20/20 Hindsight... 2007 Nfl Draft & Players We Could Have Taken Instead Of Gonzo, Ugoh

[IMissMarvin]

I know after this seaon, a large majority of you guys want Bill Polian out of town (don't hold your breath), but the fact remains that few GMS in the league today have a track record as successful as this guy. Bill Polian has long been regarded as one of the very best for building franchises up from the ashes, and our team is living proof. Throughout the late 90's and and early 2000's it seems he was dead on the money with the vast majority of his early and late round picks. A quick recap as far as 2002:

2002: We landed Freeney, Tripplet, and Thornton in the first four rounds. A+

2003: Dallas Clark (1st), Mike Doss (2nd), Robert Mathis (5th), Cato June (6th) A+

2004: Bob Sanders in the 2nd. Other quality picks like Jason David and Jake Scott in later rounds. B+

2005: Finally focused on our sedondary. Marlin Jackson and Kelvin Hayden were two quality corners in the first and second rounds respectively, Landed Giordano in the 4th. B+

2006: Addai was a quality 1st rounder. Tim Jennings was a great corner, only you wouldn't know it until the Bears picked him up and actually let him play. Bethea was probably the steal of the draft. B+

I posted these picks to assure you guys that this thread is not a knock on the success of our most beloved and cherished GM.

2007 however, no matter which way you look at it, was a complete and total failure; certanly the worst of Mr. Polian's tenure with the team, and amongst the worst in the history of the organization. Now I know a bunch of you are gonna say: 'No way, Anthony Gonzales was a quality pick that played great in Marvin's absense blah blah', but let's take a closer look at the situation:

Fact of the matter is Gonzales wasn't projected to be a first round pick, and he never should have been. We lost both Hayden and David to FA that offseason and really should have addressed our depleted and thin secondary (Hughes in round three was marginal help at best). Chris Houston out of Arkansas, a projected mid first rounder, fell to us at 32 overall and was widely considered the best overall player available on the board at any postion. I thought he was ours, no questions asked. Our number one need is a CB and the best player available is a CB. Seems pretty open and shut right? Wrong. We blew it.

Watching Houston play the other night against San Diego was remarkable. The plays he made on the ball were incredible, and Rivers routinely threw away from Houston, whether he was matched up on Vincent Jackson or not. Houston came up with an INT off one the few balls that was thrown at him. What's not to like about this guy - he is easily one of the best man coverage corners in football: fluid in transition, with exceptional ball skills, and he is one of the league's fastest players (4.32 40time at the combine). Despite missing time this year due to injuries, he is having a pro bowl caliber season with 5 INTs including one to the house. He is the main reason why the Lions' depleted secondary has held up this year, and a primary player in the contribution to the Lions' first playoff appearence in over a decade. Gonzalez, in all fairness, has not been healthy over the past few seasons, but nonetheless, even if you took into account his upside, I think Houston would have been far and away the better pick, both in regards to team needs, and biggest potential upside for the future. If we had WR needs, Sidney Rice out of South Carolina would have been the far better pick. Gonzalez is talented, but he just doesn't have the physical presence of a player like Rice. When healthy, he brings a Larry Fitzgerald-type presence to the game, as his size and athleticism make him a matchup nightmare for any opposing defence.

Our second round pick, Tony Ugoh, was undoubtedly one of our biggest busts in recent memory and the real disaster of this draft.

So as I remember, I'm still soaking in the dissapointment of our first round pick, as I watch the NFL draft, and suddenly the Colts trade up with the 49ers, and cough up next years 1st round pick for a remaining player on the board. At this point Houston is gone, so I'm really wondering what Polian has on his agenda. Our O-line was aging and getting pretty thin admittedly, but with Joe Thomas, Joe Staley, and Levi Brown all long gone in the first I was really confused as to who we were stretching for, as there were no projected first rounders that had fallen to the second at that position. For some reason, Bill Polian figured Ugoh was the guy to protect Manning. His belief was so strong in fact, that he was willing enough to pass up a high potential lineman for the previous season for this guy.

If you really look at this pick, it was such a horrible mistake for this organization. Not only was it a complete waste of our 2007 second round selection, but it ultimately killed our 2008 draft in the same respect. Trading a first round pick for a projected mid to late second rounder doesn't make much sense to begin with, but when you figure the players we passed up on, it doens't make the situation any easier to swallow. Figure this, probowl players Sidney Rice (WR - Vikings), Lamar Woodley (Steelers - LB), WR Steve Smith (Giants/Eagles - WR), and Ryan Kalil (C - Panthers) were all within our grasps and have since all accomplished great productive NFL seasons. We past on them all for Mr. Ugoh, a player who's potential upside was always been overshadowed by his lack of work ethic and football awareness. It still stings just thinking about it.

This pick of course, would continue to haunt us throughout the next season. Aside from the players we passed up on for Ugoh in the 2007 NFL draft, here's a look at the players that would have still been available to at the 31st overall pick the following year: Bears' RB Matt Forte (one of my favorite players in the league), Eagles' WR Desean Jackson (proabably the game's best deep threat after Mike Wallace), Redskins' TE Fred Davis (Skins' leading receiver), Saints' CB Tracey Porter (boy did that ever come back to bite us in the rear), Ravens' RB Ray Rice, Packers WR Jordy Nelson, Chiefs' CB Brandon Flowers (maybe second best cover CB in football after Revis), Cheifs' RB Jamal Charles, and Giants' safety Kenny Phillips, among others.

Thats right folks. We could have had arguably the leagues best WR combo with Wayne + Jackson/Rice/Nelson, the leagues' best cover corner tandom in Houston/Flowers/Porter, or the some of the leagues best runners and pass rushers with Woodley/Rice/Forte.

Instead, we got a couple sub-par years from an out-of shape linemen who never lived up to his physical potential - even in college, and an above average slot receiver that only produced such big numbers in college due to playing accross from Ginn Jr (another Buckeyes WR who never should have never went as high as he did). He has rarely stayed healthy for a full season and has since been reduced to our second string slot receiver by a much better WR that we were able to land in FOURTH in Austin Collie!!

Alas, Ugoh is gone, and Gonzales will probably follow suit and be out of town next year. I am surely no NFL caliber scout when it comes to evaluating college talent, but I can't stress to you guys enough the level of dissapointment I felt that cold dreary day on April 19th, 2007. I know a lot of you guys will retort that Mr. Polian was addressing team needs above all else (which is balony - CB was our first and foremost need that year without question: still is) but sometimes you have to draft the best player available. In many cases, time tells the tale and justifies these sort ofthings, but in this particular case, 20/20 hindsight has only made the sting grow worse.

[Deano1818]

The thing about picks is..... Everyone blows a few

Gonzo and ugoh were decent prospects.

When you get to the end of the first round the number of "for sure stars" Are fewer

If a number 28 pick fails its somewhat normal

If the number 1 pick fails, a coach gets fired

[tonychen]

This is like looking at your fantasy football team at the end of season and ask yourself why did/didnt I take xxx ? Not to mention in fantasy football you have much more information to evaluate the talent for these established NFL players instead of kids out of college...

On the other hand, sometimes it is the system that developes the players into the stars they are. Take Forte as an example, yesterday his 3rd backup run for 100+ yards against the packs and they just keept running no matter who is there. If he was drafted by the Colts he might still be struggling with pass protection problems and be 3rd on the depth chart. You plug Donald Brown in Bears running system he might have already reached 1000 yds per season.

[IMissMarvin]

I understand your point of view. But with Harper and David gone, you knew DB was our main need, and we opted for a slot receiver instead. Sometimes you take the best player available, but Gonza was definitely a stetch any way you look at it.

We still don't have a shut down corner, a big time RB, or an elite deep threat WR and we could have gotten them all, or at least two of the three, had we drafted smarter.

[tonychen]

I understand your point of view. But with Harper and David gone, you knew DB was our main need, and we opted for a slot receiver instead. Sometimes you take the best player available, but Gonza was definitely a stetch any way you look at it.

We still don't have a shut down corner, a big time RB, or an elite deep threat WR and we could have gotten them all, or at least two of the three, had we drafted smarter.

Just like your ID they also missed Marvin when he retired and they did find some similarity between Gonzo and Marvin and wanted to let him replace Marvin. The only problem was they did not anticipate the guy just cannot stay healthy.

For WRs your called 'elite' from that draft classes, I just dont see Desean Jackson an elite since he has the attitude. Colts system do not welcome guys that will give up their routes and behave like a child in the locker room. Jordy Nelson is supposed to be the Packs system WR and many dont see him better than Collie, and we all kinda agree that as good as Collie is he might still be behind Gonzo on the depth chart had Gonzo stayed healthier in his early career.

[GoDeep]

I just have trouble getting into draft redos. If they knew what each player would become, it would be a whole different process.

[IndyTrav]

2002: We landed Freeney, Tripplet, and Thornton in the first four rounds. A+

2003: Dallas Clark (1st), Mike Doss (2nd), Robert Mathis (5th), Cato June (6th) A+

2004: Bob Sanders in the 2nd. Other quality picks like Jason David and Jake Scott in later rounds. B+

2005: Finally focused on our sedondary. Marlin Jackson and Kelvin Hayden were two quality corners in the first and second rounds respectively, Landed Giordano in the 4th. B+

2006: Addai was a quality 1st rounder. Tim Jennings was a great corner, only you wouldn't know it until the Bears picked him up and actually let him play. Bethea was probably the steal of the draft. B+

You must think its still Christmas, those grades are a gift.

[MAC]

They absolutely needed a WR when Gonzalez was drafted, you are forgetting about Harrison. Pretty ironic considering your screen name. In contrast to your comments, CB wasn't the primary need at all. And Gonzalez was only a slot receiver initially because that was the only spot open. It was clearly the intention to make him an outside receiver, and he looked tremendous there when given the opportunity. You can't predict injuries, so removing that from the equation I'd much prefer Gonzalez over ANY of the WRs you mention. I wouldn't want Jackson anywhere near the Colts. I can't stand prima donnas like that.

Some of the others you mention simply wouldn't have been drafted by the Colts in the first round. A first round center when you already had a pro bowler in place? A first rounder on a 3-4 LB? A first round CB when they had a first and second round tandem (and a second round reserve) ready to step in? If you are going to cherry pick and fantasize, they should at least make sense. Gonzalez was an excellent draft pick. Ugoh was an attempt at smart advance planning because they thought Glenn had one year left. They didn't envision a better talent than Ugoh being available the following year with the pick they gave up. How about fantasizing about what would have happened if they DIDN'T draft Ugoh with Glenn then retiring unexpectedly. Ugoh wasn't considered a failure that first year, was he? How about envisioning how Ugoh's career might have gone if he'd been able to be developed by the team as envisioned instead of thrown to the wolves.

[WoolMagnet]

They absolutely needed a WR when Gonzalez was drafted, you are forgetting about Harrison. Pretty ironic considering your screen name. In contrast to your comments, CB wasn't the primary need at all. And Gonzalez was only a slot receiver initially because that was the only spot open. It was clearly the intention to make him an outside receiver, and he looked tremendous there when given the opportunity. You can't predict injuries, so removing that from the equation I'd much prefer Gonzalez over ANY of the WRs you mention. I wouldn't want Jackson anywhere near the Colts. I can't stand prima donnas like that.

Some of the others you mention simply wouldn't have been drafted by the Colts in the first round. A first round center when you already had a pro bowler in place? A first rounder on a 3-4 LB? A first round CB when they had a first and second round tandem (and a second round reserve) ready to step in? If you are going to cherry pick and fantasize, they should at least make sense. Gonzalez was an excellent draft pick. Ugoh was an attempt at smart advance planning because they thought Glenn had one year left. They didn't envision a better talent than Ugoh being available the following year with the pick they gave up. How about fantasizing about what would have happened if they DIDN'T draft Ugoh with Glenn then retiring unexpectedly. Ugoh wasn't considered a failure that first year, was he? How about envisioning how Ugoh's career might have gone if he'd been able to be developed by the team as envisioned instead of thrown to the wolves.

I'd say Gonzo was brought in more to replace Stokely than harrison.

As far as grading picks, you can't single out pick-by-pick. You must look at drafts as a whole.

Overall, I STILL feel polian has drafted as well as just about any other team since he's been here.

[GoDeep]

I'd say Gonzo was brought in more to replace Stokely than harrison.

As far as grading picks, you can't single out pick-by-pick. You must look at drafts as a whole.

Overall, I STILL feel polian has drafted as well as just about any other team since he's been here.

I think he actually was slated as Harrison's replacement.

[WoolMagnet]

I think he actually was slated as Harrison's replacement.

He's more suited in the slot, as Stokely was.

[MAC]

I'd say Gonzo was brought in more to replace Stokely than harrison.

I disagree. Harrison was getting pretty old - particularly for a small receiver who relied on speed. They were planning a succession since it takes time for a wide receiver to blossom. The slot is just where they stuck him to get some experience in Marvins final years - which were probably going to be dictated by contract status as much as anything. My recollection going into that draft is that Marvin was probably going to be going the way of Edge, and as I sat there on draft day with 2-3 printed guides in hand, I was absolutely confident that they were targeting a wide receiver. Even reading the descriptions of the ones still available as the Colts draft slot approached, Gonzalez seemed like the likely candidate. I'm still scratching my head about the OP's confident recollection that: "Our number one need is a CB". Apparently he didn't follow the same resources that I did, nor think that Polian was going to hold true to form (which he did). I can't imagine the Colts ever using a first round pick on a slot receiver. That's like using a first round pick on your second tight end.

Gonzalez has all the skills needed to play outside, which he demonstrated when he was healthy. It is extremely sad and frustrating the way his career has gone, but I'm still hopeful that he will play a significant role.

[WoolMagnet]

I disagree. Harrison was getting pretty old - particularly for a small receiver who relied on speed. They were planning a succession since it takes time for a wide receiver to blossom. The slot is just where they stuck him to get some experience in Marvins final years - which were probably going to be dictated by contract status as much as anything. My recollection going into that draft is that Marvin was probably going to be going the way of Edge, and as I sat there on draft day with 2-3 printed guides in hand, I was absolutely confident that they were targeting a wide receiver. Even reading the descriptions of the ones still available as the Colts draft slot approached, Gonzalez seemed like the likely candidate. I'm still scratching my head about the OP's confident recollection that: "Our number one need is a CB". Apparently he didn't follow the same resources that I did, nor think that Polian was going to hold true to form (which he did). I can't imagine the Colts ever using a first round pick on a slot receiver. That's like using a first round pick on your second tight end.

Gonzalez has all the skills needed to play outside, which he demonstrated when he was healthy. It is extremely sad and frustrating the way his career has gone, but I'm still hopeful that he will play a significant role.

I don't disagree with you.

I just thought Gonzo was brought in to replace Stokely. We had a gap there until Collie.

As far as a #1 on a slot receiver, who thought we'd take a #3 DE with the #1 either. Nothing Polian does surprises me really.

[21isSuperman]

For those interested, I wrote a Colts blog entry on this topic

[MAC]

As far as a #1 on a slot receiver, who thought we'd take a #3 DE with the #1 either. Nothing Polian does surprises me really.

I didn't mean #2 tight end as in a backup, I meant Brody Eldridge's position. They aren't going to use a number one on a spot that doesn't require the rare athleticism typically found in a 1st rounder in order to be successful. Slot receivers just need to be shifty enough to get open a little and stout enough to not get killed over the middle (and nuts enough to be willing to go their in the first place). I'd be willing to bet that Gonzalez can get downfield significantly faster than Collie can, and is quicker as well.

Using a #1 on a DE when they did was actually exactly the same as using a #1 on Gonzalez when they did. He was supposed to get his feet wet and then replace Mathis or Freeney. Polian reinforced the same concept in an interview this evening.

[WoolMagnet]

I didn't mean #2 tight end as in a backup, I meant Brody Eldridge's position. They aren't going to use a number one on a spot that doesn't require the rare athleticism typically found in a 1st rounder in order to be successful. Slot receivers just need to be shifty enough to get open a little and stout enough to not get killed over the middle (and nuts enough to be willing to go their in the first place). I'd be willing to bet that Gonzalez can get downfield significantly faster than Collie can, and is quicker as well.

Using a #1 on a DE when they did was actually exactly the same as using a #1 on Gonzalez when they did. He was supposed to get his feet wet and then replace Mathis or Freeney. Polian reinforced the same concept in an interview this evening.

I see your point.

If thats the case, why are so many opposed to Luck coming in to "eventually" replace Manning? Its very similar, and the other guys weren't backing up an injured / possibly done player.

[MAC]

I see your point.

If thats the case, why are so many opposed to Luck coming in to "eventually" replace Manning? Its very similar, and the other guys weren't backing up an injured / possibly done player.

In a sense it is the same, and I understand the argument.

However personally I think it is different because the QB spot in 2011 is not one where you can just seamlessly slide in a replacement. Replacing Manning essentially means you are changing the character and capabilities of the team. Plus as special as Peyton is, it took him years of starting to develop into the dominating force of nature that he is now. I fear that too many of the people pushing for Luck believe that he will be able to just take right over and we won't feel any pain. I don't believe it. There is nothing seamless about this. And if he IS the next Peyton (or Elway, or whomever) than sitting on bench will just slow down his development and waste his career.

In a nutshell, if Peyton can't return, than we need a QB. Luck, *, I don't care. The FO can figure it out better than I can. But IF Peyton is healthy than I believe that he will remain the star that he is for several more years - not the 1-2 that many people conveniently assume. Having Luck here will create incredible pressure to terminate Peyton's Colts career prematurely. Heck, it's happening already and we haven't even drafted him. And then what if Luck isn't "all that". I would 100 times over prefer that the Colts ride Peyton as long as they possibly can, and win every Super Bowl for the next several years before he retires. If we then have to endure 2-3 lousy seasons before finding another franchise QB, so be it. I say that with confidence because the odds are significant that whomever the next QB for the Colts is, he won't be the . Anybody who assumes that is just taking Peyton for granted, and you won't realize what you have until he is gone.

[IMissMarvin]

I'd much prefer Gonzalez over ANY of the WRs you mention. I wouldn't want Jackson anywhere near the Colts. I can't stand prima donnas like that.

Is this unrational Colts bias or do you actually mean this? How is Jackson a prima donna? Because he got benched for being late for a practice? Because he celebrates TDs like 90% of the wide receivers in this league? Ansy Reid has actually spoken really highly of this man.

Character aside, it is obvious who is the more productive player; Jackson has out-produced Gonzalez on every level imaginable, and has scored 20 rec TDs, compared to Gonzo's 7, and that's not including his 4 on Special Teams (another area where Jackson is greatly valued). Jackson will be signing a multi-million dollar contract in the offseason and Gonzo will most likely be sitting on the couch.

Steve Smith has caught over 100 balls in one season playing the same position with Peyton's little brother, which is more than Gonzalez has caught in his whole career (99).

Jordy Nelson has emerged as one of this games' premier receivers this season. This year alone he has 1,101 rec. yards, 12 TDS and the highest YPC in the NFL at 18.7. Gonzo has 1,307 7 TDS and 13.2 YPC over the couirse of his entire career.

[MAC]

Is this unrational Colts bias or do you actually mean this? How is Jackson a prima donna? Because he got benched for being late for a practice? Because he celebrates TDs like 90% of the wide receivers in this league? Ansy Reid has actually spoken really highly of this man.

Character aside, it is obvious who is the more productive player; Jackson has out-produced Gonzalez on every level imaginable, and has scored 20 rec TDs, compared to Gonzo's 7, and that's not including his 4 on Special Teams (another area where Jackson is greatly valued). Jackson will be signing a multi-million dollar contract in the offseason and Gonzo will most likely be sitting on the couch.

Steve Smith has caught over 100 balls in one season playing the same position with Peyton's little brother, which is more than Gonzalez has caught in his whole career (99).

Jordy Nelson has emerged as one of this games' premier receivers this season. This year alone he has 1,101 rec. yards, 12 TDS and the highest YPC in the NFL at 18.7. Gonzo has 1,307 7 TDS and 13.2 YPC over the couirse of his entire career.

Is it really necessary to call me irrational? Why don't you slow down and consider the possibility that you failed to comprehend what I wrote. I said:

"You can't predict injuries, so removing that from the equation I'd much prefer Gonzalez over ANY of the WRs you mention. I wouldn't want Jackson anywhere near the Colts. I can't stand prima donnas like that."

The point was that you are debating the quality of the draft, and expressing disappointment with the selection of Gonzalez from the moment it happened. I think that you are far off-base. I feel that Gonzalez was an excellent draft pick - he just happened to get injured. It happens. If you are going to second guess in that manner you might as well modify your discussion and talk about the injuries to Sanders, Jackson, Hayden, and many others. I don't regret the pick because you can't project injury - it was a great pick! When he played, Gonzalez was a significant contributor who was getting better all the time. If not for the injuries you wouldn't even know much about either Collie or Garcon because one of them likely wouldn't have had much chance to even get on the field. Perhaps Collie wouldn't have even been drafted.

I live in NJ, so I'd heard enough about both Smith and Jackson to last a lifetime. Smith is an adequate secondary receiver - nothing more. If you only value stats, try comparing his first two years to Gonzo's first two years. There is a stark difference in Gonzo's favor. On the other hand, comparing their career stats as you have is akin to debating whether "you want the guy who plays, or the guy who is injured?", which is really kind of absurd if you think about it. (For the record, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, ahhhhhhhhhhhh, I think I'll take the guy who plays thank you very much).

Jordy Nelson is a nice player NOW, but you could say exactly the same thing about his first two years. It takes time to develop, and Gonzo was WAY ahead of both of these guys when he was injured. He might have been a perennial all-pro by now for all you know.

Jackson is a whole different story, and I chose NOT to ignore character if you don't mind. The Colts have done well to target mature responsible team players, and Jackson simply doesn't fit in - starting with the fact that he dropped in the draft to begin with because of it. Never a good sign. Sure, the guy has game-breaking speed. That doesn't change the fact that he combines the ego of Dion Sanders with the cancerous "me me me me me me me" attitude of Terrel Owens, yet is a dramatically inferior player to either. I detest all three of them. I wouldn't want any of them on "my" team regardless of talent. Jackson had his own Philly talk show about 5 minutes after he arrived in town. He's all talk, and he's all about DeSean. (Does that sound like Marvin Harrison who you obviously respect?) Just as his team was reinventing itself this offseason - bringing in a boatlode of new talent for a super bowl run, Jackson decided to destructively hold out - damaging his own team until the last possible second when it might cost HIM money (compared to Reggie - who I assume you respect - who complained a bit about his contract, then arrived at camp on time and with insane enthusiasm and fanfare, ready to help his TEAM win). And then when the season started going south, when leaders should have been stepping up to pull the team up by their bootstraps, Jackson starts a penny-anti crusade to annoy the living heck out of his coach because of some issue that was bothering HIM (very likely costing his team a win in the process, seeing as how they lost by four points to the lowly Cardinals in his absense). Do you see the trend here and understand the problem? Yes, Jackson can run fast. That's the ONLY positive thing I can think to say about him. That doesn't even acknowledge that he's a better receiver than Gonzalez in any other respect. Safe to say, however, that any other descriptive phrases I'd have for Jackson wouldn't make it past the site's filters. Suffice it to say that I suspect that he is one of Sander's favorites, that he and Vick deserve each other, and that I actively route against the Eagles (something that wasn't the case five years ago when a business associate was dragging me to one of their games every year). You want him? You can have him.

[WoolMagnet]

In a sense it is the same, and I understand the argument.

However personally I think it is different because the QB spot in 2011 is not one where you can just seamlessly slide in a replacement. Replacing Manning essentially means you are changing the character and capabilities of the team. Plus as special as Peyton is, it took him years of starting to develop into the dominating force of nature that he is now. I fear that too many of the people pushing for Luck believe that he will be able to just take right over and we won't feel any pain. I don't believe it. There is nothing seamless about this. And if he IS the next Peyton (or Elway, or whomever) than sitting on bench will just slow down his development and waste his career.

In a nutshell, if Peyton can't return, than we need a QB. Luck, *, I don't care. The FO can figure it out better than I can. But IF Peyton is healthy than I believe that he will remain the star that he is for several more years - not the 1-2 that many people conveniently assume. Having Luck here will create incredible pressure to terminate Peyton's Colts career prematurely. Heck, it's happening already and we haven't even drafted him. And then what if Luck isn't "all that". I would 100 times over prefer that the Colts ride Peyton as long as they possibly can, and win every Super Bowl for the next several years before he retires. If we then have to endure 2-3 lousy seasons before finding another franchise QB, so be it. I say that with confidence because the odds are significant that whomever the next QB for the Colts is, he won't be the . Anybody who assumes that is just taking Peyton for granted, and you won't realize what you have until he is gone.

I guess my point is rookie or established vet, neither can "step right in" behind Manning......obviously.

We need to start grooming "the next" QB now. Even if manning can play this year, odds are we're gonna need someone to come in sooner rather than probably later. And later is probably only in 2 or 3 years, best case.

With that in mind, would you rather have painter, Danny O, Collins, etc or a highly touted Luck who will "most likely" be a star? Whether you need a starter or back-up for manning, everything considered, it seems a no-brainer. No vet (worth anything) will be any cheaper than Luck would be.

I'd take my chances, I think. If we beat jax, it prob won't matter anyway but I just don't understand the "hate" for Luck or holding out on hope that Manning will be fine.

Come early march, if manning isn't "healed", not drafting Luck (since the experts agree on his future) if we have the chance looks to be a HUGE mistake.

And that doesn't mean I think we should give up on manning, it just mirrors the same reasons most are upset about the lack of depth we've had at QB here.

[Leon]

im more upset about the 2009 draft than the 2007 draft, we werent in desperate need of a RB, and passed on a few players who, if i recall, alot of ppl in the draft forum were screaming for, including hakeem nicks and kenny britt, among other top defensive prospects, james laurenitis and ray maualuga, i refuse to believe the at our pick Donald Brown was the BPA

[MAC]

im more upset about the 2009 draft than the 2007 draft, we werent in desperate need of a RB, and passed on a few players who, if i recall, alot of ppl in the draft forum were screaming for, including hakeem nicks and kenny britt, among other top defensive prospects, james laurenitis and ray maualuga, i refuse to believe the at our pick Donald Brown was the BPA

Just like with the Gonzalez pick, it was clear before the draft what the Colts priorities were. I actually paused my DVR before the Colts selection, read all the RB descriptions again, and then circled "Brown", because he had exactly the combination of intelligence and versatility in the pass/run game that I would expect the Colts to look for. The league had evolved to the point that everyone wanted two good backs, and the Colts were coming off a year with Adaii, Rhodes (who has never been much to write home about - SB performance aside), and a bunch of scrubs. Adaii had also been underperforming (the running game in total was horrid), and they appeared to be setting themselves up to let him go when his contract expired. So in contrast to your comments, RB appeared to be a crying need - which the printed draft guides I had all agreed with.

I wouldn't have minded if they took Britt (I'm a Rutgers fan) or Nicks, but WR was a much lower priority. As said a few posts ago, they had just set themselves up with Wayne/Gonzalez as the starting wide outs so spending a #1 there made no sense (and they had interesting prospects including Garcon and Hall on the roster), and they weren't about the invest a #1 on a slot receiver. They got Collie in the fourth round, which was a phenomenal pick. They also view LBs as disposable, and were incredibly unlikely to invest a first rounder there - particularly with ample competent depth on the roster all ready. They weren't going to invest a #1 in a MLB with Brackett established, and they weren't going to invest a #1 in an OLB ever - regardless of the screaming from the draft forum. The other glaring weakness was DT, and they drafted Moala. It's hard to complain about Powers or McAfee either. This was actually a pretty good draft.

[Restored]

Let me put it like this:

-For one, Gonzo was never drafted to replace Marvin. BP specifically stated in the moments after drafting Gonzo that he (gonzo) would be the perfect replacement to Brandon Stokely.

-Otherwise I agree on the notion that the 2007 draft pretty much sucked.

-Oh and I'm on the draft Andrew Luck train.

[MAC]

Let me put it like this:

-For one, Gonzo was never drafted to replace Marvin. BP specifically stated in the moments after drafting Gonzo that he (gonzo) would be the perfect replacement to Brandon Stokely.

Considering that Stokely had just been released, obviously that was where he was intended to start out as I previously suggested. Polian's comment does nothing to change my position. Did you think he was going to step to the podium and announce that the draft pick was intended to replace an all-pro quality legend already on the roster? It doesn't work that way. The fact is, however, that Stokely was a fourth round pick (as was Collie). Heck, Welker was an UFA, and I'm having trouble evening thinking of the names of any other slot receivers from around the league. It's just not a position that you invest a first round draft pick on. It is, however, often where you put young receivers while you develop them.

[Restored]

Considering that Stokely had just been released, obviously that was where he was intended to start out as I previously suggested. Polian's comment does nothing to change my position. Did you think he was going to step to the podium and announce that the draft pick was intended to replace an all-pro quality legend already on the roster? It doesn't work that way. The fact is, however, that Stokely was a fourth round pick (as was Collie). Heck, Welker was an UFA, and I'm having trouble evening thinking of the names of any other slot receivers from around the league. It's just not a position that you invest a first round draft pick on. It is, however, often where you put young receivers while you develop them.

Really? Wait and see when we draft Luck what Polian says at the podium.

[MAC]

Really? Wait and see when we draft Luck what Polian says at the podium.

Do you actually think that the situations are comparable, or are you just trying to be ornery? There are people in Tibet who neither speak English nor follow football who know that Luck would be Manning's successor. Being discrete about the subject would hardly be warranted.

[Restored]

Do you actually think that the situations are comparable, or are you just trying to be ornery? There are people in Tibet who neither speak English nor follow football who know that Luck would be Manning's successor. Being discrete about the subject would hardly be warranted.

They actually are very comparable. The difference being their position but still the same mindset. Gonzo was brought in (as you said) to eventually replace Marvin. Luck would be brought in (As I said) to eventually replace Peyton. What would warrant them being silent about Marvin then? The colts obviously felt prior to the 2007 season that Marvin still had a few seasons left (prior to his knee issue) so they thought Gonzo could be used in the slot to replace stokely and go back to how our offense was run in late 2003/2004. Not to mention WR's are more readily avaliable and replaceable in the league than say, a HOF QB.

[MAC]

They actually are very comparable. The difference being their position but still the same mindset. Gonzo was brought in (as you said) to eventually replace Marvin. Luck would be brought in (As I said) to eventually replace Peyton. What would warrant them being silent about Marvin then? The colts obviously felt prior to the 2007 season that Marvin still had a few seasons left (prior to his knee issue) so they thought Gonzo could be used in the slot to replace stokely and go back to how our offense was run in late 2003/2004. Not to mention WR's are more readily avaliable and replaceable in the league than say, a HOF QB.

Come on man, it doesn't sound like we actually disagree about anything - this is pretty silly. Clearly the circumstances are unique because it's Manning, he's been out all season and his career is in doubt, and there is an enormous controversy about the number one pick, and the concept that Luck might be special. If Gonzalez had been selected AFTER Marvin hurt his knee and missed the better part of a season than there would have been nothing odd about Polian announcing that they had to take a WR with Marvins future in doubt (but they hoped that Marvin would make a full recovery and play for many more years, etc). That is very different than announcing that "we took a WR in the first round because even though Marvin just had one of his best years statistically in some time, the fact is that he his getting old and he is arguably overpaid. We need to develop his replacement now because when his contract expires he is going to want a fortune, and the chances of us resigning him are slim to none. (Ooops, did I just crush the fragile ego of one of the most important players on the roster. My bad.). Similarly Hughes was drafted "because we've needed a third rusher for a long time" not because Freeney and Mathis are getting old. GMs and coaches emphasis the positive,they don't rip their own players. I was just participating in a thread about Rex Ryan waxing poetic about Mark Sanchez. Anyone paying attention knows that is the weak link on that team, but Ryan is never going to say it, nor should we expect him to.

[Superman]

Antoine Bethea was a 6th round pick. Robert Mathis was a 5th round pick. Dwight Freeney was too small and fell to #11 (David Carr was the #1 pick that year, by the way).

Every draft, by every team, is like this. Unless you can tell the future, you don't get a draft 100% right. I don't understand why people think it's fair to go back four years ago and say "We took X, but Y turned into a really good player, and that means we blew the draft."

Look at the receivers that went ahead of Reggie Wayne in 2001. David Terrell? Koren Robinson? Rod Gardner? Santana Moss?

If you really want your mind blown, try this one out: The Ravens picked Todd Heap at #31. The Chargers picked Drew Brees at #32. Then the Chargers let Drew Brees walk in free agency in 2006. Last night, he set the single season yardage record. Meanwhile, the Ravens have been stuck with terrible to mediocre quarterback play for the last decade. And Todd Heap has 22 catches for 248 yards this season.

It's not fair to come back years later and judge a draft by what players turned out good and what players didn't. If a GM continually makes the wrong picks, and the team continually fails to compete, then you can determine that he doesn't know how to draft. But to cherry pick players here and there isn't really a fair way to judge.

If you say "our team had this need, and we went in the opposite direction, and now the player we could have taken at that position is really good, and we still have that need," that's a little more reasonable. In 2009, as a pass-first team, we didn't need a running back, although I understand the rationale with Addai missing a big chunk of the previous season. But we needed corners, safeties, offensive linemen, defensive linemen ... and we took a running back. It's even worse that Brown didn't produce in his first two years; he's done decent this year, but that doesn't make up for the fact that we went in the wrong direction with that. And if you really wanted a running back, you could have come back later for Shonn Greene, Glen Coffee, Javon Ringer. Not a lot of backs in that draft, but no reason to spend a first rounder on one of the easiest positions to fill in the new NFL.

Same thing in 2010: We had these needs, particularly in the middle of both lines, and we took a back up pass rusher. It makes it much worse that Jerry Hughes has done practically nothing in the NFL, but that's not the point. At least not to me. The point is that we had much more pressing needs than a third pass rusher. And if you really want a third pass rusher, you can come back in the later rounds and get a bench player. Again, rationale was that he'd be able to step in and take Mathis' place after 2011, but that's two years of bench riding when we could have had a starter at guard or anywhere else.

[MAC]

Same thing in 2010: We had these needs, particularly in the middle of both lines, and we took a back up pass rusher. It makes it much worse that Jerry Hughes has done practically nothing in the NFL, but that's not the point. At least not to me. The point is that we had much more pressing needs than a third pass rusher. And if you really want a third pass rusher, you can come back in the later rounds and get a bench player. Again, rationale was that he'd be able to step in and take Mathis' place after 2011, but that's two years of bench riding when we could have had a starter at guard or anywhere else.

Except that we had been knocked out of the playoffs two years in a row essentially because of injuries at DE - and the older Freeney/Mathis get the more they benefit from limiting their snap count. Hughes isn't looking like a great pick, but I understood the reasoning and didn't have a problem with it. To draft for the oline would been to give up on Ugoh already - which would have been a little strange. Of course they would have been wise to prepare for Diem's decline earlier - amongst other things - but a first rounder would have been inappropriate for that.

Also, I'm pretty sure that its also 20/20 hindsight to talk about the roll of RBs in today's NFL with regards to 2009. Sure, there were no first round RBs this year, but there were three in 09, and Brown stacks up pretty well against the other two. There were also three taken in 2010. Things have changed quickly. It was perfectly reasonable for the Colts to take a RB in 09 - particularly one who could be expected to excel in the passing game as Brown can.

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

I know after this seaon, a large majority of you guys want Bill Polian out of town (don't hold your breath), but the fact remains that few GMS in the league today have a track record as successful as this guy. Bill Polian has long been regarded as one of the very best for building franchises up from the ashes, and our team is living proof. Throughout the late 90's and and early 2000's it seems he was dead on the money with the vast majority of his early and late round picks. A quick recap as far as 2002:

2002: We landed Freeney, Tripplet, and Thornton in the first four rounds. A+

2003: Dallas Clark (1st), Mike Doss (2nd), Robert Mathis (5th), Cato June (6th) A+

2004: Bob Sanders in the 2nd. Other quality picks like Jason David and Jake Scott in later rounds. B+

2005: Finally focused on our sedondary. Marlin Jackson and Kelvin Hayden were two quality corners in the first and second rounds respectively, Landed Giordano in the 4th. B+

2006: Addai was a quality 1st rounder. Tim Jennings was a great corner, only you wouldn't know it until the Bears picked him up and actually let him play. Bethea was probably the steal of the draft. B+

I posted these picks to assure you guys that this thread is not a knock on the success of our most beloved and cherished GM.

2007 however, no matter which way you look at it, was a complete and total failure; certanly the worst of Mr. Polian's tenure with the team, and amongst the worst in the history of the organization. Now I know a bunch of you are gonna say: 'No way, Anthony Gonzales was a quality pick that played great in Marvin's absense blah blah', but let's take a closer look at the situation:

Fact of the matter is Gonzales wasn't projected to be a first round pick, and he never should have been. We lost both Hayden and David to FA that offseason and really should have addressed our depleted and thin secondary (Hughes in round three was marginal help at best). Chris Houston out of Arkansas, a projected mid first rounder, fell to us at 32 overall and was widely considered the best overall player available on the board at any postion. I thought he was ours, no questions asked. Our number one need is a CB and the best player available is a CB. Seems pretty open and shut right? Wrong. We blew it.

????

OK looking it up, I think you mean Harper, definitely not Hayden. And the replacements for Harper and David were already on the roster (Jackson or Hayden for Harper and Jennings for David). CB was clearly not a top need in the 07 draft. Replacing Glenn who had abruptly retired was a much more pressing need.

[MAC]

????

OK looking it up, I think you mean Harper, definitely not Hayden. And the replacements for Harper and David were already on the roster (Jackson or Hayden for Harper and Jennings for David). CB was clearly not a top need in the 07 draft. Replacing Glenn who had abruptly retired was a much more pressing need.

Correct, but note that Ugoh hadn't retired yet. They were actually planning ahead, and it looked like a brilliant bit of for-sight until Ugoh got injured and regressed.

Love your screen name by the way. Perfect for this year. Took me a few seconds to work it through. OK, Whiskey, got it, Tango, got it, Foxtrot, got it. What the, oh YEAH? What the...........

[Superman]

Except that we had been knocked out of the playoffs two years in a row essentially because of injuries at DE - and the older Freeney/Mathis get the more they benefit from limiting their snap count. Hughes isn't looking like a great pick, but I understood the reasoning and didn't have a problem with it. To draft for the oline would been to give up on Ugoh already - which would have been a little strange. Of course they would have been wise to prepare for Diem's decline earlier - amongst other things - but a first rounder would have been inappropriate for that.

A first rounder would have been inappropriate to prepare for Diem's decline (which had already started), but not inappropriate for a third pass rusher?

The only time we got knocked out of the playoffs because of injuries to pass rushers was in 2007. And that's because both of our star pass rushers were hurt. I don't believe we lost the Super Bowl because of Freeney's injury. I think we failed to do anything to make it harder for Brees to complete short passes underneath our coverage, independent of our pass rush. Even if Freeney wasn't ineffective, it was never relevant. We allowed them to nickel and dime us, and even the greatest pass rush would never have gotten close with the way we played in the secondary.

Meanwhile, we had an offensive line that completely fell apart in 2008, despite using four picks in two years to improve it. We cut Ryan Lilja (which I didn't have a problem with, to be honest) after 2009. Polian essentially blamed the offensive line for the Super Bowl loss (which I disagreed with, even though they failed on the 3rd and short at the end of the first half, which I didn't have a problem with), and then didn't even look at the offensive line until the 4th round. I don't understand what the focus was in that draft. We had obvious needs, and I think a backup pass rusher was pretty far down the list.

And Ugoh didn't make the 2010 team. So we gave up on him that same year anyway. Draft a guard or a tackle, or a corner, or a defensive tackle, or a linebacker. Not a backup pass rusher who winds up being inactive as we get steamrolled by the Texans in the opener.

Also, I'm pretty sure that its also 20/20 hindsight to talk about the roll of RBs in today's NFL with regards to 2009. Sure, there were no first round RBs this year, but there were three in 09, and Brown stacks up pretty well against the other two. There were also three taken in 2010. Things have changed quickly. It was perfectly reasonable for the Colts to take a RB in 09 - particularly one who could be expected to excel in the passing game as Brown can.

We pioneered the NFL as it is today. We were the definition of a pass first team in 2008. We had the worst rushing attack in the league. If you want to improve that, improve the offensive line. The NFL, as it has existed for the last five years, is geared toward good passing teams, and if you have a decent running back and a decent offensive line, you can run the ball. I've been saying for several years that I don't think running backs are worth first or second round draft picks. Unless you're a superstar, can't-miss prospect (like Adrian Peterson, who also would have struggled behind our line from 2008-10), I don't get why we would draft a running back in the first round. Look at the going cost of a decent veteran running back the past several years. We could have had someone to fill the first/second/third back role for the past two years without spending a first round pick on it.

And this has nothing to do with Donald Brown. I actually like him, at least more than most people. I've defended him for two years on this and other Colts boards, because I've always felt the primary issue was our offensive line and our blocking scheme. We've made changes this season, including using a fullback, including using some high draft picks on linemen, and now all of a sudden Donald Brown looks like an NFL back. But we could have addressed a need -- offensive line, linebacker, safety, corner, defensive tackle (all those positions were decimated by injury in 2008) -- and come back for a running back later in the draft, or in free agency.

All I'm saying is that I don't like the direction we took in the first round in those two drafts. We had clear needs at other positions, needs that outweighed backups at other positions, and we essentially neglected them.

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

Correct, but note that Ugoh hadn't retired yet. They were actually planning ahead, and it looked like a brilliant bit of for-sight until Ugoh got injured and regressed.

Love your screen name by the way. Perfect for this year. Took me a few seconds to work it through. OK, Whiskey, got it, Tango, got it, Foxtrot, got it. What the, oh YEAH? What the...........

You are right, I had forgotten that Glenn retired after the draft. IIRC, Ugoh played pretty decent his rookie year but it may have been a case of an otherwise strong O line covering up for Ugoh's weaknesses.

[Superman]

You are right, I had forgotten that Glenn retired after the draft. IIRC, Ugoh played pretty decent his rookie year but it may have been a case of an otherwise strong O line covering up for Ugoh's weaknesses.

I thought he played well in his rookie year. Got out and blocked in space, was athletic, he actually lived up to the billing and it looked like a stroke of genius. It turned out that he didn't have the drive to keep himself in shape and keep getting better as a player, and now he's out of the league. I don't think you can put that on Polian, not with the way he played at the outset.

[MAC]

A first rounder would have been inappropriate to prepare for Diem's decline (which had already started), but not inappropriate for a third pass rusher?

The only time we got knocked out of the playoffs because of injuries to pass rushers was in 2007. And that's because both of our star pass rushers were hurt. I don't believe we lost the Super Bowl because of Freeney's injury.

Meanwhile, we had an offensive line that completely fell apart in 2008, despite using four picks in two years to improve it.

And Ugoh didn't make the 2010 team. So we gave up on him that same year anyway.

We pioneered the NFL as it is today. We were the definition of a pass first team in 2008. We had the worst rushing attack in the league. If you want to improve that, improve the offensive line.

And this has nothing to do with Donald Brown. I actually like him,

All I'm saying is that I don't like the direction we took in the first round in those two drafts. We had clear needs at other positions, needs that outweighed backups at other positions, and we essentially neglected them.

I understand where you are coming from, and the team would have clearly been better off to draft as you are suggesting. I would say, however:

My recollection of the Super Bowl is that Freeney looked fine in the first half but disappeared in the second. Perhaps it was NO adjustments - I'd have to watch the game - but I recall commentators suggesting at the time that his injury might not have liked the long half-time break. A lot of things went wrong in that game, but the inability to pressure the QB in the second half was a major contributing factor.

Regarding Diem, I'm saying that you don't use a first round pick on a right tackle. I agree that they would have been wise to address the oline in the draft, but we are talking about the first round pick. That's for game changing talent only - as Polian just reemphasized this week. That third pass rusher you are talking about was intended to be our second pass rusher (letting Mathis go this year) or our first pass rusher (letting Freeney go later). The problem is that he hasn't developed and we may now have to overpay to keep an aging Mathis. The concept was fine, because the position is vital to everything the Colts defense does.

You are right about Ugoh - it seems ridiculous in retrospect. They obviously expected him to rebound and be with the team for years. I'd love to know what happened. Maybe they didn't rate Saffold that highly, and thought that Hughes was special.

And while I understand and appreciate your sentiments about the role of running backs and the Colts influence, you can't ignore the fact that the Colts used their 1999 first rounder and their 2006 first rounder on running backs, and that 2006er was looking to be a problem. The Steelers, the Patriots, or the Jets, may be able to stack up any old RB behind all that beef and be successful, but the Colts stars had a skill set that you may not find in the lower rounds. They had just brought Dominic Rhodes back out of desperation if memory serves, and he was even slower and less effective than in his prime. They needed help. Once again, in 2011 teams are going for quantity over quality, but I don't believe that that was the mind set back then.

[MAC]

I thought he played well in his rookie year. Got out and blocked in space, was athletic, he actually lived up to the billing and it looked like a stroke of genius. It turned out that he didn't have the drive to keep himself in shape and keep getting better as a player, and now he's out of the league. I don't think you can put that on Polian, not with the way he played at the outset.

And then I'll turn around on the other hand and criticize the FO on the same issue. I went back not too long ago and looked at a draft guide, and it turns out that there were hints of this exact "drive" issue when Ugoh was in college.

Half the secret to the Colts drafting success is doing their homework and drafting people with the correct attitude. I universally defend the Polians, but I find that chain of events to be very disappointing. Maybe they knew somehow that Glenn was going to retire, and they felt the need to reach for someone that might have some issues.

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

I thought he played well in his rookie year. Got out and blocked in space, was athletic, he actually lived up to the billing and it looked like a stroke of genius. It turned out that he didn't have the drive to keep himself in shape and keep getting better as a player, and now he's out of the league. I don't think you can put that on Polian, not with the way he played at the outset.

FYI, he was signed by the NY Giants on 12/7. He has played a little for them. He came in on at least one play this past weekend as an extra blocker.

[Superman]

I understand where you are coming from, and the team would have clearly been better off to draft as you are suggesting. I would say, however:

My recollection of the Super Bowl is that Freeney looked fine in the first half but disappeared in the second. Perhaps it was NO adjustments - I'd have to watch the game - but I recall commentators suggesting at the time that his injury might not have liked the long half-time break. A lot of things went wrong in that game, but the inability to pressure the QB in the second half was a major contributing factor.

I understand the sentiment. Perhaps Freeney was limited.

I'm saying it was never relevant after his sack at the end of the second quarter. The Saints refused to find out. They threw quick, hitting hot receivers all game long, never giving the rush a chance to get close. And there's still the issue of Robert Mathis, a great pass rusher in his own right. He never got close. No one got close because we allowed the receivers free release off the line, we played back, we dropped into Tampa 2 all game long, and there was never an issue of whether Brees would be pressured. He didn't need time to throw because the receivers were immediately open. He was 32/39 for 288 yards. That's not an issue of no pass rush. That's an issue of his receivers being wide open.

We could have redirected receivers off the line, slowed them up, messed with the timing, etc. We did nothing, much like the first three months of this season. That's the primary reason we lost the Super Bowl, if you ask me. Not an inability to generate pressure on the quarterback.

Regarding Diem, I'm saying that you don't use a first round pick on a right tackle. I agree that they would have been wise to address the oline in the draft, but we are talking about the first round pick. That's for game changing talent only - as Polian just reemphasized this week. That third pass rusher you are talking about was intended to be our second pass rusher (letting Mathis go this year) or our first pass rusher (letting Freeney go later). The problem is that he hasn't developed and we may now have to overpay to keep an aging Mathis. The concept was fine, because the position is vital to everything the Colts defense does.

You're a passing team. Why don't you? Isn't the future of the offensive line as important as the future of the pass rush? Your franchise player is your quarterback. Make sure he can be as effective as possible. You already have a great pass rush, and both guys are under contract for at least two more years. I don't see how a backup pass rusher is a high priority there. Certainly not a first round priority. If you don't want a lineman, we could have used a corner, a safety, a linebacker, a guard... We had several needs more important and more pressing than a third pass rusher.

I agree that the pass rush is very important, but there are a lot of ways to skin a cat. Most teams don't have two elite defensive ends like we do, and that's to Polian's credit (nod to Dungy as well). Those guys aren't a dime a dozen, and I'd be much more forgiving of this decision if Jerry Hughes was any good. I've been more patient with him than most, but he certainly doesn't look special, game-changing, as you put it.

Revisionist history: We could have had James Laurinitis in 2009 and Rodger Saffold in 2010. I don't think that's necessarily fair, but I do think those were more important positions and needs to address than what we did with those two picks. It's just icing on the cake that they've been better players.

You are right about Ugoh - it seems ridiculous in retrospect. They obviously expected him to rebound and be with the team for years. I'd love to know what happened. Maybe they didn't rate Saffold that highly, and thought that Hughes was special.

They obviously thought Hughes could be special. They had Saffold rated as a right tackle, not a left tackle. I understand that.

What I don't understand is how a backup pass rusher who might start in two years is more important than a backup right tackle who might start in one year. If Saffold bombs out of the league, at least you could say that we identified the need and tried to address it. The way it stands, we totally ignored the needs, and the player we went with doesn't look special.

And while I understand and appreciate your sentiments about the role of running backs and the Colts influence, you can't ignore the fact that the Colts used their 1999 first rounder and their 2006 first rounder on running backs, and that 2006er was looking to be a problem. The Steelers, the Patriots, or the Jets, may be able to stack up any old RB behind all that beef and be successful, but the Colts stars had a skill set that you may not find in the lower rounds. They had just brought Dominic Rhodes back out of desperation if memory serves, and he was even slower and less effective than in his prime. They needed help. Once again, in 2011 teams are going for quantity over quality, but I don't believe that that was the mind set back then.

Edgerrin James was special, and that much is obvious from how well he played and how long he stayed in the league. But the NFL was completely different in 2009 from how it was in 1999. You can even see that from the Addai pick -- good player, very versatile, but hasn't lived up to the first round billing, whether it's because of injuries or the makeup of the team since 2008.

The Broncos proved in 2008 that if you have a decent offensive line, you can plug a back in off the scrap heap and have a measure of success. And I use their example because they had an offensive line much like the one we were trying to build at the time: not a lot of size, but skilled and athletic blockers who could protect the passer and get the back to the second level. One of the best rushing attacks, with seven different running backs, only gave up 11 sacks. Good system that you could plug any back into and get production.

You mention the Steelers, and their offensive line has been almost as bad as ours the past three years. Almost. And they made the Super Bowl two of those three years.

I'm not saying we should have just grabbed bum running backs off the street and thrown a Colts jersey on them, but I do think we should have placed more importance on improving the offensive line rather than on drafting an average back to run behind a sub-average line.

The feature back has been dead for several years now. Some people are just catching up, but I've (honestly) been saying this for four or five years now. There's no more Edgerrin James. Unless you are a superstar (Adrian Peterson), you're not worthy of a first round pick. That's my opinion, really solidified over the past two years or so. The position is too physical. The shelf-life is too low. The impact is too marginal, especially when your team lives and dies by your quarterback. We can go running back by committee with plug-ins and get the same production as we've gotten out of our first round backs the past three years. I like Brown and Addai. I just don't think it makes good sense to use a first rounder on a running back anymore.

And I think that was the case in 2009. We could set the trend as a pass-first team, but we couldn't get out of the feature back mold? I think maybe that's the kind of change we should be out ahead of. That's one of the things that separates good GMs from great GMs.

[Superman]

FYI, he was signed by the NY Giants on 12/7. He has played a little for them. He came in on at least one play this past weekend as an extra blocker.

Didn't know that. There's a lot of former Colts that didn't do anything here, but went on to play roles with other teams. Ramon Humber made a couple of plays last night against the Falcons. I didn't even know he was there.

Back to Ugoh, the talent was there. He just didn't put in the work.