Scheme vs. Talent... Where the Colts may have gotten it wrong offensively

[Indeee]

I alluded to offensively as I believe defensively the Colts have done a better than average job. I'm not so sure this was Ballard though even though he will get the credit. I believe most of the defensive success lays at the hands of Dodds from evaluation, Ballard's second in charge who was part if not the architect for the Seattle Defense.

 

Offensively though, The Colts IMO have gotten this all wrong. Excluding the pick of Nelson, which any fan could have made, the selections of draftees and selection of FA's at the skill positions have failed miserably and here is why.

 

These positions have been selected on scheme fit. To me, that's the most telling clue and why to this point that philosophy has failed this team. Truly Talented "offensive" players will always excel no matter what scheme they get thrown into. The talent will outweigh the system every time. In the case of the Colts, the offensive players who were selected were based on scheme fit and not talent overall. That isn't to say that some are not talented, it's to say they are not above average talent, so in that case, scheme would matter.

 

Until the Colts stop selecting offensive players based on scheme and select on pure talent alone, the Colts will never be talented enough to compete with the teams that chose talent over scheme within other top organizations. 

[Zoltan]

Do you have any specific examples?

[tweezy32]

15 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

Do you have any specific examples?

P. Campbell

[Shepman]

I would like to better understand what selections are for a particular scheme and what that scheme is and how it differs to ours.  I can't imagine Taylor doesn't fit our scheme and concepts.

[Shive]

6 minutes ago, Indeee said:

I alluded to offensively as I believe defensively the Colts have done a better than average job. I'm not so sure this was Ballard though even though he will get the credit. I believe most of the defensive success lays at the hands of Dodds from evaluation, Ballard's second in charge who was part if not the architect for the Seattle Defense.

 

Offensively though, The Colts IMO have gotten this all wrong. Excluding the pick of Nelson, which any fan could have made, the selections of draftees and selection of FA's at the skill positions have failed miserably and here is why.

 

These positions have been selected on scheme fit. To me, that's the most telling clue and why to this point that philosophy has failed this team. Truly Talented "offensive" players will always excel no matter what scheme they get thrown into. The talent will outweigh the system every time. In the case of the Colts, the offensive players who were selected were based on scheme fit and not talent overall. That isn't to say that some are not talented, it's to say they are not above average talent, so in that case, scheme would matter.

 

Until the Colts stop selecting offensive players based on scheme and select on pure talent alone, the Colts will never be talented enough to compete with the teams that chose talent over scheme within other top organizations. 

While every team has a "prototype" or ideal skillset for each position, I don't think "drafting for scheme over talent" has been an issue with our offensive skill positions. Campbell was drafted purely on his talent and not how he fit into the scheme, in fact he seemed a bit redundant at the time since TY was our speedster. We drafted JT, who many believe doesn't necessarily fit our blocking scheme, because of his overall talent.

 

I'm really curious who you think was drafted for a scheme fit in lieu of more talented players.

 

Please provide some examples and more detailed reasoning.

[DougDew]

Agree with OP.  The players are talented, but their talents seem to be used in specific roles, with the emphasis in talent evaluation being what role they are going to play.

 

In addition to Campbell, Ebron was a role player.  Mack is a between the tackles runner, and we drafted JT who is similar. 

 

We don't have dynamic edge players.  Campbell and Ebron are slot/seam guys added to the team for that reason.  They are not all-around good football players given their prices.  Hines is our only edge player, and that's all he is, and he isn't very good, IMO.

 

When Doyle and Ebron were on the field together, Ebron was the down the field guy, and Doyle the possession guy, often times taking passes in the flat.  Specific roles.  Specific talent.

 

Specific players added with specific talents for specific roles is what leads to substitutions and then predictability.

[Indeee]

58 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

Do you have any specific examples?

Parris, Hines, Ebron, Funchess, Pittman Jr., Cain.... 

 

Remember? Cain, fountain, Funchess: Big bodied wideout to compliment TY. That's not talent that's positional; scheme

 

Hines. Parris: fast little guys to fit scheme of crossing under route slot, backfield checkdown

 

Pittman Jr.: In mold of Vincent Jackson, again trying to find big bodied wideout to compliment

 

Taylor was drafted based on the Colts finding out 3 years too late that Mack was injury prone and wasn't going to stand up to rigors of every down back. With that being said, Taylor, IF his body holds up, might be the only skill player drafted on pure talent alone

 

My point is that in every one of these cases, they were selected based on trying to find a guy who fit a scheme piece that was missing and not on pure talent alone

[Indeee]

33 minutes ago, Shive said:

While every team has a "prototype" or ideal skillset for each position, I don't think "drafting for scheme over talent" has been an issue with our offensive skill positions. Campbell was drafted purely on his talent and not how he fit into the scheme, in fact he seemed a bit redundant at the time since TY was our speedster. We drafted JT, who many believe doesn't necessarily fit our blocking scheme, because of his overall talent.

 

I'm really curious who you think was drafted for a scheme fit in lieu of more talented players.

 

Please provide some examples and more detailed reasoning.

Parris was not drafted based on pure talent alone, you are wrong. As a matter of fact, the Ohio state wideout with the pure talent was McLaurin. Parris was talented but oft injured and was always a porotype slot playing out of position in OU and the Colts took him knowing they were looking for a slot guy. It's why they passed on other wideouts that year who have fared better as they thought they had the other positions on the team locked into place. If not for injuries it was going to be TY, Funchess, and Campbell. See how that works out? The Colts have been trying to build and fill a scheme

[Smonroe]

Scheme was only part of the selection process.  Talent assuredly came into play, as well as their character (how many college captains do we have?).

 

All the successful teams draft based on scheme and talent.  It makes no sense drafting a guy who's not going to fit the system.

 

I'll still take Ballard's draft success over most other GMs.  Who has done a better job the last three years?

[Four2itus]

Man, injuries can create all kinds of misconceptions.

[Smonroe]

2 minutes ago, Indeee said:

Parris was not drafted based on pure talent alone, you are wrong. As a matter of fact, the Ohio state wideout with the pure talent was McLaurin. Parris was talented but oft injured and was always a porotype slot playing out of position in OU and the Colts took him knowing they were looking for a slot guy. It's why they passed on other wideouts that year who have fared better as they thought they had the other positions on the team locked into place. If not for injuries it was going to be TY, Funchess, and Campbell. See how that works out? The Colts have been trying to build and fill a scheme

 

How 'oft' injured was he in college?  

[Zoltan]

56 minutes ago, tweezy32 said:

P. Campbell

 

P. Campbell I would say is very talented, he is just really unlucky with injuries and has a promising future.

[DougDew]

After the fact injuries are not the point.  Injuries can force some players to play out of character, but that doesn't mask the notion they were added for a specific role or to compliment an existing player who had a different role.

[Zoltan]

8 minutes ago, Indeee said:

Parris, Hines, Ebron, Funchess, Pittman Jr., Cain.... 

 

Remember? Cain, fountain, Funchess: Big bodied wideout to compliment TY. That's not talent that's positional; scheme

 

Hines. Parris: fast little guys to fit scheme of crossing under route slot, backfield checkdown

 

Pittman Jr.: In mold of Vincent Jackson, again trying to find big bodied wideout to compliment

 

Taylor was drafted based on the Colts finding out 3 years too late that Mack was injury prone and wasn't going to stand up to rigors of every down back. With that being said, Taylor, IF his body holds up, might be the only skill player drafted on pure talent alone

 

My point is that in every one of these cases, they were selected based on trying to find a guy who fit a scheme piece that was missing and not on pure talent alone

 

Ebron, Funchess were one year signs to see if they could rebound, which Ebron did with luck then fell apart the next year. Funchess you really can't count because he never played really, but they were good risk FA pickups.

 

Hines and Campbell are very talented players, Hines just needs to be used better and Campbell needs to stay healthy, because he looked amazing at the start of the year.

 

Pittman Jr. was well regarded as a great talented player going into the draft and balanced out our receiving corp.

 

I just don't see an argument that the players they selected were considered reaches which you see when teams draft for scheme vs talent. I would also say don't let hindsight affect your decision. 

 

For example DK Metcalf hadn't played in a year and was coming back from neck surgery, not to mention his lateral speed was not good. I would also argue he wouldn't be as good with our team just because we don't have a QB who can throw the deep ball as well as Wilson

[Zoltan]

12 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

How 'oft' injured was he in college?  

2016 for a sprained ankle and missed one game

 

That was the only time 

 

https://www.sportsinjurypredictor.com/player/parris-campbell/10209

[MacDee1975]

Ah, if only Luck were still here.....we wouldn’t be subject to nonsensical threads such as this.

[DougDew]

Banagu, Turay, and Lewis were drafted to play certain roles.  They are not, nor ever were thought of as, three down players.

 

Yes, role players and positions are important, but generally 1st and 2nd rounds can find overall talented players who have more versatility.

 

Blackmon is a good example.  He dropped because of the knee but was regarded as a pure second round pick.  In fact, as a second round grade, he is more versatile than our "deep ball hawk" that was drafted pick 15.

[Rally5]

24 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

 

Ebron, Funchess were one year signs to see if they could rebound, which Ebron did with luck then fell apart the next year. Funchess you really can't count because he never played really, but they were good risk FA pickups.

 

Hines and Campbell are very talented players, Hines just needs to be used better and Campbell needs to stay healthy, because he looked amazing at the start of the year.

 

Pittman Jr. was well regarded as a great talented player going into the draft and balanced out our receiving corp.

 

I just don't see an argument that the players they selected were considered reaches which you see when teams draft for scheme vs talent. I would also say don't let hindsight affect your decision. 

 

For example DK Metcalf hadn't played in a year and was coming back from neck surgery, not to mention his lateral speed was not good. I would also argue he wouldn't be as good with our team just because we don't have a QB who can throw the deep ball as well as Wilson

I think you have it right.

[NannyMcafee]

Its not because they are picking scheme over talent its because of this scheme in general and lack luster play calling or lack of execution. Either way, im not sure how much faith I have in Frank or Nick. 

[Indeee]

32 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

 

Ebron, Funchess were one year signs to see if they could rebound, which Ebron did with luck then fell apart the next year. Funchess you really can't count because he never played really, but they were good risk FA pickups.

 

Hines and Campbell are very talented players, Hines just needs to be used better and Campbell needs to stay healthy, because he looked amazing at the start of the year.

 

Pittman Jr. was well regarded as a great talented player going into the draft and balanced out our receiving corp.

 

I just don't see an argument that the players they selected were considered reaches which you see when teams draft for scheme vs talent. I would also say don't let hindsight affect your decision. 

 

For example DK Metcalf hadn't played in a year and was coming back from neck surgery, not to mention his lateral speed was not good. I would also argue he wouldn't be as good with our team just because we don't have a QB who can throw the deep ball as well as Wilson

Here... this might help. Name one Colt skill position player who has the talent or make up to play any position at any time on the field, consistently effective. Meaning as example can Pittman Jr. play the x y or z and thrive at all 3 consistently and effectively? That will show you what I was trying to say because the answer is NO

[chad72]

Parris Campbell was just like Curtis Samuel, had not run a full route tree since Urban Meyer did not need him to but had all the talent in the world. If anything, I have wondered why they haven't used him in a scheme friendly fashion as he had the talent and the speed to run reverses, to put him in motion more often than TY etc. So, the bigger question is why aren't the offensive coaches using their "talent" to "scheme" them for success? Pittman, it is way too early to say anything about him, I fancied they would use him more on the outside and inside based on down and distance. Hines, his "talent" usage has been downright mind boggling, running him between the tackles instead of letting him beat LBs in space like Dion Lewis, Danny Woodhead, Darren Sproles, James White type of guys. 

