Sony Michell shows why you need a good RB

[Verdict]

I have not seen anyone say it is not possible to get a good RB outside of the top 10.

Isn't it funny how posters take a point or argument and reframe the argument to be something other than it is? It is as if they either didn't read the post clearly, didn't understand the point, or are just short bus riding simpletons.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

I have not seen anyone say it is not possible to get a good RB outside of the top 10.

Then keep reading, its in one of the Zeke threads

 

[Sydla]

And Philly won the year before with Jay Ajayi, LaGarrett Blount and Corey Clement.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

The Pats do what all coaching staffs are theoretically supposed to do - adjust their gameplan to match their opponent. Michel has a role as the bruiser back when they want to load up and go run heavy. Chargers putting 3 safeties on the field? Bludgeon those guys with 30 carries. The week after that, they'll go shotgun 4 wide and throw it all over the yard. The only constant with Belichick is that he's going to do what you don't want him to do.

Michel's not really a feature back in the chameleon-esque Patriots offense, but he's looking like a really nice piece who can strap up for 25 carries and turn it into 100 yards when the Hoodie deems it necessary.



I just looked it up, and out of the top 10 leading rushers this year, 5 of them were top 10 picks. 8 of them went in the first two rounds.

So if you want an elite rusher, a primo pick is the best way to get him.

What 5 backs were top 10 picks

 

[Idgit]

Elliott is a hell of a player. But we drafted him too high. We’re either going to let him walk or pay a RB too much. The opportunity cost was way too high at 4 overall.

 

[beware_d-ware]

What 5 backs were top 10 picks

Zeke, Barkley, Gurley, McCaffrey, and Adrian Peterson.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

Zeke, Barkley, Gurley, McCaffrey, and Adrian Peterson.

Gurley wasn't top 10

 

[aria]

It didn’t hurt that two of the three teams the OP mentioned were one the top 10 worst defenses against the rush. Regardless, you could pretty much use anything the Patriots do to support an argument whether it’s true or not. Ie (Patriots were ranked as the 20th overall defense. Patriots show why defense isn’t important.)

 

[beware_d-ware]

Gurley wasn't top 10

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_NFL_Draft#Player_selections

 

[Cowboysheelsreds053]

Michel wasn’t a top 4 pick, but he was a first rounder. So he wasn’t some unknown late round pick either.

This, look at Howard for da bears, he was a 4 to 6th rounder and now there is talk about him being traded. That was fast.

 

[robjay04]

You are missing my point. I understand what you're saying, what I'm trying to point out is you can find good running backs outside the top 10. Howard at one point was a top back and was taken i think round 6. I'm ok with Zeke at 4, I'm not arguing that. Some on this board think only great backs are top 10 picks and if we let Zeke go by trade or whatever we won't be able to run the ball cause we aren't picking at 4 again. Thats just silly

Misunderstood

Only season Zeke I am okay with us taking Zeke is the lack of top end talent in the draft. Plus...still to this day, almost 3 years later, I haven’t heard a single confirmed trade down offer we had at 4. I don’t think teams wanted to trade up because of the top end talent.

In a draft with normal top end and first round talent, Zeke goes mid to late 1st.

 

[mattjames2010]

Misunderstood

Only season Zeke I am okay with us taking Zeke is the lack of top end talent in the draft. Plus...still to this day, almost 3 years later, I haven’t heard a single confirmed trade down offer we had at 4. I don’t think teams wanted to trade up because of the top end talent.

In a draft with normal top end and first round talent, Zeke goes mid to late 1st.

The top 5 had Wentz, Goff, Bosa, and Ramsey. The first two picks were teams that jumped us to get ahead. If we wanted to move up, we could have. We were simply complacent with getting Zeke.

 

[robjay04]

The top 5 had Wentz, Goff, Bosa, and Ramsey. The first two picks were teams that jumped us to get ahead. If we wanted to move up, we could have. We were simply complacent with getting Zeke.

