Crazy idea but ... | Page 4 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Crazy idea but ...

Richardson is the type of player that can carry a team...richardson is in amazing shape...he could def be apart of chips offense...chip is going to build his offense around his players anyway...and if all else you can just hand the ball to rich and get three yards everytime...would i trade for him yes...but for a first rounder? No way..

Sent from my DROID Pro using Tapatalk 2
 
Chip Kelly is not going to Cleveland. That wouldn't make any sense. He's using Cleveland as leverage.

Philadelphia is the perfect fit for Chip Kelly. They have the appropriate personnel for his style of play.
 
Dolfansal said:
If Chip Kelly does become the Browns coach like expected, Trent Richardson does not really fit his upbeat speed offense.

Would you trade our 1st to Clev for Richardson??
Click to expand...

Trent Richardson was a top 5 draft pick. Of course I would trade the 12th overall pick for Trent Richardson. Would it ever happen? Absolutely not.

And for the record, Chip kelly will work magic with T-Rich. Brandon Weeden, on the other hand, has absolutely no place in his system. Nor would I want any team of mine to have anything to do with Brandon Weeden.
 
Digital said:
Hey man, hold off on trading that purple drank ... at least until after the weekend, OK?

I wouldn't trade a 1st for a quality RB like Richardson, because in our offense that's a waste and we have a lot of guys who we could get with that pick who would be impact players in our offense.

As for Chris' comment on Ingram, let's first agree that the Saints have a history of not featuring backs in the Payton/Brees era. Reggie Bush was a 3rd down back, but Sproles was even better for the New Orleans offense, while Bush certainly has shown he is worthy of more than being a 3rd down back since he joined Miami under multiple staffs. So, we don't really know what Ingram would be if featured. It's all projections, and those often wildly differ from good evaluators.

Also, many RB's have excelled outside of the top two rounds, so while Daniel Thomas may not be the poster-child for that theory, I'd say Alfred Morris is, and Lamar Miller wasn't a bad pick either. So, there is definitely a large body of evidence supporting NOT spending a 1st rounder on a RB, even if it means you don't get Adrian Peterson, because there's quality to be had later as well.

In our fathers' NFL, it was extremely hard to win without a running game. Today's NFL it's not so hard. The Packers, Patriots, and the Peytons (errrr I mean the Broncos) have all shown that the running game and the RB position has changed. Even the teams with strong RB's mostly do it by committee to reduce the wear and tear on a position that has a very short NFL lifespan. Twenty years ago Frank Gore, Arian Foster and Jamaal Charles would be feature backs, not splitting carriers with change of pace teammates.

Chris provides lots of analysis, and I think it's going overboard expecting that level of analysis in every post. IMHO, he routinely provides sound analysis and over time I think most of us will agree.
Click to expand...

I tentatively agree, but Trent Richardson has Adrian Peterson-like potential. He will be the best back in football within 3 years.
 
JCane said:
Chip Kelly is not going to Cleveland. That wouldn't make any sense. He's using Cleveland as leverage.

Philadelphia is the perfect fit for Chip Kelly. They have the appropriate personnel for his style of play.
Click to expand...

Nice call!
 
ChrisJNelson said:
Nice call!
Click to expand...

More like obvious call IMO. Chip Kelly did the Browns a common courtesy just by giving them the time of day. Buffalo has less of a shot than anyone.

Cleveland doesn't have one player on their roster that jumps off the page as a game changing playmaker. Not even Trent Richardson. He's a nice player, but he'll decline like most every other RB in the league after three seasons.

Well...I take that back. You'll see a gleam in the eyes of Dolphin fans it you start talking about their left tackle. Other than that...not much jumps out at you.

Philadelphia has speed and lots of it at every single skill positions. Mike Vick at QB. McCoy at RB who catches the ball out of the backfield and turns it up field on screens. Maclin & Jackson are pure burners. That's the job for Chip Kelly if he's going to leave Oregon. And that's something else to consider in itself if we begin talking about money and money is more important to Chip than winning at the next level.

Nike money > NFL money
 
You know, usually if "Crazy idea but..." seems like a valid thread title to describe your post, you probably shouldnt type out your thought and post it. Just a word of advice.
 
i'm convinced buffalo doesn't want to win...now watch that sob be a hall of famer :lol:
 
ChrisJNelson said:
First of all, I don't suspect Richardson would be going anywhere.

Secondly, running backs are not worth first-round picks. Ever. Don't do it.
Click to expand...

Dont agree totally I dont think most of them are worth high first round picks but Adrian Peterson has been worth the high pick invested in him.
 
dlockz said:
Dont agree totally I dont think most of them are worth high first round picks but Adrian Peterson has been worth the high pick invested in him.
Click to expand...

Without a quarterback, you go nowhere. Peterson is as good as you can hope for when you draft a running back, but it doesn't mean he's worth a first-round pick. Not when backs are so often products of their line and found elsewhere.

Look at the running backs still alive in the playoffs. Rice second round, Foster undrafted, Ridley second round, Turner fifth round, Green Bay has a bunch of nobodies, Gore second round. Moreno/McGahee first round (though it's not like either carried their team.) Really, the only first-round back still alive in the playoffs worth a damn to his offense is Lynch.

And that's the case every year. Peterson carried his team as much as I've ever seen a running back do, but they were still one-and-done in the playoffs and likely wouldn't have gone much farther than Ponder. If you give me the choice of Peterson or an impact wideout, pass rusher, corner or especially a quarterback, I'll take someone from the latter group any day of the week.
 
ChrisJNelson said:
Without a quarterback, you go nowhere. Peterson is as good as you can hope for when you draft a running back, but it doesn't mean he's worth a first-round pick. Not when backs are so often products of their line and found elsewhere.

Look at the running backs still alive in the playoffs. Rice second round, Foster undrafted, Ridley second round, Turner fifth round, Green Bay has a bunch of nobodies, Gore second round. Moreno/McGahee first round (though it's not like either carried their team.) Really, the only first-round back still alive in the playoffs worth a damn to his offense is Lynch.

And that's the case every year. Peterson carried his team as much as I've ever seen a running back do, but they were still one-and-done in the playoffs and likely wouldn't have gone much farther than Ponder. If you give me the choice of Peterson or an impact wideout, pass rusher, corner or especially a quarterback, I'll take someone from the latter group any day of the week.
Click to expand...

Using the carrying a team to a SB logic, no players except QBs should go in round 1.
 
tylerdolphin said:
Using the carrying a team to a SB logic, no players except QBs should go in round 1.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that. But I am saying that running backs really aren't worth high picks because they are too interchangeable and can't carry a team on their own as much as a quarterback can. And even before running back, there are a lot more impactful positions. I'd take an elite pass rusher or shutdown corner over an elite running back 100 times out of 100.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom