Kiper Mock Draft 1.0 + McShay Reacts (Colts)

[oldunclemark]

7 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

Josh Allen would be a mistake, IMO. 

 

At least Pac 12 Ds that Rosen and Darnold have played against are higher than the middle of the pack in the FBS, not so sure about the Mountain West conference. 

I think Allen would be an awful pick for Cleveland

[oldunclemark]

6 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

This is no surprise to me at all.

I have said that the Browns will end up with Barkley one way or another.

With 2 high picks, they can take the risk...an RB in the first round is always a risk

[jskinnz]

2 hours ago, gacoop1 said:

Mistake to pass on Darnold or Rosen if one of them is there when pick #3 comes up.  Don't know the condition of Luck.

 

Follow me here.  By the time they have to make that decision, they will know Luck's condition.  

[crazycolt1]

42 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

With 2 high picks, they can take the risk...an RB in the first round is always a risk

True but if the Browns do take Barkley and end up with a decent QB there is nowhere but up to go.

[Andrew Luck fan club]

Doesn’t matter if we run 3-4 or a 4-3. Bradley Chubb isn’t scheme specific and can play any front. 

 

You all saying Barkley are crazy. 

[Hoo-Hoo-Hoo-Hoosiers]

Taking Barkley or Allen #1 overall feels very Cleveland-esk.  I think this might have happened under many previous FO regimes, but this FO seem more conservative.  My guess is Rosen and Darnold go #1 and #2, the Colts cant get any trade partners at #3 and go BPA, and then some QB hungry team gives up the house to Cleveland for the #4 

[Gigc]

7 hours ago, Restored said:

No way the Colts pass on Barkley if he's there.

Yeah. I'm still pretty enamored with Barkley. I like our spot no matter what, tho. I'd be happy with Chubb, Barkely OR trading back a few spots and still getting Chubb or one of the OL. Nice position to be in

[akcolt]

5 hours ago, NorthernBlue said:

If we go back to the 4-3, we gonna need some pass rushing ends (Simon and Sheard are better suited for the 3-4 OLB I think). In that case, drafting Chubb makes sense. Doubt he makes it past Tampa though. That Denver scenario would be the best. 

 

Regarding switching to the 4-3, isn't that the base Defense Basam played in? If he develops like we hope, a duo of him and Chubb could be deadly.

Sheard isn't better suited for a 3-4 He has 28.5 career sacks as a DE compared to 13 as an OLB. Simon would be fine at ILB in a 4-3 although he too played DE at OSU. If you look at who Ballard signed on D in FA the move would be pretty easy Hank played in a 4-3  Chubb would be fine standing up in a 3-4 if that's what we do IMO

[BleedBlu8792]

11 minutes ago, akcolt said:

Sheard isn't better suited for a 3-4 He has 28.5 career sacks as a DE compared to 13 as an OLB. Simon would be fine at ILB in a 4-3 although he too played DE at OSU. If you look at who Ballard signed on D in FA the move would be pretty easy Hank played in a 4-3  Chubb would be fine standing up in a 3-4 if that's what we do IMO

 

We really don't know that. I've pretty much watched his whole career since college, being an OSU fan. He's never played anywhere other than DE/OLB. I'm not saying he couldn't do it, but it would be a huge change for him considering where he's been playing the last 7-8 years. I could see him playing SAM in a 4-3, but other than that he needs to be on the line either as a DE or OLB going after the QB. 

[OhioColt]

Honestly do not seeing the Browns drafting a QB in Round 1.  Fully expect the Browns to take a QB in FA with either Alex Smith or Cousins.   With the first pick the Browns will take Edge Bradly Chubb as BPA. 

 

Since Chubb is now off the board I am projecting the Colts to select LB Roquan Smith.  Even if Chubb were still on the board I personally think that Roquan will be our biggest need value player.  In Round 2 we can focus on another Edge Ogbonnia Okoronkwo who is projected as a borderline 1-2.  Both of these players should immediately make Day 1 impacts.  Round 3 would love to see either OT Brian O'Neill or OG Isiah Wynn be available.

 

The other draft option is to take Edge Chubb in Round 1 than follow up and select RB Sony Michel in Round 2.  However this still leaves a major void in our LB core unless we can acquire top talent during FA along with offensive line help.

[coltsnation]

Mel Kiper is officially the worst at scouting QBs.  Josh Allen has had bad production, bad accuracy, bad competition, and is a bad decision maker.  This would go on the list of Browns busts.

[BOTT]

1 hour ago, OhioColt said:

Honestly do not seeing the Browns drafting a QB in Round 1.  Fully expect the Browns to take a QB in FA with either Alex Smith or Cousins.   With the first pick the Browns will take Edge Bradly Chubb as BPA. 

 

Since Chubb is now off the board I am projecting the Colts to select LB Roquan Smith.  Even if Chubb were still on the board I personally think that Roquan will be our biggest need value player.  In Round 2 we can focus on another Edge Ogbonnia Okoronkwo who is projected as a borderline 1-2.  Both of these players should immediately make Day 1 impacts.  Round 3 would love to see either OT Brian O'Neill or OG Isiah Wynn be available.

 

The other draft option is to take Edge Chubb in Round 1 than follow up and select RB Sony Michel in Round 2.  However this still leaves a major void in our LB core unless we can acquire top talent during FA along with offensive line help.

The Browns aren't going to sign a 34yr old QB instead of selecting a top prospect at the position.

 

Why would Cousins sign with Cleveland?

[unvrsty07]

5 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

True but if the Browns do take Barkley and end up with a decent QB there is nowhere but up to go.

 

They went 0-16. Even not picking a player there is nowhere but up to go. 

[OhioColt]

1 hour ago, BOTT said:

The Browns aren't going to sign a 34yr old QB instead of selecting a top prospect at the position.

 

Why would Cousins sign with Cleveland?

"During an appearance on 92.3 The Fan on Wednesday (Jan. 10), Albert Breer of the MMQB reported Cousins would "seriously consider" the Browns if he hit free agency (h/t Kyle Kelly of Browns Wire).

 

Cousins, 29, could be an unrestricted free agent in March if he's unable to reach a contract agreement with Washington."

[OhioColt]

"With a borderline 5,000-yard passer at the helm, Cleveland can then focus on the rest of the roster for the foreseeable future."

[loudnproudcolt]

After watching the show, I came away with the thought that unless the Colts move back to around the 9-11 area, there is no way we are going to be taking Quentin Nelson from Notre Dame. Although I love the guy, I believe with McDaniel's offensive scheme, and Luck getting rid of the ball quickly most of the time, a guard at #3 just does not make sense.

I think Chubb or Barkley, depending on who is there will be the choice, although if Barkley is there, and a QB, or even possibly Chubb, there are going to be teams wanting to move up. I really came away thinking how much I would like Chubb after all I have read on him lately, but if the right picks were involved, and we could move down just a bit, have to think about it. I found it interesting that Polian said he would not move off our spot unless we got at least another 1st draft pick next year, and one more high round this year. It seems Barkley, Chubb, Rosen, and Darnold, and possibly Allen are going to have a lot of suitors vying for them. FA will change all this, but Ballard is going to have to make some tough decisions on draft day I believe.

 

Can't believe it is only 3 months away.

[Finball]

3 hours ago, BOTT said:

The Browns aren't going to sign a 34yr old QB instead of selecting a top prospect at the position.

 

Why would Cousins sign with Cleveland?

 

Money.

 

Can't really think any other good reason.

[Mel Kiper's Hair]

4 hours ago, coltsnation said:

Mel Kiper is officially the worst at scouting QBs.  Josh Allen has had bad production, bad accuracy, bad competition, and is a bad decision maker.  This would go on the list of Browns busts.

 

 

Hey now! Let's not make things personal here! Hahaha. Listening to Mel yesterday on ESPN Radio he said that he didn't have Allen as his highest rated player (he said Chubb or Barkley) but that he was predicting what he thought the Browns would do.

[crazycolt1]

5 hours ago, coltsnation said:

Mel Kiper is officially the worst at scouting QBs.  Josh Allen has had bad production, bad accuracy, bad competition, and is a bad decision maker.  This would go on the list of Browns busts.

Any QB who had a rating of 127.8 in 2017 and  144.9 in 2016 cant be called a bust. I agree he don't have big numbers but he didn't have to in Wyoming. He is 6-5 and weighs 233.

You will see he will have great numbers at the combine and will move up the QB ratings fast.

[Restored]

15 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

With all due respect you don't know who the Colts will pick. I agree Barkley is the best RB on the board but that automatically mean the Colts take him. The same thing could be said of Chubb. We get a pass rusher it then in turns makes the whole defense better. It would have a bigger effect on this team than a great RB IMO.

If you look at where the Colts are drafting, Chubb seems like a big reach at #3. Barkley is ahead of Chubb in terms of pure talent and if the Colts want to go BPA, Barkley is the better player and there is a pretty general consensus around that. Plus a great RB will do wonders in an offense ran by Josh McDaniels. If he can turn no name RB's into productive players, imagine what he could with a player like Barkley. It's easy to forget how much more effective the Colts offense was in 2014 when they had Bradshaw in the backfield.

[DaColts85]

13 hours ago, The Peytonator said:

 

Now I’m not a GM or scout, but I can read some box scores and watch draftbreakdown cut ups, and this dude put up a mighty impressive 52.6 quarterback rating on the year playing against some real powerhouse teams like Gardner-Webb and Texas State. I don’t see how anybody can pass up future hall of famer Josh Allen. I mean, the guy is 6’5! That’s some real NFL ability being so tall. 

Looking at that box score really shows the potential and key attributes scouts look for huh?  Again you are not a GM or scout and it is apparent.

[crazycolt1]

57 minutes ago, Restored said:

If you look at where the Colts are drafting, Chubb seems like a big reach at #3. Barkley is ahead of Chubb in terms of pure talent and if the Colts want to go BPA, Barkley is the better player and there is a pretty general consensus around that. Plus a great RB will do wonders in an offense ran by Josh McDaniels. If he can turn no name RB's into productive players, imagine what he could with a player like Barkley. It's easy to forget how much more effective the Colts offense was in 2014 when they had Bradshaw in the backfield.

You have a point but with a healthy Luck offense wont be a problem. It is the defense that needs a pass rusher to make them even come close to coming out of the bottom of the league.

[Restored]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

You have a point but with a healthy Luck offense wont be a problem. It is the defense that needs a pass rusher to make them even come close to coming out of the bottom of the league.

 

If you have the chance to add players that are true game-breakers, you add them to your roster. Teams should never really reach for a player of need. Think about it like this. If Barkley goes on to be an elite RB for years to come and Chubb turns out to be just a good but never truly elite player and the Colts had the choice to take either, who should they take?

[crazycolt1]

2 minutes ago, Restored said:

 

If you have the chance to add players that are true game-breakers, you add them to your roster. Teams should never really reach for a player of need. Think about it like this. If Barkley goes on to be an elite RB for years to come and Chubb turns out to be just a good but never truly elite player and the Colts had the choice to take either, who should they take?

IMO Barkley will be the #1 pick. He will never reach the Colts. We shall see.

[Restored]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

IMO Barkley will be the #1 pick. He will never reach the Colts. We shall see.

 

That could be true. At that point, Colts would be wise IMO to try and trade back. I'm sure they will get offers.

[crazycolt1]

26 minutes ago, Restored said:

 

That could be true. At that point, Colts would be wise IMO to try and trade back. I'm sure they will get offers.

Hopefully we get an offer that can't be refused. There is so much that can change after the combine so it's a waiting game at this point.

On a side note:: with the Browns history anything can happen.

[Reboot]

I understand why post-Wentz people are eager to find the next QB from a state with more antelope than people, it's a wonderful story, but Allen is nothing more than his size.  It surprises me to have so many experts watch a guy competing against Mountain West foes hover in the mid-50% completion range and tell me he's the best player in this draft.  Wentz led national championship teams.  Completed 65% of his passes.  Was asked to do a ton more.  Allen's future success according to all these guys?  That happens if he is placed in the perfect situation with very specific kinds of coaching, surrounded by talent at OL, RB, TE, and WR... well, yeah, we'd all succeed given that kind of support!  The caveats created for him are cheap and make everything else positive said worthless.  I watched at least parts of four Wyoming games this year, plus the bowl game, because I couldn't understand the hype.  I still don't.  More to the point, if the Browns take a guy like Allen over Rosen or even Darnold, heck maybe even Mayfield, they are simply perpetuating what they've done wrong since Kosar.  Take the the kid who can do it now, not the one with 1000 "if only's" associated with him.

