Eddie Lacy reminds me so much of an ex Colt great

[BlueShoe]

Well I think everybody that has posted in the thread besides Blueshoe has summed it up pretty well. RB's are a waste of a pick early in the draft. We don't need one and I hate the excuse of, "well what happens if so and so gets injured" teams that draft because they're afraid of injury at a certain position, are teams that fail. 

 

We are talking about a late first, which gives an option for an extra year under a very cap friendly rookie scale. I t doesn't matter who agrees with us on a message board. In the end, it is what the Colts management believes is best for the team.

 

If Ballard goes down is a good question for the Colts management to ask in draft meetings as I am sure they are.

[BlueShoe]

When the Colts won the SB Glenn was playing...along with Jake Scott....it was a good line

 

We were not discussing our Super Bowl year. We were talking about the years after Glenn retired.

[BlueShoe]

No, Peyton and Edge had the best line in the league in 2004 and 2005 (irregardless Peyton throwing them under the bus vs. Steelers in playoffs).

 

 

C 63 Jeff Saturday 5 29 6-2 292 North Carolina    RG 73 Jake Scott 0 23 6-5 283 Idaho   RG 56 Tupe Peko 1 26 6-4 305 Michigan St.    LG 65 Ryan Lilja 0 23 6-2 285 Kansas St.    LG 64 Rick DeMulling 3 27 6-4 304 Idaho     RT 71 Ryan Diem 3 25 6-6 331 Northern Illinois    LT 78 Tarik Glenn 7 28 6-5 332 California

 

With Marcus Pollard, Dallas Clark, and Ben Hartsock at TE.  Lilja was the rookie backup to DeMulling then.

 

Peyton set passing records in 2004 behind these guys, and Edge benefited greatly too.  I'm hoping we build something similar here soon for Luck, Brown/Ballard!  Go BPA  (not RB) in draft Grigson!

 

We were not talking about our O-Line when we won the Super Bowl. I am not sure anyone is arguing with you about the line when Glenn was still playing. After he retired our line started to go downhill every year.

[BOTT]

We were not discussing our Super Bowl year. We were talking about the years after Glenn retired.

You responded to a post I made about the colts running game when they won the SB

[ColtsBlueFL]

We were not talking about our O-Line when we won the Super Bowl. I am not sure anyone is arguing with you about the line when Glenn was still playing. After he retired our line started to go downhill every year.

 

Edge never played on a Colts O line without Tarik Glenn.  Point is is then either irrelevant or moot.  

[ColtsBlueFL]

We were not talking about our O-Line when we won the Super Bowl. I am not sure anyone is arguing with you about the line when Glenn was still playing. After he retired our line started to go downhill every year.

 

We were so, it came from here-

 

 

Posted Yesterday, 11:29 PM

BLOODontheTRACKS, on 26 Mar 2013 - 00:30, said:

I don't miss Edge at all. After Edge left, the Colts won the SB behind the running of the incomparable duo of Addai and Rhodes. Running backs are a dime a dozen

BlueShoe

**We ran the ball on trickery by fooling defenses. You can thank Peyton for that success.**

 

It was then BoTT and myself responded.  Then you change the statement to after Edge's line of 2004 or Addai/Rhodes line of 2006 where Peyton and the backs had field days.  Any back would have suffered the same fate.  We lost a lot of those guys off that O line and their drafted replacements were flops.  Of course we have been bad running since then. Many of us are surprised at the production at times of some the backs despite this... Peyton trickery, possibly but it wasn't enough in any event.

 

[cbear]

If Grigs truly goes with BPA, he may take Lacy.  If he goes with a need position, no way.  Almost every position outside of QB is a bigger need. 

[Pombi9]

MAYBE, looks like Edge after he tore his ACL.

Does NOT at ALL, look like videos of Edj at the U or his rookie year.

