Obviously, Gurley went way before we could have taken him. With that said, if the draft pretty much goes the same way, but Gurley fell to us, would you have taken him over Byron Jones?
Obviously, Gurley went way before we could have taken him. With that said, if the draft pretty much goes the same way, but Gurley fell to us, would you have taken him over Byron Jones?
Is this a trick question?
No? Before the draft, I don't think anyone had Gurley as a top 10 pick.
Well, he was considered a top 10 talent. I don't think there's any question we would have taken Gurley, even with the injury. Perhaps a better hypothetical would be, would we have taken him if we drafted where the Rams did?
Gurley not because I have a preference of rb over cb/safety but because Gurley would have been in a higher tier than Jones as a prospect.
I was pretty surprised that St. Louis went with him at #10.Top 10 talent with a blown ACL who might not be available for the beginning of the season. I think it would have been a slight gamble at 27th, but a huge gamble spending a top 10 pick on ANY running back, especially a top 10.
No? Before the draft, I don't think anyone had Gurley as a top 10 pick.