ieatcrayonz Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 At least one of the legitimate top 10 picks in every draft turns out sucking. This year Talleywhacker will be picked in the top 10 and will definitely suck horribly so don't use him as your choice as it is too obvious. Which of the other top 10 picks do you think will suck. My picks are Reiff if he goes top 10 or Andrew Luck.
jjmac Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 At least one of the legitimate top 10 picks in every draft turns out sucking. This year Talleywhacker will be picked in the top 10 and will definitely suck horribly so don't use him as your choice as it is too obvious. Which of the other top 10 picks do you think will suck. My picks are Reiff if he goes top 10 or Andrew Luck. Cordy Glenn. I still think he's a G, and whoever would draft him that high would do so with the purpose of trying him at T.
ieatcrayonz Posted April 26, 2012 Author Posted April 26, 2012 Cordy Glenn. I still think he's a G, and whoever would draft him that high would do so with the purpose of trying him at T. He is probably not going in the top 10 though. To be fair, Reiff probably isn't either. I guess I will change my formal pick to Luck. Please select someone other than Glenn.
jjmac Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 He is probably not going in the top 10 though. To be fair, Reiff probably isn't either. I guess I will change my formal pick to Luck. Please select someone other than Glenn. Kalil. He's got the athletic ability, but does he have the attitude?
MikeSpeed Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 Floyd. He'll be nothing more than say 2nd tier receiver. I predict Hill, Jeffery, and Streeter will all have as good a career.
CSBill Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 Andrew Luck - he'll be nothing more than an average NFL QB
peterpan Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 Well suck is a relative term to where the player is drafted isn't it? Ill go with Richardson. He doesn't have the elite speed to warrent a top ten pick, and RBs are chewed up and spit out these days. Peterson and C Johnson as evidence.
Fan in Chicago Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 At least one of the legitimate top 10 picks in every draft turns out sucking. This year Talleywhacker will be picked in the top 10 and will definitely suck horribly so don't use him as your choice as it is too obvious. Which of the other top 10 picks do you think will suck. My picks are Reiff if he goes top 10 or Andrew Luck. I just hope it is not the one the Bills pick.
STLBILLS15 Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 Well suck is a relative term to where the player is drafted isn't it? Ill go with Richardson. He doesn't have the elite speed to warrent a top ten pick, and RBs are chewed up and spit out these days. Peterson and C Johnson as evidence. This argument holds no water. Last year was the only year Peterson rushed for under 1200 yards. Johnson never under 1,000. Richardson is going to be a good player, and you can't just base it off off "potential" injuries.
CosmicBills Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 This argument holds no water. Last year was the only year Peterson rushed for under 1200 yards. Johnson never under 1,000. Richardson is going to be a good player, and you can't just base it off off "potential" injuries. And neither team has made the playoffs or won a Lombardi trophy ... RBs in the first round are a waste no matter how good they are.
STLBILLS15 Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 And neither team has made the playoffs or won a Lombardi trophy ... RBs in the first round are a waste no matter how good they are. E. Smith W. Payton E. Dickerson I think these guys were pretty good first round RB's.
section122 Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 (edited) And neither team has made the playoffs or won a Lombardi trophy ... RBs in the first round are a waste no matter how good they are. except for 2009 where the Titans were the #1 seed and Minny won their division and 2010 when Minny was bountygate away from the superbowl. Your argument has a few holes in it. RB is a part of a team not the whole team, just bc there has been some lack of team success doesn't make it a bad pick. The question is are those teams better with or without those players on their team? The answer is of course better. edit: aww man i was hoping to avoid OCincin.. i mean crayonz post too dammit Edited April 26, 2012 by section122
NickelCity Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 E. Smith W. Payton E. Dickerson I think these guys were pretty good first round RB's. To be fair, strategies have changed considerably since those players were in the league.
STLBILLS15 Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 (edited) To be fair, strategies have changed considerably since those players were in the league. Nickel, youre 100% correct, but I was just responding to the comment presented. But back to the original post, I've seen Coples going in the top 10, so I'm gonna go with him. Edited April 26, 2012 by STLBILLS15
thebandit27 Posted April 26, 2012 Posted April 26, 2012 And neither team has made the playoffs or won a Lombardi trophy ... RBs in the first round are a waste no matter how good they are. Baltimore drafted Jamal Lewis in the 1st and won a Superbowl. Pittsburgh drafted Mendenhall in the 1st and won a Superbowl. Indy drafted Joseph Addai in the 1st and won a Superbowl. So if Superbowls are the only measure of an impact player, there's your counter-argument. On the other hand, if you're judging impact by actual affect on the game, it's pretty silly to deny that guys like Peterson and Johnson have had a massive impact on their teams' performance over the years.
Recommended Posts