Calling it now

[NDcolt]

Trufant

[mvbighead]

I am not doing this again because you are just too much to handle with your constant repetition of the same point whilst ignoring what I say.

 

If I was coming up with MY mock draft, and if I was coming up with MY big board, I would predict that WR will not be BPA at #24. Why would mock drafts and top 50/100 player articles exist if not to attempt to project what will happen in the draft? You can predict things based on the schemes of the teams ahead on you, past experience of drafts, players with injuries, undersized players etc etc etc. These predictions may not materialize, but at least they have basis.

 

How is your argument that Austin could drop, any different from the argument that as pass rusher could drop? (Don't answer that, it's a rhetorical question)

 

I'll go ahead and answer that rhetorical question anyway. <- again ignoring what you say

 

First and foremost, I am not enamored with Austin.  It was an example that was intended to be used to prove a point that a WR could fall from a projected spot to where we sit, based on some characteristic.  In this case, stature.  I am not making an argument that Austin will fall, just using an example on why he could (and he is one that seems to be projected in the upper 15).

 

I see your point, but my point was raised to suggest that suggesting that either projection of BPA is simply foolish because we don't know who will fall.  

 

Why not just say that you think it will be a pass-rushing specialist that makes the most sense there?  Why not suggest that there is ample talent at the top of the draft for pass-rushing specialists, and you think a good one will fall because some team will reach for a _____?  Why hide behind the guise of BPA?  As if to suggest that not selecting OLB/DE at that spot would be us forgoing BPA because such and such a player dropped?

 

I just don't get the point of suggesting that BPA has anything to do with it when:

 

1) We have no idea who will be there.

2) We have no idea what the interviews were like to see if a draft prospect were to have a desire type of problem (Ala Tony Ugoh) and thus not merit consideration despite analysts lofty expectations (Tony Mandarich anyone?)

 

Now, I understand you are referring to your big board based on your analyses.  Basically what you're saying is that you've done analysis of every player (presumably in the top 50).  That you've done a mock draft (presumably of the 1st round).  And that you've concluded that certain teams will bypass your evaluations and reach down for a position of need, thus pushing players with higher grades down the draft towards #24.  And that you're going to select your highest rated player at #24, and you suspect it'll be some position other than receiver (presumably OLB based on another thread).  That about spell it out?

 

To me, that is an awful lot of speculation to be making the claim that:

I still believe that the BPA policy dictates that we won't go WR at #24.

 

The basis of your statement is that the policy is dictating what we'll select.  The reality is, you are projecting what will happen in the draft, and based on that, the BPA dictates what we'll select.  There is a distinct difference.

 

Just say that you think a good player will fall to our spot.  No need to suggest that policy is what is dictating the decision, when that is purely based on your speculation.

[FalseStart]

The Indianapolis Colts are on the clock..."There is a trade"

 

With the 24th pick;

...the Arizona Cards select Matt Barkley

...the Dallas Cowboys select Matt Barkley

...the San Francisco 49ers select Jesse Williams, Sheldon Richardson, Sylvester Williams, Jonathan Hankins, Demontre Moore...

...the Buffalo Bills select Ryan Nassib

[AntonMcG]

I'll go ahead and answer that rhetorical question anyway. <- again ignoring what you say

 

First and foremost, I am not enamored with Austin.  It was an example that was intended to be used to prove a point that a WR could fall from a projected spot to where we sit, based on some characteristic.  In this case, stature.  I am not making an argument that Austin will fall, just using an example on why he could (and he is one that seems to be projected in the upper 15).

I am well aware of how you are using the example, but a talented player at any position can fall based on something that one team considers important and others don't.

 

I see your point, but my point was raised to suggest that suggesting that either projection of BPA is simply foolish because we don't know who will fall.  

Of course we don't, stop saying this, I have seen you say it 100 times, and I will still make my predictions the same way most other do on this forum, look at the amount of people saying we will take this type of player or that type of player, or these guys would be a reach and these guys might fall. BPA isn't going to be some random order, there will be some degree of alignment with  most big boards because there are a lot of good scouts and analysts out there.

 

Why not just say that you think it will be a pass-rushing specialist that makes the most sense there?  Why not suggest that there is ample talent at the top of the draft for pass-rushing specialists, and you think a good one will fall because some team will reach for a _____?  Why hide behind the guise of BPA?  As if to suggest that not selecting OLB/DE at that spot would be us forgoing BPA because such and such a player dropped?

Are you actually being serious?? I said that so many times in the other thread that this EXACT same argument took place. I made every one of those points. My God. There are quite a few quality pass-rushers in the draft, a lot of team will only take certain types of pass-rushers because it is considered a very scheme-dependant position, so there is (in my opinion) a good chance one falls, and there is a good chance, because they fall, that they are BPA. Teams reach for QBs in the first every year. Others will reach for WRs, but I do not believe the Colts will. What in God's name are you talking about "hiding behind the guise of BPA", there are more pass-rushers projected at the top than WR's... pass rushers are much more scheme-dependant than WR's.... so (IN MY OPINION) there is a better chance that a good one falls. Outside of Allen and Patterson what other WRs are being projected as top-20 talent, not draft position, but talent. I don't know where you seen Austin as a top-15 guy, I haven't seen him considered that high too often.

 

I just don't get the point of suggesting that BPA has anything to do with it when:

 

1) We have no idea who will be there.

2) We have no idea what the interviews were like to see if a draft prospect were to have a desire type of problem (Ala Tony Ugoh) and thus not merit consideration despite analysts lofty expectations (Tony Mandarich anyone?)

 

Now, I understand you are referring to your big board based on your analyses.  Basically what you're saying is that you've done analysis of every player (presumably in the top 50).  That you've done a mock draft (presumably of the 1st round).  And that you've concluded that certain teams will bypass your evaluations and reach down for a position of need, thus pushing players with higher grades down the draft towards #24.  And that you're going to select your highest rated player at #24, and you suspect it'll be some position other than receiver (presumably OLB based on another thread).  That about spell it out?

 

Or maybe... I have read a lot of analysis from experts this off-season... other big boards, other mocks, other forms of analysis... that has led me to believe that the WR class is not strong at the top, pass-rushers are, and because of different schemes, and teams in front of us that draft based on need, one might fall. I cannot make it clearer than that. I am not saying I'm right, I am saying I believe this is the case. Of course there is a degree of difference between different teams boards, but there will be some degree of continuity.... some players are better than others and everyone knows it/can see it.

 

To me, that is an awful lot of speculation to be making the claim that:

I still believe that the BPA policy dictates that we won't go WR at #24.

 

The basis of your statement is that the policy is dictating what we'll select.  The reality is, you are projecting what will happen in the draft, and based on that, the BPA dictates what we'll select.  There is a distinct difference.

The policy is BPA... I cannot fathom how you do not get that this is my opinion, and no matter how many 1000-word posts you send to me saying it is too speculative, I, along with many others, will continue to speculate. Just like you did with you assertion that we have a need at WR, and therefore are likely to go there at #24, because a lot will be available. Whether you consider my opinion more speculative than yours... frankly I don't care.

Just say that you think a good player will fall to our spot.  No need to suggest that policy is what is dictating the decision, when that is purely based on your speculation.

Please don't tell me what to say, it is very annoying. I have made my argument clear so many times. General consensus is that this is not a strong WR class at the top. BPA is the policy, Grigson has told us as much, and he drafted that way last year, whether you believe it or not is up to you. The fact that we apparently went after a 'Whopper' of a WR in a trade scenario just reinforces my belief that the Colts (probably along with the majority of the league) do not seem much value at WR in the top end of this draft.

[Coffeedrinker]

On CBS sports both Rob Rang and Pete Prisco have the Colts drafting Desmnd Trufant, CB< Washington.  And I must admit if that were to happen that would not be a bad thing, IMO.

[mvbighead]

I am well aware of how you are using the example, but a talented player at any position can fall based on something that one team considers important and others don't.

 

Of course we don't, stop saying this, I have seen you say it 100 times, and I will still make my predictions the same way most other do on this forum, look at the amount of people saying we will take this type of player or that type of player, or these guys would be a reach and these guys might fall. BPA isn't going to be some random order, there will be some degree of alignment with  most big boards because there are a lot of good scouts and analysts out there.

 

Are you actually being serious?? I said that so many times in the other thread that this EXACT same argument took place. I made every one of those points. My God. There are quite a few quality pass-rushers in the draft, a lot of team will only take certain types of pass-rushers because it is considered a very scheme-dependant position, so there is (in my opinion) a good chance one falls, and there is a good chance, because they fall, that they are BPA. Teams reach for QBs in the first every year. Others will reach for WRs, but I do not believe the Colts will. What in God's name are you talking about "hiding behind the guise of BPA", there are more pass-rushers projected at the top than WR's... pass rushers are much more scheme-dependant than WR's.... so (IN MY OPINION) there is a better chance that a good one falls. Outside of Allen and Patterson what other WRs are being projected as top-20 talent, not draft position, but talent. I don't know where you seen Austin as a top-15 guy, I haven't seen him considered that high too often.

 

 

Or maybe... I have read a lot of analysis from experts this off-season... other big boards, other mocks, other forms of analysis... that has led me to believe that the WR class is not strong at the top, pass-rushers are, and because of different schemes, and teams in front of us that draft based on need, one might fall. I cannot make it clearer than that. I am not saying I'm right, I am saying I believe this is the case. Of course there is a degree of difference between different teams boards, but there will be some degree of continuity.... some players are better than others and everyone knows it/can see it.

 

The policy is BPA... I cannot fathom how you do not get that this is my opinion, and no matter how many 1000-word posts you send to me saying it is too speculative, I, along with many others, will continue to speculate. Just like you did with you assertion that we have a need at WR, and therefore are likely to go there at #24, because a lot will be available. Whether you consider my opinion more speculative than yours... frankly I don't care.

Please don't tell me what to say, it is very annoying. I have made my argument clear so many times. General consensus is that this is not a strong WR class at the top. BPA is the policy, Grigson has told us as much, and he drafted that way last year, whether you believe it or not is up to you. The fact that we apparently went after a 'Whopper' of a WR in a trade scenario just reinforces my belief that the Colts (probably along with the majority of the league) do not seem much value at WR in the top end of this draft.

