Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Kay Adams: "Giants over-hyping Saquon Barkley"

Eric from BBI : Admin : 5/15/2018 12:19 pm
I'm paraphrasing, but she raised an interesting point that I think some folks on BBI have mentioned. She thinks the Giants are doing a disservice to Barkley and the team by over-hyping Barkley. My guess is she was mostly talking about Gettleman's comments, but it raises an interesting question.

Would a 1,200 yard rookie season be a disappointment for most fans? How about 10 touchdowns?

What is YOUR expectation level with Barkley.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 <<Prev | Show All |
RE: Bush was never a workhorse  
Danny80 : 5/16/2018 4:44 pm : link
In comment 13965965 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
and played in a far more talented offense. He also came into the league 12 years ago so now, whatís the point of comparing the 2 anyway?

Itís a different NFL, and the 2 players have a different skill set. And even if they were identical as far as style and talent, would that somehow mean Barkley is destined to have the same career?


How do they have different skill sets?

Bush had 200 carries his junior year. Barkley had 217 carries his junior year. Each played 13 games their senior year. So Barkley had barely over 1 carry more per game than Bush. How was Bush never a workhorse in college but Barkley was? Yes, over the course of their college careers, Barkley had significantly more carries, but the talent and competition levels at USC at the time and Penn State were vastly different.

Bush had 37 receptions his junior year; Barkley had 54 receptions, definitely a good amount more. But their sophomore years, Bush had 43 receptions and Barkley had 28. They both were big time receiving threats out of the backfield and in the slot in college.

I'm not saying that Barkley is destined to have a career similar to Bush's (which wasn't bad, just not great). But I do think it's useful to look back at the actual facts rather than peg players into the narrative we've created for them years later.

In college, Barkley looked more like Reggie Bush than like Ezekiel Elliot or Todd Gurley in terms of how they played in college and their strongest skill sets.
RE: RE: Bush was never a workhorse  
bw in dc : 5/16/2018 4:52 pm : link
In comment 13966006 Danny80 said:
Quote:

Bush had 200 carries his junior year. Barkley had 217 carries his junior year. Each played 13 games their senior year. So Barkley had barely over 1 carry more per game than Bush. How was Bush never a workhorse in college but Barkley was?


Bush split carries 50/50 with Lindale White, especially in 2005. White was a terrific between the tackles RB at the college game (just didn't translate to the pros because he liked food too much).

Granted, SC killed a lot of people that year and White likely got more carries that way. But White had more carries than Bush in the championship game against TX. He played a helluva game.
The comparisons to Bush are only valid as far as his skillset  
Brown Recluse : 5/16/2018 4:56 pm : link
and athleticism, but people using that comparison as some sort of reason why he won't be successful conveniently forget that Barkley is about 30 lbs heavier than Bush and more powerful. Bush was never a workhorse and wasn't very big.

Personally, my own opinion on Bush is that he could have been much better than he was if not for injuries. He somehow magically became a better back in Miami and Detriot when he was available for pretty much the whole season and received more carries. I think people gloss over his numbers and don't look any further than that.

Regardless, Barkley is not Bush. That is an incomplete assessment.
RE: RE: Bush was never a workhorse  
UConn4523 : 5/16/2018 5:28 pm : link
In comment 13966006 Danny80 said:
Quote:
In comment 13965965 UConn4523 said:


Quote:


and played in a far more talented offense. He also came into the league 12 years ago so now, whatís the point of comparing the 2 anyway?

Itís a different NFL, and the 2 players have a different skill set. And even if they were identical as far as style and talent, would that somehow mean Barkley is destined to have the same career?



How do they have different skill sets?

Bush had 200 carries his junior year. Barkley had 217 carries his junior year. Each played 13 games their senior year. So Barkley had barely over 1 carry more per game than Bush. How was Bush never a workhorse in college but Barkley was? Yes, over the course of their college careers, Barkley had significantly more carries, but the talent and competition levels at USC at the time and Penn State were vastly different.

