Todd Gurley

[Mick063]

Forget the Lynch retirement discussion.
Forget the Lynch contract negotiation.
Forget the needs in other areas.
Forget the depth at the running back position.

When a transcendent running back comes along, you can't pass. If he seems reachable, you reach, trade up, do what it takes. Forget the ACL tear. It is not what it used to be, countless examples of players that come back from it to All Pro form.

Gurley is a generational back, the best to come out since Peterson, and I believe, will be better than AP. He is Eric Dickerson II. Get that dude on a rookie contract, pay the quarterback and middle linebacker, and hitch the wagon to Gurley for a four year ride. Follow the same game plan that took the team to consecutive Super Bowls.

Most of all, move up to deny him from the Cowboys. Gurley with that offensive line would create a huge menace in the NFC. There is a reason the cowpokes are hedging on Murray and using the franchise tag on Bryant. They want Gurley on that rookie contract and they feel very fortunate that they draft ahead of Seattle. Jerry Jones was smartly talked out of Johnny Football. His confidants will not be so adamant to talk him out of Gurley. They know how good Gurley is.

In the distant future, there will fans across NFL nation writing, "We could have drafted Gurley but we took this bum instead." I hope the fans at .Net are not writing it as well.

 

[Hawks46]

Well, if he comes back 100% then it works really well for us. With our RB depth, we can redshirt him a year and get him completely ready for the next year. Unless Lynch retires, we really don't need him next year.

What would be the perfect situation for us, is that Lynch tells the team he's going to retire, but it's kept under wraps until after the draft. Then teams wouldn't know to block us from getting Gurley.

Gurley would make the Cowboys impressive, but I honestly don't think he'll be 100% ready by the beginning of next year. If they let Murray walk, Jones will do something stupid like playing Gurley too quickly and risk reinjuring him. Kinda like what happened to Jerry Rice. Came back too quickly and broke his kneecap.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

He's not a transcendent back.

A transcendent back is someone like AP, LT or Ricky Williams. Those are guys with speed, power, elusiveness, quickness, receiving skills. No red flags.

Gurley has the power component. He doesn't have the same quickness or acceleration that any of those three possessed. Although honestly before he was hurt, he was very very close.

I'd certainly put him ahead of McFadden/Benson/Richardson. Guys who went top 5. Although Benson was pretty close too as a prospect. McFadden had ludicrous speed, but wasn't the same all around back.

The issue of course is now he is damaged. And there is certainly an expectation that he will recover from that. But there is no guarantee he'll be the same player we saw before the injury.

In the changed environment of today's NFL, these backs wouldn't have gone as early. But they'd have gone by pick 15. Which is where I would have expected Gurley to go pre injury.

For Seattle's style of runner, Gurley looks like we could have picked him out of a catalog. He basically has everything we covet in our backs. And does those things at a very high level across the board. Would Seattle make a move up to get him? Anything is possible -- and the fit to talent ratio is about as high as any player in this draft at any position.

I would most definitely approve of such a move. This would be Seattle's version of drafting Aaron Rodgers when you still have mileage on your HOF quarterback. Pick him, and stash him. And when Lynch decides he's not bluffing anymore about retirement or when he precipitously falls off the map in between seasons (which is generally how RBs decline) -- we don't miss a beat.

If it costs us a third round pick for that kind of win forever insurance -- I make that move every time.

 

[Rat]

I'd certainly put him ahead of McFadden/Benson/Richardson. Guys who went top 5. Although Benson was pretty close too as a prospect. McFadden had ludicrous speed, but wasn't the same all around back.

Thinking about it, McFadden might be a solid comparison to Gurley in terms of style. That's not necessarily a bad thing, as McFadden was a tremendous prospect. Didn't work out, but that's hardly unusual for a Raiders pick. He certainly didn't bust because he didn't have the strength and athleticism for the position.

I like Gurley, although nowhere near as much as Mick does. I used my "Adrian Peterson potential" card when Mark Ingram was in the draft. I don't know if I'm allowed another one so soon.

 

[ImTheScientist]

He doesn't have the same quickness or acceleration that any of those three possessed. Although honestly before he was hurt, he was very very close.
.

http://www.georgiadogs.com/sports/c-tra ... 38685.html

Not True.

 

[getnasty]

Gurley is the complete package, he literally lacks nothing. If he was available at our pick we'd be crazy not to take him. I think he might have went in the top 10 if he didn't injury his knee.

 

[vin.couve12]

Not sure that Gurley lacks nothing. I'm sure of it, in fact. He doesn't have a whole lot of quick twitch explosiveness in the short area, IMO. Absolutely great when he gets a head of steam N/S, but is kind of a build up speed. Very much like another UGA all time great in that very same way.

 

[nbk35zw]

Not impressed. He reminds me of Trent Richardson. Struggles in the trash, shows limited vision. He is big, runs fast, and can hit a big hole like a monster.

He is nothing like Lynch. He does not create yards where none exists.

I would be highly disappointed if we drafted the damaged Gurley.

[EDIT]
If you are looking for a Lynch replacement, throw on some tape of Jay Ajayi. Ajayi's running style is similar to Lynch: his feet are beautiful: slide stepping, wide base, well-balanced runner. Great burst. Average speed. Decent vision (similar to Lynch, who struggled to pick up the zone read), great after contact, tough as hell. Throw in the intangibles, great hair, scary thick and looking for contact, and voila.

This is the guy you want.

 

[BAllenHawk]

Not impressed. He reminds me of Trent Richardson. Struggles in the trash, shows limited vision. He is big, runs fast, and can hit a big hole like a monster.

He is nothing like Lynch. He does not create yards where none exists.

I would be highly disappointed if we drafted the damaged Gurley.

[EDIT]
If you are looking for a Lynch replacement, throw on some tape of Jay Ajayi. Ajayi's running style is similar to Lynch: his feet are beautiful: slide stepping, wide base, well-balanced runner. Great burst. Average speed. Decent vision (similar to Lynch, who struggled to pick up the zone read), great after contact, tough as hell. Throw in the intangibles, great hair, scary thick and looking for contact, and voila.

This is the guy you want.

No...It's definitely Gurley.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Not impressed. He reminds me of Trent Richardson. Struggles in the trash, shows limited vision. He is big, runs fast, and can hit a big hole like a monster.

He is nothing like Lynch. He does not create yards where none exists.

I would be highly disappointed if we drafted the damaged Gurley.

[EDIT]
If you are looking for a Lynch replacement, throw on some tape of Jay Ajayi. Ajayi's running style is similar to Lynch: his feet are beautiful: slide stepping, wide base, well-balanced runner. Great burst. Average speed. Decent vision (similar to Lynch, who struggled to pick up the zone read), great after contact, tough as hell. Throw in the intangibles, great hair, scary thick and looking for contact, and voila.

This is the guy you want.

Im not looking for the next Lynch, Im looking for the next great RB. Ajayi isn't in the same league as Gurley. I also disagree that he struggles in trash and shows limited vision.

Gurley's NFL comparison has been Lynch fwiw. Multiple experts and sites have said that much. Even on NFL.com you can see it. http://www.nfl.com/draft/2015/profiles/ ... id=2552475 , I do realize Ajayi has had the Lynch comparison as well....

 

[kjreid]

If Gurley is #1 comparison to Lynch, then Cobb (MN) could be 1A and picked up in the 3rd round. I don't see much of a difference between Gurley and Cobb except I think Cobb can see the hole and cut through it where Gurley will make the hole. everything I have been seeing on Cobb keeps moving him up my RB chart. I think the 3rd rd value pick would be exceptional for us to get Cobb.

 

[ImTheScientist]

If Gurley is #1 comparison to Lynch, then Cobb (MN) could be 1A and picked up in the 3rd round. I don't see much of a difference between Gurley and Cobb except I think Cobb can see the hole and cut through it where Gurley will make the hole. everything I have been seeing on Cobb keeps moving him up my RB chart. I think the 3rd rd value pick would be exceptional for us to get Cobb.

You can have Cobb in the 3rd and I'll take Gurley in the 1st.

 

[hawknation2015]

Yeah, hear that GMs around the league, Gurley sucks. Better not waste your time drafting him.




























Wink, wink.

 

[Hasselbeck]

Not impressed. He reminds me of Trent Richardson. Struggles in the trash, shows limited vision. He is big, runs fast, and can hit a big hole like a monster.

He is nothing like Lynch. He does not create yards where none exists.

I would be highly disappointed if we drafted the damaged Gurley.

What in the world have you been watching? :lol:

Gurley is nothing like Trent Richardson.

 

[kjreid]

If Gurley is #1 comparison to Lynch, then Cobb (MN) could be 1A and picked up in the 3rd round. I don't see much of a difference between Gurley and Cobb except I think Cobb can see the hole and cut through it where Gurley will make the hole. everything I have been seeing on Cobb keeps moving him up my RB chart. I think the 3rd rd value pick would be exceptional for us to get Cobb.

You can have Cobb in the 3rd and I'll take Gurley in the 1st.

I agree, Gurley would be a great #1 pick IF THAT IS our biggest need. the OP stated that regardless of what we need Gurley should be taken. I think the value of Cobb in the 3rd (when RB is not our greatest need this year) outweighs taking a #1 to work behind Lynch for a year or two. If Lynch was gone and RB became our #1 issue then go for Gurley but I still think that Cobb will have a very good career and be a very good running back behind a scheme blocking Offensive line, where he picks the hole.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

I agree, Gurley would be a great #1 pick IF THAT IS our biggest need. the OP stated that regardless of what we need Gurley should be taken. I think the value of Cobb in the 3rd (when RB is not our greatest need this year) outweighs taking a #1 to work behind Lynch for a year or two. If Lynch was gone and RB became our #1 issue then go for Gurley but I still think that Cobb will have a very good career and be a very good running back behind a scheme blocking Offensive line, where he picks the hole.

We're talking about two different kinds of picks.

Cobb could be a value pick. Seattle already has two value picks, in both Turbin and Michael. Guys who have had decent careers and should play late into their 20s.

Gurley is really an alpha back. And truth be told, if we're picking at 31, and he recovers from his injury -- then you really don't get more value than getting what was a consensus top 12 type talent at 31. Gurley leaps off the screen. He has been electric since his freshman year and has been the projected #1 RB prospect for 2015 since. He certainly hasn't done anything on the field to change that -- other than his ACL injury. He'd still be the top back if Melvin Gordon didn't develop and emerge as a legitimate first round talent. He also is a physical freak for the position. Possessing size, power and speed combinations that is unique even by NFL standards.

When you look at Seattle's picks, they have really sought alpha type attributes. Speed has been a huge premium for those positions that favor it. I expect RB would be more driven by power, with good speed. Gurley tips those attributes better than any other in that regard.

Cobb could be a consideration -- although to be honest, I don't think we're in the market for mere value back picks. Taking Gurley isn't so much about need, as it is about tracing a direct succession route between Lynch and our next feature back, which I don't think we are confident that we have on the roster. I would not expect Seattle to go the value route to try and find their future workhorse.

 

[bbsplitter]

This is Richardson's highlight tape: [youtube]97W6bMMWdzc[/youtube]

If I didn't have a crystal ball and knew that he would be a bust, and he was available to us at 31st, I would have picked Richardson based on his tape an talent. I don't really know why he failed in the NFL, obviously lack of vision has been a big part, but he actually had pretty good awareness and for the most part picked the right holes to hit back in college, so I dont know what happened.

Point is, you can't NOT draft him because he reminds you of Richardson, and you cant DRAFT him because he reminds you of Lynch. No one will be Lynch 2.0. Ever. So we need to take a step back and analyze him as his own player, and I for one would be completely on board with drafting him at the 31st pick. Idk about trading up for him, but depending who is left available around that range, I could possibly see it.

 

[nbk35zw]

Not impressed. He reminds me of Trent Richardson. Struggles in the trash, shows limited vision. He is big, runs fast, and can hit a big hole like a monster.

He is nothing like Lynch. He does not create yards where none exists.

I would be highly disappointed if we drafted the damaged Gurley.

What in the world have you been watching? :lol:

Gurley is nothing like Trent Richardson.

I am most likely wrong. I don't get paid for my opinion

That said, living in the South, and having a close friend whose daughter is graduating from Georgia this May, I have watched many (all…) Georgia games the past four years.

Gurley is an enigma. He has all the tools, yet he has never really delivered consistently on his talent. Combine that with the success that Nick Chubb had behind the Georgia line, and you begin to wonder.

Gurley reminds me very much of Trent Richardson. Tons of natural gifts, yet he tends to only shine when the holes are massive. I do think I am being harsh on his yards after contact, yet his ability to read blocks and “get small” is very much in question.

I realize you are not impressed with Ajayi, as he is quick to bounce outside and uses the spin move too often. Yet, he is making people miss, sliding through small cracks, make yards that are “not there”.

Ajayi does fumble too often. Probably too often for him to be a Seahawk. That said, aside from Gordon, I think he is the most natural running talent.

Always appreciate the feedback.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Not impressed. He reminds me of Trent Richardson. Struggles in the trash, shows limited vision. He is big, runs fast, and can hit a big hole like a monster.

He is nothing like Lynch. He does not create yards where none exists.

I would be highly disappointed if we drafted the damaged Gurley.

What in the world have you been watching? :lol:

Gurley is nothing like Trent Richardson.

Gurley is an enigma. He has all the tools, yet he has never really delivered consistently on his talent. Combine that with the success that Nick Chubb had behind the Georgia line, and you begin to wonder.

Gurley reminds me very much of Trent Richardson. Tons of natural gifts, yet he tends to only shine when the holes are massive. I do think I am being harsh on his yards after contact, yet his ability to read blocks and “get small” is very much in question.


Always appreciate the feedback.

We see things very differently I guess.

 

[seahawkfreak]

Great speed,size,vision and patience. I did question his trucking but just watched some more film on him and he definitely can break a tackle. Hits the holes as fast as AP and the vision of Marcus Allen.

So many good receivers that I would hate to pass up on though.