 

Once you get past Day 1 and Day 2 (after Round 3), roles become more important because the talent pool dwindles in the draft, so you have to coach up some DIII player like Garcon with raw talent and have the right veteran QB, WR and coaches to get them up to speed faster. Plus, Ballard has been known to draft his later round players based on measurables, albeit from small schools or just decent production. Deon Cain, where the heck is he? That was "talent from a big school", right, that fell to us? Steelers still drafted Claypool and cut bait with him, and they still had JuJu and Diontae Johnson.

 

So, the premise that Ballard has used measurables consistently to draft his players and the fact that our play calling has been more conservative and underutilizing talent more often than not all leads me to believe it is not the talent assembled, it is how it is being utilized. So, I strongly disagree with the OP.  If anything, Ballard just needs to double dip into the talent pool when he can with strong WR classes like 2020 and 2021, IMO, that is the only thing he may be guilty of.

[chad72]

48 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Banagu, Turay, and Lewis were drafted to play certain roles.  They are not, nor ever were thought of as, three down players.

 

Yes, role players and positions are important, but generally 1st and 2nd rounds can find overall talented players who have more versatility.

 

Blackmon is a good example.  He dropped because of the knee but was regarded as a pure second round pick.  In fact, as a second round grade, he is more versatile than our "deep ball hawk" that was drafted pick 15.

 

This thread is about offensive players!!! If you started one about defensive players and made this point, I would agree.

[DougDew]

19 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

This thread is about offensive players!!! If you started one about defensive players and made this point, I would agree.

I think it shows a method of approach.  And the defense got a shot in the arm this year when it added a true talent at 3T, Buckner, instead of the role playing 3T, Lewis/Autry.

 

I mentioned in another thread that sometimes smart people fall in love with their brains and their analytical abilities and processes.  They focus on the grains of sand and not the beach.

 

I hope that when we replace LT, they don't over think it and try to figure out which T will make a better "zone" OT or "power man" LT.  Because any long term player needs to be good at both, which is why Nelson excels.

[Zoltan]

43 minutes ago, Indeee said:

Here... this might help. Name one Colt skill position player who has the talent or make up to play any position at any time on the field, consistently effective. Meaning as example can Pittman Jr. play the x y or z and thrive at all 3 consistently and effectively? That will show you what I was trying to say because the answer is NO

Hines can play slot

 

I would argue we don’t know yet Campbell and Pittman are young and haven’t been able to show what they got. 

Your judgment seems premature 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

We are missing speed. When Campbell got injured that went down the toilet. We need to just keep drafting some speedy WR until we get some that aren’t injured and stick. On JMV he mentioned with the colts luck with injuries we should’ve of drafted Pittman and Claypool back to back. I kind of agree with him.

[Zoltan]

2 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

We are missing speed. When Campbell got injured that went down the toilet. We need to just keep drafting some speedy WR until we get some that aren’t injured and stick. On JMV he mentioned with the colts luck with injuries we should’ve of drafted Pittman and Claypool back to back. I kind of agree with him.

With our Luck if Claypool was on our team, he would probably be hurt right now lol 

[DougDew]

7 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

 On JMV he mentioned with the colts luck with injuries we should’ve of drafted Pittman and Claypool back to back. I kind of agree with him.

Forget injuries.  They are both tall, fast, good hands, and run decent routes.  Any team short on WR talent could use both.  Who cares if one plays Z better than the other and another plays X better than the other? 

 

 

[Behle]

You might to draft for scheme when the players that fit the mold of an every down player or able to play any and all positions are few and far between.

[chad72]

47 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I think it shows a method of approach.  And the defense got a shot in the arm this year when it added a true talent at 3T, Buckner, instead of the role playing 3T, Lewis/Autry.

 

I mentioned in another thread that sometimes smart people fall in love with their brains and their analytical abilities and processes.  They focus on the grains of sand and not the beach.

 

I hope that when we replace LT, they don't over think it and try to figure out which T will make a better "zone" OT or "power man" LT.  Because any long term player needs to be good at both, which is why Nelson excels.

 

You cannot apply the same argument to the offensive side.