[BlueShoe]

We were so, it came from here-

 

 

Posted Yesterday, 11:29 PM

BLOODontheTRACKS, on 26 Mar 2013 - 00:30, said:

BlueShoe

**We ran the ball on trickery by fooling defenses. You can thank Peyton for that success.**

 

It was then BoTT and myself responded.  Then you change the statement to after Edge's line of 2004 or Addai/Rhodes line of 2006 where Peyton and the backs had field days.  Any back would have suffered the same fate.  We lost a lot of those guys off that O line and their drafted replacements were flops.  Of course we have been bad running since then. Many of us are surprised at the production at times of some the backs despite this... Peyton trickery, possibly but it wasn't enough in any event.

 

 

After 2002, our offensive line was a better pass blocking line than run blocking and this trend continued until we also couldn't pass block. If anyone here disagrees with that then they were not paying attention, at all. We became a finesse offensive line and we won most of our running battles because we fooled defenses and utilized the stretch play with a lot of play action. We haven't had a dominate run blocking line since mid 2001 when we had a combination of a healthy Edgerrin, Steve McKinney, and Adam Meadows was healthy and still a Colt. As soon as Edgerrin got the power back in his knee then Meadows health started to fail.

 

Our offensive line throughout the Peyton years were at its best when we had this lineup:

 

Tarik Glenn, Steve McKinney, Jeff Saturday, Larry More, Adam Meadows.

 

In 2002, DeMulling and Diem replaced McKinney and Moore and yes losing McKinney was a HUGE downgrade, and this started a downhill spiral in our running game, in which Peyton had to be creative for our running game to be successful. Remember the line shift in 2002 when we moved DeMulling to LG and Diem to RT? If you lived it on a Colts message board then you will never forget it.

 

After 2004, we lost DeMulling and our guards were Lilja and Scott. Do you believe that was a dominate run blocking line? If so then I don't know what you were watching.

 

After 2007, we lost Glenn and that is when the average Colts fan began to realize our running game was becoming inadequate at best. This is when Peyton really had to turn up the trickery for us to successfully running the ball.

 

Other than drawing this out for you in crayons, there is not really much more I can do to help you understand this. I have already spent more time educating you with this than I care to. If I spend anymore time then I am sending you a bill.

 

If anyone here thinks we absolutely will not use our #24 pick on a running back then I don't know what has been passed in this circle, as I have been gone for about a year or so, but you guys are highly mistaken. I am not saying that we will use our #24 on a RB, but I am not discounting it because you believe that "RB's are a dime a dozen". That is just crazy talk. You have to draft game breakers when the opportunity is there. If Grigson believes that Lacy is a game breaker then he will draft him, and it won't matter what anyone on a message board says. I am sure that half the people in this thread will change their tune at that point though, and say they were always in favor of drafting Lacy, because that is what happens on message boards. I have watched it happen for nearly 20 years.

[Andy]

Is it just me or is this the 3rd guy that has been compared to Edge (linked or playing on the Colts).

 

First it was Javarris James,

then it was Ballard, who by the way is the reason why RB is not a need right now. I'd bet he gets over 1000 next year, especially with the Colts going to a power running game.

then there's Lacy. 

 

If Lacy is there at 24, the only the Colts should do is look away. 

[BOTT]

After 2002, our offensive line was a better pass blocking line than run blocking and this trend continued until we also couldn't pass block. If anyone here disagrees with that then they were not paying attention, at all. We became a finesse offensive line and we won most of our running battles because we fooled defenses and utilized the stretch play with a lot of play action. We haven't had a dominate run blocking line since mid 2001 when we had a combination of a healthy Edgerrin, Steve McKinney, and Adam Meadows was healthy and still a Colt. As soon as Edgerrin got the power back in his knee then Meadows health started to fail.

 

Our offensive line throughout the Peyton years were at its best when we had this lineup:

 

Tarik Glenn, Steve McKinney, Jeff Saturday, Larry More, Adam Meadows.

 

In 2002, DeMulling and Diem replaced McKinney and Moore and yes losing McKinney was a HUGE downgrade, and this started a downhill spiral in our running game, in which Peyton had to be creative for our running game to be successful. Remember the line shift in 2002 when we moved DeMulling to LG and Diem to RT? If you lived it on a Colts message board then you will never forget it.

