Chubb or Barkley at #3?

[jshipp23]

2 hours ago, IinD said:

I wouldn't look at sack #'s on if he's a good pick in his first year. 

 

Even if he gets pressures it would be a huge improvement. QB's sometimes had time to tie their shoes while dropping back. The secondary can't cover forever.

 

We have to improve our rushing talent. 

 

McD can make an offense work without a stud rb.

 

He can make it work witbout one..What if he has 1 through? ??

[Yoshinator]

19 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

He can make it work witbout one..What if he has 1 through? ??

Then Luck won't be as big of a centerpiece as he should and we'll be a balanced team on offense with no defense. It will be somewhat similar to the Peyton days with Peyton and James, except no Mathis or Freeney. McDaniels offense works perfectly with mid-tier RBs like Dion Lewis, James White and Rex Burkhead. We can duplicate their offense and have a respectable pass rush with Chubb, as opposed to using Barkley as much as Luck and shedding the magic of Luck being a Franchise QB. Luck should be throwing 40-50 times a game, not handing the ball off to the RB. Barkley would be a luxury. RB's are easy to implement in McDaniels system. The pass rush is almost non-existent with only 25 sacks last year. The answer to me is simple.

[2006Coltsbestever]

When it comes to Barkley most think he is a once in a lifetime generational RB like a Barry or Bo or Dickerson. I do, so if we Draft Chubb I expect 10 Sacks. Freeney had 13 his Rookie Season. If we Draft Chubb and he only has 3 or 4 Sacks I don't want to hear the excuses. I will guarantee Barkley will go for 1200+ Yards and catch around 40 passes. If Chubb gets 10+ Sacks then I will say we made the right choice by choosing him.

[Narcosys]

6 hours ago, Coltfreak said:

Sorry my opinion is that your opinion sucks. 

That's fair. Can't argue that lol

[IinD]

8 hours ago, jshipp23 said:

He can make it work witbout one..What if he has 1 through? ??

What @Jared Cisneros said. Saves me typing it. 

 

We've been addicted to offense in Indy, just to make another point on picking D, we've gotta get a solid D to travel to those cold weather cities where your offense doesn't work as well and it's unfair to ALWAYS put it on the O to win a game. It will be exactly like years past where if Peyton had a bad day, we're probably losing.

 

Teams like SEA, NE and PITT over the years have bailed out their QB's. Luck has rarely been allowed to have a bad game and still win.

 

If Ballard can get a couple of G's with that money, whoever our RB's are, they'll look decent. Maybe not Barkley good, but definitely good enough.

[jshipp23]

11 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Then Luck won't be as big of a centerpiece as he should and we'll be a balanced team on offense with no defense. It will be somewhat similar to the Peyton days with Peyton and James, except no Mathis or Freeney. McDaniels offense works perfectly with mid-tier RBs like Dion Lewis, James White and Rex Burkhead. We can duplicate their offense and have a respectable pass rush with Chubb, as opposed to using Barkley as much as Luck and shedding the magic of Luck being a Franchise QB. Luck should be throwing 40-50 times a game, not handing the ball off to the RB. Barkley would be a luxury. RB's are easy to implement in McDaniels system. The pass rush is almost non-existent with only 25 sacks last year. The answer to me is simple.

The idea is to  not have it all on Luck's shoulders, not be 1 dimensional and predictable on offense...Having a back like Barkley will keep defenses honest and off balance..All we really need is 1 good guard , and hopefully it's Norwell...There will be some good edge rushers with high ceiling potential in the top of the 2nd round...If Frank Gore can get 1,000 yards with poor line play, and inept coaching,  imagine what Barkley will do.. 3 down franchise backs usually go in round 1, you can get lucky and get 1 in round 3 or 4, but for the most part backs you get in later rounds are specialist, either scat backs, can't pass block, don't have hands, or are short yardage backs ..3 down workhorses are just as rare as edge rushers, if not rarer..

[Yoshinator]

7 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

The idea is too not have it all on Luck, not be 1 dimensional and predictable on offense...Having a back like Barkley will keep defenses honest and off balance..All we really need is 1 good guard , and hopefully it's Norwell...There will be some good edge rushers with high ceiling potential in the top of the 2nd round...If Frank Gore can get 1,000 yards with poor line play and inept coaching,  imagine what Barkley will do.. 3 down franchise backs usually go in round 1, you can get lucky and get 1 in round 3 or 4, but for the most part backs you get in later rounds are specialist, either scat backs, can't pass block, don't have hands, or are short yardage back..3 down workhorses are just as rare as edge rushers, if not rarer..

Except we don't need a 3rd down workhorse back. We need a double digit sack guy that can get pressure on the QB. All we need are a few RBs that can come and go based on the situation in McDaniels Offense. Mack is one. We can sign one in FA, and draft another in the mid-rounds, and we have our version of the Pats offense. Barkley would be a complete waste in McDaniels systems as it favors multiple RBs, while Chubb would be a 3 down back that could create pressure every down and get double digit sacks every year.

