BlueShoe

Comp Picks Awarded - Set Draft Order (for Colts)

Recommended Posts

As expected, Colts have no comp picks this year. 

 

Coin flip still to decide 49ers and Raiders. 

 

Colts are picking 3, 36, 67, 104, 140, 178, and 221.

 

NFL Draft Order

 

Compensatory Draft Picks Awarded

 

Third Round
97. Cardinals
98. Texans
99. Broncos
100. Bengals

 

Fourth Round
133. Packers
134. Cardinals
135. Giants
136. Patriots
137. Cowboys

 

Fifth Round
170. Bengals
171. Cowboys
172. Packers
173. Cowboys
174. Packers

 

Sixth Round
207. Packers
208. Cowboys
209. Chiefs
210. Raiders
211. Texans
212. Raiders
213. Vikings
214. Texans
215. Ravens
216. Raiders
217. Raiders
218. Vikings

 

Seventh Round
251. Chargers
252. Bengals
253. Bengals
254. Cardinals
255. Buccaneers
256. Falcons

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may not be thinking straight here, but why is it not pick 35 in the second round? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ColtJ82 said:

I may not be thinking straight here, but why is it not pick 35 in the second round? 

 

Tied teams "cycle picks" beginning in round 2. Houston was the only other 4-12 team, so we should alternate with them (or whoever has the pick).

 

The Colts would be:

 

Round 1 - Pick #3

Round 2 - Pick #4

Round 3 - Pick #3

Round 4 - Pick #4

Round 5 - Pick #3

Round 6 - Pick #4

Round 7 - Pick #3

 

Looks like Football DungeonWalter Football, and Tankathon all have it the same way:

 

Round 1 - Pick #3

Round 2 - Pick #4

Round 3 - Pick #3

Round 4 - Pick #4

Round 5 - Pick #3

Round 6 - Pick #4

Round 7 - Pick #3

 

Barring trades, the Colts picks are set at: 3, 36, 67, 104, 140, 178, and 221.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

For whatever it's worth...   the drafted trade value chart had us picking 3rd and not 4th in R4.

 

They show the Colts picking 103rd and not 104th overall.    Either way, it's not a big deal, just wanted to note the difference..

 

(Still hoping for a RB with that 4th R pick)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Fir whatever it's worth...   the drafted trade value chart had us picking 3rd and not 4th in R4.

 

They show the Colts picking 103rd and not 104th overall.    Either way, it's not a big deal, just wanted to note the difference..

 

(Still hoping for a RB with that 4th R pick)

 

 

Yeah. The NFL has not released anything "official" yet, so people are going off of past "commonly known" rules. At any time a new wrinkle to the rule could surface. 

 

I am pretty sure the Colts draft picks are set at : 3, 36, 67, 104, 140, 178, and 221.

 

We will see soon enough though.

 

I am not targeting any running back for any particular round, but some people look at it that way. I am not as big on positional value as most people are. I target the players I like, and if they are the BPA when it's time to roll, then I'd roll with them. 

 

I am not against taking Barkley at No. 3 or even moving back a couple of times and taking Guice. I am not against using our second on Ronald Jones, Sony Michel, Nick Chubb, or Rashaad Penny. If the Colts front office like any of those players and they are the BPA on the Colts board then I am all for it. 

 

Same thing with guards. If the front office wants to move back and take Nelson then count me in as being pleased. There will probably be some good offensive line talent in the second round too. I won't even get mad if they double up on the OL in the first and the second. There is so much interior offensive line talent in this draft that some first round talent is going to fall.

 

I cannot image a scenario where James Daniels, Billy Price, Isaiah Wynn, and Frank Ragnow are all off the board when we pick at No. 36. In my opinion, all of them are either first round talents or pretty close to it. I might even add Connor Williams to the list of interior offensive linemen on my board soon. Depending on his arm-length at the combine, he might get kicked inside.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BlueShoe said:

Colts are picking 3, 36, 67, 104, 140, 178, and 221.

I actually appreciate our picks being laid out like this because I can cut & paste that order on my computer's desktop for easy reference when the draft rolls around. Thanks Blue Shoe. :hat:

 

I love when things are simple & straightforward with hardly any work required on my end. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BlueShoe said:

I am not against taking Barkley at No. 3 or even moving back a couple of times and taking Guice. I am not against using our second on Ronald Jones, Sony Michel, Nick Chubb, or Rashaad Penny. If the Colts front office like any of those players and they are the BPA on the Colts board then I am all for it. 

