forums

Said it earlier and Walton > Barkley

PSU Cane said:
He's just so physically talented.

I wonder what he could do on a better team -


If your offense is a good back away, or needs a centerpiece to build around, they absolutely can be. The Rams wouldn't be the Rams without Gurley. The Cowboys wouldn't be the Cowboys without Zeke. The Panthers offense would be putrid without McCaffrey. Say what you want, those offenses work bc of those players. It made sense for those teams to go high in the draft on a RB.

With the draft slotting these days, taking one high in the draft isn't as financially taxing as years past.
Click to expand...

Here is the catch, and the Gurley example is the best to use here...the Rams would still stink if Goff still stunk.

I don't even consider the finances...I am just talking draft capital...taking one in Round 1 is nonsense, IMO. I don't care how good he is. You can get a good one later and you can use that Round 1 on QB, OL, DL...the positions that ultimately matter in today's game.
 
Advertisement
I'll eat crow on this one. It wasn't a matter of me thinking Walton would be better, but rather Barkley being so good. Dude is a true athlete. Horrible evaluation by the recruiting services.

Now the question will be, will he sustain this or could he be another Larry Johnson? Regardless, dude is playing and I wish I would've picked him up in my Fantasy League. lol.
 
Dwinstitles said:
Bruh my boy discovered SB long ago by mistake......he is obsessed with his ability. When my boy told me about him and i watched the tape i saw a great rb. My boy saw a legend and then he convinced me. That one step vurst seperates the elites from elites. Its like Dorsett is faster then Odell but explosive first step changes everyrhing. Elite guys get going in a hurry while others take awhile to get going. This is wjy i only listento certain posters regarding prospects.

This was as cant miss as possible even the testing said that. For people to say MW was better and SB sucked those r people u never listen to again. This was lile saying Sean Taylor will suck in the NFL thats how retarded it sounded to me.
Click to expand...

Exactly. These people are delusional as **** to say walton was better than Barkley. I couldn't believe my eyes when I first read it.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Poptimus said:
I think Barkley was the right pick at #2 overall because I'm not sold on any of the QBs taken behind him (Darnold, Allen, Rosen, Jackson) being a franchise QB. I think the Giants are taking a page from the Rams a few years ago when they secured the RB in Gurley and then went Goff.
Click to expand...

This year's QB crop might not be any better than the group you just listed off...looking like Dwayne Haskins and Justin Herbert are the top two QBs. Your mileage may vary on those two, to be honest - and its not a lock that either one declares for the draft. Lets say, even after that, you like one of the next tier of Will Grier, Drew Lock, Ryan Finley et al...again, not sure you're talking about better QB prospects than Darnold and Rosen...and I am not sure those guys are much better than bottom 10 starter types.

So, now you're looking at two years, perhaps, of the Giants with Saquon, without a legit QB before they even make an attempt to draft one. As the Jaguars showed this year, the wheels can fall off as a team, and even with your high investment running back, pretty quick.

With that said, idk who would have been a better pick...the standouts from the top of the draft are Baker, Saquon, Denzel Ward, and Quenton Nelson, the latter two are really good players, but not sure you can find the value prop on a small corner and an OG as the #2, just as tough of a sell as it is (to me) in a RB at #2.

I'm just not a big fan of the value there in this incarnation in the NFL and I can not be convinced that drafting one that high is a winning move. Gurley was taken at #10, thats a bit of a different discussion there. Like I said, Top 25 rushers...5 are rookies and the guy right behind him on the list is an undrafted midget, and my take from 2017 still holds true...Michel is one the better backs from the draft and you could have had him 20 picks later or whatever.

Also, you can't look at this in a bubble, per se. What would the Giants have been better with - Barkley and Will Hernandez...or say...one of the QBs (Darnold?) and Nick Chubb? Or, trading down, taking Michel and getting Lamar Jackson. I think those are better discussions to be had.
 
