Gil Brandt has graded 492 running backs over 60 years

because a perennial all-pro will wipe out any debate, regardless of what the others go on to do.

In comment 13950749 jcn56 said:

Quote:

because a perennial all-pro will wipe out any debate, regardless of what the others go on to do.

Wow. Stay healthy young man.

I like Brandt and he's obviously a legend. But how can you say 100% All Pro?

Who are his top 10 rated RBs of all time?

The expectations for this guy are out of this world - he literally has to be a first team all-pro out of the gates otherwise people are going to hold it against him.

But Brandt isn't the only one to have an out of this world grade on him. Quite a few analysts have him as one of their highest graded RB's ever from what I've seen.

Hard to argue with the logic behind the pick. He's clearly extremely highly-regarded.

I can't wait to see this kid play in blue.

In comment 13950768 Danny Kanell said:

Quote:

I can't wait to see this kid play in blue.

x10

Time will tell.

just as Mayock is, but this guy built the most consistently good, sometimes great, football teams from the ‘60s until he left with Landry after the ‘88 season. He hasn’t lost all that much on his fastball. Imho

In comment 13950772 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

Time will tell.

I fyou had to choose...

would you consider yourself cynic, skeptic, or contrarian?

In comment 13950766 arcarsenal said:

Quote:

The expectations for this guy are out of this world - he literally has to be a first team all-pro out of the gates otherwise people are going to hold it against him. But Brandt isn't the only one to have an out of this world grade on him. Quite a few analysts have him as one of their highest graded RB's ever from what I've seen. Hard to argue with the logic behind the pick. He's clearly extremely highly-regarded.

That wouldn't really be fair to him, either.

This first year I'm hoping for him to be able to read and pick up a blitz, not look to bounce everything outside, and help in the passing game.

While it's true the nothing and no one is a sure thing, it's also true that few, if anyone at all, has been evaluated and assigned higher grades than Barkley.

It's the production, game tape, skill set, competition, pro readiness, character, work ethic, personality, combine and clean injury history.

In terms of draft prospects, he is a straight A student. Can he not live up to that? Sure. But the evidence we have now does not lead in that direction. I read one scout say that any negative he had to jot down in his write-up of Barkley felt forced and like he needed to do so in order to complete the report.

Personally, I haven't seen this type of hype in football before. This is more than even Reggie Bush. I've only seen it for LeBron and Bryce Harper. Those 2 worked out pretty well.

at the idea of someone being skeptical of a player receiving this much hype.

He is mature, respectful, talked about walking into the building and looking at the 4 Lombardi trophies. Their meaning did not go unnoticed by him. He understands that this is a cornerstone franchise. He spoke about the history of the RB position for the Giants. He's not just immensely talented,he has that "it" factor about him that very few have. ( Eli has it, OBJ has it, LT had it). You win because of guys like this.

greatest D player in NFL history, back in ‘81..

And YES, time will tell as nothing is guaranteed

In comment 13950763 ZogZerg said:

Quote:

Who are his top 10 rated RBs of all time?

I would guess:

OJ
Ricky Williams
Marcus Allen
Adrian Peterson
LaDanian Tomlinson
Marshall Faulk

Are all on the list

that I had to google what a "snapback" is. Is that a common knowledge thing?

there is no chance that this kid lives-up to some of the super-human expectations. Sports media loves to tear down the very people they laud. Every single play will be over analyzed and used as evidence of greatness and failure.

He may be very good or even great. Some pointy headed football analysts are already investigating options to poke holes in Barkley.

In comment 13950795 BamaBlue said:

Quote:

there is no chance that this kid lives-up to some of the super-human expectations. Sports media loves to tear down the very people they laud. Every single play will be over analyzed and used as evidence of greatness and failure. He may be very good or even great. Some pointy headed football analysts are already investigating options to poke holes in Barkley.

Yep and it also seems like a lot of the detractors(mainly those who wanted the Giants to select a QB) are the ones setting the bar the highest.
"If he doesn't go into the Hall of Fame first ballot AND shit a golden football into my lap, then it was a bad pick!"

.

In comment 13950793 chopperhatch said:

Quote:

In comment 13950763 ZogZerg said: Quote: Who are his top 10 rated RBs of all time? I would guess: OJ Ricky Williams Marcus Allen Adrian Peterson LaDanian Tomlinson Marshall Faulk Are all on the list

It's grades coming out of college.....

1) Barkley
2) Tony Dorsett
3) Herschel Walker

compared against players they could have chosen instead is a legitimate topic however. If they weren't in love with one of these Quarterbacks, and any of them goes on to be excellent, then their evaluations were wrong. It would take an Adrian Peterson sort of career to be more valuable than a franchise quarterback. And even that is probably something some would argue.

With so much hype.

In comment 13950814 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

.

That's good. It's the best choice. "Prove it" without being unreceptive to being wrong.

In comment 13950784 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

at the idea of someone being skeptical of a player receiving this much hype.

It's also weird to see so many disgusted with the pick of someone who is likely the very best player in the draft.

I absolutely get those that wanted a QB. So, there would be natural disappointment. But, the disdain for the Barkley pick is as if they both passed on a QB with the same type of rating Barkley has (that QB didn't exist in this draft) and drafted a reach/project in his place. Since all the QBs came with serious questions and Barkley is a consensus excellent pick, why the anger?

Most people are.

In comment 13950780 Go Terps said:

Quote:

In comment 13950766 arcarsenal said: Quote: The expectations for this guy are out of this world - he literally has to be a first team all-pro out of the gates otherwise people are going to hold it against him. But Brandt isn't the only one to have an out of this world grade on him. Quite a few analysts have him as one of their highest graded RB's ever from what I've seen. Hard to argue with the logic behind the pick. He's clearly extremely highly-regarded. That wouldn't really be fair to him, either. This first year I'm hoping for him to be able to read and pick up a blitz, not look to bounce everything outside, and help in the passing game.

I would agree.

I think if people are going to expect 2000 scrimmage yards in year one, it's probably not fair to him and not that realistic.

