Â
|
|
Quote: |
Why should I not go No. 1?” Barkley asks. He genuinely wants an answer. With every other player in the draft class, he says, there’s a but. “With me, I can confidently say there is no but.” That’s why he thinks he’s different. And Gil Brandt agrees. The legendary talent evaluator has worked in the NFL for 63 years, most notably as the vice president of player personnel for the Cowboys for three decades. He grades prospects on a nine-point system, broken down into five characteristics: character; quickness and agility; strength and explosion; competitiveness; and mental alertness. Over his career he has graded 492 running backs. Barkley ranks highest of them all. “He has a 100% chance of being an All-Pro,” Brandt says. “He’s the best player in the draft.” |
Wow. Stay healthy young man.
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.
x10
would you consider yourself cynic, skeptic, or contrarian?
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.
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.
And YES, time will tell as nothing is guaranteed
I would guess:
OJ
Ricky Williams
Marcus Allen
Adrian Peterson
LaDanian Tomlinson
Marshall Faulk
Are all on the list
He may be very good or even great. Some pointy headed football analysts are already investigating options to poke holes in Barkley.
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!"
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
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?
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.
I appreciate his confidence but we have drafted too many #1
RB busts to fall for the hype blindly
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
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
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.
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
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
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
It’s fine to be skeptical, but you should be skeptical of every player in this draft then.
Receiving: 50 rec 10.0 y/c 500 yds (Kamara had 81 and 10.2 y/r)
Total: 1625 yds, 300 touches, 10+ TDs
that’s disingenuous to good degree...
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...
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?
As far as Gil Brant goes is he serious? I have 2 words:
BO JACKSON.
I'm a born skeptic
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?
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...
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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..
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Stammering? Barkley out produced Williams freshman through junior year, more yardage and more touchdowns. Go look it up.
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.
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 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
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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:
Hype doesn’t cause a player to fail. Lack of talent and desire and work ethic does.
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.
Rb.
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.
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.
Can’t deny his talents. He’s hyped up to the heavens for a reason.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.