BlueShoe
-
Posts
8,177 -
Joined
-
Days Won
16
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by BlueShoe
-
-
2 hours ago, NorthernBlue said:
I agree I like him more than fournette and Elliot and even gurley. Plus he don't got any off field concerns or baggage.
i just feel at 3, we got a chance to finally get that pass rushing stud we've been missing for so long.
Who?
There is not a single player in this draft, who will make more of a difference for the Colts than Barkley.
There is no Freeney here. It’s possible there is a JPP, but it ain’t Chubb.
-
2 hours ago, ND Irish said:
Im sure you were saying the same about M. Garrett last year. Is he still in the league?
Your sureness is incorrect.
I am SURE many on this board would have taken Garrett over Barkley though.
Obviously, I would not have.
The only player in the 2017 and 2018 drafts, I would take over Barkley is San Darnold. The rest of the field isn’t close to either Darnold or Barkley.
-
1 hour ago, CheezyColt said:
This is dumb. The argument isn't that every running back picked after the first round is awesome. You're arguing against a point that was never made. The idea would be to find out where the successful RBs in the league were drafted. How do you miss the point by such a huge margin? It's impressive really.
What’s impressive is the “Group Think” that happens on this board. It won’t be the first time so many were Completely Wrong on this board.
This should shame a lot of people too. In a couple of years, when Barkley is grabbing his second NFL rushing title, these same naysayers will downplay they ever had this “Group Think” mentality about Barkley.
It is very impressive to watch the sheep move with such programmed coordination.
-
15 minutes ago, akcolt said:
McDaniels while in Denver took a RB being compared to Barry Sanders with the 12th pick overall. People may forget just how good Knowshon Moreno was at the UGA. In 2 years 2700+ rushing yards and 30 td's He even caught 53 passes from Stafford. Not a bad backfield
It's going to take a while, but in a couple of years these "naysayers" will all be boasting how they knew we would draft Barkley all along.
At the very least, they will down-play how much they were against us taking him.
-
1 hour ago, NorthernBlue said:
Ok I'm just saying, if you yourself was this good at player evaluation, you would probably be somewhere more important than a message board.
Hey, if you think that Barkley is gonna be can't miss, that's all good. Nothing wrong with an evaluation.
I like coming to this message board. I am a Colts fan.
Barkley's evaluation is one of the easiest I have ever done. There are no gotchas with him. It is very difficult to find anything wrong with him or his game.
-
2 minutes ago, NorthernBlue said:
I like Barkley. Just not as much as you. I question his vision a bit and his lack of production after his LT went down. Still good but not worth the 3rd I don't think.
It is not about me liking him. Personally, I do not know him.
I do know what a can't miss player looks like, and his name is Saquon Barkley.
-
3 hours ago, esmort said:
I think you are the one who might need to be medicated. I believe most here arguing against taking Barkley at #3 are also still very aware that taking him is a realistic possibility.
Where as you believe (or say you do) there is 0% chance that we take anyone else at #3 (if Barkley is there).
I would say you are in for a much bigger disappointment IF you are wrong than the the "non-Barkley" posters.
It won't be the first time this boards "Group Think" was wrong. It happens quite often, actually.
-
22 minutes ago, BOTT said:
Wager: if Barkley is there at 3 and the colts pass you never post on this forum again. If the colts take him at 3 I will never post on this forum again.
LOL!
I am leaving the door open for a possible trade-back though. So there is a possible stalemate here.
DEAL!
I would say it has been nice knowing you, but.....
-
2 hours ago, NorthernBlue said:
I'm curious as to why you think that. You keep stating BPA, but there's no way of knowing who the colts BPA is unless you secretly work for them.
Based on Ballards' and McDaniels' history, I would argue that leaves more evidence that they WON'T draft a running back early on.
Josh has ran brilliant offenses with mostly late round running backs.
When Ballard was a scout with Chicago (2001-2012) they selected 1 running back round 1 (Cedric Benson 2004). And in KC as an executive (2012-2016) they took none.
So while I wouldn't be surprised if Ballard was inticed by Barkley's talent, I don't think there's enough to say Saquon Barkley will definitely be the pick.
Because he is Saquon Barkley.
If you knew how great Saquon Barkley is then we would not be disagreeing about this.
-
3 hours ago, esmort said:
I think you are the one who might need to be medicated. I believe most here arguing against taking Barkley at #3 are also still very aware that taking him is a realistic possibility.
Where as you believe (or say you do) there is 0% chance that we take anyone else at #3 (if Barkley is there).
I would say you are in for a much bigger disappointment IF you are wrong than the the "non-Barkley" posters.
Me, disappointed? No.
It is very clear to me. Not sure why anyone else is having issues the truth. I do find it a bit humorous though. LOL
-
4 hours ago, DaColts85 said:
Wow you couldn't predict or guarantee Luck in 2012 huh? I would question your guarantee for this year then.
That was a no-brainer. Everyone knew that. LOL
-
5 hours ago, dgambill said:
What if he is taken at 2? Just being devils advocate...Giants could just as easily take him as we could or decide to trade the pick if they want to slide back for a qb. One thing I've learned in life...there are no guarantees....heck the guy could have his medical check and find he needs surgery or get busted for weed....lots of time between now and then. If this was before 2000...yes I would have agreed with you...but looking at Josh McDaniels offense I'm not sure Barkley will be that guy. Guess we just have to wait til april to find out. You could be right...but be careful of your mouth writing checks that your butt can't cash as the old sayin goes.
I have guaranteed 3 draft picks by the Colts in all my time as a Colts fan. (everybody knew we were taking Luck).
The first was Marshall Faulk. The second was Peyton Manning. The third is Saquon Barkley. Granted, Barkley has to still be there, and we have to use the pick. I would not fault Ballard for taking a deal and moving back.
The Giants could take Barkley at No.2. I said that was a possibility earlier in this thread.
If the Giants take Barkley then we will trade No. 3 overall for a Kings ransom.
-
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
No one changing any minds here.
Some of you will need to be heavily medicated if we stay at 3, because the pick is Barkley.
If we do not trade out then I guarantee the pick is Barkley. He will be the pick, because he will be the best player available.
-
1 hour ago, Indy Fan said:
You think Sam Darnold is a generational player?
Yes.
-
3 minutes ago, esmort said:
I believe if you swap out Bell for Shazier there is no way the Jags score 45, and the Steelers still put up enough points to beat them. Letting the Bortles and the Jags score 45 is craziness.
Without Bell, the Steelers do not score 42.
And no 1 player on defense was going to make that big of a difference. The Steelers got their butt's handed to them twice. Sometimes a team just has another teams number. The Jags have the Steelers right where they want them.
-
Just now, esmort said:
Chubb, Fitzpatrick, and maybe Nelson are all realistic choices at 3 .. and I bet there will be at least one or two other names in the mix by draft day.
I disagree.
None of those players are the same caliber as Saquon Barkley.
-
1 minute ago, esmort said:
Wrong ... that game didn't hinge on Bell
So you believe if you take Bell away then it's still only a 3-point game?
LOL
You cherry pick your facts.
-
13 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:
The Patriots have been to the super bowl how many times?? Their system uses multiple RBs and has shown you do not need an elite RB. Out new head coach knows that system and hopefully brings that system with him. It is a proven winning system that you cannot argue with.
The Patriots have not picked in the top 10, in a quite some time. They have had to be thrifty with later picks.
I have no doubt in my mind that if Bill Belichick was sitting at #3, that he would either take a quarterback or Barkley.
-
2 minutes ago, esmort said:
If Steelers can replay their last game and can have only one either Bell or Shazier ... who you think they pick?
A healthy Bell, EVERY time.
Not even close.
-
4 minutes ago, esmort said:
It is realistic ... right now there are at least 3 or 4 possible and realistic selections at #3 not including Barkley ... that number could change based on combine, etc ...
The only "realistic" scenarios are...
The first 2 picks are quarterbacks, and we take Barkley.
The first 2 picks quarterbacks, and another team offers us a great deal to move back, because they also want a quarterback.
Only 1 of the first 2 picks is a quarterback, and we trade the No 3 overall for a Kings ransom.
-
17 minutes ago, esmort said:
Because the impact they (elite RBs) will have versus good-very good RBs ... is not as great as the drop off at other positions.
That is your opinion.
The Hall of Fame differs from your views on this matter.
-
4 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:
I am sorry. But bringing up Tom Braatz into this conversation is well, well asinine. You have now turned this into your personal argument where you refuse to consider anyone's opinion other than your own. You have crossed over to you being argumentative so I am done with this.
Are you Tom Braatz?
If so then you should have already learned your lesson, and we should not be having this conversation.
-
6 minutes ago, NorthernBlue said:
You can get a serviceable back late in the draft.
I truncated your post to get to the root...
You can find a "serviceable" back in the later rounds. It has been done before. The Colts have had a problem succeeding at it though. I like Mack, but he is not an every down back. I see him as our change of pace dude. Contrary to popular belief, difference-makers form the running back position are not just falling off trees.
But let's go deeper.... Even if we were guaranteed a "serviceable" back in the later rounds....
I don't want a "serviceable" back, especially when a GREAT back is available.
It is not smart to pass on great talent. We are afforded the position we are in, because we had a terrible season and (most likely) do not need a quarterback. You don't pass on greatness when it is available.
-
6 minutes ago, esmort said:
Because the impact they (elite RBs) will have versus good-very good RBs ... is not as great as the drop off at other positions.
I disagree.
Look at the impact that great running backs have on their teams.
Even as recent as Elliot. The Cowboys are contenders with him and pretenders without him.
The Jaguars almost made it to the Super Bowl! The Jaguars!
Great players make a difference on football teams. Stop fooling yourself into thinking that running backs do not apply to that rule.
Mike Mayock on Marcus Davenport
in NFL Draft, Scouting, and Free Agent Talk
Posted
Yep. And they’re moving him inside at the Senior Bowl practices, just because they already know he can rush from the edge. Scouts are watching two reps of him and waking away satisfied.
He looks very impressive. I think he is a possible JPP clone. A lot of these Chubb fans are going to be surprised when Davenport gets drafted before him.