One reaction to the TRich trade that I simply don't understand.

[crazycolt1]

This.

 

We pick anywhere later than 20th next year and nobody has an issue with this trade.

If TR helps us win no one will care what the pick number is. 

[Gavin]

If we are depending on Bradshaw or Ballard to carry  the bulk something is seriously wrong??  That is why TR was signed. Make up you mind. 

you can say that again......Ballard is on the IR

[crazycolt1]

I do think one problem is that some people seem to be applying the usual criticism of trades, that you shouldn't be trading a draft pick for a guy who's, like, 30, to this situation.  Anyone saying that the Colts are losing the opportunity to acquire a young player with that draft pick are completely oblivious to the fact that they just acquired a young player with that draft pick.

 

And, hey, people are welcome to criticize the decision to acquire Richardson specifically, I would argue against them but that's my opinion, it's just that people arguing against making any trade of this sort based on some kind of overarching philosophical code are being asinine.

There are a few trolls who will have an issue and a negative comment to make no matter what the Colts did. This thread right here has one of the biggest trolls in the Colt forum. 

[crazycolt1]

"opening up holes for him" Really? Please stop just looking at stats and judging the players skill. Browns Oline is worse then ours!! I know they have Thomas and Mack is a pretty good C as well, but both their guards are awful as well as their RT. They get no push off the line and without exaggerating T-Rich was getting hit 8/10 times behind or at the LOS every time he got the ball. In fact the rare times he actually got to the LOS untouched and was able to get going down hill, he picked up 5+ yards every time.

It's no use to tell him anything. He has his opinion and will not let any legit statement keep him from arguing with you. He insist on saying the same old thing over and over no matter what the other persons opinion is. I think he trolls way too much.

[Valpo2004]

You can absolutely find a decent enough guy late in the draft or undrafted, but you can do that at other positions too, and we have several of those guys, most notably Bethea and Mathis, and Freeman was undrafted.  Toler was a 4th round guy and he's looked pretty good for us so far.

 

I think the issue is that people seem to look at a guy like Arian Foster and draw too significant a conclusion from him, that you can find a top running back late in the draft, and that it's not worth drafting a running back early.

 

So I just looked up all the all-pro running backs since the year 2000, as representative of the very best running backs in the nfl over that period (not all AP all-pros, I included anyone who was listed as an all-pro by any of the outlets tracked by PFR).  There have been precisely 30 all-pro running backs since 2000 (a number of repeats from year to year).  2 of them were undrafted (Foster and Priest Holmes).  Only 2 were drafted later than the 3rd round.  That means that 26 of the 30 were what we'd now call Day 1-2 drafted players.  16 - over half - were drafted in the first round.

 

By contrast, if you look at QBs, one of the positions you said you need to spend a high pick on, of 11 all-pro QBs since 2000, just 4 were drafted in the first round, and just 6 were drafted in the first 3 rounds.

 

My position is that the RB position is not a valuable enough position in the NFL so as to desire an all pro there that much.  (It's of course nice to have an all pro anywhere, but if I had to pick positions to have an all pro at, RB would be at the bottom of the offense.

 

You know how you have game manager QB's?  They don't take the team on their back but they just give some threat of a passing game without making too many mistakes.

 

My position is that we should have gone for a "game manager" RB.  Someone who can just do a decent job in pass blocking, running, and catching but not a guy that is going to be considered a star player.  Someone who gives us some threat of a running game and catching out of the backfield without fumbling the football.  Vick Ballard is a good example of a "game manager" RB that I'm talking about.  

 

It is quite frankly the last position on offense that I would be concerned about having an all pro.  All pro QB is obviously best, followed by an all pro WR or TE, followed by an all pro OT, followed by an all pro guard or center.  

