Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.
Announcements
-
-
Thread of the Week
-
-
Topics
-
-
Posts
-
By 2006Coltsbestever · Posted
I would think about giving them the #34 which is a good trade for both teams, then if we do draft a WR at 26 that would make sense. -
I think you offer them #34 and that's it...... maybe add the compensation 4th rounder. You'd absolutely have to be happy with netting Q. Nelson, Frank Clark (and a big contract) Braden Smith, and Kemoko Turay and Jordan Willis (last 22 from trading jets #52 pick  All for moving from 3 to 6 last year......  Don't know if someone will beat an offer of #34 and second 4th rounder...... but I'd absolutely throw it on the table and see. Clark is an awesome talent at a near impossible position to fill via trade.... he's 25, produced at a high level, very healthy over his career.... not a big locker room issue. Those are the guys you hope to draft so you CAN pay them big money to keep.... so I view the big contract as a given, a necessary evil. The Colts dream of having a DE that is good enough to necessitate a huge contract, here is one, go get him. -
Well, I appreciate you straightening out the information. That still isn't the number of possible schedules, it's just the number they created based on the financial needs mixed with the venue availability issues and other stuff.  There are some horrendous schedules for certain teams out there. Whatever human intervention took place, they clearly didn't care about screwing teams. Oakland and Tampa got it the worst and it was needless. But money is all that matters, not the health of the players or fairness of competition. That much is clear.  -
I didn't suggest anything. I'm just saying that by applying you logic to everyone on the roster, we shouldn't need to upgrade anything. Or does that just hold true to WR?
-
Simple. It means we need to continue to look elsewhere for someone ready to play out of the box. Someone who shines, even if its just as a rookie. I would suggest the draft and we hope that Cain's brief spark before injury was more than fools gold. Johnson and Paschal had brief moments where they appeared capable but certainly were far from Elite talent. Rogers and the rest of the guys on the roster after Hilton and Funchess seem like cannon fodder for the most part. We need elite talent. We need elite speed. We need elite hands. We need elite route running. In essence, we need SOMETHING to be elite about our qualified #2 and #3. I didn't see anything that suggested "Elite" from any of these guys last year. Did you? Someone will be #2 even if they're terrible. There WILL be a #2. What I think most people hope for is that the #2 has something elite, if not many things elite about their skill set. Outside of Hilton, that isn't a word that applies to the backups from last year and camp bodies.   Are you going on the record to say we have our full time, long term #2 and eventual #1 when Hilton is gone on the roster? Who would that be? And no matter how you answer, using your criteria, what supposed practical value is that supposed to have?   What practical value does my opinion have? At least the same value as any opinion you or anyone else shares.  None of us have power over the team. The point of a message board is to post opinions and discuss. You apparently disagree with my statement, so let's hear who our #2 elite talent is among the scrubs? Settling for a #2 without elite talent is what we did last year. Ryan Grant was devoid of anything elite and it showed.   Questions?Â
-
-
Members
-
