I would be okay riding with Minshew in 23

[ProblChld32]

1 hour ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

stroud is the only one worth a top 4 pick , young is too small for the nfl, the other two have huge flaws. minshew is better than all but stroud

I think that notion can be debunked Kyler Murray and Bryce are about the same in stature. Bryce may be a tad bigger I believe. But I understand why most organizations prefer a QB with the prototypical size. 

[ProblChld32]

1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I agree with  not forcing a qb. The only issue is this. Let  us say thr Minshew starts and the team plays hard undet Steichen and wins  like 8 games or so. That would have  us picking in the teens next year.  Now u really have to trade up next year and use vital draft capital. 

If we trade back to a QB needy team say Lions or Falcons we could definitely acquire trade capital to utilize to trade up next season and get a better prospect.

[Indianapolis-Colts-Fan]

I’m not a fan of how active Ballard has been in signing any OL or WR. If you cut Ryan Kelly then you’re down another oline man. It feels somewhat like he’s painting himself into another corner letting players walk without a replacement in mind. 
 

so whoever is the QB is potentially going to have a bad oline to work with. Maybe not though. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

8 hours ago, Smonroe said:

@BlueShoe covered it.  If the Colts truly believe the QB is there when we draft, they should take him. But don’t let expectations, fan based pressure, or grasping at hope influence the decision.  
 

I suspect that they think Hendon is as good, or as raw as Levis or AR.  And that they can get him later in the first.  
 

You can’t pass on a guy that can finally give opposing OC something to worry about for the next ten years.  Not for “let’s hope this guy can develop”.  

 

Yeah we don't know if AR15/Levis will ever make it let alone become Franchise or Elite QB's. But is it for sure Anderson will be a Dominant, Game Changing pass rusher for the next decade? Yeah the chances are better he contributes more early than a QB prospect, but how much and for how long and will injuries hamper him like most everyone else??   Ballard has drafted multiple Defensive Linemen and we still don't have one Dominant. Our best is Buckner who was traded for and he's a monster but not a end. Is Qwitty Paye Dominant? The question was a few years ago OT Nelson or DE Chubb.....The Broncos got Chubb, has he been Dominant and a game changer? Without a franchise QB how many playoff games has Chubb led the Broncos to?? In fact he's not even  with them anymore, they traded him, the 5th overall pick is already with another team.......and what about Myles Garrett? How many playoff games has he led the Brownies to??

 

Long story short, even very highly rated Blue Chip linemen that are Top 5 picks aren't a sure thing AND WILL NOT lead your team to Championship level without top QB play.

[CR91]

Minshew is here to be a mentor and backup. Please let's not make this more then it is.

[coming on strong]

14 hours ago, ChuggaBeer said:

Not gonna make the playoffs with any of the top 4 Qb's.  So build the D until the QB is in place 

so how will the colts get the future Qb if they build the defense first and are a solid team ?   then they will have to trade up with multiple first round picks to get a guy who has flaws just like these top 4 picks .     any really top prospect is getting scooped up without being traded .    whats left is guys who have flaws  and are risks .  would you rather trade up for a guy with flaws or sit back at 4 and and take that guy .

 

your plan is the QB purgatory plan where a team is to good to draft top ten but to bad to make a real super bowl run .       now if you run the QB purgatory plan it could work out like it did with the chiefs but its rare .   you are gonna then have to trade up multiple first round picks for a guy with flaws anyway .    

[Boondoggle]

One thing to note is that if they take a QB up high (in the first round) they get 5 years of cheap labor instead of 4 years.  So there is advantage with QB in particular to take them in the first round, because generally speaking if you hit on said QB his cost in year 5 and the resulting savings you get is significant.

 

Also if you start him all 5 years you are also getting the most from the pick.  Now that of course is tempered by the reality of wanting to win games early in those years.  But in this particular circumstance, when we look at the quality of next year's QBs who are projected to top the draft, the value of those first couple picks will probably be extremely high.  Maybe astronomical.

 

As it pertains to the coach, a guy who needs to win to keep his job is not going to entertain starting a rookie.  So had they kept Frank around for example that would not be an option unless the kid is ready to go.  But we have a first year coach and a young one to boot, who may be coerced to throw the kid out there.

 

If you compare the two possibilities, of say starting Minshew and winning maybe enough games for a wildcard, or the rookie QB they will add this year, where there is a greater chance that rookie playing will hasten the rebuild...  There are some valid reasons to just suck it up and start the kid.

 

So even though Minshew almost surely gives them the best chance to win we're probably looking at the rook starting.

[Smonroe]

41 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Yeah we don't know if AR15/Levis will ever make it let alone become Franchise or Elite QB's. But is it for sure Anderson will be a Dominant, Game Changing pass rusher for the next decade? Yeah the chances are better he contributes more early than a QB prospect, but how much and for how long and will injuries hamper him like most everyone else??   Ballard has drafted multiple Defensive Linemen and we still don't have one Dominant. Our best is Buckner who was traded for and he's a monster but not a end. Is Qwitty Paye Dominant? The question was a few years ago OT Nelson or DE Chubb.....The Broncos got Chubb, has he been Dominant and a game changer? Without a franchise QB how many playoff games has Chubb led the Broncos to?? In fact he's not even  with them anymore, they traded him, the 5th overall pick is already with another team.......and what about Myles Garrett? How many playoff games has he led the Brownies to??

 

Long story short, even very highly rated Blue Chip linemen that are Top 5 picks aren't a sure thing AND WILL NOT lead your team to Championship level without top QB play.

 

Can't argue with any of that.  However, I think the chances of Anderson becoming The Guy is probably a lot better than either Levis or AR.  As far as a DE dominating games, Von Miller pretty much won Denver their SB.  Our pass rush is going to be worse than last year if something doesn't change.

 

Injuries happen, no player is guaranteed a long career.  Look at Cam, he was bigger than both of those QBs and once the injury bug started to hit him, he was about done.   

 

I fear that AR and maybe even Levis are a lot like him.  Not the most accurate guy, so he counts on his legs a lot to move the sticks.  QBs like that just don't last.  Lamar is a prime example.

 

Anyway, it's a fun debate.

[Moosejawcolt]

2 hours ago, ProblChld32 said:

If we trade back to a QB needy team say Lions or Falcons we could definitely acquire trade capital to utilize to trade up next season and get a better prospect.

But why  trade for capital when u only intend to use it next year? Just stay put and pick. Plus the top 2 guys are  going  one and 2 and from what I have  heard, those two teams won't be trading out of those spots as they are apparently  studs.

[chad72]

7 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

I’ve been on the Hendon Hooker bandwagon since last year when he was lighting folks up. 

 

Here is a fun case test of blindly looking at individual stats without height and weight and school and QB win loss information. Based off the below info which QB would you select?
 

67% Completion, 80-12 TD to INT Rate, 4.0 YPC and 25 TD’s

 

65% Completion, 46-25 TD to INT Rate, 2.4 YPC and 17 TD’s

 

66% Completion, 80-12 TD to INT Rate, 1.2 YPC and 7 TD’s

 

55% Completion, 24-15 TD to INT Rate, 6.9 YPC and 12 TD’s

 

70% Completion, 85-12 TD to INT Rate,

1.7 YPC and 1 TD

 

 

We can’t interject fun and expect an intelligent conversation or conclusion. Numbers without context (adjusted for strength of schedule, stats versus pressure etc.) don’t lead to any intelligent decision making whatsoever.

If you’re playing fantasy football, we all know we don’t care about context, just numbers .

[chad72]

3 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

But why  trade for capital when u only intend to use it next year? Just stay put and pick. Plus the top 2 guys are  going  one and 2 and from what I have  heard, those two teams won't be trading out of those spots as they are apparently  studs.

I agree with this. Cardinals won’t be giving up their chance to draft Anderson unless they get an offer really good. Plus if Levis and Richardson are what THIS forum thinks they are i.e. uncertain ceiling type players, a good chance no one moves up to No.3.

