Spending a top-20 pick on a RB is one of the worst decisions a team can make

[Trueman]

2 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

I respect your position BOTT. I'm not trying to coerce anyone to my POV.

 

I"m just getting tired of new posters always having to be right especially after I told him politely, I might add. that he & I will never see eye to eye on Barkley. Some people can't take a hint apparently. 

What? 

 

You responded to me. With a question , I might add. Was I not supposed to say anything?

 

Do I have to have a certain amount of posts before I say anything? 

[BOTT]

4 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

I respect your position BOTT. I'm not trying to coerce anyone to my POV.

 

I"m just getting tired of new posters always having to be right especially after I told him politely, I might add. that he & I will never see eye to eye on Barkley. Some people can't take a hint apparently. 

No worries, we only have a couple more months to hash this out lol.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

1 minute ago, BOTT said:

That's not true at all

 

J. Jenkens was a shutdown corner. Rams didn't want to pay him Top CB money and tje Giants signed him. How many LBers dod polian let walk. Patriots dp it all the time. Was Nadamaka Suh drafted by lions or dolphins? 

It happens.

 

 

[PrincetonTiger]

12 minutes ago, BOTT said:

That was poor play calling on atlanta's part. They have a damn good rb and just wouldn't give him the ball.

Feel the same way about Jax but about a certain local WR

[Trueman]

8 minutes ago, BOTT said:

Beat me to it.

Apparently I should've just let you beat me instead. 

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, Trueman said:

Apparently I should've just let you beat me instead. 

We were all new here once

[southwest1]

It's fine PT. No one is gonna lose an eye or anything. LOL! Just a difference of opinion that's all. By tomorrow, this will be forgotten. 

[PrincetonTiger]

Just now, southwest1 said:

It's fine PT. No one is gonna lose an eye or anything. LOL! Just a difference of opinion that's all. By tomorrow, this will be forgotten. 

Forgot because it is Saturday 

[BOTT]

5 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

J. Jenkens was a shutdown corner. Rams didn't want to pay him Top CB money and tje Giants signed him. How many LBers dod polian let walk. Patriots dp it all the time. Was Nadamaka Suh drafted by lions or dolphins? 

It happens.

 

 

It happens....but saying they don't want to pay anyone is a gross exaggeration.

 

polian didn't sign any of those linebackers because they werent anything special.

 

patriots are an exception to almost every rule. And they usually let premier players walk due to age or being problems.

 

And the lions offered Suh enough money to make him the highest paid defensive player in the league....Miami just offered more.

 

[Trueman]

5 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

We were all new here once

Yeah, apparently the validity of opinion is based solely on tenure. 

 

Nice. I didn't realize there was an initiation process to a forum about football. 

 

not only do I "have to be right" , but yesterday I was "acting like I own this forum" and  "routinely insulting" posters. Which wasn't the case at all.

 

How many of these are you gunna throw my way Southwest?

[southwest1]

9 minutes ago, Trueman said:

Apparently I should've just let you beat me instead. 

I suppose that's my cue to apologize to you. I get that you were just trying to clarify your position & perhaps I did misinterpret your Elway/ Terrell Davis point.  I will own that. My bad. 

 

By the same token, when another member tells you that they will never see eye to eye with you on a draft selection, it may not be wise to bring up phrases like you don't need elite backs in order to win more than once. You made you point. I made mine. Move on. Just a suggestion. 

 

Hope that clears the air. 

[Trueman]

7 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

I suppose that's my cue to apologize to you. I get that you were just trying to clarify your position & perhaps I did misinterpret your Elway/ Terrell Davis point.  I will own that. My bad. 

 

By the same token, when another member tells you that they will never see eye to eye with you on a draft selection, it may not be wise to bring up phrases like you don't need elite backs in order to win more than once. You made you point. I made mine. Move on. Just a suggestion. 

 

Hope that clears the air. 

Yeah , or you could just say "fair point" or "no I don't agree" , and that would be the end of it.

 

But instead you made a passive-aggressive remark about me being a hot-shot new poster. As if a football forum needs some kind of "right of passage".

 

Giving tips on how to deal with you is ridiculous. Just be normal to me and I'll be normal with you. Jesus. 

[southwest1]

10 minutes ago, Trueman said:

Yeah, apparently the validity of opinion is based solely on tenure. 

 

Nice. I didn't realize there was an initiation process to a forum about football. 

 

not only do I "have to be right" , but yesterday I was "acting like I own this forum" and  "routinely insulting" posters. Which wasn't the case at all.

 

How many of these are you gunna throw my way Southwest?

Wow just wow...It's isn't necessarily a tenure component Trueman . It's a credibility factor based on the number of posts, the quality of those posts meaning how many people quote you or like what you say, the discussions that new threads create in terms of feedback, getting along with the moderators, & resolving differences peacefully which is what a members community reputation is based on. 

 

You really don't see how the reaction you received from other patrons not just me when you started contributing here may not have been warmly received? O Kay....Fine. 

 

"How many of these are you gunna throw my way Southwest?" 

 

Please...I mentioned you like twice in a less than glowing fashion sir. Hardly, the verbal assault your making it out to be.  We both know that. 

 

Usually, new posters lay low, observe, get the lay of the land before they start creating posts they may raise a few eyebrows around here. Controversy is fine just don't be surprised when folks see things differently that's all. 

 

You are hardly being attacked, insulted, or surpassed in any way by little ole me. Lighten up. 

[southwest1]

49 minutes ago, Trueman said:

Yeah , or you could just say "fair point" or "no I don't agree" , and that would be the end of it.

 

But instead you made a passive-aggressive remark about me being a hot-shot new poster. As if a football forum needs some kind of "right of passage".

 

Giving tips on how to deal with you is ridiculous. Just be normal to me and I'll be normal with you. Jesus. 

Actually, the forum is structured in a rookie & senior poster setting Trueman. It may not be a rite of passage classification perse ,but there is a reason moderators use those designations to separate regulars who have earned their reputation on this site for a yr or more & those individuals still earning their stripes or forum reputations as it were. 

 

I did apologize to you earlier in this thread because I shouldn't take anyone out of context rookie or veteran poster. Sorry about that. 

 

I'm just gonna pretend the last sentence of you post doesn't exist because no good can come from replying to that. 

[Trueman]

10 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

Actually, the forum is structured in a rookie & senior poster setting Trueman. It may not be a rite of passage classification perse ,but there is a reason moderators use those designations to separate regulars who have earned their reputation on this site for a yr or more & those individuals still earning their stripes or forum reputations as it were. 

 

 

 

37 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

Usually, new posters lay low, observe, get the lay of the land before they start creating posts they may raise a few eyebrows around here. Controversy is fine just don't be surprised when folks see things differently that's all. 

 

"It's fine to have contrary opinions just try not to ruffle feathers with regulars that have at least 1,000 posts. They are entitled to a high degree of respect that was earned & you'll reach that plateau eventually too"

 

"It's a credibility factor based on the number of posts, the quality of those posts meaning how many people quote you or like what you say, the discussions that new threads create in terms of feedback, getting along with the moderators, & resolving differences peacefully which is what a members community reputation is based on. "

 

 

None of this sounds crazy to you, does it?

[crazycolt1]

2 hours ago, BOTT said:

That was poor play calling on atlanta's part. They have a damn good rb and just wouldn't give him the ball.

Hell, Atlanta has two good RBs that work very well together.

[krunk]

8 hours ago, jshipp23 said:

So do they need offensive linemen, wide receivers, defensive tackles, cornerbacks, linebackers, or safetys??? I mean RB is the least important,  most easily filled position though??

I'm just saying Clevelands cupboard is not bare at pass rusher. For the most part why would they choose any of the other positions you listed when the rankings are not close? That may or may not be true that the RB position is perceived as less important, but you're still comparing apples to apples Talent Wise. And I have no doubt Barkley is one of the top talents in this draft. Where I disagree on the issue is when it comes to Chubb. I do not believe Barkley is significantly better. Actually based on last years draft there is more evidence to take Chubb at #3. People are putting Barkley in the Hall of Fame way too fast.

 

Production wise when it comes to Barkley Shipp I could do what you do and play this like we are getting Christian Mccaffrey. Matter of fact I think Mccaffrey had better numbers. And guess what he wasn't drafted at #3. He was drafted at #8. I bet you other teams are also using Mccafrey as the Marker. So since I can't get significantly better than Mccafrey then give me Chubb. If we use Bosa as the marker from last years draft then we see very equal college production from Chubb. Bosa as we all know went #3. Also as i previously showed we can definitely put up a bunch of points without Barkley. Personally if I were Ballard id be trying to swing a deal for Tevin Coleman. Many of the same attributes are there and we know he can play. Indiana boy, 4.3 speed on turf. Can catch, block and run. Would be great tandem with Mack. Bring in Blount to pound the rock. That's my stance!

[Superman]

6 hours ago, NFLfan said:

 

You are a strong proponent of drafting BPA (Best Player Available). A couple of years ago when many here were upset about the Dorsett pick, you strongly defended it on the basis that it was BPA. Many wanted a defensive player (Landon Collins, Kendricks, Mack Brown), but you liked the pick. 

