Jump to content
NewColtsFan

A New Name to Consider for Pick 34....

Recommended Posts

 

In my view,  this draft will be made or not by what we do at Pick 34.   It's our bonus pick.   The day he was hurt I floated the idea of taking Jeffrey Simmons at pick 34.   

 

But today,  I'd like to toss out a new name for you to consider.

 

This is a name that a year ago,  this player was discussed as a possible top-10 to top-15 player.    But this year,  most draft sites say he's likely a Round 2 pick.    Not sure why?    When I read his profiles,  they're mostly favorable and his problems,  his issues,  seem to be fixable with good coaching.   And we've got that.

 

So, I wonder if Mississippi Left Tackle Greg Little is a consideration at Pick 34?

 

It at appears to be a very poor year for Left Tackles.    All the other top lineman appear to be Right Tackles or guards.     They may get a look at LT,  but scouts believe it's not their best position.    Williams,  Taylor,  Ford....   all RT's or guards.   Oly Dillars is a true LT.   Little would be the 2nd best.

 

And if Ballard doesn't think we can re-sign AC to a deal,  then maybe we'd take his heir apparent a year early so he'd start by 2020?

 

Here's his NFL.com profile.    he's listed as the 36th best player.    Will he be there at pick 34?    If he is,  will Ballard consider him?

 

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/gregory-little?id=32194c49-5442-3164-c0c4-a09d5b847151

 

The Colts might be the perfect team to take Little.   A year to learn on the job before stepping in.

 

I look forward to all your thoughts....   whether you agree or disagree...   

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best player available that addresses a need IMHO.  If we get there and Little is it, then so be it.  No doubt he would help and fill a need.

 

That's about all I got because I am not familiar with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll add this little thought to your idea.

AC is in the last year of his contract.  He'll be a free agent next year.  And he'll be 32 years old.

It takes a couple/few years for a LT to get his game in shape enough to start at that difficult position.

It's not totally crazy for us to take a look at drafting a LT this year, with the possibility of starting him in 2020 or 2021.  I'm not saying we're definitely going to do it.  But it ain't crazy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will put a twist on this as well.

 

Little not only develops for a year...BUT given Smith's ability to kick inside to RG...Little essentially gives them a back up at both G and OT spots (C is already covered by Boehm).

 

If AC of Smith get hurt...Little plays LT or RT.

If Glow gets hurt...Smith kicks inside to RG and Little plays RT.

If Nelson gets hurt...Glow goes to LG, Smith kicks inside to RG and Little goes to RT.

 

I think it makes a whole lot of sense to have a legit OT as the 6th man on the OL. Whether or not that is worth a 1st round pick right now...I guess that depends on just how good that player is..and he would definitely have to be a legit future LT to justify it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could see it. But I suspect they go D. Either DT, edge or S. Or a WR. Just too many good options for genuine positions of need. I’d look for a developmental T from round 4 onward.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Hoose said:

I could see it. But I suspect they go D. Either DT, edge or S. Or a WR. Just too many good options for genuine positions of need. I’d look for a developmental T from round 4 onward.

 

Honestly....

 

Your position has been my position for months.   It's only been the last week or two,  that this thought has begun to bounce around my head as talk about re-signing guys to extensions grew louder and louder...

 

I've always thought AC would be an easy sign to an extension.   But with the signings given out to guys like Solder and Brown,  it makes me wonder if AC will want something like 5/65?    And maybe Ballard is more interested in 3/40?   That gap makes me wonder if Ballard might want to consider Little at 34.

 

It's just food for thought....    for now...

 

Oft times extensions are announced right before the draft...    so the issue is very much on my radar....

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With our new Oline coaches, I truly think they would be the perfect guys to coach Little back up.  I like it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

BUT given Smith's ability to kick inside to RG...Little essentially gives them a back up at both G and OT spots (C is already covered by Boehm).

