Barkley at #1?

[Tour2ma]

Long and winding road to get thru this maze of a thread... including a Goethe quote... very classy.... and here's the capsule summary.

• If you truly, believe you can throw a rug over the top of this QB class, then you can take Barkley at #1.
• However, if you see one QB stand out, apart from the others, then you cannot do anything but take that QB at #1... and I do not care which QB anyone thinks is that standout... even if it's cal's bag of rocks... you draft that QB... period.

Why? Because the right QB is foundational while the best RB is not.

POP QUIZ: Who was the Eagles leading back in 2017? Who was NYG's leading RB in each of their last two SB seasons?

More often than not the the top RB in a class is a finishing touch. Zeke was in Dallas after they found Dak... Gurley was with the Rams after Foles was acquired to solve their QB issues... so too might Barkley be for a team like NYG... but I doubt it.

Why? So far none of these final pieces have turned into SB gold, but it's early.

Meanwhile SB s have been won with the likes of Brandon Jacobs and Ahmad Bradshaw the leading rushers on the last two NYG championship teams. A fact I do not believe will be lost on NYG this time either should, please God, we pass on Barkley at #1 overall.

 

Oh... and that Eagles RB? LaGarette Blount... same guy who was with the Pats while they were winning the prior SB.

[Tour2ma]

And in case anyone was wondering... I see a clear standout QB in this draft... shocker... and yes, it is still Josh Rosen, but that's old news.

What's new and should be a lot more fun... as it'll blow Camp Saquon minds... is speculating on how far might he fall. Here's a scenario...

1. We go QB at #1 because Dorsey sees his guy.
2. NYG, who neither needs a QB right now nor is a RB away from a SB, trades down to a QB hungry team... Broncos, Jets or Bills, but they want to stay as high as possible to land their Stud OG so it's Denver who promptly takes their new QB.
3. Colts... need a lot of help especially on D. I think they trade back for the next QB hungry team and that team is BUF. With two QBs gone if their guy is still on the board, they go and I think win the bidding war for the pick.
4. Back to us... Saquon here? Maybe, but again we are not a RB away. Problem is the QB market is drying up and with it the trade value of our #4, but the Giants via the trade down with Denver are still between us and the Jets. Might be enough for the Jets to move up and give us their 2nd rounder.... and they take the last of the top four QBs.
5. NYG... I don't think they can resist Quentin Nelson here and may well dip back into the OG pool with their 2nd Round pick.
6. Us... again... Saquon here? Nah... no fun in that, but we just might get a call or two from teams that believe they are a RB away. Who might these teams be?

• #7 overall, Tampa Bay. They are the top team I can see that might believe they are a RB away. Moving up one spot would be a defensive move, but hell... we've done that.
• The Raiders at #10 are a candidate. While they still have BeastMode, those results were mixed last season.
• Beyond that I think it becomes a free for all between GB (#14), Ravens (#16), Seahawks (#18) and Lions (#20) to see who can pull together the best move up package.

GB would be a great fit for Barkley. Can't see dealing in the Division. Hawks and Lions are down there quite a ways.

Far fetched? Maybe, but when runs on a position start far-fetched things can happen... especially when QBs are involved. RBs? Maybe in round 2...

[SD_Tom]

1 hour ago, Gunz41 said:

Even though I have said this before, I will again. I dont dislike Barkley. I also don't think he will be a bust. What I do dislike is the constant overhyping of him. And then countless pages upon pages of him, and the refusal of any Superman fan to discuss 1 bit of his question marks. 

He is NOT more important than the right QB, even if he is close to ask great as we hear daily. Running backs just don't have the longevity of others in the league either.

 

They've been in desperate need of a QB for 20+ years. They need a franchise guy for once. Blown countless chances with their stupid trade downs and 2nd/3rd picks. 

You sucked last season to get top picks, so get some top talent for once!

 

[SD_Tom]

1 hour ago, Tour2ma said:

Long and winding road to get thru this maze of a thread... including a Goethe quote... very classy.... and here's the capsule summary.

• If you truly, believe you can throw a rug over the top of this QB class, then you can take Barkley at #1.
• However, if you see one QB stand out, apart from the others, then you cannot do anything but take that QB at #1... and I do not care which QB anyone thinks is that standout... even if it's cal's bag of rocks... you draft that QB... period.

Why? Because the right QB is foundational while the best RB is not.

POP QUIZ: Who was the Eagles leading back in 2017? Who was NYG's leading RB in each of their last two SB seasons?

More often than not the the top RB in a class is a finishing touch. Zeke was in Dallas after they found Dak... Gurley was with the Rams after Foles was acquired to solve their QB issues... so too might Barkley be for a team like NYG... but I doubt it.

Why? So far none of these final pieces have turned into SB gold, but it's early.

