Carl Peterson: "If McFadden is there at #5, we *have* to take a look (at him)"...

[jAZ]

Just listening to the Dan Patrick radio show (tape delayed here in Tucson) and one of the NFL guys talking about the combine just reported that Carl Peterson was so impressed with McFadden, that he'd seriously consider taking him at #5, even with LJ.

Don't know if this posturing for a trade offer, but if we take him at #5, this place will impode.

BTW, that's a paraphrase of the guys paraphrase... and sorry if this is a repost.

[keg in kc]

Don't know if this posturing for a trade offerI'd bet it is.

[BigChiefFan]

Sure sounds like it-@%$*^!-when is Carl going to get it through his head, ELITE players win games. If we trade down, I'm going to be disappointed.

[greg63]

He'll be gone by then.

[RealSNR]

He's no Brady Quinn...

[Silock]

If you think CP wouldn't take DMC even with LJ here, you're smoking something. He did the same thing with LJ and PH.

[mikeyis4dcats.]

could this be a ruse to try to convince someone lower who wants DMC to trade up?

[Micjones]

Carl will be making a major mistake if he drafts McFadden.
I hope this is just one thinly veiled smokescreen.

[Adept Havelock]

LJ's contract makes him untradable. What's the point of taking the Hog?

[Pitt Gorilla]

I like to yell at Carl as much as the next guy, but this is the correct thing to say, even in the likely event that we wouldn't take him.

[Iowanian]

I think Carl would be a fool to NOT suggest he'd take him.

Even if the team has no interest, to attain the best possible trade options, they SHOULD be pretending they're absolutely in LOVE with every player they think any team in the top 15 is interested in drafting.

[Coogs]

You also have to remember we are re-building now. With a "plan" no less. Last year at this time we were not rebuilding. We were trying to go back to the playoffs and win some games there.

And Herm has already publically said he is not sure how good we will be next year, but we will be younger. Just because we are all in a free for all fight for Long and Ellis... with a couple of others thrown in from time to time... Herm has said we will stay true to the draft board on many occasions. And nearly everyone here agrees with that philosophy.

There are going to be some good OT's, OG's, CB's, and WR's in the middle rounds this draft. And there will be some stud OT's in next years draft as well.

This does not appear to be a 1 year off-season fix for this team. So if we wind up with the best player in the draft, I am fine with it.

[Marco Polo]

I like to yell at Carl as much as the next guy, but this is the correct thing to say, even in the likely event that we wouldn't take him.

I agree. CP is saying the right things. Honestly, if Dorsey, Ellis and the Longs are gone when we draft at 5, I think I'd be one of the few who wouldn't have a meltdown should we draft McFadden. Yes, you need an O-line. With that in mind, if we get Flozell Adams and some other FAs, they would provide a band-aid. A band-aid isn't long term so they would have to do more work the next couple of years but an LJ-McF combo would put ADP-Chester combo to shame. Speaking of shame, it's a shame we don't have Minnesota's OL.

[Silock]

Carl will be making a major mistake if he drafts McFadden.
I hope this is just one thinly veiled smokescreen.

Was it a mistake to draft LJ when we had PH? No. It wouldn't be a mistake to draft the BPA and a guy like DMC when we're not going to do anything this year anyway. Build, build, build.

[StcChief]

Posturing, smokescreen.

[Micjones]

Was it a mistake to draft LJ when we had PH? No. It wouldn't be a mistake to draft the BPA and a guy like DMC when we're not going to do anything this year anyway. Build, build, build.

Yes it was.

Do I regret having Johnson on this team? No...
Has he had individual success as a Runningback? Sure...

But we were still working to fix a woeful defense 3 years later.
We took the wrong guy. If we draft McFadden we'll be paying 18 million dollars to a back-up Runningback who has no chance of becoming a starter here.

[kcfanXIII]

no rb, no qb, no wr will amount to anything with our present offensive line. you all can justify it however you want, but i'd rather see us get a package of picks instead of wasting it on ANOTHER rb. btw, at #5, mcfadden will be demanding a sizable contract. in case some of you forgot, we got an overpaid running back already.

[Hydrae]

If you think CP wouldn't take DMC even with LJ here, you're smoking something. He did the same thing with LJ and PH.

I don't think LJ's injury situation is anywhere near what Priests' was back then so I really don't see this as the same at all.

[BigRock]

Yes it was.

Do I regret having Johnson on this team? No...
Has he had individual success as a Runningback? Sure...

But we were still working to fix a woeful defense 3 years later.
We took the wrong guy.
You're assuming that we would have drafted a defensive playmaker instead of LJ. Dick Vermeil wanted Tyler Brayton. If we hadn't taken LJ, we still would have been working to fix a woeful defense 3 years later AND we would have had no running back.

[Micjones]

no rb, no qb, no wr will amount to anything with our present offensive line. you all can justify it however you want, but i'd rather see us get a package of picks instead of wasting it on ANOTHER rb. btw, at #5, mcfadden will be demanding a sizable contract. in case some of you forgot, we got an overpaid running back already.

Exactly.

[milkman]

no rb, no qb, no wr will amount to anything with our present offensive line. you all can justify it however you want, but i'd rather see us get a package of picks instead of wasting it on ANOTHER rb. btw, at #5, mcfadden will be demanding a sizable contract. in case some of you forgot, we got an overpaid running back already.

Highlander.

There can only be one.

[Micjones]

You're assuming that we would have drafted a defensive playmaker instead of LJ. Dick Vermeil wanted Tyler Brayton. If we hadn't taken LJ, we still would have been working to fix a woeful defense 3 years later AND we would have had no running back.

Hindsight is always 20/20.
You didn't know that when the Chiefs went on the clock that day.

The pick should've been spent on a defensive player.
Runningback is one of the easiest positions to fill in the NFL.

With Johnson we still have zero playoff wins.

[htismaqe]

You're assuming that we would have drafted a defensive playmaker instead of LJ. Dick Vermeil wanted Tyler Brayton. If we hadn't taken LJ, we still would have been working to fix a woeful defense 3 years later AND we would have had no running back.

Exactly.

[Micjones]

Exactly.

No one knew how Brayton would fare on Draft Day.
Fear of failure cannot be an excuse for making the right decisions.

[htismaqe]

Hindsight is always 20/20.
You didn't know that when the Chiefs went on the clock that day.

The pick should've been spent on a defensive player.
Runningback is one of the easiest positions to fill in the NFL.

With Johnson we still have zero playoff wins.

In this case, hindisight is 20/20. The pick wouldn't have been spent on just any defensive player. It likely would have been spent on Tyler Brayton.

Are you suggesting that Tyler Brayton would have been a better pick?

[htismaqe]

No one knew how Brayton would fare on Draft Day.
Fear of failure cannot be an excuse for making the right decisions.

There were alot of people that suggested prior to the draft that Brayton wouldn't be a great NFL player right here in these forums.

[milkman]

Hindsight is always 20/20.
You didn't know that when the Chiefs went on the clock that day.

The pick should've been spent on a defensive player.
Runningback is one of the easiest positions to fill in the NFL.

With Johnson we still have zero playoff wins.

We should never have drafted Tony Gonzalez.

In 11 years, the Chiefs have no playoff wins.

[BigRock]

Hindsight is always 20/20.
You didn't know that when the Chiefs went on the clock that day.

The pick should've been spent on a defensive player.
Runningback is one of the easiest positions to fill in the NFL.

With Johnson we still have zero playoff wins.
You're right. I have seen the light. We'd have been better off drafting Tyler Brayton instead of Larry Johnson.

[Brock]

Could have just taken Polamalu right where they were.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

Darren McFadden is going to be the next LT in this league. You heard it here first.

[Micjones]

We should never have drafted Tony Gonzalez.

In 11 years, the Chiefs have no playoff wins.

*Waving to the strawman*

In 1996, the best pass-catcher in Kansas City had 628 receiving yards.
I'm surprised they took Gonzalez #1 the off-season following.
:rolleyes:

A reliable pass-catcher was a BIG, BIG need for this franchise.
We were set defensively.

Larry Johnson wasn't as big a need as Gonzalez was when he was drafted.
You're kidding yourself.

You can't make a habit out of drafting the wrong player for your franchise.
If all you want to see is individual success then fine, but we need to draft players who'll add the most value to this team. McFadden will not.

[htismaqe]

Could have just taken Polamalu right where they were.

IIRC alot of us wanted Jerome McDougle. How did that turn out. Oh yeah.

[Brock]

IIRC alot of us wanted Jerome McDougle. How did that turn out. Oh yeah.

That is what makes this so much fun.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

*Waving to the strawman*

In 1996, the best pass-catcher in Kansas City had 628 receiving yards.
I'm surprised they took Gonzalez #1 the off-season following.
:rolleyes:

A reliable pass-catcher was a BIG, BIG need for this franchise.
We were set defensively.

Larry Johnson wasn't as big a need as Gonzalez was when he was drafted.
You're kidding yourself.

You can't make a habit out of drafting the wrong player for your franchise.
If all you want to see is individual success then fine, but we need to draft players who'll add the most value to this team. McFadden will not.

So you'd rather reach on a guy like Clady, rather than taking McFadden who would be the very best player available? If they took McFadden, don't you think LJ would be traded soon? Of course, that's if you could find some sucker to pick up his contract.

[milkman]

*Waving to the strawman*

In 1996, the best pass-catcher in Kansas City had 628 receiving yards.
I'm surprised they took Gonzalez #1 the off-season following.
:rolleyes:

A reliable pass-catcher was a BIG, BIG need for this franchise.
We were set defensively.

Larry Johnson wasn't as big a need as Gonzalez was when he was drafted.
You're kidding yourself.

You can't make a habit out of drafting the wrong player for your franchise.
If all you want to see is individual success then fine, but we need to draft players who'll add the most value to this team. McFadden will not.

While the point of my post was to show the flaw of your argument (0 playoff wins with LJ), the fact is, if I want to improve my receiving corps, as good as TG is, he would not be a prioity in my approach.

You don't build SB contenders around TEs.

TEs are complimentary pieces.

[Micjones]

So you'd rather reach on a guy like Clady, rather than taking McFadden who would be the very best player available?

If Jake Long is off the board... I take Sedrick Ellis.
If he's off the board as well... I take Ryan or trade down.

I wouldn't mind taking Clady at, say, 12.

If they took McFadden, don't you think LJ would be traded soon? Of course, that's if you could find some sucker to pick up his contract.

No, because I don't think it'll be that easy.
Especially after a season-ending injury.
And that fat ass contract.

[Deberg_1990]

You don't build SB contenders around TEs.

TEs are complimentary pieces.


Exactly.

QB first. then the Lines. Both offensive and Defensive.

If those three pieces are solid, everything else can be complimentary.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

If Jake Long is off the board... I take Sedrick Ellis.
If he's off the board as well... I take Ryan or trade down.

I wouldn't mind taking Clady at, say, 12.



No, because I don't think it'll be that easy.
Especially after a season-ending injury.
And that fat ass contract.

If you couldn't trade down, I would NEVER take Ryan over McFadden. I'd take my chances with getting a deal done for LJ. JMO

[Coogs]

One more thing...

LJ will be 29 this fall.
McFadden turns 21 in August.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

Darren McFadden is going to be the next LT in this league. You heard it here first.

One more thing...

LJ will be 29 this fall.
McFadden turns 21 in August.

I would be HAPPY if we ended up with Darren McFadden. AD may have had a good rookie season, but I'll put money on McFadden having a better career.

[Micjones]

While the point of my post was to show the flaw of your argument (0 playoff wins with LJ), the fact is, if I want to improve my receiving corps, as good as TG is, he would not be a prioity in my approach.

