Neo_Mufc
Full Member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2009
- Messages
- 10,161
Someone has put Josh Jacobs on the trading block. Should I go for him? Gurley is my 2nd choice RB. Murray on bench picked up good points.
Good thread on the (lack of) value of RBs.
Better late than never!
Amazed it took this long.
His decision to trade Hopkins is even worse now he lasted only 4 games this year. Ownership fecked up giving him so much power.
Isn’t that Miami’s pick from the Tunsil trade? You don’t need a QB or that great OT from Oregon after extending Tunsil if that’s any consolation...Crennel will be interim HC for the remainder of the season, hmm.
Might be better to go 0-16 and trade the Lawrence pick to a team for multiple first rounders or something like that
Good thread on the (lack of) value of RBs.
He has a point but I'm not sure why you'd begin making that point with the Browns when the next guy up is Hunt and they're sharing the role anyway.
No it doesn't. This is not on Hunt, Cleveland set a rushing total best without Chubb and Hunt just kept his regular role with only 11 carries. Johnson had 13 and Hilliard had 5, so Johnson (yeah, who?) out-carried and out-rushed Hunt after Chubb went down.Huh? Hunt is an amazing backup RB. Actually shows the value of RBs.
There's very little value to RB's, they are 10 a penny. A great running scheme is far more important. RB's can be picked up off the street.Huh? Hunt is an amazing backup RB. Actually shows the value of RBs.
Probably still be 4-0, tbh.Imagine if the Packers actually drafted a WR in the 1st round. So many good receivers in this past draft class too. Rodgers playing against a banged-up Falcons secondary, but still. His best receivers are Marques Valdes-Scantling and fecking Robert Tonyan.
True, but at least they'd have 1st and 2nd round talent surrounding him for the playoff run-in and the next few years. Now they drafted his back-up (who's been a healthy scratch the first few weeks) and a fecking RB they don't even use and/or need since they have one of the best dual-threat and Redzone backs in the league and a capable back-up for said player.Probably still be 4-0, tbh.
It's flaming obvious. No franchise should EVER draft a RB in the top 10 pick range, I don't care how good that player is. There are far more valuable slots to fill.Are more people beginning to accept that individual RBs really don’t have an awful lot of value?
YepIt's flaming obvious. No franchise should EVER draft a RB in the top 10 pick range, I don't care how good that player is. There are far more valuable slots to fill.
A real head scratcher wasn't it. They have a very small window with Rodgers, they should have traded up for one of the stacked class 1st round receivers. When they did finally trade up I thought it had to be receiver and then the Love pick came in.... Wow.True, but at least they'd have 1st and 2nd round talent surrounding him for the playoff run-in and the next few years. Now they drafted his back-up (who's been a healthy scratch the first few weeks) and a fecking RB they don't even use and/or need since they have one of the best dual-threat and Redzone backs in the league and a capable back-up for said player.
Their draft was mind-boggling on the moment itself and it's still the same right now.
In all honesty, LaFleur seems a good hire and this is a talented Packers team, I'm just going to try to enjoy one of my sports teams doing well for nowTrue, but at least they'd have 1st and 2nd round talent surrounding him for the playoff run-in and the next few years. Now they drafted his back-up (who's been a healthy scratch the first few weeks) and a fecking RB they don't even use and/or need since they have one of the best dual-threat and Redzone backs in the league and a capable back-up for said player.
Their draft was mind-boggling on the moment itself and it's still the same right now.
Even if they hadn't traded up - Higgins, Shenault, Pittman Jr., Mims, Jefferson, Edwards were all available and would've been decent picks too.A real head scratcher wasn't it. They have a very small window with Rodgers, they should have traded up for one of the stacked class 1st round receivers. When they did finally trade up I thought it had to be receiver and then the Love pick came in.... Wow.
Good thread on the (lack of) value of RBs.
No but once you get "your guy", the value over replacement is way higher than with RBs and that's the most important thing to take away from the discussion imo.Some good points made, but you would have to wonder whether the specific teams/situations he cites are simply down to the teams having well executing offenses with productive offensive lines. He also doesn't mention a decent counterpoint to the running back argument, which is that most successful QBs aren't drafted top 10 either.
No but once you get "your guy", the value over replacement is way higher than with RBs and that's the most important thing to take away from the discussion imo.
I was surprised how gritty the Patriots were.
They might have had a chance with a proper QB.
Fitzpatrick still starting next Sunday. I wonder how many Ls it will take before Tua gets his chance.
Imagine if the Packers actually drafted a WR in the 1st round. So many good receivers in this past draft class too. Rodgers playing against a banged-up Falcons secondary, but still. His best receivers are Marques Valdes-Scantling and fecking Robert Tonyan.