I agree. I was just showing it's a crapshoot at best. AP could have a 15 year career and challenge Emmitt's rushing record or he could blow out a knee in his 2nd game and never be heard from again. Here's the basic point. Running backs more than any position besides the punter and wide receivers rely on their legs. And on a good team, a running back is going to be churning and burning at least 20 times a game with 11 guys determined to put a lick on him. The other point is so much of the success of a running back depends on the offensive line, the scheme, and how good the QB is. You can have an outstanding running back, but until you have the rest of the team around him good, you ain't winning a ring. Football is a game won in the trenches. It all comes down to who is controlling the line of scrimmage, plain and simple. And if you can't control the line of scrimmage, you can't pass protect, then you can have Barry Sanders in the backfield and you ain't winning. Just ask Barry. Look at Indy. They just won a Super Bowl with a plug and chug running back combination after they decided not to re-sign their star running back. Do you really think Addai would have done a whole lot if he was playing for the Raiders or the Cardinals???? Sorry. Do you think the Colts still win the Super Bowl if they substituted Edge for Addai and had the rest of the same team? Certainly. Ladanian? Stuck with a rookie QB. Best player in the NFL, won't make it to the big dance until the QB gets better. If they had kept Brees, they are probably in the Super Bowl instead of Indy. Bears get the the Super Bowl with a very middle of the road running back. You could replace their back with 30 other backs in the NFL and they would be the same team. Look at the Super Bowl history. Are there some great running backs? Sure. But the overwhelming majority of Super Bowl teams and playoff teams had dominant line play and either had a dominant QB or a very efficient QB that made very few mistakes while their defense and offensive lines controlled the line of scrimmage and whoever the back was, be they great, very good, or just mediocre, got the yardage primarily off the thrust of the offensive line and the strength of the passing game. Football is the ultimate team sport. And probably one of the easiest positions to master at the NFL level is the running back position. It's all about those guys getting to the hole (if there is one), making their moves and holding on to the ball. It's mostly instinct back there. If they've got speed, vision, and good hands, they can get the job done.........provided the Oline is doing their job right. Contrast that to the QB position and the lineman. The line play is so much about proper technique and strategy to go along with strength, leverage, etc. Sorry, but if you've got a bad line, you just aren't winning. If you get average line play, you ain't going much farther than maybe getting a Wild Card. The greatest key to winning in the NFL is to control the line of scrimmage. You do that with linemen, not backs and receivers. Look at it this way. If Joe Thomas is sitting there at #8 when we pick, is there any question who we are going to pick? But the odds of him getting past Arizona are slim to none. Our #1 need on this team is a dominant offensive lineman. There simply aren't any in this draft outside Joe Thomas. So, we need to take the next best player that has the best chance of dominating one side of the line of scrimmage. I'm convinced that player is Okoye. What I'm not convinced of is if he will fall to #8. I'm beginning to think that with a good combine, he may go to Tampa Bay before us. And if that is the case, then you have to evaluate how dominant a player like Alan Branch is going to be compared to what we could get out of Peterson or what we could get if we traded down. If we could trade down a few spots and pick up another 3rd round pick, that would probably be best. Peterson is the sexy pick, like Bush last year. But I think Okoye does more to help this team.
It would be sweet justice if we pick AP at #8 and he ends up being twice the back Reggie Bush ends up being. Not exactly far fetched to think this is exactly how it goes down, either.
No...but you're assuming that we won't make any additions at RB if we don't draft AP. I'm not going to argue whether a rb is our biggest need or not. I personally don't think it is and I would bet that Kubiak feels the same way. He's had success with plugging regular backs in and having them produce. We saw most recently with Dayne. I don't think he is going to abandon a philosophy that has won super bowls and has worked almost everytime. Its not about getting cute like you posted. Its about not overpaying for a position that could be filled cheaper while possibly filling in a bigger need.
If you don't want to pick a QB because of the cap hit, then what about all the money tied up in backs, Domanick's deal, along with the rest? We want to draft a back and add it to that? And I don't think Dayne, Gado, or Lundy is going to be the guy next year if we don't draft a running back. I think Taylor is going to move up the depth chart and get a large share of the carries in a running back by committee.
i don't believe i made any such assumption; it's a draft thread. i do, however, believe that among FAs and prospects, AP is currently the best upgrade available at the position; yes. except for last year when that very thinking burned him. it hasn't "won" a SB since 1999 and that was with a boderline HOF'er in the backfield. even the greatest systems ever created need talent to run them. bill walsh didn't pick guys off the street to run his WCO. and i think we all would have dealt haywood jeffires for jerry rice or lorenzo white for barry sanders during the run'n'shoot era, right? well, again, i think the running game IS the biggest need. but your logic applies to virtually every position on the field - you'll always take a cheaper equivalent if one's available. but again, my point is only that you don't let later rounds dictate what you do in round 1.
