The Chuck Pagano you've been asking for?

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Tell the jags and Brown's that.     And malik hooker was considered an elite player.  Drafting in the top five guarantees nothing

I always try and explain this to people but they wont listen. Unless you have sure Franchise QB at #1 the Draft is a crapshoot, it always has been and I can give 100's of examples to why it is.

[Yoshinator]

5 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Tell the jags and Brown's that.     And malik hooker was considered an elite player.  Drafting in the top five guarantees nothing

You know good and well the only reason the Jags and Browns are bad is because they can't draft a QB to save their life. More proof to my point is the Raiders. They drafted in the top 5 for ages, they get Carr, and now they are instantly a playoff team. I'd love to have the no1 pick with Luck because I know how good he is, and that would of benefited us for years.

 

Also, drafting in the top 5 guarantees you one of the top 5 players on your board. So yes it does. Hooker was a lucky fall at a position of need. That's the exception, not the norm.

[jvan1973]

4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I always try and explain this to people but they wont listen. Unless you have sure Franchise QB at #1 the Draft is a crapshoot, it always has been and I can give 100's of examples to why it is.

Even then it's a crap shoot

[jvan1973]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

You know good and well the only reason the Jags and Browns are bad is because they can't draft a QB to save their life. More proof to my point is the Raiders. They drafted in the top 5 for ages, they get Carr, and now they are instantly a playoff team. I'd love to have the no1 pick with Luck because I know how good he is, and that would of benefited us for years.

 

Also, drafting in the top 5 guarantees you one of the top 5 players on your board. So yes it does. Hooker was a lucky fall at a position of need. That's the exception, not the norm.

Many top 5 picks have washed out of the league.  MANY

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Even then it's a crap shoot

Yeah you are right, some QB's that have went #1 have sucked!

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

You know good and well the only reason the Jags and Browns are bad is because they can't draft a QB to save their life. More proof to my point is the Raiders. They drafted in the top 5 for ages, they get Carr, and now they are instantly a playoff team. I'd love to have the no1 pick with Luck because I know how good he is, and that would of benefited us for years.

 

Also, drafting in the top 5 guarantees you one of the top 5 players on your board. So yes it does. Hooker was a lucky fall at a position of need. That's the exception, not the norm.

I think Hooker will pan out, just a gut feeling. He shouldve went Top 10.

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Many top 5 picks have washed out of the league.  MANY

and many more top 15 or top 25 picks than that. You know good and well more top picks make it as stars than top 15 picks or top 25 picks. You are dead wrong here. No getting around it. It may not be a guarantee, but the odds are much higher.

[jvan1973]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

and many more top 15 or top 25 picks than that. You know good and well more top picks make it as stars than top 15 picks or top 25 picks. You are dead wrong here. No getting around it. It may not be a guarantee, but the odds are much higher.

We drafted inside the top 15-this year,  And the top 25 last year.   .  I would rather be at 6-6 going into December than 2-10.  That's just me

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

and many more top 15 or top 25 picks than that. You know good and well more top picks make it as stars than top 15 picks or top 25 picks. You are dead wrong here. No getting around it. It may not be a guarantee, but the odds are much higher.

The Draft is still really a crapshoot and a lot of luck is involved. Tom Brady going in Round 6 at 199 looks silly in hindsight. Blair Thomas going 2nd and Emmitt Smith going 17th in the 90 Draft does as well. Joe Montana got drafted in Round 3 as well. Look at how many QB's that have been busts that have been drafted either 1st and 2nd where draft experts said they would be a sure thing - J. Russell, Ryan Leaf, Jeff George and a ton more.

[Yoshinator]

Just now, jvan1973 said:

We drafted inside the top 15-this year,  And the top 25 last year.   .  I would rather be at 6-6 going into December than 2-10.  That's just me

That is you then. If you'd also rather be 8-8 as well, then there's nothing else to discuss, I'd rather have the 50/50 chance at a big draft hit than wallow in mediocrity, but that's just me.

[crazycolt1]

37 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Also the NFL was way more competitive back then it's no where near as difficult now so the most recent SB winners are who he should be compared to the Harbaughs the Paytons the McCarthys the Tomlins all shoelwed they were good before year 6 

Way more competitive? Wrong. Years back teams stayed together. Now when a team wins a super bowl a lot of the players chase the money and other teams raid the super bowl winners.

