I can accurately address your concerns one by one.
The defense improved because they wasn't I the field due to the time of possession that controlled by the running game. The stats backs that up. They was also fresh when they was on the field because they wasn't having to play so many snaps. A fresh defense will look better even if the talent is not great.
that is wrong on so many levels. what you just tried to pass off as logic makes no sense. you just said it takes no talent on defense except being fresh. so I guess having McClain, McClain, Mincy, Crawford, spencer had no effect on it. it was all freshness. it takes talent to win. what you just described is an oxymoron. you argue that it takes a talented RB to be a good rushing team. yet only freshness makes a defense better talent be damned. I will let this one go and lets call it a momentary brain fart....
Second point, I sm not a Murray fan. An elite RB could have gained several hundred more yards in combination with this line. Yes , a great running game consist of a great RB and a great line.ni can't beleve that you don't know that the higher rated RBs are rated higher due to talent. If not, they all would be rated in the third round. I hope you are aware they rate players due to talent and ability. The 4th rated RB is simply not as talented and has more holes in his game.
now you just make things up. when I mentioned on multiple responses regarding a higher rated DT or RB vs. lower rated one!!! seriously dude. how old are you?
and your primary point in all of this argument is that a higher rated RB is better than a 4th rated one...yet Murray was the best of his class and he was the fifth rated one. drafted in the 3rd round. Alfred Morris was a 6th round pick. Richardson was the 4th pick of the draft and supposedly a can't miss prospect with so much talent as you are trying to argue. Mark Ingram was suppose to be the second coming of Emmitt. McFadden was the 5th pick and half the cowboys nation wanted to trade up to get him because he was going to take us to the promise land. Isiah Pead was the 3rd rated RB behind Richardson, and Alfred Morris was the 15th rated RB in both of the above.
RBs are easiest position to fill in the NFL. and stats and history proves that higher rated Defensive players do better and impact more in the NFL than lower rated ones (are there lower rated Defensive players that have been impactful? yes, so don't even try).
you do understand what I just described? you do understand these ratings are just opinions and are not scientific? just want to make sure!!!!!
C'mon man your agenda is effecting common sense. There are plenty of first round RBs that have turned out to be worth the pick. Me,Smith ting a bell. You are forgetting all the RBs that are mid-round picks that never play a down, but you never hear about them. You hear about the exceptions that make solid players. Getting an elite talent at any position is better than sorting through positions to draft the best talent left to draft. That is reaching to fill a need. You are acting like no moves have been made to improve the defense. Hardy comes to mind. He don't make you feel better? What are you so set on passing up the better talent at RB just do you can reach for a lower rated player ? It is a reach and that is how busts happen. Drafting the 4th or 5th best defensive player and passing up better talent that will have a bigger impact. The other picks can be used on defensive players that are lower rated and are 2nd and 3rd rated players anyway. The biggest point you are missing is that the team is now a running team. That increases the value of the RB in this offense.
and yes, lots of RBs are worth the first round pick and produced. lots didn't. but even as you like to do and have been so adamant...lets assume the ratings are bible. absolute truth. nothing but science to its core. I still think the 4th or 5th rated DT or CB + the 4th or 5th rated RB will make us more successful than the 2nd rated RB and the 20th rated DT or CB.....make the defense better....they get off the field. give the ball back to offense more often. and we still control the clock!!! see how it works!!!
and that's the whole premise of this argument. you are taking the opposite view. you have an opinion. you have not produced one iota of evidence to back it up.
you want to push your opinion as fact, trying to back it up with a bunch of player rating that are noting but opinions and base your argument on that!!! RB is the easiest position to fill in the NFL.
and we are rushing team? not because of the RB, its because of the OL and commitment to run. but that's ok. ignore those FACTS because it doesn't suit your argument.
and since you like stats, go look thorough all the superbowl winners and tell me if defense doesn't matter.
which brings us back full circle. you think a top rated RB will make this team's rushing game better. I have addressed that several times. YES IT DOES. but if we don't address the defense, its playoff and done. can't smell the superbowl. you don't address the defense and playoffs is all you can hang your hat on. all the past 10 years superbowl winners back up that stat.....if that makes you happy then great.
and one more thing, I am not saying that I want to weaken the running game. I never said that. I just don't think we should spend our first pick on a RB. I never said don't draft one.
so stop spinning. and lets just agree to disagree. all both of us really have are opinions. you are young. you will learn a lot over your years and how football really works. fantasy football has skewed many a young ones to think about stats as the ultimate reason to superbowl success.