I do think he has to be productive in year one - and I believe he will be. But doing all of the little things will matter just as much as the gaudy numbers.

Play the game.

I appreciate his confidence but we have drafted too many #1
RB busts to fall for the hype blindly

In comment 13950817 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

compared against players they could have chosen instead is a legitimate topic however. If they weren't in love with one of these Quarterbacks, and any of them goes on to be excellent, then their evaluations were wrong. It would take an Adrian Peterson sort of career to be more valuable than a franchise quarterback. And even that is probably something some would argue.

To me the QBs' careers have more to do with that discussion than Barkley does. We can throw Maycock out because he was off the board. So, if Rosen is hurt a lot or his injury history affects his career, if Darnold continues to throw a lot of INTs, if Allen's lack of accuracy continues and/or his past comments impact his stature with the team, and if Jackson's lack of size and accuracy are issues, then anything out of Barkley still justifies the pick. Realistically, I think the Giants would have been looking only at Darnold and Rosen, so those are the two I would focus on.

4 Qbs goes on to a HOF career, there is no certainty that we would have picked THAT QB out of the 4 anyway

It will still mean we blew the draft if Darnold, Allen, Rosen turn into franchise qbs and we are stuck with avaregare qb play going forward for the duration of SB career

If we find a franchise qb by trading 3 1st rounders or sign a Kirk Cousins type for big money and Darnold, Rosen, Allen are all franchise qbs's or 1 of them turns into a franchise qb then it will mean we screwed up

Only thing that will make the SB legit, is that he turns into a HOF type of back, Darnold blows and is not great or the other 2 and we draft a stud one in a couple of year or the back ups we have now turn into studs. That is the only way

In comment 13950853 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

4 Qbs goes on to a HOF career, there is no certainty that we would have picked THAT QB out of the 4 anyway

Keep damage controlling. 1 or 3 of them it dont matter because the Giants told you that SB was worth it because the qb's all were not primed for being franchise qb's

Only way your argument has merit is if we drafted a qb and one of the other qb's turned into HOF type.

But DG told everyone that the qb's were not worth crap and none were touched by the hand of GOD

and, if Barkley is who is supposed to be and we sign a Cousins guy for only money, then not only will I be as happy as a pig in shit but I would almost guarantee that we will double the playoff win total of those teams (or, at least he Jets) over the life of those QB's. SO, what's most important to you?

In comment 13950866 NYSports1 said:

Quote:

In comment 13950853 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: 4 Qbs goes on to a HOF career, there is no certainty that we would have picked THAT QB out of the 4 anyway Keep damage controlling. 1 or 3 of them it dont matter because the Giants told you that SB was worth it because the qb's all were not primed for being franchise qb's Only way your argument has merit is if we drafted a qb and one of the other qb's turned into HOF type. But DG told everyone that the qb's were not worth crap and none were touched by the hand of GOD

Saying they weren't in love with any of the QB's and saying they "were not worth crap" are completely different notions.

If you need gross hyperbole like this to make your point, you probably don't have a very good one.

In comment 13950866 NYSports1 said:

Quote:

In comment 13950853 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: 4 Qbs goes on to a HOF career, there is no certainty that we would have picked THAT QB out of the 4 anyway Keep damage controlling. 1 or 3 of them it dont matter because the Giants told you that SB was worth it because the qb's all were not primed for being franchise qb's Only way your argument has merit is if we drafted a qb and one of the other qb's turned into HOF type. But DG told everyone that the qb's were not worth crap and none were touched by the hand of GOD

No damage control. The Giants didn’t value any of the top 4 as franchise guys. Period. End of story. Moving on

Both are winners with pedigree and athleticiism

Most of the best all time QBs have come in later rounds- Unitas, Montana, Marino, Tarkenton, Brady.....the list goes on and on

These 5 are arguably the best NFL QBs of all time

In comment 13950866 NYSports1 said:

Quote:

In comment 13950853 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: 4 Qbs goes on to a HOF career, there is no certainty that we would have picked THAT QB out of the 4 anyway Keep damage controlling. 1 or 3 of them it dont matter because the Giants told you that SB was worth it because the qb's all were not primed for being franchise qb's Only way your argument has merit is if we drafted a qb and one of the other qb's turned into HOF type. But DG told everyone that the qb's were not worth crap and none were touched by the hand of GOD

hate to play the game that others do, but could you supply a tape of DG calling any of the qb's crap?

In comment 13950784 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

at the idea of someone being skeptical of a player receiving this much hype.

It’s fine to be skeptical, but you should be skeptical of every player in this draft then.

Rushing: 250 att 4.5 y/a 1125 yds (well below recent top rookies)
Receiving: 50 rec 10.0 y/c 500 yds (Kamara had 81 and 10.2 y/r)

Total: 1625 yds, 300 touches, 10+ TDs

In comment 13950853 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

4 Qbs goes on to a HOF career, there is no certainty that we would have picked THAT QB out of the 4 anyway

that’s disingenuous to good degree...

In comment 13950866 NYSports1 said:

Quote:

In comment 13950853 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: 4 Qbs goes on to a HOF career, there is no certainty that we would have picked THAT QB out of the 4 anyway Keep damage controlling. 1 or 3 of them it dont matter because the Giants told you that SB was worth it because the qb's all were not primed for being franchise qb's Only way your argument has merit is if we drafted a qb and one of the other qb's turned into HOF type. But DG told everyone that the qb's were not worth crap and none were touched by the hand of GOD

You’re embellishing way too much here...

Allen - busts
Rosen - Matt Ryan
Darnold - Eli

How good does Barkley then need to be to justify the pick?
- Tiki with a SB MVP?
- Faulk?
- Top 3 all time?

Does your opinion change if Lauletta (or Webb) develops into a Cousins/Alex Smith level QB?

No chance he can live up to this nonsense. Touch by the hand of God is going to be the dumbest thing any GM has ever said. JPP of tight ends times a million.

As far as Gil Brant goes is he serious? I have 2 words:

BO JACKSON.

The Manster, Roger Staubach, LT the rest I was all skeptical of including all of this years draftees.