[colt18]

11 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Then Luck won't be as big of a centerpiece as he should and we'll be a balanced team on offense with no defense. It will be somewhat similar to the Peyton days with Peyton and James, except no Mathis or Freeney. McDaniels offense works perfectly with mid-tier RBs like Dion Lewis, James White and Rex Burkhead. We can duplicate their offense and have a respectable pass rush with Chubb, as opposed to using Barkley as much as Luck and shedding the magic of Luck being a Franchise QB. Luck should be throwing 40-50 times a game, not handing the ball off to the RB. Barkley would be a luxury. RB's are easy to implement in McDaniels system. The pass rush is almost non-existent with only 25 sacks last year. The answer to me is simple.

I'm not so sure we should have Luck, who's coming off a major shoulder injury, should be throwing 40-50 times a game...I mean we had him doing that with Grigs/Pags and we saw how that lead to the injury in the first place.

[JColts72]

For years, always asked for a great D player from the draft and now can get one. What if QB falls to 3? take one then?

[JColts72]

Just now, colt18 said:

I'm not so sure we should have Luck, who's coming off a major shoulder injury, should be throwing 40-50 times a game...I mean we had him doing that with Grigs/Pags and we saw how that lead to the injury in the first place.

If Luck is throwing 50 a game, must mean the running game is bad and trying to outscore teams from poor D play.

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, colt18 said:

I'm not so sure we should have Luck, who's coming off a major shoulder injury, should be throwing 40-50 times a game...I mean we had him doing that with Grigs/Pags and we saw how that lead to the injury in the first place.

Well, a lot of passes would be short, screen passes to the rbs and he should be avoiding contact. That's the hope anyway. If McDaniels implements it is another story.

[colt18]

3 minutes ago, JColts72 said:

If Luck is throwing 50 a game, must mean the running game is bad and trying to outscore teams from poor D play.

Either that, or we replaced the running game with screens and RB dumpoffs like Brady.

 

Which I wouldn't be entirely opposed to.

 

 

 

Just now, Jared Cisneros said:

Well, a lot of passes would be short, screen passes to the rbs and he should be avoiding contact. That's the hope anyway. If McDaniels implements it is another story.

 

Ah, I see. Thanks for that. Now I understand, and I agree.

 

[Yoshinator]

6 minutes ago, JColts72 said:

If Luck is throwing 50 a game, must mean the running game is bad and trying to outscore teams from poor D play.

Not necessarily. It could just mean that Luck is taking the Brady or Manning role and dominating like the franchise QB he is supposed to be. Having 3 solid RBs around him that carry the ball 6-8 times a game and can catch the ball would do so much for the pass and run game that it could make up for the lack of WRs after Hilton on the team.  The defense should be better this year with another FA and draft class. Luck wouldn't be throwing 50 passes a game, but he could run up the score like 2014 still and the defense can keep Luck on the field to do so, especially with Chubb creating pressure on the defense. Can't find guys like Chubb in FA.

[jshipp23]

Chubb better be a perennial 10+ sack guy right out the gate to attempt to justify taking him over Barkley who could very well be 1 of best players in NFL period...There are edge guys rated below Chubb we can get in the top of 2nd, who are more dynamic athletes, and very easily could turn out just as good or better than CHUBB...You don't pass on superstar players, that's just dumb regardless of position or need...To be honest the only other guy who is a can't miss and will be a surefire pro bowler is Nelson..Chubb has potential to be great but it's far from a sure thing, he isn't a freak athlete like Myles Garrett was..If it is between Garrett and Barkley I take Garrett, but it's not...When I watch tape of Chubb it doesn't wow me, he isn't that fast, nor is he that quick twitch athlete you can't teach like a Clowney was...

[jshipp23]

When I watch Barkley I say wow, I haven't seen a guy like this before in a looong time..I see Barry freakin Sanders except bigger with more power...

[2006Coltsbestever]

Everyone knows my stance on this. I am taking Barkley if he's there at #3, going all in on Norwell in Free Agency for O.Line help, and with my last 6 Draft picks going all Defense with the exception of another O.Lineman in that mix. I am not passing on the next Marshall Faulk if he's there and I can still build my Defense with 5 or 6 more picks in the same Draft. Barkley would take a lot of pressure off of Luck. I am sick of having to rely on Luck to bail us out all the time. Norwell would be a huge addition to the O.line if we can sign him - show him the money Chris!

[2006Coltsbestever]

I see the voting is 89-74 Chubb, pretty close actually. I like Chubb but don't see the explosive burst that a 3rd pick should have. He doesn't remind me of Freeney or Mathis otherwise I would be all for it. We cant waste this pick because we will never pick this high again.

[Colts_Fan12]

If I have to vote I'll say Chubb but if rather trade out of 3 

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, Colts_Fan12 said:

If I have to vote I'll say Chubb but if rather trade out of 3 

I like Chubb don't get me wrong but just not sure he is Top 3 pick material, Barkley is. We have 6 more picks and high one's in each round to get Defense too. So we will see how this goes.

[Colts_Fan12]

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I like Chubb don't get me wrong but just not sure he is Top 3 pick material, Barkley is. We have 6 more picks and high one's in each round to get Defense too. So we will see how this goes.

Barkleys production can also be found in the mid to late rounds there are way more late round RBs taking over the league 

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, Colts_Fan12 said:

Barkleys production can also be found in the mid to late rounds there are way more late round RBs taking over the league 

A lot of people right now are looking at Defenses ruling as well. Like the Eagles, Vikings, and Jags and I get that. I am too, building a superior Defense is huge and can get you far as witnessed. Having said that, guys like Barkley don't come around often. Yeah we could get a Good back in Round 3 or 4 I agree and remember I said Hunt would be Great but not sure who this years Hunt is? I got lucky by the way with that call because I thought Hunt would be Good but he was actually Great  

[krunk]

47 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

Chubb better be a perennial 10+ sack guy right out the gate to attempt to justify taking him over Barkley who could very well be 1 of best players in NFL period...There are edge guys rated below Chubb we can get in the top of 2nd, who are more dynamic athletes, and very easily could turn out just as good or better than CHUBB...You don't pass on superstar players, that's just dumb regardless of position or need...To be honest the only other guy who is a can't miss and will be a surefire pro bowler is Nelson..Chubb has potential to be great but it's far from a sure thing, he isn't a freak athlete like Myles Garrett was..If it is between Garrett and Barkley I take Garrett, but it's not...When I watch tape of Chubb it doesn't wow me, he isn't that fast, nor is he that quick twitch athlete you can't teach like a Clowney was...

What Guarantees Barkley to Be a Superstar anymore than Chubb other than your or my opinions?  You are pegging that guy for the hall of fame before he even gets here.   There's guys like this every year and it don't always work out that way.

[CheezyColt]

4 minutes ago, krunk said:

What Guarantees Barkley to Be a Superstar anymore than Chubb other than your or my opinions?  You are pegging that guy for the hall of fame before he even gets here.

Because when he watches Barkley play he says wow to himself. He does not say wow to himself when he watches Chubb play. That means HOF and best player in the league, duh!

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, CheezyColt said:

Because when he watches Barkley play he says wow to himself. He does not say wow to himself when he watches Chubb play. That means HOF and best player in the league, duh!

I know you are being sarcastic but anyone that has watched Barkley play knows he will be Great. Anyone that has watched Chubb still has questions. Do you see Dwight Freeney in Chubb? I don't, I see Marshall Faulk on steroids in Barkley.

[jshipp23]

31 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I see the voting is 89-74 Chubb, pretty close actually. I like Chubb but don't see the explosive burst that a 3rd pick should have. He doesn't remind me of Freeney or Mathis otherwise I would be all for it. We cant waste this pick because we will never pick this high again.

Exactly...I feel the same way..Myles Garrett is going to be top 5 pass rusher in NFL next year..I don't see that athletic ability in Chubb..

[jshipp23]

11 minutes ago, krunk said:

What Guarantees Barkley to Be a Superstar anymore than Chubb other than your or my opinions?  You are pegging that guy for the hall of fame before he even gets here.   There's guys like this every year and it don't always work out that way.

There aren't guy's like this every year..This guy is on another level..PLUS he has the mentality and character to go along with it..That can't be missed, character and maturity derails a lot of great players once they get in NFL like Josh Gordon..He is a once in a generation physical talent with the mentality and work ethic to go along with it...

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, jshipp23 said:

There aren't guy's like this every year..This guy is on another level..

I don't see how people don't see this but they don't. When I see Chubb I don't see Freeney, Mathis, etc.. I do think Chubb can be Great but I have my doubts. I know Barkley will be Great, only way Barkley wont is if he gets injured.

[jshipp23]

After watching more edge prospects Arden Key is the one I want over Chubb really..Much higher ceiling. .

[2006Coltsbestever]

11 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

After watching more edge prospects Arden Key is the one I want over Chubb really..Much higher ceiling. .

Key is really Good, he and Chubb are close in talent. I like both.

[Fisticuffs111]

Wow. I meant to vote for Chubb but quickly pressed Barkley thinking it was "Bradley." Anyways, I'd be fine with either. The arguments are valid on both sides but I lean toward the arguments for taking Chubb.

