Who will get AP, Turner, Lynch?????

[Dibs]

I've had a look through all the teams RB situations. Considering that many teams have just signed up RBs to multi-year mega-million dollar contracts (ala Texans & Jags) I can see only 3 teams in need of starting RBs & another 3 that might be interested.

 

The 3 definitely in need are Bills, Titans & Packers.

 

The 3 maybes are Browns, Panthers & Cowboys.

The Browns just signed Jamal Lewis to a 1yr deal. This gives them the flexibility to draft a QB at the #3 position.

Panthers & 'Boys have Foster & Jones respectively which both might be looking for upgrades.

 

Why not.....

Bucs....Williams was great, then decent....too early to give up on such a high pick.

Vikings....Taylor in 2nd year of big long term deal & produced 1200yds at 4.0 with 6tds.....needs in too many other areas.

Falcons....Led league in rushing...Dunn is very good 1140yds at 4.0 with 4tds....&....Noorwood 633yds at 6.4 with 2tds.....RB by comittee is working well here.

Texans.....just signed Green to 4 year 23mil deal.....not gonna spend on another RB.

 

Basically, if the Browns go for a QB at #3......who gets AP???

Does he fall to #12.......if not, who trades up to get him? It's one thing to say "no way will he drop outside the top 6(10?)" but a team has to consider him worth taking over their other needs.....or worth the expense of trading up to get him. Which teams would justify this?

 

After the draft, if 2 of the 3 teams in need draft 1st round RBs.......who apart from the 3rd team in need will be vying for Turner???

 

Am I mistaken, or is there an absolute glut of RBs in the league at the moment?

[Band of Merriman]

I've had a look through all the teams RB situations. Considering that many teams have just signed up RBs to multi-year mega-million dollar contracts (ala Texans & Jags) I can see only 3 teams in need of starting RBs & another 3 that might be interested.

 

The 3 definitely in need are Bills, Titans & Packers.

 

The 3 maybes are Browns, Panthers & Cowboys.

The Browns just signed Jamal Lewis to a 1yr deal. This gives them the flexibility to draft a QB at the #3 position.

Panthers & 'Boys have Foster & Jones respectively which both might be looking for upgrades.

 

Why not.....

Bucs....Williams was great, then decent....too early to give up on such a high pick.

Vikings....Taylor in 2nd year of big long term deal & produced 1200yds at 4.0 with 6tds.....needs in too many other areas.

Falcons....Led league in rushing...Dunn is very good 1140yds at 4.0 with 4tds....&....Noorwood 633yds at 6.4 with 2tds.....RB by comittee is working well here.

Texans.....just signed Green to 4 year 24mil deal.....not gonna spend on another RB.

 

Basically, if the Browns go for a QB at #3......who gets AP???

Does he fall to #12.......if not, who trades up to get him? It's one thing to say "no way will he drop outside the top 6(10?)" but a team has to consider him worth taking over their other needs.....or worth the expense of trading up to get him. Which teams would justify this?

 

After the draft, if 2 of the 3 teams in need draft 1st round RBs.......who apart from the 3rd team in need will be vying for Turner???

 

Am I mistaken, or is there an absolute glut of RBs in the league at the moment?

Good points, but you can eliminate the Cowboys from consideration. While there may be questions regarding Jones, they have Marion Barber in the fold. He's taken over when they get inside the 20 and he's pushing Jones for the starting job. I actually wouldn't be suprised to see them move Jones and their 1st to try to move up into the 1st round to get a quality corner. Their #3 back (Tyson Thompson) has shown some promise as well.

 

I agree with the rest of what you said. I think the Browns are the key to where AP ends up, unless someone moves up to get him.

[JimBob2232]

I'd have to throw the Giants in there as well. I dont think Droghns is the answer, and Jacobs is not an every down back.

[MartyBall4Buffalo]

The 3 definitely in need are Bills, Titans & Packers.

Agreed.

 

The 3 maybes are Browns, Panthers & Cowboys.

The Browns just signed Jamal Lewis to a 1yr deal. This gives them the flexibility to draft a QB at the #3 position.

Panthers & 'Boys have Foster & Jones respectively which both might be looking for upgrades.