 

Defensive side - Polian got guys like Mathis, undersized guys, in later rounds that fit the system. Once coached up, it took them a few years but he made it in a couple of years. Polian overdrafted guys like Kelvin Hayden, Pat Angerer, and so many other guys a few rounds prior based on scheme fit. His argument was "first round, I will get the most talented player and from the second round, I will get the guys that our coaches want". Every GM has to be in tune with his HC, and sometimes it leads to talent being drafted and sometimes the HC and his coaches want specific traits the GM has to cater to.

 

On the offensive side - I do think talent has won over scheme fit with the picks they did. Otherwise, JT who ran in a primarily power/man blocking scheme in Wisconsin would not have been drafted by the Colts.

 

On the defensive side - like Dungy and his defensive coaches wanted, certain players they seemed to value more for our system than others, and I do think if Lewis and Banogu are not producing, it is just as much the coaches fault as the GM's because he was most likely giving them guys with traits they wanted.

 

Free agents to draft picks is an apples to oranges comparison - you know a track record, performance and injury history, and you are getting a more seasoned product than a raw product you have to coach up. Buckner, in his 1st or 2nd year, may not have been as dominant if the 49ers did not augment with Armstead, Solomon Thomas and then Nick Bosa.

 

So, the bottom line is, we cannot broad brush it one way or the other, is my point. When they draft players like Buckner, Kinlaw, Muhammad Wilkerson, Leonard Williams, even when they are first round players, they always talk about where they can be most productive. You don't put a round peg in a square hole, we tried with Jerry Hughes and then he went to the Bills, we all learnt he was not cut out to be a 4-3 DE, more so a 3-4 OLB. Robert Mathis was supposed to be a 3-4 OLB too because he was undersized but he learnt to be effective and in Dungy's system, excelled as a 4-3 DE in a 3-point stance. It helped because he had Freeney on the other side for the strong side DE.

 

 

[BigO]

I think he mentioned free agents and the draft. Case in point Rivers was a scheme fit for the colts instead of someone like Cam Newton. The Colts seem to like pocket passers that do not run very much. Hopefully this will change because everyone can see that the NFL is moving towards mobile  quarterbacks like Jackson, Mahomes and Murray.

[Smoke317]

I hope we don’t end up regretting taking Campbell & Pittman over Metcalf & Claypool.  Rivers would be lighting it up this year with those 2 behemoths...  One of either Campbell or Pittman has to develop into a consistent playmaker or Ballard deserves some heat for those potential misses.

[ColtStrong2013]

I think the fact that Ballard has loaded up on 2nd round picks speaks to him looking for “talented” players to fit what the team is looking for scheme/character wise versus trying to consistently find diamonds in the mid to late rounds. He’s hit on some and some are still up in the air. Smith is a talented offensive lineman, I don’t think anyone questioned that. Pittman on a normal receiver draft year is a first round talent. Campbell was a 4.4 speed talent that was considered a great pick at the time. He’s had bad luck with injuries. To say Ballard hasn’t worked to bring in talent is interesting to me. I guarantee you Andrew Luck would be playing his best ball with this offense right now. Instead we get an old Phillip Rivers. 

 

[chad72]

9 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

I hope we don’t end up regretting taking Campbell & Pittman over Metcalf & Claypool.  Rivers would be lighting it up this year with those 2 behemoths...  One of either Campbell or Pittman has to develop into a consistent playmaker or Ballard deserves some heat for those potential misses.

 

If you didn't have Russell Wilson or Big Ben, there is a good chance Metcalf with Bridgewater and Claypool with Daniel Jones (say) might be getting the short end of the stick.  We definitely are not getting Rivers in his prime, something we have to reconcile to.

 

The problem right now is teams are going all in with free agency while having QBs on rookie contracts - Rams with Goff went with Brandin Cooks and Todd Gurley, and other free agents. Now Cardinals with Kyler Murray going with Hopkins, and when a guy like Mahomes gives you early returns, keeping the core of Hill, Kelce, Watkins becomes important because windows are short in the NFL. No more waiting 3 years for the likes of Reggie Wayne to come up to speed in the system (even then Polian kept investing in Wayne, Clark, Addai within a span of 5 years all in round 1 to keep the identity of the team that was Peyton and the offense humming). Given all of this, it is surprising the Ravens haven't invested in much for Lamar to throw to.

 

THAT is the true problem we are facing with fans and expectations all around.

[NewColtsFan]

4 hours ago, Indeee said:

I alluded to offensively as I believe defensively the Colts have done a better than average job. I'm not so sure this was Ballard though even though he will get the credit. I believe most of the defensive success lays at the hands of Dodds from evaluation, Ballard's second in charge who was part if not the architect for the Seattle Defense.

 

Offensively though, The Colts IMO have gotten this all wrong. Excluding the pick of Nelson, which any fan could have made, the selections of draftees and selection of FA's at the skill positions have failed miserably and here is why.

 

These positions have been selected on scheme fit. To me, that's the most telling clue and why to this point that philosophy has failed this team. Truly Talented "offensive" players will always excel no matter what scheme they get thrown into. The talent will outweigh the system every time. In the case of the Colts, the offensive players who were selected were based on scheme fit and not talent overall. That isn't to say that some are not talented, it's to say they are not above average talent, so in that case, scheme would matter.

 

Until the Colts stop selecting offensive players based on scheme and select on pure talent alone, the Colts will never be talented enough to compete with the teams that chose talent over scheme within other top organizations. 

Dear God.....    someone PLEASE get a gun and shoot me!   Shoot me right in the head!

 

I know there are a number of you who would love to do this — so I invite you all!    Anything to spare me from reading posts like this....   so painful!     

 

 

[chad72]

1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:

Dear God.....    someone PLEASE get a gun and shoot me!   Shoot me right in the head!

 

I know there are a number of you who would love to do this — so I invite you all!    Anything to spare me from reading posts like this....   so painful!     

 

 

 

I know exactly what you are feeling!!! I hear ya!!!

[DougDew]

24 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

You cannot apply the same argument to the offensive side.

 

Defensive side - Polian got guys like Mathis, undersized guys, in later rounds that fit the system. Once coached up, it took them a few years but he made it in a couple of years. Polian overdrafted guys like Kelvin Hayden, Pat Angerer, and so many other guys a few rounds prior based on scheme fit. His argument was "first round, I will get the most talented player and from the second round, I will get the guys that our coaches want". Every GM has to be in tune with his HC, and sometimes it leads to talent being drafted and sometimes the HC and his coaches want specific traits the GM has to cater to.

 

On the offensive side - I do think talent has won over scheme fit with the picks they did. Otherwise, JT who ran in a primarily power/man blocking scheme in Wisconsin would not have been drafted by the Colts.

 

On the defensive side - like Dungy and his defensive coaches wanted, certain players they seemed to value more for our system than others, and I do think if Lewis and Banogu are not producing, it is just as much the coaches fault as the GM's because he was most likely giving them guys with traits they wanted.

 

Free agents to draft picks is an apples to oranges comparison - you know a track record, performance and injury history, and you are getting a more seasoned product than a raw product you have to coach up. Buckner, in his 1st or 2nd year, may not have been as dominant if the 49ers did not augment with Armstead, Solomon Thomas and then Nick Bosa.

 

So, the bottom line is, we cannot broad brush it one way or the other, is my point. When they draft players like Buckner, Kinlaw, Muhammad Wilkerson, Leonard Williams, even when they are first round players, they always talk about where they can be most productive. You don't put a round peg in a square hole, we tried with Jerry Hughes and then he went to the Bills, we all learnt he was not cut out to be a 4-3 DE, more so a 3-4 OLB. Robert Mathis was supposed to be a 3-4 OLB too because he was undersized but he learnt to be effective and in Dungy's system, excelled as a 4-3 DE in a 3-point stance. It helped because he had Freeney on the other side for the strong side DE.

 

 

And Dungy's role playing defenses were average until we got a 3T in Booger who could push the pocket and stop the run, and a S in Sanders who could stop the run and defend the deep pass.  We gave 2nd round capital for those versatile players, unlike giving second round capital to the three DEs we have now.