Meanwhile SB s have been won with the likes of Brandon Jacobs and Ahmad Bradshaw the leading rushers on the last two NYG championship teams. A fact I do not believe will be lost on NYG this time either should, please God, we pass on Barkley at #1 overall.

 

Oh... and that Eagles RB? LaGarette Blount... same guy who was with the Pats while they were winning the prior SB.

From an ex Giants scout. 

“Obviously you get some of these guys with the spread systems,” Gettleman said, via Newsday. “There are six things that a lot of these kids have never done that, to me, is Quarterback 101 through 106.”

Gettleman broke these traits down to Rock as follows: 1. Making a huddle call, 2. Identifying a mike linebacker, 3. Making a protection call, 4. Taking a snap from center, 5. Calling an audible and 6. Throwing a hot route.

The Giants are rebuilding the roster FAST under new GM Dave Gettleman, and we are just weeks away from free agency and the draft, take a second to sign up for our FREE Giants newsletter!

While his fellow 2018 classmates Baker Mayfield and Sam Darnold played in a spread offense, Rosen played in what is much closer to a pro-style offense at UCLA, specifically during the 2017 season with Jed Fisch. Rosen took snaps under center, thrives as a play-action passer, and checked off all six of Gettleman's boxes. For comparison's sake, Mayfield took almost every one of his collegiate snaps in the shotgun.

When it comes to the mental side of the game, Rosen stands out among the rest of his class. He reportedly learned the UCLA playbook within three days of arriving as a freshman and this helped him started his first game ever as a true freshman. NFL Network analyst David Carr talked about how Rosen hasn't been challenged yet by an offensive coordinator and is so advanced from the mental standpoint that he may get bored without the right coach to challenge him. Carr also ranked Rosen as his top quarterback from this draft class for teams to pursue this offseason and compared him to Eli Manning.

"He's the most pro-ready quarterback in this draft class, and I believe Rosen could win a starting job in a lot of places due to his football IQ and physical ability," Carr said, via NFL.com. "I've had conversations with him, and he reminds me of Eli Manning, who I've said countless times is the smartest player I've ever been around. Having that same type of vibe, you get the sense he's almost bored. Some evaluators will see this trait as arrogance, but the teams that aren't intimidated by his intellect will challenge him. Give Rosen a playbook and a few months, and he'll bring it to life."

[boo fagley]

11 hours ago, bjh2130 said:

I fail to see what you are saying. From what I gathered you were saying we should draft Barkley because these running backs were picked in the top 5, excluding Giovanni who was picked 37th, and have all made the playoffs. Is that not what you were going for?

Yup, somebody said no sane team would take a RB in the top 5 picks and probably the top 10.picks.

Other top 5 guys: Barry Sanders, Marshall Faulk, Garrison Hearst, Bo Jackson, Eric Dickerson, Earl Campbell. If Barkley is the next Marshall Faulk do you not take him? Hell yes.

[boo fagley]

All this talk about winning Super Bowls with Brandon Jacobs and Blount is nice.

All you need is a Tom Brady or Eli Manning at QB and any scrap heap RB will do. No problem finding QBs like those guys. The Browns have Taylor and are in win now mode with the way Dorsey is wheeling and dealing. The Colts will take Barkley at 3 if the Browns pass on him. 

[boo fagley]

19 hours ago, The Gipper said:

Franco Harris,    Larry Csonka,  Roger Craig,  Terrell Davis,  Mark Van Eaghan

Gold Jacket - Bradshaw, Griese, Montana, Elway, Stabler.

[TexasAg1969]

So is taking Taylor throwing a monkey wrench into all this draft talk on the Browns? Is he the real franchise QB?

Do we now start with Chubb and see if Barkley remains when QB hungry teams trade into 2 & 3? 

Or add Fitz if Barkley is gone?

Inquiring minds want to know!

[Flugel]

7 hours ago, Tour2ma said:

Just reading through this thread. Did not want to lose this bit...

Flugs... in all sincerity... Why should we care about this? What is the value of a 3-down RB when no RB plays more than 2/3rds of the snaps in a game anymore?

 

All this is kind of moot now now that we've added Carlos Hyde to team up with Duke.  I'll share my line of thinking though; because others have the same train of thought you do.

A guy like LeVean Bell gets his team over 70 receptions and over 1000 yards rushing in each of the last few seasons.  I would find that a tremendous value to an offense and his QB and OC (Haley) in particular.  Best of all, it doesn't tip off  tendency due to who is in.  Further back, there were guys like Marshall Faulk and Roger Craig that could contribute 1000 yards receiving with the their 1000 yards rushing.  It made their QBs very comfortable and efficient.  Those bring up the completion percentages and move the sticks. 

