One thing to keep in mind re: recent FA acquisitions and the draft....

[TMPHBITEU]

There wouldn't be an exception to the rule IMO. RB's are over rated...Period! Nobody knew Adrian Peterson was going to turn out to be who he is now before he was drafted. Yes, he had the talent, but so does tons of other players who fall flat on their face in the pro's. I'm playing the percentages everytime and percentages tell you that RB's are extremely injury prone and not worth 1st rd. picks in general. Thats why less and less RB'd get taken early in the draft every yr. now. Teams do not value the RB position the way they used to, because history tells you they aren't worth the risk.

Let's say you're the 49'ers picking 31st in the first round. A highly touted RB (AP/Trent Richardson/Reggie Bush pre-draft as an example) is available: Would you still not roll the dice on such a player, and why?

[Mouthfire]

Oi.....just get to the point where you tell us which RT, OG, OLBs, CB, WR you want.

Pass rusher. It's the one glaring need that hasn't even been touched yet.

CB would be nice, though.

[Balzer40]

Let's say you're the 49'ers picking 31st in the first round. A highly touted RB (AP/Trent Richardson/Reggie Bush pre-draft as an example) is available: Would you still not roll the dice on such a player, and why?

 

 

 

I don't know why some are having such a difficult time excepting that this is just my opinion, although I believe there are more and more teams that would agree with me. I don't think RB is a highly valued position anymore. It's just not, more teams would rather use a RB by committee style instead of using a featured back.

 

RB's are extremely injury prone and have the shortest career span of any other position in football. They are a dime a dozen and can easily be replaced. The O-line is the key to a successful running game. IMO, I would rather roll the dice on a player that plays a different position and can have a bigger impact.

[Coltsfanforlife12]

Honestly think our First round pick should be used on a stud CB to pair with Davis.  Toler is injury prone and if he goes down were dealing with crap after Vontae again.. Don't want that happening.  This draft may be deep in Cornerbacks but I'd like to see one of the Top Flight guys: Xavier Rhodes, Jonathan Banks (who i feel may drop to us in the third), Desmond Trufant.  We don't need to draft O-line so early because grigson made it obvious he doesn't like to start rookie olinemen.  Your first round pick should come in and be able to start.  I say go oline later (because its deep this draft) get a corner and pass rusher in the first and third round or even trade back up into the second to get a pass rusher.

[HarassedOffTheSite]

Pass rusher. It's the one glaring need that hasn't even been touched yet.

CB would be nice, though.

 

We do not have any need at pass rusher, much less a glaring one. That is why it hasn't been "touched".

 

And we do not have a need at CB either.

 

I would not be opposed to adding depth at either position. But only after the 1st round.

[Mouthfire]

We do not have any need at pass rusher, much less a glaring one. That is why it hasn't been "touched".

 

And we do not have a need at CB either.

 

I would not be opposed to adding depth at either position. But only after the 1st round.

How's that? The OLB that we signed was Walden, who was signed to "set the edge" and isn't really a pass rusher. That leaves us moving Mathis to the rush linebacker spot on the right. Mathis, although he's still a decent player, just isn't an elite pass rusher anymore.

In any event, that leaves us Mathis as our pass rusher, with Hughes as his backup. Are we happy with that? Are we just not going to pass rush from the left side at all?

If I had my choice between an elite pass rusher in the 1st, and say... Eddie Lacy, I'd pick the pass rusher in a heartbeat. I think most GM's would.

[TMPHBITEU]

I don't know why some are having such a difficult time excepting that this is just my opinion, although I believe there are more and more teams that would agree with me. I don't think RB is a highly valued position anymore. It's just not, more teams would rather use a RB by committee style instead of using a featured back.

 

RB's are extremely injury prone and have the shortest career span of any other position in football. They are a dime a dozen and can easily be replaced. The O-line is the key to a successful running game. IMO, I would rather roll the dice on a player that plays a different position and can have a bigger impact.

Don't get me wrong, I accept your opinion. And to some extent agree with it.

There aren't many circumstances under which I'd pick a running back in the first round myself. I just have a hard time understanding why anyone would say never in this case, which is why I brought up this example to see whether you truly mean "never", or just "never" under "normal" circumstances. Take it as a compliment that I'm interested in your opinion beyond what you wrote in your original statement.

