would've guessed he would be graded 3rd. He's certainly the most talented and explosive, but after the year McCaffery had I'm really surprised he's not #1. I'd take CMC over Elliot, but Elliot is also a hell of a runner and has an argument as #1 as well.
I really hope Barkley stays healthy and reaches his ceiling.
Get the OL fixed in front of him, and it should help slow the game down for him so he uses his vision, which was excellent at the college level, and develops patience to allow the blocks to set up in front of him.
Wasted pick, should have drafted QB or OL. RB don't win championships. -most of BBI
I would not say that RB are easy to get. The problems are they generally require an OL to be in place and the difference between an elite RB and a good RB is not as large as elite vs. good at other positions. How many playoff wins did Barkley/CMac/Zeke account for last year? I get that there are other players on the field, but the need for a RB is heavily decreased in today's game. Yes keeping more men in the box allows less players to be in coverage, but as long as your OL can hold up someone is going to get open or draw a penalty in today's offense. The only scenarios where having the running game matters is in the 4th Quarter when you are trying to protect a lead and need a 10 or 15 play clock eating drive. Even then, what you need is a RB who can consistently get 4-5 yards when you touch a ball, not a guy who is just as much of a threat to take it to the house everytime he touches the ball as he is to get tackled for a gain of 2 yards or less.
Wasted pick, should have drafted QB or OL. RB don't win championships. -most of BBI
I would not say that RB are easy to get. The problems are they generally require an OL to be in place and the difference between an elite RB and a good RB is not as large as elite vs. good at other positions. How many playoff wins did Barkley/CMac/Zeke account for last year? I get that there are other players on the field, but the need for a RB is heavily decreased in today's game. Yes keeping more men in the box allows less players to be in coverage, but as long as your OL can hold up someone is going to get open or draw a penalty in today's offense. The only scenarios where having the running game matters is in the 4th Quarter when you are trying to protect a lead and need a 10 or 15 play clock eating drive. Even then, what you need is a RB who can consistently get 4-5 yards when you touch a ball, not a guy who is just as much of a threat to take it to the house everytime he touches the ball as he is to get tackled for a gain of 2 yards or less.
He's a threat to take it to the house any time he touches the ball. Similar to what Odell brought to the table. He can also catch a bomb over his shoulder like a WR downfield. He's a great player, not just a great RB. He's a special talent.
Barkley has a few things to prove before he leap frogs CMC and Elliot.
The obvious one is his pass protection — if Jones is going meaningfully cut down on his turnovers he needs to trust his last line of defense. Barkley was a mess in pass pro last year.
The Giants need consistent production on the ground, game to game, and this goes to the running backs and blocking. I look forward to how he is used by Garrett, who has no problem wracking up the carries for a back.
He is one of the top players. Pure running and receiving I think he is the best. He has a lot to prove as a blocker though. The debate on Barkley for me was that we didnt have the pieces in place to value a RB that high. If we were a few guys away from competing for the playoffs I think the pick would have been received better. Now 2 seasons in and Barkey has not elevated the team yet.
RE: Shows you how worthless RBs are in this era of NFL
Wasted pick, should have drafted QB or OL. RB don't win championships. -most of BBI
I would not say that RB are easy to get. The problems are they generally require an OL to be in place and the difference between an elite RB and a good RB is not as large as elite vs. good at other positions. How many playoff wins did Barkley/CMac/Zeke account for last year? I get that there are other players on the field, but the need for a RB is heavily decreased in today's game. Yes keeping more men in the box allows less players to be in coverage, but as long as your OL can hold up someone is going to get open or draw a penalty in today's offense. The only scenarios where having the running game matters is in the 4th Quarter when you are trying to protect a lead and need a 10 or 15 play clock eating drive. Even then, what you need is a RB who can consistently get 4-5 yards when you touch a ball, not a guy who is just as much of a threat to take it to the house everytime he touches the ball as he is to get tackled for a gain of 2 yards or less.
Then what's the rationale behind elite WR's not being seemingly critical to a team's playoff success? You can do this same exercise for many positions not named QB.
A lot of the angst and positional value discussion on RB's arose because the Giants picked Barkley. The Cowboys and Jags weren't as scrutinized for drafting RB's high.
RE: Shows you how worthless RBs are in this era of NFL
Wasted pick, should have drafted QB or OL. RB don't win championships. -most of BBI
I would not say that RB are easy to get. The problems are they generally require an OL to be in place and the difference between an elite RB and a good RB is not as large as elite vs. good at other positions. How many playoff wins did Barkley/CMac/Zeke account for last year? I get that there are other players on the field, but the need for a RB is heavily decreased in today's game. Yes keeping more men in the box allows less players to be in coverage, but as long as your OL can hold up someone is going to get open or draw a penalty in today's offense. The only scenarios where having the running game matters is in the 4th Quarter when you are trying to protect a lead and need a 10 or 15 play clock eating drive. Even then, what you need is a RB who can consistently get 4-5 yards when you touch a ball, not a guy who is just as much of a threat to take it to the house everytime he touches the ball as he is to get tackled for a gain of 2 yards or less.
Then what's the rationale behind elite WR's not being seemingly critical to a team's playoff success? You can do this same exercise for many positions not named QB.
A lot of the angst and positional value discussion on RB's arose because the Giants picked Barkley. The Cowboys and Jags weren't as scrutinized for drafting RB's high.
The Cowboys had the OL in place. A number of people did question whether they should have taken Jalen Ramsey instead. It wasn't like there was a QB or WR there that the Cowboys should have taken instead.
With Leonard Fournette there were many people who said this was the Jags being the Jags again and reaching. The Jags don't get a lot of coverage nationally so it mainly faded quickly. I would not say a draft strategy was good because the Jags did it.
With the selection of Barkley, you had a team that did not have the OL in place and lacked a QB. Would the Giants have been better off drafting Quentin Nelson at #2 and drafting Nick Chubb at #34 instead of Will Hernandez? Sam Bradford, by many, was the top QB in this draft. At that time he was my #2 guy (behind Baker Mayfield), but I did think he needed to be brought along like Manning or Mahomes where he was not looked at as the opening day starter.
Fournette was a reach because of the type of RB he is
said it then and still believe it now. Barkley isn't in that mold, completely different and more explosive player. And I wouldn't pay Fournette either, Barkley I would.
Thanks for making my point. Wasting top 10 picks on RBs gets coaches fired and takes away too much cap room from the positions that do matter to winning OTs, DEs, QBs etc. Next year the Maras are probably going to give Barkley the biggest contract in NFL history for a RB. Good for Barkley he seems like a good person. Bad for anyone who wants the Giants to win a lot of games.
Thanks for making my point. Wasting top 10 picks on RBs gets coaches fired and takes away too much cap room from the positions that do matter to winning OTs, DEs, QBs etc. Next year the Maras are probably going to give Barkley the biggest contract in NFL history for a RB. Good for Barkley he seems like a good person. Bad for anyone who wants the Giants to win a lot of games.
Snoooooooooooooozeeee.......
You have to believe in your scouting and draft board
Saying the Cowboys built an OL and then plugged in the RB is a bit misleading. The guy they plugged in could well be in the HoF in ten years. Saying the Giants should've picked a QB or Nelson doesn't guarantee a better build either, just look at the progress of Darnold so far, for example. He's an average QB, and Rosen is a bust.
I get saying RB isn't a great use of the #2 pick. But, if he was the best player in that draft, they did just fine. They picked a HoF talent in Barkley. That's not good enough, in light of the other players they could've drafted?
DG is poised to make a bigger cap mistake in LW, if you want to be concerned about waste. Look at the contract he handed to Solder, the contract of Zeitler, picking Hernandez in the top 40, $15M per to a CB not considered elite. Overpaying is part of the game now, going to have to look past it. If you're doing a good job overall, your face of the franchise tailback can be afforded rather easily in the big financial picture.
and I'm still ok with the selection of Barkley. He's going to be the engine of the offense. Cowboys offense lives and dies with the performance of Elliott, despite their talent on that side of the football. He's their engine. Barkley's going to figure it out soon and all bets will be off.
