If we do not decide to go QB at #2 ?

Let's assume you knew without a shadow of a doubt that Barkley was a Hall of Fame RB.

Let's also assume then that you knew without a shadow of a doubt that Darnold was basically Matt Ryan II.

Who do you pick?

And we have Eli, OBJ, Engram, and even a modest OL upgrade, I take Barkley and then worry about how we can pick a future QB from the 32nd spot next year.

In comment 13828547 allstarjim said:

Quote:

In comment 13828537 Bill L said: Quote: From Walter Football Quote: Merging the 2018 and 2017 prospects Josh Rosen Mitch Trubisky Pat Mahomes II Deshaun Watson Sam Darnold Josh Allen Lamar Jackson Baker Mayfield DeShone Kizer Davis Webb And Rosen has a Borland shelf-life. So comparing magnitude of Barkley over even the next best versus what you get a QB simply has to be part of the calculus. Bill there's nothing wrong with Walter Football in terms of checking out their lists and mock drafts, as well as rumors, but Mel Kiper has more credibility than they do in term of developing any kind of draft ranking. And Mel Kiper doesn't have much credibility. I wouldn't give that list any thought whatsoever. It's not worth the proverbial paper it's proverbial paper it's written on.

you could be write, but I think the point remains that no matter who is evaluating this group of QB, you’ll find that it’s a very deep class without much height..

Some here have stated that Barkley has the kind of talent that he can score anytime from anywhere on the field when he gets his hands on the ball, by pass or otherwise. Thats the kind of ability the great backs had. That kind of weapon is a game changer for sure. Put him out there with OBJ and our other receivers and look out if we can fix this OL.

is that he seems to be such a natural, smooth pass catcher. If they don't go QB, he's gotta be considered.

With two DTs Vernon and JPP - DLine could become a strength. Secondary is in decent shape, especially if Apple snaps out of it

In comment 13828466 allstarjim said:

Quote:

I think Barkley is the best player in the draft. And, I think there is a fairly reasonable chance that Barkley is unavailable at our pick at #2. In your scenario, if he was available, I'd want Barkley. I've made no secret at that. But I do love the discussion, what would happen if we traded back? Who would you like then? And to answer that, we could have a discussion on the draft spot we'd be trading back to. A separate discussion would be, if the Giants decided they didn't like ANY of the QBs in the draft at #2, and Barkley was taken at #1 overall (unlikely, I know, and I'd of course be shouting to take Darnold), who would you want? In this case, I would definitely want them to trade back. But if you take that off the table, my pick would be Bradley Chubb, who I think is going to be a defensive force for many years.

I think you meant to say "Like some others" not most, because most others do NOT think he is the best player in the draft

In comment 13828482 allstarjim said:

Quote:

If I was Cleveland, and I wanted to keep both #1 and #4 (which is in and of itself an interesting question, I could see the Browns trading down from one of those picks), I would take Barkley #1, without question. And the reasoning behind that is, at #4, I am almost guaranteed to get, at minimum, the 2nd highest rated QB on my board. Unless there is a big drop-off in my grade at QB, and acknowledging that every QB in this draft has inherent risk, I might as well get my QB at #4. I do not think the Colts will draft a QB. Sure, they could trade down to a QB-needy team, but we can't assume that they will. And that means, only if they do trade down, and both the Giants and the team trading up to #3 takes both QBs at the top of my board, do I then have to take my third-best QB. And with 4 highly rated QBs at the top, I can live with taking that chance. Perhaps I want Rosen, and the Giants take Darnold at #2. Then the Colts trade out to Denver...and I will go on record right now, I think that Denver will be infatuated with Josh Allen. Denver takes Allen at #3, and then I get Rosen at #4, who I possibly would've taken at #1 overall anyway. Plausible. But to me, it is rare to have the opportunity to draft a franchise-changing RB like Barkley, a guy who is clearly a generational talent. That is the prize at #1, and then I get my guy at #4, sign whoever the Vikings don't want out of Bridgewater, Bradford, or Keenum to serve as the bridge, and then begin developing my guy. Not Cousins, though (too much money, and my draft pick will be my future at the position).

And that's precisely why you don't work in the front office of an NFL team. You NEVER settle for the 2nd or 3rd best QB on your list if your #1 rated guy is there. You take the one at the top of your list if they are there when you pick.