BoxingRobes said:
This year's QB crop might not be any better than the group you just listed off...looking like Dwayne Haskins and Justin Herbert are the top two QBs. Your mileage may vary on those two, to be honest - and its not a lock that either one declares for the draft. Lets say, even after that, you like one of the next tier of Will Grier, Drew Lock, Ryan Finley et al...again, not sure you're talking about better QB prospects than Darnold and Rosen...and I am not sure those guys are much better than bottom 10 starter types.

So, now you're looking at two years, perhaps, of the Giants with Saquon, without a legit QB before they even make an attempt to draft one. As the Jaguars showed this year, the wheels can fall off as a team, and even with your high investment running back, pretty quick.

With that said, idk who would have been a better pick...the standouts from the top of the draft are Baker, Saquon, Denzel Ward, and Quenton Nelson, the latter two are really good players, but not sure you can find the value prop on a small corner and an OG as the #2, just as tough of a sell as it is (to me) in a RB at #2.

I'm just not a big fan of the value there in this incarnation in the NFL and I can not be convinced that drafting one that high is a winning move. Gurley was taken at #10, thats a bit of a different discussion there. Like I said, Top 25 rushers...5 are rookies and the guy right behind him on the list is an undrafted midget, and my take from 2017 still holds true...Michel is one the better backs from the draft and you could have had him 20 picks later or whatever.

Also, you can't look at this in a bubble, per se. What would the Giants have been better with - Barkley and Will Hernandez...or say...one of the QBs (Darnold?) and Nick Chubb? Or, trading down, taking Michel and getting Lamar Jackson. I think those are better discussions to be had.
Click to expand...
I'd go Saquon #2 if I'm doing a re-draft because you can tell the guy has HOF potential. He almost never is tackled by the first defender and has elite speed and size that has translated to actual games. I go with the bird in the hand over the upside potential of Darnold or whoever else. If anything, I'm more sure about it now because the only known commodity is Saquon. It was a much more compelling question, IMO, before he showed he's a Pro Bowl - and possible HOF - talent. The rest of these dudes are question marks at QB.
 
BoxingRobes said:
Here is the catch, and the Gurley example is the best to use here...the Rams would still stink if Goff still stunk.

I don't even consider the finances...I am just talking draft capital...taking one in Round 1 is nonsense, IMO. I don't care how good he is. You can get a good one later and you can use that Round 1 on QB, OL, DL...the positions that ultimately matter in today's game.
Click to expand...

You would take a bust for the sake of filling a need over a Pro Bowl talent?

We literally have the benefit hindsight. We are in the future now, it’s not a guess anymore.

That’s like saying “if I could go back to the 90s, I’d invest in desktop capital instead of smartphones. A good desktop could make or break my work day - and I need one super duper bad. A good smartphone is a dime a dozen.”

Wrong.
 
Advertisement
CanesWooshWoosh said:
You would take a bust for the sake of filling a need over a Pro Bowl talent?

We literally have the benefit hindsight. We are in the future now, it’s not a guess anymore.

That’s like saying “if I could go back to the 90s, I’d invest in desktop capital instead of smartphones. A good desktop could make or break my work day - and I need one super duper bad. A good smartphone is a dime a dozen.”

Wrong.
Click to expand...

Your example kind of straw-like. So I won't focus on it.

We're talking about building a real team. This isn't fantasy football. Barkley is a good player. But running back isn't a position that you build your team around in this era of football for a few different reasons. At the top of the draft, you're a ****** team...and building your roster with a player that may not be useful by the time you actually become good or consistently good, seems like a poor investment so high.

Is he a good player? Yes. Is he the best player in that vicinity in the draft? So far, yes. Is running back a foundational, building block piece of a team? In this era of the NFL, the answer is no. Do you still take that player that high in the draft? Thats not preferred team building method, so I would say no. If you think so, cool, but we just have a disagreement on team building.
 
cmike73 said:
Barkely has rushed 5 times under 50 yards so I can make that statement. 5 times averaged less than 3.5 ypc
Click to expand...

He also plays on an inferior team. Gurley is part of a loaded and potent offense, not so much for Barkley. Even so, Barkley averages half a yard more per carry. Gurley has more TD's. Barely is blazing hot right now, Gurley not so much. Barkley has one more 100 yard game than Gurley. Gurley averaged under 4.2 ypc four times, so what?