Agree with all your points. He was the right pick. Why it is still being debated is another question.
The money he is spending on the FA market has not been a fruitful endeavor. I am am being nice with that. It's been an a disaster. The LW thing is just another in a pattern really dumb pickups.
My only issue about having your offense around a RB is that he is irreplaceable. One hammy or high ankle sprain and then what?. We know, injuries can happen to anyone, but with a guy with that skillset, you can't duplicate.
I’m in the minority, but I don’t think Barkley is in a tier of talent by himself. He’s in the top band with Elliot and CMC. All three have HOF type skill.
Barkley, like the other two is the type of player you can build an offense around, and that’s special.
The key as always is to get the stars to align on your roster. The numbers say a RB peaks early and depreciates more quickly. Doesn’t make Barkley a bad pick, just a variable to contend with — that shouldn’t hurt feelings in the discussion.
DG is poised to make a bigger cap mistake in LW, if you want to be concerned about waste. Look at the contract he handed to Solder, the contract of Zeitler, picking Hernandez in the top 40, $15M per to a CB not considered elite. Overpaying is part of the game now, going to have to look past it. If you're doing a good job overall, your face of the franchise tailback can be afforded rather easily in the big financial picture.
This is a good post.
Don't agree teams still in need of restructuring should be overpaying at egregious levels (Solder) but understand general theme that it generally happens.
The NY Giant problem still comes back to the draft and what collateral was used on what positions when. Running backs at overall #2 are a stretch for a team in this bad a shape.
but it's going to happen. Merely pointing out we have numerous examples of bad contracts and players not living up to them that are really egregious. I expect this will not be the case with SB.
I haven't seen anyone lay out a better use of the #2 pick yet. It sounds good on paper speaking in general about positions like QB and Edge being more important, but I don't see any practical examples that were clearly better options in the 2018 draft. Trading down for one of the QBs and a lesser tailback prospect doesn't add up to more than the best player in the draft, imv. You don't draft the "best QB" simply because you need one. You have to believe in that player and his ability to win championships. Rosen wasn't that guy. It's not looking super for Darnold so far.
At some point you have to put your chips down on the actual talent. It's how the bet teams have used the draft and built teams for decades.
Joe Thomas won zero playoff games. Calvin Johnson, zero. Khalil Mack has won zero.
Besides true Franchise QBs, no one player can put a franchise on their backs in today's NFL. The best LT, WR, and Edge/OLB of the past 10 years and they have nothing to show for it on a team level.
And it's a very underrated point. This is one of the exercises that has been on BBI for years. We have the best (fill in blank) WR's, OL, Secondary, etc.
It takes more than one player to get you to the promise land. Just look at all the future HoF QB's still playing. Rodgers, Brees, Marino, Young, etc..1 SB..
I'm not, as a fan. satisfied because we have a possible HoF player. If it does not lead to WINS, what does it matter?
RE: Shows you how worthless RBs are in this era of NFL
Football. Barkley & McCaffrey are 20-44 the past two years with all their big RB stat numbers.
JFC you’re the worst. We can play this stupid fucking game with any position and player. Ready? Try and keep up.... how many Super Bowls has aaron Donald won? How about JJ Watt? Or everyone’s worldly Qb Lamar jackson? He’s on a well oiled team and well coached, no titles yet. How many titles has kali Mack won? What about the all world guard in Indy? None. I guess those aren’t valuable positions either.
There were absolutely other options rather than picking Barkley.
Whether you think they are better options is subjective and goes a lot to positional value, life cycles of RBs and a few other factors. But let's not downplay that there were other options with merit.
But with a team in need of deep restructuring all over the place, the debate that more longer term value could have been had from B. Chubb or Q. Nelson or trading out of that spot is warranted. This shouldn't at all be about forcing the QB in debating the options here.
Everybody likes to point to Barkley's stats in his rookie year but these Chubb and Nelson above also were clear cut standouts as well. And it wasn't very difficult to see that they were going to be either pre-draft (like Barkley).
We bet on the talent, I'm good with it. A trade down for a booty is a good option, but the booty has to be there. No indications it was despite how many like to bash the GM (and I'm not remotely his biggest fan). Nelson is special but still an OG, a position truly down the food chain. Chubb had questions about where he would play in the NFL.
I understand the macro argument about picking the RB #2 overall not being optimal positionally. But, if there's no franchise QB available to you at that slot then optimal tends to go out the window unless you can trade down. In that case, it's another wasted exercise unless we know what was on the table.
While i mostly agree with you, the sentiment that he is just a OG, even though for that positon, he would have been a worthy pick.
I only say that bcuz the ORG got bashed for not going up to get Brandon Scherff. Even though he was drafted as a LT and moved to guard, A damn good one at that.
I think, those who don't agree with the RB pick wanted a OL, regardless.
RE: RE: Shows you how worthless RBs are in this era of NFL
Football. Barkley & McCaffrey are 20-44 the past two years with all their big RB stat numbers.
JFC you’re the worst. We can play this stupid fucking game with any position and player. Ready? Try and keep up.... how many Super Bowls has aaron Donald won? How about JJ Watt? Or everyone’s worldly Qb Lamar jackson? He’s on a well oiled team and well coached, no titles yet. How many titles has kali Mack won? What about the all world guard in Indy? None. I guess those aren’t valuable positions either.
Just maybe this has more to do with the teams they play on? Where did this falicy come from your top pick in any draft will magically make you a playoff team? There are 22 players out there. The Giants had the #2 pick for a reason, because their 22 players sucked. Having 1 stud and 21 left improves them, but its a process. You need to improve numerous positions, and Barkley/Jones/Peppers are a great start.
By the way, why not say the same thing about Jones and Engram. We didn't get magically better after their picks either?
Only a few guys ever had more than 12 sacks in their rookie year and those names include guys like Reggie White, Dwight Freeney, etc. He is clearly special and I think that is downplayed because he got injured last season.
And Nelson being a Guard should not be downplayed at all. He is an elite offensive lineman, and has been since Day 1. And my guess is he will be blocking at this level well beyond Barkley running at his top level. Fans of the NY Giants should be very cognizant how bad the offense plays when anybody is poor on the OL...whether that is center, tackle or guard.
in today's NFL. They are NOT the engine of the offense. The OL is. Barkley is a great talent that has has added no value to the Giants team. RB's are mainly needed now for short yardage situations that sustain drives when you are protecting the lead. Problem is Giants never have the lead and Barkley is the worst short yardage RB in NFL. He does not move the chains. He is perfectly wrong for Giants - a RB that mostly goes nowhere until he breaks a long run when Giants are down by 20 points. Get used to losing.
in today's NFL. They are NOT the engine of the offense. The OL is. Barkley is a great talent that has has added no value to the Giants team. RB's are mainly needed now for short yardage situations that sustain drives when you are protecting the lead. Problem is Giants never have the lead and Barkley is the worst short yardage RB in NFL. He does not move the chains. He is perfectly wrong for Giants - a RB that mostly goes nowhere until he breaks a long run when Giants are down by 20 points. Get used to losing.
You seem to be confusing average RB's with star RB's. The star RB's are absolutely positively focal points of the offense. Gurley (pre injury), Elliott, CMC, Barkley, etc are each team's best offensive player and when they aren't on the field the backups generally don't replicate production/impact, and the team suffers. They are absolutely their offenses "engines".
And if your grand thought on all this is Barkley hasn't added value then its a conversations you should bow out of.
in today's NFL. They are NOT the engine of the offense. The OL is. Barkley is a great talent that has has added no value to the Giants team. RB's are mainly needed now for short yardage situations that sustain drives when you are protecting the lead. Problem is Giants never have the lead and Barkley is the worst short yardage RB in NFL. He does not move the chains. He is perfectly wrong for Giants - a RB that mostly goes nowhere until he breaks a long run when Giants are down by 20 points. Get used to losing.
