Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Herm Edwards: I'd Draft Luck And Trade Peyton


Recommended Posts

Excellent post...I agree on all counts. The only thing I would do is change the word "catered" to "evolved to"...I don't think those guys ever had any idea early on that Peyton would be capable of all the things he does so the offense evolved and became more and more QB dependent. I fully agree with you though on the explanation for the "complexity" of the offense and that the offense will need to be changed, not just tweaked but changed, for the next franchise QB. Then the offense can evolve around his strengths as well.

Okay Jason....now let's translate all this into the much more balanced offensive approach that Andrew Luck has been prepared to operate.

Do you understand why alot of us are enthusiastic about the prospect of him eventually succeeding Peyton?

We're talking about a QB that has heavily utilized WRs (last season), TEs (this season) and a rushing attack (both seasons)....and he's done it with lethal success and command.

Yes....he's only a college QB...but so are any of the other QBs drafting this year or next, one of which we HAVE to take for when Peyton is done...whether sooner or later.

But the very balanced, "pick your poison" quality of the Stanford offense, and hopefully a not too distant future Colts offense, will require a QB that has proven he can utilize ALL of his tools. Seeing how it will be a college QB, in any event, who takes the reigns of the Colts offense...I'd prefer a guy who's exceptionally proven himself at the college level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Rule 1a in NFL Football

Failure to recognize when a player is on a downward slide due to age results in embarrassment of player and franchise.

Making up bogus crap to prove a bogus points is even worse.

Manning had one of his best statistical years last year, and he was INJURED THE WHOLE YEAR!

How exactly is that declining performance?

Oh, and if you think Manning wont finish out his 5 year deal, you sir, are nuts.

Manning is the most competitive guy around. He prepares more than anyone.

The ONLY way he doesnt finish out his entire contract is if he isnt healthy in the next few months, and cant play next season.

Also, its stupid to draft a guy who will sit on the bench while you have the greatest QB ever to suit up for an NFL game on your roster. Its even more stupid to trade that GOAT away if they are healthy, because if they are, you take that pick, trade it for MORE picks, and make your team into the juggernaut they should have been, for the remainder of said GOATs career.

Of course that only works if you clean the sludge out of the coaching ranks and get some good guys in there that will use the available talent to the best of its abilities.

And when the end really is near, THEN you draft the replacement, so they can learn for a year or so from the best.

Stop putting the cart before the horse...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rule 1a in NFL Football

Failure to recognize when a player is on a downward slide due to age results in embarrassment of player and franchise.

How in the ____ is Manning on a "downward slide"?

10 wins + for ten+ years, he sits out from surgery and we are OHHHH and SEVEN!

Qoute me some stats, some facts, some something that shows he's circling the drain?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay Jason....now let's translate all this into the much more balanced offensive approach that Andrew Luck has been prepared to operate.

Do you understand why alot of us are enthusiastic about the prospect of him eventually succeeding Peyton?

Yes....he's only a college QB...but so are any of the other QBs drafting this year or next, one of which we HAVE to take for when Peyton is done...whether sooner or later.

But the very balanced, "pick your poison" quality of the Stanford offense, and hopefully a not too distant future Colts offense, will require a QB that has proven he can utilize ALL of his tools. Seeing how it will be a college QB, in any event, who takes the reigns of the Colts offense...I'd prefer a guy who's exceptionally proven himself at the college level.

If we're going to build our offense around the new QB, then why limit ourselves to one QB who will cost us substantially more than any of the others (I refer more to the #1 pick than salary cap)? Why not look at all of the options, compare their strengths and weaknesses, determine what it would take to build an offense that would allow this QB to succeed and consider how much of a transition it would take to get from the current Manning offense to the new QBs offense? If we have to rebuild the offense around the new QB, then is that QB so special that we have no other option than to spend the #1 pick on him even though if we chose one of the other options, we could make the trade and then have more picks to work on the transition from Manning to the new QB? And why if we're going to rebuild the offense should we draft the new QB now knowing he'll have to ride out the rest of Manning's days? People like to say he'll be learning the offense but we've already said the offense will have to be reworked so what will the QB be learning? If he has to sit for 2-3 years learning "something" then was he that much better than his peers that he absolutely warranted the #1 pick?

We're talking about a QB that has heavily utilized WRs (last season), TEs (this season) and a rushing attack (both seasons)....and he's done it with lethal success and command.

I could name you several other QBs who either do this same thing, or simply don't have one of the assets in order to be able to utilize them. And to say he "utilizes" his running game is kinda funny...that's like saying Trent Dilfer was a great SB QB with the Ravens because he "utilized" Jamal Lewis. Utilizing the WRs and TEs is a more valid point, but like I said I could name several QBs that do the same thing. I will give you, however, there are many QBs who aren't able to do this so it is an important trait to look for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

all this from Herm Edwards.....the TV announcer........maybe that's why he's now a TV announcer and not working with some team in an administrative or coaching position.....How is it that YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME by trading Manning?.....

just another iDOT with an i in the middle......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we're going to build our offense around the new QB, then why limit ourselves to one QB who will cost us substantially more than any of the others (I refer more to the #1 pick than salary cap)? Why not look at all of the options, compare their strengths and weaknesses, determine what it would take to build an offense that would allow this QB to succeed and consider how much of a transition it would take to get from the current Manning offense to the new QBs offense? If we have to rebuild the offense around the new QB, then is that QB so special that we have no other option than to spend the #1 pick on him even though if we chose one of the other options, we could make the trade and then have more picks to work on the transition from Manning to the new QB? And why if we're going to rebuild the offense should we draft the new QB now knowing he'll have to ride out the rest of Manning's days? People like to say he'll be learning the offense but we've already said the offense will have to be reworked so what will the QB be learning? If he has to sit for 2-3 years learning "something" then was he that much better than his peers that he absolutely warranted the #1 pick?

As I've said continually since the discussion of Andrew Luck first started, he should not be our selection unless Peyton definitively has less than 3 seasons remaining. I've also stated all along that Peyton Manning IS the Colts system....it operates as we are now witnessing on his abilities and his style...but unfortunately in several crucial playoff games, was at the same time relied upon far too much when the basics of possession football....i.e. a rushing attack....were a continuing and glaring weakness of ours. The "possession" part was a systematic philosophy by choice that may indeed have costed us 1-2 additional Super Bowls....IMO.

I could name you several other QBs who either do this same thing, or simply don't have one of the assets in order to be able to utilize them. And to say he "utilizes" his running game is kinda funny...that's like saying Trent Dilfer was a great SB QB with the Ravens because he "utilized" Jamal Lewis. Utilizing the WRs and TEs is a more valid point, but like I said I could name several QBs that do the same thing. I will give you, however, there are many QBs who aren't able to do this so it is an important trait to look for.

By my use of the word "utilizing"....I assumed you knew that I meant Luck's play-calling and audibling of the Stanford offense in and out of the best possible play and his overall decision making at the line of scrimmage. No one at the college level does it anywhere near as well....if in fact, they do it at all....than Andrew Luck.

And by your own contention...Nick Foles has no running game to speak of, so what do we know about his ability to "utilize" a rushing attack when one doesn't exist? His decision-making amounts to picking one of the 4-5 passing targets he's given in the Arizona spread. he may very well be able to learn and adapt to that...but it ain't gonna happen overnight.

And exactly who are these several other QBs who call the plays for their offense and audible in a "check with me" method as Luck does?

The Colts offense, post-Manning, will need more balance and Andrew Luck much more than any major college QB has run an offense more balanced than any college program in recent memory, and has done it superbly. We will choose Manning's successor from a crop of college QBs....that is unavoidable.....and IMO, taking one of them from a spread system runs the risk of that QB being badly unprepared for the more conventional and balanced offense the Colts need after Manning vacates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, its stupid to draft a guy who will sit on the bench while you have the greatest QB ever to suit up for an NFL game on your roster.

I disagree.

IF Andrew Luck is anywhere near as good as he's being advertised as being, I think you take him. Whether he's going to play now or sit on the bench for four years matters not. It would only benefit a young quarterback to learn at the feet of a great veteran like Manning. And it doesn't require any kind of tutelage. You learn by watching him do what he does, especially after a year like this. When Manning comes back, he's going to be hungry, and it's going to show even more than it normally does. Having a young quarterback be surrounded by that type of environment can only help his development. And so what if it's four years until Manning's contract is over? It's completely irrelevant, and that's so because of what Andrew Luck is expected to become. He's a "can't pass" prospect.

It's like LeBron James. No position in sports is relatable to quarterback, but when LeBron came out of college, he was a "can't pass" prospect. Everybody expected him to be a GREAT player. You don't say "well, we already have several scorers and ball-dominant players on our team, so we'll probably trade out of that top spot and build around the guys we have." No. I don't care if the Lakers had the top pick, and Kobe Bryant was their best player, they'd still draft LeBron and make those two co-exist. That's a luxury a basketball team has that a football team doesn't, not at quarterback, because only one guy can play. But the reason I believe that it makes sense is because Manning is going to retire within a few years, and when he does, if you have the next guy primed and ready to go, you don't have to miss a beat.

We all expected to have a season like this one day. We just didn't expect it to be until Manning retired, and then we'd suck, get a great pick, draft a top flight quarterback, and be on the way up again. We're having that post-Manning season right now, only we have the luxury of taking steps so that it never happens again. We can draft his replacement right now, with no pressure on his shoulders to lead a team out of the depths, and all he has to do is just watch, learn, and get ready. And if it's a guy who is expected to be as good as Luck, a guy that virtually every team in the NFL would love to have a chance at, and you have a quarterback like Manning who is on the back end of his career and his health is uncertain, I don't think it's stupid at all to draft Luck. Even if he sits on the bench for the next four years. It worked for Aaron Rodgers and the Packers.

That's not to say that I don't think trading the top pick and restocking some key positions through the extra draft picks is a sound strategy. Going off of what the Falcons gave up for Julio Jones, we could get quite a haul for the rights to draft Luck. Probably would a swap of firsts this year, plus a second and a fourth, and an additional first and third next year, or something along those lines. And now you spread your first pick risk out over five picks. I wouldn't be upset if we did this, assuming we had the #1 pick. But I'm getting more and more used to the idea of drafting Luck if we pick first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of those listed, Farve had one good season in Minn and that was about it, Montana did nothing in KC, Marino was a shell of himself at those ages due to bad knees. Elway is the exception, but he also had an incredible RB and offense around him and a pretty decent D at those ages.

Montana in KC: Took KC to the AFC Championship game, losing to the Bills like everyone did back then. Made the Pro Bowl in 1993 only playing in 11 games. I know your thing is to make asinine comments, but at least don't make assertions that are so easily debunked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How in the ____ is Manning on a "downward slide"?

10 wins + for ten+ years, he sits out from surgery and we are OHHHH and SEVEN!

Qoute me some stats, some facts, some something that shows he's circling the drain?

He's on the downward slide because DN has some weird obsession with Andrew Luck and it doesn't make sense to take Luck if Manning isn't on a downward slide. That's how he knows, without knowing anything about Manning's condition or how it will affect his game, that Manning will never be great again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm starting think the time has come for Irsay to add some clarity to the situation. I know that he probably wants to make teams think the Colts will draft luck so that, if he does want to trade, teams will make offers thinking it will take a lot to get the pick away from us. BUT, I think it's time for Irsay to unequivocally endorse Manning and put an end to all this speculation about trading him. He doesn't have to say that we won't take Luck, just that Manning will not be traded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And exactly who are these several other QBs who call the plays for their offense and audible in a "check with me" method as Luck does?

This must have been a misunderstanding. You said he utilizes all of his weapons and I meant that there are several other QBs who do the same thing...use all of the weapons he has. By that I meant there are several QBs who get all of their receivers involved, their TEs, Backs etc...anything to keep the chains moving. As I continued to say, many QBs that have 1 star weapon will focus primarily on that target and not spread the ball around and take what the defense gives him. Sean Salisbury comes to mind....the man would not throw to anyone other than Chris Carter. So no, I didn't assume you were talking about play-calling and audibling etc etc. There are several QBs that do audibilize and check down when they see something in the defense but no most likely not to the extent Luck has. Something to keep in mind, however, is that not every coach is willing to allow the QB to do that, regardless of the confidence level they have in their QB.

I believe this was discussed in another thread, but Arizona doesn't run a spread offense in the same way most teams run a spread. More often than not they use a standard personnel grouping of 2 RB, TE and 2 WR but they run it from a pistol or shotgun formation (not always but more often than under center). Also mentioned in another thread was that he has just been given the opportunity to start calling his own plays after their former HC Mike Stoops was fired a few weeks ago. I'm very curious to see if they continue to let him do this and if so how he progresses. I will point out that one of the biggest problems Arizona has had so far this season is getting off to a slow start but in the first game with Foles calling the plays they went down the field for Tds on their first 2 drives. Granted it was against UCLA and they continued to destroy UCLA's defense for the rest of the game so....you can take from that whatever you want.

As I've said continually since the discussion of Andrew Luck first started, he should not be our selection unless Peyton definitively has less than 3 seasons remaining. I've also stated all along that Peyton Manning IS the Colts system....it operates as we are now witnessing on his abilities and his style...but unfortunately in several crucial playoff games, was at the same time relied upon far too much when the basics of possession football....i.e. a rushing attack....were a continuing and glaring weakness of ours. The "possession" part was a systematic philosophy by choice that may indeed have costed us 1-2 additional Super Bowls....IMO.

This is the most important piece that I come closest to agreeing with you on. If Manning cannot come back then the whole dynamic changes. Obviously, I would still want them to workout and examine all of the top prospects and not just take Luck "no questions asked" (not saying these were your words but many have said this). I've said numerous times (though there have been so many threads about it, who can keep track of everything that's said right? :) ) that I would take Foles if we know we're going to have Manning for at least 1-2 years. Imo that's enough time to coach him up to the level that he needs to be before taking over the reigns. If Manning returns to full health and they expect him to play out his contract, and if Painter continues to improve then they may not draft a QB at all this year and instead wait another year before even going after Manning's replacement.

Again I want to re-emphasize though, my contention has always been "is Luck so much better than his peers that he warrants the #1 pick given we have time to groom a QB" and not "is Luck better than his peers". Personally, I don't think the talent gap is as wide as many experts make it out to be but that's just my humble opinion. I don't expect anyone to take my word over the "experts". However, I do expect the Polians/Irsay to conduct a much, much more thorough evaluation of all of the top prospects than I ever could and not just listen to the "experts" and take Luck based on the hype. I would expect them to pick the one that is the best overall value based on the amount of time they have before the new guy has to take over. All that said though, even if Luck turns out to be the next Manning (which imo is unlikely since there has only ever been one QB who is as cerebral as Manning is), I've got no problem passing on Peyton Manning 2.0 if we can instead get Drew Brees 2.0, Phillip Rivers 2.0 or Aaron Rodgers 2.0 etc especially since, with one of the latter guys, it would mean getting a bounty of additional picks as well.

Edited by Jason
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone else see Herm Edwards say this on Audibles on ESPN? What a maroon.

it's not a bad idea, you guys might find yourself in another favre to rodgers situation, but by trading peyton (if he's irreparable) would only serve to jump start your franchise's next incarnation. Edited by jcdavey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm starting think the time has come for Irsay to add some clarity to the situation. I know that he probably wants to make teams think the Colts will draft luck so that, if he does want to trade, teams will make offers thinking it will take a lot to get the pick away from us. BUT, I think it's time for Irsay to unequivocally endorse Manning and put an end to all this speculation about trading him. He doesn't have to say that we won't take Luck, just that Manning will not be traded.

100% nonsense.

Irsay gave Manning a $90 million contract a few months ago. Isn't that the endorsement you are looking for? Besides that, all this noise is from people on the outside who don't have a clue about what the Colts are thinking. On top of that, before deciding to draft Luck or trade Manning once they take him, the Colts should probably be in the actual position to take him, which is far from assured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I'd take the "next Andrew Rodgers, Brian Urlacher, and Derelle Revis" over the "next Peyton Manning". 3 pro bowlers > 1 pro bowler.

I don't follow college football myself, but I was just curious, if there are any good QB's to draft ext year like there are this year...? I'm just saying. Who said we couldn't trade the first overall for a 1st rounder this year, and a first rounder next year? Now I know their are no guarantees, but why not draft Peyton successor next year? I sppose it doesn't matter really if its this year or next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

100% nonsense.

Irsay gave Manning a $90 million contract a few months ago. Isn't that the endorsement you are looking for? Besides that, all this noise is from people on the outside who don't have a clue about what the Colts are thinking. On top of that, before deciding to draft Luck or trade Manning once they take him, the Colts should probably be in the actual position to take him, which is far from assured.

The contract was before the severity of the injury was known, so, no, it's not the endorsement I'm looking for. And I don't understand what making the statement, "We will not trade Peyton Manning. Peyton Manning will retire a Colt even if we draft Luck." would hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again I want to re-emphasize though, my contention has always been "is Luck so much better than his peers that he warrants the #1 pick given we have time to groom a QB" and not "is Luck better than his peers". Personally, I don't think the talent gap is as wide as many experts make it out to be but that's just my humble opinion. I don't expect anyone to take my word over the "experts". However, I do expect the Polians/Irsay to conduct a much, much more thorough evaluation of all of the top prospects than I ever could and not just listen to the "experts" and take Luck based on the hype. I would expect them to pick the one that is the best overall value based on the amount of time they have before the new guy has to take over. All that said though, even if Luck turns out to be the next Manning (which imo is unlikely since there has only ever been one QB who is as cerebral as Manning is), I've got no problem passing on Peyton Manning 2.0 if we can instead get Drew Brees 2.0, Phillip Rivers 2.0 or Aaron Rodgers 2.0 etc especially since, with one of the latter guys, it would mean getting a bounty of additional picks as well.

I think all of us would be happy with any of those "2.0s" you mentioned if Foles, Landry Jones or some other QB were to be Manning's successor and play as well as those guys.... plus bring along all the extra draft picks, provided the front office doesn't foul them up.

It's that last part that scares me.... because even our "proven" draft picks have been largely ineffective without Peyton. I'm talking about Reggie, Dallas and Collie.... who all look pretty ordinary without Peyton in there. And those are the good picks that Polian made.

It all starts with a QB that sees the defense before the ball is snapped and that often is the difference between college QBs that make it big in the NFL and the ones that don't.

They don't grow on trees.... and some of them never get it in spite of other QB qualities they do have.

But it's precisely Luck's cerebral ability that I believe has set him apart in these 2012 QB evaluations. Luck reminds me of a bigger, stronger, right-handed version of Steve Young.

So I guess the thing that has me jazzed the most is the prospect of a pass/run balanced offense and a QB with very high football smarts who can play-select well and in addition to all that, can even make plays with his escapability.

I'll be very surprised if Andrew Luck is not a legitimate, franchise NFL QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once again.

It.

Is.

Not.

A.

Complex.

Offense.

Sorry, that's straight out of Moore's mouth. Stampede Blue had a great article about it a few years ago. It's not complex, it's just all built on timing. The routes aren't hard, nor do they have anywhere near the number of routes of teams like NE and GB.

Stampede Blue doesn't right great articles... Also, the colts offense is complex. You don't just learn the timing overnight, it takes lots and lots of practice, especially with they go to the lightning fast hurry up offense.

Edited by Ramblinwreck7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think all of us would be happy with any of those "2.0s" you mentioned if Foles, Landry Jones or some other QB were to be Manning's successor and play as well as those guys.... plus bring along all the extra draft picks, provided the front office doesn't foul them up.

It's that last part that scares me.... because even our "proven" draft picks have been largely ineffective without Peyton. I'm talking about Reggie, Dallas and Collie.... who all look pretty ordinary without Peyton in there. And those are the good picks that Polian made.

It all starts with a QB that sees the defense before the ball is snapped and that often is the difference between college QBs that make it big in the NFL and the ones that don't.

They don't grow on trees.... and some of them never get it in spite of other QB qualities they do have.

But it's precisely Luck's cerebral ability that I believe has set him apart in these 2012 QB evaluations. Luck reminds me of a bigger, stronger, right-handed version of Steve Young.

So I guess the thing that has me jazzed the most is the prospect of a pass/run balanced offense and a QB with very high football smarts who can play-select well and in addition to all that, can even make plays with his escapability.

I'll be very surprised if Andrew Luck is not a legitimate, franchise NFL QB.

Is a franchise quarterback....Peyton Manning or Phil Rivers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of that was realistic.

NO really? You continue to hate on me. no surprise. That's what happens when you don't have any better ideas. If we plug Peyton back into our equation we are an 8-8 team at best... and that's being realistic. It's time to rebuild and do Manning a favor by trading him.

Edited by super8todd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rule 1a in NFL Football

Failure to recognize when a player is on a downward slide due to age results in embarrassment of player and franchise.

This "rule" is just not prevalent for great QB-s. I cant recall a single occasion when a team has replaced it's healthy true franchise QB with an unproven rookie, no matter how talented the rookie was. Not even a Brees or Rivers caliber, not to mention HOF ones. The only 2 examples we know of were the Montana=>Young and the Favre=>Rogers moves. But even these didn't fall under the "rule", because Montana was the starter, and the niners did not have any intentions to replace him, until he got injured. Hadnt he been injured, he probably woud've retired as a niner. So would Favre. The Packers took Rogers, because Favre were already speculating on his retirement. They didn't want to let Favre go at all. They even persuaded him twice to come back and play for another season, for God's sake! The only reason they eventually decided to move on, was because Favre acted like a rouchy bride, not willing to decide if he stays or retires until the last minute. Had he been a little more reliable in his decisions, I'm sure he could've retire as a packer. And it doesn't matter how good Rogers was - we now know that he is probably even better than Favre - he would never have gotten the starting position until Favre is gone.

And don't interpret this as teams are scared to make moves when necessary. They do make moves when it's logical, but the QB position is soo important, that it's just not logical to replace a proven HOF QB with an unproven rookie. No matter how promising the rookie is, and no matter if the veteran QB has only 3-4 years left in his carreer. You can replace a WR, you can replace a RB, you can replace probably anyone in the roster, except the QB. If you find a great QB, then you want him to play his entire carreer in your team. Period. This is why you find plenty of examples of replacing WR-s, RB-s, linemen, etc, but very few - if any at all - of replacing a QB.

And there is one more thing that i'm sure the Colts FO will strongly consider. If we pass on Luck, and Luck becomes a great player, while the Colts will struggle to find the new franchise QB after Manning retires, then it will be bad. I mean, really bad. But imagine what would happen, if we take Luck, cut Manning, and Manning will have 3-4 great years with an other team. Just imagine him signing with Baltimore for example. With that team, it's harder to imagine him not winning another ring than winning... What would the Indy fanbase say for letting the GOAT go and win a ring for Baltimore? Baltimore! Luck should better win 2 rings in that case - and do it soon - otherwise the fans would rip Polian's head off...

Edited by Peterk2011
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if its not complex why cant any qb expect peyton excel in it? why have players said it takes them years to learn this offense

You mean Collins and Painter? Come on man, Collins should've retired and wasn't ready. Painter is just a bad QB that knows the offense.

And its not a complex offense except for remembering all of Peyton's audibles and hot routes. What's really difficult about it is you have to be extremely disciplined and efficient, if your not, defenses will shut you down. Timing must be perfect because Manning is throwing the ball where you will be. he throws WRs open and if the receiver is off just alittle then its incomplete or worse.

That's what makes the offense difficult for new offensive players. Playing perfectly isn't easy.

Luck may end up with a different system anyway.

Edited by JoKeR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And i am sure Herm Edwards will never be a GM for sure.Where does he even have the right to say what to do did he win a SB in jets or kc no i just think he is haten on the colts franchise for having a franchise QB that he never coached. And the next sentence he is saying chiacgo needs to open there eyes and pay there best player but telling us to trade our best player he is a jerk WE PLAY TO WIN THE GAME but HERM you never did win the game. MY thoughts on this is if peyton is healthy enough to trade then he is healthy enough to play for us 4 maybe 5 more years and why would u want to get rid off a sure thing for luck that could be another leaf. both start with a L both a four letter word so why cant they both be a bust

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there is no way in heck that we'd trade the face of our franchise. Manning still has a few seasons left in him, and he needs to earn that contract. In the first round, obvious holes on defense should be filled, not Andrew Luck. Instead, the colts should take landry jones or matt barkley in the second or third round. Also the offensive line is not getting any younger, and joseph addai has been injury prone for the past two seasons.

Round 1: secondary

Round 2: Landry Jones/Matt Barkley

Round 3: offensive line

Round 4: offensuve line

Round 5: runnning back

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there is no way in heck that we'd trade the face of our franchise. Manning still has a few seasons left in him, and he needs to earn that contract. In the first round, obvious holes on defense should be filled, not Andrew Luck. Instead, the colts should take landry jones or matt barkley in the second or third round. Also the offensive line is not getting any younger, and joseph addai has been injury prone for the past two seasons.

Round 1: secondary

Round 2: Landry Jones/Matt Barkley

Round 3: offensive line

Round 4: offensuve line

Round 5: runnning back

No way do either Barkley or Jones fall to the 2nd round with as many QB needy teams as there are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we get the #1 pick this is most likely to happen. We draft Luck. Then this upcoming year we test and see what Peyton can do... If he is still struggling to get us to 8-8, then we trade Manning and start over with Luck. But keep both for at least a year to assess our situation. Teams will still throw in the kitchen sink to trade for either in a years time also.

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...