Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Irish YJ

Poll - 2019 iDL Draft Pick in the 1st

Poll - 2019 iDL Draft Pick in the 1st  

33 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. What iDL will the Colts pick at 26 (see assumptions below)

    • Christian Wilkins - doubt he falls to 26.
    • Dexter Lawrence - too big for scheme?
    • Jeffery Simmons - great talent, but off field concerns and injury
    • Jerry Tillery - too many interests outside of football?
    • Dre'Mont Jones - great athlete, is he too small, and only has one year of good production
      0
    • Zach Allen - too much of a tweener?
      0

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 04/25/2019 at 11:00 PM

Recommended Posts

Assuming

-We take an iDL as our first pick

-We don't move up or back in the draft

-Williams, Oliver, and Gary (tweener) are gone by 26

 

Who will the Colts end up with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just did a scan of Colts.com's mock mondays, and Dexter Lawrence was the most picked at 26. I wouldn't be disappointed, but would not be as excited compared to Wilkins or Tillery. I'd love Simmons, I just don't want to wait. Dre'mont is interesting too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like Jeffrey Simmons is the only answer at 26. Maybe Jerry Tillery. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MTC said:

I feel like Jeffrey Simmons is the only answer at 26. Maybe Jerry Tillery. 

 

I always wonder what the conversations with an injured guy like Simmons would be like (during pre draft interviews/meetings). You're pretty much losing a year of the cheap rookie contract due to injury. If you take him in the first, you get a fifth year option, but most players cry like a babe when a 5th year option is invoked.

 

If I were a coach/GM, I'd say "Mr. Simmons, we're going to take a chance on your injury healing, and let you sit a year, but we're also going to use the 5th year option and expect you to show up without issue"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I picked Wilkins with the assumption all were available.  I think he’s the best fit 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lawrence may not have some of the others pass rush but they don't have his run stopping ability, taking up blocks, pushing the pocket. He also actually does have pass rushing ability. Could even lose a little weight if need be. I think he's fine. Make a team one dimensional you can pin your ears back and get after them

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

What are Tillery's outside interests? First I heard of this.

 

I think book report dioramas.   Maybe Andrew will have him in his book club!

 

jk.  I don’t know.  It’s a weird negative unless it’s a nice way of saying he’s not into football

 

bryce love has said his main goal in life is to become a doctor after football but I don’t think that is a detriment to him. I think it’s a positive.  

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll go out on a limb and say that CB goes Lawrence with #26, and then SImmons with #34... Then a safety with #59, and we're on a solid base for the rest of the draft (WR, OL, Edge, and CB will round out the rest of the picks...)

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

What are Tillery's outside interests? First I heard of this.

he was class prez at ND. he likes to travel. interned at a financial corp last summer in Ireland IIRC. too smart for football. 

 

in short, he might actually have a brain or interest in things outside of the cult of football. DTs aren't supposed to do that...

 

he is, the most interesting DT in the world.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CB talks about special/ unique traits. So I think Simmons (and Brian Burns) fit that bill and I can even imagine him trading up for one of them if he likes them enough. 

 

I'd love a day 2 WR to stretch the field (M Brown/Deebo/Campbell) as I still have nightmares about the first half at KC.  

 

I think Ballard's going to draft linemen until he's satisfied w both sides, then he will truly go BPA.  After his epic draft achievement last year, I completely trust whatever he ends up doing. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If all are there, I take Wilkins 99% of the time and Simmons 1%. Like you've stated its unlikely though, so I'll go with Simmons (provided Dr's reports are good).

 

Share this post


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

he was class prez at ND. he likes to travel. interned at a financial corp last summer in Ireland IIRC. too smart for football. 

 

in short, he might actually have a brain or interest in things outside of the cult of football. DTs aren't supposed to do that...

 

he is, the most interesting DT in the world.

Pretty broad range of interests..... throw in a trip to the World Cup and I'd have thought you were talking about Andrew Luck. 

 

I'm good with Tillery at #26 if he's there.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, pacolts56 said:

Pretty broad range of interests..... throw in a trip to the World Cup and I'd have thought you were talking about Andrew Luck. 

 

I'm good with Tillery at #26 if he's there.

World Cup rocks. I would not doubt if JT was a WC attendee. I honestly thing AL and JT would get along well. Both cerebral and quirky.

 

Just posted some info on JT from his interview this AM. Still beating the "other interest" drum, and critical of where he is today lol.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im picking Simmons for the potential, but definitely against taking him in the first because of the injury. I have a feeling we take his teammate Johnathan Abram, I don't know why just a strong feeling. 

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Remember,  we are not debating whether Spring is doable.   I've stated from the beginning that I agree.    It's not as bad as some here think it is.    It's doable,   No question.   We are debating whether Spring is preferable, or desireable.    So, when you write,  that you don't think you have to say more about an issue,  any issue,  I'm sorry,   but NO!     You DO have to say more.  A heckuva lot more.    Because YOU have the burden of proof.    My position is the Industry Standard.   Your's has, by comparison,  a handful of examples.   Some are recent.   That's great.   But I view that as a nod to the position that it's doable.    You view it as a possibility that it might soon become the norm.   I'm happy to wait until that actually happens.   As to your primary argument.....    that all the prep work has been done,  and if you make the changes in winter,  that the GM is not up to speed on what the current scouts and player personnel people have done.    Except there is this......   Your argument that you yourself use to others here who complain that changing in the spring is bad.   To quote you....   it's just one draft.    One free agency period.    And there will soon be another,  and then another....   and another.   One season is nothing in the grand scheme of things.   That is what you wrote (roughly) to posters who think making the GM change in the spring is outright terrible and stupid.    Which I strongly disagree with their positin.   Your argument makes my argument for me.    I want the new GM in the building ASAP.    So he can sooner evaluate his players.    His front office.    His scouts.    The entire program.   Waiting until May or June just delays that.    I want it to begin ASAP.   I'd expect that he can and would be able to make some level of difference in his first free agency and draft.    Plus,  I think you way, way over-dramatize the handicap the new GM has arriving in January.   He's the GM.    He's already got a ton of information in his head,  and in his notebooks, his binders.    He's not in as much of a bind as you like to portray.     So, with your desired scenario, this draft could be used for a system that the new GM doesn't even want to run.    Like Chuck running a 3-4,  when Ballard wants to run a 4-3.    Like Chuck wanted to run a power running game and a deep pattern passing game.    While Ballard favors a zone running game and a get rid of the ball quick, move the chains offense.     In your preferred scenario,  you're the one who is burning the first year the GM has,  not me.     I see little of the benefits and mostly an approach that screams....   "Gee,  I hope this works out."   By the way,  I didn't want this post to end without addressing one of your main points.   Your paragraph that starts with this:   My Point:  There are always good candidates...   same is true for head coaches and coordinators.    I'm sorry,  but I'm going to STRONGLY disagree with that argument.  And I think you'll retract that.    Every so often you'll see an article about how did the class of GM's from a previous year turn out?   Or head coach hires?    I used to tell posters here who hated Pagano that the class of head coaches that included Chuck,  that all of the other coaches got fired before Chuck.    That Chuck was the best of his class.   And that happens with GM's too.   A class gets hired,  and quite often most of them, sometimes all of them don't work out.   I believe my position has far more facts to back that up.    There isn't always a Sean McVey.  There isn't always a Kyle Shannahan.   There isn't always a Josh McDaniels.   There aren't 32 good GM's, or 32 good head coaches,  or 32 good offensive or defensive coordinators.   That's why so many teams struggle for years to get those spots right.   So, no, I absolutely reject the idea that there are always good candidates.    Sorry.   I know you believe what you're writing.   But honestly, this feels like one big thought experiment. Like you're trying to make a case for something you really don't believe,  but you're trying to see if you can make a good argument anyway.   And yet I know that's NOT the case.    That you really, honestly do believe this.    That's what I find so astonishing.    There's lots of opinion,  and not a lot of evidence to back this up.    As I've said from the get-go....   I think this is doable.    I just don't think it's desireable or preferable.  
    • To your last paragraph....   yes,  I agree that if a GM,  any GM, inherits a bad roster,  then no matter how OK his draft picks may be,   they will likely stick on the roster.   But if you're a GM inheriting a poor team,  and you draft players that are only somewhat better than what you originally had,  then the improvement in the team will only be so good.   Again,  from 4 wis,  to perhaps 6-7.    That wouldn't be bad.    That would be reasonable.   But when you suddenly pop to 10 wins,  including 9 of the last 10 in the regular season,  and you win on the road in the playoffs,   then there's got to be something more there than just the GM's new guys.    Those guys have got to be good.    You can't do that well simply because they're better than the previous guys.    They're much better.    Yes, the coaching staff is better and the systems the team is running are better,  but so are the players.    They have to execute.    And we did.   Better than we thought possible.    Certainly better than when we were 1-5 and looked like a candidate for a top-10 or even a top-5 draft pick.    The players are good.   They may not be great yet,  but they're really good and much better than what we had.    The results are all the proof you need.   Again,  thanks for the exchange....  
    • I missed the first couple innings, was keeping track on phone, didn’t realize things got chippy with the benches clearing after the Contreras HR! Seems the Cubs were playing with a little extra edge tonight, I love it!!! 
    • and then NE goes into KC and throws for 350 and Sony runs for 100+ on them. our O, and O game plan just sucked.   i get KC was good, but our O just sucked.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...