An Idea Just Crossed My Mind

[jvan1973]

and what if Luck looks at the Colts and goes I don't want to sit behind Peyton Manning for four years I am going back to school for my senior year?

Once he declares eligible for the draft he cant go back

[Steagles]

For San Fransisco, I would HAVE to demand Patrick Willis with some draft picks (their #1 obv., and some other misc.) and Kaepernick. Might be over the top, but if we get the pick, and they want Luck bad enough, theyll meet our demands.

[Jason_]

Ok let me start by asking..can luck play dt, lb, or cb?(sarcasm) cuz if he cant and manning can come back 100% healthy we are wasting our time with luck. In my opinion luck would be a wasted pick unless we knew peyton would never be the same. And I will also state if we take luck and he rides the bench behind peyton. Peyton will never get another ring. We need impact players on d right now. My perfect senario is to.trade that pic for clevlands two firsts. Why would clevland want luck? He fits their power run mode plus the have a strong oline. They will finish picking in the top ten. And atlanta will pick around twenty. With our first pick we take michael floyd wr nd. Big play reciever and ima make a statement that he'll be the best wr since cj jr came out. When our second pick we take either burfict lb arizona st. or manti teo lb nd. Both are big strong hard hitters. Those two picks will set this team up. 2nd round we take peter konz c wisc. Jeff saturday its time to hang em up. For my third round im gonna say we also aquired and extra one in the browns trade(maybe not possible but oh well its fun to think about). with our pick I take the best cb left. There should be.a talented one here. With the browns pick I take harrison smith s nd. This guy.has an eye for the.ball and is good in run support. 4th I take short nt purdue(not sure if this is too high or low for him). After this round.we just.pick to fill any need

We are of very similar minds. I am also salivating at the thought of getting cleveland's 2 first round picks and what we could do with them. Also based on what they gave up a few years ago to move up for Quinn and after seeing what Atlanta gave up to move up for Julio Jones, I certainly don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that we could get their 2 first round picks and a couple of later picks as well. Some people will argue that they're set at QB with Colt McCoy. If he has a bad year, in this "we want it and we want it now" era I think it is definitely possible they could pull the trigger on Andrew Luck. It may not be the most likely of all trade scenarios but it's not entirely impossible either.

One thing I disagree with is taking a WR in the first round and CB in the 3rd and I'll explain why. Given Manning's history of making good players look great and great players look elite, I don't think that an elite WR is necessary for our offense. Would it be great to have? Absolutely but there are other positions where the player can't be made better by Manning's play and CB is one of them. I would like to see an elite playmaking CB to give us a lot more flexibility in our defensive playcalling. With a guy who can play solid press man coverage, we can be a much better blitzing team. We put a lot of pressure on McCoy in the Browns game but he was able to avoid a sack due to his mobility and he was able to get off a throw under pressure. With playmakers in the secondary I think we'll see a lot more of those throws under pressure turn into interceptions. So I'd love to have a Dre Kirkpatrick in our secondary more than I'd like to have Floyd at WR. I have nothing against Floyd and in fact if it came down to picking an elite WR in the coming draft, it could be a coinflip between him and Jeffrey...I'm not sold on Blackmon yet.

I love the Harrison Smith pick but...whether we need a SS or not will depend on what we see out of Caldwell and Lefeged. If either of them prove they can be a playmaker as a starting safety then that no longer is an area of need. If we do enter the draft still looking for a safety though, Harrison Smith is my top choice. You couldn't ask for a player to be more of a clone of John Lynch.

Since we'll likely be picking at the top of the round instead of the bottom, then Kawann Short in the 4th round may be possible. Even if he's not though, there are several solid NT's that should be available in that area. I'd be more than happy with Short, Kendall Reyes Uconn, Jaye Howard Florida, and one site even has Josh Chapman Alabama in the same area as well. This is something we'll need to be mindful of on draft day...see how many of them are left when we pick in the third round and if several of them come off the board earlier than expected then I think we have to pull the trigger on the best one still available in the third round instead of waiting for the 4th.

[Jason_]

I still disagree with you. From what I've seen Luck is head and shoulders above the other college prospects at QB. Why would we want to settle for no. 2 or 3 when we are looking for the next franchise QB? Polian would probably just squander any extra draft picks anyway.

So what you are saying is that back in the year the Colts drafted Peyton, they should have traded down and added more players over taking Peyton? Beacuse that is what you would be doing by passing on Luck. QB's on that level come out not very often and to pass on him would just be foolish. As we see, a team must have a quality QB to compete.

This goes to both of you....I want to know why Luck is SO much better than the other 3-4 top prospects at QB. I have seen nothing from him that indicates he will hands down have the better future over guys like Barkley, Landry Jones, Nick Foles and Kirk Cousins. I've yet to hear any of the draft experts or analysts say the he will have the better career or that he is a better QB than the others. The only thing they continue to say over and over is that he is the most NFL ready QB of the group (the one factor that means nothing to us if Manning comes back) and THAT is why he will be the #1 pick.

So, specifically, what is it you two have seen from Luck that makes him far and away the only choice?

[Xfiles]

They would be foolish to not take Luck. Ensure your future, not just your present.

[Jason_]

They would be foolish to not take Luck. Ensure your future, not just your present.

Again...why? Why would it be foolish to take Luck over Matt Barkley, Landry Jones, Kirk Cousins or Nick Foles? What is it that makes Luck so much better and so much more special that he should unquestionably be taken #1 over those other prospects? And keep in mind that we're basing our assumptions at this point that Manning will return. Therefore "Luck is more pro ready" is simply not a valid reason for a team who would have him riding the bench for 2-4 years.

Also, what does that say to Manning, who intentionally took less money to give us more flexibility under the cap to make moves to build a better overall team now?

[oldunclemark]

Ok, I'll concede and say stranger things have happened, but I think he has accomplished what he went back for.

If he wont come here..then we're just Out of Luck

[Jason_]

If he wont come here..then we're just Out of Luck

+1 for awesome play on words lol

[GoColts8818]

They would be foolish to not take Luck. Ensure your future, not just your present.

and how long till the fans rip the front office for not addressing real needs and rip Polian for taking a QB who is going to do nothing but sit on the bench for four years? Knowing Colts fans about the first time a corner gave up TD or we gave up a first down rushing or we let the QB get sacked.

[MCurtis32]

Its time to think about the future. Wouldn't it be better to pick the best player in the draft, especially at the QB position, than to patch a team up with a number of players to give an aging Manning another shot at a superbowl. If you pick first in every round, the defensive problems could be fixed or improved at the same time. If you don't there will be a big let down sometime sooner than we think. What if the Colts had stuck with Harbaugh and traded away the first pick and built the team around him? Some how I see Jacksonville getting luck with Moore becoming OC and wipping our * for the next 15 years.

[Corndog]

Well the Colts have not sealed up the first round pick just yet, but if they do this is a tough situation. If Luck really is that much better than the other picks at QB and isn't someone you see every year, you have to take him. I don't know this and I really haven't seen him play enough to agree with this. On the other end, this team has alot of holes to fill and getting extra picks and a possible player could help this team out a great deal. As far as Luck sitting on the bench for 4 years, I wouldn't worry about that. If a push comes to shove, Manning's last two years on his contract are much lower and he would be very tradeable at that point if he is still healthy. Also there is a chance he might not be healthy and we will need to start Luck sooner.

[tfunky14]

A. Luck could end up like another Ryan Leaf.....remember him

[18Manning]

Sorry but if the Colts have the #1 pick they must take Luck, no questions asked. Any other move would be sheer stupidity.

I agree. We should take Luck and let Peyton start grooming him to take over.

[GoColts8818]

Once he declares eligible for the draft he cant go back

Exactly, he doesn't have to declare being eligible or not till after the draft picks are set up. He's not dumb, if he doesn't want to sit for four years he can look at the situation and just choose not to make himself eligible for the draft.

