Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

2022: Colts at Dallas Post Game Thoughts


EastStreet

Recommended Posts

My concern is, if Ballard is such a good judge of talent, didn't he study or did his homework on Ryan before trading for him? For crying out loud, Ryan is really bad to put it mildly. His int's and fumbles rank up there, he's taking the number one spot on those two categories.  Just sad that Ballard didn't do more to check out this guy, and the Colt fans are paying for it....It's an emotional roller coaster with this guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 410
  • Created
  • Last Reply
9 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

 

We are definitely missing Leonard and Paye when it comes to turnovers and pressures but I don't think you need a top 5 defense if they can be in the 12-10 range I think that is good enough. Last year our defense got a ton of turnovers but it was almost like we either get a turnover or the opposing team scores, I would much prefer this years Defense where they don't get much turnovers but hold teams to figs or 3 and outs.

 

That all being said most of the season we have been playing from behind which makes it harder to get turnovers because the teams aren't forced to try to catch up on the score board which has helped our defense look better in the sense of yardage but also less opportunities for turnovers

 

I agree abut last year's defense, the saving grace was turnovers, other than that they weren't able to hold up against good offenses. And you make a good point about playing from behind. But overall, Bradley's defense isn't good at forcing turnovers, and we were always going to regress significantly from last season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I agree abut last year's defense, the saving grace was turnovers, other than that they weren't able to hold up against good offenses. And you make a good point about playing from behind. But overall, Bradley's defense isn't good at forcing turnovers, and we were always going to regress significantly from last season.

Yeah last year wasn't sustainable, and Leonard was having a crazy year when it came to punching the ball out. really can't disagree with anything ya said there lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Thunderbolt said:

My concern is, if Ballard is such a good judge of talent, didn't he study or did his homework on Ryan before trading for him? For crying out loud, Ryan is really bad to put it mildly. His int's and fumbles rank up there, he's taking the number one spot on those two categories.  Just sad that Ballard didn't do more to check out this guy, and the Colt fans are paying for it....It's an emotional roller coaster with this guy.

 

Because no one can tell the future?

 

Matt Ryan has never turned the ball over like this before. He's fallen off dramatically, almost out of nowhere. Also, it's not entirely on him; the OL is awful, and the coaching is bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Because no one can tell the future?

 

Matt Ryan has never turned the ball over like this before. He's fallen off dramatically, almost out of nowhere. Also, it's not entirely on him; the OL is awful, and the coaching is bad.

Any QB would struggle with the way our Oline has pass blocked and the lack of consistency in our scheme. But Matt Ryan has definitely lost his zip and accuracy, and doesn't seem to adjust the plays to pick up the blitz which you would expect from a veteran QB and your OC. We need an offensive rehaul. New QB, LT, HC/OC OL coach & RB coach...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TimetobringDfence! said:

Any QB would struggle with the way our Oline has pass blocked and the lack of consistency in our scheme. But Matt Ryan has definitely lost his zip and accuracy, and doesn't seem to adjust the plays to pick up the blitz which you would expect from a veteran QB and your OC. We need an offensive rehaul. New QB, LT, HC/OC OL coach & RB coach...

 

Why are you calling out the RB coach?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:

I agree.

I'm amused whenever we have a new player that puts together a string of games where they "don't suck", and all of the sudden they're Orlando Pace.  He's not.  He's a third round pick for a reason.

I'm not saying he sucks.  I'm saying that more than likely he'll never be better than "adequate".  And we shouldn't stop trying to find someone better.

He was a 3rd round pick mainly due to an injury concern and his age, but was considered having mid-late 1st round talent by a lot of draft folks. I think he's done pretty well for a rookie LT (certainly not Orlando Pace level), but definitely not without his warts. I think more time in an NFL strength program and he'll be a solid LT for years to come. To Supe's point, I don't think we stop trying to get better at the position, but I don't think we dedicate substantial resources to it either.

 

4 minutes ago, Thunderbolt said:

My concern is, if Ballard is such a good judge of talent, didn't he study or did his homework on Ryan before trading for him? For crying out loud, Ryan is really bad to put it mildly. His int's and fumbles rank up there, he's taking the number one spot on those two categories.  Just sad that Ballard didn't do more to check out this guy, and the Colt fans are paying for it....It's an emotional roller coaster with this guy.

I don't doubt he did his homework before trading for Ryan, but Ryan has also only had double digit fumbles in 3 of his last 14 seasons (2015, 2018, 2021) with a really bad OL most of that time. The projection was that despite his limited mobility, with our supposed top-ranked OL and run game, Ryan would be able to sit back and carve up a defense with his accuracy. Our OL started the year out nearly getting him killed and a lot of what we're seeing is a shell-shocked Matt Ryan that is panicking in the pocket at times, holding onto balls longer than he should, and throwing balls he shouldn't just in an attempt at not getting sacked (throwing spooked). I don't think Ryan is blameless by any means for what we're seeing on the field, but I also don't think it's as simple as "well Ballard obviously didn't do his homework".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Shive said:

He was a 3rd round pick mainly due to an injury concern and his age, but was considered having mid-late 1st round talent by a lot of draft folks. I think he's done pretty well for a rookie LT (certainly not Orlando Pace level), but definitely not without his warts. I think more time in an NFL strength program and he'll be a solid LT for years to come. To Supe's point, I don't think we stop trying to get better at the position, but I don't think we dedicate substantial resources to it either.

I certainly hope you're right.  That he's gonna work out.  And work out well enough that we don't need to spend more top-end capital on his position.  Time will tell.

"And the Zen Master says, 'We'll see'." -- Philip Seymour Hoffman, Charlie Wilson's War

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John Hammonds said:

I agree.

I'm amused whenever we have a new player that puts together a string of games where they "don't suck", and all of the sudden they're Orlando Pace.  He's not.  He's a third round pick for a reason.

I'm not saying he sucks.  I'm saying that more than likely he'll never be better than "adequate".  And we shouldn't stop trying to find someone better.

 

35 minutes ago, Shive said:

He was a 3rd round pick mainly due to an injury concern and his age, but was considered having mid-late 1st round talent by a lot of draft folks. I think he's done pretty well for a rookie LT (certainly not Orlando Pace level), but definitely not without his warts. I think more time in an NFL strength program and he'll be a solid LT for years to come. To Supe's point, I don't think we stop trying to get better at the position, but I don't think we dedicate substantial resources to it either.

Not to mention the starting LT for the eagles was a 7th round pick, the LT for the Chiefs was a 3rd round pick and those are just the ones I know about, without looking it up. The round they were drafted doesn't cap how good they will become, especially when they show some progress, which fans get excited about because it means they were a good pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the colts cb’s and dt’s have played very well this year and safety’s have been adequate. If there was a decent pass rush they would both probably look a lot better. I don’t like the lb’s, and don’t like defensive players being judged on how many tackles they make. Making a tackle 5+yards down field isn’t a good play. I’m sick of hearing “so and so in the leading tackler”. Are linemen getting penetration, sacks, or occupying two linemen. Are lb’s filling the holes and stopping plays for a loss or short gains. I haven’t seen this much from the colts for a long time. Leonard got a lot of turnovers, but I don’t think he was dominant other than that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, 1959Colts said:

 

I fully agree with your statement, but I do wonder, if Saturday's priority is to evaluate?

Saturday said he's being judged (as head coach) by wins and losses.

So far, it's seems he is determined to just roll with Matt Ryan.

and should he not make position changes, during these next games, how will they ever know if these young players have what it takes?

It will be very interesting, with the bye week next, and then the remaining games, if Saturday shakes up the lineup? And give some more playing time to different players?

I do believe it (evaluate is priority). But I believe he is also judged (as a HC) on Ws/Ls too. Both can be true. 

 

Rolling with Ryan, is likely the best choices, of all bad choices. Neither Sam or Nick are "the future". Neither is Matt. 

But Matt probably allows the most evaluation of other players (WR, TEs, etc..). For instance, I don't think Sam throwing to rooks (or vets). Nick was demoted to 3rd or 4th spot in Chicago. Probably a better option than Sam, but not a great option either. 

 

In short, none of the QBs play well behind our OL. But at least, Matt has the most experience, most chemistry, etc., in our O, and with our players. 

 

In short, I think we need to at minimum, weed out the bad vets, while taking a close look at young kids. Not saying playing all the rooks 100%, but at get them in the mix while test the vets. And I agree, it will be interesting what happens in the final 4 games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zoltan said:

 

Not to mention the starting LT for the eagles was a 7th round pick, the LT for the Chiefs was a 3rd round pick and those are just the ones I know about, without looking it up. The round they were drafted doesn't cap how good they will become, especially when they show some progress, which fans get excited about because it means they were a good pick.

True.  There are always exceptions to the rule.

Yet, Chargers 1st round pick Rashawn Slater made the pro bowl his rookie year.  Bucs 1st round pick Tristan Wirfs made the pro bowl his second year.  Ravens 1st round pick Ronnie Stanley did it in his third.  Dolphins 1st round pick Laramie Tunsil went twice, in his 3rd and 4th years.  Vikings 1st round pick Christian Darrisaw is already making waves.

Although it's true that not every 1st round LT is a blue chip pick (see: Mike McGlinchey), it's gonna happen more often than not.

We may point to Tom Brady as an example of how a 6th round pick can wind up as the greatest QB ever, but it doesn't mean that 6th round picks equate to greatness.  It's a bad idea to use an exception to define a rule.

I hope Raimann turns out just like your 3rd round and 7th round guys.  A successful exception to the rule.  I think the odds are against him.  But that's the nature of being an exception.  Succeeding when somebody like me says you probably won't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zoltan said:

 

Not to mention the starting LT for the eagles was a 7th round pick, the LT for the Chiefs was a 3rd round pick and those are just the ones I know about, without looking it up. The round they were drafted doesn't cap how good they will become, especially when they show some progress, which fans get excited about because it means they were a good pick.

 

I just hope Raimann has a tremendous offseason with S&C. He is good technically, just needs some good weight, and more strength. All the tendinitis rumors..... doesn't seem to impact him.  At worse, I hope he turns out to be a great swing depth guy. Still have hopes that he develops to starter with time/S&C.

 

And.... his grades are now up to 68.5.... That's good given he's committed 7 penalties, and allowed 5 sacks... And now higher than Fisher's 2021 grade... AC's 2020 grade was 73.4, so not far from him.... So definitely improving with Jeff. If he ends up 70+

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Zoltan said:

 

Not to mention the starting LT for the eagles was a 7th round pick, the LT for the Chiefs was a 3rd round pick and those are just the ones I know about, without looking it up. The round they were drafted doesn't cap how good they will become, especially when they show some progress, which fans get excited about because it means they were a good pick.

That stuff can happen, but you don't plan for it to happen that way.  Nobody plans to find their franchise LT in the 3rd to 7th round.  Just like nobody plans to find Robert Mathis in the 5th...you draft Dwigth Freeney at 11 instead.  You go into the draft with a certain amount of logic and knowledge that guides value assessment.

 

If we need a QB, LT, a dominant Edge player, and a dominant secondary player, then plan your capital investment to include 4 first round draft picks.  Maybe more if you need to trade up for the QB.

 

Sure, the draft may fall where you take a flyer on a 7th round developmental tackle that makes it, but that's not how its planned.  And, it will take that guy at least two years to develop, so you need a starter in the mean time.  Plan accordingly.

 

Even Ballard planned for Raimann to not start right away...risks....  He paid Pryor starters money to let Raimann have time to develop.  Getting shoved into the spot early now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John Hammonds said:

True.  There are always exceptions to the rule.

Yet, Chargers 1st round pick Rashawn Slater made the pro bowl his rookie year.  Bucs 1st round pick Tristan Wirfs made the pro bowl his second year.  Ravens 1st round pick Ronnie Stanley did it in his third.  Dolphins 1st round pick Laramie Tunsil went twice, in his 3rd and 4th years.  Vikings 1st round pick Christian Darrisaw is already making waves.

Although it's true that not every 1st round LT is a blue chip pick (see: Mike McGlinchey), it's gonna happen more often than not.

We may point to Tom Brady as an example of how a 6th round pick can wind up as the greatest QB ever, but it doesn't mean that 6th round picks equate to greatness.  It's a bad idea to use an exception to define a rule.

I hope Raimann turns out just like your 3rd round and 7th round guys.  A successful exception to the rule.  I think the odds are against him.  But that's the nature of being an exception.  Succeeding when somebody like me says you probably won't.

 

56 minutes ago, DougDew said:

That stuff can happen, but you don't plan for it to happen that way.  Nobody plans to find their franchise LT in the 3rd to 7th round.  Just like nobody plans to find Robert Mathis in the 5th...you draft Dwigth Freeney at 11 instead.  You go into the draft with a certain amount of logic and knowledge that guides value assessment.

 

If we need a QB, LT, a dominant Edge player, and a dominant secondary player, then plan your capital investment to include 4 first round draft picks.  Maybe more if you need to trade up for the QB.

 

Sure, the draft may fall where you take a flyer on a 7th round developmental tackle that makes it, but that's not how its planned.  And, it will take that guy at least two years to develop, so you need a starter in the mean time.  Plan accordingly.

 

Even Ballard planned for Raimann to not start right away...risks....  He paid Pryor starters money to let Raimann have time to develop.  Getting shoved into the spot early now.

 

I think y'all missed the point of my post, and that's on me for not making it more clear. I was replying to the "he's a third round pick so he can't be good" narrative. I just don't think you should say a guy can't be good because of where they were drafted. Raimann has shown progression in a year that he wasn't even suppose to play, if he continues to grow than I have optimism that with a good offseason with S&C he should be alot better next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

 

 

I think y'all missed the point of my post, and that's on me for not making it more clear. I was replying to the "he's a third round pick so he can't be good" narrative. I just don't think you should say a guy can't be good because of where they were drafted. Raimann has shown progression in a year that he wasn't even suppose to play, if he continues to grow than I have optimism that with a good offseason with S&C he should be alot better next year.

 

Yup. And many projections had him earlier. 

Not saying he's the next great LT at all. Just saying some thought he was early round pick, and his grades are improving (better than FIsher's 2021 grade)... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Because no one can tell the future?

 

Matt Ryan has never turned the ball over like this before. He's fallen off dramatically, almost out of nowhere. Also, it's not entirely on him; the OL is awful, and the coaching is bad.

I don’t think it’s out of no where.  There is a definite trend of sliding numbers for years.  I think it’s typical for aging guys really, there is a gradual slide then you get to the cliff edge.  Ryan went over the cliff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Zoltan said:

 

 

I think y'all missed the point of my post, and that's on me for not making it more clear. I was replying to the "he's a third round pick so he can't be good" narrative. I just don't think you should say a guy can't be good because of where they were drafted. Raimann has shown progression in a year that he wasn't even suppose to play, if he continues to grow than I have optimism that with a good offseason with S&C he should be alot better next year.

I agree with your point.  Just because someone was drafted in the late round doesn't mean we should automatically dismiss them, and don't even give them a chance to earn the starting job.  It can happen.  Let them try.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Thunderbolt said:

My concern is, if Ballard is such a good judge of talent, didn't he study or did his homework on Ryan before trading for him? For crying out loud, Ryan is really bad to put it mildly. His int's and fumbles rank up there, he's taking the number one spot on those two categories.  Just sad that Ballard didn't do more to check out this guy, and the Colt fans are paying for it....It's an emotional roller coaster with this guy.

Agree 100%

 

Not having a young QB to develop is criminal

 

He is batting ZERO on the MOST important position in football - QB

 

He has been given a pass because "Luck retired early"  - That was quite a few years ago now

 

He was:

Wrong on Brissett 

Wrong on Long term of Rivers

Wrong on Carson W

Wrong on Matt Ryan.....  The guy has no velocity on his passes....

Why wasnt this checked out before he came?????

 

Wrong on Sam E.

 

I think Ballard has to go as well

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Zoltan said:

 

 

I think y'all missed the point of my post, and that's on me for not making it more clear. I was replying to the "he's a third round pick so he can't be good" narrative. I just don't think you should say a guy can't be good because of where they were drafted. Raimann has shown progression in a year that he wasn't even suppose to play, if he continues to grow than I have optimism that with a good offseason with S&C he should be alot better next year.

Ok.  It goes without saying that anybody who is drafted or even signed as a UDFA has a chance to become an All-Pro.   

 

To me, the question is more complex.  If the QB isn't there, and the EDGE isn't there, do you pass on a "franchise LT" at pick 7 because Raimann looks like he can be a starter?

 

I say pick the LT, swing BR to RT and slide Smith to RG.  Now since you couldn't fix the QB position or the pass rush, you've at least fixed the oline with one pick....and you still get to see Raimann improve if that's what you want.  The alternative would be to hopefully find a RG somewhere (not at pick 7...LOL) while hoping Raimann is more than just a starter.

 

Bottom line, there are not very many positions worthy of a top 10 pick.  QB, EDGE, and LT and maybe Z WR are pretty much it.  IMO.  So you take a near-elite player at one of those positions if you're drafting that high, especially if your LT is still a question mark.  And the reason you're drafting that high in the first place is probably because at least one of those positions is grossly deficient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, BeanDiasucci said:

Some of us said Ryan, the O-Line and the first-string offense looked bad in training camp and exhibition games, and this was going to be a big problem. How did you respond, Homer? 

Some of you did but my point is nobody in here had us starting 4-8-1 and I can't recall anyone in here saying Matt Ryan would be a turnover machine either. Also go back and look at the Poll, how we would do this season before it started. Most had us winning the division and a playoff game. Hindsight is a man's best friend. Homer Reaction GIF by MOODMAN- Homer says so :thmup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Ok.  It goes without saying that anybody who is drafted or even signed as a UDFA has a chance to become an All-Pro.   

 

To me, the question is more complex.  If the QB isn't there, and the EDGE isn't there, do you pass on a "franchise LT" at pick 7 because Raimann looks like he can be a starter?

 

I say pick the LT, swing BR to RT and slide Smith to RG.  Now since you couldn't fix the QB position or the pass rush, you've at least fixed the oline with one pick....and you still get to see Raimann improve if that's what you want.  The alternative would be to hopefully find a RG somewhere (not at pick 7...LOL) while hoping Raimann is more than just a starter.

 

Bottom line, there are not very many positions worthy of a top 10 pick.  QB, EDGE, and LT and maybe Z WR are pretty much it.  IMO.  So you take a near-elite player at one of those positions if you're drafting that high, especially if your LT is still a question mark.  And the reason you're drafting that high in the first place is probably because at least one of those positions is grossly deficient.

 

  Raimann grades as a 80+ run blocker and a 75 pass blocker. What to do?

  You draft a guard in the 3rd.
  At 7, if there is Elite talent available at CB or DT you consider going there.
  But you have to consider trading back 5-10 spots to pick up 2 VG prospects rather than one.
This is fun. Draft talk already.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, EastStreet said:

I do believe it (evaluate is priority). But I believe he is also judged (as a HC) on Ws/Ls too. Both can be true. 

 

Rolling with Ryan, is likely the best choices, of all bad choices. Neither Sam or Nick are "the future". Neither is Matt. 

But Matt probably allows the most evaluation of other players (WR, TEs, etc..). For instance, I don't think Sam throwing to rooks (or vets). Nick was demoted to 3rd or 4th spot in Chicago. Probably a better option than Sam, but not a great option either. 

 

In short, none of the QBs play well behind our OL. But at least, Matt has the most experience, most chemistry, etc., in our O, and with our players. 

 

In short, I think we need to at minimum, weed out the bad vets, while taking a close look at young kids. Not saying playing all the rooks 100%, but at get them in the mix while test the vets. And I agree, it will be interesting what happens in the final 4 games. 

I would think, the Colts have seen enough of Ryan, that they would have to believe he is not the answer for next season.

So to simply "roll with him" the rest of this year would prevent them from evaluating either Sam or Foles as a possibility to sick around next season (at least as the backup)...

 

And after only playing in two games, it seems Sam is simply considered as a bum.

...as I recall, he played pretty well in his first outing against Washington, which we could have won, but our defense allowed Taylor Heinicke to march down the field for the game winning score.

 

Then Ehlinger had an awful game vs NE... but our entire team (and especially our O-line) was so atrocious in that game, that even if Dan Marino was our qb... he would have struggled.

 

I believe Ehlinger should be given another opportunity.