 

As for Chubb to the Colts, sure, it will be a perfect fit and the best DE in the draft, so nobody will criticize.  It's safe for sure.  The question I have is, is Chubb that much better than the other DEs in this draft, as compared to Barkley and other RBs, or Nelson and other OL or Fitzpatrick and other DBs,,,  To me, when in the beautiful position of basically getting your pick of the entire lot of players other than QB, and with a lot of holes to fill, who among those players separates themselves the most?  And the answer to that isn't Chubb to me.  I'm not a hater - if Chubb is the pick, I'll applaud and move on - needed position, best at it, all good.  But I think that what Barkley brings at RB, and what Fitzpatrick brings at DB are so far superior to the next best, that I think you get more bang for your buck taking one of them.  Even Nelson to me is that much better than the next best OL.  But what's holding these three back is some make-believe chart that tells us all when an interior lineman should be picked.  Or RB.  I think that's shortsighted and flawed.  You can't scream BPA and then not take the player because a chart says no OG can be taken in the top 10.  And except for QBs.  Or building up a player like Chubb and trying to make him a Watt because we haven't had one since Freeney.  We are no longer talking about BPA at that point.  Now we're match making at a school dance. 

[BProland85]

14 hours ago, Hoo-Hoo-Hoo-Hoosiers said:

Taking Barkley or Allen #1 overall feels very Cleveland-esk.  I think this might have happened under many previous FO regimes, but this FO seem more conservative.  My guess is Rosen and Darnold go #1 and #2, the Colts cant get any trade partners at #3 and go BPA, and then some QB hungry team gives up the house to Cleveland for the #4 

 

I think that would be the worst case scenario for the Colts, but I doubt it'll happen. I can't envision no trade partners at all for Ballard to move down. Theres simply too much talent with the QBs, and a generational RB at the top of the draft. 

[The Peytonator]

5 hours ago, DaColts85 said:

Looking at that box score really shows the potential and key attributes scouts look for huh?  Again you are not a GM or scout and it is apparent.

 

The most important thing a quarterback should be able to do is hit his target, and Josh Allen is bad at that. Anyone can see that. It doesn’t take the completely infallible NFL scouts and GMs that have drafted guys like Jamarcus Russell, Ryan Leaf, and Blaine Gabbert in the first round to see it. The only things he is good at is evading pressure, being hard to bring down, and I’ll give him credit for having the balls to throw downfield. Other than that he’s a massive bust if he’s drafted first overall or even in the first round. 

[TheMarine]

Not withstanding FA:
1 Browns QB
2 Giants QB
3 Colts BPA Chubb/Barkley
4 Browns Whomever Colts Dont select BPA
5 Denver QB
6 Jets QB/BPA
7 Tampa BPA

8 Bears BPA

9 49'ers BPA

10 Raiders BPA

 

If the Browns land a FA QB like cousins, I think they'll take Barkley #1 overall, as they already have Garrett. If they do, theres a 'chance' if Eli is still with the Giants they could go BPA as well, and get Chubb. we obviously wont need a QB, I could see us dropping to probably #6 so the Jets can get whomever they wish as a QB. Id be happy w/ #6 overall (think a certain guard from ND) and a #6 in R2 would be a good dealio. can still get RB talent late

[HectorRoberts]

I really don’t care who we take at #3 as long as it’s the best player there 

[Dr. T]

In my opinion, the combo of Ballard and McDaniels would never agree to pick Barkley at #3. Again, Ballard is a moneyball guy and knows that RBs statistically don't have enough value if picked that high. Also, McDaniels prefers offenses with running backs by committee, so we need to find someone to pair with Mack, and that person can be found later in the draft. Remember, Mack is a Ballard pick and showed flashes that he could be something special on his own. As a result, Ballard woud not just chuck Mack to the side for Barkley, who will probably be an every down back. Every down backs get beat up, so that is why the running backs by committee approach keeps the RBs fresh, and that can be important, especially later in a game. I think that Ballard would also consider that picking Barkley at #3 would be a waste of one of his draft picks from last year. So, according to this line of thinking, I could only conclude that Ballard and McDaniels will never pick Barkley at #3. Sorry Barkley fans.

