Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colts interested in Mike Mcglinchey?


Recommended Posts

 

I don't know how credible this is, but it would be a cheaper option as he's still on his rookie deal and we can use the fifth year option. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is San Fran the pipeline all of a sudden. There's a couple OT's recently released that I'd kick the tires on. This guy would cost us a #1 pick at least.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it’s interesting in thst McGlincey has been playing RIGHT Tackle in the NFL, not the left.  
 

I know he played the Left in college, just not at the Pro level.   San Fran I think spent roughly the 10th overall pick in him.   What’s the incentive to trade him now — still on his rookie deal — for pick 21?

 

Feels like there are pieces of this puzzle that are either missing, or don’t fit.   Seems odd. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

Isn’t he strictly a RT on this level?

 

Well the 49ers also had Joe Staley and Trent Williams since He's been drafted so not exactly that he can't play LT. Just didn't need him to.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I think it’s interesting in thst McGlincey has been playing RIGHT Tackle in the NFL, not the left.  
 

I know he played the Left in college, just not at the Pro level.   San Fran I think spent roughly the 10th overall pick in him.   What’s the incentive to trade him now — still on his rookie deal — for pick 21?

 

Feels like there are pieces of this puzzle that are either missing, or don’t fit.   Seems odd. 

 

Well the 49ers also had Joe Staley and Trent Williams since He's been drafted so not exactly that he can't play LT. Just didn't need him to.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CR91 said:

 

Well the 49ers also had Joe Staley and Trent Williams since He's been drafted so not exactly that he can't play LT. Just didn't need him to.

 

 

All fair points.   Do you want to I trust that important spot to someone who has not yet done it on the NFL level?

 

Just asking.... 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:

All fair points.   Do you want to I trust that important spot to someone who has not yet done it on the NFL level?

 

Just asking.... 

 

Well obviously Ballard would think so if he pulled the trigger.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Well obviously Ballard would think so if he pulled the trigger.


Obviously, yes.   But it should be noted, this info about the Colts interest is coming from the 49ers, not from Indy.   Hard for me to gage our real interest.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Obviously, yes.   But it should be noted, this info about the Colts interest is coming from the 49ers, not from Indy.   Hard for me to gage our real interest.  

 

I have seen it mentioned a few times now on Twitter, but I haven't been able to find a credible source yet so this is all speculation.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

All fair points.   Do you want to I trust that important spot to someone who has not yet done it on the NFL level?

 

Just asking.... 

Well that statement accounts for any draft prospect as well. What LT are you going for?

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

The 49'ers are not going to sign Trent Brown, so if they're willing to trade him that means they don't like what they see..

 

Trent Brown?

 

He was with the Raiders, and they just traded him to New England.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Well the 49ers also had Joe Staley and Trent Williams since He's been drafted so not exactly that he can't play LT. Just didn't need him to.

 

 

I think that's it in a nutshell.  I could see them resigning Williams so LT would be secured.  If Ballard made the call then he's interested in him as a LT and match him up with Nelson again.  Great idea really.   He would be younger and cheaper than a FA LT and you have the fifth yr. option.  Ballard could then use the cap for ER, WR and CB.  The 49'ers could also use our 1st pick as a chip in any trade for a QB they might be trying to go after.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

Well that statement accounts for any draft prospect as well. What LT are you going for?

 

If I'm drafting a LT....

 

The guys I'm most interested in are.....

 

Darrisaw at pick 21.

 

Cosmi and Little and maybe Jenkins after a small trade down later in the first.

 

Eichenberg, Radunz and I think I'm forgetting someone off the top of my head at pick 54.

 

That's my list as of Mid-March.

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Trent Brown?

 

He was with the Raiders, and they just traded him to New England.

 

 

Williams, you know who I meant..

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

If I'm drafting a LT....

 

The guys I'm most interested in are.....

 

Darrisaw at pick 21.

 

Cosmi and Little and maybe Jenkins after a small trade down later in the first.

 

Eichenberg, Radunz and I think I'm forgetting someone off the top of my head at pick 54.

 

That's my list as of Mid-March.

 

But in regards to your previous statement no of these prospects have played NFL LT yet. So McGlinchey not playing LT yet shouldn’t be a huge deal either right? I personally thing McGlinchey would come into Indy and reconnect well with Nelson on the left side. I also would be fine in just drafting one as well. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, ColtJax said:

Williams, you know who I meant..

Honestly I didn’t know.     Because I’m not convinced SF doesn’t bring back Williams.  
I think they’ve got a shot at keeping him.  

I don’t know how good that shot is, but I think it’s possible. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

But in regards to your previous statement no of these prospects have played NFL LT yet. So McGlinchey not playing LT yet shouldn’t be a huge deal either right? I personally thing McGlinchey would come into Indy and reconnect well with Nelson on the left side. I also would be fine in just drafting one as well. 

Sorry, I don’t think that’s a fair argument.  If you have a choice you out the younger, cheaper player at LT.   They didn’t when the had Staley.   They could’ve after that, and again didn’t.  They paid the more expensive Williams.   To me, that says SF isn’t convinced MM can play LT at the NFL level.   That’s what some said in college.   That he’d be a Right Tackle at the next level.   And that’s what he’s been.   Maybe he gets moved to the Left side now?   Maybe. 

 

As far as the college guys, no one here has written more about college guys, saying that just because they played LT on the college level, doesn’t mean they can also do it on the NFL level.  It’s totally different.   I remind people here of that fact every year.   Same as QB.   Just because you were great in college, doesn’t mean you’ll also be great in the NFL.   If only that were true! 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please no more trading high picks unless for young studs.

 

I’d rather get young players in the draft since I do trust Ballard and this scouting dept to evaluate draft classes. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BProland85 said:

Isn’t he strictly a RT on this level?

People have posted that they want Ramczk too, and he's a RT. Same as they post Smith should be moved to LT or Q should be moved to LT. I think we need a Left Tackle...   I'd vote for Alejandro Villanueva as a bridge and draft one.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Big Mike would be fine at LT with Nelson on his hip.

 

Not sure though why SF would want to deal him unless they're desperate to pick up more draft capital. And his 5th year option would only cost them around 10M next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like teams really like this draft class. Obviously the current cap environment is having an effect, but it seems like some teams would rather draft a cheap replacement than pay OTs. Very interesting development. 
 

I think Ballard calling SF is pretty natural after they made the Buckner deal last year. He’s probably checked on the cost of a few OTs...so he could have options. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I look at McGlinchey the same way I do Orlando Brown. Neither would be cheap in draft capital, very soon after they arrive we would have to pay them a lot of money, and neither has played LT at the pro level. I think McGlinchey could do it but is that a worthy gamble based on how much it’s going to cost? 
 

I’d much rather bring in a cheapish vet, work to develop Holden, and draft one on day one or two. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If he's trying to get him for a 4th rounder or a future 2nd, maybe. But since we don't have a 3rd it would be the 1st or 2nd this year.. I'd rather get a good one that falls to us in the 1st or trade up a few spots to guarantee one..

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

and neither has played LT at the pro level.

This is false.

 

Orlando Brown played LT last year after Stanley went down and at a pretty high level.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Big Mike would be fine at LT with Nelson on his hip.

 

Not sure though why SF would want to deal him unless they're desperate to pick up more draft capital. And his 5th year option would only cost them around 10M next year.

 

If they want a trade up card on the Draft, that would make sense.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Sorry, I don’t think that’s a fair argument.  If you have a choice you out the younger, cheaper player at LT.   They didn’t when the had Staley.   They could’ve after that, and again didn’t.  They paid the more expensive Williams.   To me, that says SF isn’t convinced MM can play LT at the NFL level.   That’s what some said in college.   That he’d be a Right Tackle at the next level.   And that’s what he’s been.   Maybe he gets moved to the Left side now?   Maybe. 

 

As far as the college guys, no one here has written more about college guys, saying that just because they played LT on the college level, doesn’t mean they can also do it on the NFL level.  It’s totally different.   I remind people here of that fact every year.   Same as QB.   Just because you were great in college, doesn’t mean you’ll also be great in the NFL.   If only that were true! 
 

That’s a fair point and maybe SF thinks he is just a RT. To your second part I completely agree. College to pros is a hard transition. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If y'all recall, I tried to suss out possibilities in that draft to see if we could get both of them.  I would love to have McGlinchey.  But as people have pointed out, it may come at a steep price.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ColtJax said:

If he's trying to get him for a 4th rounder or a future 2nd, maybe. But since we don't have a 3rd it would be the 1st or 2nd this year.. I'd rather get a good one that falls to us in the 1st or trade up a few spots to guarantee one..

Keep in mind all you're guaranteeing yourself is a prospect who hasn't played a down in the NFL.  McGlinchy was a high 1st rd pick who has proved himself as an NFL starter and is still on a rookie contract.  IMO he is easily worth our 1st pick this year.  Having already played next to Nelson is icing on the cake.  5th yr option to boot.  A no brainer really.  The only way the 49'ers do this is for draft capital to make a trade. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Keep in mind all you're guaranteeing yourself is a prospect who hasn't played a down in the NFL.  McGlinchy was a high 1st rd pick who has proved himself as an NFL starter and is still on a rookie contract.  IMO he is easily worth our 1st pick this year.  Having already played next to Nelson is icing on the cake.  5th yr option to boot.  A no brainer really.  The only way the 49'ers do this is for draft capital to make a trade. 

That's true.  Do a simple comparison.  Just like last year.  Do you want rookie Javon Kinlaw?  Or trade the pick for DeForest Buckner?  This year:  Do you draft Samuel Cosmi?  Or trade the pick for Mike McGlinchey?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:

That's true.  Do a simple comparison.  Just like last year.  Do you want rookie Javon Kinlaw?  Or trade the pick for DeForest Buckner?  This year:  Do you draft Samuel Cosmi?  Or trade the pick for Mike McGlinchey?

 

Or do you trade the 1st for Gilmore and have a shut down corner? There's a lot of possibilities, I'd take Gilmore and try to sign Reiff the former OT of the Vikings. 2 great players and lose 1 draft pick ,not bad..

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

All fair points.   Do you want to I trust that important spot to someone who has not yet done it on the NFL level?

 

Just asking.... 

 

 Like even a rookie! Of course you do. Like Q propped up AC, our next guy will be ok.
 SF dumping McG makes no sense though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the 49ers don't love him enough to pay him big in 2 years, otherwise it's hard to see why they might do this.  

 

I can see why the Colts would do it.   You start paying a second contract a little sooner for a proven commodity, someone you know can play in this league.  I'm sure he could adequately replace and play to AC's level.  He would be fine next to Nelson.

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

 

Or do you trade the 1st for Gilmore and have a shut down corner? There's a lot of possibilities, I'd take Gilmore and try to sign Reiff the former OT of the Vikings. 2 great players and lose 1 draft pick ,not bad..

Sure there are a lot of possibilities.  No denying that.  You trade for Gilmore you need to extend him like Buckner.  Cap space.  Then you sign Reiff more cap space.  You trade for McGlinchey and very little cap space with two years of control and a younger LT could play many seasons with Nelson.  More cap space to add a couple of difference making FA's.  Again the only way it happens is if they resign Williams and want to trade or move up for a QB.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

McGlinchey would be a fine addition to the o-line next to Big Q. Pairing the two college teammates could yield great results.

 

However, you also have to consider what we already have from the 2018 class.

 

After this upcoming season, we will have to re-sign Leonard and Braden Smith, and use the 5th year options on Q and Mike.

 

Then in the 2022 season we'll have to re-sign those two to long term deals.

 

That's a ton of money to dish out within a span of a couple years, and is why I'm much more inclined to draft the LT in the draft, allowing us longer team control for cheap without a ton of money being needed to distribute elsewhere when the time comes for them to be extended.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, WarGhost21 said:

McGlinchey would be a fine addition to the o-line next to Big Q. Pairing the two college teammates could yield great results.

 

However, you also have to consider what we already have from the 2018 class.

 

After this upcoming season, we will have to re-sign Leonard and Braden Smith, and use the 5th year options on Q and Mike.

 

Then in the 2022 season we'll have to re-sign those two to long term deals.

 

That's a ton of money to dish out within a span of a couple years, and is why I'm much more inclined to draft the LT in the draft, allowing us longer team control for cheap without a ton of money being needed to distribute elsewhere when the time comes for them to be extended.

 

I get what you're saying, but that's two years down the road since we'd have the fifth year option for both Q and Mike. The cap will go back to 200+ that it's normally at.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • That Walker was so bad in coverage they had to get him off the roster.  The question is why are we so bad in coverage? Exit Walker.  And, Ya-Sin will never have the speed so i believe he is not in great shape to be on the roster past this season. My crystal ball. Could he become a safety?  
    • I live in Massachusetts and even here the people i talk to are excited for it.
    • You have to NOT Believe in getting better, and try as i might i can't get the Bracket comparison. Bracket became pretty decent against the run but his height/length was a weakness dropping in coverage.  Oke seems the opposite. As of today.  Some think he has a brain and that experience should benefit him in all areas of his game. This should be a really good learning year for him.
    • Positions that are clear (real and perceived) QB1, X-WR, RB1, APB, RT, RG, C, LG, 3T, NT, CB1 (Rhodes), NB (Moore), WILL, TE1 and TE2.   The rest, have some element of fog (real or perceived) IMO.   Offense QB2 - If Eason is clearly #2, not sure whey we waste a draft pick on another QB. I didn't get it then, and not now lol. Z - Hilton his aging. Pretty clear the plan when drafting Campbell was that he would gradually work outside. Slot - PC is the obvious guy if healthy, but if he is healthy, and they start moving him outside, we still have questions.  LT - Fisher is clear if he returns to form. If not, a lot of fog. TE3 - Granson is a wildcard but assuming they want to use him as a move-slot-TE like they tried to use Burton. Not really a true TE   Defense L and RDE - time share here. There are several rotations I can see here, and likely won't be set early. MIKE - Oke is the clear leader, but there will be a lot of eyes on his run D. A time share here would not shock me. SAM - we don't use it a lot, so who knows. I could even see Oke playing SAM and Franklin handling MIKE on those SAM downs. LB Depth - who knows. Will we ever see Speed emerge? CB2 and CB Detph - RYS vs Carrie vs Tell vs Rogers. Nothing would surprise me. FS - Blackmon needs to take a big step forward in deep coverage. If not, I could see a rotation here. SS - Willis is very solid, but I could see him getting pushed by Shawn Davis.  
  • Members

    • rock8591

      rock8591 565

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Wentzszn

      Wentzszn 11,139

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Smonroe

      Smonroe 2,622

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Fat Clemenza

      Fat Clemenza 361

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • csmopar

      csmopar 7,792

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • w87r

      w87r 5,639

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • EastStreet

      EastStreet 10,829

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Dogg63

      Dogg63 2,317

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • RollerColt

      RollerColt 2,837

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Fluke_33

      Fluke_33 2,891

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