Jump to content

If NFL Nation reporters could re-pick the 2018 draft, here's how things would shake out in redraft


Patriot Killa

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Patriot Killa said:

They obviously think Allen did better than Rosen.

We heard all about Josh Allen a full year before the draft; his potential and rocket arm.  JA was training with Jordan Palmer, and he (Jordan) told his father-in-law, who told us, that this guy has all the skills to develop as the top QB of his class.  Evidently, Sam agreed.

We’ll see what happens after a few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Macaggnan taking Allen after the absolute dogsh*t he displayed on the field this year makes a looooooot of sense tho.

kindof still depends on how accurate allen can be.  the guy has some serious mobility and right now he relies on it too much.  let's see him next season when he may get his accuracy up and game sense.  i wouldn't take him over darnold though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

The problem is, Darnold doesn’t have to be a “superstar” for him to end up being the guy who got away. 

If Darnold is an above-average to very good 10 year starter, the Giants f*cked up.

 

But lets say we get Bell this year in FA. He's a great running back, same as Barkley. However he's what, six years older? So assuming both stay healthy, the Giants would have their #1 RB about 5 years longer, and wouldn't have had to pay about 16 mil per year to get him.

Now lets look at the QB thing. Lets say the Giants take Haskins, or another QB, maybe Murray(?) this year. Neither team will be close to title contention for at least another year or two. I'd give a slight advantage to the Jets/Darnold at QB because Sam now has a year of NFL experience, and it would be a lot to ask of the Giants rookie QB to come in and excel right away. It wouldn't be a stretch though, given the skill players like OBJ and Barkley he'll have to work with.

My point is, with two teams as bad as the Jets and the Giants, does it really matter whether they got the RB or QB first? The key to the Jets future is Darnold MUST be very good, but they need to get weapons around him though, or it won't really matter. The Giants? They already have all the weapons, they need the QB. As Jets fans we want to believe we've seen enough that we have no doubt about Sam, and I think there's a good chance he will be really good. I just don't think we can automatically assume all the pieces will fall into place so easily for this team. They rarely do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, bealeb319 said:

Did they wafxh Allen play?

Sent from my LGUS991 using JetNation.com mobile app
 

Maybe they did, and they feel that he's young, is mobile, has a great arm, and with the talent he showed last season, he can develop into a franchise QB who'll play at a high level for the next 10-15 years. Now I'm not going to tell you which of the 5 rookie QBs I'm talking about, but can you at least fathom the idea all of these teams feel this way about the one they have?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, slimjasi said:

The problem is, Darnold doesn’t have to be a “superstar” for him to end up being the guy who got away. 

If Darnold is an above-average to very good 10 year starter, the Giants f*cked up.

 

I fully agree with the only caveat being that possibly the Giants will still hit on a different QB (e.g. Tua) and so it won't matter (plus they'll have a superstar in Barkley).  But I still think they were crazy to pass on Darnold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 14 in Green said:

Or they could just stay where they are, and probably get the top QB in this draft, and certainly no worse then the second best. Again you're assuming a lot with Darnold in thinking he'll automatically become an elite QB. Right now he has the potential to be, but he hasn't separated himself from any of the other rookie QBs. In fact he's behind Mayfield, and whether you like the way he plays or not, possibly Jackson, who revitalized his team and led them to the playoffs. 

I agree with you about Darnold.  Only on this website do people have such certainty about his future notwithstanding his lack of playing time.  He's got the ceiling and showed well over the last quarter of the season, but it's hard to make definitive conclusions based on a 4-game stretch.  One thing I noticed is that while he can move in the pocket, he doesn't have a feel for the pocket.

It will be interesting to see how teams adjust to defending against Jackson with an offseason and sufficient film to come up with a game plan.  The Browns started using a 5-2 in the last half of the 4th quarter that seemed to slow Jackson down.  Eventually, he's going to have to show he's a competent thrower.  And while fumbling was a concern with Darnold coming into the season, it was an actual problem with Jackson.  He had 12 fumbles over the 7 or 8 games he started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Darnold and mayfield are gone, you go Barkley based on everything we know up until today, end of discussion

then we are discussing resigning Teddy, going after foles, bringing in bortles for the veteran minimum while we wait till next years an class or over drafting a an this year 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 14 in Green said:

But lets say we get Bell this year in FA. He's a great running back, same as Barkley. However he's what, six years older? So assuming both stay healthy, the Giants would have their #1 RB about 5 years longer, and wouldn't have had to pay about 16 mil per year to get him.

