Trent Dilfer's "double Talk"

[WoolMagnet]

His comments today made little sense to me.

first he said the Colts should keep manning and trade the 1st pick because there will be plaenty of other QBs available in later rounds and in the next few years.

Then he said there are PLENTY of other teams DYING to draft Andrew Luck and trade for the pick.

if there are so many other QBs of that quality available later like he said , why on earth would other teams be dying to get him and why on earth would they trade away "the farm" to get him?

I like what trent says sometimes, but there are other times he contradicts himself and seems to just like to hear himself talk.

I feel he is wrong. Like most of the other "experts", I don't feel you'll have a chance at a Luck type caliber QB later or in upcoming years. If he's gonna make a statement like this, he should name the QBs he is referring to. Otherwise , the statement holds NO water. Just like his QB ability.

Sheesh, the guy has arguably the best defense of all time carry his average butt to a Super Bowl, and suddenly he's an expert.

[Ramblinwreck7]

His comments today made little sense to me.

first he said the Colts should keep manning and trade the 1st pick because there will be plaenty of other QBs available in later rounds and in the next few years.

Then he said there are PLENTY of other teams DYING to draft Andrew Luck and trade for the pick.

if there are so many other QBs of that quality available later like he said , why on earth would other teams be dying to get him and why on earth would they trade away "the farm" to get him?

I like what trent says sometimes, but there are other times he contradicts himself and seems to just like to hear himself talk.

I feel he is wrong. Like most of the other "experts", I don't feel you'll have a chance at a Luck type caliber QB later or in upcoming years. If he's gonna make a statement like this, he should name the QBs he is referring to. Otherwise , the statement holds NO water. Just like his QB ability.

Sheesh, the guy has arguably the best defense of all time carry his average butt to a Super Bowl, and suddenly he's an expert.

There are good quarterbacks over the next few years, but you're telling me that there are no quarterback desperate teams out there who want to trade up for Andrew Luck? Teams don't wait to fill there needs by playing through whole seasons just to get to next years draft so they can draft a quarterback. They try to fill there needs now. Some good evidence of that is how a lot of quarterbacks were reached on early in last years draft.

[Peyton and Eli fan]

Plenty of teams have won the superbowl without THE best QB in the league. If Peyton is good, might be better to fill other needs and pick up a good to great QB in another draft.

[WoolMagnet]

There are good quarterbacks over the next few years, but you're telling me that there are no quarterback desperate teams out there who want to trade up for Andrew Luck? Teams don't wait to fill there needs by playing through whole seasons just to get to next years draft so they can draft a quarterback. They try to fill there needs now. Some good evidence of that is how a lot of quarterbacks were reached on early in last years draft.

Agreed.

But according to Dilfer (the first part), there are other QBs available in later rounds.

If so, WHY would they give up anything (let alone 2-1sts +)to get Luck?

Answer: because Luck is THAT much better (speculative).

[Ramblinwreck7]

Agreed.

But according to Dilfer (the first part), there are other QBs available in later rounds.

If so, WHY would they give up anything (let alone 2-1sts +)to get Luck?

Answer: because Luck is THAT much better (speculative).

I think you heard him wrong, because I didn't hear that and I just watched the video. If he said that, he didn't mean it that way. I'm sure he meant that there are good quarterbacks over the next few years, not in the later rounds. There probably are good quarterbacks in the later round though, there just very, very hard to find.

[WoolMagnet]

Plenty of teams have won the superbowl without THE best QB in the league. If Peyton is good, might be better to fill other needs and pick up a good to great QB in another draft.

I agree with you.

But if you look at most of the Super Bowl winners, especially recently (QB driven leage now), more and more you need a TOP QB to get there and win. (I'm not saying "the best QB" because that is arguable)

Examples: Rogers, Rothelesberger, Brees, Brady, P. manning, E. manning etc.

It seems obvious to me that average or slightly better than average QBs just don't cut it in today's NFL.

The rules today make it hard on defenses. Therefore a TOP defense isn't as important as in past. The better the QB, however, vastly improves your chances.

IMO.

