|
Quote:
This exactly, overpay as needed. This high pick makes it easy to justify bad decisions, perhaps somewhat like heroin. We have a top 5 QB and a bottom 5 line. I don't see that there is any priority above the OL. This team absolutely sucks without Andrew Luck. Lets protect that first. God forbid we somehow manage to create a running game out of the deal. |
Quote:
If we really wanna face the facts, Gore just doesn't have the speed anymore to not only hit some of the holes, but to break the big runs. If there is a cutback lane to the outside, you can see that he can't take full advantage of it. Also, I'm not sold on Mack as Gore's replacement either. We've got to get another dynamic dual threat RB. |
Quote:
But, I want the order to be O-Line first, RB second. Taking a RB with one of our top three choices in the 2018 draft reverses that order. That is all I am trying to say. Fix the O-Line; find an Edge. That is the order Ballard should take. Walk Worthy, |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Frank Gore is a very good back for his age. I'm happy to bring him back for another year to transition to our new lead back. But he's old and will slow down or get hurt. Happens to everyone. I'm not convinced Mack is the guy at all. I don't think he can carry the ball 20 times a game and I don't think there's evidence to expect him to. We do need a Gore replacement. Whether he re-signs or not. I don't really want Barkley. I don't believe in high first round RBs. You don't need one to succeed, at all. But even if you just look at the numbers, the large majority of top RBs are drafted in the first three rounds. If a guy like Michel is available in the third and we got some good prospects in the first couple of rounds I'm in favor of drafting him. A dynamic back like him coupled with a better OL will only help Luck and our new OC better implement the new offense. |
I would prefer a bad ass defensive player, but if ballard actually takes barkley, I wont kill him for it.
|
Last year 3 RB's went 1st round
All 3 teams made the playoffs A dynamic back like Barkley can make a hell of a difference |
I am in the fix the line at all costs line. Open the vault and bring in two guards. Spend the high pick on a tackle. I love Barkley but this draft is thick with running backs. You'll get a damn good one in the second or third round. I think we have a much better chance of winning the super bowl with a great offensive line than with a transcendent running back
|
Quote:
so the question comes down to do you want barkley or a defender with our first pick? |
We need some explosion at that position (RB). Someone who can convert the short yardage gains that Gore can give us, but also take advantage of openings like Mack can; Without having to sacrifice one to get the other.
I like where FatDT's head is at. If we can find that value later, we should wait. I also think Barkley could make our offensive line look a lot better. I'm interested to see how things shake out during the combine and offseason. It seems like kid's stock always changes. Who really knows how these kids will be valued through the spring? I voted trade down, but if the trades aren't there and Chubb is no longer considered as strong as a pick as he is now, go with Barkley. It's going to take a couple of years, lets get better in the OL next year when our record doesn't allow us to pick a true impact player like we can this year (assuming Chubb's stock suffers). If Chubb is still the man when the draft rolls around I will completely understand the heat for passing on him for Barkley. We really do need someone who can get in the opposition's cheeks and Chubb plays with a nice edge. |
I initially voted to trade back, but I'm leaning towards a disruptive pass rusher.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
#5 overall (1,700) + 2nd round 5th pick, #37 overall (530) = 2,230 points. About an even trade with us perhaps having to throw in a 6th or 7th round pick to even it out. To drop from #5 with same year compensation, you need to drop down to #11 overall to get another 2nd rounder: #11 overall (1,250) + 2nd round 11th pick, #43 overall (470) = 1,720 points. So, some of the options appear to be something like: Option A = Pick #03 + #35. Option B = Pick #05 + #35 + #37 Option C = Pick #11 + #35 + #37 + #43 Honestly, I choose option C above. 4 guys in the top 43 beats 2 guys in the top 35 when we have as many holes on our roster as we do. Of course, you can slide down less from pick #5 if you want to just pick up 3rd or 4th round choices instead of 2nd round choices. I would rather get guys in the top 50 than guys in the 100s. Walk Worthy, |
Quote:
#11 Harold Landry #35 Sony Michel #37 Will Hernandez |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Matt Miller is a guy I trust (I know GBB88 can back me up on this):
@nfldraftscout Bradley Chubb is special. That is all. |
On this site, http://walterfootball.com/draft2018charlie.php the mock draft has the Browns taking Barkley, G-men take Rosen, Colts take Chubb and then the Browns take Darnold. If the first two picks actually went this way, there are a few teams that would give up a lot to move ahead of the Browns and take Darnold.
|
Quote:
Since a lot of you are asking: I don't think Chubb is on Myles Garrett's level. Bet I end up grading him similar to Joey Bosa. His agility at 6'4 1/2" and 275 lbs is pretty damn rare. |
Quote:
I have seen at least 2 sites that have Mason Rudolph as their top QB? Then you throw in the wildcard of Lamar Jackson, who IMO is not a 1st rd QB, and I can see teams falling in love with smoe of these guys and moving up to get them. |
Dang....
I was doing research on the potential hiring of Josh McDaniels and found a few tidbits. From this article on a Cheats board (Pats Pulpit....here), they looked at McDaniels' offense from 2006 - 2014 and who got the ball (touches) and who gained the most yards. This period includes McDaniels' 1st time as Cheats OC (2006 - 2008), Denver HC (2009 - 2010) and St. Louis OC (2011) before returning to the Cheats for a 2nd time as OC (2012 - 2014). What did he find? Quote:
Quote:
I did some spot analysis of the Cheats 2016 / 2017 numbers and they are in line with the above figures. So, to bring that back to this thread. Fact A = Ballard says that he drafts BPA pretty much exclusively (obviously, not at QB but otherwise...). Fact B = Under a McDaniels' offense, the RBs average touching the ball on 63% of the offensive plays (run or pass). Fact C = The Colts RB corps for 2018 currently is underwhelming. Even if they re-sign Frank Gore, they are still, at best, NFL average. Fact D = Penn State RB Saquon Barkley is considered by many to be the best player in the 2018 draft and completely NFL ready to start and succeed from day one. Obviously, the combine and the vetting process may change this assessment but as of now.... Ergo, if McDaniels' is the next HC of the Colts, Barkley will be our pick at #3 overall in the 2018 draft. Need plus BPA marry up on this one. Further, if McDaniels' is the next HC of the Colts, I fully expect that at least 2 "monster" free agency contracts signed by us will be offensive line. Sigh....not the way that I want it to happen. I like Barkley but our O-Line / Defensive Front-7 are not stocked well enough for us to pick a "luxury" pick of RB at #3 overall, IMO. But, he will be Andrew's "Edge" and that will make Irsay and McDaniels very happy. Walk Worthy, |
Quote:
The Pats RB's have been Corey Dillon, Lawrence Maroney, Kevin Faulk, Sammy Morris, Green Ellis, Fred Taylor, Stevan Ridley, Danny Woodhead, Shane Vareen, Brandon Bolden, Jonas Gray, LaGarrette Blount, James White, Dion Lewis, Mike Gilesllee, Rex Burkhead. Notice a trend? All role playing RB's for the most part. Although, the Pats offense is labeled a Erhardt/Perkins scheme, essentially BB and McDaniels are running a Ted Marchibroda modified offense from the '70's. The old timers here can back me up on this, but the Baltmore Colts under Marchibroda threw to the RB's a lot. I can see a lot of what Brady does under center is very similar to what Bert Jones did. So, in theory, we would not need a superstar RB. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The Cheats have had the luxury of having a top defense for the majority of their run since 2006. This contributes to.... An effective offense centered around a stud QB. Yeah, I hate Tommy Cheater but he is a stud. This is fueled by.... An offensive line that, while not top five, has been solidly good for a long time. I think that Tommy Cheater's quick release and intelligence game plan design does a lot of this but.... Leading to the fact that RB, while getting 63% of the touches, is RARELY the focus of opposing defenses or opposing game plans. Early on, folks game planned to score on the Pats defense. Later, they game planned to stop Tommy Cheater. Rarely, if ever, did they gameplan to stop the run. The Colts do not have a top defense, they don't have a stud QB (that might change but currently, and they don't have a demonstrated good game plan. That means that running back by committee will probably not work out much better than it has over the past couple of years for the Colts. Also, our owner wants Barkley. He wants his next Edge. Big factor there. I am with you, brother. I want a complete team with studs at QB, O-line, and on Defense before I want a stud RB. However, if McDaniels' is our next HC, I see all the factors coming together at Barkley at #3 overall. Walk Worthy, |
Quote:
Barlkely IMO, can be something special. But if Colts brass believes that a guy like Michel is just a notch below and a better value, than I would rather go that route. Really good evaluation of Michel here:https://www.pewterreport.com/cover-3...el-sony-shake/ I really like the way he can make his cuts w/o gearing down. |
Quote:
I think the "safe" conclusion is simply that the offense would need a lot of work to get the personnel the way that McDaniels would want it. He likes the quick-hitting passing game underneath and the current roster is not equipped for that style outside of Hilton. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I am with you, brother. I want a complete team with studs at QB, O-line, and on Defense before I want a stud RB.
However, if McDaniels' is our next HC, I see all the factors coming together at Barkley at #3 overall. Walk Worthy,[/QUOTE] If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.......With all due respect Sherck, central to your analysis is the presumption that McDaniels is a slave to one mental model of how to design/run an offense. He very well may be.....I don't know. However, if Ballard is half the leader and assessor of talent that people like Polian purport him to be then I hope that a key criteria to his assessment is finding a leader that understands the long term key to winning is adaptability. It's no different than any other industry......you adapt or quickly become irrelevant. This, I think, was the central failing of Pagano (with all due respect to those that think coaching doesn't matter). He simply wouldn't (or I think couldn't) realize that stubborn enslavement to that "we just do what we do" mentality was a recipe for irrelevance as everyone else (including the AFC South) passes you by. I think the right question to be in for McDaniels is is he capable of flexible thinking? |
“Interesting thing @SeniorBowlPhil just told me and @HorowitzJason on @ESPNUonSiriusXM: The Broncos staff requested that Baker Mayfield be placed on their team at the Senior Bowl.“
If he makes a good enough impression, then maybe the Broncos will thin about trading up. |
I may be wrong but for some reason I get feeling Baker Mayfield might turn out to be Johnny Manziel part 2 ... :cool:
|
I don't have a trade chart, but curious since Bills aren't sold on Tyrod Taylor as their QB if they might offer their two first round picks #21 and #22 for our #3 ? :cool:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
If we got Chubb and Michel I wouldn't care much so else we draft. IMO Michel is this year's Kamara, but less overlooked.
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:46 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
ColtFreaks.com is in no way affiliated with the Indianapolis Colts, the NFL, or any of their subsidiaries.