With the 8th pick you must pick a pro bowl player. Whoever it is. Peterson is pretty good but being a little over hyped here. He is strong, and has good vision, good speed, but lacks the moves and quickness that would make him a no brainer. I like the fact he can break tackles. I think I like the idea of a trading a few spots down for an extra #2 if possible. I wouldn't mind drafting at 12-14 with an extra pick in the 2nd round. Here are some very good players who could be available in that range- Jamaal Anderson Gaines Adams Marshawn Lynch Okoye LaRon Landry Charles Johnson Joe Staley Levi Brown Leon Hall edit- I think most of this group will fall past #8- one or two might slip up to 7-8
the simple answer is you can't play, so why pay two QBs. in terms of specifics, DD is injured and unable to play; regardless of the cap ramifications his injury may carry (which can be negotiated if he's released for health reasons), you have to have someone back there who can play. taylor is promising, but i'd be very disappointed if they went into the 2007 expecting him to be the featured back, or even a viable plan b.
Well, I've liked AP ever since his first game I saw as a freshman at Oklahoma. He has got Marcus Allen type ability if you ask me. But we need so much help right now. DLine, OLine, linebacker, and defensive backfield all need at least one more stud along with the need to get improved play from the running back and quarterback positions. And if we can't pass protect, teams are just going to sit on our running attack until they can force a 3rd and long.
If it was that easy, there'd never be busts. Nor would there ever be guys like Tom Brady taken in late rounds.
You asked if we'd be happy with Dayne, Gado, and Lundy...but you're leaving out the fact that we could still draft someone like Bush or maybe sign a guy like Turner even if we pass on AP.. Now if you asked if we'd be okay with Bush, Irons, or Turner to go along with Dayne, Taylor, Taylor...then most would say yes. I wouldn't say it burned him...we still got pretty good production out of Dayne but I see what you're saying. What do you think helped him become a borderline HOF'er? IIRC...Davis wasn't a big name prospect coming out of college. They plugged in guys like Mike Anderson, Tatum Bell, Griffin, etc...and got great production out of them. They even traded Portis despite running for over 3000 yards his first 2 seasons. I think its easy to say that but I would bet that no team actually operates like that. That's why you always hear about the depth of a certain position, it does affect who you draft early. Why spend a #8 pick on a position that could be filled in the 3rd and 4th round when you've had success doing it. Especially when you have just as big of a need, if not bigger, of another position to fill. If Kubiak passes on AP because he feels he can get production elsewhere...I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. If he does pick him, i'd be okay with it. But the depth at rb this year does give us a lot of realistic alternatives.
It's not easy, that's why few of the teams are contenders for the ring. That's why the track record for so called 'experts' and GM's is so poor. But there are players who are pretty obvious if you aren't trying to be smart and cute and you're not always enamored with potential... like one former Texan GM. For instance in last years draft in the top 11 picks there were 5 pretty obvious picks (no brainers)- Young, Ferguson, Leinhart, Huff, Bush At least by my draft board, not that I know anything
I think the vast majority would disagree with you on Peterson. If there weren't injury concerns, we wouldn't even be talking about him because there's no way he'd drop to 8.
Exactly why you HAVE to take him if he's there at #8 IMO. This is the guy who people were saying might be the #1 overall pick and runaway Heisman winner back in August before his freak injury. He could end up being a bargain at #8, as odd as that sounds. Yes, we have LOTS of needs which, to me, means we are still in "pick the best player on the board" mode. If AP is there at #8, he's the best player on the board.
we're assessing team needs; those are based on players actually on the team. well, let's see: he passed on reggie bush; didn't draft a back until the 6th round; failed to address the RB situation until after the second preseason game and even then, he did so by signing an out of shape, out of work former 1st round bust, and then didn't act further (trading for gadko) until after the season had started. and the team went 3-3 in games in which the leading RB rushed for 63 or more yards, and 2 of those losses were on the game's final play. i'm thinking things would be a little better these days in texan-land if they had gone 8-8 and been competitive in 13 of their 16 games. so, yeah, it burned him. hopefully, he learned his lesson. look at the yards/game - davis and portis were significantly better than the others. you control only the pick in front of you - why would you give up that control and compromise you're draft board? obviously, if you rate a RB and DE equally, and need both equally, you might take a peek ahead. but you'd never pass on the RB if he graded higher under the assumption a viable plan B would be there 32 picks later.