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/1664558

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=89477&draftyear=2013&genpos=WR

http://www.draftsite.com/nfl/mock-draft/2013/ <- 32nd overall, less prominent site however

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2013/mock-drafts <- only one has him going after our selection.

 

Those are just the google results.  And again, I personally don't care for Austin, but that is purely from the size standpoint.  It simply doesn't help his chances on an NFL football field, and is likely a reason many of your guys might not have him in the top 15.  That doesn't change the fact that many reputable analysts have him as the top receiver.

 

Finally, the whole guise of the BPA comment... that is my problem with your posts.  You are suggesting that BPA is going to be X. Who does that?  Why not just say that you think X is going to fall to us.  You seem to insist that if we don't select a guy who fell, then we won't be selecting BPA.  The reality is, guys fall in the draft all the time.

 

I still believe that the BPA policy dictates that we won't go WR at #24.  <- Who says that?

 

I still believe that the BPA won't be a WR at #24.

 

See the difference?  The onus is on you, not the policy.

[mvbighead]

On CBS sports both Rob Rang and Pete Prisco have the Colts drafting Desmnd Trufant, CB< Washington.  And I must admit if that were to happen that would not be a bad thing, IMO.

 

That would probably be a solid pick.  My only problem with this is it puts us back to the Marlin Jackson/Kelvin Hayden scenario.  We have a guy who will be behind Davis and Toler (and potentially Butler) for the foreseeable future.  Given what Pagano did with Ladarius Webb (a 3rd rounder), I'd like to see us develop a lesser draftee behind our top 2/3 guys.  Less investment, and we can get much more value out of that pick in a position of need.

[AntonMcG]

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/1664558

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=89477&draftyear=2013&genpos=WR

http://www.draftsite.com/nfl/mock-draft/2013/ <- 32nd overall, less prominent site however

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2013/mock-drafts <- only one has him going after our selection.

 

Those are just the google results.  And again, I personally don't care for Austin, but that is purely from the size standpoint.  It simply doesn't help his chances on an NFL football field, and is likely a reason many of your guys might not have him in the top 15.  That doesn't change the fact that many reputable analysts have him as the top receiver.

Once again you are equating draft position to talent, I am not saying he isn't projected to go before us, I am saying he isn't considered a top #20 talent by the majority of people, maybe that is because the slot position is not held in as a high a regard as outside receivers. Allen and Patterson are mostly considered top #20 talents, but I am yet to see a mock that has Patterson fall to us, and not many that has Allen. And again, I think Irsay's tweets are proof that the Colts are not high on the position at the top. That has been my argument since we started this ridiculous back-and-forth.

 

Finally, the whole guise of the BPA comment... that is my problem with your posts.  You are suggesting that BPA is going to be X. Who does that?  Why not just say that you think X is going to fall to us.  You seem to insist that if we don't select a guy who fell, then we won't be selecting BPA.  The reality is, guys fall in the draft all the time.

No I am not, I am saying that BPA won't be a WR because the only ones analysts seem to be high on will be gone, it might not be a pass-rusher either but there is better chance of it being a pass-rusher than a WR.

I still believe that the BPA policy dictates that we won't go WR at #24.  <- Who says that?

 

I still believe that the BPA won't be a WR at #24.

 

See the difference?  The onus is on you, not the policy.

 

So the whole basis for your argument is semantic interpretation? When we started this argument, it wasn't about BPA, it was about whether or not the Colts would draft a WR at #24....

[mvbighead]

Once again you are equating draft position to talent, I am not saying he isn't projected to go before us, I am saying he isn't considered a top #20 talent by the majority of people, maybe that is because the slot position is not held in as a high a regard as outside receivers. Allen and Patterson are mostly considered top #20 talents, but I am yet to see a mock that has Patterson fall to us, and not many that has Allen. And again, I think Irsay's tweets are proof that the Colts are not high on the position at the top. That has been my argument since we started this ridiculous back-and-forth.

 

No I am not, I am saying that BPA won't be a WR because the only ones analysts seem to be high on will be gone, it might not be a pass-rusher either but there is better chance of it being a pass-rusher than a WR.

 

So the whole basis for your argument is semantic interpretation? When we started this argument, it wasn't about BPA, it was about whether or not the Colts would draft a WR at #24....

 

I am equating draft position to talent?  No, I am providing links to sites that suggest the specific spot that he'd be drafted.

 

Will be gone... are you sure about that?  You seem certain of this point, but then suspect that a pass rusher will fall.  How can you be so sure?  And why do you assume that there is a better chance of a pass rusher?  Because of the quantity?  They certainly all can't fit our scheme, can they?

 

I am figuring out that my whole reason for being annoyed with your interpretation is that you seem to present it in near factual terms.  I believe that the policy dictates we will...

