Why A Total Rebuild Is Coming - And How We Got In This Situation

[shasta519]

Just now, chad72 said:

 

Apples and oranges. College level talent, those elite FBS schools get to hog the cream of the talent. Alabama won so many national championships churning out RB after RB with their superior OL. Means nothing to me for the NFL.

 

At least Bama churns out legit NFL talent at the skill positions. Other than DPJ and Nico Collins, I can't even think of any Michigan players.

 

I definitely would not be looking to emulate them on offense. 

[chad72]

5 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

At least Bama churns out legit NFL talent at the skill positions. Other than DPJ and Nico Collins, I can't even think of any Michigan players.

 

I definitely would not be looking to emulate them on offense. 

 

No matter which QB you draft, you have to support and tailor your system around them. Not all of them can have the legs like Lamar or Jalen Hurts or Justin Fields but you can incorporate their legs into the offense to make it most effective. It doesn't have to be smash mouth to do so, just because they can run well. Hurts has better pass catchers than Lamar or Fields, no wonder their team is on the top of so many offensive categories, mainly because Hurts improved as a passer.

[Moosejawcolt]

1 hour ago, BlueShoe said:

 

This team has a lot of talent on it. 

 

It needs a quarterback, and a unified vision from front office to the coaching staff. A rookie quarterback is coming this offseason. It is always a roll of the dice on those things though. But the Colts will have to take that risk. 

K ...have a proposition.  List the talent we have and  if we were to trade any one of those players what do u think we would get for them? 

[richard pallo]

It's clear college offenses don't translate well into the NFL.  Owners have experimented with it for years with failure.  The latest with Kingsberry and he got the quarterback he wanted.  Different game entirely.  It certainly helps to have a quarterback who can run.  I would hope today's young quarterbacks can run a little better than a 37 year old Ryan.  But making that running mobile quarterback your focal point doesn't translate well.  Same for the offensive lineman.  They don't know how to block when it comes to NFL offenses.  That's been well documented too.  The college offenses are not producing talented offensive lineman.  That's why all the teams are struggling to find them.  Unless you are a rebuilding team you draft a quarterback to fit your offense.  The Colts have been built up to now to be a running offense 1st.  Pound and control the clock and have a strong defense.  Reich said it along with Ballard.  Remember run the damn ball t shirts.  That was by design.  Can't do it now with this OL.  But that's the plan.  Hopefully we can continue that goal.  Drafting a quarterback that fits our design is what is needed.  jmo.

[shasta519]

1 minute ago, chad72 said:

 

No matter which QB you draft, you have to support and tailor your system around them. Not all of them can have the legs like Lamar or Jalen Hurts or Justin Fields but you can incorporate their legs into the offense to make it most effective. It doesn't have to be smash mouth to do so, just because they can run well. Hurts has better pass catchers than Lamar or Fields, no wonder their team is on the top of so many offensive categories, mainly because Hurts improved as a passer.

 

Yeah. I appreciate the outside the box thinking, but I have to respectfully disagree with this idea that smash mouth football is the future.

 

Have you seen WR contracts recently? Or QB contracts? Does that bubble suddenly burst? I doubt it.

 

Or how does a player like Malik Willis, a perfect fit for that style of football, fall to the 3rd round?

 

I mean...BAL is supposedly leading this revolution and they don't even want to pay the QB, who is the prototype.

 

It's a passing league, where nearly the entire league passes more than they run (except for a couple of teams). And it's basically sponsored by sports betting. I can't speak for everyone, but many fans want to see offense, see their team score points and/or their fantasy players score TDs. The actual players want to score points, accrue stats and get paid. 

 

For it to revert back to the old style would take a seismic shift...like a threepeat or something. And IMO, it would be a bad product. We actually saw some of that this season. 

 

And while the NFL might not dictate how teams run their offense, they can certainly make it so that passing is far more advantageous (as they have been). 