[pacolts56]

and how long till the fans rip the front office for not addressing real needs and rip Polian for taking a QB who is going to do nothing but sit on the bench for four years? Knowing Colts fans about the first time a corner gave up TD or we gave up a first down rushing or we let the QB get sacked.

Hey....thanks for the great news!!!

I'm thrilled that your able to guarantee that Peyton Manning will return to full health and finish his contract out.

You DID inform Peyton and his doctors, right? lol

[GoColts8818]

Hey....thanks for the great news!!!

I'm thrilled that your able to guarantee that Peyton Manning will return to full health and finish his contract out.

You DID inform Peyton and his doctors, right? lol

Read the whole thread, I have said it is something that COULD happen, I have never said for a fact that it WILL happen.

[pacolts56]

Read the whole thread, I have said it is something that COULD happen, I have never said for a fact that it WILL happen.

Chill out my man...just having a little fun.

Anything can happen...good or bad...we're just gonna have to sweat out the next 4-5 months.

[BOTT]

For San Fransisco, I would HAVE to demand Patrick Willis with some draft picks (their #1 obv., and some other misc.) and Kaepernick. Might be over the top, but if we get the pick, and they want Luck bad enough, theyll meet our demands.

it isn't over the top at all. 49ers would dump willis in a heartbeat for a chance to get luck. plus, the colts should want proven players, not a bunch of draft picks. peyton is what 36? who wants to depend on buch of rookies at this stage in his career?

not that any of this matters, luck is going to be a seahawk. and the 49ers could offer willis and vernon davis and the seahawks still wouldn't do the deal.

[BOTT]

Exactly. We'd need an entire offensive overhaul before we could attempt to put him in a similar situation to what he's in now. However a Landry Jones or Nick Foles both come from a more spread style offense which really is closer to what we run. Colts are working on becoming more balanced and being able to run the ball better but with the current personnel we're more of a passing team. We have no way of knowing how Luck would play if he came here where he wouldn't have the same power running game to rely on and the same elite type of offensive line. Our OL is getting better but it's gonna be a while before they'd be able to give Luck the type of protection he has now. So in that regard one could argue it would be more of a risk to bring him in as opposed to someone who's been under similar circumstances in college and still was able to perform at a high level.

Just something to think about, here are the top rated QB's and the help they get from their team's running game:

Andrew Luck, Stanford, 5.4 ypc, 196 yards per game

Matt Barkley, USC, 3.9 ypc, 131 yards per game

Landry Jones, Oklahoma, 4.2 ypc, 179 yards per game

Kirk Cousins, Michigan St, 3.5 ypc, 125 yards per game

Ryan Tannehill, Texas A&M, 4.6 ypc, 176 yards per game

Robert Griffin, Baylor, 6.3 ypc, 208 yards per game

Brandon Wheeden, Oklahoma St, 4.7 ypc, 193 yards per game

Nick Foles, Arizona, 2.6 ypc, 56 yards per game

Kellen Moore, Boise St, 3.7 ypc, 137 yards per game

All of these quarterbacks are getting it done and that's why they're all so highly rated. However, some of them are clearly getting more help than others. How would Griffin, Wheeden or Luck fare if their teams weren't rushing the ball for ~200 yards every game?

is that just for this year or their entire college careers? if it's just this year, that is a very small sample size.

[Jason_]

is that just for this year or their entire college careers? if it's just this year, that is a very small sample size.