[IndyScribe]

13 hours ago, OhioColt said:

Honestly do not seeing the Browns drafting a QB in Round 1.  Fully expect the Browns to take a QB in FA with either Alex Smith or Cousins.   With the first pick the Browns will take Edge Bradly Chubb as BPA. 

 

Since Chubb is now off the board I am projecting the Colts to select LB Roquan Smith.  Even if Chubb were still on the board I personally think that Roquan will be our biggest need value player.  In Round 2 we can focus on another Edge Ogbonnia Okoronkwo who is projected as a borderline 1-2.  Both of these players should immediately make Day 1 impacts.  Round 3 would love to see either OT Brian O'Neill or OG Isiah Wynn be available.

 

The other draft option is to take Edge Chubb in Round 1 than follow up and select RB Sony Michel in Round 2.  However this still leaves a major void in our LB core unless we can acquire top talent during FA along with offensive line help.

Smith isn't worth the third pick. I doubt Chubb goes first as well. Browns are likely going QB or Barkley.

[IndyScribe]

10 hours ago, OhioColt said:

"During an appearance on 92.3 The Fan on Wednesday (Jan. 10), Albert Breer of the MMQB reported Cousins would "seriously consider" the Browns if he hit free agency (h/t Kyle Kelly of Browns Wire).

 

Cousins, 29, could be an unrestricted free agent in March if he's unable to reach a contract agreement with Washington."

Browns can throw the most money after him, if that's what he's after.

[IndyScribe]

3 hours ago, Dirty Mudflaps said:

I understand why post-Wentz people are eager to find the next QB from a state with more antelope than people, it's a wonderful story, but Allen is nothing more than his size.  It surprises me to have so many experts watch a guy competing against Mountain West foes hover in the mid-50% completion range and tell me he's the best player in this draft.  Wentz led national championship teams.  Completed 65% of his passes.  Was asked to do a ton more.  Allen's future success according to all these guys?  That happens if he is placed in the perfect situation with very specific kinds of coaching, surrounded by talent at OL, RB, TE, and WR... well, yeah, we'd all succeed given that kind of support!  The caveats created for him are cheap and make everything else positive said worthless.  I watched at least parts of four Wyoming games this year, plus the bowl game, because I couldn't understand the hype.  I still don't.  More to the point, if the Browns take a guy like Allen over Rosen or even Darnold, heck maybe even Mayfield, they are simply perpetuating what they've done wrong since Kosar.  Take the the kid who can do it now, not the one with 1000 "if only's" associated with him.

 

As for Chubb to the Colts, sure, it will be a perfect fit and the best DE in the draft, so nobody will criticize.  It's safe for sure.  The question I have is, is Chubb that much better than the other DEs in this draft, as compared to Barkley and other RBs, or Nelson and other OL or Fitzpatrick and other DBs,,,  To me, when in the beautiful position of basically getting your pick of the entire lot of players other than QB, and with a lot of holes to fill, who among those players separates themselves the most?  And the answer to that isn't Chubb to me.  I'm not a hater - if Chubb is the pick, I'll applaud and move on - needed position, best at it, all good.  But I think that what Barkley brings at RB, and what Fitzpatrick brings at DB are so far superior to the next best, that I think you get more bang for your buck taking one of them.  Even Nelson to me is that much better than the next best OL.  But what's holding these three back is some make-believe chart that tells us all when an interior lineman should be picked.  Or RB.  I think that's shortsighted and flawed.  You can't scream BPA and then not take the player because a chart says no OG can be taken in the top 10.  And except for QBs.  Or building up a player like Chubb and trying to make him a Watt because we haven't had one since Freeney.  We are no longer talking about BPA at that point.  Now we're match making at a school dance. 

Yeah, that's the issue for me. He's talented for sure, and he'll be good, but he's not the best. I'm not sure if he's on Bosa or Garrett levels. Both are beasts, and I don't know if Chubb can reach those levels. If he can, I'd take him #3 no questions asked.