I know what you were TRYING to do.
The problem was it didn't take the team makeup, at the time, into consideration.

You don't build SB contenders around TEs.

TEs are complimentary pieces.

Fair enough.

But you don't build them around RB's either...

[Micjones]

If you couldn't trade down, I would NEVER take Ryan over McFadden. I'd take my chances with getting a deal done for LJ. JMO

I'm fine with not taking Ryan, but McFadden damn sure wouldn't be the player I drafted.

[Deberg_1990]

If you couldn't trade down, I would NEVER take Ryan over McFadden.

You would pass up a potential franchise QB over a RB? WTF??

[Micjones]

You would pass up a potential franchise QB over a RB? WTF??

When RB is an easier position to fill...
:spock:

[Mr. Flopnuts]

You would pass up a potential franchise QB over a RB? WTF??

Potential was the key word there. I don't think Ryan will amount to shit. JMO. If you were being sarcastic, I missed it. :D

[Mr. Flopnuts]

When RB is an easier position to fill...
:spock:

How many guys have LT quality in this league? I don't think there is a franchise qb in this draft that will be taken in the first 10 picks. I'm sure someone will snag one in the 4th or 5th round that will stick around for a while. I just don't think Brohm, or Ryan is going to get it done. Honestly, I think Woodsen may be the best QB in this draft. JMO

[milkman]

I know what you were TRYING to do.
The problem was it didn't take the team makeup, at the time, into consideration.

The problem, as I see, is that the braintrust in Arrowhead have a history of taking team makeup in account when drafting.

That is in large part why our O-Line is the pathetic mess it is in.

Fair enough.

But you don't build them around RB's either...

Agreed.

[Deberg_1990]

Potential was the key word there. I don't think Ryan will amount to shit. JMO. If you were being sarcastic, I missed it. :D

Well, im not a scout, but if the Chiefs have Ryan rated highly and he falls to us, i absolutely think he is the guy the Chiefs must take.

Especially if the top rated linemen are all gone.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

Well, im not a scout, but if the Chiefs have Ryan rated highly and he falls to us, i absolutely think he is the guy the Chiefs must take.

Especially if the top rated linemen are all gone.

Me neither. I don't know anything. It's just my opinion of the guy. I think his decision making skills are horrible. He threw WAY too many INT's this year.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

Me neither. I don't know anything. It's just my opinion of the guy. I think his decision making skills are horrible. He threw WAY too many INT's this year.

I'm too lazy to look, wasn't it like 18 picks he threw this year?

[Micjones]

The problem, as I see, is that the braintrust in Arrowhead have a history of taking team makeup in account when drafting.

That is in large part why our O-Line is the pathetic mess it is in.

I don't think our approach is what has been the problem.
I think the poor evaluation of Defensive Line talent has.

We went overboard trying to fix the Defensive Line and it cost us on the other side. The real problem though was the scouts and the coaches. We missed on too many D-Line prospects.

Not to mention the fact that we haven't made big commitments to the Offensive Line through the Draft.

[Micjones]

How many guys have LT quality in this league? I don't think there is a franchise qb in this draft that will be taken in the first 10 picks. I'm sure someone will snag one in the 4th or 5th round that will stick around for a while. I just don't think Brohm, or Ryan is going to get it done. Honestly, I think Woodsen may be the best QB in this draft. JMO

We can argue over which QB to take... If any at all.
I just know that drafting McFadden will be a mistake.
And it has nothing at all to do with what he will become in the NFL.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

We can argue over which QB to take... If any at all.
I just know that drafting McFadden will be a mistake.
And it has nothing at all to do with what he will become in the NFL.

I understand what you're saying. The only way I would draft McFadden is if the targets we had were gone. I certainly wouldn't keep him and LJ on the same roster for any longer than I had too either. I would trade LJ and try to address team needs that way. Would it be possible? I don't know, I'm not an NFL executive. That's just the route my inexperienced ass would go.