[WoolMagnet]

I think you heard him wrong, because I didn't hear that and I just watched the video. If he said that, he didn't mean it that way. I'm sure he meant that there are good quarterbacks over the next few years, not in the later rounds. There probably are good quarterbacks in the later round though, there just very, very hard to find.

yes, he said BOTH. I have it on DVR.

[P-Money]

This whole Manning debacle has really woken me up to the fact that the sports media is going to only say things to boost their ratings. Some of these so called experts have contradicted themselves so much its sad. What's the more intriguing story? Manning staying put in Indy or Manning choosing which path to go down? They will only talk about what keeps people intrigued when the fact is they have no clue what will actually happen. So lets make up some crap so people will listen to our craptastic thoughts. I can't even listen to most of the ESPN radio shows without wanting to scream.

[WoolMagnet]

This whole Manning debacle has really woken me up to the fact that the sports media is going to only say things to boost their ratings. Some of these so called experts have contradicted themselves so much its sad. What's the more intriguing story? Manning staying put in Indy or Manning choosing which path to go down? They will only talk about what keeps people intrigued when the fact is they have no clue what will actually happen. So lets make up some crap so people will listen to our craptastic thoughts. I can't even listen to most of the ESPN radio shows without wanting to scream.

You are 100% right.

Its crazy, with the Super Bowl only a couple days away, P-Money is STILL the #1 topic.

The media certainly has THEIR agenda. And that is to keep us glued to the TV.

[Coltsagent]

I do give Trent a lot of credit b/c I remember before the season started when we knew Peyton was out at least 8 weeks Trent said we would not win any games and our entire roster was second rate and masked by the skills of Peyton.

[WoolMagnet]

I do give Trent a lot of credit b/c I remember before the season started when we knew Peyton was out at least 8 weeks Trent said we would not win any games and our entire roster was second rate and masked by the skills of Peyton.

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut eventually.

[P-Money]

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut eventually.

..... exactly

[ColtJ82]

IMO, you don't pass up on the closest thing to sure-fire. Yes, there are QBs available later......but IMO you go with the best when you are in the best position to draft them. In theory, if Manning was able to come back strong, we would probably be picking in the 20s next year

[JTcardscolts]

i think they made perfect sense....go trent

[BmoreColt]

Trent is a big fan of nick foles, for starters. He called Peyton the greatest of all time. He has been saying for years how bad this colts team was. Whether you like him or not, think he was a good qb or not, he knows the game, he knows it very well. I'm glad he had a different opinion on the subject, nobody says trade the pick. And he is saying if manning is healthy u trade the pick cause there is other talent that can sit and develop, and you can get valid for luck meanwhile.

[Peyton and Eli fan]

It's refreshing to hear an analyst have a unique opinion. No one even bothers to use the word "if" anymore when talking about Peyton getting released.

[WoolMagnet]

Trent is a big fan of nick foles, for starters. He called Peyton the greatest of all time. He has been saying for years how bad this colts team was. Whether you like him or not, think he was a good qb or not, he knows the game, he knows it very well. I'm glad he had a different opinion on the subject, nobody says trade the pick. And he is saying if manning is healthy u trade the pick cause there is other talent that can sit and develop, and you can get valid for luck meanwhile.

painter "sat and developed" and you see where that got us

[holeymoley99]

Next year this time Matt Barkley will be the best QB propsect since Elway, not saying Luck wont be successfull but worth 5 high draft picks which is what we could get ? Sorry no way too much of a gamble. Luck cant turn around Cleveland or Washington so if we send the pick to either club we may be picking #1 overall again next year.

[UndecidedFrog]

Next year this time Matt Barkley will be the best QB propsect since Elway, not saying Luck wont be successfull but worth 5 high draft picks which is what we could get ? Sorry no way too much of a gamble. Luck cant turn around Cleveland or Washington so if we send the pick to either club we may be picking #1 overall again next year.

I doubt it. In order for Barkley to be the best QB prospect since Elway, he would have to be a better prospect than Luck. Before Barkley decided to return to school next year, he was ranked in the draft boards by the scouts, Although he was ranked highly (above RG3) he was head and shoulders below Luck.