 

If Barkley turns out to be BPA when the Colts are on the clock, why are you so opposed to the Colts selecting him?

 

Btw, has the Forum ever created its own Big Board? Perhaps the Forum can have a daily poll and members can vote on the best player available from a list of, say, 10 to 15 players. The player with the most votes at the end of the day is added to the board. If this is done daily until draft day, about 60 players will be on the board. It is just an idea.

 

That wasn't really my position on Dorsett. You're remembering me disagreeing with a bunch of sensationalism about the Dorsett pick, but I wasn't really a fan of the pick, and I said as much. Everyone else was screaming about how 'We don't need receivers, we just signed Andre Johnson and Duron Carter!' or 'This means we're not going to re-sign Hilton!' or 'We just gave up 7,000 rushing yards to the Patriots, we need defense!' etc. My point was more that everyone was being ridiculous than it was that Dorsett was the right pick for the Colts.

 

For instance: http://forums.colts.com/topic/38046-colts-select-phillip-dorsett-29-mega-merge/?page=11

 

I defended the strategy behind the pick, which was basically 'don't reach past your 16th ranked player because he doesn't play a position of perceived need to draft your 30th ranked player because he plays a position of perceived need.' I also thought Dorsett would perform better than he did -- I still think Colts did a terrible job deploying him, but the Pats didn't get anything out of him either -- so I was wrong about his ability, just like the Colts were. Bad scouting undermines good draft strategy.

 

"BPA" has come to be a misnomer. My thinking is scout honestly, stick to your board, don't reach for need, maximize value. 

 

I don't think drafting a RB at #3 is maximizing value, for several reasons. In a nutshell, individual RBs don't have very high value, even really good RBs, and using a very rare draft pick for any RB isn't a good use of that pick. I also don't think the NFL is kind to RBs, and even very good RBs aren't likely to perform at a high level for more than 3-4 seasons.

 

And, it's become pretty clear that many Barkley fans aren't being honest about their evaluation of Barkley at this point. The Hyperbole Machine is in full force right now, and people are pretending they know Barkley will be the next all time great RB, which is unknowable. Statistically speaking, Barkley is more likely to be a journeyman player than a HOFer, but there's no allowance made for the possibility that Barkley winds up being even above average. 

 

The big board idea is a good one. We've done mock drafts, maybe we'll do a big board this year. I'd rather wait until after the Combine.

[Superman]

12 hours ago, jshipp23 said:

They don't understand and NEVER will..lol..Glad someone sees it..

 

Sees what... the future?

[Superman]

6 hours ago, Aaron86 said:

I don't know why the RB position is less important then the next.

 

Pats do not win the SB with out blunt, Philly does not win with out Blunt, Seahawks do not win without Lynch. I can't remember any team winning without a respectable running game.

 

It makes no sense to me why some people think picking a RB is a waste in the first. We need teams to learn to fear and respect our running game. 

 

Also I will be just as stoked if we get Chubb. I just want us to take the best player available and not worry about the position. 

 

The Pats got Blount for a 7th rounder and a former track star. The Seahawks got Lynch for a 4th and a 5th. You're illustrating why you don't need to spend a first rounder on a RB.

[Superman]

14 hours ago, JMichael557 said:

If a RB is irrelevant then why do teams put 8 men in the box to stop the run

 

Why do play action passes work? 

 

Statistically, the success of play action isn't very closely related to the strength of a team's rushing offense.

 

Take the 2016 Vikings. Adrian Peterson missed most of the season, McKinnon (3rd rounder) and Matt Asiata (UDFA) split carries. They averaged about 3.2 yards/carry. They used play action on 19% of their pass plays, and they averaged 3.2 yards more per pass play when using play action, which was the biggest differential in the league.

 

The 2016 Steelers only averaged 1.4 yards more per play action pass, and they have one of the best RBs in the league. The 2016 Cowboys only averaged 1.8 yards more per play action pass.

 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/2016-play-action-offense

[LJpalmbeacher2]

4 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Hell, Atlanta has two good RBs that work very well together.

 

Yeah, and one of them, Coleman, should have been ours. 

[NFLfan]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

That wasn't really my position on Dorsett. You're remembering me disagreeing with a bunch of sensationalism about the Dorsett pick, but I wasn't really a fan of the pick, and I said as much. Everyone else was screaming about how 'We don't need receivers, we just signed Andre Johnson and Duron Carter!' or 'This means we're not going to re-sign Hilton!' or 'We just gave up 7,000 rushing yards to the Patriots, we need defense!' etc. My point was more that everyone was being ridiculous than it was that Dorsett was the right pick for the Colts.

 

For instance: http://forums.colts.com/topic/38046-colts-select-phillip-dorsett-29-mega-merge/?page=11

 

I defended the strategy behind the pick, which was basically 'don't reach past your 16th ranked player because he doesn't play a position of perceived need to draft your 30th ranked player because he plays a position of perceived need.' I also thought Dorsett would perform better than he did -- I still think Colts did a terrible job deploying him, but the Pats didn't get anything out of him either -- so I was wrong about his ability, just like the Colts were. Bad scouting undermines good draft strategy.

 

"BPA" has come to be a misnomer. My thinking is scout honestly, stick to your board, don't reach for need, maximize value. 

 

I don't think drafting a RB at #3 is maximizing value, for several reasons. In a nutshell, individual RBs don't have very high value, even really good RBs, and using a very rare draft pick for any RB isn't a good use of that pick. I also don't think the NFL is kind to RBs, and even very good RBs aren't likely to perform at a high level for more than 3-4 seasons.

 

Okay. Your opinion was more nuanced than what I remembered. I get it. Thanks.

 

How do you assess value? Do you think drafting WR early is good value? I see WRs the way you see RBs. I think you can find great WRs in lower rounds. I think OL may have the most value, as the play of the OL impacts the passing game and the running game. A strong OL makes a mediocre QB look like a great player. It protects your QB (the position considered the most "valuable"). A good OL also improves time of possession and gives the offense more options. Yet, most people do not put as much value on OL as they do skill players and pass rushers. Why aren't offensive linemen being selected earlier? 

 

Those who like Barkley see a special player who would force opposing defenses to pay attention to him and put less pressure on Luck. They see value in that. So, just as you understood the Dorsett pick, I understand why Colts fans would want Barkley... Nelson would be my pick. It is about time the Colts start to protect their QBs.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, NFLfan said:

 

Okay. Your opinion was more nuanced than what I remembered, but I get it.

 

How do you assess value? Do you think drafting WR early is good value? I see WRs the way you see RBs. I think you can find great WRs in lower rounds. I think OL may have the most value, as the play of the OL impacts the passing game and the running game. A strong OL makes a mediocre QB look like a great player. It protects your QB (the position considered the most "valuable"). A good OL also improves time of possession and gives the offense more options. Yet, most people do not put as much value on OL as they do skill players and pass rushers. Why aren't offensive linemen being selected earlier? 

 

Those who like Barkley see a special player who would force opposing defenses to pay attention to him and put less pressure on Luck. They see value in that. So, just as you understood the Dorsett pick, I understand why Colts fans would want Barkley... Nelson would be my pick. It is about time the Colts start to protect their QBs.

If I had the pick I would still take Barkley but Nelson would be my 2nd choice, then Chubb my 3rd choice. Let me be clear I will be happy with any of the 3. If Barkley wasn't in this Draft I would agree with the people that say taking a RB at #3 is a bad move but he is in this Draft. Remember last season I was all over people that wanted a RB in the 1st Round. I wanted Kareem Hunt in Round 3. Barkley is the BPA in the Draft and not sure anyone can debate that. If he's not there at #3 then it has to be Nelson or Chubb IMO. Taking a Guard at #3 is risky and uncommon but I am tired of Luck getting beat up every week.

[NFLfan]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Taking a Guard at #3 is risky and uncommon but I am tired of Luck getting beat up every week.

 

You may be right -- fans won't like it. That is because folks don't put enough value on offensive linemen. That may change in years to come, as the QB position continues to grow in value and QBs need to be protected... Here you have a great QB in Luck and he is given all these weapons (receivers) but the team does not invest in players to protect him (prior to 2016).

 

I was looking at the Colts 2015 draft (the Dorsett draft). Only one offensive lineman was selected...in the 7th round!! This is despite Luck having taken a beating the previous season.

 

It is a long time until the draft. Much can change until then. You may be selecting Edmunds or Fitzpatrick, if found to be BPA. 

[Colts_Fan12]

16 hours ago, jshipp23 said:

Which is why Barkley is different than Gurley, Elliot, and Fournette.....He is an elite RB who also has elite receiving ability...He can make gamechanging plays on the ground, and through the air..

And the other 3 don't? Hell Elliot catches balls a lot 

[jshipp23]

6 hours ago, krunk said:

I'm just saying Clevelands cupboard is not bare at pass rusher. For the most part why would they choose any of the other positions you listed when the rankings are not close? That may or may not be true that the RB position is perceived as less important, but you're still comparing apples to apples Talent Wise. And I have no doubt Barkley is one of the top talents in this draft. Where I disagree on the issue is when it comes to Chubb. I do not believe Barkley is significantly better. Actually based on last years draft there is more evidence to take Chubb at #3. People are putting Barkley in the Hall of Fame way too fast.

 

Production wise when it comes to Barkley Shipp I could do what you do and play this like we are getting Christian Mccaffrey. Matter of fact I think Mccaffrey had better numbers. And guess what he wasn't drafted at #3. He was drafted at #8. I bet you other teams are also using Mccafrey as the Marker. So since I can't get significantly better than Mccafrey then give me Chubb. If we use Bosa as the marker from last years draft then we see very equal college production from Chubb. Bosa as we all know went #3. Also as i previously showed we can definitely put up a bunch of points without Barkley. Personally if I were Ballard id be trying to swing a deal for Tevin Coleman. Many of the same attributes are there and we know he can play. Indiana boy, 4.3 speed on turf. Can catch, block and run. Would be great tandem with Mack. Bring in Blount to pound the rock. That's my stance!

Fair enough...Not a bad idea at all..I like Coleman, that could work..

[Aaron86]

4 hours ago, Superman said:

 

The Pats got Blount for a 7th rounder and a former track star. The Seahawks got Lynch for a 4th and a 5th. You're illustrating why you don't need to spend a first rounder on a RB.

My point was RBs are valuable in any round of the draft.

 

Saturday was UDFA and turned out amazing and Kelly was picked in the first.

 

Lynch also was a first rounder from Buffalo.

 

I'm not advocating for Barkley but to say he not worth the pick, in my mind is absurd. 

 

I trust Ballard will do the right thing. 

[jshipp23]

34 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

And the other 3 don't? Hell Elliot catches balls a lot 

It's different with Barkley, he can play the slot and be used as a WR and run downfield routes...

[Colts_Fan12]

24 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

It's different with Barkley, he can play the slot and be used as a WR and run downfield routes...

We will see he could also be Trent Richardson or Doug Martin 

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

We will see he could also be Trent Richardson or Doug Martin 

Yeah and Chubb could be Werner. 9 times out of 10 I think taking a RB is a bad move in Round 1 so I agree with most people it is. I didn't want the Colts to take a RB in Round 1 the last 2 seasons and was all over people that wanted guys like Dalvin Cook and McCaffrey early. In this case Barkley is a cant miss prospect IMO. I seriously doubt he is the next Trent Rich. I see him being every bit as great as Zeke.

[2006Coltsbestever]

We need to find ways to take the pressure off of Luck having to do everything on Offense in order for us to win.

[PrincetonTiger]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

We need to find ways to take the pressure off of Luck having to do everything on Offense in order for us to win.

Picking a shiny toy is not the answer especially if the other problems are not fixed

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, PrincetonTiger said:

Picking a shiny toy is not the answer especially if the other problems are not fixed

Well that shiny toy is real damn shiny

[2006Coltsbestever]

I will say this to the people that want Chubb, Luck is undefeated in his career when we hold teams below 19 points. So having a Great Defense is huge and I get that but just not sure Chubb will be Great. I am more sure about Barkley and that is where my problem lays.

[PrincetonTiger]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Well that shiny toy is real damn shiny

Let it shine in Cleveland

 

 

   With the issues RG left CB

picking Barkley is like putting a band aid on a compound fracture 

[2006Coltsbestever]

I really hope if we take Chubb he ends up dominating. I thought Joey Bosa would be a bust so I am wrong quite a bit. I was way wrong on that one but even Superman thought he wouldn't be any good either. I don't think Chubb will be a bust so it's not that drastic, I just question his greatness.

[PrincetonTiger]

8 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I will say this to the people that want Chubb, Luck is undefeated in his career when we hold teams below 19 points. So having a Great Defense is huge and I get that but just not sure Chubb will be Great. I am more sure about Barkley and that is where my problem lays.

With the issues the Colts have the franchise cannot afford to pick SB if guys like Chubb, Nelson or Fitzpatrick who IMO fill more important needs

 

  

[PrincetonTiger]

IMO Barkley is a pick that the Colts do not have the luxury to pick

[Colts_Fan12]

44 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah and Chubb could be Werner. 9 times out of 10 I think taking a RB is a bad move in Round 1 so I agree with most people it is. I didn't want the Colts to take a RB in Round 1 the last 2 seasons and was all over people that wanted guys like Dalvin Cook and McCaffrey early. In this case Barkley is a cant miss prospect IMO. I seriously doubt he is the next Trent Rich. I see him being every bit as great as Zeke.

You do know Trent was a "can't miss prospect"