DaveSpadaro

[News] Early Thinking On Some Roster Battles To Watch

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, downwithdallas said:

It's not at all a total different conversation because you are talking about elite QBs well let's exclude Brees, Rodgers, Brady, Mahomes, the list goes on and on. You are talking about why you draft a QB at 2 instead of a RB none of those QBs were taken with top picks in fact let's go through those same superbowl wins and list QBs that were taken in the top 2 shall we. 2 that's right 2 of the superbowl QBs were drafted in the top 2 Brady, Foles, Wilson and Johnson weren't even drafted until at least the 3rd rd and count for 9 of the superbowls

We could really put the * on eli too since he was drafted that high but traded to a team that wasn't that high before he played a single down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, downwithdallas said:

It's not at all a total different conversation because you are talking about elite QBs well let's exclude Brees, Rodgers, Brady, Mahomes, the list goes on and on. You are talking about why you draft a QB at 2 instead of a RB none of those QBs were taken with top picks in fact let's go through those same superbowl wins and list QBs that were taken in the top 2 shall we. 2 that's right 2 of the superbowl QBs were drafted in the top 2 Brady, Foles, Wilson and Johnson weren't even drafted until at least the 3rd rd and count for 9 of the superbowls

That was HAM talking about the draft.... again ... my  was a simple one.    You don't need the elite RB to win.  The elite RBs are not winning much the last 2 decades... yet the elite QBs are.   If you think its coincidence over this long period of time... then we agree to disagree.   I wouldn't prioritize the RB.   I think te Colts for example.... Luck, Nelson or Mack ... Mack (who I think is a good RB) would be 3rd if I had to rank those guys on impact on the Colts offense.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 1wrangler said:

LOL. loving this argument!  Actually you don't have to go any further than our division to tell if a good running back makes a difference. The Eagles have beaten Dak Prescott without Elliot in the lineup but have yet to beat Prescott with Elliot in the lineup. Hoping we can change that situation this year but its remains to be proven.

It's not an arguement,we are disgusting,er I mean discussing  HAHA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

That was HAM talking about the draft.... again ... my  was a simple one.    You don't need the elite RB to win.  The elite RBs are not winning much the last 2 decades... yet the elite QBs are.   If you think its coincidence over this long period of time... then we agree to disagree.   I wouldn't prioritize the RB.   I think te Colts for example.... Luck, Nelson or Mack ... Mack (who I think is a good RB) would be 3rd if I had to rank those guys on impact on the Colts offense.  

QB's win? But noone else pitches in? Ok got it.As i said call the pats,you and me can be their RB's since,they have Brady(6th round),they need nothing else.Then from them we got this clown Blount,who helped win us a SB 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, 1wrangler said:

LOL. loving this argument!  Actually you don't have to go any further than our division to tell if a good running back makes a difference. The Eagles have beaten Dak Prescott without Elliot in the lineup but have yet to beat Prescott with Elliot in the lineup. Hoping we can change that situation this year but its remains to be proven.

I agree.... you need to look no further than knowing the Eagles won a SB without an elite RB ... and Dallas hasn't won a divisional round playoff game yet with their elite RB.   I'm hoping we DON'T that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

That was HAM talking about the draft.... again ... my  was a simple one.    You don't need the elite RB to win.  The elite RBs are not winning much the last 2 decades... yet the elite QBs are.   If you think its coincidence over this long period of time... then we agree to disagree.   I wouldn't prioritize the RB.   I think te Colts for example.... Luck, Nelson or Mack ... Mack (who I think is a good RB) would be 3rd if I had to rank those guys on impact on the Colts offense.  