Bush had 37 receptions his junior year; Barkley had 54 receptions, definitely a good amount more. But their sophomore years, Bush had 43 receptions and Barkley had 28. They both were big time receiving threats out of the backfield and in the slot in college.

I'm not saying that Barkley is destined to have a career similar to Bush's (which wasn't bad, just not great). But I do think it's useful to look back at the actual facts rather than peg players into the narrative we've created for them years later.

In college, Barkley looked more like Reggie Bush than like Ezekiel Elliot or Todd Gurley in terms of how they played in college and their strongest skill sets.


Bush was much lighter, couldnít run in between tackles and couldnít ever carry a full load of touches. In terms of athletecism, go nuts comparing them, but they are 2 different players. Bushís usage at USC was evidence enough of this even before the NFL.

And again, this was 12 years ago, why even bother comparing them?
RE: RE: RE: Bush was never a workhorse  
Danny80 : 5/16/2018 7:03 pm : link
In comment 13966046 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
In comment 13966006 Danny80 said:


Quote:


In comment 13965965 UConn4523 said:


Quote:


and played in a far more talented offense. He also came into the league 12 years ago so now, whatís the point of comparing the 2 anyway?

Itís a different NFL, and the 2 players have a different skill set. And even if they were identical as far as style and talent, would that somehow mean Barkley is destined to have the same career?



How do they have different skill sets?

Bush had 200 carries his junior year. Barkley had 217 carries his junior year. Each played 13 games their senior year. So Barkley had barely over 1 carry more per game than Bush. How was Bush never a workhorse in college but Barkley was? Yes, over the course of their college careers, Barkley had significantly more carries, but the talent and competition levels at USC at the time and Penn State were vastly different.

Bush had 37 receptions his junior year; Barkley had 54 receptions, definitely a good amount more. But their sophomore years, Bush had 43 receptions and Barkley had 28. They both were big time receiving threats out of the backfield and in the slot in college.

I'm not saying that Barkley is destined to have a career similar to Bush's (which wasn't bad, just not great). But I do think it's useful to look back at the actual facts rather than peg players into the narrative we've created for them years later.

In college, Barkley looked more like Reggie Bush than like Ezekiel Elliot or Todd Gurley in terms of how they played in college and their strongest skill sets.



Bush was much lighter, couldnít run in between tackles and couldnít ever carry a full load of touches. In terms of athletecism, go nuts comparing them, but they are 2 different players. Bushís usage at USC was evidence enough of this even before the NFL.

And again, this was 12 years ago, why even bother comparing them?


Here's an interesting article I read before the draft, for what it's worth. I'm not all in on analytics, but it provides an interesting perspective.
Why Saquon Barkley is closer to Reggie Bush than Ezekiel Elliot - ( New Window )
the revisionism on Reggie Bush  
bluepepper : 5/16/2018 7:29 pm : link
is hilarious. He absolutely was rated a sure thing slam dunk great NFL running back. Best player in the draft. The Texans were crazy to pass on him. The Gale Sayers comparisons were repeated ad-nauseum. If anything Bush was MORE hyped than Barkley.

Now that doesn't mean for one second that Barkley won't live up to expectations but it is a cautionary tale for folks who were terrified of picking a QB because none of them were sure things.
RE: the revisionism on Reggie Bush  
BigBlueShock : 5/16/2018 7:36 pm : link
In comment 13966106 bluepepper said:
Quote:
is hilarious. He absolutely was rated a sure thing slam dunk great NFL running back. Best player in the draft. The Texans were crazy to pass on him. The Gale Sayers comparisons were repeated ad-nauseum. If anything Bush was MORE hyped than Barkley.

Now that doesn't mean for one second that Barkley won't live up to expectations but it is a cautionary tale for folks who were terrified of picking a QB because none of them were sure things.

