ckparrothead
Premium Member
i understand that but it's not like rb isn't a position that can be filled with a rookie and that rook be very effective...imo it's one of the easiest positions in pro football to fill and contribute in short order...
i'd be more along the lines of getting a back in the 3rd round or so or next year early than with pick #12
but i agree with you ck that spiller is every bit talented enough to justify the pick
i personally wouldn't take spiller over bryant right now at least...that could change if we filled some needs in free agency etc
The problem with this thinking is that C.J. Spiller isn't a position "fill". He's a rare talent. He's not Adrian Peterson, but he is absolutely one of the best backs I've seen coming out.
There's a difference between a guy that just gains yards behind a good offensive line, and a guy that genuinely scares a defense. Spiller is a guy that scares a defense. It isn't easy to find a guy like that.
I probably wouldn't take Spiller over Bryant either, I agree with that...BUT, that also depends on what happens with free agency, doesn't it? I mean if it works out to where there is a new CBA, Ronnie is set to be a free agent, he wants to be the richest back in the NFL, meanwhile because of the CBA some options at WR and LB open up....do you pay Ronnie Brown if that means not being able to make offers to good WRs and LBs in free agency? I would rather fill those needs with guys that could make immediate impacts, free agents, than rookies who will need years of seasoning. Like you said, Spiller could make an IMMEDIATE impact, which means he could be an IMMEDIATE replacement for Ronnie Brown.
I think that could be the smarter move, IF things play out that way with the CBA and available free agents. By doing that you don't lose anything at tailback, and you gain immediate help at the other positions, instead of focusing on a rookie WR or LB who may take years of seasoning to be good.