Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

With At Top 5 Pick, You Draft A Legend Not A Need.


Recommended Posts

People keept talking about the draft in terms of position. In my opinion, you use a top five pick on the best player available. If Adrian Peterson is there, you draft him no matter how many running backs you have. If luck is there you get Luck. You don't go after Joe Blow CB because it is a need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luck isn't a legend in college. He's just getting hyped as an NFL-ready QB. Tebow was a legend. Were the other 20+ teams that passed on him foolish? Tebow was literally the best player in college football history, and he almost fell to the 2nd round.

When you said, "If Adrian Peterson is there, you draft him no matter how many RB's you have."

That's true, but you can also use RB's in a multitude of ways, and multiple RB's can play at the same time.

Luck would sit on the bench and do nothing. For years, he would be getting paid to NOT DO A THING.

Big difference.

So no, you don't draft Luck based on that reasoning.

Keep trying though. One of these days a decent argument may present itself. (<---NOTE: I will not change this tone even if our front office does take Luck. This isn't the Favre/Rodgers scenario. It would be a financial disaster and a waste of the kid's potential.)

Edited by doogansquest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree. If you have a glaring hole at defensive end/tackle, like we do, you end up taking the position of need. You can not sit there and tell me that if Luck and Suh were in the same draft class, that you would take Luck based on the circumstances that we "might" face barring Manning doesn't come back.

Of course, with the way Suh is playing though....

Edited by AustinCollie17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luck isn't a legend in college. He's just getting hyped as an NFL-ready QB. Tebow was a legend. Were the other 20+ teams that passed on him foolish? Tebow was literally the best player in college football history, and he almost fell to the 2nd round.

When you said, "If Adrian Peterson is there, you draft him no matter how many RB's you have."

That's true, but you can also use RB's in a multitude of ways, and multiple RB's can play at the same time.

Luck would sit on the bench and do nothing. For years, he would be getting paid to NOT DO A THING.

Big difference.

So no, you don't draft Luck based on that reasoning.

Keep trying though. One of these days a decent argument may present itself. (<---NOTE: I will not change this tone even if our front office does take Luck. This isn't the Favre/Rodgers scenario. It would be a financial disaster and a waste of the kid's potential.)

Sounds to me like you have an emotional attachment to Peyton. Peyton is 35 and coming off of a major, career-threatening surgery. If Luck is there, the Colts take him, and trade Peyton after a year or two if need be. Also, the rookie wage pool has been restructured so top picks don't make what they used to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i disagree that Luck would hold the clipboard. Manning would run up the score, and Luck would close every 4th quarter. then with all that experience... we could even run Luck at 3rd Quarter to give Manning a break... since he isn't going to be as durable to last 16games every season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds to me like you have an emotional attachment to Peyton. Peyton is 35 and coming off of a major, career-threatening surgery. If Luck is there, the Colts take him, and trade Peyton after a year or two if need be. Also, the rookie wage pool has been restructured so top picks don't make what they used to.

How is it "emotional" to think that you should keep a proven HOF QB that excels in our system over taking a new rookie that may or may NOT work out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is it "emotional" to think that you should keep a proven HOF QB that excels in our system over taking a new rookie that may or may NOT work out?

Five years ago, I would agree with that. But, now Peyton is aging and has an injury history that dictates that we look for his replacement very seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude im pretty sure we wont take Luck. Peyton is coming back and being our starter for atleast 3 more years.

Nobody knows if Manning will last another 3 yrs. NOBODY!!! Therefore if we get the #1, I would bet that the Colts will indeed, take Luck.

You just simply do not pass up on that kind of talent for wishfull thinking.

Edited by Balzer40
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea being that you want to get a future NFL legend with your top 5 pick. If a team projects Luck as a future legend then that's who they go with.

And how exactly does a team project a player to be a Legend?

I'm pretty sure they believe all players come with a calculated risk. No one looks at a draft board and says, "players A, Q, and 11 are going to be Legends..." That's just laughable.

This has to be the most ridiculous thread of all-time. It's embarrassing that this is what some of our fans consider to be constructive football discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude im pretty sure we wont take Luck. Peyton is coming back and being our starter for atleast 3 more years.