[BelieveinB]

I think the biggest problem with the trade is that it doesn't address any of our weaknesses. It was a luxury move, and an overpriced one, at that

I don't think it was a luxury move in the eyes of most. Bradshaw (a decent running back but past his prime and dealing with chronic foot issues) is a bandaid at that position. Brown has under achieved imo since he's been here. By picking up Trich not only due we add a youthful power back with a huge upside, you give Luck for the first (real) time a credible play action. This move just narrows down the needs of the team to the O line.

[OffensivelyPC]

I don't buy that argument. Adrian Peterson rushed for over 2,000 yards with Christian Ponder as his QB, and accounting for more than half of the team's offense. If Trent is a rare talent , he should at least be able to crack the 4 ypc mark with Joe Thomas and Alex Mack opening running lanes for him. Now he has Costanzo and McGlynn   

If you're going to make the argument that Richardson is no Adrian Peterson, then you shouldn't be comparing the two.  AP is a top 5 RB all time.  Lets keep the comparisons realistic.  But even if I bite, Ponder is still a better QB than Weeden, at least in terms of last year.  Not to mention they had Harvin as a receiver threat.  AP, a 6 year vet, still had a lot more than Richardson, a rookie RB, had.

[jvan1973]

My position is that the RB position is not a valuable enough position in the NFL so as to desire an all pro there that much. (It's of course nice to have an all pro anywhere, but if I had to pick positions to have an all pro at, RB would be at the bottom of the offense.

You know how you have game manager QB's? They don't take the team on their back but they just give some threat of a passing game without making too many mistakes.

My position is that we should have gone for a "game manager" RB. Someone who can just do a decent job in pass blocking, running, and catching but not a guy that is going to be considered a star player. Someone who gives us some threat of a running game and catching out of the backfield without fumbling the football. Vick Ballard is a good example of a "game manager" RB that I'm talking about.

It is quite frankly the last position on offense that I would be concerned about having an all pro. All pro QB is obviously best, followed by an all pro WR or TE, followed by an all pro OT, followed by an all pro guard or center.

we are paying him next to nothing. that will allow grigs to address other areas in free agency

[JWF]

Who cares? It's a running back. Plug and play, next man up. Our offense should be centered around it's franchsie player anyways. If we're depending on Bradshaw or Ballard to carry the bulk of the offense, something else is seriously wrong. 

 

I somewhat agree but if Richardson can live up to the potential he had coming out of college he can give us more than anything we had on this roster currently at the position and potentially help to mask some of the larger deficiencies we have on offense. There is some risk to this trade but I think the reward is worth it.

 

Keep in mind....we have only had a single 1000 yard rusher since 2007 and I would say that coincides with the last time we had actually had a running game that teams were forced to really respect.

 

Also this move isnt just about this season. The kid is 22. This is move is also for the future.

[bavanlan]

By giving up a first round pick, Grigson is saying he is a rare talent

 

I think you're reaching here a bit.  By giving up a first round pick, all Grigson is saying is that he thinks Richardson will be better than the available prospects at that position (otherwise, he wouldn't do it).  But I'm not sure you can make the argument that there's consistent "rare talent" in the second half of the first round.

 

Richardson doesn't have to be an elite player, all he has to be is better than anyone available at wherever our first round pick next year would be to make this trade worthwhile.

 

That's a much lower bar.

[Valpo2004]

we are paying him next to nothing. that will allow grigs to address other areas in free agency

 

But we gave up a first round pick for him where we could have gotten another talented youngster that we could pay next to nothing for.  

 

It's really not the salary cap at all for me, it's the first round draft pick used IMO at the least important offensive position in the NFL.  

 

Would have rather spent that first rounder on a guard, a WR, or an OT.  If we had any need at TE I would name that too, but we don't have needs at TE.  

[JWF]

But we gave up a first round pick for him where we could have gotten another talented youngster that we could pay next to nothing for.  

 

We're basically paying very little for Richardson.

[jvan1973]

But we gave up a first round pick for him where we could have gotten another talented youngster that we could pay next to nothing for.

