(04-30-2021, 09:42 AM)The Real Marty Wrote:

(04-30-2021, 09:19 AM)Sibelius Wrote: From Frank Schwab, draft winners and losers:

Teams unnecessarily taking running backs: Running backs do matter. But they can be found later in the draft. Sometimes after the draft.

The Jaguars know this. Last year they got James Robinson as an undrafted free agent, and he had 1,414 yards from scrimmage. He was a good NFL starter.

And the Jaguars, who went 1-15 last season and have many needs, took a running back 25th overall. Clemson running back Travis Etienne is a very good player, but was that the best way for the Jaguars to use their draft resources?

About the bolded part- that is complete and total horse manure. 

Since 2005, here is a breakdown of the RBs taken in the first round who became 1,000 yard rushers: 

RD 1  - 55% 15/27
RD 2  - 29% 11/38
RD 3  - 16% 6/37
RD 4  - 7% 3/45
RD 5  - 7% 3/42
RD 6  - 4% 2/46
RD 7  - 2% 1/51

Case closed!  

Sure, you can find a RB in the later rounds, just like you can find a QB in the later rounds (Tom Brady), but like any other position, you'll have the best result if you try to pick the best one.  

/Leonard Fournette waves
//Trent Richardson stares at dirt, realizes he should wave too

Go back to those stats. Break down just how many had a vacuum at RB when they made their pick. Or how many were replacing a 1000 yard rusher from the year prior. Truth is, most of those teams were probably grabbing a glaring need, or adding a final piece to their roster (like CEH last year)

The contention was not that you can find Etienne later in the darft. It's that if you are looking for a change of pace/complement to the RB who just carried your offense, those change of pace guys can be found all throughout the draft.

The criticism is not over taking Etienne. It's over who is passed up to take someone to serve the role he's going to be expected to serve.

---