I'm a born skeptic

For instance, If 1 of these 3 turn into an Andy Dalton level quarterback and SB turns into an all pro RB are will still regretting it?

Dalton signed a second contract with his team for nearly 100 million, and quarterbacked a team to 4 straight playoff appearances. He's a franchise quarterback correct? So, would you be upset if we passed on the next Andy Dalton?

In comment 13950886 Jimmy Googs said:

Quote:

In comment 13950853 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: 4 Qbs goes on to a HOF career, there is no certainty that we would have picked THAT QB out of the 4 anyway that’s disingenuous to good degree...

It's npot really. It *has* to be Darnold and no other. Because he was, based on all accounts that even had has so much as glancingly considering a QB, the only alternative. How the others do is completely irrelevant.

In comment 13950861 NYSports1 said:

Quote:

It will still mean we blew the draft if Darnold, Allen, Rosen turn into franchise qbs and we are stuck with avaregare qb play going forward for the duration of SB career If we find a franchise qb by trading 3 1st rounders or sign a Kirk Cousins type for big money and Darnold, Rosen, Allen are all franchise qbs's or 1 of them turns into a franchise qb then it will mean we screwed up Only thing that will make the SB legit, is that he turns into a HOF type of back, Darnold blows and is not great or the other 2 and we draft a stud one in a couple of year or the back ups we have now turn into studs. That is the only way

Winning a Superbowl wouldn't?

In comment 13950905 BigK said:

Quote:

In comment 13950861 NYSports1 said: Quote: It will still mean we blew the draft if Darnold, Allen, Rosen turn into franchise qbs and we are stuck with avaregare qb play going forward for the duration of SB career If we find a franchise qb by trading 3 1st rounders or sign a Kirk Cousins type for big money and Darnold, Rosen, Allen are all franchise qbs's or 1 of them turns into a franchise qb then it will mean we screwed up Only thing that will make the SB legit, is that he turns into a HOF type of back, Darnold blows and is not great or the other 2 and we draft a stud one in a couple of year or the back ups we have now turn into studs. That is the only way Winning a Superbowl wouldn't?

Wow. I think that you might be the first person who mentioned or seemed to take into account team results in any of these conversations.

When we had Vereen I said each year that he should have been our leading receiver after Beckham. The running back in space against a linebacker is usually going to be the biggest mismatch available in the passing game.

Check out the numbers of the two best rookie running backs last year, Alvin Kamara and Kareem Hunt:

Kamara: Rush: 120/728/8, Rec.: 81/826/5
Total: 201 Touches, 1554 yds, 7.7 yds/touch, 13 TD

Hunt: Rush: 272/1327/8, Rec.: 53/455/3
Total: 325 Touches, 1782 yds, 5.5 yds/touch, 11 TD

If I had to pick one or the other, I'd rather Barkley's rookie season looked like Kamara's. I'm hoping for explosive plays, particularly in the passing game.

In comment 13950912 Go Terps said:

Quote:

When we had Vereen I said each year that he should have been our leading receiver after Beckham. The running back in space against a linebacker is usually going to be the biggest mismatch available in the passing game. Check out the numbers of the two best rookie running backs last year, Alvin Kamara and Kareem Hunt: Kamara: Rush: 120/728/8, Rec.: 81/826/5 Total: 201 Touches, 1554 yds, 7.7 yds/touch, 13 TD Hunt: Rush: 272/1327/8, Rec.: 53/455/3 Total: 325 Touches, 1782 yds, 5.5 yds/touch, 11 TD If I had to pick one or the other, I'd rather Barkley's rookie season looked like Kamara's. I'm hoping for explosive plays, particularly in the passing game.

Hunt didn't have as many explosive plays, but I hope Barkley gets the ball as much as he did (300-325 touches) rather than the 200 touches Kamara had. With this OL, averaging 5.0 yards/rush might be a bit of a stretch, but I fully expect Barkley to exceed Hunt's 8.6 yards/rec number.

Ultimately, I can see 300 touches with 6.0-6.5 yds/touch which would likely be a ROY season.

In comment 13950912 Go Terps said:

Quote:

When we had Vereen I said each year that he should have been our leading receiver after Beckham. The running back in space against a linebacker is usually going to be the biggest mismatch available in the passing game. Check out the numbers of the two best rookie running backs last year, Alvin Kamara and Kareem Hunt: Kamara: Rush: 120/728/8, Rec.: 81/826/5 Total: 201 Touches, 1554 yds, 7.7 yds/touch, 13 TD Hunt: Rush: 272/1327/8, Rec.: 53/455/3 Total: 325 Touches, 1782 yds, 5.5 yds/touch, 11 TD If I had to pick one or the other, I'd rather Barkley's rookie season looked like Kamara's. I'm hoping for explosive plays, particularly in the passing game.

Quote:

If I had to pick one or the other, I'd rather Barkley's rookie season looked like Kamara's. I'm hoping for explosive plays, particularly in the passing game.

If the hype turns out to be reasonably credible, this is my main hope as well.

“He has a 100% chance of being an All-Pro,” Brandt says.


That's too high an expectation.. for anyone.. SB may live up to that but still No one has a 100% chance of being an all-pro..

But then i watched Barry highlights and looked at his stats

2638 yards with 37 TDs and a 7.4 you. That’s one season!

Barkleys 1134 yds and 18 TDs and 5.7 ypc pale in comprison

Im not sure how anyone grades out higher than Barry and that is a knock on Barkley.

In comment 13950905 BigK said:

Quote:

In comment 13950861 NYSports1 said: Quote: It will still mean we blew the draft if Darnold, Allen, Rosen turn into franchise qbs and we are stuck with avaregare qb play going forward for the duration of SB career If we find a franchise qb by trading 3 1st rounders or sign a Kirk Cousins type for big money and Darnold, Rosen, Allen are all franchise qbs's or 1 of them turns into a franchise qb then it will mean we screwed up Only thing that will make the SB legit, is that he turns into a HOF type of back, Darnold blows and is not great or the other 2 and we draft a stud one in a couple of year or the back ups we have now turn into studs. That is the only way Winning a Superbowl wouldn't?