 

After 2004, we lost DeMulling and our guards were Lilja and Scott. Do you believe that was a dominate run blocking line? If so then I don't know what you were watching.

 

After 2007, we lost Glenn and that is when the average Colts fan began to realize our running game was becoming inadequate at best. This is when Peyton really had to turn up the trickery for us to successfully running the ball.

 

Other than drawing this out for you in crayons, there is not really much more I can do to help you understand this. I have already spent more time educating you with this than I care to. If I spend anymore time then I am sending you a bill.

 

If anyone here thinks we absolutely will not use our #24 pick on a running back then I don't know what has been passed in this circle, as I have been gone for about a year or so, but you guys are highly mistaken. I am not saying that we will use our #24 on a RB, but I am not discounting it because you believe that "RB's are a dime a dozen". That is just crazy talk. You have to draft game breakers when the opportunity is there. If Grigson believes that Lacy is a game breaker then he will draft him, and it won't matter what anyone on a message board says. I am sure that half the people in this thread will change their tune at that point though, and say they were always in favor of drafting Lacy, because that is what happens on message boards. I have watched it happen for nearly 20 years.

U disagree with me = you are stupid. Gotcha

[schwamm]

After 2002, our offensive line was a better pass blocking line than run blocking and this trend continued until we also couldn't pass block. If anyone here disagrees with that then they were not paying attention, at all. We became a finesse offensive line and we won most of our running battles because we fooled defenses and utilized the stretch play with a lot of play action. We haven't had a dominate run blocking line since mid 2001 when we had a combination of a healthy Edgerrin, Steve McKinney, and Adam Meadows was healthy and still a Colt. As soon as Edgerrin got the power back in his knee then Meadows health started to fail.

Our offensive line throughout the Peyton years were at its best when we had this lineup:

Tarik Glenn, Steve McKinney, Jeff Saturday, Larry More, Adam Meadows.

In 2002, DeMulling and Diem replaced McKinney and Moore and yes losing McKinney was a HUGE downgrade, and this started a downhill spiral in our running game, in which Peyton had to be creative for our running game to be successful. Remember the line shift in 2002 when we moved DeMulling to LG and Diem to RT? If you lived it on a Colts message board then you will never forget it.

After 2004, we lost DeMulling and our guards were Lilja and Scott. Do you believe that was a dominate run blocking line? If so then I don't know what you were watching.

After 2007, we lost Glenn and that is when the average Colts fan began to realize our running game was becoming inadequate at best. This is when Peyton really had to turn up the trickery for us to successfully running the ball.

Other than drawing this out for you in crayons, there is not really much more I can do to help you understand this. I have already spent more time educating you with this than I care to. If I spend anymore time then I am sending you a bill.

If anyone here thinks we absolutely will not use our #24 pick on a running back then I don't know what has been passed in this circle, as I have been gone for about a year or so, but you guys are highly mistaken. I am not saying that we will use our #24 on a RB, but I am not discounting it because you believe that "RB's are a dime a dozen". That is just crazy talk. You have to draft game breakers when the opportunity is there. If Grigson believes that Lacy is a game breaker then he will draft him, and it won't matter what anyone on a message board says. I am sure that half the people in this thread will change their tune at that point though, and say they were always in favor of drafting Lacy, because that is what happens on message boards. I have watched it happen for nearly 20 years.

So to make sure my less informed fan-ship and slower mind is following along as best as possible...

The line had been terrible for years... so the team needs to add a running back?

I certainly appreciate your thorough recitation of the history of the OLine. Certainly nothing new or earth shattering, just a reasonably accurate accounting. Where I don't follow is your non-sequitur you wish to use as a conclusion.

If you want to say the RBs struggle, so fix the OLine, I can follow the logic.

If you want to say the OLine is terrible, so upgrade at one or more positions there, that makes sense.

But to say the OLine struggles, so we should add a RB, as if that would address a problem on the line... That logic may need more explanation.

[BlueShoe]

So to make sure my less informed fan-ship and slower mind is following along as best as possible...

The line had been terrible for years... so the team needs to add a running back?