 

[chad72]

13 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Yeah. I appreciate the outside the box thinking, but I have to respectfully disagree with this idea that smash mouth football is the future.

 

Have you seen WR contracts recently? Or QB contracts? Does that bubble suddenly burst? I doubt it.

 

Or how does a player like Malik Willis, a perfect fit for that style of football, fall to the 3rd round?

 

I mean...BAL is supposedly leading this revolution and they don't even want to pay the QB, who is the prototype.

 

It's a passing league, where nearly the entire league passes more than they run (except for a couple of teams). And it's basically sponsored by sports betting. I can't speak for everyone, but many fans want to see offense, see their team score points and/or their fantasy players score TDs. The actual players want to score points, accrue stats and get paid. 

 

For it to revert back to the old style would take a seismic shift...like a threepeat or something. And IMO, it would be a bad product. We actually saw some of that this season. 

 

And while the NFL might not dictate how teams run their offense, they can certainly make it so that passing is far more advantageous (as they have been). 

 

 

You and I agree on that. Look at my posts disagreeing with the OP. I was referring to those running QBs as examples as to how smash mouth football is NOT necessary to maximize their talent. 

[shasta519]

7 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

You and I agree on that. Look at my posts disagreeing with the OP. I was referring to those running QBs as examples as to how smash mouth football is NOT necessary to maximize their talent. 

 

I know. I was agreeing with your earlier posts

[CoachLite]

I think the days of smashmouth football are long gone, but football is not merely an academic exercise, either. I think most fans overlook the psychological aspects of the game, and there are a lot of complex physical parts that go with the mental part.

 

To win, it takes all the parts - and we aren't there, yet.

[chad72]

25 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

It's clear college offenses don't translate well into the NFL.  Owners have experimented with it for years with failure.  The latest with Kingsberry and he got the quarterback he wanted.  Different game entirely.  It certainly helps to have a quarterback who can run.  I would hope today's young quarterbacks can run a little better than a 37 year old Ryan.  But making that running mobile quarterback your focal point doesn't translate well.  Same for the offensive lineman.  They don't know how to block when it comes to NFL offenses.  That's been well documented too.  The college offenses are not producing talented offensive lineman.  That's why all the teams are struggling to find them.  Unless you are a rebuilding team you draft a quarterback to fit your offense.  The Colts have been built up to now to be a running offense 1st.  Pound and control the clock and have a strong defense.  Reich said it along with Ballard.  Remember run the damn ball t shirts.  That was by design.  Can't do it now with this OL.  But that's the plan.  Hopefully we can continue that goal.  Drafting a quarterback that fits our design is what is needed.  jmo.

 

I would take some of those exclusively blocking TEs whose blocking is highly rated in college, that have no pass catching value in college, the ones who may go undrafted, and ask them to put on weight and stash them on the PS and develop. There is as good a chance they may develop into good OL like Joe Reitz.

[ShuteAt168]

2 hours ago, BlueShoe said:

 

Greg Roman has opened the door to the future of the NFL... And I explained why... You did not. 

 

Feel free to disagree. Not sure if you and I have anything else to talk about. I don't think we do. Have a good day. 

With everyone looking for running QBs and using spread offense, there probably is a market inefficiency in acquiring players for a “smash mouth offense.” Even if everyone agrees this is a great idea, do we trust Ballard to pull off such a plan? I know I don’t. What we are watching every Sunday now is the result of his belief in the trenches. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

33 minutes ago, CoachLite said:

I think the days of smashmouth football are long gone, but football is not merely an academic exercise, either. I think most fans overlook the psychological aspects of the game, and there are a lot of complex physical parts that go with the mental part.

 

To win, it takes all the parts - and we aren't there, yet.

Seems like colleges are not developing very good oline players. I wonder if that is attributing to the nfl going more mobile QB.

[richard pallo]

38 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

I would take some of those exclusively blocking TEs whose blocking is highly rated in college, that have no pass catching value in college, the ones who may go undrafted, and ask them to put on weight and stash them on the PS and develop. There is as good a chance they may develop into good OL like Joe Reitz.

For me i have had it with taking on project players and developing them on the practice squad.  Takes forever.  Look at Cox.  We love doing it with basketball players and making them TE's.  No thank you.  Now let's make a TE a OL.  No thank you.  At least Raiman got a head start in college.  Coaches and GM's don't have forever to win.  Draftees should be able to contribute right away for the most part.  They have been playing football since they were kids. 

[Goatface Killah]

Scoring is actually down pretty significantly and the NFL seems to have already caught up to the new styles of offense. 

 

So Im not sure why anyone would feel like there has been some sort of shift in the league offensively. 

 

Every team still wants a QB that is at his most dangerous, from the pocket. 

 

Teams have just adjusted to the fact there arent enough of these guys and found ways to maximize the talent of guys like Hurts and Lamar who dont have that kind of talent as a passer. 

 

But those types of teams have still not had any real post season success.

[richard pallo]

19 minutes ago, ShuteAt168 said:

With everyone looking for running QBs and using spread offense, there probably is a market inefficiency in acquiring players for a “smash mouth offense.” Even if everyone agrees this is a great idea, do we trust Ballard to pull off such a plan? I know I don’t. What we are watching every Sunday now is the result of his belief in the trenches. 

I think Ballard can do it.  We were off to a good start until AC retired.  He missed there but he knows how to do it.  He hit on Nelson and Smith then Nelson got hurt.  Pinter is ready for center I think and Raiman is coming along.  Our OL could be fixed pretty easily with a good FA addition.  What puzzles me is why we don't have a true fullback on the roster.  That would help tremendously.  There are a few good ones in the league.  The 49er's use one effectively.  A lead FB would really help JT.  

[Two_pound]

College coaches aren't developing pocket passers because the guys who run around like a chicken with their head cut off and can't read a defense is all you need to win in college because no college team has extremely fast guys at all eleven positions on defense. Stroud is by far the best qb in this years draft, should be a lock for the top pick which means he's going to Houston.

[ColtV]

12 hours ago, bluephantom87 said:

 

This is a passing league now and the rules are setup to for that very reason. 

This. This. This!

 

I've been saying for 2 years now, there is a literal and figurative arms race in the AFC. The top 4 passing offenses, and 5 of the top 6, right now are in conference. And the quarterbacks of those teams are all under 30 years old. 

[Jackie Daytona]

13 hours ago, DougDew said:

How we got here:

 

Top 37 picks over the course of 5 years:

 

C,FS,G,ILB,RT, zone corner, skinny X.

 

The C is breaking down.  The ILB has replacements drafted in the 5th round playing almost as well.  The Corner was traded to rent a pass rush specialist on a one year contract.

 

Capital simply has been deployed very inefficiently.

 

Oh, and there is no current QB or future QB within sight.

Don't pretend that Leonard has played MLB more than what, three games?  In his career ....  

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

K ...have a proposition.  List the talent we have and  if we were to trade any one of those players what do u think we would get for them? 

Ryan:  Ham Sandwich

JT: 2nd rounder...he's a RB

Pitt:  2nd rounder.

Woods:  Where he was drafted

Pierce:  Where he was drafted.

Parris:  Ham Sandwich.  Nice player, but a FA in a few weeks, so no trade value.

MAC:  LOL

Raimann:  Where he was drafted.

Nelson:  Teams can sign a G for $20M in the offseason.  What would we get for a team to want this G at this price?  3rd rounder.

Kelly:  Same as Nelson.  Not as good of a player, but a better contract.  3rd rounder.

Pryor:  LOL

Pinter: LOL

Fries: LOL

Smith:  Same as Nelson, Kelly.  Probably a better balance between talent and contract.  2nd rounder.

 

The key to trading away players is that you have another player already on the roster that can fill the vacancy.  Our depth sucks, so any pick we get from the trades will need to be put right back into the positions that have been traded.  Unless you want to cannibalize a few positions for a few seasons to get that special QB this year.

 

Not only did Ballard screw the team by needing a rebuild, we don't even have the ability to rebuild.   

 

We need to play with the players we have, and add to them where the holes are.   

[Jackie Daytona]

1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

It's clear college offenses don't translate well into the NFL.  Owners have experimented with it for years with failure.  The latest with Kingsberry and he got the quarterback he wanted.  Different game entirely.  It certainly helps to have a quarterback who can run.  I would hope today's young quarterbacks can run a little better than a 37 year old Ryan.  But making that running mobile quarterback your focal point doesn't translate well.  Same for the offensive lineman.  They don't know how to block when it comes to NFL offenses.  That's been well documented too.  The college offenses are not producing talented offensive lineman.  That's why all the teams are struggling to find them.  Unless you are a rebuilding team you draft a quarterback to fit your offense.  The Colts have been built up to now to be a running offense 1st.  Pound and control the clock and have a strong defense.  Reich said it along with Ballard.  Remember run the damn ball t shirts.  That was by design.  Can't do it now with this OL.  But that's the plan.  Hopefully we can continue that goal.  Drafting a quarterback that fits our design is what is needed.  jmo.

This OL didn't forget how to be a power running team in a calendar year....  They've been running power blocking schemes their entire playing lives.  Strausser is garbage.

[CoachLite]

56 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Seems like colleges are not developing very good oline players. I wonder if that is attributing to the nfl going more mobile QB.

It's harder than it looks. It takes a crafty, if not smart, big, strong agile guy with the soul of a ballerina. Then, you have to coach them how to use those traits in a chaotic ballet.

[DougDew]

7 minutes ago, Jackie Daytona said:

Don't pretend that Leonard has played MLB more than what, three games?  In his career ....  

I'm not.  I just understand football language.  A WILL is a ILB.  Same responsibility as a 34 WILL, except a 34 has a guy lined up outside of him because that guy also rushes the passer and sets an edge, as well as drops back occasionally.  That guy is listed as an OLB.

 

Leonard does not play a LB position where he needs to be strong enough to set the edge, strong enough to bull rush, or bendy enough to pass rush, as well as athletic enough to cover.  That's what OLBs do, and they are the guys that are harder to find than the guy who mainly just has to find the ball and tackle the player.

[DougDew]

6 minutes ago, Jackie Daytona said:

This OL didn't forget how to be a power running team in a calendar year....  They've been running power blocking schemes their entire playing lives.  Strausser is garbage.

LOL.  Pinter is our 6'3" 306 pound RG, who played TE.  A smart NFL HC would not even think of running power with him.  Its zone calls all of the way.  No choice.  Poor Strausser.

 

If you want power, forget the shotgun/RPO.  That is a zoned blocking based offense.  Most NFL teams run zone.

[Superman]

3 hours ago, shasta519 said:

Yeah. I appreciate the outside the box thinking, but I have to respectfully disagree with this idea that smash mouth football is the future.

 

Have you seen WR contracts recently? Or QB contracts? Does that bubble suddenly burst? I doubt it.

 

Or how does a player like Malik Willis, a perfect fit for that style of football, fall to the 3rd round?

 

I mean...BAL is supposedly leading this revolution and they don't even want to pay the QB, who is the prototype.

 

I think you're misrepresenting some of these facts.

 

Malik Willis is a very limited passer. That's still the foundational skill required of NFL QBs, the ability to pass the ball, even if you want to use them in the running game. And Baltimore has no problem paying Lamar, the real questions are about what Lamar wants, and whether the NFL is going to start giving QBs fully guaranteed contracts. The Ravens would offer Lamar the Kyler Murray contract right now; rumor has it they already offered him more. 

