Here's a thought

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

3 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

The thing is this.  The Colts have a tough schedule next year.  They could be actually be picking higher in the draft next year.  The key thing is if the Colts love somebody in this draft.  For all we know, the Colts may not like any of the top qbs.

That’s what I said. They have to love the QB. If you seen how mad ballard was in his year end press conference he will not tolerate having a worse record. Jacoby probably has a little more ceiling if WR stay healthy and we get him more weapons. Just don’t think that ceiling is high enough.

[DougDew]

42 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

If Castanzo retires there is no way they trade up.  They have to many holes and cannot afford to give up picks.  I think next year mayb the year they would move up.  I think if they do pick a qb this year it will surprise people who they pick.  Everyone is suggesting Herbert,Tua and Love.  I don't think they  r the type of qb that they r looking for.

How about this:

 

Pick 34 and pick 75 would provide exactly enough draft value chart points to move up to pick 22 held by BUFF.  Just ahead of NE at 23 and NO at 24.

 

If it was for Fromm or Love, or if Eason looks good, or a fallen DT or OT , I think giving up pick 75 would be worth it.  Getting two of the needed positions in QB, DT, or OT by selecting one at 13 and then sacrificing only our 3rd rounder is well worth it, IMO.

 

And we still have pick 44.

 

https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp

 

[adubb84]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

The vibe I am getting from 90% of the forum is, take a QB at 13 or else otherwise this place will implode  . I see maybe 10-15% of people in here that are ok with taking a QB with our 34 and not being desperate. We need a DT and a difference maker at WR that is fact.

From my POV and seeing similar posts in different threads it’s coming down to a nervousness about the future of the colts. As someone else pointed out the next draft class isn’t promising with QB’s. So that puts folks in one of two buckets. Invest the 13th pick on a QB with a higher upside (maybe) or use the 34th or later on a QB that may be more raw/less talented and set the franchise back even more years pending JB doesn’t pan out. Free agency will clear up a BUNCH of questions on where we are trying to head. 
 

Just odd times because the colts really haven’t been in a position like this since Peyton first came on board. This offseason is a BIG one. 

[Indeee]

2 hours ago, stitches said:

Chad Kelly is a third string QB on a roster with Jacoby Brissett as the starter and Brian Hoyer as the backup. Pause for a moment and think about it for a minute or two. Jacoby Brissett and Brian Hoyer give us better chance to win than Chad Kelly according to our coaching staff. Brian Hoyer! Who's lost his last dozen games in the league. I honestly have no idea why people put ANY hopes whatsoever in the Chad Kelly basket. 

In terms of how he is viewed in roster depth chart, sure. He is third. Hoyer would not have been here except Kelly was suspended first couple games. Why they gave a 3 year contract to Hoyer is the question. Maybe this has more to do with Hoyers agent or maybe it speaks volumes of Brissett. Hoyer wouldn't have been here if Kelly wasn't suspended if logic weighs in. I truly believe that JB was given the entire year to prove it. This is evident with Reich "putting in wrinkles" to help JB in week 15 or 16, and why Kelly never saw the field. Logic says based on JB being a good guy, locker room guy, etc. He was getting full season unless injury took that away and has nothing to do with how the club sees Kelly.  So my question to you is this. Taking emotion out of it, if you have a rookie ( in terms of playing opportunity only in his career ) that has mobility, accuracy, decent arm and awareness that "experts" claimed was in top 5 of his draft class at his position that had in some cases better intangibles or comparable intangibles to MaHomes on your current roster, why would you then draft  a guy viewed the same way similar to the guy you already have on your team? When I use logic to answer same question the answer I come up with is that you don't. Why would you? Now I will await your answer and let's see if you logically convince me otherwise. I don't want speculation but logic

[Jdubu]

3 hours ago, jchandler7 said:

In regards to Chad Kelly...He MAY have the skills to play QB at a high level. But, is his head in the right place to be the leader of this team? Listening to Ballard, it sounded to me like the front office/ coaching staff do not fully trust him yet. They believe he's still got alot to prove and has to earn their trust. IMO we cannot roll into next season hoping Kelly has his head on straight and is ready to be the leader on & off the field. 