 

Look at SF... they threw their rookie qb Brock Purdy (Mr Irrelevant) out there and he looks great.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Some of you did but my point is nobody in here had us starting 4-8-1 and I can't recall anyone in here saying Matt Ryan would be a turnover machine either. Also go back and look at the Poll, how we would do this season before it started. Most had us winning the division and a playoff game. Hindsight is a man's best friend. Homer Reaction GIF by MOODMAN- Homer says so :thmup:

 

 Bean "the glass is mostly empty" joined other dips judging the team just as they were getting started.
With all of our youth, many new players, a new DC, how pathetic of a knowledgeable FAN is one to go negative that early on THEIR Team knowing that each season is a work in progress to reach your potential.
 We were generally thought to be close to .500, in a weak division, slightly above if things went well, maybe below if they didn't.
 Welcome to the NFL Super Bowl Champ Rams. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  Raimann grades as a 80+ run blocker and a 75 pass blocker. What to do?

  You draft a guard in the 3rd.
  At 7, if there is Elite talent available at CB or DT you consider going there.
  But you have to consider trading back 5-10 spots to pick up 2 VG prospects rather than one.
This is fun. Draft talk already.  

Yeah, if Aaron Donald or Warren Sapp are there you take him with the top 10 pick and change your defense around him.  Bye Bye Bucky?   Sure, a truly generational talent at an impact position is always desirable, but more routine drafts demand we stick to a template.

 

I think Corners are one of those positions where there are a lot of busts in the high picks, but lots of good players with the lower picks.....Corners are way harder to judge NFL success than LTs. 

 

Yes, if not one QB, EDGE, LT, (do we need a "Z" with AP, Pitt, and PC seemingly  ok...with PCs contract?) is worthy of the top 10 pick, you trade down to where they are worthy and select the BPA there.  This is where the draft is like a Poker game where all of your moves are the right ones but the cards just fall against you and sort of dictate the quality of your first round pick.

 

Raimann's grades are great, but we need one if not TWO more lineman if you don't trust Kelly/Pinter to be starters.   Passing on an elite LT just because your rookie is grading well seems foolish to me.  Pick the LT then shuffle the talent around the oline.  (The LT scenario is if the QB is not up to standards)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  Raimann grades as a 80+ run blocker and a 75 pass blocker. What to do?

  You draft a guard in the 3rd.
  At 7, if there is Elite talent available at CB or DT you consider going there.
  But you have to consider trading back 5-10 spots to pick up 2 VG prospects rather than one.
This is fun. Draft talk already.  

Absolutely.  And this talk about moving Smith to RG is nonsense.  It’s never going to happen.  Yet people are enamored with it.  Bring it up all the time.  They can bring it up until the cows come home.  Not happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:

I would think, the Colts have seen enough of Ryan

 

Doubt Ryan plays another snap.  Ideally you might like to keep him around to ease into the next QB, but he's incapable.  

 

If you draft a QB high, I would just start him from day one, run Taylor and gradually put more on his plate as the season goes on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yeah, if Aaron Donald or Warren Sapp are there you take him with the top 10 pick and change your defense around him.  Bye Bye Bucky?   Sure, a truly generational talent at an impact position is always desirable, but more routine drafts demand we stick to a template.

 

I think Corners are one of those positions where there are a lot of busts in the high picks, but lots of good players with the lower picks.....Corners are way harder to judge NFL success than LTs.  I would NEVER pick a Corner top 10.

 

Yes, if not one QB, EDGE, LT, (do we need a "Z" with AP, Pitt, and PC seemingly  ok...with PCs contract?) is worthy of the top 10 pick, you trade down to where they are worthy and select the BPA there.  This is where the draft becomes like a Poker game where all of your moves are the right ones but the cards just fall against you and sort of dictate the quality of your first round pick.

 

Raimann's grades are great, but we need TWO lineman if not three, if you really trust Kelly/Pinter to be starters.   Passing on an elite LT just because your rookie is grading well seems foolish to me.  Pick the LT then shuffle the talent around the oline.  (The LT scenario is if the QB is not up to standards)

I would start Pinter right now at center.  I think that’s his position. I think he’s better than Kelly.  Now is the time to find out I would think. That’s the move I’m hoping for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Ok.  It goes without saying that anybody who is drafted or even signed as a UDFA has a chance to become an All-Pro.   

 

To me, the question is more complex.  If the QB isn't there, and the EDGE isn't there, do you pass on a "franchise LT" at pick 7 because Raimann looks like he can be a starter?

 

I say pick the LT, swing BR to RT and slide Smith to RG.  Now since you couldn't fix the QB position or the pass rush, you've at least fixed the oline with one pick....and you still get to see Raimann improve if that's what you want.  The alternative would be to hopefully find a RG somewhere (not at pick 7...LOL) while hoping Raimann is more than just a starter.