Maybe I'm misreading the post, but why are you asking if we'd be happy w/ those players? I don't think anyone will argue that we need to improve our running game. And we still managed to have a half-decent running game w/ those guys at the end. Hell...the out of work, former 1st round bust was the main reason we beat the Super Bowl champs. If you want to look at wins/losses and who is to blame, then RB's should be one of the last on the list. Our secondary and QB are the ones to blame for the bulk of the losses IMO. Well Davis was a 6th round pick himself so it kind of proves my point. But Anderson (another 6th rounder) and Tatum Bell (2nd rounder) were still very productive backs that put up good numbers. Kubiak passed on Reggie Bush, the Broncos traded Portis for a DB (despite Portis winning ROY and running for 1500+ yards his first 2 seasons each), he's had success w/ getting production out of his RBs. He may have overestimated himself last season, but I hope he doesn't go away w/ what made him and the Broncos successful. BTW, Portis was the 51st pick in his draft. I wouldn't call it compromising your draft board or giving up control. You still get to make your pick . Could you pass on a RB if there is another player graded equally as high and the draft is deep at RB? I guess that's what I'm getting at. My final point is that I feel the Texans could wait to find a RB later if they feel that another player at #8 would be better worth the pick. If they feel AD is worth the pick, then I think it would be a great pick. But Kubiak has had success with his scheme so when it comes to the running game, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
when i suggested it was the team's BIGGEST need, several posters disagreed, citing success near the end of last year. and thus, it began... sure, they did have some success. so did the passing game. the secondary looked good, too, in small doses (oakland). but of those responsible for the running game's turnaround, how many of them are we willing to count on again this year? two back-up tackles, a back-up FB and a back-up RB. i would rate that more fluke than anything substantial to make me rethink my position on how important upgrading the running game is this year. and i'd prefer and believe the team needs more than a "half-decent running game." the foundation of this version of the WCO is the running game; if it's not effective, the offense will not be effective. it HAS to get better. understand, i'm not using the 3-3 record to blame the running game; it's being used to demonstrate just how important it is to this team winning and/or being competitive. they had good #s; davis and portis had superlative #s. if you're content and confident that terrell davis' dot most 5th and 6th rounds, then sure, go ahead and pass on adrian peterson. but i think it's a fool's chase and an unwise appraoch to building a team. i don't think there's any "may" about it - he did. i thought kubiak's rookie season was, far and away, mediocre and a lot of it had to do with the way he didn't address the running game with any real urgency. in fact, were it not for a producitve FA class and a terrific draft, i'd very nearly label it a failure. hopefully, he was humbled. sure, and i said as much. my point is that if AP is ranked 3rd on your board, and he's still there at 8, but you pass on him to draft the 8th guy on your board because other backs will be available later, you're making a giant blunder. if RB, LT and DE are all priorities, and when you get on the clock, a blue chip RB, LT and DE are all available, you certainly start to peek ahead. again, except for last year, when his faith in the scheme burned him. imagine if the texans had agressively pursued chester taylor? or edgerrin james? or drafted bush? how much better would the team have been? again, they were 3-3, etc., etc.
That's very debatable Ric. Not sure how much (if any) better we'd be w/ Reggie Bush's fantastic 565 yards rushing or his 3.6 ypc. Edge himself only got 3.4 ypc last season. Edge: 337 attempts, 1159 yards, 3.4 ypc, 6 TDs Dayne: 151 attempts, 612 yards, 4.1 ypc, 5 TDs Bush: 155 attempts, 565 yards, 3.6 ypc, 6 TDs Not too shabby for an out of work, former 1st round bust IMO. You can't say how much better we'd because frankly we don't know. Obviously we could have used Bush's receiving out of the backfield, but how much worse would our DL have been w/o Mario? We don't know. I myself may or may not be confident that Daviss dots most 5th or 6th round picks, but Kubiak might. Other than last season, Kubiak has seen GREAT success w/ his RBs and his scheme. You said hopefully he'll learn his lesson, but I hope more than anything that he doesn't scrap something that won A LOT of games for him.
where's chester taylor? never mind... dayne finished well (well, his best game WAS against the worst run defense in football last year), but he was incapable of producing at that clip over a 16-game schedule. putting an obviously better back behind the same line would have yielded better results, and you know that. hopefully, kubiak now does as well. we certainly know taylor, james and bush are better backs than ron dayne. agreed; and hopefully what he's learned is that systems still need talent to run them. that droughens, anderson and bell were good; davis and portis were significantly better.
Kiper's latest projections have AP going to Cleveland. He seems to suddenly feel very strongly about this. He also thinks Brady Quinn will slide to #9. Therefore, he has us taking Levi Brown, OT out of PSU (and passing on Landry and Branch). I'm still hoping for AP.
