Yes, I know... it makes no sense. A roster depleted offensively and aching defensively and the Team takes 2 tight ends. I mean, what comes next? We take a QB in the 4th round? Afterall, what if the QB is the "best player" available?
But hold on just a second. Perhaps theres more to it. Then again, it seems like there's some heat flying around in the Colts Upperhands, so perhaps there isn't. Still I'll give a shot at rationalizing the picks.
Fleener at 34 was a popular pick by most fans and many scouts. We needed a TE. And Fleener was very high on the Colts draft board. Something must have clicked between him and the Team. We as fans may disagree, but the guys making the call invested a lot on this pick, so I trust there is something there. Fleener is a non-traditional TE.... fast, excels at route running and catching, and is a good kid. I respect that.
Allen at 64 was probably the best player available. He's probably a bit more traditional than Fleener. So the two are notably different, even though they play the same position. Fleener can stretch the field more, Allen can block better.
Why is this good? Consider the circumstance that we drafted a receiver and a TE, which most would have approved of. There we seek to bolster the passing game/give Luck more weapons. But a TE can do more than just catch... they block as well. Essentially with a two TE set, we have two pass catchers and two extra blockers if we choose to run. That to me, is a better offense given... just bear with me... who our OC is, what our HC wants to do, and what Luck is best at.
We want a power running game, our OC likes the 2 TE set, and Luck is brilliant within 20 yards. All of that may now be accomplished. Personally, I would have loved to see Luck air it out and learn to develop the deep ball. But if the Colts can keep picking up change on offense fielding 2 TE's, Wayne (an semi-elite receiver), Collie (a solid slot guy), and Avery as a burner every now and then... we should be in good shape. Luck will throw to all 7 positions on offense (including FB and RB), and this gives an ideal situation to utilize the short field... much like New England. Personally, I think this is a better scenario than drafting a WR, who have a larger learning curve as they operate one on one and they are one dimensional (offer nothing to the run game).
But what about our DEFENSE, which is pitiful? Shouldn't we have gone with a DB or a tackle or anything that plays on the other side of the football game? I definitely agree. Defense is going to be critical if the Colts expect to win, especially with a defensive head coach. But now, we can focus the rest of our draft picks on getting the best DB, LB, and DT available. We still have 7 left. Surely we can get some physical players (guys who tackle and play hard... preferably big and fast) in those later rounds. I know Grigs said he'd continue with the "best player"... but I fully trust that he will consider the defense first.
The OL is also a concern, but less so. As I said, the extra TE's will help block, and our off season was solely focused on the OL. So now, on to the defense.
Because I can't rationalize anything contrary.