Jump to content

Those that don’t want a RB at four


hornbybrown

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, TheeRealDeal said:

Pretty sure we did a good job of that already. If a player is clearly above another you take him regardless of position but Barkley is not clearly above Chubb, Nelson, James or even Ward & Edmunds for me.

Mostly agree.

Barkley clearly is above the RBs you mentioned, but is he so above as to warrant that use of the asset?

The answer is: No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, TheeRealDeal said:

Pretty sure we did a good job of that already. If a player is clearly above another you take him regardless of position but Barkley is not clearly above Chubb, Nelson, James or even Ward & Edmunds for me.

If Barkley were a better inside runner or ran with more authority or had better balance or ran with more of a sense of urgency then maybe I'd consider the idea. I would not hate it if we took him at #4 but he is not my 1st choice. Ronald Jones runs harder inside and turns out more tough yards than Barkley.

its hard to be an inside runner when the interior of his offensive line was complete garbage. Its hard to run with urgency when he played in a zone read offense and the key is to be patient to allow the hole to develop. I strongly believe Barkley is going to be even better in the NFL when he gets put into a legit running offense and he gets the ability to run down hill or get a legit lead blocker in front of him. Hell, Barkley would of looked better if PSU ran a power spread offense attack like tOSU runs but PSU was more of a finesse option attack than anything else. I completely disagree saying he needs to run with better balance. dudes center of gravity was nasty, especially how low he would get and how nasty his jump cut was. You have to have great balance to use the jukes he utilizes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has nothing to do with it. I've watched plenty. Saquan Barkley's 1st instinct is always to bounce it outside as is many many many college RBs. He doesn't like the idea of traffic. There have been plenty of times with more than adequate movement on the line and Barkley still looks to get outside. He doesn't finish runs. He doesn't find small creases. He does always keep his wheels spinning. He does not run with a sense of urgency. All this all time greatest RB prospect talk is such a joke.  He is one of the all time great athletes and probably the greatest athlete at RB I can ever remember but I'd take Peterson, Gurley and Elliott all over him. I think I would give him the edge over Fournette though because Fournette is just the opposite of Barkley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, buno67 said:

its hard to be an inside runner when the interior of his offensive line was complete garbage. Its hard to run with urgency when he played in a zone read offense and the key is to be patient to allow the hole to develop. I strongly believe Barkley is going to be even better in the NFL when he gets put into a legit running offense and he gets the ability to run down hill or get a legit lead blocker in front of him. Hell, Barkley would of looked better if PSU ran a power spread offense attack like tOSU runs but PSU was more of a finesse option attack than anything else. I completely disagree saying he needs to run with better balance. dudes center of gravity was nasty, especially how low he would get and how nasty his jump cut was. You have to have great balance to use the jukes he utilizes. 

All of that ignores the question of the value of drafting Barkley at 4 vs. what we could get trading the pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, bruceb said:

All of that ignores the question of the value of drafting Barkley at 4 vs. what we could get trading the pick.

I dont care about value, I care about getting impact players. I dont want the Browns to trade down, no matter what. Unless its 1-3 spots. IMO Browns 2nd pick has to be Barkley, Chubb, or Ward. If its not, its the same ole browns, trying to be the smartest person in the room but actually out smarted themselves. Dorsey wants the best football players, I cant see him passing on the best front 7 player, the best defensive back, or the best playmaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There may not be much value in the trade down if 3 Qbs are taken. So Barkley may be the BPA. Not saying he is an allpro, but he atleast has a shot to be. Not so sure about any of the other prospects being mentioned. He'd also take pressure off the qb which has been a turnstile. Another quality corner can be had rd 2 just as an rb can. It will be a tough decision especially when factoring in the value of chubb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TheeRealDeal said:

I always love a good challenge.

Junior Seau #5 Overall LB in 1990 Super Bowl in 1994
Willie McGinest #4 Overall DE in 1994 Super Bowl in 1996, 2001, 2003, 2004
Jonathan Ogden #4 Overall OT in 1996 Super Bowl in 2000
Orlando Pace #1 Overall OT in 1997 Super Bowl in 1999
Peter Boulware #4 Overall LB in 1997 Super Bowl in 2000
Charles Woodson #4 Overall CB in 1998 Super Bowl in 2002
Julius Peppers #2 Overall DE in 2002 Super Bowl in 2003
Larry Fitzgerald #3 Overall WR in 2004 Super Bowl in 2009
Von Miller #2 Overall LB in 2011 Super Bowl in 2013, 2015
Lane Johnson #4 Overall OT in 2013 Super Bowl in 2017

Just on the outside of Top 5
Walter Jones #6 Overall OT in 1997 Super Bowl in 2005
Richard Seymour #6 Overall DL in 2001 Super Bowl in 2001, 2003, 2004
Russell Okung #6 Overall OT in 2010 Super Bowl in 2013, 2014
Jake Matthews #6 Overall OT in 2014 Super Bowl in 2016

 

Seems to me like history heavily favors drafting an OT in the Top 5 being that  6 Top 6 offensive lineman have played in 7 Super Bowls. Pass rusher certainly make a strong case as well with Peppers, Seymour, McGinest, Boulware, and Miller pulling in a ridiculous 11 Super Bowls and Junior Seau was no slouch getting after the passer either even though I'd consider him a 100% off the ball linebacker. Only 1 DB and 1 WR on the list as well.

Well I guess this quick little research just provides even more proof than ever that winning football is all about winning the trenches.

and the RBs to do it BTW

Jamal Lewis #5 Overall RB in 2000 Super Bowl in 2000
Reggie Bush #2 Overall RB in 2006 Super Bowl in 2009

 

Bush was a middling factor in that championship team and Lewis had one of the greatest defensive ever to help him as well as probably a Top 8 all time offensive line in front of him.

Wait you are trying to tell me those guys lead their teams to Super Bowls? and they wouldn’t of made it without them? In almost every case except maybe the ravens it was the QB that got them there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a good way to see how the NFL values RBs is to check the franchise tag amounts per position. Only safeties, tight ends, and special teamers make less. It's not this forum that undervalues RBs, it's football itself. Welcome to the new world of passing first football. Barkley may be 10% better than the next RB, but Chubb is 10% more valuable by position, IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want a RB at 4, I want a RB at 1 overall.  If we browns it up, and don't take him, then I still don't want a RB at 4 because the transcendently talented Barkley will be off of the board by then and another team will be riding his coat tails for the next 12 years to likely championships.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DizzyDean said:

I don't want a RB at 4, I want a RB at 1 overall.  If we browns it up, and don't take him, then I still don't want a RB at 4 because the transcendently talented Barkley will be off of the board by then and another team will be riding his coat tails for the next 12 years to likely championships.

I actually think, with the Jets trade, both Barkley and Chubb will be there at 4, which is why this debate is so relavent. Those two or a trade back is likely our choice at 4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...