On each side of the ball, which positions would you want them for? These are guaranteed can't miss start from day one type players. You get one on defense and one on offense.
On each side of the ball, which positions would you want them for? These are guaranteed can't miss start from day one type players. You get one on defense and one on offense.
Qb
De
QB - DE.. I will caveat that if this was the case I'd also wish we weren't running Leach's system. a top 3 pick in Dan's system would be insane. Means he has all the passing talent Mike's QB would but also athletic enough to run. Basically 2011 Cam. 2011 Cam > Andrew Luck in CFBQuote:
Originally Posted by starkvegasdawg
QB - no explanation needed
DE - Disrupts passing game
WR - Offers explosive potential which allows you to change games
There's no other correct answer. These are the positions on each side of the ball that have the most impact in today's game. Distant second on each side would be WR and CB. You could maybe argue OT over WR as second on offense.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
Agree that there is no debate at the first two. <del>I would take a LT over WR with the second most important position on offense, but agree that's debatable. Just depends on what the alternative in question is. If you're talking about "replacement player" being the worst starter in the league, then you probably go LT b/c the worst starting LT probably means you have big time problems when you play against those teams with an elite pass rusher while the worst starting #1 receiver is going to limit you, but a good QB can make up for it spreading the ball around. If you are talking about having the average starter, maybe the way a great #1 WR stretches and opens up the field makes it more important than upgrading at LT.</del>Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverCityDawg
ETA: I didn't read closely and thought this was about NFL teams. In college, I take a badass WR rather than LT.
You can't compete with Bama without elite WR play.Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverCityDawg
One could argue that a MLB that is bad ass on blitzes, the run, and coverage would be a 1 man wrecking crew.
QB on offense hands down. I would go with unstoppable RB as well.
QB and DE is the correct answer though. most impact typical in games.
We can debate which positions are most important on the field, but the other component here is supply & demand & the NFL draft highlights that.
17 of the 1st round NFL picks were QB, OT, & WR with CB being the other major contributor
Supply & demand is important because it means it's the hardest positions to be elite at & also means it's at those positions you're less likely to have a competent replacement option
MLB would be pretty far down my list.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord McBuckethead
Since you didn't specify which sport...
I'd take a pitcher
But in the context that most took it..
QB
LB
Oh... if we get any sport.... I'll take a power hitting SSQuote:
Originally Posted by Ezsoil
QB
DT
I'd rather have the best DT in college football than the best DE.
So you'd rather have Derrick Brown than Chase Young?Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
https://media.tenor.com/images/4482f...6a5d/tenor.gif
Yep, I would as well. If a player is good enough to be a number 1-3 draft pick from the interior... that means they completely dominate everyone they played from the inside position. There is no scheme that takes the interior push out of play if they consistently beat double teams.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
This was the formula that Bill Bellichick used for years to win Superbowls.
So.. you'd really take Derrick Brown over Chase Young? I'll give you another tryQuote:
Originally Posted by Hot Rock
Derrick Brown was the 7th pick in the draft not a top 3 pick. Bad question, he is not in the equation.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Are you implying those two were the best at their respective positions in college football? I'm not sure, so I cannot answer that question with respect to my statement that I'd rather have the best DT in college football than the best DE.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
IMO, the DE is much easier to account for and scheme against. You can run away from a 9 technique all day. Can't do that against a 1 technique. You can chip him without committing to doubling him. Cant do that against a 3 technique. You can also bring pressure off the edge with numerous guys/position groups, but only one position (DT) can dominate the interior of a line.
I believe scheme was why young was a no show down the stretch against MI and Wisconsin and against Clemson in the playoff last year (it wasn't talent bc young was more talented and it wasn't lack of caring about a meaningless game bc he was playing for a natty). Meanwhile, Brown was a beast against LSU.
This may be so, but you still have to account for him & allocated bodied to stop him & it take more talented players to stop a great DE than a great DTQuote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
On top of that, the supply & demand of DTs far exceeds that of top shelf DEs. You take the DE everyday & twice on Sunday if he's elite.
The only time that I would even consider taking a DT above a DE is if that DT has legit pass rushing ability like Chris Jones. With a Chris Jones type, you're still getting the pass rush that needed to stop today's offenses
I'm going:
LT
CB
DT
Got to win in the trenches and you got to be able to cover. You can find a QB in the 3rd round like a Dak, Wilson, etc. Build the trenches and the rest will take care of itself. Example- Tennessee. They plan to be around awhile- after their run to the AFC Title game- they came right back and drafted OT, CB, RB, and DT
Be great in the trenches and then you can find the rest
DT and RB. RBs are never taken that high in the draft anymore, so he would probably be the Heisman winner.
Chris jones was not even close to a top 3 pick in the draft and you bring him up. Think about what a DT would have to do to be a top 3 pick and tell me you wouldn't want that guy over a DE like Chase Young that disappeared in the biggest games of the year.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
I get a top 3 pick DT and a top 3 pick QB? I am in the mix for a title if the rest are given us a fighting chance. Hell, I might even take a top 3 RB over a QB because those guys aren't even getting drafted in the first round. Imagine what a RB would have to do these days to be a top 3 pick. That guy might when us a title by him freaking self.
I will go one step farther, in Leech's offense a top three RB might win 3 titles in a freakin row. He would have set records that can't be fathomed on a per run basis to be that high of a pick as a RB.
I would but that's cause I don't buy the Vernon Gholston 2 hype.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Better question to your point is Suh vs. Clowney. 10 years ago I take Suh, I think I take clowney now with how much the game has moved away from running.
This is a good point. Given the context Leach's offense can produce a QB to be above what he should be drafted. Tim Couch was a top 3 QB draft pick. In Leach's offense I believe the impact over replacement would be greater to have a Reggie Bush than someone Leach can make top 3 at QB.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Rock
I could buy an argument that a Saquon / Bush type would be phenomenal in Leach's system. And given the context that this is a guy who would only get the ball about 20% of the time on offense in the name of Leach's balanced system, for him to be top 3 would mean he was astronomical for us.
Although I might choose running back sooner than most on here. If you are a college RB and get chosen in the top 3 picks of the Draft then you have some serious juice. Like a Saquon Barkley
The NFL is a passing game & you've got to have defenders that disrupt the passing game.Quote:
Originally Posted by dantheman4248
With the first pick, you take the guy with the greatest ability to do that.
80% of the time, that's going to be a DE, but there is a 20% of DT in the Aaron Donald or Chris Jones mode, that disrupt the passing game quite well
depends what defense you run also tho. A 3-4 DE is not the same as a 4-3 DE. And you left out guys like Fletcher Cox, Jeffrey Simmons, DeForest Buckner, Geno Atkins...total disruptorsQuote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
To me, the ones you just mentioned effect the passing game & are thus worth the 1st pick. A guy like Derrick Brown IMO is more of a run stuffer & I don't think that guy is worth using the first pick onQuote:
Originally Posted by Coach34