My Reason Why The First Pick Must Be Traded

[JTcardscolts]

fixed it for you

Nope not really...

Come up short again....

Nice try keep at it, you'll get it right one day

[CR91]

Nope not really...

Come up short again....

Nice try keep at it, you'll get it right one day

sorry but i prefer to stop living in the past. your just a peyton fan not a colts fan.

[hoosiercoltsfan82]

The difference between the Colts and Pats over the past 12 seasons has not been at the QB position. Both Manning and Brady are elite quarterbacks and will likely be first ballot hall of famers. The difference is in team balance. The Colts method was to use high draft picks and cap money on the offense. The Colts offensive free agents were typically signed before the Colts defensive free agents. Thus, the Colts defense got the short straw. Lower draft picks and less cap money, hence, why some of the better defenders for the Colts were not resigned in years past.

To sum up the Colts over the past 12 years. Elite quarterback, paired with an elite running back, receivers and tightend for part or most of his career. Mediocre defense.

However, while the Patriots offense has been very good the past 12 seasons, they have not had an elite running back or elite receivers. No running back or receiver on the Pats the past 12 years has been on par with Edgerrin James, Marvin Harrison, or Reggie Wayne (except for Moss and maybe Welker). Their backs and receivers have been good and dependable, but not elite hall of fame potential. The trade off is that while the offense was not ever as great as the Colts offense, their defense was better.

To sum up the Pats the last 12 years. Elite quarterback, paired with a core of good, dependable backs and receivers for most of his career. Stronger and more dependable defense.

Moving forward, I would like to see the Colts with an elite QB (Manning or Luck) and a core of good backs and receivers, that are quality and dependable.

[JTcardscolts]

sorry but i prefer to stop living in the past. your just a peyton fan not a colts fan.

it's actually really simple do u want the best QB or the best team???

And from there you can go why take the cap hit and cut Peyton if he's healthy...it would be like signing luck to a 17 mil a yr contract for the next 4 years. Then we would also have to sign a quality veteran back up, just a guess, but another 2 mil there...that's a lot if money spent on the QBs, as if we don't already have enough tied up in the QB already

[CR91]

it's actually really simple do u want the best QB or the best team???

And from there you can go why take the cap hit and cut Peyton if he's healthy...it would be like signing luck to a 17 mil a yr contract for the next 4 years. Then we would also have to sign a quality veteran back up, just a guess, but another 2 mil there...that's a lot if money spent on the QBs, as if we don't already have enough tied up in the QB already

danny o would be a fine backup to luck. i actually prefer to keep both. i want peyton to still be a colt but i also want us to excel once hes done which is probably in 3 years.

[JTcardscolts]

danny o would be a fine backup to luck. i actually prefer to keep both. i want peyton to still be a colt but i also want us to excel once hes done which is probably in 3 years.

Indeed I agree, about excelling post Peyton. I guess we just see it a bit different when it comes to getting there

[WSO]

it's actually really simple do u want the best QB or the best team???

And from there you can go why take the cap hit and cut Peyton if he's healthy...it would be like signing luck to a 17 mil a yr contract for the next 4 years. Then we would also have to sign a quality veteran back up, just a guess, but another 2 mil there...that's a lot if money spent on the QBs, as if we don't already have enough tied up in the QB already

I'm having a hard time understanding this post...where did the Luck 17m/yr figure come from? Cutting Manning and taking Luck would save the Colts a significant amount of money over the next 4 years. People think we can just kick Manning after 2 years or so but forget his cap hit gets worse each year and the dead money that would be associated.

FYI lucks cap hit will be 4.2mish. Peyton down the road would end up 20m in his final year. On a per year basis the amount of money saved between Luck and Manning is enough to go sign a lot of our potential f/a's down the road and even acquire much better talent from f/a.

[BProland85]

If we could get a healthy Peyton back Id be all for doing this trade...

1st overall to Cleveland for 4th, 22nd, 2013 1st, and NT Phil Taylor

And if we could land RG3 with the 4th overall pick that would be the tops!

[WSO]

If we could get a healthy Peyton back Id be all for doing this trade...

1st overall to Cleveland for 4th, 22nd, 2013 1st, and NT Phil Taylor

And if we could land RG3 with the 4th overall pick that would be the tops!

The problem is the Rams are most likely going to trade their pick so someone can grab rg3. Of course I can be wrong but they have a franchise QB who has shown some bright spots. If the colts trade, they will not only miss out on Luck but also RG3. Like I said I can be wrong but I'm willing to put my money on the rams trading their pick.

[JTcardscolts]

I'm having a hard time understanding this post...where did the Luck 17m/yr figure come from? Cutting Manning and taking Luck would save the Colts a significant amount of money over the next 4 years. People think we can just kick Manning after 2 years or so but forget his cap hit gets worse each year and the dead money that would be associated.

FYI lucks cap hit will be 4.2mish. Peyton down the road would end up 20m in his final year. On a per year basis the amount of money saved between Luck and Manning is enough to go sign a lot of our potential f/a's down the road and even acquire much better talent from f/a.

Cutting Peyton leaves us with a 10.5mil? Dead cap space for the next 4 yrs(could be wrong) I figured 4.5 for luck, with like 500k increase a yr(just a guess) then Collins' cap it 1.5mil or 2.5mil I know its one or the other. So I figured it would be about 17 next yr with Collins' and with a pay raise the following year about 17 after.

[JTcardscolts]

The problem is the Rams are most likely going to trade their pick so someone can grab rg3. Of course I can be wrong but they have a franchise QB who has shown some bright spots. If the colts trade, they will not only miss out on Luck but also RG3. Like I said I can be wrong but I'm willing to put my money on the rams trading their pick.

The rams, I believe have every intention on trading that pick but with Cleveland trading with us no one else will have the pieces the rams want to make that trade, Washington maybe but fisher will be asking for the first pick and some quality players that Washington will not want to part ways with.

[GoColts8818]

Cutting Peyton leaves us with a 10.5mil? Dead cap space for the next 4 yrs(could be wrong) I figured 4.5 for luck, with like 500k increase a yr(just a guess) then Collins' cap it 1.5mil or 2.5mil I know its one or the other. So I figured it would be about 17 next yr with Collins' and with a pay raise the following year about 17 after.

Cutting Peyton before March 8th takes Peyton off the books after this year but you are right it would cause about a 10.5 million cap hit for this season. That's why that date is so important. If we cut him after March 8th then we have a cap hit for the remainder of the contract not to mention that cap hit jumps a lot.

[UndecidedFrog]

Cutting Peyton leaves us with a 10.5mil? Dead cap space for the next 4 yrs(could be wrong) I figured 4.5 for luck, with like 500k increase a yr(just a guess) then Collins' cap it 1.5mil or 2.5mil I know its one or the other. So I figured it would be about 17 next yr with Collins' and with a pay raise the following year about 17 after.

Releasing PM before paying him the option bonus of $28MM due March 8, will result in a one-time hit to the 2012 salary cap of $10.4MM.

Luck/RG3 will hit the salary cap as follows, assuming the contract will be a 5% increase of Cam Newton's contract:

2012: $4.2MM

2013: $ 5.2MM

2014: $6.3 MM

2015: $7.4MM

Total $23.1 MM

A #3QB at league minimum will hit the salary cap at $0.4MM each year.

In 2012, we have the remnants of the Collins contract that will hit the salary cap at $1.25MM, and the remnant of Painter (if we cut him) of less than $0.1MM.

So the scenario if you cut PM without paying the option bonus due March 8, the QB salary cap hit will be:

$10.4MM PM cut

$4.2 MM Luck/RG3

$0.4MM #3QB

$1.25MM Collins remnant

Totals: $16.25MM

In 2013, if we assume the QB roster is Luck/RG3 and a #3QB, the salary cap hit will be : $5.6MM

[JTcardscolts]

Cutting Peyton before March 8th takes Peyton off the books after this year but you are right it would cause about a 10.5 million cap hit for this season. That's why that date is so important. If we cut him after March 8th then we have a cap hit for the remainder of the contract not to mention that cap hit jumps a lot.

Yea I just assumed it was for the remainder of the contract, thanks for verification

[JTcardscolts]

Releasing PM before paying him the option bonus of $28MM due March 8, will result in a one-time hit to the 2012 salary cap of $10.4MM.

Luck/RG3 will hit the salary cap as follows, assuming the contract will be a 5% increase of Cam Newton's contract:

2012: $4.2MM

2013: $ 5.2MM

2014: $6.3 MM

2015: $7.4MM

Total $23.1 MM

A #3QB at league minimum will hit the salary cap at $0.4MM each year.

In 2012, we have the remnants of the Collins contract that will hit the salary cap at $1.25MM, and the remnant of Painter (if we cut him) of less than $0.1MM.

So the scenario if you cut PM without paying the option bonus due March 8, the QB salary cap hit will be:

$10.4MM PM cut

$4.2 MM Luck/RG3

$0.4MM #3QB

$1.25MM Collins remnant

Totals: $16.25MM

In 2013, if we assume the QB roster is Luck/RG3 and a #3QB, the salary cap hit will be : $5.6MM

Nevermind I guess I assumed wrong.

[GoColts8818]

Yea I just assumed it was for the remainder of the contract, thanks for verification

I wasn't...

You are right about the 10.5 mil cap hit for this season. The thing is if we cut Peyton before the March 8th deadline then there is no more cap hit after this season. That's why so many people say from a money stand point we have to cut Peyton.

[JTcardscolts]

I wasn't...

You are right about the 10.5 mil cap hit for this season. The thing is if we cut Peyton before the March 8th deadline then there is no more cap hit after this season. That's why so many people say from a money stand point we have to cut Peyton.

Yea sorry I had to reread it

[GoColts8818]

Yea sorry I had to reread it

It's all good, that's just a very key point to this whole thing. If there wasn't a chance to get the contract off the books in future years and we were going to have cap issues rather we released him or kept him we might as well keep him and hope for the best but since there is a chance to get out of the contract you can't blame the Colts for looking at it if they are truly concerned about Manning's health.

[smittywerb]

'If' would have been a better word choice on my part, clearly, since my attempt at humor was lost.

Oh, and the old 'defense wins championships' is great, but untrue. The Giants ranked 25th in points allowed, 27th in yards allowed, 29th against the pass, and 19th against the run. 27th in total defense. Packers 5th, Saints 25th, Steeler 1st, Giants 7th, Colts 21st. There are plenty of ways to win it all. You don't have to be a one seed, you don't have to play at home, you don't have to stop the run or run the ball. All those things were true, but not any more.

I think it has come to having a defense that can make plays rather than a shutdown defense. In today's NFL, you rarely have those teams that can play shutdown defense, and tbh, they haven't had much success as to winning the SB. Only two teams comes to mind that has won a SB in this decade with a shutdown defense, the Steelers and the early 2000's Pats, and even they have 1st-Tier QBs. I agree with you and think we should build a strong offense and a defense that can make plays when we need them. I know people will say "Well isn't that how the Colts were built?" NO, they were not built that way.

The landscape has changed, we don't necessarily need a top 5 defense anymore.

[MSColtsFan]

I think it has come to having a defense that can make plays rather than a shutdown defense. In today's NFL, you rarely have those teams that can play shutdown defense, and tbh, they haven't had much success as to winning the SB. Only two teams comes to mind that has won a SB in this decade with a shutdown defense, the Steelers and the early 2000's Pats, and even they have 1st-Tier QBs. I agree with you and think we should build a strong offense and a defense that can make plays when we need them. I know people will say "Well isn't that how the Colts were built?" NO, they were not built that way.

The landscape has changed, we don't necessarily need a top 5 defense anymore.

There are actually more teams with the number one offense who have played in the Super Bowl than teams with the number one defense. It's a common misperception because the mantra 'defense wins championships' is so commonly used. Since 1983 10 teams have gone to the Super Bowl after ranking first in overall O, while only 5 have done so with the number one D. If you look at the stats what really stands out is balance. The Colts and Bucs were the oddest Super Bowl winners, having the largest disparity between the two sides of the ball. Almost all others have balance - rank in the top 10 of both categories fro example. Clearly, more often than not, teams have to have both a potent O or D, and then a productive, top half other side.

[MSColtsFan]

Would those in support of trading the first pick do so if the return was two first rounders and one second round pick? Or two firsts and two seconds, which likely would come from different drafts?

I have seen a lot of talk about three firsts, a couple second rounders, plus players. That is unlikely to be offered. Teams use a chart, the same basic chart to put a point value on draft picks. Here is one example:

http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php

Even if Cleveland was a willing partner (I have serious doubts), picks 4, 22, and their second round pick are actually worth more than the first overall pick based on the chart. Could Cleveland throw in another pick, or some marginal player too? Sure, but it likely won't be another first round pick, or stud player from their roster.

For example, last year when Atlanta moved up to 6 to take Julio Jones, and gave away picks 27, 59, and 124 in 2011, and 22 and 118 from 2012, which was called things like a 'king's ransom', Atlanta's true "overpay" was the equivalent to the 63rd pick in the draft - or, 31st pick of the seccond round. The Saints giving away all their picks to get Ricky Williams was similar, and the "overpay" was a top 10 pick for the second round. Marshall Faulk, a first ballot HOFer, existing stud RB, was traded for a 2 and a 5. Carson Palmer, a proven NFL starter, not an unproven rookie who hasn't taken a snap, was had for a first and a second the following year (unless the Raiders made the playoffs this year, which they didn't, or next year, at which point it becomes a one, we think based on reports).

So my quesiton to those thinking we'll land a ton of first round talent and maybe existing players is do you feel the same if it just three players, or four, spread over two or three years is all that is offered? Say, picks 4 and 22 from this year, and picks 42 (10th in the second round) in the next twwo drafts (2013 and 2014). The other huge risk is future picks - what if the trade partner goes to the playoffs next year, and what you thought would be a pick high in a round becomes one really low in the round?

[GrizzColt]

I'm a big Peyton fan, but......you can't really argue with Kiper's track record for grading QB's. We're going to look stupid for releasing Peyton and stupid if we don't pick the 2nd highest graded QB Kiper ever had. Yes, there a 2 busts on here, but there are 8 successes.

1. John Elway (No. 1 pick, 1983) - 5 Super Bowls

Insert Andrew Luck, per Mel Kiper

2. Jim Kelly (No. 14, 1983) - 4 Super Bowls

3. Drew Bledsoe (No. 1, 1993) - 2 Super Bowls

4. Peyton Manning (No. 1, 1998) - 2 Super Bowls

5. Ryan Leaf (No. 2, 1998) n/a

6. Vinny Testaverde (No. 1, 1987) - zero Super Bowls

7. Andre Ware (No. 7, 1990) - n/a

8. Troy Aikman (No. 1, 1989) - 3 Super Bowls

9. Boomer Esiason (No. 38, 1984) - 1 Super Bowl (I think)

10. Steve Young (Round 1 of supplemental draft, 1984) - 3 Super Bowls (2 as backup and 1 as starter)

Where Luck stands

If I did this list and included Luck based on where I think his pre-draft grade will be, he'd be at No. 2 overall. I still have his prospect grade below Elway at this point, but he edges out Kelly and has the second-highest grade for a QB in the 32 years I've been doing this. That's the kind of elite company he is in.

[Superman]

Releasing PM before paying him the option bonus of $28MM due March 8, will result in a one-time hit to the 2012 salary cap of $10.4MM.

Luck/RG3 will hit the salary cap as follows, assuming the contract will be a 5% increase of Cam Newton's contract:

2012: $4.2MM

2013: $ 5.2MM

2014: $6.3 MM

2015: $7.4MM

Total $23.1 MM

A #3QB at league minimum will hit the salary cap at $0.4MM each year.

In 2012, we have the remnants of the Collins contract that will hit the salary cap at $1.25MM, and the remnant of Painter (if we cut him) of less than $0.1MM.

So the scenario if you cut PM without paying the option bonus due March 8, the QB salary cap hit will be:

$10.4MM PM cut

$4.2 MM Luck/RG3

$0.4MM #3QB

$1.25MM Collins remnant

Totals: $16.25MM

In 2013, if we assume the QB roster is Luck/RG3 and a #3QB, the salary cap hit will be : $5.6MM

Cut, paste, repeat.

[Smitto]

Yes, if I only look at the 49ers and the Ravens, I won't see teams that sling it. However, I look at all 32 teams in the NFL, and I do see them sling it. But what I see may not be what you see.

What we can both see are the rules of the game and how they have evolved since 1985 to 2012. How have the rules changed to favor a passing offense? How has the pass interference foul been interpreted over that time? How has the no-touch zone evolved beyond 5 yards of the LOS? How have the rules changed to protect the passer, and how has the roughing the passer fouls been interpreted?

Rules schmules when it all comes down to it you still go out there and play defense, you can still hit, defend the pass and all that good stuff... point is regardless of how friendly the rules have gotten for the offense, if you had a very stingy and good defense the chances of you winning a championship is higher than having a great QB

[Smitto]

'If' would have been a better word choice on my part, clearly, since my attempt at humor was lost.

Oh, and the old 'defense wins championships' is great, but untrue. The Giants ranked 25th in points allowed, 27th in yards allowed, 29th against the pass, and 19th against the run. 27th in total defense. Packers 5th, Saints 25th, Steeler 1st, Giants 7th, Colts 21st. There are plenty of ways to win it all. You don't have to be a one seed, you don't have to play at home, you don't have to stop the run or run the ball. All those things were true, but not any more.

And your point is?... did you see the Giants defense in the playoffs? they did not play by those numbers at all... the Giants defesne showed up and played solid football all throughout the playoffs... ravens 2000 is also a good example about defense... colts 2006 is also a good example... especially the colts

[MSColtsFan]

And your point is?... did you see the Giants defense in the playoffs? they did not play by those numbers at all... the Giants defesne showed up and played solid football all throughout the playoffs... ravens 2000 is also a good example about defense... colts 2006 is also a good example... especially the colts

My point is your opinion that you don't need a top QB and a good D to win a title is great, and I'm not suggesting by any measure you aren't entitled to that opinion, but it is inaccurate. What I am saying is 26 Super Bowl winning QBs were selected in the first round (obviously repeat winners in that number, but each SB is its own event), and just as many offensively great teams play in and win titles as those who have what would be condidered a dominant D. You may prefer a great D to a great O, might not want a QB-centric team, but just because others do doesn't make them crazy or wrong. On the contrary, the misconceeption that defenses win more, or are of more value, is incorrect. Just like the notion that because Tom Brady or Bart Starr won titles being drafted inthe 6th or 17th rounds means teams can therefore find late round champions more often than not. It's the opposite.

You are quick to correct people when they state opinion as fact (you did it to me in this thread when I used the word when instead of if), yet you follow it up with statements which are not true based on actual results. They are your opinions. Perpatuating the myth that defenses win championships, and dismissal of the importance of QB (posiiton drafted would be an indicator of evaluated talent, and perceived value) are things you and I disagree about. Which is fine.

[Superman]

And your point is?... did you see the Giants defense in the playoffs? they did not play by those numbers at all... the Giants defesne showed up and played solid football all throughout the playoffs... ravens 2000 is also a good example about defense... colts 2006 is also a good example... especially the colts

When your defense plays well in the playoffs, you have a much great chance of winning. But just because you don't have a top-ranked defense (by the numbers) doesn't mean your team is doomed. 2006 proved that. So did this year, because both the Giants and the Patriots were in the bottom third of the league in total defense, and both of them beat defensive-minded teams to get to the Super Bowl.

[Smitto]

My point is your opinion that you don't need a top QB and a good D to win a title is great, and I'm not suggesting by any measure you aren't entitled to that opinion, but it is inaccurate. What I am saying is 26 Super Bowl winning QBs were selected in the first round (obviously repeat winners in that number, but each SB is its own event), and just as many offensively great teams play in and win titles as those who have what would be condidered a dominant D. You may prefer a great D to a great O, might not want a QB-centric team, but just because others do doesn't make them crazy or wrong. On the contrary, the misconceeption that defenses win more, or are of more value, is incorrect. Just like the notion that because Tom Brady or Bart Starr won titles being drafted inthe 6th or 17th rounds means teams can therefore find late round champions more often than not. It's the opposite.

You are quick to correct people when they state opinion as fact (you did it to me in this thread when I used the word when instead of if), yet you follow it up with statements which are not true based on actual results. They are your opinions. Perpatuating the myth that defenses win championships, and dismissal of the importance of QB (posiiton drafted would be an indicator of evaluated talent, and perceived value) are things you and I disagree about. Which is fine.