A head coach taking a super bowl ready team has an advantage. Pagano walked into a 2-14 team and then took them to three 11-5 seasons. Nuff said.

[Colts_Fan12]

20 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

If luck is healthy the whole year and we don't make a run in the playoffs ,  I'm guessing he will be gone.  But unlike you,  I'm not hoping for it

I'm not hoping for anything I'll be happy either way I'm just able to see the positives either way no matter what I'm not gonna be all * if we get a high pick and I won't be mad if we win in the playoffs 

[NewColtsFan]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

That is you then. If you'd also rather be 8-8 as well, then there's nothing else to discuss, I'd rather have the 50/50 chance at a big draft hit than wallow in mediocrity, but that's just me.

 

I think you're setting up a false argument.

 

Look at New England, Seattle,  Pittsburgh, Denver and Arizona.     They've had good seasons,  they draft toward the bottom of every round,  and they still manage to draft talent.

 

Look at the same teams that are drafting in the top-10 over and over and over again.     You know who they are.   They draft players and the team still can't seem to get out of it's own way.

 

Drafting at the bottom of a round doesn't mean you're not going to be drafting good players.    Well run teams stay competitive....

 

[Lucky Colts Fan]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

and many more top 15 or top 25 picks than that. You know good and well more top picks make it as stars than top 15 picks or top 25 picks. You are dead wrong here. No getting around it. It may not be a guarantee, but the odds are much higher.

 

  I think you're being kind of presumptuous about how valuable a top pick is, and if you really want to be picking top-5 every year.

 

Other teams in the league have proven that you don't need any top-5 draft picks at all to be successful.

 

[Colts_Fan12]

7 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

That is you then. If you'd also rather be 8-8 as well, then there's nothing else to discuss, I'd rather have the 50/50 chance at a big draft hit than wallow in mediocrity, but that's just me.

Same with me stuck in mediocrity is where the pacers have been and that's not good at all it's better to have a shot at top players if you are gonna be out of the playoffs 

[Yoshinator]

Just now, NewColtsFan said:

 

I think you're setting up a false argument.

 

Look at New England, Seattle,  Pittsburgh, Denver and Arizona.     They've had good seasons,  they draft toward the bottom of every round,  and they still manage to draft talent.

 

Look at the same teams that are drafting in the top-10 over and over and over again.     You know who they are.   They draft players and the team still can't seem to get out of it's own way.

 

Drafting at the bottom of a round doesn't mean you're not going to be drafting good players.    Well run teams stay competitive....

 

Grigson didn't run this team well though, and his drafts and FA's failed for the most part. Our team also wasn't nearly as good as those ones. We had a complete rebuild for the most part, those were mostly complete teams. Those top 5 picks would of allowed us to hit on someone like a Khalil Mack or a Jalen Ramsey or an Ezekiel Elliott. It's night and day what our situation was and those teams, both player wise and GM wise (until Ballard this year).

[Colts_Fan12]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Grigson didn't run this team well though, and his drafts and FA's failed for the most part. Our team also wasn't nearly as good as those ones. We had a complete rebuild for the most part, those were mostly complete teams. Those top 5 picks would of allowed us to hit on someone like a Khalil Mack or a Jalen Ramsey or an Ezekiel Elliott. It's night and day what our situation was and those teams, both player wise and GM wise (until Ballard this year).

Might as well give up the pagano bunch is here to save the day lol 

 

Indiana sports fans love being mediocre for some reason and idk why 

[NewColtsFan]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Grigson didn't run this team well though, and his drafts and FA's failed for the most part. Our team also wasn't nearly as good as those ones. We had a complete rebuild for the most part, those were mostly complete teams. Those top 5 picks would of allowed us to hit on someone like a Khalil Mack or a Jalen Ramsey or an Ezekiel Elliott. It's night and day what our situation was and those teams, both player wise and GM wise (until Ballard this year).

 

Yes.....   that's what was in the past....    but you're now arguing that you'd rather the team really suck this year rather go 8-8 and miss the playoffs so we can instead get higher draft picks.

 

I'm simply noting that nothing is a guarantee.     That well run teams find a way to get talent and continue to win.

 

As a fan,  I'm proud that our two worst seasons were not below 500.     That we've never gone worse than 8-8.   I think that's a tribute to the organizaqtion.      I don't want to bottom out in Ballard's first year.     I'd like to see our last two draft classes pay off and Ballard's free agents come together to help the team have a solid year.

 

I think this team can go 10-6.    But much depends on Luck as well.    We can also go 8-8 again.

 

I hope it's not worse than that.

 

[Lucky Colts Fan]

3 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Grigson didn't run this team well though, and his drafts and FA's failed for the most part. Our team also wasn't nearly as good as those ones. We had a complete rebuild for the most part, those were mostly complete teams. Those top 5 picks would of allowed us to hit on someone like a Khalil Mack or a Jalen Ramsey or an Ezekiel Elliott. It's night and day what our situation was and those teams, both player wise and GM wise (until Ballard this year).

 

Hindsight is 20/20.

 

I didn't like most of his drafts, but Polian made it into the HoF drafting at the end of rounds because he built successful teams.  What Browns GM from the last decade, with all those top-5 picks, is going into the HoF?

 

You don't need a top-5 pick to win a SB.  Although a #1 guy like Luck certainly helps.  

[Yoshinator]

Just now, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

Hindsight is 20/20.

 

I didn't like most of his drafts, but Polian made it into the HoF drafting at the end of rounds because he built successful teams.  What Browns GM from the last decade, with all those top-5 picks, is going into the HoF?

 

You don't need a top-5 pick to win a SB.  Although a #1 guy like Luck certainly helps.  

I never use hindsight my friend. Having Luck, with a franchise in a rebuild, just begs for some early draft picks to use as foundation pieces for the team. That's not hindsight, that's common sense. The only hindsight is that none of us probably thought Grigson would ruin the team in 5 years.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

5 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Yes.....   that's what was in the past....    but you're now arguing that you'd rather the team really suck this year rather go 8-8 and miss the playoffs so we can instead get higher draft picks.

 

I'm simply noting that nothing is a guarantee.     That well run teams find a way to get talent and continue to win.

 

As a fan,  I'm proud that our two worst seasons were not below 500.     That we've never gone worse than 8-8.   I think that's a tribute to the organizaqtion.      I don't want to bottom out in Ballard's first year.     I'd like to see our last two draft classes pay off and Ballard's free agents come together to help the team have a solid year.

 

I think this team can go 10-6.    But much depends on Luck as well.    We can also go 8-8 again.

 

I hope it's not worse than that.

 

 

Yes.  The name of the game is "improvement" right?  The Colts improved every year until the bottom fell out two years ago.

 

For our worst recent season to be 8-8... That's a pretty good basement to start from for the new regime.

 

A losing season should be unthinkable to a Colts fan.  Well, as long as Luck can play anyway...  

[Yoshinator]

6 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Yes.....   that's what was in the past....    but you're now arguing that you'd rather the team really suck this year rather go 8-8 and miss the playoffs so we can instead get higher draft picks.

 

I'm simply noting that nothing is a guarantee.     That well run teams find a way to get talent and continue to win.

 

As a fan,  I'm proud that our two worst seasons were not below 500.     That we've never gone worse than 8-8.   I think that's a tribute to the organizaqtion.      I don't want to bottom out in Ballard's first year.     I'd like to see our last two draft classes pay off and Ballard's free agents come together to help the team have a solid year.

 

I think this team can go 10-6.    But much depends on Luck as well.    We can also go 8-8 again.

 

I hope it's not worse than that.

 

My original thought on this was earlier in this thread that I wished we could of got the last pick with Luck on the team because I knew Luck would be good and it wouldn't affect us like the Jags and Browns. Jvan then said that he would rather go 6-6 or 8-8 and last place is the worst place. That's when I said I'd rather get last to get the higher picks. I never changed my argument. It won't do nearly as good to bottom out now, but my argument was that it would of during Luck's early years while we were originally rebuilding.

[jvan1973]

24 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Might as well give up the pagano bunch is here to save the day lol 

 

Indiana sports fans love being mediocre for some reason and idk why 

And the doomsday crowd is always here.  Predicting failure before the season begins.      

 

Fans have no impact on how a season will end up.   Being a champion or last place has nothing to do with us.  

[Colts_Fan12]

3 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

And the doomsday crowd is always here.  Predicting failure before the season begins.      