[HarassedOffTheSite]

How's that? The OLB that we signed was Walden, who was signed to "set the edge" and isn't really a pass rusher.

 

And? That IS the job of that LB. Set the edge. Are you magically creating new priorities on that LB in a 3/4? Regardless, Grigs said himself the kid is disruptive and makes game changing plays. How about we let him get a single snap in the horseshoe before we start pretending he cannot create pressure.

 

That leaves us moving Mathis to the rush linebacker spot on the right.

 

The RUSH linebacker spot. Thank you.

 

Mathis, although he's still a decent player, just isn't an elite pass rusher anymore.

 

That's nonsense.

 

In any event, that leaves us Mathis as our pass rusher, with Hughes as his backup. Are we happy with that?

 

We have been for years. What is different now? Nevertheless, we also have Hickman and Killeen.

 

Are we just not going to pass rush from the left side at all?

 

Of course we are.

If I had my choice between an elite pass rusher in the 1st, and say.......I'd pick the pass rusher in a heartbeat.

 

Good for you.

[Mouthfire]

And? That IS the job of that LB. Set the edge. Are you magically creating new priorities on that LB in a 3/4? Regardless, Grigs said himself the kid is disruptive and makes game changing plays. How about we let him get a single snap in the horseshoe before we start pretending he cannot create pressure.

 

 

 

The RUSH linebacker spot. Thank you.

 

 

 

That's nonsense.

 

 

 

We have been for years. What is different now? Nevertheless, we also have Hickman and Killeen.

 

 

 

Of course we are.

 

 

Good for you.

 

Hmmmmm.... Did I miss the part where Walden is known to be a good pass rusher?  Or did I just wake up in a world where Mathis isn't on the decline, or a planet where Hickman and Killeen are proven pass rushers? 

 

Mathis with 8 sacks, btw, puts him squarely in a six way tie as the 29th best pass rusher in the league.

 

The fact of the matter is: if anything, the Colts pass rush is downgraded from last year, with the subtraction of Freeney.  We haven't added a single pass rusher since the end of the season.  And our pass rush last year really wasn't anything to write home about.

 

So where in this whole scenario did the Colts upgrade the pass rushing situation?

[HarassedOffTheSite]

yawn

[Mouthfire]

yawn

 

Heheh... Glad I could keep you entertained.

[HarassedOffTheSite]

Heheh... Glad I could keep you entertained.

 

I apologize. I'm sick and kinda got a crappy attitude.

[jskinnz]

I apologize. I'm sick and kinda got a crappy attitude.

 

And apparently are not seeing things very clearly because of it.

 

Pass rusher is a position of need - no two ways about it.  Will be shocked beyond words if it is not addressed in the draft. 

[HarassedOffTheSite]

And apparently are not seeing things very clearly because of it.

 

Pass rusher is a position of need - no two ways about it.  Will be shocked beyond words if it is not addressed in the draft. 

 

Nah. Not a 1st round need.

[jskinnz]

Nah. Not a 1st round need.

 

If there is a pass rusher there that Grigson rates worthy of the pick, he will make the selection.

[Balzer40]

Hmmmmm.... Did I miss the part where Walden is known to be a good pass rusher?  Or did I just wake up in a world where Mathis isn't on the decline, or a planet where Hickman and Killeen are proven pass rushers? 

 

Mathis with 8 sacks, btw, puts him squarely in a six way tie as the 29th best pass rusher in the league.

 

The fact of the matter is: if anything, the Colts pass rush is downgraded from last year, with the subtraction of Freeney.  We haven't added a single pass rusher since the end of the season.  And our pass rush last year really wasn't anything to write home about.

 

So where in this whole scenario did the Colts upgrade the pass rushing situation?

 

 

 

Which should probably tell you that the team is fairly comfortable with who we have. Just because the fans aren't don't mean they are going to rush out and get a rush LBer. If there is a good one available with one of our picks, I could definitely see us picking him, but I think the fans are much more concerned than the team is.

[HarassedOffTheSite]

If there is a pass rusher there that Grigson rates worthy of the pick, he will make the selection.

 

Maybe, maybe not. But it just isn't that kind of need when compared to others we do have.

