If Barkley is available

[Rackeen305]

I bet if Barkley is available when the Colts pick, And we do pick Barkley (kinda wishful thinking), I believe every team will look back and say how did we allow that to happen? Luck, TY, Barkley on the same roster. 

[Jackie Daytona]

 

I think it could play out that way, and many here would freak out hardcore.....   I'd be cool with it though 

[TdungyW/12]

3 minutes ago, Shafty138 said:

 

I think it could play out that way, and many here would freak out hardcore.....   I'd be cool with it though 

Browns will take darnold, giants will take Barkley ..... colts will be sitting at #3 and taking calls. 

[Southside Hoosier Fan]

If Barkley is there at 3 with how FA has gone so far, you have to take him. Not sure how you sell season tickets with what has NOT happened so far in FA.

[Architects08]

Take him!!!!

[TdungyW/12]

4 minutes ago, SanDiegoColt8 said:

Take him!!!!

He’s not needed .... we have Mack and we can add depth in later rounds! DO NOT spend a #3 pick on a RB. 

 

We need to work on our def .... getting Chubb will automatically boost our secondary which was horrible last year up. 

[lollygagger8]

Who's going to block for him? 

[Jackie Daytona]

1 minute ago, lollygagger8 said:

Who's going to block for him? 

 

To his credit, no one blocked for him at PSU.....lol

[BProland85]

With the many many needs this team will still have after free agency with Ballard not bringing in starters, the best option will be to trade down for a haul from a team like possibly the Bills or Dolphins. 

[HectorRoberts]

I like Nelson at #3 but if Barkley is there when we pick, it would be stupid to pass him up

[runthepost]

20 minutes ago, TdungyW/12 said:

He’s not needed .... we have Mack and we can add depth in later rounds! DO NOT spend a #3 pick on a RB. 

 

We need to work on our def .... getting Chubb will automatically boost our secondary which was horrible last year up. 

Mack isn’t anything special...

[Fisticuffs111]

I don't care who falls to #3, I think I'm pretty firmly on team tradeback.

Our team has so many holes and although I'm not upset with our lack of activity in FA, it's looking like our best option is to stockpile picks.

[gspdx]

44 minutes ago, Southside Hoosier Fan said:

If Barkley is there at 3 with how FA has gone so far, you have to take him. Not sure how you sell season tickets with what has NOT happened so far in FA.

Not sure season ticket holders usually base their purchases on what happens in one off - season.

[Coffeedrinker]

A Colts drafting Barkley thread.  Well, that is something unique on this forum.

[richard pallo]

27 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

With the many many needs this team will still have after free agency with Ballard not bringing in starters, the best option will be to trade down for a haul from a team like possibly the Bills or Dolphins. 

 I'm convinced we are trading back and that has been the plan all along. Ballard has said he wants to build with the draft and there is no better way to do it than to trade back and acquire a huge number of top round picks.  I think we can all forget about Chubb and Barkley.  We need more than one difference maker.  

[MarquisJ]

i think browns take sam with their 1st and denzel ward with their 4th (wow that’d be great for them) but anyways giants will most likely trade out or grab believe it or not quentin nelson ... If Saquon Barkley is there you grab him immediately unless the bills offer you 12 22 and their 2nd & 3rd pick otherwise you grab the best player in the draft

[Southside Hoosier Fan]

We would not have needed "more difference makers" if we would have signed a couple Free Agents that would have been immediate starters. We didn't do that. Now maybe we sign a couple of LB's that can start from day 1 and that helps. By all accounts we needed 1-2 OL starters out of free agency, so far we have ZERO. We needed 1-2 LB starters out of free agency,We got ZERO If we didnt get both of those we needed a starting CB, we got ZERO. so far we have ZERO. So unless something dramatic happens in next day or two to change that situation, we will need to plug the following holes through the draft. 1-2 Starting OL. 1-2 starting LBS. 1 Starting RB, and 1 starting CB, that is 6 starters out of our 7 draft picks. No one hits on that. That is why free agency and $70 MILLION to spend gets a BIG FAT ZERO so far.

