- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 52,811
Yeah I was just giving you a hard time for using what I consider a cheesy word. But I know what you were getting at. Essentially a great RB motivates a great offensive line and vice versa which leads to an even better running game then just the original individual talent of the two units put together.Yea but it also makes sense within the context that I used it.
As far as him being Peterson or Tomlinson, no I don't think he is quite that level, but those are probably the top two RB's of the last 15-20 years, so there's that. I do think he is one of the best RB prospects to come out in a while and I would understand the temptation to put a talent like that behind an OL like the one we have in an attempt to create a running game so formidable that it could carry an average defense and an injury prone QB to a title.
I mention Peterson and Tomlinson because I look at the recent NFL and I have a hard time picking out a RB that I would take in the top 5 of the draft other then those two. Doug Martin was the second best RB last year in the NFL. Would you have taken him in the top 5 of the draft? I fail to see the appeal of taking a RB that highly unless I'm getting a special talent ala Tomlinson or Peterson (Neither of whom won a superbowl). I guess maybe Steven Jackson would go into that category. Most RBs are flash in the pan guys. You see them for 2 or 3 years and they disappear. To me that isn't worth a top five draft pick.
So if you want to talk Elliot at 4, I think he needs to be a Tomlinson or Peterson type. And even still I don't see all of the appeal. Running games don't carry teams to SuperBowls anymore.