Archer: Would a runner make sense for the Cowboys at No. 4?

fortsbest

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
3,733
Did you think Emmitt was worth trading up for at the time? I didn't say draft him if a QB is there and we want that QB, but I just don't think Jerry and his troops think the need is there like the rest of us do. And frankly, I've told all of you how pessimistic I am. If their plan was to trade with SF at 7 and get those picks and tale Elliot there, then by God Jax or Balt would take him before us. He looks like the surest bet to be the kinda of back that would make this offense dominant again and if they believe that as well, then take him at 4 and don't risk it.

Nice sig Joe!
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
Then good, saves us of blowing a top ten pick on a 5 year player AT Most.
Great running backs should give you 7 very good to great years, barring injuries.

How long do you think this OL is going to be together anyway?

Nothing lasts forever, and Dallas has a rare opportunity to put together one of the best rushing attacks since Dickerson with the Rams. I say take it.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
Great running backs should give you 7 very good to great years, barring injuries.

How long do you think this OL is going to be together anyway?

Nothing lasts forever, and Dallas has a rare opportunity to put together one of the best rushing attacks since Dickerson with the Rams. I say take it.
The king of hyperbole strikes again.:lol

How in the world did you invoke the name of Dickerson.
 

fortsbest

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
3,733
I don't necessarily think it's hyperbole. I think Elliott looks to be a very good overall back. He seems to be patient enough to wait for things and hits holes hard when they appear. We all agree this line makes a decent back good. It could make an very good back exceptional. For crying out loud, Murray got 1800 plus and we all agreed with the idiot back that Murray left yards on the field.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
Great running backs should give you 7 very good to great years, barring injuries.

How long do you think this OL is going to be together anyway?

Nothing lasts forever, and Dallas has a rare opportunity to put together one of the best rushing attacks since Dickerson with the Rams. I say take it.
those "great" RBs are more rare than franchise QBs. Steven Jacksons and Adrian Peterson's don't grow on trees. Since the last great RB was drafted Luck, Newton, Ryan, Flacco, and Stafford have become franchise QBs.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
I don't necessarily think it's hyperbole. I think Elliott looks to be a very good overall back. He seems to be patient enough to wait for things and hits holes hard when they appear. We all agree this line makes a decent back good. It could make an very good back exceptional. For crying out loud, Murray got 1800 plus and we all agreed with the idiot back that Murray left yards on the field.
All of that could be said for most backs in any draft, there is nothing Elliot does that is extra special.

The Hyperbole was invoking Dickerson who was one of the best athletes and RB's in NFL history and played in an era where they ran the ball much more than they did now.

And oh yeah how many superbowls did those teams or Dickerson ever get to?
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,453
There is a reason that the NFL puts such little value on RBs these days. It's wonderful to invoke names of previous eras but the NFL is different now. Name me the elite NFL RBs right now? AP who is at the tail end? Hell everyone thought the Packers had one and then he immidiately fell off. It's how the position goes.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
There is a reason that the NFL puts such little value on RBs these days. It's wonderful to invoke names of previous eras but the NFL is different now. Name me the elite NFL RBs right now? AP who is at the tail end? Hell everyone thought the Packers had one and then he immidiately fell off. It's how the position goes.
And Ravi was the one waving the Lacey flag the most.:lol
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
those "great" RBs are more rare than franchise QBs. Steven Jacksons and Adrian Peterson's don't grow on trees.
So if you have a chance to get one, why not take it?

And it takes the right kind of team, too. Dallas has a tradition of feeding good RBs, and now we have our best OL ever. This would be a perfect fit.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
So if you have a chance to get one, why not take it?

And it takes the right kind of team, too. Dallas has a tradition of feeding good RBs, and now we have our best OL ever. This would be a perfect fit.
So now Elliot is a rare back?
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
So if you have a chance to get one, why not take it?

And it takes the right kind of team, too. Dallas has a tradition of feeding good RBs, and now we have our best OL ever. This would be a perfect fit.
I feel like there's this delusion the Elliot is a known commodity. The closest things that have come to "sure things" in the draft since Peterson were Richardson and McFadden, they were definitely not great RBs as it turns out. Elliot isn't rated nearly as highly as those two, he's a bottom of the first, top of the second back. He's Melvin Gordon level of talent (not to say he's an analogous type of running back, just commenting on his rough value)

If we were debating whether to take Leonard Fornette at #4, it'd be a different conversation. Fornette has all the look of that "great" back you're talking about.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,453
Elliot to me is a Jonathan Stewart type prospect. A good player and will be good in the NFL but not anywhere worth a high first round pick.
 
Top Bottom