I am not quick to correct anyone, you must be confusing me with someone else, when stating things like this you cant state them as facts but its a pretty wide census on that that defense DO win championships...

http://gnb.scout.com/a.z?s=61&p=2&c=1149037&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fgnb.scout.com%2f2%2f1149037.html

this isnt an article but it just goes to show no matter how great of an offense you do have if you dont have a great or really good defense your chances of winning when it counts are slim.

[Smitto]

When your defense plays well in the playoffs, you have a much great chance of winning. But just because you don't have a top-ranked defense (by the numbers) doesn't mean your team is doomed. 2006 proved that. So did this year, because both the Giants and the Patriots were in the bottom third of the league in total defense, and both of them beat defensive-minded teams to get to the Super Bowl.

You have a point to some extent.. in 06 when the colts got to the playoffs who carried the colts mostly? the kicker and the defense....

the giants defense got much better when it got into the playoffs not to mention the team with the better defense won the superbowl this year...

Soo many times the colts have got into the playoffs and who has let them down most of the time? defense or special teams

[JimJaime]

i seen(read) nothing but bad things said about Eli from pats fans

I have nothing against Eli, I think he has a lucky horseshoe stuck up his butt, but I have no hard feelings. Actually this last SB he played awesome. (Although as they just pointed out on Felger and Mazz that 1st TD they got Mayo was right there to PICK it off but over ran the play. Just shows how this is a game of inches huh lol)

I don't hate ELI, he hasn't beaten the Pats the Giants have beaten the Pats.

[WSO]

Cutting Peyton leaves us with a 10.5mil? Dead cap space for the next 4 yrs(could be wrong) I figured 4.5 for luck, with like 500k increase a yr(just a guess) then Collins' cap it 1.5mil or 2.5mil I know its one or the other. So I figured it would be about 17 next yr with Collins' and with a pay raise the following year about 17 after.

Kerry Collins is retired

Our only quarterbacks for next year are Painter and Manning. If Manning is cut, it'll be just Painter. Painter has a cap hit of 500k or something like that.

[UndecidedFrog]

Kerry Collins is retired

Our only quarterbacks for next year are Painter and Manning. If Manning is cut, it'll be just Painter. Painter has a cap hit of 500k or something like that.

Yes, but some ($1.25MM) of Collins' contract will hit the 2012 salary cap.

[JTcardscolts]

I have nothing against Eli, I think he has a lucky horseshoe stuck up his butt, but I have no hard feelings. Actually this last SB he played awesome. (Although as they just pointed out on Felger and Mazz that 1st TD they got Mayo was right there to PICK it off but over ran the play. Just shows how this is a game of inches huh lol)

I don't hate ELI, he hasn't beaten the Pats the Giants have beaten the Pats.

agreed, everyone seems to forget its a team sport.

myself included

[Superman]

I have nothing against Eli, I think he has a lucky horseshoe stuck up his butt, but I have no hard feelings. Actually this last SB he played awesome. (Although as they just pointed out on Felger and Mazz that 1st TD they got Mayo was right there to PICK it off but over ran the play. Just shows how this is a game of inches huh lol)

I don't hate ELI, he hasn't beaten the Pats the Giants have beaten the Pats.

Good to hear a Pats fan embrace the "team" concept. All these years of hearing how this quarterback has won more than that quarterback have worked me up into a frenzy on more than one occasion.

Oh, by the way, I listened to Damien Woody on Cowherd this morning, and they said a lot about how Brady has to carry his team every week, how he can't have a bad game or else they lose, how the media needs to stop blaming Brady (and Welker) and start blaming the defense, how Belichick needs to fix the defense, how they have no running game, etc. It sounded really familiar to me, but I can't figure out why...

[OZZ]

Good to hear a Pats fan embrace the "team" concept. All these years of hearing how this quarterback has won more than that quarterback have worked me up into a frenzy on more than one occasion.

Oh, by the way, I listened to Damien Woody on Cowherd this morning, and they said a lot about how Brady has to carry his team every week, how he can't have a bad game or else they lose, how the media needs to stop blaming Brady (and Welker) and start blaming the defense, how Belichick needs to fix the defense, how they have no running game, etc. It sounded really familiar to me, but I can't figure out why...

Funny how things work out like that, eh? :yes:

[Superman]

Funny how things work out like that, eh? :yes:

I probably wouldn't call it funny, but whatever.