[masterlock]

Even if ALL the free agents we picked up turn out to be studs, they could still get injured. Depth is important too, as is competition within each position.

[Mouthfire]

I apologize. I'm sick and kinda got a crappy attitude.

 

No offense taken.  I like crappy attitudes, anyways.  Keeps things interesting. ;-)

[Mouthfire]

Which should probably tell you that the team is fairly comfortable with who we have. Just because the fans aren't don't mean they are going to rush out and get a rush LBer. If there is a good one available with one of our picks, I could definitely see us picking him, but I think the fans are much more concerned than the team is.

 

Or... it could mean that they didn't like the pass rushers that were available in free agency.  The best of the bunch was probably Paul Kruger, and he's way overrated.  There's no way the Colts were going to shell out a long-term contract for one of the pass rushers in this year's FA class, especially since the this year's draft class is particularly deep with pass rushers.

 

Remember... our best pass rusher was the 29th best in the league last year.  And, we lost our 2nd best pass rusher in Freeney...

[Dustin]

Or... it could mean that they didn't like the pass rushers that were available in free agency.  The best of the bunch was probably Paul Kruger, and he's way overrated.  There's no way the Colts were going to shell out a long-term contract for one of the pass rushers in this year's FA class, especially since the this year's draft class is particularly deep with pass rushers.

 

Remember... our best pass rusher was the 29th best in the league last year.  And, we lost our 2nd best pass rusher in Freeney...

 

Our best pass rusher was 13th best in the league this year. Our second best pass rusher was 18th.

[Mouthfire]

Our best pass rusher was 13th best in the league this year. Our second best pass rusher was 18th.

 

Based on what criteria?  Based on sacks, Mathis had 8 total, which places him in a six way tie for 29th.  Source: ESPN NFL stats.

[Dustin]

Based on what criteria?  Based on sacks, Mathis had 8 total, which places him in a six way tie for 29th.  Source: ESPN NFL stats.

 

Sacks aren't a good way to judge pass rushers. You want to look at the amount of hurries and pressures. 

 

From PFF: Mathis ranked 13th in PRP (Pass Rushing Productivity) and Jerry Hughes ranked 18th. 

 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/11/14/signature-stat-snapshot-pass-rushing-productivity/

 

People like to crap on Hughes, but he was one of the better rotational pass rushers in the league last year.

[Mouthfire]

Sacks aren't a good way to judge pass rushers. You want to look at the amount of hurries and pressures. 

 

From PFF: Mathis ranked 13th in PRP (Pass Rushing Productivity) and Jerry Hughes ranked 18th. 

 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/11/14/signature-stat-snapshot-pass-rushing-productivity/

 

People like to crap on Hughes, but he was one of the better rotational pass rushers in the league last year.

 

Fair enough.  Still think our pass rushing needs upgrading, though.

[Superman]

Sacks aren't a good way to judge pass rushers. You want to look at the amount of hurries and pressures. 

 

From PFF: Mathis ranked 13th in PRP (Pass Rushing Productivity) and Jerry Hughes ranked 18th. 

 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/11/14/signature-stat-snapshot-pass-rushing-productivity/

 

People like to crap on Hughes, but he was one of the better rotational pass rushers in the league last year.

 

As always, you have to keep these aggregate stats in perspective. For instance, that list would suggest that Jerry Hughes was as good or better than Aldon Smith last season at rushing the passer (yes, THAT Aldon Smith).

 

It doesn't take into consideration the fact that certain players benefit from different pass rushing schemes. For instance, you have Michael Bennett rushing the passer virtually every passing down, compared with someone who rushes more situationally like Justin Houston. Houston benefits from his scheme more than Bennett does.

 

The stat shows who was productive. It doesn't show who the best pass rushers are/were. If it did, then we could call the Niners right now and offer them Hughes for Smith.

[taintedmeat]

I wouldn't. I don't Fluker would even be the BPA at 24 and Jones is mediocre at best IMO. The only thing he really has going for him is the fact that he's versatile, he's basically average at every position. I'd love if we grabbed Jones in the 3rd, but he's not worth trading up for IMO.

Ya that makes since. All of these players just seem so much better with Alabama next to their name

[NewColtsFan]

We do not have any need at pass rusher, much less a glaring one. That is why it hasn't been "touched".