 

 

I've had it in the back of my mind that it would be awesome to see Smith kick back inside and put a fresh new tackle to round out what would unquestionably be the best O-line in football... with enough depth that you've got Glow coming in off the bench to add fresh legs game-by-game or a fresh body when injuries occur.  Nice one, brotha!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nate is arguably a top 10 LT in the league and played 98% of O snaps. AC isn't a top 20 T, and played around 65% of snaps last year. I'm sure he'll want a raise if he's healthy through 2019, but doubt he gets NS level pay. Regardless, I think it's silly to do it this year when we have far more pressing needs.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still really want Simmons but now you have got me thinking about this. Honestly what are the chances of us getting a shot at a good AC replacement picking where we will for the foreseeable future? Taking him would be a pretty good pick imo.

 

 

Now how to figure out how to get both him and Simmons haha

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Nate is arguably a top 10 LT in the league and played 98% of O snaps. AC isn't a top 20 T, and played around 65% of snaps last year. I'm sure he'll want a raise if he's healthy through 2019, but doubt he gets NS level pay. Regardless, I think it's silly to do it this year when we have far more pressing needs.

Where as Solder is a solid LT let me again battle this pointless rhetoric of AC is not good crap. AC is easily a top 20 LT. if you don’t see that then please watch more tape or study the position. If he plays like he did last year I see Ballard giving him an extension but not some historic one. A good short term deal to finish his career as a Colt. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Honestly....

 

Your position has been my position for months.   It's only been the last week or two,  that this thought has begun to bounce around my head as talk about re-signing guys to extensions grew louder and louder...

 

I've always thought AC would be an easy sign to an extension.   But with the signings given out to guys like Solder and Brown,  it makes me wonder if AC will want something like 5/65?    And maybe Ballard is more interested in 3/40?   That gap makes me wonder if Ballard might want to consider Little at 34.

 

It's just food for thought....    for now...

 

Oft times extensions are announced right before the draft...    so the issue is very much on my radar....

 

There is ZERO chance CB would give a 32 y/o AC a 5 year contract and I honestly can’t imagine his agent even asking for such. I can see 3-40 being in the wheelhouse but still a touch on the higher side. I’d be fine with us extending him right now for 4 years (includes this current year into the deal). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been so consumed with defense I didn't give it much thought. Would actually be a good move. To be honest so would that TE Hockenson sp? Both great future moves

Share this post


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

Been so consumed with defense I didn't give it much thought. Would actually be a good move. To be honest so would that TE Hockenson sp? Both great future moves

While I still think the only offensive player taken in Day 1 or 2 would be a WR, I can also see the TE argument. Doyle has some questions now about his hip; Ebron is a FA after this season; and TE is a very important part of the Reich offensive scheme. I doubt Hockenson would be picked, since he's likely a Round 1 guy, but another top TE could get the nod later in Day 2. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if Little is the guy to go after, but I agree that Ballard might be trying to extend AC as we speak and if he doesn't like where it's going I wouldn't be surprised if he drafts another potential LT for the future. Little kind of fits because he's not ready but has great profile, but if you trust your new OL coach and Mudd with player development(seems like that's the main reason they picked Strausser... this is the main thing he's supposed to be great at - technical development of players), then you should be taking shots at raw but talented players that can be molded with time and work. 

 

Dillard is kind of the best pure LT prospect of this draft(Juwaan Taylor being RT coming into the league). The thing is... we would be lucky if he drops to 26 so... what if he does? Would you draft him(or Jonah Williams, whoever drops)? It's kind of weird drafting LT in the first and letting him sit a year. Or... here's a wild one. What if Ballard decides to trade AC on draft day(in case he's not able to extend him)?* Last year the Bills traded Cordy Glenn in order to move from 21 to 10 in the draft. This is the equivalent of a high second, low first round pick. And AC is MUCH better than Glenn, so I think it's reasonable to expect a 1st for him. For example, the Vikings have a big need for OT and they want to run the ball + they are ready to win now rather than wait for an OT to develop. What's AC's best phase of the game? Run blocking... Is he ready to play winning football now? Absolutely.  Also... lets incorporate this one with another rumor - the Colts looking at trade for a CB. Trae Waynes has been rumored to be available for trade... So what do you say about... 