 

The reality is that you believe a pass rusher is going to fall do to the quantity available, and the likelihood that some team will reach down for a QB.  The problem is, the QB class is also considered much weaker than recent years, and some are even speculating that Geno Smith could get out of the top 10.  No one seems to be pressing for a QB this year, and Arians claims he is comfortable with Stanton (one of the few QB needy teams).

 

All in all, I am just going to leave it to the fact that I don't agree with the way you present your points.  What you intended to say is that you don't believe the best player available will be a receiver.  I get that now.

 

I'll just stick to my opinion that I believe there are several receivers with talent worthy of a 1st round selection at 24.  This includes Hopkins, Patterson, Allen, and to a lesser extent, Austin.  Perhaps a player with a higher grade will be available as well, and if he fits a need, go for it.  i just hate the methodology of wasting early picks on players that have very little opportunity to contribute.  Granted, I could see us taking an OLB, developing him for a year, and trading/releasing Mathis, but I feel Mathis has been one of our most consistent contributors.

[Coffeedrinker]

That would probably be a solid pick.  My only problem with this is it puts us back to the Marlin Jackson/Kelvin Hayden scenario.  We have a guy who will be behind Davis and Toler (and potentially Butler) for the foreseeable future.  Given what Pagano did with Ladarius Webb (a 3rd rounder), I'd like to see us develop a lesser draftee behind our top 2/3 guys.  Less investment, and we can get much more value out of that pick in a position of need.

I disagree in that I think Toler would be the nickle corner but who knows.

 

As a qualifier I know Rang posted his mock before FA.  I don't know about Prisco.

[weslo1812]

I still believe you can't determine who the BPA is until you've seen who has gone at picks #1-#23.

More than any of that we don't know who Grigs and the staff will view as the best player. We may think one thing but their probably on a whole other track as far as evaluating players. Their views very well may not be what ours are. We cant get stuck on what we think or see or even how all the experts may have it mocked and all the positions ranked. Its gonna mean nothing. Irsay, Griegson and Pagonos view will mean everything when the pick comes.

[AntonMcG]

I am equating draft position to talent?  No, I am providing links to sites that suggest the specific spot that he'd be drafted.

 

Will be gone... are you sure about that?  You seem certain of this point, but then suspect that a pass rusher will fall.  How can you be so sure?  And why do you assume that there is a better chance of a pass rusher?  Because of the quantity?  They certainly all can't fit our scheme, can they?

 

I am figuring out that my whole reason for being annoyed with your interpretation is that you seem to present it in near factual terms.  I believe that the policy dictates we will...

"I believe"... do you understand that that indicates my personal belief, and not something I claim to be factual in any way???

 

You are so wrapped up in semantics that you have stopped arguing about football a long time ago, and instead argue about phrasing, it's pathetic.

The reality is that you believe a pass rusher is going to fall do to the quantity available, and the likelihood that some team will reach down for a QB.  The problem is, the QB class is also considered much weaker than recent years, and some are even speculating that Geno Smith could get out of the top 10.  No one seems to be pressing for a QB this year, and Arians claims he is comfortable with Stanton (one of the few QB needy teams).

Arians didn't sound as comfortable with Stanton to me, he basically avoided saying he would be the starting QB and instead said he would be happy if he ended up being the starting QB, surely someone as adept as you at decrypting the underlying meaning behind how a sentence is phrased could have seen that. Gabbert, Ponder, Weeden etc. weren't first round talent, but there hasn't been only one QB taken in the first since 2001.... this is a bad year for QB's, yes, but there are quite a few QB-needy teams in front of us, which is why I BELIEVE a few QBs will go... I've been wrong before and I will be wrong again.

All in all, I am just going to leave it to the fact that I don't agree with the way you present your points.  What you intended to say is that you don't believe the best player available will be a receiver.  I get that now.

 

I'll just stick to my opinion that I believe there are several receivers with talent worthy of a 1st round selection at 24.  This includes Hopkins, Patterson, Allen, and to a lesser extent, Austin.  Perhaps a player with a higher grade will be available as well, and if he fits a need, go for it.  i just hate the methodology of wasting early picks on players that have very little opportunity to contribute.  Granted, I could see us taking an OLB, developing him for a year, and trading/releasing Mathis, but I feel Mathis has been one of our most consistent contributors.

 

You misinterpret the concept of BPA then... see my post here http://forums.colts.com/index.php?/topic/16478-so-do-you-guys-think-we-are-done-in-fa/page-2#entry439441

 

As for OLB's... we base our defense on the Ravens, four OLB's are significant contributors there, because they offer different skill-sets. We have one proven pass rusher on our entire roster, do you really think that is enough?

[mvbighead]

"I believe"... do you understand that that indicates my personal belief, and not something I claim to be factual in any way???

 

You are so wrapped up in semantics that you have stopped arguing about football a long time ago, and instead argue about phrasing, it's pathetic.

Arians didn't sound as comfortable with Stanton to me, he basically avoided saying he would be the starting QB and instead said he would be happy if he ended up being the starting QB, surely someone as adept as you at decrypting the underlying meaning behind how a sentence is phrased could have seen that. Gabbert, Ponder, Weeden etc. weren't first round talent, but there hasn't been only one QB taken in the first since 2001.... this is a bad year for QB's, yes, but there are quite a few QB-needy teams in front of us, which is why I BELIEVE a few QBs will go... I've been wrong before and I will be wrong again.

