Poll - QB Preference (now that PR has officially retired) (merge)

[2006Coltsbestever]

46 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

ouch. I was typing it all out, and accidentally deleted a few lines when I went back to re-org some choices. Guess I forgot that one. 

 

If I was going to forget one though, glad it was him. Doubt we'd extend the capital to go up that high for him. I like Wilson and Lance much better than him. Perhaps even Trask too. 

 

Good catch

This is probably not a popular opinion but I think Lance is the 2nd best QB in this draft only behind Lawrence. I guess I will soon find out when he starts his pro career. Fields will go before him in all likely hood but I like Lance a tad better.

[EastStreet]

10 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I’m just trying to think this thru....
 

I don’t think Ballard would like to pay TWO QBs, especially if one of the two he needs is already on his roster.  
 

I’m not sure if anything happens in March, especially this year with Covid.   That leaves April and May to test Eason as much as possible to answer a pretty important question — is he ready to be the backup?   I assume it would be mostly white board work with quizzes.   What to do in this situation or that situation?   Plus film work.   Plus some on field work.  Again, not sure how much of that will be available? 
 

I don’t think Ballard can wait until camp in July or until the preseason games in August, can he?   By then, if the answer is no, it’s too late to get someone he would feel comfortable with — isn’t it?   Again thinking out loud.

 

If theres a better scenario, I’m open to it.  Wouldn’t you rather pay Eason on his rookie minimum to be the backup, than someone else 2-3 million to do the same?  

I'd absolutely prefer to pay him a rook salary to be the backup. That's part of the point (from my previous posts). If he's not developed enough to at minimum be a backup, it's either

 

A) failure to develop, or

B) bad pick. 

 

Given we'll at minimum have a new QB (starter) to break in from the get go, there simply won't be a lot of "testing" time available in the offseason. Just seams given our situation (no QBs under contract except for Eason), we'd have done more with him. 

 

Anyway, my guess is A above. I understand it was a tough situation this year, but still a failure. Could be B though, but IMO he's got sufficient innate skill to be a backup. 

 

[EastStreet]

4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

This is probably not a popular opinion but I think Lance is the 2nd best QB in this draft only behind Lawrence. I guess I will soon find out when he starts his pro career. Fields will go before him in all likely hood but I like Lance a tad better.

Wouldn't surprise me one bit to be honest. I think he's got an extremely high ceiling, but also high bust potential too.

 

Here's my my boom bust ranks of the top 7

 

Boom

1. Lawrence

2a. Lance

2b. Wilson

4. Newman

5a. Trask

5b. Fields

7. Jones

 

Bust

1 Fields

2 Lance

3 Newman

4 Wilson

5 Jones

6. Trask

7 Lawrence

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

Looking at the Polls, a lot of people in here have faith in Eason. He has received 39 votes and is in 2nd only behind Stafford who has 43. Interesting. Those 2 are blowing everyone else away. I went went with Stafford.

[NewColtsFan]

12 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I'd absolutely prefer to pay him a rook salary to be the backup. That's part of the point (from my previous posts). If he's not developed enough to at minimum be a backup, it's either

 

A) failure to develop, or

B) bad pick. 

 

Given we'll at minimum have a new QB (starter) to break in from the get go, there simply won't be a lot of "testing" time available in the offseason. Just seams given our situation (no QBs under contract except for Eason), we'd have done more with him. 

 

Anyway, my guess is A above. I understand it was a tough situation this year, but still a failure. Could be B though, but IMO he's got sufficient innate skill to be a backup. 

 

I would agree with you if this past year was any other year but Covid.   I think Covid blows up all the norms.   Covid prevented the Colts from finding out what they had with Eason.   
 

That’s why I hope a narrow two month window offers more insight.   I guess we will find out soon enough.   If Ballard signs some FA QB and says they expect him to be the backup, then my hope goes up in smoke and my idea will be wrong.  
 

So, March with the free agent window is what we look next at.   

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Wouldn't surprise me one bit to be honest. I think he's got an extremely high ceiling, but also high bust potential too.

 

Here's my my boom bust ranks of the top 7

 

Boom

1. Lawrence

2a. Lance

2b. Wilson

4. Newman

5a. Trask

5b. Fields

7. Jones

 

Bust

1 Fields

2 Lance

3 Newman

4 Wilson

5 Jones

6. Trask

7 Lawrence

 

Lance did play at a small college but he still looked unreal at times. I just don't see the hype behind Fields, he could be good but by my eye test, not sure.

[EastStreet]

10 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I would agree with you if this past year was any other year but Covid.   I think Covid blows up all the norms.   Covid prevented the Colts from finding out what they had with Eason.   
 

That’s why I hope a narrow two month window offers more insight.   I guess we will find out soon enough.   If Ballard signs some FA QB and says they expect him to be the backup, then my hope goes up in smoke and my idea will be wrong.  
 

So, March with the free agent window is what we look next at.   

Or pre-March if they re-sign JB... 

Keep in mind, we can negotiate/etc with our own FAs prior to the Mar15 legal tampering date.

[EastStreet]

12 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Lance did play at a small college but he still looked unreal at times. I just don't see the hype behind Fields, he could be good but by my eye test, not sure.

Yup. We really never know about small school guys until they hit the NFL. Even P5 kids at big time schools don't adjust sometimes. Coming from a non-D1 is just a huge jump. I like his chances though. Clearly has the "it" and "freak" factors. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

6 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Or pre-March if they re-sign JB... 

Keep in mind, we can negotiate/etc with our own FAs prior to the Mar15 legal tampering date.

I can't wait to see the threads in here if we re-sign JB 

[NewColtsFan]

12 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Or pre-March if they re-sign JB... 

Keep in mind, we can negotiate/etc with our own FAs prior to the Mar15 legal tampering date.

Yes...  agreed.   If Brissett is the starter plan, then that may change the backup plan.   Or were you talking about re-signing JB as the backup?  

[EastStreet]

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I can't wait to see the threads in here if we re-sign JB 

I don't have any issues with him coming back for 2ishM early. 

I'd think he would want to test the market though. 

There's a glut in the market for backups IMO. Anything more than 2Mish would get me going lol.

6 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Yes...  agreed.   If Brissett is the starter plan, then that may change the backup plan.   Or were you talking about re-signing JB as the backup?  

Backup.

If he's the starter plan.... holy cow.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

16 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Yup. We really never know about small school guys until they hit the NFL. Even P5 kids at big time schools don't adjust sometimes. Coming from a non-D1 is just a huge jump. I like his chances though. Clearly has the "it" and "freak" factors. 

Look at a lot of the elite QB. Quite a few didn’t go to big schools. I think you can evaluate a small school QB much better because they don’t have a ton of talent around them.  Easier to see if the elevate the players around them.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

I don't have any issues with him coming back for 2ishM early. 

I'd think he would want to test the market though. 

There's a glut in the market for backups IMO. Anything more than 2Mish would get me going lol.

What about 8 Mill for 2 years = 4 Mill a year 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I won’t be surprised if they sign Jacoby as insurance before FA. The question will be does he want to test the market first.  Or how things are going with say the lions on getting Stafford.

[EastStreet]

3 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Look at a lot of the elite QB. Quite a few didn’t go to big schools. I think you can evaluate a small school QB much better because they don’t have a ton of talent around them.  Easier to see if the elevate the players around them.

IDK. Some schools like NDS have a lot of talent around them (relative to competition). You do realize that NDS won the FCS championship like 8 out of the past 10 years, right.

 

Love is the perfect example. He had a good team around him 3 years ago. The next year, he had 10 new starters on O, a new coach, a new scheme, and the D also took a major step back.

[2006Coltsbestever]

6 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Look at a lot of the elite QB. Quite a few didn’t go to big schools. I think you can evaluate a small school QB much better because they don’t have a ton of talent around them.  Easier to see if the elevate the players around them.

I always think of Tony Romo when this subject comes up. He played for a small school and wasn't even drafted. He was never great but ended up having solid/good pro career. He was a 4-time pro bowler, led the league in passer rating 1 year, and even won a couple of playoff games. He could also run really well.

[EastStreet]

6 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

What about 8 Mill for 2 years = 4 Mill a year 

Nah man. We'd likely be able to get Winston, Fitzmagic/tragic, Newton, or Dalton for a million or two. I'd take any of them for 1 or 2 mill over JB for 4. 

 

Heck, I'd pick up Glennon for a mill or two as well. Just so many options right now.

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/all/quarterback/

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, EastStreet said:

Nah man. We'd likely be able to get Winston, Fitzmagic/tragic, Newton, or Dalton for a million or two. I'd take any of them for 1 or 2 mill over JB for 4. 

 

Heck, I'd pick up Glennon for a mill or two as well. Just so many options right now.

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/all/quarterback/

I figured you would say no so I was kinda messing around with you  . 4 Mill would be peanuts though compared to what he made this past season. I would love to have Fitz for a backup, that would be entertaining and at times he can be really good.

[EastStreet]

10 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I figured you would say no so I was kinda messing around with you  . 4 Mill would be peanuts though compared to what he made this past season. I would love to have Fitz for a backup, that would be entertaining and at times he can be really good.

Peanuts vs last year is an EXTREMELY low bar lol... 

We could have had 20M carry over lol.

[NewColtsFan]

On 1/20/2021 at 7:54 PM, EastStreet said:

There was talk out of camp and in the locker room that Herbert was lighting sheet up from the get go.

 

If you believe everything a coach says, you shouldn't believe it now (or he would have kept his word and went back to Taylor).

 

This was no fluke. Happens all the time. Guys go down, and other guys take over. Guys that went down goes somewhere else. 

 

If you want specifics, he played one game. That game was a sub 30 QBR (super bad) against a bad team.  Herbert came in an averaged 300ish the next 5 games. Wasn't even close.

 

Poof, gone. Far from Hollywood script. It just quickened what was always going to happen.

 

 

 

Lighting it up in camp?

 

Taylor was the starter in the season opener.     Herbert didn't even make it close.

 

That's why the first few games when Herbert was shocking everyone with how well he played,  reporters kept asking if the job was now his.    And Lynn kept saying no.    That the job was still Taylor's.

 

It took about 4 weeks of great play for Lynn to back off his position.    By that point,  Herbert had clearly earned the job.

[NewColtsFan]

On 1/20/2021 at 9:49 PM, EastStreet said:

You do realize this whole narrative doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

1. Not good enough to be a backup, but good enough to keep on the 53.

 

2. Picked because the QB situation was highly questionable after year one, but wasn't prepped enough to be at least a backup...

 

3. Ballard says not ready to be a backup, and talks about possible drafting this year.

 

Sorry, but if Ballard is telling the truth, they either failed to prep/develop him, he's not what they thought, or it's coach/GM-speak or misdirection. If they view his ceiling as starter, they failed in year one in the development process. If they view him as perhaps a backup in year 3, they failed in scouting (you don't waste 2 years roster time on a maybe backup). Just not a lot of good common sense. Long game on just a backup who takes a roster spot for 3 years only to be ready when it's time for a new contract. Or maybe a starter in year 4... lol

 

 

 

The Answers:

 

1.   Your note here is a PLUS for Eason.   Good enough to be kept as the third string is a very good sign.

 

2.   Covid is the answer to all questions and comments as to why Eason didn't show more.   A whole pre-season wiped out followed by a regular season with limited practice for the Varsity....    so he had even less time than one would ordinarily get.

 

3.   Ballard didn't say Eason is definitely not ready to be the back-up.  He left it somewhat open.  He's just not ready to declare that in January.   As we've been discussing,  Ballard might be able to say one way or the other by April or May.

[NewColtsFan]

On 1/20/2021 at 10:28 PM, EastStreet said:

@NewColtsFan said that Ballard said he wasn't ready to be a backup. I heard something somewhat similar from a bud, but not near clear cut as how NCF presented it. I trust NCF not to spread blatant lies, so will give him the benefit of the doubt. 

 

Like I said in an early post, I don't hang on everything the coaches say like many do. IMO, drink half of what they say. The other half, fill with Crown or a good Pinot Noir and your own common sense.

 

Ballard's comment was framed in the context that Eason wasn't ready to be the starter,  and he's still a question mark as of the day of the press conference.    I think we are in un-chartered water with Eason and this Covid year.    So, I'm reading into Ballard's comment a bit when I say I believe Ballard wants to see what Eason shows in April and May.    Without knowing NFL Covid protocols this coming off-season I don't know how much live action on the field that will be?    Or will it just be classroom work and quizzes?     But since we haven't heard anything bad about Eason so far,  I think the benefit of the doubt here is OK.

 

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

The Answers:

 

1.   Your note here is a PLUS for Eason.   Good enough to be kept as the third string is a very good sign.

 

2.   Covid is the answer to all questions and comments as to why Eason didn't show more.   A whole pre-season wiped out followed by a regular season with limited practice for the Varsity....    so he had even less time than one would ordinarily get.

 

3.   Ballard didn't say Eason is definitely not ready to be the back-up.  He left it somewhat open.  He's just not ready to declare that in January.   As we've been discussing,  Ballard might be able to say one way or the other by April or May.

He was always going to be kept on the 53. They're not taking a chance of their potential next QB getting poached off the PS.

 

What is going to happen before the April 29th draft that would allow Ballard to change his opinion?

[NewColtsFan]

2 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

He was always going to be kept on the 53. They're not taking a chance of their potential next QB getting poached off the PS.

 

What is going to happen before the April 29th draft that would allow Ballard to change his opinion?

 

I get it.   But if he wasn't showing much during the season,  they could've removed him from the 53 if they didn't care about losing him.   That they didn't tells me they liked what they were seeing.    So, I view it as a plus.    Something favorable.

 

As to the draft,  since Eason is not going to be the starter,  then I don't think any Eason decision impacts the draft and our possibly taking a QB who might someday be our starter.

 

We can still draft a potential future starter if we like.     I'm thinking April and May will give Eason time to show if he's improved one year from the last.     And maybe show enough to give Ballard confidence that Eason can indeed be the starter.    If not,  I think there will be someone Ballard likes available to be the 2021 back-up and keep Eason as the third string if they still like him long term.

 

PS -- I just tried to send you a friendly PM about our communication this week.   But I'm blocked.   So, I thought I'd share it public.    The back and forth this week has been good.    I deliberately did not respond to a flood of posts in the middle of the week.    Wanted to make sure things were OK.    I had planned to respond today all along.   I just didn't expect this week to be so crazy.    Sorry your inbox has been flooded.    Appreciate the back and forth.

 

[EastStreet]

21 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Lighting it up in camp?

 

Taylor was the starter in the season opener.     Herbert didn't even make it close.

 

That's why the first few games when Herbert was shocking everyone with how well he played,  reporters kept asking if the job was now his.    And Lynn kept saying no.    That the job was still Taylor's.

 

It took about 4 weeks of great play for Lynn to back off his position.    By that point,  Herbert had clearly earned the job.

Dude, do you even read camp reports? Didn't make it close lol??? I don't think I read one report that was all that optimistic about Taylor. I did read plenty of reports that Herbert was improving, then impressive and throwing darts. And also that they/Pep were increasing his load a bunch, and pitting him vs the #1 D..... 

 

Not close??? lol. OK....

 

I think you're the only one that was shocked. Taylor is just not that good, and never has been. Nobody was shocked he took Taylor's job. They might have been surprised how well he did, but not because he won the job. The coach was trying to slow roll. Not surprising.

[NewColtsFan]

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

Dude, do you even read camp reports? Didn't make it close lol??? I don't think I read one report that was all that optimistic about Taylor. I did read plenty of reports that Herbert was improving, then impressive and throwing darts. And also that they/Pep were increasing his load a bunch, and pitting him vs the #1 D..... 

 

Not close??? lol. OK....

 

I think you're the only one that was shocked. Taylor is just not that good, and never has been. Nobody was shocked he took Taylor's job. They might have been surprised how well he did, but not because he won the job. The coach was trying to slow roll. Not surprising.

 

Huh?

 

When did I EVER say I was shocked?

 

I wasn't.

 

I'm not backing Taylor.     Never have.    Herbert was always the future.   The question was when.

 

This started when you claimed the Herbert outperformed Herbert in competition.    I simply stated that wasn't true because there was no competition.     Taylor won the job out of camp.    He lost it when he got hurt.    By the time he was healthy,  Herbert had won the job easily. 

 

But there was no head to head competition.

 

[EastStreet]

3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I get it.   But if he wasn't showing much during the season,  they could've removed him from the 53 if they didn't care about losing him.   That they didn't tells me they liked what they were seeing.    So, I view it as a plus.    Something favorable.

 

As to the draft,  since Eason is not going to be the starter,  then I don't think any Eason decision impacts the draft and our possibly taking a QB who might someday be our starter.

 

We can still draft a potential future starter if we like.     I'm thinking April and May will give Eason time to show if he's improved one year from the last.     And maybe show enough to give Ballard confidence that Eason can indeed be the starter.    If not,  I think there will be someone Ballard likes available to be the 2021 back-up and keep Eason as the third string if they still like him long term.

 

PS -- I just tried to send you a friendly PM about our communication this week.   But I'm blocked.   So, I thought I'd share it public.    The back and forth this week has been good.    I deliberately did not respond to a flood of posts in the middle of the week.    Wanted to make sure things were OK.    I had planned to respond today all along.   I just didn't expect this week to be so crazy.    Sorry your inbox has been flooded.    Appreciate the back and forth.

 

He never got a chance to show anything. No 2nd team reps, no garbage time. I don't know if he ever even dressed. So not really a chance to show anything, except maybe a little scout team... And even if he's not impressing, doubt they would demote him as it would put him at risk, but also tip their hat that he's not that good (potentially lowering future trade stock even if it is low). Like I said, doubt he's going to have an opportunity to show anything before the draft.

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Huh?

 

When did I EVER say I was shocked?

You said "everyone" was shocked. See your post above.

2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I wasn't.

 

I'm not backing Taylor.     Never have.    Herbert was always the future.   The question was when.

 

This started when you claimed the Herbert outperformed Herbert in competition.    I simply stated that wasn't true because there was no competition.     Taylor won the job out of camp.    He lost it when he got hurt.    By the time he was healthy,  Herbert had won the job easily. 

 

But there was no head to head competition.

 

Taylor was always going to win the job out of camp. Lynn talked about Taylor like he was pre determined starter even before camp started. And he was most likely always going to lose it later because Taylor just isn't good.

[superrep1967]

On 1/22/2021 at 10:21 PM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Because it is Houston and Watson can go where he wants is what people don't realize. Watson has a no trade clause, if Houston tries to trade him to the Jets for example, he can say no I don't want go there.

Okay, got you thanks

[Mr. Irrelevant]

The rumor that Lions and Stafford might both want to split up makes me warm up to getting him for a couple of years until we figure out the long term solution. But I don’t want to give up a first round pick so we need to be patient and if it works out, great, if someone else want to pay dearly for Stanford, we should immediately bow out of the bidding war.

[Imgrandojji]

19 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Looking at the Polls, a lot of people in here have faith in Eason. He has received 39 votes and is in 2nd only behind Stafford who has 43. Interesting. Those 2 are blowing everyone else away. I went went with Stafford.

Always easy to vote for a young guy who hasn't accumulated a lifetime of sins.  It's just the standard prejudice of football fans speaking.  I'd be OK with Stafford or Matt Ryan.  And I definitely would have been OK going 1 more year with Rivers if he had been up for it, he was decent.  Brissett is a longterm backup and a good guy to have on the roster but at this point probably shouldn't be your Plan A starter.

[Imgrandojji]

btw what would fans think if instead of all this, Ballard traded a second rounder to the 9ers and brought in Nick Mullens?  Personally I think he's an interesting young cat, very high completion percentage and good yards per attempt.  he is prone to the INT but I think a lot of that has to do with the fact that as the third quarterback, if he's on the field his franchise is in turmoil by default.  and he has been on the field.  A lot.

 

  I think he could be turned into a fine pocket passing QB.  Especially with the protection we can afford him.  Might be an interesting buy low candidate.

[Lancer1]

4 hours ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:

The rumor that Lions and Stafford might both want to split up makes me warm up to getting him for a couple of years until we figure out the long term solution. But I don’t want to give up a first round pick so we need to be patient and if it works out, great, if someone else want to pay dearly for Stanford, we should immediately bow out of the bidding war.

Looks like there will be several young quarterbacks on the move (Stafford, Garrapolo, Drew Lock & others) so we shouldn't trade multiple picks to get Matt but if we can get him on a decent deal (and he would likely want to come here) then this could work out well and keep us competitive.

[Myles]

5 hours ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:

The rumor that Lions and Stafford might both want to split up makes me warm up to getting him for a couple of years until we figure out the long term solution. But I don’t want to give up a first round pick so we need to be patient and if it works out, great, if someone else want to pay dearly for Stanford, we should immediately bow out of the bidding war.

I would give our 1st for Stafford in a second.  

[PRnum1]

45 minutes ago, Lancer1 said:

Looks like there will be several young quarterbacks on the move (Stafford, Garrapolo, Drew Lock & others) so we shouldn't trade multiple picks to get Matt but if we can get him on a decent deal (and he would likely want to come here) then this could work out well and keep us competitive.

I'm reading the lions are asking for a 1st rounder.

 

That wouldn't be bad.

[Mr. Irrelevant]

39 minutes ago, Myles said:

I would give our 1st for Stafford in a second.  

 

Our first round pick isn’t exactly at a premium spot so maybe not that bad when I think about it. 

[Lancer1]

52 minutes ago, PRnum1 said:

I'm reading the lions are asking for a 1st rounder.

 

That wouldn't be bad.

 

10 minutes ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:

 

Our first round pick isn’t exactly at a premium spot so maybe not that bad when I think about it. 

If it was just the 21st pick and nothing else, that sounds like a good deal for us.

[Dingus McGirt]

I believe the Colts will draft another young gun and he and Eason will compete in camp.  As far as a "backup" option for JB - that should be limited to a moving van backing up to his current abode.  It's time to get younger, stronger and faster at the QB spot ... and move on.

[CanuckColt]

It looks like Stafford is coming to Indy.

He has agreed to part ways with the Lions and will be available for trade.

The mock drafts even have our 1st round pick going to the Lions.

 

[Four2itus]

4 hours ago, Dingus McGirt said:

It's time to get younger, stronger and faster at the QB spot ... and move on.

Interesting.

 

When I think of QB attributes to lead this current team, those don't even come to mind. I want smart, accurate, and resilient.