Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Chloe6124

Could colts trade for Clowney?

Recommended Posts

One of the most overrated players in the league.

 

No. We have young guys and we added Houston and still have Sheard, why trade picks and young players for him? The Texans would flex us too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, richard pallo said:

True.  But if I remember correctly Bellicheck sent Bledsoe to the Bills and then started Brady.  That was a long time ago of course and I don't remember what they received in return.  I wonder if there are more current examples of a star player being traded within the same division?  

 

I think they tried for a fairly long time to move Drew. It takes 2 to tango, and surprisingly few other teams were interested. In addition, the Bills were quite bad (Jim Kelly was long gone) and eventually willing to part with a first round pick for Drew, so the Pats pulled the trigger.

 

It's usually like the Favre scenario.  Take Darelle Revis. Jets wanted to trade him. Patriots and Dolphins were interested. So was Tampa Bay.  Who are you going to negotiate with?  Easy, the Bucs.  You play him once every 4 years, and don't compete for a playoff spot where either of the other 2 you play twice a year and compete for playoffs.  Like Favre, Revis ended up on the rival (Pats) team shortly thereafter anyway.

 

The only other in division trade of note (to me I can recall) was the Eagles trading Donovan McNabb to the Redskins.  There might be more, I just don't remember any others though.

 

 

Share this post


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

One of the most overrated players in the league.

 

No. We have young guys and we added Houston and still have Sheard, why trade picks and young players for him? The Texans would flex us too.

 

Legit question - what does “the Texans would flex us” mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jskinnz said:

Legit question - what does “the Texans would flex us” mean?

 

I guess he meant fleece us.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never going to happen. I love Clowney as a player and he's the only guy I fear on that Texans defense. He wants a long term contract and wants to get paid but injuries have always been his downfall. The Texans aren't foolish enough to trade him to Indianapolis and Ballard isn't giving the Texans what they want for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, DarkSuperman87 said:

Never going to happen. I love Clowney as a player and he's the only guy I fear on that Texans defense. He wants a long term contract and wants to get paid but injuries have always been his downfall. The Texans aren't foolish enough to trade him to Indianapolis and Ballard isn't giving the Texans what they want for him.

 

He hasn't missed more than 3 games in a season since his rookie year, & he's been nominated to the Pro Bowl the last 3 seasons. That's not to say I'd want Ballard to give up the farm for him, but his injury history isn't nearly as bad as it's made out to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

He hasn't missed more than 3 games in a season since his rookie year, & he's been nominated to the Pro Bowl the last 3 seasons. That's not to say I'd want Ballard to give up the farm for him, but his injury history isn't nearly as bad as it's made out to be.

 

The major concern for me is that he had microfracture surgery and a torn meniscus. Then two years in a row in 2017 and 2018, he needed cleanup procedures on the same knee. He likely has a degenerative condition in that knee (maybe the other one, also; congenital knee defects are common, especially related to cartilage), and the clock is ticking. I'll be shocked if that knee doesn't become a persistent issue in the next couple of years.

 

I didn't remember that until reading your post. That being the case, no way would I commit big guaranteed money to him. If I were the Texans, I'd probably be looking to trade him.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

The major concern for me is that he had microfracture surgery and a torn meniscus. Then two years in a row in 2017 and 2018, he needed cleanup procedures on the same knee. He likely has a degenerative condition in that knee (maybe the other one, also; congenital knee defects are common, especially related to cartilage), and the clock is ticking. I'll be shocked if that knee doesn't become a persistent issue in the next couple of years.

 

I didn't remember that until reading your post. That being the case, no way would I commit big guaranteed money to him. If I were the Texans, I'd probably be looking to trade him.

 

He didn't have the clean up this year though (at least as far as we know)...could have just been part of the prescribed rehab and treatment after the microfracture surgery...since both occurred immediately after the season.

Share this post


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

 

He didn't have the clean up this year though (at least as far as we know)...could have just been part of the prescribed rehab and treatment after the microfracture surgery...since both occurred immediately after the season.

 

I'm skeptical. He had microfracture in 2014. Then three and four years later, he did cleanup procedures. It's possible his knee looked and felt great this January, but it's more likely that he declined having surgery because of his contract status. From what we know about microfracture and knee cartilage, this isn't a condition that just goes away; it gets worse with time. I'm assuming his knee is going to continue to be a problem, and will get worse, just like everyone else who's ever had microfracture.