I still think the Super Bowl metric for franchise QB is a bit overrated and not a great metric. I think a better metric of whether someone is a franchise QB is whether he has you in playoff contention every year that he is healthy and on the field. A bad team around him is still a playoff contender, a bad team without him has a bad losing record. A pretty good team around him and there's a chance for a deep run in the playoffs or a Super Bowl.

To me, that's the best metric. Not even the greatest QB is going to go to or win a Super Bowl without a good team around him. But a franchise QB is someone who by himself puts his team in playoff contention and if you can add some good pieces around him, he can take the team far into the playoffs.

That's my problem with running backs. Although I love the running back position and think it is an important position -- aside from LT (the Giants one), Barry Sanders is my favorite player of all time -- there's really only been one team that I can recall since 2000 that has won a Super Bowl without a franchise caliber QB: the Baltimore Ravens (Trent Dilfer who was a top 10 pick in the draft, with Jamaal Lewis), and they had perhaps the best defense of all time. More important than that though, I can't think of any great running backs since 1990 who have consistently year in and year out had their teams in the playoffs or at least playoff contention throughout their career, unless they had a franchise QB playing alongside them. The reason, to me, seems to be that you need far more pieces around a RB to make the team very good than you need around a QB, and in modern free agency, it's really hard to keep those pieces together, not to mention the fact that it's rare that a RB plays 10 years in the NFL without his skills deteriorating significantly. Even some of the best of the best, LaDanian Tomlinson, Adrian Peterson, became only part time running backs after 8-9 years or so. And Emmett Smith, whose career was maybe the longest of all great RBs, only had two 1,000 yard rushing seasons after his tenth year in the league, and never again averaged 4.0 yards per carry or more after his his 11th year. And given how big defenders are now, I'm not sure that Emmett's longevity can be reproduced almost twenty years later.

So if Eli were a running back, his career most likely would have been over by 2014 or 2015, yet here we are thinking he has "years" left.

A great defense can take you to the playoffs and beyond, but in modern free agency and the rules being what they are now, it is so much easier to make a single franchise QB the cornerstone of your team for a decade plus, and build some good pieces around him for 4 years at a time, then to build a dominant defense and keep it together for more than a few years at best. As it stands now, it looks like this might be the last year that the Jaguars have a top defense, with several key players coming up on free agency next year. Maybe the same with Denver.

In comment 13950985 Danny80 said:

Quote:

In comment 13950905 BigK said: Quote: In comment 13950861 NYSports1 said: Quote: It will still mean we blew the draft if Darnold, Allen, Rosen turn into franchise qbs and we are stuck with avaregare qb play going forward for the duration of SB career If we find a franchise qb by trading 3 1st rounders or sign a Kirk Cousins type for big money and Darnold, Rosen, Allen are all franchise qbs's or 1 of them turns into a franchise qb then it will mean we screwed up Only thing that will make the SB legit, is that he turns into a HOF type of back, Darnold blows and is not great or the other 2 and we draft a stud one in a couple of year or the back ups we have now turn into studs. That is the only way Winning a Superbowl wouldn't? I still think the Super Bowl metric for franchise QB is a bit overrated and not a great metric. I think a better metric of whether someone is a franchise QB is whether he has you in playoff contention every year that he is healthy and on the field. A bad team around him is still a playoff contender, a bad team without him has a bad losing record. A pretty good team around him and there's a chance for a deep run in the playoffs or a Super Bowl. To me, that's the best metric. Not even the greatest QB is going to go to or win a Super Bowl without a good team around him. But a franchise QB is someone who by himself puts his team in playoff contention and if you can add some good pieces around him, he can take the team far into the playoffs. That's my problem with running backs. Although I love the running back position and think it is an important position -- aside from LT (the Giants one), Barry Sanders is my favorite player of all time -- there's really only been one team that I can recall since 2000 that has won a Super Bowl without a franchise caliber QB: the Baltimore Ravens (Trent Dilfer who was a top 10 pick in the draft, with Jamaal Lewis), and they had perhaps the best defense of all time. More important than that though, I can't think of any great running backs since 1990 who have consistently year in and year out had their teams in the playoffs or at least playoff contention throughout their career, unless they had a franchise QB playing alongside them. The reason, to me, seems to be that you need far more pieces around a RB to make the team very good than you need around a QB, and in modern free agency, it's really hard to keep those pieces together, not to mention the fact that it's rare that a RB plays 10 years in the NFL without his skills deteriorating significantly. Even some of the best of the best, LaDanian Tomlinson, Adrian Peterson, became only part time running backs after 8-9 years or so. And Emmett Smith, whose career was maybe the longest of all great RBs, only had two 1,000 yard rushing seasons after his tenth year in the league, and never again averaged 4.0 yards per carry or more after his his 11th year. And given how big defenders are now, I'm not sure that Emmett's longevity can be reproduced almost twenty years later. So if Eli were a running back, his career most likely would have been over by 2014 or 2015, yet here we are thinking he has "years" left. A great defense can take you to the playoffs and beyond, but in modern free agency and the rules being what they are now, it is so much easier to make a single franchise QB the cornerstone of your team for a decade plus, and build some good pieces around him for 4 years at a time, then to build a dominant defense and keep it together for more than a few years at best. As it stands now, it looks like this might be the last year that the Jaguars have a top defense, with several key players coming up on free agency next year. Maybe the same with Denver.

Foles this past season. Also, just getting to the championship game or losing in the SB with decent, but not great QBs, cannot be glossed over.

In comment 13950905 BigK said:

Quote:

In comment 13950861 NYSports1 said: Quote: It will still mean we blew the draft if Darnold, Allen, Rosen turn into franchise qbs and we are stuck with avaregare qb play going forward for the duration of SB career If we find a franchise qb by trading 3 1st rounders or sign a Kirk Cousins type for big money and Darnold, Rosen, Allen are all franchise qbs's or 1 of them turns into a franchise qb then it will mean we screwed up Only thing that will make the SB legit, is that he turns into a HOF type of back, Darnold blows and is not great or the other 2 and we draft a stud one in a couple of year or the back ups we have now turn into studs. That is the only way Winning a Superbowl wouldn't?

