Would you be mad if we took Fournette?

[Cillmatic]

A great RB would take pressure of Joe and could get us off this west coast offense stuff and back to OLD SCHOOL RAVENS FOOTBALL.

Edited November 3, 2016 by Cillmatic

[Jacquouille]

What? How could you be mad to have a top3 talent that is widely seen as the next AP, and maybe even better if you consider his all around skill?

Everyone knows I'm more impressed by Cook but come on, how could you refuse such a playmaker?

[JoeyFlex5]

Wouldn't be mad, but I don't think a RB will make us competitive if we still have no OL, pass rush, cb2, wr, or depth in general.

If we spend a top 10 pick in fournette, then he will get ran into the ground as he would be the only thing we have on offense and no line to make him effective and as a result he probably destroys his body before his rookie deal expires, and I don't think we're gonna get fully rebuilt in 4 years. 

I think it would be a big impact pick but l ultimately a waste because he's not gonna carry this old, talent deficient, and injured roster to a title.

[jboy19]

I still don't trust top RBs. Yeah Zeke's been good, but after seeing Gurley regress behind the Rams OL and mixed results from Gordon, I'm less inclined to be enthusiastic... But if we take Fournette, I'd be a Fournette fan and viciously hope for his success. 

[hn68wb4]

mad? no

disappointed would be a better word for me. The RB class is super deep, we can probably sit back and still get a starting caliber RB in the second, maybe even third if we want to take one - I'd be happy rolling with West and Dixon moving forward. The key to having a consistent running game lies with the line, not necessarily the back. And as a player I'm not a huge Fournette fan - that isn't to say I don't like him, don't get my language confused. There are lots of players in the first that I'd have over him at our selection.

Edited November 3, 2016 by hn68wb4

[RaineV1]

12 hours ago, jboy19 said:

I still don't trust top RBs. Yeah Zeke's been good, but after seeing Gurley regress behind the Rams OL and mixed results from Gordon, I'm less inclined to be enthusiastic... But if we take Fournette, I'd be a Fournette fan and viciously hope for his success. 

I can trust first round RBs when the team is actually set up well for them. The Cowboys already had the OL in place and a passing game. They just needed a strong compliment to it after Murray left. Gurley would be shattering records if he went to a team with things in place like the Cowboys had for Zeke, but the Rams wanted to commit to the run without giving him any help.

Expecting a RB alone to carry an offense is almost as bad as throwing a rookie QB on an awful team and just hoping he makes everything better.

[ravefan52]

Fournette would be a great pick

[DefensiveMind]

I would be stoked, as long as he could stay healthy...

[52520Andrew]

I think us establishing the run fixes a lot of problems with this team. More people in the box means less people to cover the WRs and gives Flacco some great play action opportunities. Furthermore it wears the defense out and gives our defense time to recover and stay fresh. We need our line to be good as well if we want to have a good ground game but I think the issues there are more about health than anything else and bolstering the depth would help a lot. 

I guess that isn't the best answer but basically if Fournette helps us establish the run consistently then I can't be mad at the pick even though I don't like going RB early due to the depth at the position.

[Wildabeast88]

I'm with Joey I would resign West and keep him with Dixon because we need to address pass rush with at least a first 3 round pick as well as another CB even though I like Tavon and some of the young injured CBs and O-line with at least 2 picks, so I would pass plus Fournette as been garbage this year hurt consistently and ineffective minus his last game 

[Davesta]

We need a strong O-line before even considering a RB. 

[ALPHA]

On 11/13/2016 at 2:09 PM, Davesta said:

We need a strong O-line before even considering a RB. 

This basically. I would take a stud G or C over Fournette.

[usmccharles]

I would prefer not.  But I completely get the cowboys taking Elliot because they have an Oline that I could run behind.  We need to build the OL, pass rushers, and CBs before a RB imo

[Somerset Ravens]

On 11/12/2016 at 11:09 PM, Davesta said:

We need a strong O-line before even considering a RB. 

