RB Leonard Fournette

Originally posted by Vito_Corleone:
But if Kyle thinks that Mahomes is equal to Trubisky, then perhaps you trade down and pick Mahomes plus get extra picks

Erm, that depends where Mahomes is, may be we could have him at 34 or we trade up from 34. But, yes ultimately it will depend on when we think Mahomes might go. If we are talking about the mid teens for example then yes we may then have to trade down.

Originally posted by LifelongNiner:
And even if you removed the rushing yards from the QB, we still wouldn't have a historically bad rushing offense. As bad as we look on offense, don't question if our O-line can play at this level. I don't question if our starting TE can play at this level. I don't question if Carlos Hyde can play at this level. I don't question if Pierre Garcon can play at this level. The way some of you are talking, it's as if you expect the offense to be worse than the 27th/31st (pts/yards) ranking. We already get 8 in the box looks with Carlos Hyde. How much more is Fournette adding to the team? I swear I thought we might give up a 100 yard rusher to Alabama or Ohio State in 2016 the way were playing.

Everything is relative in this world.

You take away the QB rushing yards, our rushing offense will rank in the 20s. May be not "historically bad" per se, but bad enough. Then you look at the passing offense, we are ranked dead last. All in all, yes our offense is pretty close to being historically bad. This is especially true when you look at the players/talents on the roster on both sides of the ball. The 4 x 1st round picks that I mentioned before on the defensive side of the ball that we drafted in the past 4 years, namely Reid, Ward, Armstead and Buckner, yes they are still there. No way you could say the same about the offense, could you? In fact, we have zero talent left on the offensive side of the ball, we don't even have a franchise QB. And as for RB, we have a guy who only managed to play 12 games out of 32 in the past 2 years, you could hardly call that a franchise back, could you?

So basically with Kap and Hyde we had around 1,450 rushing yards last yr. Kap is gone and so is that 468 yards, we aren't getting those rushing yards from hoyer.

So people want to replace Hyde and put LF in...being generous give him 1,450 rushing yards in his rookie yr. We basically didn't produce more running yards then last yr you know a yr when we went 2-14 lol.

Waste of a pick at two. The running game wasn't the problem....everything else was the problem especially our historically bad defense, just so happens this draft has elite defensive prospects at the top...but people want a RB

Originally posted by NYniner85:

So basically with Kap and Hyde we had around 1,450 rushing yards last yr. Kap is gone and so is that 468 yards, we aren't getting those rushing yards from hoyer.

So people want to replace Hyde and put LF in...being generous give him 1,450 rushing yards in his rookie yr. We basically didn't produce more running yards then last yr you know a yr when we went 2-14 lol.

Waste of a pick at two. The running game wasn't the problem....everything else was the problem especially our historically bad defense, just so happens this draft has elite defensive prospects at the top...but people want a RB

Aren't you tired of beating a dead horse? You been arguing about the same topic for weeks now...All this is opinion based

Originally posted by Rascal:

Everything is relative in this world.

You take away the QB rushing yards, our rushing offense will rank in the 20s. May be not "historically bad" per se, but bad enough. Then you look at the passing offense, we are ranked dead last. All in all, yes our offense is pretty close to being historically bad. This is especially true when you look at the players/talents on the roster on both sides of the ball. The 4 x 1st round picks that I mentioned before on the defensive side of the ball that we drafted in the past 4 years, namely Reid, Ward, Armstead and Buckner, yes they are still there. No way you could say the same about the offense, could you? In fact, we have zero talent left on the offensive side of the ball, we don't even have a franchise QB. And as for RB, we have a guy who only managed to play 12 games out of 32 in the past 2 years, you could hardly call that a franchise back, could you?

100% Agree..

Originally posted by Rascal:

The truth is once genus49 realized Kap in fact contributed as much as 468 of those rushing yards, he should have dropped his argument that the 9ers already has a top rushing unit being 4th in total yards and all.

You're taking away rushing yards along with attempts by eliminating the QB rushes. My point was not all the QB yards came from scrambles. We had plenty designed runs. You want to assume that if we take away Kap's yards they disappear and nobody else rushes the ball to count towards the rushing yards by RBs.