In comment 13828509 Jim in NH said:

Quote:

Here are 13 Super Bowl winning QBs drafted after Round One: Bart Starr Round 17 Player 200 Roger Staubach Round 10 Player 129 Ken Stabler Round 2 Player 52 Joe Montana Round 3 Player 82 Joe Theismann Round 4 Player 99 Jeff Hostetler Round 3 Player 59 Mark Rypien Round 6 Player 146 Brett Favre Round 2 Player 33 Kurt Warner undrafted Tom Brady Round 6 Player 199 Brad Johnson Round 9 Player 227 Russell Wilson Round 3 Player 75 Nick Foles Round 3 Player 88

That's rather selective to look at only 13 QBs. Where were the other SB winning QBs taken? You know, guys like Peyton and Eli Manning, John Elway, Phil Simms, etc... Or perhaps you left them out because their inclusion would shoot your argument to shit.

Their careers are short and there’s normally an abundance of other Running Backs that are quite capable of giving a team a sensational running game. Get an Oline and then we’ll start to see a decent running game. Look for a RB, but not until round 3 IMO.

In comment 13828448 djstat said:

Quote:

Goes #2 are moronic fans. Barkley is not worth 2

Yeah Sy is a moron, so am I. Barkley may go 1st if the Browns are smart and like more than 2 of the QBs up there.

In comment 13828530 Jim in NH said:

Quote:

31 QBs have won 51 Super Bowls. I listed 12 drafted after Round One (plus one undrafted). Here are the 18 others: Joe Namath Round 1 Player 1 Len Dawson Round 1 Player 5 Earl Morrall Round 1 Player 2 Bob Griese (2) Round 1 Player 4 Terry Bradshaw (4) Round 1 Player 1 Jim Plunkett (2) Round 1 Player 1 Jim McMahon Round 1 Player 5 Phil Simms Round 1 Player 7 Doug Williams Round 1 Player 17 Troy Aikman (3) Round 1 Player 1 Steve Young Round 1 Player 1 John Elway (2) Round 1 Player 1 Trent Dilfer Round 1 Player 6 Eli Manning (2) Round 1 Player 1 Ben Roethlisberger Round 1 Player 11 Aaron Rodgers Round 1 Player 24 Joe Flacco Round 1 Player 18 Peyton Manning (2) Round 1 Player 1

I responded to your first post before I saw this, but I was correct. Only 4 of these 18 were selected below the 7th pick, but all were first round selections.

In comment 13828787 Simms11 said:

Quote:

Their careers are short and there’s normally an abundance of other Running Backs that are quite capable of giving a team a sensational running game. Get an Oline and then we’ll start to see a decent running game. Look for a RB, but not until round 3 IMO.

we already have two f those and...well, we got what we paid for.

Locking in to absolutes is the way you become the Browns. Pick the best players and you’ll win more often than not.

So, you agree, of the 31 QBs who won 51 Super Bowls:

14 were picked in the first round, positions 1-7
13 were picked after the first round, or were undrafted
4 were picked lower in the first round?

I actually think the whole data set (which leaves out Ryan Leaf, JaMarcus Russell, Josh Freeman, Mark Sanchez, Vince Young, Matt Leinart, Byron Leftwich, David Carr, and others) supports my view that it does not matter where you pick, but it matters a lot who does the picking.

The facts do not support the view that the only way, or even the best way, to get a QB who can win the Super Bowl is by using a high first round draft choice.

Matt Ryan is a very good QB, but not a HOF QB.

Anchoring bias that goes on on this board. People don’t question their assumptions

In comment 13828846 Reb8thVA said:

Quote:

Anchoring bias that goes on on this board. People don’t question their assumptions

there probably is a lot of dead weight here.

But most agree Barkley is the best RB and many think the best player in the draft. He will make a huge impact day one for NYG.

It's all about the plan that DG and PS come up with.

In comment 13828452 Big Rick in FL said:

Quote:

He's not in Jim Brown or OJ Simpson territory. Please let's stop comparing him to HOFers before he even runs at the combine. Also let's get it out of our head that the Giants aren't drafting q QB. It makes no sense to draft a RB at 2. When you can get guys like Michel, Chubb, Freeman, Rodney Anderson etc etc somewhere in rounds 2-5. The value just isn't there.

I dunno. In hindsight it seems laughable, but I bet people said the same about Ladainian Tomlinson prior to 2001... "You could just as easily take a guy like Deuce McCallister, Travis Henry, Lamont Jordan, etc much later and get almost the same production!"