Interesting factoid:

The Barkley-led Trojans never beat the Luck-led Cardinal.

[coltsblue1844]

His comments today made little sense to me.

first he said the Colts should keep manning and trade the 1st pick because there will be plaenty of other QBs available in later rounds and in the next few years.

Then he said there are PLENTY of other teams DYING to draft Andrew Luck and trade for the pick.

if there are so many other QBs of that quality available later like he said , why on earth would other teams be dying to get him and why on earth would they trade away "the farm" to get him?

I like what trent says sometimes, but there are other times he contradicts himself and seems to just like to hear himself talk.

I feel he is wrong. Like most of the other "experts", I don't feel you'll have a chance at a Luck type caliber QB later or in upcoming years. If he's gonna make a statement like this, he should name the QBs he is referring to. Otherwise , the statement holds NO water. Just like his QB ability.

Sheesh, the guy has arguably the best defense of all time carry his average butt to a Super Bowl, and suddenly he's an expert.

he made perfect sense to me! He said that THE COLTS wouldnt need Luck if we have a healthy Peyton Manning as our QB next season...that if we have Peyton, it would make far more sense to trade the #1 pick to a team that needs a starting qb NOW and get as much in return for the pick as we can, use what we get to rebuild/retool the team and then get a QB later on down the road, in a year or so when we are getting closer to actually NEEDING a new starting QB ourselves

[Malakai432]

Everyone knows Dilfer is delusional and not to be taken seriously.

[Tony Sullivan]

Trent Dilfer, bad QB, even worse broadcaster

[UndecidedFrog]

His comments today made little sense to me.

first he said the Colts should keep manning and trade the 1st pick because there will be plaenty of other QBs available in later rounds and in the next few years.

Then he said there are PLENTY of other teams DYING to draft Andrew Luck and trade for the pick.

if there are so many other QBs of that quality available later like he said , why on earth would other teams be dying to get him and why on earth would they trade away "the farm" to get him?

I like what trent says sometimes, but there are other times he contradicts himself and seems to just like to hear himself talk.

I feel he is wrong. Like most of the other "experts", I don't feel you'll have a chance at a Luck type caliber QB later or in upcoming years. If he's gonna make a statement like this, he should name the QBs he is referring to. Otherwise , the statement holds NO water. Just like his QB ability.

Sheesh, the guy has arguably the best defense of all time carry his average butt to a Super Bowl, and suddenly he's an expert.

He contradicts himself to push his agenda, not unlike how some posters have done similarly on these forums.

[JTcardscolts]

he made perfect sense to me! He said that THE COLTS wouldnt need Luck if we have a healthy Peyton Manning as our QB next season...that if we have Peyton, it would make far more sense to trade the #1 pick to a team that needs a starting qb NOW and get as much in return for the pick as we can, use what we get to rebuild/retool the team and then get a QB later on down the road, in a year or so when we are getting closer to actually NEEDING a new starting QB ourselves

^ This

[Rebelknight]

If we cut Manning ( I hope not BTW )

Why not trade the #1 to someone who is more in love with Luck or RG3 for a boat load of picks...

Pick a QB in the later rounds..Sure they may/maynot be as good as Luck or RG3...Or perhaps we can get by with a middle of the road QB because we have a heck of a running game with the likes of Trent Richardson and Dan O until the rookie QB is up to speed...

Everyone assumes that Luck is the second coming of Manning .....What if he isnt?

[JTcardscolts]

He contradicts himself to push his agenda, not unlike how some posters have done similarly on these forums.

Yea and just like all the other experts on espn, they say "Peyton is the best ever, teams are gonna be lining up to sign him when the colts cut him."

Now that's funny...

[UndecidedFrog]

If we cut Manning ( I hope not BTW )

Why not trade the #1 to someone who is more in love with Luck or RG3 for a boat load of picks...

Pick a QB in the later rounds..Sure they may/maynot be as good as Luck or RG3...Or perhaps we can get by with a middle of the road QB because we have a heck of a running game with the likes of Trent Richardson and Dan O until the rookie QB is up to speed...