When I see a 230 lb back with breakaway speed that helps the passing game especially when his line wasn't exactly Ohio State up front - I see a lot of value I don't see in others.  54 receptions in 13 games is projects him in the 60s over 16 games.  I'm thinking if this guy had the line OSU had or even the one Dallas had in Elliott's rookie year - he'd be saying feed me those hand offs. He didn't so he got to put another dimension on film for an NFL era that should welcome a guy that can do all roles well.

I guess if 1 QB emerged as a clear cut, consensus #1 - I would have never found a reason to think there's only 2 picks between us and us. I have 3 QB faves at this time with me feeling Mayfield is the safest while Rosen moved ahead of Darnold at least this week.

 

 

[TexasAg1969]

Flugs-one of the reasons I like Michel from Bama is those hands out of the backfield. We have to seriously consider trading up into the 1st to get him if Barkley goes elsewhere.

[bjh2130]

2 hours ago, boo fagley said:

Yup, somebody said no sane team would take a RB in the top 5 picks and probably the top 10.picks.

Other top 5 guys: Barry Sanders, Marshall Faulk, Garrison Hearst, Bo Jackson, Eric Dickerson, Earl Campbell. If Barkley is the next Marshall Faulk do you not take him? Hell yes.

Then what I was asking you to do of listing other running backs that were taken in the top 5 wasn't out of context. You can't just list the playoff teams that selected running backs and even have one on there was taken in the second round. If he is he next Curtis enis kijana carter Trent Richardson do you take him? Hell no

[boo fagley]

22 minutes ago, bjh2130 said:

Then what I was asking you to do of listing other running backs that were taken in the top 5 wasn't out of context. You can't just list the playoff teams that selected running backs and even have one on there was taken in the second round. If he is he next Curtis enis kijana carter Trent Richardson do you take him? Hell no

Bad GMs took those guys.

Would you take Terrell Davis with the 1 pick tomorrow? 

[Gunz41]

53 minutes ago, boo fagley said:

Bad GMs took those guys.

Would you take Terrell Davis with the 1 pick tomorrow? 

Of course not, he's way too old 😀😁😂

[mjp28]

33 minutes ago, Gunz41 said:

Of course not, he's way too old 😀😁😂

What? A 45 year old running back isn't that bad is it? 

[mjp28]

Back to old Barkley v2.0 or is it v3.0 here?

......342 replies  4,197 views  and nobody's picked him yet!

[bjh2130]

2 hours ago, boo fagley said:

Bad GMs took those guys.

Would you take Terrell Davis with the 1 pick tomorrow? 

So you are saying take him I'm saying pass we'll see who the bad gm is if the browns take him. If our team was well built and it was a luxury pick id take him. We have to many holes to take a luxury pick. The cowboys taking zeke was luxury. They already had their line their an their wrs their d line their linebackers. Albeit their qb got injured and a rookie 4th rounder came in. Same goes for the jags. They didn't have holes. Fournette was a luxury pick because they had no pressing needs. The browns have holes.

[The Cysko Kid]

5 hours ago, boo fagley said:

All this talk about winning Super Bowls with Brandon Jacobs and Blount is nice.

All you need is a Tom Brady or Eli Manning at QB and any scrap heap RB will do. No problem finding QBs like those guys. The Browns have Taylor and are in win now mode with the way Dorsey is wheeling and dealing. The Colts will take Barkley at 3 if the Browns pass on him. 

I don't think the browns are in "win now" mode. I think they're in "not be the worst team in the NFL now" mode 

[The Gipper]

16 hours ago, pappanorm said:

Barkley is more "tried and true" than any of the QB's in the draft.  I would go with this exceptional back and watch him & Duke Johnson catch short passes out of the backfield... There will still be at least 3 quality developmental QB's at #4.

I am not sure I buy that statement.

For instance:    Compare what they did vs. Ohio State:

Barkley....21 carries for 44 yards.....but he did have that kick return.

Also....Darnold made to look below ordinary vs.  OSU defense.

But then.....look what Mayfield did to them.  

Not that I am arguing Mayfield over Barkley or Darnold......all I am saying is that the OSU defense came about as close to an NFL defense that you can for a college team (maybe Alabama)........and compare what these 3 players did against theml

[The Gipper]

16 hours ago, pappanorm said:

The Browns have been a "field goal" team for quite a while. They get near the red zone then end up settling for the field goal. I'm sick of it. It is time to seriously address the offense. #1 Barkley RB (Penn State).

That is primarily because of the QBs.....NOT because they did not have an RB that could run the ball in.

[The Gipper]

6 hours ago, boo fagley said:

All this talk about winning Super Bowls with Brandon Jacobs and Blount is nice.

All you need is a Tom Brady or Eli Manning at QB and any scrap heap RB will do. No problem finding QBs like those guys. The Browns have Taylor and are in win now mode with the way Dorsey is wheeling and dealing. The Colts will take Barkley at 3 if the Browns pass on him. 

Well....the plan is to get the next Tom Brady or Eli Manning.......and then we can utilize some scrap RB....if you want to call them that.   Hyde,   a 2d rounder.

Yep....maybe you were being facetious....but I think you hit on the plan exactly.

[bjh2130]

4 hours ago, boo fagley said:

Bad GMs took those guys.

Would you take Terrell Davis with the 1 pick tomorrow? 

Also would I take td with the number 1 pick tomorrow knowing what I know about his career. Yes more than likely but I would also take ed reed tom Brady and others knowing what I know about their careers. Would I take td coming out of college with the number one not knowing what his NFL career would be. No I wouldn't.

I would much rather take td in the 6th round where he was selected because good running backs are littered throughout draft classes.

That just proves my point.

[Tour2ma]

On 3/16/2018 at 1:43 AM, SD_Tom said:

From an ex Giants scout. 

That's one smart scout...

On 3/16/2018 at 5:53 AM, boo fagley said:

All this talk about winning Super Bowls with Brandon Jacobs and Blount is nice.

All you need is a Tom Brady or Eli Manning at QB and any scrap heap RB will do. No problem finding QBs like those guys. The Browns have Taylor and are in win now mode with the way Dorsey is wheeling and dealing. The Colts will take Barkley at 3 if the Browns pass on him. 

So E. Manning = T. Brady = N. Foles = Taylor??? lol...

Colts? Maybe as they have their QB... or at least hope they still do... but they have a lot of other needs as well. Other needs where this Draft is nowhere as deep as it is at RB.

 

 

[Tour2ma]

8 hours ago, boo fagley said:

Gold Jacket - Bradshaw, Griese, Montana, Elway, Stabler.

First... Van Eagan???

Second... weren't all those RBs added after their HoF QB counterpart was established?

Third... In anticipation of the answer to my second question being "yes"... thank you for proving my point.

[hoorta]

13 minutes ago, Tour2ma said:

So E. Manning = T. Brady = N. Foles = Taylor??? lol...

Colts? Maybe as they have their QB... or at least hope they still do... but they have a lot of other needs as well. Other needs where this Draft is owhere as deep as it is at RB.

 

FWIW- Word from Indy is they are willing to trade down- for the right price...   

[Tour2ma]

22 minutes ago, hoorta said:

FWIW- Word from Indy is they are willing to trade down- for the right price...   

Which is in part why I had them do so in my scenario....

[The Gipper]

52 minutes ago, Tour2ma said:

First... Van Eagan???

Second... weren't all those RBs added after their HoF QB counterpart was established?

Third... In anticipation of the answer to my second question being "yes"... thank you for proving my point.

Well....Van Eaghan WAS the starting RB on two SB winning Raider teams....for what that's worth.  And that was what we were talking about. 

As for who was established first?   Probably the QBs.  Though not necessarily.  While Bradshaw was drafted in 1970...and Franco Harris in 1972....Harris may in fact been "established" as a quality performer before Bradshaw...who struggled for 2-3 years. 

[The Gipper]

56 minutes ago, hoorta said:

FWIW- Word from Indy is they are willing to trade down- for the right price...   

What is that price?  And how far down would they go.   And who would trade up?  And for what?  A QB?   Barkley? Chubb?

[hoorta]

3 hours ago, The Gipper said:

What is that price?  And how far down would they go.   And who would trade up?  And for what?  A QB?   Barkley? Chubb?

TBD Gip, no idea at this point how low, and it depends on who is doing the trading up what the asking price is going to be. Let's see. Broncos, Jets, and Bills are the likely trade up partners. Nobody is trading up for a position player- it's going to be for a quarterback. Draft value chart says the Broncos would only need to give up a second, and maybe a 4th. Jets a little more. The Bills would have to give up at least both first rounders, and one of their second round picks or a future first. 

IMHO Arizona flat out won't have the ammo to make a move to #3, short of trading Peterson, their first and second, and a future first.  

[Gunz41]

10 hours ago, boo fagley said:

Bad GMs took those guys.

Would you take Terrell Davis with the 1 pick tomorrow? 

Aside from my joke because he has been retired and is old now, doesn't that kind of prove people's point on RB? The guy you used as your example (TD), was a 6th round draft pick. So that multiple time Super Bowl champion and HOF didn't go in 1st-5th.

He also ran behind one heck of a line, and had one of the best QBs of ALL TIME.

I know where you were going with this. But TERRIBLE example for your argument.

[Orion]

The Colts may very well trade down a bit as they have multiple needs and someone may want to jump up for a QB (as someone does that almost every year).  We, of course, have multiple needs...but we have multiple 2nd round picks.

I don't understand how anyone can think that we're drafting a RB at #1 overall....but then, I can't figure out flat-earther's either.