Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

2023 Colts and NFL free agency news, rumors, discussions


stitches

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Patrick Miller said:

I have to say I’m pretty disappointed that we have not picked up any impact players in free agency. I was really hoping that Chris Ballard would have a fire lit under his keister, but I guess not. I know it’s early, but this next season is not looking too promising.

Ballard is changing is approach right now No more quick fix free agents and no more older vets because he realizes this is going to be a retooling season with a young QB.  Plus this was a pretty weak FA class. I still think we will sign some Oline guys but that might wait until after the draft to see what we still need.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Ballard is changing is approach right now No more quick fix free agents and no more older vets because he realizes this is going to be a retooling season with a young QB.  Plus this was a pretty weak FA class. I still think we will sign some Oline guys but that might wait until after the draft to see what we still need.

If another QB hungry team trades to #3, the Colts will draft Anderson and roll with Minshew and Foles in 2023. I'd expect them to draft a QB day 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

I think they like Hendon Hooker. Top of 2nd round. 

The problem with this gamble is hope Hooker passes the end of 1st round (a lot of teams, like the vikings, can pull the trigger), and if that happens, the question is: the can gamble thinking that maybe if hooker is not there, Stetson will be... or they think that after Hooker the drop off is big, and they will stay without a QB... 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

I think they like Hendon Hooker. Top of 2nd round. 

This would be a gamble imo.  If he wants a player he has shown he will go and get him.  Moving up for Taylor and Cross are cases in point.  Waiting for a quarterback to fall to him is too risky.  There has to be another plan B.  Trading back into the 1st would seem more like a Ballard move especially if he intends to draft a quarterback.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, richard pallo said:

This would be a gamble imo.  If he wants a player he has shown he will go and get him.  Moving up for Taylor and Cross are cases in point.  Waiting for a quarterback to fall to him is too risky.  There has to be another plan B.  Trading back into the 1st would seem more like a Ballard move especially if he intends to draft a quarterback.

I think the plan is to trade down in the first round if Hooker is the target. Somewhere around pick 18-20 if they can find a trade partner maybe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:

I think the plan is to trade down in the first round if Hooker is the target. Somewhere around pick 18-20 if they can find a trade partner maybe?


Maybe you’re right.   But it’s hard for me to believe that trading down, collecting more picks (which sounds like Ballard) would be the way to go to take Hooker.  
 

I think the safer play is to take Anderson or another other top DE,  like Wilson at 4.   Then trade UP for Hooker.   Our Day Two picks, 35 and 79 should allow the Colts to move up far enough into the 1st round for Hooker.  
 

Put another way, ending up with Hooker as your top pick in the draft rather than the second 1st round player behind some other top DE strikes me as an easier thing to sell to a fan base and media who would like crush the Colts if they trade down to take HH. 
 

And I say all that as someone who really likes Hooker and would be fine if that’s who Steichen really prefers. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:

I think the plan is to trade down in the first round if Hooker is the target. Somewhere around pick 18-20 if they can find a trade partner maybe?

A definite possibility but you are still hoping Hooker doesn’t get picked earlier when you are in the middle of the round.  If you are not going to pick a quarterback at 4 I would think you would need to be comfortable with more than one of the remaining quarterbacks not drafted.  Once you pass on a quarterback at 4 anything could happen at any time.  I could see them taking BPA at 4 then watching the draft unfold with the target of moving back into the first.  I would expect they will have a good handle on how it should play out.  Hopefully it falls as you thought and you trade back in where you want to.  But if one of your targets gets drafted then you move up to get the other choice.  Since it’s not a great class I think there’s a good chance it works out and we still get a great prospect at 4 and the quarterback.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:

I think the plan is to trade down in the first round if Hooker is the target. Somewhere around pick 18-20 if they can find a trade partner maybe?


By the way, I should have added that if it turns out you’re right and the Colts trade down to make their move,  I’ll try to remember to give you full credit!   :thmup:
 

And if I don’t, please be sure to remind me!!      :thmup:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Maybe you’re right.   But it’s hard for me to believe that trading down, collecting more picks (which sounds like Ballard) would be the way to go to take Hooker.  
 

