I heard next years draft has great RB's. Lots of them. Grab one then.
We don't need to try to get fancy or move around to draft Elliot.
The thing I like most about Elliot is we get a ton of draft picks if we trade down to get him.
We could fill a ton of holes with that 1 simple trade down.
I don't think we need to draft based on what we think is available next year. You'll pass over some prime talent with that type of thinking. Besides, who knows what will happen and where we'll be drafting in 2017.
I'm really not sure what you're looking for if you don't think Elliot is special.
He has tremendous top-end speed, while also having incredible power and being very difficult to take down. He's got elite, one-cut explosion and open field wiggle. He's got tremendous vision and sees the second level before he is there, which leads to a lot of huge gains. He's run for over 1800 yards for two consecutive years with 18 and 23 touchdowns respectively, so he's put up elite numbers to match. He's going to run a 4.4X 40 at 230lbs.
If you don't think this kid is special, I can't help but think you just refuse to see it. I understand if you don't value runningbacks as high draft picks, but this kid is an elite talent.
I have to say that I'm a bit wishy-washy on this.
Next year is supposedly a weak QB class, with Watson being he only sure fire guy coming out. So to me, that makes getting a QB more important this year, assuming the guy you choose grades out. At the same time, several excellent RB's are coming out, I don't think we should be spending our time trying to finagle a way to one guy this year.
Certainly, looking at next years draft is not a primary consideration as to who you take this year. But I do think you should at least have an eye as to what the strength's and weaknesses are next year. I don't believe you can completely ignore it. But it is not a primary driver either.
Does that make sense? Even I don't know if it does.
There are very few "special" players in this league.
Peterson is a special talent at TB. Elliott isn't in that class.
there's a lot of QB's in the draft.
This has been Jerry Jones view of developing QB's. Always looking for short cuts. Drew Hutchinson, Drew Henson, Clint Stoerner, etc., etc, etc. Jerry got EXTREMELY lucky in finding Tony Romo, an undrafted free agent. It took several years after Troy Aikman retired, but he found his short cut.And there will be QBs in the next draft and in the next draft and ...
I don't get the attitude that this is our only chance to replace Romo. Now, I think we should draft a developmental QB at least every other year, but when the time comes to get someone to replace Romo, we can target a guy and go after them. I know we're in a great position where we don't have to trade up to get our guy, but we're also in a greater position to win now with Romo than we will be when he's done.
For the time being, we need to find a vet backup and see if we can develop Romo's successor without having to pay a premium.
Oh yes they have. Almost everybody I have had a debate with about QB at 4 saids to reach for him. ........also what do you think they mean when they say we have to take a QB at 4 for the future? Again I'm not a professional scout but I see better players then Wentz and Goff and at 4 you take best player available period.
This has been Jerry Jones view of developing QB's. Always looking for short cuts. Drew Hutchinson, Drew Henson, Clint Stoerner, etc., etc, etc. Jerry got EXTREMELY lucky in finding Tony Romo, an undrafted free agent. It took several years after Troy Aikman retired, but he found his short cut.
I'm not interested in ex-baseball players, UDFA's or even mid-round picks looking for the next Tom Brady. Or any other short cut. We are in a unique position to draft a premium QB prospect today. If the scouts are on board, it would be negligent to ignore that opportunity. I want to see a smooth transition from Romo to the next guy. Not some herky-jerky, lets-see-if-Tony-Banks-can-play BS. I had too much of that after Aikman retired.
The failure after Aikman was definitely Jones trying to find his QB without spending a premium pick. I don't advocate that. If Romo shows he's done this year, then next year, we go after his replacement in the first round, even if we have to trade up to get him (doubt we would be in a much different position than we are this year though). If Romo calls it quits the year after, then we go after his replacement in the first round.
Jerry's failure in replacing Aikman is that he did not invest in replacing him.
Now, I have no problem with drafting Romo's replacement this year if Dallas values at QB more than other players who can help them at No. 4. But drafting one just because we're at No. 4 is an overreaction to Jerry's previous bad choices in addressing the position.
There's nothing wrong IMO of drafting a developmental guy to see if he can develop while we still have Romo. There's everything wrong with drafting a developmental guy when you don't have a starting QB.
Rarely are qb's taken where they are ranked as far as best player. You will always have to over draft a QB or just get lucky with a guy like Brady or romo
To me it's not about best value but a player who can be a franchise QB
If the scouts think one of these guys can be a franchise QB then I could care less how he is ranked in relation to other players. The position is more important than others and that's why qb's are always over drafted
The post by conner01 immediately above yours is where I stand regarding taking a QB at #4. Nobody advocates reaching for a QB. But if scouts tell Jerry that a QB is worthy of the draft position, Jerry has to pull the trigger, IMO.
Thats not true. Rodgers wasn't reached for neither was Wilson. Guys that reach tend to end up like the Browns
How many qb's in the last decade were taken before higher ranked players? The majority of them
Wilson and Rodgers are the exception
The vast majority are over drafted because teams need qb's
That just the way the league is and will continue to be as long as the passing game is such a huge part of the game
You said you always have to over draft for QBs which I provided 2 examples where that is not true.
I'm not giving you a history lesson on drafted players, do the research yourself
There are always exception
Because romo was undrafted does that mean you should forget about drafting a QB and just sign one after the draft?
The fact is the vast majority of qb's are drafted with higher ranked players still on the board and QB are ranked higher to begin with because of there position alone
20 years and counting of "win now" mode. Same song and dance.