Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

rock8591

2017 NFL Draft - Day 3 Thread - starts at NOON EST

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, ColtsUrUs said:

Why doesn't it say we have the 143 pick anywhere? 

 

It does, on my CBS Sports draft tracker list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard is looking shrewd at this point . I like his style lets see what he does with these picks, and then in UDFA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have Gallman, McNichols or Jamal White been taken yet?  Outside of those possible options  I'm not really interested in anyone else available  at running back. 

 

Looks like we might be stuck with  pretty much the same quality  of backfield as last year. That's the problem with trying to rely on finding mid to late round gems to address RB position.  Can't have it all though.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point, double down on CB, LB and OL depth, IMO, and get a specialist RB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jay Kirk said:

Ballard is looking shrewd at this point . I like his style lets see what he does with these picks, and then in UDFA

With all the free agents he signed and the 8 draftees, this may be a harder than usual year for Colts' UDFA to make it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very happy with the move after the run of guys I like. 

 

Would have preferred moving up to get one but will never knock patience. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, il vecchio said:

With all the free agents he signed and the 8 draftees, this may be a harder than usual year for Colts' UDFA to make it.

Good point but there always seem to be some that sneak in because of Special Teams play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I like that our draft picks are grouped.  Can pick some players in bunches.

We could go Moe, Curly and Larryhaha 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, wig said:

Vwry happy with the move after the run of guys I like. 

 

Would have preferred moving up to get one but will never knock patience. 

At this point hes just looking for solid players

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, James said:

 

Stupid post. Extra picks are better at this point if they don't like any prospect at 121.

 

Edit: a 4th and a 5th. Yeah, that's much better than staying if they don't like any player at 121.

 

Please, quit belly-aching.

At first the tracker was just showing the 5th, not the 4th too, I think anyone would question that trade...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

damonte kazee ain't a bad pick as a Nickel back. Or maybe Desmond King.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

First,  Ballard made a good trade to move down in the 4th and pick up a 5th.       Well done.

 

Second,   don't be surprised if he does the exact same thing in the 5th with one of our two picks.     Move down in the round  and pick up a later 5th and a 6th to go with it.        If it's possible,   I think Ballard will want to do that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Majin Vegeta said:

Great pick there for the browns. 

I actually think the browns have quietly had a solid draft. At least on paper anyway...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RockThatBlue said:

I actually think the browns have quietly had a solid draft. At least on paper anyway...

Agreed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Colts_Fan12 said:

I wouldn't put it past the stupid patriots to take Brantley tho 

Who you call in' stupid?  :flyingelvis:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our picks are so far back in the 4th round that we basically now have 4 5th round picks. Hard for me to get excited much about 5th round or later picks. Lots of talent already flying off the board. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, ColtsUrUs said:

Why doesn't it say we have the 143 pick anywhere? 

I think it may be 2018....which would be great....high 4th instead of low 4th

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I wouldn't put it past the stupid patriots to take Brantley tho 

I could see the Cowboys as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BrentMc11 said:

Is NFL keeping up with picks? ESPN sucks

I'm watching NFL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, egg said:

I think it may be 2018....which would be great....high 4th instead of low 4th

Its showing on NFL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BrentMc11 said:

Good coverage?

 

Yes it is, I just took a look at espn, it's like they're on a 10 minute delay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't think espn had any viewers this year...heard that Wingo guy for a minute and haven't tuned in since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yep. Up until that neck injury I don’t think manning missed a snap his entire career here.
    • Andrew has had 3 maybe 4 injuries since the beginning of his career, manning only missed one season here. So no worries the bad luck was all Bob's. 
    • that guy is too short, has no wheels, and has to take a time out after every 6 attempts. will never make it.. nice jugs though
    • The facts.. a hung jury (twice) mistrial with most voters having sided for the alleged accuser/victim... both times.     She (prosecution) didn't drop the charges, the school (judge/jury) did.  She wanted round 3.  She wanted a full yes or no vote (4-1 or 5-0) either way, not we're split 3-2 so we'll just call it against the majority vote and designate as "Not Responsible" because it isn't 4 or more votes either way. - 'Case closed'.     There were questions (and other items) from the accuser that were never allowed in or asked in follow up questioning.  I think one of the changes to the Stanford Title IX hearing rules is to also allow an attorney to be not only in attendance but to also perform all duties of representation.  And an outside group determines what is admissible as questions/evidence, follow questions, etc...     At some level, it did, and many things at Stanford were changed after. At the  minimum, it was a mistrial x2, with no conclusive verdict either way. Then school (not prosecution) drops the case.   So she really needed to report this to both the school, and also the Police.  But with what evidence does she have to convince the LEO?  Guess the gals need some hidden body cam w/audio these days, like many folks do with dash cams (like me and my wife's cars...) and be their own TMZ...   Video, apparently the only way things get rectified anymore...     No worries, at least we know each others positions.  All is good.     Except to have (at some level) differing story from a another high achieving Stanford student about another high achieving Stanford student-   https://www.collegesimply.com/colleges/california/stanford-university/admission/     We don't even know for certain they ever got the FULL story, but articles I've read suggest that the Stanford Panel repressed/disallowed many/most of her interrogating questions and supplemental follow up inquiries to be asked of the accused.  Unless someone directly asks her directly, how could you answer as to whether her whole story was even heard or not?   If you are not truly interested to fully know those answers, then you don't ask.  At least, that's my perspective.  
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...