Of course it will trump my argument. But I said going forward if we get average qb play which means no shot at winning super bowl. You not winning a sb with average at best qb play

In comment 13951013 NYSports1 said:

Quote:

In comment 13950905 BigK said: Quote: In comment 13950861 NYSports1 said: Quote: It will still mean we blew the draft if Darnold, Allen, Rosen turn into franchise qbs and we are stuck with avaregare qb play going forward for the duration of SB career If we find a franchise qb by trading 3 1st rounders or sign a Kirk Cousins type for big money and Darnold, Rosen, Allen are all franchise qbs's or 1 of them turns into a franchise qb then it will mean we screwed up Only thing that will make the SB legit, is that he turns into a HOF type of back, Darnold blows and is not great or the other 2 and we draft a stud one in a couple of year or the back ups we have now turn into studs. That is the only way Winning a Superbowl wouldn't? Of course it will trump my argument. But I said going forward if we get average qb play which means no shot at winning super bowl. You not winning a sb with average at best qb play

Peyton?

.

is that he is being carefully managed... and I just hope the managed image is also the real Saquon

In comment 13950973 twostepgiants said:

Quote:

But then i watched Barry highlights and looked at his stats 2638 yards with 37 TDs and a 7.4 you. That’s one season! Barkleys 1134 yds and 18 TDs and 5.7 ypc pale in comprison Im not sure how anyone grades out higher than Barry and that is a knock on Barkley.

When you look at Ricky Williams' numbers you'll get the same reaction, and he wasn't exactly playing behind great linemen either.

In comment 13951004 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

In comment 13950985 Danny80 said: Quote: In comment 13950905 BigK said: Quote: In comment 13950861 NYSports1 said: Quote: It will still mean we blew the draft if Darnold, Allen, Rosen turn into franchise qbs and we are stuck with avaregare qb play going forward for the duration of SB career If we find a franchise qb by trading 3 1st rounders or sign a Kirk Cousins type for big money and Darnold, Rosen, Allen are all franchise qbs's or 1 of them turns into a franchise qb then it will mean we screwed up Only thing that will make the SB legit, is that he turns into a HOF type of back, Darnold blows and is not great or the other 2 and we draft a stud one in a couple of year or the back ups we have now turn into studs. That is the only way Winning a Superbowl wouldn't? I still think the Super Bowl metric for franchise QB is a bit overrated and not a great metric. I think a better metric of whether someone is a franchise QB is whether he has you in playoff contention every year that he is healthy and on the field. A bad team around him is still a playoff contender, a bad team without him has a bad losing record. A pretty good team around him and there's a chance for a deep run in the playoffs or a Super Bowl. To me, that's the best metric. Not even the greatest QB is going to go to or win a Super Bowl without a good team around him. But a franchise QB is someone who by himself puts his team in playoff contention and if you can add some good pieces around him, he can take the team far into the playoffs. That's my problem with running backs. Although I love the running back position and think it is an important position -- aside from LT (the Giants one), Barry Sanders is my favorite player of all time -- there's really only been one team that I can recall since 2000 that has won a Super Bowl without a franchise caliber QB: the Baltimore Ravens (Trent Dilfer who was a top 10 pick in the draft, with Jamaal Lewis), and they had perhaps the best defense of all time. More important than that though, I can't think of any great running backs since 1990 who have consistently year in and year out had their teams in the playoffs or at least playoff contention throughout their career, unless they had a franchise QB playing alongside them. The reason, to me, seems to be that you need far more pieces around a RB to make the team very good than you need around a QB, and in modern free agency, it's really hard to keep those pieces together, not to mention the fact that it's rare that a RB plays 10 years in the NFL without his skills deteriorating significantly. Even some of the best of the best, LaDanian Tomlinson, Adrian Peterson, became only part time running backs after 8-9 years or so. And Emmett Smith, whose career was maybe the longest of all great RBs, only had two 1,000 yard rushing seasons after his tenth year in the league, and never again averaged 4.0 yards per carry or more after his his 11th year. And given how big defenders are now, I'm not sure that Emmett's longevity can be reproduced almost twenty years later. So if Eli were a running back, his career most likely would have been over by 2014 or 2015, yet here we are thinking he has "years" left. A great defense can take you to the playoffs and beyond, but in modern free agency and the rules being what they are now, it is so much easier to make a single franchise QB the cornerstone of your team for a decade plus, and build some good pieces around him for 4 years at a time, then to build a dominant defense and keep it together for more than a few years at best. As it stands now, it looks like this might be the last year that the Jaguars have a top defense, with several key players coming up on free agency next year. Maybe the same with Denver. Foles this past season. Also, just getting to the championship game or losing in the SB with decent, but not great QBs, cannot be glossed over.

True, but Foles only had to win a handful of games. He played very well in those games, but he didn't take the team through a 16 game schedule to get them that home field advantage in the playoffs. I think Foles and Hostetler have to fall in a different category because they weren't the ones who really put their teams in that position from the beginning of the season. But with Foles and the Eagles, they ended up winning with a tandem of running backs, similar to what the Patriots do so well. I still like having a featured back, but teams seem to be able to win more frequently without one than without a franchise QB.

I'd have to look at how many teams got to a Super Bowl and lost with good, but not great QBs. But still, to me at least, the most important factor is whether the QB, RB or any other player has the team in playoff contention year after year throughout their career. If a team goes to one NFC championship game with a great RB, very good defense and average QB, but then doesn't go to the playoffs for another 4 or 5 years, that means he wasn't able to elevate his team to a playoff level year after year despite his talents as a RB.

In comment 13950876 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

In comment 13950784 Ten Ton Hammer said: Quote: at the idea of someone being skeptical of a player receiving this much hype. It’s fine to be skeptical, but you should be skeptical of every player in this draft then.

And the knowledgeable fan is, within reason. But not every player in this draft is being labeled as "a generational player" the "best RB prospect in 25 years" "touched by the hand of god" or being compared to any number of the greatest runningbacks in the history of the sport.