Basically it is semantics, but the original comment was hysterical in its timing. Both are solid. Both have some bad games. They are still one and two in yardage on the season.
 
Advertisement
BoxingRobes said:
Your example kind of straw-like. So I won't focus on it.

We're talking about building a real team. This isn't fantasy football. Barkley is a good player. But running back isn't a position that you build your team around in this era of football for a few different reasons. At the top of the draft, you're a ****** team...and building your roster with a player that may not be useful by the time you actually become good or consistently good, seems like a poor investment so high.

Is he a good player? Yes. Is he the best player in that vicinity in the draft? So far, yes. Is running back a foundational, building block piece of a team? In this era of the NFL, the answer is no. Do you still take that player that high in the draft? Thats not preferred team building method, so I would say no. If you think so, cool, but we just have a disagreement on team building.
Click to expand...

Oh ok. Strawman so don’t address it. I’d totally take the 50 offensive lineman the dolphins have drafted in the first round recently. Because good blocking wins championships. So they’re more valuable than Barkley. Makes sense.
 
CanesWooshWoosh said:
Oh ok. Strawman so don’t address it. I’d totally take the 50 offensive lineman the dolphins have drafted in the first round recently. Because good blocking wins championships. So they’re more valuable than Barkley. Makes sense.
Click to expand...

Yeah, good blocking does win championships.

But as an aside...teams speak with their money...and right now, running back average salary is lower than every position outside of Long Snapper and Fullback. Even kickers and punters average a higher salary.

Look at the Steelers and the LeVeon Bell situation. Using capital (financial or draft capital) on a running back, no matter how good they are, is a poor use of said capital.
 
Remember that RB is the position that college players make the easiest transition to the NFL. There have been countless running backs who started off great the rookie or second-year and then quickly faltered after a while. It's the opposite with quarterbacks, rookie or even second year they look like maybe a bust but the good ones emerge and have great careers. Look at Goff and Alex Smith. Many were proclaiming them a bust after their first year or so and they became big-time quarterbacks. I think Darnold and Rosen are going to be top notch but it also depends how the team surrounds them with Talent as well.
 
BoxingRobes said:
Just for some reference. Combine times of other South Florida running backs...all just so happen to be successes in the NFL and outplayed their draft slot.

Devonta Freeman 4.58 (3rd Round)
James White 4.57 (4th Round)
Lamar Miller 4.40 (4th Round)
Dalvin Cook 4.49 (2nd Round)
Alex Collins 4.59 (5th Round)
Frank Gore 4.58 (3rd Round)
Branden Oliver 4.62 (Pro-Day) (UDFA)
Gio Bernard 4.54 (2nd Round)
Duke Johnson 4.54 (3rd Round)

You all can doubt Sony Michel and Mark Walton...but odds are in their favor that they are among the top...say...5 backs in the class when its all said and done. One of them will likely be the best RB from the class. At MINIMUM, they are going to valuable role players on an offense that loves throwing to the backs. Michel is already getting Alvin Kamara comps by the guys at NFLN.

Barkley is a fine player...what you are seeing at the combine, though, is nothing no one didn't see coming. It tells us nothing new. But, the brakes need to be pumped on him being some generational talent. If you think he's the top RB in the class...cool...seems like its the consensus...I tend to think Sony or Guice is the best back...or will be the best back when its all said done...but you all need to stop clowning on Mark Walton...the dude is going to be AT MINIMUM in the Duke Johnson/Gio Bernard/James White spectrum of backs as a 40+ reception player that plays specials like a demon. I think he's a better runner than Bernard and White and might become more of a pro runner than Duke Johnson...which is a pretty **** good, eventual Top 5 back in the class.
Click to expand...

This is a fun thread to bump since Marky Walton is now a starter in the NFL and thats pretty cool.

Barkley is pretty good...but South Florida backs are also pretty good and like LIFE...they find a way.

giphy.gif
 
Advertisement
Back
Top