SI Top 10 College offensive draft prospects

[Doomsday101]

10 Phil Landholt OT OU
9 Malcolm Kelly WR OU
8 Andre Woodson QB Ken
7 Michael Oher OT Miss
6 DeSean Jackson WR Cal
5 Joathan Stewart RB Ore
4 Brian Brohm QB Lou
3 Matt Ryan QB BC
2 Jake Long OT Mich
1 Darren McFadden RB Ark

 

[Real1st]

Malcom Kelly will be better than Jackson..

Jackson is another Ted Ginn

 

[YosemiteSam]

Malcom Kelly will be better than Jackson..

Jackson is another Ted Ginn

While I agree Malcolm Kelly will be far better than Jackson, I don't think Jackson is the next Ginn. I would say he is the next Santana Moss.

Now saying that, Moss is way out of place being the #1 receiver. Same goes for Coles whom he was traded for. Both are solid #2 just like Terry Glenn.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

Thanks to Cleveland, it will not matter for us.......dang it!

 

[FCBarca]

And how is Mike Hart not in that list?

 

[Rampage]

jake long would be a nice replacement for flo

 

[YosemiteSam]

jake long would be a nice replacement for flo

Yeah, I would probably draft Long before McFadden. Offensive linemen are far more valuable than any running back. Just like last year, I would have taken Joe Thomas over Adrian Peterson, but Peterson was second on my list.

 

[Rampage]

Yeah, I would probably draft Long before McFadden. Offensive linemen are far more valuable than any running back. Just like last year, I would have taken Joe Thomas over Adrian Peterson, but Peterson was second on my list.

well i think we have no shot at mcfadden cause the browns are a decent team. maybe we get turner from SD, who knows? But i really like jake long being a michigan fan he stands out

 

[YosemiteSam]

well i think we have no shot at mcfadden cause the browns are a decent team. maybe we get turner from SD, who knows? But i really like jake long being a michigan fan he stands out

Jake Long will probably go top 3 top 5 at most in my opinion. If there is any chance whatsoever, I try and trade the Browns #1 for Larry Fitzgerald or Roy Williams since there seems to be a trade possibility there with both. Then used the Cowboys #1 to draft a DB. Kenny Phillips and Justin King will be gone very early I believe, but Malcolm Jenkins could still be there. Jenkins is bigger than King too, but King is faster.

 

[theogt]

And how is Mike Hart not in that list?

Because he's not a top 10 offensive talent.

jake long would be a nice replacement for flo

He would be, but unfortunately, we won't have a shot at him unless Derek Anderson drops dead tomorrow.

Yeah, I would probably draft Long before McFadden. Offensive linemen are far more valuable than any running back. Just like last year, I would have taken Joe Thomas over Adrian Peterson, but Peterson was second on my list.

Right, because the Vikings would be the #1 rushing team if they had been able to draft Joe Thomas instead of Peterson. PSYCHE!

 

[BehindEnemyLinez]

And how is Mike Hart not in that list?

Because his size and speed doesn't translate to him being a top NFL prospect. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't get drafted until the late 2nd, early 3rd round...which is where Dallas should draft a RB, in my opinion, if they decide not to keep the "platoon system" that's in place now.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Right, because the Vikings would been the #2 rushing team if they had been able to draft Joe Thomas instead of Peterson. PSYCHE!

I'm not sure how to take youre comment. Joe Thomas wasn't even an option for the Vikings because he was drafted #3 overall. The idiots of the draft were Oakland, Detriot, Tampa, Cardinal, and Washington. Oakland and Detriot for not taking Thomas first or second, and Tampa, Cardinals, and Washington for not taking Peterson. Sure, you can say Washington had Clinton Portis and Betts, but while they are good, they aren't Peterson. They could have traded Portis for more draft choices.

 

[theogt]

I'm not sure how to take youre comment. Joe Thomas wasn't even an option for the Vikings because he was drafted #3 overall.

Hence, the "if they had been able to." It was designed to show you that an elite RB will help your running game more than an elite OT. That should be obvious. Really good tackles are good to have, but they're not as valuable as really good QBs or really good RBs.

The top 3 offenses in the NFL all have LTs drafted in the 2nd round. You can get by with an average to above average LT.

The idiots of the draft were Oakland, Detriot, Tampa, Cardinal, and Washington. Oakland and Detriot for not taking Thomas first or second, and Tampa, Cardinals, and Washington for not taking Peterson.

