Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts


Senior Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Posts posted by GoColts8818

  1. 1 minute ago, The Peytonator said:

    Don’t know much about him but I feel screwed by the draft gods twice in a row now. I was wanting Baun at 75 and he goes at 74. Trade down ten spots and I wanted Lewis and he goes right before us. No idea if Ballard was looking at either but my hopes were ruined. 

    I wonder if Blackmon signals a stronger push to move Hooker. I think we played a good amount of three safety sets so it’s not like he’s just for depth. 

    He’s coming off a torn ACL late in the season so I doubt this kid plays this year.  However, he could be Hooker’s replacement if the Colts elect to let him walk.

    • Like 1

  2. 2 minutes ago, ProblChld32 said:

    Yea but this kid is a FS , Geathers was more of Box Strong Safety. 

    Yes if he played SS it would be due to injury but he’s a body that could all be it not ideal.  When I said could be a future starter I was thinking he could be the replacement for Hooker if the Colts don’t keep him.

    • Like 1

  3. 42 minutes ago, Shafty138 said:

    Hi Ed is the only RB who can catch out of the backfield.... And he's great in open space.

    He is which is why he has a place on this team namely in passing downs.  I am not suggesting Hines should be let go.  However if you are talking about him as the backup running back he’s not that.  They have spent two years trying to get Wilkins to lock down the role and outside of one big run vs the Titans he hasn’t done much.  So it’s not like the running back spot couldn’t use an upgrade.


    Add into that Mack is going into the last year of his deal and he has had some injury issues and taking a guy who can be the other half of a two headed monster makes sense.  

    add into that Taylor could be a really special player I think.  Him and Mack behind this line is going to be nightmare to stop and then oh yeah you have Rivers and the passing game behind that.  

    let’s also remember the Colts carried four running backs last year, granted they did not have a full back last year either but it’s not impossible they could keep Mack, Taylor, Hines, and Wilkins.


    I heard an interview with Irsay where he said a couple of things.  First that getting Pittman and Taylor was the dream scenario tonight.  The second was they had really good intel another team was going to take Taylor before 44.  That looks to be the Jags.  So not only did you get a good player who can help your team you kept him away from a division rival.  

    Also for those upset about giving up the fifth I don’t like it either but the Seahawks gave up a second and third to move up to the Jets pick after the Colts pick.  Giving up a fifth doesn’t look so bad now.

    • Like 4

  4. 16 minutes ago, Superman said:


    Do you have a really strong preference for Pittman, over say Mims? (I actually prefer Mims, but would take Pittman.)


    I don't think we have to stay at #34 to get a good WR. I'm thinking we trade back.

    I think they could get a really good WR as late as third round in the draft.  It’s pretty deep.  

  5. 1 hour ago, #12. said:


    If they clearly didn't want Love, what does signing Rivers have to do with anything?



    Having two QBs on the roster the Colts feel can be starters (and yes while most fans  have given up on Brissett it’s pretty clear the Colts have not) would really decrease the need to take a QB high, especially when you have as many other areas of need as the Colts do.

    • Like 1

  6. 1 hour ago, chad72 said:

    Talking through both sides of his mouth, at least this one he put it in writing, Ian Rappoport that is. 

    He’s not. People misrepresented what he said last night.  I watched the video and he pretty much said the same thing there as he did here which is the Packers traded up because of fears that the Colts might be trying to move up.  He never said for a fact they were.  My guess is that he was going on what the Packers told him not the Colts and the Packers have no way of knowing if the Colts were trying to move up or not they just knew the same reports that we did that the Colts could very well be interested in Love and might want to move up to get him.

  7. 3 hours ago, needanoline63 said:

    Cardinals and dolphins offensive lines were horrible when he did play though 

    Yet other QBs were able to do better than him behind the same or similar lines.  He isn’t just the product of bad line play.

  8. 3 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

    Could have been like the Mahomes situation. IIRC, Mahomes's agent told KC that another team was looking to move up, so KC made the move.

    Yep like I said before there is a lot of purposeful bad information out there right now.  Not saying this was because we will probably never really know but people need to remember to take EVERYTHING with a grain of salt right now.

  9. 3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

    Epenesa isn’t even a scheme fit for what we look for.   His game is power and strength.   We look for DL’s with speed and athleticism.


    Epenesa has been described as a perfect fit for a 3-4 defense.   He doesn’t fit anywhere along our DL.   I’m not saying he’s not a good player, I’m saying he doesn’t fit for what we want. 




    he might fit best in a 3-4 but looks like lots of people think he could work in a 4-3 too and could be a run stopper which the Colts need at end with Shread gone.  

    • Like 1

  10. Just now, Hawkeyecolt said:

    Autry and Houston are both in the last year of their deals.  Turay looks good but hasn't proven anything and is coming off of a nasty injury.  I will be happy with many of their options however Epenesa will give a consistent bull rush from Left End and can slide inside too.  He dominated USC's Jackson so I wouldn't compare him to Bjorn.


    I don't see Hooker getting dealt.  No one is giving up a #2 for Hooker like it was suggested.  Who know how much practice the teams will have prior to a season.  No reason to deal out a young talented veteran who knows the defense under these circumstances.  WR, OL, DL, CB,  then safety depth.

    Oh I don’t think they would get a two for Hooker.  I think a mid round pick would be about as much as they could get for him.  One thing is sure there are several players on the board that fill a need for the Colts so they have options and that’s always good in the draft.

  11. 2 minutes ago, stitches said:

    This is from a local reporter. I take the word of a national reporter over the locals every single time. The local reporters don't have real sources, that's why they never break any stories and it's always the national guys that break news on the Colts. The local ones just do the cleanup/PR work for the team.

    Well the national reporter didn’t say the Colts were for sure trying to move up, he said the Packers moved up because they heard the Colts were looking to move up.  That tells me he probably got it from the Packers.  The Packers have no way of knowing if the Colts were really trying to move up or not if and if they were who they were after.  

    • Like 2

  12. 1 minute ago, Pointz said:

    I agree it’s risky but we wouldn’t have to give up much and could see if Reich could work his magic. Could be low risk with a high reward.

    I just don’t see it.  I think Ballard would be more likely to go forward with a rookie.  Also, I know fans have given up on Jacoby but the Colts have no.  I don’t see them trying revive Rosens career and continue to develop Jacoby but strange things have happened.

  13. 3 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

    I can see a scenario where the Buccaneers try to move up to get Brady his receiving back (Swift). Could we do a trade with them where we trade them the 34th pick for their 45th pick & OJ Howard?  Would we have to add another pick to pull that trade off?

    I don’t see the Colts trading for Howard after signing Burton.  I think Ballard would listen to that offer if the Bucs included another pick or two though.

    • Like 1
  • Create New...