 

Fans have no impact on how a season will end up.   Being a champion or last place has nothing to do with us.  

Me nor Jared are predicting failure he was simply arguing that it's better to have a top pickbthen be stuck in mediocrity if you are gonna miss the playoffs every year it's better to have better odds at top players in the draft it's that simple

[jvan1973]

4 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Me nor Jared are predicting failure he was simply arguing that it's better to have a top pickbthen be stuck in mediocrity if you are gonna miss the playoffs every year it's better to have better odds at top players in the draft it's that simple

Wrong.  Ask the teans that are always bottom feeders.   Having a culture of winning is a much better strategy

[crazycolt1]

47 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Me nor Jared are predicting failure he was simply arguing that it's better to have a top pickbthen be stuck in mediocrity if you are gonna miss the playoffs every year it's better to have better odds at top players in the draft it's that simple

I understand what you think is logic but where a draft pick is made makes no difference as long as the player can contribute to wins. The whole NFL is full of starters who were not high picks. There are pro bowl players who were not high draft picks. It's not where you pick it's who you pick.

[crazycolt1]

47 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Wrong.  Ask the teans that are always bottom feeders.   Having a culture of winning is a much better strategy

Truer words cant be spoken. The winning culture is the main reason the forum is full of what you called the doomsday crowd. They are so used to winning that when the team is average they lose their minds.

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

Wrong.  Ask the teans that are always bottom feeders.   Having a culture of winning is a much better strategy

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ THIS!!! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

Thank you!     Thank you!       And,  thank you!!

 

Sometimes it feels like a few of us have to fight our way up stream every year around this time......

 

[ColtsFanMikeC]

On 8/15/2017 at 4:26 PM, J@son said:

 

Or maybe pagano has more freedom now under Ballard than he did grigson.

 

Just throwing out an alternate possibility

 

Chuck came from a hard-nosed Ravens team and always preached wanting us to have that same toughness... I sort of wonder if the reason we never practiced in pads with hitting in preseason prior to this year was Grigson's vote.

 

On 8/15/2017 at 5:05 PM, crazycolt1 said:

I think you are putting too much into the last pre season game. Pagano cant make the Colts competitive overnight with a virtually a new team.

 

I tend to agree with this, though there was some weirdness when Ballard was hired without having an option for a new coach.  If the two show they can work together well and that improvement is happening, I see Pagano being fine even if we don't win the division.  However, if they get into any sort of arguing like Grigs/Pags or if the team isn't showing improvement (this looks, at least on paper, to be an improved team - especially on D) I think Pags is very much on the hot-seat.

[tweezy32]

4 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

That is you then. If you'd also rather be 8-8 as well, then there's nothing else to discuss, I'd rather have the 50/50 chance at a big draft hit than wallow in mediocrity, but that's just me.

I agree with you!  Thats all that matters ;) 

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Me nor Jared are predicting failure he was simply arguing that it's better to have a top pickbthen be stuck in mediocrity if you are gonna miss the playoffs every year it's better to have better odds at top players in the draft it's that simple

 

Nice Strawman argument!

 

Who is missing the playoffs EVERY YEAR?!?

 

If the Colts don't make the playoffs this year,  that will be the last 3 years.    But 3 out of the 6 years since Luck came to the team.

 

You think the teams that are successful every year secretly wish for a crappy year?      They'll take it if they get it,  but they sure don't want it.

 

If we miss the playoffs it likely won't be by much.    That pretty much depends on Luck.    

 

 

 

 

 

[Colts_Fan12]

3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Nice Strawman argument!

 

Who is missing the playoffs EVERY YEAR?!?

 

If the Colts don't make the playoffs this year,  that will be the last 3 years.    But 3 out of the 6 years since Luck came to the team.

 

You think the teams that are successful every year secretly wish for a crappy year?      They'll take it if they get it,  but they sure don't want it.

 

If we miss the playoffs it likely won't be by much.    That pretty much depends on Luck.    

 

 

 

 

 

Its generally speaking you and everyone arguing knows damn well the odds are better to get great players earlier in the draft you can argue til you are blue in the face and me and Jared are still right 

[Colts_Fan12]

7 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

Wrong.  Ask the teans that are always bottom feeders.   Having a culture of winning is a much better strategy

Jesus Christ it's just like the pacers fans. picking high one damn year or 2 won't ruin our winning culture you all act like picking high and landing a great player will make us suck for the rest of eternity.