I think the safer play is to take Anderson or another other top DE,  like Wilson at 4.   Then trade UP for Hooker.   Our Day Two picks, 35 and 79 should allow the Colts to move up far enough into the 1st round for Hooker.  
 

Put another way, ending up with Hooker as your top pick in the draft rather than the second 1st round player behind some other top DE strikes me as an easier thing to sell to a fan base and media who would like crush the Colts if they trade down to take HH. 
 

And I say all that as someone who really likes Hooker and would be fine if that’s who Steichen really prefers. 

Yeah, our day two picks might also do the trick. Question is how much of a gambler Ballard will be…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:

Yeah, our day two picks might also do the trick. Question is how much of a gambler Ballard will be…


Yes….   Last year, Ballard was a big gambler.   
 

Traded down and gambled Pierce would be there at 53.    He was.   
 

Gambled Woods would be there at 73.  He was.  
 

Gambled Raimann would be there at 77.   And he was.   
 

Gambled he’d be able to trade back into the third round for Cross.   And he did that too. 
 

But on a year to year basis, it’s hard to know.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Ballard is changing is approach right now No more quick fix free agents and no more older vets because he realizes this is going to be a retooling season with a young QB.  Plus this was a pretty weak FA class. I still think we will sign some Oline guys but that might wait until after the draft to see what we still need.

he may to decide to go for it with minshew and our new head coach likes minshew for a starter better than any rookie in this draft. we may already have the qb they want

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/21/2023 at 11:57 AM, chad72 said:


I was one of the first ones who brought up Hooker to the Vikings because cousins has just one more year to go. @NFLfan didn’t think it was feasible.

 

That’s the thing – teams like the Bucs or the Vikings have a tad more time to let a QB like Hooker develop behind a starter. They’re my most likely candidates.

 

A couple of publications have the Vikings trading up to draft Levis at 7 or at 10.

 

From the Athletic:

Quote

7. Minnesota Vikings (from LV): Will Levis, QB, Kentucky

Trade details: Vikings send No. 23, 87 and a 2024 first-round pick to the Raiders for No. 7 and 204

The Vikings’ future at quarterback is in question. Kirk Cousins remains under contract through 2023. The team has yet to extend him. Until they do, thinking about the team’s next thrower of the football is worthwhile. Though it might be tempting to save key 2024 draft capital, especially with the potential QBs in next year’s NFL Draft, the Vikings could benefit from adding a QB now. A season to learn head coach Kevin O’Connell’s system would be a boon. So would the opportunity to sit behind Cousins.

 

https://theathletic.com/4327828/2023/03/22/nfl-mock-draft-2023-vikings-rodgers?source=user-shared-article

 

I definitely do not want to trade up. I would rather trade back, get more picks, and draft someone else. I don't like the idea of trading up when we have only 5 or 6 picks. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/25/2023 at 10:44 AM, richard pallo said:

This would be a gamble imo.  If he wants a player he has shown he will go and get him.  Moving up for Taylor and Cross are cases in point.  Waiting for a quarterback to fall to him is too risky.  There has to be another plan B.  Trading back into the 1st would seem more like a Ballard move especially if he intends to draft a quarterback.

Yea I agree with you. Waiting is risky and moving back would definitely be a Ballard move. Grab more picks and still get your QB. I would not be opposed to this. That being said Will Anderson possibly being there at 4 could change my mind. We clearly are “adjusting” the roster since rebuilding seems to be a strong word. So grabbing a stud ER would be a good move this year. But that means probably rolling with Minshew. I’m conflicted. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, krunk said:

Wonder if we have any plans to draft 2 quarterbacks?

Doubt it.  Why sign Minshew then when you have Foles and Sam still on the roster then?  Also, drafting two QBs in one draft, unless you have plans for one to be a backup, is a waste of a draft pick because you are betting on at least one of your picks to fail or not use one.  As far as I know Washington has done that and that’s about it (again outside of taking one to be a backup) and I don’t think anyone is saying any team in the league needs to use Washington as an example of how to run your team.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Doubt it.  Why sign Minshew then when you have Foles and Sam still on the roster then?  Also, drafting two QBs in one draft, unless you have plans for one to be a backup, is a waste of a draft pick because you are betting on at least one of your picks to fail or not use one.  As far as I know Washington has done that and that’s about it (again outside of taking one to be a backup) and I don’t think anyone is saying any team in the league needs to use Washington as an example of how to run your team.

