Peter King on JMV

[LJpalmbeacher2]

Said he doubts the Colts will have a dominant defense this year BUT Thinks we could have a DOMINANT OFFENSE!

 

He really likes Reich and thinks we will see creative plays from him.

[2006Coltsbestever]

30 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Said he doubts the Colts will have a dominant defense this year BUT Thinks we could have a DOMINANT OFFENSE!

 

He really likes Reich and thinks we will see creative plays from him.

I am not going to go on a how great Barkley will be Post. Everyone knows my take there but if Luck is healthy, we Draft Barkley, get a Good O.Lineman in Free Agency, and Draft a Great prospect at O.Line then yes we would be scary on Offense. TY Hilton is a Top 10 WR in the league and Jack Doyle is a Good TE. We would be tough to stop once Luck got his groove back. I think our Defense will be better too even if we take Barkley because we still have 6 other picks and can Draft Defense with at least 4 or 5 of those.

 

-Regarding the Offense, I also think Mack will be better as well.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

7 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I am not going to go on a how great Barkley will be Post. Everyone knows my take there but if Luck is healthy, we Draft Barkley, get a Good O.Lineman in Free Agency, and Draft a Great prospect at O.Line then yes we would be scary on Offense. TY Hilton is a Top 10 WR in the league and Jack Doyle is a Good TE. We would be tough to stop once Luck got his groove back. I think our Defense will be better too even if we take Barkley because we still have 6 other picks and can Draft Defense with at least 4 or 5 of those.

 

-Regarding the Offense, I also think Mack will be better as well.

I agree with everything you said but will add that we need to sign a big target #1b or #2 WR to help TY out.

[2006Coltsbestever]

5 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

I agree with everything you said but will add that we need to sign a big target #1b or #2 WR to help TY out.

I agree. I don't think Moncrief is that guy. I was just thinking if Barkley goes 1 or 2 we could still take Chubb at 3 and Draft a RB in Round 2 like the other Chubb or Guice to pair with Mack. Guice looks like he will be pretty Good.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

8 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I agree. I don't think Moncrief is that guy. I was just thinking if Barkley goes 1 or 2 we could still take Chubb at 3 and Draft a RB in Round 2 like the other Chubb or Guice to pair with Mack. Guice looks like he will be pretty Good.

 

Cant depend on moncreif as a #2 even if ballard brings him back which i doubt. Im ok with him as a #3 though.

 

I don't like rb chubb from Georgia. But Guice and a couple others would be ok. But I have my heart set on Barkley lol. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Cant depend on moncreif as a #2 even if ballard brings him back which i doubt. Im ok with him as a #3 though.

 

I don't like rb chubb from Georgia. But Guice and a couple others would be ok. But I have my heart set on Barkley lol. 

Oh yeah Barkley is the man but I do like Guice, Guice would probably be my 2nd choice if I was taking a RB.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Oh yeah Barkley is the man but I do like Guice, Guice would probably be my 2nd choice if I was taking a RB.

 

I watched Darnold a few games. And USC has a back that looked good. If not Barkley, maybe Guice or Jones from USC. And a big bruiser like the FA from Giants or maybe Turbin is good enough.

 

I'd like a vertical TE too. Do you think Swoope or that #43 rookie can be that guy or sign or draft one?? ....Graham a FA but should be expensive.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

I watched Darnold a few games. And USC has a back that looked good. If not Barkley, maybe Guice or Jones from USC. And a big bruiser like the FA from Giants or maybe Turbin is good enough.

 

I'd like a vertical TE too. Do you think Swoope or that #43 rookie can be that guy or sign or draft one?? ....Graham a FA but should be expensive.

I haven't thought about TE too much since we have Doyle and I spaced on Graham being a Free Agent. I wonder how much money Graham would want? Graham is like a WR/TE, that would be a nice weapon for Luck to have.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I haven't thought about TE too much since we have Doyle and I spaced on Graham being a Free Agent. I wonder how much money Graham would want? Graham is like a WR/TE, that would be a nice weapon for Luck to have.

 

I like Doyle but would also like add a more vertical TE also. Maybe Swoope or that rookie #43 can be that vertical TE?

[superrep1967]

49 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

I agree with everything you said but will add that we need to sign a big target #1b or #2 WR to help TY out.

Yeah, I heard on JMV that the Colts are not resigning Moncrief. 

[Smonroe]

11 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

I watched Darnold a few games. And USC has a back that looked good. If not Barkley, maybe Guice or Jones from USC. And a big bruiser like the FA from Giants or maybe Turbin is good enough.

 

I'd like a vertical TE too. Do you think Swoope or that #43 rookie can be that guy or sign or draft one?? ....Graham a FA but should be expensive.

 

Jones (USC) is a good back but he fits the same role as Mack.  He may even be a little smaller.  

 

Either Guice or Michel would be a decent second rounder.  None of them compare to Barkley who has the size, speed, returns and can catch.  He’s the total package.

 

BUT as everyone will tell you, we need a pass rusher.  I like to ask them who do they think is the best player in the draft?   Don’t we go bpa?

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

I like Doyle but would also like add a more vertical TE also. Maybe Swoope or that rookie #43 can be that vertical TE?

Yeah you are talking about Ross Travis - #43. I couldn't remember his name but knew he was the Penn State guy. I had to look him up. I don't know about him, he hasn't played much for us. Luck can make anyone good though in time.

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, superrep1967 said:

Yeah, I heard on JMV that the Colts are not resigning Moncrief. 

 

JMV actively dislikes Moncrief. I wonder if what you heard was mostly his opinion, like when he said he was hearing that Pagano would be fired on the Wednesday after the Jags shutout...

[superrep1967]

Just now, Superman said:

 

JMV actively dislikes Moncrief. I wonder if what you heard was mostly his opinion, like when he said he was hearing that Pagano would be fired on the Wednesday after the Jags shutout...

He said he heard it from sources. 

[Mel Kiper's Hair]

I think everyone who has their heart set on Barkley are going to be very disappointed when the Giants take him at 2. If Andrew Luck is healthy and under center then our offense is going to be a heck of a lot better. Even if Luck isn't healthy our offense will be better by the simple fact that Jacoby Brissett with have the full offseason, OTA'S and training camp to learn the new system and not be thrown onto the field a week after arriving. I know many people are skeptical about the Colts, but I think we are heading in the right direction.

[2006Coltsbestever]

17 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

Jones (USC) is a good back but he fits the same role as Mack.  He may even be a little smaller.  

 

Either Guice or Michel would be a decent second rounder.  None of them compare to Barkley who has the size, speed, returns and can catch.  He’s the total package.

 

BUT as everyone will tell you, we need a pass rusher.  I like to ask them who do they think is the best player in the draft?   Don’t we go bpa?

Barkley may not be there when we pick so my Plan B would be Draft Chubb because we need Defense and Guice in Round 2 to pair with Mack, then perhaps take the best O.Lineman available in Round 3. I would really love to snag Norwell in Free Agency but a lot of teams will be after him - that wont be easy.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

4 minutes ago, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

I think everyone who has their heart set on Barkley are going to be very disappointed when the Giants take him at 2. If Andrew Luck is healthy and under center then our offense is going to be a heck of a lot better. Even if Luck isn't healthy our offense will be better by the simple fact that Jacoby Brissett with have the full offseason, OTA'S and training camp to learn the new system and not be thrown onto the field a week after arriving. I know many people are skeptical about the Colts, but I think we are heading in the right direction.

 

I realistically expect Barkley to be off the board when we pick.

[boo2202]

I'm hoping four QBS go in the top 5 is that unrealistic?

[superrep1967]

28 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Barkley may not be there when we pick so my Plan B would be Draft Chubb because we need Defense and Guice in Round 2 to pair with Mack, then perhaps take the best O.Lineman available in Round 3. I would really love to snag Norwell in Free Agency but a lot of teams will be after him - that wont be easy.

Yes, I want Norwell but like you said it won't be easy to sign him. 

[NewColtsFan]

Two points for this thread...

 

The vertical tight end we want is already on the team.   His name is Erik Swoope... and in 2016 he averaged 20 yards a catch!

 

As for Norwell...    the latest buzz on him is that the Panthers will likely franchise tag him and not let him leave for nothing.   They will clear cap space to make room for him.

 

[Surge89]

1 hour ago, Smonroe said:

 

Jones (USC) is a good back but he fits the same role as Mack.  He may even be a little smaller.  

 

Either Guice or Michel would be a decent second rounder.  None of them compare to Barkley who has the size, speed, returns and can catch.  He’s the total package.

 

BUT as everyone will tell you, we need a pass rusher.  I like to ask them who do they think is the best player in the draft?   Don’t we go bpa?

 

Tremaine Edmunds is mine.  And I wouldn't hesititate taking him at 3 if I were GM.  But I'm not so he will probably go around picks 8-14.

[Aaron86]

53 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Barkley may not be there when we pick so my Plan B would be Draft Chubb because we need Defense and Guice in Round 2 to pair with Mack, then perhaps take the best O.Lineman available in Round 3. I would really love to snag Norwell in Free Agency but a lot of teams will be after him - that wont be easy.

I could get behind this 100%.

[ColtsFanMikeC]

6 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I agree. I don't think Moncrief is that guy. I was just thinking if Barkley goes 1 or 2 we could still take Chubb at 3 and Draft a RB in Round 2 like the other Chubb or Guice to pair with Mack. Guice looks like he will be pretty Good.