 

I don't think smash mouth football is the future of the NFL. I do think you need a dynamic QB who can make plays as a passer and as a runner. I also think the NFL will continue to go through cycles, like it always has. And as teams play more and more nickel, and use 3 tech interior DL, and 225 pound inside LBs, I think some offenses will respond with run heavy gameplans. That's what the Eagles did to the Packers Sunday night. In fact, that's what teams had been doing to the Eagles. The Browns have embraced a 'let them run' philosophy on defense, and it's causing them serious problems. So I think being able to run the ball effectively can serve a team well in certain matchups throughout the season.

 

But I think a major lesson has to be taken from last year's playoffs. Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, Herbert, etc., are not going anywhere. You have to be able to pass the ball effectively and make big plays in the passing game to get to the Super Bowl. Build a smash mouth offense if you want, but your ceiling will be capped until you have a playmaking QB.

 

And where do the Colts stand? We have no identity on offense. Even when we were good at running the ball last season, there were times when the gameplan went away from the run for unknown reasons (Bucs game, second Titans game, etc.) Now our OL struggles in both phases, and our QB is limited, so how can you get anything done on offense? We're toast for the rest of the season, except if we play a team with a really bad defensive unit that we can exploit, like the Raiders DL.

 

I don't think we need a full rebuild to fix this. We need to figure out what needs to be done at OL, and I think that's probably just LT and C. And then we need a playmaking QB. Neither of those requires a total rebuild. The only reason to get rid of really good players is if we want to completely reset our window around a young QB -- and maybe we should, but we need that QB first -- and we want to preserve some draft resources. Other than that, just tearing down with no real goal in sight won't serve any purpose.

[FanFromtheWasteland]

People are saying that it was a mistake to not call a timeout after the Ryan run. I think Jeff made his biggest mistake the Wednesday after he was hired by deciding to start Ryan again in the first place. J m o

[richard pallo]

3 minutes ago, FanFromtheWasteland said:

People are saying that it was a mistake to not call a timeout after the Ryan run. I think Jeff made his biggest mistake the Wednesday after he was hired by deciding to start Ryan again in the first place. J m o

Ryan is the best quarterback on the team.  He almost pulled out another 4th quarter comeback last night.  Jeff is trying to win.  He is auditioning for the job.  He nor Irsay are currently looking ahead to next year.  His job and the players jobs are to win right now.  Period end of story.

[chad72]

3 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Ryan is the best quarterback on the team.  He almost pulled out another 4th quarter comeback last night.  Jeff is trying to win.  He is auditioning for the job.  He nor Irsay are currently looking ahead to next year.  His job and the players jobs are to win right now.  Period end of story.

True. Draft position and looking ahead is what we fans do, good or not. However it has no bearing on what’s going to play out on the field, we should know by now.  

[FanFromtheWasteland]

9 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Ryan is the best quarterback on the team.  He almost pulled out another 4th quarter comeback last night.  Jeff is trying to win.  He is auditioning for the job.  He nor Irsay are currently looking ahead to next year.  His job and the players jobs are to win right now.  Period end of story.

Well almost doesn't count for anything. It's still a loss and we had "0" yards in the 1st qt.

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, FanFromtheWasteland said:

Well almost doesn't count for anything. It's still a loss and we had "0" yards in the 1st qt.

 

First quarter looked a lot like the entire game against the Patriots. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

As much as we hated this season and what has happened it was probably needed to reset at QB. Rarely does a team not fall off a cliff and still get their QB. Bills and KC maneuvered the draft perfect  to get their QB while still winning. It also took teams in the top five picking the wrong QB so those guys fell in the draft.

[Scott Pennock]

Not even close......I stopped reading when you led with the miscommunication about the WR Room.....

 

Look at the primary WR's he had in San Diego in 2014 and 2015:

Keenan Allen 6'2 & 211

Malcolm Floyd 6'5 & 225

Dontrell Inman 6'3 & 205

Seyi Ajirotutu 6'3 & 211

Eddie Royal 5'10 & 182

Steve Johnson 6'2 & 210

Tyrell Williams 6'4 & 210

 

Primary WR's he had in Philly in 2016 and 2017:

Jordan Matthews 6'3 & 215

Dorial Green-Beckham 6'5 & 225

Nelson Agholor 6' & 198

Torrey Smith 6' & 205

Alshon Jeffery 6'3 & 218

Mack Hollins 6'4 & 221

 

Colts WR's fit into that mold of all of the above with one exception - TY Hilton whom he inherited. 

[OLD FAN MAN]

6 hours ago, Goatface Killah said:

Scoring is actually down pretty significantly and the NFL seems to have already caught up to the new styles of offense. 

 

So Im not sure why anyone would feel like there has been some sort of shift in the league offensively. 

 

Every team still wants a QB that is at his most dangerous, from the pocket. 

 

Teams have just adjusted to the fact there arent enough of these guys and found ways to maximize the talent of guys like Hurts and Lamar who dont have that kind of talent as a passer. 

 

But those types of teams have still not had any real post season success.

hard for a pocket passer to be effective when ballards oline does not make a pocket lol

[Moosejawcolt]

5 hours ago, DougDew said:

Ryan:  Ham Sandwich

JT: 2nd rounder...he's a RB

Pitt:  2nd rounder.

Woods:  Where he was drafted

Pierce:  Where he was drafted.

Parris:  Ham Sandwich.  Nice player, but a FA in a few weeks, so no trade value.

MAC:  LOL

Raimann:  Where he was drafted.

Nelson:  Teams can sign a G for $20M in the offseason.  What would we get for a team to want this G at this price?  3rd rounder.

Kelly:  Same as Nelson.  Not as good of a player, but a better contract.  3rd rounder.

Pryor:  LOL

Pinter: LOL

Fries: LOL

Smith:  Same as Nelson, Kelly.  Probably a better balance between talent and contract.  2nd rounder.

 

The key to trading away players is that you have another player already on the roster that can fill the vacancy.  Our depth sucks, so any pick we get from the trades will need to be put right back into the positions that have been traded.  Unless you want to cannibalize a few positions for a few seasons to get that special QB this year.

 

Not only did Ballard screw the team by needing a rebuild, we don't even have the ability to rebuild.   

 

We need to play with the players we have, and add to them where the holes are.   

It's a cluster ......It is funny that people that have been attacking me for years on  my views about Ballard's drafting/ team building , the D scheme, Nelson, Leonard have all gone silent. Moose knew nothing, he was a hater and negative, watch his draft picks wil flourish.....I could go on. I don't know the X's and O's like a lot on tis board but zi mne years ago this team would not win a super owl jnder Ballard and I have been on record as saying so. If I was a top end coach, I would not come to Indy. All of our cap is in the wrong places. No elite skill players. The guys coming due for contracts, I am tempted to let walk. I am calling for a total rebuild. To think that we are a player and/or qb away is ludicrous. Make some serious cuts this off season and trade any player that still has value.

[Two_pound]

Hey Moose I know we aren't allowed to make personal attacks on this forum site, but I will say that has to be the dumbest post on this board in quite some time. By the way, did you always think we would only win one Super Bowl with Manning because Bill Polian didn't know what he was doing either? Polian had a tremendous won/loss record but only one Super Bowl???? Come on, Manning was his qb for 14 years. Ballard has been working from behind the 8 ball since Luck retired.

[shasta519]

5 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I think you're misrepresenting some of these facts.

 

Malik Willis is a very limited passer. That's still the foundational skill required of NFL QBs, the ability to pass the ball, even if you want to use them in the running game. And Baltimore has no problem paying Lamar, the real questions are about what Lamar wants, and whether the NFL is going to start giving QBs fully guaranteed contracts. The Ravens would offer Lamar the Kyler Murray contract right now; rumor has it they already offered him more. 

 

I don't think smash mouth football is the future of the NFL. I do think you need a dynamic QB who can make plays as a passer and as a runner. I also think the NFL will continue to go through cycles, like it always has. And as teams play more and more nickel, and use 3 tech interior DL, and 225 pound inside LBs, I think some offenses will respond with run heavy gameplans. That's what the Eagles did to the Packers Sunday night. In fact, that's what teams had been doing to the Eagles. The Browns have embraced a 'let them run' philosophy on defense, and it's causing them serious problems. So I think being able to run the ball effectively can serve a team well in certain matchups throughout the season.

 

But I think a major lesson has to be taken from last year's playoffs. Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, Herbert, etc., are not going anywhere. You have to be able to pass the ball effectively and make big plays in the passing game to get to the Super Bowl. Build a smash mouth offense if you want, but your ceiling will be capped until you have a playmaking QB.

 

And where do the Colts stand? We have no identity on offense. Even when we were good at running the ball last season, there were times when the gameplan went away from the run for unknown reasons (Bucs game, second Titans game, etc.) Now our OL struggles in both phases, and our QB is limited, so how can you get anything done on offense? We're toast for the rest of the season, except if we play a team with a really bad defensive unit that we can exploit, like the Raiders DL.

 

I don't think we need a full rebuild to fix this. We need to figure out what needs to be done at OL, and I think that's probably just LT and C. And then we need a playmaking QB. Neither of those requires a total rebuild. The only reason to get rid of really good players is if we want to completely reset our window around a young QB -- and maybe we should, but we need that QB first -- and we want to preserve some draft resources. Other than that, just tearing down with no real goal in sight won't serve any purpose.

It’s just my opinion. The only facts are the figures we have seen for players who impact the passing game.
 

But Lamar had lots of questions as a passer coming out of college as well. Granted he didn’t play at Liberty, but he was definitely a polarizing prospect at QB. 

But he’s been a massive success in BAL. I think that, if there is this shift happening (in a copycat league) with BAL/Lamar leading the way, then it stands to reason that some team would have scooped up Willis earlier. Instead, he was picked where backup QBs typically  get picked. 
 

I just don’t see any indication that smash mouth football is the future. I think we agree on that. 

[Nesjan3]

19 hours ago, BlueShoe said:

You and I do not agree. And we won’t. If you want to know the future of the NFL then look at what Greg Roman is doing in Baltimore. The future of the NFL is a version of that. 

What NFL are you watching? The best teams have a really good QB with lots of weapons. Its steadily been trending in that direction for 10 years now. WR has quickly become on3 of the most important and highest paid positions.

[tvturner]

Get a franchise QB, surround him with playmakers at WR and TE and build out with a *creative* offensive minded coach

 

The Chiefs, Bengals, Chargers, Bills, and Dolphins are all reaping the benefits from that plan

 

RBs are not as important as they used to be, unless you're Vrabel and the Titans

 

[Superman]

21 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

It’s just my opinion. The only facts are the figures we have seen for players who impact the passing game.
 

But Lamar had lots of questions as a passer coming out of college as well. Granted he didn’t play at Liberty, but he was definitely a polarizing prospect at QB. 

But he’s been a massive success in BAL. I think that, if there is this shift happening (in a copycat league) with BAL/Lamar leading the way, then it stands to reason that some team would have scooped up Willis earlier. Instead, he was picked where backup QBs typically  get picked. 
 

I just don’t see any indication that smash mouth football is the future. I think we agree on that. 

 

Lamar was a better passer, player, and producer in college than was Willis, I personally don't even think it's close. Jalen Hurts at Oklahoma is a much better comparison to Lamar, and he went in the second. (By the way, I think Lamar and Hurts both are limited and will have problems succeeding in the playoffs. I could be wrong, and I hope they both succeed, but they both have some issues.) Willis dropped primarily because of his limitations as a passer, and he got drafted where backups normally get drafted because his projected ceiling is probably decent backup QB, IMO.

