Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum


Senior Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by OffensivelyPC

  1. lol Hey, if he paid me enough and let me sit in the owner's suite, I'd clean his glasses too. I think he's an *, and you know what they say about a fool and his money!
  2. I was hearing this on the radio and it makes no sense to me either. Romo isn't the problem there, they signed him to a huge deal last year and he's locked up for the next couple of years. It would be a foolish pick if you ask me.
  3. I think there's some good ones, even late there are some decent projects. But that is also true of the OL in this year's class. So I mean, what we're really discussing is whether our preference for going OL early or OLB (or any other position for that matter). And that's all really just a matter of opinion. Reasonable people can disagree on that one. Heck, watch the Colts draft this year and go in a completely different direction lol.
  4. Yeah, but I'm fairly sure that a lot of that contract was not guaranteed. Certainly not over 2/3 the total value of the contract.
  5. They are both the highest paid at their position. You don't really get much better than that.
  6. I don't think this touches the last year of his rookie contract. It's just in addition to. So he gets what he was owed in year 4 of his rookie contract, and then the 4 year, 57 million and 40 million guaranteed is in the 4 year extension part. could be wrong, but that's how I'm reading the articles on rotoworld and espn.
  7. I'm with Manning1887, I see Exum more as a safety prospect. I think picking him at 90 is a bit of a reach as well. Taking your draft philosophy, I would have rather drafted an OG prospect with our 90 and then use next year's 4th to nab Exum. But I guess it really just depends on your Big Board. Other notes, I like the position you drafted in the 2nd, Buchannon just isn't the guy I prefer, but I could live with the pick. There's arguments that could be made for Ward, Buchannon, or Brooks (whom I prefer). I just think Buchannon is another Landry. I prefer Brooks for his coverage. Both
  8. Took out the parts that I didn't feel the need to respond to. OLB - it's not about finding guys that are "that next greatest pass rusher" or whatever. It's about finding guys that will come in and play and boost our defense. In our defense, you can never have enough OLB/DE guys rotating in and out to keep them fresh. It's about depth and right now we have Werner, Walden and Mathis. We really don't know what we're getting out of Adongo, and Cam and Hickman are okay, but they are emergency subs. Billy Turner: It seems to me that the basis for drafting another OL is the same as the reas
  9. I'm a fan of Caraun Reid too, I just think that we'd be better off addressing a different position at that early stage of the draft. I could live with Gabe, but not the direction I'd go. We all have our differences in opinion as to what we would do with our first two picks, and I really do like the rest of your picks. Many of htem I considered in my mock as well.
  10. And that thought had crossed my mind re: the "win now" players. That's why I waited until the 5th and 6th round. Because in all actuality, any player you get in the 5th or 6th round isn't going to see meaningful playing time anyway, they are often injured prospects or players with raw potential, and sometimes career special teams players. I suppose we could have gone for some S/T players and backups, but I felt it was better to go for max potential with only 5 picks. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But you could say that about going for guys that aren't injured in the late round
  11. Marcus Smith is the biggest stretch, IMO. He's been evaluated from early 2 to early 4. I personally think he's a early to mid-third round guy. My other option would have been Trent Murphy, who I personally liked better, but I dont' think there's a snowball's chance that he'd be there at 90. Smith on the other hand, has a better shot and given his somewhat limited potential, so I didn't feel like I was stretching it beyond reason. Of course, like any mock draft, all it takes is one team to pull the trigger and poof, your mock is shot.
  12. Yeah, but Donald isn't being hyped and compared to Lawrence Taylor - one of the greatest defensive football players of all time. Even if you want to downplay that comparison (which I strongly suggest you do), there's still no doubt that the hype around Clowney dwarfs that of Donald. When you're hyped to the degree that Clowney is, there should be little t ono question about your effort on the field...but that question does persist and there's at least a fair amount of film to back it up.