The difference being, people are saying that the QBs arenít slam dunks because, weíll, the QBs themselves. They all have warts and question marks. It seems the only thing people can drum up on Barkley is...Reggie Bush. Nothing to do with the player himself, just, Reggie Bush.
Danny80  
UConn4523 : 5/16/2018 7:39 pm : link
that article sucks. It goes right into ďanalyticsĒ without even talking about the talent disparity that the RBs played with. It then goes on to talk about PFF which, to me, isnít exactly analytics. They have their own system and I have no idea how they break things down, and they are always questioned by not only Giants fans, but in articles of other teams as well.

The guy who wrote that doesnít believe a RB should be taken high. Perfectly fine opinion, but thatís really all that article is about. I happen to think that line of thinking is outdated, which is why comparing this draft class to 2006 is pretty worthless.
RE: Danny80  
BigBlueShock : 5/16/2018 7:49 pm : link
In comment 13966111 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
that article sucks. It goes right into ďanalyticsĒ without even talking about the talent disparity that the RBs played with. It then goes on to talk about PFF which, to me, isnít exactly analytics. They have their own system and I have no idea how they break things down, and they are always questioned by not only Giants fans, but in articles of other teams as well.

The guy who wrote that doesnít believe a RB should be taken high. Perfectly fine opinion, but thatís really all that article is about. I happen to think that line of thinking is outdated, which is why comparing this draft class to 2006 is pretty worthless.

Exactly. Sports are always evolving, changing. This idea that RBs donít get taken high is all because people are conditioned to think that way. But itís been proven recently that times are changing. Elliott and Fournette were both drafted in the top 5. Gurley was top 10 only because of his gruesome injury. Had he been healthy he would have absolutely been a top 5 pick. And all of them are huge parts of their teams success. The Rams didnít have an OL when they drafted Gurley either but they took him and then got a line in front of him. There is no magical formula. You add pieces one at a time and it doesnít matter the order. You take the best players then add pieces around them. Iím not sure why thatís so hard for some people to grasp.
Iím also fairly certain  
BigBlueShock : 5/16/2018 7:54 pm : link
That if you gave the Browns management team a lie detector test, theyíd tell you that they would have preferred Barkley. But the stigma of taking a RB 1st overall and the fact that they had screwed up so severely recently passing up QBs pretty much dictated what they had to do.

Thatís just my opinion however, which doesnít mean much.
When a RB..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 5/16/2018 8:17 pm : link
is 30 pounds heavier and otherwise has many of the same attributes, saying they are the same back really ignores the physics of what that 30 pound differential means.
I'm pretty sure  
PEEJ : 5/16/2018 8:49 pm : link
there's a few more teams out there "over-hyping" their fabulous top draftees. It comes with the territory.
...  
christian : 5/16/2018 9:49 pm : link
There are plenty of RB busts, Bush is just the most recent to be picked number 2 overall with wild expectations as a can't miss, do-everything type.

The reality is no player is can't miss. A number of things can happen. Lots of players can't translate what they were great at in college to the pros. No one projected Trent Richardson to be an absolutely terrible NFL player. Maybe his talent wasn't top 3, but he didn't show any signs that he literally couldn't play pro football.

Barkley is going to be bad at things, he's a rookie. The game is going to be really fast for him, he's going to blow blitz pick-ups, he's going to fumble the ball, he's going get his ass kicked. And when that happens the media and even some of the fans on this thread will shit on him. A number of people on this thread, seemingly in favor of the pick expect 11 or 12 hundred yards. Only 7 backs in the league hit that. That's going to take great health, consistentancy, and productivity. Is that realistic to expect year 1?

He's going to have unwarranted expectations as the no. 2 overall pick, in New York, on a team trying to get the heroic QB one more shot.