[Micjones]

I understand what you're saying. The only way I would draft McFadden is if the targets we had were gone. I certainly wouldn't keep him and LJ on the same roster for any longer than I had too either. I would trade LJ and try to address team needs that way. Would it be possible? I don't know, I'm not an NFL executive. That's just the route my inexperienced ass would go.

If we could move LJ off of the roster I'd do it, but that won't be easy.
And we're almost certain not to get the right value for him in a trade.

[kcfanXIII]

marty took TG because he was a perfect fit for marty ball. suddenly, you didn't need to have 2 WR to threaten to pass. allows for a lot of play action out of "big" sets.

taking LJ, when we still had priest turned out to be a good idea i guess. holmes' injury was serious enough to threaten his career, we could afford the contract on a rb taken where he was taken, i want to say between 17 to 25. i don't remember exactly and i'm too lazy to look up.

you're talking here about a much less serious injury, to a much higher paid RB. also we'd be drafting higher, so the contact on the rookie will go up. not to mention our offensive line is in shambles, we have one legit theat at wide receiver, and no QB has stepped up enough to claim a starting job.

i believe kolby smith showed some good stuff when the 31 show finally left town. yet another way HERL has stunted the development of the youth on this team. back to the point, if we put a line in front of LJ and KS, our running game will all of a sudden be the least of our concerns.

no matter what you think, LJ will not be traded. let me just repeat myself just a bit louder: LJ WILL NOT BE TRADED. as if the contract wasn't enough of a drawback, johnson was injured for half the season last year. nobody is going to over look those two facts combined. its not going to happen, just quit telling yourself we could trade him to justify taking mcfadden.

[Brock]

that was when the Chiefs were running a west coast offense, not to mention at the time Gonzalez could have been viewed as a missing piece for a pretty complete team. Certainly doesn't apply now.

[evolve27]

This does not appear to be a 1 year off-season fix for this team. So if we wind up with the best player in the draft, I am fine with it.

If he's the best player when Carl's on the clock then so be it.

[gblowfish]

If Mizzou kicked his ass, what do you think Denver and San Diego will do to him?

Dallas wants McFadden bad. Jerry Jones is an Arkansas guy. They have 2 first round picks. If we can't get Jake Long, trade the pick to Dallas for 2 first rounders, and pickup the second or third best tackle and the first or second best guard in the draft.

[chop]

Does anyone think LJ will have to renegotiate his contract or be cut in a couple of years?

8/21/2007: Signed a six-year, $45.05 million contract. The deal included a $12.5 million signing bonus and contains $19 million in total guarantees. The first three years' base salaries are guaranteed. 2008: $2.5 million (+ $100,000 workout bonus + $62,500 per-game roster bonuses), 2009: $4.55 million (+ $100,000 workout bonus + $62,500 per-game roster bonuses), 2010: $5 million (+ $1 million roster bonus due 3/1 + $100,000 workout bonus + $62,500 per-game roster bonuses), 2011: $5.3 million (+ $1 million roster bonus due 3/1 + $100,000 workout bonus + $62,500 per-game roster bonuses), 2012: $5.9 million (+ $1 million roster bonus due 3/1 + $100,000 workout bonus + $62,500 per-game roster bonuses), 2013: Free Agent. Cap charges: $6.156 million (2008), $8.206 million (2009), $9.183 million (2010), $9.483 million (2011), $10.083 million (2012).

[Silock]

Yes it was.

Do I regret having Johnson on this team? No...
Has he had individual success as a Runningback? Sure...

But we were still working to fix a woeful defense 3 years later.
We took the wrong guy. If we draft McFadden we'll be paying 18 million dollars to a back-up Runningback who has no chance of becoming a starter here.

And if we hadn't had LJ, you'd be talking about our woeful offense as soon as PH went down and DV was still the coach.

[Silock]

I don't think LJ's injury situation is anywhere near what Priests' was back then so I really don't see this as the same at all.

