This goes to a handful of people complaining that SB's other 3 (usually they add 1 to help their point) went for 4 yards. Same people were talking about all offseason how SB won't be able to get 3 or 4 yards and will try to get 40 every time. Now 2 of the 3 carries went for 3 or 4 yards and these same people are complaining that he didn't go for 40 every time. Do people just say anything that fits their agenda without trying to be consistent?
Sorry, I will delete this if it's duplicate.
1. RB goes 100 yards on first play from scrimmage and then zero yards for 19 next carries, averaging 5 yards per play.
2. RB has 20 carries each exactly 5 yards per play.
Both backs average 5 yards a carry - but the respective runners' impact on the game couldn't be more different.
The "worry" I read about Saquon before the draft is that he his game stats are closer to example 1 style runner rather than example 2.
PS: I have no idea whether the concern is valid.
1. RB goes 100 yards on first play from scrimmage and then zero yards for 19 next carries, averaging 5 yards per play.
2. RB has 20 carries each exactly 5 yards per play.
Both backs average 5 yards a carry - but the respective runners' impact on the game couldn't be more different.
The "worry" I read about Saquon before the draft is that he his game stats are closer to example 1 style runner rather than example 2.
PS: I have no idea whether the concern is valid.
I agree with you, but scenario 1 is still better than being bottled up on that first plays and having 0 yards for the game. You want a guy that when the other team has a great game plan to stop him and has great players that he's still a threat to break one. I remember in 2008 or so we played Adrian Peterson and we stopped him the whole game and then he took one to the house for like 80. I was puffing my chest out, but in the end that's what great RBs do. There's never been one great RB that didn't have a poor game but it's nice to have an RB that even during a poor game can break one huge run. OBJ is the same thing as a WR. He's had plenty of games where outside of one big play his stats weren't amazing (the 2015 Pats game is coming to mind). Also, I don't think that was the case yesterday with Barkley he didn't seem to have anywhere to go and 3 routine runs is not nearly enough of a sample size to judge. Some people want to say that 1 run isn't enough to say he's great but the best RBs in NFL history have gone for 4 yards total on 3 successive runs. A select few RBs could have done even once what Barkley did on his 39 yarder.
But the concern is that Barkley will lose yards instead of getting 3 or 4 yards. Two of the three runs he gained those 3 or 4 yards. Most thumpers have A LOT of those types of runs.
What's the concern? He took the 3-4 yard gains everyone has been
clamoring for.
Quote:
And I believe Eli has said it too
What's the concern? He took the 3-4 yard gains everyone has been
clamoring for.
OK I misunderstood.
However, as one who wanted a quarterback, but am also a Penn State fan that saw almost everyone of Barkley s runs from scrimmage the past two seasons, what we saw last night, was a small sample of his college career.
Big plays, mixed in with small gains and losses. To be fair, Penn State did not have the line to pound it between the tackles.
I still believe the Giants made a mistake taking a running back instead of a quarterback. But if I m proven correct, it won t be because Barkley underperformed. It will be because no running back can be as important to a team as a franchise quarterback.
Which is why my personal opinion is that the evaluation of Barkley s selection is somewhat contingent on how Darnold s career unfolds.
FMIC disagrees with my take, and I see his point, the draft selection success should be judged solely on the peosupof the player drafted. By that standard I am confident Giants will have been proven correct.
But there are people in the business who also see it my way
It’s always what ifs or there’s greener grass someplace else. And they know more than anyone. Fucking assholes.
Just be happy we got a legit talent will likely be one of the great ambassadors of the NY Giants franchise and shut the hell up already. Every time one of these qbs throws a tight spiral we’re gonna hear about it. Jerkoffs.
Wanting a quarterback does not preclude a fan from fanatically rooting for Barkley.
Your response is way too angry for someone who states they could care less how those quarterbacks past on play.
I absolutely hate that argument, especially at the QB position. It’s perfectly fine to have preferred a QB, but there are many people on this site making things up about what Barkley should and shouldn’t be doing because they are so blinded by their own draft preference.
AP had speed and power but wasn't ever that nimble.
If you can't see how that kind of ability is going to mean great things for him than you need your eyes or brain checked.
From a team construction standpoint he wasn't necessarily the best pick, that being said, if you don't think Saquon is going to instantly be one of the best all around backs in the league I hope you find the taste of crow delicious.
This!
Oh by the way his first four carries in his professional career.
Blah blah blah web should retire Eli didn't put touchdowns on the board and Darnold was 66% in his first drive.