Gettleman needs to know better than the perfect prospect, hand of God stuff. What value does that serve other than make him feel like the tits for picking him?
RE: RE: Danny80  
Danny80 : 5/16/2018 9:53 pm : link
In comment 13966118 BigBlueShock said:
Quote:
In comment 13966111 UConn4523 said:


Quote:


that article sucks. It goes right into ďanalyticsĒ without even talking about the talent disparity that the RBs played with. It then goes on to talk about PFF which, to me, isnít exactly analytics. They have their own system and I have no idea how they break things down, and they are always questioned by not only Giants fans, but in articles of other teams as well.

The guy who wrote that doesnít believe a RB should be taken high. Perfectly fine opinion, but thatís really all that article is about. I happen to think that line of thinking is outdated, which is why comparing this draft class to 2006 is pretty worthless.


Exactly. Sports are always evolving, changing. This idea that RBs donít get taken high is all because people are conditioned to think that way. But itís been proven recently that times are changing. Elliott and Fournette were both drafted in the top 5. Gurley was top 10 only because of his gruesome injury. Had he been healthy he would have absolutely been a top 5 pick. And all of them are huge parts of their teams success. The Rams didnít have an OL when they drafted Gurley either but they took him and then got a line in front of him. There is no magical formula. You add pieces one at a time and it doesnít matter the order. You take the best players then add pieces around them. Iím not sure why thatís so hard for some people to grasp.


I was never on the don't draft a RB high wagon. I loved Todd Gurley coming out of college, thought he was the best back since Adrian Peterson and he was my #1 choice for the Giants that year. I remember my friends laughing when I flipped out when the Giants didn't take him. That said, having Gurley and Eli still in his prime could have given the Giants five years of a great RB and very good QB combo. I don't think many people would say Eli has 5 years left now.

It's also not about size, but about running style. Many evaluators pointed out that Barkley too often tried to bounce outside even when the blocking was there for designed inside runs, and that he did not have a lot of yards after contact, despite his size. I think that's where the Combine, specifically the 230 lb weigh-in, moved Barkley from being a top running back prospect to a "generational" back.

Ron Dayne and Jerome Bettis were about the same size (259, 248 lbs) and had close 40 times at the combine (4.65, 4.70). Dayne actually was bigger and faster, but they had different running styles. Yes physics do matter, but running style matters a lot too. Barkley will likely need to rely less on his instincts to bounce it outside than he did in college and develop a stronger, more violent downfield running style. I don't know if that's very possible to change or if it's so ingrained that in his running instincts that it'll be a challenge to change. I'm hoping the former.
RE: RE: RE: Danny80  
Danny80 : 5/16/2018 9:58 pm : link
In comment 13966174 Danny80 said:
Quote:
In comment 13966118 BigBlueShock said:


Quote:


In comment 13966111 UConn4523 said:


Quote:


that article sucks. It goes right into ďanalyticsĒ without even talking about the talent disparity that the RBs played with. It then goes on to talk about PFF which, to me, isnít exactly analytics. They have their own system and I have no idea how they break things down, and they are always questioned by not only Giants fans, but in articles of other teams as well.

The guy who wrote that doesnít believe a RB should be taken high. Perfectly fine opinion, but thatís really all that article is about. I happen to think that line of thinking is outdated, which is why comparing this draft class to 2006 is pretty worthless.


Exactly. Sports are always evolving, changing. This idea that RBs donít get taken high is all because people are conditioned to think that way. But itís been proven recently that times are changing. Elliott and Fournette were both drafted in the top 5. Gurley was top 10 only because of his gruesome injury. Had he been healthy he would have absolutely been a top 5 pick. And all of them are huge parts of their teams success. The Rams didnít have an OL when they drafted Gurley either but they took him and then got a line in front of him. There is no magical formula. You add pieces one at a time and it doesnít matter the order. You take the best players then add pieces around them. Iím not sure why thatís so hard for some people to grasp.



