Colts draft Khari Willis, SS, Michigan State

[WoolMagnet]

36 minutes ago, BOTT said:

2 Hookers are always better than one.

Especially for massages

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

7th best according to who? Obviously they were way off the mark.  Kiper (for what it is worth) said he was #2 available on the board at the start of the 4th.  He (contrary to any false belief) does not do all the research on his list of picks.  He has a team working on it.  And they thought highly of this guy.  Frankly by the 4th round, there is little difference between the NFL quality players still remaining beyond their special individual characteristics.  In that area, this guy is an A+ leader and team guy.  THAT is why they went up and got him.  We have a team FULL of character guys.  That will allow us, at some point, to take a chance on a troubled player because a team full of true leaders and high character guys can keep someone like that in line while protecting the locker room from any possible contagion.  Remember when Ballard said we weren't quite ready to take on someone like Bell or Brown? Well, with some of these picks so far this year, that small gap is being closed.  By next year, if a massive FA of need come available (like a pass rusher etc.) we may be ready to handle any personality issues.  

In terms of boards, I look at NFL.com's (which IIRC is a composite of all of their guys), CBS composite, and some of the others. I try as much as possible to use composites than the individual experts. I don't agree with all of them, but they're decent.

 

Kiper's mocks and big boards have been pretty off, so he's not someone historically I put a lot of stock in.

 

Specifically on Willis, NFL.com's had 7 or 8 guys ahead of him. CBS even more IIRC. 

 

I agree he's a high character guy. Like I said above, I think he'll be limited to a back up box safety. I'd take a more well rounded and higher rated guy. I'll use NFL.com's ratings to keep it simple. Willis was rated 5.3 (which means NFL back up or ST's potential)

 

Still available was:

Hooker 5.8 (chance to become NFL starter) - good size and speed, great big nickel potential

Thompsom 5.78 (same as above) - good speed, violent hitter

Johnson 5.61 (same as above) - good hitter and cover, team captain

plus 2 more in that same tier, and 2 others still above Willis.

 

[Colt Overseas]

The only tape I've seen from him, he played a very solid game versus Michigan.

 

 

 

Looks like an ideal fit for our Cover -2 defense, runs a 4.52 which is plenty. Probably lacks some quickness in man coverage. I think we will like him. I saw alot of Amani Hooker before today so for Ballard to draft Willis before him must mean he is a good player too.

[NewColtsFan]

37 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

This is how a good team is run.  NO ONE expected the Colts to move up this much to get a player (really to move up to get ANY player) so guess what? The # of other teams that might have planned to draft him just got blind sided completely.  

 

A hard nosed box safety... what's not to like? He can take on TE's as well.  High character.  Great pick!  

 

Not sure Willis is a box safety?   The profile page at NFL.com makes him seem like a free safety and not a strong.   Honestly, they made him sound like a life long backup... 

[NewEra]

Watchu talkin bout Willis?!?

[JPFolks]

21 minutes ago, Bluefire4 said:

Don't know why all of the analysts are saying he is good at covering TEs. He shut down Zach Gentry at Michigan who is not good. He would get murdered by any average TE in the NFL.

 

Bottom line for me is that his ceiling is a backup safety who is great on special teams and I think there were options on the board that could actually replace Geathers in the future.

 

And I didn't mean to insinuate that the only reason Ballard picked him was for his character, but I do think that was a major part of the decision. I guarantee him being a team captain and hard worker is the first thing out of Ballard's mouth at the press conference.

 

The only thing I like about the fit is that he is a really good fit in our zone defense and he comes up and tackles well similar to Geathers. He shows no instincts or coverage ability, so unless he improves I'd be scared to have him cover anybody on passing downs.

And you know all this for a fact based on ?  Have you scouted his season against TE's? Who is your source otherwise?  And is that source more respected than Ballard and his team or even (for what it is worth) Mel Kiper and his team?  How about coverage in zone versus man schemes? I defer to Ballard and his team and corroborated by others.  Plus, his primary use is unquestionably going to be in the box.  Were there better Safeties in the box than him? Which ones? Based on who's evaluation?  You don't mention any of that in your criticism.  

[EastStreet]

22 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 So Ballard took the 7th best safety still on this imaginary board. chuckle
 silliness. And as the GM in your imaginary world, you can have any one of them.
  Interesting that in Kiper's top available players to start the day Willis was #2.