[crazycolt1]

19 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Its generally speaking you and everyone arguing knows damn well the odds are better to get great players earlier in the draft you can argue til you are blue in the face and me and Jared are still right 

 

17 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Jesus Christ it's just like the pacers fans. picking high one damn year or 2 won't ruin our winning culture you all act like picking high and landing a great player will make us suck for the rest of eternity.

First of all Jesus Christ has nothing to do with the NFL!

The top team at this time is New England. They have low picks in every round and continue to field a team that is always in the mix. They may not have the best starting team in the league but their depth is always good enough to pull wins out. They have that one player every season that comes out of nowhere and makes THE play needed.

 It's the player picked, not the position the  player is picked.

You are so possessed thinking picking high in the draft will solve our issues when that is not the case.

The GMs job is to find players that contribute no matter what position that is dealt to him.

Our best center in years was undrafted and working at a electrical supply store. He was a walk on for the Ravens and was cut. I think Jeff Saturday was his name.

 

[Yoshinator]

8 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

 

First of all Jesus Christ has nothing to do with the NFL!

The top team at this time is New England. They have low picks in every round and continue to field a team that is always in the mix. They may not have the best starting team in the league but their depth is always good enough to pull wins out. They have that one player every season that comes out of nowhere and makes THE play needed.

 It's the player picked, not the position the  player is picked.

You are so possessed thinking picking high in the draft will solve our issues when that is not the case.

The GMs job is to find players that contribute no matter what position that is dealt to him.

Our best center in years was undrafted and working at a electrical supply store. He was a walk on for the Ravens and was cut. I think Jeff Saturday was his name.

 

This is correct, but what you are failing to mention is that we never had the opportunity to get a lot of elite players because of our draft position. Grigson didn't really figure out how to draft early until his final year here, and that cost us a good team. The lower you are, the less of a chance you hit on your picks, that's just fact. Even the best GM's will get their top picks snagged if they draft lower and have to resort to guys they preferred less. That's why New England trades a lot, because their position in the draft is so weak. They'll either accumulate picks, or trade for proven players. We missed out on so many top players because of our position. Malik Hooker is the first break we've gotten of a high end talent falling, and that's a once in 6 year scenario in a deep draft. Won't happen often. Kelly just happened to be the right pick. How often were we picking correctly before that though? Not very often, because our draft position not only handicapped us in the first round, but each subsequent round after that. 

 

Never a guarantee, but I would bet money that if Grigson had a mid round every year in 2013-2015 like 2016 where we drafted Kelly, he would of hit on many more picks throughout the whole draft, and this team would be in better shape today. 

[crazycolt1]

7 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

This is correct, but what you are failing to mention is that we never have the opportunity to get a lot of elite players because of our draft position. Grigson didn't really figure out how to draft early until his final year here, and that cost us a good team. The lower you are, the less of a chance you hit on your picks, that's just fact. Even the best GM's will get their top picks snagged if they draft lower and have to resort to guys they preferred less. That's why New England trades a lot, because their position in the draft is so weak. They'll either accumulate picks, or trade for proven players. We missed out on so many top players because of our position. Malik Hooker is the first break we've gotten of a high end talent falling, and that's a once in 6 year scenario in a deep draft. Won't happen often. Kelly just happened to be the right pick. How often were we picking correctly before that though? Not very often, because our draft position not only handicapped us in the first round, but each subsequent round after that. 

 

Never a guarantee, but I would bet money that if Grigson had a mid round every year in 2013-2015 like 2016 where we drafted Kelly, he would of hit on many more picks throughout the whole draft, and this team would be in better shape today. 

I do understand the concept you are saying but there is one thing you are failing to realize.

Your concept works in fantasy football, not the real NFL.

 

[Yoshinator]

Just now, crazycolt1 said:

I do understand the concept you are saying but there is one thing you are failing to realize.

Your concept works in fantasy football, not the real NFL.