I was never on the don't draft a RB high wagon. I loved Todd Gurley coming out of college, thought he was the best back since Adrian Peterson and he was my #1 choice for the Giants that year. I remember my friends laughing when I flipped out when the Giants didn't take him. That said, having Gurley and Eli still in his prime could have given the Giants five years of a great RB and very good QB combo. I don't think many people would say Eli has 5 years left now.

It's also not about size, but about running style. Many evaluators pointed out that Barkley too often tried to bounce outside even when the blocking was there for designed inside runs, and that he did not have a lot of yards after contact, despite his size. I think that's where the Combine, specifically the 230 lb weigh-in, moved Barkley from being a top running back prospect to a "generational" back.

Ron Dayne and Jerome Bettis were about the same size (259, 248 lbs) and had close 40 times at the combine (4.65, 4.70). Dayne actually was bigger and faster, but they had different running styles. Yes physics do matter, but running style matters a lot too. Barkley will likely need to rely less on his instincts to bounce it outside than he did in college and develop a stronger, more violent downfield running style. I don't know if that's very possible to change or if it's so ingrained that in his running instincts that it'll be a challenge to change. I'm hoping the former.


All that said, I'm in his corner. I'm hoping he becomes the best RB in the NFL very quickly and helps makes the Giants a playoff and Super Bowl contender year in and year out for 7-10 years.
I'm not..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 5/16/2018 10:00 pm : link
sure why a more violent downfield running style would be necessary for success.

You know what Reggie Bush's main problem was? Staying healthy. He only played in all 16 games two times. One was his rookie year where he had 88 receptions, which is damn good.

And let's not act as if Bush was a bust. He's a guy who played 10 years, with 54TD's.

He was only healthy one of the 5 years he was in New Orleans.

Barkley could maintain the same style as in college and be successful. Basically - we need him to stay healthy.
.  
arcarsenal : 5/16/2018 10:03 pm : link
People talk about Reggie Bush like he was a complete nobody.

He actually was a pretty good player and stuck around for a much longer time than people thought he would.

He was also quite productive when he did play.

If Barkley is a more durable, more versatile version of Bush, it'll be a very good pick.
RE: .  
Danny80 : 5/16/2018 10:53 pm : link
In comment 13966187 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
People talk about Reggie Bush like he was a complete nobody.

He actually was a pretty good player and stuck around for a much longer time than people thought he would.

He was also quite productive when he did play.

If Barkley is a more durable, more versatile version of Bush, it'll be a very good pick.


I don't disagree. My first post on this string was that Reggie Bush had a very good (just not a great) career. He was a good player, just didn't live up to the immense expectations that were set for him.
If Barkley's career is anywhere near Reggie Bush at the end of the day  
Ten Ton Hammer : 5/16/2018 11:22 pm : link
then that's not very good and I don't know how you could spin it otherwise. Yes, Bush found a role in the league but that certainly doesn't make it worth it now that his career is in the books.

But I can't see how anyone would think comparing Barkley to Bush makes any sense whatsoever. It's a really, really, really bad comparison.

RE: When a RB..  
Gatorade Dunk : 5/17/2018 2:32 am : link
In comment 13966127 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
is 30 pounds heavier and otherwise has many of the same attributes, saying they are the same back really ignores the physics of what that 30 pound differential means.

This point cannot be stated enough. Even if one chooses to fixate on the similarities between Bush and Barkley, if they do so without acknowledging that Barkley posseses the physical attributes to translate those skills to the NFL where Bush could not, they're either being disingenuous or willfully obtuse.
Most athletes and front offices  
Mike from SI : 5/17/2018 4:27 am : link
don't let the media chatter affect them. Barkley does not seem like the type who will care what the callers on WFAN or posters here say about him. Therefore, I don't think it matters (in this case).
RE: Most athletes and front offices  
christian : 5/17/2018 7:47 am : link
In comment 13966226 Mike from SI said:
Quote:
don't let the media chatter affect them. Barkley does not seem like the type who will care what the callers on WFAN or posters here say about him. Therefore, I don't think it matters (in this case).


