Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Jordan Love might be available for trade... Should we do it??


Recommended Posts

Yea, let's trade all our 1st round picks for the next three years to the Packers for a guy who can't throw into a stationary NET.... :lol:

 

From this morning Jan. 26th, 2021

 

ESPN's Rob Demovsky said Packers backup QB Tim Boyle "would be more suited" than Jordan Love to start in 2021 if Aaron Rodgers is traded or retires this offseason. 

In other words, the Packers would be in bad spot if Rodgers isn't in green and yellow next season. Demovsky said "nothing [Love] has shown, at least publicly, would suggest" he's ready to replace Rodgers a year after the Packers inexplicably drafted Love in the first round. Packers beat writers have written extensively since last summer that Love is an erratic passer who appears over his head in Green Bay's offense. "Love has struggled with accuracy -- in the drill where quarterbacks throw to a stationary target (usually a net) and to players running routes on air (without a defender)," Demovsky said. He suggested the team's best course might be to trade Love, like the Patriots did with Jimmy Garoppolo when Tom Brady was unhappy about New England drafting his successor. That Love isn't locked in as Green Bay's starter post-Rodgers is an indictment of the entire organization. 

 

Second coming of MaHomes aye @stitches ? seems like this guy couldn't hit the side of my MaHome standing two feet in front of it.... :lol:

 

What a joke, then and now...

 

Enjoy!!

 

 

 

 

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Indeee said:

Yea, let's trade all our 1st round picks for the next three years to the Packers for a guy who can't throw into a stationary NET.... :lol:

 

From this morning Jan. 26th, 2021

 

ESPN's Rob Demovsky said Packers backup QB Tim Boyle "would be more suited" than Jordan Love to start in 2021 if Aaron Rodgers is traded or retires this offseason. 

In other words, the Packers would be in bad spot if Rodgers isn't in green and yellow next season. Demovsky said "nothing [Love] has shown, at least publicly, would suggest" he's ready to replace Rodgers a year after the Packers inexplicably drafted Love in the first round. Packers beat writers have written extensively since last summer that Love is an erratic passer who appears over his head in Green Bay's offense. "Love has struggled with accuracy -- in the drill where quarterbacks throw to a stationary target (usually a net) and to players running routes on air (without a defender)," Demovsky said. He suggested the team's best course might be to trade Love, like the Patriots did with Jimmy Garoppolo when Tom Brady was unhappy about New England drafting his successor. That Love isn't locked in as Green Bay's starter post-Rodgers is an indictment of the entire organization. 

 

Second coming of MaHomes aye @stitches ? seems like this guy couldn't hit the side of my MaHome standing two feet in front of it.... :lol:

 

What a joke, then and now...

 

Enjoy!!

 

 

 

 

inside the nfl football GIF by Robert E Blackmon

Link to post
Share on other sites

All I'm going to say is... Jordan Love has shown to Green Bay media about the same amount Jacob Eason has shown to Indy media. Have no idea whatsoever how any of them can have any sort of opinion on him by watching PRECISELY ZERO snaps of him in any sort of action this year. Now, the reports were not great coming out of camp, but again... the most they've seen in camp is a couple of practices where he's probably not thrown more than 10-15 balls.

 

It's not like people didn't expect Love to need some time to get ready. Now I too have about the same level of insight on Love and his progression so I can't say much, but if they are willing to trade him, IMO that doesn't bode well for his prospects. If you trade up in the 1st for a QB and a year later you've given up on him, then there must be something that's not inspiring confidence and thus... I'd be reluctant to trade for him unless it's as a reclaimation project(i.e. 3d round pick or lower) rather than as a presumtive QB of the future. 

 

Also just for the record Rob Demovsky is a local Aaron Rodgers loyalist. 

 

 

  • Like 7
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, they chose to hedge their wagon to Jordan Love. We should not bail them out. There was a reason why we did not move up for Jordan Love, whether it was the interview process or whether it was because they felt he wasn't first round value. If they did not feel he was first round value then, they are not going to believe he is now.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Id be blown away if theres any truth to this. Its the same with the Hurtz traded out of philly rumors. Since when has it been established that if your drafted in the NFL you have to start immediately. Love or Hurtz are on rookie contracts not going anywhere, they will sit behind the respective starters (Wentz, Rodgers) till its time. People forget Aaron sat behind Favre for 3 seasons

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Indeee said:

ESPN's Rob Demovsky said Packers backup QB Tim Boyle "would be more suited" than Jordan Love to start in 2021 if Aaron Rodgers is traded or retires this offseason. 

In other words, the Packers would be in bad spot if Rodgers isn't in green and yellow next season. Demovsky said "nothing [Love] has shown, at least publicly, would suggest" he's ready to replace Rodgers a year after the Packers inexplicably drafted Love in the first round. Packers beat writers have written extensively since last summer that Love is an erratic passer who appears over his head in Green Bay's offense. "Love has struggled with accuracy -- in the drill where quarterbacks throw to a stationary target (usually a net) and to players running routes on air (without a defender)," Demovsky said. He suggested the team's best course might be to trade Love, like the Patriots did with Jimmy Garoppolo when Tom Brady was unhappy about New England drafting his successor. That Love isn't locked in as Green Bay's starter post-Rodgers is an indictment of the entire organization. 

