Jump to content
NBC Sports Edge Forums

Saquon Barkley 2018 Outlook


Message added by tonycpsu

[Automated message: This outlook thread for the 2018 season will be locked on 2019-01-31. Please finish any 2018 discussions here, and take any 2019 outlook discussions to the 2019 outlook thread . If one does not exist, feel free to create one. Thanks!]

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Gohawks said:

Yet neither of the teams in the Super Bowl had an elite running back nor did another one in the final 4.

 

Yet neither had a 1st round QB and the only one that did in the final 4 happens to ironically be the worst of the bunch - 1 who was talked about being benched literally days before the season started 

 

All I did was prove, with evidence, how effective a run game is in determining success for teams - with or without the almighty “franchise QB”. 

 

So, what did the Giants do? Solder, Hernandez, Barkley added ... and yet, somehow this isn’t a smart move because you guys can’t seem to get over the fact the Giants stuck to their board and took the best player available - who just happens to have “RB” next to his name and still fills a huge need.

 

Oh, and they did so while still grabbing an excellent QB to develop who’s skill set just may translate seamlessly to Shurmur’s offense 

 

We just watched 9/12 teams make the playoffs with top 10 run games (or I did, seems like a lot of you just read what an expert tells you to think) ... most of the playoff field actually led by teams with QBs I would not consider “franchise” QBs  by any means ... and yet some of you still just can’t get over the “gotta take a QB early” nonsense. It’s ridiculous, ironically

short sighted (no matter how many times you say “future face of this franchise” it guarantees nothing especially when he has a lower grade than Barkley / Chubb), and 2017 gift wrapped examples of how/why the “franchise QB” is not the end all be all of success in the NFL. 50% of the playoff QBs are mediocre at best (including 3/4 of the conference championship ... with the 1/4 being a 6th rounder)... yet somehow they managed to be successful. 

 

You apparently can win with Foles, Keenum, Bortles (who would’ve been in the SB if the Jags were allowed to play defense for 4 quarters) ... when you surround them with talent.

 

I think Engram, Beckham, Shepard, and Barkley behind an OL that has aggressively  been addressed this offseason just may suffice as a supporting cast.

 

Otherwise, great points you got me.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
34 minutes ago, CyberneticGhostOfXMasPast said:

Yet neither had a 1st round QB and the only one that did in the final 4 happens to ironically be the worst of the bunch - 1 who was talked about being benched literally days before the season started 

 

The Eagles do have a 1st round QB who led them to an 11-2 record, was on his way to an MVP season, and would have been playing in that game had he not been injured. We have to be real here; The Eagles team is built around their 1st round QB talent on a rookie contract. More often than not teams that compete for champinships fit into 1 of 3 buckets. 

 

1. Teams will MVP/HoF caliber QBs

2. Teams with QBs who play well on rookie contracts that allow their team to spend big bucks on marquee players throughout the rest of their roster. 

3. The Patriots

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, P@ckersFan said:

 

The Eagles do have a 1st round QB who led them to an 11-2 record, was on his way to an MVP season, and would have been playing in that game had he not been injured. We have to be real here; The Eagles team is built around their 1st round QB talent on a rookie contract. More often than not teams that compete for champinships fit into 1 of 3 buckets. 

 

1. Teams will HoF caliber QBs

2. Teams with QBs who play well on rookie contracts that allow their team to spend big bucks on marquee players throughout the rest of their roster. 

3. The Patriots

 

Did he play in the SB and/or do anything in the playoffs? No, he didn’t - but he somehow got them there. 

 

this argument is so tired, not gonna break people out of the demigod QB worship I see ... I love what the Giants have done this offseason, see ya.

 

we can drop the economics argument too ... the Giants are 1 of the younger teams in the league with a ton of cap room for 18/19 and then Eli comes off the books ... not to mention it goes up annually and there’s many creative ways to structure big money deals to fit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, CyberneticGhostOfXMasPast said:

You apparently can win with Foles, Keenum, Bortles

 

Foles was only in the Super Bowl because a #2 overall pick led the Eagles to an 11-2 record, and put Foles in a position where he only had to win three games to get a ring.  The Eagles wouldn't have finished anywhere close to 13-3 if Foles had been the Week 1 starter.  Keenum was great last season (and it is pretty funny that a former #1 overall pick was the Week 1 starter ahead of him), but I think we're about to see the fluke wear off in Denver.

 

You also keep bringing up the 2017 season's anomalous Final Four.  In 2016, the final four quarterbacks were Big Ben, Rodgers, Ryan and Brady.  Brady is the only one of those four who wasn't a first-rounder.  The 2015 final four featured three former #1 overall picks and Brady. 

I still think Saquon, the OL improvements, and a healthy OBJ will put them in a position where they finish 8-8 or maybe even 9-7, and wind up with the #20 pick in next year's draft.  And if they fall in love with a QB prospect then, it's going to cost them a 2019 second rounder and a 2020 first rounder and more to move up. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, CyberneticGhostOfXMasPast said:

Did he play in the SB and/or do anything in the playoffs? No, he didn’t - but he somehow got them there. 

 

this argument is so tired, not gonna break people out of the demigod QB worship I see ... I love what the Giants have done this offseason, see ya.

 

I like what they've done this offseason too. I've said before I thought they should take a QB, but if they didn't like any of the guys that much I understand them not going in that direction just because they could. 

 

But if we're talking just general football here we gotta be real about the situation: The Eagles are built around Carson Wentz and his low contract has allowed him to acquire and keep all of that talent that helped them win the Super Bowl. He got them 11 wins which led to their first round bye. He was on pace to win the MVP. The Eagles traded picks to move up and grab him. 

 

Yes the SB worked out for them with Foles who played amazing, but if you asked every team in the league if they wanted to drop their starter and roll with their backup QB for the whole season how many of them do you think would be excited about that prospect? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Carson Wentz helped get them a good record ... he did not QB a snap in the playoffs. Bortles/Keenum -why did they go far? The Giants are not in a bad cap situation and actually have a ton next year and beyond - with one of the younger rosters in the league and 2 young promising QBs 

 

I know the shiny top pick QB makes everyone feel all warm and fuzzy ... but they actually do like Webb and stole Lauletta as even more insurance.

 

They took the best player in the draft, addressed the OL, and now have 2 QBs with a lot to work with and a “qb guru” head coach. 

 

There in a lot better position than most people want to believe, likely because of the 3-13 record/Eli’s age. 

 

We’ll see if this team is closer to the 11-5 playoff contender (the actual rebuild) or an aging 3-13 hopeless franchise. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, eg4190 said:

 

Foles was only in the Super Bowl because a #2 overall pick led the Eagles to an 11-2 record, and put Foles in a position where he only had to win three games to get a ring.  The Eagles wouldn't have finished anywhere close to 13-3 if Foles had been the Week 1 starter.  Keenum was great last season (and it is pretty funny that a former #1 overall pick was the Week 1 starter ahead of him), but I think we're about to see the fluke wear off in Denver.

 

You also keep bringing up the 2017 season's anomalous Final Four.  In 2016, the final four quarterbacks were Big Ben, Rodgers, Ryan and Brady.  Brady is the only one of those four who wasn't a first-rounder.  The 2015 final four featured three former #1 overall picks and Brady. 

I still think Saquon, the OL improvements, and a healthy OBJ will put them in a position where they finish 8-8 or maybe even 9-7, and wind up with the #20 pick in next year's draft.  And if they fall in love with a QB prospect then, it's going to cost them a 2019 second rounder and a 2020 first rounder and more to move up. 

 

Good point on Ben, Rodgers, Brady, Ryan ...

 

2 of them had top 8 rushing offenses (ATL / NE top 5 in rush TDs), another had Leveon Bell, and Rodgers is the best QB in the league and the only QB I think can currently “carry a team” 

 

So, I’ll give you Rodgers ... he’s the best QB I’ve ever seen. If the next Rodgers was available - I’d take him (I said I’d even take the “next Luck”) ... wanna bet on any of these QBs being the next Rodgers?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, P@ckersFan said:

 

I like what they've done this offseason too. I've said before I thought they should take a QB, but if they didn't like any of the guys that much I understand them not going in that direction just because they could. 