I hope that is true -- but Barkley hasn't failed on a large scale in the NFL yet. He will soon enough, and when he does Gettleman's hyperbole certainly won't help keep the noise down.
So Barkley..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 5/17/2018 7:52 am : link
will fail soon?
RE: RE: Most athletes and front offices  
BigBlueShock : 5/17/2018 8:07 am : link
In comment 13966260 christian said:
Quote:
In comment 13966226 Mike from SI said:


Quote:


don't let the media chatter affect them. Barkley does not seem like the type who will care what the callers on WFAN or posters here say about him. Therefore, I don't think it matters (in this case).



I hope that is true -- but Barkley hasn't failed on a large scale in the NFL yet. He will soon enough, and when he does Gettleman's hyperbole certainly won't help keep the noise down.

Only because fans that wanted a QB are taking Gettlemans obvious joking statement so seriously. Itís been mentioned numerous times on this thread but there is a segment of fans that are just waiting to sit back and holler ďI told you so!Ē. It is amazing to me that people are taking those comments so seriously. If the stupid fans would chill out there would be no issue. Where is the noise going to come from? Fans that donít like the pick. Blame them for overreacting, not Gettleman or Barkley
RE: RE: RE: Most athletes and front offices  
christian : 5/17/2018 8:47 am : link
In comment 13966270 BigBlueShock said:
Quote:
In comment 13966260 christian said:


Quote:


In comment 13966226 Mike from SI said:


Quote:


don't let the media chatter affect them. Barkley does not seem like the type who will care what the callers on WFAN or posters here say about him. Therefore, I don't think it matters (in this case).



I hope that is true -- but Barkley hasn't failed on a large scale in the NFL yet. He will soon enough, and when he does Gettleman's hyperbole certainly won't help keep the noise down.


Only because fans that wanted a QB are taking Gettlemans obvious joking statement so seriously. Itís been mentioned numerous times on this thread but there is a segment of fans that are just waiting to sit back and holler ďI told you so!Ē. It is amazing to me that people are taking those comments so seriously. If the stupid fans would chill out there would be no issue. Where is the noise going to come from? Fans that donít like the pick. Blame them for overreacting, not Gettleman or Barkley


That's a very simplistic and intellectually flimsy argument.

If Barkley comes out flat (whether his fault or not), and the back cover headline in the Post is 'Touched by the Hand of God' -- that will be because some fans didn't like the pick?

It will have nothing to do with a rookie playing poorly and the GM having gone overboard praising how great the pick was?

I think you drastically underestimate how critical the press here is, and that Barkley is not going to get a semblance of a break no matter how much some fans like him.

I think Barkley is going to have a fine year, but I think the line will still be a big problem, and the offense will have growing pains in a new system and not much depth at WR.

I think Barkley is going to have rough moments and when he does the professional critics will pounce and Gettleman has given them fodder, just like a every Reese hyperbolic praise turned into a jab.

If Barkely is completely impervious to criticism and pressure in New York, as a top 2 pick, on a team coming off an awful season with an aging and flawed hero at QB and the GM effectively annointing him, he's more perfect than Gettleman even graded.
This thread  
JonC : 5/17/2018 8:51 am : link
needs a lot more Kay Adams, and a lot less everything else.
If Barkley..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 5/17/2018 8:54 am : link
is anything like Ezekiel Elliott, the only time the headlines might use the term Touched By the Hand of God is if he's accused of assault......
We might be best served to just trade Barkley at this point  
Jimmy Googs : 5/17/2018 10:16 am : link
the expectations...the media...the GM comments...the pressure of being the pick instead of a franchise-QB. Its all too much.

The NY Giants gave it a shot but its obvious that this was never going to work...

