masterlock

Not sure if this has been posted, but here's some pre-draft film analysis of him.

Campbell played 48 of 49 games at Ohio State. So no. I think just a fluky string of bad luck at the pro level.

Not to mention just 1 INT. (And it doesn't hurt that Taylor is in the top-5 in rushing.)

In Wentz, I think we have a skillset that is very comparable to Andrew Luck. Luck was an improviser who took some risks to extend a play; same for Wentz. I think the two are also very comparable in terms of athleticism, mobility, arm strength, mental processing, and accuracy.

Yeah, and not just any old knives, BUTCHER knives.

Exactly, for all we know, they could finish 13-4. Probably won't, but still mathematically possible. I'm thinking 10-7 is more realistic. Whatever the final record, all they need to do is win the division.

BUT....is he better than Trent Richardson? ;-)

Disagree. Q is worth whatever the market will bear. He's a rare HOF talent, and we're lucky to have him. The personification of tough guy, bass-* football.

The biggest problem, IMO, is the lack of pass rush. The Tampa-2 hybrid that Eberflus is using just doesn't work without a dominant pass rush. I know the Colts have played some good quarterbacks this year, but according to this source, they're dead-last in NFL Team Opponent Average Team Passer Rating at 124.9. That pretty much says it all.

I agree there should be some kind of legal repercussions for threatening someone's life, but 5 years in prison for the first offense? How about a restraining order, ankle bracelet, mandatory psych evaluation and/or anger management?

I think it's pretty straight forward. He had surgery on his ankle, missed a lot of practice time, aggravated the repaired ankle, and is now trying to play through the pain. I'm not surprised that his level of performance is off.

I think it's fair for a GM to intervein in particularly egregious decisions. He is, after all general MANAGER, which includes managing the coach when needed. I think he would've been within his bounds to question playing a QB with TWO ankle sprains, one of which looked to be serious.

I think you can't count on both of those things. If they didn't limit Wentz' snaps on Sunday, when they had every reason to do so, then I don't see them becoming suddenly prudent moving forward. By playing him on Sunday, they were basically saying, 'We're willing to put our star quarterback at risk of further injury to win a game. Short-term thinking IMO. If Wentz can physically stand, I think they'll play him, and he'll get 75% of the snaps.

If they were going to sit him then they would have on Sunday--two sprained ankles, playing with the mobility of a statue.

Yeah, I watched them too. Agree to disagree.