Now lets look at the QB thing. Lets say the Giants take Haskins, or another QB, maybe Murray(?) this year. Neither team will be close to title contention for at least another year or two. I'd give a slight advantage to the Jets/Darnold at QB because Sam now has a year of NFL experience, and it would be a lot to ask of the Giants rookie QB to come in and excel right away. It wouldn't be a stretch though, given the skill players like OBJ and Barkley he'll have to work with.

My point is, with two teams as bad as the Jets and the Giants, does it really matter whether they got the RB or QB first? The key to the Jets future is Darnold MUST be very good, but they need to get weapons around him though, or it won't really matter. The Giants? They already have all the weapons, they need the QB. As Jets fans we want to believe we've seen enough that we have no doubt about Sam, and I think there's a good chance he will be really good. I just don't think we can automatically assume all the pieces will fall into place so easily for this team. They rarely do. 

I like the spin and it's quite intriguing, but the logic is flawed in that for your argument to be true, one would have to assume that Eli Manning was the crux of the Giant's problems. This is simply not true. Statistically this year his numbers were as good as, or better than his performance of two years ago {2016} when the Giant's record was 11-5.  His biggest issue this year was sacks, 47, 26 more than that campaign.  A case can be made that his mobility could be a cause, but it's more likely that the lack of a dependable running game and pass protection due to a poor offensive line hurt more. While the Giants Offense ranked 11th in the league in passing yards, they were 24th in rushing yards, despite being 10th in yards/attempt.  In spite of all the good work done by Barkley, the Giants still had a lousy team because of the supporting cast and a Rank Defense. In essence Barkley was no more the solution than Manning was the problem.   So to equivocate one situation with the other is really not feasible.  What is known, however is that both the Jets and  Giants as currently constituted are bad football teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, DetDawg said:

I agree with you about Darnold.  Only on this website do people have such certainty about his future notwithstanding his lack of playing time.  He's got the ceiling and showed well over the last quarter of the season, but it's hard to make definitive conclusions based on a 4-game stretch.  One thing I noticed is that while he can move in the pocket, he doesn't have a feel for the pocket.

It will be interesting to see how teams adjust to defending against Jackson with an offseason and sufficient film to come up with a game plan.  The Browns started using a 5-2 in the last half of the 4th quarter that seemed to slow Jackson down.  Eventually, he's going to have to show he's a competent thrower.  And while fumbling was a concern with Darnold coming into the season, it was an actual problem with Jackson.  He had 12 fumbles over the 7 or 8 games he started.

Please explain to me the rationale behind the statement that Sam Darnold, while being adept at moving in the pocket, somehow does not have a "feel" for the pocket.  I can understand how one can have a "feel" and not be able to "move" due to mobility problems, but don't understand how the opposite can be true.  As far as "Only on this website" are people so certain about Sam Darnold' s future, once again I am perplexed.  It is pretty universally acknowledged that Sam Darnold has an extremely bright future., If you can provide me with examples of the "doubters", in media or print, I would be interested in hearing their perspective.  Thanks.  By the way, your observations on Jackson are spot on.  In respect to Darnold, not so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, 14 in Green said:

It really would be fascinating to see what the Giants would do if they could pick again after seeing everyone play a year. I think they'd probably stay with the sure thing in Barkley. I'm not trying to troll here, I'm just not as convinced that Darnold is guaranteed to be the super star most of you are convinced he will be, and I am convinced about Barkley. I also think the Browns are satisfied with the rookie trio of Mayfield QB, Ward CB(probable DROY) and Chubb RB over Mayfield/Barkley, although I have to be honest, if I were them, last year I'd have picked Barkley at 1, then taken whichever QB was left at 4 among Darnold, Allen and Rosen. That would've left Mayfield for the Jets, and left me all warm and fuzzy, LOL. Guess that's why I was never hired as a GM. ?

I respect yout opinion but I can't agree with you. A RB at 2 is not equal to a QB at 3.  Even if Barkley is a better RB than Darnold is a QB it's not worth it. Look as how great Barkley played and the Giants only won 5 games.  

Also on a side note, I am convinced Darnold is going to be something special.  Everyone forgets he is only 21, two years younger than Mayfield (with inferior talent around him as a rookie). I thought Darnold made plays, especially after coming back from his foot injury that only special players can make.  Time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TeddEY said:

Yes, but with the power of hindsight, you take Barkley there.  It's unfortunate, but you don't pass of a generational runner for a poor QB.