The browns ate the biggest majority of trents contract. We owe him six million over three years. not to mention we got first round talent for our pick. Grigson felt rb was a priority. Will the deal be worth it? only time will tell

[Danfish98]

If you're going to make the argument that Richardson is no Adrian Peterson, then you shouldn't be comparing the two.  AP is a top 5 RB all time.  Lets keep the comparisons realistic.  But even if I bite, Ponder is still a better QB than Weeden, at least in terms of last year.  Not to mention they had Harvin as a receiver threat.  AP, a 6 year vet, still had a lot more than Richardson, a rookie RB, had.

 

How strange did it feel typing those words lol?

[runtelldat]

Majority of people love the move as they should in my opinion. There will always be people who don't care for a trade, pick in the draft, the way plays are called, certain players, certain coaches, the owner, and on and on. Some peoples very nature is just to complain for the sake of it. Some live in the negative. This is not throwing everyone who disagrees with anything mentioned into being a certain type of person, just stating that there are people like this. Point being, everyone sees things differently and it will always come down to a majority of people agreeing one way and a minority seeing it a different. Sometimes even more 50-50. We're all Colts fans. Agree or disagree at the end of the day we root for this team and organization to succeed. Time will tell us who is right and who is wrong, if anyone. For now it's just a matter of opinion.
 

My opinion I absolutely love the trade. I don't buy into the injury argument as TRich appears to be one tough as nails RB. He missed one game last year. He's faced nothing but stacked boxes due to no one concerned about the Browns passing attack. This is night and day in my eyes. He's should see lanes here in Indy that will be like parted seas compared to what he was afforded in Cleveland. The first round pick giving up for him will be a lower first round pick I believe. As such I am fine with a stud RB would can grow with a potent offense. I believe he will grow to live up to his potential here in Indy and be a beast. The Colts will work on fixing that offensive line and our running game will only get better. It's already looked pretty damn good the first two games.
 

As for comparing him to Adrian Peterson, I don't think it's a fair comparison. At least not yet. AP has been in the league for 6-7 years now. Trent is a few games into his second. It's kinda like people comparing Luck to Manning. We see Luck has the potential to be great. We know Manning is great. Time will tell us just how great Luck is. I think he will definitely live up to it... As for Trent he has excellent potential to be great. I think he will also live up to it, but it is time that will ultimately tell us the answers. For now we can only sit back, watch, and enjoy the show. It's going to be really fun to watch this young team grow together. Can we capture another title in the next decade? Maybe more?

 

I expect big things to come for the team over the next decade. Same as the organization as a whole does. I expect us to compete year in and year out to make that Superbowl trip. I expect us to continue to strive for excellence. Know matter what get's thrown the teams way, the will to fight to overcome and keep pushing forward is what I know this team is built to do. You can achieve quite a lot on that will alone. The future is very bright here in Indy and I myself am enjoying soaking it all in...

 

GO COLTS!

[Indygal1218]

Overpriced if Grigson and Pagano were going to use the pick in a way naysayers approve of. Otherwise it doesn't matter.

[rockywoj]

Trent Richardson Rookie Stats:

 

Rush      267    950 yds   11 tds

Rcpts       51    367 yds      1 td

 

Total      318    1,317 yds  12 TDs

 

The above done with broken ribs and other nicks and bruises.

 

Methinks that that fandom that is calling him a disappointment are fraught with unrealistic expectations.  The guy was and is a stud.

 

As for the complaints that a mid to low first round pick is too much to give up for an offensive stud of a runningback, I would say a lack of historical perspective is in play.  Ergo, flavor of the day, which is to devalue the importance of the RB, is without regard for historical perspective.  The running game has always and remains a super important part of any offense.  A great many of the greatest stars in NFL history are RBs.  Today's fashion is to dismiss such as archaic and outdated in today's new offensive reality.  To that I say hogwash.  Great RBs will always be super key offensive contributors.  Sure, value can be found in later rounds, but such as pretty much always been the case for ALL positions.  True studs, though, will always be worth a first round pick and more.