But, if Anderson is all that and a bag of gold, how does one explain the Bears moving to No.9? Football is a team sport and the only player that doesn’t come off the field on either side of the O or D is the QB.

[chad72]

4 hours ago, Smonroe said:

 

Can't argue with any of that.  However, I think the chances of Anderson becoming The Guy is probably a lot better than either Levis or AR.  As far as a DE dominating games, Von Miller pretty much won Denver their SB.  Our pass rush is going to be worse than last year if something doesn't change.

 

Injuries happen, no player is guaranteed a long career.  Look at Cam, he was bigger than both of those QBs and once the injury bug started to hit him, he was about done.   

 

I fear that AR and maybe even Levis are a lot like him.  Not the most accurate guy, so he counts on his legs a lot to move the sticks.  QBs like that just don't last.  Lamar is a prime example.

 

Anyway, it's a fun debate.

Yes, Von Miller made game changing plays but did it occur to you that when you have 3 great man CBs allowed to play physical in Talib, Roby and Harris, you had to hold the ball a tad allowing the pass rush to get there? Did it occur to you that the other bookend rusher was HOF Ware who was going to get his share if you gave Miller undue attention?
 

Being a Top 3 run D in the league was overlooked with the Broncos because of their pass rush. Plus, with an interior of Derek Wolfe and Malik Jackson in their prime that pushed the pocket added to stellar pass rushers and stellar secondary gave the Broncos once in a couple of decades defensive stats similar to the 2013 Seahawks and 2000 Ravens. Von Miller got the majority of the credit. Think if Freeney/Mathis had such man CB support and interior pocket pushing support, where we could have been instead of a wimpy Cover 2.
 

Aaron Donald and that Rams interior, Von Miller got his help there too, just that there was another star to get most of the credit in his prime for the Rams SB win.  We remember only game changing plays but not the plays that led to them happening.  
 

It’s harder to man up WRs since the 2015 Broncos days, we’ve had lots of critical illegal contact and DPIs called at critical moments in playoffs nowadays. So hard for top defensive teams to win it all.

[Smonroe]

28 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Yes, Von Miller made game changing plays but did it occur to you that when you have 3 great man CBs allowed to play physical in Talib, Roby and Harris, you had to hold the ball a tad allowing the pass rush to get there? Did it occur to you that the other bookend rusher was HOF Ware who was going to get his share if you gave Miller undue attention?
 

Being a Top 3 run D in the league was overlooked with the Broncos because of their pass rush. Plus, with an interior of Derek Wolfe and Malik Jackson in their prime that pushed the pocket added to stellar pass rushers and stellar secondary gave the Broncos once in a couple of decades defensive stats similar to the 2013 Seahawks and 2000 Ravens. Von Miller got the majority of the credit. Think if Freeney/Mathis had such man CB support and interior pocket pushing support, where we could have been instead of a wimpy Cover 2.
 

Aaron Donald and that Rams interior, Von Miller got his help there too, just that there was another star to get most of the credit in his prime for the Rams SB win.  We remember only game changing plays but not the plays that led to them happening.  
 

It’s harder to man up WRs since the 2015 Broncos days, we’ve had lots of critical illegal contact and DPIs called at critical moments in playoffs nowadays. So hard for top defensive teams to win it all.

I’m not sure what your point is?  Sure, no one player dominates a game. A QB needs a line and receivers that can get open too.  That’s a given.

 

My point was that a player like Anderson or Carter has a much better chance of being an impact player than Levins or AR.  Not saying either of them can’t do it, just that the odds are against them.  
 

Just going by the eye test, I don’t think either of those two are better than Herndon.  It just seems to me that if we can get a (possibly) dominant DE and a QB with potential it’s a better deal than just getting a QB with potential.

 

 

[ProblChld32]

5 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

But why  trade for capital when u only intend to use it next year? Just stay put and pick. Plus the top 2 guys are  going  one and 2 and from what I have  heard, those two teams won't be trading out of those spots as they are apparently  studs.