Yeah....you do.

You win with a QB, not a RB.

And do you know how many 'generational' RB in the best 15 years went on to be not-so-generational when picked?  Lots.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

Yeah....you do.

You win with a QB, not a RB.

And do you know how many 'generational' RB in the best 15 years went on to be not-so-generational when picked?  Lots.

 

That doesn’t change the fact that Barkley is good and Allen is bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

I like the spin and it's quite intriguing, but the logic is flawed in that for your argument to be true, one would have to assume that Eli Manning was the crux of the Giant's problems. This is simply not true. Statistically this year his numbers were as good as, or better than his performance of two years ago {2016} when the Giant's record was 11-5.  His biggest issue this year was sacks, 47, 26 more than that campaign.  A case can be made that his mobility could be a cause, but it's more likely that the lack of a dependable running game and pass protection due to a poor offensive line hurt more. While the Giants Offense ranked 11th in the league in passing yards, they were 24th in rushing yards, despite being 10th in yards/attempt.  In spite of all the good work done by Barkley, the Giants still had a lousy team because of the supporting cast and a Rank Defense. In essence Barkley was no more the solution than Manning was the problem.   So to equivocate one situation with the other is really not feasible.  What is known, however is that both the Jets and  Giants as currently constituted are bad football teams.

Both teams were hurt by very poor offensive line play and neither will become competitive until they change that. The post you are quoting was a reply to the person who said "as long as Darnold was above average or very good for the next 10 years, the Giants would regret not taking Darnold" I'm not sure why you're bringing Manning into that QB/RB chicken or the egg draft discussion. My basic point was because both teams are so bad, it makes no difference what order each team gets the RB and QB, as long as they both get them. I think the Giants can do it cheaper, since they can get both on rookie deals, while the Jets would have to pay a ransom for a six year older back such as Bell. Of course I realize the Jets have the advantage of already having the young QB, which is the more important position, but the Giants can still get one this year, and won't have to worry about upgrading the skill positions around him. 

So what are we talking about here? Two bad football teams, with horrible OLs. One has a rookie QB they hope develops into a star, and is hoping to sign a $16 mil per year star RB to help him. The other is hoping to draft a rookie QB and pair him with their star RB and WR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 14 in Green said:

Both teams were hurt by very poor offensive line play and neither will become competitive until they change that. The post you are quoting was a reply to the person who said "as long as Darnold was above average or very good for the next 10 years, the Giants would regret not taking Darnold" I'm not sure why you're bringing Manning into that QB/RB chicken or the egg draft discussion. My basic point was because both teams are so bad, it makes no difference what order each team gets the RB and QB, as long as they both get them. I think the Giants can do it cheaper, since they can get both on rookie deals, while the Jets would have to pay a ransom for a six year older back such as Bell. Of course I realize the Jets have the advantage of already having the young QB, which is the more important position, but the Giants can still get one this year, and won't have to worry about upgrading the skill positions around him. 

So what are we talking about here? Two bad football teams, with horrible OLs. One has a rookie QB they hope develops into a star, and is hoping to sign a $16 mil per year star RB to help him. The other is hoping to draft a rookie QB and pair him with their star RB and WR.

Don't go wild, but I don't want Bell.  Too many needs, too much money/resources devoted to one solution.  We have too many holes for such a luxury.  I want a long term fix, even at the cost of missing the playoffs, possibly next year, and the next.  My point with Eli was that I'm not sure replacing him would benefit them all too much, specifically next year.  This would bring you to year four of Barkley's "prime" without the Heir apparent in place and seasoned.  Good job with your observations on this thread, you stimulated a lot of provocative thought and spirited discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, JetsFanatic said:

I respect yout opinion but I can't agree with you. A RB at 2 is not equal to a QB at 3.  Even if Barkley is a better RB than Darnold is a QB it's not worth it. Look as how great Barkley played and the Giants only won 5 games.  

Also on a side note, I am convinced Darnold is going to be something special.  Everyone forgets he is only 21, two years younger than Mayfield (with inferior talent around him as a rookie). I thought Darnold made plays, especially after coming back from his foot injury that only special players can make.  Time will tell.