 

Disagree Other the browns these 2 teams dont really need rb's. The Panthers also have 1st rd pick of last year Deangelo Williams who is a good receiver out of the backfield and good runner with tremendous vision and cut back ability with good speed. With the cowboys having Marion Barber even if they were to trade away jones are good at rb. Agree with the browns but I'd replace the cowboys and panthers with the raiders and the cardinals.

 

With the raiders announcing that there will be an open competition between jordan/rhodes/fargas for the #1 job coupled with the reduction in salary of jordan and rhodes not signed for all that much money I wouldnt be shocked to see the raiders take peterson at 1. The Cards might be thinking long term. Edge is up there in years. Although they may want to build their line 1st, rather then go the glam route of a rb. Although Leinart,Boldin,Fitz,Peterson looks awfuly tempting for a franchise who otherwise doesn't get much recognition.

 

Why not.....

Bucs....Williams was great, then decent....too early to give up on such a high pick.

Vikings....Taylor in 2nd year of big long term deal & produced 1200yds at 4.0 with 6tds.....needs in too many other areas.

Falcons....Led league in rushing...Dunn is very good 1140yds at 4.0 with 4tds....&....Noorwood 633yds at 6.4 with 2tds.....RB by comittee is working well here.

Texans.....just signed Green to 4 year 23mil deal.....not gonna spend on another RB.

Agree on these teams except for the falcons. Petrino is changing the offense to more a power based team. I think they'll be drafting a rb this year. I tend to think Petrino will go with his guy Michael Bush in the 3rd. In the meantime Im sure they'll grab a wr early so people have someone else to blame except vick . Peterson would still be tempting for the texans, and after passing on bush/young last year I can only imagine the collective moan of the texan fans if they were to pass on another top 3 prospect who grew up in their neck of the woods.

 

Basically, if the Browns go for a QB at #3......who gets AP???

Does he fall to #12.......if not, who trades up to get him? It's one thing to say "no way will he drop outside the top 6(10?)" but a team has to consider him worth taking over their other needs.....or worth the expense of trading up to get him. Which teams would justify this?

 

Obviously you didn't say this but reading around this board and others I've heard quite a few people go. "Even if peterson gets past the browns someone like the packers would trade up for him and we wouldn't get him anyway". I call bull sh--. I dont get how it makes more sense the packers would trade up instead of the bills. Being at 12 it would take less for us to trade up to 5-6 if peterson falls then it would for green bay. Personaly I can see The Browns taking a qb, and the only legit threats to get peterson from 4-10 imho are The Cardinals and Texans.

 

If Peterson makes it past the cards. I really hope the bills call the redskins sitting at 6 and trade up. Hell with all the talk of trading picks for turner I'd much rather get someone considered to be a real difference maker and possible franchise back. Peterson runs with a tremendous skill set of raw power, blazing speed, great vision, and the ability to make defenders look flat out silly or run over them. True he wasn't used much as a receiver, but I believe this has a lot less to do with his potential in that area as opposed to the offensive system he was in. With Peterson's speed and vision I have little doubt he will also excell as a receiving back in the pros. All in all I do think we'd have to jump to 6 to get Peterson if he gets past the browns.

 

After the draft, if 2 of the 3 teams in need draft 1st round RBs.......who apart from the 3rd team in need will be vying for Turner???

I'm pulling a wildcard team here and going to say the falcons. Arthur Blank has shown no qualms about trading for potential. Peerless Price, and Ashley Lelie, John Abraham all come to mind, and with the picks accquired in the matt schaub trade I can see them forking over more then the titans and bills to get turner. Turner and Jerious Norwood would make a very good 1/2 duo and they can move on from the aging warrick dunn. With the offensive system change I wouldn't bank on dunn continuing his success from recent years.

 

Am I mistaken, or is there an absolute glut of RBs in the league at the moment?

 

You're kind of mistaken. There's a good number of rb's, and yeah you can find rb's later in the draft. I'm not of the mindset that rb is as easy as a position to fill as the "dime a dozen" crowd make it out to be. Stat's for rb's are hardly indictive of the whole story. How does a back control a game. How is the back in different situations. Is the said back a home run threat, a workhorse, change of pace, scat back, goalline back 3rd down back. Very Few backs have a nice combination of all these attributes so while you can find joe blow, The great backs are a rare breed and I really believe Adrian Peterson is the next in line of that class of rare breed.

