What should Ballard do?

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, BOTT said:

That's won't people told me after I said the TRich trade was horrible.  Not that I expect Barkley to be that kind of player.

I was 50/50 on the TRich trade, I thought it was ok at the time because we gave up a late 1st rounder to get him. Also we needed a RB but I didn't think he would be Pro-Bowler or anything either. If you said TRich would stink then you nailed that one. I wasn't on this Site when that trade went down so credit to you on that one. 

[esmort]

12 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

Yep........Until his 1st 200+ total yard game...Then they will be buying his jerseys...

Wouldn't change my mind. Of course if he is drafted I would root for him to be the best, but it would still be a negative mark on Ballard in my book

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, esmort said:

Wouldn't change my mind. Of course if he is drafted I would root for him to be the best, but it would still be a negative mark on Ballard in my book

What if we win the Division by going 11-5 or just make the Playoffs at 10-6 and Barkley ends up with 1400 Yards and 10 TD's? How would that would be negative? Just asking.

[Carlos Danger]

I chose "trade back and try to get Chubb", which would be a great outcome, but there are tons of great possibilities with the #3 pick, especially in a trade...

 

I won't be upset at all if Ballard addresses OG in FA, then trades back with the Bills and gets O. Brown to play RT and then uses the other 1st round pick on J. Jackson, D. James, or H. Landry...

 

Probably have 3 picks in the 2nd in that scenario, as well. If Browns and Giants stay put and draft QBs, Indy's pick should net much higher than typical value (chart value, anyway).

[BOTT]

12 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I was 50/50 on the TRich trade, I thought it was ok at the time because we gave up a late 1st rounder to get him. Also we needed a RB but I didn't think he would be Pro-Bowler or anything either. If you said TRich would stink then you nailed that one. I wasn't on this Site when that trade went down so credit to you on that one. 

Not great insight on my part, I simply watched some of his tape from Cleveland.

[esmort]

3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

What if we win the Division by going 11-5 or just make the Playoffs at 10-6 and Barkley ends up with 1400 Yards and 10 TD's? How would that would be negative? Just asking.

 

Than I would be happy. But, it wouldn't change the fact that I thought we didn't get full value with the pick. 

 

If your scenario happened I am going to guess that we made a lot of improvements to the team as a whole; and that another RB would be able to put up impressive numbers as well.  Even if slightly below that level, they would be good enough. 

[esmort]

16 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I was 50/50 on the TRich trade, I thought it was ok at the time because we gave up a late 1st rounder to get him. Also we needed a RB but I didn't think he would be Pro-Bowler or anything either. If you said TRich would stink then you nailed that one. I wasn't on this Site when that trade went down so credit to you on that one. 

 

If you didn't think he was pro bowl level, you definitely shouldn't have been "OK" with giving up a 1st for him. I hated the trade before he stepped on the field. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, esmort said:

 

Than I would be happy. But, it wouldn't change the fact that I thought we didn't get full value with the pick. 

 

If your scenario happened I am going to guess that we made a lot of improvements to the team as a whole; and that another RB would be able to put up impressive numbers as well.  Even if slightly below that level, they would be good enough. 

I think for a rookie on a team with a Bad O.Line, 1200 Yards should be the mark a RB should get if he's Great and probably 8 TD's or so. I just put out 1400 and 10 because I think he may be that Great but then again I could be wrong. Yeah I talk about him a lot but I just want what's best for our team.

[crazycolt1]

I have already said it a few times but I still think the Giants are going to take Barkley.

We can debate, argue and come up with umpteen reasons we all have different opinions but in the end it falls on Ballard. No matter who is taken having 25 threads made up in different ways makes no difference.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, esmort said:

 

If you didn't think he was pro bowl level, you definitely shouldn't have been "OK" with giving up a 1st for him. I hated the trade before he stepped on the field. 

I was OK with it because our RB situation sucked. I thought he would be at least Good at times playing with Luck. I didn't think he would be Great though, huge difference.

[BOTT]

1 minute ago, esmort said:

 

Than I would be happy. But, it wouldn't change the fact that I thought we didn't get full value with the pick. 

 

If your scenario happened I am going to guess that we made a lot of improvements to the team as a whole; and that another RB would be able to put up impressive numbers as well.  Even if slightly below that level, they would be good enough. 

People make the mistake of giving Elliot all the credit for the cowboys turn around...but he really just replaced the production of DeMarco Murray, whose had an up and down career.

