Grigson Has Some Explaining To Do

[BOTT]

That is why NFL teams only pay minimum wage for GMs. As is evident on this board, everyone knows which players are going to be a boom or a bust, what trades are good or bad and another team is always willing to trade with you when you want to trade down. Evaluating football players is an innate ability that every red blooded American possesses.

Someone asked a question of what linemen the colts should have drafted. Did people really think posters were going to pull up their draft boards from the last 3 yrs ago? Of course people are using hindsight...so what?

[NewColtsFan]

Someone asked a question of what linemen the colts should have drafted. Did people really think posters were going to pull up their draft boards from the last 3 yrs ago? Of course people are using hindsight...so what?

 

So what?

 

Everything is obvious when all you're using is hindsight.

 

Which means everyone is a genius using hindsight.     It shows nothing.

[Superman]

I wouldn't have been upset at all if we traded down into the second and took Worford some even had him mocked to us in a trade back

I wouldn't have been upset with Smith this year right at 29 at least we would have tried a top pick on the Oline for once besides mewhort they have all been late 3rds and back

 

Again, hindsight. There were first round prospects on the board still, and you would have passed on them to trade down and take the guy who went at #65? 

 

This is not a defense of the pick we made; everyone knows I wanted Rhodes. And I would have rather had Rhodes than Warford. That draft really was kind of terrible in the top 60, so even a trade down isn't that exciting to me. 

 

But what you're doing is cherry picking the best guys from the draft, with the benefit of hindsight, and saying 'Grigson should have done this or that.' That's hard to get with. No one had Warford as a first rounder.

[Cynjin]

Someone asked a question of what linemen the colts should have drafted. Did people really think posters were going to pull up their draft boards from the last 3 yrs ago? Of course people are using hindsight...so what?

If they want to be honest about it, yes show that 3 years ago you, or anyone else for that matter, knew more than Grigson.

[Cynjin]

0-2

Probably.

[Superman]

Someone asked a question of what linemen the colts should have drafted. Did people really think posters were going to pull up their draft boards from the last 3 yrs ago? Of course people are using hindsight...so what?

 

No, I expected people to cherry pick the best players from that draft and act like drafting players is an exact science. I'm not disappointed.

[esmort]

I always admire how great Hindsight GMs are. You guys make it look soooo easy.

 

It's not hindsight when you thought and said the same things at the time.  I like Fleener, but was not in favor of drafting him; even at the time I wanted Glenn.  Hated the the Werner pick and wanted to trade down when we made the pick and said it at the time. My thoughts on the Trent Richardson trade are well known from day 1, but admittedly did not really have anyone specific in mind who I wanted on draft day since we didn't have a pick.  And I definitely would have gambled the 7th regardless of the media kick back unless Irsay had told me specifically I couldn't. 

[esmort]

No, I expected people to cherry pick the best players from that draft and act like drafting players is an exact science. I'm not disappointed.

 

It's definitely cherry picking and unrealistic to think he would have made ALL these moves, but I don'f think it is unrealistic to be disappointed he didnt make ANY of them.

[esmort]

And what team was it that offered a competitive package that would have allowed us to trade down and get proper value for the pick we were trading out of so that we could select Warford?

 

We could have did the same trade Minnesota gave the Patriots (maybe even have gotten another low pick), which would have given us pick #52 ... Warford went at #65 + given us more picks .... instead we have Werner.

[Superman]

2012 - Fleener ---> Cordy Glenn or Osemele(+ picks for moving down)

2013 - Werner ---> Warford( + 3rd + 4th + 7th we could have gotten the Min. deal that the NE did (maybe more))

2014 - Trent Richardson ---> Joel Bitonio

2015 - Not gambling at least the 7th on calling Collin's bluff when we knew we had so many ??? at RT was a bad move.  If he sits out we lost a 7th round pick ... big deal ... I am betting he could have been talked into signing. 

 

I am sure I am missing some other possibilities

 

It's not hindsight when you thought and said the same things at the time.  I like Fleener, but was not in favor of drafting him; even at the time I wanted Glenn.  Hated the the Werner pick and wanted to trade down when we made the pick and said it at the time. My thoughts on the Trent Richardson trade are well known from day 1, but admittedly did not really have anyone specific in mind who I wanted on draft day since we didn't have a pick.  And I definitely would have gambled the 7th regardless of the media kick back unless Irsay had told me specifically I couldn't. 

 

Lots of people wanted Cordy Glenn at the time, just like lots of people wanted Xavier Rhodes the next year. I have no problem believing that you're one of them. Coby Fleener isn't exactly chopped liver, though; the highest rated player in the draft at a position that was a huge need for our roster.

 

I think the potential trade with the Vikings is unrealistic. They already had #25. I don't think they were ready to move back in to the first round until after they got past that pick and saw that another of their favorite players was still on the board. The Pats cashed in and I think that was a great trade for them, but I don't think it was available when we were on the clock. Still, I didn't like the Werner pick, and neither did a lot of other people.

 

I don't like the Warford projection. I don't think you trade out of the first round for a guy with a third round projection. I said earlier, he's outplayed his draft status, but that's where hindsight comes into play. It's fair that a lot of people liked him, but I don't agree with the 'trade down' proposition when there were so many good players still on the board at #24. Grigson just didn't take the right one.

 

The Richardson trade was bad because it was a RB. Richardson had the whole world fooled into thinking he was going to be good, but I don't like a RB for a first rounder as a matter of principle. Still, no one had a real draft board in September, so mocking Bitonio is pointless. 

 

The Collins decision is what it is. I'm not willing to hold that against any GM. They all chose not to draft him, whether that's with owner interference or not.

 

You'll see I have no problem with being critical of a GM. I just don't think most people are reasonable when it comes to grading GM performance. I think mistakes get magnified, and the good moves get shrugged off. Vontae Davis, for instance. When the trade was made, people were up in arms about how we basically gave away a first rounder (because it was predetermined that the team would be terrible in 2012 and be picking in the top 5 again) for a troubled and underachieving CB. Or 'why did we draft Allen when we already had Fleener?' Yet Allen was a great draft pick.

 

To me, it all comes down to two bad moves by Grigson in 2013, and I think those two moves had universal support within the organization. I think everyone wanted Werner, and I know everyone was thrilled to get Richardson. You take those two obvious mistakes away, and there really isn't a whole lot to complain about. The rest comes down to people who don't really understand what cap management is about.

[RockThatBlue]

Lol, a six page overreaction thread after a preseason game. Good grief.

[ColtsBlueFL]

Someone asked a question of what linemen the colts should have drafted. Did people really think posters were going to pull up their draft boards from the last 3 yrs ago? Of course people are using hindsight...so what?

 

Point is The people picked (yes, including Werner.... ugh! ) were higher ranked or regarded (ugh TRich)  than any OL available to the Colts, and trading down unlikely to produce the results desired.  So how can anyone blame Grigs in that case? Many here also wanted Levitre as a FA.  As I understand it, he is now 2nd string on the Titans O line.

[Lawrence Owen]

Yes, Grigson used a first round pick for a WR...i have no issue with that since when teams doubled T.Y..our offense looked pedestrian.  yeah, he only used a 7th round pick on an o-lineman.  And a 6th round on a RB where some people would rather had used a 2-3rd round on one.  the rest of the picks were used on defense.  

FA we grabbed some quality players on both sides.  granted still need to see Irving,..but I have high hopes for him.

If offense pans out in the skill players,..and defense at least ends up better this year..where do you think Grigson would go in the draft? Even if the starting o-line plays the entire year,...and we win it all,...our Depth behind the starters are weak and he knows it. He'd go o-line early and often.  

People put WAY too much into preseason.  Colts use this time for evals, not game planning.  If colts game planned,...they's do alot more doubling on o-line, or more chips/draw's when needed.  But itis used to see how players do 1-v-1 against certain talent.  Even AC had a couple bad plays last week and gave up a sack. ....So we should get him of the starters as well???  

Indy still has to resign a couple TE's, AC, and #12, so they have to be careful with FA's now.  O-line comes from the draft,..and I think Grigson tried to shore up the D first this year.  

Next year i fully expect him to go o-line in the draft.

[BOTT]

So what?

 

Everything is obvious when all you're using is hindsight.

 

Which means everyone is a genius using hindsight.     It shows nothing.

I never said it showed anything. I was explaining WHY people were posting who was available......because another forum member asked.

[BOTT]

Point is The people picked (yes, including Werner.... ugh! ) were higher ranked or regarded (ugh TRich)  than any OL available to the Colts, and trading down unlikely to produce the results desired.  So how can anyone blame Grigs in that case? Many here also wanted Levitre as a FA.  As I understand it, he is now 2nd string on the Titans O line.

I can blame him for TRich. I said he he stunk lol.

[esmort]

Lots of people wanted Cordy Glenn at the time, just like lots of people wanted Xavier Rhodes the next year. I have no problem believing that you're one of them. Coby Fleener isn't exactly chopped liver, though; the highest rated player in the draft at a position that was a huge need for our roster.

 

I think the potential trade with the Vikings is unrealistic. They already had #25. I don't think they were ready to move back in to the first round until after they got past that pick and saw that another of their favorite players was still on the board. The Pats cashed in and I think that was a great trade for them, but I don't think it was available when we were on the clock. Still, I didn't like the Werner pick, and neither did a lot of other people.

 

I don't like the Warford projection. I don't think you trade out of the first round for a guy with a third round projection. I said earlier, he's outplayed his draft status, but that's where hindsight comes into play. It's fair that a lot of people liked him, but I don't agree with the 'trade down' proposition when there were so many good players still on the board at #24. Grigson just didn't take the right one.

 

The Richardson trade was bad because it was a RB. Richardson had the whole world fooled into thinking he was going to be good, but I don't like a RB for a first rounder as a matter of principle. Still, no one had a real draft board in September, so mocking Bitonio is pointless. 

 

The Collins decision is what it is. I'm not willing to hold that against any GM. They all chose not to draft him, whether that's with owner interference or not.

 

You'll see I have no problem with being critical of a GM. I just don't think most people are reasonable when it comes to grading GM performance. I think mistakes get magnified, and the good moves get shrugged off. Vontae Davis, for instance. When the trade was made, people were up in arms about how we basically gave away a first rounder (because it was predetermined that the team would be terrible in 2012 and be picking in the top 5 again) for a troubled and underachieving CB. Or 'why did we draft Allen when we already had Fleener?' Yet Allen was a great draft pick.

 

To me, it all comes down to two bad moves by Grigson in 2013, and I think those two moves had universal support within the organization. I think everyone wanted Werner, and I know everyone was thrilled to get Richardson. You take those two obvious mistakes away, and there really isn't a whole lot to complain about. The rest comes down to people who don't really understand what cap management is about.

 

I actually like Fleener and have defended him many times on here, but I didn't want to draft him there especially with who was on the board. 

 

Minnesota did not get #25 off the Pats until we selected Werner at #24 and the seen Rhodes was still on the board. I find it hard to believe we couldn't have gotten the same compensation for #24 as the Pats got one pick later. (edit ... you are right they traded #29 not #25 ... although I still think they coveted Rhodes enough we could have gotten them to give us the Pats trade at #24 so they could make sure they got their guy) Although I wanted to trade down I also agree I would have been happier taking Rhodes there than Werner.  Although had we taken the trade we could have had Jaime Collins at #52 and still probably could have traded the two 3rd rounders (#83 from Min and #86 Hugh Thornton) to move back up and take Warford. 

 

I realize this is all hypothetical, and like I said I don't expect these he would make all these decisions correct without the benefit of hindsight ... but his draft and FA OL decisions have left a lot to be desired. 

 

I agree he should get mad props for the Vontae Davis trade, I'll admit I was not a big fan of it at the time and was proven wrong ... but that trade and the Hilton draft choice can only carry him for so long ... his mistakes are starting to add up. Some of his decisions concerning the OL (both lines actually) leave me scratching my head. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

I can blame him for TRich. I said he he stunk lol.

 

I don't think any level headed fan was in favor of that.  (I wasn't, not in favor of any round 1 RB) But to place Bitonio in his spot isn't accurate either.

[BOTT]

If they want to be honest about it, yes show that 3 years ago you, or anyone else for that matter, knew more than Grigson.

I never claimed I knew more than Grigson. I simply named a couple lineman that were available that he could have drafted. But if you wanna hit the archives I'm on the first page of the TRich trade thread saying how horrible the trade was. I also defended the Vontae Davis trade as a no brainer. Me is brilliant

People really need to stop being so uptight about people questioning the moves of a guy that gets paid millions to make personnel decisions. It comes with the territory and that's half the fun of sports.

[BOTT]

I don't think any level headed fan was in favor of that.  (I wasn't, not in favor of any round 1 RB) But to place Bitonio in his spot isn't accurate either.

The overwhelming majority of people on this forum were praising the trade.....as were most of the "experts".

[esmort]

I don't think any level headed fan was in favor of that.  (I wasn't, not in favor of any round 1 RB) But to place Bitonio in his spot isn't accurate either.

 

I don't think us taking the next OT who was taken off the board after what would have been our pick (only 8 picks later) is a stretch to assume as a reasonable possibility.

[ColtsBlueFL]

The overwhelming majority of people on this forum were praising the trade.....as were most of the "experts".

 

Old school, run the ball, stop the run, Ground and Pound, 3 yards and a cloud of dust types certainly did.

[Superman]

I don't think us taking the next OT who was taken off the board after what would have been our pick (only 8 picks later) is a stretch to assume as a reasonable possibility.

 

In September of 2013? Yeah, talking about anyone who was drafted in 2014 is kind of unreasonable.

 

To me, your argument is best made by saying Grigson shouldn't have traded for Richardson. It's really hard to argue that or defend the move. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

I don't think us taking the next OT who was taken off the board after what would have been our pick (only 8 picks later) is a stretch to assume as a reasonable possibility.

 

I guess the point is if Grigson made all of those moves (not taking Fleenr, Werner or trading for TRich and then getting 2 and 3 round O line players that excelled), they'd take Polian back out of the HOF, make a new rule, and stick Grigson in there in his place right now.

 

Grigson has made mistakes, but not getting top flight O lineman at bargain basement prices isn't one of them, IMO.

[esmort]

In September of 2013? Yeah, talking about anyone who was drafted in 2014 is kind of unreasonable.

 

To me, your argument is best made by saying Grigson shouldn't have traded for Richardson. It's really hard to argue that or defend the move. 

 

Well of course when the Richardson trade was made you couldn't have known for sure who was going to be there for us to pick ... but it's pretty safe to assume there would be a better choice than a RB in the 1st round.  So then when you do see who was on the board for us to pick Bitonio is a legitimate choice even if we may not have picked him (knowing Grigson's track record we probably wouldn't have).

[Superman]

I actually like Fleener and have defended him many times on here, but I didn't want to draft him there especially with who was on the board. 

 

Minnesota did not get #25 off the Pats until we selected Werner at #24 and the seen Rhodes was still on the board. I find it hard to believe we couldn't have gotten the same compensation for #24 as the Pats got one pick later. (edit ... you are right they traded #29 not #25 ... although I still think they coveted Rhodes enough we could have gotten them to give us the Pats trade at #24 so they could make sure they got their guy) Although I wanted to trade down I also agree I would have been happier taking Rhodes there than Werner.  Although had we taken the trade we could have had Jaime Collins at #52 and still probably could have traded the two 3rd rounders (#83 from Min and #86 Hugh Thornton) to move back up and take Warford. 

 

I realize this is all hypothetical, and like I said I don't expect these he would make all these decisions correct without the benefit of hindsight ... but his draft and FA OL decisions have left a lot to be desired. 

 

I agree he should get mad props for the Vontae Davis trade, I'll admit I was not a big fan of it at the time and was proven wrong ... but that trade and the Hilton draft choice can only carry him for so long ... his mistakes are starting to add up. Some of his decisions concerning the OL (both lines actually) leave me scratching my head. 

 

I think the OL will be okay. Yeah, it could be better, but there's a lot of presumptions that because Mewhort gave up a sack that the offensive line is terrible, and because they couldn't run against the Eagles that it's terrible. I disagree. The line actually looks pretty good, to me. Get Tipton out of there, and recognize that Mewhort is going to give up some pressure once in a while (so will everyone else, believe it or not), and I think we're okay. Not great, but good enough to run the ball better than we have and still get the ball downfield.

 

And I think Grigson has done okay in the draft, aside from 2013 and giving up the pick for Richardson. Yeah, we can nitpick on players like Fleener, but we still got a good player. So I don't think his mistakes are adding up; I think two big mistakes hurt us, and now it's time to get past those.

 

Back to the trade with Minnesota, I don't think they've have given up nearly as much to move from #25 to #24. The Niners moved from #31 to #18 that year, and only had to throw in #74. The Vikings moved from #52 to #29, and that's why they added in #83 and #102. You're not going to get an extra third and fourth rounder to move up one spot at the end of the first round. And as we know, they liked Rhodes and Patterson, and were guaranteed to get at least one of them (if we had taken Rhodes, they probably take Patterson; and they probably knew we weren't taking Patterson). 

[esmort]

I guess the point is if Grigson made all of those moves (not taking Fleenr, Werner or trading for TRich and then getting 2 and 3 round O line players that excelled, they'd take Polian back out of the HOF, make a new rule, and stick Grigson in there in his place right now.

 

Grigson has made mistakes, but not getting top flight O lineman at bargain basement prices isn't one of them, IMO.

 

As I said I am not asking him to make ALL of them, but I don't think it's too much to ask for him to be able to pull off one of them ... and if not in the draft at least some make some better FA decisions ... Grigson's OL decisions as a whole have been pretty bad.

[Superman]

Well of course when the Richardson trade was made you couldn't have known for sure who was going to be there for us to pick ... but it's pretty safe to assume there would be a better choice than a RB in the 1st round.  So then when you do see who was on the board for us to pick Bitonio is a legitimate choice even if we may not have picked him (knowing Grigson's track record we probably wouldn't have).

 

The bolded is why I disagree with the Richardson trade on principle.

[esmort]

I think the OL will be okay. Yeah, it could be better, but there's a lot of presumptions that because Mewhort gave up a sack that the offensive line is terrible, and because they couldn't run against the Eagles that it's terrible. I disagree. The line actually looks pretty good, to me. Get Tipton out of there, and recognize that Mewhort is going to give up some pressure once in a while (so will everyone else, believe it or not), and I think we're okay. Not great, but good enough to run the ball better than we have and still get the ball downfield.

 

 

I hope you are right  ... and it's not that I am mad we didn't win the preseason games; I really don't care about losing in pre-season. ... my issue is more with his decision making ... you have to think given how they were talking they knew there was a good chance Cherilus was not going to cut it.  But, IMO he didn't seem to address what a huge problem that could potentially be ... he can hope Mewhort can move over or maybe Reitz would avoid injury and not be totally bad, it just seems he really didn't have a good contingency plan (a mistake I think he makes a lot). 

 

Hopefully Mewhort can settle in and step up with some more practice ... if he doesn't (or we dont luck into finding a RT who was overlooked or gets cut at cutdowns) I think we are really going to be hurting. 

[Superman]

I hope you are right  ... and it's not that I am mad we didn't win the preseason games; I really don't care about losing in pre-season. ... my issue is more with his decision making ... you have to think given how they were talking they knew there was a good chance Cherilus was not going to cut it.  But, IMO he didn't seem to address what a huge problem that could potentially be ... he can hope Mewhort can move over or maybe Reitz would avoid injury and not be totally bad, it just seems he really didn't have a good contingency plan (a mistake I think he makes a lot). 

 

Hopefully Mewhort can settle in and step up with some more practice ... if he doesn't (or we dont luck into finding a RT who was overlooked or gets cut at cutdowns) I think we are really going to be hurting. 

 

I get the feeling the idea was for Mewhort to go to RT all offseason. He's worked there throughout the entire offseason program. I think they're committed to him as the RT of the future, even if it means scheming some help for him at times. That's not a strange concept to me; to use a second year guy who played well at guard as a rookie and move him to tackle, where he played in college, isn't a lack of foresight. Mewhort was a second round pick. We can give him a shot at RT. I actually think he's going to be really good in the run game, and that's a lot harder to manufacture than protection.

 

My question is who else can play RT. 

[OffensivelyPC]

I remember being OK with 'throwing away' a 7th on him.  But there's no question, teams/coaches/GM's value any and all draft picks highly, even more so than the average fan.  Even the late rounders. The agent polluted the draft pool with his threat to withdrawal after round 3.  Not a single GM/Team 'wasted' their 7th rounder on him then.  Not a single one.

If we were so willing to give up a first for Trent I don't see why we're so concerned about keeping a 7th round compensatory selection safe from high risk players.  It makes less sense to be aggressive with your highest picks and conservative with the lower ones.  When Grigson ahs been so aggressive with trading our higher picks, I don't think he gets to hide behind the defense that we value the late rounders so much that we're afraid of risking it for a reward bigger than the pick itself.  In other words, if he didn't think Trent was more valuable than what our 2014 1st round was (so what, 26th pick overall), then he wouldn't have given it up for Trent.  That same rationale applies to the 7th and Collins. 

 

I think that's a much easier decision to make when you're not actually responsible for the decision. If you draft Collins, even at #255, and he gets indicted the next week, it's a bad look. The owner of the franchise was arrested and suspended a year ago. The NFL just went through a big PR mess last season. The guy was being questioned in connection with the murder of a pregnant woman.

 

And at the end of the day, all 32 teams passed on him. They all bought his agents' bluff. They were all concerned about his situation and the possibility of a future indictment (and in fact, his contract has stipulations pertaining to that). And as soon as the draft was done, they all called to try to sign him. 

 

I agree, I think we should have just drafted him in the 7th. But I get why they didn't, and it's hard to fault them for it. 

Two Points.  First, It's a bad look, sure.  But we have signed guys with questionable histories before, even recently (i.e. D'Rick Rodgers). No, it's not as bad as murder.  But whether its pot or murder, it still feeds the negative perception of the league that teams will pay "thugs" (to borrow the popular word that gets tossed around without actually utilizing its true meaning) a lot of money as long as they can play. Some team was going to take a risk on him, so even if Collins does end up getting busted, that is going to reflect on the Colts on some indirect level because no team in the league avoids all players with questionable histories (i.e. its' a league wide negative perception).  Colts may avoid guys entwined with potential murder charges, but really, after all that's gone on the past year, as you said, the perception in general of the NFL is one that won't ever go away as long as NFL players are arrested.   And the Colts feed that perception every time they release a guy, no matter what he's charged with.  So unless we can guarantee taht no Colt will ever get arrested, I don't see why we'd shy away from a guy who may not even be involved with the particular charges being questioned about.  It's one thing if he'd been investigated before for serious violent crimes.  He hasn't.  I may think that the NFL should avoid guys with questionable histories, but there's always that risk when there's no indications.  And even then, other teams don't have to follow that code of conduct.  So to the extent we want a team with a shiny clean record (not to mention no guarantee anyone might get arrested) we're doing so by cutting out a portion of the available player pool.  If we're going to sign guys with a red flag, then what good does it do to part and parse charges when you aren't even sure the guy is guilty of said charges to begin with?

 

Second and most importantly, we admittedly chased after the guy once he hit free agency.  We don't get to sit there and say, on the one hand, that we avoided wasting a draft pick on him because it would be a bad look if we drafted a guy in the 7th round that ended up being charged with murder, and on the other hand, go after said potential murderer and try to nab him in free agency. 

 

It's these reasons (Trent response to ColtsBlue and the red flag rsponse to Superman) why I don't buy our rationale, or even understand it really.  We didn't draft Collins because "we didn't want to risk a 7th rounder."  That's after we gave up a 1st for a RB, which regardless of what we all thought about Trent before he proved to us all how bad he was, I think almost everyone here universally agreed that a 1st rounder for ANY RB is too high.  Then, we say we didn't want to risk drafting Collins because of his history, and promptly make a serious attempt at signing the guy in free agency.  I can most the time follow Grigson's rationale.  Dorsett, BPA.  Cool with taht.  I understood Werner, drafting 2 TEs back to back, Walden, etc. etc. etc.  A lot of what Grigs does makes sense to me.  Collins does not.  In this one, to me at least, he's talking out of both sides of his mouth.

[esmort]

I get the feeling the idea was for Mewhort to go to RT all offseason. He's worked there throughout the entire offseason program. I think they're committed to him as the RT of the future, even if it means scheming some help for him at times. That's not a strange concept to me; to use a second year guy who played well at guard as a rookie and move him to tackle, where he played in college, isn't a lack of foresight. Mewhort was a second round pick. We can give him a shot at RT. I actually think he's going to be really good in the run game, and that's a lot harder to manufacture than protection.

 

My question is who else can play RT. 

 

The bolded is kinda my point as to Grigson and his lack of having a good "plan B"

 

If trying Mewhort at RT has always been the plan ... ok that's fine ... but as someone else said "let's not put all of our eggs in that basket".  Reitz, Herremans, and Good are not good "plan B's" IMO.  Also, I understand if Mewhort sometimes needs help with some of the elite pass rushers, but hate the possibility of always having to have a TE or RB chip/help him it limits us in other areas.  

[ColtsBlueFL]

Actually, I thin the GM / Coaches thought TRich would be another Eddie Lacy.   Bzzzzzt.

 

As far as our 7th rounder, Denzelle Good is trying to make the team as an O lineman.  If we spent the pick on L. Collins, there was still no guarantee he would be totally cleared of the murder (at that time), nor was there any assurance he would disregard his agents threat to not sign, and re-enter the draft next season. (no one knew if that was legal etc... either).

 

A bird in the hand is better than two in the bush?

[12dalegend]

Luck got us to to the AFC title game, not Grigson. Yes, Grigson has done some good, mainly in the draft here and there (and of course the Vontae trade). But he's also done some REALLY bad (blowing two 1st round picks on Trent and Werner, signing Landry, Francois, DHB, not re-signing Bethea, and the list goes on).

But this thread is about Grigson not fixing the O line. He's had 4 years. How much more time does he deserve? This is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. Grigson had ample opportunity this offseason to do so yet he ignored it almost entirely.

Yes, Werner was puzzling I was hoping for Lacy and that would have spared the wasted 1st pick for Trent but you win some and lose some but it still hurts

[COLTS449]

I'm very worried about our line. I mean it seems so simple. We could sign Evan Mathis and fix the problem over night. If it were me I would have signed La'el Collins and signed Mathis too.

[jaywhy]

Million dollar QB one hundred dollar line.  Not a good match.  Good running backs with a line that will not block for the run.  We had good receiver.  So we should have tried to get a better offensive line to protect QB and help running backs..  Def. secondary poor tackling and coverage and we did not do anything in the draft to  improve. Reggie probably would have stayed if we improved our O-line.  He cannot catch passes the QB can't throw.

 

 

 

[RockThatBlue]

Million dollar QB one hundred dollar line. Not a good match. Good running backs with a line that will not block for the run. We had good receiver. So we should have tried to get a better offensive line to protect QB and help running backs.. Def. secondary poor tackling and coverage and we did not do anything in the draft to improve. Reggie probably would have stayed if we improved our O-line. He cannot catch passes the QB can't throw.

The colts didn't re sign Wayne, the colts o-line had nothing to do with him not being brought back.

[Gavin]

I'm very worried about our line. I mean it seems so simple. We could sign Evan Mathis and fix the problem over night. If it were me I would have signed La'el Collins and signed Mathis too.

I don't see how its so hard for people to understand....especially after it has been said multiple times.......La'el Collins would have to WANT to sign here.....He did not and Grigson said it himself he tried to get Collins to sign....He did not want to sign. Same for Mathis, He has to want to sign here...Grigson just cant forge a players signature on the dotted line and expect him to come here and play

[Buck Showalter]

I don't see how its so hard for people to understand....especially after it has been said multiple times.......La'el Collins would have to WANT to sign here.....He did not and Grigson said it himself he tried to get Collins to sign....He did not want to sign. Same for Mathis, He has to want to sign here...Grigson just cant forge a players signature on the dotted line and expect him to come here and play

But, but, but...

It's the Colts, every player in the league secretly wishes they played for the Colts...

[Jason_]

I'm very worried about our line. I mean it seems so simple. We could sign Evan Mathis and fix the problem over night. If it were me I would have signed La'el Collins and signed Mathis too.

No, you would NOT have signed Collins. He CHOSE to sign with dallas.

[Jason_]

But, but, but...

It's the Colts, every player in the league secretly wishes they played for the Colts...

Oh and don't forget, they'll happily play for league minimum.