I strongly agree with you. O-line is the weakest area of our team plus there is a chance we could lose our starting right tackle to free agency. If we could make our O-line strong our current running backs would be very productive.

[ravefan52]

I get that RB isn't really a need, but I don't know how you can look at this pathetic offense and say Leonard freaking Fournette wouldn't be an amazing addition to this team. He'd singlehandedly change the outcomes of games more than any other player besides Garrett and Allen imo. If Ozzie passed on him I'd bet there's a great chance he ends up regretting it a couple years down the road.

[LosT_in_TranSlatioN]

45 minutes ago, ravefan52 said:

I get that RB isn't really a need, but I don't know how you can look at this pathetic offense and say Leonard freaking Fournette wouldn't be an amazing addition to this team. He'd singlehandedly change the outcomes of games more than any other player besides Garrett and Allen imo. If Ozzie passed on him I'd bet there's a great chance he ends up regretting it a couple years down the road.

 

Ozzie's mantra is usually best player available. Which Fournette would be in spades. I doubt that he falls to us, but I'd be down for either him or Cook. 

[JoeyFlex5]

id be ok with fournette under a few conditions... 

1) we are picking in the teens and he inexplicably falls to us, while tim williams is off the board. 

2) we trade up in the 2nd round to double dip on the interior OL so that he can actually be useful, because with this OL fournette wont be the difference between a good and bad offense, not even close, id have a very hard time believing he'd be much more effective or consistent than either of our backs atm. 

3) if we DONT do #2 and we decide to maybe address the secondary in the 2nd, then we keep fournette on a snap count as a rookie, preserve his legs, let him get nice and seasoned as a #2 back, let him learn things like 3rd down play without asking too much of him, by year 2 hopefully he can be a 3 down back and be able to pass protect and learn the nuances and the get a feel for it at the NFL level. and in this year 2 we address the OL and he explodes onto the scene. 

i dont want to take him if we are just gonna run him into the ground with no chance of contending for a title because our line is absolutely horrid and he gets destroyed because hes all we have and he has no holes to run through.

[Static]

Whats the point? he would just get underfed as we continue to throw the ball 50 times again and forget about the run game in the 2nd half.

[Italian Raven]

With our Oline lacking some high caliber C and depth at G, and assuming we´re drafting between #15-25, I´d go with any of these pass-rushers or corners before Fournette:
McKinley, Lawson, Humphrey, Jones, Tabor, Wilson

I totally agree with Joey and those who said that without an O-line he wouldn´t be able to express his potential, which would limit the pick´s value.
 

[Ravensfan23]

I'm not saying i'd take Fournette, definitely would love to have him, i'm more of a Cook fan personally. However to the people who say it's pointless to select him without a great oline or with the oline we currently have, you guys do realize that Fournette wouldn't be a 1 year rental right? It's not like oline can't be addressed in the same draft that Fournette is selected. I think if he's there and the Ravens feel good about him you pull the trigger. 

[Italian Raven]

On 27.11.2016 at 3:46 AM, Ravensfan23 said:

I'm not saying i'd take Fournette, definitely would love to have him, i'm more of a Cook fan personally. However to the people who say it's pointless to select him without a great oline or with the oline we currently have, you guys do realize that Fournette wouldn't be a 1 year rental right? It's not like oline can't be addressed in the same draft that Fournette is selected. I think if he's there and the Ravens feel good about him you pull the trigger. 

I don´t think us "not-Fournett-lovers" are against the LSU RB and addressing the Oline and the in this draft at all, but rather against spending our highest picks on O while there are such talented OLB and CB top tier players. We simply aknowledge that a 4th-5th rounder wouldn´t help us boost the line enough to make the Fournett pick worth it, therefore would just go D with the first 1-2 picks. 
Afterall we saw it, that´s the side of the ball that keeps us on the run for a playoff spot almost every year. This is the year to replace Doom and Suggs in the long term and find a true #2 CB. I hope we´ll take full advantage of it.

Personally, I´d grade the ideal draft this way
 
RD 1 Top CB/OLB on board + RD 2 top CB/OLB on board + RD3 Oline competition + RD 3 (comp) falling defensive playmaker + RD4 Oline depth/WR
> 
RD 1 Fournette/Cook + RD 2 falling defensive playmaker + RD3 defensive player at a position of need + RD 3 (comp) Oline competition + RD4 Oline depth/WR
>
RD 1 Fournette/Cook + RD 2 starting Olineman + RD 3 falling defensive playmaker + RD 3 (comp) defensive player at a position of need + defensive player at a position of need/Oline depth/WR

[JoeyFlex5]

While we definitely need a cb and edge rusher, our defense isn't the side of the ball that needs work. Its so weird that we so desperately need to address those positions but our offense is the side that's performing badly. 

It makes it difficult really. We can't continue depending on an injured Jimmy Smith and an old doom and suggs. But we desperately need to upgrade the OL. in short I think RB is the least of our worries and while fournette would be a really exciting pick, it may be a step in the wrong direction. Now if we took fournette somehow, and then managed to land a cb and a guy like elflein with a trade up in the 2nd, then that's a different story. But that's a long shot at best.

[redlobster]

Fournette is just meh to me. I'd prefer about 6-8 other prospects (at other positions) over him.

[Ravensfan23]

I don't think RB is a issue honestly. I really like Dixon and if West stays that's a nice 1-2 punch to me. If Cook is there for us the Seminole in me says take him no doubt but I'd much rather address the oline on offense. Yanda at LG is really showing me the hole that position truly is and why it's so important to have a strong left side. Yanda and Stanley are really good and would love a young dominant LG Stanley can grow with. 

[Wildabeast88]

No Fournette to many foot/ankle issues and hitting on the team for the bowl game he would be off my board for that alone 

[ravefan52]

13 hours ago, Wildabeast88 said:

No Fournette to many foot/ankle issues and hitting on the team for the bowl game he would be off my board for that alone 

I don't blame him for not wanting to be another Jaylon Smith

[reed20]

Definitely would be mad. Dixon will be a star and we have a good 1-2 punch with him and west so drafting a back in the first would be a huge waste. I want us to continue to bulk up this offensive line with another guard in the first and a center in the second. Stanley, Yanda, Lewis, and two good ones from the draft and we have ourselves a premier O line.

Edited December 20, 2016 by reed20

[Rebel Raven]

Id personally be mad even at the end of the first, too many injuries and him being afraid to get hurt in the bowl game just does no good for his case imo. Not only that we have 2 decent running backs that could produce at a higher level with a better line in front of them. I would much rather use my first draft pick on the line than Fournette

[GrimCoconut]

On 11/26/2016 at 2:09 AM, JoeyFlex5 said:

id be ok with fournette under a few conditions... 

1) we are picking in the teens and he inexplicably falls to us, while tim williams is off the board. 

2) we trade up in the 2nd round to double dip on the interior OL so that he can actually be useful, because with this OL fournette wont be the difference between a good and bad offense, not even close, id have a very hard time believing he'd be much more effective or consistent than either of our backs atm. 

3) if we DONT do #2 and we decide to maybe address the secondary in the 2nd, then we keep fournette on a snap count as a rookie, preserve his legs, let him get nice and seasoned as a #2 back, let him learn things like 3rd down play without asking too much of him, by year 2 hopefully he can be a 3 down back and be able to pass protect and learn the nuances and the get a feel for it at the NFL level. and in this year 2 we address the OL and he explodes onto the scene. 

i dont want to take him if we are just gonna run him into the ground with no chance of contending for a title because our line is absolutely horrid and he gets destroyed because hes all we have and he has no holes to run through.

Yep. I agree with this and was about to post the same until I decided to read and see if anyone else shared my sentiments. I'm down for Fournette or Cook but if we go that route then get me an interior OL. Hell, trade picks to get the best guy if you like. If we fix the run game it makes you defense potentially better, especially when you have older defenders who need rest. It means you can control the clock and it means you keep your defense off the field.  This means your defense can potentially pin back their ears and feast

Edited December 23, 2016 by GrimCoconut