Mayock has the Colts selecting...

[#BringBobBack]

Unpopular with who?

 

Kiper and McShay at ESPN favor Flowers over Ogbuehi

 

Mayock, Zierlein, Jeremiah and Brandt favor Flowers over Ogbuehi

 

CBS Sports favors Flowers over Ogbuehi

 

Sports Illustrated favors Flowers over Ogbuehi

 

The only media outlet I found that favored Ogbuehi was.....          Bleacher Report.

 

Your view seems popular here on this website.    You've done a nice job of poisoning the information well on him for months.

your just....something Dustin please stop poisoning my info

[Dustin]

Unpopular with who?

Kiper and McShay at ESPN favor Flowers over Ogbuehi

Mayock, Zierlein, Jeremiah and Brandt favor Flowers over Ogbuehi

CBS Sports favors Flowers over Ogbuehi

Sports Illustrated favors Flowers over Ogbuehi

The only media outlet I found that favored Ogbuehi was..... Bleacher Report.

Your view seems popular here on this website. You've done a nice job of poisoning the information well on him for months.

Because Ogbuehi has a torn ACL. If he didn't, he'd be above him, seeingnfl as he was a top projection before then.

[Dustin]

your just....something Dustin please stop poisoning my info

Gotta loves NCF's flair for the dramatic.

[theanarchist]

I like Mayock. I think he's the best analyst out there on breaking down the draft. However, I hope we don't draft a player that is coming off of a major injury, especially in the first round.

[theanarchist]

All of these analysts will be surprised if we don't go offensive line in the first round. That's all I've seen.

Ive seen a lot of that too but I think, as many here probably do too, that we could go RB, DL, S, CB, LB, or CB. There is plenty of areas of need either depth need or impact player need.

[DougDew]

What in the world does "unneeded LT potential" mean? Are you saying he's too good?

 

I don't like the pick because I'd like for our first rounder to actually play this season, and odds are Ogbuehi will be on PUP and then IR. But he's a really good prospect, so I don't understand your complaint.

Yes.  If he's a LT, he's too good.  Building a roster takes proper management of limited resources.  You don't spend a 1st to get a LT, and play him at RT, the year before you resign your LT to a big FA contract.  You spend your 1st rounder elsewhere and find your RT in rd 2 to 4. 

 

LTs command much more money in the FA world than do RTs.  Its really no different with drafting.  I've said numerous times, the first round is reserved for drafting ONLY certain positions...and RT isn't one of them. 

 

If BPA doesn't align with reasonable need and position at 29, you trade down.  The only exception I would make is WR or TE, someone who can stretch the field.  Its not a waste to have three or four of those on a roster.

 

And I'm assuming Ogbuehi is an NFL LT or else he never would have been seriously projected in the top 10...never. 

[DougDew]

I have never understood why people say this about any position really (outside kicker or punter maybe). If you need a quality LT you also need a quality RT in today's game. You have speed rushers on both sides or guys flip sides more now days. If you can get a quality RT at #29, you take that and run with it.

We have a solid LT and an elite QB already. 2 TE's that are above avg and all the wr talent a team can use in one season. We could upgrade at RG and only the team knows where Cherilous is with his knee. IMO, there are no super stud lb's or safety that is going to fall to us at #29 so if a high grade RT is there, pull the trigger and strengthen the online and Luck's time to survey goes up. Win

I'd rather have a guy who can score a TD on nearly every play, like Dorsett, than someone who can hold off an occasional right side speed rusher for an additional 0.5 seconds.

[Dustin]

I'd rather have a guy who can score a TD on nearly every play, like Dorsett, than someone who can hold off an occasional right side speed rusher for an additional 0.5 seconds.

The ole Matt Millen philosophy.

[PeterBowman]

I'd rather have a guy who can score a TD on nearly every play, like Dorsett, than someone who can hold off an occasional right side speed rusher for an additional 0.5 seconds.

the only problem is that that extra .5 seconds could mean the difference between the qb getting the ball to their playmakers and not.

[Jdubu]

I'd rather have a guy who can score a TD on nearly every play, like Dorsett, than someone who can hold off an occasional right side speed rusher for an additional 0.5 seconds.

If the guy doesn't have a hole to get through or a guy to pass block for a pass catch, you are getting 1-2 yards per run most often and every 100 touches, maybe a 20+ yard run. Protect the line and avg players in the skill set look like above avg players and your stars explode off the charts.

[csmopar]

I don't like it. You don't grab injured players in round 1, period.

[DougDew]

The ole Matt Millen philosophy.

No.  Millen picked bad players. Nothing wrong with picking a good RT at 61.  You have to do that, otherwise, your exclusive 1st round picked roster would have a guy who is in his 22nd year in the NFL. 

[DougDew]

If the guy doesn't have a hole to get through or a guy to pass block for a pass catch, you are getting 1-2 yards per run most often and every 100 touches, maybe a 20+ yard run. Protect the line and avg players in the skill set look like above avg players and your stars explode off the charts.

I didn't say put a turd in the RT position.  I'm saying find a good player at 61 or 93 if you want to upgrade what you have at RT...or find one in FA since they tend to be priced correctly.

 

Use the 1st round to pick expensive positions...since you get 5 years of cheap contract with 1st round players.

 

Yes, I'd rather have a 4.23 WR with good hands for 5 years than I guy I could buy off of the FA market for Cherilous' money.

[lollygagger8]

We have enough guards already

[Manning1887]

I can't decide if Cedric is closer to Tyron Smith or Winston Justice. Maybe somewhere in between? I would not spend a first rounder on him. I would not have a problem using a second though. 

[That Guy]

Mayock has La'el Collins as his number one Tackle, but he doesn't have him going in the first (even though he has eight offensive linemen going in the first).  I don't get it.  Is this police questioning really that big of a deal?

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000488475/article/mike-mayocks-2015-nfl-draft-position-rankings-50

 

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2015/mock-drafts/mike-mayock/270801

[Superman]

Yes.  If he's a LT, he's too good.  Building a roster takes proper management of limited resources.  You don't spend a 1st to get a LT, and play him at RT, the year before you resign your LT to a big FA contract.  You spend your 1st rounder elsewhere and find your RT in rd 2 to 4. 

 

LTs command much more money in the FA world than do RTs.  Its really no different with drafting.  I've said numerous times, the first round is reserved for drafting ONLY certain positions...and RT isn't one of them. 

 

If BPA doesn't align with reasonable need and position at 29, you trade down.  The only exception I would make is WR or TE, someone who can stretch the field.  Its not a waste to have three or four of those on a roster.

 

And I'm assuming Ogbuehi is an NFL LT or else he never would have been seriously projected in the top 10...never. 

 

You've made several assertions that I don't think hold up.

 

AC might not be re-signed, in which Ogbuehi would be a natural successor on the left side. As much as I like AC, when you talk about good resource management, replacing him with a good player on a rookie contract would save considerable cap space.

 

I also disagree with the idea that you don't draft a RT prospect in the first round. While the pay discrepancy hasn't really started to change yet, RT is becoming just as important as LT. More importantly, just because today's roster projections say that he would play RT doesn't mean that he couldn't/wouldn't be used elsewhere.

 

Besides, the whole "no RTs in the first" is archaic anyways. Teams take centers and guards in the first now. I don't really agree with your "BPA at a position of need, if not trade down" stipulation, but even if I did, we clearly have a need at RT, whether in 2015 or 2016 (as most of us don't expect Cherilus to last beyond 2015, if he even makes it that far). Ogbuehi would be a sensible replacement, based on talent and merit. As I said, the reason I don't want him is because I don't know if he'll be able to play right away. But if he could, he would make Cherilus expendable right now, again helping our resource management.

[Hoosiernsavga]

No chance.

I was being sarcastic... LOL

[NewColtsFan]

Because Ogbuehi has a torn ACL. If he didn't, he'd be above him, seeingnfl as he was a top projection before then.

 

Dont' get me wrong,  I like the guy.    And I wouldn't mind if we traded down out of the first round and then took him.

 

But he was having a terrible year....   they tried to move him to LT and he completely flopped.   I think I read he led either the conference or the nation in holding...     so, they had to move him back to RT,  where he was terrific in 2013.

 

He was a top prospect at the start of 2014,  but not once the game started.   Just couldn't handle LT.   But I think he's a great RT prospect.

 

Someday we'll have to go over the issues on Flowers.    I think you're much harder on him than need be....

[DougDew]

You've made several assertions that I don't think hold up.

 

AC might not be re-signed, in which Ogbuehi would be a natural successor on the left side. As much as I like AC, when you talk about good resource management, replacing him with a good player on a rookie contract would save considerable cap space.

 

I also disagree with the idea that you don't draft a RT prospect in the first round. While the pay discrepancy hasn't really started to change yet, RT is becoming just as important as LT. More importantly, just because today's roster projections say that he would play RT doesn't mean that he couldn't/wouldn't be used elsewhere.

 

Besides, the whole "no RTs in the first" is archaic anyways. Teams take centers and guards in the first now. I don't really agree with your "BPA at a position of need, if not trade down" stipulation, but even if I did, we clearly have a need at RT, whether in 2015 or 2016 (as most of us don't expect Cherilus to last beyond 2015, if he even makes it that far). Ogbuehi would be a sensible replacement, based on talent and merit. As I said, the reason I don't want him is because I don't know if he'll be able to play right away. But if he could, he would make Cherilus expendable right now, again helping our resource management.

But the FA market suggests that guys who can only play RT go for a lot less money than LTs.  I'd rather get expensive players in round 1 because of the 5 year contract.

 

Any year can be an anomoly because of a glaring need or superior talent that falls, but this year, I'd like to find a legitimate pass rusher with OLB ability, a disruptive DT or one that commands a double team in the running game , or another stretch the field receiver in round 1.  (In other years, I may want a QB, LT, or #1 CB). 

 

If one isn't there at 29, I would prefer a trade down and get good players at other positions with this years draft and perhaps pick up a future pick in case I need to trade up to get one of those impact players in next year's draft.  Those are the positions that are really expensive and a team has to have all of them to win a SB, IMO.

[Superman]

But the FA market suggests that guys who can only play RT go for a lot less money than LTs.  I'd rather get expensive players in round 1 because of the 5 year contract.

 

I see what you're saying. I just don't think the correlation you're making between free agency cost and the draft is as important. Just get good players. If you're going to keep AC (which I think we should) and get rid of Cherilus, then the cost of free agent RTs is completely irrelevant. If you can draft a guy who will play that position for you for the foreseeable future, then you're still saving. 

 

Any year can be an anomoly because of a glaring need or superior talent that falls, but this year, I'd like to find a legitimate pass rusher with OLB ability, a disruptive DT or one that commands a double team in the running game , or another stretch the field receiver in round 1.  (In other years, I may want a QB, LT, or #1 CB).

 

If one isn't there at 29, I would prefer a trade down and get good players at other positions with this years draft and perhaps pick up a future pick in case I need to trade up to get one of those impact players in next year's draft.  Those are the positions that are really expensive and a team has to have all of them to win a SB, IMO.

 

 

I just want good players. Raise the tides. I don't think we need to earmark certain positions. Sure, no QBs, no TEs, no RBs. But a good (and available) player at any other position makes our team better. The only position I'd probably cross off would be WR, because of the value on mid round guys. I'm all about a disruptive DL, or a disruptive anything in the front 7. I don't think the value is great at safety, but I think Landon Collins is the likely pick if he's still there, and I'm fine with that. I'd take Eric Kendricks if the board dictated it.

 

I'm also fine with a trade down, just not too far down. Grigson and Irsay keep talking about letting the board speak to you. You can't say "I want this guy at #29," because that guy might not be there. Or maybe he is, but someone better surprisingly dropped to #29. Or maybe you don't really like the board, but the phone's not ringing and you can't get a decent value in a trade down. Maybe all you're getting offered is #55 and #129 or something. You had better figure out something at #29. And if that's a LT quality guy who you're going to play at RT, well, that's not the worse thing in the world. It's presumably a good player, and it checks off a need, and it keeps you out of free agency for the foreseeable future.

[chad72]

I would be fine with this pick. I would not be disappointed with Jake Fisher either. Both of them can be good edge protectors for Luck, Ogbuehi and Fisher. Mayock had Broncos taking Fisher and the Colts taking Ogbuehi. When the draft comes along, I would not be shocked if those picks are swapped.

 

For what it is worth, 3 days prior to the 2005 draft, Mike Mayock was the only one who predicted that Aaron Rodgers falls to No.24 and the Green Bay Packers will pick the heir apparent to Brett Favre in Aaron Rodgers.

[Defjamz26]

The ole Matt Millen philosophy.

 

Games like the Patriots and Cowboys games from this past season have really gotten to people. Everyone is on this philosophy that if we get as many talented WRs and RBs as possible, we'll just have the most potent offense the league has ever seen and our offense won't ever be stalled.

 

That was essentially what Millen tried to do in Detroit. The argument could have been made that he picked bad WRs except for Johnson, but his thinking was flawed from the beginning.

[Superman]

Games like the Patriots and Cowboys games from this past season have really gotten to people. Everyone is on this philosophy that if we get as many talented WRs and RBs as possible, we'll just have the most potent offense the league has ever seen and our offense won't ever be stalled.

 

That was essentially what Millen tried to do in Detroit. The argument could have been made that he picked bad WRs except for Johnson, but his thinking was flawed from the beginning.

 

False.

[Superman]

I would be fine with this pick. I would not be disappointed with Jake Fisher either. Both of them can be good edge protectors for Luck, Ogbuehi and Fisher. Mayock had Broncos taking Fisher and the Colts taking Ogbuehi. When the draft comes along, I would not be shocked if those picks are swapped.

 

For what it is worth, 3 days prior to the 2005 draft, Mike Mayock was the only one who predicted that Aaron Rodgers falls to No.24 and the Green Bay Packers will pick the heir apparent to Brett Favre in Aaron Rodgers.

 

Fisher is a good fit for the Broncos. I don't think he's a good fit for us unless we're going to run a ton of zone stuff, and I don't think we will.

[Defjamz26]

False.

 

How so?

 

Maybe not EVERYONE is saying that, but that's how a lot of posters here talk. The Colts lead the league in offense for awhile last season but because of games like the ones against the Cowboys and Patriots where we get held to 20 points or under, people act as if we just need to re-tool with all these weapons when we've got plenty.

[Superman]

How so?

 

Maybe not EVERYONE is saying that, but that's how a lot of posters here talk. The Colts lead the league in offense for awhile last season but because of games like the ones against the Cowboys and Patriots where we get held to 20 points or under, people act as if we just need to re-tool with all these weapons when we've got plenty.

 

Drafting a receiver in the third round isn't retooling the offense.

 

The consensus around here is that the Colts, above all else, need to draft trench players and hopefully get a promising DB who can play safety. The desire to add a receiver or a RB is simply about adding talented playmakers in a draft that offers several of them. That's what the draft is for, is to add talented young players who can make your team better.

[Traines]

...That's what the draft is for, is to add talented young players who can make your team better.

 

EXACTLY!!!

 

 

How so?

 

Maybe not EVERYONE is saying that, but that's how a lot of posters here talk. The Colts lead the league in offense for awhile last season but because of games like the ones against the Cowboys and Patriots where we get held to 20 points or under, people act as if we just need to re-tool with all these weapons when we've got plenty.

 

I strongly disagree with this...most here seem to think that we need to draft only defense (unless we trade up in the 2nd for Tevin Coleman) and that every player should be designed to stop the patriots run game (not saying that you are one of those), but that seems to be a far more common philosophy than the the people on here saying that we need to re-tool the offense.  Not many are calling for us to take a RB, WR, TE, or QB in the first couple of rounds.  There are a few crazies that want a 1st round RB (in a deep class), but other than that RT seems to be the most popular, which I completely agree with.  It is a move that has potential to save us future cap space and give us cheap, talented youth at an important position on the offensive line, an area where we should be glad to improve, especially with the added benefit of being a financial improvement.  That's just an exapmle, I am not necessarily pushing for that.  As Supe stated above, it is about adding talent that can make your team better.  We already have guys for every single position, they may not be all that good in your opinion (even though some of them haven't even had the chance to prove themselves), but there is someone there, we do not need to reach.  It seems that people want a safety in the 1st and feel that if Collins falls we have to take him, or if Randall is there we should go ahead and get him because the talent level drops off (not saying one is better than the other, just an example of the comments I have read on here)...so basically, the idea seems to be to just settle because we "need" a player to fill that position, forget the other talent that is there because talent is trumped by "need".  Don't get me wrong, I am all for taking Collins with our pick at 29...IF he is the best player available.  If someone falls that I like more (talent, or upside-wise) and he plays a position other than QB, TE, or RB (and probably WR - you know my allegiance is with Lockett in 2nd/3rd) for example I would take him.  Sure, you could grab Collins and he could end up being a good player, but just because you took a good player and were able to plug him in immediately does not mean that it is best for your team...you may have passed on a superior talent at CB or OL or DL or whatever position, because there is this tunnel vision that you must fill certain spots with certain picks/rounds, etc.  This is not necessarily directed at you, or anyone, this is just how I perceive the philosophy of the draft by many on this forum.