[crazycolt1]

4 minutes ago, esmort said:

 

If you didn't think he was pro bowl level, you definitely shouldn't have been "OK" with giving up a 1st for him. I hated the trade before he stepped on the field. 

I think all of us change our opinions when using hindsight on a lot of things.

Bringing up mistakes made by Grigson at this point serves no purpose but to dredge up old news.

Grigson was fired for his mistakes so lets move on. It makes no difference at this point who was right or wrong in their opinion of either Grigson or TRich.

[esmort]

4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I was OK with it because our RB situation sucked. I thought he would be at least Good at times playing with Luck. I didn't think he would be Great though, huge difference.

 

You should not have been OK with trading a 1st for just a "good RB" regardless of our situation. I wouldn't have traded a 1st even if I knew he wasn't going to be as bad as he was. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, BOTT said:

People make the mistake of giving Elliot all the credit for the cowboys turn around...but he really just replaced the production of DeMarco Murray, whose had an up and down career.

As I posted earlier if we drafted Nelson and got Norwell in Free Agency I would be happy with that because I am tired of Luck getting injured. With a Line like that, Mack should be better too. Those 2 with Kelly and AC would at least give us a decent O.Line. If we Draft Chubb I am good with it as well. He wont be a bust IMO and should make a Good Impact. If we Draft Chubb I hope he we get lucky and he is the next Reggie White so I can eat my words. I would love that. I see more Bosa though which isn't a Bad thing. Bosa is Good.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, esmort said:

 

You should not have been OK with trading a 1st for just a "good RB" regardless of our situation. I wouldn't have traded a 1st even if I knew he wasn't going to be as bad as he was. 

It wasn't like it was a Top 20 pick.

[Luck 4 president]

I think Barkley is gone at 1 now that AJ mccarron will likely go to the Browns. Hopefully it increases our pick trade value because the QB 2 will be available 

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, esmort said:

 

You should not have been OK with trading a 1st for just a "good RB" regardless of our situation. I wouldn't have traded a 1st even if I knew he wasn't going to be as bad as he was. 

Who cares at this point? That's all old news. Chastising someone over something that happened that many years ago does nothing but cause friction.

[Superman]

31 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

What if we win the Division by going 11-5 or just make the Playoffs at 10-6 and Barkley ends up with 1400 Yards and 10 TD's? How would that would be negative? Just asking.

 

There will be football beyond 2018.

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, Luck 4 president said:

I think Barkley is gone at 1 now that AJ mccarron will likely go to the Browns. Hopefully it increases our pick trade value because the QB 2 will be available 

Good point.

[esmort]

5 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I think all of us change our opinions when using hindsight on a lot of things.

Bringing up mistakes made by Grigson at this point serves no purpose but to dredge up old news.

Grigson was fired for his mistakes so lets move on. It makes no difference at this point who was right or wrong in their opinion of either Grigson or TRich.

 

It's  a discussion about the value of a RB. Only natural that Trich would be brought up as a comparison. The fact it was done by Grigson was never really even an issue in this conversation until you brought it up. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

There will be football beyond 2018.

True but I could do a lot of what IF's. What if Barkley averages 1400 Yards for 5 seasons in a row and we win a SB for example.

[aaron11]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

There will be football beyond 2018.

then we would still have a great running back.  i would go chubb over barkley myself, but its close.  so close that i wont be mad with either 

[SolidGold]

I think the question should be what 2 or 3 FA's should we target and depending on the outcome of who we actually sign will expose the holes that are left to fix in the draft. I think this years free agency will make more of an instant  impact on our team. The Draft should be the cherry on top. If our needs can be addressed  in free agency, which all are available for the picking if we spend the money and prioritize right. Then we could spoil ourselves with as many Wants of BPA in the draft. Take free agency serious and have fun in the draft.

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

then we would still have a great running back.  i would go chubb over barkley myself, but its close.  so close that i wont be mad with either 

Me too, I am fine with Nelson as well because of the state our O.Line is in.

[ColtsBlitz]

Trade back value would be absolutely absurd: trade back, let someone take Barkley, get Chubb if all works out well. Take Nelson if he’s gone. 

[jshipp23]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Me too, I am fine with Nelson as well because of the state our O.Line is in.

Nelson in a trade back is fine...I hope we don't take him at 3 though...