[Pyrite Gal]

Unfortunately though a lot of the figuring here sounds pretty sound, I think there a lot of individual issues which may make the difference in a team pulling the trigger which I think may well make them hesitate or fail to make the move necessary to get AP. These wildcards are really tough to know for sure but may make all the difference.

 

For example, I think a couple of factors may well be true for the Bills which I THINK should prevent them from making a move up even a couple of spots to get AP:

 

1. Once burned will make them really reluctant-

 

I think the ghost of Willis McGahee will likely make the Bills refuse to trade away resources to move up for AP. Ralph and the Bills almost certainly feel quite burned by taking a chance to get WM, only to find that their risk-taking was rewarded with weirdness by this individual. In fact, they viewed his behavior as so annoying they got rid of him despite his potential. WM's behavior says nothing logically about how another individual like an AP will behave, but in the end, the draft is an art form rather than a science and teams will be motivated by how things feel as well as logic. In this case, i think the feeling is that the Bills will be reluctant to put a lot of reliance on any one individual player, particularly at RB replacing Willis. Trading away more resources to get one person or even picking such a notable RB who fell will likely be too rich for the Bill's blood at this point IMHO.

 

2. There is some overarching strategy here-

 

And I think this strategy for the Bills will push them in directions with something like an RBBC for the RB position. In part this is due to the reason stated above though as difficult as it is to pull off a quality RBBC it will simply allow the Bills not to rely as much on a single individual at this spot. However, also in part the current vogue in the NFL is to make sure you have two reliable RBs (and preferably two good RBs such as a McCalister/Bush) to carry the load at RB. If the Bills were to trade away picks to move up, it both reduces their ability to get as good of another RB which they will need in any case and even further means reducing their ability to make a quality choice at LB where they are looking to replace to very good (at some points in their careers) starters.

 

It is gonna be tough though in making this assessment of need for all teams as I think that at some point AP becomes such an unexpected windfall of a potential top 5 pick a team has to pull the trigger (many of the teams indicated in the original analysis as being set at RB may well simply choose to take AP as a windfall which made it possible for them to run a two stud RB scheme). If AP drops to #12, the Bills can easily take him as a lucky drop to them or in fact, they also might pass on him and let him go to #13 or beyond if their strategy really is to put together an RBBC and the feeling made spread amongst teams that there is some reason related to his injury that they do not know about that explains his drop.

[YOOOOOO]

Peterson to Browns

Turner to Titans

Lynch to Bills

 

 

 

And Lynch will have the best career of the 3

[Mickey]

If Peterson does drop that much, it will be because ao many teams just don't need a RB given their offseason acquisitions. That pushes all the other backs down as well. And that increases the odds of a good back being there for us at 12 in the second round. I think the need at LB is greater than the need at RB and a lot harder to fill. Willis is just too good of a match for us interms of being both, the best player available and filling a need on the roster. The whole RB obsession is getting out of control. Our biggest problem last year, bar none, was the inability to stop the run, not the inability to run. We spend a bundle on lineman to repair what problems we have running the ball. We have added another DT but he is not really a run stopper. The need at MLB is so glaring that unless Jim Brown in his prime is available at 12, we need to take Willis. The alternative is to spend another season getting our butts kicked right up the gut while a highly paid RB spends most of the game on the bench wondering if our defense will ever get a stop.

[JimBob2232]

If Peterson does drop that much, it will be because ao many teams just don't need a RB given their offseason acquisitions. That pushes all the other backs down as well. And that increases the odds of a good back being there for us at 12 in the second round. I think the need at LB is greater than the need at RB and a lot harder to fill. Willis is just too good of a match for us interms of being both, the best player available and filling a need on the roster. The whole RB obsession is getting out of control. Our biggest problem last year, bar none, was the inability to stop the run, not the inability to run. We spend a bundle on lineman to repair what problems we have running the ball. We have added another DT but he is not really a run stopper. The need at MLB is so glaring that unless Jim Brown in his prime is available at 12, we need to take Willis. The alternative is to spend another season getting our butts kicked right up the gut while a highly paid RB spends most of the game on the bench wondering if our defense will ever get a stop.

