Feverdream
Club Member
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2003
- Messages
- 15,479
- Reaction score
- 39,399
If it makes you feel any better, when most people say 'BPA', that stands for... "players that I want".
Could Fins go heavy on D early?
- Thread starter yolli71
- Start date
All-defense mock. Would not be smart, but it'd definitely be fun to see what Flores does with that Front 7.
KingHydra
Active Roster
RBs are "dime a dozen" and yet there are only half a dozen great RBs in the entire NFL.
Can you explain this to me, please.
A couple points.
You are correct, that there are few "elite" RBs, but the question is in "value".
First of all, there are no backs in this draft that are at the level of the top 3 or 4 backs in the league, IMO.
Second of all, how much does a top back contribute above a "platoon" philosophy?
Look at the past 20 years, and tell me how many championships these top backs have accounted for, or in which they played a pivotal role.
Lynch.........and.........?
Let me know the last time Peterson, Ezekiel, Barkley won their team the SB. All RBs drafted in the first round who cost their teams a **** load of cash and won nothing. Should I go on? Because I can.
KingHydra
Active Roster
How many Super Bowls did one the greatest QBs ever to play; Dan Marino win?
It's a team sport.
Your argument is really "when was the last time 1 player won a Superbowl"? Seriously?
Just absurd.
I bet I can name 10 times more SBs won with great RBs than you can name great RBs that haven't won one.
Wanna see how that goes?
phinfan40353
Scout Team
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2008
- Messages
- 2,524
- Reaction score
- 1,702
Additionally, in order to realize the true value of an "elite RB" you need to make him the focal point of your offense.
Since evolution of the forward pass, the league has slowly shifted towards throwing the ball more and more until you arrive to we are now.
Fullbacks have become extinct species. That signaled the eventual demise of the "single back" philosophies.
Once more, even when a team incorporates a "throwback" power offense, their entire offensive scheme grinds to a halt when that "rare" elite RB gets injured.
RBBC's have reduced the RB to two distinct roles: 1) Pass catchers and pass protection and 2) Power running.
Each can shine in a given moment that plays to their strengths, but they are also easily replaced and cheaply.
I like Harris, but if we get Pitts and Smith/Waddle or even an OT is sitting there at 18, I won't even question passing on RB.
Tua needs weapons. I don't care the "who" as long as they make him and us better.
Earth to you who doesn’t understand today’s game
This league is about the QB, the WRs, pass rush and DBs
Of course you need a solid RB but they can be had in the second and third rounds
You draft em every four years and churn em and burn em and run them into the ground
Glad I could spell it out for you
Parsons @ 6 is a very real possibility. Honestly I have no idea what Miami is doing. We all believe Miami needs to go WR @ 6 but we don’t know what they’re thinking. What we do know is they traded back up to 6 because they don’t want to miss out on a blue chip player.
- Joined
- May 27, 2005
- Messages
- 24,329
- Reaction score
- 32,527
For Miami's purposes, I think the team needs a back that wins on short yardage situations at a better than NFL average rate.
Doesn't necessarily need to be a superstar, but someone who keeps the chains moving.
- Joined
- May 27, 2005
- Messages
- 24,329
- Reaction score
- 32,527
I think it could be 2 offense and 2 defense with those top 50 picks. Although, the roster screams more for 3-1 on offense.
Flores needs a pass rusher. I think he roles the dice on Oweh at #18, or a slight trade down.
I also think safety or corner could be picked earlier than expected.
I definitely think pick #6 is for an offensive playmaker.
Flores needs a pass rusher. I think he roles the dice on Oweh at #18, or a slight trade down.
I also think safety or corner could be picked earlier than expected.
I definitely think pick #6 is for an offensive playmaker.
That's what you are going with as an argument? One specific individual player that failed to win a ring, as an argument to an overall positional philosophy?
Weak and lame, apples and kumquats.
That is not the arguement at all. If that's what you are getting from this, I don't think you are understanding the debate.
Ok, let's do the last 20 SBs.
You start. Let's see how that goes indeed. One year wonders are not great backs, by the way. Also, just as an added bonus, lets also take note of the draft positions of the backs on championship teams.
You start. I'll wait........
KingHydra
Active Roster
Whatever you think is best.
If you can show me evidence that backs up your statement, I assure you my mind can be changed.
When someone makes a statement like:
" I bet I can name 10 times more SBs won with great RBs than you can name great RBs that haven't won one.
Wanna see how that goes?"
Then ducks his own assertion, I can only conclude it was either complete hyperbole, or an unresearched (uneducated) position.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion on the importance of the RB position. I have zero problem with that. Here, however, it's not a matter of opinion, rather a matter of record, and facts. I mean we might argue a borderline "great" back here or there, but the overall evidence does not support either your broad assertion, nor your specific statement.