 

5 hours ago, Smonroe said:

 

Jones (USC) is a good back but he fits the same role as Mack.  He may even be a little smaller.  

 

Either Guice or Michel would be a decent second rounder.  None of them compare to Barkley who has the size, speed, returns and can catch.  He’s the total package.

 

BUT as everyone will tell you, we need a pass rusher.  I like to ask them who do they think is the best player in the draft?   Don’t we go bpa?

 

To both above -- after Barkley there is a major dropoff.  I can see us getting Barkley in round 1, if he's there at #3... however, if he's not (or if we decide to take someone else or trade), I don't think it's worth getting one of those backs in round 2.  With Mack and Turbin (and potentially another FA or bringing Gore back) we should be OK at the RB postion next year.  If we brought in a once in a generation prospect like Barkley, cool... if not, I think we've got bigger needs than a second round RB who will probably be a good NFL player but not highly likely to be a superstar.  Just my two cents.

 

4 hours ago, Surge89 said:

 

Tremaine Edmunds is mine.  And I wouldn't hesititate taking him at 3 if I were GM.  But I'm not so he will probably go around picks 8-14.

 

Edmunds has some learning to do, but his athleticism and size are unreal.  With the amount of teams needing QBs and with 3-4 QBs projected to go in the top 10-12 picks, I am still thinking it may be best for us to trade down and pick up some extra picks.  It's quite possible we could trade down just a few spots (to NYJ, Denver, or a little further to number 12 Cincy or 15 Arizona) and pick up a slew of additional picks.  

 

It will be very interesting to see what happens with Kirk Cousins and other FA QBs between now and the draft.  If I'm Cleveland, I would seriously consider taking Barkley #1, knowing Rosen, Darnold, Allen or Mayfield will definitely be on the board at #4.... NYG has a strong reason to take Barkley, as well.... 

 

A lot of what happens is out of our control (part of me wishes we just lost that last game so we had the #2 pick)... but there may be serious potential to trade back a few slots and grab a guy like Tremaine (or even Chubb from NC State) a little later than #3, while stacking up on a few extra picks in the early-mid rounds.

 

 

[Aaron86]

6 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

I like Doyle but would also like add a more vertical TE also. Maybe Swoope or that rookie #43 can be that vertical TE?

I think we just need to unleash Doyle. I don't think Chud really opened him up like Reich will.

[NewColtsFan]

12 minutes ago, Aaron86 said:

I think we just need to unleash Doyle. I don't think Chud really opened him up like Reich will.

 

?????

 

I might be off but I think I read in the last week that Doyle had the second most receptions of all tight ends in the NFL.   

 

I think the number is 80.    And remember, Chud runs a tight end friendly offense and we suffered without Swoope.   

[stitches]

5 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Two points for this thread...

 

The vertical tight end we want is already on the team.   His name is Erik Swoope... and in 2016 he averaged 20yards a catch!

 

As for Norwell...    the latest buzz on him is that the Panthers will likely franchise tag him and not let him leave for nothing.   They will clear cap space to make room for him.

 

IMO not enough of a sample to rely on Swoope. You can have him on the roster as part of the TE core, but IMO you cannot go into the season penciling him in as our surefire vertical threat TE. Erik Swoope would certainly not stop me from drafting a high end TE if one is available at a place that makes sense. 

[NewColtsFan]

15 minutes ago, stitches said:

IMO not enough of a sample to rely on Swoope. You can have him on the roster as part of the TE core, but IMO you cannot go into the season penciling him in as our surefire vertical threat TE. Erik Swoope would certainly not stop me from drafting a high end TE if one is available at a place that makes sense. 

 

Hmmmm?

 

We often agree..   but not here...

 

With all the serious needs this team has you're willing to draft a high end tight end to pair up with Doyle?

 

You'd use a high draft pick on a second tight end instead of a badly needed starter on defense or offense?    Really?

 

That doesn't strike you as a luxury pick?

 

I'd be hugely disappointed in Ballard if he did that......

[Aaron86]

18 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

?????

 

I might be off but I think I read in the last week that Doyle had the second most receptions of all tight ends in the NFL.   

 

I think the number is 80.    And remember, Chud runs a tight end friendly offense and we suffered without Swoope.   

I get that but what was his average ypr. I could be wrong but it felt like he did alot of short yardage routes. 

[crazycolt1]

41 minutes ago, Aaron86 said:

I get that but what was his average ypr. I could be wrong but it felt like he did alot of short yardage routes. 

Well that happens when you are used as a dump off or safety valve receiver. Holding that against him makes no sense.