 

While the ability to stop the run was a major major problem, the running game did us no favors either. They are 1 and 1a in our needs list. However, the upgrade of the OLine should be sufficient in and of itself to help our run game.

[Dibs]

Just a few things.....

Cardinals: I simply cannot see that they could consider AP. Edge was the FA signing of last year. He is a franchise back on a 4 year 30mil deal. 11.5mil was up front. There is no way they could grab another franchise RB.....particularly with all their other needs.

 

Texans tempted? Hell yes.....but they couldn't select AP. Green is a top RB.....6 1000+ years out of 7(injured in 2005). They have just signed him to top money(7mil guaranteed). In the salary cap era, is there any team that has managed 2 franchise backs? I can't think of any.

 

Raiders: I really can't see them select RB with Johnson & 2 QBs available......possible but extraordinarily unlikely.

 

I bow to the wisdom of other posters & (in my mind) remove the Cowboys & Panthers from the 'maybe' list......though I think adding the Falcons seems warranted......& if High Motor is correct, I wouldn't be surprised to see AP in a Falcons uni post draft.

 

"Am I mistaken, or is there an absolute glut of RBs in the league at the moment?"

When I asked this, I refer only to the fact that there seems to be far more teams set at RB than at any time I can remember.

 

Patriots, Jets, Dolphins, Ravens, Bengals, Steelers, Colts, Jaguar, Texans, Chargers, Chiefs, Broncos.

AFC has only 4 teams not set in stone at RB with the Browns & Raiders servicable

 

Eagles, Cowboys, Redskins, Bears, Vikings, Lions, Saints, Panthers, Bucs, Seahawks, Rams, 49ers, Cardinals.

NFC has only 3 teams not set in stone at RB with the Giants serviceable & the Falcons actually good but wanting a change of style.

Edited April 7, 2007 by Dibs

[Kelly the Dog]

Last year, New Orleans had Deuce McAlister and they took a RB #1, which, granted, was Reggie Bush but still.

The Pats had Dillon coming off a big season and took a RB #1.

 

In 2005 The Bears had Thomas Jones and took Benson.

 

In 2004 The Rams had Faulk still going strong and took Steven Jackson

The Bengals had Rudi Johnson in his prime and took Chris Perry.

 

We all know the Bills had Henry and took Willis.

 

You had a good post and good points but there is likely a team very willing to take a RB that already has one that we're not thinking is in the running.

[jri111]

I've had a look through all the teams RB situations. Considering that many teams have just signed up RBs to multi-year mega-million dollar contracts (ala Texans & Jags) I can see only 3 teams in need of starting RBs & another 3 that might be interested.

 

The 3 definitely in need are Bills, Titans & Packers.

 

The 3 maybes are Browns, Panthers & Cowboys.

The Browns just signed Jamal Lewis to a 1yr deal. This gives them the flexibility to draft a QB at the #3 position.

Panthers & 'Boys have Foster & Jones respectively which both might be looking for upgrades.

 

Why not.....

Bucs....Williams was great, then decent....too early to give up on such a high pick.

Vikings....Taylor in 2nd year of big long term deal & produced 1200yds at 4.0 with 6tds.....needs in too many other areas.

Falcons....Led league in rushing...Dunn is very good 1140yds at 4.0 with 4tds....&....Noorwood 633yds at 6.4 with 2tds.....RB by comittee is working well here.

Texans.....just signed Green to 4 year 23mil deal.....not gonna spend on another RB.

 

Basically, if the Browns go for a QB at #3......who gets AP???

Does he fall to #12.......if not, who trades up to get him? It's one thing to say "no way will he drop outside the top 6(10?)" but a team has to consider him worth taking over their other needs.....or worth the expense of trading up to get him. Which teams would justify this?

 

After the draft, if 2 of the 3 teams in need draft 1st round RBs.......who apart from the 3rd team in need will be vying for Turner???

 

Am I mistaken, or is there an absolute glut of RBs in the league at the moment?

 

 

I've been saying this for a while that it's much more likely then people think. I'm not saying that it will happen or that it's likely, but it is possible.

 

I would also disagree about the Cowboys as others have. They have barber primed for the starting role, even if jones is traded.