 

5 minutes ago, Dr. T said:

In my opinion, the combo of Ballard and McDaniels would never agree to pick Barkley at #3. Again, Ballard is a moneyball guy and knows that RBs statistically don't have enough value if picked that high. Also, McDaniels prefers offenses with running backs by committee, so we need to find someone to pair with Mack, and that person can be found later in the draft. Remember, Mack is a Ballard pick and showed flashes that he could be something special on his own. As a result, Ballard woud not just chuck Mack to the side for Barkley, who will probably be an every down back. Every down backs get beat up, so that is why the running backs by committee approach keeps the RBs fresh, and that can be important, especially later in a game. I think that Ballard would also consider that picking Barkley at #3 would be a waste of one of his draft picks from last year. So, according to this line of thinking, I could only conclude that Ballard and McDaniels will never pick Barkley at #3. Sorry Barkley fans.

I get your point, and agree, but I think Barkley can be used with Mack. Mack is the scat-back that can make big plays after Barkley wears down the defense.

[BOTT]

10 hours ago, OhioColt said:

"During an appearance on 92.3 The Fan on Wednesday (Jan. 10), Albert Breer of the MMQB reported Cousins would "seriously consider" the Browns if he hit free agency (h/t Kyle Kelly of Browns Wire).

 

Cousins, 29, could be an unrestricted free agent in March if he's unable to reach a contract agreement with Washington."

His agent already trying to drive up that price lol

[Dingus McGirt]

1 hour ago, The Peytonator said:

 

The most important thing a quarterback should be able to do is hit his target, and Josh Allen is bad at that. Anyone can see that. It doesn’t take the completely infallible NFL scouts and GMs that have drafted guys like Jamarcus Russell, Ryan Leaf, and Blaine Gabbert in the first round to see it. The only things he is good at is evading pressure, being hard to bring down, and I’ll give him credit for having the balls to throw downfield. Other than that he’s a massive bust if he’s drafted first overall or even in the first round. 

You just described Roethlisberger, eh?

[DaColts85]

1 hour ago, The Peytonator said:

 

The most important thing a quarterback should be able to do is hit his target, and Josh Allen is bad at that. Anyone can see that. It doesn’t take the completely infallible NFL scouts and GMs that have drafted guys like Jamarcus Russell, Ryan Leaf, and Blaine Gabbert in the first round to see it. The only things he is good at is evading pressure, being hard to bring down, and I’ll give him credit for having the balls to throw downfield. Other than that he’s a massive bust if he’s drafted first overall or even in the first round. 

There is always the potential of a bust, no matter where you are drafted.  Comparing him to a JaMarcus Russell of Ryan Leaf is laughable.  If he is drafted #1 overall it is because the people who are paid to know football and have knowledge of that position see him worth it.  If he is not, then he will be picked within the top-10 unless he has a complete disaster of a combine and pro day.  Anything is possible though!

[Buddy Lee]

On 1/18/2018 at 2:21 PM, Restored said:

No way the Colts pass on Barkley if he's there.

I beg to differ

[Restored]

1 hour ago, Dr. T said:

In my opinion, the combo of Ballard and McDaniels would never agree to pick Barkley at #3. Again, Ballard is a moneyball guy and knows that RBs statistically don't have enough value if picked that high. Also, McDaniels prefers offenses with running backs by committee, so we need to find someone to pair with Mack, and that person can be found later in the draft. Remember, Mack is a Ballard pick and showed flashes that he could be something special on his own. As a result, Ballard woud not just chuck Mack to the side for Barkley, who will probably be an every down back. Every down backs get beat up, so that is why the running backs by committee approach keeps the RBs fresh, and that can be important, especially later in a game. I think that Ballard would also consider that picking Barkley at #3 would be a waste of one of his draft picks from last year. So, according to this line of thinking, I could only conclude that Ballard and McDaniels will never pick Barkley at #3. Sorry Barkley fans.

 

Do you really think McDaniels would take a no name RB over one that is projected to be one of the best RB's to come out of the draft in years? Mack could still easily be a part of the offense as well.