 

And we do not have a need at CB either.

 

I would not be opposed to adding depth at either position. But only after the 1st round.

 

A respectful, but large disagreement with my friend, BC....

 

I think we do indeed have a glaring need at pass rusher....   I think it's been 'touched' or addressed in the best way the team felt it could...   Walden, RJF and Sidbury.     Seriously.    And, no, I don't drink!

 

But I think pass rusher will be addressed before the 4th round is over whether we trade back or not...   I'd be stunned if we don't.    I think the team believes it will find someone it likes before the 4th round is out.

 

Just my hunch,  but I don't think it's unreasonable.    We can't enter 2013 with the same quality of pass rush as we had last year.    It must be better.

[GoColts8818]

Have to agree with both of you never and i say never draft a RB in first..........those are periods........get it period .................... never...................period.................

where would the Vikings be if they had followed that rule? Heck where would have the Colts been had they followed that rule with Edge? Heck even Addai was a big part of why we won a Super Bowl and he was a first rounder. I think the better rule is don't take just any running back in the first because you need a running back. If you truly think he can be a special payer then take him in the first. If you think he's just a run of the mill running back then I would agree its best to wait.

[jskinnz]

Maybe, maybe not. But it just isn't that kind of need when compared to others we do have.

 

Don Banks from SI has his mock draft out and he predicts the Colts to take LB Arthur Brown from K-State to address the pass rush.  I don't bring this up because he agrees with me but rather because of what he said regarding the Colts offseason so far.  He said that Brown would " upgrade one of the few remaining spots on the roster where Indy is not better off than it was at the start of the offseason."  Had not really thought of it that way but then also heard Chappell suggest the same thing.

 

Long story short - helping the pass rush as early as the 1st round should not be a surprise.  No position actually other than QB should be overly surprising.

[HarassedOffTheSite]

Long story short - helping the pass rush as early as the 1st round should not be a surprise.  No position actually other than QB should be overly surprising.

 

I don't think I'd be surprised but IMO we need Oline more than OLB. I'd actually put MLB above OLB too.

 

Regardless, people have their opinions. We'll see how it goes.

[Superman]

where would the Vikings be if they had followed that rule? Heck where would have the Colts been had they followed that rule with Edge? Heck even Addai was a big part of why we won a Super Bowl and he was a first rounder. I think the better rule is don't take just any running back in the first because you need a running back. If you truly think he can be a special payer then take him in the first. If you think he's just a run of the mill running back then I would agree its best to wait.

 

Adrian Peterson is probably an exception, but even then, that was several years ago. In today's NFL, I'd pass on Adrian Peterson in the first round, as a matter of principle.

 

Edge and even Addai were a long time ago (and I disagreed with Addai, by the way). The NFL is different now. In order for you to justify drafting a running back in the first round, he better be a special, special talent.

[GoColts8818]

Adrian Peterson is probably an exception, but even then, that was several years ago. In today's NFL, I'd pass on Adrian Peterson in the first round, as a matter of principle.

 

Edge and even Addai were a long time ago (and I disagreed with Addai, by the way). The NFL is different now. In order for you to justify drafting a running back in the first round, he better be a special, special talent.

Addai was one of the guys who started the arugement for you needed two backs because of how he and Rhodes owned that playoff run.  It was not THAT long ago. 

 

The point I am getting at is that it's probably better not have a rule of never ever draft this poistion in round one because different teams have different needs and sometimes guys are just special players.  If you think your team is running back away from being a Super Bowl team like the Colts felt like in 2006 then why not use your first draft pick address your biggest need? 

 

Like I said I wouldn't take just any running back in the first round it would have to be the right circamstance like you think you are getting a truly special running back like Peterson or you think you are a runningback away or you are just getting too much bang for your buck (like say you had a runningback graded as the fifth best player in the draft and you can get him at say pick 28 or something).  Other wise I would agree it's best to just stay away from backs in the first round.  Again my main point is that there are times that taking a back in round one does make sense even if it is becoming more and more of an exception. 

[Superman]

Addai was one of the guys who started the arugement for you needed two backs because of how he and Rhodes owned that playoff run.  It was not THAT long ago. 

 

You can have two backs, but that doesn't mean you drafted them in the first round, or at all, in Rhodes' case.

