Coltsfanforlife12

Dalvin Cook

117 posts in this topic

3 hours ago, a06cc said:

Yes I said "serviceable". When we won the SB in 06 that defense didn't exactly have world beaters except Bob Sanders. Remember that Jags game that season? I'm  Colts never had a defense throughout it's history. I absolutely hate the lack of research from a Colts fan. 

 

And notice we only won that 1 Superbowl because our defense was great in those playoffs but couldn't show up enough. If the Colts had better D's in in recent history they could have had multiple SBs. And its going to keep going that way if they just keep building the O and hope for a serviceable D and we might never win 1 with Luck and that would be a crime. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ty4atd said:

 

And notice we only won that 1 Superbowl because our defense was great in those playoffs but couldn't show up enough. If the Colts had better D's in in recent history they could have had multiple SBs. And its going to keep going that way if they just keep building the O and hope for a serviceable D and we might never win 1 with Luck and that would be a crime. 

When paying your QB and skills position that's going to happen. An example is HOU. Look at their QB situation over the year. But they have a great defense ever year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, aaron11 said:

i was high on taking cook, but i cooled after the combine

 

i could still see us grabbing him if he lasts to our pick though.   ballards comment about drafting for need vs taking someone like reggie wayne comes to mind

The hate on the couch Maine numbers is dumb... who the heck cares about combine numbers.. watch the tape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally speaking, I'd be so annoyed at any RB in rd1. 

 

This is a disease us Indy fans have with offense. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gabriel Alexander Morillo said:

Insane that this even has to be explained 

It's really not insane... you have three stud running backs in this draft and a deep defensive draft.  I'd rather take a stud running back and draft some good defensive players in the 2nd-4th rounds.  Running back could be the key to a top 10 offense.  We've never had a running back people have to fear taking it to the house. It's why our play action game isn't very effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Coltsfanforlife12 said:

It's really not insane... you have three stud running backs in this draft and a deep defensive draft.  I'd rather take a stud running back and draft some good defensive players in the 2nd-4th rounds.  Running back could be the key to a top 10 offense.  We've never had a running back people have to fear taking it to the house. It's why our play action game isn't very effective.

Our offense was ranked 8th last year.... so why do we need to improve to have a top 10 offense??

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, a06cc said:

When paying your QB and skills position that's going to happen. An example is HOU. Look at their QB situation over the year. But they have a great defense ever year. 

But it's not happening because the Colts are to cap strapped or don't have the opportunity to improve the D they just have over prioritized the offence. Dalvin Cook won't improve the offence or team like a Derreck Barnett, Foster or any of the CB in round 1 would improve the D. 

 

As for the Houston comparison that's because they haven't found a QB not because they couldn't afford one because they are putting to much into the D.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

Our offense was ranked 8th last year.... so why do we need to improve to have a top 10 offense??

A running game that's dangerous and not one that gets a 1000 yards on volume is going to protect our quarterback whose had some injury issues.  A running game that's dangerous will open up our passing game and help our receivers who can't break coverage. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Coltsfanforlife12 said:

A running game that's dangerous and not one that gets a 1000 yards on volume is going to protect our quarterback whose had some injury issues.  A running game that's dangerous will open up our passing game and help our receivers who can't break coverage. 

Hunt, Gallman, Perine, and Conner could all help our running game and keep defenses honest. We won't have to spend a 1st on any of them either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Coltsfanforlife12 said:

A running game that's dangerous and not one that gets a 1000 yards on volume is going to protect our quarterback whose had some injury issues.  A running game that's dangerous will open up our passing game and help our receivers who can't break coverage. 

The point is, what helps our team more, going from 8th to 6th on offense, or going from 30th to 20th on defense? A stud RB will only do so much more. A stud Pass rusher helps not only our sack numbers, but our pass defense numbers and our secondary. We HAVE a top 10 offense. Should we not try and improve where we are weak rather then continue this game of diminishing returns? 

Also how did we get 1000 yds on volume?? We werent even in the top half of the league in rushing attempts....

Gore got 260 carries, which is about where ANY RB we have had in Indy maxes out, including when we had what we thought was a "stud" in Richardson. Even if Cook got 5YPC, which is pretty ridiculous to expect, that only puts him ~250 yds above where our running game is now, which STILL leaves us as a bottom half Running team if our backup RB numbers hold true.

If you think we are going to change our entire scheme to utlilze him properly, then you are sadly mistaken. We havent changed what we do for ANY player, including #12. If we dont cater to our franchise QB, our young O line, our 1st round WR, our Top 10 paid TE, why would we all of a sudden change for a 1st round RB?? Is Cook more of a generational talent then Luck?? 

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

look what a really good --- not a fourth rounder --- running back helped them do in Dallas last year.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Gigc said:

look what a really good --- not a fourth rounder --- running back helped them do in Dallas last year.

 

Running behind the same o line that Darren freaking McFadden had 1000 yards rushing the year before. We are not Dallas. This comparison makes no sense.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Gigc said:

look what a really good --- not a fourth rounder --- running back helped them do in Dallas last year.

 

All we need is the best o line in the league

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have a top 10 offense and a WR that led the league in receiving yards. We scored enough points to win most games the defense just couldn't stop anyone from scoring. This team needs defensive playmakers. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

D Cook is the man, he will alleviate hits on Luck with his dashing through the lines.  This guy is a stud.  Get him Ballard, a sure thing..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Coltsfanforlife12 said:

The hate on the couch Maine numbers is dumb... who the heck cares about combine numbers.. watch the tape.

i know, but its not like cook is the only good player in this class

 

there are some good defenders too, and we have nobody at CB and ilb except for vontae

 

i think the combine does matter for corners too.  the good ones dont get tested often and they dont have a lot of stats to go by

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Coltsfanforlife12 said:

It's really not insane... you have three stud running backs in this draft and a deep defensive draft.  I'd rather take a stud running back and draft some good defensive players in the 2nd-4th rounds.  Running back could be the key to a top 10 offense.  We've never had a running back people have to fear taking it to the house. It's why our play action game isn't very effective.

It really is insane. How can you look at our defense with a straight face and say that you're okay taking a damn runningback in the first over a difference making shutdown corner, a versatile Middle Linebacker, or a potential pass rushing beast? Hell, I'd even go for a Defensive Tackle too.

It's crazy to see people overlook these things for such an overvalued position. Look at how good the scheme can make a runningback look, or just look at the Pats. They don't need a top 5 runningback to wreck opponents in big games year after year. 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ty4atd said:

But it's not happening because the Colts are to cap strapped or don't have the opportunity to improve the D they just have over prioritized the offence. Dalvin Cook won't improve the offence or team like a Derreck Barnett, Foster or any of the CB in round 1 would improve the D. 

 

As for the Houston comparison that's because they haven't found a QB not because they couldn't afford one because they are putting to much into the D.   

No they can't afford one. Their structure of how their team is built won't allow them. This is why we hear talks of them trading for Romo.  If we pick up Cook and he can run the ball how in the hell can you sit here and say it wouldn't help the team? It would keep the defense off the field. I don't care who the Colts pickup in the first round as long as their a game changer. I've said in all of my post regarding players would could possible pick. D or O I'd happy with whoever we acquire. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, a06cc said:

No they can't afford one. Their structure of how their team is built won't allow them. This is why we hear talks of them trading for Romo.  If we pick up Cook and he can run the ball how in the hell can you sit here and say it wouldn't help the team? It would keep the defense off the field. I don't care who the Colts pickup in the first round as long as their a game changer. I've said in all of my post regarding players would could possible pick. D or O I'd happy with whoever we acquire. 

Then how will they afford Romo if they trade for him? Houston has a D so they are a QB away from real Superbowl contenders year in and out. Since the Colts already have a top 5 QB in Luck they either need a good D to be real contenders or hope for a fluke 06 post-season where they go on a hot streak, and play like a good D.

 

Taking Cook would help the O but the D needs it more, with Luck, TY, and at least 3/5 of the line set for the future the O just needs complimentary pieces to be very good. The D has no stars no real difference makers, at least the old Colts Ds had Freeney and Mathis and Bethea and Sanders (when healthy). It just needs the help more and there should be a few guys we could take to help it out and still get great value. Obviously most of these players will be gone but Garrett, Allen, Barnett, Foster, Adams, Hooker, Lattimore, Humphrey, Jones, Thomas, Charlton, Jackson, Tabor or Wilson would all be better picks than Cook.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Cynjin said:

 

The main reason that I do not like picking a RB in the first round is that usually the difference between a RB taken in the first round and one taken in the third round is not as great as other positions.  For example an edge rusher in the first vs an edge rusher in the third.  There are always exceptions, but in general this is true, IMO.

Is this even accurate, though. I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but I feel I've read things and seen charts that show RB success rates of 1st round RBs over other rounds is still fairly in line with the success rates of other positions. Like I said, I'm not really taking sides here but every time I see the statement in your quote I wonder if it's just an assumption or if it actually hold weight. Anyone have any stats on this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

The point is, what helps our team more, going from 8th to 6th on offense, or going from 30th to 20th on defense? A stud RB will only do so much more. A stud Pass rusher helps not only our sack numbers, but our pass defense numbers and our secondary. We HAVE a top 10 offense. Should we not try and improve where we are weak rather then continue this game of diminishing returns? 