I certainly appreciate your thorough recitation of the history of the OLine. Certainly nothing new or earth shattering, just a reasonably accurate accounting. Where I don't follow is your non-sequitur you wish to use as a conclusion.

If you want to say the RBs struggle, so fix the OLine, I can follow the logic.

If you want to say the OLine is terrible, so upgrade at one or more positions there, that makes sense.

But to say the OLine struggles, so we should add a RB, as if that would address a problem on the line... That logic may need more explanation.

 

The O-Line is in better shape right now than it has been in years. We have invested serious money in a RT free agent, drafted a LT a few years back, and brought in several new faces on the OL. We haven't brought in a big name free agent tackle (for a player that wasn't our own) since plan b free agency, and Tobin drafted Glenn and Meadows, although he never receives the recognition for them or Harrison.

 

The funny thing is that I was making a case that we needed to upgrade our offensive line 3 years ago on this forum, and I was met with the same distaste as I am seeing in this thread. We ended up drafting OL with picks 1 and 2 against everyone's wishes (except mine), just as I said we would and was ridiculed for. We have taken steps even further by bringing in free agents, and now people are screaming that we need OL? Makes no sense to me. We have invested in the line - Plenty! If we see a game changer in this draft then we have to pull the trigger. I am sure Grigson is going to draft the player that he feels is best for the team. Everything else is just fans on a message board - beating their chests.

[schwamm]

The O-Line is in better shape right now than it has been in years. We have invested serious money in a RT free agent, drafted a LT a few years back, and brought in several new faces on the OL. We haven't brought in a big name free agent tackle (for a player that wasn't our own) since plan b free agency, and Tobin drafted Glenn and Meadows, although he never receives the recognition for them or Harrison.

The funny thing is that I was making a case that we needed to upgrade our offensive line 3 years ago on this forum, and I was met with the same distaste as I am seeing in this thread. We ended up drafting OL with picks 1 and 2 against everyone's wishes (except mine), just as I said we would and was ridiculed for. We have taken steps even further by bringing in free agents, and now people are screaming that we need OL? Makes no sense to me. We have invested in the line - Plenty! If we see a game changer in this draft then we have to pull the trigger. I am sure Grigson is going to draft the player that he feels is best for the team. Everything else is just fans on a message board - beating their chests.

I was begging for OLine several years ago, thought we'd go that direction in the draft, and endured ridicule then too.

So now that a more serious attempt has been made to address the line, let's take a minute to see what the Colts actually have in the backfield before getting all knee-jerky.

Looks like we agree on the history, but draw radically different conclusions from the info at hand. I still say Grigs is all about value, and value is much harder to find at RB in the first round.

[BlueShoe]

I was begging for OLine several years ago, thought we'd go that direction in the draft, and endured ridicule then too.

So now that a more serious attempt has been made to address the line, let's take a minute to see what the Colts actually have in the backfield before getting all knee-jerky.

Looks like we agree on the history, but draw radically different conclusions from the info at hand. I still say Grigs is all about value, and value is much harder to find at RB in the first round.

 

Grigson is a very good talent evaluator and he has done enough in his first draft that he gained my respect quickly. I think many people are looking into RB's drafted in the first round as a negative thing, because of the past. In today's rookie contract scale, and with the extra year given for a first round pic, and with most teams utilizing a RB by committee approach; we are going to see RB's taken in the mid to late first round more often. The value is there because the rules have changed.

 

The issue I have with most of the responses in this thread is how so many people believe that we can draft a RB anywhere in the draft and be successful. To me; that is nonsense. It doesn't work that way. Teams have been lucky to find RB talent late in the drafts, but most of the later RB picks never work out. That said, not all first round pick RB's work out either. But we can say that about every position.

 

Remember when few teams would ever take a guard in the first round? That has drastically changed too. The new rookie salary cap rules are changing everything, and most fans haven't put two and two together to realize the impact yet. I am sure there will be a fan on a Colts board explaining everything I am writing at this moment to me in a few years though, as if it is new news to me.

 

Bottom line; it all depends on what Grigson wants, and if he can sell the idea to Irsay.