 

Also don't discount the falcons. Originally I thought the same thing about them. With Dunn and Norwood they have a VERY good 1-2 punch. However a few things have changed this. First, Dunn, though still productive, is getting up there in age. Second, and the most significant, as someone alluded to eariler, they have a new coach and a new offensive system. Petrino has absolutely no allegence to the players on the roster now. He wasn't there for all the years Dunn has ran hard for them, and he didn't just use a 2nd round pick on norwood a few years ago (1 or 2, i forget?). Also he does want to run a more power based offense and Peterson would fit that role well. Both Dunn and Norwood are smaller and quicker and are not the prototypical power backs. I'd be worried if Peterson was still on the Board at 8. That said they do have a lot of other needs too, epecially on defense and Petrno might be able to get his louisville buddy Bush later, so they too could pass on him.

 

 

The fact is, if Cleveland passes on Peterson, he has a decent chance to fall to us. and you're right, WHO is going to trade up to get him?! that "someone" everyone likes to allude to needs to be a real team. and as you and others have pointed out already, there just aren't that many teams in desparate need of a RB to trade away muliple picks to jump up and get him....

[MDH]

If Peterson does drop that much, it will be because ao many teams just don't need a RB given their offseason acquisitions. That pushes all the other backs down as well. And that increases the odds of a good back being there for us at 12 in the second round. I think the need at LB is greater than the need at RB and a lot harder to fill. Willis is just too good of a match for us interms of being both, the best player available and filling a need on the roster. The whole RB obsession is getting out of control. Our biggest problem last year, bar none, was the inability to stop the run, not the inability to run. We spend a bundle on lineman to repair what problems we have running the ball. We have added another DT but he is not really a run stopper. The need at MLB is so glaring that unless Jim Brown in his prime is available at 12, we need to take Willis. The alternative is to spend another season getting our butts kicked right up the gut while a highly paid RB spends most of the game on the bench wondering if our defense will ever get a stop.

 

 

Everybody has this hard on for Willis, and I agree I think he'd be a great pick for the Bills. That being said I think Poz would be just as good for the Bills. The guy was a hell of a LB, is fast, has good latteral movement, is pretty good in coverage and is a tackling machine. As long as Crowell can successfully make the transition to MLB (or the Bills could take someone like Beason in the 2nd round) I think Poz works just as well for this team and gives them the potential to pick up more picks by moving down in the draft to get him (though I'm not really sure if Marv is that interested in trying to milk the draft for all it's worth in terms of trading down). I really wouldn't mind seeing the Bills draft LBs in the first and second rounds as long as there are players there that fit the bill.

 

As for RBs, there are so few teams that need RBs it's going to push some good RBs down in the draft and enable the Bills to pick one up later on day one. I wouldn't mind the Bills waiting until round 3 to draft a RB (like Pittman).

[jri111]

This chance of getting Peterson, along with other teams filling their runningback needs in the remainder of free agency and the draft, is why I would wait to make the deal for Turner (as much as it would pain me for the next month!). I like Turner, but if we got Turner and traded a few picks away for him and then Peterson does slip through the cracks...well that would just not be nice! Granted we could probably look to trade down then to a potential suiter (Like Tennessee) and get some good picks out of the deal, but I would hate to have known that we would have had a chance at Peterson and have passed on him becuase we already made a move at the RB position.

 

It also makes sense to wait even if Peterson is not there. Lynch and Peterson will fill two RB needs for two teams in round 1. Corey Dillion or Chris Brown may still be the answr for White's running mate in Tennessee. There are also a number a good backs in the later rounds too (Irons, Pittman, etc...). All this put together means potential suiters for Turner would diminish greatly and his stock would start falling early in the draft. HOWEVER, if the Bills are going to do this they have to tread carefully... if they wait too long then they will be the only one at the dance without a date and then A.J. Smith will start to gain the upperhand and be able to ask for more.

 

 

I just think waiting makes too much sense. Just see how the first 12 picks play out. If you get Peterson at 12, great! If you get Willis or Poz at 12 then great too! In senario two, then you can go to SD and offer our second. They can't ask for our first, because, well we already used it. Also as the 43rd pick gets closer, SD may see a player they really want that would be available if they had that pick. That also may be incentive to make the deal. This obviously doesn't HAVE to be a 2nd. We could start by offering them a third too or some other kind of package, either way though the analysis is still the same.

