Reid will get production out of any running back. He's also likely one of maybe 3 or 4 coaches who could do that. He might be the ONLY one.
If you're another team, you do not have that luxury. If you don't have Andy Reid, you need better players. No, Reid doesn't need Saquon Barkley. He doesn't "need" Tyreek Hill. But look what happens when you have Hill and Hunt? Why the hell wouldn't you want that?
Saying that you just would never take a RB at 2nd overall is just limited thinking. Taking Fisher over Barkley is fucking ridiculous. [Reply]
When you get wrapped up too much into positional value, sometimes you end up making buttfucking stupid decisions like drafting a Kolton Miller or a Vita Vea over Derwin James. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BryanBusby:
When you get wrapped up too much into positional value, sometimes you end up making butt****ing stupid decisions like drafting a Kolton Miller or a Vita Vea over Derwin James.
Running back is for sure the only spot I’d argue about
Those other ones are dumb, especially Vea. Never really understood what he was supposed to be projection wise? A nt?
Atleast with Miller you hope he could be a good tackle but it’s Jon Gruden thinking so who knows [Reply]
Originally Posted by BryanBusby:
Idiotic. One coach used a first rounder on a RB a year ago and won the Super Bowl largely because of that RB.
That’s where I really disagree with some of these guys.
No RB in the top 5 as a general rule? Fine. I won’t say I’d never do it, but I probably wouldn’t. Even if the Giants didn’t take Darnold, Chubb would’ve been a better option.
But I see absolutely nothing wrong with taking a RB late in the 1st. [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
That’s where I really disagree with some of these guys.
No RB in the top 5 as a general rule? Fine. I won’t say I’d never do it, but I probably wouldn’t. Even if the Giants didn’t take Darnold, Chubb would’ve been a better option.
But I see absolutely nothing wrong with taking a RB late in the 1st.
Taking anyone but Sam Darnold was the wrong move for the Giants. Hands down.
They were stupid enough to think they could build around Eli Manning and win. :-)
Originally Posted by O.city:
And the team before picked one up mid season for a late round pick
I guess you feel that you've got a point here when you really don't. [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
That’s where I really disagree with some of these guys.
No RB in the top 5 as a general rule? Fine. I won’t say I’d never do it, but I probably wouldn’t. Even if the Giants didn’t take Darnold, Chubb would’ve been a better option.
But I see absolutely nothing wrong with taking a RB late in the 1st.
Atleast in the late first you aren’t having to pay them that much so that’s one benefit
I still wouldnt just because of the five years of cheap labor I could get from another position
Like the Chris Jones situation we’d have been better off taking him instead of trading back [Reply]
The Chiefs have gotten and will continue to get more long term value from Fisher who is not a great player than the Giants will from Barkley. Fisher is 28 now and can still play a lot more years. RBs are rarely still effective at 28. A RB in the top half of the 1st round makes little sense. [Reply]
The Chiefs have gotten and will continue to get more long term value from Fisher who is not a great player than the Giants will from Barkley. Fisher is 28 now and can still play a lot more years. RBs are rarely still effective at 28. A RB in the top half of the 1st round makes little sense.
Fisher had a horrible rookie year and got a holding call against an old James Harrison that cost us the Steelers playoff game. How have the Chiefs gotten more 'long term value' out of Eric Fisher when Saquon has only played one season? Unlike Fisher, Saquon had a great rookie year.
Such homers on here w the Eric Fisher over Saquon crap. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BryanBusby:
A lot of this basically stems from the drought of elite caliber backs since 2000 and it has been twisted into "they have no value"
The Fisher over Barkley thing is pretty funny though. I'm sure the Cardinals still love that they took Levi Brown over Adrian Peterson.
Barkley wouldn’t even be on the team at this point, and if he was he’d probably be breaking down and overpaid.
Of course all things even you take a Barkley over a Fisher, but I’d rather have Fisher right now than a overpaid aging RB. That’s the point. [Reply]
