...and decide to trade the first overall pick to rebuild the team so they can make a run at another title with Manning in the next 3-4 years.

You are on the phone with Irsay and there are 2 min left on the draft clock. No time to negotiate. He says "give me your best offer and I'll say yes or no." You've got ONE shot to make your pitch...

What are you willing to part with for the opportunity to draft Luck or RG III #1 and which one are you taking?

Every pick in this years draft and next years 1 and 2.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

This years #1 and #4, next years #1, Jake Long.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This years #1 and #4, next years #1, Jake Long.


I like the Jake long part.

I think my best would be Long (who I'd value as TWO 1st round picks)

This years 2,3, 4

And next years 2 & 3.

I'd also throw in a caveat on the Jake Long part...if he failed to play an average of 12 per season over the next 3 years I'd give them a future #1.

I think ANY deal that doesn't have this year's #1 would be a nonstarter for the Colts. I'd prefer to give up Long than a ton of future picks, because there is no way to build your team for the future without draft picks and the cheap labor they provide. The bonus is giving up Long and not a ton of picks is the $$ savings we'd get, since he makes a ton of money and has only 2 yrs left on his deal so he'd need to get a lot more, or a franchise tag (same thing).

If you asked me to give up the next 2 entire drafts for a 20 year old John Elway or Dan Marino....


I would do it in a heartbeat.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think ANY deal that doesn't have this year's #1
> would be a nonstarter for the Colts.

Not necessarily. If we gave them this pick, chances are they would be using it on a o-lineman.

They are getting that in Long, who is a proven commodity as the best O-lineman in the league.

Any rookie they might take at 8/9 is an unproven.



> I'd prefer to
> give up Long than a ton of future picks, because
> there is no way to build your team for the future
> without draft picks and the cheap labor they
> provide. The bonus is giving up Long and not a ton
> of picks is the $$ savings we'd get, since he
> makes a ton of money and has only 2 yrs left on
> his deal so he'd need to get a lot more, or a
> franchise tag (same thing).

Yeah, they might not want long because of the money.


If they didn't want him and it was just picks...

Its 1,2,3,4 this year, plus 1,2,3 next year.

Again,

I would give up 2 drafts for a 20 year old John Elway or Dan Marino.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

That’s nice to say, but you are NEVER going to have that option, so it’s a false argument. Even at the very top of the draft there’s ZERO guarantee you’re getting the next Dan Marino or Elway. That kind of certainty simply doesn’t exist so making that statement is essentially meaningless. Sorry, but that’s the reality we’re dealing with; tendencies and probabilities my man, but NO certainties.

If you keep that basic fact in mind, then you can understand WHY no one would ever trade 2 entire drafts on one college player.

Well at this point, 15 years of irrelevancy...Im willing to take a chance on the most prolific and high profiled prospect since Elway.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

BigNastyFish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> that’s total suicide on the personnel front.

Only if you are wrong in your assessment of the QB you select.




>
> There’s a saying that “some prices are just
> too high,” and for that reason those
> transactions never happen. I realize we all want
> to have a dominant player at the QB position, but
> you can’t place a wager that you won’t be able
> to recover from.
>


We've already flushed more than that in the past on bad position player picks.




> At this point I’m OK with projecting Moore as
> the starter for next season and going after Flynn
> aggressively and/or incorporating a value-based
> plan to draft QB prospects every year (somewhere
> in the R3-R5 vicinity). And of course, if a major
> league prospect happens to fall, we need to make
> that investment, or if we can make a reasonable
> trade to get a top shelf prospect, we need to
> seriously look at that. But…


That plan doesn't work.

Not only has it been tried and has it failed miserably, stats show you are usually grooming that mid-late round pick for a career somewhere else.

We have only a few choice s left to us at this point.

We clearly need a franchise QB in today's NFL. That's not even a debatable point.

Just look at the bottom 16 teams in t he league this year and you can see that nearly ALL of them are playing 1st year QB's or have no QB.

Choice #1: Do what we've been doing. Draft for the rest of the roster...take non 1st round flyers on QB's. Hope we win the lottery with a Brady type. Consider first round QB if a bargain falls into our lap.

Choice #2: Trade for someone elses back up.

Choice #3: Hope for a good FA QB to shake loose and that he wants to play here.

Choice #4: Trade up for a QB. Identify a talent we believe in and pay the price to get him.




Option #1 doesn't work. We are living proof of that.

Option #2 is a huge risk as well. For every Matt Schaub and Matt Hasselbeck there are more Kevin Kolb's, Matt Cassels and AJ Feely's.

Option #3: Like most things in life, option 3 is hit and miss...you get the occasional Brees/Vick that shakes loose but there are far to many Culpepper's, matt moores and Matt Flynns.

Option #4: Makes the most sense. Sure there is risk involved. You have to be right about your talent evaluation, but you get YOUR guy, not someone elses cast off.

Its waaaaay beyond time for us to go get "our guy".





>
> right now we can’t recover from our past draft
> blunders, such as passing on Ryan, passing on
> Aaron Rogers, and passing on EVERY QB prospect
> since drafting Henne, with a desperation move.
> That’s just NOT a sound and reasonable way to
> get where we want to be. My opinion of course…


Actually we are one player away from "recovering" from our past draft blunders.

Its a QB.



>
> I know some folks don’t want to hear it, but
> Moore is a prime candidate to go through a
> positive growth curve and improve his game
> substantially. Of course coaching and having a
> great OL will help improve the odds of that
> happening rather dramatically. For that reason
> I’d implement a plan similar to what I’ve
> described above and NO WAY would I give up tons of
> draft capital on an UNPROVEN NFL commodity.



>
> And for record, Bradford isn’t setting the
> league on fire. He’s obviously injury prone (as
> he was in college), his production is NOT
> impressive, and his “growth” has stalled. So
> as an example, if we had given up 2 entire drafts
> on him, I think fans would be utterly disgusted.
> The kid still may be a player, but right now NO
> ONE would consider his the vaunted “franchise
> QB.”

No doubt that the luster is wearing off bradford...but if you really look at his circumstances, its not a lack of skills on his part. its a lack of TALENT on offense and on their coaching staff. Whether he's a star in the right circumstances or not remains to be seen. But right now he's david Carr. a kid with a world of talent that is being pissed away on a Tebow-awful team.


Look, I respect the notion that you don't want to give up TOO much to get a QB. Its the safe way to view things.

But that doesnt mean that I'm not going to try to convince you that playing it "safe" and waiting/hoping for a QB to fall into your lap will only get you 12 more years that closely mirror the last 12.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/12/2012 06:27AM by THE Truth.

BigNastyFish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That’s nice to say, but you are NEVER going to
> have that option, so it’s a false argument. Even
> at the very top of the draft there’s ZERO
> guarantee you’re getting the next Dan Marino or
> Elway. That kind of certainty simply doesn’t
> exist so making that statement is essentially
> meaningless.


If you are waiting for certainty when it comes to drafting players you will be waiting forever.

I hear ya. But we can't undo all the mistakes of the past with one move. We need to have a sound plan and execute that plan consistently.

History has absolutely PROVEN we’ve passed on top talent QB’s a number of times since Marino left. So we need to make sure that kind of stupidity and neglect of the MOST IMPORTANT position on the field doesn’t happen anymore.

Regretfully, depending upon how you see it, we won too many games this year, and a number of excellent QB prospects decided not to come out. So it looks like our long standing need to draft a top shelf QB (R1 certified) won’t happen this year.

But that doesn’t mean we ignore ALL the QB prospects as we have recently. Bottom line, if we don’t draft QB’s we’ll be in the same position year after year. Personally I’m sick of that shit, and for that reason alone Ireland has failed IMO.

The best GM’s and talent evaluators are always looking for QB talent they can develop. We did that once with Henne, and have ignored the position since. That’s a horrible track record. But we can’t change the past…

BigNastyFish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Every pick in this years draft and next years 1
> and 2.
>
> No team has EVER made a trade like that and no one
> ever will – that’s total suicide on the
> personnel front.
>


Ditka traded every pick in 1 draft for Ricky, and a 1st and 3d the next year. So pretty close....

Here is what those picks turned into. Whether it's "too much" depends on how the picks, and players, turned out. WAS got a bunch of crap with their picks for Ricky


1999 (Round One, pick No. 12) — The Redskins dealt this pick to Chicago, which used it to select UCLA QB Cade McNown. In 15 career starts, McNown was 3-12 with 16 touchdowns and 19 interceptions. He never played in the league after 2000.

1999 (Round Three, pick No. 71) — Chicago also was given this pick, which it used on D'Wayne Bates. Other than the 50-catch season he had for Minnesota in 2002, Bates was a bust.

1999 (Round Four, pick No. 107) — LB Nate Stimson didn't leave much of an imprint on the Nation's Capital — or anywhere, for that matter.

1999 (Round Five, pick No. 144) — With its final pick from the trade it made with Washington, Chicago grabbed LB Khari Samuel. One start, three seasons.

1999 (Round Six, pick No. 179) — Denver obtained the final two 1999 picks from Washington and used the first of which on TE Desmond Clark, who has collected more than 300 catches and 3,500 yards during his still-active career.

1999 (Round Seven, pick No. 218) — With its other pick, Denver grabbed Billy Miller, who caught 200 passes during his nine-year career, most of them coming after he left the Broncos.

2000 (Round One, pick No. 2) — The Redskins added Penn State's LaVar Arrington, who gave the club three Pro Bowl seasons (2001-03) before his play began to rapidly decline. Arrington was a solid player but failed to meet the lofty expectations that come with being a top-five linebacker pick.

2000 (Round Three, pick No. 64) — Jamaican-born Lloyd Harrison spent three years in the NFL playing for three different clubs.

This years #1, #3, #5, next years #2, #4, the following years #2, Hartline, Columbo, and Bell.