 

(By the way, Melvin Gordon had microfracture in 2016. Between his injury history and the Chargers' cap situation and upcoming free agents, I'm thinking there's less than a 5% chance Gordon gets a long term deal from the Chargers.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/16/2019 at 11:23 PM, 1959Colts said:

He is injury prone and I believe over-rated.

 

He seemed to have moved past his injury issues but I sort of agree with the overrated.  

 

He's a good player at this level but he's made out to be a special player and he's just not if you ask me.  Watt is.  This dude rushes the QB opposite Watt and still hasn't managed to get more than 10 sacks in a year.  

 

Don't get me wrong, 9 sacks a year is a good number.  But it's not special.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

This dude rushes the QB opposite Watt and still hasn't managed to get more than 10 sacks in a year.  

 

Don't get me wrong, 9 sacks a year is a good number.  But it's not special.  

 

Yeah, you'd definitely want better production out of a guy you used a #1 pick to get, but that's how the cookie crumbles sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Yeah, you'd definitely want better production out of a guy you used a #1 pick to get, but that's how the cookie crumbles sometimes.

 

Honestly in terms of trade's I think I would rather just run with Turay than invest in Clowney.  I would maybe be interested in giving up a 4th rounder for Clowney, but not much higher. 

 

He's on the franchise tag and if someone wants to get Clowney they are going to have to pay him.  And because of how he is being looked at, and being a former #1 overall pick he's probably expecting a market setting deal or at least something in line with what Khalil Mack is getting. (Mack is getting 23.5M per year)  But Mack's doing double digit sacks every year but his rookie year.  Clowney hasn't hit double digit sacks yet in his career.

 

He's not worth the pick or the money to me.  

 

Also consider next year's draft is suppose to be really good.  I'd rather give Ballard the pick in a really good draft class then take the pick away and get a good but not great 26 year old player.  

 

I am generally skeptical of trading first or 2nd round picks away.  I think the Trent Richardson trade left a bad taste in my mouth.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Honestly in terms of trade's I think I would rather just run with Turay than invest in Clowney.  I would maybe be interested in giving up a 4th rounder for Clowney, but not much higher. 

 

He's on the franchise tag and if someone wants to get Clowney they are going to have to pay him.  And because of how he is being looked at, and being a former #1 overall pick he's probably expecting a market setting deal or at least something in line with what Khalil Mack is getting. (Mack is getting 23.5M per year)  But Mack's doing double digit sacks every year but his rookie year.  Clowney hasn't hit double digit sacks yet in his career.

 

He's not worth the pick or the money to me.  

 

Also consider next year's draft is suppose to be really good.  I'd rather give Ballard the pick in a really good draft class then take the pick away and get a good but not great 26 year old player.  

 

I am generally skeptical of trading first or 2nd round picks away.  I think the Trent Richardson trade left a bad taste in my mouth.  

 

Yeah I honestly don't think he sniffs what Khalil Mack got, & as far as the Colts go, best case scenario would probably be to give up a 3rd or 4th round pick, keep him through this season, then let him walk & get a comp pick next offseason. It's a contract year for him, so that scenario could be a win for everyone involved.

Share this post


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

 

Yeah I honestly don't think he sniffs what Khalil Mack got, & as far as the Colts go, best case scenario would probably be to give up a 3rd or 4th round pick, keep him through this season, then let him walk & get a comp pick next offseason. It's a contract year for him, so that scenario could be a win for everyone involved.

 

If that happened maybe.  

 

I do think it's a moot point though.  I highly doubt the Texans would trade him to a division rival unless the compensation offered just blew them away.  But a fair trade, they would go someplace else.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am from South Carolina,  And I saw a lot of his games, before he turned pro, Over the years, the thing that jumps out at me is, despite his talent, speed, and size, he has his moments, but seems to under achieve, and takes plays off through his college career. and also pro. When you add on his history of injuries, I would not give him a big contract.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

He seemed to have moved past his injury issues but I sort of agree with the overrated.  

 

He's a good player at this level but he's made out to be a special player and he's just not if you ask me.  Watt is.  This dude rushes the QB opposite Watt and still hasn't managed to get more than 10 sacks in a year.  

 

Don't get me wrong, 9 sacks a year is a good number.  But it's not special.  