 

The point I am getting at is that it's probably better not have a rule of never ever draft this poistion in round one because different teams have different needs and sometimes guys are just special players.  If you think your team is running back away from being a Super Bowl team like the Colts felt like in 2006 then why not use your first draft pick address your biggest need? 

 

Like I said I wouldn't take just any running back in the first round it would have to be the right circamstance like you think you are getting a truly special running back like Peterson or you think you are a runningback away or you are just getting too much bang for your buck (like say you had a runningback graded as the fifth best player in the draft and you can get him at say pick 28 or something).  Other wise I would agree it's best to just stay away from backs in the first round.  Again my main point is that there are times that taking a back in round one does make sense even if it is becoming more and more of an exception.

 

I don't think the Colts felt they were a running back away in 2006. I don't think that's why they drafted Addai. I think they drafted him because they liked his potential and wanted to replace James.

 

Still, the league is different now than it was in 2006. Yes, there are sometimes special prospects, but who are they? Trent Richardson? I don't think so, and he was the third pick last year. No one in this year's draft. Really, I have to go back to AP in 2007 to find anyone that I was even remotely excited about in the first round. And even then, because of his injury concerns, I don't think I would have drafted AP, definitely not at #7 like Minnesota did. And as great as he is, his team has only been in the playoffs three times, once because they had Favre, and then last year mostly because he simply had the most impressive statistical season any back has had in the last 20+ years.

 

That 2007 draft was a lot like this one, in that there were no elite quarterback prospects (seriously, Kevin Kolb is the best guy from that draft, and he was a second rounder). So maybe that improves the stock of some other positions. But not running back, not enough to push anyone in this year's draft into the first round.

 

That's just my opinion. You can positively impact your team and your depth chart in so many other ways, especially at the top of the draft, that it's just a waste to take a running back, even if he is a really good prospect. It's too easy to get a good running back later in the draft or via trade or free agency. And it's even easier to Frankenstein a rushing attack with two or three guys who can duplicate what one premiere back can do.

[GoColts8818]

You can have two backs, but that doesn't mean you drafted them in the first round, or at all, in Rhodes' case.

Right I never said they HAD to be taken in the first round.  I am just sighting Addai as an example of a time that one was taken in round one and it did end up helping the team and frankly worked out fairly well for the Colts.

I don't think the Colts felt they were a running back away in 2006. I don't think that's why they drafted Addai. I think they drafted him because they liked his potential and wanted to replace James.

Polian said several times going into that draft that their biggest need was running back even with Rhodes on the roster.  Addai fit what they wanted/needed and turned out to be a good pick for the Colts.  Polian also went back and said part of the reason they parted ways with Edge was that they knew how deep that draft was at runningback.  So even if they didn't think they were a runningback away they clearly recognized it as one of their biggest needs and realized they could get help for it in the first round of the draft. 

Still, the league is different now than it was in 2006. Yes, there are sometimes special prospects, but who are they? Trent Richardson? I don't think so, and he was the third pick last year. No one in this year's draft. Really, I have to go back to AP in 2007 to find anyone that I was even remotely excited about in the first round. And even then, because of his injury concerns, I don't think I would have drafted AP, definitely not at #7 like Minnesota did. And as great as he is, his team has only been in the playoffs three times, once because they had Favre, and then last year mostly because he simply had the most impressive statistical season any back has had in the last 20+ years.

The league is different this year than it was last year.  It changes EVERY year however, going back to look at the 2006 draft and compare it today is not that big of a reach.  It's not like I am reaching back to 1950 and saying hey let's compare the use of the running back then to the use of the running back today. 

 

I fully agree that there might not be a first round talent EVERY year.  That's not my point.  My point is that even if it's becoming more and more of a exception there are still times that taking a running back in round one does make sense.  So the idea to have a rule to NEVER EVER take a running back in round one no matter what is a silly rule.  While it might be the norm I don't think it's a set in stone rule.  Like I said before the circumstances have to be right.   Again say Richards had fallen in the draft last year to the Pats at say pick 25 wouldn't you agree getting a guy who graded out to one of the top five best players in the draft last year at pick 25 would be great value?  Even if it was a running back. That's one circumstance where it makes sense.  The other two would be if you think you are looking at a guy like Peterson who can carry your franchise (which I agree is becoming more and more of a dying bread in the NFL) or if you feel like the best guy on board is a runningback and your team has a hole at runningback and there aren't many other players around that pick that fit a need on your board.   