 

You misinterpret the concept of BPA then... see my post here http://forums.colts.com/index.php?/topic/16478-so-do-you-guys-think-we-are-done-in-fa/page-2#entry439441

 

As for OLB's... we base our defense on the Ravens, four OLB's are significant contributors there, because they offer different skill-sets. We have one proven pass rusher on our entire roster, do you really think that is enough?

I understand that, however, the phrase indicates that you believe that the policy dictates that the BPA won't be a WR.  I've already indicated this, but you ignored that.  Lets move on.

 

All reports indicate that the Cardinals won't pick a QB at 7 with Stanton in the fold.  All reports indicate that Barkley impressed them.  I'd suspect they have every intention of drafting Barkley in round 2, but not reaching in the 1st.  That could be wrong, but I am just going on what most professionals suggest.

 

In any case, not many QBs are even a thought in the 1st round.  The Raiders and Bills seems to be the most likely to reach, but I'd suspect that with no other teams being interested in the first round, they'll wait, with the exception of Geno Smith.

 

And no, I most certainly do not misinterpret the concept of BPA.  I simply understand the idea that with 3-4 potential first round WRs there, there is a possibility/likelihood that one of them will be tops on Grigson's big board.  I am acknowledging the FACT that my "big board" is not the end all be all (something you should learn to do).  This has been my point all along, that Grigson may have a WR no one suspects at the top of his board.  That guy could even be Woods (this is not someone I really suspect, I am just throwing out a name that is not currently projected for round 1).

 

As for OLBs, we have Mathis as the only proven guy.  We have Hughes who has had potential, and done some things here and there with limited opportunities.  We have Walden to "set the edge" as Pagano has said, and he may be used sparingly as a pass rusher.  And we have Sidburry as a complete unknown, but someone several feel could be a good fit in this scheme.  That is not to suggest we can't improve, but we have two starting positions, and a new contract of 4/14 for one guy, to go with a 1 year old contract of 4/36, which means we have some money spent there, much more so than we do in the WR position.  That to me at least provides a basis for a slight bias towards WR in the draft, and on Grigson's board.  That is not to say we absolutely will pass on an OLB, but just that we might consider waiting to add more later.

[Tyler Shaw]

I was calling this because we didnt pull off the trade for a WR. Whether we trade down or not i believe if a WR is there, we will pull the trigger, cause from what we have heard is we are badly wanting another receiver 

[Truckin Sanders]

Great pick if you like ignoring obvious needs. There are other positions out there other then the sexy potions like WR and RB. People watched to much of Bill Polian and got their mind warped. 

[AntonMcG]

I understand that, however, the phrase indicates that you believe that the policy dictates that the BPA won't be a WR.  I've already indicated this, but you ignored that.  Lets move on.

You are just choosing to interpret what I said in a certain way. I don't mean that the policy is not to draft a WR, I actually wouldn't mind that much if they did considering the FA upgrades. It means that following that policy, as opposed to need-based drafting, and the fact that they persuade a trade for a WR, means WR is unlikely at #24.

All reports indicate that the Cardinals won't pick a QB at 7 with Stanton in the fold.  All reports indicate that Barkley impressed them.  I'd suspect they have every intention of drafting Barkley in round 2, but not reaching in the 1st.  That could be wrong, but I am just going on what most professionals suggest.

 

In any case, not many QBs are even a thought in the 1st round.  The Raiders and Bills seems to be the most likely to reach, but I'd suspect that with no other teams being interested in the first round, they'll wait, with the exception of Geno Smith.

I agree but that has been the case in previous years and teams panic the closer the get if they hear rumblings that x-team is interested in y-player, so y-player ends up going in the first round because a team was afraid of missing out on them, even when they did not have first round talent. It seems to be only QBs this happens with of course.

And no, I most certainly do not misinterpret the concept of BPA.  I simply understand the idea that with 3-4 potential first round WRs there, there is a possibility/likelihood that one of them will be tops on Grigson's big board.  I am acknowledging the FACT that my "big board" is not the end all be all (something you should learn to do).  This has been my point all along, that Grigson may have a WR no one suspects at the top of his board.  That guy could even be Woods (this is not someone I really suspect, I am just throwing out a name that is not currently projected for round 1).

 

I don't know why you have this belief that I don't acknowledge other people's boards... but you are neglecting that most people are not high on WR's at the top, (bar Patterson who realistically be gone), and they only start coming into the conversation around the 20's.... and the fact that the Colts clearly went after a WR in a trade (not FA... trade... which shows a degree of desperation) just reinforces my belief that the Colts do not believe in the WR draft class (in the first anyway). I am not saying this is fact, I am saying it was what I have deduced personally, maybe I am wrong, but I don't need you telling me 10-times over you don't agree with my opinions.

