Interesting take...

[Cullain]

If we are taking mcfadden I don't see us trading down with the jets to do so. It's not worth it to bank on mcfadden still being available.

And also for the naysayers, mcfadden IS an upgrade, and I believe he would have great success in the ZBS, it's a great scheme for a RB to earn his chops. And given his versatility he would be a great check down option for Russel if none of our receivers can get open.

[OTF]

Originally Posted by IowaRAIDERSFan

Even if we only trade down with the Jets it seems like a VERY wise thing to do. They move up and grab (most likely Gholston) we drop 2 spots... KC is most likely going to take Matt Ryan or trade down for offensive lineman. then we can (if it's the plan) take Mcfadden, or even Gholston (if the Jets grab Mcfadden)at the 6 spot AND pick up a player from the Jets. Plus, taking them with the 6th pick instead of the 4th we save some much needed cash. The monkey wrench in this would be who would (if KC wants to drop down) the team that trades up want... I really imagine KC wants Ryan.. I don't think they are convinced Croyle is their man.

The difference last year from #4 to #6 was about $5 Mill in contract value (same amount of years).

Interesting thoughts... I think KC is really after a LT though which makes me thing this.

Assuming that Jake Long, Chris Long and Dorsey/Ryan are the top 3 picks. That leaves us at #4 with Gholston, McFadden, Ellis & Clady all players that would make us better.

If we trade with the Jets and they take Gholston then KC will have to decide between Ryan, Clady or trading down. If they take Ryan or Clady then we are set with McFadden at #6 plus the pick/player from the Jets.

If KC trades down we take Clady, Dorsey or Ellis and still are in good shape and save money and fill a bigger need...

[Snoop750]

Originally Posted by Cullain

If we are taking mcfadden I don't see us trading down with the jets to do so. It's not worth it to bank on mcfadden still being available.

And also for the naysayers, mcfadden IS an upgrade, and I believe he would have great success in the ZBS, it's a great scheme for a RB to earn his chops. And given his versatility he would be a great check down option for Russel if none of our receivers can get open.

I think your absolutely right. I just worry about the nyj interest in McFadden. I think that's who AL wants. JMHO. So I wonder if the nyj would invest a lot of resources to go after him, or if the pattern remains the same and they'll go after gholston, just to beat the patsies to him.

The Draft you gotta love it. Just one big NFL poker table. Should be Great once again to see how things play out.

[Jnova]

I think McFadden is a great fit for this offense. I could see him leading the league in rushing in our system. When was the last time we had a running back of that caliber? We havent had one since Bo and Marcus and that was almost 20 years ago.

The main knock on McFadden is that he doesnt like contact, or at least he doesnt handle it well. The ZBS being more of a finesse system, I think it suits him quite well.

Fargas is a good player but hes no world beater and defensive coordinators arent going to lose any sleep game planning for him. Michael Bush is still an unknown and at best I see him as another Tyrone Wheatley, at worst another Nick Bell. He is very heavy for a running back, and doesnt run low to the ground either. After seeing his college highlight reels its no wonder he broke his leg.

Now Wheatley was a good player but again, he was no world beater. Are we going to pass on a player who could (potentially) be the next Marcus Allen because we already have (potentially) the next Tyrone Wheatley?

It just doesnt add up for me, and forget about trading down too. I think there was one occasion where Al traded down and he moved down from 17th or 18th or something like that, fill in those details if you know them. But Al isnt going to trade the 4th pick unless somebody makes him an incredible offer.

If McFadden is there at #4, he will be the pick. I would be borderline shocked otherwise.