Everyone assumes that Luck is the second coming of Manning .....What if he isnt?

Well, that is certainly a possibility.

Perhaps you would be interested in reviewing the history of later-round QB picks for the Colts here: http://forums.colts.com/index.php?/topic/4831-colts-record-of-developing-bench-qbs/

and then you can make some conclusions about how successful they were.

Perhaps you have a different view of what it takes to be successful in today's QB-driven NFL, with the rules modifications that favor the passer and the passing game. Maybe a strong run game is all you need to be successful.

Yes, some people do view Luck as the second coming of the Manning, or even Elway.

I guess they will be disappointed if it turns out he isn't.

I also guess others who don't view Luck as such and trade the #1 pick away for him will be disappointed if it turns out he is.

[UndecidedFrog]

Here you go, I am saving you the trouble of searching for this information:

Historical first round QBs taken by the Colts:

1998 Peyton Manning (1st overall pick)

1990 Jeff George (1)

1983 John Elway (1)

1982 Art Schlichter (4)

1973 Bert Jones (2)

Historical middle round QBs (2nd round - #160 overall) taken by the Colts:

1988 Chris Chandler 3rd round (76)

1986 Jack Trudeau 2nd round (47)

1982 Mike Pagel 4th round (84)

1976 Mike Kirkland 5th round (143)

1971 Karl Douglas 3rd round (78)

Historical bottom rounds QBs ( #160 overall and up) taken by the Colts:

2009 Curtis Painter 6th round (201)

2004 Jim Sorgi 6th round (193)

1996 Mike Cawley 6th round (205)

1990 Gene Benhart 13th round (311)

1989 Wayne Johnson 11th round (296)

1989 Steve Taylor 12th round (323)

1983 Jim Bob Taylor 11th round (280)

1975 Steve Joachim 7th round (160)

1975 Bill Malouf 16th round (392)

1974 Bob Bobrowski 12th round (307)

1973 Tom Pierantozzi 13th round (322)

1972 Van Brownson 8th round (204)

1972 Gary Wichard 16th round (412)

1970 Gordon Slade 7th round (174)

1969 Sam Havrilak 8th round (207)

1969 Larry Good 9th round (232)

1968 Jeff Beaver 15th round (404)

In which of the three categories do you think are the most successful QBs?

[Ramblinwreck7]

I agree with you.

But if you look at most of the Super Bowl winners, especially recently (QB driven leage now), more and more you need a TOP QB to get there and win. (I'm not saying "the best QB" because that is arguable)

Examples: Rogers, Rothelesberger, Brees, Brady, P. manning, E. manning etc.

It seems obvious to me that average or slightly better than average QBs just don't cut it in today's NFL.

The rules today make it hard on defenses. Therefore a TOP defense isn't as important as in past. The better the QB, however, vastly improves your chances.

IMO.

Having a top defense is the #1 reason teams win Super Bowls. The Packers had the #1 defense in the NFL when they won the Super Bowl if I remember right. The Steelers always have a top 3 defense, especially when they won their Super Bowls. The Patriots won all of their Super Bowls with highly ranked defenses. The colts won the Super Bowl because their defense was playing at a very high level. The Giants won the Super Bowl because their defense shut down the Patriots. Need I go on?

Offenses win games, defenses win championships.

[Ramblinwreck7]

yes, he said BOTH. I have it on DVR.

It's probably not how he meant it though.

[DudeFromTennessee]

Thoughts from an outsider... This is my first post here and one that made me register to make but you can take it with a grain of salt if you so choose.

As the name states, I'm from Tennessee, actually I'm only about 15 minutes from Neyland Stadium in Knoxville and I watched Peyton turn into into what

he is now, and that is a class act! When he was here he bled Orange, all the way to his heart.

He ALWAYS gave everything he had and that's why he is an icon here now. That's why so many Tennessee fans followed him to Indy.