 

Richardson's first year performance was fantastic, especially considering the crap team and crap offense he played on.  If he can avoid injuries, there is no reason to think he will not be a top 5 NFL back for years to come.  Of course, an effective OL is required, but that is the case for almost all RBs.

 

I say great trade!

[IndyColtScout]

Everyone is going to have an opinion but to me there are 2 undeniable facts to the trade that to me makes it good value to the Colts.

1) If you look at the Colts first rounders or high 2nd rounders, outside of Luck it's pretty pathetic drafting. Losing the 25th pick in 2014 just doesn't mean much to me cause with our history that player is more likely to be a bust or average than good.

2) TRich is very young & even though he isn't AP that doesn't mean he is trash. I personally believe he has multiple pro bowl selection potential still. That's pretty damn good. And TRich & Luck are locked up at very reasonable cap #s for the next 3-4 years. We have 2 young high ceiling players at our main ball handling positions. Yes we have other holes, but that's like complaing about a pick in the draft where we go BPA instead of filling a huge need.

Agree or disagree just wanted to share my thoughts.

[oldunclemark]

There's been a fair amount of negative reaction to the Trent Richardson trade, some of which I can understand. A 1st round pick is a pretty steep price, he's had his injury problems, it could even be argued that he under-achieved his rookie year.

 

However, some have been saying that this trade signifies that the Colts are sacrificing their future in an attempt to win now. This kid is 22 years old and only in his second year. He could potentially be here for another 8-10 years.

Running backs don't last 8-10 years...Trent wont play 8-10 years in Indy..with his style he may not play 4 or 5 years

If we're talking future we already had Ballard and you can get RBs in low rounds..

If you're talking NOW...we just got Bradshaw and we raved about him a month ago

and you have to agree....we have other needs O-line..D-line

Never ever use a No.1 pick on a RB....The move is a gamble

[chrisfarley]

I think the biggest problem with the trade is that it doesn't address any of our weaknesses. It was a luxury move, and an overpriced one, at that

how was it overpriced?  say we finish with the 24th pick in the draft, what are we going to get, "A sure thing"? Not hardly.  Is Trent Richardson a sure thing? He's battle proven, he's 22, and his best years are ahead of him (clearly).  Grigson is not done dealing either.  He will find help with our O-line and D-line. These days the draft is BIG, but so is confidence that you spend your pick on the right guy. Here is a PODCAST that you should listen to.  These guys really did some work checking this all out.  A really good listen.  Only the first part of it addresses the trade.

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=9694586

[gacker65]

That's a valid argument. I'd disagree to a certain extent but it certainly has some merit.

 

Just saying in my OP that most of the arguments against the trade are, at the very least, somewhat valid. But saying that we have sacrificed our future in an attempt to win now is just baseless when we have signed a 22 year old, 2nd year player.

What you say is true to a point.  Yes, TR a young player and should have a long NFL life expectance (which I hope he does), but what did we give up for him in the future.  As H.B.A. pointed out, TR was a lixury move and I agree with him.  The future that get effected is, instead of looking for a #1 WR, top tier Defensive help, or a good O-line help, we have to settle for 2nd or 3rd tier players and hope they hold the fort. 

 

Every time you give up a future draft choice for the now, you give up a future potential player.  Eample: To move up to get Hilton last year, we gave up last year's 4th round pick and this year's 5th round pick.  Let us see how that affected this year's draft; in the 5th round, we wanted Hughes, but did not have a 5th rounder, so we gave up next year's 4th round pick.  What player next year did we give up.

 

Another example: To get V, Davis, we gave up this year's 2nd round pick.  The question is, what player from this year's draft did we miss out on to get Davis and is it worth it.

 

IMO, by getting TR, we gave up any high quality players for next year and will have to settle for lower quality players.  Yes there are hidden gems in the lower rounds, but they are few and far between.

[YOUR GM]

It's no use to tell him anything. He has his opinion and will not let any legit statement keep him from arguing with you. He insist on saying the same old thing over and over no matter what the other persons opinion is. I think he trolls way too much.