That argument is not relevant to the argument for the same reason trading back isn’t. I think it’s a valid complaint but we don’t know all the details.

Maybe the Titans or Browns didn’t want to go to 4. Maybe they found more value in going back further. Maybe they wanted more picks than just dropping to 4 would have.

The argument is...should the cowboys have taken a back with the 4th pick?

Normal draft..no way.

In that particular draft? Even in retrospect, maybe 3 players were worth that pick as far as NFL success and the Cowboys got one of them.

 

[mattjames2010]

That argument is not relevant to the argument for the same reason trading back isn’t. I think it’s a valid complaint but we don’t know all the details.

Maybe the Titans or Browns didn’t want to go to 4. Maybe they found more value in going back further. Maybe they wanted more picks than just dropping to 4 would have.

The argument is...should the cowboys have taken a back with the 4th pick?

Normal draft..no way.

In that particular draft? Even in retrospect, maybe 3 players were worth that pick as far as NFL success and the Cowboys got one of them.

Again, teams far back from us moved up - they gave up the picks needed to get their guy. Once again, we sat put and were complacent because we most likely knew, at that time, Zeke would be on the board.

And this "they didn't want to go to 4" - what? If we offered them our 4th and a next year first round pick, you seriously stating they wouldn't have taken this? Eagles and Rams both offered present and future picks, if we did that, we could have moved up. It's weird to even deny this - we had more value than Eagles and Rams. Heck, even if they moved back, they STILL could have packaged the picks they got to move around still.

And what the hell is a "normal draft"? It's not as though that draft class was depleted with talent at the time - that top 5 was loaded and we were right in the mix, we just decided to stay put and take the least valuable position.

 

[kskboys]

Well he still was able to get things out of backs like White and Burkhead. Brady isn't the best QB of all time but Belichek might be the greatest coach of all time. He takes best player available and makes a gameplan to his players strengths and his opponents weakness.

Belly not only does not take BPA, he pretty much does the opposite.

 

[kskboys]

He's nothing more than a good RB in a system where defenses are looking to stop Brady and the passing game. Put him on most other teams and he's non existent.

Extremely bad assessment.

You should watch this kid. He's a demon, and would be anywhere he played. He fell to the late first due to medical issues, and had some ball security issues.

 

[kskboys]

They beat KC earlier in the year without him. They won because of Brady in the 4th and in overtime. They've also won a lot of games before Michel ever got there, and at times, with no-name or just average RBs. They also haven't taken an RB in the top 5 either or dished out a big contract to one.

If you're looking to NE to defend the RB position, you're looking at the wrong team. NE knows exactly how disposable that position is - it wouldn't surprise me if Michel ends up on the trade block in year 3.

Not true.

I have no idea what point you're trying to make by stating they haven't taken one in the top 5. That doesn't make any sense, and doesn't appear to mean anything.

NE put up w/ Blount for a couple of years because he provided the short yardage RB that Belly knows he needs. NE has gone out of their way to get/keep a guy like that on their team. NE is the perfect team to use as an example. Belly has taken 2 RB's in the first that I remember, along w/ a 3rd rounder. He also picks up RB's in FA all the time.

Belly considers every position besides QB disposable. NE is the extreme opposite of any thinking that the RB position is not important.

 

[kskboys]

It was very surprising that the Pats took ANY RB in the 1st.

The Pats using a late 1st on a player means they really put a high value on that player because many years they trade down out of the 1st.

Basically the Pats taking a RB late 1st is similar to the Browns taking one at #1 overall when you consider the relative importance that each team puts on a individual player.

It wasn't surprising at all. Belly put up w/ knucklehead Blount because he knew he needed him.

 

[kskboys]

Isn't it funny how posters take a point or argument and reframe the argument to be something other than it is? It is as if they either didn't read the post clearly, didn't understand the point, or are just short bus riding simpletons.

Agenda driven drivel.

 

[kskboys]

Gurley wasn't top 10

I truly cannot understand the obsession w/ being a top 10 pick. Why does that matter?