If you had you're choice of a guaranteed top 3 future draft choice

[starkvegasdawg]

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.

[msstate7]

Qb
De

[DEDawg]

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.. 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 CFB

[ShotgunDawg]

QB - no explanation needed
DE - Disrupts passing game
WR - Offers explosive potential which allows you to change games

[RiverCityDawg]

Qb
De

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.

[Johnson85]

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.

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>

ETA: I didn't read closely and thought this was about NFL teams. In college, I take a badass WR rather than LT.

[ShotgunDawg]

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.

You can't compete with Bama without elite WR play.

[Lord McBuckethead]

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.

[ShotgunDawg]

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

[HoopsDawg]

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.

MLB would be pretty far down my list.

[Ezsoil]

Since you didn't specify which sport...

I'd take a pitcher

But in the context that most took it..

QB
LB

[ShotgunDawg]

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 SS

[confucius say]

QB
DT

I'd rather have the best DT in college football than the best DE.

[ShotgunDawg]

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?

[Hot Rock]

So you'd rather have Derrick Brown than Chase Young?

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.

This was the formula that Bill Bellichick used for years to win Superbowls.

[ShotgunDawg]

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.

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 try

[Hot Rock]

So.. you'd really take Derrick Brown over Chase Young? I'll give you another try

Derrick Brown was the 7th pick in the draft not a top 3 pick. Bad question, he is not in the equation.

[confucius say]

So you'd rather have Derrick Brown than Chase Young?

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.

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.

[ShotgunDawg]

IMO, the DE is much easier to account for and scheme against. .

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 DT

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

[Coach34]

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