Quote:There's a few guys I want above Fournette, but I'd be totally fine with him at 4.  I don't see the argument of "Well you have to have an elite O-line or you don't draft him".  Firstly, LSU did not have a dominant offense and because of horrible QB play, everyone and their mom keyed in on Fournette and he still had big games.  Yes, ideally you'd probably want him in an I formation or some type of formation that gives him more room, but he's a rookie also (well technically not even that) and you're hoping his vision and instincts improve also to where he can do just as well in a shotgun.

 

And unless Miss Cleo is posting in here, no one knows how good of a unit we're going to have this year or the next.  For all we know, Albert stays healthy and is a great LT, we draft a rookie guard who is a stud, and maybe get another guy next year and all of a sudden our O-line is dominant.  Oakland was a pretty good example of this.  Their line was garbage and they made a couple moves and signed a "backup-quality" LT (Penn) and all of a sudden they had a great O-line.

Ok, say our oline does magically get to become great, then a lesser RB we get round 2/3/4 would be able to dominate with that great oline too. If we're taking a RB at 5 it needs to be one that transcends an oline problem...

 

Look at the Cowboys. Their oline was so good that McFadden averaged a top 5 in the league 4.6 yards per carry in 2015. Then they take a top 5 pick and Zeke helped them to a whole 1/5 of a yard better 4.8 yards per carry...at the cost of Jalen Ramsey. Does anyone really think that's better? They could have taken a number of late RBs and paired him with McFadden and been way better off with that + Ramsey. 

---