Don't misunderstand me,( @joenamathwouldn'tcry this is for you too) I'm probably not making myself clear about Darnold. I think he can be a very good QB. After watching him outplay Watkins the way he did in the Houston game, I think we have the right guy. All I'm trying to say is that doesn't mean the Giants can't find the right guy either. Plus as good as Sam can be, we still need to get players around him, both at OL and the skill positions. The Giants still need to get the QB and OL, but have the skill players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

Yeah....you do.

You win with a QB, not a RB.

And do you know how many 'generational' RB in the best 15 years went on to be not-so-generational when picked?  Lots.

 

A good RB is better than a bad QB 

a great RB is better than an average QB

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

Don't go wild, but I don't want Bell.  Too many needs, too much money/resources devoted to one solution.  We have too many holes for such a luxury.  I want a long term fix, even at the cost of missing the playoffs, possibly next year, and the next.  My point with Eli was that I'm not sure replacing him would benefit them all too much, specifically next year.  This would bring you to year four of Barkley's "prime" without the Heir apparent in place and seasoned.  Good job with your observations on this thread, you stimulated a lot of provocative thought and spirited discussion.

So did you, and the best part is look at everyone else's posts. Nobody getting nasty, just trying to make their points. Everyone just hanging out talking football. Good on all of us! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 14 in Green said:

But lets say we get Bell this year in FA. He's a great running back, same as Barkley. However he's what, six years older? So assuming both stay healthy, the Giants would have their #1 RB about 5 years longer, and wouldn't have had to pay about 16 mil per year to get him.

Yes, but having a #1 running back is simply no where near as important has having a good QB. That’s the point. Running back is an eminently replaceable position. It’s arguably the easiest position to replace on the entire field.

Good young QBs are hard to find - and, in point of fact, MUCH harder to find than good young running backs. The Giants might be looking for their next QB for 5-10 years. 

Darnold legitimately has the chance to be here for the next 15+ years. Heck, in 15 years, Darnold will be 2 years younger than Eli Manning is now. 

If Darnold is better than average, the Barkley pick was a mistake. If he is a stud, the Barkley pick was a complete and utter disaster. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

I fully agree with the only caveat being that possibly the Giants will still hit on a different QB (e.g. Tua) and so it won't matter (plus they'll have a superstar in Barkley).  But I still think they were crazy to pass on Darnold.

Yea, if they hit on another QB in the next year or two, then they won. But, IMO, the odds of landing a guy with as much potential as Darnold in the next few seasons aren’t very high. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

Yes, but having a #1 running back is simply no where near as important has having a good QB. That’s the point. Running back is an eminently replaceable position. It’s arguably the easiest position to replace on the entire field.

Good young QBs are hard to find - and, in point of fact, MUCH harder to find than good young running backs. The Giants might be looking for their next QB for 5-10 years. 

Darnold legitimately has the chance to be here for the next 15+ years. Heck, in 15 years, Darnold will be 2 years younger than Eli Manning is now. 

If Darnold is better than average, the Barkley pick was a mistake. If he is a stud, the Barkley pick was a complete and utter disaster. 

There is nothing you said here that isn't true, but let me ask you a few questions. As far as young QBs, can you ever remember a time when there were more young ones playing so well right away? Without looking, I'll guess about half the league will have QBs under 27-28 next year. Maybe they're not that hard to find anymore? 

Second question. How many times this year have we talked here about finally getting a QB, then worrying he was going to get hurt because he had no OL or he had no chance without weapons around him? So why can't the Giants find a QB in the next year or two because they might feel its wise to put a team around him first?

Last one, LOL. We are both assuming Darnold will be a 10+ year starter for us, and so are the other 4 teams who drafted QBs last year. Why wouldn't the Giants feel the same way about say Haskins, Murray, Jones, Tua, or Herbert? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 14 in Green said:

There is nothing you said here that isn't true, but let me ask you a few questions. As far as young QBs, can you ever remember a time when there were more young ones playing so well right away? Without looking, I'll guess about half the league will have QBs under 27-28 next year. Maybe they're not that hard to find anymore? 

Second question. How many times this year have we talked here about finally getting a QB, then worrying he was going to get hurt because he had no OL or he had no chance without weapons around him? So why can't the Giants find a QB in the next year or two because they might feel its wise to put a team around him first?

Last one, LOL. We are both assuming Darnold will be a 10+ year starter for us, and so are the other 4 teams who drafted QBs last year. Why wouldn't the Giants feel the same way about say Haskins, Murray, Jones, Tua, or Herbert? 

