushers on the same team in the same year with the right roster set up to make that happen.
How much more production would one expect to get if you draft one that much higher? It’s not like a guy that’s drafted 2 overall is going to challenge for 2000 yards every year.
Past results don't guarantee future outcomes.
Quote:
In comment 13935085 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
You guys are too fixated on the position.
How could you sit there with a straight face and say you wouldn't want the best player in the draft because he's a running back?
Some of you make it sound like we're taking a punter.
If the choice is between a RB or a QB, I’m taking the QB, full stop. How many times do you have to see teams win without a “name” at RB before the value of the position should change? It happened here twice right in front of us. We’ve gotten 1100 yard rushers without needing to spend a top2 pick on a RB. We’ve had TWO 1000+ rushers on the same team in the same year with the right roster set up to make that happen.
How much more production would one expect to get if you draft one that much higher? It’s not like a guy that’s drafted 2 overall is going to challenge for 2000 yards every year.
Past results don't guarantee future outcomes.
Nothing guarantees anything. But it continues to happen. The best, highest drafted RB wasn’t even the best rookie RB last year.
Last year means nothing right now. These are all different players.
There isn't one limited formula and only one. The league evolves and things change. The rookie RB's last year made huge differences for their teams.
Kamara, Fournette, Cook (before he was hurt), Hunt, etc. were all HUGE assets to their teams last year.
People are devaluing the RB position too much because it's a "passing league" - that logic sucks .
There isn't one limited formula and only one. The league evolves and things change. The rookie RB's last year made huge differences for their teams.
Kamara, Fournette, Cook (before he was hurt), Hunt, etc. were all HUGE assets to their teams last year.
People are devaluing the RB position too much because it's a "passing league" - that logic sucks .
That is really a great, succinct and spot on post