Indianapolis Colts 2012 NFL Draft Mock W/ TRADE SCENARIO
by BlueHorseShoe on Feb 11, 2012 10:28 AM EST
This is a mock draft for the Indianapolis Colts based on team needs and players that are quite capable of feeling in holes and adding much needed depth. This mock is not to be taking seriously as it is just based on speculation and writing with the limited knowledge of the 2012 Draft Class.
The difference between this mock and the last one is that the 1st Overall selection is being mocked as traded away to the Cleveland Browns for two 1st Round picks (4th and 22nd overall), a 3rd Round (68th overall), and a 4th Round (118th overall) in the 2012 NFL Draft.
Mock Draft 5.0
by coltsfan88 on Feb 11, 2012 12:14 AM EST
It's not that different from Version 4.0, which I did like, but there are still a few changes I made to it in the later rounds. Lemme know what you think.
What would you Choose?
by indycolts21 on Feb 10, 2012 9:09 PM EST
I've been wondering what most people would take if given a situation such as the one I am going to present.
Situation: You drafted your Qb of the future and are building an offense, and someone gives you a choice between these two packages after the jump
The media's hatred towards the "scrambling" QBs will continue...
by BobInBlue on Feb 10, 2012 2:17 PM EST
with Luck going to the Colts.
I have no doubt that both Griffin and Luck will be successful in the NFL as long as they land into the right situation. Griffin is yet again one of the "scrambling" QBs deemed never to be successful in the NFL solely based how often they ran in the collegiate levels. A lot of this hatred towards these players is due to a poor sample of quarterbacks who didn't amount to elite status in the NFL. Being selected high into the NFL, the "scramble" QB will usually go to one of the worst teams of the NFL. After a year, he will grow a tendency to run to escape the Wilforks or Freeneys of the world. The GM put these players into such a bad postion, one in which they cannot develop as a better passer and become more of a RB. The tendency grows not of the countless of times he ran in college but the poor offensive line which was part of the reason the team is doing poor. Robert, unknown for his intelligence and discipline, will defy the standards of the "run-first" QB if he doesn't get stuck into a place where he is forced to pick either get hit by 240+ pund lineman 25 times a game to throw a pass to a mediocre WR or to escape the pocket using his speed and agility. After the jump, the information which explains why Luck is the right choice.
analysis of RG3 as a pick - BUST
by bigr2 on Feb 10, 2012 12:47 PM EST
RG3 is going to be a complete bust for whatever team takes him. As far as "mobile" QB''s go, he is toward the bottom of the pack in terms of skills.
*He is not that fast (he used to be olympic sprinter, but only expected to run 4.4 to 4.5 because of knee injury)
*His decision making is very very poor (I believe he will have a very very very very low wunderlic score).
*He has already had a serious knee injury
*He is too small to be a mobile QB
*Mobile Qb's have not won a SB in a long, long time. Traditional pocket passers, with some ability to move around in the pocket (such as luck) are the Qbs having success in the league. Mobile, inaccurate Qb's with poor decision making are not having success.
*He does not have leadeship abilities.
*He will not be accepted in good ole Indiana.
Freeney??
by modern_day_warrior on Feb 10, 2012 8:01 AM EST
So, where does this leave Freeney in this whole "new era"? Freeney is a true 4-3 DE. He's never, to my knowledge, played LB. He is not big enough to play the DE position in a 3-4 and if you did play him at DE in a 3-4 you lose everything Freeney is about, speed and finesse off the edge.
I remember the defense before Freeney came along. It wasn't pretty. Probably worse than what we saw last year. We had no one that could rush the passer. Chad Bratzke was the closest thing we had to anyone who could put heat on the passer and he will never be compared to Freeney or Mathis in terms of production.
The new guys will have to get creative with Freeney. I think he still has a few years of production left and he's someone that you just have to keep.
Charlie Williams to be Colts WR coach
by Radcolt on Feb 9, 2012 10:27 PM EST
Looks like this means that Clyde Christianson will be the QB coach and mentoring Andrew Luck. I was hoping Clyde would go back to coaching receivers again. We were very successful when he was that position coach.
Charlie Williams was on Tony Dungy's staff (I am not sure what position he held, but it wasn't like Tampa Bay had a high powered office during those years). He has had some success with coaching receivers at UNC, so it sounds like it may be a good pickup.
