Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Elliot - Is he worth it?
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
mcnabbulous
I'm going to continue to emphatically say no. I think much of the PFF grading stuff is bullshit, but this is a nice back and forth on the merits of drafting him in the first round (let alone the top-10)

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2016/...-10-draft-pick/

A few highlights from the "no" camp:

QUOTE
In terms of elusiveness, vision and power, I just don’t see an elite player. His 54 broken tackles a year ago were only the 18th-most in the country, despite having the seventh-most carries (291) — all this behind the eighth-best run-blocking line in the FBS. Like Melvin Gordon a year ago, I don’t believe Elliott has that special ability to overcome a poor run-blocking line at the next level.


On RB impact, in general:
QUOTE
You mentioned Le’Veon Bell, and it’s generally agreed upon that he’s a top-three running back in the league right now. But that Steelers’ offense took no noticeable step back from 2014 without him in the lineup (and actually averaged more in the games when Ben Roethlisberger was healthy).

Now take Jamaal Charles’ career in Kansas City. He’s missed 27 career games while appearing in 86 others. The difference in the Chiefs’ points-per-game without Charles is less than a single point. And these are backs that would be universally considered first-round picks in any re-draft.


Say no to first round running backs!
Eyrie
I might be interested if we were drafting in the mid-20s, but not at #8. That is where you have to look and look again at the most important positions (QB, OT, DE, CB) before deciding to settle for BPA.
nephillymike
I agree no RB in the top half of the 1st round.
Zero
Too many RBs are successful after being taken much later and too many needs on this team to draft a RB in round 1.
Joegrane
Yes, especially considering they'll be using a variation of the West Coast system. Elliot is supposedly not a great receiver.

Like QB, they are not under pressure to draft a RB who can step in and play many minutes as a rookie. They have the luxury of developing someone. That rookie will have a couple of former Pro Bowlers to learn from.

quote name='Zero' date='Mar 30 2016, 08:12 PM' post='285708']
Too many RBs are successful after being taken much later and too many needs on this team to draft a RB in round 1.
[/quote]
nd9kel
Anything outside OL is insane IMHO.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nd9kel @ Mar 31 2016, 11:50 AM) *
Anything outside OL is insane IMHO.

[fart noise]
nd9kel
Excuse you.
Eyrie
QUOTE (nd9kel @ Mar 31 2016, 05:50 PM) *
Anything outside OL is insane IMHO.

I'd seriously consider DE and CB as well, or even QB despite our FA spending there.
Zero
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Mar 31 2016, 03:03 PM) *
I'd seriously consider DE and CB as well, or even QB despite our FA spending there.

How many CBs will we carry on the 53? I'd guess maybe 5 ... we have 9 on the current roster. Brooks, Carroll, Grymes, McKelvin, Rice, Rowe, Shepherd, Watkins and Evans. They just signed Brooks, Carroll, Grymes and McKelvin; they like Rowe and Shepherd, Watkins was serviceable. I realize that a player like Hargreaves would be a nice addition and an upgrade but I have to wonder why they'd sign so many new CBs if they thought they'd be drafting one.
Eyrie
QUOTE (Zero @ Apr 1 2016, 12:28 AM) *
How many CBs will we carry on the 53? I'd guess maybe 5 ... we have 9 on the current roster. Brooks, Carroll, Grymes, McKelvin, Rice, Rowe, Shepherd, Watkins and Evans. They just signed Brooks, Carroll, Grymes and McKelvin; they like Rowe and Shepherd, Watkins was serviceable. I realize that a player like Hargreaves would be a nice addition and an upgrade but I have to wonder why they'd sign so many new CBs if they thought they'd be drafting one.

CB is too important a position in the modern pass-happy NFL so I'd have no problem taking the right player there despite the numbers that we already have on the roster.

Players have been signed to one or even two year deals before and not made the final roster.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Apr 1 2016, 01:23 PM) *
CB is too important a position in the modern pass-happy NFL so I'd have no problem taking the right player there despite the numbers that we already have on the roster.

Players have been signed to one or even two year deals before and not made the final roster.

Couldn't agree more. Who we have signed and have on the roster shouldn't prohibit us from taking a highly skilled player at a key position which has been historically difficult for us to fill.

We haven't drafted a really solid CB since Sheldon. That's why Hargreaves is my #1 at this point.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.