You’re right, I think the front office have confidence in his skill set to run the team but the head issues still were a concern last year. I base this from the interview CB had with Dan Dak where he mentioned the off field issues. Look, if CB didn’t have high confidence in Kelly’s on field abilities, he never would had kept his spot last year when he needed a roster spot. I honestly feel like CB tested the kids metal by taking the approach of making the kid watch the team struggle knowing ( or thinking) he could help the team while JB. Was struggling. If CK could handle the stress and strain of being forced to watch his team struggle and not lash out or say stupid things, his physical talent along with his newfound mental growth will help CB make the choice to not force a QB in the first. I think CB thought genuinely that JB could make the leap, he didn’t and he kept CK on as a cheap insurance policy and allowed his mental growth to be checked out. So far, CK has passed the mental growth test since arriving in Indy. He has made no news that was negative. Manage that same pattern and I think we see CK competing for the starters role in 2020. 

[stitches]

56 minutes ago, Indeee said:

In terms of how he is viewed in roster depth chart, sure. He is third. Hoyer would not have been here except Kelly was suspended first couple games. Why they gave a 3 year contract to Hoyer is the question. Maybe this has more to do with Hoyers agent or maybe it speaks volumes of Brissett. Hoyer wouldn't have been here if Kelly wasn't suspended if logic weighs in.

The question is not why Hoyer is here. For whatever reason he's here. The question is after Kelly's suspension ended - why was he still behind Hoyer on the depth chart and in playing time. When the Colts were on the verge of making a run for the playoffs, and they had the choice to put in Hoyer or Kelly in Reich and co chose Hoyer. Why?

 

Quote

I truly believe that JB was given the entire year to prove it.

 

Same and I don't mind that.

 

Quote

This is evident with Reich "putting in wrinkles" to help JB in week 15 or 16, and why Kelly never saw the field. Logic says based on JB being a good guy, locker room guy, etc. He was getting full season unless injury took that away and has nothing to do with how the club sees Kelly.

To a large degree agree with this too.

 

Quote

So my question to you is this. Taking emotion out of it, if you have a rookie ( in terms of playing opportunity only in his career ) that has mobility, accuracy, decent arm and awareness that "experts" claimed was in top 5 of his draft class at his position that had in some cases better intangibles or comparable intangibles to MaHomes on your current roster, why would you then draft  a guy viewed the same way similar to the guy you already have on your team?

 

WOAH WOAH WOAH! Hold there. You make a ton of assertions, few of which I'd be willing to grand you. He's not a rookie. This was his 3d season in the league. You want to at the same time claim his rookie-eligibility and ignore why he's been sitting for 3 years and just assert that he has better intangibles than Mahomes? Are you serious? The guy that couldn't stop being in perpetual trouble for 5 years before coming to us has better intangibles than the best QB in the league and current SB finalist? At some point the draft number(7th round BTW, 253rd overall (Mr. Irrelevant)) or draft evaluation(if you believe this expert you've found that thought he was top 5 in his class) has to either be justified and confirmed or refuted. You cannot keep relying on pre-draft evaluation year after year after year without taking into account the information that's coming to you during those years. Next year will be his 4th year and he still hasn't started a game in the league.

 

Up until now he's sat behind

-2017: Brock Osweiller and Paxton Lynch

-2018: Case Keenum and Kevin Hogan

-2019: Jacoby Brissett and Brian Hoyer

 

So 2 different coaching staffs 3 years in a row, decided that Brock Osweiller, Paxton Lynch, Case Keenum, Kevin Hogan, Jacoby Brisset and Brian Hoyer give them better chance to succeed. 

 

To me putting any hope on this type of player to be your QB is irresponsible. Sure, I don't mind him being our cheap no. 3. He did well in pre-season. But making plans and making draft decisions at the very top of your roster - with the most valuable asset you have(the 1st round pick) for the most valuable and important position(the QB position) by taking into account even the existence of Chad Kelly is preposterous. 

 

Quote

When I use logic to answer same question the answer I come up with is that you don't. Why would you? Now I will await your answer and let's see if you logically convince me otherwise. I don't want speculation but logic

 

I guess my answer is - I think it's ridiculous to view Chad Kelly the same way you would a 1st round QB you pick. That's just my logic speaking here. 

[Indeee]

30 minutes ago, stitches said:

The question is not why Hoyer is here. For whatever reason he's here. The question is after Kelly's suspension ended - why was he still behind Hoyer on the depth chart and in playing time. When the Colts were on the verge of making a run for the playoffs, and they had the choice to put in Hoyer or Kelly in Reich and co chose Hoyer. Why?

 

 

Same and I don't mind that.

 

To a large degree agree with this too.

 

 

WOAH WOAH WOAH! Hold there. You make a ton of assertions, few of which I'd be willing to grand you. He's not a rookie. This was his 3d season in the league. You want to at the same time claim his rookie-eligibility and ignore why he's been sitting for 3 years and just assert that he has better intangibles than Mahomes? Are you serious? The guy that couldn't stop being in perpetual trouble for 5 years before coming to us has better intangibles than the best QB in the league and current SB finalist? At some point the draft number(7th round BTW, 253rd overall (Mr. Irrelevant)) or draft evaluation(if you believe this expert you've found that thought he was top 5 in his class) has to either be justified and confirmed or refuted. You cannot keep relying on pre-draft evaluation year after year after year without taking into account the information that's coming to you during those years. Next year will be his 4th year and he still hasn't started a game in the league.

 

Up until now he's sat behind

-2017: Brock Osweiller and Paxton Lynch

-2018: Case Keenum and Kevin Hogan

-2019: Jacoby Brissett and Brian Hoyer

 

So 2 different coaching staffs 3 years in a row, decided that Brock Osweiller, Paxton Lynch, Case Keenum, Kevin Hogan, Jacoby Brisset and Brian Hoyer give them better chance to succeed. 

 

To me putting any hope on this type of player to be your QB is irresponsible. Sure, I don't mind him being our cheap no. 3. He did well in pre-season. But making plans and making draft decisions at the very top of your roster - with the most valuable asset you have(the 1st round pick) for the most valuable and important position(the QB position) by taking into account even the existence of Chad Kelly is preposterous. 

 

 

I guess my answer is - I think it's ridiculous to view Chad Kelly the same way you would a 1st round QB you pick. That's just my logic speaking here. 

First, I wrote rookie only based on how much he has seen field, not years in the league. You answered your own question regarding why he has not seen field and comparing him to first round picks of QBs. Paxton Lynch was a first round pick and based on that most, not all, organizations normally give more opportunity to higher draft picks regardless of how they play right away. In regards to Hoyer, the answer is very clear in same terms of Foles and Minshew. MONEY. You are not going to not start Hoyer in that spot based on money you paid him, also he was brought into a backup role from the jump but only because Kelly was suspended. So money and draft position answers those 2 questions about Kelly. I dont have the link but look up the espn sports science show involving Chad Kelly and that's where the potential intangibles to MaHomes are given outside of a speculative assessment from college player experts. The speculation relation or possibilities towards any player doesnt really matter though as it is all subjective. It's okay to agree to disagree, again I just hope the Colts draft a QB with supposedly similar traits and projections than the current QB ( Kelly ) we already have fostered. To me it just doesn't make since considering both Kelly and Love or whoever's needs to be developed. If Colts were speculated to draft a pro ready lock of a QB luke Luck I would be fine, but a project with upside we already have on the team, so no need to draft another one

[stitches]

3 minutes ago, Indeee said:

First, I wrote rookie only based on how much he has seen field, not years in the league. You answered your own question regarding why he has not seen field and comparing him to first round picks of QBs. Paxton Lynch was a first round pick and based on that most, not all, organizations normally give more opportunity to higher draft picks regardless of how they play right away. In regards to Hoyer, the answer is very clear in same terms of Foles and Minshew. MONEY. You are not going to not start Hoyer in that spot based on money you paid him, also he was brought into a backup role from the jump but only because Kelly was suspended. So money and draft position answers those 2 questions about Kelly. I dont have the link but look up the espn sports science show involving Chad Kelly and that's where the potential intangibles to MaHomes are given outside of a speculative assessment from college player experts. The speculation relation or possibilities towards any player doesnt really matter though as it is all subjective. It's okay to agree to disagree, again I just hope the Colts draft a QB with supposedly similar traits and projections than the current QB ( Kelly ) we already have fostered. To me it just doesn't make since considering both Kelly and Love or whoever's needs to be developed. If Colts were speculated to draft a pro ready lock of a QB luke Luck I would be fine, but a project with upside we already have on the team, so no need to draft another one

 

I guess we have to agree to disagree. I would really really hope we draft a QB with much better traits and ESPECIALLY leadership and intangibles than Chad freaking Kelly. 

[Dingus McGirt]

6 hours ago, Indeee said:

I agree, however what if Kelly has what you say is needed to play the position? Let Kelly develop and have the growing pains. Not sure why he is getting written off so soon here. Even though I wanted him to play last year, I do believe it had more to do with Jacoby getting a full season shot with no interference. What I have been hoping for was Reich to install and offensive scheme that was part K-Gun and part RPO system he brought from the Eagles and let Kelly run it. That would be fun, but that's just my opinion.

Sorry.  No fun allowed.  Colts are to plod along behind a stalwart citizen and locker room leader.