That 2007 draft was a lot like this one, in that there were no elite quarterback prospects (seriously, Kevin Kolb is the best guy from that draft, and he was a second rounder). So maybe that improves the stock of some other positions. But not running back, not enough to push anyone in this year's draft into the first round.

I am not saying every year there is a star running back in the draft at all.  Again, like any position sometimes the draft is strong or weak at the position. 

That's just my opinion. You can positively impact your team and your depth chart in so many other ways, especially at the top of the draft, that it's just a waste to take a running back, even if he is a really good prospect. It's too easy to get a good running back later in the draft or via trade or free agency. And it's even easier to Frankenstein a rushing attack with two or three guys who can duplicate what one premiere back can do.

I think the Vikings would disagree with you about that clearly Adrian Peterson has been anything but a waste for them. Again, there are times that it works and makes sense.  There are plenty of examples of times it doesn't work or where you can find a running back beyond the first round as well. 

[BOTT]

Addai was not a good pick in the first

[Mouthfire]

The league is different this year than it was last year.  It changes EVERY year however, going back to look at the 2006 draft and compare it today is not that big of a reach.  It's not like I am reaching back to 1950 and saying hey let's compare the use of the running back then to the use of the running back today.

 

I think you're overlooking the major point.  The rules changes that turned the NFL into a "passing league" only happened within a few years ago.  Those rules changes are, namely: the increased protections for the QB, emphasis on unnecesarry roughness on the WR's (in particular "defenseless receivers"), outlawing of "spearing" hits, etc.  There are probably a few other rules changes made in the name of safety, but those are the ones off the top of my head, and I believe they all occurred after 2006 when Addai was drafted.

 

The point being, with the NFL's emphasis on safety, this really is a very different era of NFL football than in the past, and clearly different than the years with Edge, Jim Brown, Walter Payton, Earl Campbell, etc... With the new rules really opening up the passing game, the value of the RB has really taken a plummet.  You just don't need to pound the rock, in order to win anymore. 

 

So, yes.... if you're going to take a 1st round RB, he better be a damn special talent.

[GoColts8818]

I think you're overlooking the major point.  The rules changes that turned the NFL into a "passing league" only happened within a few years ago.  Those rules changes are, namely: the increased protections for the QB, emphasis on unnecesarry roughness on the WR's (in particular "defenseless receivers"), outlawing of "spearing" hits, etc.  There are probably a few other rules changes made in the name of safety, but those are the ones off the top of my head, and I believe they all occurred after 2006 when Addai was drafted.

 

The point being, with the NFL's emphasis on safety, this really is a very different era of NFL football than in the past, and clearly different than the years with Edge, Jim Brown, Walter Payton, Earl Campbell, etc... With the new rules really opening up the passing game, the value of the RB has really taken a plummet.  You just don't need to pound the rock, in order to win anymore. 

 

So, yes.... if you're going to take a 1st round RB, he better be a darn special talent.

I am not talking about the value of the running back over all.  That has never been my point although while I would agree running backs have less value today than they did even in 2006 my point is they haven't become so unvalued that can't compare a scenario in the draft in 2006 to a scenario today.  Even in 2006 their value was already slipping because they just didn't last very long and were already kinda seen as a dime a dozen.  With that said there are still scenarios, like in 2006, today that make sense to running back in round one even if their value is not what it used to be.  I am more than willing to admit those reasons are becoming more and more the exception because of new NFL rules but they still exist.  I sighted Addai as an example of a scenario of where it made sense because the Colts biggest need was a running back or DT and there wasn't a DT on the board worth taking in the first round when the Colts picked.  Addai was there so it made sense and would make sense if a team faced a similar choice in the draft this year.  The other two scenarios that I think make sense are if you just think you have a guy like Adrian Peterson looking you in the face in the first round or if you have a chance to get a guy who might have graded out to say the third best player in the draft and he just feel to the end of round one because he has fallen.  Again, those are all special scenarios but they still exist so IMO to say teams should NEVER EVER take a running back in the first round is false.