Which Would You Pick...

[dn4192]

Option 1: The entire coaching staff is let go, all new coaches are brought in,the Colts draft all defensive players, get Peyton back healthy next season and return to the top with a SB victory in one of Peytons remaining 4 seasons with the team...BUT then the Colts return to their form of the 80's and 90's of being a bottom feeder averging about 4-5 per season for the next next decade

or

Option 2: The Colts make minor coaching changes, draft a QB in the first round and some more defensive help, go 9-7 or 10-6 next year make the playoffs but not the superbowl in any of the remaining years with Peyton, but over the following decade attend at least 2-3 superbowls winning at least 2.

Which option as a fan would you rather have?

[Jason_]

wow, talk about stacking the deck to favor your argument. How about I give you 2 options:

1: Colts trade #1 pick, draft a defense and bring in competent coaches. They draft a QB somewhere after #1 overall and get a very good QB...not the next Manning but the next Rodgers or Brees. The defense is vastly improved and alone is enough to carry the team into the playoffs but we actually have an offense to go with it. This leads to 3 or more SB wins in the next 12 years

or

2. Colts draft Andrew Luck and he turns out to be a bust.

If I give you only those 2 options, which do you pick?

[coltfaninnewyork]

wow, talk about stacking the deck to favor your argument. How about I give you 2 options:

1: Colts trade #1 pick, draft a defense and bring in competent coaches. They draft a QB somewhere after #1 overall and get a very good QB...not the next Manning but the next Rodgers or Brees. The defense is vastly improved and alone is enough to carry the team into the playoffs but we actually have an offense to go with it. This leads to 3 or more SB wins in the next 12 years

or

2. Colts draft Andrew Luck and he turns out to be a bust.

If I give you only those 2 options, which do you pick?

Charlie Casserly said if in position the colt's will indeed take luck,your thoughts.

[JoKeR]

Option 2

[swflacoltsfans]

I aways pick C when I don't know the answer.

[Jason_]

Charlie Casserly said if in position the colt's will indeed take luck,your thoughts.

My thoughts are that anyone who says, right now, that the Colts WILL DRAFT LUCK should not be writing for anything other than perhaps the National Enquirer. There is still the better half of the college season to be played, the combine, individual workouts, interviews and having the chance to evaluate several top prospects, not just Luck. There's also no way at this point to predict how Manning's recovery will have progressed by the point of the draft.

I'm in no way saying the Colts will absolutely pass on Luck...that would be foolish. Just as foolish as anyone saying they absolutely will draft Luck.

[coltfaninnewyork]

My thoughts are that anyone who says, right now, that the Colts WILL DRAFT LUCK should not be writing for anything other than perhaps the National Enquirer. There is still the better half of the college season to be played, the combine, individual workouts, interviews and having the chance to evaluate several top prospects, not just Luck. There's also no way at this point to predict how Manning's recovery will have progressed by the point of the draft.

I'm in no way saying the Colts will absolutely pass on Luck...that would be foolish. Just as foolish as anyone saying they absolutely will draft Luck.

I agree,why do they allow that sensationalism when everybody knows polian ain't telling.

[Captain Americolt]

Don't listen to Carlie Casserly

[Peytongirl]

wow, talk about stacking the deck to favor your argument. How about I give you 2 options:

1: Colts trade #1 pick, draft a defense and bring in competent coaches. They draft a QB somewhere after #1 overall and get a very good QB...not the next Manning but the next Rodgers or Brees. The defense is vastly improved and alone is enough to carry the team into the playoffs but we actually have an offense to go with it. This leads to 3 or more SB wins in the next 12 years

or

2. Colts draft Andrew Luck and he turns out to be a bust.

If I give you only those 2 options, which do you pick?

I choose door number 1 please. Can I catch the plane to Fantasy Island? Oh dear...just told my age. I kid, I kid. :blush:

[JoKeR]

But we can probably all agree that no one is going to pass Luck on draft day and if the Colts take a QB as their 1st pick, it will be Luck. Baring injury of course.

[dn4192]

wow, talk about stacking the deck to favor your argument. How about I give you 2 options:

1: Colts trade #1 pick, draft a defense and bring in competent coaches. They draft a QB somewhere after #1 overall and get a very good QB...not the next Manning but the next Rodgers or Brees. The defense is vastly improved and alone is enough to carry the team into the playoffs but we actually have an offense to go with it. This leads to 3 or more SB wins in the next 12 years

or

2. Colts draft Andrew Luck and he turns out to be a bust.

If I give you only those 2 options, which do you pick?

I still go with number 2, there is always a risk, but I feel there is a better upside and chance with Luck over other QB's we take at some point which the Colts will have to do.

[Peytongirl]

Peyton will be back for a few (if not several) more years. I hate to see a good young QB be wasted.

[dn4192]

My thoughts are that anyone who says, right now, that the Colts WILL DRAFT LUCK should not be writing for anything other than perhaps the National Enquirer. There is still the better half of the college season to be played, the combine, individual workouts, interviews and having the chance to evaluate several top prospects, not just Luck. There's also no way at this point to predict how Manning's recovery will have progressed by the point of the draft.

I'm in no way saying the Colts will absolutely pass on Luck...that would be foolish. Just as foolish as anyone saying they absolutely will draft Luck.

Should draft day come and the Colts have the number 1 pick it will be a very intersting pick and day to say the least.

[dn4192]

Peyton will be back for a few (if not several) more years. I hate to see a good young QB be wasted.

What do you consider "few" or "several"? Also having a QB sit and learn for a few years ins't a bad thing if few are less then 3.

[DeathCo]

I think we are forgetting something here...

This next draft...the guys we pick up will most likely be here AFTER Manning retires... think about that for a moment.

So we have some very difficult decisions as an organization when it comes to this upcoming draft.

We could draft Luck (assuming we get the first pick) to replace Manning in 3 to 7 years. Then, for the rest of the draft keep doing what we have been doing... draft smaller guys for the D and then maybe grab some more WR's for the heir-aparent down the road...and basically have the same game plan and what not for when Luck gets into the lineup. (once again assuming Luck pans out like we wish)

-OR-

Do what we can for manning now and draft to fix the glaring holes and for the future, and maybe win a SB in the very near future... (assuming that he comes back 100% and does not lose a step)

But if I were to bet on anything, history has shown us... never bet against Manning. Hes one of the more sure bets in a game that is as transient as NFL football.

We trade the 1st overall pick for as much as we can (once again, assuming that we get that pick)

If we trade it, most likely we will still be picking in the middle to upper parts of the first round.. the good teams will not want to trade their picks away (can you see the Pats trading for Luck? nor can I)

So that means the other bottom feeders for this year will be fighting each other for Luck.. We will still have a high draft pick and more picks all around. (good deal IMO )

Then we draft defense HEAVILY.. Start with corners, then some big LB,last D-line.

Why do this? Well, lol... we need it bad bad badly. But there is a second reason to do this... A good defense can make a transition to a new system and/or new QB less painful. The pressure to carry the team on his shoulders will be a heck a lot less then what Painter is going through right now. It wont be on the QB..the D will give him more opportunities and give him more time to learn and ease into the position.

There are more points I could discuss... but there are the two major points..

Of course both scenario rely heavily on some assumptions and "what ifs" (never a good thing)

Just my two cents..yet, once again.

[Jason_]

I still go with number 2, there is always a risk, but I feel there is a better upside and chance with Luck over other QB's we take at some point which the Colts will have to do.

There is no upside for Luck in the 2 options I gave you. I very clearly said I'm giving you 2 options:

Option A - draft Luck and he is a bust

Option B - pass on Luck, get extra picks and our defense becomes a top 3 defense for the next 10+ years

Based on these 2 options alone, which do you take?

[manningstheman]

wow, talk about stacking the deck to favor your argument. How about I give you 2 options:

1: Colts trade #1 pick, draft a defense and bring in competent coaches. They draft a QB somewhere after #1 overall and get a very good QB...not the next Manning but the next Rodgers or Brees. The defense is vastly improved and alone is enough to carry the team into the playoffs but we actually have an offense to go with it. This leads to 3 or more SB wins in the next 12 years

or

2. Colts draft Andrew Luck and he turns out to be a bust.

If I give you only those 2 options, which do you pick?

fSorry, but if you have seen kid play you wouldnt think that. He is going to be a great qb. He doesnt have the skilled players some of the other schools do, its Stanford, so you have to understand he is like a Peyton Manning of his team. He makes them look really good.

[Jason_]

fSorry, but if you have seen kid play you wouldnt think that. He is going to be a great qb. He doesnt have the skilled players some of the other schools do, its Stanford, so you have to understand he is like a Peyton Manning of his team. He makes them look really good.

Did you read each post, including the original one, or just see me say something you perceived as negative about Luck?

Edited November 1, 2011 by Jason

[Gonzo]

I still go with number 2, there is always a risk, but I feel there is a better upside and chance with Luck over other QB's we take at some point which the Colts will have to do.

So basically you'd rather draft a bust then lose an argument on the internet? Way to lock yourself in on the punchline.

[MAC]

I still go with number 2, there is always a risk, but I feel there is a better upside and chance with Luck over other QB's we take at some point which the Colts will have to do.

OK, you take Jason's option two, and then declare that Luck won't be a bust.

In turn I'll take your option one, but say keep Caldwell and the offensive coaches, draft whomever the FO thinks is appropriate (not all defense), and state that the Colts will win five more Super Bowls under Peyton, find the perfect new QB at the end of round one three months after he retires, and continue onwards forever as an upper echelon team.

In answering Jason you've already demonstrated the problem with our question - that you've built the answer you want into it. I don't like either option.

[Jason_]

So basically you'd rather draft a bust then lose an argument on the internet? Way to lock yourself in on the punchline.

LOL....thank you for the laugh. +1 to you good sir

OK, you take Jason's option two, and then declare that Luck won't be a bust.

In turn I'll take your option one, but say keep Caldwell and the offensive coaches, draft whomever the FO thinks is appropriate (not all defense), and state that the Colts will win five more Super Bowls under Peyton, find the perfect new QB at the end of round one three months after he retires, and continue onwards forever as an upper echelon team.

In answering Jason you've already demonstrated the problem with our question - that you've built the answer you want into it. I don't like either option.

And +1 to you as well. I swear I was honestly starting to think I was going insane. I'm glad I'm not the only one who saw the absurdity in the original post.

[pacolts56]

My thoughts are that anyone who says, right now, that the Colts WILL DRAFT LUCK should not be writing for anything other than perhaps the National Enquirer. There is still the better half of the college season to be played, the combine, individual workouts, interviews and having the chance to evaluate several top prospects, not just Luck. There's also no way at this point to predict how Manning's recovery will have progressed by the point of the draft.

I'm in no way saying the Colts will absolutely pass on Luck...that would be foolish. Just as foolish as anyone saying they absolutely will draft Luck.

At least Casserly speaks from some experience, though.

[oldunclemark]

wow, talk about stacking the deck to favor your argument. How about I give you 2 options:

1: Colts trade #1 pick, draft a defense and bring in competent coaches. They draft a QB somewhere after #1 overall and get a very good QB...not the next Manning but the next Rodgers or Brees. The defense is vastly improved and alone is enough to carry the team into the playoffs but we actually have an offense to go with it. This leads to 3 or more SB wins in the next 12 years

or

2. Colts draft Andrew Luck and he turns out to be a bust.

If I give you only those 2 options, which do you pick?

Let me think....dont rush me!!! I'm thinking it over :scared:

[dn4192]

Peyton will be back for a few (if not several) more years. I hate to see a good young QB be wasted.

Peyton won't be wasted, I am sure we can get a few good draft choices for him.

[dn4192]

There is no upside for Luck in the 2 options I gave you. I very clearly said I'm giving you 2 options:

Option A - draft Luck and he is a bust

Option B - pass on Luck, get extra picks and our defense becomes a top 3 defense for the next 10+ years

Based on these 2 options alone, which do you take?

I take Luck...

[dn4192]

So basically you'd rather draft a bust then lose an argument on the internet? Way to lock yourself in on the punchline.

No, I take Luck because you won't know he is bust, and when you go into any draft you draft the best players available. If he is a bust then he is a bust...

[dn4192]

OK, you take Jason's option two, and then declare that Luck won't be a bust.

In turn I'll take your option one, but say keep Caldwell and the offensive coaches, draft whomever the FO thinks is appropriate (not all defense), and state that the Colts will win five more Super Bowls under Peyton, find the perfect new QB at the end of round one three months after he retires, and continue onwards forever as an upper echelon team.

In answering Jason you've already demonstrated the problem with our question - that you've built the answer you want into it. I don't like either option.

No the two options I presented are both options that are pretty close to what could happen.

[ruksak]

I'd rather pick my nose.....it soothes me.

No the two options I presented are both options that are pretty close to what could happen.

The two options are pretty close to what will happen, but you jumped the shark tank by assuming the results, therefor creating a heckuva spin to toy with. The questions are silly, as the base of the questions are ; Would you rather the Colts lose for the next several years or would you rather they win a SB?

I suppose if we want a SB we had better be in agreement with you?

[dn4192]

I'd rather pick my nose.....it soothes me.

The two options are pretty close to what will happen, but you jumped the shark tank by assuming the results, therefor creating a heckuva spin to toy with. The questions are silly, as the base of the questions are ; Would you rather the Colts lose for the next several years or would you rather they win a SB?

I suppose if we want a SB we had better be in agreement with you?

I believe many here think that with some few additions and changes in coaching the Colts with Peyton have the ability to get back to and win another SB in Peytons remaining years. Then you have those who think that we are at a point where we can either play for the next couple of seasons of possible good to great play and then be bad for a very long time, or draft and beginning building for the next decade and given the history of this franchise over the previous decade lends to the view they can be very good again for a very long time with the right drafting in the upcoming draft.

[ruksak]

Its very likely we keep all our coaches and succeed. We might keep all our coaches, get Manning back and draft Luck and still fail for years to come. Who knows, right? I mean to say, who expected us to go winless through eight games even without Manning? I knew we would suck but......0-8?

Point being, you presume to much.

[dn4192]

Its very likely we keep all our coaches and succeed. We might keep all our coaches, get Manning back and draft Luck and still fail for years to come. Who knows, right? I mean to say, who expected us to go winless through eight games even without Manning? I knew we would suck but......0-8?

Point being, you presume to much.

All we can go on is the data we have.

[Thewholefnshow28]

This is such a loaded question it is ridiculous. What happens if we can build a defense the caliber of Pitt or Baltimore that can actually carry the team when the offense struggles. The problem with this team is not that our defense is just not good enough. It is that we built this whole freaking thing around one player.

Also, if we do draft Luck we better pray that he turns out to be one of the best QBs in the league right away. You think Eli or Matty Ice could run this team like Manning does and carry the load like he does? The reason this team has been successful is not because of great coaching or how amazing our front office has been. We have rode the coattails of Peyton for over a decade and to expect a rookie to come in and have to carry the load after maybe one or two years sitting is almost career suicide.

If Luck turns out to be a top 5 QB right away we will be darn lucky, but will still have the problem because our team will just be built around Luck.

[ruksak]

All we can go on is the data we have.

...and what "data" is that?

[doogansquest]

LOL....thank you for the laugh. +1 to you good sir

And +1 to you as well. I swear I was honestly starting to think I was going insane. I'm glad I'm not the only one who saw the absurdity in the original post.

+1 on both your +1's, and I agree with pretty much every point you made.

[dn4192]

...and what "data" is that?

1. Bill Polian has a track record of putting together good teams

2 His son had a pretty good first draft this past season

3. Players in the NFL don't improve with age and have injury issue

4. Teams that are unwilling to cut ties with aging players usually have issues

5. Teams that are willing to move older players with younger better players on average do better

[dn4192]

This is such a loaded question it is ridiculous. What happens if we can build a defense the caliber of Pitt or Baltimore that can actually carry the team when the offense struggles. The problem with this team is not that our defense is just not good enough. It is that we built this whole freaking thing around one player.

Also, if we do draft Luck we better pray that he turns out to be one of the best QBs in the league right away. You think Eli or Matty Ice could run this team like Manning does and carry the load like he does? The reason this team has been successful is not because of great coaching or how amazing our front office has been. We have rode the coattails of Peyton for over a decade and to expect a rookie to come in and have to carry the load after maybe one or two years sitting is almost career suicide.

If Luck turns out to be a top 5 QB right away we will be darn lucky, but will still have the problem because our team will just be built around Luck.

He doesn't have to be a top 5 right away, we have Peyton inked for another 4 years, that allows Luck to come in and learn the system and when ready to step in and take over. That is why this is such a smart move.

[ruksak]

1. Bill Polian has a track record of putting together good teams

2 His son had a pretty good first draft this past season

3. Players in the NFL don't improve with age and have injury issue

4. Teams that are unwilling to cut ties with aging players usually have issues

5. Teams that are willing to move older players with younger better players on average do better

1. OK ~ irrelevant

2. OK ~ irrelevant

3. Players do improve with age. They don't get younger as they get better. QB's often improve past 30. Favre had his best season ever at age 39, Elway was around that age when he won his SB.....you are painting with a broad brush. Considering Peyton's game is centered around his cerebral skills and not his scrambling ability, I see no reason why he cannot continue to up his game for a few years before his arm starts to fall off.

4. I'm not sure what teams you're referring to?

5. That makes sense, in that replacing players with better players is a good thing. But then again, we all know that. Are you saying that Andrew Luck, for example, is a better QB than Manning, or that he will be within the next 2 years?

[dn4192]

1. OK ~ irrelevant

2. OK ~ irrelevant

3. Players do improve with age. They don't get younger as they get better. QB's often improve past 30. Favre had his best season ever at age 39, Elway was around that age when he won his SB.....you are painting with a broad brush. Considering Peyton's game is centered around his cerebral skills and not his scrambling ability, I see no reason why he cannot continue to up his game for a few years before his arm starts to fall off.

4. I'm not sure what teams you're referring to?

5. That makes sense, in that replacing players with better players is a good thing. But then again, we all know that. Are you saying that Andrew Luck, for example, is a better QB than Manning, or that he will be within the next 2 years?

Exactly how is 1 and 2 irrelevant? It shows they have the ability to build through the draft.

Okay of all the NFL players to ever have played please list those who have posted overall better numbers during their players years of say 35-40 over say 25-30 or 30-35.

I am saying I like our odds better long term with Luck at QB then whomever they would pick to replace Manning in the next 2-3 years.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Exactly how is 1 and 2 irrelevant? It shows they have the ability to build through the draft.

Okay of all the NFL players to ever have played please list those who have posted overall better numbers during their players years of say 35-40 over say 25-30 or 30-35.

I am saying I like our odds better long term with Luck at QB then whomever they would pick to replace Manning in the next 2-3 years.

Kurt Warner was better at 36-38 than he was from 31-35.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/W/WarnKu00.htm

Rich Gannon was better from 34-37 than he was than at any point prior to that.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/G/GannRi00.htm

Steve Young was as good in his late 30's as he was in his early 30's and better than his 20's until he got his bell run too much.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/Y/YounSt00.htm

You don't think Tom Brady is better now than he was when he was a young QB?

Players tend to get better, not worse. Brett Favre had by far the best season of his career at 40.

You have to take into account that the Favre's Manning's & Brady's of the current generation had far superior training & medical technology than even than that of Marino, Elway, Aikman & Young, that doesn't even take into consideration when you drop back to Montana, Bradshaw, & Staubach. It's completely different now than what it was. The Rodgers, Ryan's, Newton's & Luck's will likely have an even better situation from a medical & training point of view, and the top 5 qb's in 20 years more than they have.

So age in general is irreverent for Quarterbacks. If Warner hadn't retired he would still be a top 10 qb easily right now. You have to look at it on an individual basis as opposed to lumping everyone in together.

[Jason_]

No, I take Luck because you won't know he is bust, and when you go into any draft you draft the best players available. If he is a bust then he is a bust...

Seriously...you're pathetic. Your initial post gave 2 options:

A- draft Luck AND WIN A SUPERBOWL

B- pass on Luck AND BECOME CELLAR DWELLARS.

Yes you gave 2 options that could happen but they are not the only possibilities. That's why I was simply trying to make a point...the 2 options you gave had very clear and very defined (by you) results. That is the only reason I flipped the situation around and gave you 2 very clearly defined options:

A- Draft Luck and he winds up being a bust

B- Draft defense and the defense becomes a perennial top 5 defense

There is no interpretation between the choices I gave you just like there is no interpretation in the choices you gave in the initial post. I very clearly said that in my scenarios, we know for a fact that Luck becomes a bust but yet you continue to change the argument to suit your agenda.