Maybe if a team acquires him and puts him back at his DE position things could really change for him.  I thought moving him to LB was a mistake.  I don't think he has realized his full potential there.  Houston can't wait to play DE with us.  He probably feels he would have been more productive there at KC.  I would bet Clowney would also welcome the switch back to DE.  It will be interesting to see if he ever winds up with a 4-3 team.  

Share this post


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

 

The major concern for me is that he had microfracture surgery and a torn meniscus.

 

Agreed, but more with the microfracture procedure over the meniscus

 

11 hours ago, Superman said:

Then two years in a row in 2017 and 2018, he needed cleanup procedures on the same knee. He likely has a degenerative condition in that knee (maybe the other one, also; congenital knee defects are common, especially related to cartilage), and the clock is ticking. I'll be shocked if that knee doesn't become a persistent issue in the next couple of years.

 

I am on board there (bolded part).  Lots of procedures to substitute for the loss of articular cartilage. But none are nearly as good as the original.  Microfracture seems a shorter term solution over other methods as well.

 

11 hours ago, Superman said:

I didn't remember that until reading your post. That being the case, no way would I commit big guaranteed money to him. If I were the Texans, I'd probably be looking to trade him.

 

And any good team doctor will know what they are getting and make sure the GM knows.

 

10 hours ago, shastamasta said:

 

He didn't have the clean up this year though (at least as far as we know)...could have just been part of the prescribed rehab and treatment after the microfracture surgery...since both occurred immediately after the season.

 

IMHO, he's likely on borrowed time.

 

10 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I'm skeptical. He had microfracture in 2014. Then three and four years later, he did cleanup procedures. It's possible his knee looked and felt great this January, but it's more likely that he declined having surgery because of his contract status. From what we know about microfracture and knee cartilage, this isn't a condition that just goes away; it gets worse with time. I'm assuming his knee is going to continue to be a problem, and will get worse, just like everyone else who's ever had microfracture.

 

Yup, I'm of similar thought.  I wonder what his 'clean up' procedures actually was, though.

 

10 hours ago, Superman said:

 

(By the way, Melvin Gordon had microfracture in 2016. Between his injury history and the Chargers' cap situation and upcoming free agents, I'm thinking there's less than a 5% chance Gordon gets a long term deal from the Chargers.)

 

We don't know size and location of their particular articular cartilage defects. But in any event so far, microfracture has not been proven an effective long term solution.  Especially for high impact sports/professions.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard is a shrewd guy.  Maybe by contacting the Texans & making it public he’s “letting Clowney know” he’s got a fan of his game in CB & the Colts...  I saw a stat that said his tackle for losses were up there with Aaron Donald.  We need a guy like him who can wreak havoc in the backfield be it against the run or the pass.  Don’t be surprised if Ballard gives him a good long look next year in free agency unless Texans are foolish enough to trade him within the division.  

Share this post


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

 

Agreed, but more with the microfracture procedure over the meniscus

 

 

I am on board there (bolded part).  Lots of procedures to substitute for the loss of articular cartilage. But none are nearly as good as the original.  Microfracture seems a shorter term solution over other methods as well.

 

 

And any good team doctor will know what they are getting and make sure the GM knows.

 

 

IMHO, he's likely on borrowed time.

 

 

Yup, I'm of similar thought.  I wonder what his 'clean up' procedures actually was, though.

 

 

We don't know size and location of their particular articular cartilage defects. But in any event so far, microfracture has not been proven an effective long term solution.  Especially for high impact sports/professions.

 

 

Maybe he is on borrowed time...but it's not like the we are talking about getting a guy heading into his 30s...or someone that will require a 10-year contract. This is his age 26 season...and it's not unreasonable to think he could provide 3-4 high level seasons at least. And considering the Colts are in a Super Bowl window...that would be just fine by me.

 

Kelce had microfracture surgery in 2013...and has played at an incredibly high level for 6 years after...and doesn't appear to be slowing down.

 

Marques Colston had it in 2009 (age 26)...and went on to have several good-great seasons through his age 31 season. He even had it again in 2011 (age 28)...and was still basically a 1,000 yards receiver through his age 31 season.

 

Those are obviously anecdotal...but I think writing off Clowney is a bit premature.

 

 

Share this post


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

This is his age 26 season...and it's not unreasonable to think he could provide 3-4 high level seasons at least.