My point is that those rushes would go to Hyde or one of the other backs. I noticed you failed to address the fact that Hyde averaged .4 ypc better than David Johnson. Should Arizona be replacing Johnson too?

Let's be honest here. Hyde is a very good RB whose only issue is staying healthy. You want to spend #2 overall pick on a guy who got injured this past season in college and pretend he's going to be a durable stud for us for many years.

Shouldn't he be durable enough to not get injured in college to start at least? What gives you the confidence he's going to be the Brett Favre of RBs? Because if we're drafting him at #2 he damn well needs to be.

If you think he's not going to take a ton of low hits or punishment with his running style then you're high.

Originally posted by FrozeReactionZ:

Aren't you tired of beating a dead horse? You been arguing about the same topic for weeks now...All this is opinion based

So is the idea that Fournette is going to automatically be that much better and more durable than Hyde.

How about the fact that the closest defense to NFL level is Alabama and Fournette averaged 2.5 yards per carry in 3 games against them.

Guys are allowed to have bad games but failing to rush for 100 yards in 3 games vs the closest thing you'll see to an NFL defense doesn't inspire a ton of confidence that he'll be THAT much better than Hyde.

Originally posted by Rascal:

Everything is relative in this world.

You take away the QB rushing yards, our rushing offense will rank in the 20s. May be not "historically bad" per se, but bad enough. Then you look at the passing offense, we are ranked dead last. All in all, yes our offense is pretty close to being historically bad. This is especially true when you look at the players/talents on the roster on both sides of the ball. The 4 x 1st round picks that I mentioned before on the defensive side of the ball that we drafted in the past 4 years, namely Reid, Ward, Armstead and Buckner, yes they are still there. No way you could say the same about the offense, could you? In fact, we have zero talent left on the offensive side of the ball, we don't even have a franchise QB. And as for RB, we have a guy who only managed to play 12 games out of 32 in the past 2 years, you could hardly call that a franchise back, could you?

Where are you getting this number from? Are you going to just make numbers up to try to make your case?

People on here state/argue adding an elite offense player high via draft (Fournette) is asinine because of it's luxury and our actual needs....

I hear...."Brees and the Saints couldn't get over the hump and they had a power house offense with skilled players to match". But how about last year the Texans having the #1 Defense, how did that go for them in playoffs? Or how about when we had an elite roster on defense and we couldnt stop the Ravens in the superbowl?

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls of all ages, if Fournette is the pick at #2, its for F-ing reason...Kyle is going to utilize him to the "T". Basically Fournette will be our Julio Jones, but instead of WR, running back edition as far as utilization and dominating a game goes.

Fournette may not be a natural at catching like Mccaffrey, but he will get the job DONE. The doubts some of you guys have with Fournette are so comical...."he can't plant and cut on a dime, so he's not a fit", "he cant catch" Oh plz Watch his proday and tell me if you doubters aren't overreacting about his catching abilities.

Fournette coming down hill on one of those zone strech runs......Get out the way!!!!

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by Rascal:
Everything is relative in this world.

You take away the QB rushing yards, our rushing offense will rank in the 20s. May be not "historically bad" per se, but bad enough. Then you look at the passing offense, we are ranked dead last. All in all, yes our offense is pretty close to being historically bad. This is especially true when you look at the players/talents on the roster on both sides of the ball. The 4 x 1st round picks that I mentioned before on the defensive side of the ball that we drafted in the past 4 years, namely Reid, Ward, Armstead and Buckner, yes they are still there. No way you could say the same about the offense, could you? In fact, we have zero talent left on the offensive side of the ball, we don't even have a franchise QB. And as for RB, we have a guy who only managed to play 12 games out of 32 in the past 2 years, you could hardly call that a franchise back, could you?

Where are you getting this number from? Are you going to just make numbers up to try to make your case?

Typo, 20 of 32 games missing 12 games.

Originally posted by FrozeReactionZ:

Aren't you tired of beating a dead horse? You been arguing about the same topic for weeks now...All this is opinion based

you say that to me yet you've been doing the same thing just on the opposite side.

