Colts' future not as bright as it seems

[krunk]

What's your take on John Claytons article?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13013357/why-indianapolis-colts-future-bright-seems-nfl

 

"What's clear is the biological clock is ticking on the Colts, even though Luck is only 25 years old. It might not be now or never for Luck to get to his first Super Bowl, but the Colts could be heading down the path of five other franchises that have quality quarterbacks. Teams that don't hit on two or three starters in each draft class eventually suffer roster decay -- and that's the position in which the Colts currently find themselves"

[AntonMcG]

Who are these five other teams who have 'quality quarterbacks' but have declined? What is the metric for 'quality' quarterbacks?

 

He is making really really obvious points, and then does not acknowledge that QB's in the elite bracket always find ways to get there team into the SB conversation. History has proven this time and time again.

 

He uses one example to prove his point, I could give him ten examples to disprove it.

[horseshoeblue22]

Here are the "starters" Grigson has found in each draft:

2012: Luck, Hilton, Fleener, Allen, Chapman (5)

2013: Vontae Davis, Khaled Holmes (2)

2014: Jack Mewhort, Jonathan Newsome (2)

2015: ?

When you consider Moncrief and Hugh Thorton as quality backups, Grigson's drafts haven't been nearly as bad as people would lead you to believe. Theres no reason to believe that "the biological clock is ticking" on this team, or that it will take a significant step backwards in the near future.

Grigson has built this team around a lot of vet FA additions, especially on defense. But the team still has a lot of young talent. Pagano has said in the past that they tend to draft offensive players because they value experience on defense and because the defensive schemes are much more complicated compared to the offensive schemes.

Quality rookies are harder to find when they are consistently picking in the 23-29 range as they have since 2013. Its even harder when you are trading picks for vets, and signing vet FAs to fill holes. Developing young talent really haven't been a priority here the last couple of years.

[krunk]

Most of the age he speaks of is really on the defensive side of the ball.  He speaks of failed drafts, but to be honest the Colts have not really even drafted a whole lot of defensive prospects to make such a claim.  The 2015 draft is I think the most defensive players that we have drafted and their success is yet to be determined.  We'll be an even younger team next year at the LB, S and Corner postions.  Not too mention whoever else the colts draft on the DL.

 

I think Clayton is creating smoke where there really is no fire.  

[Warhorse]

[gspdx]

He does make make valid points.  The Colts need to be working on replacing 1. The aging vets we are signing now and 2. the normal attrition a team will see where some draft picks just don't cut it.  But I don't think the Colts are really any worse off that most teams.

 

The reality is the clock is always ticking for every team.  You are getting better or you are getting worse.  Just a reality.  It is almost impossible to just stay where you are from year to year.  

 

All things considered I will take the problems that the Colts have.  The next couple of years should be really fun and during that time Grigson will still be wheeling and dealing to 1. get quality in the draft and 2. get quality vets to fill needs that are cost effective.

 

I think it's a pretty good plan.

[Valpo2004]

Most of the age he speaks of is really on the defensive side of the ball.  He speaks of failed drafts, but to be honest the Colts have not really even drafted a whole lot of defensive prospects to make such a claim.  The 2015 draft is I think the most defensive players that we have drafted and their success is yet to be determined.  We'll be an even younger team next year at the LB, S and Corner postions.  Not too mention whoever else the colts draft on the DL.

 

I think Clayton is creating smoke where there really is no fire.  

 

With you here, he talks about how we only have 2 drafted defensive starters.  But if you look at our drafts we havn't drafted very many defensive players highly.  Grig's plan was clearly to build the offense first.

 

This year was the only year under Grigs that we've drafted 2 defensive players in days 1 and 2.  In 2013 we drafted Werner (who is a bust IMO) but after that it was all offense at least in the high rounds.

 

He makes one good point essentially. . . to win a championship the Colts are gonna have to draft well for a good stretch of 2 or 3 years most likely.  That's just the reality of the salary cap.  But we have a whole lot of years of Luck to chain together 2 or 3 good drafts.  He's pretending like. . . oh well after this. . . it's all over for the Colts.  That's silly.

 

Aaron Rodgers is the highest paid QB in the league right now.  Packers are competing for a championship every year.  Eventually they will probably break through and make a 2nd SB.  

 

Yes low paid QB's on their rookie deals give you an advantage cap wise.  But so few QB's actually work out that this advantage is not so great.   Having a fully paid Elite QB makes you a contender every year. . . Chain together a few good drafts and you stand a good chance of breaking through.

[peytonmanning18]

Who are these five other teams who have 'quality quarterbacks' but have declined? What is the metric for 'quality' quarterbacks?

He is making really really obvious points, and then does not acknowledge that QB's in the elite bracket always find ways to get there team into the SB conversation. History has proven this time and time again.

He uses one example to prove his point, I could give him ten examples to disprove it.

Andrew Luck is not in the elite category. And Clayton makes some good points. Once Luck is getting paid $25 million a year, Grigson won't be able to cover his draft mishaps with free agency bandaids because we won't have the cap space.

[AntonMcG]

Andrew Luck is not in the elite category. And Clayton makes some good points. Once Luck is getting paid $25 million a year, Grigson won't be able to cover his draft mishaps with free agency bandaids because we won't have the cap space.

 

We are not talking about now - we are talking about the future. Luck has been borderline elite, and I think everyone would agree that he will take his game to the next level this year due to improvements in all facets of the offense.

 

You say he makes good points, but he is making obvious points and forms isolated conclusions from them that do not correspond to what history has shown us.

[The Fish]

So Grigson needs to hit on more draft picks. Clayton is probably the very first person to make that point. What a thinker.

[horseshoeblue22]

It really grinds my gears when people bring up Grigson's "poor drafts." His 2012 draft class was great from top to bottom. His 2014 draft class produced a legit starter on OL (Mewhort), the most productive pass rusher of his class (Newsome) and a WR with a ton of athletic potential (Moncrief). This was despite trading away our 1st and 4th rd picks that year for Richardson and Montori Hughes. Richardson didnt pan out, but Grigs made up for it by finding Newsome in the 5th.

2013 wasn't good, but NFL.com is currently running an article calling 2013 "#2 in the worst draft classes in the last 25 years". Grigson did well enough to find four quality backups/fringe starters in Werner, Thorton, Hughes and Holmes. He also found a way to produce a top 5 CB from that historically poor draft class. I wouldn't call that a failure by any means.

Time will tell if the 2015 draft class has what it takes, but all of these guys were drafted at positions that can play sooner rather than later. The team has high hopes for Dorsett, Smith and Anderson. Even our later picks in Geathers, Parry, Robinson, Herrerra and Good have a reasonable shot at contributing in their rookie season. Add UDFAs like Carter, Heenan and Zack Hodges, this looks like an unbelievable draft class for our team.

[peytonmanning18]

We are not talking about now - we are talking about the future. Luck has been borderline elite, and I think everyone would agree that he will take his game to the next level this year due to improvements in all facets of the offense.

You say he makes good points, but he is making obvious points and forming isolated conclusions from them that do not correspond to what history has shown us.

Luck won't be elite until he stops turning the ball over at a Mark Sanchez/ Jay Cutler like rate

[The Fish]

Luck won't be elite until he stops turning the ball over at a Mark Sanchez/ Jay Cutler like rate

 

He sure is just like Jay Cutler and Mark Sanchez, isn't he?

[Everyone]

Luck won't be elite until he stops turning the ball over at a Mark Sanchez/ Jay Cutler like rate

Gtho with that crap.

[GoColts8818]

There isn't really anything shocking here he's pretty much saying just because you have a really good young QB that alone doesn't promise future success. You have to draft well to give him players around him. The spotlight on the draft is going to become even brighter after Luck signs his contract and the Colts aren't going to be able to spend big in free agency every year to fix mistakes they may make in future drafts.

As much as some don't want to hear this its what happened to Polian after Manning signed his first big deal, he stopped spending as much as he did in free agency to pay for Peyton. The fact he did hit high in the draft for so long (pretty much 98-06) without really having a first round miss is what made him so good at his job and is part of why he's going to the Hall of Fame.

The real test for Grigson is going to come after Luck signs his big deal because he's not going to have the cash he has now to go play in free agency. His first round drafting will have to improve. We saw what to Polian and in turn the Colts when he started missing on first rounders. Even with Peyton Manning the team was clearly in decline in 2010 and feel apart completely without him in 2011.

[krunk]

Luck won't be elite until he stops turning the ball over at a Mark Sanchez/ Jay Cutler like rate

 

Peyton Mannings first 4 seasons interceptions 1998 to 2002

 

28

15

15

23

 

 

Luck first 3 seasons

 

18

9

16

 

 

I don't see any evidence to say he's on any sort of disaster pattern any more then Peyton.

[GoColts8818]

Peyton Mannings first 4 seasons interceptions 1998 to 2002

28

15

15

23

Luck first 3 seasons

18

9

16

I don't see any evidence to say he's on any sort of disaster pattern any more then Peyton.

your not someone who wants Luck to fail that would be the difference between you and the other poster. That's why you can't see it ;)

[wig]

If you assume that the team won't draft well, then sure, but history hasn't shown us that.  

 

Everyone is hard on Grigs' drafts because of Trent and Werner.  Outside of that, he's been very solid.

[azcolt]

I know it is slightly off topic, but this thread just reminded me of how much I miss TRich. His mega-thread on this forum was truly a classic. Now we are reduced to threads about skinny, bald talking heads / former high school ball boys predicting Colts doom and gloom.

[Bubbz]

Clayton is a prolific writer. So much, that he is able to rewrite history. 3 straight division championships! Sounds good I guess

[AntonMcG]

Let me put it this way...

 

When is the last time a below average QB, regardless of the quality of the team around him, has won a Super Bowl?

 

Every long-term starting QB gets paid eventually, most will get around $16 million. Maybe Luck gets $24 million. Now, is that extra $8 million going to put these teams over the top? Or is the extra tax for an elite QB going to make the difference in the end?

 

I know what I would rather spend that $8 million p/a on. And history agrees with me.

[Dustin]

Let me put it this way...

When is the last time a below average QB, regardless of the quality of the team around him, has won a Super Bowl?

Every long-term starting QB gets paid eventually, most will get around $16 million. Maybe Luck gets $24 million. Now, is that extra $8 million going to put these teams over the top? Or is the extra tax for an elite QB going to make the difference in the end?

I know what I would rather spend that $8 million p/a on. And history agrees with me.

Joe Flacco.

[AntonMcG]

Let's also keep in mind that the salary cap is going to get considerably larger year-on-year.

[AntonMcG]

Joe Flacco.

 

Now now...

[ColtStronger]

Luck won't be elite until he stops turning the ball over at a Mark Sanchez/ Jay Cutler like rate

He isn't as bad as Cutler or Sanchez, but I get your point.  People don't want to believe it, but Andrew was still making foolish throws/holding onto the ball too long which caused many turnovers.  He most definitely will need to get better if the Colts want to make it to the SB.  I do believe he will become a smarter player these next few years.  He is maturing and entering his prime.  If you look at Peyton's first couple of years he did the same, so I'm not too worried about it, although there are alot of people on here ignoring that fact!

[ColtStronger]

Let me put it this way...

 

When is the last time a below average QB, regardless of the quality of the team around him, has won a Super Bowl?

 

Every long-term starting QB gets paid eventually, most will get around $16 million. Maybe Luck gets $24 million. Now, is that extra $8 million going to put these teams over the top? Or is the extra tax for an elite QB going to make the difference in the end?

 

I know what I would rather spend that $8 million p/a on. And history agrees with me.

I cant remember any below avg QB's winning the SB!  They're has been mediocre or avg QB's win, but they're has been alot of them.  Although many will disagree, but Flacco is probably slightly above average and so is Wilson, but normally the elite QB's are winning the big game!

[krunk]

Let me put it this way...

 

When is the last time a below average QB, regardless of the quality of the team around him, has won a Super Bowl?

 

Every long-term starting QB gets paid eventually, most will get around $16 million. Maybe Luck gets $24 million. Now, is that extra $8 million going to put these teams over the top? Or is the extra tax for an elite QB going to make the difference in the end?

 

I know what I would rather spend that $8 million p/a on. And history agrees with me.

 

 

There's not many, but I think the last time was Trent Dilfer.  Also if the Giants would have won that game then we could say Kerry Collins perhaps.

[Superman]

Such alarmism.

 

2012: Luck, Fleener, Allen, Hilton, Chapman

2013: Werner (at Sam), Holmes, Thornton (special note that two of the 2013 picks gave us Vontae and TY)

2014: Mewhort, Moncrief, Newsome

2015: TBD, but we can assume good things about our first six picks

 

It's not like we haven't drafted good players. We have.

 

And it's not true that everything will dry up once Luck gets paid. Do some math and stop just accepting this cliche about highly paid QBs choking off a team's ability to spend money. Against a projected cap of $150m (which is very conservative), the Colts go into 2016 with $33m in cap space. That's with Luck's $16m option, with Cherilus, Jackson and Thomas on the books. Get rid of those three in 2016, and we're looking at $46m in cap space. Get rid of Cherilus and Thomas this year, and we're lookign at $56m in cap space in 2016.

 

Do market contracts for AC, Hilton, Fleener and Allen, and it cuts into that space significantly. Then add Luck's long term deal, and yes, we'll be restricted. But we could easily be $25m under the cap at the start of every league year, given smartly structured contracts and expected increases in the salary cap (if we're not above $200m by 2020, I'll be shocked; top money for Luck at that point will only be 11-12% of the cap). 

 

My biggest fear is that the Colts turn into the 2013-2014 Falcons. We definitely need to get better and really milk the draft for everything we can every year. Grigson calls it "the lifeblood of the organization," and he's absolutely right. Can't miss on first rounders, can't trade them away for bad players, etc. But this idea that, because we're gong to have to spend some money on some players over the next couple years that we're going to fall behind, it's just noise. Aside from injuries, there's no real threat to the Colts ability to contend every year.

[Coffeedrinker]

Peyton Mannings first 4 seasons interceptions 1998 to 2002

 

28

15

15

23

 

 

Luck first 3 seasons

 

18

9

16

 

 

I don't see any evidence to say he's on any sort of disaster pattern any more then Peyton.

I would be willing to bet if you compare the # of INTs per pass attempt, Luck will be significantly lower than Manning as well.  The numbers are probably closer though if you make it total turnovers (INTs and fumbles) in their first three years, again though I'd be willing to bet that Luck's TOs per drop back are lower than Manning's TOs per drop back over the first three years.

[Superman]

Joe Flacco.

 

When is the last time a below average QB, regardless of the quality of the team around him, has won a Super Bowl?

 

Doesn't qualify, as Flacco wasn't below average.

[Superman]

He isn't as bad as Cutler or Sanchez, but I get your point.  People don't want to believe it, but Andrew was still making foolish throws/holding onto the ball too long which caused many turnovers.  He most definitely will need to get better if the Colts want to make it to the SB.  I do believe he will become a smarter player these next few years.  He is maturing and entering his prime.  If you look at Peyton's first couple of years he did the same, so I'm not too worried about it, although there are alot of people on here ignoring that fact!

 

Third year QB makes mistakes, needs to get better... hardly seems like a revelation.

[CanuckColt]

There are no 'perfect' teams.  Grigson is doing a good job of putting together a contending team year after year.

As already mentioned, it is difficult to draft top difference makers when picking in the 20's every year...hindsight is 20-20 and Grigson is doing a good job.  He probably missed on Werner, picking a hand-in-the-dirt speed rusher and converting him to a 3-4 rush OLB.  And since he has the cap room to use and the money to spend (from Mr. Irsay), Grigson has maxed out on the best free agents he could find without paying crazy money for a player or two. The FAs he has signed are a bit long-in-the-tooth but probably have a good year or two remaining...we will see.

[akcolt]

We are Super Bowl contenders stop letting Bucky's list and stupid off season articles get you worked up.

[akcolt]

Such alarmism.