Injuries can happen at any time.

[beach tribe]

And if we hadn't had LJ, you'd be talking about our woeful offense as soon as PH went down and DV was still the coach.

LJ is a beast no doubt, but I could have gained 1450 behind that line.

[kcfanXIII]

Injuries can happen at any time.


and they'll happen quicker with no blocking, and a one dimensional offense
sure doesn't help.

[Halfcan]

Does anyone think LJ will have to renegotiate his contract or be cut in a couple of years?

8/21/2007: Signed a six-year, $45.05 million contract. The deal included a $12.5 million signing bonus and contains $19 million in total guarantees. The first three years' base salaries are guaranteed. 2008: $2.5 million (+ $100,000 workout bonus + $62,500 per-game roster bonuses), 2009: $4.55 million (+ $100,000 workout bonus + $62,500 per-game roster bonuses), 2010: $5 million (+ $1 million roster bonus due 3/1 + $100,000 workout bonus + $62,500 per-game roster bonuses), 2011: $5.3 million (+ $1 million roster bonus due 3/1 + $100,000 workout bonus + $62,500 per-game roster bonuses), 2012: $5.9 million (+ $1 million roster bonus due 3/1 + $100,000 workout bonus + $62,500 per-game roster bonuses), 2013: Free Agent. Cap charges: $6.156 million (2008), $8.206 million (2009), $9.183 million (2010), $9.483 million (2011), $10.083 million (2012).

We should cut him now.

[Micjones]

Injuries can happen at any time.

Sure so draft another Runningback in the Top 5 on the chance that Johnson gets hurt again?

Kolby Smith is a competent backup if Johnson goes down again.
Keep in mind that RB is one of the easiest positions to replace in the NFL.

We can't afford to spend a Top 5 pick on an insurance policy.

[Mr. Laz]

I like to yell at Carl as much as the next guy, but this is the correct thing to say, even in the likely event that we wouldn't take him.

yep

[Tribal Warfare]

If he's the best player when Carl's on the clock then so be it.

I concur

[Spicy McHaggis]

Herm's dream of a gameplan comes true:

LJ -25 carries
McFadden - 25 carries
Croyle - 1 screen pass (inc.)

[BigChiefFan]

Sure so draft another Runningback in the Top 5 on the chance that Johnson gets hurt again?

Kolby Smith is a competent backup if Johnson goes down again.
Keep in mind that RB is one of the easiest positions to replace in the NFL.

That's why we ran RBBC for all of those years, right?

[Mecca]

You don't build your team around RB's, it works maybe 1 out of 20 times....

[Brock]

That's why we ran RBBC for all of those years, right?

You are aware the league has changed in the past 10 years, right?

[Micjones]

That's why we ran RBBC for all of those years, right?

How's about you step out of your trusty time machine there old pal?

It's been a long time since Kimble Anders or Donnell Bennett played for this football team.

[Mecca]

When you take a player top 5, to me that means you expect him to be productive for a decade.....the odds of a RB doing that are slim and none.

[el borracho]

IMO, Carl should have been more enthusiastic about taking McFadden to further the bluff. Carl should have said things like, "Well, I was in that same situation a few years ago and I think I made the right decision" or "I've done it (taken a RB in the 1st when I already had a great one on the roster) before." Carl could have done more to sell the idea that he is interested (even if he really isn't).

[Reerun_KC]

You are aware the league has changed in the past 10 years, right?

99% of all Chiefs fans are aware of that simple fact, but I dont think our coaching/management staff got the memo. They seem to have missed the fact that you dont win championships without scoring touchdowns anymore.

[ChiefsCountry]

When you take a player top 5, to me that means you expect him to be productive for a decade.....the odds of a RB doing that are slim and none.

What about your boy Bush?

[chagrin]

When you take a player top 5, to me that means you expect him to be productive for a decade.....the odds of a RB doing that are slim and none.

