Originally Posted by theogt
I always love this argument, i.e., discrediting a college player's accomplishments for the level of his opponents. What about those other 200 college RBs? They were going against the same college defenses and didn't put up big numbers. Bottom line is: he's the best among his peers. Assuming he won't do the same at a higher level is playing AGAINST the odds.
And as far as Houston trading down to get more picks for linemen, ANY general manager who does this would lose his job. It's fun to theorize about, and it makes you look like a football guy cause you said that O-line matters more than skill positions, BUT it ain't gonna happen. Not unless its a Rivers-Eli thing where they would be getting a roughly equivalent player PLUS more. No such option here.
I don't agree. To assume he will be as dominate and dynamic in the pros isn't going against the odds. There have been many running backs that were dominant in college and did nothing in the pros. I think the odds are that he won't have that same type of success if you base it on the past performances of top backs going to the next level. Or past Heisman trophy winners.
The track record of Heismn winners hasn't been that great when getting to the NFL. Now the track record of Heisman trophy winning running backs from USC has been very good at the NFL level. So he has that going for him. Looking at every thing he has done is what makes him look promising.