[TdungyW/12]

49 minutes ago, runthepost said:

Mack isn’t anything special...

Never said he was special ..... eagles and patriots didn’t have anyone “special” at RB in the SB .... you don’t need Barkley to be good at RB. It’s a one sided pick like colts usually draft. Chubb would make our def better, secondary greatly better and would help our offense by making us NOT have to score 25-30 points a game to stay in it.

[ColtsBlitz]

53 minutes ago, runthepost said:

Mack isn’t anything special...

How would you know this? The only thing we know is he was underutilized. He made plays. 

[1959Colts]

Does Carlos Hyde take Browns out of Saquon Barkley business?

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/03/14/does-carlos-hyde-take-browns-out-of-saquon-barkley-business/

 

Quote

 

...Hyde reportedly will make more than $5 million per year, with more than $6 million reportedly being paid in 2018. This suggests that Hyde is the guy, or at least enough of the guy to make the decision to draft Barkley a waste of his talent, since he wouldn’t be used as an every-down workhorse. If he won’t be used that way, why would anyone make him the first overall pick?

It would be foolish to invest so much draft capital in a running back if the running back won’t be used to the fullest. If the Browns will be splitting duties among Hyde and a rookie, it would be far more sensible to have the rookie be picked in one of the later rounds of the draft.

Of course, another team could trade up to No. 1 and select Barkley. But it wouldn’t make sense for the Browns to make him pick No. 1, now that the Browns are slated to have Hyde.

 

[chad72]

Giants go Barkley, they got their OL with Solder, and they need their version of Zeke in the NFC East to pair up with OBJ and Eli to make a Big 3. They may surprise and go Nelson but I still think they go Barkley.

 

Browns, I feel, will go with a QB now, to groom behind Tyrod.

[Flash7]

1 hour ago, lollygagger8 said:

Who's going to block for him? 

Vujnovic...obviously.

[CopenhagenColt]

1 hour ago, Rackeen305 said:

I bet if Barkley is available when the Colts pick, And we do pick Barkley (kinda wishful thinking), I believe every team will look back and say how did we allow that to happen? Luck, TY, Barkley on the same roster. 

I'll be willing to bet anything, that we don't get him.

We won't pick @ number 3

[FalseStart]

We in good position if he is or is not available.  A great running back can make a teams Defense better...ball control. I hope FA pulls in a couple OL players to make the call to select a RB at #3 much easier...hard to consider right now.

 

"It would be very difficult for the Colts to pass up an opportunity to add such a talented player to an offense that finished just 31st in total offense in 2017." 

[BOTT]

 

4 hours ago, HectorRoberts said:

I like Nelson at #3 but if Barkley is there when we pick, it would be stupid to pass him up

Nelson??  Here is how much the league has valued guards the last few years.

 

The Ravens allowed a top 5 guard to walk in Osemele.

The Bengals allowed a top 10 guard to walk in Zietler.

The Panthers allowed a top 5 guard in Norwell to walk.

 

a guard or a running back at 3? How about neither.

[MPStack]

With the lack of FA activity by the Colts in a weak market and lots of holes to fill. I hope they don’t go nor believe they’d take Barkley if available. I have been on the Chubb at #3 for months, but I’m thinking at this point Nelson may be the smartest pick. I don’t like getting into the whole trade down discussion. The Colts  are void of talent and at least a couple seasons away from being competitive. IMO the best course of action is protect #12. Nelson would be a solid start. 

[Coltfreak]

Awesome.   Another thread that should've been a post in an already existing thread talking about the same * thing. 

[dudley dawson]

If Barkley is available at 3, I think Colts take him.  Irsay alluded to as much during that press conference a couple months ago.

[superrep1967]

5 hours ago, TdungyW/12 said:

He’s not needed .... we have Mack and we can add depth in later rounds! DO NOT spend a #3 pick on a RB. 

 

We need to work on our def .... getting Chubb will automatically boost our secondary which was horrible last year up. 

Yeah, as much as I like Barkley we need a quality pass rusher. 

[Defjamz26]

17 hours ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

I don't care who falls to #3, I think I'm pretty firmly on team tradeback.

Our team has so many holes and although I'm not upset with our lack of activity in FA, it's looking like our best option is to stockpile picks.

I think the biggest reason to trade back would be because of how they’ve handled the LB situation. We now need to draft at least two. In a Tampa-2 you need a MLB who can drop back into deep coverage. There’s two guys who can play that position in this draft: Tremaine Edmunds and Leighton Vander-Esch. Both could be gone in the 1st.

[oldunclemark]

13 hours ago, MPStack said:

With the lack of FA activity by the Colts in a weak market and lots of holes to fill. I hope they don’t go nor believe they’d take Barkley if available. I have been on the Chubb at #3 for months, but I’m thinking at this point Nelson may be the smartest pick. I don’t like getting into the whole trade down discussion. The Colts  are void of talent and at least a couple seasons away from being competitive. IMO the best course of action is protect #12. Nelson would be a solid start. 

With The Browns needing go QB and having signed a RB...Carlos Hyde? 

..and with the Giants also signing an RB, it would seem they're not looking at Barkley or a QB

 

....I would guess that somebody (Denver, Buffalo) is trading up...

[boo2202]

If we're trading down I think it's with the jets or cardinals. Would love to make a move with the bills but they can probably move up to #2 for around the same price as colts at #3. Cardinals would have to give up a future 1st as they lack draft picks this year. Maybe a 1st, 2nd & 4th this year and a 1st next year. 

[Ne-Ca-Higher]

3 hours ago, boo2202 said:

If we're trading down I think it's with the jets or cardinals. Would love to make a move with the bills but they can probably move up to #2 for around the same price as colts at #3. Cardinals would have to give up a future 1st as they lack draft picks this year. Maybe a 1st, 2nd & 4th this year and a 1st next year. 

Do NOT trade #3 to conference rivals Jets, Broncos or Bills!  You'll be giving them their best chance to land a franchise QB.  The three or four lesser positions we fill won't allow us to overcome that, especially if Andrew's no longer Andrew.  Take the QB yourself as the best possible insurance for a struggling Andrew or even as his eventual replacement AND block one of our rivals from getting its top QB prospect.

 

Ideally, Browns take Darnold, Giants take Rosen, Colts take Mayfield or Allen.  Then at #4 the Browns either take Barkley, Chubb, Fitzpatrick, Ward or they trade down, hopefully not to a mutual conference foe.  Then Broncos and Jets can only take who's left (Mayfield, Allen, Jackson).  If Browns or Giants fall in love with Mayfield, then Darnold drops into the conversation for the Colts.  Aside from some coachable ball handling and chance taking issues, Darnold is a major prospect.  Remember, not everyone was sold on Goff, Wentz, Trubisky and Watson but look at them now.

[HarryTheCat]

On 3/14/2018 at 12:42 PM, Rackeen305 said:

I bet if Barkley is available when the Colts pick, And we do pick Barkley (kinda wishful thinking), I believe every team will look back and say how did we allow that to happen? Luck, TY, Barkley on the same roster. 

Only if he can play both ways and pick up a dozen or more sacks every season. 

[WarGhost21]

On 3/14/2018 at 2:04 PM, TdungyW/12 said:

He’s not needed .... we have Mack and we can add depth in later rounds! DO NOT spend a #3 pick on a RB. 

 

We need to work on our def .... getting Chubb will automatically boost our secondary which was horrible last year up. 

Sorry, I guess I didn't realize Chubb played in the secondary...

 

Look, I get what you mean by Chubb, so that there is just a tease, but I'll counter the rest of your statement with what happened to teams who took the first RB in the draft  since 2015:

 

2015 with Gurley: 2 year wait, Playoffs

2016 with Elliott: Playoffs in rookie year

2017 with Fournette: Conference Championship game rookie year

 

Notice a trend? Teams that have taken a RB early in the past few seasons have gone to the playoffs from being a horrible team the season prior. Looking at Indy, the only reason we were horrible last season is because we didn't have Luck. Bring Luck back healthy, add a top RB, and we will be in the playoffs. I have no doubt about that, I just am not sure Barkley will fall to 3. If he does, however, Ballard would be stupid not to at least consider him as an option.

[TdungyW/12]

1 minute ago, WarGhost21 said:

Sorry, I guess I didn't realize Chubb played in the secondary...

 

Look, I get what you mean by Chubb, so that there is just a tease, but I'll counter the rest of your statement with what happened to teams who took the first RB in the draft  since 2015:

 

2015 with Gurley: 2 year wait, Playoffs

2016 with Elliott: Playoffs in rookie year

2017 with Fournette: Conference Championship game rookie year

 

Notice a trend? Teams that have taken a RB early in the past few seasons have gone to the playoffs from being a horrible team the season prior. Looking at Indy, the only reason we were horrible last season is because we didn't have Luck. Bring Luck back healthy, add a top RB, and we will be in the playoffs. I have no doubt about that, I just am not sure Barkley will fall to 3. If he does, however, Ballard would be stupid not to at least consider him as an option.

Neither the eagles or the patriots had an elite high round RB and NE never does every year they go to the SB or play offs .... I see what your saying I do but also those teams you mentioned have WAY better lines then us and we don’t seem to be putting anything into our line to make it better at the moment. 

[WarGhost21]

1 minute ago, TdungyW/12 said:

Neither the eagles or the patriots had an elite high round RB and NE never does every year they go to the SB or play offs .... I see what your saying I do but also those teams you mentioned have WAY better lines then us and we don’t seem to be putting anything into our line to make it better at the moment. 

Right, but they are the Patriots and, as much as we all hate him, Tom Brady is the best playoff QB of all time, and the Eagles were stacked at every other position. Also, when looking at what Barkley had to work with last year in college, I'd say his linemen were way worse than ours and, even though it's just college, he still killed it against everyone. Getting Luck back and adding Barkley (also, I might add getting rid of Pagano and his staff), will make the line look tremendously better, because the defenses won't be able to just cue in on one play every time, they will have to stay honest. I, personally, want to trade down from 3, but if Barkley is still there at 3, we certainly need to second guess our trade-down.

[Four2itus]

1 hour ago, Ne-Ca-Higher said:

Do NOT trade #3 to conference rivals Jets, Broncos or Bills!  You'll be giving them their best chance to land a franchise QB.  The three or four lesser positions we fill won't allow us to overcome that, especially if Andrew's no longer Andrew.  Take the QB yourself as the best possible insurance for a struggling Andrew or even as his eventual replacement AND block one of our rivals from getting its top QB prospect.

 

Ideally, Browns take Darnold, Giants take Rosen, Colts take Mayfield or Allen.  Then at #4 the Browns either take Barkley, Chubb, Fitzpatrick, Ward or they trade down, hopefully not to a mutual conference foe.  Then Broncos and Jets can only take who's left (Mayfield, Allen, Jackson).  If Browns or Giants fall in love with Mayfield, then Darnold drops into the conversation for the Colts.  Aside from some coachable ball handling and chance taking issues, Darnold is a major prospect.  Remember, not everyone was sold on Goff, Wentz, Trubisky and Watson but look at them now.

[TdungyW/12]

14 minutes ago, WarGhost21 said:

Right, but they are the Patriots and, as much as we all hate him, Tom Brady is the best playoff QB of all time, and the Eagles were stacked at every other position. Also, when looking at what Barkley had to work with last year in college, I'd say his linemen were way worse than ours and, even though it's just college, he still killed it against everyone. Getting Luck back and adding Barkley (also, I might add getting rid of Pagano and his staff), will make the line look tremendously better, because the defenses won't be able to just cue in on one play every time, they will have to stay honest. I, personally, want to trade down from 3, but if Barkley is still there at 3, we certainly need to second guess our trade-down.

I’m not against taking Barkley if he’s available trust me I know he would help our team and our offense would be that much better .... I just think we need to work on our def IMO. But Barkley, Chubb or trade back for more picks .... either way we r better off next year with Luck back.