Genghis Khan
The worst version of myself
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 38,068
I don't agree with that. Also, they don't even get there without dominant the running game.And that lack of a pass rush kept them from advancing in the playoffs.
I don't agree with that. Also, they don't even get there without dominant the running game.And that lack of a pass rush kept them from advancing in the playoffs.
That's the reality of advocating dipping into veteran free agency at this point to try and solve our hole at running back. There are only scrubs left.I haven't seen one single person say that we can pick up some scrub RB. Maybe I've missed it.
Sure sounds like you're saying we should draft a RB over a pass rusher because it's easier.Getting a above average RB is much easier than finding a "Pass Rush" I am not saying it should not be addressed but just saying we need a pass rush out of this draft is setting yourself up for reaches and failure.
I've never disagreed with that about the running game. But that lack of a passrush did fuck us hard against a hobbled and immobile Aaron Rogers. If he would have had to move even a little, I sincerely doubt he would have been half as effective as he was.I don't agree with that. Also, they don't even get there without dominant the running game.
Then who do you think will be pushed out? Dunbar? Randal? Maybe Williams on the PS?He's a veteran back, that came very cheap. If we were to draft A great back, he'd still be a rookie. Having a veteran pass protector with some upside seems like a perfect compliment.
Maybe you're confusing me with somebody else. I've never advocated going the cheap route for a RB. If you go back a post or two, I even said we needed both positions bad. Pass rush and RB.That's the reality of advocating dipping into veteran free agency at this point to try and solve our hole at running back. There are only scrubs left.
We signed Williams to a 2 year deal. Is he even still eligible for the practice squad. This is probably the year that he either makes the team and carries part of the load or he is done. I hope Dunbar is the first to go. We basically didn't use him at all last year. If McFadden is going to be our receiving RB Dunbar has no place left on the roster. Besides, Dunbar really sucks as a RB. Don't see the point in keeping him.Then who do you think will be pushed out? Dunbar? Randal? Maybe Williams on the PS?
Ahmad Bradshaw is still available... He actually looked pretty good with the Colts last year. Not sure why he hasn't been signed.That's the reality of advocating dipping into veteran free agency at this point to try and solve our hole at running back. There are only scrubs left.
If Dunbar goes then that would leave 3 backs. If another is drafted then you have 4. Who goes, to the PS or gets pushed out. Williams signed a contract. They must have plans for him. McFadden surely will stay on or why pick him up in the first place. That would leave Randal on the bubble who has a the best YPC. It shapes up as a silly plan unless you don't plan to bring on a draft pick.We signed Williams to a 2 year deal. Is he even still eligible for the practice squad. This is probably the year that he either makes the team and carries part of the load or he is done. I hope Dunbar is the first to go. We basically didn't use him at all last year. If McFadden is going to be our receiving RB Dunbar has no place left on the roster. Besides, Dunbar really sucks as a RB. Don't see the point in keeping him.
I think the easy answer is either Williams or Randal although I think McFadden would make more sense to cut.If Dunbar goes then that would leave 3 backs. If another is drafted then you have 4. Who goes, to the PS or gets pushed out. Williams signed a contract. They must have plans for him. McFadden surely will stay on or why pick him up in the first place. That would leave Randal on the bubble who has a the best YPC. It shapes up as a silly plan unless you don't plan to bring on a draft pick.
I never said I was talking about you at all.Maybe you're confusing me with somebody else. I've never advocated going the cheap route for a RB. If you go back a post or two, I even said we needed both positions bad. Pass rush and RB.
But even so, I still don't remember seeing anybody saying we can get by with a scrub RB.
I'm not a fan relative to what I think we should be doing.Ahmad Bradshaw is still available... He actually looked pretty good with the Colts last year. Not sure why he hasn't been signed.
We absolutely need a better pass rush, even with Hardy. And absolutely it would have helped in that game. But even with what we had, we were in good position to win.I've never disagreed with that about the running game. But that lack of a passrush did fuck us hard against a hobbled and immobile Aaron Rogers. If he would have had to move even a little, I sincerely doubt he would have been half as effective as he was.
I believe, given where we pick in each round, the available RBs will be better than the available pass rushers in the top couple rounds. In other words, you likely get a better, more impactful player by taking a running back rather than a pass rusher.Sure sounds like you're saying we should draft a RB over a pass rusher because it's easier.
Nope.Sure sounds like you're saying we should draft a RB over a pass rusher because it's easier.
Yeah, but you are acting like I said we should spend half our draft on it.How else do you allocate resources to the pass rush if you are not going in thinking you have to draft several pass rushers?
Nothing I said was strawman did you not say we need to concentrate on pass rush?
Why do you keep acting like we gave any of these guys major money and the team is invested in keeping them?If Dunbar goes then that would leave 3 backs. If another is drafted then you have 4. Who goes, to the PS or gets pushed out. Williams signed a contract. They must have plans for him. McFadden surely will stay on or why pick him up in the first place. That would leave Randal on the bubble who has a the best YPC. It shapes up as a silly plan unless you don't plan to bring on a draft pick.
And who was arguing that we should reach out of desperate need? My original statement was if I could choose either RB or pass rush I would choose pass rush. How in hell you morphed that into me saying we should reach desperately is beyond me.What?
I am advocating not approaching a draft focusing on one particular thing like upgrading the pass rush, nothing more or less.
I don't know what any of the rest of that has to do with what I said. I am not advocating RB in the 1st just saying I am not passing up a better player in the name of trying to upgrade the pass rush.