In comment 13951032 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

In comment 13950973 twostepgiants said: Quote: But then i watched Barry highlights and looked at his stats 2638 yards with 37 TDs and a 7.4 you. That’s one season! Barkleys 1134 yds and 18 TDs and 5.7 ypc pale in comprison Im not sure how anyone grades out higher than Barry and that is a knock on Barkley. When you look at Ricky Williams' numbers you'll get the same reaction, and he wasn't exactly playing behind great linemen either.

Actually you won’t, Ricky Williams played 4 years at Texas. Barkley beats him across the board through Williams junior year.

Through junior year? You mean, including Ricky Williams' 1893 yard/6.8 YPC/25 TD season, which blows away anything Saquon Barkley ever did at Pedo State? And before you start stammering about how terrible his line was, 1997 UT was a bad team (4-7) with no passing game to speak of (UT threw all of 7 touchdown passes all season, one of which was thrown by Ricky Williams). I can't say I'm intimately familiar with their OL, but none of their 1997 linemen played in the NFL.

In comment 13950817 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

compared against players they could have chosen instead is a legitimate topic however. If they weren't in love with one of these Quarterbacks, and any of them goes on to be excellent, then their evaluations were wrong. It would take an Adrian Peterson sort of career to be more valuable than a franchise quarterback. And even that is probably something some would argue.

The thing is something that people seem to forget is that this is not the last draft ever. Even if the next QB we get won't be as good as Darnold, if our QB guru coach can identify and teach a solid if not spectacular QB, that QB and Barkley might well be better than a better QB and no Barkley.

In comment 13951017 Bill L said:

Quote:

.

Brad Johnson?

Big Ben (first SB win)?

I'll only speak for myself but I'm all in on this cat. I'm going to have to be shown that he's NOT worth the hype in order to believe it.

Doesn't matter what anyone does. You make your pick with information you have. No one has a crystal ball. Butterfly flaps its wings in Australia and sets off a series of events that cause a freak ice storm in the USA in 2 months and one these guys falls down and shatters his skull. It has nothing to do with the draft. This kid was the highest rated player in the last 10 years. Solid pick, end of story. Doesn't matter what any of the QBs do, they all had legit flaws, SB did not, solid pick. You research the site, I was a heavy QB guy. I wanted Rosen or Mayfield, but I cannot knock this pick.

In comment 13951179 Thegratefulhead said:

Quote:

Doesn't matter what anyone does. You make your pick with information you have. No one has a crystal ball. Butterfly flaps its wings in Australia and sets off a series of events that cause a freak ice storm in the USA in 2 months and one these guys falls down and shatters his skull. It has nothing to do with the draft. This kid was the highest rated player in the last 10 years. Solid pick, end of story. Doesn't matter what any of the QBs do, they all had legit flaws, SB did not, solid pick. You research the site, I was a heavy QB guy. I wanted Rosen or Mayfield, but I cannot knock this pick.

Agree.

The draft is about acquiring the best available talent on your team... not selecting a particular position with the hope that that player becomes a great player.

In comment 13951128 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

Through junior year? You mean, including Ricky Williams' 1893 yard/6.8 YPC/25 TD season, which blows away anything Saquon Barkley ever did at Pedo State? And before you start stammering about how terrible his line was, 1997 UT was a bad team (4-7) with no passing game to speak of (UT threw all of 7 touchdown passes all season, one of which was thrown by Ricky Williams). I can't say I'm intimately familiar with their OL, but none of their 1997 linemen played in the NFL.

Stammering? Barkley out produced Williams freshman through junior year, more yardage and more touchdowns. Go look it up.

In comment 13951150 BestFeature said:

Quote:

The thing is something that people seem to forget is that this is not the last draft ever. Even if the next QB we get won't be as good as Darnold, if our QB guru coach can identify and teach a solid if not spectacular QB, that QB and Barkley might well be better than a better QB and no Barkley.

Your point is a valid one. However what I would say to that is Shurmur himself is pretty unproven as a head coach.

In comment 13951193 BSIMatt said:

Quote:

Stammering? Barkley out produced Williams freshman through junior year, more yardage and more touchdowns. Go look it up.

Williams through his junior year: 4155 yards, 6.4 YPC, 45 TDs
Barkley: 3843 yards, 5.7 YPC, 43 TDs

You were saying?

I'll say it again there was a quarterback in this draft that outrushed and outscored Barkley in fewer rushing attempts.

I wonder if Gettleman gave any consideration to trading up for Jackson once we had drafted Barkley. Talk about speed on offense:

Jackson
Barkley
Beckham
Engram

In comment 13951218 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

In comment 13951193 BSIMatt said: Quote: Stammering? Barkley out produced Williams freshman through junior year, more yardage and more touchdowns. Go look it up. Williams through his junior year: 4155 yards, 6.4 YPC, 45 TDs Barkley: 3843 yards, 5.7 YPC, 43 TDs You were saying?

Total yardage.

I saw something in Stillwater that year that was anything but normal...

In comment 13951228 Go Terps said:

Quote:

I'll say it again there was a quarterback in this draft that outrushed and outscored Barkley in fewer rushing attempts. I wonder if Gettleman gave any consideration to trading up for Jackson once we had drafted Barkley. Talk about speed on offense: Jackson Barkley Beckham Engram

Would that have been wise? I mean they did lose that opportunity, but if they made it through that last pick, then Cleveland wasn't picking him. They lost the gamble (if their desire wold have been to pick him) but any resources would have been a lot to give to move essentially one place.

In comment 13951032 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

In comment 13950973 twostepgiants said: Quote: But then i watched Barry highlights and looked at his stats 2638 yards with 37 TDs and a 7.4 you. That’s one season! Barkleys 1134 yds and 18 TDs and 5.7 ypc pale in comprison Im not sure how anyone grades out higher than Barry and that is a knock on Barkley. When you look at Ricky Williams' numbers you'll get the same reaction, and he wasn't exactly playing behind great linemen either.

