Personally, I can't say I'd be disappointed with picking up DMC, but if I had to take a back from this class, I'd rather have Jonathan Stewart. There's no scenario, however, that makes any sense and would have us taking him, even if we were to trade back to 9 or 10. IMO, after having extensively watched him play for Oregon, he's going to be the best of this class. If Chris Long does start falling, as some prognosticators have proposed, I just hope Al Davis shits the bed and takes McFadden. Of course, the Pats would probably have the Chiefs on speed dial at that point.
Is there a rule that we have to take two picks in order for a team to move up? It can't be that we swap picks plus another pick and a player?
rofl i wouldnt worry about that. McFadden is a much better RB prospect than Gholston is a 3-4 OLB prospect.
Well considering he has never sniffed 1600 yards in his career and he played with some damn good OLs in Chicago, I would think that is nothing more than wishful thinking.
I'd swap first rounders with Philly for Lito Sheppard and maybe a 3rd. Take Jonathan Stewart with the 19th. Get one position of need and one hell of a RB.
Whether he is overrated or Barry Sanders on steroids is not the point. The point is these backs are readily available every single year, and in most years 2 or 3 of them are available. So we do not have to pick this guy and should not be in the mindset that nothing like DMC will come along for another ten years. We have bigger needs and should address those areas this year. I forgot to mention the FB Richardson we got from MN, I am very very confident our RB can get 1600+. What more do you want from that position.... How about we talk about hank poteat or david barrett or the guy behind J cothery..whats his name Suckey with a broken foot. How about slowing barton and someone to fill for the departed Vilma. you know we run a 3 -4 right, where is the depth. If you can honestly turn a blind eye to that and advocate DMC I cannot help you
I am on record SEVERAL times ACKNOWLEDGING the needs this team has. But as I've stated HUNDREDS of times...you wanna go out and concentrate on needs/concepts/other gimmicks??? use it in free agency, day to day operations, and the entire make up of the franchise. But draft day is not the place for it. You pay your scouts alot of money evaluating talent, you spend countless hours watching film, going tto workouts and interviewing players to give them draft grades for your board. Why after all that would you not stay true to your entire process and not take the best player available on your board? WHY???? Taking the best player available allows you to build depth, competition, schematic flexibility and an overall roster. THAT is how you build a long time winner. Not whining about some random need for a team and reaching for an inferior player. if you think DMAC is not the best player available..more power to ya. According to multiple sources...21 NFL gm's have him as the highest rated player in the draft. So clearly the big guns disagree...but you're entitled to that. But if you're more in line w/ ignoring a best player available approach and are just insistent on filling a need...I have a problem w/ that.
Thats a good point. So I am in the camp of taking Gholston and if he is not there I would try to trade down and if that did not work i would take DMC.
Fine, 5 years ago. It rarely happens because most teams don't have the ammunition to trade up, and those that do most of the time would rather stay where they are and fill multiple needs. Trading out of the top 6 is very hard. It's possible we can trade down a couple spots and pick up another pick, but it's really just a cop out, since it usually isn't available. I'd rather take Gholston than McFadden, I think, and I like Mendenhall a lot, too, but Mendenhall did it for one year. Looking at them coming out of high school, McFadden was 23rd, Mendenhall 90th. Stewart, by the way, was 10th that year. McFadden was also listed as an ATH.
That's a fair evaluation. Like I said..the only thing i have a probleem w/ is the jets fan who ignores the best player available approach and wants us to reach for need.
Not only that, but he put up ridiculous numbers SPLITTING CARRIES about 60/40. He's a better prospect than Peterson was coming out, and we all know what he did. It would also eliminate he need for a WR, because D-Mac could play in the slot when Jones & Washington are getting carries, much like he did when Felix Jones got carries at Arkansas.
There is not a GM that would agree with you on this planet. It has been reiterated that McFadden should not be held in the same light as Peterson, its unfair to AD.
for all the debating about this, i don't think i've seen these two points made yet. maybe i missed them. but if i didn't, kudos to you, man. using McFadden as a WR while allowing Jones and/or Washington to play at the same time is an excellent idea, an excellent option to have, and a totally new dimension to add to the Offense.
There might be. Peterson was great, and a better pure runningback, but he had injury problems that DMC doesn't have.
Apparently there was more to this than first thought. "The Jets took McFadden to the Hammerstein Ballroom to have dinner and take in a boxing card. Several Jets officials hosted McFadden, including Eric Mangini's personal assistant Erin O'Brien. One of the most important parts of the evening for the Jets was when the O'Brien escorted McFadden to ringside to meet boxing analyst Teddy Atlas, who was working the fight for ESPN. Atlas, a consultant to the Jets, is a person who Mangini leans on quite a bit for insight. Atlas is considered a great judge of people, and clearly Mangini wanted to see what the boxing guru thought of McFadden. Remember, there have been some questions about McFadden's character after a couple of off-the-field incidents while at Arkansas. If the Jets are comfortable with McFadden's character, and he is on the board when the team picks at six, there is a good chance they will take him. Gang Green is in dire need of a gamebreaker on offense, and that is exactly what McFadden is." http://www.scout.com/a.z?s=143&p=2&c=747265
