Archer's First 2021 Mock Off-Season

[Archer]

Definitely over-thought for this early in the process.  But here's my thoughts:

 

 

According to back-of-the-envelope calculations, we can 1) bring back Rivers, Hilton, Houston, Autry, Muhammed, Cox, Pascal, and Odum, 2) let Brissett, Hooker, Rhodes, Mack, Walker, Burton, Clark, Green, Carrie, and Stallworth walk, and 3) sign Cincinnati CB William Jackson III to net to about $1.5 million less than what we spent against the cap this year.  Turns out ditching Brissett’s $21 million cap hit opens up the re-signing of a lot of players.  And Ballard doesn’t mind paying to keep older players as long as he’s not committing past the next year (Houston, Autry, Rivers, Hilton).  Then I’d draft:

 

1)      Kyle Trask, QB, Florida, 6’5, 240.  Last year I was not down with the timing or the prospects as far as 1st round QBs go.  Trask seems tailor-made to run the offense we already have in place for Rivers.  Great accuracy and good decision-making on the short- to medium-range throws, and he gets the ball out quick.  Most importantly, his story is the type that Ballard and Reich eat up.  He didn’t start in HS, still somehow got a scholarship offer at Florida, and then didn’t start until an injury to the starter in game 3 of his RS Junior year at Florida.  He patiently waited and worked, and when his number was called he played balls out.  An ultimate team player who obviously worked his butt off despite the possibility that he would never play for Florida.  Many kids woulda transferred to Duke or something to get on the field, but he bet on himself winning the Florida job.  Ballard and Reich are going to eat that crap up!

 

2)      Jackson Carman, OT, Clemson, 6’5, 345.  Massive dude who is a real road grader in the run game.  He’ll have to lose some weight to be a LT in the NFL IMO, but he could be an heir apparent for Castonzo.  Ballard has to get serious about OL depth this year, so this pick would serve two purposes.

 

3)      Charlie Kolar, TE, Iowa St., 6’5, 252.  A good all-round TE who can contribute in all phases.  Trask gets his Doyle.

 

4)      Chris Rumph II, EDGE, Duke, 6’3, 225.  One of those guys who played all over the Duke D.  Too small to be a regular starter at DE, but he has legitimate pass-rush skills.  I would have loved to find the next great pass-rushing DE in the draft, but I’m not crazy about the prospects this year.  Someone like Rumph in the hands of a creative DC like Eberflus could be really useful in those manufactured pseudo-blitzes that we like to do. 

 

5)      Alaric Jackson, OL, Iowa, 6’5, 320.  They are saying that he may be better suited inside, but he has the length and a lot of experience at OT.  Could be one of those 4-position back-ups.  I’m also kind of fond of that Carter O’Donnell kid from Alberta that we’ve been stashing on our PS, but Carman and Jackson give us much better depth all along the OL.

 

6)      La’Andre Thomas, S, Memphis, 6’2, 185.  Didn’t play this year, but had a healthy 63 tackles the previous year.  Maybe a little light, but he seems to have the tackling ability we favor.

 

7)      Sam Webb, CB, Missouri Western St., 6’1, 188.  It’s a crap shoot this late in the draft.  But we’re in need of more boundary CBs, even with the addition of Jackson III and the return of Tell.  I like what I’ve read about this guy’s play at a low level of competition and he has the length Ballard likes at boundary CB.     

[danlhart87]

I would be happy with Trask or Jones. I think both have potential to be great starters in 22'

 

Colts would bring back Rivers 1 year 

[Hoose]

Gotta find a WR in free agency. Robinson from the Bears would be perfect. 

[danlhart87]

3 minutes ago, Hoose said:

Gotta find a WR in free agency. Robinson from the Bears would be perfect. 

I think Colts are fine at WR 

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, danlhart87 said:

I think Colts are fine at WR 

 

I think we have a bottom 10 WR corp for this year.

 

And I think we have TONS of question marks for next year and beyond.

 

I would lose sleep over our current WR situation.

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

17 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I think we have a bottom 10 WR corp for this year.

 

And I think we have TONS of question marks for next year and beyond.

 

I would lose sleep over our current WR situation.

 

Yeah when TY is healthy we are middle of the pack (average) but when he is out we are bottom 10. TY is still the key that starts the engine. I would definitely draft a WR, probably round 2. I think Pittman will be better in year 2 and I like Pascal as 3 or a 4.

[Archer]

We’ve put a lot of draft capital into the receiving corps the last two drafts.  The hope for the receiving corps is development of Pittman and Campbell, and I also have some hope for Harris to be a Terrance Wilkins-like complimentary piece.  Really, if you’ve drafted guys to develop, then give them time to develop rather than replace them when they aren’t instantaneously successful.  That’s why I wouldn’t draft a WR highly this year. 

[chad72]

What do you guys think about smaller WRs Rondale Moore of Purdue and Tutu Atwell of Louisville? I think they will fit what we want to get out of WRs in space in the Reich/Sirianni system. They could also be had in Rounds 3, IMO. 

[DougDew]

Great minds think alike about TE .  I've thought Kolar in Rd 3 would be perfect.  Freiermuth gets more hype, but Kolar would be very good, IMO.

 

A LT needs sufficient arm length.  At 6.5, portends inherently shorter arms than someone who is 6.6 or 6.7, and is borderline G height.  A few inches does matter there, so we'll see what the measurements are at the combine.

 

I like the idea of having a multidimensional player on defense.  But I think that dual role should be in the back seven not the front seven.  A S/LB hybrid would be helpful in stopping the underneath routes, and the NFL is moving away from the power running game.  We would use a LB like Walker when playing TEN but not many other teams, IMO.

 

1 hour ago, Archer said:

Really, if you’ve drafted guys to develop, then give them time to develop rather than replace them when they aren’t instantaneously successful.

Great point.  One of the wisest things I've read here in a while.  And the thought applies to the D as well, with Lewis and Turay and RYS needing PT to develop.  By drafting one of those positions high, you kind of shoot yourself in the foot by taking away PT from guys who need it.

 

The two most glaring positions on the whole team, IMO, where we don't have youth is at Offensive Tackle, and probably TE (I think MAC is a backup or TE#2, and we use two TEs a lot).

 

QB is a unique position. We have youth at QB with Eason, but if Trask is the guy we want then maybe we develop Eason as a backup or as trade resource.

[Archer]

Starting to see Trask gone long before our pick on a lot of mocks.  Not sure how I feel about Lance and Jones...time to look at some more film!

[WarGhost21]

I don’t want anything to do with Trask.

 

IMO, he is Jake Fromm from last year.

 

He’s a smart QB, with decent short accuracy, but he can’t push the ball and doesn’t provide much of anything on the  ground.

 

I’d much rather have a guy like Mac Jones or Desmond Ridder.

 

Trask has an NFL future as a backup/journeyman. Nothing more.

 

As for the rest of your list, you have some interesting names. I like Kolar and Carman, and though I haven’t studied any of the others yet, I’ve heard some good things about a few of them.

 

Can’t wait to see how your mock’s progress throughout the off-season!!

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, Archer said:

Starting to see Trask gone long before our pick on a lot of mocks.  Not sure how I feel about Lance and Jones...time to look at some more film!

I would be shocked if Lance didn't go top 10.

[John Hammonds]

Want to let you know, @Archer, that I appreciate the time and effort you put in to your far-to-early mock draft.  It's a lot of thinking, a lot of research, and it's still far too early to truly know anything.

 

I'd like to respond to your mock with two statements that should be delivered via bull horn, so that nobody can mistake their being said, nor their meaning.

Statement #1:

This team will not be in a position to draft a franchise quarterback until they finish the current run.

 

You just don't find franchise quarterbacks outside of the top 5 picks.  Top 10 picks if you include Mahomes.  Sure, every once in a while, you can get a Rodgers late in the first round, or Brett Favre in the second round.  But it just doesn't happen that often.  And you can't count on it happening for you.

And we were in that position to draft a QB early back in 2018.  We had the #3 pick, and there were many viable QB's to select.  However, we still had Luck on the roster at that time.  We traded down, took Nelson, Leonard, Smith, and never looked back.  From that moment, we intended to have double-digit wins for the length of their careers.  And never draft earlier than 20th in the process.  That's fine, as long as you have Luck.  But when Luck left, we needed to deal with a difficult quarterback situation without being able to draft a sure-fire franchise QB.  That means that for the next 10 years, we will either be signing veteran QB's that have a successful track record (see: Rivers), or crossing our fingers that a later draft pick with huge upside natural talents can actually drive the ship (see: Eason).  That's the plan.  And it's the plan until we stop winning.  We will not be in a position in the draft to do anything different.

 

Statement #2:

Every time Anthony Costanzo leaves the field for even five minutes, the entire team, fan base, heck even the broadcast booth, swallows their collective tongues.

 

We don't have an answer at LT.  Not for when AC gets injured.  Not for when AC retires.  We have nothing.  Zero.  Nada.  If we put a traffic cone in the spot, it would be better than whatever guys we have backing up AC.  Dealing with our LT problem is not only a priority, it's an imperative.  And we can't afford to wait until the bottom of the 2nd round to draft one.  We've got to draft the best one we can, as early as we can.

My eye is still on Liam Eichenberg.  Is he a can't-miss franchise LT?  I think the jury is still out.  But he's probably as close as you're going to get, drafting where we draft.  But you can certainly find a LT at that spot that can do well for you.  We've done it before.  2011, pick 22 -- Anthony Costanzo.

 

Anyway, sorry for being so long winded.  Long wind isn't my forte these days, as I am down with covid, and breathing is an adventure.

 

I also love your INXS quote in your tag line!

[danlhart87]

4 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I would be shocked if Lance didn't go top 10.

I thought few months ago. 

Now I'm thinking 20 to 25ish

 

Kinda like Jordan Love

[Zoltan]

4 hours ago, danlhart87 said:

I thought few months ago. 

Now I'm thinking 20 to 25ish

 

Kinda like Jordan Love

 

I agree, you could even say that the lack of good news from Love during training camp and inability to win the backup position, hurts Lance draft stock

[danlhart87]

There are only 3 1st Rounder QBs IMO 

Those are Lawrence Fields and Wilson 

 

The others are possible but depends on combine and senior bowl etc 

[Dark Superman]

I really hope we bring Rhodes back.

[Archer]

I’ve been watching highlights of Lance, bc I haven’t found any full games on demand.  So many of his TDs were to receivers open by three or four steps, which won’t happen in the NFL.  And his big runs contained a lot of missed tackles that were probably affected by the low level of competition.  And I’m not so enthralled with his mechanics in the highlights.  While I hate having to rely on highlights, I wasn’t overly impressed with what I saw...

[richard pallo]

On 12/24/2020 at 12:58 PM, John Hammonds said:

Want to let you know, @Archer, that I appreciate the time and effort you put in to your far-to-early mock draft.  It's a lot of thinking, a lot of research, and it's still far too early to truly know anything.

 

I'd like to respond to your mock with two statements that should be delivered via bull horn, so that nobody can mistake their being said, nor their meaning.

Statement #1:

This team will not be in a position to draft a franchise quarterback until they finish the current run.

 

You just don't find franchise quarterbacks outside of the top 5 picks.  Top 10 picks if you include Mahomes.  Sure, every once in a while, you can get a Rodgers late in the first round, or Brett Favre in the second round.  But it just doesn't happen that often.  And you can't count on it happening for you.

And we were in that position to draft a QB early back in 2018.  We had the #3 pick, and there were many viable QB's to select.  However, we still had Luck on the roster at that time.  We traded down, took Nelson, Leonard, Smith, and never looked back.  From that moment, we intended to have double-digit wins for the length of their careers.  And never draft earlier than 20th in the process.  That's fine, as long as you have Luck.  But when Luck left, we needed to deal with a difficult quarterback situation without being able to draft a sure-fire franchise QB.  That means that for the next 10 years, we will either be signing veteran QB's that have a successful track record (see: Rivers), or crossing our fingers that a later draft pick with huge upside natural talents can actually drive the ship (see: Eason).  That's the plan.  And it's the plan until we stop winning.  We will not be in a position in the draft to do anything different.

 

Statement #2:

Every time Anthony Costanzo leaves the field for even five minutes, the entire team, fan base, heck even the broadcast booth, swallows their collective tongues.

 

We don't have an answer at LT.  Not for when AC gets injured.  Not for when AC retires.  We have nothing.  Zero.  Nada.  If we put a traffic cone in the spot, it would be better than whatever guys we have backing up AC.  Dealing with our LT problem is not only a priority, it's an imperative.  And we can't afford to wait until the bottom of the 2nd round to draft one.  We've got to draft the best one we can, as early as we can.

My eye is still on Liam Eichenberg.  Is he a can't-miss franchise LT?  I think the jury is still out.  But he's probably as close as you're going to get, drafting where we draft.  But you can certainly find a LT at that spot that can do well for you.  We've done it before.  2011, pick 22 -- Anthony Costanzo.

 

Anyway, sorry for being so long winded.  Long wind isn't my forte these days, as I am down with covid, and breathing is an adventure.

 

I also love your INXS quote in your tag line!

You hit the nail on the head John.  Ever since Luck left most people are looking for all kinds of scenarios where we move up to draft a QB.  I just don't see it happening with our current roster.  it is ready to win now and we will be in that mode for quite a few more years.  So if Rivers wants to play another year he will be our QB. And if he retires we will sign or trade for another veteran QB.  Fortunately there are a number of veteran QB's who will or could become available that we can bring on board and win with.  Even win a SB with.  I really believe that after Rivers we will have another veteran QB take his place. Not a rookie that we move up to draft.  It would be great if Eason develops though.  That would really be hitting it out of the park.  But unless Eason really surprises the most likely next starting QB when Rivers leaves is a veteran IMO. 

[NorthernColt]

Realistically, if the colts feel the need to draft another WR within the top 2 rounds again, then I'm not sure how they don't fire Mike Groh, even Sirianni for that matter. They've spent to much on WR's to not have them develop into starters. It shouldn't be this hard. 

 

IMO, I'm fine with our WR corps, draft another in the 5th or later. I think we have good potential in the group, just a matter of injuries. I also thought Campbell was going to have a massive year this year before he got hurt.

[Archer]

12 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

You hit the nail on the head John.  Ever since Luck left most people are looking for all kinds of scenarios where we move up to draft a QB.  I just don't see it happening with our current roster.  it is ready to win now and we will be in that mode for quite a few more years.  So if Rivers wants to play another year he will be our QB. And if he retires we will sign or trade for another veteran QB.  Fortunately there are a number of veteran QB's who will or could become available that we can bring on board and win with.  Even win a SB with.  I really believe that after Rivers we will have another veteran QB take his place. Not a rookie that we move up to draft.  It would be great if Eason develops though.  That would really be hitting it out of the park.  But unless Eason really surprises the most likely next starting QB when Rivers leaves is a veteran IMO. 

Man, I agreed with you last year - I thought Love was a major reach and that the timing wasn’t even right to draft a QB of the future (Brissett had played a heck of a first seven games before injury, and I wasn’t 100% sure Luck was gone forever). And even now I wouldn’t advocate trading up for one.  However, I think the time is right - a 1st rounder could sit behind Rivers  next year and be ready the following year (when Rivers would be 40).  We can’t count on continuing to add aging veterans who still have something left - at some point we have to draft a successor, and Trask (and possibly Jones) are better than last year’s crap-o-rama...

[Defjamz26]

I don’t get the Trask to Colts thing because him and Eason are basically the same prospect but Eason has a better arm. Almost every notable draft pundit has said that Trask doesn’t have any traits that merit him being taken in the 1st. Production isn’t a trait. Take away the production and we’re not even talking about Trask. You can say Burrow’s production gave him a huge jump too but Burrow had better traits. Elite pocket presence and awareness, accuracy and ball placement, high football IQ, etc... Also where Trask has had the best season of any college QB this season, Burrow statistically had the greatest season for any QB in NCAA history and beat all the teams that Trask couldn’t.

 

I don’t see it with Eason. You’d basically be drafting a poor man’s Jacob Eason.

[NewColtsFan]

4 hours ago, NorthernColt said:

Realistically, if the colts feel the need to draft another WR within the top 2 rounds again, then I'm not sure how they don't fire Mike Groh, even Sirianni for that matter. They've spent to much on WR's to not have them develop into starters. It shouldn't be this hard. 

 

IMO, I'm fine with our WR corps, draft another in the 5th or later. I think we have good potential in the group, just a matter of injuries. I also thought Campbell was going to have a massive year this year before he got hurt.

Fire someone?    A guy we just hired this past off-season?    Based on what?   
 

Hilton — hurt.

Campbell — hurt.

Pittman — hurt.

Pascal — exceeding expectations. 
 

All this during a year of Covid which wiped out the off-season and the preseason.   And you want to fire people?   Amazing. 

[RollerColt]

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Fire someone?    A guy we just hired this past off-season?    Based on what?   
 

Hilton — hurt.

Campbell — hurt.

Pittman — hurt.

Pascal — exceeding expectations. 
 

All this during a year of Covid which wiped out the off-season and the preseason.   And you want to fire people?   Amazing. 

What’s insane to me is how much money and research we have spent on preventing injuries, yet they’re still hitting us so hard, especially in the receiving corps. The injury curse is for realsies.

[Archer]

20 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

I don’t get the Trask to Colts thing because him and Eason are basically the same prospect but Eason has a better arm. Almost every notable draft pundit has said that Trask doesn’t have any traits that merit him being taken in the 1st. Production isn’t a trait. Take away the production and we’re not even talking about Trask. You can say Burrow’s production gave him a huge jump too but Burrow had better traits. Elite pocket presence and awareness, accuracy and ball placement, high football IQ, etc... Also where Trask has had the best season of any college QB this season, Burrow statistically had the greatest season for any QB in NCAA history and beat all the teams that Trask couldn’t.

 

I don’t see it with Eason. You’d basically be drafting a poor man’s Jacob Eason.

I respectfully disagree with just about every word of this , lol.  Eason was a basket of good QB traits that had never resulted in an impressive season of QBing.  A much better athlete than Trask.  Trask, otoh, has given us a season and a half of very good, accurate, QB play.  Great decision making too.  He just lacks the traits to indicate All-Pro upside, like arm strength and mobility.  Seems to me they are almost opposite prospects...

[John Hammonds]

2 hours ago, Archer said:

I respectfully disagree with just about every word of this , lol.  Eason was a basket of good QB traits that had never resulted in an impressive season of QBing.  A much better athlete than Trask.  Trask, otoh, has given us a season and a half of very good, accurate, QB play.  Great decision making too.  He just lacks the traits to indicate All-Pro upside, like arm strength and mobility.  Seems to me they are almost opposite prospects...

I agree with you.  Eason and Trask are not the same.  If I'm to search for an equivalent to Trask, I would have to select Mitchell Trubisky.  In the final analysis, both are QB's with a certain amount of limited talent, but used the talent they had in a very, very limited number of games.  They both did a good job with the games they played, and more power to them for it.  But drafting Trubisky was the kind of thing that gets people fired.  And for that reason alone, I would be very nervous pulling the trigger on Trask.

[Archer]

2 hours ago, John Hammonds said:

I agree with you.  Eason and Trask are not the same.  If I'm to search for an equivalent to Trask, I would have to select Mitchell Trubisky.  In the final analysis, both are QB's with a certain amount of limited talent, but used the talent they had in a very, very limited number of games.  They both did a good job with the games they played, and more power to them for it.  But drafting Trubisky was the kind of thing that gets people fired.  And for that reason alone, I would be very nervous pulling the trigger on Trask.

If I had to select a Trask comp, I think it’d be a 38-YO Rivers...

[Luck 4 president]

I’d be happy with Trask. He definitely lacks athleticism and doesn’t have zip on his throws which could result in more interceptions and passes batted away in the nfl. I’d say a QB with comparable traits outside of size is Drew Brees. I wouldn’t trade up for him like the other QBs and think he should go around our pick. 

[Maniac]

So we're not gonna even try Eason?

[BProland85]

If Indy doesn’t have a shot at one of the top 4 QBs in Lawrence, Fields, Lance, or Wilson, they shouldn’t be drafting a QB round 1. 

[danlhart87]

4 hours ago, BProland85 said:

If Indy doesn’t have a shot at one of the top 4 QBs in Lawrence, Fields, Lance, or Wilson, they shouldn’t be drafting a QB round 1. 

if they end up missing playoff and get 18 they will have shot at Lance Trask or Wilson 

[Defjamz26]

On 12/27/2020 at 10:25 AM, Archer said:

I respectfully disagree with just about every word of this , lol.  Eason was a basket of good QB traits that had never resulted in an impressive season of QBing.  A much better athlete than Trask.  Trask, otoh, has given us a season and a half of very good, accurate, QB play.  Great decision making too.  He just lacks the traits to indicate All-Pro upside, like arm strength and mobility.  Seems to me they are almost opposite prospects...

If Eason is a basket full of good traits, I’ll take that over a one season wonder with no elite traits. Look at all the good QBs in the league. Besides Brees and Brady, how many of them lack elite traits? None. Mahomes, Wilson, Rodgers, Allen, Watson, etc... all have multiple elite traits.

 

Again you’re putting too much stock into production. Production is not a trait. Why would you want the Colts to spend a 1st round pick on a player whose only advantage over Eason is that he had better production in college? Especially when Trask had way better talent on top of that. Even when you say the ball comes out quick with Trask, that’s not saying much. Most college QBs get the ball out fast due to the spread scheme. They’re in mostly one read plays so it’s designed to get the ball out quick. So take that away and his only standout trait is that he’s tall. Arm is average, athleticism is non-existent, accuracy is average, can’t improvise, etc..

 

IDK why every year people get enamored with these boring, non-athletic average traits pocket passer QBs, when there is no precedent in the current era of pro football that those players are successful. Last year it was Jake Fromm and Anthony Gordon. This year it’s Trask and Jones. I just don’t get the fascination. It’s like people just box score scout and figure that it’ll translate.

[funktacious2]

I'm going to go ahead and make an early prediction and say Eason is our guy for the future. I was a pretty big fan Herbert coming out and thought Hurts was better than people gave him credit for as well. So I'm predicting it now, Eason is gonna be good. I can definitely see us not drafting a QB unless the right guy falls in our lap and of course assuming Rivers returns.

[Archer]

On 12/28/2020 at 12:44 PM, Defjamz26 said:

 

 

Again you’re putting too much stock into production. Production is not a trait. Why would you want the Colts to spend a 1st round pick on a player whose only advantage over Eason is that he had better production in college? Especially when Trask had way better talent on top of that. Even when you say the ball comes out quick with Trask, that’s not saying much. Most college QBs get the ball out fast due to the spread scheme. They’re in mostly one read plays so it’s designed to get the ball out quick. So take that away and his only standout trait is that he’s tall. Arm is average, athleticism is non-existent, accuracy is average, can’t improvise, etc..

 

I think you’re underselling Trask’s accuracy, decision making, competitiveness, and football IQ.  You’re right that production is not a trait, but he has unbelievable accuracy on his short- to mid-range throws.  I was very impressed in the games I watched with his ability to put the ball in the exact spot the receiver needs it.  And this is the kind of accuracy a QB needs for NFL success.  True, his skill set may not be as sexy as a canon arm or a lightening fast 40 time, but Brees has had a HoF career with strengths a lot like Trask’s.  
 

Oh, also, I agree that we shouldn’t give up on Eason.  He exceeded my expectations last year by making the team over Kelly.  However, I have a hard time relying on a strong-armed QB who never developed very much in college as the succession Plan A.  Going into 2022 with someone like Trask and Eason is a much better succession plan than just hoping Eason develops...

[NorthernColt]

On 12/26/2020 at 4:35 PM, NewColtsFan said:

Fire someone?    A guy we just hired this past off-season?    Based on what?   
 

Hilton — hurt.

Campbell — hurt.

Pittman — hurt.

Pascal — exceeding expectations. 
 

All this during a year of Covid which wiped out the off-season and the preseason.   And you want to fire people?   Amazing. 

Try rereading the post, I didn't say I want anyone fired. Im saying, hypothetically, if management thinks WR is such a pressing need that we need to use a 1st, 2nd or 3rd on one, then you'd probably have to look internally and see your staff hasnt been able to develop them. 

 

This is not my opinion, I think they like their WR group. I don't think we need to draft any other high WRs. I literally said if you read, no earlier then the 5th.

[Hoose]

On 12/28/2020 at 5:00 AM, danlhart87 said:

if they end up missing playoff and get 18 they will have shot at Lance Trask or Wilson 

Wilson will go with the second pick in the first round. He's passed Fields at this point. 

[NewColtsFan]

5 minutes ago, Hoose said:

Wilson will go with the second pick in the first round. He's passed Fields at this point. 

Passing Fields is one thing.   Passing Sewell is quite another.   Being the second best QB doesn’t automatically mean being taken 2nd overall.   Wilson MIGHT go 2nd.   But I wouldn’t bet that just yet.  
 

Check back in early April. 

[danlhart87]

3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Passing Fields is one thing.   Passing Sewell is quite another.   Being the second best QB doesn’t automatically mean being taken 2nd overall.   Wilson MIGHT go 2nd.   But I wouldn’t bet that just yet.  
 

Check back in early April. 

If im the Jets im taking  Sewell or trading down 

[Defjamz26]

7 hours ago, Archer said:

but he has unbelievable accuracy on his short- to mid-range throws.

I’d counter that by saying he wasn’t accurate on his short to intermediate throws and much as he was accurate because most of his throws were low risk short to mid range throws. Also his weapons were very good as opposed to someone like Jordan Love who completed passes despite his receivers not being able to separate consistently.

 

 

7 hours ago, Archer said:

However, I have a hard time relying on a strong-armed QB who never developed very much in college as the succession Plan A.

I’m not saying Eason is succession Plan A. I’m just saying that why give up on Eason to draft a guy who is probably around the same skill set? If Trask had the same final year that Eason had in college, no one would be saying draft him in the 1st. If you’re going to draft a succession plan for QB, you’d be better off seeing if Lance falls or going for Jamie Newman in the 2nd-3rd round.

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, danlhart87 said:

If im the Jets im taking  Sewell or trading down 

If you trade down, the key is not to trade down too far.   Our deal with the Jets was PERFECT. 
 

So you have to find a team willing to trade up and pay the acceptable price.   Get the draft pick haul plus the player you want.   Just as the Colts got Nelson and three 3’s. 
 

It’s all easier said than done.