A Little Clarity on Peyton's Injury
by colt_monger on Feb 9, 2012 6:47 PM EST
Only reporters with supposed "insider connections" are making all the half ass prophecies about Peyton.
11 comments
|
2 recs |
Tweet
About The "Trade The #1 Pick For More Picks" Thing ... What About Free Agency?
by an_auburn_fan on Feb 9, 2012 2:26 PM EST
A lot of folks are playing the "keep Peyton Manning and trade the #1 pick for a boatload of draft picks" angle. BUT there is another way of looking at it. What is Peyton Manning's salary cap figure again? For this year? Next year? The year after that? Retaining Manning would preclude the Colts from signing free agents, and would also even keep them from retaining some of their own. And not just this year, but over the life of Manning's contract.
By contrast, drafting Andrew Luck would mean that he would get paid $22-24 million over the next 4 years. (That is in contrast with the $28 million that Manning would get on March 8 alone.) It is the $6 million a year that Luck would get versus the $18 million a year that Manning would get. Hmmm ... so how many more veteran starters - more proven players than draft picks - could the Colts sign over that time in free agency? Being just a bit simplistic ... the $28 million that they are paying Manning this season would garner 5 linemen at an average of $5 million a year (Chris Canty, Giants DT, made $5.25 million this year). Being similarly simplistic, $18 million per year for Manning versus $6 million per year for Luck for the 4 years that Luck will play his rookie deal: that is $48 million. Again, assuming that a quality NFL free agent will get $4 million to $5 million ... that would be 9 to 10 players. Stars? No. But definitely good players: starters and top reserves.
And oh yeah ... it isn't like the Colts are just going to stop drafting people. The difference is that with Luck, the Colts will be able to improve themselves via the draft AND free agency. With Manning, you'll only have the draft. Even if you get three #1 picks in return for the 1st round pick ... since one of those picks is an "even swap" (i.e. the #1 overall for Cleveland's #4 overall) the net is just 2 more players. And - again assuming the trade is with the Browns - one of those picks is at #22. Whoopee! Granted, the Falcons gave up 5 picks for Julio Jones, but that was to move up from #27 to to #6, not going from #4 to #1. Plus, 2 of the 5 picks were in the 4th round. So REALLY the Browns only netted 3 picks: a pair of second rounders and #22 overall. The Colts aren't going to get THAT MUCH more than that by trading the #1 pick.
The Colts would get far more players - and proven veterans able to contribute immediately at that - by using the $64 million left on the $90 million Manning contract to chase free agents than they would by dealing the #1 pick. Again, where trading the #1 overall would get them 4 extra rookies max, Manning's contract could get them a bunch of veteran players to plug into the starting lineup and provide veteran depth.
Of course, if Luck pans out, his next deal will break the bank. But that is a better problem to have with a 26 year old QB and a roster stocked with (hopefully) 4 years of prudent drafting and free agency signings than it is to have NOW with a terrible roster and a 36 year old QB.
Looking at what the Superbowl could bring to the city of Indianapolis
by PatsR18andDONEwithoutCHEATING on Feb 8, 2012 11:46 PM EST
One of the reasons the city of Indianapolis bid to host a super bowl, was to get bigger business and more things to do in the city of Indianapolis. According to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, unlike the city of Dallas last year the city of Indianapolis did an excellent job of hosting the super bowl and the NFL would like to return to Indy for another super bowl. Not to mention the fact that Patriots wide receiver Deon Branch claimed that the city of Indianapolis did a great job hosting the super bowl in an interview at a Pacers game and Bob Kravits gave the city of Indianapolis an A+ in being a good host for the super bowl on his super bowl 2012 report card Indy Star article. So the next question becomes, what will the super bowl bring entertainment wise to the city of Indianapolis.
Well personally since I don't think it's possible for the city of Indianapolis to get an NHL, MLS, Cricket, professional fighting, or professional lacross team due to lack of fan support in the state of Indiana. And since the Indiana Fire Birds (AFL team 2001-2004) were kind of a failure in the city of Indianapolis, I would say an MLB team may be our best option as far as sports entertainment/professional sports goes. Then 2 other things I feel the city of Indianapolis needs is an amusement park and an aquarium. So below I've listed the reasons why or why not the city of Indianapolis could or couldn't have an MLB team, large aquarium, or an amusement park after being the only city in the midwest to have a successful superbowl hosting and likely get another super bowl.
