Would you take it...

[BleedBlue4Shoe86 466]

So, I think it has been well documented on this forum that over this week I have had a liking for Jalen Hurts. I think how bad he looked on Tuesday and then how he has turned it around on Wednesday and Thursday, shows he can develop and learn with good coaching( which who better than Reich). So I ask....

 

if Herbert and live are gone at 13, would you take the following: 

 

Ceedee Lamb at 13 

Neville Gallimore at 34 Or Raekwon Davis 

Jalen Hurts at 44 

 

Forgive the all OU flavor. 

[WifiGuy 80]

5 minutes ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

So, I think it has been well documented on this forum that over this week I have had a liking for Jalen Hurts. I think how bad he looked on Tuesday and then how he has turned it around on Wednesday and Thursday, shows he can develop and learn with good coaching( which who better than Reich). So I ask....

 

if Herbert and live are gone at 13, would you take the following: 

 

Ceedee Lamb at 13 

Neville Gallimore at 34 Or Raekwon Davis 

Jalen Hurts at 44 

 

Forgive the all OU flavor. 

 

Not enough info to answer the question .   Who were the 1st 12 picks before us?

 

 

[NewColtsFan 20,119]

6 minutes ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

So, I think it has been well documented on this forum that over this week I have had a liking for Jalen Hurts. I think how bad he looked on Tuesday and then how he has turned it around on Wednesday and Thursday, shows he can develop and learn with good coaching( which who better than Reich). So I ask....

 

if Herbert and live are gone at 13, would you take the following: 

 

Ceedee Lamb at 13 

Neville Gallimore at 34 Or Raekwon Davis 

Jalen Hurts at 44 

 

Forgive the all OU flavor. 

Lamb at 13 is great.

 

Gallimore at 34 is fine.

 

Davis at 34 is way WAY too soon.  3rd round at earliest.

 

Hurts at 44 is too early for me,  but if the front office likes him enough there — then fine.  Just not my preference. 

[BProland85 2,630]

Other than getting Lamb I’m not a fan of this. 

[BleedBlue4Shoe86 466]

Only reason I bring this up is that you get a stud WR and a QB that has amazing chemistry with him and can develop with coaching ( we have seen that at OU and at the Senior Bowl). You also get a great IDL in gallimore. 

[jchandler7 285]

I would rather have Herbert or Love at 13 but if there both gone I'd be good with this. 

[WifiGuy 80]

Take Kinlaw!!!!

 

 

Most important positions on this D as it stands

 

3 Tech

Edge Rush 

SS

MLB

 

MLBer . Check  (where the hell is my check on this keyboard)

SS . maybe 

Edge.... yes for now in Houston

 

3 Tech???????   Get him .  one of the most if not THE most important position on this D 

 

 

 

[BleedBlue4Shoe86 466]

14 minutes ago, jchandler7 said:

I would rather have Herbert or Love at 13 but if there both gone I'd be good with this. 

That is the point I am making. If they were both gone. 
 

let me ask this. If they were both there: Herbert and Love, Who you taking?

[Colts_Fan12 5,564]

35 minutes ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

That is the point I am making. If they were both gone. 
 

let me ask this. If they were both there: Herbert and Love, Who you taking?

Love 

[Repeat Offender 2]

Look at the Utah St vs LSU game tape....Love is not our guy

[HectorRoberts 701]

3 hours ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

That is the point I am making. If they were both gone. 
 

let me ask this. If they were both there: Herbert and Love, Who you taking?

Herbert

[stitches 7,482]

I would take the first two, I don't want Hurts. 

[Thunderbolt 213]

Herbert!

[indykmj 18]

As a lifelong, diehard OU football fan who saw every snap Hurts played this

past season (Mayfield and Murray in previos years too, so I recognize how

much the OU offense was scaled back to account for Hurts' shortcomings), no way do I take him at #44.

 

I would only draft Hurts (5th round or later) as a prospective

Taysom Hill-esque, backup/special situations type guy.

 

 

[BleedBlue4Shoe86 466]

4 hours ago, stitches said:

I would take the first two, I don't want Hurts. 

Ok. So what QB would you take at 44

[stitches 7,482]

1 hour ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

Ok. So what QB would you take at 44

I'd probably prefer to not draft one and trade the pick for future ammunition for QB. 

 

Maybe if Love is still there, but IMO if he's there that probably means there are some serious flags in his leadership/ability at the whiteboard/etc. 

 

I can be talked into Eason and Fromm too, but I would not be the biggest fan.

[crazycolt1 11,081]

1 hour ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

Ok. So what QB would you take at 44

So how upset you going to be if Ballard don't draft a QB in the first three rounds? 

[crazycolt1 11,081]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

I'd probably prefer to not draft one and trade the pick for future ammunition for QB. 

 

Maybe if Love is still there, but IMO if he's there that probably means there are some serious flags in his leadership/ability at the whiteboard/etc. 

 

I can be talked into Eason and Fromm too, but I would not be the biggest fan.

So if Ballard don't go the direction you think you question his leadership/ability? 

Not to be argumentative to you but are you serious? 

[stitches 7,482]

15 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

So if Ballard don't go the direction you think you question his leadership/ability? 

Not to be argumentative to you but are you serious? 

Huh? No. I'd be pretty happy with 4 QBs in the 1st round... whoever Ballard decides is his guy/whoever he can get in position to draft I'm good with it. In the second round I'd be good with Eason or Fromm, but I don't have as high of an opinion on them as the other 4 so I wouldn't be super excited about them. 

 

The leadership/ability at whiteboard comment was about Love, not about Ballard - I think he has way too high profile traits and skill for him to drop to the middle of the second round. That's what I meant... IMO if he falls, it probably means there are red flags of other kinds that we as fans are not aware of but NFL front offices would know about. 

 

If there is no QB Ballard likes, IMO he should be loading up with draft assets for future drafts so he can more easily get in position to draft a QB(this would mean trading back(with the compensation being future picks) or even trading out of some of those picks(i.e. trading 34 for future 1st for example).  In general I think Ballard should be in "acquire future franchise QB" mode until he gets one. This means - get one now, or load up with assets that will help you get one next year. I would prefer for it to be ASAP(this year's draft), but I won't fault him if he doesn't like any of the QBs. I think it's fair to fault him if he loves one of them but is complacent and the guy gets drafted by ... lets say Oakland at 12. We probably will never know if that was the case for sure, so that's more of a theoretical scenario. 

 

I would start questioning Ballard if he decides for example to give Brissett another extension after what he put on tape last year. There are multiple scenarios that are not my favorite one that I will be good with and very few that will make me question Ballard's leadership and ability. 

[chad72 10,966]

Lamb did not go against quality CBs in Big 12 for me, WR at No.13 would not give us the best return on investment in a WR deep class, no WR is a Megatron or Julio or Randy Moss to be a cinch at No.13 for me in this draft.
 

QB, OT or DT at No.13 gives us the best return on investment there long term, can be cornerstones you can build around. I see the Bengals - Green and Dalton, see the Raiders - Cooper and Carr, examples of WR in round 1 and QB in round 2, they ended up being middle of the road teams. I’m afraid that’s what will happen to us if we go WR at No.13

[crazycolt1 11,081]

2 minutes ago, stitches said:

Huh? No. I'd be pretty happy with 4 QBs in the 1st round... whoever Ballard decides is his guy/whoever he can get in position to draft I'm good with it. In the second round I'd be good with Eason or Fromm, but I don't have as high of an opinion on them as the other 4 so I wouldn't be super excited about them. 

 

The leadership/ability at whiteboard comment was about Love, not about Ballard - I think he has way too high profile traits and skill for him to drop to the middle of the second round. That's what I meant... IMO if he falls, it probably means there are red flags of other kinds that we as fans are not aware of but NFL front offices would know about. 

 

If there is no QB Ballard likes, IMO he should be loading up with draft assets for future drafts so he can more easily get in position to draft them(this would mean trading back or even trading out of some of those picks(i.e. trading 34 for future 1st for example).  In general I think Ballard should be in "acquire future franchise QB" mode until he gets one. This means - get one now, or load up with assets that will help you get one next year. I would prefer for it to be ASAP(this year's draft), but I won't fault him if he doesn't like any of the QBs. I think it's fair to fault him if he loves one of them but is complacent and the guy gets drafted by ... lets say Oakland at 12. We probably will never know if that was the case for sure, so that's more of a theoretical scenario. 

 

I would start questioning Ballard if he decides for example to give Brissett another extension after what he put on tape last year. There are multiple scenarios that are not my favorite one that I will be good with and very few that will make me question Ballard's leadership and ability. 

Fair enough.

As far as Brissett, I think Ballard will give him every opportunity to retain his starting position. I don't believe he is ready to give up on him. I understand that is not a popular belief but the signs are pointing that direction IMO. 

Now if one of those top 4 QBs do happen to fall to us he would be smart to make the move. 

My question is what is he going to do with Hoyer?  Is he going to take the 5 million cap hit by cutting him? 

[stitches 7,482]

18 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

 

My question is what is he going to do with Hoyer?  Is he going to take the 5 million cap hit by cutting him? 

IMO, if we draft a QB high, he cuts him. If we don't, he keeps him. 

[AZColt11 1,497]

I wouldn't absolutely hate it, but I would do this instead, assuming they are still available:

 

13 - DT Kinlaw (I would LOVE to have Bown but he'll be LONG gone)

34 - WR Jefferson

44 - QB Gordon

[jchandler7 285]

11 hours ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

That is the point I am making. If they were both gone. 
 

let me ask this. If they were both there: Herbert and Love, Who you taking?

I want Herbert but I would still be happy with Love. I believe Herbert is the safe pick. However, Love has more upside if he fully develops. I think Herbert would give us close to what Luck did while Love could end up playing like Mahomes or Blake Bortles. Hes either going to be great or bust with no in between. Just my opinion. 

[BleedBlue4Shoe86 466]

1 hour ago, jchandler7 said:

I want Herbert but I would still be happy with Love. I believe Herbert is the safe pick. However, Love has more upside if he fully develops. I think Herbert would give us close to what Luck did while Love could end up playing like Mahomes or Blake Bortles. Hes either going to be great or bust with no in between. Just my opinion. 

I think that is a great point in Love. You see the Boom potential but it could also be bust. I think your point is very spot on. 

[Coffeedrinker 7,479]

1 hour ago, AZColt11 said:

I wouldn't absolutely hate it, but I would do this instead, assuming they are still available:

 

13 - DT Kinlaw (I would LOVE to have Bown but he'll be LONG gone)

34 - WR Jefferson

44 - QB Gordon

I like Gordon as well but IMO there is no reason to draft him at 44... he will fall into the 4th round or later.

[Stoney 158]

On 1/23/2020 at 9:25 PM, WifiGuy said:

Take Kinlaw!!!!

 

 

Most important positions on this D as it stands

 

3 Tech

Edge Rush 

SS

MLB

 

MLBer . Check  (where the hell is my check on this keyboard)

SS . maybe 

Edge.... yes for now in Houston

 

3 Tech???????   Get him .  one of the most if not THE most important position on this D 

 

 

 

OLB is extremely important in this D too 

[FalseStart 308]

The Castanzo decision will influence Colts board... Top OT if he retires would be preferred at 13 or 34...with the other selections rounding out the first two rounds being the top DT, DE or WR on our board. Aside from burrow, none of the QBs mentioned, from a BPA perspective, Have done anything to insert themselves in our top 4 Colt Picks. There are too many good/great prospects to choose from other than QB.  4th round... sure take a chance on a guy there. Was there a time line on the Castonzo decision? 

[NannyMcafee 1,632]

If it comes down to Kinlaw vs CeeDee the pick will be Kinlaw. Ballard knows he can find adequate WRs, even elite WRs much more frequently than finding a great DT.