Draft an RB in the 2nd Round

WCL

Organ Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 21, 2011
Posts:
7,830
Liked Posts:
9,011
It seems like the value in this draft is d-line in the first and secondary in the second (the safeties mentioned above along with corners like Dennard, Fuller, the Florida guys). And there should be plenty of good corners and safeties still there in the third.

Beyond the third, you're looking at backups that might develop and role-players, so a running back like De'Anthony Thomas would be great in the fourth.

They also need an interior linemen and a tight end. Unless I'm forgetting someone, it's been 16 years since they drafted a center. Everyone's expecting all defense, but I wouldn't be surprised if Phil picked up three players on offense if that's where the value is.
 

AHSIllini32

New member
Joined:
Nov 5, 2012
Posts:
3,196
Liked Posts:
1,548
IMO you should bring in a rookie RB every season. Round 5-7 or FA. Also you draft a QB every season until you have a a young guy in development. I don't know if Matt Blanchard is still filling that role.

So you think teams should spend two draft picks every year on a RB and a QB? Sorry but that's just ridiculous.
 

number51

Señor Member
Donator
Joined:
Aug 25, 2012
Posts:
16,895
Liked Posts:
11,717
Location:
Funk & Wagnalls' porch
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Notre Dame Fighting Irish
So you think teams should spend two draft picks every year on a RB and a QB? Sorry but that's just ridiculous.

Reading is a skill.

"until you have a a young guy in development"

Not every year, once you have young, competent, low paid, reliable backups at QB and RB it's all good. The Bears may or may not have those things, if they think they do, then draft neither.

Having no young depth at RB is not just ridicules it's a sure sign of incompetence.
 

AHSIllini32

New member
Joined:
Nov 5, 2012
Posts:
3,196
Liked Posts:
1,548
Reading is a skill.

"until you have a a young guy in development"

Not every year, once you have young, competent, low paid, reliable backups at QB and RB it's all good. The Bears may or may not have those things, if they think they do, then draft neither.

Having no young depth at RB is not just ridicules it's a sure sign of incompetence.

You still don't draft a RB every year until you happen to think you have one that is developing. That's stupid. What if they look like they're developing because they're playing well as a backup but then they can't handle the full load as a starter? Saying you need to draft a position every year (regardless of which position it is) until you get a guy who develops is completely asinine. They you're stuck with 2-3-4-5 young rbs behind your starter that you have to try and find playing time for and it's a giant cluster fuck.

You draft positions of need every year and trust that the players you drafted develop into starters. Does it always happen? Obviously not, but you don't overload a position or two just by stuffing it with players, sitting back, and saying "well someone will step up and turn into a starter!"
 

number51

Señor Member
Donator
Joined:
Aug 25, 2012
Posts:
16,895
Liked Posts:
11,717
Location:
Funk & Wagnalls' porch
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Notre Dame Fighting Irish
you're stuck with 2-3-4-5 young rbs

lol?

Kidding right?

Once you have a young, inexpensive, reliable, RB that can produce against NFL starters you stop drafting them.

5 Young RB's on the roster? Please tell me you were kidding.


Or kill yourself.
 

AHSIllini32

New member
Joined:
Nov 5, 2012
Posts:
3,196
Liked Posts:
1,548
lol?

Kidding right?

Once you have a young, inexpensive, reliable, RB that can produce against NFL starters you stop drafting them.

5 Young RB's on the roster? Please tell me you were kidding.


Or kill yourself.

It takes more than one year to find that type of RB you fucking brainless shart. Also, how can you figure out if a RB can produce consistently against starters if you already have a starter firmly entrenched (ie Forte)? Or are you suggesting continually running out rookie RB's until one of them looks like they have it figured out?

You might be the most ignorant poster on this board.
 

number51

Señor Member
Donator
Joined:
Aug 25, 2012
Posts:
16,895
Liked Posts:
11,717
Location:
Funk & Wagnalls' porch
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Notre Dame Fighting Irish
It takes more than one year to find that type of RB you fucking brainless shart. Also, how can you figure out if a RB can produce consistently against starters if you already have a starter firmly entrenched (ie Forte)? Or are you suggesting continually running out rookie RB's until one of them looks like they have it figured out?

You might be the most ignorant poster on this board.

Slow down man, you seem to be really worked up. I'm not even in the top 5 most ignorant poster on this board. Top 10?

The backup RB will get carries just like the #3 CB will get plays. That is why it's so important to have a solid backup RB. Hopefully one that isn't as expensive as Michael Bush, Marion Barber, or Chester Taylor.

Calm down and cheers man.
 

Bearfanfromnewjersey

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
4,856
Liked Posts:
2,333
2nd round is pretty high with our defense but I would use a 4th on a complimentary RB. Forte is gods for another 2-3 year. We don't need his replacement yet.. Just someone to replace bush.
 

hyatt151

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
10,748
Liked Posts:
3,517
How about the Outlaw "Josey[/COLOR]" Wales!
 

Top