Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RB's drafted in top 5 since 2000 have added...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • RB's drafted in top 5 since 2000 have added...

    NFL posted a Stat last year after Leonard Fournette was drafted number 4. Since 2000 10 RB's have been drafted in the top 5 have and their teams have experienced a plus 4.8 win total the next year. This is highest among all position groups. Add to it the fact that this does not add Jacksonville's win total of plus 7 into the average. Yes, plus 7, with Blake Bortles at QB is pretty remarkable. I know they have an amazing Defense but Fournette brings a physicality and TOP dimension to the team. I also remember Bill Polian talking about what the Giants should do at #2 on NFL Network and he said to draft Barkley and basically reinforced this stat. He basically said drafting a RB in the top 5 on average adds 5 wins to your team the next year and that number is "real".

    We can all argue all day about what the right choice was and should have been but I like to look at the upside. We are going for it now and we are going all in on the next few seasons and I for one am excited. I don't particularly enjoy watching our team get pummeled week in and week out. Here's to hoping we have the best show in NY.

    https://twitter.com/NFLResearch/stat...62027121393664

  • #2
    The Jags were 7-6 in the games that Fournette played in, and 3-0 without him.

    Comment


    • #3
      They also won there first 2 games in the playoffs and had NE on the ropes in the AFC Championship game, with him. I am not saying he is the reason they won all there games, its a team sport, but having a ultra talented RB does not hurt your team

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by MagicManning View Post
        They also won there first 2 games in the playoffs and had NE on the ropes in the AFC Championship game, with him. I am not saying he is the reason they won all there games, its a team sport, but having a ultra talented RB does not hurt your team
        He ran for 3.5 yards per carry in the playoffs.

        I'm not saying that he isn't a good player (he is), but let's be real.

        Comment


        • #5
          Who cares about Year 1? RB is the easiest transition from college to pro, drafts are not about Year 1. Teams that pick in the top 5 suck. The only way to go in the immediate future is up. A plug and play RB may help in Year 1, who is arguing. We could be 4 games better in 2018 than 2017. Is Barkley getting the credit for that if Odell has 1500 yards receiving after being a non factor?

          Im not worried about Barkley in 2018. Iím not worried about Barkley at all. My question has been why take a RB at 2 when you can get a RB outside of round 1.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by BigBlueTradeEli View Post
            Who cares about Year 1? RB is the easiest transition from college to pro, drafts are not about Year 1. Teams that pick in the top 5 suck. The only way to go in the immediate future is up. A plug and play RB may help in Year 1, who is arguing. We could be 4 games better in 2018 than 2017. Is Barkley getting the credit for that if Odell has 1500 yards receiving after being a non factor?

            Im not worried about Barkley in 2018. Iím not worried about Barkley at all. My question has been why take a RB at 2 when you can get a RB outside of round 1.
            Because RBs outside of round 1 didn't have more receiving production in college than Marshall Faulk. Or combine the best measurables of the combine into a 230 lb package. Or display the top notch character Barkley does...I can continue if you want.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by TCHOF View Post

              He ran for 3.5 yards per carry in the playoffs.

              I'm not saying that he isn't a good player (he is), but let's be real.
              I'm not saying he is the greatest RB ever or that he is the sole reason for their success. But they were 3-13 the year before they drafted him and 10-6 after and made it to the AFC Championship game.

              The hard thing to argue is with the numbers. I guess we will have to wait and see if we are above or below the average.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by MagicManning View Post

                I'm not saying he is the greatest RB ever or that he is the sole reason for their success. But they were 3-13 the year before they drafted him and 10-6 after and made it to the AFC Championship game.

                The hard thing to argue is with the numbers. I guess we will have to wait and see if we are above or below the average.
                I hope you are right.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by TCHOF View Post

                  He ran for 3.5 yards per carry in the playoffs.

                  I'm not saying that he isn't a good player (he is), but let's be real.
                  Just looking at ypc is very short sighted.
                  Engage brain before speaking.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by speedman View Post

                    Just looking at ypc is very short sighted.
                    Ok, so tell me specifically what he did in those games that made the difference between winning and losing.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by TCHOF View Post

                      Ok, so tell me specifically what he did in those games that made the difference between winning and losing.
                      I was speaking in general terms. I didnít watch those games so I canít give you specifics. If you watched those games you can tell us if the defense had to worry about the running game or if they could drop 7 players into coverage. If he was effective in blocking to help the passing game or as a receiver out of the backfield.
                      Engage brain before speaking.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by JayMas9 View Post

                        Because RBs outside of round 1 didn't have more receiving production in college than Marshall Faulk. Or combine the best measurables of the combine into a 230 lb package. Or display the top notch character Barkley does...I can continue if you want.
                        What you just posted would be relevant if I was questioning Barkley. I'm not. He may be Leveon Bell or David Johnson in the NFL. He won't be better and both of them were Round 2 picks. My question is why not scout and find a guy like that rather than be lazy and take a non-premium position at # 2? Penn St RBs in and of themselves have terrible track records. Big 10 RBs have terrible track records. There are countless reasons not to take a RB with such a high asset. Shorter careers. Injury prone. Replace-ability.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by MagicManning View Post
                          They also won there first 2 games in the playoffs and had NE on the ropes in the AFC Championship game, with him. I am not saying he is the reason they won all there games, its a team sport, but having a ultra talented RB does not hurt your team
                          dont try to state facts to these people,,they know it all already but at the same time know nothing. its a disgrace some of them are giants fans.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by BigBlueTradeEli View Post

                            What you just posted would be relevant if I was questioning Barkley. I'm not. He may be Leveon Bell or David Johnson in the NFL. He won't be better and both of them were Round 2 picks. My question is why not scout and find a guy like that rather than be lazy and take a non-premium position at # 2? Penn St RBs in and of themselves have terrible track records. Big 10 RBs have terrible track records. There are countless reasons not to take a RB with such a high asset. Shorter careers. Injury prone. Replace-ability.
                            The track records of Penn State and/or Big Ten RB's is a ridiculous criteria for deciding whether or not to take Barkley.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by BigBlueTradeEli View Post

                              What you just posted would be relevant if I was questioning Barkley. I'm not. He may be Leveon Bell or David Johnson in the NFL. He won't be better and both of them were Round 2 picks. My question is why not scout and find a guy like that rather than be lazy and take a non-premium position at # 2? Penn St RBs in and of themselves have terrible track records. Big 10 RBs have terrible track records. There are countless reasons not to take a RB with such a high asset. Shorter careers. Injury prone. Replace-ability.
                              And our track record lately picking later round rb has not worked out. Instead of trying to find a diamond in the rough we finally said screw it let's just bye the darn diamond.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X