In comment 13828498 Big Rick in FL said:

Quote:

Quarterbacks last a lot longer then RBs. It's a fact.

Yeah but... So?

I can't imagine that your average GM is spending those minutes in the draft room debating between taking the guy who might be less talented but is more likely to be on the team for 15 years (but by no means guaranteed to be, for a litany of reasons), and the much more talented guy who may merely be around for half that. That's a good way for the GM to be fired prior to the end of those 15 years.

In comment 13828823 Jim in NH said:

Quote:

So, you agree, of the 31 QBs who won 51 Super Bowls: 14 were picked in the first round, positions 1-7 13 were picked after the first round, or were undrafted 4 were picked lower in the first round The facts do not support the view that the only way, or even the best way, to get a QB who can win the Super Bowl is by using a high first round draft choice.

Don't the facts above EXACTLY support the view that the most likely place to find a Super Bowl Winning QB is Rd 1?

what am i missing...

I think there is a good chance this may happen since both Darnold and Rosen have their warts but as much as I love Barkley, I would not take a RB at #2 either. Average life for a RB is 4-5 years. You want this pick to be a 10 year starter who goes to the Pro Bowl on a regular basis. A cornerstone player.
With the announcement that Manning will be around for another year or two and with the presumed development of Davis Webb, there does not seem to be an urgency to force a QB right now, especially for a team with so many other needs thanks to the Reese/Ross drafting regime. Both Denver at #5 and the Jets at #6 would love to have the #2 pick to secure their QB of the future. Were the Giants to swap 1st round picks with either, they would likely pick up an extra #2 and #4 this year. Given that they likely won't find much OL help in free agency, save for maybe Andrew Norwell, and that their two best lineman, Pugh and Richburg, are free agents who may not be worth paying what they want, and the fact that Gettleman and Shurmer have both stated that the OL needs to be fixed, I think the Giants best course of action might be to trade down to #5 or #6 and draft Quenton Nelson, a cornerstone lineman who may be the best and safest player in this draft and then go with LT Martinas Rankin and either Sony Michel or Nick Chubb at the top of Round 2. Move Flowers to RT and let Rankin compete with Wheeler at LT. Can worry about the QB next year.

stanking. Weak player.weak power base.

Trade back as far as #6 with the Jets with only Denver an undesirable partner because of the strong chance they have a rebound seasson with a weak schedule and devalue the next years #1 that must be the cornerstone of any offer to move down, even if it's a deal with the Colts at #3.

In comment 13829149 johnboyw said:

Quote:

I think there is a good chance this may happen since both Darnold and Rosen have their warts but as much as I love Barkley, I would not take a RB at #2 either. Average life for a RB is 4-5 years. You want this pick to be a 10 year starter who goes to the Pro Bowl on a regular basis. A cornerstone player. With the announcement that Manning will be around for another year or two and with the presumed development of Davis Webb, there does not seem to be an urgency to force a QB right now, especially for a team with so many other needs thanks to the Reese/Ross drafting regime. Both Denver at #5 and the Jets at #6 would love to have the #2 pick to secure their QB of the future. Were the Giants to swap 1st round picks with either, they would likely pick up an extra #2 and #4 this year. Given that they likely won't find much OL help in free agency, save for maybe Andrew Norwell, and that their two best lineman, Pugh and Richburg, are free agents who may not be worth paying what they want, and the fact that Gettleman and Shurmer have both stated that the OL needs to be fixed, I think the Giants best course of action might be to trade down to #5 or #6 and draft Quenton Nelson, a cornerstone lineman who may be the best and safest player in this draft and then go with LT Martinas Rankin and either Sony Michel or Nick Chubb at the top of Round 2. Move Flowers to RT and let Rankin compete with Wheeler at LT. Can worry about the QB next year.

Nelson may not even be the best OG, let alone the best OL, and certainly not the best player. Maybe you can draft a line break for your wall of text with #2 pick.

In comment 13828454 Bill L said:

Quote:

Unless you’re saying that you *wouldn’t* ever draft Jim Brown or OJ Simpson at #2. Which is okay I guess. Some people are wed to their dogma. IMO, it’s daft, but different strokes.

todays complete RB must also be a good blocker and neither Brown or Simpson were blockers, as a matter of fact Jim Brown told the Browns that he wasn't being paid to block he was a RB..