I said trade back if the plan is to rock with Minshew at QB. That helps us acquire draft capital to go get a bonafide franchise QB the following season. And still address our other top needs which are currently CB, Interior OL and WR. 

[Scott Pennock]

1 hour ago, chad72 said:

We can’t interject fun and expect an intelligent conversation or conclusion. Numbers without context (adjusted for strength of schedule, stats versus pressure etc.) don’t lead to any intelligent decision making whatsoever.

If you’re playing fantasy football, we all know we don’t care about context, just numbers .

While that may be true I would bet most couldn’t discern the difference between the the top 3 versus the bottom 2 without google! 

[compuls1v3]

11 hours ago, richard pallo said:

We can not win with Minshew.  Maybe a handful of games at best.  He’s a backup.  His contract screams backup.  He has not earned a starter’s role wherever he has been.  Shane knows him and coached him and we only signed him to a one year backup contract.  We are drafting and starting a rookie quarterback.  That’s all there is to it.

The question is where that QB is drafted.

[chad72]

16 hours ago, Smonroe said:

I’m not sure what your point is?  Sure, no one player dominates a game. A QB needs a line and receivers that can get open too.  That’s a given.

 

My point was that a player like Anderson or Carter has a much better chance of being an impact player than Levins or AR. Not saying either of them can’t do it, just that the odds are against them.  
 

Just going by the eye test, I don’t think either of those two are better than Herndon.  It just seems to me that if we can get a (possibly) dominant DE and a QB with potential it’s a better deal than just getting a QB with potential.

 

 

It all depends on their evaluation and if Levis or AR are considered bigger difference makers than Hooker or other QBs coming after them. Then the what IFs will never end if we passed on them. 

 

If we didn't get that dominant DE, we could overcome that better than missing out on a difference making QB, that is my counter to it. Mainly because QB salaries are double that of a DE, the QB also plays every snap on offense unlike most DEs, and this draft is loaded with DEs throughout Day 2, not the case with QB. Justin Tuck was Round 3 and Michael Strahan was Round 2, both of them went on to have great pass rushing careers, just like our Robert Mathis from Round 4, so did Freeney in Round 1. The odds of a Day 2 pass rusher being very good and having a productive career are greater than a Day 2 QB being very good, based on history.

 

For all the sacks Mathis and Freeney brought to the table, the Patriots and other teams still managed to get the ball out quickly to their pass catchers, and same with the Chiefs vs Eagles pass rush in the recent SB. It just tells you that you can negate the impact of very good pass rushers better than you can negate the impact of a very good QB.

[Smonroe]

1 hour ago, chad72 said:

 

It all depends on their evaluation and if Levis or AR are considered bigger difference makers than Hooker or other QBs coming after them. Then the what IFs will never end if we passed on them. 

 

If we didn't get that dominant DE, we could overcome that better than missing out on a difference making QB, that is my counter to it. Mainly because QB salaries are double that of a DE, the QB also plays every snap on offense unlike most DEs, and this draft is loaded with DEs throughout Day 2, not the case with QB. Justin Tuck was Round 3 and Michael Strahan was Round 2, both of them went on to have great pass rushing careers, just like our Robert Mathis from Round 4, so did Freeney in Round 1. The odds of a Day 2 pass rusher being very good and having a productive career are greater than a Day 2 QB being very good, based on history.

 

For all the sacks Mathis and Freeney brought to the table, the Patriots and other teams still managed to get the ball out quickly to their pass catchers, and same with the Chiefs vs Eagles pass rush in the recent SB. It just tells you that you can negate the impact of very good pass rushers better than you can negate the impact of a very good QB.

 

I get what you're saying.  But your second paragraph actually supports taking an Edge rusher if his chances of making it are better than a QBs chance, right?

 

As you said, it all comes down to the QB evaluations.  Pretty much know it's going to be between Levis and AR.  

 

Not to be redundant, but in my mind - unless they have those two guys rated way higher than Hooker, I'd take the D player and trade back into the first for Hooker.

