Should the Colts take more chances signing and drafting players ?

[Brent71]

It's been a theme since I've been a Colts fan in '95 to stay away from players with perceived character issues, but some teams like the Bengals have hit a home run with players such as Vontaze Burfict. Like the title says, should the Colts take more chances on players ?

[jskinnz]

Da'Rick Rogers, Montori Hughes, Chris Rainey, Lavon Brazill, Hugh Thornton all say hello. I am sure there are others.

[HungarianColtsFan]

More than we've already took? Practically there were roster moves on weekly basis.

 

On one hand it is good, as indicates our FO is always ready to grab every opportunity to improve the roster, on the other hand too intense fluctuation may hinder building chemistry.

[OffensivelyPC]

Bottom line is, you never know with absolute certainty what you are getting.  Draft the best player possible, it's just that simple. 

[IUfan_Charlie]

Bottom line is, you never know with absolute certainty what you are getting.  Draft the best player possible, it's just that simple. 

And that is exactly the opposite of what Grigson did. 

[jwilli69]

If they are ballers, they work hard in games and in practice and the issue isn't one that will cause major havoc during the year, sign them. If they signed autographs in college and got caught for that, who cares. If they smoked some weed, drank some beer or something like that, they are kids and they grow up. Did they shoot up a bar, steal a car, beat up their girlfriend, much bigger issue, stay out of those camps imo, way bigger risk regardless of who they are. The latter is more of a flawed character vs a child growing up.

[OffensivelyPC]

And that is exactly the opposite of what Grigson did. 

That's easy to say with the benefit of hindsight.

[NewEra]

Da'Rick Rogers, Montori Hughes, Chris Rainey, Lavon Brazill, Hugh Thornton all say hello. I am sure there are others.

Exactly, no way they would be on the team with Dungy. Actually used to drive me nuts with that nonsense. Kids make mistakes. It's whether they learn from it that matters.

[GoDeep]

It's been a theme since I've been a Colts fan in '95 to stay away from players with perceived character issues, but some teams like the Bengals have hit a home run with players such as Vontaze Burfict. Like the title says, should the Colts take more chances on players ?

 

I wouldn't use the Bengals as an example.  They have been dysfunctional for so long with character issues.  This is like a down time for them.

[jbaron04]

Oh we haven't bin doing that already??

[IUfan_Charlie]

That's easy to say with the benefit of hindsight.

I wasn't a fan of our offseason before the season started to be fair. He ridiculously overpaid average free agents and his draft was awful. 

[Jason_]

I wasn't a fan of our offseason before the season started to be fair. He ridiculously overpaid average free agents and his draft was awful. 

 

way too much hyperbole to even try to take seriously.  He didn't "ridiculously" over pay for anyone in free agency.  He may have somewhat overpaid but 1) that's to be expected in free agency and 2) everyone with the exceptions of DHB and Toler (due to injury) has earned pretty much every penny so far.  I think RJF and Walden especially have far exceeded expectations, especially the expectations of the fan base....even though a decent percentage of the fan base won't admit to that.

 

As for the draft, you cannot seriously try to grade a draft in less than a year.  The standard rule is to judge a draft class after around 3 years.  This gives players time to adjust to the speed and strength of players in the NFL, time to learn the systems and schemes in place with their respective teams, and to learn the pro style of football that most players don't play in college.

[Valpo2004]

way too much hyperbole to even try to take seriously.  He didn't "ridiculously" over pay for anyone in free agency.  He may have somewhat overpaid but 1) that's to be expected in free agency and 2) everyone with the exceptions of DHB and Toler (due to injury) has earned pretty much every penny so far.  I think RJF and Walden especially have far exceeded expectations, especially the expectations of the fan base....even though a decent percentage of the fan base won't admit to that.

 

As for the draft, you cannot seriously try to grade a draft in less than a year.  The standard rule is to judge a draft class after around 3 years.  This gives players time to adjust to the speed and strength of players in the NFL, time to learn the systems and schemes in place with their respective teams, and to learn the pro style of football that most players don't play in college.

 

I would agree with you somewhat but think of it this way.

 

We spent how much money on defense and this is what we get?  

 

With draft classes I think you have to wait 3 years to close the book on them entirely, but you can at this point say "It's not looking good."

[Valpo2004]

Da'Rick Rogers, Montori Hughes, Chris Rainey, Lavon Brazill, Hugh Thornton all say hello. I am sure there are others.

 

Hugh Thornton had character issues?  I know he had his parents murdered in front of him but I didn't hear about any character issues.  Did I miss something? 

[BOTT]

Hugh Thornton had character issues?  I know he had his parents murdered in front of him but I didn't hear about any character issues.  Did I miss something?

Not really. He was in a bar fight in college and was busted for minor consumption. Although I am stunned 20 yr old college kid was drinking.....

[husker61]

there always seems to be players that drop in the draft because of off the field character issues. there is nothing guaranteed in the draft. i would rather take a chance on the highly skilled player with these character issues that may turn into a impact player or complete bust, rather than the safe high character player that's upside is a good player. top of the 1st round you can have both, but at the bottom i like to take a chance. this is the thing about bp's drafts that i didn't like. 

[Valpo2004]

Not really. He was in a bar fight in college and was busted for minor consumption. Although I am stunned 20 yr old college kid was drinking.....

 

Even though I personally never got into any trouble in college or really ever, A bar fight in college and minor consumption I don't think really trip off the radar as being "character issues."

 

It's more of "college kid did stupid college kid stuff".  

 

I don't think that excuses it, I'm the last person to excuse that kind of stuff.  But at the same time I hardly look at that and think "Oh we got a trouble maker here!"

[Jason_]

I would agree with you somewhat but think of it this way.

 

We spent how much money on defense and this is what we get?  

 

With draft classes I think you have to wait 3 years to close the book on them entirely, but you can at this point say "It's not looking good."

 

To a degree I could understand.  However think about this...which players that we brought in during FA are not doing their jobs?  The only one is Toler and that's only because he's been injured.  RJF and Walden have been doing exactly what they were supposed to do and imo have even done better than expected.  Landry is exactly what we thought he would be.  Toler was doing his job and the entire defense was playing very well for the most part in the 7 games that Toler played.  The defensive woes got a lot worse when Toler went out.  Franklin was the other starter brought in during FA.  He struggled early on but has gotten better.  However he wasn't brought in to "fix" anything.  He was brought in to be a stop-gap until Chapman is ready to take over.

 

As for the draft class...sure you can look at it right now, less than a full season into their rookie years, and say "it's not looking good."  However imo that would be very premature and extremely ridiculous to do.  I'll say again that too many people got spoiled by the 2012 draft.  That was one of the best draft classes...possibly ever.  There were a lot of pro ready players who were ready to come in to the NFL and start from day 1.  The 2013 draft class, like most, did not have nearly as many "can't miss" prospects.

[Superman]

To a degree I could understand.  However think about this...which players that we brought in during FA are not doing their jobs?  The only one is Toler and that's only because he's been injured.  RJF and Walden have been doing exactly what they were supposed to do and imo have even done better than expected.  Landry is exactly what we thought he would be.  Toler was doing his job and the entire defense was playing very well for the most part in the 7 games that Toler played.  The defensive woes got a lot worse when Toler went out.  Franklin was the other starter brought in during FA.  He struggled early on but has gotten better.  However he wasn't brought in to "fix" anything.  He was brought in to be a stop-gap until Chapman is ready to take over.

 

As for the draft class...sure you can look at it right now, less than a full season into their rookie years, and say "it's not looking good."  However imo that would be very premature and extremely ridiculous to do.  I'll say again that too many people got spoiled by the 2012 draft.  That was one of the best draft classes...possibly ever.  There were a lot of pro ready players who were ready to come in to the NFL and start from day 1.  The 2013 draft class, like most, did not have nearly as many "can't miss" prospects.

 

Yup. Toler being out has hurt, but really, the players not doing their jobs on defense are guys who were already here (Bethea, Vaughn, Angerer, Moala, Butler, etc.). Add to that the fact that we don't have a complementary pass rusher to Mathis, and yeah, the defense isn't performing well. Pile on top of that the position the offense has put the defense in over the past two months, and it's even worse.

 

But what Grigson did defensively made total sense. We need an athlete in the front seven to help against running QBs, but the run defense is much improved. The secondary has struggled, and that's troubling, but again, we need another pass rusher. And that's the one legitimate mark against Grigson, as it pertains to the defensive side of the ball. RJF, Walden and Landry have been good, if not spectacular. We just need another pass rusher, and he got rid of a guy who could have filled that role nicely for us.

[will426]

Walden has played better than expected so has RJF but Landry...eh no he has made the tackles and all but the majority of them are after the catch also is a liability in coverage along with bethea..both are basically linebackers in my opinion

[Superman]

Walden has played better than expected so has RJF but Landry...eh no he has made the tackles and all but the majority of them are after the catch also is a liability in coverage along with bethea..both are basically linebackers in my opinion

 

Some arguments never die, even after they've been disproven. Landry has been fine in coverage. Not great, not a world beater, but hardly a liability. He's been twice as good as Bethea.

[Jason_]

Yup. Toler being out has hurt, but really, the players not doing their jobs on defense are guys who were already here (Bethea, Vaughn, Angerer, Moala, Butler, etc.). Add to that the fact that we don't have a complementary pass rusher to Mathis, and yeah, the defense isn't performing well. Pile on top of that the position the offense has put the defense in over the past two months, and it's even worse.