Aquarium
Reasons why we need one-A large Aquarium would be a wonderful addition to the city of Indianapolis in my opinion, because it could be a wonderful educational experience for allot of people in school grades K-12 as well as families just looking to do something fun on the weekends. An aquarium would also provide great opportunities for both Purdue and IUPUI's graduate programs for their school's of science, nature, and fishery departments. IU has their med school program run through IUPUI, why couldn't an aquarium get a graduate program for a few of Purdue's fishery programs run through IUPUI which is supposed to stand for Indiana Purdue University Indianapolis not Indiana University Indianapolis.
Reasons why we don't- Aquariums are expensive to build, most of the time more expensive then zoos. Aquariums also require allot of maintenance and risk involved with acquiring certain types of aquatic life such as the marine sun fish, dolphin tuna, spanish makerel, tiger shark, sawfish, and bull shark. Plus given Indiana's location, it would be allot more difficult for the city of Indianapolis to get any of the fish mentioned above then it would in a location on the coast with an aquarium.
MLB Team
Reasons why we need one-When the Hoosier Dome (RCA dome 1994-2008) was built in 1982 it was originally supposed to be a direct smaller replica of the Metro Dome (home to the Minnesota Vikings since 1982 and the Twins from 1982-2009). But some things happened (many believed the city of Cincinnati and Marge Schott (owner of the Reds at the time) blocked the city of Indianapolis from getting an MLB team, because she didn't want any MLB team with in 200 miles of hers') and the RCA Dome ended up being a football only stadium that got the Colts. Plus the Indianapolis Indians even when their bad have one of the best attendances in tripple A ball which is better then the attendance of any AAA teams in the states of New Jersey or North Carolina or the cities of Las Vegas, New Orleans, Buffalo, Nashville, or Salt Lake City. Not to mention the fact that twice the city of Louisville has tried to get an NBA twice team and failed. It was also believed that Pacers owner Herb Simon who was on a board of people who got the city of Indianapolis the Colts in 1984 didn't want a team in the city of Louisville who accounts for allot of the city of Cincinnati's fan support for both their professional sports teams in the Reds and Bengals, possibly indicating the city of Cincinnati could account for allot of the fan support for an NBA team in Louisville. Possibly meaning all in all that if the city of Cincinnati wants to block the city of Indianapolis from getting an MLB team, a settlement could be called where the city of Indianapolis supports an NBA team in Louisville if the city of Cincinnati supports an MLB team in Indianapolis.
Reasons why it won't happen-It seems like the city of Indianapolis's chance to get an MLB team was from 2005-2010. That was when the Colts were good and no one cared about the Pacers (and yes I am talking about the year after Reggie retired). Since the MLB season starts when college basketball ends, has the playoffs in September, and ends in October an MLB team would have been ideal at that time, because by the time the Colts training camp had rolled around in late July early August an Indianapolis MLB team possibly playing at an expanded Victory field would have been out of the playoffs with nothing to play for and things likely would have been like that for the team till Peyton retired and the Colts got bad again (I'm just going by the way things seemed at that time, I'm not be any means saying Luck is going to be a bust or the Pacers are still bad and have poor attendance). Now the Pacers pose competition for an MLB team as far as ticket sales go until May or June depending on how far they go in the playoffs. Not to mention the fact that since the Indianapolis Hoosiers MLB team folded in the 1800's there has never been an MLB team located with in 200 miles of the Cincinnati Reds and for that reason the city of Indianapolis may never be able to get a team. Plus an MLB team not being in the NL central may hurt ticket sales as well due to the fact that the state of Indiana MLB fan base has always been dominated by Cubs, Cardinals, and Red fans. But then again even though it's been true since the late 1800's the 200 mile thing was just something I heard at a bar so it may not be a factual statement and the NBA has been on a pretty steep decline lately.
Amusement Park
Reasons why we need one-Currently aside from sports, it seems like the 2 missing links in the entertainment industry for the city of Indianapolis are an amusement park and an aquarium. An amusement park in the city of Indianapolis would also give teenagers something to do after their prom's as well as provide allot of family fun for the city of Indianapolis. An amusement park with a water park, wave pool, and lazy river would also cool allot of people down in the summer and show there is more then just corn, basketball, and football in the city of Indianapolis.
Reasons why it won't happen-The city of Cincinnati Ohio (just over 2 hours from Indianapolis) already has 3 amusement parks, and 2 water parks. Plus it's not like the state of Indiana doesn't have an amusement park the cities of Monticello and Santa Claus Indiana both have amusement parks.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