 

 

As for OLBs, we have Mathis as the only proven guy.  We have Hughes who has had potential, and done some things here and there with limited opportunities.  We have Walden to "set the edge" as Pagano has said, and he may be used sparingly as a pass rusher.  And we have Sidburry as a complete unknown, but someone several feel could be a good fit in this scheme.  That is not to suggest we can't improve, but we have two starting positions, and a new contract of 4/14 for one guy, to go with a 1 year old contract of 4/36, which means we have some money spent there, much more so than we do in the WR position.  That to me at least provides a basis for a slight bias towards WR in the draft, and on Grigson's board.  That is not to say we absolutely will pass on an OLB, but just that we might consider waiting to add more later.

 

It is just, and always has been just my opinion, that if a good player was likely to fall, it would be a OLB/DE, because there are a lot of them high on big boards, Jones has back history, Mingo isn't everyones cup of tea, Ansah hasn't got a big production of history, they are scheme-dependant, teams will reach for QBs etc etc etc etc etc etc. There are so many reasons teams pass every year, some are inexplicable. Again, this may not happen, but what I am pretty sure of is that a good player will fall to #24 and Grigson seems to be the type who would grab them.

 

WR is definitely a need, I just think if we don't get one before the draft, it will be more likely in the 3rd round, or else we trade back.

[Tyler Shaw]

Great pick if you like ignoring obvious needs. There are other positions out there other then the sexy potions like WR and RB. People watched to much of Bill Polian and got their mind warped. 

WR is a obvious need. We filled a lot of needs in the FA. dont know where you have been, but WR has jumped up to or near the top, with a Guard, maybe maybe OLB, ILB.

[BOTT]

More than any of that we don't know who Grigs and the staff will view as the best player. We may think one thing but their probably on a whole other track as far as evaluating players. Their views very well may not be what ours are. We cant get stuck on what we think or see or even how all the experts may have it mocked and all the positions ranked. Its gonna mean nothing. Irsay, Griegson and Pagonos view will mean everything when the pick comes.

This. As fans we tend to lump players/positions together...I am sure that grigson's opinion of players is much more defined.

[Deathiltis]

Marquess Wilson will be the best receiver in this draft class. Had an avarage season in 2012, but in 2011 he had 12 TDs and 1388 yards.

He can be had in the 4th, maybe 3rd round. Go defense in the first.

The dude is projected as a 6-7th rounder. We could potentially pick him up in the 6th if he's still there.

[Gavin]

The dude is projected as a 6-7th rounder. We could potentially pick him up in the 6th if he's still there.

Early 4th according to NFL.com grades, 67.3  http://www.nfl.com/draft/2013/profiles/marquess-wilson?id=2540177

[BOTT]

Early 4th according to NFL.com grades, 67.3  http://www.nfl.com/draft/2013/profiles/marquess-wilson?id=2540177

That's about where scouts inc has him too. Read he had a food pro day, so he may move up a tick. Hard to say where he will go though considering he left the team his senior yr.

[chad72]

That's about where scouts inc has him too. Read he had a food pro day, so he may move up a tick. Hard to say where he will go though considering he left the team his senior yr.

 

What is a food pro day? The kind where you go head-to-head vs Joey Chestnut in a hot dog eating contest??? J/k

[Truckin Sanders]

WR is a obvious need. We filled a lot of needs in the FA. dont know where you have been, but WR has jumped up to or near the top, with a Guard, maybe maybe OLB, ILB.

No it is not. Wayne/Hilton are fine as starers along with Fleener and Allen as pass catchers. Again outside of Landry and Cherilus none of the guys will be impact players. Walden is terrible and maybe the worst signing in free agency. Our D-line has chapman- unproven, franklin- old, mckinney- 30 when the season starts, RJF- versatile but just 3 career sacks and 33 career tackles. Not a group I would be supremely confident in.

[Tyler Shaw]

No it is not. Wayne/Hilton are fine as starers along with Fleener and Allen as pass catchers. Again outside of Landry and Cherilus none of the guys will be impact players. Walden is terrible and maybe the worst signing in free agency. Our D-line has chapman- unproven, franklin- old, mckinney- 30 when the season starts, RJF- versatile but just 3 career sacks and 33 career tackles. Not a group I would be supremely confident in.

First you only call out 2 receivers. Which proves my point that wr is a need. Second it doesn't matter what u thunk about Walden because the FO likes him. And he hasn't played a down with us yet and your saying its the worse ever...wow...no need to comment on that. And Mathis is going the rush lb so that's a upgrade. It doesn't matter what u think its what the front office thinks and they like the players they targeted. And as far as age players can still play past 30 and we got depth at nose tackle and there is a reason why rjf was targeted by 10 teams....

[Tyler Shaw]

If the front office didn't think wr was a need why would they try to get one please explain that....

[Truckin Sanders]

First you only call out 2 receivers. Which proves my point that wr is a need. Second it doesn't matter what u thunk about Walden because the FO likes him. And he hasn't played a down with us yet and your saying its the worse ever...wow...no need to comment on that. And Mathis is going the rush lb so that's a upgrade. It doesn't matter what u think its what the front office thinks and they like the players they targeted. And as far as age players can still play past 30 and we got depth at nose tackle and there is a reason why rjf was targeted by 10 teams....

Point out a worse free agent signing. Every beat writer that I have read is completely puzzled by what they saw in Walden. I wasn't aware the FO is infallible. I never said worst ever but it is the worst signing for any team in this free agency season. Apparently you dont realize this is 2013 where tight ends can be very good pass catchers. Still have Brazil and can use a late round pick on a receiver along with the possibility of still having Griff Whalen on the roster. By the way name the wide recievers the patriots had when they won all their super bowls. I can tell you it is struggle. Now tell me how many super bowls they won with Moss/Welker and company? Ya zero exactly. Our offense is a lot farther along than our defense and defense can still win you championships. 

 

Edit: People seem to be hooked on constantly worrying about receivers which was the Polian way of doing things. You can win without a stable of great receivers. 

[Tyler Shaw]

Point out a worse free agent signing. Every beat writer that I have read is completely puzzled by what they saw in Walden. I wasn't aware the FO is infallible. I never said worst ever but it is the worst signing for any team in this free agency season. Apparently you dont realize this is 2013 where tight ends can be very good pass catchers. Still have Brazil and can use a late round pick on a receiver along with the possibility of still having Griff Whalen on the roster. By the way name the wide recievers the patriots had when they won all their super bowls. I can tell you it is struggle. Now tell me how many super bowls they won with Moss/Welker and company? Ya zero exactly. Our offense is a lot farther along than our defense and defense can still win you championships. 

 

Edit: People seem to be hooked on constantly worrying about receivers which was the Polian way of doing things. You can win without a stable of great receivers. 

Saying its the worst signing without him playing a down for us is just ...blah....the most puzzling sure. Hell wallace might be the worst you dont know. And why does everyone keep talking about Griff like hes the next best thing since sliced bread ? Hes has yet to play a down of regular season football so get off his nuts please. Brazil is not a number 2 receiver, imo. And you want to spread the field and go 5 wide...what you going to use Allen and Fleener for that ? Possible but i dont see it happening. FO wants a receiver because they see it has a need. More weapons for Luck the better. If they didnt believe in the guys they got in FA, then why target them. THEY believe we are set in the areas where we picked up the FA

[Truckin Sanders]

Saying its the worst signing without him playing a down for us is just ...blah....the most puzzling sure. heck wallace might be the worst you dont know. And why does everyone keep talking about Griff like hes the next best thing since sliced bread ? Hes has yet to play a down of regular season football so get off his nuts please. Brazil is not a number 2 receiver, imo. And you want to spread the field and go 5 wide...what you going to use Allen and Fleener for that ? Possible but i dont see it happening. FO wants a receiver because they see it has a need. More weapons for Luck the better. If they didnt believe in the guys they got in FA, then why target them. THEY believe we are set in the areas where we picked up the FA

Yes they believe they believe. Again do you believe they are infallible? The front office has never made a mistake? And yes looking at all the signings and what every writer I have seen is puzzled by the erik walden signing especially all colts beat writers. 

[Colts_Fan12]

No it is not. Wayne/Hilton are fine as starers along with Fleener and Allen as pass catchers. Again outside of Landry and Cherilus none of the guys will be impact players. Walden is terrible and maybe the worst signing in free agency. Our D-line has chapman- unproven, franklin- old, mckinney- 30 when the season starts, RJF- versatile but just 3 career sacks and 33 career tackles. Not a group I would be supremely confident in.

I notice you like to complain alot about wat the colts gave done weather you like it or not the FA we signed will start and any defensive players we draft will prolly be backups and our top needs 2 are WR and OG and we can get a guard better then McGlynn later in the draft plus give walden a chance everyone wants to hate on him he was one of the best at stopping the run that's good the colts need it if they all are bad this coming season then you can complain

[Truckin Sanders]

I notice you like to complain alot about wat the colts gave done weather you like it or not the FA we signed will start and any defensive players we draft will prolly be backups and our top needs 2 are WR and OG and we can get a guard better then McGlynn later in the draft plus give walden a chance everyone wants to hate on him he was one of the best at stopping the run that's good the colts need it if they all are bad this coming season then you can complain

False on many accounts. Loved Landry, loved Cherilus. Loved the draft last year. Hate Walden. A guy who managed only 3 sacks last year with Clay Matthews getting triple teamed on the other side of him. Which says a lot about a guy I hate on Jerry Hughes. Again wide receiver is not a need. Use a 4th on one at the highest. Investing high picks in receivers is a waste. 

[Colts_Fan12]

False on many accounts. Loved Landry, loved Cherilus. Loved the draft last year. Hate Walden. A guy who managed only 3 sacks last year with Clay Matthews getting triple teamed on the other side of him. Which says a lot about a guy I hate on Jerry Hughes. Again wide receiver is not a need. Use a 4th on one at the highest. Investing high picks in receivers is a waste.