Darnold 66% in first drive. That made me laugh out loud.
Barkley sucks, should have drafted Bridgewater...~
I absolutely hate that argument, especially at the QB position. It’s perfectly fine to have preferred a QB, but there are many people on this site making things up about what Barkley should and shouldn’t be doing because they are so blinded by their own draft preference.
isn't it human nature if they were convicted the Giants should take a quarterback, that their anger would flare up when they see that quarterback play well, even in a preseason game.
No one is that clairvoyant. Sorry.
I simply stated if Barkley becomes a super star back, and say Darnold become another Simms or Eli, Giants goofed
Don t see how that is an unreasonable take. Again, I think your name calling might more be motivated by the possibility that history might prove the Giants made the wrong pick, then you are at the other clowns you referred to.
I want Barkley to be good, that’s it. I couldn’t care less about Darnold.
I'm not giving you shit I'm just asking.
Perfect response
Only two runs longer last year...
You really can't get away with that often at the NFL level. What I saw yesterday was SB doing exactly what he should have done when there were no holes to waltz into. He correctly decided to take what was given on that play. He did very well based off limited carries.
But part of me believes Gettleman believes Giants can win now and didn t want to blow the opportunity with a rookie quarterback.
For me it s simple. The Barkley pick is tied to Darnold s success simply because Good quarterback trumps good running back. Great quarterback trumps great running back.
But if Giants win Super Bowl with Barkley and Jets never win one with Darnold, it would be silly to think Giants goofed regardless of how good Darnold is.
1. RB goes 100 yards on first play from scrimmage and then zero yards for 19 next carries, averaging 5 yards per play.
2. RB has 20 carries each exactly 5 yards per play.
Both backs average 5 yards a carry - but the respective runners' impact on the game couldn't be more different.
The "worry" I read about Saquon before the draft is that he his game stats are closer to example 1 style runner rather than example 2.
PS: I have no idea whether the concern is valid.
Bill: I have found median value to be a much more useful stat than average value in many areas of life.
If I'm reading correctly he had 3 more carries for -2, 3, 3.
He showed what his supporters and critics see in him. A dynamite long run, and a sprinkling of below average runs.
Quote:
yards per carry... take two different theoretical game stats:
1. RB goes 100 yards on first play from scrimmage and then zero yards for 19 next carries, averaging 5 yards per play.
2. RB has 20 carries each exactly 5 yards per play.
Both backs average 5 yards a carry - but the respective runners' impact on the game couldn't be more different.
The "worry" I read about Saquon before the draft is that he his game stats are closer to example 1 style runner rather than example 2.
PS: I have no idea whether the concern is valid.
Bill: I have found median value to be a much more useful stat than average value in many areas of life.
With small sample sizes that's often the case. At the same time I just can't disregard an 80 yard TD run no matter how poor the median number is.
If I'm reading correctly he had 3 more carries for -2, 3, 3.
He showed what his supporters and critics see in him. A dynamite long run, and a sprinkling of below average runs.
But his critics make it sound like his runs are losses when they're not long. I've heard numerous times that he needs to take 3-4 yard runs when there's nothing there and he did twice.
Drafting a QB at all costs is what poorly run teams do.
But part of me believes Gettleman believes Giants can win now and didn t want to blow the opportunity with a rookie quarterback.
For me it s simple. The Barkley pick is tied to Darnold s success simply because Good quarterback trumps good running back. Great quarterback trumps great running back.
But if Giants win Super Bowl with Barkley and Jets never win one with Darnold, it would be silly to think Giants goofed regardless of how good Darnold is.
Wait a minute, Joe. How do we know that Darnold was rated higher than Rosen & Allen on the Giants draft board?
I suspected the Giants would snag a QB but knew even before the draft that if they didn't take one of the top 4 it meant they did not see "FRANCHISE" written all over the guy. They know a lot more about grading QB prospects than I ever will. Since no QB, I'm glad they took Barkley.
I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. Drafting a good player is drafting a good player. It's not throwing darts at a wall.
The Giants have several good years but fall short of a championship.
Darnold is outstanding, the Jets have several good years but falls short of a championship.
Nelson is outstanding and apparently the missing piece and the Colts go on to win two SupeBowls?
The Giants have several good years but fall short of a championship.
Darnold is outstanding, the Jets have several good years but falls short of a championship.
Nelson is outstanding and apparently the missing piece and the Colts go on to win two SupeBowls?
If the Colts will win two Super Bowls Nelson wouldn't be the main reason.