 

The question is whether you want to guarantee him $75-100m over the next 3-4 years.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank God Ballard is too smart to fall for this kind of noise. Looking forward to this season I think we have a fine team

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, indyagent17 said:

Thank God Ballard is too smart to fall for this kind of noise. Looking forward to this season I think we have a fine team

Well it did say in the article Ballard contacted the Texans about his availability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't believe everything you hear. He's perhaps just testing out market value

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

The question is whether you want to guarantee him $75-100m over the next 3-4 years.

 

Mack got $90M gtd...I can't see Clowney getting close to that. I think it would probably be ~$60-65M...which is what Lawrence and Clark both got...and maybe not even that much. 

 

It's not my money...but I would do it. The Colts have the money...and I don't think the Colts will find a better player to add to the team in FA...Clowney is a 3x consecutive Pro Bowler with double digit sack upside...heading into his prime...whose skill sets fits perfectly into a position where they have a long-term need. 

 

To put it another way...I would much rather give Clowney a deal and add him to this team to try and win a Super Bowl...than spend that cash on extending guys 1-2 years before they are due. The Colts have a nice 3-4 year window where they can be a lot more aggressive.

 

Signing someone like Clowney will make a dent...but it won't hurt them long-term. There is a very good chance this team will have left upwards of $80M on the table over this four-year period. Right now, they have to spend $44M in cash next offseason just to get 89% (using OTC and estimating a $10M increase for the salary cap). They will make that up for sure (in FA and extensions)...but they have the flexibility to commit to a player like Clowney. I get being lean during those first two years...but not now.

 

The key for me would be the draft capital. If it's only one of those 2nds...I am very intrigued. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Well it did say in the article Ballard contacted the Texans about his availability.

 

 Actually it says "it is believed" that we did. He also believes we haven't spent squat and have MOST of our Cap $$$ still available. NOT!

Share this post


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

Signing someone like Clowney will make a dent...but it won't hurt them long-term.

 

So I agree with this, for a clean sheet difference maker at a premium position, with years of high impact play remaining. I wanted Flowers and Lawrence (both have injuries, but nothing like microfracture). 

 

Quote

Clowney is a 3x consecutive Pro Bowler with double digit sack upside...heading into his prime

 

This is where we disagree. I don't think Clowney fits that profile I described above, primarily due to the microfracture. That makes me question whether he is actually heading into his prime, or whether the odds say he's going to start having serious problems with that knee.

 

I also wonder whether actually has double digit sack potential, just based on his ability and skill. I mean, it's not unreasonable to project him getting 10-12 sacks, but he hasn't broken that barrier yet. He can obviously beat blockers, and he has tools, but I kind of see him in that Trey Flowers area -- lots of pressures and disruption, but lacking the closing ability to get a lot of sacks. I definitely don't see him ever hitting the 15+ sack range.

 

He's undoubtedly a really good player (obviously better than Flowers, btw), but is he ever going to be a monster, a dominant difference maker for a good defense? I'm skeptical.

 

Add in the knee condition, and my level of interest in guaranteeing him even $60m over three years goes way down; it basically disappears. I'd rent him for a year, but I'd only want to pay rental price, which means it's not gonna happen.

Share this post


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

 

So I agree with this, for a clean sheet difference maker at a premium position, with years of high impact play remaining. I wanted Flowers and Lawrence (both have injuries, but nothing like microfracture). 

 

 

This is where we disagree. I don't think Clowney fits that profile I described above, primarily due to the microfracture. That makes me question whether he is actually heading into his prime, or whether the odds say he's going to start having serious problems with that knee.

 

I also wonder whether actually has double digit sack potential, just based on his ability and skill. I mean, it's not unreasonable to project him getting 10-12 sacks, but he hasn't broken that barrier yet. He can obviously beat blockers, and he has tools, but I kind of see him in that Trey Flowers area -- lots of pressures and disruption, but lacking the closing ability to get a lot of sacks. I definitely don't see him ever hitting the 15+ sack range.

 

He's undoubtedly a really good player (obviously better than Flowers, btw), but is he ever going to be a monster, a dominant difference maker for a good defense? I'm skeptical.

 

Add in the knee condition, and my level of interest in guaranteeing him even $60m over three years goes way down; it basically disappears. I'd rent him for a year, but I'd only want to pay rental price, which means it's not gonna happen.

 

What's considered a rental price? You wouldn't give Clowney $17M for one year? I would...in a heartbeat. If I could get like a 4/$65M...even better.

Share this post


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

 

What's considered a rental price? You wouldn't give Clowney $17M for one year? I would...in a heartbeat. If I could get like a 4/$65M...even better.

 

To the bolded, absolutely. I was talking about the trade compensation. If he were a free agent, and willing to sign a one or two year deal, I'd sign him. What I don't want is to give up significant trade compensation to get him. Then add on top a big, five year deal with huge guarantees... I'm not interested.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

 

To the bolded, absolutely. I was talking about the trade compensation. If he were a free agent, and willing to sign a one or two year deal, I'd sign him. What I don't want is to give up significant trade compensation to get him. Then add on top a big, five year deal with huge guarantees... I'm not interested.

 

Gotcha. Yeah...I am not a fan of the trade part either. Would have to be reasonable...which doesn’t happen in intra-division trades.

 

Clowney aside...flexing his cap space in trade is a move I would love to see Ballard make at some point. Spend $15-20M of that saved cash.

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

    • I rewatched the game as I thought this would be pretty strange as well.  He did not play in the fourth except for his usual special teams slot.     I was confused as well by those who say he had a bad game.  He gave up one completion where he got turned around.  Other than that he was glued to his man as usual.    I think he's still having trouble living down his reputation from his rookie year. 
    • depth wise, S, OL, and iDL are my biggest concerns. if folks were grading positions ( starters and depth), i'd be surprised if many graded safety in the top half.  outside of Hooker, lots of questions, at least to me. i definitely don't agree with Venturi. ESPN doesn't either. Hopefully the starters stay healthy, and Willis grows into a stud.
    • lol... you wrote a novel. while i didn't read it all, i did skim. the mock draft stuff, it wasn't a poll. it was a well defined systemic grading. if you're mom can do well on the 1st round, why didn't your favorite guys? lol. on the wide receiver study, it was laughable. no defined parameters, no comparative cross position stats, etc.. not even Busch league stuff.  like i said, legend in your own mind.   in terms of who can dish it out, but can't take it, look at your reaction above to a "sad".... what a rant/tantrum.....  self awareness is obviously not your strongest trait. feel free to "crush" me anytime... gives me a good laugh.
    • very astute observations!!
    • You live your life like the Coyote chasing the Road Runner....    and you keep running into the mountain side,  or running off the cliff....     OK....    you're not going to change....   So, I'll take apart your nonsense --- again.    This will be the longest post I've ever made,  trying to answer all your nonsense.    Doubt you'll read it.    But here it comes....     Of course we know if Luck's injury, whatever it is,  ISN'T minor.   What minor injury do you know lasts four months?    He barely participated in any off-season program.    Does that sound like a minor injury?    The Colts have NEVER, EVER called it minor.   Not once.  The only thing they've said is he hopes to be back by certain deadlines,  and he's missed almost every one.    Does that sound like a minor injury?    This paragraph may confuse you.   It's full of common sense and logic.   I don't know how you got the nerve to try to argue that no one knows.   Unbelieveable!   Nope.   No Tantrum from me.   Just pointing ot what should be obvious,  but apparently the obvious isn't obvious to you.     By the way,  while you were giving me a sad on my post to my friend CBE,   do you know who was giving me a "like"?    CBE.    I criticized his post and he still gave me a like.    He know while we may not agree,  he knows I'm not trying to pound him.   I'm  trying to be as honest and factual as I can.    No wonder you can't see for yourself.   What triggered me, was your latest attempt to sound like you know what you're talking about.   You judged Willis on half of the first pre-season game.    That's all you've got.    That's it.   Doesn't even occur to you that that is.....   NOTHING!    Hello?    And you present it like it should be taken seriously,  when it should be laughed at.    Goodness gracious, you want to go back to the media draft comparison?    I was hoping for your sake that you wouldn't.    But since you insist.     Did you ever really look at that poll?   Seriously,  did you look at the four category breakdown?    Did you see what was actually involved?    If you did,  you shouldn't have been crowing about it.    First,  what I care about from guys like Kiper and McShay and Jeremiah and others isn't just the first round.   My  momma can do a decent job on the first round, and she's been dead for nearly 30 years!    I care about their view on ALL ROUNDS.   And your survey was only about the first round.   That's it.   There were four categories.    In three of them,  the leader got no more than 50%.   That's it.   The best person in three of the four categories scored no more than 50 percent.   When the top guy is scoring no more than 50 percent and everyone else is close behind,  then no one really knows anything.    