This sentence is the only part of your post that has merit..."They are NOT the engine of the offense."
But the "RB's are mainly only used now for short yardage situations" is a real doozy." Really wish the Giants would have drafted a guy who can catch the ball and make things happen in the passing game.
subjective as said to which might have been better. I don't hand the same value to an OG as a LT, it's non-logical positionally imv. I think those against SB are going to be pleasantly surprised when his game matures in the NFL. The macro-financial argument is more of an optimizer thing which I totally understand, but it doesn't eat at me. Solder's contract? Absolutely. Bradberry? Not thrilled with it. Case by case basis.
Ezekiel Elliott IS the engine that makes the Cowboys offense go, despite all its overall talent on offense. I don't recall many here bashing the huge extension he signed. Give SB the same opportunity to grow.
I really hope Barkley stays healthy and reaches his ceiling.
steps before having to avoid the first defender
I would not say that RB are easy to get. The problems are they generally require an OL to be in place and the difference between an elite RB and a good RB is not as large as elite vs. good at other positions. How many playoff wins did Barkley/CMac/Zeke account for last year? I get that there are other players on the field, but the need for a RB is heavily decreased in today's game. Yes keeping more men in the box allows less players to be in coverage, but as long as your OL can hold up someone is going to get open or draw a penalty in today's offense. The only scenarios where having the running game matters is in the 4th Quarter when you are trying to protect a lead and need a 10 or 15 play clock eating drive. Even then, what you need is a RB who can consistently get 4-5 yards when you touch a ball, not a guy who is just as much of a threat to take it to the house everytime he touches the ball as he is to get tackled for a gain of 2 yards or less.
Quote:
Wasted pick, should have drafted QB or OL. RB don't win championships. -most of BBI
I would not say that RB are easy to get. The problems are they generally require an OL to be in place and the difference between an elite RB and a good RB is not as large as elite vs. good at other positions. How many playoff wins did Barkley/CMac/Zeke account for last year? I get that there are other players on the field, but the need for a RB is heavily decreased in today's game. Yes keeping more men in the box allows less players to be in coverage, but as long as your OL can hold up someone is going to get open or draw a penalty in today's offense. The only scenarios where having the running game matters is in the 4th Quarter when you are trying to protect a lead and need a 10 or 15 play clock eating drive. Even then, what you need is a RB who can consistently get 4-5 yards when you touch a ball, not a guy who is just as much of a threat to take it to the house everytime he touches the ball as he is to get tackled for a gain of 2 yards or less.
He's a threat to take it to the house any time he touches the ball. Similar to what Odell brought to the table. He can also catch a bomb over his shoulder like a WR downfield. He's a great player, not just a great RB. He's a special talent.
The obvious one is his pass protection — if Jones is going meaningfully cut down on his turnovers he needs to trust his last line of defense. Barkley was a mess in pass pro last year.
The Giants need consistent production on the ground, game to game, and this goes to the running backs and blocking. I look forward to how he is used by Garrett, who has no problem wracking up the carries for a back.
That's not the definition of worthless, that's the definition of it being a team game. Why didn't you add Zeke to this? Hmmm, i wonder....
Quote:
Wasted pick, should have drafted QB or OL. RB don't win championships. -most of BBI
I would not say that RB are easy to get. The problems are they generally require an OL to be in place and the difference between an elite RB and a good RB is not as large as elite vs. good at other positions. How many playoff wins did Barkley/CMac/Zeke account for last year? I get that there are other players on the field, but the need for a RB is heavily decreased in today's game. Yes keeping more men in the box allows less players to be in coverage, but as long as your OL can hold up someone is going to get open or draw a penalty in today's offense. The only scenarios where having the running game matters is in the 4th Quarter when you are trying to protect a lead and need a 10 or 15 play clock eating drive. Even then, what you need is a RB who can consistently get 4-5 yards when you touch a ball, not a guy who is just as much of a threat to take it to the house everytime he touches the ball as he is to get tackled for a gain of 2 yards or less.
