All I was saying was very good to great QBs can be found outside the first round and hoping Ballard gets one.

Yeah I don't care what round we find a franchise QB in, just keep drafting QB's until we hit on one. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

I'll still watch the Colts though. I watched when Curtis Painter was the QB, so if I can get through that, I can watch JB until a better option emerges.

You certainly can, just your odds go down with each round just like all the other positions.

You are so wrong. I'm old enough to have seen Bradshaw play. The first 5 years of is career, they were doing anything they could do to replace him...Terry Hanratty, Joe Gilliam, etc.

Did he develop? Yes he did, but it took so god damn long, that he surely was a bust.

So why does Bradshaw belong in the HOF over say Jim Plunkett, He doesn't ...and neither one do. Nor does Joe Namath.

Namath is probably the most overrated QB of all time.

Talk about milking a moment. I still remember Namath drunk on the Jets sideline hitting on the sideline reporter.

Calm down old fucker....You are correct about the early years . But he developed into a very good QB . he was a 3 time pro bowler and made the all pro team once along with 4 SB's

Was he great? No but he is a lot better than the others Dilfer and McMahon he was grouped in with.

Don’t know if it’s been mentioned here but Foles to the Colts makes some sense because of Reich.

I hope it doesn’t happen, but it’s possible. If we’re signing a veteran, make it Bridgewater.

I heard this yesterday. The Packers have had 30 straight years of first ballot HOF quarterback play, and they have 2 SB to show for it. Same as the Ravens who have nothing close to HOF quarterback play.

Sometimes I forget that it is a team sport. We had Manning/Luck for years with very little in championships to show.

There are a lot of former high draft choices available in free agency and thru trades if you believe the chatter. At least one of them, given the right circumstances, will probably be able to turn their careers around. Ballard/Reich will give these guys a long look. We should look everywhere in our search.

Bradshaw was a physical freak when he came out. Arm like a gun, big and athletic. Loved watching him throw the ball. I would love to have a guy as crappy as you guys think he was under center. Four super bowl wins in 6 years. Take that any day. We don't need a GOAT, just a guy who is good enough.

What about the seasons in between the championship runs?

If your point is that a HOF QB will give you more wins in the regular season, you're right. The Packers have had only 4 or 5 terrible years and the rest were either good or at least mediocre years. I won't argue with you that having QBs like Luck or Manning made every season more enjoyable, I just don't want to see this team give up too much just to get a QB who may or may not end up being of HOF caliber. I thought Darnold was a sure thing, now, I'm not so sure.

If our goal is a championship there is no sure thing, at least no one player can guarantee that. With a qb the caliber of Luck you could be lazy, rest on your laurels and still have a pretty good year. Without that quality leading your team front office/coaching doesn’t have as much leeway in putting an enjoyable product on the field. Ballard/Reich need to earn their money

Irsay got it right with Manning and blew it with Luck.

He hired Polian and Mora. Solid guys who understood how to handle a team and young talent. Griegson and Pagano was a cluster ****. Neither one had ever run a team or organization before.

I like what they have with Ballard and Reich. Granted, Ballard has never run an organization before, but he has shown his metal. Frank Reich has seen it from the worst to the best and he knows a QB when he sees one.

If the Colts are going to draft a QB in the first round its not about is athletic ability, it's going to be about what's between his ears. Is he all about football or all about how he looks?

About the Packers, between Starr and Farve, they had very few trips to the playoffs. A great QB can get you into the playoffs. The rest of the team needs to win it.

WHOA WHOA WHOA WHOA WHOA...... Are you forgetting Steve McNair ands Fatty McButterpants?

I don't think Irsay blew it with Luck. Everyone loved the Luck pick and he played well. No one could have anticipated Luck retiring this early in his career. The only other option was RG111 and he was good for 1 year. Can't blame Irsay for picking Luck.

Who is fatty mcbutterpants?

He's the OC for Tampa now

So even more reason that Winston sucks . Besides Arians killing him every play

Buyin Sandwich

Well they had a HOF defense and Flacco played at a HOF level that other year so QB play did matter.

I honestly don't know why some of you are leaning towards average QB play. A great QB always has you in a position to win year in and year out. It just makes things easier. A game manager is only as good as the team around him and that never last and is frankly a shorter time frame.

You missed the whole point of his post. It was about the leadership paired with the great QB he was referring to. Polian/Mora/Dungy vs the clown show.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not what I was saying. He got a GM who put tools around Manning and made them competitive.

Pagano and Grigson couldn't buid an O line or muscle up a D to help Luck. Oh and having an offense that had him throw out of a 7 step drop with an O line that couldn't block got Luck hurt. I know, Luck wouldn't slide. But the admin of the Colts couldn't protect him and he took a beating.

I agree that a great qb will have us in a position to win. I just don't think we will without spending too much. Burrow and tuna are likely off the table for us. Let's keep building the teams pass protection and pass rush, then see who we can get in the late second or early third.
Then we follow Ballard's philosophy and let that qb compete with hoyer and brissett for the job.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

How did Mariota go from winning a playoff game to where he is now?

I'm with you.

The mocks that have us taking Love @ 13 make me uncomfortable.

go DB, DT, OT, WR; Whatever. Don't reach on the QB and if the team crashes and burns again next year perhaps we will be in position to draft the right guy.

To me there is almost no price too high for a great QB. The issue is of course the risk in moving up and being wrong, but a really good team will likely be wasted without having a QB so to me standing pat carries substantial risk as well. I do agree that they need to look at shoring up OT. If they don’t move up for a QB this year (or take one at 13) solidifying the line is probably the next best thing they can do for the QB position long term.

As far as letting guys compete, QB is the one position I’m not a fan of having a competition for. If you have 3 guys battling for the starting QB job, you simply don’t have a starting quality QB.

I’m uncomfortable about Love at 13 because of the concerns I’ve seen about his accuracy and understanding of defenses. The second MAY be able to be taught, but the first I think is hard to improve. I seen an article discussing it before, but my basic understanding is people talk about changing mechanics and footwork etc, but guys that have made it to this level and still aren’t accurate usually don’t get fixed.

No to Love. Not at 13. Maybe at 34, but I'd prefer to get a QB like him on Day 3. I'm not big on QBs with accuracy issues, so I'm going to be lower on Herbert and Love than most.

I take your points here as well. I'm not saying that if we somehow managed to trade up (more or less two years worth of picks) to get Burrow, he would be demolished behind this line, as that is not likely to be the case, but:

1. He will have a defense that is not remarkably improved
2. He will have questions at OT with Constanzo and Smith
3. He will have the same WR questions that Brissett had
4. He will have thin depth at TE with Ebron's departure

My $0.02 uninformed scenario:

1. Address OT with our first, and pick up a reasonable OT from free agency also. If Costanzo re-ups, we will get improvement at guard with Smith moving inside (Nelson, Smith and Kelly in the middle of our line would be fantastic.
2. Address DE with our first second and see if Eason lasts to our second second, if not, use our second second for WR.
3. Get best QB with our third
4. Get WR or TE with 4th.

I don't like how my scenario fails to address WR until the 4th (or perhaps late 2nd).

I think at the end of the day when fans think stuff like this through you have to admit that we have zero idea of what Ballard will actually do.

I just don't want to see us trade two years worth of development to get a franchise QB that we cant keep upright or cant support with an improved defense.

Another scenario if we are not going to trade up for a QB is that we trade down our first for another second and another 3rd. Get the best QB available with our first second rounder, then use our remaining two seconds rounders on OL & DL... then we would have two thirds to address WR and TE.

But what if they have good 40 times

Dont just take the "best available QB" in the second round. thats seem dumb. If you really like a guy and he is there, fine. but dont just take one to take one.

Take Kinlaw .

o


The youngest Manning brother is retiring from the Giants after 16 seasons ....... his everlasting image to most will be of his improbable breaking away from being sacked by several New England Patriot defenders late in the 4th quarter of Super Bowl XLII, and then the equally improbably catch on that same play by David Tyree.



https://media2.giphy.com/media/hiYItCpteRurC/source.gif

o

I think one thing to remember is that with JB in place it’s entirely possible, maybe even likely, that even if they move up to get someone he sits this first year. That means you have two offseasons to address issues. Their draft capital would be diminished, but not gone. And they still have tons of cap space.

If AC retires then LT admittedly becomes a huge concern, but the others wouldn’t be a huge issue. I think the rest of the roster is good enough to support a young QB. Much better than most teams that take a guy high. I’m much more concerned with getting the right guy. If he’s in this draft and you can get him then pull the trigger and let him sit a year and learn. Trying to improve the roster first may help them develop but it would also make him harder to acquire too. If they pass this year (and don’t push draft picks forward) I’m not sure when they have this ammunition again with an improving roster. Loose that extra 2nd and draft at 18-22 instead of 13 and it becomes even harder to move up.

Well said, if castanzo retires, is LT a bigger priority than qb?

Thinking this through I would not be surprised if we trade down. If we cant get a generational qb, then let's trade down to have more capital to trade up next year.

I'm continually surprised how all these different roads lead to costanzo. If he retires it will be a completely different calculus.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

I think it's safe to say that this draft and offseason will define Ballard.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

I appreciate the hell out of Eli for beating Brady and the cheats twice!

Only way I’d be ok taking Love is if we sign a big name defensive guy gotta solidify the trenches on defense

For me, no - a QB is priority. But again, I’m more worried about getting the right guy than in having it be this year, so I’d see taking a LT at 13 and then trading 34 and 44 for 1sts next year as a pretty good alternative to getting a QB this year. Solidify the line and have potentially 3 1st rounders next year to make a move.