 

Bottom line, there are not very many positions worthy of a top 10 pick.  QB, EDGE, and LT and maybe Z WR are pretty much it.  IMO.  So you take a near-elite player at one of those positions if you're drafting that high, especially if your LT is still a question mark.  And the reason you're drafting that high in the first place is probably because at least one of those positions is grossly deficient.

I've said before I'm on board with drafting a LT if that's what the cards show, but I absolutely think we should be taking a shot at a QB. If it's not possible with our first pick then with our second. Start throwing darts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would definitely start Pinter the final four.  It may be time to move on from Kelly, but I'm not handing Pinter anything, RG or C, without seeing it first.  I wanna see if I'm in the market for a C or not.

 

This is where hiring Saturday as interim is starting to look like a big mistake.  Does Saturday have the same goals as the front office, knowing he probably won't be head coach in a month or so?  Had you made Gus interim and assured him you want him back one way or another in 2023, perhaps he makes some decisions with the future in mind.  Saturday, on the other hand,, is still trying to win now to prove he can coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, #12. said:

 

Doubt Ryan plays another snap.  Ideally you might like to keep him around to ease into the next QB, but he's incapable.  

 

If you draft a QB high, I would just start him from day one, run Taylor and gradually put more on his plate as the season goes on.

I think that this game and the bye week is the perfect cover for Saturday/Irsay to make that move.  Two issues though:

 

  • It would say that Ryan is done as a Colt, almost assuring a release without having another QB on board to start next year.  Ballard would be telegraphing his draft strategy (to the extent its not already assumed by the rest of the NFL already).   And is Irsay ready to say that Ryan won't be here next year if he thinks the oline/offensive scheme is holding Ryan back?
  • It would be confirming Frank's decision to bench Ryan and go with Sam.  Do you want to confirm a major decision your former HC made three weeks after you fired him?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, husker61 said:

I think the colts cb’s and dt’s have played very well this year and safety’s have been adequate. If there was a decent pass rush they would both probably look a lot better. I don’t like the lb’s, and don’t like defensive players being judged on how many tackles they make. Making a tackle 5+yards down field isn’t a good play. I’m sick of hearing “so and so in the leading tackler”. Are linemen getting penetration, sacks, or occupying two linemen. Are lb’s filling the holes and stopping plays for a loss or short gains. I haven’t seen this much from the colts for a long time. Leonard got a lot of turnovers, but I don’t think he was dominant other than that. 

 

 Oke was grabbing wind the whole Cowboys game. Always to late.

 He was awful!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

I think that this game and the bye week is the perfect cover for Saturday/Irsay to make that move.  Two issues though:

 

  • It would say that Ryan is done as a Colt, almost assuring a release without having another QB on board to start next year.  Ballard would be telegraphing his draft strategy (to the extent its not already assumed by the rest of the NFL already).   And is Irsay ready to say that Ryan won't be here next year if he thinks the oline/offensive scheme is holding Ryan back?
  • It would be confirming Frank's decision to bench Ryan and go with Sam.  Do you want to confirm a major decision your former HC made three weeks after you fired him?

 

 

Good point... but it seems both of those issues (for keeping Ryan in at qb) are mainly about the Colts "saving face" 

I would hope they could put their egos and pride aside and move forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

I think that this game and the bye week is the perfect cover for Saturday/Irsay to make that move.  Two issues though:

 

  • It would say that Ryan is done as a Colt, almost assuring a release without having another QB on board to start next year.  Ballard would be telegraphing his draft strategy (to the extent its not already assumed by the rest of the NFL already).   And is Irsay ready to say that Ryan won't be here next year if he thinks the oline/offensive scheme is holding Ryan back?
  • It would be confirming Frank's decision to bench Ryan and go with Sam.  Do you want to confirm a major decision your former HC made three weeks after you fired him?

 

 

 

  Ryan as Irsay's all-in QB? Don't see how you get there from here. Bye

 And he has to be cut before FA, far before the draft. That is a sign.

   To me, he might be talked into a J Love trade. But i would estimate 9 to 1 we are drafting our next QB. 

   I see LT Skoronski rated 7th by PFF. Raimann at RT would give us at least 4 horseman. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...