 

Although it would pain me to wait now, I think it would be better and smarter for the Bills in the long run. Not to mention, make draft day that much more exciting!

[MDH]

Last year, New Orleans had Deuce McAlister and they took a RB #1, which, granted, was Reggie Bush but still.

The Pats had Dillon coming off a big season and took a RB #1.

 

In 2005 The Bears had Thomas Jones and took Benson.

 

In 2004 The Rams had Faulk still going strong and took Steven Jackson

The Bengals had Rudi Johnson in his prime and took Chris Perry.

 

We all know the Bills had Henry and took Willis.

 

You had a good post and good points but there is likely a team very willing to take a RB that already has one that we're not thinking is in the running.

 

 

The common thread is most of those is that their primary RB was reaching the end of the line. Both Faulk and Dillon were old backs about the hang it up. Deuce was coming off a knee injury and even if he wasn't I'm guessing Bush was just too good of a prospect to pass up.

 

As for Chris Perry, he was drafted before Rudi had really taken over the starting job. The year before they drafted Perry Rudi only started a handful of games. The Bengals had just let Dillon go and were unsure if of what they had in Rudi.

 

The bottom line is I don't think any of those picks was that surprising. Most of those are akin to Houston drafting Peterson, sure they have a guy but he's old and they could break in Peterson slowly.

[Simon]

Peterson to Browns

Turner to Titans

Lynch to Bills

And Lynch will have the best career of the 3

I don't mean to imply that he's not a good player; just that he's not a great player. I watch Cal a few times a year just because I dig the diversity and ingenuity of Tedford's offense so I've seen Lynch play some. I actually like him because he plays his ass off, is versatile, and plays a smart game. I think he's the kind of guy who can carve out a nice little NFL career for himself. But with a juicy #12 pick I don't want a guy who can have a nice little career, I want an explosive player who can make plays that change games and I just don't see that in Lynch. I think he's another guy in a long line of guys from Fresno, Oregon and Cal who were solid players that broke or neared school records because they were playing in that Tedford offense and then only went on to be journeyman backs in the NFL. I think in the next 2-3 years Marshawn Lynch will join the company of guys like Onterrio Smith, Michale Pittman, Maurice Morris, JJ Arrington, Ruben Droughns, Saladin McCulough, etc. All those guys were average players who put up big numbers playing under JeffT but couldn't be gamebreakers when they no longer had the advantage of playing in tons of space against inferior defenders.

Lynch will be a nice addition to somebody's team and and able versatile player if utilized properly, but I want a ProBowlin, playmakin, bigballin, bluechip stud with that pick and Peterson is the only back I've seen in this draft that fits that description.

[Kelly the Dog]

The common thread is most of those is that their primary RB was reaching the end of the line. Both Faulk and Dillon were old backs about the hang it up. Deuce was coming off a knee injury and even if he wasn't I'm guessing Bush was just too good of a prospect to pass up.

 

As for Chris Perry, he was drafted before Rudi had really taken over the starting job. The year before they drafted Perry Rudi only started a handful of games. The Bengals had just let Dillon go and were unsure if of what they had in Rudi.

 

The bottom line is I don't think any of those picks was that surprising. Most of those are akin to Houston drafting Peterson, sure they have a guy but he's old and they could break in Peterson slowly.

I mostly agree but still, if Houston doesn't take Stupor Mario, the Saints don't take a RB #1. I recall a lot of people pretty surprised that the Rams took Jackson #1. The point is really only that don't be surprised if one of two teams not on the most wanted list very much want or would take Peterson.

