ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum   ColtFreaks.com Home Page

Go Back   ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum > Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum > Indianapolis Colts Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #491  
Old 04-19-2018, 02:56 PM
VeveJones007 VeveJones007 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,922
Thanks: 523
Thanked 383 Times in 219 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Puck View Post
Depends.... they could do a serious upgrade with Barkley and Chubb Ride out the QB for another yr or go with Taylor. Taylor is not a bad QB.

They will probably take a QB but you never know.... Do you think any of these QB's are sure fire superstars? Will all of them be better than Taylor?
There are some bad takes that stick to posters. Seriously positing that the Browns wonít draft a QB is one of those takes.
Reply With Quote
  #492  
Old 04-19-2018, 03:23 PM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 93
Thanks: 40
Thanked 72 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007 View Post
I'm hoping he meant "Darnold" and just mistakenly typed "Barkley."

In fact, the Ringer is reporting that the Browns have considered taking two QBs early (not necessarily #1 and #4, but #1 and maybe a 2).
Taking two QBs at 1 and 4 would be crazy and undeniably bold, and open Cleveland to further ridicule. However, there might be some kind of weird logic to it - maximize your chance to land a top QB, which will set you up for contending for the next 10+ years. Trade the other guy. This article points out that Dallas kinda did this in 1989 with Troy Aikman (1st overall pick) and Steve Walsh (supplemental 1st round pick):

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...-quarterbacks/

I realize it's not as simple as 2 QB prospects are better than 1. Who knows what it would do to the psychology of the two QBs, and would you reduce the chance of either excelling by having both of them there? Would they refuse to sign? That would be crazy and interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #493  
Old 04-19-2018, 03:55 PM
VeveJones007 VeveJones007 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,922
Thanks: 523
Thanked 383 Times in 219 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaka View Post
Taking two QBs at 1 and 4 would be crazy and undeniably bold, and open Cleveland to further ridicule. However, there might be some kind of weird logic to it - maximize your chance to land a top QB, which will set you up for contending for the next 10+ years. Trade the other guy. This article points out that Dallas kinda did this in 1989 with Troy Aikman (1st overall pick) and Steve Walsh (supplemental 1st round pick):

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...-quarterbacks/

I realize it's not as simple as 2 QB prospects are better than 1. Who knows what it would do to the psychology of the two QBs, and would you reduce the chance of either excelling by having both of them there? Would they refuse to sign? That would be crazy and interesting.
The issue is practice reps. There aren't enough to go around to properly develop both, particularly with Taylor in the fold.
Reply With Quote
  #494  
Old 04-19-2018, 04:21 PM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 93
Thanks: 40
Thanked 72 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007 View Post
The issue is practice reps. There aren't enough to go around to properly develop both, particularly with Taylor in the fold.
That would be a problem also, no doubt.

Anther gutsy option, if Cleveland was convinced that the Giants really want Darnold (and Cleveland really wants Allen or someone else), is to draft Darnold at 1 and then engineer a trade with down with the Giants before picking their preferred QB at 2 or 4. Kind of like a more extreme and compressed version of what the Chargers did when they drafted Eli Manning. Reports are that the Jets are locked in on Mayfield, and if so, Cleveland could roll the dice again and try to pull the same thing on them. It would be the craziest draft ever.
Reply With Quote
  #495  
Old 04-19-2018, 04:49 PM
Puck's Avatar
Puck Puck is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Fort Wayne
Posts: 5,370
Thanks: 499
Thanked 574 Times in 331 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007 View Post
There are some bad takes that stick to posters. Seriously positing that the Browns wonít draft a QB is one of those takes.
Not saying they wonít. But I donít see it as a guarantee. They needed a QB last yr and took Garrett number one.


Either way Chubb will go #2 to Giants or 4 to Cleveland The question is do the Browns love Barkley enough to ride with Taylor for at least a yr. or trade back up and take a QB later in round 1 or take their top rated QB at 1

No one saw last yrs draft unfolding the way it did. So nothing is guaranteed
__________________
If you're not a Freak then you're just on the bandwagon
Reply With Quote
  #496  
Old 04-19-2018, 05:16 PM
rcubed's Avatar
rcubed rcubed is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 2,749
Thanks: 234
Thanked 343 Times in 196 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Puck View Post
Not saying they wonít. But I donít see it as a guarantee. They needed a QB last yr and took Garrett number one.


Either way Chubb will go #2 to Giants or 4 to Cleveland The question is do the Browns love Barkley enough to ride with Taylor for at least a yr. or trade back up and take a QB later in round 1 or take their top rated QB at 1

No one saw last yrs draft unfolding the way it did. So nothing is guaranteed
last years QB crop was considered weak compared to this year
Reply With Quote
  #497  
Old 04-19-2018, 05:53 PM
Chromeburn Chromeburn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 375
Thanks: 94
Thanked 149 Times in 88 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaka View Post
Taking two QBs at 1 and 4 would be crazy and undeniably bold, and open Cleveland to further ridicule. However, there might be some kind of weird logic to it - maximize your chance to land a top QB, which will set you up for contending for the next 10+ years. Trade the other guy. This article points out that Dallas kinda did this in 1989 with Troy Aikman (1st overall pick) and Steve Walsh (supplemental 1st round pick):

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...-quarterbacks/

I realize it's not as simple as 2 QB prospects are better than 1. Who knows what it would do to the psychology of the two QBs, and would you reduce the chance of either excelling by having both of them there? Would they refuse to sign? That would be crazy and interesting.
2 of those QBs out of the top 4 are going to fail. Thatís just the odds. You would increase your chances of getting a good one. However I think this is as likely as them taking two non QBs. Say Barkley and Chubb or Nelson. They have passed on QBs before, but really, when it comes to QBs. You just keep taking them till you get the right one.
Reply With Quote
  #498  
Old 04-19-2018, 06:18 PM
Dam8610 Dam8610 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 3,319
Thanks: 25
Thanked 273 Times in 174 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Puck View Post
Not saying they wonít. But I donít see it as a guarantee. They needed a QB last yr and took Garrett number one.


Either way Chubb will go #2 to Giants or 4 to Cleveland The question is do the Browns love Barkley enough to ride with Taylor for at least a yr. or trade back up and take a QB later in round 1 or take their top rated QB at 1

No one saw last yrs draft unfolding the way it did. So nothing is guaranteed
You seem to really want it to go that way, but like you said, nothing is guaranteed. I personally can't see the GMs in the top five not going 4 QBs and Barkley, but we won't know until next Thursday.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by omahacolt View Post
i was wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #499  
Old 04-19-2018, 09:46 PM
VeveJones007 VeveJones007 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,922
Thanks: 523
Thanked 383 Times in 219 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcubed View Post
last years QB crop was considered weak compared to this year
This class is deeper, but some analysts rated Trubisky in line with the top of this class.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
ColtFreaks.com is in no way affiliated with the Indianapolis Colts, the NFL, or any of their subsidiaries.