Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colts QB, the present, and the future (Merge)


Recommended Posts

This is a thread to talk about the realities of finding, developing, and sustaining good QB play for the Colts. I know there is a vast array of opinions on how this is to be done, and I believe that the combination of our Head Coach and GM, is the right pair to get that done. IMO, it is far more important than the end result of this years win total, although they look to being doing all they can to win now. What I would ask is for this not to become a debate over which QB is better, but more about the discussion of how to get from where the team is, to where we hope the team to be in the near future. Of course that will include comments about past, current, and future QB possibilities, but I hope that this becomes an eloquent waxing of the path to franchise QB Valhalla rather than the rock pitching and torch throwing muck of QB comparison ditch wallowing. 

 

Percentages, ladies and gentlemen.......percentages.

 

Feel free to look at the number of successful, franchise QB's in the NFL over the last 20 years.....compared to the number of "needed" QB's in the last 20 years. By "Needed", I mean teams who have competed in the league without what most of you feel is at least adequate skills and abilities to win you a championship. I think you will find that to be a disturbingly low percentage. Even if you skew the comparison to eliminate all picks after the sixth round, it is still revealingly low number. 

 

So, I can already hear some of you say, "That is why you do everything you can to find that QB". What if the Colts offered 4 first round picks to move up and get "That" guy. Even if he was all that, the cost in the ability to put talent around him likely negates all the great things he brings to the future of the franchise.

 

My point? Teams are fluid. Rosters are fluid. Re-building, building, re-tooling, or whatever you want to call it, is far from a static process. A team with young defense for instance, treats the draft differently than a team with a seasoned defense. Where are the skill positions, where is the offensive line, or where are your pass rushers in terms of their NFL lifespan? 

 

The Colts are deeper in their offensive and defensive lines combined than I have seen since they moved to Indy. This is a huge accomplishment. It is one that takes patience, vision, and determination by the GM. It would be wonderful to simply pick the right QB, but it is possible that the best the team can do......considering all aspects of its team, development, and immediate future...is to go for either a pick like they did to get Eason, or to pay for that FA like they did for PR (or trade for Brissett). Please don't go to the "Tank" card. GM, coaches, scouts, players....all do everything they can to win. It is their very livelihood on the line. Besides....sucking bad enough to get that high pick guarantees nothing more than a possibility. 

 

I feel that the team is doing damn near as well as they could in the timeline they are in, which includes our former Andrew Luck, who got so injured both through a GM that couldn't surround him with protection and support, his first coordinator to hung him out to dry with long developing play calling, and his own stubborn need to hang on the the ball too long. I might add that Mr Luck  may deserve some blame for not truly developing his short game.....I just don't think it was ever part of his persona. Hell, I refused to ever develop my short game in golf. Why, because I love to crush that little white ball. Sometimes, we know exactly what we should do, and we do something else anyway.

 

But to surmise, to state that the team needs to go get "X" QB, no matter the cost, does not realistically take in the total job required of a front office. They need to create wins...each and every year. They can't throw away the present, to possibly make a better future. I do not think the Eason pick was a light attempt to get a QB for the future. I think it was a calculated selection, and it was probably about as good as they could do, considering where they are in their own personnel/development/team timeline. My guess, is that is was a very wise move.

 

Please share your thoughts on how the team should go after the QB you want, but if you could, please elaborate on current and future needs of the entire team, because that QB selection, and the price paid to achieve it, can be a franchise changing choice. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I mean to defend Wentz have you seen the Talent he's working with it's laughable. He is trying to do to much, but if he wasn't playing hero ball I don't think they win a game. That's 6 Offensive

Maybe in theory.  In application, trading up for a QB and drafting a franchise, cornerstone QB is so improbably that it's hardly worth trading up. Trading up for Lawrence from where we'll likely be pi

IMO if you get Rodgers you end up in the same situation the Packers were in prior to taking Love and the situation we are in right now - namely, still searching for the future franchise QB. Getting Ro

Windows of a strength remaining a strength are short. Look at the Cowboys - their OL is all worldly but then injuries happen and the strength is not a strength anymore. While injuries cannot be predicted, our strengths are going to remain strengths for only so long. So we have to do everything to cash in/build on the continuity and strength of our OL sooner than later.

 

Having the QB is indeed the cornerstone for extending that window. Great QBs like Peyton and even Luck to an extent overcame OL flaws but the best of OL cannot provide you elite QB play out of a QB with a limited ceiling. Not every team can hit on so many of their draft picks to get their pass rush and front 7 at an elite level like the 2013 Seahawks or hit on free agency well to put together a D like the 2015 Broncos. 

 

So, bottom line, do what you need to do to secure a franchise QB for the next 5-6 years with a good ceiling, whether it is via draft equity or free agency. They don't grow on trees, so you have to make some draft equity sacrifices or player sacrifices in order to accomplish it. You cannot have depth on every facet of the team including QB, so we need to come to terms with that fact and plan accordingly for the upcoming years. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The bottom line is we need to identify the QB we want that will be available in some form (draft, trade, or FA) and go get him. When healthy at the beginning of the year, this team is a franchise QB away from being a SB contender. That doesn't mean we'll win the SB, but it means with that QB, we are on the Chiefs and Ravens level, and that's good enough to make it 3 times in 10 years potentially, which I would completely accept. Get that guy, if it costs us an additional 1st round pick to get Trey Lance hypothetically, and Dodds liked what he saw while scouting him. Go get him. If you think you can get Darnold and turn him around, go get him. If Eason is the guy, start him next year and build another draft around him next year to fix any additional weaknesses this team may have.

 

Have a plan and go with it. There are plenty of possibilities.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

The bottom line is we need to identify the QB we want that will be available in some form (draft, trade, or FA) and go get him. When healthy at the beginning of the year, this team is a franchise QB away from being a SB contender. That doesn't mean we'll win the SB, but it means with that QB, we are on the Chiefs and Ravens level, and that's good enough to make it 3 times in 10 years potentially, which I would completely accept. Get that guy, if it costs us an additional 1st round pick to get Trey Lance hypothetically, and Dodds liked what he saw while scouting him. Go get him. If you think you can get Darnold and turn him around, go get him. If Eason is the guy, start him next year and build another draft around him next year to fix any additional weaknesses this team may have.

 

Have a plan and go with it. There are plenty of possibilities.

Draft wise we are gonna have to give up several picks but I think the rewards outweigh the risks 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Draft wise we are gonna have to give up several picks but I think the rewards outweigh the risks 

When was the last time a team gave up a kings ransom for a rookie qb and it worked out?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

When was the last time a team gave up a kings ransom for a rookie qb and it worked out?

Rams traded up for Goff and made a SB. Chiefs traded up for Mahomes and won a SB. Not exactly a kings ransom for Mahomes, but it was multiple 1st round picks. Bills gave up a lot for Josh Allen and it's looking decent. Those are just a few recent examples.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, danlhart87 said:

Trade the farm for Lawrence 

 

Genuinely curious - what do you think a team would take in exchange to allow another team to move up to draft Lawrence?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Goff and Wentz haven't been too bad career wise but Wentz is struggling this year 

Watching Wentz last night, a couple thing stood out to me.

 

1. He makes some bad decisions, I think his poor OL that has started 6 or 7 different combinations this season, has a little to do with it, but he took sacks and didnt throw it away when he should of. Forced throws, he should of never considered. (10ints this year)

 

2. He makes a lot of great throws as well. If he would cut down on #1, he could probably return to MVP form, but his bad decisions is troubling.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, danlhart87 said:

Trade the farm for Lawrence 

 

Probably would take multiple years of 1st round picks. I'd pass but maybe try and grab someone else within the top 10.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the input so far. Here is some mega research. I'll start with the Bills and let's dig into this...

 

Buffalo Bills since Doug Flutie 1998-2000: 

 

Drew Bledsoe

JP Losman

Kelly Holcomb

Trent Edwards

Ryan Fitzpatrick

Brian Brohm

EJ Manuel 

Thaddeus Lewis

Jeff Tuel

Kyle Orton

Matt Cassel

Tyrod Taylor

Nathan Peterman

Josh Allen

Derek Anderson

LeSean McCoy

Matt Barkley

 

 My first question, before I can do the percentage math, is how many of these QB's would you feel or have felt at the time were true possibilities at being a franchise QB. As a whole, they represent over 300 starts. 

 

All research from this site....  Here

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This post of mine won't be anything I haven't regurgitated a thousand times already around here, but yeah...

 

My thoughts on the QB position in general and for the Colts:

 

QB in general - the QB is unequivocally the most important position in football by some significant margin. It's the position that can cover for a ton of mistakes or sink a well built team. This is NOT to say that the rest of the roster doesn't matter. On the contrary - getting a quality franchise QB does not absolve you from the responsibility of building a good roster around that QB and we have first hand knowledge of exactly that scenario here. What Grigson and Pagano did with that amazing talent they got gifted at the QB position should be studied for decades going forward as an example of what not to do when you get a franchise QB. You can have one of the best QBs in the game and it still won't matter, because the goal ultimately is to compete for the SB and when you get to those rounds of the playoffs, most teams have comparable talent at QB and then the difference is in how well the rest of the team is built and how well they are coached.

 

In the grand scheme of things team building is a complex and very fluid process. You have restrictions on the cap and the draft resources you have and you have to constantly adjust those as players graduate from their cheap rookie deals and become too expensive to keep or as they age out of their best shape or as their careers get derailed by injury or other circumstances... You will always have swings in the quality of roster you can put on the field, but that thing that almost certainly can make you perennial contender is the QB. It's a single position(easier to keep) and it's the most valuable position that impacts winning the most... Once you have that one locked, that puts some very high floor on the team(provided the QB is healthy). 

 

Those are in not so short terms the reasons why I'm firm proponent of the idea that if you don't have a long-term franchise QB on your roster you should be on a constant search for one and you should not spare resources in that search even if in the short term it might hurt the quality of your roster. And no, it's NOT going to be easy... and it IS going to be painful,,, but the alternative I contend is worse. 

 

So now for the Colts QB position(long-term)...

1. Rivers and Brissett are not it. This is probably not controversial so I won't spend too much time on it. I will just say that I can see us giving Rivers one more year after this as a caretaker/bridge/mentor QB for whoever the next QB will be for the Colts

2. Eason - I was higher on Eason than the league. I had second round ranking on him and was really happy we managed to snap him in the 4th. I think he was a great shot to take at a toolsy QB and see if we can develop him into something. The buzz from the coaching staff on his development has been overwhelmingly positive, but we also learned this week that he's not even taking scout team reps. We haven't seen a single snap of him in the league... be it in a pre-season game or regular season game or even from practice. I don't know how to even begin to evaluate whether he's our future QB. Based on my pre-draft evaluation and on the feedback we are getting from coaches I'd say he has a chance. But, I also would say that I'd like for him to show enough by the end of the year in practice that the coaching staff would know whether or not he's on the path to our starting spot, or whether we need to be investing more resources come draft time. 

3. Draft... - Lawrence, Fields, Lance, Wilson... the first two are probably out of our range. It's easy to say sell the farm for one of them, but even if you want to, you will have to find takers for whatever you consider a reasonable offer. I doubt whoever ends up that bad this year that they pick in the top 3 will trade out of a Lawrence... or even Fields. Now the other two are interesting... I feel like we can probably get in position to get one of those without completely sacrificing our future. It might be expensive, but it probably won't be prohibitive. So yeah... now the question is - do Ballard and Reich Love any of them? This is really the main question here - do they think any of them have a good chance to be a franchise QB. If the answer is yes, I would like for us to make a move for one of those players(not necessarily move up... but be ready to take the player you love be it by trading up or by waiting for him to slip to our pick). 

4. Trade for one or FA... I'm not a huge fan of this one to be fair. Darnold, Trubisky( :puke: ), Carr, Dak... I don't love any of those options for variety of reasons. I think I prefer us going the draft route if we know Eason is not going to cut it. I might be open to being talked into Dak, but that injury throws a wrench into any sort of projection for his career going forward... 

 

SO yeah... here's the

tl;dr: QB is not the only important thing for long-term success, but it is by far the most important and valuable piece of perennial contenders. So... I view acquiring a franchise QB as a priority no. 1 for this team and I think the draft is the best place to do it. It's a painful process, but you need to keep trying, until you succeed. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

Genuinely curious - what do you think a team would take in exchange to allow another team to move up to draft Lawrence?

1s in 21 22  as well as several 2s and 3s 

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, stitches said:

This post of mine won't be anything I haven't regurgitated a thousand times already around here, but yeah...

 

My thoughts on the QB position in general and for the Colts:

 

QB in general - the QB is unequivocally the most important position in football by some significant margin. It's the position that can cover for a ton of mistakes or sink a well built team. This is NOT to say that the rest of the roster doesn't matter. On the contrary - getting a quality franchise QB does not absolve you from the responsibility of building a good roster around that QB and we have first hand knowledge of exactly that scenario here. What Grigson and Pagano did with that amazing talent they got gifted at the QB position should be studied for decades going forward as an example of what not to do when you get a franchise QB. You can have one of the best QBs in the game and it still won't matter, because the goal ultimately is to compete for the SB and when you get to those rounds of the playoffs, most teams have comparable talent at QB and then the difference is in how well the rest of the team is built and how well they are coached.

 

In the grand scheme of things team building is a complex and very fluid process. You have restrictions on the cap and the draft resources you have and you have to constantly adjust those as players graduate from their cheap rookie deals and become too expensive to keep or as they age out of their best shape or as their careers get derailed by injury or other circumstances... You will always have swings in the quality of roster you can put on the field, but that thing that almost certainly can make you perennial contender is the QB. It's a single position(easier to keep) and it's the most valuable position that impacts winning the most... Once you have that one locked, that puts some very high floor on the team(provided the QB is healthy). 

 

Those are in not so short terms the reasons why I'm firm proponent of the idea that if you don't have a long-term franchise QB on your roster you should be on a constant search for one and you should not spare resources in that search even if in the short term it might hurt the quality of your roster. And no, it's NOT going to be easy... and it IS going to be painful,,, but the alternative I contend is worse. 

 

So now for the Colts QB position(long-term)...

1. Rivers and Brissett are not it. This is probably not controversial so I won't spend too much time on it. I will just say that I can see us giving Rivers one more year after this as a caretaker/bridge/mentor QB for whoever the next QB will be for the Colts

2. Eason - I was higher on Eason than the league. I had second round ranking on him and was really happy we managed to snap him in the 4th. I think he was a great shot to take at a toolsy QB and see if we can develop him into something. The buzz from the coaching staff on his development has been overwhelmingly positive, but we also learned this week that he's not even taking scout team reps. We haven't seen a single snap of him in the league... be it in a pre-season game or regular season game or even from practice. I don't know how to even begin to evaluate whether he's our future QB. Based on my pre-draft evaluation and on the feedback we are getting from coaches I'd say he has a chance. But, I also would say that I'd like for him to show enough by the end of the year in practice that the coaching staff would know whether or not he's on the path to our starting spot, or whether we need to be investing more resources come draft time. 

3. Draft... - Lawrence, Fields, Lance, Wilson... the first two are probably out of our range. It's easy to say sell the farm for one of them, but even if you want to, you will have to find takers for whatever you consider a reasonable offer. I doubt whoever ends up that bad this year that they pick in the top 3 will trade out of a Lawrence... or even Fields. Now the other two are interesting... I feel like we can probably get in position to get one of those without completely sacrificing our future. It might be expensive, but it probably won't be prohibitive. So yeah... now the question is - do Ballard and Reich Love any of them? This is really the main question here - do they think any of them have a good chance to be a franchise QB. If the answer is yes, I would like for us to make a move for one of those players(not necessarily move up... but be ready to take the player you love be it by trading up or by waiting for him to slip to our pick). 

4. Trade for one or FA... I'm not a huge fan of this one to be fair. Darnold, Trubisky( :puke: ), Carr, Dak... I don't love any of those options for variety of reasons. I think I prefer us going the draft route if we know Eason is not going to cut it. I might be open to being talked into Dak, but that injury throws a wrench into any sort of projection for his career going forward... 

 

SO yeah... here's the

tl;dr: QB is not the only important thing for long-term success, but it is by far the most important and valuable piece of perennial contenders. So... I view acquiring a franchise QB as a priority no. 1 for this team and I think the draft is the best place to do it. It's a painful process, but you need to keep trying, until you succeed. 

Excellent response, and thanks for taking the time. Yes, this is and has been your stance, but it helps this discussion greatly. This is exactly what I hope to see more of in this thread. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, stitches said:

This post of mine won't be anything I haven't regurgitated a thousand times already around here, but yeah...

 

My thoughts on the QB position in general and for the Colts:

 

QB in general - the QB is unequivocally the most important position in football by some significant margin. It's the position that can cover for a ton of mistakes or sink a well built team. This is NOT to say that the rest of the roster doesn't matter. On the contrary - getting a quality franchise QB does not absolve you from the responsibility of building a good roster around that QB and we have first hand knowledge of exactly that scenario here. What Grigson and Pagano did with that amazing talent they got gifted at the QB position should be studied for decades going forward as an example of what not to do when you get a franchise QB. You can have one of the best QBs in the game and it still won't matter, because the goal ultimately is to compete for the SB and when you get to those rounds of the playoffs, most teams have comparable talent at QB and then the difference is in how well the rest of the team is built and how well they are coached.

 

In the grand scheme of things team building is a complex and very fluid process. You have restrictions on the cap and the draft resources you have and you have to constantly adjust those as players graduate from their cheap rookie deals and become too expensive to keep or as they age out of their best shape or as their careers get derailed by injury or other circumstances... You will always have swings in the quality of roster you can put on the field, but that thing that almost certainly can make you perennial contender is the QB. It's a single position(easier to keep) and it's the most valuable position that impacts winning the most... Once you have that one locked, that puts some very high floor on the team(provided the QB is healthy). 

 

Those are in not so short terms the reasons why I'm firm proponent of the idea that if you don't have a long-term franchise QB on your roster you should be on a constant search for one and you should not spare resources in that search even if in the short term it might hurt the quality of your roster. And no, it's NOT going to be easy... and it IS going to be painful,,, but the alternative I contend is worse. 

 

So now for the Colts QB position(long-term)...

1. Rivers and Brissett are not it. This is probably not controversial so I won't spend too much time on it. I will just say that I can see us giving Rivers one more year after this as a caretaker/bridge/mentor QB for whoever the next QB will be for the Colts

2. Eason - I was higher on Eason than the league. I had second round ranking on him and was really happy we managed to snap him in the 4th. I think he was a great shot to take at a toolsy QB and see if we can develop him into something. The buzz from the coaching staff on his development has been overwhelmingly positive, but we also learned this week that he's not even taking scout team reps. We haven't seen a single snap of him in the league... be it in a pre-season game or regular season game or even from practice. I don't know how to even begin to evaluate whether he's our future QB. Based on my pre-draft evaluation and on the feedback we are getting from coaches I'd say he has a chance. But, I also would say that I'd like for him to show enough by the end of the year in practice that the coaching staff would know whether or not he's on the path to our starting spot, or whether we need to be investing more resources come draft time. 

3. Draft... - Lawrence, Fields, Lance, Wilson... the first two are probably out of our range. It's easy to say sell the farm for one of them, but even if you want to, you will have to find takers for whatever you consider a reasonable offer. I doubt whoever ends up that bad this year that they pick in the top 3 will trade out of a Lawrence... or even Fields. Now the other two are interesting... I feel like we can probably get in position to get one of those without completely sacrificing our future. It might be expensive, but it probably won't be prohibitive. So yeah... now the question is - do Ballard and Reich Love any of them? This is really the main question here - do they think any of them have a good chance to be a franchise QB. If the answer is yes, I would like for us to make a move for one of those players(not necessarily move up... but be ready to take the player you love be it by trading up or by waiting for him to slip to our pick). 

4. Trade for one or FA... I'm not a huge fan of this one to be fair. Darnold, Trubisky( :puke: ), Carr, Dak... I don't love any of those options for variety of reasons. I think I prefer us going the draft route if we know Eason is not going to cut it. I might be open to being talked into Dak, but that injury throws a wrench into any sort of projection for his career going forward... 

 

SO yeah... here's the

tl;dr: QB is not the only important thing for long-term success, but it is by far the most important and valuable piece of perennial contenders. So... I view acquiring a franchise QB as a priority no. 1 for this team and I think the draft is the best place to do it. It's a painful process, but you need to keep trying, until you succeed. 

 

 

There is one guy that we need to include while proposing hypotheticals. Aaron Rodgers. If the Packers go on a downward spiral and want to hedge their bets on Jordan Love, I think we could prolong his career better than taking our chances with Philip Rivers again, IMO. He can at least do roll outs and add a few things that Rivers cannot, like not throwing INTs and make plays down the field.

 

I would give up a first and a 2nd for Rodgers in a heartbeat.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see Ballard trading a boatload of picks to move up and draft a QB.  Not with this team.  I believe he thinks he can win a SB with Rivers right now.  Rookies and rookie QB' carry so much risk.  I don't see him mortgaging the franchise on one.  He doesn't have the time. Both Ballard and Irsay know we are SB contenders right now.   Eason is his developmental QB. We drafted him for that reason.  As long as he progresses I don't see him moving up to try and get another.  As long as Rivers shows he can get the job done he's the guy.  But if he can't then it's more likely we trade for a veteran until Eason shows he is or he is not the guy long term.  Ballard's not afraid to trade a pick for a premium player but I doubt he would trade multiple premium picks for a rookie QB.  He loves draft picks.  He has said it many times.  I don't think that would be a path he would go down.  

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

I don't see Ballard trading a boatload of picks to move up and draft a QB.  Not with this team.  I believe he thinks he can win a SB with Rivers right now.  Rookies and rookie QB' carry so much risk.  I don't see him mortgaging the franchise on one.  He doesn't have the time. Both Ballard and Irsay know we are SB contenders right now.   Eason is his developmental QB. We drafted him for that reason.  As long as he progresses I don't see him moving up to try and get another.  As long as Rivers shows he can get the job done he's the guy.  But if he can't then it's more likely we trade for a veteran until Eason shows he is or he is not the guy long term.  Ballard's not afraid to trade a pick for a premium player but I doubt he would trade multiple premium picks for a rookie QB.  He loves draft picks.  He has said it many times.  I don't think that would be a path he would go down.  

I don't really see us as SB contenders at this point 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

 

There is one guy that we need to include while proposing hypotheticals. Aaron Rodgers. If the Packers go on a downward spiral and want to hedge their bets on Jordan Love, I think we could prolong his career better than taking our chances with Philip Rivers again, IMO. He can at least do roll outs and add a few things that Rivers cannot, like not throwing INTs and make plays down the field.

IMO if you get Rodgers you end up in the same situation the Packers were in prior to taking Love and the situation we are in right now - namely, still searching for the future franchise QB. Getting Rodgers is not the end of the search, it's the beginning.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, stitches said:

IMO if you get Rodgers you end up in the same situation the Packers were in prior to taking Love and the situation we are in right now - namely, still searching for the future franchise QB. Getting Rodgers is not the end of the search, it's the beginning.

 

True, it just buys us 2-3 years. But I'd rather have 2-3 years with him than with Rivers after this season to maximize any window we might have with the talent assembled while getting another QB groomed. 

 

However, the coaches may have a different idea, give Eason 1 good shot with 1 good year with a good backup.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

I don't really see us as SB contenders at this point 

I think they do and most of the analysts do as well.  I don't think they gave Rivers 25M to groom Eason.  Same goes for the trade for Buckner and his new contract.  Im not saying we are ready to win a SB maybe we could but contenders absolutely.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Id be fine adding to it too

Lawrence is going to be a good one 

 

For Indy to move up I honestly don’t believe they could ever offer enough. With the Colts likely drafting no worse than 16th, no package of players and picks would ever convince a team to pass on this generation’s Elway or Luck. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jskinnz said:

 

For Indy to move up I honestly don’t believe they could ever offer enough. With the Colts likely drafting no worse than 16th, no package of players and picks would ever convince a team to pass on this generation’s Elway or Luck. 

I sadly can agree with that

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Colts finish around 15 to 18 the Goff trade years ago I think would be close to what it would take. 

 

They would have to throw in 3rd 1 most likely cause of Lawrence being so highly touted.

 

To me he's worth it all

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

If the Colts finish around 15 to 18 the Goff trade years ago I think would be close to what it would take. 

 

They would have to throw in 3rd 1 most likely cause of Lawrence being so highly touted.

 

To me he's worth it all

 

 

Curious, with all those high picks gone, how do you replace Castonzo, TY, and Houston?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, danlhart87 said:

Goff and Wentz haven't been too bad career wise but Wentz is struggling this year 

Wentz is not struggling.   He is the only thing keeping that team from imploding.   Pederson is going to get him killed. He is on the same path as Luck. Great qb getting killed by his head coach

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Rams traded up for Goff and made a SB. Chiefs traded up for Mahomes and won a SB. Not exactly a kings ransom for Mahomes, but it was multiple 1st round picks. Bills gave up a lot for Josh Allen and it's looking decent. Those are just a few recent examples.

I dont think the Chiefs and Bills gave up a kings ransom.  There is no way that Lawrence will b traded. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, w87r said:

Watching Wentz last night, a couple thing stood out to me.

 

1. He makes some bad decisions, I think his poor OL that has started 6 or 7 different combinations this season, has a little to do with it, but he took sacks and didnt throw it away when he should of. Forced throws, he should of never considered. (10ints this year)

 

2. He makes a lot of great throws as well. If he would cut down on #1, he could probably return to MVP form, but his bad decisions is troubling.

 

I mean to defend Wentz have you seen the Talent he's working with it's laughable. He is trying to do to much, but if he wasn't playing hero ball I don't think they win a game.

That's 6 Offensive Lineman, 1 starting RB, 2 TEs, 4 WRs

 

Miles Sanders RB Out

Andre Dillard LT Out

Brandon Brooks RG Out

Jason Peters OT Out

Jalen Reagor WR Out (Rookie)

Isaac Seumalo G Out

Zach Ertz TE Out

Dallas Goedert TE Out

Alshon Jeffery WR Out

Desean Jackson WR Out

Jordan Mailata OT Out

Marquise Goodwin WR Out

Jack Driscoll OT Out (Rookie)

 

And Just for Kicks

Lane Johnson OT MCL Sprain Questionable

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

 

There is one guy that we need to include while proposing hypotheticals. Aaron Rodgers. If the Packers go on a downward spiral and want to hedge their bets on Jordan Love, I think we could prolong his career better than taking our chances with Philip Rivers again, IMO. He can at least do roll outs and add a few things that Rivers cannot, like not throwing INTs and make plays down the field.

 

I would give up a first and a 2nd for Rodgers in a heartbeat.

I don’t disagree about Rodgers but don’t see it happening. 
 

Reich has been very focused on completion percentage and YPA when he evaluates QBs. 
 

Rivers has higher completion percentage and YPA than Rodgers both this year and over his career. So why would Reich trade a 1 and 2 for lower production in his favorite stats?

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

Wentz is not struggling.   He is the only thing keeping that team from imploding.   Pederson is going to get him killed. He is on the same path as Luck. Great qb getting killed by his head coach

IDK man. I watch a few games this year, and he looked brutal. 

It's just not him though. 

Here's a decent read if interested.

https://www.bleedinggreennation.com/2020/10/1/21492313/philadelphia-eagles-carson-wentz-everything-problem-doug-pederson-wide-receivers-offense-quarterback

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Four2itus said:

Curious, with all those high picks gone, how do you replace Castonzo, TY, and Houston?

If you get the right QB the other positions won't seem as bad.

 

Do you think the Chiefs care that they missed out on other positions after trading up for Mahomes?

 

No because once they drafted him and put him in he was such a difference maker!

 

Trading up is very very risky but also can be very very rewarding if you grab the right guy.

 

Lawrence is worth the risk IMO and then some.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Using Mahomes as an example is kinda an exercise in futility.  Of course you trade multiple picks for the best QB in the game.  I would give up 3 first round and two 2nds for Mahomes and a third any day of the week. That trade is the exception and not the rule.  The real expectation level should be set at what should we do for a QB like Matt Ryan, D Watson or Matt Stafford.  All three are good solid QBs but not in the conversation as the best.  This is most likely the ceiling of whatever QB we would get.  You can build teams around them and compete in the playoffs but if you miss on other parts of the roster it can make you miss the playoffs.  
 

I would not trade more than two first round picks to move up for a QB of this caliber.  They aren’t good enough to overcome multiple deficiencies on a team.  They are good enough to take an average team and put them in the playoffs tho.  Combine that with a good coaching staff and you have a shot at making a run in the playoffs.  This team has upcoming needs at premium positions: Tackle, DE and corner and we need the draft picks to get replacements to start grooming. Kinda in no mans land right now so something will have to be sacrificed unless we get lucky.  This decision will make or break Ballards career and I’m sure he knows this.  I appreciate his willingness to be patient and search for the right guy.  I hope it pays off and he finds him.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Going to be interesting to see what the giants and jets do. If they were smart they would trade their pick for loads of draft picks and keep their young QB. Bengals are going to get a high pick also. There could be some teams picking high that might be willing to trade their picks. Justin Fields looks so good today. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Going to be interesting to see what the giants and jets do. If they were smart they would trade their pick for loads of draft picks and keep their young QB. Bengals are going to get a high pick also. There could be some teams picking high that might be willing to trade their picks. Justin Fields looks so good today. 

Never trade away a pick when a once in a generation style QB comes out like Lawrence. 

 

If Giants and Jets finish top 2 bottom teams and both pass on Lawrence they will be the laughing stock of the league.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • w87r changed the title to Colts QB, the present, and the future (Merge)

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.


×
×
  • Create New...