Maybe we get rid if Sam and Foles? Was just thinking out loud. You prob. right

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, krunk said:

Maybe we get rid if Sam and Foles? Was just thinking out loud. You prob. right

Foles I think will go at some point.  I think he’s just here in case the draft works in a way they don’t get a QB.  Sam I think is still the back up of the future.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Would you guys trade our 3rd round pick for Jerry Jeudy rather then draft one with that 3rd? Or maybe colts trade down from 35 some and pick up an extra third they could use for him.

 I read where the top five picks in the 3rd round is considered the sweet spot in the draft for what it’s worth.  They are looking for picks.  I would offer our 3rd and one of our multiple 5ths and hope that gets it done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

 I read where the top five picks in the 3rd round is considered the sweet spot in the draft for what it’s worth.  They are looking for picks.  I would offer our 3rd and one of our multiple 5ths and hope that gets it done.

Those will be some prime spots. 
 

too bad Denver already owns ours lol

 

we traded that pick last year In the Nick Cross draft trade

 

so Denver has back to back picks at pick 4&5 of round three. 

 

so our 3rd is from Washington in the Wentz trade at pick 79 (16th pick of the 3rd)

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Would you guys trade our 3rd round pick for Jerry Jeudy rather then draft one with that 3rd? Or maybe colts trade down from 35 some and pick up a extra third they could use for him.

I would trade our 3rd round pick for Jerry Jeudy in a heartbeat.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/rams-tried-to-trade-up-for-brock-bowers-then-byron-murphy   You seem to be right.
    • Read this this morning. Thought it was interesting    https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/indianapolis-colts/news/colts-rams-nfl-draft-trade-offer-revealed-rejected/be019bcd2ee81b6ffeb4656e     "This was the rejected trade offer from the Rams to the Colts in the first round:     Rams get: Nos. 15, 191   Colts get: Nos. 19, 99, 154   While that's the kind of deal Chris Ballard would be expected to take in the past, the Colts clearly had an eye for edge rusher Laiatu Latu.   It's clear that it would have taken much more in the offer for the Colts to move off the chance of selecting the prospect they believe was the best defender in the entire draft.   There were a few viable prospects available at the time so it would have made sense for the Colts to trade back.   But this only proves how convicted they were in draft Latu."     Not too surprised we turnt that down as it has us losing on the draft chart by a little bit, but does show the conviction they had in Latu.
    • Offense wins in the league now and to take it a step further the QB is by far the lost important piece on any team.    So, on offense you need the best possible QB with the best possible supporting cast and on defense you need players who can affect the play of the opposing QBs directly. 
    • This is definitely an issue. So, either Ballard is A.) Cheap and he doesn't want to spend money on FAs (even with injuries happening) or B.) He can't build a competitive enough team to attract any worthwhile FA's after 7 going on 8 years now.    If AR and the current team can't attract FAs that could theoretically get a starting job at the S position for a year, then we are in big trouble according to the opinions of the players of the NFL. Personally, I think Ballard just avoids FA so much that he doesn't want to bring outside help in. He wants to be known as the GM who builds his team from the draft.   Wish the local media would call him out on this.
    • I think the Colts have the money to be competitive for a good free agent safety.  I think bringing in one of them may depend on whether a player like Simmons wants to play for the Colts.  They may be hoping to sign for a team with a better chance of making the playoffs.   So I don’t know if Ballard is making a statement or not?     Hope my answer makes sense to you….    
  • Members

    • Old Colt

      Old Colt 289

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • lincolndefan

      lincolndefan 92

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • richard pallo

      richard pallo 9,139

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Yoshinator

      Yoshinator 9,464

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • krunk

      krunk 8,434

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NFLfan

      NFLfan 17,532

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ADnum1

      ADnum1 3,213

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • w87r

      w87r 14,516

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • lollygagger8

      lollygagger8 5,473

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Solid84

      Solid84 6,889

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