[MDH]

I don't mean to imply that he's not a good player; just that he's not a great player. I watch Cal a few times a year just because I dig the diversity and ingenuity of Tedford's offense so I've seen Lynch play some. I actually like him because he plays his ass off, is versatile, and plays a smart game. I think he's the kind of guy who can carve out a nice little NFL career for himself. But with a juicy #12 pick I don't want a guy who can have a nice little career, I want an explosive player who can make plays that change games and I just don't see that in Lynch. I think he's another guy in a long line of guys from Fresno, Oregon and Cal who were solid players that broke or neared school records because they were playing in that Tedford offense and then only went on to be journeyman backs in the NFL. I think in the next 2-3 years Marshawn Lynch will join the company of guys like Onterrio Smith, Michale Pittman, Maurice Morris, JJ Arrington, Ruben Droughns, Saladin McCulough, etc. All those guys were average players who put up big numbers playing under JeffT but couldn't be gamebreakers when they no longer had the advantage of playing in tons of space against inferior defenders.

Lynch will be a nice addition to somebody's team and and able versatile player if utilized properly, but I want a ProBowlin, playmakin, bigballin, bluechip stud with that pick and Peterson is the only back I've seen in this draft that fits that description.

 

 

I feel like I've read this somewhere before.

[Git'er Done]

I wouldn't just cross the Cowboys off the list. They have a new coach and Barber wasn't THAT great.

 

The whole RBBC thing seems a bit overworked on the board. It works great when you have McCallister and Bush (2 FIRST ROUNDERS! for all you haters out there) not so good when you have Lamont Jordan and Justin Vargas. If anything the RBBC thing would make me want a first round back even more. It seems to have developed because teams are grooming a successor to their top back, like Dillion to Maroney. It works there but somewhere like Atlanta it just seems to bring out mediocrity in each RB.

[The Dean]

I don't mean to imply that he's not a good player; just that he's not a great player. I watch Cal a few times a year just because I dig the diversity and ingenuity of Tedford's offense so I've seen Lynch play some. I actually like him because he plays his ass off, is versatile, and plays a smart game. I think he's the kind of guy who can carve out a nice little NFL career for himself. But with a juicy #12 pick I don't want a guy who can have a nice little career, I want an explosive player who can make plays that change games and I just don't see that in Lynch. I think he's another guy in a long line of guys from Fresno, Oregon and Cal who were solid players that broke or neared school records because they were playing in that Tedford offense and then only went on to be journeyman backs in the NFL. I think in the next 2-3 years Marshawn Lynch will join the company of guys like Onterrio Smith, Michale Pittman, Maurice Morris, JJ Arrington, Ruben Droughns, Saladin McCulough, etc. All those guys were average players who put up big numbers playing under JeffT but couldn't be gamebreakers when they no longer had the advantage of playing in tons of space against inferior defenders.

Lynch will be a nice addition to somebody's team and and able versatile player if utilized properly, but I want a ProBowlin, playmakin, bigballin, bluechip stud with that pick and Peterson is the only back I've seen in this draft that fits that description.

 

 

OK, since you keep posting this, I must ask, "were any of these guys (bolded) even DISCUSSED as being possible mid-1st round draft picks?" Not to my recollection. and there's a reason, IMO. Lynch is WAY WAY better than that bunch. I think he won't be joining their company in the NFL.

 

I also must ask, "Why are you bringing Tossy McSalad into this?"

[Dibs]

Lynch will be a nice addition to somebody's team and and able versatile player if utilized properly, but I want a ProBowlin, playmakin, bigballin, bluechip stud with that pick and Peterson is the only back I've seen in this draft that fits that description.

I find this school of thought intriguing.

 

So Peterson definitely won't be like Thomas Jones, Ron Dayne, Curtis Enis, Warrick Dunn, Lawrence Phillips, Tim Biakabutuka, Ki-Jana Carter, Garrison Hearst, Tommy Vardell, Blair Thomas, Tim Worley, Sammie Smith, Alonzo Highsmith, or Brent Fullwood......

 

and Lynch definitely wont be like Steven Jackson, Larry Johnson, Deuce McAllister, Shaun Alexander, Eddie George or Robert Smith....not to mention the 2nd+ rounders....ok, just a few......Portis, Davis, Martin, Dillon, etc, etc, etc.

 

I've said this a lot in the past year........The draft position does not mean the draftee will be a better player......it means you have a (theoretically) bigger chance of getting a better player.

 

ProBowlin, playmakin, bigballin, bluechip studs are found after the #12 pick every year....lots of them. This means that every year every single team thinks "Player X is the only player of Y position I've seen in this draft that fits that description."......and every single year they are wrong.