[mvbighead]

I do not like the idea of a RT in round 1.  I can see that Cherilus is injured, but I think we have much bigger problems on the defensive side of the ball.  Safety would be ideal in my opinion, but a good NT would be awesome.  I think we need OL depth, but we've got so many guys on the roster now, I don't see the need to bring in one in round 1.

 

I suppose many will call it drafting the BPA vs need, but Polian drafted Hughes... he never had a shot here behind Freeney/Mathis.  And now he's making 9mill/season in Buffalo and is arguably one of their best defensive players.  We need to draft a player that is nearly a certainty to be on the field.  A good safety would be that.  A dominant DL would be that.  But whenever Cherilus returns, what do we do with him then?  Pay him 7+ mill to ride the pine?  I just don't see it.

[Traines]

I do not like the idea of a RT in round 1.  I can see that Cherilus is injured, but I think we have much bigger problems on the defensive side of the ball.  Safety would be ideal in my opinion, but a good NT would be awesome.  I think we need OL depth, but we've got so many guys on the roster now, I don't see the need to bring in one in round 1.

 

I suppose many will call it drafting the BPA vs need, but Polian drafted Hughes... he never had a shot here behind Freeney/Mathis.  And now he's making 9mill/season in Buffalo and is arguably one of their best defensive players.  We need to draft a player that is nearly a certainty to be on the field.  A good safety would be that.  A dominant DL would be that.  But whenever Cherilus returns, what do we do with him then?  Pay him 7+ mill to ride the pine?  I just don't see it.

 

How many of those guys are you comfortable with protecting Andrew Luck for a whole season?  Polian drafted Hughes, how is this relevant?  You would rather take a Safety in the 1st (who is not anything besides solid ITB and average in coverage -and I'm not a hater, I like him), than to ensure that your franchise is protected; and to do so because well, we are already paying him $7mil, he needs to be out there whether he is hurting us or not?  This is also assuming he can return, this appears to be something more serious, a degenerating knee issue possibly.  I'm not saying no to Collins if he is the best player on the board at 29, I think he can improve our safety position immediately, but to rule out drafting a RT in the first for the reasons you stated seems somewhat absurd.

[mvbighead]

How many of those guys are you comfortable with protecting Andrew Luck for a whole season?  Polian drafted Hughes, how is this relevant?  You would rather take a Safety in the 1st (who is not anything besides solid ITB and average in coverage -and I'm not a hater, I like him), than to ensure that your franchise is protected; and to do so because well, we are already paying him $7mil, he needs to be out there whether he is hurting us or not?  This is also assuming he can return, this appears to be something more serious, a degenerating knee issue possibly.  I'm not saying no to Collins if he is the best player on the board at 29, I think he can improve our safety position immediately, but to rule out drafting a RT in the first for the reasons you stated seems somewhat absurd.

 

Hughes was relevant because we drafted a guy we could seldom put on the field before.  With the WR pick right now, it seems to be about the same.  Had we drafted a RT and Cherilus returned healthy, we'd either put a 1st rounder on the bench or a 7/million dollar player.  Neither of those is good idea.  We need depth on the OL, and for our starters to return healthy.  Unless we planned on offloading Cherilus outright, drafting an OT in the first IMO would have been very similar to the Hughes situation.

 

As for the safety, it appears GB took a guy I thought we'd be taking.  Soooo... 

 

All I can say is, they must be expecting something major from Dorsett.  That, and I suspect we're going to let TY go in some way shape or form either as a trade soon or next off season so we have cap space to re-sign Luck.  That's about all I can figure.