It's funny that some fans refuse to see any farther than their nose. It is like another guy posted due to their blind emotional attachment to Peyton. 3 years with Peyton or possibly 12+ years with Luck? If Colts are in the position to take Luck, I doubt they will fail to see past the Peyton Manning era. lol They'd be fools. We can build up the team around Peyton for his three years with the rest of our early round selections. But taking Luck with the number 1 pick (assuming we get it) puts in place a potential cornerstone for the Colts future. If an aging & ineffective Manning eventually stands in the way of Luck's development after a few years then it is Manning who must and will be moved or sat down. If it happened to the the great Johnny Unitas it can happen to any legend. It's simply the NFL circle of life. <cue up Lion King theme music>

Edited by Coltsman1788
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny that some fans refuse to see any farther than their nose. It is like another guy posted due to their blind emotional attachment to Peyton. 3 years with Peyton or possibly 12+ years with Luck? If Colts are in the position to take Luck, I doubt they will fail to see past the Peyton Manning era. lol They'd be fools. We can build up the team around Peyton for his three years with the rest of our early round selections. But taking Luck with the number 1 pick (assuming we get it) puts in place a potential cornerstone for the Colts future. If an aging & ineffective Manning eventually stands in the way of Luck's development after a few years then it is Manning who must and will be moved or sat down. If it happened to the the great Johnny Unitas it can happen to any legend. It's simply the NFL circle of life. <cue up Lion King theme music>

So what do you tell guys like Freeney, Clark and especially our FA's at the end of the year in Mathis, Saturday and Wayne when you spend the highest draft pick available on a guy that's not going to do anything to help them win another SB? Why would Mathis, Saturday and Wayne want to come back to an organization that's not committed to winning now? Sure we can use the other picks we get but we'd taking the very best draft pick and spending it on a guy we're putting on the shelf and saving for a rainy day. I can't see that sitting well with any of the vets on the team. Yeah they're professionals and blah blah but they're competitors first. They want to win while they still can and their window is about the same as a healthy Peyton's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what do you tell guys like Freeney, Clark and especially our FA's at the end of the year in Mathis, Saturday and Wayne when you spend the highest draft pick available on a guy that's not going to do anything to help them win another SB? Why would Mathis, Saturday and Wayne want to come back to an organization that's not committed to winning now? Sure we can use the other picks we get but we'd taking the very best draft pick and spending it on a guy we're putting on the shelf and saving for a rainy day. I can't see that sitting well with any of the vets on the team. Yeah they're professionals and blah blah but they're competitors first. They want to win while they still can and their window is about the same as a healthy Peyton's.

No you are taking that first pick and extending the franchise's viability beyond the Manning era which is drawing to a conclusion. If Peyton is healthy next year this is once again a potential playoff team that could be fortified enough with our remaining early round selections. Drafting Luck and fortifying the team for Manning's stretch run are not mutually exclusive options.

Edited by Coltsman1788
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No you are taking that first pick and extending the franchise's viability beyond the Manning era which is drawing to a conclusion. If Peyton is healthy next year this is once again a potential playoff team that could be fortified enough with our remaining early round selections. Drafting Luck and fortifying the team for Manning's stretch run are not mutually exclusive options.

You just completely sidestepped the question.

So what do you tell guys like Freeney, Clark and especially our FA's at the end of the year in Mathis, Saturday and Wayne when you spend the highest draft pick available on a guy that's not going to do anything to help them win another SB?

We have a team that, with Peyton, is always a contender. If we wind up with the #1 pick and spend it on a guy who's going to do nothing for the short term then you're not just affecting Manning, you're affecting the entire veteran core of the team and I don't think they'd take it as lightly as some are going to claim they would.

Edited by Jason
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have a team that, with Peyton, is always a contender. If we wind up with the #1 pick and spend it on a guy who's going to do nothing for the short term then you're not just affecting Manning, you're affecting the entire veteran core of the team and I don't think they'd take it as lightly as some are going to claim they would.

Well said. These guys are professionals, and they want to win. They aren't thinking about life after Peyton. They don't want to think about leaving to make room for a guy who won't play for several years. They are thinking about winning now, and winning again when Peyton returns.

