Quote:
Originally Posted by Rain Man
All of those guys had first-round pick QBs that led their teams. No one's arguing that a high-round quarterback can lead a team to a Super Bowl with a running back of moderate skills.
Again, no one's saying that a franchise quarterback isn't more valuable than a franchise running back. The argument is whether 1st-round running backs are a waste of time. They aren't.
Dan Marino. Jim Plunkett. Archie Manning. Donovan McNabb. And so on.
He won a Super Bowl.
Based on your argument, why didn't they go in the 5th round?
No one's arguing that good running backs can't come from later rounds. The odds are way better that you'll get a franchise back in the first round.
|
While you're spending that first round pick on a RB who has a grade of 98 and I'm picking behind you and there's a QB with a grade of 96, I'll gladly allow for you to take the BPA.
It's not that a franchise QB is worth more than a franchise RB. It's that impact DE's, DT's, corners, safeties, and tackles are ALL worth more than a franchise running back.
Jim Plunkett won a Super Bowl. Marino and McNabb carried their teams to Super Bowls.
It's quite simple: you win with good play on the lines and from the quarterback position. It's a passing league, and your ideas are outdated, much like Herm's.
You can't shut down a great QB unless you have a great pass rush.
You can't shut down a great DE unless you have a great tackle.
You can't shut down a great DT unless you double team him, and then he opens things up for every other member of the line.
You can't shut down a great CB...he shuts off half the field.
All you have to do to shut down a great RB is put 8 or 9 guys in the box.
Ultimately, you win with playmakers. Playmakers from every other position come in the early rounds. You can find playmaking RBs in the later rounds.
Furthermore, it is a position with the shortest lifespan of any in the NFL.