And with the #1 pick, I take...Griffin.

BigNastyFish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We clearly need a franchise QB in today's NFL.
> That's not even a debatable point.
>
> Simple case in point, the Jets beat the Pats last
> year in the playoffs in Foxborough, and made it to
> the AFC Championship game with Sanchez (!) at QB.
> There’s no way Moore is not a significantly
> better QB than Sanchez, and add the fact Flynn is
> in play, so there ARE options besides the titanic
> hope and prayer that RGIII or whoever is the next
> great QB ready to lead this team to glory as a
> matter of fact.
>

The exception doesn't disprove the rule.

there are ALWAYS teams that get hot, or lucky, or both and over achieve. It happens almost every single year...but they can't sustain that level of play year to year without a QB...

Case in point...your Jet reference...they backed into playoffs two years ago...advanced to the AFC title game on the strength of two missed routine FG's by their opponents...had a nice run last year...now they are 8-8 and disintegrating because they have no franchise QB to coalesce around.

Yea, and Ditka was seen as a buffoon for doing that. That trade didn’t work for the Saints, and when you evaluate compensation I believe you need to take a look at ALL the players that we’re available to be picked in those slots. For example, the #2 we got for Jason Taylor a few drafts ago was blown on Patty White, but the actual POTENTIAL of that pick is only appreciated when you look at ALL the players we passed on that where available on the board with that pick.

And that’s one problem I have with Ireland et al, IMO they haven’t taken THE BEST player that was available (on the board) once in 4 years or however long it is now. Pouncey was a very good pick, and so was Long, but they were not the BEST pick available at the time IMO.

BNF, if you accept your premise that Ireland sucks at drafting, then giving up all those picks shouldn't be such a bad thing since we are more likely than not to blow them and take the wrong guy.
But I agree I don't want to give up an entire draft plus additional high picks for RG3---maybe for Luck but not RG3 who is less of a sure thing

I'm not saying Ireland "sucks" as a personnel dude, in fact I believe he has significant upside and could grow into one of the better GM’s if (a) he learns from his mistakes and (b) stays away from the formula driven “Parcells” erector-set method of drafting. I think he took a step in the right direction last year, and deserves the proverbial benefit of the doubt. But I do have some real issues with his way of handing things and chalk a lot of that to his inexperience and learning curve. So time will tell…

As far as Luck, I’ve said before I believe he’s the most NFL ready QB to come out since Matt Ryan. But I don’t see the extraordinary arm that the truly dominant QB’s have. Luck has had the good fortune of functioning in a great system with a top shelf OL and excellent ground game. He’s definitely a “winner” in the right system, but I don’t see him as the type of dude who can literally carry a team – like Marino or Manning.

I've heard 2 unrelated rumors lately about Manning.

1. The Jest are interested in his services.
2. His injury is more serious then reported and he will never play another NFL game ever again.

DarthHoodie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've heard 2 unrelated rumors lately about
> Manning.
>
> 1. The Jest are interested in his services.

Half the teams in the league will be interested in his services (including us) if he gets cut loose. This isn't a rumor, its a fact.

If the Jets really want him, then hiring mr. conservative ground & pound as your OC probably wasn't a bright move.



> 2. His injury is more serious then reported and
> he will never play another NFL game ever again.

Could be, but then why the internal scuffle of him playing at the end of the year?

Why the shocking dismissal of Polian and his son over what has been reported by several sources to be a disagreement over what to do with Manning and the 1st pick.

I'm not buying it.

He may be done, but he's going to try to play again.

In the scenario described I would tell him, this year's #1, 2 & 3, next year's #1 & 2 and a defensive lineman on our team of your choice.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Short and simple. I'm willing to pay a lot but I
> squarely agree with BNF. I think you'd go
> overboard, The Truth. Andrew Luck is Bob Griese
> reborn with better athletic ability and being here
> only because of Griese, I obviously like that.
>

Great!

So you'll pay...but not what I'm willing to pay. Terrific...

What's your offer?

Rex can salivate all he wants over Peytons little piggies, but I don't think there's a snow balls chance in hell Manning would go there (with Fisher, we'd have a better shot). For one, the Jets don't have the offense or the offensive weapons to lure him there, It's an outdoor, cold weather city and I can't see him stealing little marble jaw Elis spotlight in the Big Apple. I'd be shocked if he chose the jets.

I'll tell you what I "wouldn't" offer and that's this year's whole draft even if not accompanied by any draft choices next year.

I don't think that Indy would take just our number 1 and Jake Long.

I'd give them this year's first, next year's first, and I'd have to think about current players.

--------------------------------

Irrelevant topic really. May as well start a "let's say the packers release aaron rodgers "thread.

Oh man, I beg JC to let you stay this time.

You are like a boomerang...they throw you out and you always come back.


I think you deserve to be here. You obviously want too. Just this time, stay level headed. Dont go too overboard.

I vote for you to stay, DAMiaThunderGoganStunnerThumperTRUUTH#1.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"