RE: This thread  
Klaatu : 5/17/2018 10:57 am : link
In comment 13966300 JonC said:
Quote:
needs a lot more Kay Adams, and a lot less everything else.


Ask and ye shall receive:

I don't mind doing the RB comparison thing  
BSIMatt : 5/17/2018 3:19 pm : link
regardless of size, but strictly based on style of play. Honestly you have to do that a bit when finding comparisons with Barkley because his playing style uses so much shiftiness and elusiveness, guys his size don't usually have that trait. However, Barkley and Bush really have nothing in common other than they are both really fast and are good at catching footballs. Go back and watch Bush USC highlights, he runs really nothing at all like Barkly. It's not a good comparison. For being such a phenomenal athlete, Bush wasn't exceptionally shifty, he was insanely explosive and fast, but LeSean McCoy had much more shake than Reggie, and Barkely runs much more like McCoy than Bush, except he has Bush's speed(and yes, bot those guys were 200lb runningbacks oh by the way).
If Bush is used as an example of why not to draft a rb instead of qb  
steve in ky : 5/17/2018 9:23 pm : link
with a high pick it's probably fair to point out that Vince Young was #3 just behind Bush and Matt Leinart was the other qb drafted in the top 10 that year. There are no guarantees in an NFL draft regardless if position.
RE: If Bush is used as an example of why not to draft a rb instead of qb  
arcarsenal : 5/17/2018 9:32 pm : link
In comment 13967045 steve in ky said:
Quote:
with a high pick it's probably fair to point out that Vince Young was #3 just behind Bush and Matt Leinart was the other qb drafted in the top 10 that year. There are no guarantees in an NFL draft regardless if position.


Yup.

Reggie Bush was a better draft pick than both Vince Young and Matt Leinart. Not even debatable.
RE: RE: If Bush is used as an example of why not to draft a rb instead of qb  
BigBlueShock : 5/17/2018 9:45 pm : link
In comment 13967056 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
In comment 13967045 steve in ky said:


Quote:


with a high pick it's probably fair to point out that Vince Young was #3 just behind Bush and Matt Leinart was the other qb drafted in the top 10 that year. There are no guarantees in an NFL draft regardless if position.



Yup.

Reggie Bush was a better draft pick than both Vince Young and Matt Leinart. Not even debatable.

Yeah but those other two guys were highly touted QBs, isnít that the only thing that matters? From reading BBI, Iíve learned that an ordinary QB is more valuable than a very good RB.
The more interesting take..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 5/17/2018 9:49 pm : link
is that a RB who played 10 years in the NFL was a bust and a terrible pick.

Why people don't ever discuss the gray middle ground is what rabbit holes a lot of these discussions.

RE: The more interesting take..  
BigBlueShock : 5/17/2018 9:57 pm : link
In comment 13967067 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
is that a RB who played 10 years in the NFL was a bust and a terrible pick.

Why people don't ever discuss the gray middle ground is what rabbit holes a lot of these discussions.

Come on man. If Barkley doesnít run for 4000 yards and lead the Giants to the playoffs in year one he is an utter failure because the GM said he was touched by the hand of God. Iíll be foaming at the mouth if this guy doesnít end up the best RB ever because our GM gushed about him. Iím sitting here just waiting to pounce because the Daily News May post an article picking on Gettleman and Barkley if he doesnít run for 300 yards every week.... and I take the articles that some fat slob from the Daily News writes seriously, man.
.  
arcarsenal : 5/17/2018 9:59 pm : link
Unfortunately, that's where we're going next.

Every time Barkley doesn't have a spectacular showing, we'll have to hear about how God must have taken the day off or how "DSG" is clueless.

Can't wait!
But lets face it...you guys come on this site so you can  
Jimmy Googs : 5/17/2018 10:13 pm : link
jump on the "weak, non-sensical" posts/posters...at least to some degree.

