Lombardi on Levis/Richardson and the Colts and other NFL stuff

[Moosejawcolt]

 https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/mac-jones-not-being-shopped-ravens-nix-lamar-questions/id1458884463?i=1000607742772

 I know some of you dont care for Lombardi, but I think this  is a really good listen. The podcast starts off with NFL,  stuff  (Matt Jones and Patriots) but a good assessment of what  the Colts at #4  are looking at . Some very good info on Richardson and Levis. In short, we in trouble at #4 lol. Like I have been saying, I go get Lamar and I think after the Colts study all the film, they may come to that conclusion. I have been saying for months that this is not a good qb draft and would not be surprised to see them all bust out. I think it is actually a pretty weak draft and when we look back and , a lot of these 1st round guys will be on different teams. I do like what he said about Anderson as not explosive and not bend as I have been saying that for weeks. Hard draft for the Colts to be at #4; go get Lamar!!! Let me know what you guys think. I would not be shocked if our 1s pick is not qb if we cannot swing for Lamar.  Also let me know if you guys think it is valuable to keep posting this podcast

[NewColtsFan]

I don’t think the Colts decision on whether to go after Lamar has anything to do with watching more tape.  Of the prospects or of Lamar.   
 

I think it has to do with everything else.  

[richard pallo]

I want Lamar but if he’s not a possibility than I would rather have Mac Jones than any   of these four quarterbacks.  Jones was the 11th pick in 2021 and made the all rookie team and pro bowl that year.  He has a 5th year option available in two years.  He has proven himself to be a franchise quarterback.  His issue last year was horrendous coaching thanks to Belichick’s choice for OC.  Now he’s in his doghouse.  If he truly is available I would gladly swap our 4th pick for their 14th pick and Jones.  Let them take their swing with the 4th pick I would rather have Jones.  

[Mr. Irrelevant]

Why do I have a feeling of Déjà vu, looking at the title of this thread?

[cdgacoltsfan]

1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

 https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/mac-jones-not-being-shopped-ravens-nix-lamar-questions/id1458884463?i=1000607742772

 I know some of you dont care for Lombardi, but I think this  is a really good listen. The podcast starts off with NFL,  stuff  (Matt Jones and Patriots) but a good assessment of what  the Colts at #4  are looking at . Some very good info on Richardson and Levis. In short, we in trouble at #4 lol. Like I have been saying, I go get Lamar and I think after the Colts study all the film, they may come to that conclusion. I have been saying for months that this is not a good qb draft and would not be surprised to see them all bust out. I think it is actually a pretty weak draft and when we look back and , a lot of these 1st round guys will be on different teams. I do like what he said about Anderson as not explosive and not bend as I have been saying that for weeks. Hard draft for the Colts to be at #4; go get Lamar!!! Let me know what you guys think. I would not be shocked if our 1s pick is not qb if we cannot swing for Lamar.  Also let me know if you guys think it is valuable to keep posting this podcast

Lombardi was the personnel director of the Raiders awhile ago and was a complete flop.

[Stephen]

42 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I want Lamar but if he’s not a possibility than I would rather have Mac Jones than any   of these four quarterbacks.  Jones was the 11th pick in 2021 and made the all rookie team and pro bowl that year.  He has a 5th year option available in two years.  He has proven himself to be a franchise quarterback.  His issue last year was horrendous coaching thanks to Belichick’s choice for OC.  Now he’s in his doghouse.  If he truly is available I would gladly swap our 4th pick for their 14th pick and Jones.  Let them take their swing with the 4th pick I would rather have Jones.  

No thanks to jones he isnt that good

[krunk]

1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

 https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/mac-jones-not-being-shopped-ravens-nix-lamar-questions/id1458884463?i=1000607742772

 I know some of you dont care for Lombardi, but I think this  is a really good listen. The podcast starts off with NFL,  stuff  (Matt Jones and Patriots) but a good assessment of what  the Colts at #4  are looking at . Some very good info on Richardson and Levis. In short, we in trouble at #4 lol. Like I have been saying, I go get Lamar and I think after the Colts study all the film, they may come to that conclusion. I have been saying for months that this is not a good qb draft and would not be surprised to see them all bust out. I think it is actually a pretty weak draft and when we look back and , a lot of these 1st round guys will be on different teams. I do like what he said about Anderson as not explosive and not bend as I have been saying that for weeks. Hard draft for the Colts to be at #4; go get Lamar!!! Let me know what you guys think. I would not be shocked if our 1s pick is not qb if we cannot swing for Lamar.  Also let me know if you guys think it is valuable to keep posting this podcast

Gee i wonder what his take was when Allen was drafted for pretty much the same reasons Richardson is being considered? Was he just as contrary as he is in this podcast?

[Moosejawcolt]

3 hours ago, krunk said:

Gee i wonder what his take was when Allen was drafted for pretty much the same reasons Richardson is being considered? Was he just as contrary as he is in this podcast?

He said he was wrong on Allen as qbs rarely if ever improve their accuracy in thr NFL. Allen also had 3 years of film as a starter;  Richardson had one year and that is huge. Polian always said he wanted 3 years on a player.

[Boondoggle]

Lot of people were wrong on Allen.  He's an outlier for sure.  Shows how it can be worth it to take that lottery ticket QB because if you hit you got yourself a real nice window.

[Moosejawcolt]

3 hours ago, cdgacoltsfan said:

Lombardi was the personnel director of the Raiders awhile ago and was a complete flop.

I love this board. I post it to give people's perspective coming from a GM. Lombardi is thec1st to admit he makes mistakes. Is there anything he said about Richardson and/or Levis that was wrong? Please tell me. I am also of the view of both are huge risks.

[Moosejawcolt]

3 hours ago, krunk said:

Gee i wonder what his take was when Allen was drafted for pretty much the same reasons Richardson is being considered? Was he just as contrary as he is in this podcast?

U r right Lombardi  knows nothing

[Boondoggle]

1 minute ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I love this board. I post it to give people's perspective coming from a GM. Lombardi is thec1st to admit he makes mistakes. Is there anything he said about Richardson and/or Levis that was wrong? Please tell me. I am also of the view of both are huge risks.

Re: the link I am sure he's correct on Mac Jones and that stuff happens all the time and is often driven by agents who take things out of context.  I listened to most of it and I think he was correct with a lot of it even though I don't care for the guy at all.

 

I think he's correct Levis is the logical selection for the Colts. And he is correct re: Richardson.  Richardson's not good enough.  He has upside in spades but upside alone is not enough to be a guy the Colts want or move up for.  People need to watch the entire games with Richardson.  But we live in a world of highlight reels and media types parroting each other's takes.

 

Where I differ with him is his take that Levis is slow minded.  The guy was playing in a different offense than so many college QBs.  He was processing reads at the line of scrimmage to determine rush threats and defensive backfield calls.  He was executing the offense they installed with much of the WCO concepts the Rams use.  So he could bust and there is risk, but when you consider the elements around him I give him some leeway.  Lot of these QBs are going to be doing all those things with an NFL rush for the first time.

 

Which one's better...  Seeing that stuff in college and struggling when his OL wasn't there and his OC was hired away by the Rams.  Or seeing it for the first time in the NFL.  One guy is going to have a much easier transition in OTAs and camp, where he might be grasping a lot of the concepts that give rookie QBs problems instead of his head spinning.

 

So for the Colts he represents a really interesting option I think.  The best option for sure in many ways which is what I've been saying.

[krunk]

1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

U r right Lombardi  knows nothing

And this has what to do with my question?

[krunk]

1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

He said he was wrong on Allen as qbs rarely if ever improve their accuracy in thr NFL. Allen also had 3 years of film as a starter;  Richardson had one year and that is huge. Polian always said he wanted 3 years on a player.

But Lombardi is sitting in a broadcast booth after being fired. His word isnt gospel anymore than anyone else. Some GMs may not see one prospect the same way he does. Theres certainly been guys who did well who didnt have 3 years. At least it seems he didnt pump Allen up either. Its okay for him to have an opinion of his own but it doesnt mean someone else who doesnt share his take is making a mistake. And i honestly dont think his or your take on Richardson changes much even if he had 3 years of stats.

[PRnum1]

How is young any better than Mac Jones ?

[ChuggaBeer]

30 minutes ago, PRnum1 said:

How is young any better than Mac Jones ?

He is not a bright shinny new prospect.  Even though he would cost WAY less than #4. 