Also how did we get 1000 yds on volume?? We werent even in the top half of the league in rushing attempts....

Gore got 260 carries, which is about where ANY RB we have had in Indy maxes out, including when we had what we thought was a "stud" in Richardson. Even if Cook got 5YPC, which is pretty ridiculous to expect, that only puts him ~250 yds above where our running game is now, which STILL leaves us as a bottom half Running team if our backup RB numbers hold true.

If you think we are going to change our entire scheme to utlilze him properly, then you are sadly mistaken. We havent changed what we do for ANY player, including #12. If we dont cater to our franchise QB, our young O line, our 1st round WR, our Top 10 paid TE, why would we all of a sudden change for a 1st round RB?? Is Cook more of a generational talent then Luck?? 

 

This is a great post. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the thing though.  Just because Grigson couldn't land defensive talent in rounds 2-7 doesn't mean Ballard can't.  

 

Would I have been upset with Grigson taking a RB in round 1?  Yes.  Ballard?  Not so much.  For all we know, he might  nail free agency and then nail every defensive pick in rounds 2-7.  We'll have to wait and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is this even a topic of discussion anymore? Not even the media mocks Cook to us anymore, colts fans still banging in the table for this guy?!? You will all be disappointed in April, Dalvin will not be a colt

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone (including me) who advocates taking a RB this year in the 1st round should receive a permaban.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, #12. said:

Here's the thing though.  Just because Grigson couldn't land defensive talent in rounds 2-7 doesn't mean Ballard can't.  

 

Would I have been upset with Grigson taking a RB in round 1?  Yes.  Ballard?  Not so much.  For all we know, he might  nail free agency and then nail every defensive pick in rounds 2-7.  We'll have to wait and see.

Has nothing to do with Grigson being terrible at drafting talent and everything to do with the state of our roster rn. Even if we add a few more pieces in FA our D still has so many wholes and no elite players. Taking a RB round 1 leaves them high and dry again. I'm sure we get starting caliber players rounds 2-4 but not a potential star like you'd get in the first. It won't happen 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ty4atd said:

 

And notice we only won that 1 Superbowl because our defense was great in those playoffs but couldn't show up enough. If the Colts had better D's in in recent history they could have had multiple SBs. And its going to keep going that way if they just keep building the O and hope for a serviceable D and we might never win 1 with Luck and that would be a crime. 

Common fallacy with the Bill Polian Colts. They had Top 10 scoring defense 5 times including the #1 in 2007 and #2 in 2005. We actually won it in 2006 when we were 23rd rank. Fact is we have had top 10 defenses here and haven't won. I'd love to have one don't get me wrong but there is a lot more that goes into winning then only the defense. In this instance I'm all for building our defense...we have so many holes there and no real playmaking stars so it isn't enough to address it but to get some playmakers there...ones that get you stops and force turnovers. Best chance is to draft those early because we aren't going to find them in FA. We need to invest heavily early in the draft to commit to the defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

20 minutes ago, Tmoney said:

Has nothing to do with Grigson being terrible at drafting talent and everything to do with the state of our roster rn. Even if we add a few more pieces in FA our D still has so many wholes and no elite players. Taking a RB round 1 leaves them high and dry again. I'm sure we get starting caliber players rounds 2-4 but not a potential star like you'd get in the first. It won't happen 

 

Plenty of game changers across the league taken after round 1.  We've had 3 in recent times, and two, Bob and Mathis were taken after round 1.  Not only that, Freeney was projected late round 1, early round 2 by some, and was considered a serious reach at the time.  Hard to believe now, but true.

 

Again, just because Grigson couldn't hope to find a game changer after round 1 doesn't mean Ballard can't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, funktacious2 said:

Is this even accurate, though. I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but I feel I've read things and seen charts that show RB success rates of 1st round RBs over other rounds is still fairly in line with the success rates of other positions. Like I said, I'm not really taking sides here but every time I see the statement in your quote I wonder if it's just an assumption or if it actually hold weight. Anyone have any stats on this?

Most everyone wants a great RB. Understandable.

This team wins games when we hold the opponent under 19 points. That is fact.

Not utilizing this upcoming draft at getting the best defensive player available at pick #15 IMO would be a huge mistake. With our O-line being pretty much all new they are not going to be able to block for him. We don't have an O-line like Dallas or Pittsburgh so Cook wouldn't help the already potent offense much at all.