[Superman]

I have some disagreements with some of the ideas in the OP, but where I agree is I don't believe we need to force it with any QB in this year's draft. After a lot of consideration on my part, I feel like Stroud is the best option, but I don't think he's special enough to spend extra resources to move up and guarantee a shot at him.

 

Everyone else, I'd be okay with passing on them this year. I like some things about the rest, but have some serious concerns with all of them. At the end of the day, if we're on the clock at #4, and Stroud isn't there, I'm fine if we don't draft one of the other guys. If Stroud is there, we should run our card to the podium and make him our next QB.

 

But if we don't draft a QB this year, I'm only okay with one other use of our #4 pick, and that's a trade back that includes a 2024 first rounder. This team has one main priority, and it stands head and shoulders above everything else: find our next QB for the decade. Until we have him, our ceiling is capped, and we likely cannot do anything meaningful in this league. Our most valuable resource right now is our 2023 first round pick. Using it to do anything other than acquire our next QB would be malpractice. Especially when the QBs in next year's draft are as good as everyone expects them to be (I've watched plenty of Caleb Williams; if he were in this year's draft, I'd move up to #1 for him). I like Anderson, I like Carter, but we need to use our best resource wisely.

 

This might be a crazy opinion, but trading back and targeting a QB next year might be my first preference. 

 

I don't care what we do with Gardner Minshew. I think he's a replacement level player, he might have a decent half a season but we can't win anything with him. I'm not against him being a stopgap starter. I'm also not against using a Day 2 pick on Hendon Hooker. (I don't think very much of Stetson Bennett; I rewatched some of him after the Combine because he showed off some serious throwing power, but I don't think he's going to make it in the NFL. I haven't really watched any of the other guys.)

 

If they draft Young, Levis, Richardson at #4, fine. All three of them have a chance at being good in the NFL, even though they're all big question marks in one way or another. But we cannot use #4 for anything other than drafting a QB, or positioning ourselves to draft a QB.

[Superman]

Side note: Strategically speaking, I'd endorse trading back from #4, picking up an extra first in 2024, and then either signing Lamar to an offer sheet. That would cost us our 2024 and 2025 first rounders, but we'd have the extra first in 2024. Or we could use that extra first to negotiate a trade with the Ravens, and then figure out the Lamar contract later.

 

To be clear, I'm not in favor of going after Lamar. I have issues with his play and development. But I think we could realistically have a window for a season or two where we could potentially make a deep playoff run with him. And if we move back in 2023 and pick up extra resources, those could offset the trade cost. Just workshopping the strategy, definitely not arguing that the Colts should sign Lamar. 

[Smonroe]

Just now, Superman said:

Side note: Strategically speaking, I'd endorse trading back from #4, picking up an extra first in 2024, and then either signing Lamar to an offer sheet. That would cost us our 2024 and 2025 first rounders, but we'd have the extra first in 2024. Or we could use that extra first to negotiate a trade with the Ravens, and then figure out the Lamar contract later.

 

To be clear, I'm not in favor of going after Lamar. I have issues with his play and development. But I think we could realistically have a window for a season or two where we could potentially make a deep playoff run with him. And if we move back in 2023 and pick up extra resources, those could offset the trade cost. Just workshopping the strategy, definitely not arguing that the Colts should sign Lamar. 

I’ve been a Colts fan since Unitas.  If they did sign Lamar, I’d really have to think about not following the laundry.   
 

As for a playoff run with him…well he has to be around for the playoffs. 

[Superman]

11 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

I’ve been a Colts fan since Unitas.  If they did sign Lamar, I’d really have to think about not following the laundry.   
 

As for a playoff run with him…well he has to be around for the playoffs. 

 

Meh. Lamar isn't my favorite, but I have no strong feelings against him. But the bolded is one of my biggest concerns with him.

 

This is not something I expect to happen. It's not a Ballard move, at all. 

[OLD FAN MAN]

On 3/19/2023 at 4:51 PM, CR91 said:

Minshew is here to be a mentor and backup. Please let's not make this more then it is.

we dont know what they had in mind with him

[Two_pound]

Just watched the replay of eagles-cowplops from last season where Minshew played. He looked pretty good 29-40 for 355. Had 2 ints. but the second one a defender took the ball from the eagle, it was a good throw, should have been a completion.. Minshew will definitely be a plus here.