2012: Luck, Fleener, Allen, Hilton, Chapman

2013: Werner (at Sam), Holmes, Thornton (special note that two of the 2013 picks gave us Vontae and TY)

2014: Mewhort, Moncrief, Newsome

2015: TBD, but we can assume good things about our first six picks

It's not like we haven't drafted good players. We have.

And it's not true that everything will dry up once Luck gets paid. Do some math and stop just accepting this cliche about highly paid QBs choking off a team's ability to spend money. Against a projected cap of $150m (which is very conservative), the Colts go into 2016 with $33m in cap space. That's with Luck's $16m option, with Cherilus, Jackson and Thomas on the books. Get rid of those three in 2016, and we're looking at $46m in cap space. Get rid of Cherilus and Thomas this year, and we're lookign at $56m in cap space in 2016.

Do market contracts for AC, Hilton, Fleener and Allen, and it cuts into that space significantly. Then add Luck's long term deal, and yes, we'll be restricted. But we could easily be $25m under the cap at the start of every league year, given smartly structured contracts and expected increases in the salary cap (if we're not above $200m by 2020, I'll be shocked; top money for Luck at that point will only be 11-12% of the cap).

My biggest fear is that the Colts turn into the 2013-2014 Falcons. We definitely need to get better and really milk the draft for everything we can every year. Grigson calls it "the lifeblood of the organization," and he's absolutely right. Can't miss on first rounders, can't trade them away for bad players, etc. But this idea that, because we're gong to have to spend some money on some players over the next couple years that we're going to fall behind, it's just noise. Aside from injuries, there's no real threat to the Colts ability to contend every year.

Thank you always the voice of reason. People get to worked up over stupid list's and crystal ball articles. We are fine and will be in the mix for the foreseeable future

[Dustin]

When is the last time a below average QB, regardless of the quality of the team around him, has won a Super Bowl?

I disagree.

Doesn't qualify, as Flacco wasn't below average.

[Gavin]

He is right

[Valpo2004]

Here are the "starters" Grigson has found in each draft:

2012: Luck, Hilton, Fleener, Allen, Chapman (5)

2013: Vontae Davis, Khaled Holmes (2)

2014: Jack Mewhort, Jonathan Newsome (2)

2015: ?

When you consider Moncrief and Hugh Thorton as quality backups, Grigson's drafts haven't been nearly as bad as people would lead you to believe. Theres no reason to believe that "the biological clock is ticking" on this team, or that it will take a significant step backwards in the near future.

Grigson has built this team around a lot of vet FA additions, especially on defense. But the team still has a lot of young talent. Pagano has said in the past that they tend to draft offensive players because they value experience on defense and because the defensive schemes are much more complicated compared to the offensive schemes.

Quality rookies are harder to find when they are consistently picking in the 23-29 range as they have since 2013. Its even harder when you are trading picks for vets, and signing vet FAs to fill holes. Developing young talent really haven't been a priority here the last couple of years.

 

You could count Freeman in 2012 as I think a UDFA counts for all intents and purposes.  (They play cheap)  However I don't think you can count Davis because when we traded for him he didn't have many years left on his contract on which he would play cheap.  Yes we traded a draft pick for him and yes it was very worth it, but I think the point is getting starters who play for 3 to 4 years without big hits to the cap.  

 

Questionable about Holmes and Newsome.  Holmes because they seem to like Harrison too, although to be fair I would say since Harrison was a UDFA he would count if Holmes wasn't listed.

 

Newsome started last year due to injuries.  Mathis is back and we signed another pass rusher as well.  That could regulate him to quality backup status.

 

Don't know about Thornton being a quality backup but Moncrief may have starter level talent but held back by WR depth.  WR may be a special case for us. 

[amfootball]

I think with this article, Clayton is basically saying in his era of FA/cap, the draft is critical. It is as critical as having the elite or great QB. Nothing earth shattering and with Luck due to get his big pay day, the emphasis of the draft will be magnified.

[GoColts8818]

When is the last time a below average QB, regardless of the quality of the team around him, has won a Super Bowl?

Doesn't qualify, as Flacco wasn't below average.

especially not that post season

[Superman]

He is right

 

Not really.