Eisen: If you feel Ezekiel Elliott is the next La'Veon Bell....

[robjay04]

Mike Mayock stole my answer:


Mayock: I would disagree. I would tell you that they're not going to be drafting at No. 4 again in the future, and they've got a 36-year-old quarterback that has not fininshed a season in three years, and if they think there's a franchise quarterback out there at No. 4 and he's available? To me, that trumps everything.

I can get my next starting running back in free agency. I can sign Lamar Miller or Doug Martin on day one of free agency.

Where's my next starting quarterback?

I agree, take a QB. If Wentz is gone and you don't value Goff that high---take the player that can have the most impact right away.

 

[endersdragon]

I don't see him going before 15, makes trading with the Rams really ideal even if we can only get a second and fourth or so. They get their QB we get Elliott and a few extra players

 

[Stash]

I agree, take a QB. If Wentz is gone and you don't value Goff that high---take the player that can have the most impact right away.

Just my opinion, but if these guys "don't value Goff that high", maybe we need new guys?

Up until about a month ago, Goff was the consensus best quarterback in this draft. A guy the Cowboys didn't have a chance of getting at #4.

"This is Aaron Rodgers. He's the real deal," Texas Longhorns defensive coordinator Vance Bedford said in September. "This young man is exceptional."

And, like Aaron Rodgers before him, he's suddenly getting picked apart and questioned from the time he last played a game until now, based on nothing he's actually done.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/jared-goff-1.html

I defy anyone to take a look at those career numbers and still have the nerve to question this player. He's done nothing but improve each year he's played.

 

[Miller]

Mike Mayock stole my answer:


Mayock: I would disagree. I would tell you that they're not going to be drafting at No. 4 again in the future, and they've got a 36-year-old quarterback that has not fininshed a season in three years, and if they think there's a franchise quarterback out there at No. 4 and he's available? To me, that trumps everything.

I can get my next starting running back in free agency. I can sign Lamar Miller or Doug Martin on day one of free agency.

Where's my next starting quarterback?

Agree. In fact Lamar Miller has been so underutilized/misused compared to the outstanding production he was getting when playing, I'd go that route if the cash wasn't too high. QB it is for me. But if they went D I hope its not Bosa. I just see this guy struggling out of the D players being talked about.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

At 4, I might take a once in a generation type TB. Adrian Peterson, for example.

Elliott isn't that guy. So no, I don't take Elliott at 4. That would be a horrendous waste of resources at 4 IMO.

What if Elliot becomes that AP type player.

 

[robjay04]

Just my opinion, but if these guys "don't value Goff that high", maybe we need new guys?

Up until about a month ago, Goff was the consensus best quarterback in this draft. A guy the Cowboys didn't have a chance of getting at #4.

"This is Aaron Rodgers. He's the real deal," Texas Longhorns defensive coordinator Vance Bedford said in September. "This young man is exceptional."

And, like Aaron Rodgers before him, he's suddenly getting picked apart and questioned from the time he last played a game until now, based on nothing he's actually done.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/jared-goff-1.html

I defy anyone to take a look at those career numbers and still have the nerve to question this player. He's done nothing but improve each year he's played.

You could probably find a scout or college coach that compared Jake Locker, Christian Ponder or Blaine Gabbert to Aaron Rodgers as well. I'm not saying don't take Goff but I don't want the team taking him "just because he's a QB" either. If Goff is your guy, take him. This post is more of a hypothetical post to see everyone's reaction if we thought Elliott was that best player, special back.

 

[Stash]

You could probably find a scout or college coach that compared Jake Locker, Christian Ponder or Blaine Gabbert to Aaron Rodgers as well. I'm not saying don't take Goff but I don't want the team taking him "just because he's a QB" either. If Goff is your guy, take him. This post is more of a hypothetical post to see everyone's reaction if we thought Elliott was that best player, special back.

Hey, no problem. I always like a good conversation starter. You absolutely don't have anything to apologize for on that.

But Goff was 'the guy' coming into this draft. And I find it ridiculous - just like I did with Rodgers - that he's suddenly picked apart and questioned after having played his last game.

And anyone interested can compare Goff's numbers in his three years at Cal with any of the guys you mentioned - Locker, Ponder, or Gabbert for themselves. And I wish they would, because it only serves to reinforce how good this kid actually is.

 

[Sydla]

What if Elliot becomes that AP type player.

He's not.

Peterson is a rare combination of size, speed, agility, etc. He ran a 4.38 at the combine compared to Elliott's time of 4.47. Elliott had a vertical of 32.5 inches, Peterson was at 38.5 inches. He broad jumped nearly a foot more than than Elliott.