 Seems like what you know about it is well, not much based on the info you gather from your chair.

Kiper's track record is pretty bad...

 

I'm not a GM, just a fan with an opinion (isn't this what a discussion board is about?). And I'll never be the guy who sunshine pumps every pick or every thing that comes out of Ballard's mouth. Love him because he's a Colt, but I don't worship him or believe he's incapable of being imperfect. 

[EastStreet]

15 minutes ago, Colt Overseas said:

The only tape I've seen from him, he played a very solid game versus Michigan.

 

 

 

Looks like an ideal fit for our Cover -2 defense, runs a 4.52 which is plenty. Probably lacks some quickness in man coverage. I think we will like him. I saw alot of Amani Hooker before today so for Ballard to draft Willis before him must mean he is a good player too.

 

the criticism is that he's straight line fast enough, but not explosive, quick, or fluid.

definitely will do better in zone than coverage.

 

[JPFolks]

16 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

In terms of boards, I look at NFL.com's (which IIRC is a composite of all of their guys), CBS composite, and some of the others. I try as much as possible to use composites than the individual experts. I don't agree with all of them, but they're decent.

 

Kiper's mocks and big boards have been pretty off, so he's not someone historically I put a lot of stock in.

 

Specifically on Willis, NFL.com's had 7 or 8 guys ahead of him. CBS even more IIRC. 

 

I agree he's a high character guy. Like I said above, I think he'll be limited to a back up box safety. I'd take a more well rounded and higher rated guy. I'll use NFL.com's ratings to keep it simple. Willis was rated 5.3 (which means NFL back up or ST's potential)

 

Still available was:

Hooker 5.8 (chance to become NFL starter) - good size and speed, great big nickel potential

Thompsom 5.78 (same as above) - good speed, violent hitter

Johnson 5.61 (same as above) - good hitter and cover, team captain

plus 2 more in that same tier, and 2 others still above Willis.

 

Irish, since I consistently respect your posts, my question is this: 

 

What is your theory then?  Were Ballard and his team asleep at the wheel and missed not one or two but nearly an entire draft (7?????) worth of Safeties that were clearly better,  OR is it possible they know something you don't about this player?  Consider this: Historically, 50% of FIRST ROUNDERS turn out to be disappointing or complete busts.   So consider ALL these prognosticators being completely wrong (horribly wrong in some cases) so often year after year.  Then consider Ballard's success rate.  Will he draft some busts?  Sure.  He already has.  He's also got an impressive track record AND he's doing something completely different than all those folks you mentioned.  they are doing LEAGUE WIDE evaluations of talent and abilities.  Ballard is doing TEAM SPECIFIC evaluations for just our very specific needs and wants.  This is why no "mock draft" is ever remotely close to predicting results.  Some of us are actually good and evaluating overall rankings/talent, but we're really not able to find the minute tiny little intricacies of what a team needs.  Ballard has that advantage over even the most qualified talent evaluators among us or the media.  He may be wrong of course, but he's playing high stakes poker and we''re all playing fantasy level poker with pretend money.  He's using live ammo while we use blanks.  And he's on the ground in the battle while we are watching it at a safe distance using blanks.  I don't always agree with him either.  I had other Safeties I was hoping he would pick.  But for all of us, myself included, we're just outsiders of a very inside game.   

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Ballard is going to take players that fit the colts not what fans or media think fit.

[JPFolks]

35 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Kiper doesn't have a team.   That’s McShay.   Kiper works alone.   Always has.    McShays team is two other guys who played college ball, as did McShay.

I'll agree to disagree.  He uses other people's evaluations in setting up his lists.  He does NOT go into each teams practices, watch every single game by every single team at all levels, o become knowledgeable about every single player listed through all 7 rounds.  Believe what you want, including media fables created to sucker people into believing all sorts of nonsense.  He does not do it alone.  He is not breaking down each play, all 22 players on the field, for every single moment of all teams.   He uses other people's work to put his list together.  

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

1 hour ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I like the fact they only gave the two 4ths

Honestly you only gave up 1 4th rd pick

[Bluefire4]

16 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

And you know all this for a fact based on ?  Have you scouted his season against TE's? Who is your source otherwise?  And is that source more respected than Ballard and his team or even (for what it is worth) Mel Kiper and his team?  How about coverage in zone versus man schemes? I defer to Ballard and his team and corroborated by others.  Plus, his primary use is unquestionably going to be in the box.  Were there better Safeties in the box than him? Which ones? Based on who's evaluation?  You don't mention any of that in your criticism.  

This is based off my opinion and my own eyes. I'm not relying on anybody else to give me information. I'm just calling it like I see it and giving my opinion on a forum. This is what this platform is for.

 

You can't expect every person to like every pick. Nobody is 100% right. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. Not bashing Ballard, just don't like the pick.

[crazycolt1]

42 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

Especially for massages

That's right. Robert Kraft can vouch for that.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

6 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

He does not do it alone.  He is not breaking down each play, all 22 players on the field, for every single moment of all teams.

 

Does anyone?

 

Is that even possible to do by yourself?

[ColtsBlueFL]

1 hour ago, csmopar said:

He was a late 4th to Mid 5th by most “expert” sources. So a bit of a reach but not drastically 

 

Taking him early in the 5th at #144 is a reach?  I don't think he lasts until our next pick at 164 (mid/late 5th).  Oh I see, Willis vs. Tell. Ok.

 

Still, I don't see Willis lasting to 144 either.

[crazycolt1]

I don't understand why some think a 4th rounder has to be a starter and when they are not it is a bad pick?

GMs take players in the later rounds with the thought process of them developing.

It makes no difference where a player is taken as long as they can contribute.

 

[EastStreet]

7 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

Irish, since I consistently respect your posts, my question is this: 

 

What is your theory then?  Were Ballard and his team asleep at the wheel and missed not one or two but nearly an entire draft (7?????) worth of Safeties that were clearly better,  OR is it possible they know something you don't about this player?  Consider this: Historically, 50% of FIRST ROUNDERS turn out to be disappointing or complete busts.   So consider ALL these prognosticators being completely wrong (horribly wrong in some cases) so often year after year.  Then consider Ballard's success rate.  Will he draft some busts?  Sure.  He already has.  He's also got an impressive track record AND he's doing something completely different than all those folks you mentioned.  they are doing LEAGUE WIDE evaluations of talent and abilities.  Ballard is doing TEAM SPECIFIC evaluations for just our very specific needs and wants.  This is why no "mock draft" is ever remotely close to predicting results.  Some of us are actually good and evaluating overall rankings/talent, but we're really not able to find the minute tiny little intricacies of what a team needs.  Ballard has that advantage over even the most qualified talent evaluators among us or the media.  He may be wrong of course, but he's playing high stakes poker and we''re all playing fantasy level poker with pretend money.  He's using live ammo while we use blanks.  And he's on the ground in the battle while we are watching it at a safe distance using blanks.  I don't always agree with him either.  I had other Safeties I was hoping he would pick.  But for all of us, myself included, we're just outsiders of a very inside game.   

 

Like I said, Love what Ballard did last year. I love his background and respect his acumen. Like you said, all GMs hit, all miss. Ballard has a short track record as GM, and he's done far more good than bad thus far. 

 

In terms of theory, that's a hard one. I'd love to know what goes on in his head lol. I do believe he's got a specific plan for everyone. It could be because he's plainly looking long term, could be reacting to last year's deficiencies in a certain area (like our woeful D vs TEs), or he might be prioritizing leadership/character over talent. 

 

Who knows specifically for Willis. He is a high character guy. He can help us vs TEs. Could Ballard have passed over more talented guys with a little less character, sure. He's probably been listening to all the Indy radio talking about him being the point guy on the Tyreek Hill pick. Might that be impacting him a little? Maybe. We'll never know.

 

We're all Monday morning QBs and GMs. I'm just tossing out my opinion based on what I've read, and the tape I've watched. That's minuscule to what Ballard and team has done obviously, but I'd guess I watch more CFB and follow stats and film more than most fans. Like I've said countless times, I just want wins. My player or pick specific opinions doesn't keep me from cheering crazy hard for those same players come September.

[JPFolks]

2 minutes ago, Bluefire4 said:

This is based off my opinion and my own eyes. I'm not relying on anybody else to give me information. I'm just calling it like I see it and giving my opinion on a forum. This is what this platform is for.

 

You can't expect every person to like every pick. Nobody is 100% right. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. Not bashing Ballard, just don't like the pick.

I appreciate your honest answer.  Most people hide behind some random other person's opinion to protect them.   I had other Safeties in mind myself, but I also realized I knew very little about Willis beyond the simple evaluations I had read prior to the pick.  Since the pick, I have learned more.  Leadership is is calling card.  He obviously has measurables that meet criteria for the job.  I've seen evaluations that suggest he'll be a great piece of our team's needs.  Other people disagree such as yourself.  As long as you state is it simply your opinion, then cool, you would have chosen otherwise.  How much did you honestly know about THIS player beforehand?  I had others in mind because I had done a lot more research into other names beforehand, but not much into this player.  So sure, I liked some of those players.  I had to stop, spend some time checking out who this kid was and it became clear to me he has the team personality they want, and must have met or exceeded the other desires the team had.  Heck, for them to aggressively move up 20 spots means they SERIOUSLY wanted this specific player and paid a hefty price (in my view) to get him.  I am not a blind fanboy of Ballard (or anyone for that matter) but I DO respect our current team of scouts and execs and I know they know 100 times what any of us do about what they want/need in their locker room.  For all we know he could simply be perfect for Special teams/back up only needs and they are CONFIDENT Geathers will be healthy and good to go long term at Safety.  They may feel like this guy is perfect to be PREPARED to step up in case of injury, perhaps faster than some other options out there.  There are so many variables we will NEVER have access to, it makes our decisions/desires blind no matter how much good faith time we put in.  

 

I think of the WR situation.  Ironically, I really WANTED Campbell all along and was thrilled that in one single case, the guy I wanted was ALSO the guy they wanted.  None of us predicted more than one or two players in any given draft and most of us batted ZERO most of the time.  Outside of obvious early 1st round picks, my guess is historically, no one here has gotten more than 2 picks right in any draft we've had.  (I haven't seen that claimed/backed up anyway).  It could be as simple as none of the other guys you wanted had the leadership skills they demand from their players here.  Perhaps that ability/skill becomes even MORE critical for players viewed as long time backups.  Think Reich.  Imagine having THAT type of quality guy as a long time backup in your program? That's a lot of value to have.  4th round picks aren't often day one starters, but if you knew this was the type of guy who could be ready by week 4 to fill in for an injured safety on our team, THAT has a lot of value.  

 

Anyway, thanks for your no nonsense answer.  It's refreshing honesty we need more of here.  

[JPFolks]

13 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

Does anyone?

 

Is that even possible to do by yourself?

That's my point.  He had a team of people (he may not pay them, but make no mistake, he relies on a team of people to form his list, which makes his claims of doing on his own a lie in my view).  He just doesn't pay people a salary to do it.  He get's it for free like all the fans do.  At least other guys pay their team.  

[Dingus McGirt]

1 hour ago, Smonroe said:

 

I was listening to nfl channel o Sirius.  They said he was the S that all the TEs had the hardest time against.  They loved the pick and how Ballard is building the team. 

Heard that as well.  Good pickup.

[Bluefire4]

8 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

I appreciate your honest answer.  Most people hide behind some random other person's opinion to protect them.   I had other Safeties in mind myself, but I also realized I knew very little about Willis beyond the simple evaluations I had read prior to the pick.  Since the pick, I have learned more.  Leadership is is calling card.  He obviously has measurables that meet criteria for the job.  I've seen evaluations that suggest he'll be a great piece of our team's needs.  Other people disagree such as yourself.  As long as you state is it simply your opinion, then cool, you would have chosen otherwise.  How much did you honestly know about THIS player beforehand?  I had others in mind because I had done a lot more research into other names beforehand, but not much into this player.  So sure, I liked some of those players.  I had to stop, spend some time checking out who this kid was and it became clear to me he has the team personality they want, and must have met or exceeded the other desires the team had.  Heck, for them to aggressively move up 20 spots means they SERIOUSLY wanted this specific player and paid a hefty price (in my view) to get him.  I am not a blind fanboy of Ballard (or anyone for that matter) but I DO respect our current team of scouts and execs and I know they know 100 times what any of us do about what they want/need in their locker room.  For all we know he could simply be perfect for Special teams/back up only needs and they are CONFIDENT Geathers will be healthy and good to go long term at Safety.  They may feel like this guy is perfect to be PREPARED to step up in case of injury, perhaps faster than some other options out there.  There are so many variables we will NEVER have access to, it makes our decisions/desires blind no matter how much good faith time we put in.  