So you are saying you can't win with an elite running back you need an elite QB. I believe we won with an average QB and that was 2 years ago. It doesn't matter who you have at any position it's a team sport and the best teams win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GreenbleedinFL said:

QB's win? But noone else pitches in? Ok got it.As i said call the pats,you and me can be their RB's since,they have Brady(6th round),they need nothing else.Then from them we got this clown Blount,who helped win us a SB 

Everyone says "Foles won us the SB" NOT TRUE.As I said before the QB gets the glory.We won as a team

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GreenbleedinFL said:

QB's win? But noone else pitches in? Ok got it.As i said call the pats,you and me can be their RB's since,they have Brady(6th round),they need nothing else.Then from them we got this clown Blount,who helped win us a SB 

OMG... why do you keep putting words in my mouth.... I don't get it.   At home, if someone cooks you dinner and says we are hving chicken.... you you keep bringing up that you like your steak well done?   One has nothing to do with the other.    Conversation is ONLY about the eltie RBs... nothing else.   Stop changing the subject... not running game as a whole... not that you could win with bad RBs... not that nobody else contributes but the QB ... NONE of that.   It's simply .... the ELITE RBs haven't won much the last 20 years... and the elite QBs have.   Yes... 10 other guys were on the field.   Yes .. those QBs handed the ball off.    Yes... those QBs also have owners, GMs, coaches... equipment managers... people to turn the lights on at the stadium... people who sell beer, people who patrol the parking lots, people who sell tickets , people who work in IT, accountants, marketing people, janitors.    LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GreenbleedinFL said:

Everyone says "Foles won us the SB" NOT TRUE.As I said before the QB gets the glory.We won as a team

The offensive line won us the superbowl and our defensive line sealed the deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW we are "stuck" or we prefer the RBBC approach because we dont take STUD RB's even when they are there

2 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

OMG... why do you keep putting words in my mouth.... I don't get it.   At home, if someone cooks you dinner and says we are hving chicken.... you you keep bringing up that you like your steak well done?   One has nothing to do with the other.    Conversation is ONLY about the eltie RBs... nothing else.   Stop changing the subject... not running game as a whole... not that you could win with bad RBs... not that nobody else contributes but the QB ... NONE of that.   It's simply .... the ELITE RBs haven't won much the last 20 years... and the elite QBs have.   Yes... 10 other guys were on the field.   Yes .. those QBs handed the ball off.    Yes... those QBs also have owners, GMs, coaches... equipment managers... people to turn the lights on at the stadium... people who sell beer, people who patrol the parking lots, people who sell tickets , people who work in IT, accountants, marketing people, janitors.    LOL

Define "elite" What does it take for YOU to say "A RB won this game?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, downwithdallas said:

So you are saying you can't win with an elite running back you need an elite QB. I believe we won with an average QB and that was 2 years ago. It doesn't matter who you have at any position it's a team sport and the best teams win.

NO.... AGAIN..... I'M SIMPLY SAYING ONE THING  ....   the elite RBs have not won over the last 2 decades.... by using this data, I'm saying I would not focus on getting the top RB and having to pay him ... I would use my resources elsewhere.   What I am also saying is that I like the fact that both Dallas and the Giants had top 4 picks and used them on a RB who got paid from day 1 and will both be getting big contracts.   

Really... there is no hidden meaning to what I'm saying... its not that hard really if you just take the words without trying to "read between the lines"   its a simple factual observation of the past 2 decades in the NFL.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GreenbleedinFL said:

BTW we are "stuck" or we prefer the RBBC approach because we dont take STUD RB's even when they are there

Define "elite" What does it take for YOU to say "A RB won this game?"

BTW there is no right or wrong answer,just asking your opinion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the issue is that you guys quote yourselves ... and think that I'm the one saying these things other than ... elite RBs have not won much the last 2 decades.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, joemas6 said:

I think the issue is that you guys quote yourselves ... and think that I'm the one saying these things other than ... elite RBs have not won much the last 2 decades.    