Peterson is/was just a better all around athlete than Elliott and backed it up with significnat production in college to prove that he was more than just a combine freak when he got drafted.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Eisen: ...If you think Elliot is a LeVeon Bell type of talent, you think he can bring to you what Bell is bringing to the Steelers, and you've got Romo for two, three, maybe four more years, and you've got Dez Bryant, how do you not pull the trigger on Elliot, and put a star on the side of his helmet, and go to work, see what you can do, and win a championship in the window that you might have?

Eisen must have forgot about how bad our defense is.

 

[Bizwah]

I like the idea of drafting EE. Of course, so much depends on free agency. If we somehow cover our bases with the DL, MLB, and depth at CB, then I don't have a problem with us taking the player that would help our team the most.

I know many think that four is too high for a RB....or that we should trade down. But if the player you want is there....I don't care where I am....you take him. We messed up when we tried to get cute with Max Unger. We had him, traded down, and Seattle took him from us.

 

[Stash]

Eisen must have forgot about how bad our defense is.

I saw JJT make a similar case, citing 2014 as an example of how the team performed better overall with an emphasis on time of possession, controlling the ball, lowering Romo's pass attempts, and keeping the defense off of the field.

It's not a bad case overall, and one I might consider if I got frozen out on both quarterbacks. But, since I feel I can get a quality running back in free agency, I wouldn't use #4 overall on a running back.

 

[Daillest88]

Ezekiel Elliott was a man amongst boys in college , just like Peterson was.. Elliott behind this line would break the rushing record. it would happen. saying that I would trade down and try to get another 2nd round pick than draft Elliott

 

[texbumthelife]

Same thing in every thread. Of course teams are going to be chomping at the bit to give Cowboys picks to move up...

Trading down is an option, but acting like its a matter of fact if a player isn't there is silly.

 

[Gaede]

Totally cool with Zeke at 4. Do you guys remember how good this offense was with an 1800 yard back?

Do you remember how many explosive plays we made on offense last year?

 

[texbumthelife]

Eisen: ...If you think Elliot is a LeVeon Bell type of talent, you think he can bring to you what Bell is bringing to the Steelers, and you've got Romo for two, three, maybe four more years, and you've got Dez Bryant, how do you not pull the trigger on Elliot, and put a star on the side of his helmet, and go to work, see what you can do, and win a championship in the window that you might have?

http://sportsday.***BANNED-URL***/dallas-cowboys/cowboys/2016/02/26/rich-eisen-think-ezekiel-elliott-leveon-bell-type-talent-cowboys-pull-trigger

My first thought is "reach" BUT....if you are not sold on a QB and you don't feel Ramsey or Bosa are special enough to spend a 4th pick on, why not take a guy that has a chance to have the biggest impact in the draft? Of course, trading back to land him is the best option but if that can't be done, it won't be insanely high considering he has been a top 10 pick in a few mocks. There is a real chance that Elliott is the going to be the best offensive player in the draft and the thought of having a La'Veon Bell talent on this offense is quite intriguing.

I am still leaning towards QB but if you want a safe, impact player...it might not be a horrible spot to go if you feel Elliott can be one of the elite backs in the league.

I think Elliott is a better prospect than Bell.

 

[Daillest88]

I think Elliott is a better prospect than Bell.

He does everything!! He block, he can catch, he has excellent vision.. He would help this offense and defense

 

[robjay04]

I think Elliott is a better prospect than Bell.

I don't disagree. Eisen's argument was that if you feel Elliott can bring you what Bell has brought the Steelers, how can you pass? In Bell's one full season, his production was pretty much as elite as you can get. If Elliott can do that, how can you pass on him with Romo's shrinking(if it's not gone)?

That's the argument and I feel it is a good argument at the least.

 

[tyke1doe]

In my mind it's simple.

Ezekial Elliott isn't winning you a championship.

If the QBs are gone off the board or you only like one and can't get that guy, and you don't like Bosa or Jack or Ramsey or Stanley or whomever at 4.............. you trade back. You don't take a TB at 4.

So who is winning us a championship? Ramsey? Bosa? Romo?

Please explain your statement. Thank you.

 

[tyke1doe]

At 4, I might take a once in a generation type TB. Adrian Peterson, for example.

Elliott isn't that guy. So no, I don't take Elliott at 4. That would be a horrendous waste of resources at 4 IMO.

Was Emmitt Smith a once-in-a-generation back?

 

[texbumthelife]

I don't disagree. Eisen's argument was that if you feel Elliott can bring you what Bell has brought the Steelers, how can you pass? In Bell's one full season, his production was pretty much as elite as you can get. If Elliott can do that, how can you pass on him with Romo's shrinking(if it's not gone)?

That's the argument and I feel it is a good argument at the least.

And I was strengthening the argument by saying I think Elliott is even better than Bell