Barkley's measurables beat them both. Better blocker and receiver than both. Sanders was a solid character guy, but his rhythm beat to a different drum. Williams had issues. I think Barkley's character is better than both as well. They both had him in rushing production for sure. I think you can make an argument for Barkley being a better prospect than either and someone traded an entire draft for Williams.

if that's what this guy was trying to say, then he should say so.

But fine. 5038/6.5 yards per touch/51 TDs for Barkley, 4820 yards/6.6 yards per touch/47 TDs for Ricky. 213 yards and 4 TDs spread out over 3 years. Big fucking deal.

Sadly, Ricky wasn't touched by the hand of God, though.

In comment 13951243 Bill L said:

Quote:

In comment 13951228 Go Terps said: Quote: I'll say it again there was a quarterback in this draft that outrushed and outscored Barkley in fewer rushing attempts. I wonder if Gettleman gave any consideration to trading up for Jackson once we had drafted Barkley. Talk about speed on offense: Jackson Barkley Beckham Engram Would that have been wise? I mean they did lose that opportunity, but if they made it through that last pick, then Cleveland wasn't picking him. They lost the gamble (if their desire wold have been to pick him) but any resources would have been a lot to give to move essentially one place.

I don't know. They wouldn't have had to trade as much as Baltimore did, as Philly would only have moved down two spots.

In comment 13951218 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

In comment 13951193 BSIMatt said: Quote: Stammering? Barkley out produced Williams freshman through junior year, more yardage and more touchdowns. Go look it up. Williams through his junior year: 4155 yards, 6.4 YPC, 45 TDs Barkley: 3843 yards, 5.7 YPC, 43 TDs You were saying?

Leaving out receiving yardage, would favor Ricky.

Williams: 711 plays, 4820 yards, 47 touchdowns 6.78ypp
Barkley: 773 plays 5038 yards 51 touchdowns, 6.52 ypp

So, yeah, I was saying.

Also, four lineman from Texas were drafted during Ricky's time, including All american's Dan Neil, and Leonard Davis(2 x outland finalist).

Stammer on...

Which we were setting aside, remember? He was a DT as a freshman in 1997. Dan Neil was a senior when Ricky was a sophomore so, again, my point about the line in 1997 stands.

John Elmore played on the 1995 Longhorns, when Ricky was a freshman. Was drafted, never made an NFL roster. Jay Humphrey was the same class as Ricky. Again, was drafted but never made a roster. So, yeah, the OLs he ran behind at Texas were nothing special.

Do you make any posts that aren't made just to argue with everyone? Seems like you're just looking for a reason to argue.

Isn't that the purpose of a message board? I wasn't aware that this was supposed to be a circle jerk where we all exalt the almighty Saquon Barkley, God's chosen running back.

inserting "Pedo?" :)

In comment 13951179 Thegratefulhead said:

Quote:

Doesn't matter what anyone does. You make your pick with information you have. No one has a crystal ball. Butterfly flaps its wings in Australia and sets off a series of events that cause a freak ice storm in the USA in 2 months and one these guys falls down and shatters his skull. It has nothing to do with the draft. This kid was the highest rated player in the last 10 years. Solid pick, end of story. Doesn't matter what any of the QBs do, they all had legit flaws, SB did not, solid pick. You research the site, I was a heavy QB guy. I wanted Rosen or Mayfield, but I cannot knock this pick.

You can knock the pick if the professionals entrusted with the long-term health of the franchise picked the wrong player. Not end of story. The story ends years from now. Sometimes GMs fall in love with players and they make the wrong choice because of it. Just like Ernie Accorsi had his mind made up in 2004. And if Eli had flamed out in 2007, that would have been the wrong choice too.

In comment 13951314 Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

inserting "Pedo?" :)

Hey, don't blame me - I didn't make them cover up child rape, nor am I the one to blame for abominations like this:

In comment 13950823 George from PA said:

Quote:

With so much hype.

Hype doesn’t cause a player to fail. Lack of talent and desire and work ethic does.

As some kind of equalizer to determine which qb has (had) more potential?

In comment 13951312 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

Isn't that the purpose of a message board? I wasn't aware that this was supposed to be a circle jerk where we all exalt the almighty Saquon Barkley, God's chosen running back.

You’ve gotten a little weird. One of my favorite posters but to me you immediately just hated gettleman from the jump and can’t seem to get behind anything this franchise does lately. Whatever works, it’s just odd to see some fans fight showing any optimism tooth as hard as you are. It actually bothers you that our GM and many others think Barkley is a once in a lifetime prospect. Why? These guys aren’t making shit up.

In comment 13951402 djm said:

Quote:

As some kind of equalizer to determine which qb has (had) more potential?

Rb.

In comment 13951232 Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

In comment 13951218 Greg from LI said: Quote: In comment 13951193 BSIMatt said: Quote: Stammering? Barkley out produced Williams freshman through junior year, more yardage and more touchdowns. Go look it up. Williams through his junior year: 4155 yards, 6.4 YPC, 45 TDs Barkley: 3843 yards, 5.7 YPC, 43 TDs You were saying? Total yardage.

Here we go again. Is this the same unreal talent that lost every big game he had ever played. Jackson was a numbers freak.

Yet you know more than THE ENTIRE LEAGUE who considered Barkley tje best player in the whole draft and Jackson who almost slipped out of the whole first round.

I cant wait to see him play in the NFL if gor no other reason than to see him middle while picking a few games to put up some numbers and string together highlights while flopping during huge match ups and getting the Ravens nowhere. Actually, no that would suck because then you will literally never shut up about him.

Who are you talking about?

In comment 13951289 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

John Elmore played on the 1995 Longhorns, when Ricky was a freshman. Was drafted, never made an NFL roster. Jay Humphrey was the same class as Ricky. Again, was drafted but never made a roster. So, yeah, the OLs he ran behind at Texas were nothing special.

Greg,

You seem very intent on proving some point that Williams should have undoubtedly been rated higher than Barkley coming out of college. You could possibly make an argument he should have been rated higher, but it is not far-fetched that someone might have rated Barkley higher than Williams...

