Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

I'm hearing the Indianapolis Colts are considering Kamalei Correa in Round 1 - Walter Football


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, krunk said:

 

In his defense, people brought up some similar type of accusations about Marcus Peters last year and all he did was ball and go to the Pro Bowl so...... I feel the Colts certainly passed on him due to that stuff in their evaluations. Ultimately if I remember right the Chiefs ended up taking him before our pick any way.

 

That is different though. Marcus Peters was actually suspended (for a game) by his head coach, because he threw a fit on the sideline after getting a penalty called on him. There were public signs of Peters having character issues. Peters had enough talent that he should have been a top 10 pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BlueShoe said:

 

That is different though. Marcus Peters was actually suspended (for a game) by his head coach, because he threw a fit on the sideline after getting a penalty called on him. There were public signs of Peters having character issues. Peters had enough talent that he should have been a top 10 pick.

 

Yes it is a bit different, but it's all tied into character and maturity I think.  Different scenarios I think, but ultimately similar reasons as to what is causing the dropping privately or publicly known character and maturity related stuff.  In both situations the view seems or seemed to be "Pain To Deal With".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BlueShoe said:

 

I see a lot of Bruce Smith in him. 

 

People don't realize he's a big dude to deal with as a pass rusher. Especially coming from a stand up position. He's much bigger and stronger than most of our OLB outside of maybe Trent Cole.  The guy is 6'4" 260lbs running a 4.7.  And like you are pointing to with the Bruce Smith reference he can also come from that 3 point stance and get home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, krunk said:

 

Yes it is a bit different, but it's all tied into character and maturity I think.  Different scenarios I think, but ultimately similar reasons as to what is causing the dropping privately or publicly known character and maturity related stuff.  In both situations the view seems or seemed to be "Pain To Deal With".

 

Agreed. It could be that there hasn't been a trigger to ignite the underlying issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BlueShoe said:

 

Agreed. It could be that there hasn't been a trigger to ignite the underlying issue. 

 

You know this makes me think back to when I was watching "A Football Life" feature on Charles Haley.  They say he was pretty hard to deal with as well.  Not necessarily off the field but from a personality stand point.  I could kind of see Mackenzie Having a difficult locker room personality in some ways.  I could see him being kind of Cold one day and Hot the other. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, krunk said:

 

People don't realize he's a big dude to deal with as a pass rusher. Especially coming from a stand up position. He's much bigger and stronger than most of our OLB outside of maybe Trent Cole.  The guy is 6'4" 260lbs running a 4.7.  And like you are pointing to with the Bruce Smith reference he can also come from that 3 point stance and get home.

 

I believe ultimately that is where he should play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, krunk said:

 

You know this makes me think back to when I was watching "A Football Life" feature on Charles Haley.  They say he was pretty hard to deal with as well.  Not necessarily off the field but from a personality stand point.  I could kind of see Mackenzie Having a difficult locker room personality in some ways.  I could see him being kind of Cold one day and Hot the other. 

 

Excellent point. Brandon Marshall comes to mind as well. Maybe he will befriend a teammate who can point him in the right direction. Ala Ricky Williams with Brandon Marshall. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, krunk said:

 

Yeah I figured that, but in this defense you know he will be doing more than that unless they switch him down to 3-4 DE.

 

I agree. That is why I like him so much. He can play all three downs for us. He could easily play in our 4-3 package at DE, and also stay in when we are in nickel. I think he could play 5 technique in our base 3-4.

 

And there is nothing stopping us from lining him up at Rush OLB or Strong OLB. He can really do it all. He can rush the QB, he sets the edge well, and he stuffs the run.

 

That is why I believe when we look back on this draft, Lawson might be the best player in this entire class. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BlueShoe said:

I can't buy this at all. If Grigson selected another project like this in the first round then he would bet his entire career on the pick.

 

Even if this was a leak, we have to remember that it's lying session. Don't believe anything coming from front offices a few weeks before the draft.

This is exactly what I wanted to say. Tis the season for smokescreens and misdirections, take everything you hear with a grain of salt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem with our pick at #18 is that none of the possibilities are materially better prospects than those likely to be available 20 picks later.  So, you can say that any realistic prospect for us could fall into the 2nd round.  Trying to figure out the likelihood of various prospects being there for us, I tried to categorize those prospects sure to be gone by #18.  I came up with this order (without overthinking):

 

Sure to be Gone: (9) Goff, Wentz, Tunsil, Ramsey, Bosa, Buckner, Elliott, Stanley, Hargreaves

 

Highly Likely to Be Gone: (5) Lee, Jack (ticking time bomb), Lawson, Rankins, Conklin

 

This leaves only three more players gone before we pick.  I've ordered these by likelihood of selection:

 

Treadwell, Jackson III, Lynch, Robinson, Ragland, Decker, Floyd, Spence, Reed, Doctson, Fuller, Apple, Dodd, Coleman.  I say we should take either Spence or Decker (to be our new RG) and know we've done about as well as we could value-wise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Archer said:

Problem with our pick at #18 is that none of the possibilities are materially better prospects than those likely to be available 20 picks later.  So, you can say that any realistic prospect for us could fall into the 2nd round.  Trying to figure out the likelihood of various prospects being there for us, I tried to categorize those prospects sure to be gone by #18.  I came up with this order (without overthinking):

 

Sure to be Gone: (9) Goff, Wentz, Tunsil, Ramsey, Bosa, Buckner, Elliott, Stanley, Hargreaves

 

Highly Likely to Be Gone: (5) Lee, Jack (ticking time bomb), Lawson, Rankins, Conklin

 

This leaves only three more players gone before we pick.  I've ordered these by likelihood of selection:

 

Treadwell, Jackson III, Lynch, Robinson, Ragland, Decker, Floyd, Spence, Reed, Doctson, Fuller, Apple, Dodd, Coleman.  I say we should take either Spence or Decker (to be our new RG) and know we've done about as well as we could value-wise.

 

I agree. Which is why I will not be surprised if we move up or down.

 

I would even add Ragland to the group that will likely be gone before we pick.

 

That trade back with Denver is looking better and better to me. I hope Paxton Lynch stays on the board until 18.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, BlueShoe said:

That trade back with Denver is looking better and better to me. I hope Paxton Lynch stays on the board until 18.

 

Yes, that trade would probably be ideal.  You never really know what team will fall in love with which of these remaining prospects, but there's always the possibility it'll happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...