 

I don't see it as a broad brush.  I see the draft philosophy as having elements of reaching for role players by overthinking the scheme rather than keeping it simpler by looking for better overall football players.

[Smoke317]

17 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

If you didn't have Russell Wilson or Big Ben, there is a good chance Metcalf with Bridgewater and Claypool with Daniel Jones (say) might be getting the short end of the stick.  

 

The problem right now is teams are going all in with free agency while having QBs on rookie contracts - Rams with Goff went with Brandin Cooks and Todd Gurley, and all these free agents. Now Cardinals with Kyler Murray going with Hopkins, and when a guy like Mahomes gives you early returns, keeping the core of Hill, Kelce, Watkins becomes important because windows are short in the NFL. 

I understand what you’re saying but as great as Russ & Ben are, I believe what we’re seeing out of DK & Chase are based off of their own accomplishments. Sure Russ & Ben & their OC’s deserve credit for recognizing the talent in front of them & being smart enough to get them the ball. But those 2 young receivers deserve all the credit for getting it done.  
 

And my gut is telling me Rivers would be feeding both a lot if we had them. Remember that deep throw to TY that he “lost in the shadows”?  That would be a Rivers & Metcalf special.  Maybe we can find a way to get Patmon on the field for a few plays?

[chad72]

8 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

I understand what you’re saying but as great as Russ & Ben are, I believe what we’re seeing out of DK & Chase are based off of their own accomplishments. Sure Russ & Ben & their OC’s deserve credit for recognizing the talent before them & being smart enough to get them the ball. But those 2 young receivers deserve all the credit for getting it done.  
 

And my gut is telling me Rivers would be feeding both a lot if we had them. Remember that deep throw to TY that he “lost in the shadows”?  That would be a Rivers & Metcalf special.  Maybe we can find a way to get Patmon on the field for a few plays?

 

Grigson knew he had to replace TY and drafted Dorsett, and the idea was right, but the execution was bad. Ballard believed in a well balanced team but looks like Polian was the one ahead of the curve, replenishing the offensive cupboard with Wayne, Clark, Addai, Gonzalez etc. to keep the identity of the team which was Peyton and the offense. 

 

Ballard drafted like he was having Luck around, and a guy like Luck would make guys look better than they are, just like Peyton did with Blair White and Pierre Garcon. Now, we are in QB purgatory, it feels like.

 

If RW doesn't buy time a lot of times, Metcalf doesn't make a lot of plays. Same with Hill and Mahomes. Look at TY's production with Luck and without Luck (even before last year), tells you all that you need to know. If Big Ben and the Steelers do not surround him with a good OL that gives him time and enough weapons, a 3rd wheel like Claypool doesn't get utilized as well. If Big Ben weren't around, do you think JuJu does anything? Remember last year?

 

Yes, talent is important but it only goes so far without a competent QB and offensive play calling, that is my point. The problem is, we don't have the luxury of utilizing the talent we have with Campbell and Pittman while they are on the sidelines, and TY on a decline seems like a death knell for our offensive production. Add to that being a franchise spoiled with very good to elite QB play, we are experiencing shortages all around.  

[Zoltan]

8 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

I understand what you’re saying but as great as Russ & Ben are, I believe what we’re seeing out of DK & Chase are based off of their own accomplishments. Sure Russ & Ben & their OC’s deserve credit for recognizing the talent in front of them & being smart enough to get them the ball. But those 2 young receivers deserve all the credit for getting it done.  
 

And my gut is telling me Rivers would be feeding both a lot if we had them. Remember that deep throw to TY that he “lost in the shadows”?  That would be a Rivers & Metcalf special.  Maybe we can find a way to get Patmon on the field for a few plays?

I can’t agree, Rivers doesn’t have the arm strength those have, and his deep ball is to slow allowing the CB to recover

[Zoltan]

I also feel I have to mention no team hits on every draft pick and hindsight picking the perfect draft for your team is not realistic