We pretty much have to take a RB on day 2 in the draft, right?

[scratched]

5 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

All of them are light years below Cmac.

 

You dump a star you have to replace him with a star or you go backwards 

CMC has 3 to 4 years left. It will take us 2 to 3 to get to a playoff caliber team. No need in paying him and him helping us for 1 year. The only people who don't like the trade are on this message board. 

[Navy_football]

Forman can be the bruiser. I want a scatback that can break you down and go the distance. Blake Corum, Michigan. He'll fall because of his size. Probably get him late third or fourth. 

[Shotgun]

 RBs aren't what brings you success in the NFL. If a team has good QB, Oline, & Dline play, they can compete every year.  

[stan786]

3 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

Yea I agree. But the Giants, Cowboys and Chiefs are all winning right now with first round RBs. No single position is REQUIRED to win except QB, but the more weapons you give your QB the better he’ll look. 

Id agree though I think the chiefs are doing it in spite of their RB.  Giants are 100% overachieving thanks to Barkley and some really good coaching.

[Cdparr7]

Probably one of our 3rds or a 4th plus a FA guy.

[JawnyBlaze]

Just now, stan786 said:

Id agree though I think the chiefs are doing it in spite of their RB.  Giants are 100% overachieving thanks to Barkley and some really good coaching.

Yea I almost didn’t think to include the Chiefs, but they qualify and it helps my point so I did, lol

[mrcompletely11]

7 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

Yea I agree. But the Giants, Cowboys and Chiefs are all winning right now with first round RBs. No single position is REQUIRED to win except QB, but the more weapons you give your QB the better he’ll look. 

Another stupid take:

The bills, jets, ravens, bengals, ravens, Colts, chargers, niners and falcons to name a few are all winning without first round rbs

 

Also the giants and cowboys are about to part ways with their first round running backs

Edited October 21, 2022 by mrcompletely11

[TheRumGone]

6 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

Anyone that thinks he's easily replaced is insane. 

The point is we don’t have to. We’re about to get a very talented qb that we need to build around. Don’t take a rb until 4th round or later. Take positions of better value in the second or third rounds like te, lineman or wr. Build this team the correct way. 
 

it is so weird reading some of these posts. It’s like some people don’t  watch how other successful teams are built.

[Jmac]

28 minutes ago, lightsout said:

I think Foreman could legitimately hold down the position for another year if need be, provided he protects the ball. He's a 4 ypc back I think, will never be a guy teams fear but he will do what we need him to do, which is be steady. No need to reach for a RB unless there's a can't-miss guy there.

If he can replace Henry when he was hurt, why not productive here?

[JawnyBlaze]

Just now, mrcompletely11 said:

Another stupid take:

The bills, jets, ravens, bengals, ravens, Colts, chargers, niners and falcons to name a few are all winning without first round rbs

Colts, ravens, niners and falcons are winning? And I never said you need one to win, I was arguing against the idea that teams that win don’t have first round RBs.  I showed that there are teams that are indeed winning with first round RBs.  Of course you can win without one, there’s plenty of teams winning by your definition without a first round QB, doesn’t mean it isn’t better to have one. Talk about a stupid take. 

[Jaxel]

Only one I'd take is probably Gibbs mid second round, he is very similar to Kamara and Breece Hall, can catch passes out of the back field well. Don't know how good of blocker he is though.

[mrcompletely11]

Just now, JawnyBlaze said:

Colts, ravens, niners and falcons are winning? And I never said you need one to win, I was arguing against the idea that teams that win don’t have first round RBs.  I showed that there are teams that are indeed winning with first round RBs.  Of course you can win without one, there’s plenty of teams winning by your definition without a first round QB, doesn’t mean it isn’t better to have one. Talk about a stupid take. 

2nd in their division just like the giants and Cowboys (3rd).  So according to you winning

[JawnyBlaze]

And for the record I definitely don’t want to spend a first on a RB, even if we had a lower first. But if there’s a stud in the second, then absolutely. 

[trueblade]

18 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

You dump a star you have to replace him with a star or you go backwards 

We're going to try. It's just that we're going to replace a star RB with [hopefully] a star QB. Just got to get the pick right.