And the one category that the winner did well in --- one category --- he scored in the 90's.   And everyone else was right behind him.    So, most everyone did well in ONE OUT OF THE FOUR categories.   Big stinking deal.    I tried to tell you this silly survey didn't support what you believed but you wouldn't listen.   No surprise there.  All you cared about the results.   The fatal flaw.     Finally,  without a single fact,  you offered this opinion in that post.    I remember it like it was yesterday,  that your new age guys were doing a better job than the more traditional scouts.   Based on one poll.   One poll of one round.    And you said the older guys like Kiper and company were resting on their laurels and not working as hard.   Nope, the old guys were covering all seven rounds.    Most of your guys,  covering one round.   You have no facts to support that, but that's your view.    When logic and common sense would tell you that the guys I prefer make a ton more money and have their reputation at stake.    They have more to lose.    There's no way they're resting on anything.    But you'll say ANYTHING to try and prove a point.   There's no argument you won't twist to try to win an argument, no matter how foolish the argument is.   I've told you publicly and privately,  you're not interested in honest debate.   You're the least honest poster here.  You're only interested in winning and you'll do anything, say anything to do that.      As to the WR study.    You got crushed.   I'm talking about a bank safe fell on you and your response was to talk about cherry picking stats.    Either English is a second language or you don't know the meaning of the words.     I made two links for you.    One was almost identical to yours.    Yours covered 25 years dating back to a time when passing rules were dramatically different so comparing a receiver from 1990 to one from 2018 was silly.   We're playig a different game now.    My first link covered 20 years from 1995 to 2014 .   There was great over-lap in the two studies.  But the conclusions were entirely different.   The only reason I used it was your post said roughly 60% percent of 1st Round WR's were successes.    Mine said roughly 40%.   Guess which one you preferred?    Surprise!   Then the second link was one of my own making.    I listed every 1st round WR since Luck came into the league in 2012.  That's 7 years.   The last 7 years.   I put into bold each 1st Round WR who was clearly a success.   It came to 41%.   It also showed how few WR's have been taken in the last few drafts.   That's the NFL talking, in case you weren't paying attention.    You didn't dispute one WR.    Not one.   But you called it cherry picking.   Clearly you don't know how to use that expression correctly.    And now you throw out a list of criteria as if you're making the rules here.   Here's another free tip.   You're not.   Never have.   I'm not surprised you don't recognize the facts I put into posts.   You don't use them.   You're all about the opinion.   Most posters here are.   Because that means every single poster can simply say.....    "I'm entitled to my opinion."    Yes, they are.   Everyone is,  even you, who has no need for facts.    But what you're not entitled to is your own facts.    Just like you stated Funchess was a terrible signing based on your facts,  and it never even occured to you that Ballard and Reich had other facts that showed DF could be useful to us.    You actually thought you knew more than they did?!?    Again, unbelieveable.   You had no facts to support your nonsense about Reich being a poor play caller.   You had one game.   And I called you on it.   You've been doing a very bad back-peddle ever since,  but that's your view, with no facts to support it.   In fact all the facts support the exact opposite view.   Yet, you still try to claim victory.   It's so intellectually dishonest that it's nauseating.   And so I observed,  that with almost nothing to base it on,  you thought Willis has inconsistancies.    Thanks, Capt. Obvious.    Tomorrow will likely be sunny during the day,  turning to widely scattered darkness at night.    Anymore obvious insights?   Funny, how you now publicly call for me to ignore your posts,  when a few days ago,  in a thread I was barely even in,  you took a completely uncalled for shot at me.    Or does the phrase "legend in his own mind" not mean anything to you?      Bottom line....    you can dish it out,  especially when you think no one is looking.....   but you can't take it.   Glass ego.   I call a fraud a fraud.   
  • Members

    • Fluke_33

      Fluke_33 837

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • MikeCurtis

      MikeCurtis 1,265

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ManningGM

      ManningGM 515

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • coltsfeva

      coltsfeva 1,181

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NFLfan

      NFLfan 7,795

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • SteelCityColt

      SteelCityColt 6,908

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jskinnz

      jskinnz 5,348

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ar1888

      ar1888 292

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • TonyBungee

      TonyBungee 198

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Melancholie

      Melancholie 3

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...