 

Do I know you?.....If anything, you're the troll with the personal attacks. I'm entitled to an opinion just like the rest of you. Just because I'm not always on board with every decision made by the organization, makes me no less of a fan. If you got a problem with it, put me on ignore

[CanuckColt]

There's been a fair amount of negative reaction to the Trent Richardson trade, some of which I can understand. A 1st round pick is a pretty steep price, he's had his injury problems, it could even be argued that he under-achieved his rookie year.

 

However, some have been saying that this trade signifies that the Colts are sacrificing their future in an attempt to win now. This kid is 22 years old and only in his second year. He could potentially be here for another 8-10 years. 

The negatives fans are not thinking straight...we gave ONE 1st round pick...it is like trading Werner for Richardson...would anyone NOT do that deal?

We lucked out on the trade because the Brownies are going for the 1st overall pick.

[YOUR GM]

If we are depending on Bradshaw or Ballard to carry  the bulk something is seriously wrong??  That is why TR was signed. Make up you mind. 

 

If we're depending on ANY back to carry the bulk of the offense, when we have Andrew Luck and all his targets available, something IS wrong. That was my point.

 

Way to try to twist my words. I think I'm about done talking to you. You're more looking to attack my character and twist my words than you are to looking to counter anything I actually said

[Buck Showalter]

18's numbers would not have looked nearly as good early in his career without Edge...

T.Richardson will help open things up for this offense, he had nearly 500 yards receiving last year as well...

Good move by the Colts

[T Y Goodbye]

3.6 ypc with zero threat of the qb killing you if you load the box. Lets see what he can do when he isn't the only playmaker on offense

 

I'd also like to add that he played I think 10 games with broken ribs...not sure on the amount, but he played hurt..

[Dudley Smith]

It's true that RBs are a dime a dozen in the NFL. I would generally agree that the OL is more important. A great OL can make an average RB into a pro-bowler. That said, some RBs are special talents that you generally are not going to find in a lot of drafts. I think T-Rich is one of those guys. He had a good rookie season last year and was a very special player at Alabama. As others have pointed out, we get him cheap too. Will he be injured off and on in his career? I'm sure he will. Almost all RBs are injured at some point. That's why we have Ballard though. Keep the T-Rich's carries reasonable and still have a solid back to come in and grab the hand off.

 

I also do not think this OL is as far away from being a decent (not elite) unit as some make it out to be. I think a few of the sacks this year have been due to Luck wanting to make a play (and sometimes he does) and holding onto the ball as long as he can. Sure there have been some breakdowns on the OL's part, but I think with another draft/FA period Grigson will have this OL looking solid by next season. I think it is ridiculous to believe he is being completely negligent about the OL simply because he went out and got a high profile RB.

 

Lastly, as many others have pointed out multiple times, just because you select a someone in the 1st round doesn't mean they are going to have heaps of success. The Colt's themselves are a great indicator of that. Giving up the 1st rounder, while maybe a little risky, I think is being made out to be a bigger deal than it really is.

[oldunclemark]

That's a valid argument. I'd disagree to a certain extent but it certainly has some merit.

 

Just saying in my OP that most of the arguments against the trade are, at the very least, somewhat valid. But saying that we have sacrificed our future in an attempt to win now is just baseless when we have signed a 22 year old, 2nd year player.

CORRECTION: A 22-year-old running back....a collision style RB..who has already been hurt

RBs have a very short shelf life. It is logical to assume that he will suffer some season ending injuries...in his time

That's the positon...That's why everyone said (including all of us until this week)that you never spend a No.1 on a RB.

[Insert Colts Pun Here]

Do I know you?.....If anything, you're the troll with the personal attacks. I'm entitled to an opinion just like the rest of you. Just because I'm not always on board with every decision made by the organization, makes me no less of a fan. If you got a problem with it, put me on ignore

 

Gotta agree here. 

 

I disagree with most of what HireBruceArians has said in this thread but he's just putting his opinion forward in exactly the same way as the rest of us.