 

But what Grigson did defensively made total sense. We need an athlete in the front seven to help against running QBs, but the run defense is much improved. The secondary has struggled, and that's troubling, but again, we need another pass rusher. And that's the one legitimate mark against Grigson, as it pertains to the defensive side of the ball. RJF, Walden and Landry have been good, if not spectacular. We just need another pass rusher, and he got rid of a guy who could have filled that role nicely for us.

 

 

Right, and I totally get that.  I'm just trying to make some sense out of why they were playing so much better before Toler got hurt.  I'm not saying he was the absolute deciding factor but it just seems like too much of a coincidence that they played so much better before his injury and that they've been so consistently bad since. 

[21isSuperman]

I would have loved Vontaze Burfict and Tyrann Mathieu.  I didn't hear anything about us going after Burfict and we didn't have an appropriate draft pick for Mathieu (1st would have been too high and we wouldn't have lasted until our 2nd).  I think the character issue thing was more a Polian/Dungy mindset than Grigs.

[buccolts]

way too much hyperbole to even try to take seriously.  He didn't "ridiculously" over pay for anyone in free agency.  He may have somewhat overpaid but 1) that's to be expected in free agency and 2) everyone with the exceptions of DHB and Toler (due to injury) has earned pretty much every penny so far.  I think RJF and Walden especially have far exceeded expectations, especially the expectations of the fan base....even though a decent percentage of the fan base won't admit to that.

 

As for the draft, you cannot seriously try to grade a draft in less than a year.  The standard rule is to judge a draft class after around 3 years.  This gives players time to adjust to the speed and strength of players in the NFL, time to learn the systems and schemes in place with their respective teams, and to learn the pro style of football that most players don't play in college.

 

I agree, but wanted to further address/pose a question, regarding the bold.

Even though there was very little bad money spent, meaning most of the contracts wouldn't hurt us after 1 year if the player didn't work out, there is this seemingly overwhelming feeling among the posters that we paid WAY too much.

 

Question being: How do we feel about that, vs. Polian's signing existing talent to contracts that were way too long, and too much money?

 

Me? I'm fine with our present approach.

[Iancolts]

I like our approach too cause we can cut them after 1 year without much penalty against the cap. I loved that cause FA is a gamble much like the drafts but FA is worse cause they tend to hinder a team more money wise if they don't work out so I love the grigson contracts so far

[Superman]

Right, and I totally get that.  I'm just trying to make some sense out of why they were playing so much better before Toler got hurt.  I'm not saying he was the absolute deciding factor but it just seems like too much of a coincidence that they played so much better before his injury and that they've been so consistently bad since. 

 

I agree with all of that. My comments were more directed at the mistaken idea that our defense isn't good despite signing defensive players, therefore our signings must have been bad. 

[Superman]

I agree, but wanted to further address/pose a question, regarding the bold.

Even though there was very little bad money spent, meaning most of the contracts wouldn't hurt us after 1 year if the player didn't work out, there is this seemingly overwhelming feeling among the posters that we paid WAY too much.

 

Question being: How do we feel about that, vs. Polian's signing existing talent to contracts that were way too long, and too much money?

 

Me? I'm fine with our present approach.

 

I think the overwhelming feeling that we paid too much is ill conceived to begin with, mostly propagated by the noisy and mob driven Colts blogosphere.

 

The Colts spread their money out much more effectively than the Dolphins, for instance. They signed five big name guys for $135m, averaging $27m/player, with a weighted average of about $7.1m/year. We signed ten guys, lesser known, for $140m, averaging $14m/player, at about $4.8m/year. Only Landry and Cherilus are painful to release after this season. And if we do get rid of some of those signings because they didn't work out, we create more cap space. We already have nearly $40m for next season.

 

I think we were very smart with our money, even if I don't love every signing. So I reject the premise.

 

Problem with Polian's signings is that he refused to consider any free agent alternatives to his own free agents. Many of the guys we overpaid could have been upgraded for the money we spent. And then, the longer they were here, the less likely they were to ever be released for cap savings. His approach was always too .. introverted, I guess, for my liking. The devil you know... 

 

I think, as Grigson's drafted players reach free agency, he'll get more reserved and lean more toward signing his own guys. You usually get a better deal that way.

 

Take a look at this site. http://www.profootballrosters.com/2013/07/24/how-assembled-chart-indianapolis/ Compare a team that has made a lot of acquisitions over the past couple years, like the Colts, to a team that focuses on the draft and their own guys, like the Packers. http://www.profootballrosters.com/2013/07/21/how-assembled-chart-green-bay/ I think Grigson's will start to look more like that, but not so heavily. Maybe more like the Pats: http://www.profootballrosters.com/2013/07/08/how-assembled-chart-new-england/

[Le Neon]

I think the overwhelming feeling that we paid too much is ill conceived to begin with, mostly propagated by the noisy and mob driven Colts blogosphere.