Everything you and the LF lovers have been saying is opinion based.

Also what have I said that's opinion based? only 1 first rd RB was a top 10 rusher this past yr #fact

How many yards do you think Fournette is gonna get? More than what Kap and Hyde got? Over 1,500 yards? That's a bunch of BS with no QB and a s**t OL.

Originally posted by FrozeReactionZ:

People on here state/argue adding an elite offense player high via draft (Fournette) is asinine because of it's luxury and our actual needs....

I hear...."Brees and the Saints couldn't get over the hump and they had a power house offense with skilled players to match". But how about last year the Texans having the #1 Defense, how did that go for them in playoffs? Or how about when we had an elite roster on defense and we couldnt stop the Ravens in the superbowl?

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls of all ages, if Fournette is the pick at #2, its for F-ing reason...Kyle is going to utilize him to the "T". Basically Fournette will be our Julio Jones, but instead of WR, running back edition as far as utilization and dominating a game goes.

Fournette may not be a natural at catching like Mccaffrey, but he will get the job DONE. The doubts some of you guys have with Fournette are so comical...."he can't plant and cut on a dime, so he's not a fit", "he cant catch" Oh plz Watch his proday and tell me if you doubters aren't overreacting about his catching abilities.

Fournette coming down hill on one of those zone strech runs......Get out the way!!!!

With an awful defense you arent winning a thing. I am far more confident in Hyde being a top flight RB than I am in Armstead, Mitchell and Smith suddenly turning into stud players.


On offense the biggest weaknesses are at QB and WR.


On defense weaknesses are everywhere. There isnt a single position that they cant get a lot better at. Buckner is the closest thing they have to a cornerstone player considering that Bowman is working his way back from an injury.

Originally posted by FrozeReactionZ:

People on here state/argue adding an elite offense player high via draft (Fournette) is asinine because of it's luxury and our actual needs....

I hear...."Brees and the Saints couldn't get over the hump and they had a power house offense with skilled players to match". But how about last year the Texans having the #1 Defense, how did that go for them in playoffs? Or how about when we had an elite roster on defense and we couldnt stop the Ravens in the superbowl?

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls of all ages, if Fournette is the pick at #2, its for F-ing reason...Kyle is going to utilize him to the "T". Basically Fournette will be our Julio Jones, but instead of WR, running back edition as far as utilization and dominating a game goes.

Fournette may not be a natural at catching like Mccaffrey, but he will get the job DONE. The doubts some of you guys have with Fournette are so comical...."he can't plant and cut on a dime, so he's not a fit", "he cant catch" Oh plz Watch his proday and tell me if you doubters aren't overreacting about his catching abilities.

Fournette coming down hill on one of those zone strech runs......Get out the way!!!!

Wait is Brees coming coming to SF??? See the common theme here...FQB not RB.

They won the SB with an UDFA in Pierre Thomas who had 790 yards.

Thanks for proven our point

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

With an awful defense you arent winning a thing. I am far more confident in Hyde being a top flight RB than I am in Armstead, Mitchell and Smith suddenly turning into stud players.


On offense the biggest weaknesses are at QB and WR.


On defense weaknesses are everywhere. There isnt a single position that they cant get a lot better at. Buckner is the closest thing they have to a cornerstone player considering that Bowman is working his way back from an injury.

I understand your insinuation, but what did the Texans do in the playoffs last year, with that #1 defense?

Originally posted by FrozeReactionZ:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

With an awful defense you arent winning a thing. I am far more confident in Hyde being a top flight RB than I am in Armstead, Mitchell and Smith suddenly turning into stud players.


On offense the biggest weaknesses are at QB and WR.


On defense weaknesses are everywhere. There isnt a single position that they cant get a lot better at. Buckner is the closest thing they have to a cornerstone player considering that Bowman is working his way back from an injury.

I understand your insinuation, but what did the Texans do in the playoffs last year, with that #1 defense?

We don't have to build a #1 defense. We need to build a not-32nd-ranked-defense-that-gives-up-300-yds-rushing-a-game.

Just because some of us want to spend 60-70% of our picks (including our first 3) on Defense doesn't mean we want to be the Houston Texans.