In all honesty, it will be nice when INDY finally hands in the draft card for #3 once & for all just to end the suspense for good. Whoever we take, I'll embrace because Ballard is the GM not Grigson anymore. 

 

I really respect what Cris did in Kansas City. He'll get our defense where it needs to be.

 

Besides, I've my thoughts clear on this pick in another thread. Enough said. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I watch ESPN draft coverage, but every once in awhile I did flip over there when NFL Network was on a commercial break. It's gonna be strange not seeing Jon Gruden there anymore. 

 

I always remember how CC1 got a kick out of watching Chucky's eyes light up like a Christmas tree on TV whenever he got excited over somebody. I'm gonna miss that depraved gleam in Gruden's eye too. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

Not that I watch ESPN draft coverage, but every once in awhile I did flip over there when NFL Network was on a commercial break. It's gonna be strange not seeing Jon Gruden there anymore. 

 

I always remember how CC1 got a kick out of watching Chucky's eyes light up like a Christmas tree on TV whenever he got excited over somebody. I'm gonna miss that depraved gleam in Gruden's eye too. :D

:D------Or how every player he has ever seen is going to be a pro bowl player!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, richard pallo said:

 

 

27 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

:D------Or how every player he has ever seen is going to be a pro bowl player!! 

Uh huh, Gruden was definitely known for that. No question.  I'd just say Jon, Jon, Jon; shake my head, & laugh. 

 

Hey, you actually watch the draft with the sound up? Only teasing brother since you like to watch games with the sound off. 

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry BlueShoe, I should be discussing draft selections for us. I usually wait for the best & brightest on here to tell me who we should be going after. Not my strong suit. Thanks for your commentary after the order of our picks though. I like reading your insights. 

 

"I am not against taking Barkley at No. 3 or even moving back a couple of times and taking Guice," 

 

Appreciate that. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

Sorry BlueShoe, I should be discussing draft selections for us. I usually wait for the best & brightest on here to tell me who we should be going after. Not my strong suit. Thanks for your commentary after the order of our picks though. I like reading your insights. 

 

"I am not against taking Barkley at No. 3 or even moving back a couple of times and taking Guice," 

 

Appreciate that. 

 

No worries. You have nothing to apologize about. Thank you for the kind words. :)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, BlueShoe said:

 

No worries. You have nothing to apologize about. Thank you for the kind words. :)

You're welcome my friend. :hat:

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, southwest1 said:

 

Uh huh, Gruden was definitely known for that. No question.  I'd just say Jon, Jon, Jon; shake my head, & laugh. 

 

Hey, you actually watch the draft with the sound up? Only teasing brother since you like to watch games with the sound off. 

 

 

Nah, I just watched bits and pieces later. Shoot, I can't sit that long without taking a nap. :spit:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Cubs game time pushed back to 850pm due to Rain Delay. Brewers and Cards are currently 0-0 in the Bottom of the 1st. I would like to see the Cards win 2 of 3, that would give the Brewers 2 more losses and still give us breathing room from the Cards giving them 1 more loss.
    • I take it as a confidence that the new staff will help the offense be more effective, especially late in games. Not necessarily a knock against Pagano, but definitely a knock on the offensive staff.   Reich still has a lot to prove. I'm hopeful, but we'll see what he does.
    • How would you know this? Serious question not being sarcastic.
    • That is good news.  Recovery now much shorter/easier.
    • I don't think you'll be proven wrong Monday, or at any point this year. I think the defense will be pretty ragged this season, unless a really good pass rush and a 3 tech emerge.   As for the defense in the first preseason game, I disliked some of the alignments. A few times outside corners were 10+ yards off the line of scrimmage, which I hate. I hope we don't see much more of that, especially outside of 3rd and long. But the players in the secondary won't get many chances to make plays unless the front can get stops on early downs and get pressure in passing situations.    I don't have a problem with the scheme. It's not my favorite; I'd prefer a man based coverage philosophy, but zone has it's advantages. On the field, it's more effective at defending mobile QBs; for team building, it's less expensive. The key -- as it is with almost everything -- will be good drafting and good player development. Find good players, and help them succeed. If they don't do one or both of those well, it doesn't matter what scheme they run. But I don't think the scheme itself is flawed. It's had plenty of success, even in the modern NFL.
  • Members