Quick question here, are you saying you prefer a solid 10 year player with a top 5 over a playmaker for 5-7 years?

Not arguing, just asking. Because it seems to me that there are some holes in this statement, on its own.

[CosmicPal]

Taking a look doesn't mean he's going to draft him. Of course you take a look when you have a player of that quality sitting there. But, what he's probably doing is feigning interest so that he can possibly pull a trade or get a team to jump up in front of them and draft McFadden so he knows we're guaranteed a shot a Long or Ellis or someone we really covet. Jerry Jones has indicated repeatedly that they are interested in a RB this draft. There are a few teams out there that could use McFadden.

Al is the kind of guy who would draft Long or Ellis knowing damn well the Chiefs could use them. If Peterson pulls the "I'm taking McFadden card" it could lure a team to get trigger happy and pull a trade with Al- thus taking the Faiders out of the draft ahead of us. Or, should the Faiders take Ellis and Long is gone or something like that- Carl then has the "I"m taking McFadden card" still waving and he can use it to move down a few spots and pick up an extra pick or two.

[chagrin]

What about your boy Bush?

He meant *except* USC players

[BigRedChief]

smokescreen. A bad one too. Does he not realize that other teams are aware that we have LJ locked into a non-tradable contract? A reliable backup signed for another 3 years?

I don't think these comments are going to scare anyone into trading up. They are transparent. Not that King Carl is wrong in doing this. It's just part of the draft board game.

[Mecca]

Quick question here, are you saying you prefer a solid 10 year player with a top 5 over a playmaker for 5-7 years?

Not arguing, just asking. Because it seems to me that there are some holes in this statement, on its own.

A RB lasting 7 years would be really good...

I just don't think RB is a valuable enough position, it's to easily replaceable. Odds say by the time your team that is shitty enough to pick top 5 is good he'll be about done..

Bush is a great weapon to have but I when push comes to shove wouldn't have taken him unless my team was good and somehow sucked for a year and had that high of a pick...

Houston did the right thing DE>RB

[BigChiefFan]

Guys, we ran RBBC because we didn't have a competent starting HB-it was lack of talent, not because we thought it was the best course of action-don't let the facts cloud your judgement, though.


Next you'll tell me Donnell Bennett would have been a starter on the majority of the teams in the league, right? ****in' revisionists.

[Brock]

Guys, we ran RBBC because we didn't have a competent starting HB-it was lack of talent, not because we thought it was the best course of action-don't let the facts cloud your judgement, though.


Next you'll tell me Donnell Bennett would have been a starter on the majority of the teams in the league, right? ****in' revisionists.

So you don't agree that it is much, much easier to obtain a good RB than it was in 1995?

[BigChiefFan]

So you don't agree that it is much, much easier to obtain a good RB than it was in 1995?
I don't agree that every team has an Adrian Peterson type quality back on their team. Mcfadden is considered top 5 for a REASON. The reason is... he's BETTER than his competition in this year's draft.

[Brock]

I don't agree that every team has an Adrian Peterson type quality back on their team. Mcfadden is considered top 5 for a REASON. The reason is... he's BETTER than his competition in this year's draft.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with that, I'm just disagreeing with putting that much importance on a running back. The better teams in the league don't seem to do that.

[Mecca]

Not every team has an Adrian Peterson back, but you don't have to have that you just need a productive back.

This league is loaded with backs, anymore it's better to go with the 2 good RB's theory and start splitting guys into roles.

[Bowser]

Not every team has an Adrian Peterson back, but you don't have to have that you just need a productive back.

This league is loaded with backs, anymore it's better to go with the 2 good RB's theory and start splitting guys into roles.

I'll agree with this. One of the few good things to come out of the 2007 season was to see the Kolby Smith can actually be a solid #2 back.

[talastan]

This is just a Carl smokescreen. There is no way we are going to break the bank two years in a row for a RB when our franchised DE needs a long term contract and we need to pay nine other drafted players.


Then again this is CeePee we're talking about?!! :shrug: