Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Other Qb Possibilities?


Recommended Posts

Just throwing this out there, If the Colts do trade the pick and pass on Luck, who would you like to see the Colts select in the draft, go after in free agency, or keep from their own roster to be back-up/ QB of the future.

I personally like Brock Osweller from ASU. I didn't think he was entering this year, but he did declare. CBS had him as a 4th round pick, but scouts are calling him easily the third best QB in the draft. Luck would bring immense value for the Colts short and long term, in trading the pick. Osweller could come in and sit and slowly develop and fine-tune his skills. He would have the same impact Luck would if Manning was healthy, which is none, sitting on the bench. Osweller would have no pressure, and represents a player who could be developed. With Manning the QB position is set, Luck isn't necessary nor a need for the Colts if Manning returns. With the value from the Luck pick, the Colts would have a stronger more balanced team, making the transition easier for the future QB, allowing the Colts to compete now, and rebuild at the same time! It keeps them from having to start over when Luck takes over in four years. I would rather the Colts win now and give Manning the pieces through the value of Luck, and still getting that replacement in this draft. Plus after his final years, the team can be already rebuilt, more complete and balanced, similar to say the Giants or Ravens. Osweller is someone everyone should take a long hard look at, I just hope Irsay and Grigson are considering all possiblities and variables. Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see Brock Osweiler as a 2nd to 3rd round pick, contingent on a good combine result, including the wonderlic.

Some scouts indeed consider Osweiler as the #3 QB. Other scouts consider Ryan Tannehill (Texas A&M, of the broken foot) as the #3. And yet other scouts consider Brandon Weedon (OSU, and is 28 years old) as the #3.

I don't think any of them, including RG3, compare favorably with what Luck brings to the table.

IOW, I see Luck having greater FQB potential than any of these other QBs in this draft class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Colts do not use the #1 pick on a QB (either trades it, or uses it for another position), I think the Colts should select a backup QB later in the draft. Who, depends on the offensive philosophy.

If the Colts want to become like the Eagles (ala Vick), then draft D. Thomas in the 7th round or as a UDFA.

If the Colts want to stay more like the old Colts (ala Peyton), then draft Foles or Osweiler or Weedon in the 2nd-3rd-4th rounds, respectively.

Luck, RG3 and possibly Tannehill will not be there after the 1st round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to predict tomorrow much less March 8th, but right now all signs point to the possibility of Manning not being able to pass a physical to play football when his $28M option is due. With no certainty that he can play in 2012 that means we would be going into the season with Orlovsky as our starting quarterback which I can guarantee you won't happen.

One thing is sure. Grigson won't pay $28M for a player that may never hit the field. This team needs a quarterback of the future. Luck is the best player available at a position of need. I don't see how you can justify passing on Luck. If you think another QB has better upside then draft two quarterbacks by picking up Foles, Osweiller, or Keenum. As least then you can guard against Luck busting and then if Andrew works out groom the later pick for a trade vis-a-vis the Kevin Kolb trade to Arizona for a 2nd round pick and a player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luck > Any other QB who has played or ever will play the game.

Didn't you know that?

No, I didn't know that. What I do know is that Luck is better than the other QBs in this year's draft, according to the consensus of people who get paid to make these analyses. Accordingly, Luck is projected to be the #1 overall pick. It will be interesting to see if the Colts passes on or exercises the opportunity to draft him with the #1 overall pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to predict tomorrow much less March 8th, but right now all signs point to the possibility of Manning not being able to pass a physical to play football when his $28M option is due. With no certainty that he can play in 2012 that means we would be going into the season with Orlovsky as our starting quarterback which I can guarantee you won't happen.

One thing is sure. Grigson won't pay $28M for a player that may never hit the field. This team needs a quarterback of the future. Luck is the best player available at a position of need. I don't see how you can justify passing on Luck. If you think another QB has better upside then draft two quarterbacks by picking up Foles, Osweiller, or Keenum. As least then you can guard against Luck busting and then if Andrew works out groom the later pick for a trade vis-a-vis the Kevin Kolb trade to Arizona for a 2nd round pick and a player.

actually, the only "one thing thats for sure" is that Irsay will make the decision on Peyton, NOT Grigson...Irsay has already said as much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just throwing this out there, If the Colts do trade the pick and pass on Luck, who would you like to see the Colts select in the draft, go after in free agency, or keep from their own roster to be back-up/ QB of the future.

I personally like Brock Osweller from ASU. I didn't think he was entering this year, but he did declare. CBS had him as a 4th round pick, but scouts are calling him easily the third best QB in the draft. Luck would bring immense value for the Colts short and long term, in trading the pick. Osweller could come in and sit and slowly develop and fine-tune his skills. He would have the same impact Luck would if Manning was healthy, which is none, sitting on the bench. Osweller would have no pressure, and represents a player who could be developed. With Manning the QB position is set, Luck isn't necessary nor a need for the Colts if Manning returns. With the value from the Luck pick, the Colts would have a stronger more balanced team, making the transition easier for the future QB, allowing the Colts to compete now, and rebuild at the same time! It keeps them from having to start over when Luck takes over in four years. I would rather the Colts win now and give Manning the pieces through the value of Luck, and still getting that replacement in this draft. Plus after his final years, the team can be already rebuilt, more complete and balanced, similar to say the Giants or Ravens. Osweller is someone everyone should take a long hard look at, I just hope Irsay and Grigson are considering all possiblities and variables. Thoughts?

yea I was looking at this kid a few weeks ago before right after his bowl game. He's a reall big QB at like 6'7" but they say he doesn't have the arm strength a guy his size should have, which I'm fine with that. Has long has hes smart and a quick release hed be a good option to sit behind Peyton and learn. I would like to stay away from a QB the first couple rounds, and get a sleeper. Everything else your spot on. Let's hope Peyton is healthy and Irsay sticks to his words.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man I just realized how weak this draft is at QB. The only three I like as future NFL starters are Luck, RG3, and Foles. Weeden might be good but he'll never get his fair shake due to his age. I really would not mind at all trading down the pick and going with Foles in round 2 or 3. He'd be the perfect guy to sit behind Peyton the next four years, then take over at the helm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of the 42 QBs in this year's draft, only the top 17 are expected to be drafted within 7 rounds.

That leaves 25 QBs that can be had without using a pick! On top of that, I am sure they will all be happy with the league minimum for rookies.

The problem is that none of them have a great potential/probabilty to be a franchise QB like the top rated QBs. Arguably, they may even have more of a bust potential than the QBs that will be drafted.

Decision and comparison point: Make sure that the QB you sign (draft pick or FA) is better than your Orlovsky/Painter/Collins backup, right now.

jacory harris in the 7th

Jacory Harris (Miami) is projected by CBS to be the 436 pick as an UDFA, and the 24th QB in the class. IMO, he would be a large risk even for backup duty, and has very slim potential to become a decent starter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Colts do not use the #1 pick on a QB (either trades it, or uses it for another position), I think the Colts should select a backup QB later in the draft. Who, depends on the offensive philosophy.

If the Colts want to become like the Eagles (ala Vick), then draft D. Thomas in the 7th round or as a UDFA.

If the Colts want to stay more like the old Colts (ala Peyton), then draft Foles or Osweiler or Weedon in the 2nd-3rd-4th rounds, respectively.

Luck, RG3 and possibly Tannehill will not be there after the 1st round.

So then my osweiler theory is solid..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man I just realized how weak this draft is at QB. The only three I like as future NFL starters are Luck, RG3, and Foles. Weeden might be good but he'll never get his fair shake due to his age. I really would not mind at all trading down the pick and going with Foles in round 2 or 3. He'd be the perfect guy to sit behind Peyton the next four years, then take over at the helm.

I could dig foles, but he would have to be selected at 34... Osewriler could be a 4-5 guy... But I like both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So then my osweiler theory is solid..

If we assume that trading the #1 pick for multiple picks is the way the Colts will be going, yes your theory has merit. I think either Foles, Osweiler and Weedon will be better than the Orlovsky/Painter/Collins backup plan. However, I don't think any of these have the same potential to be a franchise QB as either Luck or RG3 provide.

If you think Luck has bust potential, how much greater must that bust potential be for these guys?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The logic here is amazing. A late round pick (which is obviously a late round pick for a reason) has a better chance at being a success than Luck. It makes zero sense. :wall:

Yes, this is the point that many do not address. They would much rather talk about the bust potentials of the top rated QBs, rather than think about the same point about the not so highly rated QBs that they want to draft. That's why I said:

If you think Luck has bust potential, how much greater must that bust potential be for these guys?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, this is the point that many do not address. They would much rather talk about the bust potentials of the top rated QBs, rather than think about the same point about the not so highly rated QBs that they want to draft. That's why I said:

Yep. Well over half the starting qbs in the league were taken in the first round. Eight of the 12 starting qbs in the playoffs were 1st rounders. Much better success rate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The logic here is amazing. A late round pick (which is obviously a late round pick for a reason) has a better chance at being a success than Luck. It makes zero sense. :wall:

Yep, Some people just want to be different and say something against the grain just in case the microscopic chance that it happens and they can brag that they were right. Unfortunatly for them, there is absolutely no chance that they'll be right about passing on the top rated QB this yr. to draft some scrub later in the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we assume that trading the #1 pick for multiple picks is the way the Colts will be going, yes your theory has merit. I think either Foles, Osweiler and Weedon will be better than the Orlovsky/Painter/Collins backup plan. However, I don't think any of these have the same potential to be a franchise QB as either Luck or RG3 provide.

If you think Luck has bust potential, how much greater must that bust potential be for these guys?

My point is not about luck being a bust, it's that his value could really help rebuild the team with talent for now and for the future. Luck sitting on the bench is just as good as foles or osweiler on the bench, zero impact is zero impact. I have been saying go all in on one or the other, and I then would trade the pick and be all in on manning and building a more balanced team for the future, while competing now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is not about luck being a bust, it's that his value could really help rebuild the team with talent for now and for the future. Luck sitting on the bench is just as good as foles or osweiler on the bench, zero impact is zero impact. I have been saying go all in on one or the other, and I then would trade the pick and be all in on manning and building a more balanced team for the future, while competing now.

I am in agreement with you on the go all in on one or the other (Peyton/Luck).

The other 2 scenarios don't seem viable, although Irsay and management may choose to go one of those ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is not about luck being a bust, it's that his value could really help rebuild the team with talent for now and for the future. Luck sitting on the bench is just as good as foles or osweiler on the bench, zero impact is zero impact. I have been saying go all in on one or the other, and I then would trade the pick and be all in on manning and building a more balanced team for the future, while competing now.

I would also rather have Peyton healthy and playing another 3 or 4 years and using the plethora of picks we would get in the trade to fill the holes on the team and build a more solid, balanced team. But if Peyton will not be ready then I say take Luck and hes the guy from day 1.

If we do trade down I would like to get Foles in the 2nd or Moore in the 5th. I know he is too small and not a strong arm that many like for the NFL.

"Plays in the spread offense, taking the bulk of his snaps from the shotgun... Tends to side-arm his passes going deep...Lacks accuracy and touch on his long throws... Seems more comfortable in the short/intermediate passing attack...Does not possess the ideal height you look for in a pro passer"

This is his scouting report. and by his I dont mean Moore, I mean Drew Brees.

Im not saying that He is going to be Brees, but just to show that a guy that is too small and not good enough at the deep ball can be successful.

http://www.footballsfuture.com/2001/profile/drew_brees.html

I think he could be a future starter in the right system and could at least be a formidable back-up. I think under Peyton he could become a starter. But if Peyton isnt healthy and come back to finish his contract then this is all immaterial and Luck will be the pick. And probably will be regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if Peyton isnt healthy and come back to finish his contract then this is all immaterial and Luck will be the pick. And probably will be regardless.

I foresee a potential timing issue.

By March 8, when Peyton is due his bonus of $28MM, the Colts management may not be confident that Peyton can return to the field.

What do they do? Pay Peyton or decide to draft Luck?

