In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 358
Online now 292 Record: 4815 (3/13/2012)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Well your opinion would certainly be different than that of NFL GM's and scouts.
Over the past 10 NFL drafts here are the numbers regarding CB's and RB's.
287 CB's have been selected in the NFL draft compared to 196 RB's. Even though twice as many CB's see the field compared to RB's, RB's are selected at a more often clip than CB's.
Of those 287 CB's that were selected only 40 (13.9%) were in the 1st round and only 9 (3.1%) were in the Top 10 overall picks with the highest selection used on a CB at the 5th position.
Of the 196 RB's selected, 28 (14.2%) were selected in the 1st round and 7 (3.5%) were selected in the Top 10 overall picks with the highest selections used on a RB at the 2nd position.
While the numbers are close, it does show that GM's and NFL scouts do lean towards RB as being the more important position.
That's a different, but let's examine that.
Peterson is one of the best RBs in the NFL, and yet he has not made a big difference for the Vikings.
How much do you think Darelle Revis, Charles Woodson, or Champ Bailey have mattered for their respective team's records?
If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion.
and how many of those RBs have failed to produce?
They keep drafting RBs because they can't find one who succeeds in today's NFL to the extent they did twenty years ago.
CBs, on the other hand, get drafted and keep their jobs, especially the best ones.
RBs are a dime a dozen. NFL CBs are much harder to find.
So now you are saying the most drafted position in the NFL is as such because guys keep their jobs?
This is getting to be remarkably entertaining.
We can cherry pick examples all day long, but I'll stand by a top notch IB carrying an offense on most days, especially in college--which is what we originally started talking about with Braylon Heard.
Not sure you can say that about a big 10 CB.
I won't say this often but DA is right here.
Top flight CB is waaaaayyyy more important than RB.
Especially on a team that is light on CB depth
nustudent, go to bed...no snacks.
Why do NFL GMs and Scouts conitinue to draft RB's at a higher clip and more important drafting position than CB"s if CB's were waaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyy more important?
Unless you believe you know more than the 32 GM's and hundreds of NFL scouts, then your opinion doesn't hold much water.
Your logic above isn't as black and white as you make it out to be.
I believe defense trumps offense. Also believe the style of offense you run can make a decent RB look good. I dont think you can say that as easily on defense.
Not to mention the specifics of our situation. We have a number of other talented guys at RB. We don't at CB
Yes it is Black and White.
I was stating that your opinion isn't what NFL GM's and scouts believe.
If you think otherwise over the last 10 years then you are questioning the entire landscape of what those guys do.
Thus your 'logic' doesnt' hold water unless you belive you know more than the guys selecting players and paying athletes millions of dollars based upon their decisions.
Black or White. Are you more in the know than those guys?
Don't know more but you can't just look at numbers and make that case without knowing what goes into the numbers or the picks.
For example, maybe there was a higher percentage of busts at RB then CB causing the need for more draft picks.
No, because RBs DON'T keep their jobs. Because RB has the shortest NFL lifespan of almost any position, so they're constantly looking for someone who can stay healthy.
Look, I don't give a rat's azz if you guys agree with me or not.
The statistics back up what I'm saying.
Go ahead and trust your opinions rather than the facts.
But of the 40 1st round picks of CB's and the 28 1st round picks of RB's we have the following:
10 RB's have been named All-Pro.
14 CB's have been named All-Pro.
Certainly looks like the RB's have not busted out as much as CB's.
What facts can you give us to back your opinion?
I've given plenty to discount your opinon, I'd certainly like to see one that would back your own.
I'm not arguing about what they believe. I'm arguing about what they do when they draft a player.
The 2011 draft is a perfect case in point. Out of the first 100 players drafted, 15 CBs were taken, while only eight RBs were selected. Heisman Trophy winner Mark Ingram was chosen behind three CBs.
That's black and white.
2010? Six CBs taken in the top fifty, while only four RBs were taken. Top CB was #7. Top RB was #9
2009 saw four CBs in the top 50. Three RBs were selected in the top 50.
You can argue about drafting and all the other bullroar you guys have decided to gang up on me with, but the fact is that CB is a far more important position in a pass-happy league than RB will ever be. When and if the league ever returns to a running league, perhaps RB will once again be a crucial position, but it's just not anymore.
And yet, you haven't really proven anything, have you?
You are reaching here. This has little to no relevance to the argument.
So your stats agree with me is what you are saying?
Call me stupid again, but an NFL team only fields a single RB compared to 2 CB's on any given down.
Thus, when you claim numbers like 15 vs 8 or 6 vs 4 you are actually giving creedence to my opinion.
What is sad is even in a pass-happy league you can't bring forth a statistic that backs CB being more important than RB.
Give a single statistic that backs your opinion in favor of CB being more important than RB.
I'm asking for ONE. Just ONE that would back your opinion.
Reaching? I've given plenty of statistics that back my opinion and you have given nothing. Other than personal opinions and 'reaching' statements you haven't put forth a single statistic that backs your opinion.
Whats next, you call my facts stupid again? Or do you actually buckle in and give forth reasonable and well thought facts that can back your opinion?
Yes these facts are very painful towards your argument and thus have no relevance.
Could you maybe supply some statements from GMs and scouts where they actually state how much more important RBs are than CBs?
How do you know what GMs and scouts believe? Where's your corroboration?
Otherwise you're just recycling your opinion.
This post was edited by daddyact 2 years ago
BTW, exactly what FACTS have you presented?
We have three good RBs. We don't know if we have four good CBs. Actually, in this defense, you need six good CBs.
So you can't bring forth any facts to support your opinion is what you are saying?
Richard Vernon said it best: "I expected more from a varsity letterman...."
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports