Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Conversations are moderated for civility. We ask that you please stay on topic. For more info, see our Community Guidelines ×
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum
Enter To Win 2 Tickets to Steelers @ Colts Sun 09/29 | 1:00 PM EDT

Question of the Day - 05/24

sb41champs

By sb41champs
in Colts Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Nadine Ring of Honor

Nadine

Posted
Posted

On a scale of 1 to 10 - being both realistic - AND - leaving emotion out of your answer:

How would you grade our new General Manager in assembling a new Colts roster ??

Mary I got NOTHING BUT EMOTION.

I heard he spoke to the staff this week (non football staff) and they are now completely stoked......and I.....just hearing about it am stoked.

I'm going with 10

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weslo1812 Walk On

weslo1812

Posted
Posted

First the biggest thing you can say he didnt really adress well at least is getting another good quality coner to play with powers. But he did go out and get a number of UDFA CB's to come in and compete so he did something there.

Now what we did adress well. We needed to adress the D-Line which was done with Big Mack and Chapman and Redding, then he filled the void at saftey with Zibakowski who I feel just needs playing time to prove himself. He adressed the O line with Mc Glynn and Justice and the a couple guys from the draft and UDFA. Got our new QB Luck, and got him a new array of weapons which was needed. Oh and he kept some savy veterans like Wayne, Freeny and Mathis around to help the young guys and provide a veteran presance.

So to me he pretty much adressed in some way just about every need of our team. And for the most part they were good quality additions, maybe not pro bowlers or big names but still guys that are capable of getting the job done. Now how all these additions and aquisitions play out is TBD. But none the less he adressed the areas of need to an adequate degree in my mind considering what we had to work with as far as money goes.

Having said all this my grade would be 9.0

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gacker65 Walk On

gacker65

Posted
Posted

And you know this how? Did you help Grigson assemble his board?

Had stated before draft that he would use BPA for this draft because of the holes in team. If Fleener and Hilton were the BPA at that point in the draft, we are in trouble.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coltsguy510 Walk On

coltsguy510

Posted
Posted

Had stated before draft that he would use BPA for this draft because of the holes in team. If Fleener and Hilton were the BPA at that point in the draft, we are in trouble.

How? We got two very good weapons for Luck to use, both of which create mismatches.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gacker65 Walk On

gacker65

Posted
Posted

How? We got two very good weapons for Luck to use, both of which create mismatches.

IMO, Fleener is a liability to Luck and the Colts. With Luck, Fleener slows Luck from developing chemistry with the rest of the WR/TEs, as Fleener is Luck's BFF from college. If we were looking for a good weapon at this draft spot why not draft the WR Hill out of Georgia Tech. In Hill, we would at the very least had a #2 WR (which we do not have) and at best, would have been grooming reggie's replacement. I also noticed that though there was 3 teams in the bottom half of the 1st round that needed TEs, they all passed on Fleener. This speaks volumes about Fleener's abilities.

As for Hilton, I admit that all I have seen of him is his highlights. I read what the analyst wrote and based my opinion on those. I see Hilton as another Devin Hester, a good KR, but not WR. We drafted him looking for the next Desean Jackson and not for who or what Hilton is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coltsguy510 Walk On

coltsguy510

Posted
Posted

IMO, Fleener is a liability to Luck and the Colts. With Luck, Fleener slows Luck from developing chemistry with the rest of the WR/TEs, as Fleener is Luck's BFF from college. If we were looking for a good weapon at this draft spot why not draft the WR Hill out of Georgia Tech. In Hill, we would at the very least had a #2 WR (which we do not have) and at best, would have been grooming reggie's replacement. I also noticed that though there was 3 teams in the bottom half of the 1st round that needed TEs, they all passed on Fleener. This speaks volumes about Fleener's abilities.

As for Hilton, I admit that all I have seen of him is his highlights. I read what the analyst wrote and based my opinion on those. I see Hilton as another Devin Hester, a good KR, but not WR. We drafted him looking for the next Desean Jackson and not for who or what Hilton is.

It speaks volumes about those teams needs for other positions! Maybe they needed the position they drafted more than they needed Fleener. Fleener having that chemistry with Luck helps us because Luck now can focus more on the other WR's and TE's. Hilton is a very good receiver and is nothing like Hester. Hester was a Corner before he was drafted and was drafted just as a KR and PR. The Bears thought that he would make a good WR and they were wrong. Hilton started for 4 years as a WR at FIU and also happens to be a great KR. Hilton does have more of a Desean Jackson skill set than a Hester skill set. He has the tools and opportunity to be Jackson without the baggage.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scott Pennock Ring of Honor

Scott Pennock

Posted
Posted

IMO, Fleener is a liability to Luck and the Colts. With Luck, Fleener slows Luck from developing chemistry with the rest of the WR/TEs, as Fleener is Luck's BFF from college. If we were looking for a good weapon at this draft spot why not draft the WR Hill out of Georgia Tech. In Hill, we would at the very least had a #2 WR (which we do not have) and at best, would have been grooming reggie's replacement. I also noticed that though there was 3 teams in the bottom half of the 1st round that needed TEs, they all passed on Fleener. This speaks volumes about Fleener's abilities.

As for Hilton, I admit that all I have seen of him is his highlights. I read what the analyst wrote and based my opinion on those. I see Hilton as another Devin Hester, a good KR, but not WR. We drafted him looking for the next Desean Jackson and not for who or what Hilton is.

So you would take Hill who had almost zero production but measures well and looks good in football pads but not a guy who creates mismatches with EVERYONE lined up across from him who has more production and has chemistry with his QB already? Who were the three teams that you noticed needed tightends but passed?

Secondly, Hilton was an extremely productive widereceiver in college whereas Hester was a DB???? There is no correlation other than to say that Hilton has the potential to be a competant PR/KR as well as widereceiver. He doesn't need converted, he needs refined! So to say that he is closer to Jackson is A LOT closer to the truth than anything else.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but production with talent far outweighs potential to be talented any day of the week and twice on Sunday for me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gavin Walk On

Gavin

Posted
Posted

I'd go with 7.5 until proven that some of the guys we drafted are healthy, Chapman, Hilton, we passed on some guys at those same positions that were healthy, keeping with what Grigson did trading out of the 4th to get back in the 3rd I would have taken Jayron Hosley but I would have kept all my draft picks anyway and drafted (keeping something similar to what Grigson did)

1.Luck

2.Fleener

3.Jayron Hosley

4.Ta'amu

5.Streeter

5.B.J. Cunningham

6.Terrance Ganaway

7.Trevin Wade

7.Trevor Guyton

7.Kellen Moore

but thats just based of what Grigson did with the exception of taking two Tight Ends

although I wouldn't have done anything close to that

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...