Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I only agree with the one about Dexter Lawrence.  I don’t see S or WR as big needs.  We may be able to upgrade in the draft, but we’re fairly deep at both positions...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing I agree with is not adding a safety.  I am not sure bout Dexter Lawrence and if he fits this D.  I do remember wen Cory Simo played for us. He was over weight but man he ate up some blockers

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Honestly,  I'm not the least bit worried about any of those issues.

 

-- Ballard will know what to do in any situation.

-- Not worried about not being able to find a WR that we like.   After round one,  this is a decent class of WR's.

-- Not worried if it looks like our choice is Dexter Lawrence.   Ballard either wants him, or he doesn't.   If he does,  and he's there,  come on down.   If he doesn't want him,  it's next up on his board.

-- The story says this is a weak class of safety's.   Just saw a video where Gil Brandt says this is one of the best and deepest classes of safeties he's ever seen.   Maybe ever.   Now, I will say that most of them seem to be Free Safeties and not Strong side guys.   Few like Geathers.   But I'm confident that Ballard and Eberflus will find guys they like.

 

Seriously....   I don't view anything here as a possible nightmare.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really worried either, but for different reasons.

 

1. There will be a rush on Edge and iDL, which means other BPA positions will likely be pushed down.

 

2. There should be a pretty decent iDL option at 26. If Lawrence is the best, I'd be OK with him. He might not bring pass rush, but he has other quality attributes. I do think we'll see someone better than Lawrence available at 26.

 

3. It's not a great S class in terms of tier 1 guys, but there is a decent amount of T2 guys. IMO, I don't see any T1 guys at all. I see about 6 or 7 quality T2 guys. That's great news for a team with 3 picks from 26-59.

 

4. We simply don't have any glaring holes. S is more of injury issue than lack of talent. Both S (or DB in general) and iDL will benefit from the addition of Houston. Future needs aside, we just don't have any big weaknesses. So need to look to upgrade point differential spots, and look to the future.

 

5. From a simple points differential perspective, I think WR is the biggest need. We simply can't afford to get shut down with double teams like we did vs KC. There should be several good options from 26-59.

 

6. In short, I think iDL, WR, and S are the biggest needs, and I think we'll have decent choices for those three in the first 2 rounds. I don't care which one is first, second, or third. I'd bet though that iDL is 26, and WR and S with the next two.

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so I guess I won't be reading any more from that chump or that site.

 

So, this guy hasn't been watching Ballard the past 2 years?

 

Total failure is possible, but I think not.

Irish YJ. you got it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, jmac_48 said:

so I guess I won't be reading any more from that chump or that site.

 

So, this guy hasn't been watching Ballard the past 2 years?

 

Total failure is possible, but I think not.

Irish YJ. you got it!

in fairness to the author, he's just putting a what if scenario out there based on his opinions of needs. i just don't agree with him. i have done plenty of mock simulations. some are awesome for the colts, some are frustrating as hell. i'm not ballard (thank god), and i'm just a fan, so anything can happen lol. 

 

if you haven't done a simulation, give it a shot. fun stuff. it's a little chess, a little monopoly, a little plain luck.

 

here's an easy one without nonsense.

https://fanspeak.com/ontheclock/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t agree with any of his points and  am not worried. Ballard isn’t going by the same criteria the media and fans are going by.  He didn’t last year and He recently said his board is different than the mocks out this year as well.

 

As a side note, Chris Simms said Lawrence is his 4th best def lineman, better Than Wilkins. So who knows where Ballard has him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I'll be the oddball out, and agree with the article.

Dexter Lawrence is a good player.  Possibly even a great player.  But I don't think he's worth it at 26.  I'd rather take him at 34, and get a more dynamic player with our first pick.  But what happens if he's the best guy left on our board, and we can't trade down?  Do we take him anyway?  I might.  But I would also be unhappy doing it.

I do think we need to come away with a WR in this draft.  And there are plenty of them, all with grades from low 1st through the entire 2nd round.  But what happens if we address, say, DL and DB at 26 and 34, and then everybody gets taken by the time we get to 59?  And all that's left are WR's that rank no better than Funchess, or, worse yet, no better than Chester Rogers?  (Which is where I grade Boykin, by the way.)  I think that would kinda suck.

I would like to get a safety in this draft, but I think we can get one in the 3rd or 4th round.  We don't need Mr. Amazing.  We just need an assurance that if our current starters get injured (again), the cupboard won't be completely bare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am glad that a tree didnt have to die for a read

 

This was weak stuff, not worth the time

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well being I actually want to draft Lawrence just like I wanted Nelson with our 3rd pick last year I'm totally cool. I do t need the flash and dash when o know what works and the ripples these guys cause for the rest of the team. 

Share this post


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

 

garbage

Agreed! None of those are failure situations 

Just now, NewEra said:

Agreed! None of those are failure situations 

Or nightmare situations 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

in fairness to the author, he's just putting a what if scenario out there based on his opinions of needs. i just don't agree with him. i have done plenty of mock simulations. some are awesome for the colts, some are frustrating as hell. i'm not ballard (thank god), and i'm just a fan, so anything can happen lol. 

 

if you haven't done a simulation, give it a shot. fun stuff. it's a little chess, a little monopoly, a little plain luck.

 

here's an easy one without nonsense.

https://fanspeak.com/ontheclock/

Thanks for posting that link. Lots of fun, and lots of different ways to play it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going back to this article, I feel as though it has been misinterpreted. I think what the author means by this is not that it would ruin the draft if any of this happened, but rather what he hopes doesn't happen. It is similar to what many people do on here in that regard, such as some people saying that they really hope we don't go for position x in round one and others arguing against them. Sure, the title page is misleading, but I agree with the majority of what is written, especially that I hope we don't take Lawrence due to scheme fit and the fact that someone better will likely be on the board, as well as that we need to grab a WR and a safety at some point, preferably early. 

 

Also, for clarification to those who just skimmed, I advise you read deeper into what is written in the first scenario, which I assume is what most of you are upset by. Here is an excerpt:

 

Quote

"This isn’t to say making a trade is necessary in the first round but having the option to do so always makes things easier, especially when there is no clear prospect on the board."

 

He isn't saying we need to trade out of 26, rather that we need to have the option available if we decide that no player is worth the value at that pick.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, WarGhost21 said:

Going back to this article, I feel as though it has been misinterpreted. I think what the author means by this is not that it would ruin the draft if any of this happened, but rather what he hopes doesn't happen. It is similar to what many people do on here in that regard, such as some people saying that they really hope we don't go for position x in round one and others arguing against them. Sure, the title page is misleading, but I agree with the majority of what is written, especially that I hope we don't take Lawrence due to scheme fit and the fact that someone better will likely be on the board, as well as that we need to grab a WR and a safety at some point, preferably early. 

 

Also, for clarification to those who just skimmed, I advise you read deeper into what is written in the first scenario, which I assume is what most of you are upset by. Here is an excerpt:

 

 

He isn't saying we need to trade out of 26, rather that we need to have the option available if we decide that no player is worth the value at that pick.

 

I'm really not overly concerned with any of those scenarios.  I think we're in perfect position to just take the best player that makes sense for us.  

 

Don't get me wrong there are some places that we could use improvement more than others.  But this team won 9 of the final 10 games and all the major contributors to that are back on plus Funchess & Houston.  Inman is probably the biggest name that isn't back on the team and I don't think he's signed anyplace yet.  

 

I really don't think I'm going to be bothered if we come out of the draft without getting a player in a specific position such as WR or S unless there seemed to me to be an obvious fit there in a player available on the board and the Colts went in a different direction and picked a player that they don't appear to have any major need of improvement.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its like a test in school.  The people worried are the ones who are least prepared. The guy who sat up front all year and is prepared can’t wait for the test.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, LockeDown said:

its like a test in school.  The people worried are the ones who are least prepared. The guy who sat up front all year and is prepared can’t wait for the test.  

I too can’t wait, but at the same time you also have that kid who isn’t worried because he knows he’s going to fail anyways. It’s about doing your homework and knowing what could possibly go wrong, that way you are ready if it does. Those who worry excessively, I agree, are the worst, but at the same time, you need to worry a little bit if you care

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, jmac_48 said:

so I guess I won't be reading any more from that chump or that site.

 

So, this guy hasn't been watching Ballard the past 2 years?

 

Total failure is possible, but I think not.

Irish YJ. you got it!

 

To be fair, he's not saying it WILL happen.

 

I think he and everyone else knows that Ballard knows what he's doing

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

Ok, I'll be the oddball out, and agree with the article.

Dexter Lawrence is a good player.  Possibly even a great player.  But I don't think he's worth it at 26.  I'd rather take him at 34, and get a more dynamic player with our first pick.  But what happens if he's the best guy left on our board, and we can't trade down? 

 

 

If you don't call a few teams and line a couple of them up for potential trade (well before the draft), then you might be stuck.  Truth is, Chris is calling GM's everyday day now.  I'm sure more than a few asked would they be willing to trade up to our 26 If the guy the Colts target is gone?  They say yes, then decide potential compensation.  Deal is if Colts guy (no names mentioned) is gone they call them up. If their guy is still there, they complete the trade as set up previously. If their guy is also gone too, then you call the next team you set up a similar deal (possibly different compensation etc...) and see if that one goes through.  Rinse and repeat.

 

Quote

Do we take him anyway?  I might.  But I would also be unhappy doing it.

 

If he is best on your board, you are saying you are unhappy with the scouting and the way the draft team set up the board?  Or the GM's inability to setup contingency plans to address the case of BPA at that slot not being a guy you want at that slot if it arises on draft day?

 

By a different viewpoint, say you do want player Solidguy A at #34, not 26. So you take Dynamo A- at 26 instead (why isn't he BPA unless he is equal grade but at position of perceived less need?), waiting to take Solidguy A at #34.  Then Bill Belichick decides Solidguy A is BPA on his board and takes him instead of trading down.  How have you prepared for missing on Solidguy A completely now?

 

Quote

I do think we need to come away with a WR in this draft.  And there are plenty of them, all with grades from low 1st through the entire 2nd round.  But what happens if we address, say, DL and DB at 26 and 34, and then everybody gets taken by the time we get to 59?  And all that's left are WR's that rank no better than Funchess, or, worse yet, no better than Chester Rogers?  (Which is where I grade Boykin, by the way.)  I think that would kinda suck.

 

Then you stay true to your board and take BPA. Maybe it's that safety you want, or... someone else. Forget filling WR in that draft round if there are none on the board close to your BPA guys that are still there in that slot.

 

Quote

I would like to get a safety in this draft, but I think we can get one in the 3rd or 4th round.  We don't need Mr. Amazing.  We just need an assurance that if our current starters get injured (again), the cupboard won't be completely bare.

 

I'd go BPA, and if many guys are 'tied' in grade there, take the one at a greatest perceived need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, WarGhost21 said:

I too can’t wait, but at the same time you also have that kid who isn’t worried because he knows he’s going to fail anyways. It’s about doing your homework and knowing what could possibly go wrong, that way you are ready if it does. Those who worry excessively, I agree, are the worst, but at the same time, you need to worry a little bit if you care

...yeah, I always did. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Total clickbait.

i wouldnt call any of those scenarios a nightmare.  And i hate how the guy follows every point with "thats not to say.....". Talk about hedging your bets.  Way to go out on a limb buddy.

  I'm thinking Ballard could get as many calls on our first 2nd rounder as our 1st.  If giys slip thru to the 2nd round, our phone will be ringing at the #2 pick.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, HarryTheCat said:

Thanks for posting that link. Lots of fun, and lots of different ways to play it. 

you're welcome. 

it really makes you think about strategy and timing of picks. 

the lack of monster studs, but good depth of the this year's WR and S class, has made it easy for me (my needs prioritized 1-iDL, 2a-WR, 2b-S) getting what I want in the first two rounds. the exercises have really made me look more at the mid round potential. 

 

not that anything plays out like we want it to, or we know what ballard wants/does, but I really like the depth of this year's class for areas of our need.

Share this post


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

Ok, I'll be the oddball out, and agree with the article.

Dexter Lawrence is a good player.  Possibly even a great player.  But I don't think he's worth it at 26.  I'd rather take him at 34, and get a more dynamic player with our first pick.  But what happens if he's the best guy left on our board, and we can't trade down?  Do we take him anyway?  I might.  But I would also be unhappy doing it.

I do think we need to come away with a WR in this draft.  And there are plenty of them, all with grades from low 1st through the entire 2nd round.  But what happens if we address, say, DL and DB at 26 and 34, and then everybody gets taken by the time we get to 59?  And all that's left are WR's that rank no better than Funchess, or, worse yet, no better than Chester Rogers?  (Which is where I grade Boykin, by the way.)  I think that would kinda suck.

I would like to get a safety in this draft, but I think we can get one in the 3rd or 4th round.  We don't need Mr. Amazing.  We just need an assurance that if our current starters get injured (again), the cupboard won't be completely bare.

In terms of grading, I'll use NFL.com's draft ratings. Funchess was a 5.64 during the 2016 draft (6.0 is assumed a "Starter"). Rogers wasn't even rated or included in most big boards at all (top 300 or 400). 

 

Rogers was an undrafted free agent, so saying someone ranks under Rogers is a bit of a head scratcher. There are 16 WRs rated higher than Funchess's 5.64 in this year's draft. Boykin is one of them. One advantage to taking one of those 16, or even one a bit lower, is that you're not paying them 10M or more per year for the next XX years. Isabella for instance is rated a little below 5.64, but is RW and PFF's top rated WR. I'd have zero problem whatsoever taking him at 59. And I'd have zero problem with several of the WRs at 34. Chances are that a 6.0 WR will be available at 26 is pretty much a given, and at 34, pretty likely as well.

 

You can disagree with the ratings, but there will be plenty of solid WRs throughout the 2nd, and possibly into the 3rd. Short on T1 talent, but plenty of good T2 guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2019 at 1:16 AM, Irish YJ said:

if you haven't done a simulation, give it a shot. fun stuff. it's a little chess, a little monopoly, a little plain luck.

 

here's an easy one without nonsense.

https://fanspeak.com/ontheclock/

 

I played it, but I have not adjusted my board for medical and scheme fits. (which most fans don't, but might make a tremendous difference in these selections if it's done).  Here is my results-
 

26: R1P26  EDGE RASHAN GARY

34: R2P2 S JOHNATHAN ABRAM

59: R2P27 CB ROCK YA-SIN

89: R3P25 TE JACE STERNBERGER

129: R4P27 CB SEAN BUNTING

135: R4P33 WR TERRY MCLAURIN

 

I just took my BPA from list that was left when my turn came up.  Not drafting for position {unless I had two real close, I would have went with the player at a perceived hole in the roster}.

 

P.S. - Jonathan Abram is not afraid to hit. He was ejected from a Spring game (which was suspended as well) in 2017 for a hit on a team mate!!

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

I played it, but I have not adjusted my board for medical and scheme fits. (which most fans don't, but might make a tremendous difference in these selections if it's done).  Here is my results-
 

26: R1P26  EDGE RASHAN GARY

34: R2P2 S JOHNATHAN ABRAM

59: R2P27 CB ROCK YA-SIN

89: R3P25 TE JACE STERNBERGER

129: R4P27 CB SEAN BUNTING

135: R4P33 WR TERRY MCLAURIN

 

I just took my BPA from list that was left when my turn came up.  Not drafting for position {unless I had two real close, I would have went with the player at a perceived hole in the roster}.

 

P.S. - Jonathan Abram is not afraid to hit. He was ejected from a Spring game (which was suspended as well) in 2017 for a hit on a team mate!!

 

 

I've seen Gary dropping a bit in a few mocks, but I don't see him dropping to 26. It would be tempting to take him if he did, even if you don't think Edge is a top 3 need. 

 

I love Abrams as a run stopper, just a lot of concerns on his coverage ability due to the scheme he was in. I'm still partial to a few all-around guys like Thorn, Savage, and CJG.

 

As far as CB is concerned, I really like Jordan Brown in the later rounds. Check him out. I definitely think he's one of the hidden gem guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Abram is gonna be a penalty/fine machine. Not to mention he misses a lot of tackles. And I imagine he’ll end up hurting one of his own teammates either in practice or in a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Ballard I trust.  If he thinks Lawrence, or any of those other guys are worthy of drafting 1st, then so be it.  He's been pretty good in the early rounds so far so he has my confidence.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot stress enough how totally overblown our "need" at safety is. We currently have 3 starter caliber players, and a 2nd year guy in Odum who started a bit last year. We DO NOT need to go early on safety. Early day 3? Fine. But I'm not taking a safety until Saturday unless it's theres a large gap in talent on the board.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, AZColt11 said:

In Ballard I trust.  If he thinks Lawrence, or any of those other guys are worthy of drafting 1st, then so be it.  He's been pretty good in the early rounds so far so he has my confidence.

People are underestimating Lawrence pass rush. I read an article where they compared him with two other big guys who got drafted in the first round and Lawrence numbers were better. He just wasn't asked that at Clemson and still had a lot of hits on the qb. I would rather have Lawrence who can shut the run down, keep our lbers clean and still blow up the middle. Verses a guy who only brings pass rush

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This article was weak but I understand you need filler on a slow news day.

 

How about a REAL nightmare scenario:

 

On April 24, Chris Ballard contracts the 72-hour strain of the Ebola virus after passing through O'Hare airport.  Ryan Grigson talks his way into the Colts war room and chooses the pick at 26:

 

D.K. Metcalf :hissy:

 

Share this post


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

How about a REAL nightmare scenario:

 

On April 24, Chris Ballard contracts the 72-hour strain of the Ebola virus after passing through O'Hare airport.  Ryan Grigson talks his way into the Colts war room and chooses the pick at 26:

 

D.K. Metcalf :hissy:

 

Hey now...

Why even put something that scary out there in the "Ether"???

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, AZColt11 said:

In Ballard I trust.  If he thinks Lawrence, or any of those other guys are worthy of drafting 1st, then so be it.  He's been pretty good in the early rounds so far so he has my confidence.

This is my stance. I see comments where others are saying but Lawrence doesn’t make sense, he doesn’t fit our scheme or the 340+ DT are fossils of the league etc... If CB says we pick Lawrence, it’s because he and his coaching staff and his scouts have discussed him and watched his film a ton. If CB and the coaches agree he isn’t a fit here, he won’t be in the BPA list because he isn’t BPA for this scheme. 

 

May this stage of the draft threads, I’m just ready to get the draft over so we can get fresh threads with new disagreements about how CB missed on _____________ and how we reached picking this or that guy lol (not saying you or your reply here). 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Jdubu said:

This is my stance. I see comments where others are saying but Lawrence doesn’t make sense, he doesn’t fit our scheme or the 340+ DT are fossils of the league etc... If CB says we pick Lawrence, it’s because he and his coaching staff and his scouts have discussed him and watched his film a ton. If CB and the coaches agree he isn’t a fit here, he won’t be in the BPA list because he isn’t BPA for this scheme. 

 

May this stage of the draft threads, I’m just ready to get the draft over so we can get fresh threads with new disagreements about how CB missed on _____________ and how we reached picking this or that guy lol (not saying you or your reply here). 

Lol amen to that. You don't pick a guard that high in the draft. Drafts a guard. This guys doesn't fit, that guys doesn't fit. Drafts that guy. Lol, it's great comedy. 

 

And I'm all about Lawrence just like I was about Nelson. He does fit. He does bring pash rush. He will help shut the run down and keep our guys able to roam and make plays. Now if he only had that mean streak Nelson does. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Lol amen to that. You don't pick a guard that high in the draft. Drafts a guard. This guys doesn't fit, that guys doesn't fit. Drafts that guy. Lol, it's great comedy. 

 

And I'm all about Lawrence just like I was about Nelson. He does fit. He does bring pash rush. He will help shut the run down and keep our guys able to roam and make plays. Now if he only had that mean streak Nelson does. 

You can’t tell me a guy who weighs 340+ doesn’t have a mean streak in him. Maybe we have to pull it out of him a little bit by hiding his pregame meal or telling him there is cake and cookie only to find out it’s really tofu cake and cardboard cookies :)

  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

You can’t tell me a guy who weighs 340+ doesn’t have a mean streak in him. Maybe we have to pull it out of him a little bit by hiding his pregame meal or telling him there is cake and cookie only to find out it’s really tofu cake and cardboard cookies :)

Lol I like the way you think. I also use some smelling salts for powerlifting. A shot of Skull Smash will bring the rage out in you lol

Can you imagine Lawrence and Nelson going at it at practice? That would be awesome to watch

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2019 at 8:02 AM, John Hammonds said:

Ok, I'll be the oddball out, and agree with the article.

Dexter Lawrence is a good player.  Possibly even a great player.  But I don't think he's worth it at 26.  I'd rather take him at 34, and get a more dynamic player with our first pick.  But what happens if he's the best guy left on our board, and we can't trade down?  Do we take him anyway?  I might.  But I would also be unhappy doing it.

I do think we need to come away with a WR in this draft.  And there are plenty of them, all with grades from low 1st through the entire 2nd round.  But what happens if we address, say, DL and DB at 26 and 34, and then everybody gets taken by the time we get to 59?  And all that's left are WR's that rank no better than Funchess, or, worse yet, no better than Chester Rogers?  (Which is where I grade Boykin, by the way.)  I think that would kinda suck.

I would like to get a safety in this draft, but I think we can get one in the 3rd or 4th round.  We don't need Mr. Amazing.  We just need an assurance that if our current starters get injured (again), the cupboard won't be completely bare.

You realize the difference between pick 26 and 34 is 8 spots right? That’s not a lot. You’re not going to get a significantly better player at 26 than you would at 34. The skill set will be around the same. That’s why the guys you see mocked from picks 25-32 you sometimes see in the 2nd round and vice versa. I think Ballard just recently said there’s maybe 14 blue chip talents in this draft. 26 is basically an early 2nd round pick.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

You realize the difference between pick 26 and 34 is 8 spots right? That’s not a lot. You’re not going to get a significantly better player at 26 than you would at 34. The skill set will be around the same. That’s why the guys you see mocked from picks 25-32 you sometimes see in the 2nd round and vice versa. I think Ballard just recently said there’s maybe 14 blue chip talents in this draft. 26 is basically an early 2nd round pick.

Lets say hypothetically that we are at 26, and Ballard's board has Lawrence, A.J. Brown, McGary, and Abram as his BPA's. While it's true that Ballard said there 14 blue-chip prospects, that doesn't mean 26 isn't much better than 34. At 26, Ballard can choose any of the 4 he prefers at the position he prefers. At 34, he's probably getting the player that's leftover from the other 3 in most scenarios. All about getting your choice of player within a tier.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whenever I use Fanspeak, feel like I come away with a loaded draft.  Who says no to this gem of a mock:

 

26: R1P26

 

EDGE CLELIN FERRELL

CLEMSON

34: R2P2

 

DL JEFFERY SIMMONS

MISSISSIPPI STATE

59: R2P27

 

WR J.J. ARCEGA-WHITESIDE

STANFORD

89: R3P25

 

CB AMANI ORUWARIYE

PENN STATE

129: R4P27

 

WR EMANUEL HALL

MISSOURI

135: R4P33

 

S AMANI HOOKER

IOWA

Share this post


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

Whenever I use Fanspeak, feel like I come away with a loaded draft.  Who says no to this gem of a mock:

 

26: R1P26

 

EDGE CLELIN FERRELL

CLEMSON

34: R2P2

 

DL JEFFERY SIMMONS

MISSISSIPPI STATE

59: R2P27

 

WR J.J. ARCEGA-WHITESIDE

STANFORD

89: R3P25

 

CB AMANI ORUWARIYE

PENN STATE

129: R4P27

 

WR EMANUEL HALL

MISSOURI

135: R4P33

 

S AMANI HOOKER

IOWA

lol.. what board did you select, and what needs did you pick?