 

But if we're talking just general football here we gotta be real about the situation: The Eagles are built around Carson Wentz and his low contract has allowed him to acquire and keep all of that talent that helped them win the Super Bowl. He got them 11 wins which led to their first round bye. He was on pace to win the MVP. The Eagles traded picks to move up and grab him. 

 

Yes the SB worked out for them with Foles who played amazing, but if you asked every team in the league if they wanted to drop their starter and roll with their backup QB for the whole season how many of them do you think would be excited about that prospect? 

Of course.   A handful of teams have made serious SB runs without a top qb,  but it’s the exception.  Defense has too many working parts to think you can control that for any amount of time without the key cog- your qb.  Top D studs want to get paid and their teams can’t manage

to pay them all unless you’re cheating the market by having a franchise qb on a rookie deal.   The legacy of the Barkley pick will come down to whether the Giants can find and develop their next franchise qb.  What Saquon does is irrelevant otherwise.   He can be Barry Sanders on the field and not win s---.   It happens all the time. 

 

If i hear “2017 proved blah blah blah” again, I’m gonna puke.   It proves NOTHING except that there are anomalies that exist in every set of stats given enough time.   This point has been made over and over again by good posters here-  enough charts, stats, and economic breakdowns to choke a donkey...but alas- the misinformation continues to percolate.   

 

“You can lead a horse to water, but....”

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Impreza178 said:

Of course.   A handful of teams have made serious SB runs without a top qb,  but it’s the exception.  Defense has too many working parts to think you can control that for any amount of time without the key cog- your qb.  Top D studs want to get paid and their teams can’t manage

 

Yup, that's why we see these windows open and then shut so quickly. Look what's happening to the Seahawks right now. SF was dominant years ago and it all vanished so quickly as well. The poor Ravens still haven't recovered from Joe Flacco's contract. He was so good in the playoffs (over 250 ypg, 11TDs, 0 picks) that they had to pay him, but he's never lived up to his contract and his cap hit has hamstrung the rest of the roster. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, CyberneticGhostOfXMasPast said:

 

we can drop the economics argument too ... the Giants are 1 of the younger teams in the league with a ton of cap room for 18/19 and then Eli comes off the books ... not to mention it goes up annually and there’s many creative ways to structure big money deals to fit.

 

 

Total cap amount may increase but the allocation on a percentage per position usually is in-line historically so your argument does not  refute anything, basically you are demonstrating you don't understand the economic fundamentals of your argument. 

What you may be able to argue is that going forward teams may allocate more of their salary cap to every down rb's(bell  has been attempting to make this point)  which  would be a shift in the current salary model  and that would mean other positions would receive less. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, CyberneticGhostOfXMasPast said:

 

Good point on Ben, Rodgers, Brady, Ryan ...

 

2 of them had top 8 rushing offenses (ATL / NE top 5 in rush TDs), another had Leveon Bell, and Rodgers is the best QB in the league and the only QB I think can currently “carry a team” 

 

So, I’ll give you Rodgers ... he’s the best QB I’ve ever seen. If the next Rodgers was available - I’d take him (I said I’d even take the “next Luck”) ... wanna bet on any of these QBs being the next Rodgers?

 

LOL. Brady didn't carry his team last year?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, P@ckersFan said:

 

Yup, that's why we see these windows open and then shut so quickly. Look what's happening to the Seahawks right now. SF was dominant years ago and it all vanished so quickly as well. The poor Ravens still haven't recovered from Joe Flacco's contract. He was so good in the playoffs (over 250 ypg, 11TDs, 0 picks) that they had to pay him, but he's never lived up to his contract and his cap hit has hamstrung the rest of the roster. 

Put Denver on there too.  

And Jax’s window is now.   Couple years and it’s salary cap H E double hockey sticks 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Impreza178 said:

.but alas- the misinformation continues to percolate.   

 

“You can lead a horse to water, but....”

 

 

 

You have to fight misinformation with fact based education or it becomes dogma and normalized. :)

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

You have to fight misinformation with fact based education or it becomes dogma and normalized. :)

Shoe, 

Im quickly reaching my breaking point with one particular broker of misinformation.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, dmb3684 said:

 

LOL. Brady didn't carry his team last year?

 

more importantly add up the rb contracts of all of those top rushing teams in the playoffs and the eventual SB winners. Guarantee you those rb contracts are cheap as dirt . 

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

 

more importantly add up the rb contracts of all of those top rushing teams in the playoffs and the eventual SB winners. Guarantee you those rb contracts are cheap as dirt . 

Good teams draft with positional value in mind. Qbs, edge rushers, secondary, O line are all difficult and expensive to add in FA.   

 

Bad teams pick shiny toys and try to sell a middle round flyer as the next Brady.    

 

Look no further than CJA.   27 years old and a top 10 rushing back in 2017.  Yours for the low low price of 2M a season and zero draft capital. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CyberneticGhostOfXMasPast said:

 

Yet neither had a 1st round QB and the only one that did in the final 4 happens to ironically be the worst of the bunch - 1 who was talked about being benched literally days before the season started 

 

All I did was prove, with evidence, how effective a run game is in determining success for teams - with or without the almighty “franchise QB”. 

 

So, what did the Giants do? Solder, Hernandez, Barkley added ... and yet, somehow this isn’t a smart move because you guys can’t seem to get over the fact the Giants stuck to their board and took the best player available - who just happens to have “RB” next to his name and still fills a huge need.

 

Oh, and they did so while still grabbing an excellent QB to develop who’s skill set just may translate seamlessly to Shurmur’s offense 

 

We just watched 9/12 teams make the playoffs with top 10 run games (or I did, seems like a lot of you just read what an expert tells you to think) ... most of the playoff field actually led by teams with QBs I would not consider “franchise” QBs  by any means ... and yet some of you still just can’t get over the “gotta take a QB early” nonsense. It’s ridiculous, ironically

short sighted (no matter how many times you say “future face of this franchise” it guarantees nothing especially when he has a lower grade than Barkley / Chubb), and 2017 gift wrapped examples of how/why the “franchise QB” is not the end all be all of success in the NFL. 50% of the playoff QBs are mediocre at best (including 3/4 of the conference championship ... with the 1/4 being a 6th rounder)... yet somehow they managed to be successful. 

 

You apparently can win with Foles, Keenum, Bortles (who would’ve been in the SB if the Jags were allowed to play defense for 4 quarters) ... when you surround them with talent.

 

I think Engram, Beckham, Shepard, and Barkley behind an OL that has aggressively  been addressed this offseason just may suffice as a supporting cast.

 

Otherwise, great points you got me.

 

The first round QB argument? That’s what you use? Who gives a damn where the QB was drafted? One had one of the best to ever play the game and another one was only in the position they were because a potential MVP got them home field. 

 

Also, the ones that didn’t have a good QB had very good defenses. You either need a top notch defense or a top notch QB to win it all. Having a top notch RB doesn’t mean jack. It’s more of a luxury than a necessity. Which is why they should’ve fixed Cleveland’s mistake and taken Chubb. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Iron-cock said:

 

why-not-w6cvqu.jpg

Because saying a RB made this of a huge jump out of nowhere after 2 years is just wrong. Especially considering it’s a position that players don’t really develop in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing to consider is that GMs these days who draft players who will be able to help the team win games two or three years down the road or often out of a job before that time arrives.

 

Gettleman just got fired from Carolina.  Think he wants to get fired again?  Giants are in "win-now" mode.

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

 

 

Gettleman just got fired from Carolina.  Think he wants to get fired again?  Giants are in "win-now" mode.

 

 

I think gettleman took barkley because Mara wanted Barkley. That's how you keep your job give the owner what he wants because if Barkley busts the owner won't resent you, instead he will be 'understanding' as to why you took the risk and it didnt work out

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • tonycpsu changed the title to Saquon Barkley 2018 Outlook
  • phatrat locked this topic
  • phatrat unlocked this topic
  • phatrat locked and unlocked this topic

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...