Good call Grigson

[Valpo2004]

The difference is that Brady is a ten plus year vet and who he is in the league is well established. Richardson had only played one year and could amount to anything or nothing. The Colts bought low on someone that had/has the potential to be a gamechanging running back. Whether or not he is a bust, whether or not you believe we should have made the trade, we did buy low. It was only a year prior to the Colts trading for him that multiple analysts referred to him as a sure thing and a game changer

 

I don't know if the Colts really bought low or not.  If you looked at his stats his YPC where never that high.  At the time that was blamed on stacked boxes and poor quarterbacking.  

 

It took going to the Colts for most people to realize he was a bust.  

 

Unfortunately he's now gotten that label that people havn't been able to notice that he's doing significantly better.  I don't think he'll ever do anything that will make him worthwhile of a first round pick, but he's playing a lot better.

[cm43sports]

No, when you're argument for one player is based on Draft position you can't change the rules to suit your argument. You still have to use logic and apply your argument to all players.

We didn't buy low. A first for a first, No matter the position is not buying low. Every analyst out there has said we paid to much or that the Browns got the better end of the deal.

Analysts said he was good before he ever played a snap in the nfl. Now a sure thing has turned into complete uncertainty, and you think we got a good deal on him? That proves there's no point in discussing this with you any further.

http://forums.colts.com/topic/20840-browns-only-called-indianapolis-when-offering-trent-richardson/

We did buy low. Now if you don't like the trade then I understand your position but your belief that we overpaid is unfounded and at that time untrue. Regarding the Tom Brady situation, as with every rule there are exceptions. Richardson was a prospect the Brown's traded up to select and drafted third overall. In his rookie season, he rushed for almost 1000 yards and had 11 tds despite the fact he was playing with broken ribs. At the conclusion of his rookie season he was selected to the top 100 and the coaching staff was replaced. Now Brady is considered one of the biggest draft day steals of all time. During his career he has proved himself to be a top quarterback and obviously is worth more than a fifth round pick. Brady has proven who he is in the league and Richardson was potential so there is a clear difference, however; Richardson's potential far exceeds that of a typical 26th pick and therefore is buying low.

[Narcosys]

http://forums.colts.com/topic/20840-browns-only-called-indianapolis-when-offering-trent-richardson/

We did buy low. Now if you don't like the trade then I understand your position but your belief that we overpaid is unfounded and at that time untrue. Regarding the Tom Brady situation, as with every rule there are exceptions. Richardson was a prospect the Brown's traded up to select and drafted third overall. In his rookie season, he rushed for almost 1000 yards and had 11 tds despite the fact he was playing with broken ribs. At the conclusion of his rookie season he was selected to the top 100 and the coaching staff was replaced. Now Brady is considered one of the biggest draft day steals of all time. During his career he has proved himself to be a top quarterback and obviously is worth more than a fifth round pick. Brady has proven who he is in the league and Richardson was potential so there is a clear difference, however; Richardson's potential far exceeds that of a typical 26th pick and therefore is buying low.

I have no clue what that forum topic has anything to do with the argument at hand. It's only the opinions of board members that have nothing to do the discussion at hand. The browns knew we were desperate and would be the only ones to pay that much. There's no proof that we bought low but it is suggestive that we paid too much when the Browns only offered to him to us knowing we were in desperate need. That's how it works, when you know a person is in desperate need of something and you're the only able to provide that need, you extort them. His potential is also subjective. Plus RB's, and Good ones are being drafted farther and farther back. Look at giovani bernard, he completely proves you wrong. So you can't say that you can't get his potential that far back in the Draft. Look at TY, vick ballard, donte Moncrief, etc.. you also can't compare a RB'S 'potential' to another positions potential.

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/2025585-have-we-seen-the-last-of-the-first-round-running-back-in-the-nfl-draft

You keep making these definitive matter of fact statements that are the farthest thing from being true.

[Superman]

http://forums.colts.com/topic/20840-browns-only-called-indianapolis-when-offering-trent-richardson/

We did buy low. Now if you don't like the trade then I understand your position but your belief that we overpaid is unfounded and at that time untrue. Regarding the Tom Brady situation, as with every rule there are exceptions. Richardson was a prospect the Brown's traded up to select and drafted third overall. In his rookie season, he rushed for almost 1000 yards and had 11 tds despite the fact he was playing with broken ribs. At the conclusion of his rookie season he was selected to the top 100 and the coaching staff was replaced. Now Brady is considered one of the biggest draft day steals of all time. During his career he has proved himself to be a top quarterback and obviously is worth more than a fifth round pick. Brady has proven who he is in the league and Richardson was potential so there is a clear difference, however; Richardson's potential far exceeds that of a typical 26th pick and therefore is buying low.

 

Trading a first rounder for a RB is NOT buying low, no matter what. You're trying to twist the Richardson trade into a good thing, and it will never be a good trade. Richardson can play his butt off for the next five years, and it will still have been a bad trade. Good RBs don't call for first round draft picks, not in today's NFL.

[csmopar]

Yep, a good 75% of the forum exploded and didn't like it

Funny. Cause of those posters felt we didn't need a WR and some were supporters of Da'Rick. Funny how Da'Rick doesn't even touch the field now

I still like rogers potential but right now, moncrief is just better. Ive got a gut feeling Reggie is gonna hang it up at seasons end. I just hope we can get him another ring before he does.

Side note, once Reggie retires, itll be the first time since the mid 80s that the chat of Reggie Reggie Reggie won't be heard in Indianapolis... First Reggie miller with the pacers and of course Reggie Wayne...

[TKnight24]

I still like rogers potential but right now, moncrief is just better. Ive got a gut feeling Reggie is gonna hang it up at seasons end. I just hope we can get him another ring before he does.

Side note, once Reggie retires, itll be the first time since the mid 80s that the chat of Reggie Reggie Reggie won't be heard in Indianapolis... First Reggie miller with the pacers and of course Reggie Wayne...

to acquire Reggie Bush in the offseason?

[rock8591]

I still like rogers potential but right now, moncrief is just better. Ive got a gut feeling Reggie is gonna hang it up at seasons end. I just hope we can get him another ring before he does.

Side note, once Reggie retires, itll be the first time since the mid 80s that the chat of Reggie Reggie Reggie won't be heard in Indianapolis... First Reggie miller with the pacers and of course Reggie Wayne...

 

I still like rogers potential but right now, moncrief is just better. Ive got a gut feeling Reggie is gonna hang it up at seasons end. I just hope we can get him another ring before he does.

Side note, once Reggie retires, itll be the first time since the mid 80s that the chat of Reggie Reggie Reggie won't be heard in Indianapolis... First Reggie miller with the pacers and of course Reggie Wayne...

 

 

Funny enough, Reggie Miller's middle name happens to be "Wayne" also.