 

No matter what, it starts with being able to perform from the pocket. Teams aren't just handing their offense over to QBs who can't make plays in the passing game. What has changed -- is changing? -- is the willingness of pro coaches to weaponize QB run plays more frequently. But consistent ability as a passer is still a baseline requirement. 

 

I also meant to mention your comment about WR contracts. I don't see that bubble bursting, but I do wonder if the sharp acceleration from the last couple seasons will flatten out. Still, that doesn't mean teams won't lean heavily on the run. The Eagles, Niners, and Washington all paid young WRs big money this offseason; the Eagles and Commanders are #3 and #4 in rushing attempts so far, and the Niners would prefer to be a top ten rushing team also. 

 

Yeah, we agree about smash mouth football. I think any team that has sustained success has to be able to make plays in the passing game. Even in the regular season, you have to be an outstanding rushing team if you're going to rely on the run to win games. And you probably still have to be efficient passing, which is the big difference between the Eagles (10-1, 6.9 net yards/attempt, 27.5 points/game) and the Commanders (7-5, 5.6 net yards/attempt, 19.4 points/game). So you still need a capable QB, which we don't have.

[Moosejawcolt]

10 hours ago, richard pallo said:

It's clear college offenses don't translate well into the NFL.  Owners have experimented with it for years with failure.  The latest with Kingsberry and he got the quarterback he wanted.  Different game entirely.  It certainly helps to have a quarterback who can run.  I would hope today's young quarterbacks can run a little better than a 37 year old Ryan.  But making that running mobile quarterback your focal point doesn't translate well.  Same for the offensive lineman.  They don't know how to block when it comes to NFL offenses.  That's been well documented too.  The college offenses are not producing talented offensive lineman.  That's why all the teams are struggling to find them.  Unless you are a rebuilding team you draft a quarterback to fit your offense.  The Colts have been built up to now to be a running offense 1st.  Pound and control the clock and have a strong defense.  Reich said it along with Ballard.  Remember run the damn ball t shirts.  That was by design.  Can't do it now with this OL.  But that's the plan.  Hopefully we can continue that goal.  Drafting a quarterback that fits our design is what is needed.  jmo.

Philly runs a college offence. Cardinals offence isn't successful because it is a college offence  but because u have a petulant clown as their qb. I said that contract would haubt then for years.

[Moosejawcolt]

9 hours ago, Two_pound said:

College coaches aren't developing pocket passers because the guys who run around like a chicken with their head cut off and can't read a defense is all you need to win in college because no college team has extremely fast guys at all eleven positions on defense. Stroud is by far the best qb in this years draft, should be a lock for the top pick which means he's going to Houston.

If Stroud is far and away uour best qb then it is a weak draft. Never draft an Ohio State qb to be your savior.  It won't work out.

[Moosejawcolt]

3 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

It's a cluster ......It is funny that people that have been attacking me for years on  my views about Ballard's drafting/ team building , the D scheme, Nelson, Leonard have all gone silent. Moose knew nothing, he was a hater and negative, watch his draft picks wil flourish.....I could go on. I don't know the X's and O's like a lot on tis board but zi mne years ago this team would not win a super owl jnder Ballard and I have been on record as saying so. If I was a top end coach, I would not come to Indy. All of our cap is in the wrong places. No elite skill players. The guys coming due for contracts, I am tempted to let walk. I am calling for a total rebuild. To think that we are a player and/or qb away is ludicrous. Make some serious cuts this off season and trade any player that still has value.

So that's your best response? A laugh. I mean  no  I was wrong and give  me reasons. U were sure thereto dump all over me when I made my statements in thw past  and the best u can do is a laugh? Ah I forgot that is a tactic of the left lol.