Yes that is from this year so far through 3 games. Here are numbers for last year:

Andrew Luck: 263/372, 70.7%, 3338 yards, 32 TD, 8 Int, Sacked 6 times

Stanford Rushing: 535 rushes, 2779 yards, 5.2 ypc, 213.8 yards per game

Matt Barkley: 236/377, 62.6%, 2791 yards, 26 TD, 12 Int, Sacked 16 times

USC Rushing: 477 rushes, 2461 yards, 5.2 ypc, 189.3 yards per game

Landry Jones: 405/617, 65.6%, 4718 yards, 38 TD, 12 Int, sacked 19 times

Oklahoma Rushing: 578 rushes, 1932 yards, 3.3 ypc, 138.0 yards per game

Kirk Cousins: 226/338, 66.9%, 2825 yards, 20 TD, 10 Int, sacked 20 times

Michigan St Rushing: 444 rushes, 1978 yards, 4.5 ypc, 152.2 yards per game

Ryan Tannehill: 152/234, 65.0%, 1638 yards, 13 TD, 6 Int, sacked 12 times

Texas A&M Rushing: 519 rushes, 2145 yards, 4.1 ypc, 165.0 yards per game

Robert Griffin: 304/454, 67.0%, 3501 yards, 22 TD, 8 Int, sacked 20 times

Baylor Rushing: 468 rushes, 2530 yards, 5.4 ypc, 194.6 yards per game

Brandon Wheeden: 342/511, 66.9%, 4277 yards, 34 TD, 13 Int, sacked 8 times

Oklahoma St Rushing: 450 rushes, 2267 yards, 5.0 ypc, 174.7 yards per game

Nick Foles: 286/426, 67.1%, 3191 yards, 20 TD, 10 Int, sacked 23 times

Arizona Rushing: 435 rushes, 1712 yards, 3.9 ypc, 131.7 yards per game

Kellen Moore: 273/383, 71.3%, 3845 yards, 35 TD, 6 Int, sacked 6 times

Boise St Rushing: 485 rushes, 2603 yards, 5.4 ypc, 200.2 yards per game

Of all of them, Andrew Luck got the most help from the running game while Landry Jones and Nick Foles got the least from theirs. Luck was also sacked the least.

[Xfiles]

Again...why? Why would it be foolish to take Luck over Matt Barkley, Landry Jones, Kirk Cousins or Nick Foles? What is it that makes Luck so much better and so much more special that he should unquestionably be taken #1 over those other prospects? And keep in mind that we're basing our assumptions at this point that Manning will return. Therefore "Luck is more pro ready" is simply not a valid reason for a team who would have him riding the bench for 2-4 years.

Also, what does that say to Manning, who intentionally took less money to give us more flexibility under the cap to make moves to build a better overall team now?

Because Luck is Better, and smarter than all those players you mentioned. He is the most likely to be able to step in and run the type of offense we run here, and if you just pass on him when you had the chance to get him, you would be kicking yourself later.

Go colts, to answer your question, the perception of our front office in the eyes of fans and media means nothing to me. I am a football fan, not a media member, player, or coach.

[pacolts56]

Yes that is from this year so far through 3 games. Here are numbers for last year:

Andrew Luck: 263/372, 70.7%, 3338 yards, 32 TD, 8 Int, Sacked 6 times

Stanford Rushing: 535 rushes, 2779 yards, 5.2 ypc, 213.8 yards per game

Matt Barkley: 236/377, 62.6%, 2791 yards, 26 TD, 12 Int, Sacked 16 times

USC Rushing: 477 rushes, 2461 yards, 5.2 ypc, 189.3 yards per game

Landry Jones: 405/617, 65.6%, 4718 yards, 38 TD, 12 Int, sacked 19 times

Oklahoma Rushing: 578 rushes, 1932 yards, 3.3 ypc, 138.0 yards per game

Kirk Cousins: 226/338, 66.9%, 2825 yards, 20 TD, 10 Int, sacked 20 times

Michigan St Rushing: 444 rushes, 1978 yards, 4.5 ypc, 152.2 yards per game

Ryan Tannehill: 152/234, 65.0%, 1638 yards, 13 TD, 6 Int, sacked 12 times

Texas A&M Rushing: 519 rushes, 2145 yards, 4.1 ypc, 165.0 yards per game

Robert Griffin: 304/454, 67.0%, 3501 yards, 22 TD, 8 Int, sacked 20 times

Baylor Rushing: 468 rushes, 2530 yards, 5.4 ypc, 194.6 yards per game

Brandon Wheeden: 342/511, 66.9%, 4277 yards, 34 TD, 13 Int, sacked 8 times

Oklahoma St Rushing: 450 rushes, 2267 yards, 5.0 ypc, 174.7 yards per game

Nick Foles: 286/426, 67.1%, 3191 yards, 20 TD, 10 Int, sacked 23 times

Arizona Rushing: 435 rushes, 1712 yards, 3.9 ypc, 131.7 yards per game

Kellen Moore: 273/383, 71.3%, 3845 yards, 35 TD, 6 Int, sacked 6 times

Boise St Rushing: 485 rushes, 2603 yards, 5.4 ypc, 200.2 yards per game

Of all of them, Andrew Luck got the most help from the running game while Landry Jones and Nick Foles got the least from theirs. Luck was also sacked the least.

Isn't it also possible that Luck's low sack totals are the result of quicker decision making....and that his skillset commands more respect from opposing defenses, and consequently, the Stanford ground game actually benefits considerably from HIS abilities?

[Balzer40]

Isn't it also possible that Luck's low sack totals are the result of quicker decision making....and that his skillset commands more respect from opposing defenses, and consequently, the Stanford ground game actually benefits considerably from HIS abilities?

This is exactly right! What people are looking at are solely stats and from a physical talent standpoint, most of the other top QB's are probably pretty close to Luck, but people aren't seeing the big picture. I laugh when I hear somebody say that Luck has more help around him than the other QB's, Thats completely ridiculous!

Stanford is not exactly a football powerhouse, In fact this is the reason why all the scouts say Luck is much better than his stats would say(even though there still the best). Luck does not have top level RB or WR talent around him. Anybody that says he does simply has not ever watched Stanford football.

Stanford in many ways is like the Colts. Manning has had to carry the Colts and make mediocre players look much better than they really are. Luck has done much the same for Stanford. Again, this is what sets him apart from the other QB's. He's not surrounded by NFL level talent like a Landry Jones or Matt Barkley. If you take Luck off that Stanford team they fall off the radar and become a less than mediocre team.

[mouthofsouth]

The most logical thing for the Colts to do if they get the no. 1 pick and can draft a potentially great qb, like Luck, is to keep him and have him understudy Manning, completely learning the Colts system before he is turned loose. That could take several years, since the Colts offense is supposedly so complex. I know that may do great damage to the salary cap, but somehow Green Bay pulled it off when they drafted Rodgers.

[pacolts56]

This is exactly right! What people are looking at are solely stats and from a physical talent standpoint, most of the other top QB's are probably pretty close to Luck, but people aren't seeing the big picture. I laugh when I hear somebody say that Luck has more help around him than the other QB's, Thats completely ridiculous!

Stanford is not exactly a football powerhouse, In fact this is the reason why all the scouts say Luck is much better than his stats would say(even though there still the best). Luck does not have top level RB or WR talent around him. Anybody that says he does simply has not ever watched Stanford football.

Stanford in many ways is like the Colts. Manning has had to carry the Colts and make mediocre players look much better than they really are. Luck has done much the same for Stanford. Again, this is what sets him apart from the other QB's. He's not surrounded by NFL level talent like a Landry Jones or Matt Barkley. If you take Luck off that Stanford team they fall off the radar and become a less than mediocre team.

Another very good point....you don't weasel your way onto the Stanford football team without maintaining some very challenging academic standards.

A claim that VERY few major football programs can make.

[Jason_]

Isn't it also possible that Luck's low sack totals are the result of quicker decision making....and that his skillset commands more respect from opposing defenses, and consequently, the Stanford ground game actually benefits considerably from HIS abilities?

If Stanford lined up primarily in 1 back sets with multiple WR's, then I would agree that your theory would likely be correct. However, they line up in goal line type formations all over the field. I've watched them run a full drive from a 3 TE/2 RB set without a single WR on the field. They are a power running team first and a passing team second.

The most logical thing for the Colts to do if they get the no. 1 pick and can draft a potentially great qb, like Luck, is to keep him and have him understudy Manning, completely learning the Colts system before he is turned loose. That could take several years, since the Colts offense is supposedly so complex. I know that may do great damage to the salary cap, but somehow Green Bay pulled it off when they drafted Rodgers.

Rodgers was a very different scenario. He was not considered pro-ready coming out of college. He had some work to do on his mechanics (footwork, throwing motion, etc). THAT is why Green Bay was able to draft him at the end of the first round. If he had been as pro-ready as people claim Luck to be then he would have also gone in the top 5 and would have been likely starting from day 1.

name='XfilesBecause Luck is Better, and smarter than all those players you mentioned. He is the most likely to be able to step in and run the type of offense we run here, and if you just pass on him when you had the chance to get him, you would be kicking yourself later.

This is simply not true. The Stanford offense is nothing like the Colts offense...in fact they are about as opposite as you can get. Stanford has Jason Whitten type TE's who are big, strong and are great blockers but are also good receivers. Our primary TE's are more finesse guys who are often described as oversized WR's. They are receivers first and blockers second. Stanford runs out of multiple power sets using multiple blocking TE's and multiple backs. The Colts run mostly out of 1 back sets. When we use 2 TE sets it's usually 1 blocking TE (Eldridge/McNeill) and one receiving TE (Clark/Tamme). I am not in any way saying Luck couldn't come in and run our offense, but to say he's the most likely to be able to step in and run our offense is simply not true.

The type of offense we run is closer to a college spread offense. Yes the Colts are trying to establish more balance, but with the type of receivers and TE's we have, we will always be more of a finesse team than a power running team. Therefore imo guys like Landry Jones or Nick Foles would be a better fit because they're used to running a more pass-oriented, spread style offense.

[pacolts56]

If Stanford lined up primarily in 1 back sets with multiple WR's, then I would agree that your theory would likely be correct. However, they line up in goal line type formations all over the field. I've watched them run a full drive from a 3 TE/2 RB set without a single WR on the field. They are a power running team first and a passing team second.

Alright, let's look a little deeper into his stats....

http://www.cfbstats.com/2010/player/674/1018393/passing/situational.html

When we do, we first of all see that Andrew Luck passed for 3300+ yards with 32 TDs and 8 INTs out of a well-balanced, pro-style offense.....and not the spread offense that most of those other QB prospects operate. Not only that, but he attempted and completed far more of his passes in the 1st half of games...and as the following link shows, the Stanford rushing attack progressively added carries in each QTR, no doubt the result of comfortable 1st half leads where Luck did most of his business.

http://www.cfbstats.com/2010/team/674/rushing/offense/situational.html

And Luck clearly shows the ability to distribute the ball in many directions, hardly limited to his TEs, because he distributed the majority of his passes to WRs.....

WR Doug Baldwin - 58 rec

WR Ryan Whalen - 41 rec

TE Coby Fleener - 28 rec

RB Stepfan Taylor - 28 rec

WR Chris Owusu - 25 rec

TE Konrad Reuland - 21 rec

WR Griff Whalen - 17 rec

TE Zach Ertz - 16 rec

FB Owen Marecic - 9 rec

Jason....your preference to trade-down the 1st overall pick, should we wind up with it, certainly has merit in that we'd likely get a very high premium from whoever wants Andrew Luck. If Seattle or someone else comes knockin' with two 1st rounders and two 2nd rounders...then we have a heck of a decision to make.

Short of that scenario, there are a good number of those who think Luck will be a legitimate NFL franchise QB, and would like to see him take the QB reigns after Peyton retires....and most definitely so if Peyton cannot regain his old form, which we all hope is not the case.

[Jason_]

Short of that scenario, there are a good number of those who think Luck will be a legitimate NFL franchise QB, and would like to see him take the QB reigns after Peyton retires....and most definitely so if Peyton cannot regain his old form, which we all hope is not the case.