IDK how you define that or how you can decide that.it's just a "good,better best" at all positions including QB.You need competence from both,whther one or the other "wins" the game the QB gets the accolades

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GreenbleedinFL said:

BTW there is no right or wrong answer,just asking your opinion

Elite ... the very best... you can define it if you like.   you want to say top guy ... top 2 , top 5 ... probowl ( which means top 6 plus any replacements)   
It's not a simply just an average or above average RB.   Right now... Bell, David Johnson, Kamara, Zeke, Barkely .... over the years ... Shady, Arian Foster, AP, LT .... guys at that level.   Not Ajayi type guys.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So RB- you see stats.Would you rather have a RB that gets 120 yards a game but cant score or the guy that gets you 2 yards every 3rd down and blasts it in from 3 yards out for a TD? which is the "stud??" IDK I cant define that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GreenbleedinFL said:

IDK how you define that or how you can decide that.it's just a "good,better best" at all positions including QB.You need competence from both,whther one or the other "wins" the game the QB gets the accolades

IDK GBFL.... did I ever say opposite????  did I ever say you don't need anything else besides a QB?     

I simply said the guys that you ... or maybe not you, but most football fans would call the top RBs... they havent had much team success in the last 20 years.   Instead of trying to counter that point... it turns into all these otehr things????  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, joemas6 said:

Elite ... the very best... you can define it if you like.   you want to say top guy ... top 2 , top 5 ... probowl ( which means top 6 plus any replacements)   
It's not a simply just an average or above average RB.   Right now... Bell, David Johnson, Kamara, Zeke, Barkely .... over the years ... Shady, Arian Foster, AP, LT .... guys at that level.   Not Ajayi type guys.  

And aren't most of those pretty good teams? All those RB's give us problems.if they had "average" RB's would they be this good? I cant know the answer to that

Just now, joemas6 said:

IDK GBFL.... did I ever say opposite????  did I ever say you don't need anything else besides a QB?     

I simply said the guys that you ... or maybe not you, but most football fans would call the top RBs... they havent had much team success in the last 20 years.   Instead of trying to counter that point... it turns into all these otehr things????  

I'm asking how do youdefine who "won" the game? because the team won the QB wins the game? Like a pitcher in baseball?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

OMG... why do you keep putting words in my mouth.... I don't get it.   At home, if someone cooks you dinner and says we are hving chicken.... you you keep bringing up that you like your steak well done?   One has nothing to do with the other.    Conversation is ONLY about the eltie RBs... nothing else.   Stop changing the subject... not running game as a whole... not that you could win with bad RBs... not that nobody else contributes but the QB ... NONE of that.   It's simply .... the ELITE RBs haven't won much the last 20 years... and the elite QBs have.   Yes... 10 other guys were on the field.   Yes .. those QBs handed the ball off.    Yes... those QBs also have owners, GMs, coaches... equipment managers... people to turn the lights on at the stadium... people who sell beer, people who patrol the parking lots, people who sell tickets , people who work in IT, accountants, marketing people, janitors.    LOL

I could make a list of elite QBs that never won a superbowl in the last 20 years too it's the teams built around them. Look at the QBs on that list look at the organizations around them. Then look at the rest of the teams and their organizations. Ask yourself a one questions on why most of them didn't have elite RBs with elite QBs where were they drafting most years and did elite RBs fall to them in the draft most of the time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GreenbleedinFL said:

So RB- you see stats.Would you rather have a RB that gets 120 yards a game but cant score or the guy that gets you 2 yards every 3rd down and blasts it in from 3 yards out for a TD? which is the "stud??" IDK I cant define that

OMG... again with this assumption.   OK.. you tell me... you don't see AP, LT, Bell, Shady, Arian Foster as elite RBs.... Ajayi is better?    Now, I know you didn't say Ajayi is better, but this is how you respond to what I'm saying...  

AGAIN... I'M SAYING ONE THING .... those top RBs... who most fans would call the top RBs... if you want to use stats, its up to you.   They haven't won much the last 2 decades.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suppose it comes down to this.I place a higher value on RB's than you do.It's personal opinion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now