Again as I said walden is to stop the RUN he was ranked 7th in stopping the run and Mathis will move to rush OLB you also don't think much of RJF but many teams wanted him ppl have said he will get a starting job this season and I like our WR but brazil isn't a #2 Ty is a slot WR and griff hasn't played 1 time not to mention we kinda need a little size to throw to I just think its way better to get a starting WR then a backup D player and a guard you can get later for sure

[Truckin Sanders]

Again as I said walden is to stop the RUN he was ranked 7th in stopping the run and Mathis will move to rush OLB you also don't think much of RJF but many teams wanted him ppl have said he will get a starting job this season and I like our WR but brazil isn't a #2 Ty is a slot WR and griff hasn't played 1 time not to mention we kinda need a little size to throw to I just think its way better to get a starting WR then a backup D player and a guard you can get later for sure

 

 

The Ravens won with a deep threat in Torrey Smith( TY Hilton) and a reliable veteran in Boldin( Reggie Wayne). There best receiver was probably Ray Rice. Also have a nice young pair of tight ends. Dominant o-line and a defense that when everyone was healthy made a pretty big difference. 

 

Lets look at the 49ers Crabtree(Wayne) a great pass catching running back again. They didn't even have a dominant number 2 receiver that belong to Gore or Davis. To go along with a dominant o-line and a dominant defense. 

 

So again we are just fine with allen, hilton, wayne, fleener, and brazil + late round pick.

 

You don't bring in 3-4 outside linebackers to stop the run and especially he needs to still be able to rush the passer which he has proven to be awful at

 

Edit: Again quarterbacks make receivers. If Tom Brady can win with Givens and whatever other garbage he had Luck will be just fine.

[Colts_Fan12]

The Ravens won with a deep threat in Torrey Smith( TY Hilton) and a reliable veteran in Boldin( Reggie Wayne). There best receiver was probably Ray Rice. Also have a nice young pair of tight ends. Dominant o-line and a defense that when everyone was healthy made a pretty big difference.

Lets look at the 49ers Crabtree(Wayne) a great pass catching running back again. They didn't even have a dominant number 2 receiver that belong to Gore or Davis. To go along with a dominant o-line and a dominant defense.

So again we are just fine with allen, hilton, wayne, fleener, and brazil + late round pick.

You don't bring in 3-4 outside linebackers to stop the run and especially he needs to still be able to rush the passer which he has proven to be awful at

The ravens D was better then ours they have a much better run game don't really prove anything and Ty is more of a slot WR and also the FO obviously wants a WR so it's a need then but as I said I feel better with getting a starter in the first over getting a back up

[Truckin Sanders]

The ravens D was better then ours they have a much better run game don't really prove anything and Ty is more of a slot WR and also the FO obviously wants a WR so it's a need then but as I said I feel better with getting a starter in the first over getting a back up

I think you are missing the obvious point. So if we maybe i dunno know improve our defense or line through the draft its as if they stand a good chance to get better. There is only 1 receiver i would find acceptable taking in the first and that is Tavon Austin. 

[Colts_Fan12]

I think you are missing the obvious point. So if we maybe i dunno know improve our defense or line through the draft its as if they stand a good chance to get better. There is only 1 receiver i would find acceptable taking in the first and that is Tavon Austin.

Well i think Grigson likes chapman redding will start of course and RJF as well plus the other guy we signed will play and we have depth on the d line Ik you don't like some of the players on the D or I line but Grigson and the FO wat I'm trying to say is all the FA we brought in are gonna start basically Ik that bothers some but that's how it is and I do think we need another starting guard but we can get one in the 3rd that will be an improvement plus we have that ijalana guy who if he's healthy this year could be good at the other guard spot I agree that we could go defense in the 1st and that player could be better then the starter but I think Grigson and Pagano like the ppl they have so they aren't planning on replacing them name someone you would want and wat position

[John Dee]

J Cooper...  or  B Jones...   

 

Would Warmack be too much to dream for.?     

Colts with the 24th pick select WR D. Hopkins. Unless one of the other two are there lol

[John Dee]

OT...   But JMV said today that Chapman is 1000% good to go.     

 

Ready to roll.....    Great news....

Well i think Grigson likes chapman redding will start of course and RJF as well plus the other guy we signed will play and we have depth on the d line Ik you don't like some of the players on the D or I line but Grigson and the FO wat I'm trying to say is all the FA we brought in are gonna start basically Ik that bothers some but that's how it is and I do think we need another starting guard but we can get one in the 3rd that will be an improvement plus we have that ijalana guy who if he's healthy this year could be good at the other guard spot I agree that we could go defense in the 1st and that player could be better then the starter but I think Grigson and Pagano like the ppl they have so they aren't planning on replacing them name someone you would want and wat position

[Colts_Fan12]

OT... But JMV said today that Chapman is 1000% good to go.

Ready to roll..... Great news....

That is great news I like chapman I think he will be a beast with him and RJF our d line is already alot better and redding is still good Franklin is too sure older but there not 50 plus they can help out the young guys

[Tyler Shaw]

J Cooper... or B Jones...

Would Warmack be too much to dream for.?

I would love Jones and he seems to be falling idk why he's seems like a colt guy

[Tyler Shaw]

I think you are missing the obvious point. So if we maybe i dunno know improve our defense or line through the draft its as if they stand a good chance to get better. There is only 1 receiver i would find acceptable taking in the first and that is Tavon Austin.

What another slot receiver ? Really we have 2 already