#51
|
||||
|
||||
If Luck is done, wouldn't you keep the #3 and pick a better QB than what you would get at 6? Especially when we traded to a team that will take one of the QBs off the board.
__________________
Keep your political crap out of a football forum! Nobody here gives a rat's a** |
The Following User Says Thank You to Racehorse For This Useful Post: | ||
Spike (03-18-2018) |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
This is the most QB topheavy draft quite possibly ever. It's like the class of 83, but if every team in the top 5 of that draft needed a QB. If you don't think Luck is coming back, you don't trade out of the top 5 and miss out on a QB.
|
#53
|
||||
|
||||
If Luck is done, and you know Brissett is serviceable, then you stick to the plan to build a TEAM through the draft by acquiring more picks. Ballard has often said the Colts are not about Andrew Luck, they're more than one player.
__________________
Irsay and Ballard got the Reich guy! |
#54
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
If Luck is done you absolutely keep the #3 pick (and get who you can) and then deal Brissett for a 3rd (or whatever) in a desperate attempt to build as much as you possibly can around this new franchise QB. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
The Jets gave up a lot to move from #6 to #3. Why? They need a QB and at #6, the QB pickings slim down considerably. The Colts made the deal getting the extra picks. Why? They don't need a QB, they need depth and if the first 5 picks are 1 RB and 4 QBs, they'll still get the man they seem to want the most.
|
|
|