Back to the future. Who would you pick at #6.

[compuls1v3]

Interested to see what everyone's thoughts are.  I pick keep big Q.  Of course, I love pancakes, 'cuz waffles don't cut it for me!

[GoColts8818]

I mean at the time Luck was here and no one had a clue he was going to retire so it’s just 20/20 hindsight to say take a QB.

[compuls1v3]

Just now, GoColts8818 said:

I mean at the time Luck was here and no one had a clue he was going to retire so it’s just 20/20 hindsight to say take a QB.

Right.  That's why I said "Knowing what you know now".

[GoColts8818]

10 minutes ago, compuls1v3 said:

Right.  That's why I said "Knowing what you know now".

Enh, you can always play 20/20 hind sight.  I am more concerned and impressed with Ballard’s ability to make what he did work.  

[Yoshinator]

I wanted Josh Allen at 5 to the Broncos that year and he was my favorite QB in the draft class, so if I knew Luck would retire in a year, I'd obviously take Josh Allen at 6.

 

However, Ballard absolutely made the right choice without hindsight.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Hindsight or knowing what we know now is kind of unfair to ask. That would be about like me saying, what we know now in hindsight in 1998, why didn't the Chargers take Randy Moss with the #2 pick instead of Ryan Leaf. I could do 100's of these. We had Luck at the time so the 100% right pick was Nelson. 

 

A better question would be, did we make the right pick at #6 with Nelson, I think we did. Many thought taking a Guard at #6 was a bad idea, I was fine with it. I was actually praying Chubb would go #5 so we could get Nelson.

[shasta519]

It wasn’t just take Q or someone else though. There should be a 3rd option of trading back with BUF for the same offer that TB got (let’s assume it was the same offer though it could have been more). That would have landed picks #12, #53 and #56. 
 

In this ultimate universe, perhaps Derwin James doesn’t get hurt. He and Leonard would have been fun together. 
 

With even more 2nd round picks, Ballard could have done just about anything he wanted, including trading them for future capital. But if he had stayed put, Warner was the guy I would have taken then and especially now. And with the luxury of having so many 2s, toss in Chark or Mark Andrews.

 

But it’s all hindsight with so many variables. If we have a time machine, you take Josh Allen, knowing what you know about Luck.

 

 

 

[John Hammonds]

Also to remember is that we started out at #3.  It wasn't just the choice of Q, but also the trade back to #6 with the Jets that gave us so many picks.  And the subsequent trades that followed.  It's not just Q vs Allen.  Its Q + Braden Smith + Kemoko Turay + Jordan Wilkins + RYS.  All five players came out of that #3 pick.

[Myles]

I would go for Q right now.    Allen has had 1 good season so far so I want to see him do it again.

I think he will as he looks to have the tools and the confidence.  

[Mitch Connors]

With hindsight in mind.... Q could be the best guard of all time and he will still never be as valuable as an MVP caliber franchise QB.

 

I get that we love Nelson but hes not even in the same universe as Josh Allen if we're talking value, team building and immediate impact. 

[Solid84]

5 minutes ago, Mitch Connors said:

With hindsight in mind.... Q could be the best guard of all time and he will still never be as valuable as an MVP caliber franchise QB.

 

I get that we love Nelson but hes not even in the same universe as Josh Allen if we're talking value, team building and immediate impact. 

I agree. Knowing what we know now I would have gone with Josh Allen 10/10 times. Q is an absolute BEAST playing at a non-top 3 offensive position, unfortunately.

 

Edit: Had he been a LT with comparable skill-level for the position it might have been a more difficult choice.

[DougDew]

5 hours ago, shasta519 said:

It wasn’t just take Q or someone else though. There should be a 3rd option of trading back with BUF for the same offer that TB got (let’s assume it was the same offer though it could have been more). That would have landed picks #12, #53 and #56. 
 

In this ultimate universe, perhaps Derwin James doesn’t get hurt. He and Leonard would have been fun together. 
 

With even more 2nd round picks, Ballard could have done just about anything he wanted, including trading them for future capital. But if he had stayed put, Warner was the guy I would have taken then and especially now. And with the luxury of having so many 2s, toss in Chark or Mark Andrews.

 

But it’s all hindsight with so many variables. If we have a time machine, you take Josh Allen, knowing what you know about Luck.

 

 

 

That draft was pretty deep at G, IIRC, so I wanted the trade down.  I remember Ballard specifically saying about the Smith pick that "he was the last starting caliber G on the board" justifying why he took him at 37 instead of his more "projected" slot of 49.  If we didn't take Nelson at 6, somebody else would have taken him a little later and that may have pushed all of the olineman down a few slots.

 

Its possible we could have taken McGlinchey at 12 then and put him at RT with Smith at LG, and still have Leonard plus two more second round picks that draft.

[BlackTiger]

It would be a tough call between Allen and Jackson for me.  Josh will probably last longer but I think Lamar is more fun to watch.  As a fan I would probably say Lamar, but if I was actually the GM I might have to go with Josh 

 

 

[BlackTiger]

On second thought, if everyone had this hindsight those two QBs may not even make it to the 6th pick.

 

If nobody else had hindsight i would trade back to the end of the first and take Lamar right before the Ravens did.  Who knows where Darius Leonard would have gone if the Colts didnt take him where they did.

[NannyMcafee]

Well the state of the line was in shambles. I was hoping at the time with everything in me the Colts would get Nelson for this terrible line. The rest is history. In hindsight its hard to say Josh Allen needed some work when he was being drafted and the Bills have done a really good job with him. 

[PrincetonTiger]

[Myles]

It sure would be odd having to tell Luck we are drafting a QB in the top 10 when Luck hadn't thought of retiring yet.  I guess we would cut Luck.

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, Myles said:

It sure would be odd having to tell Luck we are drafting a QB in the top 10 when Luck hadn't thought of retiring yet.  I guess we would cut Luck.

I'm much more devious than that. If Luck told me privately that he was going to retire in a year, I would draft Allen and trade Luck for two first round picks. Then I would just say we thought Luck was "damaged goods" from the old regime, and we move on from him and get Allen. Luck retires a year later, and we reap the benefits of the 2019 and 2020 draft lol!  

[Myles]

15 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I'm much more devious than that. If Luck told me privately that he was going to retire in a year, I would draft Allen and trade Luck for two first round picks. Then I would just say we thought Luck was "damaged goods" from the old regime, and we move on from him and get Allen. Luck retires a year later, and we reap the benefits of the 2019 and 2020 draft lol!  

But there is nothing that shows that Luck was going to retire in a year.    Since we are playing the hindsight game, you would know and need to unload him.    Boy the fan base would be mad.  

[NorthernColt]

I mean knowing what we know how, if someone says we should still take Q is out to lunch. I love Q as much as the next guy, but at the end of the day he's still a guard. Allen is looking like a prime Luck too.

[Coltsfan98]

I'd still take Q. 

 

Doubt a QB whoever it was survives without Q at guard much less becomes an MVP contender. Buffalo has done a great job building around Allen. I've never been a Lamar fan anyway.

[compuls1v3]

1 hour ago, Myles said:

It sure would be odd having to tell Luck we are drafting a QB in the top 10 when Luck hadn't thought of retiring yet.  I guess we would cut Luck.

That's a very fair point.  I didn't consider that.  It would have been awkward to select a QB.

[Hoose]

1 hour ago, NorthernColt said:

I mean knowing what we know how, if someone says we should still take Q is out to lunch. I love Q as much as the next guy, but at the end of the day he's still a guard. Allen is looking like a prime Luck too.

I take Q. He has transformed the O-line into a weapon from a mess, and his attitude and talent is generational. So call me "out to lunch", but there are few, special players who have an impact well beyond their talent. Q is one of those unique players. 

[Four2itus]

I wanted Nelson at #3. 

[PuntersArePeopleToo]

I still take Q, knowing our team and history of the Oline, the fact is he is such a force and changed the lines culture and attitude. Allen, I still don't know if he would have had the same success with us as Buffalo. Now if it was 2017 with Mahomes different story, he I think would be doing with any team. Allen has a bit more to him

[Myles]

13 minutes ago, PuntersArePeopleToo said:

I still take Q, knowing our team and history of the Oline, the fact is he is such a force and changed the lines culture and attitude. Allen, I still don't know if he would have had the same success with us as Buffalo. Now if it was 2017 with Mahomes different story, he I think would be doing with any team. Allen has a bit more to him

I agree.  People forget that Allen has only had 1 very good season out of 3.   We'll see what he does this season.   I think he'll be very good again.   Hopefully Wentz is.  

[PuntersArePeopleToo]

2 minutes ago, Myles said:

I agree.  People forget that Allen has only had 1 very good season out of 3.   We'll see what he does this season.   I think he'll be very good again.   Hopefully Wentz is.  

Ya, that is my thought, not uncommon a player has a great season and no others. I expect he will still be good, his progress from year 1-3 is feasible, but Q just a different beast that the Colts needed with any QB and changed culture

[EastStreet]

Nelson is my favorite player, but with the gift of hindsight, obviously Allen.

 

 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

With hindsight of course the pick is Josh Allen, a Franchise QB who is  presently the 2nd best QB in the afc. 

He's easily more important than 2 Q's.

But back then if you did go the QB route picking Allen was not the obvious choice,  there were several other choices. 

[Stephen]

3 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

With hindsight of course the pick is Josh Allen, a Franchise QB who is  presently the 2nd best QB in the afc. 

He's easily more important than 2 Q's.

But back then if you did go the QB route picking Allen was not the obvious choice,  there were several other choices. 

Trade Luck and pick nelson and Josh Allen

[ar1888]

I like that we took Nelson, but wish we would’ve traded back into the number 32 spot and taken Jackson there. 

[coming on strong]

i would try to get both trade up for Q after getting allen .  Q is worth trading a first and a second to trade up again

[jmac_48]

Hey Zeus Christopher...

 

We got a three time all pro at LG and people are still questioning this draft choice...

 

smh

[LJpalmbeacher2]

13 hours ago, Stephen said:

Trade Luck and pick nelson and Josh Allen

 

There was rumors that the Brownies were willing to give a slew of top.picks for luck. Some on here, including myself weren't against that. I know Ballard said he didn't want to be the one who got rid of luck.....I dont remember if it was then or some other time he said that.

[Four2itus]

7 hours ago, jmac_48 said:

Hey Zeus Christopher...

Well done good sir......well done. 

[ColtV]

1 hour ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

There was rumors that the Brownies were willing to give a slew of top.picks for luck. Some on here, including myself weren't against that. I know Ballard said he didn't want to be the one who got rid of luck.....I dont remember if it was then or some other time he said that.

I remember that. It was a hot topic here in Ohio during draft week but it never seemed like it was real: Why would the Colts trade Luck if he was healthy, and why would the Browns take the risk if he wasn't? Browns fanbase was definitely opposed

[NannyMcafee]

4 hours ago, ColtV said:

I remember that. It was a hot topic here in Ohio during draft week but it never seemed like it was real: Why would the Colts trade Luck if he was healthy, and why would the Browns take the risk if he wasn't? Browns fanbase was definitely opposed

 

I believe it was during the 2012 draft. 

[csmopar]

On 8/26/2021 at 1:22 AM, compuls1v3 said:

Interested to see what everyone's thoughts are.  I pick keep big Q.  Of course, I love pancakes, 'cuz waffles don't cut it for me!

At the time, I wanted either Q or Bradley Chubb. Seeing how Q has turned into a beast and Chubb has just been well serviceable, I’d stick with the Q

[Nickster]

Josh Allen is a far more valuable player than Q.  It’s not even honestly discussable.  It’s silly.  So if the question is from the perspective of the now, this is obviously a no brainer, you pick Allen a trillion times out of a trillion.

 

but if you are looking at it at the time, we had Luck seemingly for another 10 years, but if you knew Allen was this valuable you could rob other teams blind with a top QB on a rookie deal.

 

Josh Allen

[Nickster]

And people are weird about Allen.  He had a good rookie year, a really good 2nd year, and MVP type third year.  Dude has like 1600 yds and 25 TDS rushing in his career in addition to more than respectable passing stats with limited weapons his 1st 2 seasons.

 

he’s on HOF trajectory