 

He's been polite and respectful from what I've seen.

[crazycolt1]

Do I know you?.....If anything, you're the troll with the personal attacks. I'm entitled to an opinion just like the rest of you. Just because I'm not always on board with every decision made by the organization, makes me no less of a fan. If you got a problem with it, put me on ignore

No problem- I have no problem with that at all. Its not the point of you having a different opinion. The point is no matter anyones elses opinion is you refuse to accept it for what it is and then argue about it.  There is no debate to your opinions. So I will put you on ignore as you say. 

[rockywoj]

Trent Richardson Rookie Stats:

 

Rush      267    950 yds   11 tds

Rcpts       51    367 yds      1 td

 

Total      318    1,317 yds  12 TDs

 

The above done with broken ribs and other nicks and bruises.

 

Methinks that that fandom that is calling him a disappointment are fraught with unrealistic expectations.  The guy was and is a stud.

 

As for the complaints that a mid to low first round pick is too much to give up for an offensive stud of a runningback, I would say a lack of historical perspective is in play.  Ergo, flavor of the day, which is to devalue the importance of the RB, is without regard for historical perspective.  The running game has always and remains a super important part of any offense.  A great many of the greatest stars in NFL history are RBs.  Today's fashion is to dismiss such as archaic and outdated in today's new offensive reality.  To that I say hogwash.  Great RBs will always be super key offensive contributors.  Sure, value can be found in later rounds, but such as pretty much always been the case for ALL positions.  True studs, though, will always be worth a first round pick and more.

 

Richardson's first year performance was fantastic, especially considering the crap team and crap offense he played on.  If he can avoid injuries, there is no reason to think he will not be a top 5 NFL back for years to come.  Of course, an effective OL is required, but that is the case for almost all RBs.

 

I say great trade!

 

 

Also keep in mind, as has been posted elsewhere, draft picks are a crap shoot.  Look at the last bunch of Colts first round picks as evidence.  Even top 15 and top 10 picks are more often than not a hit or miss proposition.  Overall, I would say 50% or LESS of picks are usually not even on a team or productive in the league within 4 years of being drafted.  

 

Richardson is a proven commodity based on his first year performance and he still has HUGE upside promise ... and THAT is worth a lot more than some speculative hit or miss mid to late first round draft pick.

[Hoosierdome93]

I believe it addresses several issues. On pass plays Trent is a great blocker and has great hands which makes him a real threat of catching screens when D-lines blitz. Teams know this and will be less likely to bum rush our O-line every other down. This also gives Luck more time in the pocket to go threw his reads safely. On rush plays he can wear down a D-line by pounding it up the middle. All of this helps the O-Line and gives us a good threat at RB. As a COLT fan there is only one way to look at this trade until time proves different... and that's a win, win move by the COLTS

GO COLTS

[HarryTheCat]

There's been a fair amount of negative reaction to the Trent Richardson trade, some of which I can understand. A 1st round pick is a pretty steep price, he's had his injury problems, it could even be argued that he under-achieved his rookie year.

 

However, some have been saying that this trade signifies that the Colts are sacrificing their future in an attempt to win now. This kid is 22 years old and only in his second year. He could potentially be here for another 8-10 years. 

Lots of "back seat GMs" out there are second-guessing this trade, citing all of these "injury problems". The two knee surgeries were relatively minor (a torn meniscus at 'Bama and some cartiledge fragments at Cleveland), both repaired by arthroscopic surgeries. C'mon, folks, we're not talking about major (ACL/MCL) kinds of injuries here. The other injuries were either bruised or broken ribs (accounts differ). Show me a player who made it through a college or the NFL career without a bruised rib or two and I'll show you a kicker or a guy who did nothing more strenuous than carrying a clipboard.

[HarryTheCat]

Also keep in mind, as has been posted elsewhere, draft picks are a crap shoot.  Look at the last bunch of Colts first round picks as evidence.  Even top 15 and top 10 picks are more often than not a hit or miss proposition.  Overall, I would say 50% or LESS of picks are usually not even on a team or productive in the league within 4 years of being drafted.  