Oakland is an idiot for thinking that a franchise QB is more important than a OT? Ummm....ok.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Because his size and speed doesn't translate to him being a top NFL prospect. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't get drafted until the late 2nd, early 3rd round...which is where Dallas should draft a RB, in my opinion, if they decide not to keep the "platoon system" that's in place now.

I'm not so sure that is true. A lot of backs come out around 200lbs. Hart has 4.4 speed which if you look at most of the top backs coming out all have 4.4 speed. What I like about Hart is he has a low center of gravity and has power to break tackles. This guy is going to be NFL running back no question.

 

[Achozen]

Oakland already has a bust in Robert Gallery. He was supposed to be the safest pick in that draft and look what happened.

I don't think they wanted to risk it with Thomas.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Hence, the "if they had been able to." It was designed to show you that an elite RB will help your running game more than an elite OT. That should be obvious. Really good tackles are good to have, but they're not as valuable as really good QBs or really good RBs.

The top 3 offenses in the NFL all have LTs drafted in the 2nd round. You can get by with an average to above average LT.

Oakland is an idiot for thinking that a franchise QB is more important than a OT? Ummm....ok.

Houston Texas never shored up their offensive line since inception and they always sucked. The new Browns have sucked since they re-began. They were expected to finish dead last this year. What did they do? They signed Eric Steinbach and drafted Joe Thomas. All the sudden everyone expects Dallas' Browns pick to be around 15th. Football is a team sport and Peterson is part of a team that includes Steve Hutchinson signed away from Seattle.

 

[theogt]

Houston Texas never shored up their offensive line since inception and they always sucked. The new Browns have sucked since they re-began. They were expected to finish dead last this year. What did they do? They signed Eric Steinbach and drafted Joe Thomas. All the sudden everyone expects Dallas' Browns pick to be around 15th. Football is a team sport and Peterson is part of a team that includes Steve Hutchinson signed away from Seattle.

The Texans have never had a good QB or good RB. And the Browns are good this year because of surprisingly good QB play. And don't think for a minute that the good QB play is the result of the O-line -- that's just silly.

 

[BehindEnemyLinez]

I'm not so sure that is true. A lot of backs come out around 200lbs. Hart has 4.4 speed which if you look at most of the top backs coming out all have 4.4 speed. What I like about Hart is he has a low center of gravity and has power to break tackles. This guy is going to be NFL running back no question.

True...he MAY be another Emmitt Smith but some college analysts don't seem to think so. Look at most of the backs drafted early the past few years, while not too many of them are world-beaters most were drafted because of their size/speed combination, and Hart doesn't provide that. He runs hard but @ 200lbs he's not built to pound it between the tackles 25x a game like a true lead back should. That's why I don't think he'll be a first rounder but he might fit into a system like Dallas' where the carries are split (even though his running style doesn't complement MB3's).

 

[YosemiteSam]

The Texans have never had a good QB or good RB. And the Browns are good this year because of surprisingly good QB play. And don't think for a minute that the good QB play is the result of the O-line -- that's just silly.

I never said good QB play is a result of a good offensive line, but a good QB who doesn't have time to throw will look bad.

I'm one of the biggest Donovan McNabb haters in the world (you can look back at my posts), but he biggest issue right now is the fact that his offensive line isn't protecting him. So, I ask you this. Is McNabb a good or a bad QB? If you look back, he has won an awful lot of games and has taken his team deep into the playoffs and even to a SuperBowl.

What has changed from the last what 7 years and this year with the Eagles? They cannot protect McNabb. The Eagles are 30th in sacks given up with 27.

 

[theogt]

I never said good QB play is a result of a good offensive line, but a good QB who doesn't have time to throw will look bad.

I'm one of the biggest Donovan McNabb haters in the world (you can look back at my posts), but he biggest issue right now is the fact that his offensive line isn't protecting him. So, I ask you this. Is McNabb a good or a bad QB? If you look back, he has won an awful lot of games and has taken his team deep into the playoffs and even to a SuperBowl.

What has changed from the last what 7 years and this year with the Eagles? They cannot protect McNabb. The Eagles are 30th in sacks given up with 27.

McNabb's problem this season has been two-fold: recovering from his knee injury, and his O-line playing horrible. But despite that horrible O-line play, you can still look at him and tell their offense is potent because they have a good QB, despite their horrible line this year.

So, bringing up the Eagles only disproves your point (i.e., good offense despite bad O-line because they have a good QB and RB).