@Coltsman1788: How is Luck "fortifying" the future without Peyton? What about fortifying the chance to win more Super Bowls WITH Peyton? There are other positions that can transcend eras besides the QB, and other QB's will be available for far cheaper a cost. Luck hasn't played a down in the NFL yet, and hasn't proven anything. The only guys who predictably auto-translate to the NFL from college are top 10-pick WR's. Even then, it's not a sure thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And how exactly does a team project a player to be a Legend?

I'm pretty sure they believe all players come with a calculated risk. No one looks at a draft board and says, "players A, Q, and 11 are going to be Legends..." That's just laughable.

This has to be the most ridiculous thread of all-time. It's embarrassing that this is what some of our fans consider to be constructive football discussion.

You are grasping dude. If a team can't project that someone is likely to become great (a legend) then, you are saying that a team has no ability to predict NFL success at all. The the fact of the matter is first round picks work out better than seconds on average and so on. Risk aside, you don't pass on someone who you think is going to be a hall of framer to fill a need with someone you project as solid starter quality.

The Bottom line is that when you pick high. You take the best player available, unless you have a young all-pro at that position already. Most positions are duplicated so it's not an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And how exactly does a team project a player to be a Legend?

I'm pretty sure they believe all players come with a calculated risk. No one looks at a draft board and says, "players A, Q, and 11 are going to be Legends..." That's just laughable.

This has to be the most ridiculous thread of all-time. It's embarrassing that this is what some of our fans consider to be constructive football discussion.

How can you say Luck is a legend? He's never played a down in the nfl yet

Honestly, these types of statements are pretty trite and don't really belong in big-boy discussions. Everyone understands that there is an element of risk in any draft pick, but nonetheless, prospects are all assigned grades and picked based on their potential. People are not drafted at random. If you want to quibble in details like this perhaps these discussions are too big for you to participate in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, these types of statements are pretty trite and don't really belong in big-boy discussions. Everyone understands that there is an element of risk in any draft pick, but nonetheless, prospects are all assigned grades and picked based on their potential. People are not drafted at random. If you want to quibble in details like this perhaps these discussions are too big for you to participate in?

There's a big difference in giving a prospect a draft grade indicating the probability that he will be successful in the NFL, and proclaiming someone a "legend" or "future HOFer". No one has said that Luck won't be a successful NFL QB but to proclaim him as a legend or to say he will be in the HOF when he's never played a game with the big boys is ridiculous. If you can't grasp the difference, then perhaps you were wrong about who shouldn't be involved in the discussion. ;)

I'm sure guys like Tim Couch, Alex Smith, Jamarcus Russell, Jeff George, David Carr and Ryan Leaf all received very high draft grades as well.

Edited by Jason
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usually to make a snarky comment that demonstrates a superficial understanding of the topic.

Or because I find it fun to watch people labor over false presumptions, misguided analysis, and a poor understanding of the Draft just to defend a position like it belongs to them.

There's no reason to get so personal, dude. But watching you squirm and get so defensive is just hilarious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a big difference in giving a prospect a draft grade indicating the probability that he will be successful in the NFL, and proclaiming someone a "legend" or "future HOFer". No one has said that Luck won't be a successful NFL QB but to proclaim him as a legend or to say he will be in the HOF when he's never played a game with the big boys is ridiculous. If you can't grasp the difference, then perhaps you were wrong about who shouldn't be involved in the discussion. ;)

Explain that difference. All the combine scores and field play is converted into a multiple regression coefficient. Various cutoffs determine, the round grades. What's so far fetched about there being a grade that indicates a likely hall of famer?

Edited by GoGoColts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or because I find it fun to watch people labor over false presumptions, misguided analysis, and a poor understanding of the Draft just to defend a position like it belongs to them.

There's no reason to get so personal, dude. But watching you squirm and get so defensive is just hilarious.

Nah... It's really more like a child interrupting when grownups are talking.

Edited by GoGoColts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who are the grown ups and who is the child?

Too many childish posters to name, but you can count yourself among them. There are three hallmarks of childish posters.

1. Talking as if they were a player.

2. Snarky comments demonstrating superficial understanding

3. Attempts at in depth analyses with superficial understanding

Edited by GoGoColts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well said. These guys are professionals, and they want to win. They aren't thinking about life after Peyton. They don't want to think about leaving to make room for a guy who won't play for several years. They are thinking about winning now, and winning again when Peyton returns.