[CR91]

25 minutes ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

we dont know what they had in mind with him

 

It's a one year contract. Don't make this out to be more then it really is.

[OLD FAN MAN]

20 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

It's a one year contract. Don't make this out to be more then it really is.

as of now he is our starting qb, in spite of many on this board thinking ballard got him to be a backup

[CR91]

52 minutes ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

as of now he is our starting qb, in spite of many on this board thinking ballard got him to be a backup

 

That means nothing until after the draft

[chad72]

6 hours ago, Smonroe said:

 

I get what you're saying.  But your second paragraph actually supports taking an Edge rusher if his chances of making it are better than a QBs chance, right?

 

As you said, it all comes down to the QB evaluations.  Pretty much know it's going to be between Levis and AR.  

 

Not to be redundant, but in my mind - unless they have those two guys rated way higher than Hooker, I'd take the D player and trade back into the first for Hooker.

 

Not at all. My point was I would rather get my QB early in Round 1 and pass rusher later in Round 2 in a DE deep draft. History does support Round 1 QBs statistically slightly being better than Round 2 QBs. One might think it is quantitatively skewed by more being drafted in Round 1 but even as a percentage, it is higher. Here is a study you might want to look at.

 

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/nfl-draft-round-round-qb-study-1994-2016

 

But then, recent trends with rookie contracts have allowed teams to move on from QBs fast enough that the risks are not the same as before when you missed on JaMarcus Russell or Ryan Leaf when there was no rookie wage scale. So many QBs have not stayed with the team they were drafted with. It is rare to see patience like what the NY Giants have shown with Daniel Jones and IMO, if they can't get someone better in the draft, I don't blame them going with the commodity they know. It is not like Burrow or Mahomes or Allen are going on the trade market any time soon. That is why I am not in the "the sky is falling if Levis or AR don't live up to expectations" camp because you can move on faster than a decade or two ago.

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/02/18/no-qbs-drafted-from-2009-16-are-set-to-be-with-team-that-drafted-them/

 

 

[sb2001]

I wouldn’t mind if we traded the 4 for future picks. Actually, I would prefer it. 

[TigerColt]

I like the Minshew signing.  Gives Colts some options.  

 

What if the Colts don't love a QB at 4.   Pick BPA or trade down to pick up a few more premium picks and pick up someone like Hooker later in the draft.  Offer Lamar the contract he wants and if the Ravens dont match the Colts give up 1st in 24 and 25.  If they Ravens match we roll with Minshew and Hooker when he is ready.  If they don't pan out then the Colts are in position to draft a generational QB next year. 

[runthepost]

Can’t wait till he starts and folks start whining about drafting a QB again

[Patrick Miller]

 

[jvan1973]

On 3/20/2023 at 7:12 PM, OLD FAN MAN said:

we dont know what they had in mind with him

He wasn't brought in to be the starter for 3.5 million

[07dleigh]

Sorry.. this was a sorta off subject rant. Gonna just start a thread haha.

[Shaolin06]

Anthony richardson and Gardner minshew have been training in Florida together according to stampede blue. I couldn't upload the screenshot because the file was to big. Does that mean we're looking at getting richardson in the draft to sit behind minshew?

[Dunk]

2 hours ago, Shaolin06 said:

Anthony richardson and Gardner minshew have been training in Florida together according to stampede blue. I couldn't upload the screenshot because the file was to big. Does that mean we're looking at getting richardson in the draft to sit behind minshew?

I would post a link if I was tech savvy enough to figure out how to use chrome.

Basically Minshew has always worked out at that Florida facility. He lived outside of it in a converted prison van last year.

Richardson was a Gator, wouldn't be surprised if it was just a coincidence. 

[BlueShoe]

On 3/19/2023 at 7:05 AM, stitches said:

That's why we haven't released Nick Foles yet. 