I know that a majority of my posts make it sound like I am actually anti-Luck and that's simply not the case. I do believe he will be a top-level QB in the NFL. The only point I've been trying to make is that he's not the only QB prospect who will probably become a top-level QB. So many people are treating it like it's either Andrew Luck or bust but that's simply not the case. Landry Jones, Nick Foles and Ryan Tannehill also have outstanding potential, especially if some of the minor issues with their mechanics can be fixed with coaching...which is entirely possible and I would even say probable.

So, if the have the #1 overall pick and are going to take a QB in the first round, then I would still prefer we trade down, acquire a lot of extra picks and then take one of the other top prospects.

I also never meant to imply that I think Luck's success is exclusively due to the situation he's in. I'm merely saying that a lot of people use the "spread offense equals inflated stats" against QB's like Jones and Foles, and that the argument could be made that Luck's success could also at least partly be due to the situation he's in.

Hopefully that clears some things up regarding to how I feel about Luck.

**EDIT...one thing I was trying to find earlier is the number of yards after catch the Stanford receivers have. I was trying to figure out what percentage of the passing yardage comes from short passes that the receiver turns into big plays and how often Luck tries to go downfield. Unfortunately I tried a few different sites and couldn't find yac stats....if you happen to know of a site that provides this I'd be very interested.

[pacolts56]

Hopefully that clears some things up regarding to how I feel about Luck.

**EDIT...one thing I was trying to find earlier is the number of yards after catch the Stanford receivers have. I was trying to figure out what percentage of the passing yardage comes from short passes that the receiver turns into big plays and how often Luck tries to go downfield. Unfortunately I tried a few different sites and couldn't find yac stats....if you happen to know of a site that provides this I'd be very interested.

It's all good....the poor feller who does eventually come in after Peyton will have his hands full but we'll all be rooting for him whoever he is.

As far as YAC....I couldn't find that info, but it does look like all of those Stanford guys had pretty nice average per catch numbers with 4 of the top 5 targeted guys all coming in around 15 yards per catch.

[Jason_]

It's all good....the poor feller who does eventually come in after Peyton will have his hands full but we'll all be rooting for him whoever he is.

As far as YAC....I couldn't find that info, but it does look like all of those Stanford guys had pretty nice average per catch numbers with 4 of the top 5 targeted guys all coming in around 15 yards per catch.

Agreed...Peyton's successor, yeah talk about some big shoes to fill. lol

AS for the YAC, the main reason I wanted to check it is to get a better idea of, like I said, how much he really goes down field. In the Stanford/Arizona game alone I saw several plays where the pass was for maybe 10 yards but because the defense bit so hard on the play action, it turned into a 50-60 yard TD. I just like to have as much information as I can when discussing things like this because I know there will be a few people who say "well yeah but he throws over 300 yards per game in a pro style offense so he's obviously the best QB ever!"

I'm definitely not saying he's not talented and won't be a great QB, but some people think that he will be solely on something they heard someone say or from a superficial look at the stats. I think it's very obvious you're not one of those people and you know that it takes more than just a glance at the total numbers to get a true feel for how good he will be. And, like I said, I know that the way I come off sometimes makes it sound like I'm totally against Luck (been mentioned in a couple different threads) but that really isn't the case. I just don't think any of the QB's, Luck included, would be worth us taking in the #1 overall spot based on other needs we have as well and also based on the understanding that Manning is able to return.

[MAC]

If we were to trade the first pick overall for multiple picks, the odds are that some of them will be in future years. I've previously spun this as a negative because "the future is now" with Peyton getting older. However a future first round pick from a perpetual league bottom feeder with a lousy front office may be exactly what the doctor ordered.

So all you draft gurus out there, does anyone know who will be available in the draft of 2014 or 15?

