(12-20-2018, 01:04 PM)Cleatwood Wrote:

(12-20-2018, 12:12 PM)Inziladun Wrote: Think you're being obtuse. Barkley is better than Fournette, but so what? Fournette is a bust because a player that was taken 2 picks earlier than him, a year later is better? What does it matter that Barkley is better? Does a top 5 pick have to be a future hall of famer to not be labeled a bust? Does the fact that Barkley was taken 2 picks higher than Fournette afford him a little bit of room to be better without Fournette being labeled a bust? If a RB is taken first overall next year turns out better than Barkley, does that mean he's a bust? We can point at a bunch of players that are better than on our roster, so I'm not sure if I'm missing the point or you're just looking for reasons to whine.

Our QB is WORSE than Eli Manning.
Our OLINE is WORSE than the Giants.
Our OC is WORSE than the Giants.


So our RB being worse than the Giants just seems par for the course. But I think the comparison to Barkley is ridiculous because we never even had a chance to get him, so what does it matter? Why be bitter than Fournette is not Barkley when we didn't take Fournette over Barkley?

I never said he was a bust but he's not producing like a top 5 running back. Zeke, Gurley, CMac and Barkley are all RBs taken in the top 10 and Fournette isn't even close to them. You should never use a top 10 pick on a RB BUT if you do, they need to be elite. Fournette isn't.