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

    • That might always be the case, but when it's a DII guy who wasn't at the Combine, it's hard to imagine there was a ton of interest in him. Of course, all it takes is one team being in love with him. I'm sure there was another team expecting him to be a UDFA, mad because the Colts took him in the fifth. Get your guy, that's the most important thing.
    • Good point.  I think this has serious merit 
    • My take   1. We overachieved last season. Period 2. We played at KC 3. TY limited the offense because he was so injured.  4. We played a very very good coach with time to prepare and his guys got some rest too and time to scout the team. Remember, Reich is well known to Reid as well by now.  5. Not having Hooker really mattered 6. Play calling was a bit blah 7. How does Vinny automatic miss those kicks? 8. A strip sack for us turns into a strip sack for them a few plays later, that hurt.  9. A young team who wasn’t supposed to be in the playoffs, let alone a second game in the playoffs had some factor here.  10. KC had a pretty good team   my concern from that game would be how poorly our run game was going forward. Kelly better play better than he did this season or I don’t see a 15 million/yr contract coming his way in Indy. I think with a healthy TY, the additions of DF and Cain and Paris and others should really boost that offense. An offense with TY, Paris, Doyle, EE and Mack, now that’s gonna be a tough group to match up with and defend. Run or pass, heck coach, idk what they are doing lol.    Gonna be fun to see this team evolve and have better back ups coming off the bench. I just hope we have enough beef in the middle to stop the run and I just hope that Kelly was hobbled in that KC game because it was one of his worst games that year. 
    • This again boils down to you hanging on to 'this is how it's always been done.' And you don't get that I don't care about that rationale. I think it can be done better. Which is why, in my first post in this thread, I said "to me, it's a no brainer." To me. It should be obvious that this is my stated preference, not me saying that teams that don't do it this way are stupid.   There should be nothing more that I have to say about that, except you continue to rely on that appeal to authority, and I'm telling you that 'how it's always been done' isn't legitimate reason for not examining potential alternatives. Not just in this area, but in everything.      You're missing an important detail, and I think it's because you've put my argument in a box and are unwilling to actually examine it on its merits.   As I said initially, and have said since, my argument is to make this change six months sooner, not six months later. "Imagine if we had fired Grigson in June 2016 instead of January 2017." Did you miss that part, again? What about "if the Texans had waited until January 2020 to fire Gaine..."?    I want him in asap. You want him asap, but not until January.   My statement about it being just one draft is referencing the worst case scenario, which is 'we just blew a draft cycle by letting a lame duck GM stay,' to which I say 'get over it, I'm okay with that if that's what it takes to get the guy I want in the building, with the staff he wants.' And that's where my argument about it potentially being easier to interview candidates in the down season after the draft is critical. The Jets wanted Joe Douglas; he evidently didn't want to entertain a move during draft season, but jumped at it in May/June. (There's the matter of moving his family during the school year, etc.) In theory, this approach could make it easier to interview good candidates. Whether you agree with that or not, whether it's important to you or not, this is mostly an aside. As I said, this was my response to the alarmist reaction of 'they just blew a draft!' Which I think is overstated, especially in the Texans' case.     Not at all. Again, if Ballard started in June 2016, he theoretically could have changed coaches a year sooner.      This is a hindsight fallacy. Go back to the Texans wanting to hire Caserio. I'm not arguing that he's going to be a great GM, I'm arguing that he's the guy they want to hire, and he's available in June. Same for the Jets and Douglas. The Chiefs and Veach.    We know that every person hired doesn't succeed. I never argued that they do. That's true of whoever you rush to hire in January. The point is that there is always a pool of qualified candidates from which to choose. I won't be retracting that, I firmly believe it, and I said it when the Colts were interviewing coaches in 2012, when they interviewed GMs in 2017, and when they interviewed coaches in 2018. You choosing to reject that is pretty ridiculous, to be honest. There are always qualified candidates. Choosing the right one is a different story.   And again, if there's one guy you really, desperately want, why wait until January to get him?     You could give me the benefit of the doubt and assume that if I'm saying it, I mean it. Especially this far into the discussion...    And going back to what I said earlier, this is and always has been my opinion. I'm not offering studies and conclusive evidence to support this opinion because it's a personal preference, it's what I think would be best (although I have offered evidence and rationale to support my opinion, you've just chosen to reject, for reasons I don't agree with).    I'm okay with the disagreement. What I find personally off-putting is the insistence that, because you don't understand my angle, it means I either haven't actually thought it through, or I don't actually believe it. As I said earlier, I understand that general consensus disagrees with my viewpoint, but that doesn't mean I'm just going to conform. The fact that I'm presenting an argument in earnest should be enough.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...