 

Second coming of MaHomes aye @stitches ? seems like this guy couldn't hit the side of my MaHome standing two feet in front of it.... :lol:

 

What a joke, then and now...

 

Enjoy!!

This is such nonsense and you know it is nonsense. Why should I take a Rodgers loyalist's opinion on Love over what I've seen of him and numerous others have seen of him pre-draft... and what made the Packers trade up for him. Accuracy was never a major knock on him. When kept clean he was acutally one of the most accurate QBs in college football. It was his  decisionmaking that he was dragged for. "nothing [Love] has shown, at least publicly, would suggest he's ready to replace Rodgers". Now ask yourself what has Rob Demovsky seen publicly of Jordan Love? He's seen NOTHING... or close to nothing since camp. He's seen about as much of him as Kevin Bowen and Stephen Holder and me and you have seen of Jacob Eason... NOTHING. I would bet you he's not seen more than about 20-30 throws Jordan Love has made since entering the NFL and that's in a practice setting. 

 

And since you are calling me out by name for things I've never said I would like to point out that I never said he would be the "second coming of Mahomes". When I'm throwing out comparisons I've said multiple times that I'm doing a stylistic/traits comparison and not an expectation of similar or better success(because there are so many more things than that that go into how the player's career will develop). So yes... Jordan Love plays incredibly similar style to Mahomes, but there are obviously reasons why he wasn't drafted no.1 or hell even no. 10 where Mahomes went. 

 

And one more thing - Jordan Love very well might bust. The reasons for that could be many. Either way... it won't be my first miss and it won't be my last miss. NFL GMs miss on about 50% of their early round picks and 70-90% of their mid-late round picks... I promise you I won't be better than them and I have no illusions about it. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, stitches said:

This is such nonsense and you know it is nonsense. Why should I take a Rodgers loyalist's opinion on Love over what I've seen of him and numerous others have seen of him pre-draft... and what made the Packers trade up for him. Accuracy was never a major knock on him. When kept clean he was acutally one of the most accurate QBs in college football. It was his  decisionmaking that he was dragged for. "nothing [Love] has shown, at least publicly, would suggest he's ready to replace Rodgers". Now ask yourself what has Rob Demovsky seen publicly of Jordan Love? He's seen NOTHING... or close to nothing since camp. He's seen about as much of him as Kevin Bowen and Stephen Holder and me and you have seen of Jacob Eason... NOTHING. I would bet you he's not seen more than about 20-30 throws Jordan Love has made since entering the NFL and that's in a practice setting. 

 

And since you are calling me out by name for things I've never said I would like to point out that I never said he would be the "second coming of Mahomes". When I'm throwing out comparisons I've said multiple times that I'm doing a stylistic/traits comparison and not an expectation of similar or better success(because there are so many more things than that that go into how the player's career will develop). So yes... Jordan Love plays incredibly similar style to Mahomes, but there are obviously reasons why he wasn't drafted no.1 or hell even no. 10 where Mahomes went. 

 

And one more thing - Jordan Love very well might bust. The reasons for that could be many. Either way... it won't be my first miss and it won't be my last miss. NFL GMs miss on about 50% of their early round picks and 70-90% of their mid-late round picks... I promise you I won't be better than them and I have no illusions about it. 

 

 

 

It doesn't just mention Demvosky, it mentions Packers beat writers as in Plural and their observations over time. Clearly you cannot read or assess an item article properly so why would anyone think you could assess a player as well. You're whole "Demovsky hates Love cause Demovsky loves Rodgers" defense is bunk when ALL packers beat writers have been stating this guy ain't all that.... Your failing to acknowledge that is what is nonsense.... I am not claiming to know anything other than what my eyes tell me and what the PRO's outa GB are telling me, oh and the "PRO" talent evaluators on here... Which one of these three doesn't fit in this circumstance? When a major outlet as roto posts it, I don't believe it can be viewed as nonsense

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Indeee said:

It doesn't just mention Demvosky, it mentions Packers beat writers as in Plural and their observations over time. Clearly you cannot read or assess an item article properly so why would anyone think you could assess a player as well. You're whole "Demovsky hates Love cause Demovsky loves Rodgers" defense is bunk when ALL packers beat writers have been stating this guy ain't all that.... Your failing to acknowledge that is what is nonsense.... I am not claiming to know anything other than what my eyes tell me and what the PRO's outa GB are telling me, oh and the "PRO" talent evaluators on here... Which one of these three doesn't fit in this circumstance? When a major outlet as roto posts it, I don't believe it can be viewed as nonsense

 

 

My only question would be the NFL this year based on COVID protocol allotted 30 minutes to local media at the beginning of practice. Which means they saw stretching. With this you could merely have guys referring to camp that was what 6 months ago? Just curious of what they would be talking about in all honesty. 
 

For the record I was not a Love fan but this just seems like @stitches said a local writer and or two writers that are a Rodgers fan putting out a piece to make sure and back their guy. Dog the competition. Here in Indy you have Doyle who is known as this type of writer in regards to local sports players and coaches. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Indeee said:

It doesn't just mention Demvosky, it mentions Packers beat writers as in Plural and their observations over time. Clearly you cannot read or assess an item article properly so why would anyone think you could assess a player as well. You're whole "Demovsky hates Love cause Demovsky loves Rodgers" defense is bunk when ALL packers beat writers have been stating this guy ain't all that.... Your failing to acknowledge that is what is nonsense.... I am not claiming to know anything other than what my eyes tell me and what the PRO's outa GB are telling me, oh and the "PRO" talent evaluators on here... Which one of these three doesn't fit in this circumstance? When a major outlet as roto posts it, I don't believe it can be viewed as nonsense

The only PROs in GB are the ones that traded up for Love. So they believed in his talent enough to give up extra compensation and move up in the 1st to get him. They are also the only ones that have actually watched him throughout the year. Acting like Demovsky is not a Rodgers loyalist who's hated this pick from the very start is disingenuous. Shasta posted the full history of the reports about Love's struggles in camp in the other thread, you can check it out if you want.

 

And again I will keep telling you the same - Demovsky and ALL of GB reporters have seen about as much of Love since training camp as me and you have seen from Eason(I personally have seen ZERO). Now you can act as if reports of a training camp practice struggle in COVID-disrupted off-season of a rookie QB who was supposed to be raw is some sort of big deal that means they are ready to trade him or that they no longer believe in him, but unless there is an actual report about that rather than pure conjecture based ENTIRELY on those couple of practices in training camp and NOTHING SINCE, I will be reluctant to believe anything coming out of Demovsky. 

 

For whatever it's worth, IF GB indeed is willing to give him up 1 year after they took him, then IMO there is something wrong with him and his approach/attitude/ability to grasp concepts, etc (or the evaluation was just bad and he's not good and showing no promise). So I WILL believe that information and I will take it much more seriously than Demovsky's petty narrative push. If GB want to give up on Love a year after they traded up for him, then I would be much less interested in him, which is kind of the paradox here. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Shive locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I agree. He has the size and length that Ballard wants plus I just think he will be a good pro. 
    • I like Smith, but I'd still save the bank and maybe go after Dan Arnold or Gerald Everett first, and max out a contract for one of the stud pass rushers in free agency - yannick, lawson, hendrickson. By doing this then that alleviates two draft picks to spend on those areas and you can concentrate on the total depth on the roster.
    • Bingo. The bolded is why I have little use for their college rankings, etc. Failure to project, or account for changed circumstances, etc. They tend to freeze players in time, when prediction is a major factor in scouting, drafting, and player acquisition.   They said this about Justin Herbert before the draft: There’s a lot of potential with Herbert, but to pick potential over what’s been proven isn’t the best way to go.    About a rookie. Just kind of crazy to me to think that anything is proven about a draft pick, much less to be so dismissive about potential. Just as an example. None of us can know the future, but they have a particular blind spot for anything that hasn't happened yet.   In this case, they make little allowance for Wentz's potential to return to his previous form. Not even the MVP form of 2017, just start with the previously praised level of play in 2019. If Wentz plays that well in 2021, he's already twice as good as any of those other players, except maybe Fitzpatrick (and he's still likely to be decidedly better than Fitzpatrick). It shouldn't be hard to understand why a team would value 28 year old Carson Wentz over 38 year old Ryan Fitzpatrick, right? Or at least mention that basic fact?   And in the ultimate irony, they say 'if you want a previous MVP-level QB, go with Cam Newton,' even though Cam Newton won the MVP six years ago now, and looked like he can't even throw the ball anymore in 2020. So they can ignore Cam's recent performance to make their tortured point, but won't consider adjusting for Wentz's bad year?    It should be obvious that the Colts anticipate Wentz playing better in 2021 than he did in 2020. If he doesn't, this trade will be bad for the team. But to analyze the trade as if it's not even a possibility -- which a lot of people have been doing, btw -- is kind of disingenuous.
    • Denver select Quinn Meinerz, OG/OC , Wisconsin - Whitewater   @runthepostwith the Cowboys on the clock. 
  • Members

    • KSColt

      KSColt 1

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Fisticuffs111

      Fisticuffs111 1,988

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DaColts85

      DaColts85 387

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • runthepost

      runthepost 790

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • JediXMan

      JediXMan 414

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • RNGDShobby

      RNGDShobby 177

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NewColtsFan

      NewColtsFan 8,257

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jal8908

      jal8908 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Chloe6124

      Chloe6124 9,802

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Flash7

      Flash7 1,107

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...