[Jason_]

If we were to trade the first pick overall for multiple picks, the odds are that some of them will be in future years. I've previously spun this as a negative because "the future is now" with Peyton getting older. However a future first round pick from a perpetual league bottom feeder with a lousy front office may be exactly what the doctor ordered.

So all you draft gurus out there, does anyone know who will be available in the draft of 2014 or 15?

I'll tell you this, if we could wind up with 2 first round draft picks next year and decided to use them to trade up for someone then I would have no problem doing that for Marcus Lattimore, RB from South Carolina. Honestly, the closest player I can think of to compare him to is Emmitt Smith. Lattimore has great (not elite) speed, great power (again, not elite) and excellent vision. He's a tough, durable back that can carry the ball 25-30 times per game without taking much wear and tear for it.

The other thing is, you never know how the team you trade with will do the following year. If we trade with someone who's say 4-8 this year, there's no guarantee they'll play better next year. Injuries could occur, Luck could have more growing pains than it's expected he'll have, etc etc. We could conceivably wind up with a top 5 pick next year too.

[LiveColtsFootball]

Sorry but if the Colts have the #1 pick they must take Luck, no questions asked. Any other move would be sheer stupidity.

Everything about what u just typed is sheer stupidity!

[MAC]

The other thing is, you never know how the team you trade with will do the following year. If we trade with someone who's say 4-8 this year, there's no guarantee they'll play better next year. Injuries could occur, Luck could have more growing pains than it's expected he'll have, etc etc. We could conceivably wind up with a top 5 pick next year too.

Exact-eratully. Some teams just can't get out of their own way. They aren't likely to turn around quickly, particularly if they send us all their high draft picks!

[Jason_]

Exact-eratully. Some teams just can't get out of their own way. They aren't likely to turn around quickly, particularly if they send us all their high draft picks!

Exactly, and then there's always the incredibly rare scenario that even a top team stumbles. If we had made a trade with another team to move up and gave up our first round pick this year....who would have ever imagined that'd turn into a top 5 pick? lol

Speaking of...imagine if Polian did make a bold move last year to move up for someone, like he did for Ugoh, giving up this year's first round pick thinking no more of it than he did back then. With everything that's happened, that had happened he'd have traded away a potential top 5 pick.....how much of a field day would the Polian haters have had with that? lol

[MAC]

Speaking of...imagine if Polian did make a bold move last year to move up for someone, like he did for Ugoh, giving up this year's first round pick thinking no more of it than he did back then. With everything that's happened, that had happened he'd have traded away a potential top 5 pick.....how much of a field day would the Polian haters have had with that? lol

My head hurts - that's too horrible to even contemplate.

I detest trading future draft picks. I was beside myself in the 80's when the Colts did it. Back then WE were the bottom feeder with the lousy front office.

[BOTT]

I'll tell you this, if we could wind up with 2 first round draft picks next year and decided to use them to trade up for someone then I would have no problem doing that for Marcus Lattimore, RB from South Carolina. Honestly, the closest player I can think of to compare him to is Emmitt Smith. Lattimore has great (not elite) speed, great power (again, not elite) and excellent vision. He's a tough, durable back that can carry the ball 25-30 times per game without taking much wear and tear for it.

The other thing is, you never know how the team you trade with will do the following year. If we trade with someone who's say 4-8 this year, there's no guarantee they'll play better next year. Injuries could occur, Luck could have more growing pains than it's expected he'll have, etc etc. We could conceivably wind up with a top 5 pick next year too.

for a running back?? i'm almost to the point to where i wouldn't take ANY running back in the first round, let alone trade up for one.

[Dtman513]

Gotta grab Luck.....

[Jason_]

for a running back?? i'm almost to the point to where i wouldn't take ANY running back in the first round, let alone trade up for one.

999/1000 times I'd agree with you. If there were a back to, at the very least make me consider it, then it's Marcus Lattimore.

[GoColts8818]

Gotta grab Luck.....

I think there have been plunty of cases made that say no you don't. I think one thing is for sure though, if we get the number one pick people are going to complain about what Polian does no matter what.