 

If ya'll haven't figured it out I am all about the value of the pick.   Anderson/Witherspoon etc and a QB   whether it be Hooker (yes) or Mac Jones    interests me 

[Moosejawcolt]

51 minutes ago, krunk said:

But Lombardi is sitting in a broadcast booth after being fired. His word

gospel anymore than anyone else. Some GMs may not see one prospect the same way he does. Theres certainly been guys who did well who didnt have 3 years. At least it seems he didnt pump Allen up either. Its okay for him to have an opinion of his own but it doesnt mean someone else who doesnt share his take is making a mistake. And i honestly dont think his or your take on Richardson changes much even if he had 3 years of stats.

That makes absolutely no sense with regards to your last sentence. For example if he went back to college as he should have. Richardson would have had two years, more experience and we could be talking about hom over Williams. Or he could have went back and been a complete dud . That's why film is important.

[crazycolt1]

12 hours ago, cdgacoltsfan said:

Lombardi was the personnel director of the Raiders awhile ago and was a complete flop.

I think Gruden had more to do with the Raiders flopping than Lombardi. 

Just saying.  

[Boondoggle]

7 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

I think Gruden had more to do with the Raiders flopping than Lombardi. 

Just saying.  

Disagree.  In fact the most important decision a GM will make is the head coach hire.  And his hire of Gruden in 1998 was excellent.  Now it might be argued that Davis made the hire, since Al sort of did his own thing while his GM influenced him.  But regardless neither Lombardi nor Gruden deserved criticism for that 98-07 stretch of time as both performed well.

[sb41champs]

22 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

I don’t think the Colts decision on whether to go after Lamar has anything to do with watching more tape.  Of the prospects or of Lamar.   
 

I think it has to do with everything else.  

I concur.

 

Lamar Jackson was given the non-exclusive tag.  NO TEAMS contacted him (acting as his own agent) OR the Ravens.

 

Lamar Jackson requested a trade.  NO TEAMS contacted him OR the Ravens.

 

In fact - MORE teams have contacted the Ravens to say they are NOT INTERESTED - than any other kind of contact about Jackson.

 

All of this says a LOT more about the overall NFL interest in Lamar Jackson - than "if" the Colts would consider a trade.

[Crush22]

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, Boondoggle said:

Disagree.  In fact the most important decision a GM will make is the head coach hire.  And his hire of Gruden in 1998 was excellent.  Now it might be argued that Davis made the hire, since Al sort of did his own thing while his GM influenced him.  But regardless neither Lombardi nor Gruden deserved criticism for that 98-07 stretch of time as both performed well.

You may disagree all you want but the facts speak for themselves.  

[Boondoggle]

10 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

You may disagree all you want but the facts speak for themselves.  

Gruden had two eras with the Raiders.  In the first era, in which he and Lombardi intersected, they were largely successful.  They put up some good winning teams and had a lot of success.  There wasn't any real failure to cite as you suggest, in relation to the two.

 

I realize this probably annoys you, but your comment was misleading.  As an older fan I recall the two eras.

 

In Gruden's second era, in which he failed in dramatic fashion, Lombardi was not a part of it.

[jvan1973]

12 hours ago, Boondoggle said:

Disagree.  In fact the most important decision a GM will make is the head coach hire.  And his hire of Gruden in 1998 was excellent.  Now it might be argued that Davis made the hire, since Al sort of did his own thing while his GM influenced him.  But regardless neither Lombardi nor Gruden deserved criticism for that 98-07 stretch of time as both performed well.

Al Davis was the GM

[crazycolt1]

55 minutes ago, Boondoggle said:

Gruden had two eras with the Raiders.  In the first era, in which he and Lombardi intersected, they were largely successful.  They put up some good winning teams and had a lot of success.  There wasn't any real failure to cite as you suggest, in relation to the two.

 

I realize this probably annoys you, but your comment was misleading.  As an older fan I recall the two eras.

 

In Gruden's second era, in which he failed in dramatic fashion, Lombardi was not a part of it.

117-112 lifetime record.  5 winning seasons in 15. 

He was 8-8, 8-8, 12-4 and 10-6 his first stint at the Raiders.  He was 5-4 in post season.  

Those are the facts I spoke of.