If they pay Peyton, and if Peyton gets injured during the 2012 season such that he is out again for the rest of the season, what is the backup plan? Remember, at this time, because you traded down the #1, you now have drafted Moore that is presumably working under Peyton. Do you insert Moore into the field? Do you expect Moore to be better than the Orlovsky/Painter/Collins backup plan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they pay Peyton, and if Peyton gets injured during the 2012 season such that he is out again for the rest of the season, what is the backup plan? Remember, at this time, because you traded down the #1, you now have drafted Moore that is presumably working under Peyton. Do you insert Moore into the field? Do you expect Moore to be better than the Orlovsky/Painter/Collins backup plan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see that too. Its hard to get a pick late that is ready to go in and start. That is why they are develpmental players, but Luck is ready to start, but that is also a problem because it is hard to give a number 1 overall pick for a back up which is what he will be while Peyton is here. There are downsides to every scenario.

We definatly need a better back up QB now. But if Peyton is healthy we dont need another starter until he is gone.

If Peyton is healthy I want him. If not, I want Luck. But Im not a fan of having Luck on the bench for more than a year. But I do not want to kick Peyton out before he is ready to go.

Please stop making so much sense.. It's overwhelming! haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please stop making so much sense.. It's overwhelming! haha

Im sorry. I will try to prevent these further problems. lets trade the pick and drop manning and sign Dan O to an extention and let him be the face of our franchise.

That would really help our future of getting top 3 draft picks... Consistency is key. haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if Peyton is healthy we dont need another starter until he is gone.

Sorry to remind you, but isn't that the same plan as the Colts had before Peyton had his surgeries?

Result = 2-14, with Orlovsky/Painter/Collins.

Then we can repeat the same arguments in the 2013 draft with an overall #1 pick. :clap:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how about trading down like 3 spots and taking rg III? or is that out of the question? would other teams move up on the draft to get the st louis pick if we were to have the 4th pick? or 5th or something like that

Very circumstantial, washington and Cleveland could have interest. I'd rather get Claiborne or seine else than a qb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to remind you, but isn't that the same plan as the Colts had before Peyton had his surgeries?

Result = 2-14, with Orlovsky/Painter/Collins.

Then we can repeat the same arguments in the 2013 draft with an overall #1 pick. :clap:

You can take a small part out of almost anything and have the point misconstrued. I clearly said there needs to be an improvent at backup quarterback. If you would only have read the sentence before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can take a small part out of almost anything and have the point misconstrued. I clearly said there needs to be an improvent at backup quarterback. If you would only have read the sentence before.

Oh I see the sentence you mean. You said:

We definatly need a better back up QB now.

An previously you identified Moore or Foles as a potential backup QBs that should be considered.

How would you rate their potential success given what you know of them now?

1) compared to Luck

2) compared to Orlovsky?

3) compared to Painter?

Which of the following QBs do you think would be the best back up for the Colts?

a) Luck

b) Orlovsky

c) Painter

d) Foles

e) Moore

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would you rate their potential success given what you know of them now?

1) compared to Luck

2) compared to Orlovsky?

3) compared to Painter?

Which of the following QBs do you think would be the best back up for the Colts?

a) Luck

b) Orlovsky

c) Painter

d) Foles

e) Moore

Luck would be the obvious best QB. But a number 1 overall pick isnt drafted to be a back-up. They are expected to be a franchise QB. I am not against Luck. I am against Luck being a bench warmer for 4 years. Of the rest, I would want for a back up would go.

1 Foles

2 Orlovsky

3 Moore

4 Me or you

5 Painter

Foles has the highest ceiling of the other back ups. He needs a year or two on the bench to develop where Luck does not.

Moore also may be able to be a startiing QB with a couple years.

I dont want to draft anyone number one and then wait for the return for 4 years.

If Irsay already has decided to cut ties with Peyton then I am all for Luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of the rest, I would want for a back up would go.

1 Foles

2 Orlovsky

3 Moore

4 Me or you

5 Painter

LOL, no you wouldn't want me at back up QB. I have zero potential as an NFL QB, and I am even older than Peyton, but probably as mobile.

I think Foles will be taken in the 2nd round, and Moore in the 4th or 5th.

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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