On the other hand Getting a great D player under a rookie contract would bring more wins.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, funktacious2 said:

Is this even accurate, though. I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but I feel I've read things and seen charts that show RB success rates of 1st round RBs over other rounds is still fairly in line with the success rates of other positions. Like I said, I'm not really taking sides here but every time I see the statement in your quote I wonder if it's just an assumption or if it actually hold weight. Anyone have any stats on this?

I think what he is implying is that even a star running backs production is not that much greater than say a starter on another team. We have tons of backs taken outside the first rd that are among the best in the league. I mean sure you have Elliott but you got gues like Bell and McCoy taken later that are as good if not better. In this new NFL RB is just not that hard to find good production. To me your OL has a greater correlation to your running game then the RB behind it. I look at the NFL and top rbs and I see a ton of talent taken in day 2 and later. Not that Cook can't be great but I feel confident I can find a good back that can all but match his production in a later rd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, rock8591 said:

Anyone (including me) who advocates taking a RB this year in the 1st round should receive a permaban.

There are obvious reasons to take one in the first rd. Such as its the focus of your offense or you have an aging qb or your team is deep with most other positions of need filled or it's a once in a generation talent ala Barry Sanderd or Adrian Peterson but I don't think we have any of those situations facing the Colts right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Cook were a young Frank Gore 2.0 (including all tangibles and intangibles) then I would be okay with it, but I don't think he is.  We need defense and we need it now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dgambill said:

Common fallacy with the Bill Polian Colts. They had Top 10 scoring defense 5 times including the #1 in 2007 and #2 in 2005. We actually won it in 2006 when we were 23rd rank. Fact is we have had top 10 defenses here and haven't won. I'd love to have one don't get me wrong but there is a lot more that goes into winning then only the defense. In this instance I'm all for building our defense...we have so many holes there and no real playmaking stars so it isn't enough to address it but to get some playmakers there...ones that get you stops and force turnovers. Best chance is to draft those early because we aren't going to find them in FA. We need to invest heavily early in the draft to commit to the defense.

Defensive rankings can be very misleading.  We all watched those defenses.  They were only impressive if the colts had a decent lead and knew what the offense had to do.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CheezyColt said:

Running behind the same o line that Darren freaking McFadden had 1000 yards rushing the year before. We are not Dallas. This comparison makes no sense.

Yes, we don't have Dallas' line. But we were running the ball better near the end of the year. the line was playing better all the way around. 

I was just saying --- you put a stud RB in our offense, it makes us better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zeke changed my opinion about taking RBs early.

 

That was some performance last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gigc said:

Yes, we don't have Dallas' line. But we were running the ball better near the end of the year. the line was playing better all the way around. 

I was just saying --- you put a stud RB in our offense, it makes us better

That can be said about any position. We're always looking for stud players. That being said, a stud defender would help us a lot more than a stud RB. We can't keep falling into the trap of picking the shiny toy every year. Last year's Kelly pick is exactly the kind of picks we need to keep making. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, zibby43 said:

Zeke changed my opinion about taking RBs early.

 

That was some performance last year.

Anyone in a wheel chair could get through the running lanes the Dallas's O-line cleared.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Coltsfanforlife12 said:

A running game that's dangerous and not one that gets a 1000 yards on volume is going to protect our quarterback whose had some injury issues.  A running game that's dangerous will open up our passing game and help our receivers who can't break coverage. 

 

Agree with this in a huge. But I do think continued focus on our O-line might help us as well as adding a running back. I like Aaron Jones out of UTEP for example. Here's a guy probably not going in the first 2 days who would bring explosiveness to the RB position, as well as some ability to catch and block out of the backfield as well (I don't think he's elite in these areas, but he's passable). Add a difference maker at right guard and put Haeg in as the 6th O-lineman, which means not only jumbo packages but also that realistically he'll still be starting some games from us. There's a running game you can feel solid about IMO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Track Guy said:

 

Agree with this in a huge. But I do think continued focus on our O-line might help us as well as adding a running back. I like Aaron Jones out of UTEP for example. Here's a guy probably not going in the first 2 days who would bring explosiveness to the RB position, as well as some ability to catch and block out of the backfield as well (I don't think he's elite in these areas, but he's passable). Add a difference maker at right guard and put Haeg in as the 6th O-lineman, which means not only jumbo packages but also that realistically he'll still be starting some games from us. There's a running game you can feel solid about IMO. 

All for not with the defense giving up more points than the offense is scoring. Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

All for not with the defense giving up more points than the offense is scoring. Just saying.

Aaron Jones will probably go in the 5th or later. You can use every other pick on defense...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

All for not with the defense giving up more points than the offense is scoring. Just saying.

 

A good running game will help our defense. It worked for Dallas. Everyone thought they were going to have a historically bad defense in 2014. It'll also help keep Luck healthy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.