 

@BlueShoe    I was hoping you would endorse Anthony Richardson like you endorsed Shaq Leonard when we drafted him or George Kittle or Justin Herbert...  You have some insane hits in previous draft.  

I think Young and Stroud come off the board at 1 and 2. Young could be the next Drew Brees or he could be the next Murray. Stroud has all the tools, but why would he say that he admires Vick and Watson? Has he been oblivious to everything? As a GM, that would concern the hell out of me. 

 

That leaves Levis, Hooker, and Richardson. 
 

Hooker is the most polished of the 3, and I really like his pocket mobility. There are times when he doesn’t see the rush, but it’s a similar issue I noticed early with Aaron Rodgers, and he can overcame it. Hooker can be very accurate, but he lacks anticipation. Has a strong enough arm, and wheels. While it is not an exact carbon copy, I see a lot of Daniel Jones in Hooker. And he will have the same hurdles in the NFL. But the potential is there. 
 

Levis has a huge upside. Strong arm and mobile enough. He is very cocky though. It might be hard to teach this guy how to leave his ego at the door of the quarterback room. Guys like this tend to have leadership issues. People can overcome this, but they normally don’t. If he can then his upside is similar to Josh Allen. 
 

Richardson is very raw, and he is one of the most inaccurate quarterbacks I’ve ever seen mentioned as a top 5 pick. He is an athletic freak. One rule to always remember is, you are either born with accuracy or you’re not. This is not something people usually improve drastically with. I think he is going to struggle in the NFL, and it’s all going to linked to his ability to put the football in the right place. 
 

If Levis is off the board, then I’m taking BPA or bouncing out of that 4th pick. And there would need to be some very good interviews with Levis, to convince me that he is the guy. 
 

I would most likely either make a path to get Hooker, or arrange a deal for Lamar. And if all else fails, I’d be okay to ride with Minshew in 23. 

[NewColtsFan]

On 3/20/2023 at 8:08 PM, chad72 said:

 

Not at all. My point was I would rather get my QB early in Round 1 and pass rusher later in Round 2 in a DE deep draft. History does support Round 1 QBs statistically slightly being better than Round 2 QBs. One might think it is quantitatively skewed by more being drafted in Round 1 but even as a percentage, it is higher. Here is a study you might want to look at.

 

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/nfl-draft-round-round-qb-study-1994-2016

 

But then, recent trends with rookie contracts have allowed teams to move on from QBs fast enough that the risks are not the same as before when you missed on JaMarcus Russell or Ryan Leaf when there was no rookie wage scale. So many QBs have not stayed with the team they were drafted with. It is rare to see patience like what the NY Giants have shown with Daniel Jones and IMO, if they can't get someone better in the draft, I don't blame them going with the commodity they know. It is not like Burrow or Mahomes or Allen are going on the trade market any time soon. That is why I am not in the "the sky is falling if Levis or AR don't live up to expectations" camp because you can move on faster than a decade or two ago.

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/02/18/no-qbs-drafted-from-2009-16-are-set-to-be-with-team-that-drafted-them/

 

 

Interesting….   This story about zero QBs from 09-16 not being with their original drafting team is from Feb of 21.    But it’s important, so I’m glad you found it.   
 

[ÅÐØNϧ 1]

DRAFT A QB What The Front office Has Been Doing A The Position For Years Has FAILED ..

 

We Have Needed A Franchise QB Since Luck Retired. Now's The Time .

 

To Not Get One This Season IMO Means We Are Not serious About WINNING RETREAD QB & Old QB's Are Not Gonna Get Our Colts Over The HUMP .

 

It's Time Ballard Figured This Out His QB Selections To This Point Have Failed You Either Pull The Trigger Or Be Ready For More Of The Same .

 

 

[BlueShoe]

My idea with this post is catching on in the mainstream media. Not saying this will be the Colts direction. 

 

This is just one example below. But I’ve seen several people talk about the possibility, after I wrote this post. 
 

https://www.nfl.com/_amp/bucky-brooks-2023-nfl-mock-draft-3-0-colts-pass-on-quarterback-will-levis-falls-