The Colts spread their money out much more effectively than the Dolphins, for instance. They signed five big name guys for $135m, averaging $27m/player, with a weighted average of about $7.1m/year. We signed ten guys, lesser known, for $140m, averaging $14m/player, at about $4.8m/year. Only Landry and Cherilus are painful to release after this season. And if we do get rid of some of those signings because they didn't work out, we create more cap space. We already have nearly $40m for next season.

I think we were very smart with our money, even if I don't love every signing. So I reject the premise.

Problem with Polian's signings is that he refused to consider any free agent alternatives to his own free agents. Many of the guys we overpaid could have been upgraded for the money we spent. And then, the longer they were here, the less likely they were to ever be released for cap savings. His approach was always too .. introverted, I guess, for my liking. The devil you know...

I think, as Grigson's drafted players reach free agency, he'll get more reserved and lean more toward signing his own guys. You usually get a better deal that way.

Take a look at this site. http://www.profootballrosters.com/2013/07/24/how-assembled-chart-indianapolis/ Compare a team that has made a lot of acquisitions over the past couple years, like the Colts, to a team that focuses on the draft and their own guys, like the Packers. http://www.profootballrosters.com/2013/07/21/how-assembled-chart-green-bay/ I think Grigson's will start to look more like that, but not so heavily. Maybe more like the Pats: http://www.profootballrosters.com/2013/07/08/how-assembled-chart-new-england/

He had to bring in some vets to establish a culture and shore up some weaknesses. As he drafts more players and evaluates his signings from previous years he'll have more opportunity to be reserved. I agree, I think he did a nice job spreading money around rather than paying one player, though it'll be tough to evaluate for a couple more years at least. Two straight playoff seasons is a pretty decent start.

[Narcosys]

That's easy to say with the benefit of hindsight.

no. There were better players in the board each time he picked.

[IrishColt22]

way too much hyperbole to even try to take seriously. He didn't "ridiculously" over pay for anyone in free agency. He may have somewhat overpaid but 1) that's to be expected in free agency and 2) everyone with the exceptions of DHB and Toler (due to injury) has earned pretty much every penny so far. I think RJF and Walden especially have far exceeded expectations, especially the expectations of the fan base....even though a decent percentage of the fan base won't admit to that.

As for the draft, you cannot seriously try to grade a draft in less than a year. The standard rule is to judge a draft class after around 3 years. This gives players time to adjust to the speed and strength of players in the NFL, time to learn the systems and schemes in place with their respective teams, and to learn the pro style of football that most players don't play in college.

I agree with ya. In response to the original post I think that the FO should but I also think that this forum would breakdown from the sheer impatience of a lot of posters on the growth and development of players. Patience is a dying virtue unfortunately

[Jason_]

no. There were better players in the board each time he picked.

According to who? You? Mel kiper? Mcshay?

[Alfred Cox]

No.... at this point it'll only hurt the team not help it... we made the playoffs... that's good enough..... two winning seasons in a row is good... better then our 2011 season. 

[buccolts]

I agree with ya. In response to the original post I think that the FO should but I also think that this forum would breakdown from the sheer impatience of a lot of posters on the growth and development of players. Patience is a dying virtue unfortunately

 

Oh, how true.

[SkyBane]

Oh, how true.

Its not that patience is dead. It has simply been replaced by other virtues of more value to a corporate based sink or swim society. Namely thrift and efficiency. Patience can be seen as slow, and thus mistaken for ineffeciency, making it appear as a sin rather than a virtue.

[OffensivelyPC]

no. There were better players in the board each time he picked.

Again...easy to say with the benefit of hindsight.  Point is, with some of your picks that you "would have made", you would have picked someone that wasn't as good.  I doubt you would have pick Sheldon Richardson over anyone else available in the 1st round.

[GoColts8818]

Generally speaking a team that takes a chance on a guy at least in the draft is a team that has extra draft picks, something we haven't had in the Grigson era, so that if it doesn't work out you have other picks to recover from it.  That or it's a team that is in pretty good shape talent wise that they can afford to be wrong.  You can't really say that about the Colts right now.  They need guys and can't afford a guy to not work out.  With that said, Grigson has taken his fair share of swings on guys and seems to be more willing to take a chance on a guy than Polian was. 

[Narcosys]

Again...easy to say with the benefit of hindsight.  Point is, with some of your picks that you "would have made", you would have picked someone that wasn't as good.  I doubt you would have pick Sheldon Richardson over anyone else available in the 1st round.

Over Werner yes, but i was more looking at Xavier Rhodes who i felt would have been a better position to draft and a better player to draft over Werner.