I know you all as good posters too when it comes to football, but you can't tell me you don't get some interest or "jollies" out of the argumentative battles you take on.

just sayin' (again)...
.  
arcarsenal : 5/17/2018 10:28 pm : link
LOL, well I don't think that's why I come here - I come here primarily to talk about the Giants (and sports in general), but sometimes the stupid is too difficult to ignore.

Beyond that, I suppose if we all agreed on everything, there wouldn't be much to talk about. :)
Thats fine. I wasn't trying to be insulting with the comment  
Jimmy Googs : 5/17/2018 10:36 pm : link
as I know the ideal view is to talk Giant football. Reality is its more to argue about Giant football...

;-)
You found me out  
steve in ky : 5/17/2018 10:41 pm : link
22 years here just to get my jollies arguing while the Giant talk/info is secondary.
RE: The more interesting take..  
Ten Ton Hammer : 5/18/2018 3:47 am : link
In comment 13967067 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
is that a RB who played 10 years in the NFL was a bust and a terrible pick.

Why people don't ever discuss the gray middle ground is what rabbit holes a lot of these discussions.


Would you really say that a runningback picked 2nd overall and played 10 years, finishing with 5500 rushing yards, and only actually got a full time starter's share of carries in three of those 10 years turned out to be a quality pick?

Put another way, think of an NFL player who you would describe as fully average. Not special, not bad. Solid starter.

Would picking that player 2nd overall be classified as a success? If Justin Pugh was drafted 2nd overall, would that not equate to a wasted pick?

Shorting him a bit with just rushing stats. Assume Bush had ample  
Jimmy Googs : 5/18/2018 7:41 am : link
receiving numbers as well. And I think he was a pretty decent punt returner, at least early in career.
Bush was only..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 5/18/2018 7:49 am : link
healthy enough to play a full 16 games two times in his career. One of those seasons was his rookie year where he only started 8 games and yet amassed 88 receptions.

He only had two 1,000 yard seasons and he had nearly 500 receptions in his career.

What part of the gray area I was talking about above is confusing? He's neither a bust, nor a guy who lived up to the #2 position. He was neither a wasted pick nor a terrible one.

I don't even get the connection to Pugh. Pugh was drafted much lower and many here look at him as a wasted pick. Not sure what the exercise of drafting him at #2 illustrates.
And Googs..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 5/18/2018 7:51 am : link
is right about him being a PR. He had 4 punt return TD's in his career and he led the league with a 13.5 average once.
Btw - this thread has become a bit of garden variety of topics  
Jimmy Googs : 5/18/2018 7:56 am : link
Why the hell is Reggie Bush being discussed...because he is comparative to what we should expect from Barkley?
Quoting his rushing stats  
UConn4523 : 5/18/2018 7:58 am : link
and foregoing everything else is useless. Itís the epitome of cherry picking. Bush had some really good years in the nfl, and despite his injuries a fairly long career for his position.
Bush was an All Pro and helped the Saints win a Superrbowl  
Britt in VA : 5/18/2018 8:11 am : link
I'd sign up for that.
.  
arcarsenal : 5/18/2018 10:40 am : link
Because people keep using Reggie Bush as some sort of disparaging comparison for Barkley. Bush had a pretty solid career for a RB.

I expect Barkley to be better, but people talk about Bush like he was some massive bust which wasn't the case at all.
I'm beginning to think Barkley is taking the mantle from Manning  
JOrthman : 5/18/2018 12:30 pm : link
and some in this fan base/the NFL are going to be on him throughout his career unless he turns into Barry Sanders 2.0.
RE: Bush was an All Pro and helped the Saints win a Superrbowl  
GoBlue6599 : 5/18/2018 2:48 pm : link
In comment 13967206 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
I'd sign up for that.

Reggie Bush was a All pro RB? Or a All Pro special teams player who played on a SB winning team
U honestly would be happy if Barkley is nothing more then a dynamic scat back and great special teams player?
Expectations for the 2nd overall pick have to be much higher
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner