KontradictioN

It's a good thing you apologized for that up front. Lord knows you would have been raked over the coals for that one. I made a thread like this just mentioning McFadden being there at number 7 (keep in mind I said the best thing we could do if he was was call the Cowboys) and it turned into four pages worth of flame war. But then again, you posted it in here and not in the draft forum where people seem to be frustrated about their lack of interaction with women.

That said, NO, I do not trade Maroney. He showed us what he's all about in the playoffs and there is no way I draft him for an unproven commodity. If he's there, the best thing we can do for ourselves is get the Cowboys two first round picks.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


CREDIT - Sicilian

Rob0729

I don't think we can get a first for Maroney because of his injuries the first two years.

We are better off trying to trade the seventh pick even if it is down three or four spots. I think we get more value for the seventh pick than for Maroney just because of perception. Besides, I would rather have Maroney and his salary than McFadden and the 7th pick's salary. McFadden no matter what anyone says is no lock for greatness. Remember Reggie Bush was more hyped than this guy and Bush sucked last year and looks to be exposed as more of a change of pace back.

VJCPatriot

LOL. And the fact that the Patriots had to abandon the run in the playoffs doesn't bother you at all?

It's an interesting idea. But it would depend on what we can get in return for Maroney and the cap hit the trade would entail. If the cap hit is low enough and we can still draft Groves or a quality corner with the pick we get back, the idea doesn't sound as bizarre as it first sounds...

__________________

AndyJohnson

It really doesnt make sense.

As of now we have Maroney plus the #7.
If we made such a trade, we'd have McFadden plus what #20 or so?

We would be severely decereasing the value of our pick in order to bring in a player at a position we are already set. On top of this, we know what Maroney can do, and do not know what McFadden will do as a pro. Everyone seems to automatically think this is Adrian Peterson II, but he could also be KiJana Carter, Blair Thomas, Curtis Enis or Lawrence Phillips, etc, etc.
Personally, I have too many concerns about McFadden to bank so much on him when there is no need to. There are numerous observers who think he will struggle at the NFL level "goes down on first contact", "doesnt run with power" are the typical knocks.
If in order to take that risk you are asking me to:
1) Bail on Maroney, who we KNOW can do the job
2) Devalue my first round pick
3) Eat the remaining signing bonus on Maroneys contract
4) Pay #7 money to hand over our running game to a rookie
5) (3) and (4) hurt the cap significantly this year AND in the future, and its very likely we end up worse off on the field that just using the #7 on a corner (or trading down, getting the corner in mid round 1 and adding another day 1 pick.)

AndyJohnson

I thought in the playoffs I watched we ran more in 2 of the 3 games than we had most of the year?
I thought back to back 122 yard games from Maroney was anything but abandoning the run.

drew4008

We aren't going to get a first for Maroney. I'm not even that high on McFadden... I just have not been impressed at all by Maroney, and think Morris would be a better starting RB for us.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

State

McFadden could do in the running game what Moss has done to the passing. Come on, guys. He's better than Maroney, wouldn't you say? Could you imagine the sweating of defensive coordinators about stopping the Pats?

KontradictioN

10 chars.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


CREDIT - Sicilian

MoLewisrocks

Ivan Fears addressed the early season use of Maroney during the Superbowl run up. He said the coaches were not comfortable rushing him back after his 2006 shoulder injury and they opted to be conservative with him. When Morris went down the Brady to Moss connection fairly exploded so there was little hue and cry for balance. He ran well down the stretch. The game plan in the Superbowl was not geared to feature the run or they wouldn't have subbed our feature back as a kick returner. Turns out we might have fared better with a power running game, but the fact is we don't have one absent a downhill runner - and our downhill half of the tandem was on IR. That's not what Maroney is, but neither is it what McFadden is. Maroney is two years farther along in transition to the pro game. If Bill wanted to continue to rely heavily on/feature the power running game, then he drafted the wrong guy in 2006. McFadden would then be an exponentially more expensive version of the wrong guy two years behind on the transition curve. I think Bill wanted to move away from the power running game because being dependent on a guy like Dillon proved to be a dicey proposition 2 out of 3 seasons, and when you have Brady and add Moss and Welkerto your roster you should never be dependent on a RB or line built to power run/block. The answer to what went wrong here has more to do with the OL than the RB. Construct a line that can hold their blocks and execute more consistently without all sorts of schematic assists and Brady will hit receivers (including TE's) instead of the ground and in between Maroney will burst into space where he's tough for LB to catch or CB's to bring down.

This is from NFLDraftscout.com. McFadden's stock seems to be slipping and Mayock on NFLN still doesn't see him in the top ten and has him as the second best RB in this draft. Bill's been burned once or twice by the play on the old adage you can't coach speed...

04/05/08 - The top four running backs in the upcoming NFL draft have something in common—none of them plays in a traditional pro-style running game. At Arkansas, Darren McFadden and Felix Jones were used in a system that utilized both halfbacks together frequently. McFadden would sometimes take a direct snap and either hand off or run himself. Rashard Mendenhall was used in the option at Illinois, and he rarely ran behind a fullback. Oregon ran a similar offense with Jonathan Stewart, spreading the field and attacking the edges of the defense with the running game. So for NFL teams, evaluating these prospects is slightly more difficult than evaluating running backs like Adrian Peterson, for example. Peterson played in a more traditional offense at Oklahoma, running between the tackles more frequently. The margin for error in evaluations always increases when projections are involved, and there is some projection involved with McFadden, Jones, Mendenhall and Stewart. "It does cause some problems," one AFC general manager said. "They're running sideways a lot, not playing downhill as much as they will in the NFL." Colts President Bill Polian points out running backs in such systems eventually do everything NFL teams are looking for them to do—they just don't do them as frequently as some other backs. So for scouts, it might mean more work. "You have to watch a little more tape with these guys," the general manager said. "You might see them run from an I formation with a fullback five times a game instead of 25 times, so you have fewer opportunities to see how well he does what you're looking for." - Dan Pompei, Chicago Tribune

04/03/08 - 04/02/08 - Draft Scout Fallers: Though it isn't likely to dissuade a team from drafting him in the top 10, a lack of upper body strength by McFadden does post an immediate red flag in the eyes of some scouts. The All-American disappointed scouts at his March 25 Pro Day in posting only 13 repetitions of 225 pounds. Running backs tested at the Combine averaged 21 reps, with Illinois' Rashard Mendenhall and Oregon's Jonathan Stewart, the other two backs universally considered first-round talents -- posting 26 and 28 repetitions, respectively.

richpats

I agree, the Pats HAD to abandon the run because they didn't have a reliable running game and haven't since 2004. But if a team goes into the playoffs with no confidence or commitment in their running game, should they be expected to win any championships?

Forget McFadden, we need a healthy Sammy Morris next year. He IS the key to another Lombardi!