Polian: Kyle Orton Could Have Been A Colt

[21isSuperman]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d829645d5/article/kyle-orton-could-have-been-a-colt-bill-polian-says?module=HP11_headline_stack

NFL owners agreed to move the trade deadline from Week 6 to Week 8 last week. Had that rule been enacted just one year earlier, the Indianapolis Colts could have stepped up their efforts to acquire quarterback Kyle Orton from the Denver Broncos. Bill Polian tells Sports Illustrated's Peter King in this week's edition of "Monday Morning Quarterback".

The move could have led to the Colts finishing with a better record in 2011 and keeping Peyton Manning, which would have allowed another team to draft Andrew Luck.

"I think the deadline being moved last year would have made a difference for us," said Polian, who was let go from his role as team president by owner Jim Irsay after the season.

"We would have rekindled our interest in Orton. In Week 6, we knew our quarterback situation wasn't great, but after a couple more weeks, we realized the situation was bad. We probably would have called Denver, who'd gone to (Tim) Tebow by then, and said, 'Hey, we'll give you a three (third-round draft choice) for Orton.' "

--

That's an interesting thing to think about. With Orton, we almost certainly would have done better than 2-14 and we wouldn't have gotten Andrew Luck. Giving up our 3rd rounder would have almost meant no Dwayne Allen. Personally, I'm not a fan of giving up such a high draft pick for a temporary fix at QB. But it could have also meant that we kept Peyton Manning.

And let's keep it clean here, folks. We don't want to get into any childish arguments.

[Nobody]

Woulda coulda shoulda. I'm happy where we are now, although this was interesting. Weren't the Broncos 1-4 with Orton? Also, we are unquestionably a worse team than Denver. I think that we would've had an outside shot at Luck anyway. Danny O was a decent QB, IMO, especially with what he had to work with. We should've resigned Orlovsky and not traded for Stanton. Also, with us at 0-7, would we really trade a third for Orton?

[LJpalmbeacher2]

Thank the Football Gods that things played out the way they did.

[dgambill]

We could have done a lot of things. I would have kept Peyton and traded Luck still! That is my opinion. If we had to cut money I would have been all for most of the changes we made and just subbed cutting Freeney instead of Manning. That would have equaled out just about money wise. Then I would have traded that first pick for something like the Rams did. Cleveland would have been the likely destination and landed us these picks. 4,22,37 and next years 1st for them....a likely top 10 pick for sure. Put together whatever kinda roster you want from that. We likely would have resigned Tamme so I think drafting that TE wouldn't have been as much a need. 4th pick could have landed us Blackmon or Richardson and the 22nd likely would have got us Decastro or Reiff to sure up the OL. We likely change our pick at 34 and take Upshaw now to replace Freeney and see Hughes get more playing time. 37 could still land us a WR like Hill or Fleener. Instead of focusing on WR and TEs in rounds 3,4, and 6 that could have let us focus on defense like CB and OL help. Anyways it could have changed a lot. I think we could have rebuilt this year and still had a shot at contending by just keeping Manning for the next 4 or 5 years and using that pick next year we got or one of ours later to get a qb.

Still Orton I don't think wouldh have equaled more wins...how many did he get the Broncos???? I actually think starting Orvlosky sooner would have gotten us a win or two more. Orton...probably not much more than 1 or 2 either.

[CR91]

you play the hand your dealt

[GoDeep]

We are set up for a long time this way.

It wasn't the rule last year so...meh.

[MTC]

We probably would have called Denver, who'd gone to (Tim) Tebow by then, and said, 'Hey, we'll give you a three (third-round draft choice) for Orton.' "

[Moncrief]

I like the way you think. Send your resumè to Irsay in case this Grigs dude doesn't work out

[Larry Horseman]

What week was Orton put on waivers? And if Polian really wanted him why didn't he pick him up then?

[GoColts8818]

Woulda coulda shoulda. I'm happy where we are now, although this was interesting. Weren't the Broncos 1-4 with Orton? Also, we are unquestionably a worse team than Denver. I think that we would've had an outside shot at Luck anyway. Danny O was a decent QB, IMO, especially with what he had to work with. We should've resigned Orlovsky and not traded for Stanton. Also, with us at 0-7, would we really trade a third for Orton?

I agree. I don't know about being completely happy with where we are now I wish we still had Peyton but if we were going to have to give up Peyton for a rookie QB Andrew Luck would have been my first choice in terms of the ones that have come along in recent years.

I think Orlovsky wanted to go to a place where he would at least get a sniff at starting. He's more than likely the back up in Tampa but with a new coaching staff I'd say the odds are better that they would give up on Freeman before the Colts gave up on Luck.

Like you I wonder if Polian would have really made this trade or if he's just trying to save a little face. Like you said though it's all coulda, woulda, shoulda now though.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Orton might have made a difference in a couple of games. In the end it would have likely made the #1 pick more costly than it already was, because the Colts would have likely been sending some #1s in a package to move up to get the Rams #1 overall.

[JoKeR]

I don't understand the point of this. That wasn't the rule, so it doesn't matter. I wouldn't want Orton anyway.

[JCPatriot]

Like you I wonder if Polian would have really made this trade or if he's just trying to save a little face. Like you said though it's all coulda, woulda, shoulda now though.

If he is trying to save face, he is doing a terrible job. I have been a Polian supporter, but if he had made this trade I think I would have lost it. There definitely would have been an angry rant. One thing that I was 100% opposed to last season was trading away anything of value (especially draft picks) for a temporary band-aid at the QB position just to scrap out a couple more wins in a lost season. Unless they thought that they were going to win a Super Bowl with Orton, take your lumps, do the best you can with what you've got, make moves that could make you better in the future, and prepare to get better next season. The one thing that I absolutely did not want to see was mortgaging the future just for a couple token wins that don't mean anything in the long run.

[GoColts8818]

If he is trying to save face, he is doing a terrible job. I have been a Polian supporter, but if he had made this trade I think I would have lost it. There definitely would have been an angry rant. One thing that I was 100% opposed to last season was trading away anything of value (especially draft picks) for a temporary band-aid at the QB position just to scrap out a couple more wins in a lost season. Unless they thought that they were going to win a Super Bowl with Orton, take your lumps, do the best you can with what you've got, make moves that could make you better in the future, and prepare to get better next season. The one thing that I absolutely did not want to see was mortgaging the future just for a couple token wins that don't mean anything in the long run.

Look Orton might not be the best QB in the world but it's pretty clear he's better than what we knew we had in Curtis Painter at the time. Had we made this trade I think you would have seen us cut Orvlosky for Orton. For the record I do think Orton is better than Orlovsky. It would have still been a stop gap move that wouldn't have changed much during the season other than to make us like 4-12 at best it might have resulted in us keeping Peyton during the off-season but we could have still done what we did and then as another poster said had to trade a lot to try to move up with the Rams to get Luck. I think Polian is just trying to save face in saying he would have done something more about Painter. At the end of the day when he had a chance to do more about Painter when he had the job he didn't do it. So he got fired and we move on.

[21isSuperman]

I disagree with some of you in that if we were 4-12 and were picking at 5 instead of 1, I don't think we would have traded up for Luck. I think we would have stayed at 5 and kept Peyton. I do still think Polian and Caldwell and all of them would be gone, but I think Peyton would be a Colt. Regardless, it's just something that's fun to think about, no real implications.

[JoKeR]

This

[FireJimCaldwell]

I disagree with some of you in that if we were 4-12 and were picking at 5 instead of 1, I don't think we would have traded up for Luck. I think we would have stayed at 5 and kept Peyton. I do still think Polian and Caldwell and all of them would be gone, but I think Peyton would be a Colt. Regardless, it's just something that's fun to think about, no real implications.

I believe Irsay was given misinformation early on after Manning's surgery that he would never play again and at that point he became infatuated with Luck being the next quarterback. So if the pick was from 2 to 5-6, I see Irsay doing whatever he has to do to facilitate a trade up for Luck.

[21isSuperman]

I believe Irsay was given misinformation early on after Manning's surgery that he would never play again and at that point he became infatuated with Luck being the next quarterback. So if the pick was from 2 to 5-6, I see Irsay doing whatever he has to do to facilitate a trade up for Luck.

Hm...that's a possibility. Just a hunch or do you have a link or something regarding the misinformation?

[JCPatriot]

Look Orton might not be the best QB in the world but it's pretty clear he's better than what we knew we had in Curtis Painter at the time. Had we made this trade I think you would have seen us cut Orvlosky for Orton. For the record I do think Orton is better than Orlovsky.

Of course Orton is better than Painter. I'm not questioning that. Orton has always been better than Painter.....even at Purdue. My point was that Orton was not the long-term solution, and I did not want to trade away future value (especially draft picks) for a stop gap that would result in a couple extra token wins in a lost season.

It would have still been a stop gap move that wouldn't have changed much during the season other than to make us like 4-12 at best.

...and we give up a 3rd round draft pick in the process. Not a good trade.

I think Polian is just trying to save face in saying he would have done something more about Painter. At the end of the day when he had a chance to do more about Painter when he had the job he didn't do it. So he got fired and we move on.

And this is where I say that if he is trying to save face, he is doing a terrible job of it......at least with me. I would have been extremely upset if he had made this trade. Giving away a 3rd round pick for a guy that is going to play half a season (in a season that is lost anwyay) and then be replaced does not help the team moving forward. All I can say is thank goodness the rules were what they were and Polian was that slow to figure out how terrible Painter was.

[HungarianColtsFan]

It smells like Polian is explaining himself. We had a decent QB last season, but we've struggled with Collins and Painter until the week 13th before we've switched to Danny O. QB situation was completely mishandled by FO and coaching staff. I don't get why it had made sense to trade for Orton? It had been just an other mistake IMO.

What would have happened, if we had more wins, is an other question... if we had traded up to 1/1 pick or we would still have PM ...we will never know.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Hm...that's a possibility. Just a hunch or do you have a link or something regarding the misinformation?

Just how Irsay commented throughout that time frame and then how he started acting when it was clear Manning was going to play and the "He hasn't been cleared by Colts doctor's". Maybe it is time for new Doctor's, because it is quite clear they are wrong.

There was a Peter King or Mortenson article at some point saying how Irsay was told Manning should/would be forced to retire. I don't have a link, but I would call it more than a hunch, if that makes sense.

[FireJimCaldwell]

The biggest problem for most of last year falls on the coaching staff failing to put an offensive scheme on the field that Collins and then Painter could run adequately.

Collins did not have nearly enough time to absorb the offense, no matter what Polian's catch 48 hour quote was. The exact quote alludes me at the moment. Caldwell & Christensen(how he retained his job I have no clue), sent each of them out there trying to pretend they were Manning and neither of them stood a chance to be successful in that role. When they finally did make some changes and start adjusting to what was under center, they started doing better. That just coincidentally was when Orlovsky was given the ball. I do believe Orlovsky is a better QB than Painter, and to be honest it would take a detailed search to find one in the NFL that isn't better than Painter, but I do not believe Orlovsky is better than Collins. If you put Collins in an offense that he more comfortable in, then he a ) plays better b ) gets rid of the ball quicker and might not get concussed in the process.

Every team has a base I package in their offense. It's called the goal line package. It would have been easy to expand off of that, with plays added based on the terminology from other sets. Instead of the heavy goal line package, you split one or both of the ends out to 87 and 85 and have 17 at the slot, and you can run any 3 wr play from the I that you could from the gun or ace sets. So the lack of a full off-season/training camp to make a change like that does not hold water to me.

As soon as Manning went under the knife for the 2nd time, that should have been the direction of the offense. Caldwell and Christensen failed this franchise as much if not more than Polian or Painter.

[IndyBarb]

Just how Irsay commented throughout that time frame and then how he started acting when it was clear Manning was going to play and the "He hasn't been cleared by Colts doctor's". Maybe it is time for new Doctor's, because it is quite clear they are wrong.

There was a Peter King or Mortenson article at some point saying how Irsay was told Manning should/would be forced to retire. I don't have a link, but I would call it more than a hunch, if that makes sense.

Just a hunch...still feel as though "something" surrounding this whole story is still brewing!

[Creekside]

Easy to say in hindsight this would have been a terrible move....had this been done last June, though, I would have agreed with it. In my opinion Orton would have done well and the Colts would have gone something like 8-8. Don't think polian is trying to do anything but do his job, talk about football...just like we all do...but I'm glad things turned out the way they did.

[21isSuperman]

Just how Irsay commented throughout that time frame and then how he started acting when it was clear Manning was going to play and the "He hasn't been cleared by Colts doctor's". Maybe it is time for new Doctor's, because it is quite clear they are wrong.

There was a Peter King or Mortenson article at some point saying how Irsay was told Manning should/would be forced to retire. I don't have a link, but I would call it more than a hunch, if that makes sense.

Ah, I see. Yeah, that makes sense. We can't say for sure, but I could see that as a possibility.

[Captain Americolt]

All I have to say is... I'm glad Polian isn't here anymore.

[MAC]

With 20/20 hindsight I would have loved anything that would have prevented the debacle that we went through, and allowed us to keep Peyton without this schism damaging the fan base. But I doubt that I would have been thrilled with the deal at the time. A third for a QB that I've never respected (who wouldn't be the solution the following season whether Peyton returned or not) would have irritated me. Now if you could expand the fantasy, and have picked him up in early August for something like a fifth (with him being happy being a backup for multiple years) so that we never had to play musical QBs (ie: the Collins nonsense) in the first place, that would have been wonderful.

[Gavin]

I'd take a healthy offensive line and Orlovsky any day over Orton, But we have what we have now.

[Creekside]

Easy to say in hindsight this would have been a terrible move....had this been done last June, though, I would have agreed with it. In my opinion Orton would have done well and the Colts would have gone something like 8-8. Don't think polian is trying to do anything but do his job, talk about football...just like we all do...but I'm glad things turned out the way they did.

.......wait I just realized Polian is talking about the trade in the middle of the season....I thought he meant before the season began......make the trade when the Colts are already 0-7 ?.........absolutely not........

[Balzer40]

I don't care what Polian says, I like the way things worked out for us. If we would have gotten Orton, then we may still be stuck with Caldwell and the rest of the clowns we called, coaches. No thanks!

[Coltsman1788]

In addition to having Peyton for a few more non-prime years, we also would probably still have the Jim Caldwell coaching staff and their lackadaisacal version of Tampa 2; no caproom; Chris Polian still riding his daddy's coat tails, and no Andrew Luck waiting in the wings. I'd say things worked out just fine considering.

[MAC]

Caldwell & Christensen(how he retained his job I have no clue), sent each of them out there trying to pretend they were Manning and neither of them stood a chance to be successful in that role. When they finally did make some changes and start adjusting to what was under center, they started doing better. That just coincidentally was when Orlovsky was given the ball.

As much as I've defended Caldwell to you, I would second this. I would even go so far as to say that it wasn't a coincidence. At the time I felt as if they immediately and intentionally changed the offense to emphasize the run the moment that Orlovski was put in. When he then found some success (leading most fans to curse the team for not putting him in earlier) I felt even worse for Painter than I did before. I think that Painter has a lot more talent than Orlovski, but that he broke down mentally. (That's not an excuse by the way, that's a fatal flaw). The mental side of QB play is huge). Apparently they held out hope that Painter COULD find sufficient success playing Peyton's style to warrant not changing the entire nature of the teams offense. He probably showed enough in practice (and in helping Peyton with defenses) to lead them to that conclusion, while they never even considered Orlovski to have a prayer of doing so. So in other words it was their confidence in Painter that exposes his flaws. Sadly I feel that if they had changed the offense for him as they did for Orlovsky, and put him in place in game one without any of the drama or head games, the team would have won enough games to avoid the nightmare and embarrassment, and they would be going into this season with Peyton as QB, and Painter as a trusted backup.

[NewColtsFan]

Just looked up Kyle Orton on-line.... he was released last year late in the season.... Wk 12. So, I think he won a couple of games later for KC. Perhaps he might've come in and helped us win a game, maybe two.

Personally, I'm happy the Colts didn't pick him up. What's the point of winning a game or two ending up with the 4th to 7th pick overall.... You've lost out on Luck.

I realize that some (many?) here would be happy if Manning were still a Colt. I get that. But that's hindsight now. He's looking OK now. But back then? The reports were not that encouraging. And he's still got to get through a whole season before we know how well he does.

I'm a long term guy. I know I'm prejudiced because of serious Man Crush on Luck. But even so, allowing for 2-3 more very good years for Manning.... I'll take 12-14 years of Luck over the last 2-3 years of Manning. And I appreciate there will be many here who think I'm nuts! (Hey, you wouldn't be the first!)

Still... the ship has sailed.... the horse is out of the barn.... the future has begun and it looks bright....

NewColtsFan

[Gavin]

Just looked up Kyle Orton on-line.... he was released last year late in the season.... Wk 12. So, I think he won a couple of games later for KC. Perhaps he might've come in and helped us win a game, maybe two.

Personally, I'm happy the Colts didn't pick him up. What's the point of winning a game or two ending up with the 4th to 7th pick overall.... You've lost out on Luck.

I realize that some (many?) here would be happy if Manning were still a Colt. I get that. But that's hindsight now. He's looking OK now. But back then? The reports were not that encouraging. And he's still got to get through a whole season before we know how well he does.

I'm a long term guy. I know I'm prejudiced because of serious Man Crush on Luck. But even so, allowing for 2-3 more very good years for Manning.... I'll take 12-14 years of Luck over the last 2-3 years of Manning. And I appreciate there will be many here who think I'm nuts! (Hey, you wouldn't be the first!)

Still... the ship has sailed.... the horse is out of the barn.... the future has begun and it looks bright....

NewColtsFan

totally agree and I dont think your nuts for saying it

[MAC]

Perhaps he might've come in and helped us win a game, maybe two.

Personally, I'm happy the Colts didn't pick him up. What's the point of winning a game or two ending up with the 4th to 7th pick overall.... You've lost out on Luck.

I realize that some (many?) here would be happy if Manning were still a Colt. I get that. But that's hindsight now. He's looking OK now. But back then? The reports were not that encouraging. And he's still got to get through a whole season before we know how well he does.

I'm a long term guy. I know I'm prejudiced because of serious Man Crush on Luck. But even so, allowing for 2-3 more very good years for Manning.... I'll take 12-14 years of Luck over the last 2-3 years of Manning. And I appreciate there will be many here who think I'm nuts! (Hey, you wouldn't be the first!)

Still... the ship has sailed.... the horse is out of the barn.... the future has begun and it looks bright....

NewColtsFan

You probably won't be surprised to learn that this argument has been made repeatedly (and this topic debated ad nauseam) since last August. It's certainly a valid perspective, but I'm kinda scratching my head regarding this level of reflection and concern on the topic coming from someone whose name would be "NewRedskinsFan" if not for the aforementioned circumstances. While you were indifferently waiting to see who your new team was going to be, we were being slowly tortured. As someone who is as invested in the Colts as you are in Stanford (and as invested in Manning as you are in Luck - despite being incapable of uttering the phrase "Man Crush" without snarling in disgust) - I would have MUCH preferred retaining Manning. How would you feel if it was 2026, and Luck was the one being pushed out the door to make room for a much ballyhooed kid from - oh lets just say The University of California! Would that feel any different?

[bavanlan]

What week was Orton put on waivers? And if Polian really wanted him why didn't he pick him up then?

This is the question that needs to be asked.

Orton went on waivers between Week 11 and Week 12, meaning we could have had him for 6 weeks if we wanted him without giving up a single thing in compensation (other than having to cut our 53rd man to make room). It's pretty clear that Polian didn't want Orton, at least by week 12.

[Creekside]

As much as I've defended Caldwell to you, I would second this. I would even go so far as to say that it wasn't a coincidence. At the time I felt as if they immediately and intentionally changed the offense to emphasize the run the moment that Orlovski was put in. When he then found some success (leading most fans to curse the team for not putting him in earlier) I felt even worse for Painter than I did before. I think that Painter has a lot more talent than Orlovski, but that he broke down mentally. (That's not an excuse by the way, that's a fatal flaw). The mental side of QB play is huge). Apparently they held out hope that Painter COULD find sufficient success playing Peyton's style to warrant not changing the entire nature of the teams offense. He probably showed enough in practice (and in helping Peyton with defenses) to lead them to that conclusion, while they never even considered Orlovski to have a prayer of doing so. So in other words it was their confidence in Painter that exposes his flaws. Sadly I feel that if they had changed the offense for him as they did for Orlovsky, and put him in place in game one without any of the drama or head games, the team would have won enough games to avoid the nightmare and embarrassment, and they would be going into this season with Peyton as QB, and Painter as a trusted backup.

....Competely agree about Painter. I think he's better than his reputation suggests. He was badly mishandled from the beginning. In '09, he was thrown to the wolves against a good Jets defense in a must win game for them. They took out starters and gave him Hank Baskett and Tom Santi for weapons. In his first series his first pass was a nine yd. completion to Baskett. But Brown had two carries for no yds. His next series, at their own 20, Calvin Pace (who between 07 and 09 had 187 tackles and 21.5 sacks) easily runs around Tom Santi and strips Painter from hs blind side and the Jets recover in the end zone.....

[smittywerb]

Glad this didn't go through.

[JCPatriot]

Orton went on waivers between Week 11 and Week 12, meaning we could have had him for 6 weeks if we wanted him without giving up a single thing in compensation (other than having to cut our 53rd man to make room). It's pretty clear that Polian didn't want Orton, at least by week 12.

What happens when a player is waived? Isn't there a waiver wire and an order in which teams can claim the player off the waiver wire, and wouldn't the Chiefs have been ahead of the Colts on the waiver wire? I'm not asking because I'm saying that you are wrong. I'm asking because I legitimately don't know.

[21isSuperman]

What happens when a player is waived? Isn't there a waiver wire and an order in which teams can claim the player off the waiver wire, and wouldn't the Chiefs have been ahead of the Colts on the waiver wire? I'm not asking because I'm saying that you are wrong. I'm asking because I legitimately don't know.

I think it goes in reverse order of standings, so the worst team in the standings gets the first waiver pick up. And I believe we were worse than KC