Bradley Chubb to meet with Colts

[ColtsBlitz]

 

[NorthernBlue]

I'm sure they'll meet with all the top prospects

[MPStack]

It's that simple!

[Yoshinator]

Not surprised. There's a high chance we get Chubb IMO. I think it's more likely now than before the combine that the Browns or Giants take Barkley now.

[MPStack]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Not surprised. There's a high chance we get Chubb IMO. I think it's more likely now than before the combine that the Browns or Giants take Barkley now.

I think its money in the bank, unless the Browns, Giants or a team trades up to get him. Also, Ballard stated its highly doubtful the Colts trade back. The Giants and Browns also have pass rushers on their respective rosters. With that being said, I think as long as Chubb is available at #3 overall, he's going to be a Colt. I'm all for it.

[TdungyW/12]

Draft him! 

 

We can get a RB in the 3rd.

 

sign the 2 FA linemen and we r good! 

[Maniac]

I think I've settled on Chubb @ #3.

 

Barkley and Nelson are tempting, but I think there are good players in those positions that will be available at 36 and 67. 

 

I'm on board with Chubb now.

[NewColtsFan]

 

This is as good a place as any to put this...........

 

Among the things that I like most about Chubb,  beyond his ability to rush the QB and stop the run are these....

 

One,  it is said he is great in the locker-room...   a team leader....    a good guy....

 

Two,  on the field,  he has my favorite quality --- especially for a defensive player --- a non-stop motor!     I love that.   And those are hard to find.      Guys WITH talent and ability and the right attitude AND a non-stop motor.   

 

Sign!    Me!     Up.

 

All that said....    as I have noted a number of times,   if we take someone else,  I will support the decision because I trust Ballard.       And if we trade back a small amount and take someone else....   well....   same.

 

I just hope we are not trading back too far....    we won't know until draft night......    so,  we will see....

 

Just wanted to share the above.....

 

p.s. --- oh, and for those who want more....    here is Chubb's NFL.com profile...

Scroll down....   about 1/2 way down is a LONG section on strengths...  followed by a

short section on weaknesses.        Enjoy!!

 

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/bradley-chubb?id=32462018-0002-5600-4365-bb46dbbd3505

 

[stitches]

12 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

This is as good a place as any to put this...........

 

Among the things that I like most about Chubb,  beyond his ability to rush the QB and stop the run are these....

 

One,  it is said he is great in the locker-room...   a team leader....    a good guy....

 

Two,  on the field,  he has my favorite quality --- especially for a defensive player --- a non-stop motor!     I love that.   And those are hard to find.      Guys WITH talent and ability and the right attitude AND a non-stop motor.   

 

Sign!    Me!     Up.

 

All that said....    as I have noted a number of times,   if we take someone else,  I will support the decision because I trust Ballard.       And if we trade back a small amount and take someone else....   well....   same.

 

I just hope we are not trading back too far....    we won't know until draft night......    so,  we will see....

 

Just wanted to share the above.....

 

I feel the same way. I am still a bit queasy about his testing. I want to see him test well. So much of pass-rush in the league is tied to athleticism that I cannot ignore it if he doesn't test well. This is why I've been making this caveat constantly in the "who would you rather have" variation of threads. I'm sold on Chubb in every respect that is known so far - leadership, on-field tape, size and physical attributes, hell he's a bit of a goofball and character - something we've been missing since McAfee retired... one by one he's checking all the boxes but the one that I have most questions about is still there and will be answered tomorrow. I don't need him to be Myles Garrett level athlete... he obviously isn't that. I need him to be around Bosa level... I'd be OK with him even if he comes close but doesn't beat Bosa. Those are the ones I'm looking at:

 

3cone - under 7s

short shuttle - under 4.4

broad jump - around 120"... ideally over but I wouldn't knock him if he comes at say... 118...

10 yard split - under 1.7

I don't care much for the 40 but if he goes in the 4.7s or low 4.8s that would be good. 

[krunk]

To each his own I guess. The testing is really not that big a concern for me because I've seen him on film way too many times whipping NFL caliber linemen. The athleticism thing is a myth. I mean what do you want the guy to do? Start hitting back flips and round offs? I'm tired of the Not Bosa, Not Garrett type comments. This guy gets plenty of sacks and hes in the backfield causing havoc way more than Miles Garrett and more than Bosa. Check his numbers. The guy creates many TFLs. That's what's impressive to me because it tells you hes very hard to block. It tells me he penetrates a whole lot and wrecks plays. It tells me with a tweek here or there he can go from 10 sacks to 14 sacks. It tells me he got back there and maybe missed a couple sacks. But yet hes still not Garrett and Bosa! Him being Bradley Chubb is just fine for me.

[stitches]

41 minutes ago, krunk said:

To each his own I guess. The testing is really not that big a concern for me because I've seen him on film way too many times whipping NFL caliber linemen. The athleticism thing is a myth. I mean what do you want the guy to do? Start hitting back flips and round offs? I'm tired of the Not Bosa, Not Garrett type comments. This guy gets plenty of sacks and hes in the backfield causing havoc way more than Miles Garrett and more than Bosa. Check his numbers. The guy creates many TFLs. That's what's impressive to me because it tells you hes very hard to block. It tells me he penetrates a whole lot and wrecks plays. It tells me with a tweek here or there he can go from 10 sacks to 14 sacks. It tells me he got back there and maybe missed a couple sacks. But yet hes still not Garrett and Bosa! Him being Bradley Chubb is just fine for me.

I actually think he compares to Bosa on tape. He wins in similar ways. I am one of the biggest proponents of Chubb on here and I've been saying he's much closer to Bosa than people think, but I also believe that athleticism matters in the league, especially for the pass-rushers. It's not a myth, there is actually a strong correlation between great athletic/physical tests and success in the league. This is why I don't dismiss the tests. Yes his tape is as good as anything Bosa/Garrett has put out in college, but you need to know if this will translate against bigger, faster, better O-linemen in the league and part of it is going over purely physical limitations. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, stitches said:

I actually think he compares to Bosa on tape. He wins in similar ways. I am one of the biggest proponents of Chubb on here and I've been saying he's much closer to Bosa than people think, but I also believe that athleticism matters in the league, especially for the pass-rushers. It's not a myth, there is actually a strong correlation between great athletic/physical tests and success in the league. 

If he produces like Bosa I will definitely be glad we drafted him. That would be a huge help to our Defense with that kind of play.

[stitches]

8 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

If he produces like Bosa I will definitely be glad we drafted him. That would be a huge help to our Defense with that kind of play.

Nobody in the history of the league(I think, or at least in the last 20-ish years) has produced like Bosa in his first 2 years in the league. I'm not sure this is a fair expectation to put on Chubb or any prospect really. Bosa for starters has another great pass-rusher on his team that teams have to pay additional attention to. We don't have that. All the additional attention will be on Chubb if we drafted him, simply because he will be the most talented player on that line. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

20 minutes ago, stitches said:

Nobody in the history of the league(I think, or at least in the last 20-ish years) has produced like Bosa in his first 2 years in the league. I'm not sure this is a fair expectation to put on Chubb or any prospect really. Bosa for starters has another great pass-rusher on his team that teams have to pay additional attention to. We don't have that. All the additional attention will be on Chubb if we drafted him, simply because he will be the most talented player on that line. 

Yeah NCF and Superman both already called my Post out when I expected Chubb's Sack numbers to be where Bosa's were at. After thinking about it, I agree with NCF that 6-8 Sacks would be a Great Rookie season. Maybe in season 2, 10 Sacks? Bosa was pretty unreal and his Sack total for a Rookie at 10.5 doesn't haven't often. Although Freeney did have 13 his Rookie Season - but that is extremely rare. I would be happy with 6-8 Sacks and a few key QB pressures throughout the season helping us win.

[stitches]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah NCF and Superman both already called my Post out when I expected Chubb's Sack numbers to be where Bosa's were at. After think about it, I agree with NCF 6-8 Sacks would be a Great Rookie season. Maybe in season 2, 10 Sacks? Bosa was pretty unreal and his Sack total for a Rookie at 10.5 doesn't haven't often. Although Freeney did have 13 his Rookie Season - but that is extremely rare. I would be happy with 6-8 Sacks and a few key QB pressures throughout the season helping us win.

yeah, that's more reasonable, IMO. 

[BOTT]

1 hour ago, krunk said:

To each his own I guess. The testing is really not that big a concern for me because I've seen him on film way too many times whipping NFL caliber linemen. The athleticism thing is a myth. I mean what do you want the guy to do? Start hitting back flips and round offs? I'm tired of the Not Bosa, Not Garrett type comments. This guy gets plenty of sacks and hes in the backfield causing havoc way more than Miles Garrett and more than Bosa. Check his numbers. The guy creates many TFLs. That's what's impressive to me because it tells you hes very hard to block. It tells me he penetrates a whole lot and wrecks plays. It tells me with a tweek here or there he can go from 10 sacks to 14 sacks. It tells me he got back there and maybe missed a couple sacks. But yet hes still not Garrett and Bosa! Him being Bradley Chubb is just fine for me.

Are saying a certain amount of athleticism required for a pass rusher is a myth or Chubb not being athletic enough is a myth?

[Yoshinator]

I guess the question now if we do get Chubb is, can we trade down and still get Chubb? Or do we have to draft him at no3? He won't get by TB, but maybe a trade down with DEN or NYJ and pick up a couple extra picks and take Chubb.

[csmopar]

27 minutes ago, stitches said:

Nobody in the history of the league(I think, or at least in the last 20-ish years) has produced like Bosa in his first 2 years in the league. I'm not sure this is a fair expectation to put on Chubb or any prospect really. Bosa for starters has another great pass-rusher on his team that teams have to pay additional attention to. We don't have that. All the additional attention will be on Chubb if we drafted him, simply because he will be the most talented player on that line. 

That is all true and I'm not dismissing it but we do have Hankins and woods, teams are already doubling Hankins a lot, just how many can they double team? 

[2006Coltsbestever]

6 minutes ago, stitches said:

yeah, that's more reasonable, IMO. 

I agree at this point. Basically with my 1st Post above I was just saying if he put up Bosa's numbers that would be unreal and I would be extremely happy.

[csmopar]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I guess the question now if we do get Chubb is, can we trade down and still get Chubb? Or do we have to draft him at no3? He won't get by TB, but maybe a trade down with DEN or NYJ and pick up a couple extra picks and take Chubb.

Highly doubtful. We're gonna be lucky enough to have him at 3. I really don't see him getting past the Giants at 2.

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I guess the question now if we do get Chubb is, can we trade down and still get Chubb? Or do we have to draft him at no3? He won't get by TB, but maybe a trade down with DEN or NYJ and pick up a couple extra picks and take Chubb.

It depends with Denver, if they get Cousins they are out of the equation. Jets will need a QB no matter what though. Denver may have to Draft one as well, so we will see.

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Highly doubtful. We're gonna be lucky enough to have him at 3. I really don't see him getting past the Giants at 2.

Right now, after his combine, I see Josh Allen going to either the Browns or the Giants. That's heavily in our favor. Another thing that's heavily in our favor is the Browns are shopping the no1 overall pick. If they do trade it, no one is going for anything other than a QB. So I'm saying it's over 50% either Chubb or Barkley are there at 3, with a decent chance we may trade down and get Chubb still (with Nelson as the backup plan).

[stitches]

7 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I guess the question now if we do get Chubb is, can we trade down and still get Chubb? Or do we have to draft him at no3? He won't get by TB, but maybe a trade down with DEN or NYJ and pick up a couple extra picks and take Chubb.

Yeah, this ideally is the trade down scenario. A lot will depend on who gets Cousins. He will indeed not go past TB. IMO, if you think he's a special talent, you cannot really risk it, you have to take him at 3. 

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

It depends with Denver, if they get Cousins they are out of the equation. Jets will need a QB no matter what though. Denver may have to Draft one as well, so we will see.

At this point, I'm hoping Cousins goes with anyone but CLE, DEN, or NYJ. Those are the 3 teams that can hurt us. If he signs with the Vikes, then those other 3 teams will all be trying to get a QB and Ballard can manipulate it to his advantage.

[stitches]

11 minutes ago, csmopar said:

That is all true and I'm not dismissing it but we do have Hankins and woods, teams are already doubling Hankins a lot, just how many can they double team? 