And now he bleeds Blue and White, you can see it in his eyes when he talks, you can hear it in his voice. He is what all players should be, dedicated

to a fault! He lives, breaths and dies for his team, and their fans... Because of Peyton, I am a huge Colts fan now. And now I watch a city devided.

To be honest, I'd take Peyton at 75% over just about ANY QB at 100% any day of the week... Why? Because he makes everyone around him better!

He always has. It's not just because of the talent he has on the field but the class he has regardless of where is. The players want to play for him

because he makes them believe. He did the same thing here. And if for some reason he's playing somewhere else next year, he'll do the same thing there.

And trust me, he WILL be playing somewhere next year. His heart is in Indy, Indy is the only place he wants to play, that's who he is. But to

think another team wouldn't take him in a second is a fallacy! I only hope I see number 18 wearing blue and white next year tearing up the field...

[Mark Hammond]

Great post..i also live in the Volunteer state[about 25mins. north of Chattanooga]..I hear what your saying...I grew up in Seymour In.

Have been a Colts fan since I was 7yrs.old,and my parents got me a Johnny U.helmet...I remember drafting Jeff G. and pulling for him

to do well for the Shoe,but alas we know where that ended up...I think if healthy Peyton should be a Colt,trade with someone like browns

take there no.1 this year and next and no.2 s,Draft a QB next year with 1st round pick,You could get Barkley by packaging a 1 n 2 next year.

This year use all picks to make this team better..Take the best 3/4 dt in draft..take talent at all positions...Lets rebuild and WIN next year

[Blue Horseshoe]

Agreed.

But according to Dilfer (the first part), there are other QBs available in later rounds.

If so, WHY would they give up anything (let alone 2-1sts +)to get Luck?

Answer: because Luck is THAT much better (speculative).

Because they don't always act rationally. They are only human and they can get sucked in by the hype like anyone else. Dilfer is making a lot of sense with his analysis. There is no double talk at all.

[JTcardscolts]

Because they don't always act rationally. They are only human and they can get sucked in by the hype like anyone else. Dilfer is making a lot of sense with his analysis. There is no double talk at all.

Discount double check!!!

[JTcardscolts]

Discount double check!!!

^This is what the OP was talking about

[MLawRunner]

So here is the deal - I hear what Dilfer is saying, and what some on this board is saying. The problem is, we are assuming (in March/April) that Manning is 100% ready to roll as a QB. One of the posters above says he'd rather have a 75% Manning for the motivation - well, that may make players "want to play for him" but that will not squeeze the ball between three defenders in the perfect window like we are used to. 75% arm strength means that throw is incomplete or a pick - not a winning combination.

I think if we are sure we had a 100% ready Peyton Manning, then of course you keep him and it makes a lot of sense to trade the #1 overall pick to bolster the roster as much as possible. The trouble is, we don't have a 100% healthy Manning - in fact there is constant speculation of just how long this nerve regeneration will take. I happen to be a Nick Foles fan as well, but there is no question he is a "prospect guy" that would benefit from sitting behind Peyton for a couple of years to learn. So what if we draft him in the second, then he has to play right away because Peyton is not ready yet? Then we risk turning a talented guy into a Chad Henne or David Carr, who had talent but played before he was ready and took too much of a beating for it on his confidence, body, etc.

I am by no means an NFL scout - but when you are facing a situation where you don't know if your superstar is ready to go (or can ever go again - nerve regeneration is a very tricky scenario), and you are in position to draft what "experts" have said is the best prospect since Manning/Elway, it would be foolish to pass that up. If this were last year and there was no clear standout guy, then maybe you trade it. But all we have to go off of is what the expert scouts are saying, and they rave about Luck (and not Foles, Tannehill, etc.). I would hate to be the team that passed on Luck only to sit there for potentially the next decade while he is successful and we are playing quarterback roulette (note - I acknowledge that there is no guarantee Luck will be successful, I am just basing this opinion off of what the "experts" have said).