Then what's the rationale behind elite WR's not being seemingly critical to a team's playoff success? You can do this same exercise for many positions not named QB.
A lot of the angst and positional value discussion on RB's arose because the Giants picked Barkley. The Cowboys and Jags weren't as scrutinized for drafting RB's high.
Cause running backs coach and play defense as well. I get the thought process
Quote:
In comment 14930788 Darth Paul said:
Quote:
Wasted pick, should have drafted QB or OL. RB don't win championships. -most of BBI
I would not say that RB are easy to get. The problems are they generally require an OL to be in place and the difference between an elite RB and a good RB is not as large as elite vs. good at other positions. How many playoff wins did Barkley/CMac/Zeke account for last year? I get that there are other players on the field, but the need for a RB is heavily decreased in today's game. Yes keeping more men in the box allows less players to be in coverage, but as long as your OL can hold up someone is going to get open or draw a penalty in today's offense. The only scenarios where having the running game matters is in the 4th Quarter when you are trying to protect a lead and need a 10 or 15 play clock eating drive. Even then, what you need is a RB who can consistently get 4-5 yards when you touch a ball, not a guy who is just as much of a threat to take it to the house everytime he touches the ball as he is to get tackled for a gain of 2 yards or less.
Then what's the rationale behind elite WR's not being seemingly critical to a team's playoff success? You can do this same exercise for many positions not named QB.
A lot of the angst and positional value discussion on RB's arose because the Giants picked Barkley. The Cowboys and Jags weren't as scrutinized for drafting RB's high.
The Cowboys had the OL in place. A number of people did question whether they should have taken Jalen Ramsey instead. It wasn't like there was a QB or WR there that the Cowboys should have taken instead.
With Leonard Fournette there were many people who said this was the Jags being the Jags again and reaching. The Jags don't get a lot of coverage nationally so it mainly faded quickly. I would not say a draft strategy was good because the Jags did it.
With the selection of Barkley, you had a team that did not have the OL in place and lacked a QB. Would the Giants have been better off drafting Quentin Nelson at #2 and drafting Nick Chubb at #34 instead of Will Hernandez? Sam Bradford, by many, was the top QB in this draft. At that time he was my #2 guy (behind Baker Mayfield), but I did think he needed to be brought along like Manning or Mahomes where he was not looked at as the opening day starter.
Snoooooooooooooozeeee.......
I get saying RB isn't a great use of the #2 pick. But, if he was the best player in that draft, they did just fine. They picked a HoF talent in Barkley. That's not good enough, in light of the other players they could've drafted?
RB is the position with the largest potential delta between "talent" and production because:
1) It is very reliant on the offensive line
2) Largest durability and career longevity concerns
3) Easier to game-plan around stopping the running game than the pass (without the presence of a top flight OL)
4) Threat of the running game or shorter passes is negated when your team is behind
5) Sometimes running game is non viable because of the clock
Patience.
The money he is spending on the FA market has not been a fruitful endeavor. I am am being nice with that. It's been an a disaster. The LW thing is just another in a pattern really dumb pickups.
My only issue about having your offense around a RB is that he is irreplaceable. One hammy or high ankle sprain and then what?. We know, injuries can happen to anyone, but with a guy with that skillset, you can't duplicate.
Barkley, like the other two is the type of player you can build an offense around, and that’s special.
The key as always is to get the stars to align on your roster. The numbers say a RB peaks early and depreciates more quickly. Doesn’t make Barkley a bad pick, just a variable to contend with — that shouldn’t hurt feelings in the discussion.
This is a good post.
Don't agree teams still in need of restructuring should be overpaying at egregious levels (Solder) but understand general theme that it generally happens.
The NY Giant problem still comes back to the draft and what collateral was used on what positions when. Running backs at overall #2 are a stretch for a team in this bad a shape.