@Coltsman1788: How is Luck "fortifying" the future without Peyton? What about fortifying the chance to win more Super Bowls WITH Peyton? There are other positions that can transcend eras besides the QB, and other QB's will be available for far cheaper a cost. Luck hasn't played a down in the NFL yet, and hasn't proven anything. The only guys who predictably auto-translate to the NFL from college are top 10-pick WR's. Even then, it's not a sure thing.

Doog's you are a respected & knowlegable poster in my eyes so I certainly respect your opinions but must disagree in this case.

If this year we find ourselves in a position to draft a qb prospect who is actually more highly touted than even Peyton was coming out of college then you got to take it. We don't know if we will have another opportunity to select a QB prospect of Luck's caliber in the future. If Peyton returns healthy next year we could return to the playoffs and be picking near the end of the draft again. Thus, we will most likely have our best shot this year so you strike when the iron is hot.

Despite some Colts fans being in self-denial Peyton has 4 years left at best. Luck would be here for much longer than that putting the franchise potentially in better shape for it's Manningless future. If Peyton is healthy this is still his team and the rest of the draft picks can be used to help strengthen the team around him. But the Manning era window is closing so we also need to augment our draft with some limited & smart free agent acquisitions. This isn't the normal Colts approach but if they want to improve the team enough to win it all again with Peyton, the draft alone probably is not going to get it simply because we are now running out of time.

Also the cost argument is over used in light of the new CBA which caps rookie salaries now. A 1st round pick isn't making anywhere close to the absurd amounts they used to. This point has been raised many times by others here.

To Jason's point about veteran players wanting to win now and being upset about the Colts not using it on a player to help the team immediately, I say that players are self-interested and want what they perceive as being what is best for them right now. The front office has the responsibility for being more objective and must also consider the long-term viability of the franchise as well as the present on field product. Some players might not understand all moves that the front office makes but their approval is not required. The front office will do what they feel is best for the franchise as a whole and those veteran players will fall in line and make themselves content with the improvements to the team that the front office makes with our remaining draft picks because that is what they get paid to do. I expect that they will rally around having Manning back and be motivated enough by that and any other improvements potentially made.

Also no draft pick is guaranteed. All can bust whether it's Luck, or some 1st pick DT, WR, CB or whoever. So the he might bust argument doesn't really carry alot of weight with me.

Edited by Coltsman1788
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish Andrew Luck all the success in the world. He's a smart kid, a talented player, and he will have his degree. He's done it the right way.

Unfortunately for us, we don't need a QB for the 2012 season, because we will have Manning, and a relatively capable (though not too impressive) back up in Painter. We will also have a healthy offensive line.

Andrew Luck will be starting when he gets into the league. He's not a 24th pick, like Rodgers, with an awkward throwing motion who needs time to develop. If he's playing for the Miami Dolphins or the Seattle Seahawks, I hope he has 15 years of productive football.

If he does, I wouldn't regret passing on him at all. Not if it means we take a player who improves our chances to win now, while simultaneously injecting us with youth for the future, instead of hoping said player will keep us from completely sucking 4 years from now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luck is a legend?? He has yet to win a Heisman or BCS title!! Now Tim Tebow is a legend lol.

Tim Tebow? He's trash. But I agree, Luck is not a legend. He's just surpassed Elway's numbers at Stanford and still trucking. He's looking darn good in college and his team really isn't all that great. Kind of like a Manning. I say if Luck is there in the draft wherever we end up, we have to take a chance and draft him. Him under Peyton's training for a couple years could make him into a monster. I've seen Luck play and he even throws the ball like Peyton and has a very similar play style with the ability to run/scramble out of the pocket. Just look what Favre did with Rodgers...and that's Brett Favre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude im pretty sure we wont take Luck. Peyton is coming back and being our starter for atleast 3 more years.

You're also making the error of assuming Manning won't get injured again. Yes, he had an ironman streak, but he is also older and coming off a season injury, so he may be rusty, slower in his delivery, and is not hitting the gym as hard as he could be to avoid injury aggravation. This could lead to another injury. I also don't trust our o-line. One miscue by the o-line and Peyton may get hit in a hurry, and god knows at his age coming off the injury, anything can happen.

Edited by ReMeDy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...