 

I think of the WR situation.  Ironically, I really WANTED Campbell all along and was thrilled that in one single case, the guy I wanted was ALSO the guy they wanted.  None of us predicted more than one or two players in any given draft and most of us batted ZERO most of the time.  Outside of obvious early 1st round picks, my guess is historically, no one here has gotten more than 2 picks right in any draft we've had.  (I haven't seen that claimed/backed up anyway).  It could be as simple as none of the other guys you wanted had the leadership skills they demand from their players here.  Perhaps that ability/skill becomes even MORE critical for players viewed as long time backups.  Think Reich.  Imagine having THAT type of quality guy as a long time backup in your program? That's a lot of value to have.  4th round picks aren't often day one starters, but if you knew this was the type of guy who could be ready by week 4 to fill in for an injured safety on our team, THAT has a lot of value.  

 

Anyway, thanks for your no nonsense answer.  It's refreshing honesty we need more of here.  

I'm not going to sit here and act like a guru and say I watch every snap of all the small school draft prospects. However, Khari Willis went to Michigan State who had one of the best defenses in college football with players like Kenny Willekes and Justin Layne. So I tried to evaluate Willis as I was evaluating Layne and Willekes(Willekes decided to stay in school).

 

I trust Ballard and believe he knows more football than I could ever dream of. Just giving another perspective here.

 

 

[Bluefire4]

19 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I don't understand why some think a 4th rounder has to be a starter and when they are not it is a bad pick?

GMs take players in the later rounds with the thought process of them developing.

It makes no difference where a player is taken as long as they can contribute.

 

For me, it's not the fact that I'm expecting them to draft a starter this late. It is based on the other players on the board. If there is a guy who was on the board with that 4th round pick that I wanted who ends up being a instant impact guy and future starter, it is fair to judge the pick.

 

If Khari Willis ends up being a key part to the team whether he starts or not, nobody should worry about who we passed to get him.

 

[JPFolks]

1 minute ago, Bluefire4 said:

I'm not going to sit here and act like a guru and say I watch every snap of all the small school draft prospects. However, Khari Willis went to Michigan State who had one of the best defenses in college football with players like Kenny Willekes and Justin Layne. So I tried to evaluate Willis as I was evaluating Layne and Willekes(Willekes decided to stay in school).

 

I trust Ballard and believe he knows more football than I could ever dream of. Just giving another perspective here.

 

 

It's a mystery from me as to why they felt urgency for move up so aggressively to get this player.  Not only did THEY want him, they must have had very good reason to think someone else (or multiple other teams) were going to draft him before their next pick came up.   So it at least implies he was highly valued by at least one other team in addition to the Colts.  Either that OR he was such an immediate fit for our team they just couldn't risk losing him.  It is their urgency that made me drop the "dang, I was hoping for X player" and instead dig deeper into who this player was and what did I miss about him that had him so much more valued than I initially did.  I hope he's the steal of the draft.  For such an aggressive and out of character move, he certain has me excited to learn what that move was all about.  

[csmopar]

32 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Taking him early in the 5th at #144 is a reach?  I don't think he lasts until our next pick at 164 (mid/late 5th).  Oh I see, Willis vs. Tell. Ok.

 

Still, I don't see Willis lasting to 144 either.

Ummm dude, we took Willis at pick 109, traded up to the early part of round 4.... 

[Peterk2011]

1 hour ago, Irish YJ said:

In terms of boards, I look at NFL.com's (which IIRC is a composite of all of their guys), CBS composite, and some of the others. I try as much as possible to use composites than the individual experts. I don't agree with all of them, but they're decent.

Kiper's mocks and big boards have been pretty off, so he's not someone historically I put a lot of stock in.

Specifically on Willis, NFL.com's had 7 or 8 guys ahead of him. CBS even more IIRC. 

 

Throw away that draft board for this particular draft, you will do a favor for yourself.

 

I am serious. I do use to create my own composite board, from cca 10 different boards (CBS, pff, Matt Miller and many more), and it's usually quite nicely follows the draft. However, this year it's just waaaay off. It was never ever close to this much off before.

 

Even in the second round, the terms "reach" and "steal" practically lost their meanings because there most teams with most picks went all over, like a drunken shotman. This years draft class is just a big messy mix of a lot of similarly graded players and everyone picks by their own preference and taste, from all over.