When we're talking about rating a prospect, we have to look at the whole player, not just yards-per-rush. Actually, through three years of playing, in terms of total touches, yards, and touchdowns, the two players had extremely similar totals. Barkley happens to be more prolific as a receiver, which I think would give him a slight edge because it is an added dimension to his game (not just coming out of the backfield, but lining up in the slot and running routes as well, which is rare for a RB to be so good at). He's also a terrific pass-blocker and return man, and had ZERO red flags in terms of character, which I don't think the same could be said about Williams.

The point of this whole thread was regarding Gil Brandt's overall draft rating of RBs coming into the NFL, not a discussion about who had the most total rushing yards in college. If the discussion was regarding the latter, then yes, I agree with you, Ricky Williams had more rushing yards than Saquon Barkley. But I don't know why you would choose giving Ricky Williams the highest rating of a draft prospect ever as your hill to die on, because if you would have rated him higher than Marshall Faulk or LDT coming out of college (as perhaps some people did) you ultimately would have turned out wrong.

The ZOMG HE'S THE GREATEST EVER AND WILL ABSOLUTELY BE AMAZING happy talk that's going on now is ridiculous. That's why I keep saying "we'll see". The value of the position is relatively low - even great backs tend to wear down quickly relative to other positions, and I don't think the margin separating him from, say, Guice or Chubb is so great as to make picking him #2 overall a quality use of resources.

I guess I’m just more of a dreamer.

Can’t deny his talents. He’s hyped up to the heavens for a reason.

All the top rated QBs in this draft had serious question marks by their names.If these guys were so sure fire why wasn't anybody making an offer the Giants simply couldn't refuse for the #2 pick? No one was calling any of them generational players. 2004 QB class this group is not. We drafted the consensus #1 player in the 2018 draft class who has been called that generational player.

In comment 13951544 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

The ZOMG HE'S THE GREATEST EVER AND WILL ABSOLUTELY BE AMAZING happy talk that's going on now is ridiculous. That's why I keep saying "we'll see". The value of the position is relatively low - even great backs tend to wear down quickly relative to other positions, and I don't think the margin separating him from, say, Guice or Chubb is so great as to make picking him #2 overall a quality use of resources.

I don’t know...the impression I got from this draft is that Guice isn’t long for this league.

In comment 13951750 Paul326 said:

Quote:

All the top rated QBs in this draft had serious question marks by their names.If these guys were so sure fire why wasn't anybody making an offer the Giants simply couldn't refuse for the #2 pick? No one was calling any of them generational players. 2004 QB class this group is not. We drafted the consensus #1 player in the 2018 draft class who has been called that generational player.

I don't think it's fair to say this class of QBs is definitely not the 2004 class. Every QB in the 2004 class had question marks/red flags too.

Eli had a ho hum personality and only above average arm strength. Questions abounded whether he would have been a projected #1 pick if his last name wasn't Manning. Ben

Roethlisberger was coming from a small school as a junior, raw and potentially a bust -- he went #11 in the draft after all, people seem to forget that.

And Philip Rivers had the terrible throwing motion and questionable arm strength, and had to be a "scheme fit" who wouldn't be for everyone.

Hindsight is always 20/20, but the 2004 class was not the 2004 class when they were drafted.

of the franchise, but it was in the best interest of me, a fan of such an age that I'm not looking ahead 10-15 years.

Now there is something to look forward to next season. If they protect Eli, a big IF, he should be serviceable enough.

In finding a new star quarterback, you are always playing the odds. The odds would have been at their best had they taken a quarterback with the second pick, but like the Cowboys we may be lucky and have the clouds part and our next QB fall out of the sky.

In comment 13952081 SB 42 and 46 and ? said:

Quote:

of the franchise, but it was in the best interest of me, a fan of such an age that I'm not looking ahead 10-15 years. Now there is something to look forward to next season. If they protect Eli, a big IF, he should be serviceable enough. In finding a new star quarterback, you are always playing the odds. The odds would have been at their best had they taken a quarterback with the second pick, but like the Cowboys we may be lucky and have the clouds part and our next QB fall out of the sky.

The odds argument really only applies to dumb , random chance. It very much ignores whether or not you've done research or have knowledge or experience. It's like picking a card and saying you have a 50-50 chance at a red card or black suited card. However, if you've been watching them flip cards over and the first 26 cards turned over were red, then you have more confidence in picking a black-suited card.

than Brandt ever knew.

In comment 13951544 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

The ZOMG HE'S THE GREATEST EVER AND WILL ABSOLUTELY BE AMAZING happy talk that's going on now is ridiculous. That's why I keep saying "we'll see". The value of the position is relatively low - even great backs tend to wear down quickly relative to other positions, and I don't think the margin separating him from, say, Guice or Chubb is so great as to make picking him #2 overall a quality use of resources.

Guice and Chubb are the 'run of the mill' fairly high end Rbs you see almost every draft. Sure they can play at a nice level and complement your team but they aren't game changers.

Its like the difference from having a quality receiver like Amani Toomer vs and Odell Beckham. One is a game changer the other is a strong talent.

Adrian Peterson was a game changer. Barkley is graded at that level.

In comment 13951282 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

Which we were setting aside, remember? He was a DT as a freshman in 1997. Dan Neil was a senior when Ricky was a sophomore so, again, my point about the line in 1997 stands.

I was talking production in college, I said through his junior year.

Even still setting aside, freshman and soph campaigns...
Jay Humphrey played on the 1996(with Dan Neil), 1997 and 1998(with Leonard Davis) lines and , was outland finalist, an all american and was drafted and played in the NFL for 5 years.

Not even trying to nitpick Ricky Williams because I thought he was a fantastic runningback and made first team all pro. If his head was on straight his career could have been much different.

However, even if you strictly want to focus on just the junior campaign, Barkely is still right there..it's not as if Williams is in some otherwordly stratosphere...

Ricky had 2043 yards from scrimmage and 25 TDS for 6.8 yards per play.

Barkely had 1903 yards from scrimmage and 23 TDS(21 rush/rec plus two kick return tds) for 7.0 yards per play.

Pretty comparable. Williams had 140 more yards from scrimmage on 28 more touches, and 2 more touchdowns, Barkley had a shade higher average.