 

Richardson is a proven commodity based on his first year performance and he still has HUGE upside promise ... and THAT is worth a lot more than some speculative hit or miss mid to late first round draft pick.

For everybody out there who thinks we just traded away the opportunity to draft the second coming of Edgerrin James next year there is an equal number of people who are relieved that we just got a better-than-average running back in return for what could be the second coming of Trev Alberts.

[Coffeedrinker]

I don't buy that argument. Adrian Peterson rushed for over 2,000 yards with Christian Ponder as his QB, and accounting for more than half of the team's offense. If Trent is a rare talent , he should at least be able to crack the 4 ypc mark with Joe Thomas and Alex Mack opening running lanes for him. Now he has Costanzo and McGlynn   

 

I know this will mean very little to you, but according to Football Outsiders the Colts, after two games, have the #1 run blocking line in the NFL.  They are also #1 in "Stuffed ranking" with the back before stopped for a loss or no gain only 10% of the time.  Their power rank is poor at #21 (success when running on 3rd or 4th down and 2 yards or less).

 

Furthermore, the Colts are 5th in the NFL in rushing yards (at least they were before the Thursday night game) even though they are 20th in rushing attempts.

 

In all rush catagories the Colts O line is ranked higher than the Browns O line.  So your argument seems to be a bit lacking.

[Deathiltis]

I think the biggest problem with the trade is that it doesn't address any of our weaknesses. It was a luxury move, and an overpriced one, at that

 

It wasn't overpriced, we got the 3rd overall pick, a guy who proved he could be a workhorse, for a bottom half 1st round price, no more. That being said I agree grabbing a RB wasn't our biggest need. But there is no doubt that acquiring Richardson will be beneficial, it will give the offense some breathing room.

Anyone who says that the Browns got the better end of the deal is insane. The Browns gave up multiple draft picks to select this guy at #3, he has the physical tools and mental prowess to run well, and to run well in our offense, and all we gave up was a bottom half first round pick that probably would have been used on a kid that won't make an impact immediately anyway. This move secures our present and future and will really help Luck. Our offense is going to be scary good in a couple years.

[Luck_Is_Skilled]

I think the biggest problem with the trade is that it doesn't address any of our weaknesses. It was a luxury move, and an overpriced one, at that

I don't know about you but I kind of like my leather couch and big screen Tv.

[NewColtsFan]

There's been a fair amount of negative reaction to the Trent Richardson trade, some of which I can understand. A 1st round pick is a pretty steep price, he's had his injury problems, it could even be argued that he under-achieved his rookie year.

 

However, some have been saying that this trade signifies that the Colts are sacrificing their future in an attempt to win now. This kid is 22 years old and only in his second year. He could potentially be here for another 8-10 years. 

 

One simply can't anticipate a running back -- any running back, not just Trent Richardson -- lasting 8-10 years.

 

For every Adrian Peterson,   there are dozens and dozens whose career lasts 3-4 years.     Running backs not only get hurt often,  but they get old quickly...   sometimes almost overnight...    they age quickly and badly....   and it's very hard to gage before it happens....

 

For what it's worth,  most of the comments I've read have been favorable to the Colts....

[JoKeR]

My only issue is I hope running the ball isn't the bulk of our offense, I like a ratio around 60+%passing/ 40-% running. Our QB is our best weapon, use him diversely. The trade does seem to be somewhat of a luxury move when we have other needs. I think he's a top their talent though, worth the 1st round pick. So I'm not really negative about the move, I just have concerns that are related to the trade.

[JoKeR]

***If we're depending on ANY back to carry the bulk of the offense, when we have Andrew Luck and all his targets available, something IS wrong.***** That was my point.

 

Way to try to twist my words. I think I'm about done talking to you. You're more looking to attack my character and twist my words than you are to looking to counter anything I actually said

My concern exactly. We have to wait and see though.