 

AC+3d OR 4th round pick for Vikings 1st(no. 18) and Trae Waynes? 

 

We draft Dillard with no. 18 and start him next to Big Q. 

 

@NFLfan you are welcome to share your opinion on this one too... 

 

*Disclaimer: I do NOT want AC gone. If it was up to me I'd do everything possible to sign him to an extension. Those are just hypothetical scenarios I'm going through in my head and letting them spill here since we are going a bit out of the box in this thread. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

In my view,  this draft will be made or not by what we do at Pick 34.   It's our bonus pick.   The day he was hurt I floated the idea of taking Jeffrey Simmons at pick 34.   

 

But today,  I'd like to toss out a new name for you to consider.

 

This is a name that a year ago,  this player was discussed as a possible top-10 to top-15 player.    But this year,  most draft sites say he's likely a Round 2 pick.    Not sure why?    When I read his profiles,  they're mostly favorable and his problems,  his issues,  seem to be fixable with good coaching.   And we've got that.

 

So, I wonder if Mississippi Left Tackle Greg Little is a consideration at Pick 34?

 

It at appears to be a very poor year for Left Tackles.    All the other top lineman appear to be Right Tackles or guards.     They may get a look at LT,  but scouts believe it's not their best position.    Williams,  Taylor,  Ford....   all RT's or guards.   Oly Dillars is a true LT.   Little would be the 2nd best.

 

And if Ballard doesn't think we can re-sign AC to a deal,  then maybe we'd take his heir apparent a year early so he'd start by 2020?

 

Here's his NFL.com profile.    he's listed as the 36th best player.    Will he be there at pick 34?    If he is,  will Ballard consider him?

 

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/gregory-little?id=32194c49-5442-3164-c0c4-a09d5b847151

 

The Colts might be the perfect team to take Little.   A year to learn on the job before stepping in.

 

I look forward to all your thoughts....   whether you agree or disagree...   

Yes.  I don't know if Little is regarded as a sure thing prospect, as I think he has been mentioned to have flaws, but that aside, an OT is certainly a consideration.

 

However, I think Ballard would look to spread the talent out amongst the roster rather than having concentrated in the oline just after signing Glow to the starters contract and pushing Smith to RT. 

 

I think your observation is sound, I just don't think this draft will be the one where Ballard takes an OT high.  Too soon on the heels of the Glow signing, IMO, so another position will probably be drafted.

 

BTW, I think AC will be signed and viewed as a priority.  I don't expect CB to low-ball him or allow him to test the market.  He'll receive a contract commensurate with his age, maybe a little more, but he won't be low-balled, IMO.

Share this post


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

 

AC+3d OR 4th round pick for Vikings 1st(no. 18) and Trae Waynes? 

 

We draft Dillard with no. 18 and start him next to Big Q. 

 

@NFLfan you are welcome to share your opinion on this one too... 

 

Thanks. I think the Vikings would be giving up too much. And we have a bigger need for interior linemen. I would rather trade for Glowinski and swap first round picks. If needed, I may add a low round pick to that. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it.

 

Our OLine is already great, but it's always a good idea to have quality OT depth, and a future starting LT is hard to pass up.

 

I don't see AC leaving either.  He already got paid with a nice 2nd contract, and it will be hard to find a better situation than having Luck as your QB, Nelson as your right-hand man, and Mudd as your OLine coach.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Honestly....

 

Your position has been my position for months.   It's only been the last week or two,  that this thought has begun to bounce around my head as talk about re-signing guys to extensions grew louder and louder...

 

I've always thought AC would be an easy sign to an extension.   But with the signings given out to guys like Solder and Brown,  it makes me wonder if AC will want something like 5/65?    And maybe Ballard is more interested in 3/40?   That gap makes me wonder if Ballard might want to consider Little at 34.

 

It's just food for thought....    for now...

 

Oft times extensions are announced right before the draft...    so the issue is very much on my radar....

 

 

Ballard values his draft picks a LOT, you already know that. For every case of Jaylon Smith, there could be a case of Marcus Lattimore. I am not so sure you can count on a valuable draft pick always returning your investment the way Jaylon Smith did.

 

It is too much of a risk to take, especially if you have other quality players that could  contribute at a high level available to be picked at No. 34.

 

I can definitely see Greg Little as a dark horse pick but if Ballard believes in AC and his locker room value, he will pay up, IMO, to re-sign his own.

 

Thus, I am going to differ on Jeffrey Simmons being a candidate there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an interesting thought and worth considering.  The thing that makes me nervous is we have only added one new starter, Funchess, in FA.  That pretty much leaves the draft as the most likely spot to find a couple.  Picks 26 and 34 would be the obvious spots.  To pick a player to groom there for a year seems kind of early for pick 34 IMO.  I have to think they will want to keep Costanzo unless his play falls off sharply.  I think he has quite a few years left and I would imagine he would be agreeable to extending with the Colts.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

Nate is arguably a top 10 LT in the league and played 98% of O snaps. AC isn't a top 20 T, and played around 65% of snaps last year. I'm sure he'll want a raise if he's healthy through 2019, but doubt he gets NS level pay. Regardless, I think it's silly to do it this year when we have far more pressing needs.

I know don’t feed the troll but AC isn’t a top 20 T? Then insinuating that there is reason to think Castonzo won’t be healthy. The guy had missed 3 starts since his rookie season prior to last season. He had started 97% of the regular season games(93 of 96). 

11 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I've always thought AC would be an easy sign to an extension.   But with the signings given out to guys like Solder and Brown,  it makes me wonder if AC will want something like 5/65?    And maybe Ballard is more interested in 3/40?   That gap makes me wonder if Ballard might want to consider Little at 34.

 

Oft times extensions are announced right before the draft...    so the issue is very much on my radar....

 

 

As far as OL free agents at the end of this season it’s not just AC but Haeg and Clark are both going to be up for new deals. Obviously neither will be looking at starting LT money but that’s LT’s 1-3

 

I think it’s absolutely possible we look at taking a LT with any pick including 34. It’s probable that we take a T somewhere in the draft. Ballard’s goal is 10 starting caliber offensive lineman.  

 

I don’t think there will be a problem getting AC signed to a new deal. He doesn’t strike me as a guy who wants anything more than a fair deal. I think he wants to be here and we want him here.

 

Ballard talks about growing your own and rewarding your guys. I can’t think of a player that fits that any better then AC.  I trust CB will get it handled. Haeg is the guy I could see getting an absurd offer if allowed to test the market. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't watched him, but I have no problem with the strategy. And not just for Little, and not just at #34. I said a few weeks back that if one of the top tackles were to drop, I'd be fine taking him at #26.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, akcolt said:

I know don’t feed the troll but AC isn’t a top 20 T? Then insinuating that there is reason to think Castonzo won’t be healthy. The guy had missed 3 starts since his rookie season prior to last season. He had started 97% of the regular season games(93 of 96). 

 

As far as OL free agents at the end of this season it’s not just AC but Haeg and Clark are both going to be up for new deals. Obviously neither will be looking at starting LT money but that’s LT’s 1-3

 

I think it’s absolutely possible we look at taking a LT with any pick including 34. It’s probable that we take a T somewhere in the draft. Ballard’s goal is 10 starting caliber offensive lineman.  

 

I don’t think there will be a problem getting AC signed to a new deal. He doesn’t strike me as a guy who wants anything more than a fair deal. I think he wants to be here and we want him here.

 

Ballard talks about growing your own and rewarding your guys. I can’t think of a player that fits that any better then AC.  I trust CB will get it handled. Haeg is the guy I could see getting an absurd offer if allowed to test the market. 

I can see us taking a T in this draft just not in the 1st. two picks.  I don't see Haeg getting an absurd offer.  He couldn't beat out Good when he was here and healthy.  We brought in Glowinski after he was here and Glowinski won the job at RG.  We can replace Haeg and Clark with better prospects IMO.  That's why I can see us drafting T or G in this draft. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, stitches said:

I'm not sure if Little is the guy to go after, but I agree that Ballard might be trying to extend AC as we speak and if he doesn't like where it's going I wouldn't be surprised if he drafts another potential LT for the future. Little kind of fits because he's not ready but has great profile, but if you trust your new OL coach and Mudd with player development(seems like that's the main reason they picked Strausser... this is the main thing he's supposed to be great at - technical development of players), then you should be taking shots at raw but talented players that can be molded with time and work. 

 

Dillard is kind of the best pure LT prospect of this draft(Juwaan Taylor being RT coming into the league). The thing is... we would be lucky if he drops to 26 so... what if he does? Would you draft him(or Jonah Williams, whoever drops)? It's kind of weird drafting LT in the first and letting him sit a year. Or... here's a wild one. What if Ballard decides to trade AC on draft day(in case he's not able to extend him)?* Last year the Bills traded Cordy Glenn in order to move from 21 to 10 in the draft. This is the equivalent of a high second, low first round pick. And AC is MUCH better than Glenn, so I think it's reasonable to expect a 1st for him. For example, the Vikings have a big need for OT and they want to run the ball + they are ready to win now rather than wait for an OT to develop. What's AC's best phase of the game? Run blocking... Is he ready to play winning football now? Absolutely.  Also... lets incorporate this one with another rumor - the Colts looking at trade for a CB. Trae Waynes has been rumored to be available for trade... So what do you say about... 

 

AC+3d OR 4th round pick for Vikings 1st(no. 18) and Trae Waynes? 

 

We draft Dillard with no. 18 and start him next to Big Q. 

 

@NFLfan you are welcome to share your opinion on this one too... 

 

*Disclaimer: I do NOT want AC gone. If it was up to me I'd do everything possible to sign him to an extension. Those are just hypothetical scenarios I'm going through in my head and letting them spill here since we are going a bit out of the box in this thread. 

I'd do that trade in a heart beat we get Waynes and another 1st rounder!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, count me in on the group who's been pondering this lately as well. I'd be fine with it. I like AC plenty, and if we extend him great, but the last thing we need is for AC to go down and see what our offense was like without him/a competent LT again. Not that any LT we draft would be ready right away, but still.

There's another guy who intrigues me, Trey Pipkins. Small school developmental guy. I wouldn't really wanna take him until the 3rd but he could very well be gone by then, and even then I'm not super high on him or anything. Just an interesting prospect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DaColts85 said:

Where as Solder is a solid LT let me again battle this pointless rhetoric of AC is not good crap. AC is easily a top 20 LT. if you don’t see that then please watch more tape or study the position. If he plays like he did last year I see Ballard giving him an extension but not some historic one. A good short term deal to finish his career as a Colt. 

I'm a fan of AC, but I'm not going to pump sunshine. He's solid, but I've never seen him on a top 10 or 20 list at position. I'm all for an extension. My point is that he's not worth the money that Nate got. And if that's what he demands, CB will let him walk. He's not going to settle though for a "short" term deal IMO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

I'm a fan of AC, but I'm not going to pump sunshine. He's solid, but I've never seen him on a top 10 or 20 list at position. I'm all for an extension. My point is that he's not worth the money that Nate got. And if that's what he demands, CB will let him walk. He's not going to settle though for a "short" term deal IMO. 

AC is not elite, but he's been around top 10-15 OT in the league for several years now. Nate Solder is WORSE player than AC. And he's getting more money than AC. 

 

AC was ranked no. 9 OT in the NFL last year by PFF. This includes both LTs and RTs. This year he was ranked no. 14... again including both LTs and RTs... and this is after he started slow coming back from his injury. 

 

He absolutely is worth what Solder got. Every above average starting LT will get that money if he hits FA. Just look at what the starting OTs this year got and most of them cannot touch the level of play AC's been at for the last several years. 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

I'm a fan of AC, but I'm not going to pump sunshine. He's solid, but I've never seen him on a top 10 or 20 list at position. I'm all for an extension. My point is that he's not worth the money that Nate got. And if that's what he demands, CB will let him walk. He's not going to settle though for a "short" term deal IMO. 

As stitches put above just check the lists again. Maybe you glossed over his name because he has been top 20 almost every year. Top 10 last year. A contract can always be worked out but again if he plays like he did last year I could easily see CB resign him. I highly doubt a 5 year deal or something but a good contract. Money goes up every year based on salary cap so I’m not concerned about Solder and his contract. Obsolete to the times. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, stitches said:

AC is not elite, but he's been around top 10-15 OT in the league for several years now. Nate Solder is WORSE player than AC. And he's getting more money than AC. 

 

AC was ranked no. 9 OT in the NFL last year by PFF. This includes both LTs and RTs. This year he was ranked no. 14... again including both LTs and RTs... and this is after he started slow coming back from his injury. 

 

He absolutely is worth what Solder got. Every above average starting LT will get that money if he hits FA. Just look at what the starting OTs this year got and most of them cannot touch the level of play AC's been at for the last several years. 

 

 

 

Thanks for this...   you beat me to it...    I was just about to make this very post when I arrived and saw yours.    Glad you made it.      

 

The only thing I'd add is that I don't think Solder has been a top OT for a number of years.    If he was,  I don't think BB would've let him leave New England.   But I read that due to his bad back which he's had most of his career,  Solder couldn't be counted on long term.   That's part of the math BB used.    Also,  I read that the Giants weren't necessarily all that thrilled with the job that Solder did for them.    Not that he was terrible,  but he wasn't as good as they were hoping for.

 

Props for stepping up, Stiches.   Much appreciated.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I know don’t feed the troll but AC isn’t a top 20 T? Then insinuating that there is reason to think Castonzo won’t be healthy. The guy had missed 3 starts since his rookie season prior to last season. He had started 97% of the regular season games(93 of 96). 

 

I've seen many articles ranking OTs pre, and post 2018 season. AC was not listed in any of them that I saw. I'd be happy to dig up a few and post them. Again, not saying AC sucks, he's just not a T1 guy. If you're assuming their are 32 teams with 2 starting tackles, 64 starters overall, he'd grade out mid 20s or early 30s. That's not bad, just not Tier 1. 

 

He's also going to be 31. While that's not terrible, it is a time when injuries can start impacting OL. The fact the injury was "nagging" is a bit of a concern. I expect him to be 100 to start this year, but it is something you have to watch for with an aging T. 

 

In short, it is a concern, but nothing to panic over. I'd take a T in the late rounds regardless for depth and development. I would not take one in the first 2 rounds though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

As stitches put above just check the lists again. Maybe you glossed over his name because he has been top 20 almost every year. Top 10 last year. A contract can always be worked out but again if he plays like he did last year I could easily see CB resign him. I highly doubt a 5 year deal or something but a good contract. Money goes up every year based on salary cap so I’m not concerned about Solder and his contract. Obsolete to the times. 

I haven't seen the PFF list, but I've seen many others. Top 10 would put you at least in Pro-Bowl alternate status, which he hasn't been. 

 

I definitely want to re sign him. If he comes asking for Solder like dollars, I just don't think CB will pay. He'd rather go draft the year that AC's contract expires. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

couldn't find AC ranked on PFF. not saying he isn't, but I couldn't find it (please post if you have it handy).

 

here's PFF's end of season unit ranking summary. AC is not mentioned, but Smith ended as the 25th rated T of the season. If AC was graded high, I think they would have mentioned him along with Smith and Nelson. 

 

Quote

We knew they’d be better, but I don’t think even the biggest Colts homer could have foreseen this coming. Drafting the highest-graded rookie guard though and the second-highest-graded rookie tackle will do that. Everyone and their mother predicted Quenton Nelson would be a stud, and he was as a second-team PFF All-Pro, but Braden Smith going from college guard to pro tackle was a wildcard. Fortunately, that card came up aces as Smith was PFF’s 25th-highest graded tackle on the season.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

I haven't seen the PFF list, but I've seen many others. Top 10 would put you at least in Pro-Bowl alternate status, which he hasn't been. 