Personally though I'm hoping for an insane trade down offer. I really like this crop of 1st and 2nd round prospects, not to mention the running back prospects in the mid rounds.

I still think it's very possible the Browns take Barkley and #1 and get their QB at #4, but who knows.

[jshipp23]

19 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I don't see how people don't see this but they don't. When I see Chubb I don't see Freeney, Mathis, etc.. I do think Chubb can be Great but I have my doubts. I know Barkley will be Great, only way Barkley wont is if he gets injured.

Key is better than Chubb..I would be okay with Key in 1st and Michel or Guice in 2nd if we go that route..

[CheezyColt]

22 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I know you are being sarcastic but anyone that has watched Barkley play knows he will be Great. Anyone that has watched Chubb still has questions. Do you see Dwight Freeney in Chubb? I don't, I see Marshall Faulk on steroids in Barkley.

I do agree Barkley has the potential to be great. I don't dispute that. What I do dispute is the notion that he would provide more of an improvement to our team as a whole than a great pass rusher. Furthermore, the difference in impact from a 2nd tier running back compared to a top tier one is much smaller, imo, than the difference in impact between top/2nd tier pass rushers. That discrepancy in replacement value is where I, and many others I presume, have an issue with being told RB is the only way to go here.

[Fisticuffs111]

Key has some serious question marks off the field, especially the dedication to the game questions. I wouldn't want him in the 1st even in a trade down.

Ballard doesn't seem like the type to take a risk on Key, at least not in the 1st.

[jshipp23]

1 minute ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Key has some serious question marks off the field, especially the whole dedication to the game thing. I wouldn't want him in the 1st even in a trade down.

Ballard doesn't seem like the type to take a risk on Key, at least not in the 1st.

Yeah it's risky from that aspect I agree....Just watching them both Key looks like the better player...Maybe we get lucky and he falls to us early 2nd....

[krunk]

29 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

There aren't guy's like this every year..This guy is on another level..

There's guys every single season who everyone says "He's a Generational RB".  Usually the back that's pegged to be the top runner in the draft.  They said the same type of stuff about Ricky Williams and many other backs.  Doesnt guarantee they'll be what we think they are.  Nobody is guaranteed.

[jshipp23]

3 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Key has some serious question marks off the field, especially the whole dedication to the game thing. I wouldn't want him in the 1st even in a trade down.

Ballard doesn't seem like the type to take a risk on Key, at least not in the 1st.

That's what I love about Barkley, you don't have that risk with him...He is gonna come in and put in work...

[krunk]

31 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I don't see how people don't see this but they don't. When I see Chubb I don't see Freeney, Mathis, etc.. I do think Chubb can be Great but I have my doubts. I know Barkley will be Great, only way Barkley wont is if he gets injured.

You're not supposed to see Freeney when you watch Chubb.  It's like looking for Freeney watching Reggie White.   They are two different rushers!   And for that matter Freeney didn't get drafted at 3 either so I don't know what you'd be looking for that would satisfy.   I'm not going to be mad if we select either or, but I'm not going to make up silly stuff just to puff up the attributes of the other player.  Not saying that is you.

[jshipp23]

2 minutes ago, krunk said:

You're not supposed to see Freeney when you watch Chubb.  It's like looking for Freeney watching Reggie White.   They are two different rushers!  

What are your thoughts on Arden Key, NFL player comparison? 

[jshipp23]

5 minutes ago, krunk said:

There's guys every single season who everyone says "He's a Generational RB".  Usually the back that's pegged to be the top runner in the draft.  They said the same type of stuff about Ricky Williams and many other backs.  Doesnt guarantee they'll be what we think they are.  Nobody is guaranteed.

Honestly Ricky Williams was a MONSTER, he had some good years..His character issues killed his career,  didn't love the game or he would've been all time great..I don't see Barkley having that problem..

[krunk]

16 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

Honestly Ricky Williams was a MONSTER, he had some good years..His character issues killed his career,  didn't love the game or he would've been all time great..I don't see Barkley having that problem..

Yeah but you didn't know that until he got in the league.   Ricky Williams was spotless coming out of college as far as I know.  But he won't be in the Hall of Fame mainly because of the stuff we didn't know about him coming out of school.    I do think Barkley will be very good and I really won't be upset if we take him.  However I think Chubb is very good as well.   I think he's better than Key.   Problem is I don't think Key will be there by the time we hit the second round.   I think Key is every bit as good as Leonard Floyd and he went high in the 1st round.   I can't see Key going in the Round 2.  I think he goes in Round 1.  But thats just my opinion.  My other issue with taking Barkley is the offensive system is RBBC.   That's what Mcdaniels and the Pats have always employed.   I think if you know you want to use multiple backs then you place less value on having one guy tote the rock 30 times a game.  Knowing that I'd personally go with the elite pass rusher.   But I think we will get better as a team with either selection.