[Rebelknight]

Here you go, I am saving you the trouble of searching for this information:

Historical first round QBs taken by the Colts:

1998 Peyton Manning (1st overall pick)

1990 Jeff George (1)

1983 John Elway (1)

1982 Art Schlichter (4)

1973 Bert Jones (2)

Historical middle round QBs (2nd round - #160 overall) taken by the Colts:

1988 Chris Chandler 3rd round (76)

1986 Jack Trudeau 2nd round (47)

1982 Mike Pagel 4th round (84)

1976 Mike Kirkland 5th round (143)

1971 Karl Douglas 3rd round (78)

Historical bottom rounds QBs ( #160 overall and up) taken by the Colts:

2009 Curtis Painter 6th round (201)

2004 Jim Sorgi 6th round (193)

1996 Mike Cawley 6th round (205)

1990 Gene Benhart 13th round (311)

1989 Wayne Johnson 11th round (296)

1989 Steve Taylor 12th round (323)

1983 Jim Bob Taylor 11th round (280)

1975 Steve Joachim 7th round (160)

1975 Bill Malouf 16th round (392)

1974 Bob Bobrowski 12th round (307)

1973 Tom Pierantozzi 13th round (322)

1972 Van Brownson 8th round (204)

1972 Gary Wichard 16th round (412)

1970 Gordon Slade 7th round (174)

1969 Sam Havrilak 8th round (207)

1969 Larry Good 9th round (232)

1968 Jeff Beaver 15th round (404)

In which of the three categories do you think are the most successful QBs?

I agree the Colts havent had the best of Luck ( pun intended ) but what about over the entire league? Hasnt there been more non first round QB's take there team to the Superbowl?

Off the top of my head Drew Brees was a 2nd..Brady was a 6th....Jake Delhome was undrafted.....Kurt Warner was undrafted.

I know the chances in finding one of those guys is really small

What if we take Luck and there is a deal on the table for a kings ransom in picks...Just like everyone felt when we didnt take the Ricky Williams/Saints trade..We could have traded up to take Edge and still walked away with picks....

I think we would be ok trading the pick. Getting by with Peyton/Dan O untill we groom a young QB.

[MLawRunner]

I agree the Colts havent had the best of Luck ( pun intended ) but what about over the entire league? Hasnt there been more non first round QB's take there team to the Superbowl?

Off the top of my head Drew Brees was a 2nd..Brady was a 6th....Jake Delhome was undrafted.....Kurt Warner was undrafted.

I know the chances in finding one of those guys is really small

What if we take Luck and there is a deal on the table for a kings ransom in picks...Just like everyone felt when we didnt take the Ricky Williams/Saints trade..We could have traded up to take Edge and still walked away with picks....

I think we would be ok trading the pick. Getting by with Peyton/Dan O untill we groom a young QB.

There are always going to be exampled of late round draft finds that turn out to be superstars. But the fact of the matter is there are more examples league wide of late (even early) draft busts. Odds are that Luck will be better than a mid round guy in the long run (again, not sure thing, but going off odds alone). If we had 100% healthy Peyton, take the trade. But if it may be another year of Dan O? DRAFT LUCK.

[gacker65]

IMO, what6 Trent Difer was saying is, with a healthy Peyton Manning, the Colts have options and not a need. To answer the question about developing QBs, that is on the coaching staff, if the back-up is not ready or able to step in and perform well enough to help the team win, the it is lack of coaching. Now, let us discuss Barkley and Foles. Barkley was on a descent USC team, a team not up to normal USC standards and still was ranked 2nd only to Luck. Think abou where Barkley could have been ranked if USC was up to their norm. Foles spent 2 years starting on a bad Arizona team and still put Luck-like numbers. Foles negatives IMO can from a bad O-line. Foles looked good in the time he had in the Senior Bowl and if continues like that in the combine, then IMO he could be picked in the first round.

[BmoreColt]

I doubt it. In order for Barkley to be the best QB prospect since Elway, he would have to be a better prospect than Luck. Before Barkley decided to return to school next year, he was ranked in the draft boards by the scouts, Although he was ranked highly (above RG3) he was head and shoulders below Luck.

Interesting factoid:

The Barkley-led Trojans never beat the Luck-led Cardinal.

Interesting factoid for you, some were ranking Barkley at or even ahead of luck.