 

I definitely want to re sign him. If he comes asking for Solder like dollars, I just don't think CB will pay. He'd rather go draft the year that AC's contract expires. 

I don’t base things on the Pro-bowl. Leonard was a beast and didn’t make it. 

 

Contract wise im sure AC is smart and sees that he might be able to go somewhere for huge money (possibly) or stay here. If he plays well CB will put his value on him within reason. CB has stated multiple times he wants the trenches secure and letting your bookend leave for a possible rookie is quit the opposite. If he asks for something stupid tho... yes I agree he might be wearing a different jersey. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you HAVE to consider it 

 

Especially is the top DL is off the board

 

We have ZERO depth at OT...... AC is coming up on contract ....... he is a good player

he is not a great player

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Irish YJ said:

couldn't find AC ranked on PFF. not saying he isn't, but I couldn't find it (please post if you have it handy).

 

here's PFF's end of season unit ranking summary. AC is not mentioned, but Smith ended as the 25th rated T of the season. If AC was graded high, I think they would have mentioned him along with Smith and Nelson. 

 

 

 

They also didn't meantion Kelly or Glowinski....    and they both enjoyed their best seasons.

 

Just because they didn't mention AC doesn't mean he's not very good.

 

If you want further proof...   what happened to the Colts OL once AC came back.   We won 9 of 11 games with dramatically improved offensive line play.    Most here don't think it's a coincidence the OL became a force when AC returned.    Yes,  there's plenty of credit to go around.   Everyone played to, or exceeded expectations.    But that includes AC as well.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

couldn't find AC ranked on PFF. not saying he isn't, but I couldn't find it (please post if you have it handy).

 

here's PFF's end of season unit ranking summary. AC is not mentioned, but Smith ended as the 25th rated T of the season. If AC was graded high, I think they would have mentioned him along with Smith and Nelson. 

 

 

Here's his end of season ranking: 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/nfl/players/anthony-castonzo/6174

 

No.14 among all tackles(again, this includes both left and right tackles). He was ranked no. 9 the previous season. 

Share this post


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

 

Thanks for this...   you beat me to it...    I was just about to make this very post when I arrived and saw yours.    Glad you made it.      

 

The only thing I'd add is that I don't think Solder has been a top OT for a number of years.    If he was,  I don't think BB would've let him leave New England.   But I read that due to his bad back which he's had most of his career,  Solder couldn't be counted on long term.   That's part of the math BB used.    Also,  I read that the Giants weren't necessarily all that thrilled with the job that Solder did for them.    Not that he was terrible,  but he wasn't as good as they were hoping for.

 

Props for stepping up, Stiches.   Much appreciated.

 

What do you think about my out of the box idea? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, shastamasta said:

I will put a twist on this as well.

 

Little not only develops for a year...BUT given Smith's ability to kick inside to RG...Little essentially gives them a back up at both G and OT spots (C is already covered by Boehm).

 

If AC of Smith get hurt...Little plays LT or RT.

If Glow gets hurt...Smith kicks inside to RG and Little plays RT.

If Nelson gets hurt...Glow goes to LG, Smith kicks inside to RG and Little goes to RT.

 

I think it makes a whole lot of sense to have a legit OT as the 6th man on the OL. Whether or not that is worth a 1st round pick right now...I guess that depends on just how good that player is..and he would definitely have to be a legit future LT to justify it.

 

I would argue that if Nelson where hurt it would make more sense to move Smith to LG and put Little at RT.  

 

LG probably pulls a lot more than RG and Smith would be better suited to pulling than Glow.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

I would argue that if Nelson where hurt it would make more sense to move Smith to LG and put Little at RT.  

 

LG probably pulls a lot more than RG and Smith would be better suited to pulling than Glow.  

 

You're probably right. I just figured kicking inside from RT to RG and RG to LG would be less of a shift for the incumbent guys.

 

I think I might have convinced myself that a legit OT is something this team needs.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...