1) Good point, but I think sometimes good QBs come in bunches, so that is skewing things a bit right now. Also, some of them walked into some very good situations. Goff is pretty good, but on a loaded team. Wentz is pretty good, but has serious durability issues. Mahomes is obviously a star. I'm not crazy about Trubisky - we'll see.  I like Mayfield and Darnold a lot, but let's see where they go from here. Good young QBs may not be as hard to find as they were, but I suspect that, in the end, there will still be more busts than successes in any given draft, on average. 

2) You are right. The Giants certainly could find their guy in this year or next year's draft. Absolutely. But, they could also easily miss out on him. The thing is, the Giants were sitting there at #2, without having to trade up, with a chance to take the guy that most GMs had as the number 1 QB in the draft. That's an opportunity that doesn't come around very often. What if they get beat out by other teams this year who trade up for Haskins/Murray? (There's no guarantee that they get either guy picking where they are this year - and what if they only like one of them?) What if they finish 5-11 next year, end up picking 6th again in the draft, and several teams picking ahead of them need QBs? So, while they very well may be able to land a guy they really like in one of the next few drafts, it is entirely possible that they are just mediocre enough to miss out on everyone. There are no guarantees. Meanwhile, last year, they had a chance to take a QB that most teams thought was THE guy to take. If I were a Giants fan, that would really bother me. 

3) If the Giants land a guy like Tua, they will certainly feel very good about things. But, again, that is just such a huge IF. They had a chance to take Darnold. Idk, I guess I'm just high on Darnold. I have been a Darnold guy for well over a year now, so I guess I am just biased. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 14 in Green said:

What duo you feel  Sam has actually done that separates himself from them?

I am no way a QB whisperer and I am a jet fan so I’m a pessimist from jump street, that being said I’ve never been this happy about the qb position ever. I knew nothiing of these  5 QBs until the draft and had no dog in the race. We pick Darnold and I just hoped for the best. , I can’t describe “it”, I’m not paid to and won’t pretend I know how to but this kid has “it”. The throws, the moxie, the ability to improvise all while being surrounded by garbage. The better play as the season went on. Not hindsight but wasn’t a fan of geno, tried to give Sanchez a shot, heck I was done with Pennington way before most jet fans. There’s just something about Sam that gives me hope. JMO

all that being said, I don’t think he had some great rookie season, there is a lot of room for improvement and if you wanna argue mayfield was the better pick you can argue but up to this point Allen as a qb, not an athlete, was disappointing and Rosen looked lost

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 14 in Green said:

What duo you feel  Sam has actually done that separates himself from them?

IMO, he thoroughly outperformed Rosen (who also had a terrible supporting cast) and slightly outperformed Allen (although Allen did just fine). 

It's only one year anyway. I think we will know a lot more after years 2-3. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Anthony Jet said:

I am no way a QB whisperer and I am a jet fan so I’m a pessimist from jump street, that being said I’ve never been this happy about the qb position ever. I knew nothiing of these  5 QBs until the draft and had no dog in the race. We pick Darnold and I just hoped for the best. , I can’t describe “it”, I’m not paid to and won’t pretend I know how to but this kid has “it”. The throws, the moxie, the ability to improvise all while being surrounded by garbage. The better play as the season went on. Not hindsight but wasn’t a fan of geno, tried to give Sanchez a shot, heck I was done with Pennington way before most jet fans. There’s just something about Sam that gives me hope. JMO

all that being said, I don’t think he had some great rookie season, there is a lot of room for improvement and if you wanna argue mayfield was the better pick you can argue but up to this point Allen as a qb, not an athlete, was disappointing and Rosen looked lost

To be honest, I only seen clips of Rosen. Still haven’t seen him play a full game. I haven’t heard anything different then what you said. I did get to see Allen play a few times though, and he impressed me. He was exactly as advertised, probably the most physical gifts of the 5 rookies, but raw. I will say he had what I thought was the single most impressive game of any of them the day Buffalo went into Minnesota and destroyed the Vikings. I know the knock on him is accuracy, but I think this idea people have here that it cannot improve is urban legend. He might not fulfill his potential, but if he ever comes close, watch out. He’ll be the best of all of them. BTW, I might be wrong, but I think he’s only a few months older then Sam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

IMO, he thoroughly outperformed Rosen (who also had a terrible supporting cast) and slightly outperformed Allen (although Allen did just fine). 

It's only one year anyway. I think we will know a lot more after years 2-3. 

Agree 100%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...