I haven't seen anyone lay out a better use of the #2 pick yet. It sounds good on paper speaking in general about positions like QB and Edge being more important, but I don't see any practical examples that were clearly better options in the 2018 draft. Trading down for one of the QBs and a lesser tailback prospect doesn't add up to more than the best player in the draft, imv. You don't draft the "best QB" simply because you need one. You have to believe in that player and his ability to win championships. Rosen wasn't that guy. It's not looking super for Darnold so far.
At some point you have to put your chips down on the actual talent. It's how the bet teams have used the draft and built teams for decades.
Besides true Franchise QBs, no one player can put a franchise on their backs in today's NFL. The best LT, WR, and Edge/OLB of the past 10 years and they have nothing to show for it on a team level.
It takes more than one player to get you to the promise land. Just look at all the future HoF QB's still playing. Rodgers, Brees, Marino, Young, etc..1 SB..
I'm not, as a fan. satisfied because we have a possible HoF player. If it does not lead to WINS, what does it matter?
JFC you’re the worst. We can play this stupid fucking game with any position and player. Ready? Try and keep up.... how many Super Bowls has aaron Donald won? How about JJ Watt? Or everyone’s worldly Qb Lamar jackson? He’s on a well oiled team and well coached, no titles yet. How many titles has kali Mack won? What about the all world guard in Indy? None. I guess those aren’t valuable positions either.
But with a team in need of deep restructuring all over the place, the debate that more longer term value could have been had from B. Chubb or Q. Nelson or trading out of that spot is warranted. This shouldn't at all be about forcing the QB in debating the options here.
Everybody likes to point to Barkley's stats in his rookie year but these Chubb and Nelson above also were clear cut standouts as well. And it wasn't very difficult to see that they were going to be either pre-draft (like Barkley).
I understand the macro argument about picking the RB #2 overall not being optimal positionally. But, if there's no franchise QB available to you at that slot then optimal tends to go out the window unless you can trade down. In that case, it's another wasted exercise unless we know what was on the table.
I only say that bcuz the ORG got bashed for not going up to get Brandon Scherff. Even though he was drafted as a LT and moved to guard, A damn good one at that.
I think, those who don't agree with the RB pick wanted a OL, regardless.
Quote:
Football. Barkley & McCaffrey are 20-44 the past two years with all their big RB stat numbers.
JFC you’re the worst. We can play this stupid fucking game with any position and player. Ready? Try and keep up.... how many Super Bowls has aaron Donald won? How about JJ Watt? Or everyone’s worldly Qb Lamar jackson? He’s on a well oiled team and well coached, no titles yet. How many titles has kali Mack won? What about the all world guard in Indy? None. I guess those aren’t valuable positions either.
Just maybe this has more to do with the teams they play on? Where did this falicy come from your top pick in any draft will magically make you a playoff team? There are 22 players out there. The Giants had the #2 pick for a reason, because their 22 players sucked. Having 1 stud and 21 left improves them, but its a process. You need to improve numerous positions, and Barkley/Jones/Peppers are a great start.
By the way, why not say the same thing about Jones and Engram. We didn't get magically better after their picks either?
And Nelson being a Guard should not be downplayed at all. He is an elite offensive lineman, and has been since Day 1. And my guess is he will be blocking at this level well beyond Barkley running at his top level. Fans of the NY Giants should be very cognizant how bad the offense plays when anybody is poor on the OL...whether that is center, tackle or guard.
Where do some of you fucking morons come up with this shit?
You seem to be confusing average RB's with star RB's. The star RB's are absolutely positively focal points of the offense. Gurley (pre injury), Elliott, CMC, Barkley, etc are each team's best offensive player and when they aren't on the field the backups generally don't replicate production/impact, and the team suffers. They are absolutely their offenses "engines".
And if your grand thought on all this is Barkley hasn't added value then its a conversations you should bow out of.
This sentence is the only part of your post that has merit..."They are NOT the engine of the offense."
Ezekiel Elliott IS the engine that makes the Cowboys offense go, despite all its overall talent on offense. I don't recall many here bashing the huge extension he signed. Give SB the same opportunity to grow.