[southwest1]

7 hours ago, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

think everyone who has their heart set on Barkley are going to be very disappointed when the Giants take him at 2.

The 1 thing I've learned about the draft is just when people think something's a lock, a given, or an athlete is destined to go to a specific team; that's when peculiar stuff happens. I still like our adds landing RB Barkley personally. 

 

BIG Blue still has a huge LT Ereck Flowers problem. Oh look, yet another false start penalty. LOL! 

 

https://247sports.com/nfl/new-york-giants/Bolt/Report-Giants-benched-Ereck-Flowers-because-he-was-checked-out-112919448

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, Aaron86 said:

I get that but what was his average ypr. I could be wrong but it felt like he did alot of short yardage routes. 

 

Yes....   a lot of short yardage stuff....    his avg per catch was down in 2017 from what it was in 2016.

 

I don't know if that was due to the switch from Luck to Brissett or something else....

 

 

[southwest1]

8 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

I realistically expect Barkley to be off the board when we pick.

Does this mean you reluctantly agree with Mel Kiper's Hair that Barkley will be gone when INDY is on the clock LJ or that MKH's assertion is completely unfounded in your estimation? 

 

Your yuck symbol could easily apply to both situations. Just looking for some clarity I guess. 

 

Or is this just a polite version of a boo voicing your displeasure at such a horrific realty missing out on a top prospect we desperately need? Let me know.

[crestmount]

If Browns don't take Barkley, Giants will

[southwest1]

19 minutes ago, crestmount said:

If Browns don't take Barkley, Giants will

Isn't Shane Vereen still on the Giants roster? Their problem is creating running lanes not backs themselves. I disagree. 

 

Regarding the Browns, don't they draft QBs every yr since that franchise has been in the NFL? It sure feels like it. 

 

[southwest1]

Look, I can handle if we miss out on Barkley for say Chubb. I just refuse to concede that INDY has not shot at drafting Saquon. Have a little faith folks. I don't capitulate anything that darn quickly. Not my style at all. 

[stitches]

3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Hmmmm?

 

We often agree..   but not here...

 

With all the serious needs this team has you're willing to draft a high end tight end to pair up with Doyle?

 

You'd use a high draft pick on a second tight end instead of a badly needed starter on defense or offense?    Really?

 

That doesn't strike you as a luxury pick?

 

I'd be hugely disappointed in Ballard if he did that......

My point is more about how much you need to take into account Swoope's presence into constructing your roster, not about whether we really need to draft a TE high.

 

TE high is absolutely a luxury pick. My point is more about the presence of Swoope hindering you from making moves you think are right, rather than me considering TE as some sort of priority. We definitely need to address other positions much more seriously, BUT Swoope is not high on my mind when considering whether to get a TE(whether in the draft or in FA). Lets say Goedert falls to the third... should having Swoope stop me from drafting him? Hell no. I'm taking Goedert and not thinking twice about it if I feel like he's a good value. Just Swoope has not shown enough for us to count him as anything more than depth at the position. 

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, southwest1 said:

Isn't Shane Vereen still on the Giants roster? Their problem is creating running lanes not backs themselves. I disagree. 

 

Regarding the Browns, don't they draft QBs every yr since that franchise has been in the NFL? It sure feels like it. 

 

But the Browns haven't had Dorsey as their GM all those years either.

[jshipp23]

9 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Two points for this thread...

 

The vertical tight end we want is already on the team.   His name is Erik Swoope... and in 2016 he averaged 20 yards a catch!

 

As for Norwell...    the latest buzz on him is that the Panthers will likely franchise tag him and not let him leave for nothing.   They will clear cap space to make room for him.

 

You can't realistically depend on the "Swoope Project", hopefully there is a contigency plan...

[jshipp23]

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Yes....   a lot of short yardage stuff....    his avg per catch was down in 2017 from what it was in 2016.

 

I don't know if that was due to the switch from Luck to Brissett or something else....

 

 

Doyle made a lot of 5 yard catches on 3rd and 8...just saying..

[jshipp23]

1 hour ago, stitches said:

My point is more about how much you need to take into account Swoope's presence into constructing your roster, not about whether we really need to draft a TE high.

 

TE high is absolutely a luxury pick. My point is more about the presence of Swoope hindering you from making moves you think are right, rather than me considering TE as some sort of priority. We definitely need to address other positions much more seriously, BUT Swoope is not high on my mind when considering whether to get a TE(whether in the draft or in FA). Lets say Goedert falls to the third... should having Swoope stop me from drafting him? Hell no. I'm taking Goedert and not thinking twice about it if I feel like he's a good value. Just Swoope has not shown enough for us to count him as anything more than depth at the position. 

I take Goedert 100 times out of 100 if he is there in the 3rd regardless of Doyle and especially Swoope..I agree 100%