Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

JimJaime

If Colts Get The #1 Pick In Draft..

Recommended Posts

If you were the Colts GM what would you do if the colts had the #1 overall draft pick?

Would you stay there and Draft Luck or trade down for more picks?BUT Staying there and

I being an outsider can see the benefits doing both, trading down you get more HIGH picks (and prbl 2 #1 next year or even this year plus more) to improve any weaknesses the colts have expecting Manning be back next yr and doing this MAY give him a better rounded team and a chance win another SB.

BUT staying there and drafting Luck makes sense as you do two things:

1. Have a GOOD back-up behind Manning in case he cant go you remain competitive.

2. Manning can groom Luck for 3 yrs ala Favre to rogers.. except Manning would actually help the kid

So what would you do in this WORSE case scenerio.. remembering you are getting the franchise back next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Polian says he takes the best player available. That's why we ended up with Brown and Hughes. He thought they were the best prospects available at that time.

If we pick #1, it will be Luck.

It would be an incredible opportunity for the franchise. We have a Hall of Fame QB who is the GOAT, and we would have the opportunity to draft a guy who has the potential to be nearly as good as Manning. That would set us up for another decade of success, why pass on that.

When Peyton is gone, we're screwed. Drafting Luck would give us our best chance of combating that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

gallery_46_8_27840.jpg

Hey bavanlan....welcome back to the Forum.

Since we're on the subject of Andrew Luck....maybe in the coming days you can share your salary cap expertise i.e. the new rookie cap and the eventually possibility of having him AND Peyton on the roster.

I'm not dooming us to the #1 pick just yet, but if we DO wind up there...somebody is gonna get paid in the neighborhood of 22-25 mil.

Whatever else you can share about salary cap scenarios and other veterans we have would also be appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

gallery_46_8_27840.jpg

Hey Bav! Didn't even notice that was you till someone pointed it out!

I was asking about you and Coltscap.net back in late July/early August.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Bav! Didn't even notice that was you till someone pointed it out!

I was asking about you and Coltscap.net back in late July/early August.

New job, new baby, no CBA = No time = Meh on ColtsCap.

I'm still around elsewhere, though not as much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Manning is healthy, I don't see us going for Luck for the following reasons:

1. where are we going to get the money to pay him as a #1 pick

2. He won't be content to sit on the bench for four more years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were the Colts GM what would you do if the colts had the #1 overall draft pick?

Would you stay there and Draft Luck or trade down for more picks?BUT Staying there and

I being an outsider can see the benefits doing both, trading down you get more HIGH picks (and prbl 2 #1 next year or even this year plus more) to improve any weaknesses the colts have expecting Manning be back next yr and doing this MAY give him a better rounded team and a chance win another SB.

BUT staying there and drafting Luck makes sense as you do two things:

1. Have a GOOD back-up behind Manning in case he cant go you remain competitive.

2. Manning can groom Luck for 3 yrs ala Favre to rogers.. except Manning would actually help the kid

So what would you do in this WORSE case scenerio.. remembering you are getting the franchise back next year.

I would trade the pick. we will have PM back for maybe 4 more productive years. trade it and put a team around him. we need 1 DT one cb and one more good ot. we then should get rid of some of the first rounders that are not working out and replace them with backups that can stand out on special teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Manning is healthy, I don't see us going for Luck for the following reasons:

1. where are we going to get the money to pay him as a #1 pick

2. He won't be content to sit on the bench for four more years

Your question 2 is more relevant. The new CBA has placed a significant cap on what the Number 1 draftee can get in a contract. Affording him would be about like affording Collins right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your question 2 is more relevant. The new CBA has placed a significant cap on what the Number 1 draftee can get in a contract. Affording him would be about like affording Collins right now.

Yep.

The Rookie Wage Scale put an end to ungodly rookie deals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sad thing is I don't think we are bad enough to get the number 1 pick, I would say we are looking at picks 3-5 when it comes draft time. What we have to hope for is a team like carloina having the number 1 pick and maybe we trade up for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the new rookie contacts will play a part in our decision. If Manning plays a couple more years which we all expect him to do Luck would be sitting on the bench for the first years of his career. Then Polian has to make a decision do you pick up his fifth year, which will pay him top 10 QB money for never playing a down. Basically you would be betting on two things. One, that Manning will be done that fifth year. Two, that Andrew Luck will be worth top 10 money without probably taking a snap in a real game.

A guy like Matt Kalil could be in play as well because that would allow Anthony to move over to RT and we would have RT and LT solidified for years to come.

Depending on where we fall in the top 5 we could grab someone like Justin Blackmon and get rid of Garcon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, even though I think Luck is still the no.1 guy, I think Matt Barkley is quickly climbing, and perhaps be no.1 by the end of the year. He's doing better than Luck right now, even though they're both tearing it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, even though I think Luck is still the no.1 guy, I think Matt Barkley is quickly climbing, and perhaps be no.1 by the end of the year. He's doing better than Luck right now, even though they're both tearing it up.

That is mainly due to Harbaugh no longer being at Stanford IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evidently, we need a franchise QB on this team. I am hoping we take Luck, although KC and Seattle might be front runners as well.

We need a transition, ala Favre to Rogers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully, the Colts brain trust will have a VERY clear picture as to Peyton's health and risk of re-injury by next Draft Day.

We're operating on alot of "what ifs?" right now, but drafting his successor can no longer be categorized as premature....and IMO, we should select Andrew Luck with the 1st overall pick considering the more favorable rookie salary limits.

If Polian decides otherwise, then we better get an absolute king's ransom in exchange for the top pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we do the same thing the packs did. give him three years under peyton and give the keys to luck. i love peyton to death. he brought back a dead franchise, but no one is bigger then the team

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to see if say Seattle got the number 1 pick whom they would take?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to see if say Seattle got the number 1 pick whom they would take?

they would jump on luck in a sec. jackson sucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the smartest move the colts could make is to take a guy like Kellen Moore from Boise State University. This guy has been SOLID in his career as a QB and truthfully he is very similar to Manning in play decision making abilities. He also has the ability to scramble when necessary. I'd take Moore over Luck any day of the week. A 40-2 record is dag-on impressive and if you seriously watch that kid play he is going to be an excellent NFL QB.

I was happy the colts got Collins to play QB...until I saw the last 2 games. Now I'm definitely not so sure anymore. I say stick Painter in there and let him have fun at least..see if he can be a solid backup and prove himself. I think our chances are as equivalent with Painter as with Collins, except with Painter he has years left and like they said..a month ago the Colts had to talk Collins off his rocking chair to get him in! :)

I'm still a COLTS fan, but I sure hope we can make some defensive changes over the next year or two, we just aren't built well. With the game between the Browns our defense was pretty dang good through the first half (with the exception of the touchdown before the end of the half). We suck when QB's get outside the pocket and we are just not able to put pressure and rack the sacks like we are "supposedly" built to do.

G'day all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would personally without a doubt trade down and acquire extra picks.

1-Atlanta gave up an arm and a leg to draft up and get Julio Jones. Cleveland (who has 2 first rd picks this year) has shown they have no problem packaging picks and trading up ala Brady Quinn. With all of the hype Luck is getting, I think there's no question that a bigger deal could easily be made for him than the Atlanta deal last year. Acquiring extra draft picks would go a long way towards helping us shore up some areas of weakness in what is going to be a very strong draft class.

2-There are so many people posting on the forum about how much more success Manning could have had with a better defense and running game and I agree. I'm not saying we haven't been successful, that's absurd. However I do think if we had continued to maintain a running game like we had when Edge was here then our offense would have, imo, maintained a higher degree of explosiveness than what we've seen the past few years. Same can be said of our defense...how many more championships could we have won if we had a stronger defense? I do think our D is improving and we'll see even more improvement if they learn the right and wrong times to use the tampa 2. However, we still have strong needs at CB and DT and other less-critical areas where at the very least we need better depth. Also we don't need just any DT but rather a NT. Of all DT's that come out in the draft only a portion of them are capable of playing a true NT position so the ones who can play NT and at an elite level are generally off the board relatively quickly. Same can be said of CB. There is going to be a lot of talent at CB in the draft but we have to ask ourselves if we really want to keep taking chances with lower round guys to step into the starting lineup instead of pulling the trigger on a high-level prospect where the risk is much less. So yeah, by trading down and acquiring additional picks we can shore up these holes as well as bring in some additional depth at several other positions.

3-Some QB's you bring in to groom for a few years and some you bring in and put them right in the starting lineup. Luck appears to be one of those that you bring in and start right away ala Manning, Manning (eli), Bradford, Stafford, Flacco, Ryan etc. I recall reading somewhere (unfortunately don't have the link so believe me or don't) that Manning said he felt one of the things that helped him the most was starting right away. If he's as polished and NFL ready as people claim him to be then it would almost be a disservice to him to have him ride the bench for the next 3-4 years while Manning is still here. The QB's that you bring in to groom for the future are guys who there are question marks around. Whether it be with their leadership ability, throwing mechanics, them coming from a spread-type offense or any number of other potential question marks. You ride these guys on the bench behind a veteran so they can learn how to play the position better. From all that is said about Luck I don't get the impression he's one of those types of QB's. I have no problem with looking to bring someone in to compete with Painter in attempt to upgrade the backup spot but if that's what we're looking for then wait until the 3rd or 4th round.

4-So based on #3, the only real reason that would make sense to have Luck be "groomed" by Peyton is to give Luck opportunity to learn our offense and scheme. This makes little sense to me. Anyone who thinks there is another QB who will come in and be able to do the things Manning does is expecting way too much. I'm not going to say for certain that Luck or another QB could definitely not do it, but the fact that there's not another QB in the league today who has as much control of the offense as Manning does and that to go back through history, the closest and most recent example would be Jim Kelly of Buffalo..and that was late 80's/early 90's. When Manning goes...so does the amount of control the QB position has goes as well. When Manning goes we are going to have to make adjustments, make things less complicated from the QB perspective and the offensive coaches are going to have to be more involved in play calling and game planning etc. Not saying that they're not involved now, but with Manning they don't have to be as involved as they are going to have to be with any other QB. So why bring Luck in to learn a system he likely won't be running anyway?

5-Based on #4, we should spend every resource available to us to build a better team around Manning while he's still here. Not only does this seem to be the right thing to do for Peyton and to give him a chance to retire with more than one ring, but in waiting to address the QB situation we are building a much better team so that when the time does come and we have to find our next franchise QB, we have a much, MUCH better team built around him and that will make things a lot easier for him and should mean success much earlier.

6-Everyone compares the situation of Manning grooming Luck to Montana/Young and Favre/Rodgers. This goes back to my 3rd point...Young wasn't even drafted by San Fran, they acquired him from Tampa Bay where he was riding the bench. Rodgers was a late first round pick, not a top 5 pick. Neither of these teams went out and spent the #1 pick on the top QB prospect of the draft and then spent the next few years developing them. These were both guys that had areas of concern and aspects of their game that needed to be polished before they would be considered ready to be a full time starter in the NFL.

7-We can continue being a team that's built entirely around a GOAT caliber QB and base all of our success on him, meaning any time he has a subpar game...we lose. Or we can build a much better team first, one that can stand on its own 2 feet regardless of how the QB plays and then we go out and find our next franchise QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to see if say Seattle got the number 1 pick whom they would take?

Why wouldn't they take Luck? They have some QB problems themsaelves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they would jump on luck in a sec. jackson sucks

I could be wrong but I think the implication might be which QB would they take, not would they take a QB. The possibility they go with someone other than Luck I'm assuming is based on Matt Barkley of USC (Pete Carroll's old team) also being a high first round prospect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would be interesting to see for me is if we get the #1 over-all pick would we trade down to about #2-5 or somewhere around there. We have a lot of free agent WRs next year and we might want to get an up and coming stud at the WR position. However, in our system I feel that WRs are a dime a dozen. I feel that this is a quarterback driven league, and we need to start thinking about the future. Sure Peyton is the man right now, but his time is running out and this is the best opportunity for us to get another franchise quarterback. I just hope we take the best available player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seattle plays that West Coast style, and will need a day 1 franchise player. Luck would be a better fit there. I still feel as though we can land a good successor later on, while surrounding Manning with a superb team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say trade pick if it's a top 5 pick for more picks upgrade defense and maybe wr and take kellen Moore qb from Boise state in 3rd round.

If kellen Moore had the measurables of luck he would be on the discussion of top pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the smartest move the colts could make is to take a guy like Kellen Moore from Boise State University. This guy has been SOLID in his career as a QB and truthfully he is very similar to Manning in play decision making abilities. He also has the ability to scramble when necessary. I'd take Moore over Luck any day of the week. A 40-2 record is dag-on impressive and if you seriously watch that kid play he is going to be an excellent NFL QB.]

Exactly...we don't even necessarily have to go out and find the next greatest QB in the game today. There are arguably 28-29 teams who have to find other ways to win besides having one of the best in the game today type QB.

Even if Manning retires, I would still rather wait a year before going QB in the first round. Trade down, get extra picks for both this and next year, draft some quality defensive players to improve our defense (and also fire coyer if he can't figure out when to use the tampa 2 and when not to) as well as OL and WR and whatever other holes we're able to fill this year. Then if we have to have one more off year because Manning had to retire, then we address QB next year. If the future QB of our team isn't in the draft (which if the past few years are any indication there will be more than a few capable, solid starters available) then we could also look elsewhere. Maybe give the Patriots a call about Ryan Mallet...or Green Bay and ask about Matt Flynn. There are some very young backups right now who could very well turn into future franchise QB's in the same manner as Favre (yeah, he wasn't groomed by GB, he was picked up from Atlanta), Steve Young, Matt Schaub, Matt Cassell (jury still out on him), Kevin Kolb etc etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would personally without a doubt trade down and acquire extra picks.

1-Atlanta gave up an arm and a leg to draft up and get Julio Jones. Cleveland (who has 2 first rd picks this year) has shown they have no problem packaging picks and trading up ala Brady Quinn. With all of the hype Luck is getting, I think there's no question that a bigger deal could easily be made for him than the Atlanta deal last year. Acquiring extra draft picks would go a long way towards helping us shore up some areas of weakness in what is going to be a very strong draft class.

2-There are so many people posting on the forum about how much more success Manning could have had with a better defense and running game and I agree. I'm not saying we haven't been successful, that's absurd. However I do think if we had continued to maintain a running game like we had when Edge was here then our offense would have, imo, maintained a higher degree of explosiveness than what we've seen the past few years. Same can be said of our defense...how many more championships could we have won if we had a stronger defense? I do think our D is improving and we'll see even more improvement if they learn the right and wrong times to use the tampa 2. However, we still have strong needs at CB and DT and other less-critical areas where at the very least we need better depth. Also we don't need just any DT but rather a NT. Of all DT's that come out in the draft only a portion of them are capable of playing a true NT position so the ones who can play NT and at an elite level are generally off the board relatively quickly. Same can be said of CB. There is going to be a lot of talent at CB in the draft but we have to ask ourselves if we really want to keep taking chances with lower round guys to step into the starting lineup instead of pulling the trigger on a high-level prospect where the risk is much less. So yeah, by trading down and acquiring additional picks we can shore up these holes as well as bring in some additional depth at several other positions.

3-Some QB's you bring in to groom for a few years and some you bring in and put them right in the starting lineup. Luck appears to be one of those that you bring in and start right away ala Manning, Manning (eli), Bradford, Stafford, Flacco, Ryan etc. I recall reading somewhere (unfortunately don't have the link so believe me or don't) that Manning said he felt one of the things that helped him the most was starting right away. If he's as polished and NFL ready as people claim him to be then it would almost be a disservice to him to have him ride the bench for the next 3-4 years while Manning is still here. The QB's that you bring in to groom for the future are guys who there are question marks around. Whether it be with their leadership ability, throwing mechanics, them coming from a spread-type offense or any number of other potential question marks. You ride these guys on the bench behind a veteran so they can learn how to play the position better. From all that is said about Luck I don't get the impression he's one of those types of QB's. I have no problem with looking to bring someone in to compete with Painter in attempt to upgrade the backup spot but if that's what we're looking for then wait until the 3rd or 4th round.

4-So based on #3, the only real reason that would make sense to have Luck be "groomed" by Peyton is to give Luck opportunity to learn our offense and scheme. This makes little sense to me. Anyone who thinks there is another QB who will come in and be able to do the things Manning does is expecting way too much. I'm not going to say for certain that Luck or another QB could definitely not do it, but the fact that there's not another QB in the league today who has as much control of the offense as Manning does and that to go back through history, the closest and most recent example would be Jim Kelly of Buffalo..and that was late 80's/early 90's. When Manning goes...so does the amount of control the QB position has goes as well. When Manning goes we are going to have to make adjustments, make things less complicated from the QB perspective and the offensive coaches are going to have to be more involved in play calling and game planning etc. Not saying that they're not involved now, but with Manning they don't have to be as involved as they are going to have to be with any other QB. So why bring Luck in to learn a system he likely won't be running anyway?

5-Based on #4, we should spend every resource available to us to build a better team around Manning while he's still here. Not only does this seem to be the right thing to do for Peyton and to give him a chance to retire with more than one ring, but in waiting to address the QB situation we are building a much better team so that when the time does come and we have to find our next franchise QB, we have a much, MUCH better team built around him and that will make things a lot easier for him and should mean success much earlier.

6-Everyone compares the situation of Manning grooming Luck to Montana/Young and Favre/Rodgers. This goes back to my 3rd point...Young wasn't even drafted by San Fran, they acquired him from Tampa Bay where he was riding the bench. Rodgers was a late first round pick, not a top 5 pick. Neither of these teams went out and spent the #1 pick on the top QB prospect of the draft and then spent the next few years developing them. These were both guys that had areas of concern and aspects of their game that needed to be polished before they would be considered ready to be a full time starter in the NFL.

7-We can continue being a team that's built entirely around a GOAT caliber QB and base all of our success on him, meaning any time he has a subpar game...we lose. Or we can build a much better team first, one that can stand on its own 2 feet regardless of how the QB plays and then we go out and find our next franchise QB.

knowing the polians past drafting history. (donald brown, hughes, gonzo, ugoh, pollack) They keep trying to find replacements for players, that they might loose in the near future.

Obviously they would be dumb enough to draft Luck and have him waste away on the bench for 5 years behind manning. And then suck really bad, like brown, hughes, ugoh, gonzo). Why would he suck? because you need other players around him to make a good team, and right now the colts have NOBODY!!!!!!!!!!! All their pro-bowlers will be old/retired before Luck would play a down.

I say, lets win 3 superbowls in a Row when Manning comes back and to do that we need a 1st round pick that helps our team NOW. So we need a DB, DT, LB, OL........pretty much any position besides QB, RB, WR.

We can worry about finding a replacement in the last 1-2 years before Manning retires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6-Everyone compares the situation of Manning grooming Luck to Montana/Young and Favre/Rodgers. This goes back to my 3rd point...Young wasn't even drafted by San Fran, they acquired him from Tampa Bay where he was riding the bench. Rodgers was a late first round pick, not a top 5 pick. Neither of these teams went out and spent the #1 pick on the top QB prospect of the draft and then spent the next few years developing them. These were both guys that had areas of concern and aspects of their game that needed to be polished before they would be considered ready to be a full time starter in the NFL.

There were some absolute studs in the first round in 2005. Of course hindsight is 20/20, but Rodgers could warrant 1st overall pick in a redo. He is now Brady/Manning class, definitely if he keeps up his level of play. GB spent its 1st pick on the future of the QB position when they still had Favre.

We should take a stud QB with our 1st pick if there is one available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

knowing the polians past drafting history. (donald brown, hughes, gonzo, ugoh, pollack) They keep trying to find replacements for players, that they might loose in the near future.

I can't tell you how afraid I am that you might be right. I have hope though....the overall drafting style has changed since Dungy left and as the transition was made from Bill to Chris at GM. A few years back, positions like OL, DT and LB were often regarded as secondary priorities and were not addressed until later rounds. Since Dungy left, however, they've shown a different type of priority. Now we're going after guys like Drake Nevis in the 3rd round, Pat Angerer in the 2nd, Castonzo and Ijalana in 1st and 2nd etc etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New job, new baby, no CBA = No time = Meh on ColtsCap.

I'm still around elsewhere, though not as much.

whaaaaaaaa....that's no excuse;-)

keep your butt over here;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. If Peyton comes back 100% healthy and the Colts end up with the nr. 1 pick I would trade down, get a few quality extra picks and take a backup qb in rounds 3-5.

2. If Peyton comes back but not at 100% health or doubts about his health i say get Luck with pick nr. 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were some absolute studs in the first round in 2005. Of course hindsight is 20/20, but Rodgers could warrant 1st overall pick in a redo. He is now Brady/Manning class, definitely if he keeps up his level of play. GB spent its 1st pick on the future of the QB position when they still had Favre.

We should take a stud QB with our 1st pick if there is one available.

When you say absolute studs, I'm assuming you're referring to non-QB's right? Like others have said, this is a QB driven league. If there were no questions about Rodgers coming out of college, if there weren't aspects of his game that teams CLEARLY felt needed working on, if there was even a single team in the league who felt he was ready to start right away then he would have been drafted and put in the starting lineup right away. The fact he was not drafted higher than he was and made an immediate starter (and the fact that Alex Smith was) makes it seem to me that he had areas of his game that needed to be polished before he would be ready to start in the pro game. That is not the case with Luck. I've never watched a game but there's not a single "expert" mentioning any area of his game that might be of concern that would require him to need to be "groomed" before being made a full time starter.

Bottom line, apparently there wasn't a single team who felt Rodgers was ready to start from day one. Conversely, there's not a single team who thinks that Luck can't start week one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you say absolute studs, I'm assuming you're referring to non-QB's right? Like others have said, this is a QB driven league. If there were no questions about Rodgers coming out of college, if there weren't aspects of his game that teams CLEARLY felt needed working on, if there was even a single team in the league who felt he was ready to start right away then he would have been drafted and put in the starting lineup right away. The fact he was not drafted higher than he was and made an immediate starter (and the fact that Alex Smith was) makes it seem to me that he had areas of his game that needed to be polished before he would be ready to start in the pro game. That is not the case with Luck. I've never watched a game but there's not a single "expert" mentioning any area of his game that might be of concern that would require him to need to be "groomed" before being made a full time starter.

Bottom line, apparently there wasn't a single team who felt Rodgers was ready to start from day one. Conversely, there's not a single team who thinks that Luck can't start week one.

Yes, I meant non-QBs. Guys like Ware and White.

I just think we have shown how important our QB position is. We take Luck if he's there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we get the #1 pick and Manning seems to be fully recovered, then we should absolutely trade down. I'd like to see us trade down somewhere between the #5 and #10 picks and get a star caliber WR, either Justin Blackmon or Lashon Jeffery, in a package deal along with a 2nd round pick and a proven vet. With the 2nd round pick and the proven vet, we should get players to fill any of these positions of need: OL (guard or center), DT (a big fat run stopper to play along with Nevis), LB (someone with some size that hits hard), CB (someone solid in man coverage), or RB (someone better than Addai, no need for depth).

It'd be awesome if we do get the #1 pick and the Browns offered us both of their first round picks (which should be somewhere around #3-#8 and #18-#25) along with a proven vet. Josh Cribbs would be an instant way to improve our special teams.

Regardless of what happens with the draft though, we seriously need to make some wholesale changes and fully utilize the free agent market. There are some very good players that are going to be free agents that could really help our team win now. Haloti Ngata, DT from the Ravens would instantly resolve our DT problems, and he's only 28 so he has plenty of gas left in the tank. Carl Nicks, G from the Saints is one of the best guards in the league, and we desperately need good interior olinemen (and he's only 27). Brandon Flowers, CB from the Chiefs and Tracey Porter, CB from the Saints are both very good cornerbacks that would help immensely (they're both only 26). Also, LaRon Landry, S from the Redskins would be sort of like getting Bob Sanders back, in that he hits really hard and is huge in run support. Those are just a few of many good free agents that will be available. We need to get rid of our aging vets that aren't contributing like they ought to be and are being grossly overpaid. Gary Brackett ($5 million salary in 2012) should be traded or cut. We should try to trade off Freeney ($14,035,000 salary in 2012) while we can still get something decent in return for him. I love the guy, but he's not worth anywhere near that much and he's not producing anymore. Donald Brown needs to be cut. We should not resign Anthony Gonzalez, Pierre Garcon, Ryan Diem, or Jeff Saturday. I'd like us to resign Reggie Wayne and Robert Mathis, but if they're expecting too much salary, then let them walk and use that money to bring in some good free agents.

I'm hoping by the time the 2012 NFL season rolls around, we will have made a bunch of significant moves and changed the identity of our team. I'm tired of us being the 'sissys' of the NFL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. If Peyton comes back 100% healthy and the Colts end up with the nr. 1 pick I would trade down, get a few quality extra picks and take a backup qb in rounds 3-5.

2. If Peyton comes back but not at 100% health or doubts about his health i say get Luck with pick nr. 1

Good logic in this, IMO. Maximizes our SB chances for Peyton's last few years, if he's 100% healthy, and still builds for the future. If he's not healthy, we have no SB chance, so get the best QB to start the process again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It is incredibly unlikely, I am still hoping that I will be able to get one of the packages but I wont know that until the 24th. 
    • I think Pascal showed last year he is reliable and a playmaker.  Campbell showed flashes, but still has a lot to prove and a need to stay healthy.  TY also needs to stay healthy after two years in a row with nagging injuries.   I'm pretty confident that Pittman is going to be solid, but you're right he needs to prove it before we get too excited.   And yes, interesting with the new PS rules (sounds like we can protect up to 4 players if they don't get claimed after being cut and before being placed on the PS), will be to see if we keep any of our young guys locked up.  I'm also intrigued given no pre-season games or intersquad practices (i.e., our coaching staff/FO will really be the only group of NFL personnel who will have gotten a chance to see the young guys perform against other NFL players).  That may benefit us with a guy like Patmon, and since no other team will have seen him perform, he may have a likelier chance of making it to the PS and being protected than a guy like Dulin who other NFL teams have seen on Sundays.   Anyway, just in TY, Campbell, Pascal and Pittman I am a lot more confident with our top 4 than I was going into any year since Reggie got hurt.    
    • As always, highlights are highlights. That said, he has an impressive burst, a knack for knowing when to move on from the blocking call, and a serious nose for more yards after contact. He has a lot of MJD in his game. 
    • He is a whole different order of threat than Mack.  I'll be very surprised if teams aren't focusing him by week 4 or so.  And if it wasn't for Mack I'd say he's a real good bet for ROY.  Still might be even with Mack sharing carries.
    • Sub par reading comprehension on my part.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...