 

My concept works perfectly in the NFL draft. Players have their draft board, and a list of players at each position of a preference of who they want as well as an overall list. The lower you are, the less likely you get your picks. Even a Bill Belichick or an Ozzie Newsome will get sniped a ton and have to make the decision to go with BPA where it won't help them for a player that wasn't high on their list, or trade down and risk not getting anyone. The lower you are, the lower a player on your list you can draft. We were the victim of that. It didn't help that Grigson took 5 years to learn how to draft, but the low picks sure affected our ability to get elite players heavily. The majority of the top players go in the first round, the lower in the first round you go, the more of a chance you have of missing on a pick, and the more likelyhood the player won't be as elite as a top 5 pick. After that, it gets even worse and harder to find starters and the few remaining gems, so it's even more vital to draft higher in each round. We never had this opportunity beyond 2012. That's what caused the collapse after the 2014 season.

[crazycolt1]

14 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

My concept works perfectly in the NFL draft. Players have their draft board, and a list of players at each position of a preference of who they want as well as an overall list. The lower you are, the less likely you get your picks. Even a Bill Belichick or an Ozzie Newsome will get sniped a ton and have to make the decision to go with BPA where it won't help them for a player that wasn't high on their list, or trade down and risk not getting anyone. The lower you are, the lower a player on your list you can draft. We were the victim of that. It didn't help that Grigson took 5 years to learn how to draft, but the low picks sure affected our ability to get elite players heavily. The majority of the top players go in the first round, the lower in the first round you go, the more of a chance you have of missing on a pick, and the more likelyhood the player won't be as elite as a top 5 pick. After that, it gets even worse and harder to find starters and the few remaining gems, so it's even more vital to draft higher in each round. We never had this opportunity beyond 2012. That's what caused the collapse after the 2014 season.

If your concept works then why do teams like the Browns continue to have top three picks in the draft year after year and still are the bottom feeders?

Teams like the Patriots, Seahawks, Chiefs, Broncos and even the Colts up until the last couple of years continue to have a winning culture. If there is a player a GM wants bad enough in a high position all they have to do is work a trade to move up.

Having a high draft pick is not the recipe for success. Being smart in the picks made is by far the best recipe.

[Yoshinator]

5 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

If your concept works then why do teams like the Browns continue to have top three picks in the draft year after year and still are the bottom feeders?

Teams like the Patriots, Seahawks, Chiefs, Broncos and even the Colts up until the last couple of years continue to have a winning culture. If there is a player a GM wants bad enough in a high position all they have to do is work a trade to move up.

Having a high draft pick is not the recipe for success. Being smart in the picks made is by far the best recipe.

Teams like the Browns continue to have top 3 picks for one simple reason, they can't draft a QB. That's why our situation would of been great had we not went 11-5 for 3 straight years right away, we would of had our franchise QB and got to build around him with elite picks. The hard part was over, we had the QB, the Browns and other teams don't have that. We just won too quick, and then fell to earth after 2 years of horrible drafting in 2013 and 2014, and 2015 wasn't much better. That's why the Raiders are a playoff team now. All those years of drafting in the top 5 did no good, but when they got Carr, those early picks like Cooper, Mack and the rest over the last few years will now elevate them with a top QB. You get the QB, and the other picks become that much more effective. We have the QB, but we never got the rebuild or a chance at those picks. That's why we're where we are today and why we came down to Earth.

[crazycolt1]

7 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Teams like the Browns continue to have top 3 picks for one simple reason, they can't draft a QB. That's why our situation would of been great had we not went 11-5 for 3 straight years right away, we would of had our franchise QB and got to build around him with elite picks. The hard part was over, we had the QB, the Browns and other teams don't have that. We just won too quick, and then fell to earth after 2 years of horrible drafting in 2013 and 2014, and 2015 wasn't much better. That's why the Raiders are a playoff team now. All those years of drafting in the top 5 did no good, but when the got Carr, those early picks like Cooper, Mack and the rest over the last few years will now elevate them with a top QB. You get the QB, and the other picks become that much more effective. We have the QB, but we never got the rebuild or a chance at those picks. That's why we're where we are today and why we came down to Earth.

I see it different. 

The Colts become average because the right players were not taken at the position the Colts picked. There were players taken after the Colts pick that contributed to their teams and helped keep their team winning. The strategy you seem to think builds a winning team does not compute into wins.

You seem to think drafting in the NFL is like the NBA or a fantasy football team. It simply does not work in the NFL. The key is finding the right player no matter what position you draft in. It has worked that way for the best GMs in the league and will continue. If a GM can't do that they lose their job.