@tour2ma said:

He's a good, complementary back... great in space with really good hands. Had some moments including the over-the-shoulder TD-catch vs. SD(?). But he's not a full-time back and he's not meant to be half of a tandem.

Mack-Byner was a very special pairing of two well-rounded backs with a lot of interchangeability. Their whole exceeded the sum of their parts.

that's fair. fwiw Duke's size probably woulda been a lot more effective between the tackles against the mid-1980s DLines.

you know, if Tr3nt could read a defense can you imagine him in the mid 80s? fun to think about for a second.

@the-gipper said:

ranked 29th in point differential. Yes, bad offense, but they were also not stopping other teams from scoring much.Maybe somewhat statistically. But they really weren't in the middle. They ranked 32 in turnover ration which means they weren't taking the ball away at all. (it was not all on the offense). Plus they

Cool outlier stats. Yes, their QBs were awful so they couldn't score. Point differential is irrelevant. What were they in total D and scoring D?

@tour2ma said:

His three-cone was similar to TJ Yeldon, which wasn't too far behind Adrian Peterson. tenth of a second. I'm OK with his agility and burst

@wargograw said:

ranked 29th in point differential. Yes, bad offense, but they were also not stopping other teams from scoring much.Maybe somewhat statistically. But they really weren't in the middle. They ranked 32 in turnover ration which means they weren't taking the ball away at all. (it was not all on the offense). Plus they

@mike-h said:

My point was Henry's "run" through the 4-gate, mini-slalom was a crawl. Sports Science is not going to diss a subject... even if they have to invent something to make him look good... like QB-skeet...

Just not the type of back Henry is... and not the type I want... not for this team... not now...

@tour2ma said:

I'm woefully ignorant on the guy, tbh. My gut reaction was that he was a slightly above average talent that benefitted from being the son of a former NFL runningback, so I didn't watch too much tape on him. Mostly highlight cuts and maybe a game or two.

@tour2ma said:

That didn't say anything bad about Henry's agility, only that his "game" was different, and it was pretty flattering to the type of player he is. He's a brute force back with explosion and breakaway speed. Not seeing the holes, or being able to change direction are not things I saw from his Bama tape.

@the-gipper said:

Well, the Cowboys are by no means that team. Sorry, but the problems with that team are a hell of a lot more than just having Romo out. Romo on last legs anyway. Defense way below average.

No it's pretty much right at average.

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

TC, any thoughts on Kevin Taylor (RB)?

@mike-h said:

kk...

Good to disagree again about Henry... It was getting ridiculous.

Just seemed the hole had to be in proximity of where it was drawn up. Certainly saw many plays where once he stops and looks he seldom gets going again (also saw a stat on that... may have been Merril Hodge).

But the clincher for me was the SportsScience segment he and Zeke shared. Check the 2:00 mark...

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=15215832

@darren15 said:

Well, the Cowboys are by no means that team. Sorry, but the problems with that team are a hell of a lot more than just having Romo out. Romo on last legs anyway. Defense way below average.

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

Would be sweet to get Jack in the 3rd and Jaylon with one of the extra 4ths and stash him until 2017. Then we would pretty much have 3 1st rounders next year.

@mike-h said:

Well Connor Cook can go fuck himself into oblivion, I'm fully out on him.

Jack would be a nice consolation in the third, you can't pass on his upside there. Although I'd still rather take the gamble on Jaylon than Jack.

I'm not scared one bit about Ragland's heart. If it were a major issue, it would have surfaced in college. With careful monitoring, it shouldn't affect his production in the least IMO.

@tour2ma said:

Not much else to add. I think unearthing the right RB for the right price is a trial-and-error endeavor. We'll see how they value Crowell and the position in general over the next two days.

@mike-h said:

Yup- I have no problems swapping those second rounders with teh Cowboys- move down 2 spots- get more picks.

And just no to the guys you mentioned.

I don't see Henry... not behind a questionable OL. Nice patience and burst, but limited lateral movement concerns me. And Prosise is a guy I've been off and on about. Just not comfortable with the value as a late 2/early 3. Same as Dixon who I was on for a bit, until he rose. Some of the same "not a good time in the rebuild to go big for a RB" left over from Zeke. Just feel "foundational" enough for where we are.

RB I am drawn to continues to be Williams (Arkansas). Limited reps due to time missed, but much of the same power hybrid promise a full round later than the two above... albeit a bit slower than your two guys.

Couple later and cheaper alternatives I've put only a little time in on are: Kevin Taylor (Florida) and late riser (and unknown) Darius Jackson (E. Michigan). The later brings the competition questions we went through with Terrence West.

Thoughts?

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

No worries by you about the medical issue?

@mike-h said:

I agree with this completely. Henry in the second or Prosise in the third would be great pickups.

Although, now that Ragland has fallen this far, I'd rather see us take Ragland than Henry here.

@tour2ma said:

I disagree. I feel Duke can be part of a pairing. Ideally I'd like a 225lb #1 back that can still catch the ball, but have Duke good for 8-10 rushes and 3-4 catches a game.

Good luck, kid...

@logicisforsquares said:

Good then I guess he would have no problem with taking the pay cut of being picked in the upper 20s?

Yep. Or riding pine behind some team that already has a starter.