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, jshipp23 said:

Nelson in a trade back is fine...I hope we don't take him at 3 though...

I doubt we do but lets say Barkley and Chubb are gone (Barkley to the Browns/Chubb to the Giants), then who at 3 if we keep the pick?

[2006Coltsbestever]

11 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

True but I could do a lot of what IF's. What if Barkley averages 1400 Yards for 5 seasons in a row and we win a SB for example.

By the way this is possible with his talent IMO.

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, esmort said:

 

It's  a discussion about the value of a RB. Only natural that Trich would be brought up as a comparison. The fact it was done by Grigson was never really even an issue in this conversation until you brought it up. 

Huge difference between pick #3 over pick # 26.

Huge difference in value.

 

[jshipp23]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I doubt we do but lets say Barkley and Chubb are gone (Barkley to the Browns/Chubb to the Giants), then who at 3 if we keep the pick?

Fitzpatrick, or maybe Edmonds if he has Keuchley like potential...I think we can fix Guard in free agency or 2nd round..The scheme change and better coaches will make a difference with thw guys we already have...Our line isn't as bad as people make it out to be in my opinion...Injuries and scheme played a significant role in it looking worse than the talent we had...

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Huge difference between pick #3 over pick # 26.

Huge difference in value.

 

Thank you, people act like we traded a Top 5 pick for Trent. Not even close and we needed a RB badly. It was just a gamble that failed. No way would I have agree'd too trading even a Top 10 pick for Trent when that went down.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

Fitzpatrick, or maybe Edmonds if he has Keuchley like potential...I think we can fix Guard in free agency or 2nd round..The scheme change and better coaches will make a difference with thw guys we already have...Our line isn't as bad as people make it out to be in my opinion...Injuries and scheme played a significant role in it looking worse than the talent we had...

I was thinking Fitz as well.

[Tracy Denton]

6 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

By the way this is possible with his talent IMO.

He would also be a solid Off the field guy and no worries of a locker room cancer.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, Tracy Denton said:

He would also be a solid Off the field guy and no worries of a locker room cancer.

Yeah I agree. Not only is he a guy that can get you 12-1400 Yards a season for probably 7 or 8 years, he is a great guy off the field much like Luck is. He is the total opposite of Elliott with the same talent if not slightly better talent than Elliott. He's stronger than Elliott, has legs like tree trunks!

[SolidGold]

Please keep that same energy for Barkley when Mack is named the starter and does everything you imagine Barkley doing but 1 year already under his belt and already proven he can play in the NFL. Mack is big, fast, strong, and slippery. We don't need Barkley. What Guard on our team is better or similar to Nelson ? The odds of Mack or any other back in the draft doing better or equal to Barkley this year is way higher than any other Guard out performing QN this year. IMO

[crazycolt1]

18 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Thank you, people act like we traded a Top 5 pick for Trent. Not even close and we needed a RB badly. It was just a gamble that failed. No way would I have agree'd too trading even a Top 10 pick for Trent when that went down.

As bad as Grigson ended up being I don't he would have traded a top 10 pick for TRich either. We had Bradshaw on the roster so gambling on TRich at the time was not a bad idea.

The thing with TRich was it was him who ate his way off the team and hurt himself and the Colts. Blaming the Colts without at seeing why TRich failed is just looking for reasons to blame with no merit.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

33 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

There will be football beyond 2018.

Exactly. More seasons for Barkley to help us.

[HectorRoberts]

2 hours ago, VaAllDay757 said:

Draft nelson at 3 and address the other needs keep it simple

The worst thing we could do is draft for need

[indyagent17]

1 hour ago, NorthernBlue said:

Sign Norwell and draft Nelson, Colts have the one of best Olines in the league for 5+ years.

 

Draft Barkley, and with Luck and TY, colts will have one of the most explosive offenses in the league.

 

Draft Chubb and you get that elite talent to build your Defense around.

 

Lots of options.

 the only concern I have with drafting Barkley is we have to have a decent offensive line to create holes for him to run through. I know he has Elite status but with poor blocking it makes even the best running back look poor

[jshipp23]

2 minutes ago, indyagent17 said:

 the only concern I have with drafting Barkley is we have to have a decent offensive line to create holes for him to run through. I know he has Elite status but with poor blocking it makes even the best running back look poor

Im sure we will improve the line, but Gore had 1,000 yards behind it last year so it's probably safe to say Barkley would beat that by a significant amount if he stays healthy...