Yeah, Hankins was getting some double teams because he was our best linemen(him and Sheard) last year. IMO he's still better run stopper than pass-rusher from the inside, so IMO if we draft Chubb, teams will start doubling Chubb more. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

11 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Right now, after his combine, I see Josh Allen going to either the Browns or the Giants. That's heavily in our favor. Another thing that's heavily in our favor is the Browns are shopping the no1 overall pick. If they do trade it, no one is going for anything other than a QB. So I'm saying it's over 50% either Chubb or Barkley are there at 3, with a decent chance we may trade down and get Chubb still (with Nelson as the backup plan).

It is amazing how teams fall in love with QB's but that is the most important position on the field so I see why. We have 4 QB's in this Draft that could be Good or Great in Darnold, Rosen, Allen, and Mayfield. The Draft and Draft moves are going to be real interesting to see how they go down.

[csmopar]

18 minutes ago, stitches said:

Yeah, Hankins was getting some double teams because he was our best linemen(him and Sheard) last year. IMO he's still better run stopper than pass-rusher from the inside, so IMO if we draft Chubb, teams will start doubling Chubb more. 

Which frees up Hankins. I'd still like to go OL overall but I think Chubb is the Better pick between Barkley and Him.

22 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Right now, after his combine, I see Josh Allen going to either the Browns or the Giants. That's heavily in our favor. Another thing that's heavily in our favor is the Browns are shopping the no1 overall pick. If they do trade it, no one is going for anything other than a QB. So I'm saying it's over 50% either Chubb or Barkley are there at 3, with a decent chance we may trade down and get Chubb still (with Nelson as the backup plan).

Perhaps. But Browns having that number 4 really is like having a check on the top spot. They could go Barkley or Chubb and still get Allen. I just don't think the Giants draft a QB like everyone thinks

[krunk]

Chubb not being athletic is a myth in the first place. Hes plenty athletic, and especially for his size. Definitely quick. Again im not letting combine tests over ride his film. The film shows him routinely beating NFL caliber linemen. Not just any linemen but the best of the best. And when he gets in the league he will be taught whatever is necessary to win against established pros. Hes already got the technique and fundamentals. He moves quite well to me. I'm not letting tests over ride what I see on film. I can name you a whole bunch of combine freaks who couldn't cut the mustard. In the case of Chubb the film speaks volumes. Who hes beating and how often hes beating them tells you his game translates. This is how I do things. You're welcome to your own approach!

[Hoose]

Why wouldn’t the Browns try trading up out of the 4 spot with the Colts or Giants? They can give either team the luxury of the first pick in the second round along with the 4th overall pick. The Browns could pick Barkley first and still get their QB. That would be the Colts’ ideal scenario. Unfortunately, it might also be the Giants’ perfect situation. 

[Stephen]

7 hours ago, csmopar said:

Highly doubtful. We're gonna be lucky enough to have him at 3. I really don't see him getting past the Giants at 2.

Giants will take barkley a qb or nelson

[stitches]

9 hours ago, stitches said:

I feel the same way. I am still a bit queasy about his testing. I want to see him test well. So much of pass-rush in the league is tied to athleticism that I cannot ignore it if he doesn't test well. This is why I've been making this caveat constantly in the "who would you rather have" variation of threads. I'm sold on Chubb in every respect that is known so far - leadership, on-field tape, size and physical attributes, hell he's a bit of a goofball and character - something we've been missing since McAfee retired... one by one he's checking all the boxes but the one that I have most questions about is still there and will be answered tomorrow. I don't need him to be Myles Garrett level athlete... he obviously isn't that. I need him to be around Bosa level... I'd be OK with him even if he comes close but doesn't beat Bosa. Those are the ones I'm looking at:

 

3cone - under 7s 

short shuttle - under 4.4

broad jump - around 120"... ideally over but I wouldn't knock him if he comes at say... 118...

10 yard split - under 1.7

I don't care much for the 40 but if he goes in the 4.7s or low 4.8s that would be good. 

So far:

 

3cone - under 7s ->??

short shuttle - under 4.4 -> ??

broad jump - around 120".... -> 121 - 1" better than Bosa

10 yard split - under 1.7 -> 1.63!!!!!!! 0.6 better than Bosa

40 but if he goes in the 4.7s or low 4.8s that would be good -> 4.65!! 0.2 better than Bosa

vertical jump(didn't include it initially) -> 36" - 4" better than Bosa 

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, stitches said:

So far:

 

3cone - under 7s ->??

short shuttle - under 4.4 -> ??

broad jump - around 120"... ideally over but I wouldn't knock him if he comes at say... 118... -> 121 - 1" better than Bosa

10 yard split - under 1.7 -> 1.63!!!!!!! 0.6 better than Bosa

I don't care much for the 40 but if he goes in the 4.7s or low 4.8s that would be good. -> 4.65!! 0.2 better than Bosa

Damn maybe he is Clubber Lang. Thanks for the updates. Chubb is a badder dude than I thought!

[NewColtsFan]

2 minutes ago, stitches said:

So far:

 

3cone - under 7s ->??

short shuttle - under 4.4 -> ??

broad jump - around 120".... -> 121 - 1" better than Bosa

10 yard split - under 1.7 -> 1.63!!!!!!! 0.6 better than Bosa

40 but if he goes in the 4.7s or low 4.8s that would be good -> 4.65!! 0.2 better than Bosa

 

And the vertical was around 36 or so....   correct?   

[stitches]

Just now, NewColtsFan said:

 

And the vertical was around 36 or so....   correct?   

Correct! This is 4 inches better than Bosa. 

[chad72]

26 minutes ago, Stephen said:

Giants will take barkley a qb or nelson

 

I agree. After spending 5 yrs $85 mil. on Olivier Vernon, having Jason Pierre Paul and rookie (2nd year in 2018 season) Avery Moss, who the Colts wanted apparently, at the DE position, I am not sure the Giants will invest in Bradley Chubb.

 

The Ds are actually heading in opposite directions, I feel. Here is an article on giants.com which says their new DC James Bettcher, former Cardinals DC, has run a 3-4 most of his life, and will be the new Giants DC under Shurmur. I just do not think they will have Chubb on their list as high as us, and we are clearly making a switch to the 4-3, IMO.

 

Yeah, I know what people always say. A talented player can be MADE to fit in any scheme. But we tried with Jerry Hughes in a 4-3 and Bjoern Werner in a 3-4 (maybe bad example), but you get the point. 

 

[Matabix]

Guess I'm the only skeptic, I'm just looking at all those NC St. guys on the DL invited to the combine. Did there presence make Chubb look better. Kinda why I'm liking Davenport a little more, and Landry is closing in. 

Example: Richardson had high marks coming out of college, all his lineman ended up going in first 2 rounds. Was it him or the lineman.

Hopefully Browns trade out of #1, so our chances of getting Barkley are better cause I think Giants will go big arm Allen. If that doesn't happen I'm for trading out of 3, and picking up a later 1st and tons of 3's. The ilb depth in this years draft is alot. Most impressed with the Vanderbilt guy( not sure why I can't ever remember his name), and Fred Warner. 

I think you can pick up the Vanderbilt kid in 3, and Fred in 4, both 2nd round talents. With other 2 3's I hope we get, pick up a TE and WR.

[stitches]

12 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

I agree. After spending 5 yrs $85 mil. on Olivier Vernon, having Jason Pierre Paul and rookie (2nd year in 2018 season) Avery Moss, who the Colts wanted apparently, at the DE position, I am not sure the Giants will invest in Bradley Chubb.

 

The Ds are actually heading in opposite directions, I feel. Here is an article on giants.com which says their new DC James Bettcher, former Cardinals DC, has run a 3-4 most of his life, and will be the new Giants DC under Shurmur. I just do not think they will have Chubb on their list as high as us, and we are clearly making a switch to the 4-3, IMO.

 

Yeah, I know what people always say. A talented player can be MADE to fit in any scheme. But we tried with Jerry Hughes in a 4-3 and Bjoern Werner in a 3-4 (maybe bad example), but you get the point. 

 

I surely hope so! It would be so depressing to have Chubb realize all my hopes and surpass them at the combine after I fell in love with his tape and then have him get taken ahead of us.