  13. UNC, Clemson, and those are just the first two games I randomly selected. When I watch those games, I don't see the #1 pick overall. UNC he was notoriously criticized for coming out in the season opener flat, but many gave him a pass because it was the first game of the season. In the Clemson game, I see a guy consistently beat one on one and not the guy "that didn't produce because he was constantly being double and triple teamed." He wasn't. And even when he was, there was several times that he just ran 8 yards up field but never affected the play. The sack and couple of tackles he act
  14. That was fun too, but I think what makes the mock more difficult is that who you've already picked matters. So you lock yourself into corners sometimes by, say, reaching for a CB in one round, and not having a BPA that fits other needs in the next round. I really had a hard time with my 5th round pick in the first one. Any CBs I imagined being available were a reach, I didn't really like any of the DL projected around that pick, etc. I had passed up on most hte OL that I liked, leaving Brandon Thomas. Anyway, it's just a fun exercise, but it does get pretty cumbersome sometimes and is r
  15. I did give us a 3rd and 4th. I gave up #59 overall for the #70 and #114 picks overall.
  16. I would have preferred McGill if I thought he could be there, I just don't think he will be. Phillip Gaines was another guy I really considered, but he may not be there either. To me, SJB seemed like the most likely option, but in my mind I rank the three McGill>Gaines>SJB.
  17. I can't really decide. And the reality is, we probably won't get any of these guys lol.
  18. I never do these, and to be quite frank, I almost didn't do one at all because it's so impossible to do, but I've got two mocks - one no trade, the other with a trade. But in the spirit of the draft, I'll do one. Enjoy ripping it to shreds! Mock #1 (no trade) 2/27 - Terrence Brooks, S. Should fill the hole created by Bethea's departure and do it nicely. Plays man well and good support in the run game. 3/26 - Marcus Smith, OLB. I've opened up to him more, and this pick assumes that Werner moves over to the Sam position. Very good pass rush and solid in coverage. 5/26 - Brandon T
  19. I've revised this thing so many times I'm just throwing it up. There's so many guys I like and not enough slots - or draft picks. Round 2 - #59 A- Terrence Brooks, FS B- Kyle Van Noy, OLB C- Jeremiah Attaochu, OLB Round 3 - #90 A- Keith McGill, CB B- Dion Bailey, FS C-Trai Turner, OG Round 5 - #166 A – Brandon Thomas, OG B- Preston Brown, ILB C- Antone Exum, DB Round 6 - #203 A- Howard Jones, OLB B- Aaron Lynch, DE C- Khyri Thornton, DT Round 7 - #232 A- Jon Halapio, OG B- Walt Aikens, CB C- Ryan Lankford, WR
  20. Count me in with the Mack over Clowney camp. It's not that Mack is a better physical specimen, i'ts that he doesn't take plays off like Clowney. Give Clowney Mack's heart and then I'd take Clowney. But I'm not using a first pick on a guy with questions at work ethic. I really just don't understand the argument that he took plays off to preserve his draft status. That should scare anyone that picks him. If the coaches want to preserve him for the playoffs and sit him on plays, that's one thing. But a football player should never make the unilateral decision to take plays off. The team c
  21. Couple of trades for our 2/27 that make the most sense point-wise and is pretty fair for both sides via the draft chart chable. Here's what we could conceivably get: SEA - 2/32 and 4/32 - trade favors no team at 0 points CLE - 3/7 and 4/6 - trade favors Indy by 7 points DEN - 3/31 and 4/31 - trade favors Indy by 7 points JAX - 3/6 and 4/14 - trade favors JAX by 7 points
  22. That might be true for some...I wouldn't take him in the 5th...
  23. No, you're not. Part of it is realism, the other part is, schematic. Ward would be good here...but so would Brooks. Who would be better could never be decided on these forums.
  24. He was on the Cardinals when Skelton, Kolb and some other guy sucked it up. He couldn't beat out any of those guys either. I get the argument you're trying to make...but I'm sorry..it's a losign one. He's been a backup to a bunch of guys that wouldn't even be backups on other teams. So yeah, he had a couple of good games...the likelihood is it was an aberration.
  • Create New...