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Throw away that draft board, you will do a favor for yourself. I mean it.  I do use to create my own composite board, from cca 10 different boards (CBS, pff, Matt Miller and many more), and the board never was so much off than this year. Even in the second round, the terms "reach" and "steal" lost their meanings because there were not only a handful of weird picks, but practically all teams went all over the board. This years draft class is just a big messy mix of tons of similarly graded players and everyone picks by their own preference and taste, from all over.

 

sure they were off in terms of where teams drafted guys. 

but does that mean they were wrong in terms of evaluation.

keep it handy and grade it after the season 

[ColtsBlueFL]

8 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Ummm dude, we took Willis at pick 109, traded up to the early part of round 4.... 

 

I see. You feel he would have still been there a #129 then.  And make no trade.  Ballard evidently didn't want to chance it.

[ProblChld32]

2 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Hooker has character concerns. We were never touching him.

There were still better players on the board Thompson was still there. 

[superrep1967]

2 hours ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Thought it'd be Hooker but oh well.

Box safety, great character guy. Average athlete below average speed. Nothing really jumps out about him other than character praise.

Depth guy

[ColtsBlueFL]

5 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Throw away that draft board, you will do a favor for yourself. I mean it.  I do use to create my own composite board, from cca 10 different boards (CBS, pff, Matt Miller and many more), and the board never was so much off than this year. Even in the second round, the terms "reach" and "steal" lost their meanings because there were not only a handful of weird picks, but practically all teams went all over the board. This years draft class is just a big messy mix of tons of similarly graded players and everyone picks by their own preference and taste, from all over.

 

This ^^^

 

It's a reason team don't have to have more than 150 on 'their' draft board.  All teams have a different 150 that the thinks fits better.

 

2 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

 

sure they were off in terms of where teams drafted guys. 

but does that mean they were wrong in terms of evaluation.

keep it handy and grade it after the season 

 

I trust true scouts evaluation and (especially) fit to 'their team' over media 'experts' who get info from scouts with no clue how to slot them to teams, just listing by their perceived BPA.

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

I trust true scouts evaluation and (especially) fit to 'their team' over media 'experts' who get info from scouts with no clue how to slot them to teams, just listing by their perceived BPA.

We only have one SB winner every year. We only have 12 playoff teams every year. And we have many teams that just stink. Every one of those teams spend a boat load on scouting. Only a few get it really right each year. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

Just now, Irish YJ said:

We only have one SB winner every year. We only have 12 playoff teams every year. And we have many teams that just stink. Every one of those teams spend a boat load on scouting. Only a few get it really right each year. 

 

It's not just scouting, it coaching, schemes, and correct play calling too. And players stepping up their game each week and getting better.

[EastStreet]

7 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

It's not just scouting, it coaching, schemes, and correct play calling too. And players stepping up their game each week and getting better.

sure there are a lot of things that go into an individual's success.

doesn't distract from the fact a lot of scouts get things wrong. 

some do good, some don't.

[Peterk2011]

3 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

sure there are a lot of things that go into an individual's success.

doesn't distract from the fact a lot of scouts get things wrong. 

some do good, some don't.

 

Sure, but this does not mean that you can beat a one armed soldier on the battlefield, if you are not a soldier yourself. ;)

 

 

[csmopar]

28 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

I see. You feel he would have still been there a #129 then.  And make no trade.  Ballard evidently didn't want to chance it.

No. You’re reading WAY TOO DEEP.. I’m simply saying he went about half a round earlier than he was projected is all. 

[hoosierhawk]

3 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Hooker has character concerns. We were never touching him.

I'm aa big Iowa fan. First I ever heard Hooker had character concerns.

[ColtsAC]

4th round...needing a backup for "In the Tub" Geathers...seems like an OK pick...not great, not bad.

[NDcolt]

5 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Can he cover?  Cause Geathers doesn't really miss tackles either, he just has problems with coverage.

Geathers might not miss many tackles but he sure does miss many games!  DEPTH

[ColtsBlueFL]

8 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

sure there are a lot of things that go into an individual's success.

doesn't distract from the fact a lot of scouts get things wrong. 

some do good, some don't.

Good ones get promoted and eventually become GM's one day ( Chris Ballard ).  Others become TV personalities...

 

Besides, the meetings where you have to report in front of the GM, directors, and other scouts.  Then the discussions/debates begin.  It's never about 1 scout.