2012 Draft.

So what surprised you guys most in the draft this year. For me it was my Cowboys moving up from 14 to sixth to get Mo Claiborne. There is no reason that dude should have still been there at 6. Tampa wanted him, but got cute and traded down to 7th thinking he would still be there. LOL that bit them in the butt!

I was suprised that the Broncos drafted like they are building for the future instead of trying to win now. Considering they are on borrowed time with Manning, I figured they'd mortgage the future in order to get to the Superbowl now. Of coarse, since I don't like the Broncos... who cares?!?!

Also not sure why the Colts went crazy on offensive players since their defense is so horrible.

The move by the Browns to go get Richardson was the best move of the draft IMO.

zero24gravity wrote:

I was suprised that the Broncos drafted like they are building for the future instead of trying to win now. Considering they are on borrowed time with Manning, I figured they'd mortgage the future in order to get to the Superbowl now. Of coarse, since I don't like the Broncos... who cares?!?!

Also not sure why the Colts went crazy on offensive players since their defense is so horrible.

The move by the Browns to go get Richardson was the best move of the draft IMO.

I think the reasoning for the Colts was to give Luck as many weapons as possible. The know they aren't gonna win this year.

It's probably more important for their long term success to have Luck start out on the right foot.

Romoholic wrote:

I think the reasoning for the Colts was to give Luck as many weapons as possible. The know they aren't gonna win this year.

It's probably more important for their long term success to have Luck start out on the right foot.

He won't be doing well and get off on the right foot if Luck has to be on the field throwing 40+ times a game, getting killed by crazed pass-rushers, since the defense won't be be able to stop anyone and he'll be playing from behind the whole season.

I didn't say it was going to work I just think that was their thought process.

I actually think whats left of their front office is going to get exposed big time now that Manning is gone.

zero24gravity wrote:

Romoholic wrote:

I think the reasoning for the Colts was to give Luck as many weapons as possible. The know they aren't gonna win this year.

It's probably more important for their long term success to have Luck start out on the right foot.

He won't be doing well and get off on the right foot if Luck has to be on the field throwing 40+ times a game, getting killed by crazed pass-rushers, since the defense won't be be able to stop anyone and he'll be playing from behind the whole season.

Hey, thats the exact same situation that Peyton was thrown into. He did alright.

Mutangclan wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

Romoholic wrote:

I think the reasoning for the Colts was to give Luck as many weapons as possible. The know they aren't gonna win this year.

It's probably more important for their long term success to have Luck start out on the right foot.

He won't be doing well and get off on the right foot if Luck has to be on the field throwing 40+ times a game, getting killed by crazed pass-rushers, since the defense won't be be able to stop anyone and he'll be playing from behind the whole season.

Hey, thats the exact same situation that Peyton was thrown into. He did alright.

Well I guess they better hope he is the next Manning . Those type of QBs are once in a lifetime type QBs. It would almost be unfair for a team to get two back to back!

Romoholic wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

Romoholic wrote:

I think the reasoning for the Colts was to give Luck as many weapons as possible. The know they aren't gonna win this year.

It's probably more important for their long term success to have Luck start out on the right foot.

He won't be doing well and get off on the right foot if Luck has to be on the field throwing 40+ times a game, getting killed by crazed pass-rushers, since the defense won't be be able to stop anyone and he'll be playing from behind the whole season.

Hey, thats the exact same situation that Peyton was thrown into. He did alright.

Well I guess they better hope he is the next Manning . Those type of QBs are once in a lifetime type QBs. It would almost be unfair for a team to get two back to back!

Yea, well, I think its been established.......Colts are unfair! At least certainly seems that way with the way the league has been talking about Luck. He's widely considered another Manning already.

I Luck really that much of a sure fire can't miss superstar? I mean yeah I have seen him play and yes he looks good. So have other QBs that have been hyped beyond belief.

I guess I've just seen to many of the next so and so's turn out to be average to below average to buy into it until it happens.

Well, since I'm in St. Louis and only get the St. Lou perspective, I'm a little surprised the Rams didn't go after a WR in the first round. Maybe we've got some trades lined up, but, it seems to be a waste of a really good QB (Bradford) if we don't invest in a few 1st tier WRs. The idea of Bradford's best 1st option being to hand off to Steven Jackson, and his 2nd best option being to throw to Steven Jackson seems a little weak as far as offensive strategies go.

As for Denver, the Tebow trade and picking up Manning seems, well, really crazy. I'd be glad to be proved wrong on this, but, really?

Why isn't Denver a contender with Manning? Not a Denver fan, they beat my beloved Steelers in the playoffs, but not a Bronco hater either. Denver has a good running back, and a good defense. Not too sure about their offensive line or their receivers but if they can make the playoffs with a rookie as their QB I'm prone to think they can make some noise this season..

BTW, I'll need to lookup the Broncos defense to see just how good they were. Maybe they were middle of the pack, dunno.

As far as the Steelers: They're always a contender. I read they got an "A" on their drafting report card- think they got a linebacker and O lineman as their first two picks.... just not into the NFL draft like the NBA draft.

With Manning at QB, you'll see that, all of a sudden, like magic, the Broncos DO have good receivers!

Now, maybe it was just an amazing 12 year string of coincidences that the Colts just happened to luck out with every receiver they obtained being way better than their draft or trade or contract price...but the more likely explanation is that Manning MADE them good. Blair White, anyone??

It's (one of) my secret* draft strategy for fantasy this year: Reach for anybody that has *Den, WR* next to their name. Also, Denver's O-line is a terrific run-blocking unit, and an effective running game IS the best pass protection.

As for Luck, if he's the next Manning, "thrown to the wolves behind an aging offensive line"**, keep these numbers in mind: 3-13, 24 and 28. That's the Colts' record, and Mannings TD/Int totals in his first year. They're stupid to concentrate on "giving him weapons" when they should be investing in the O-line first, second and third.

Decreased success due to "inadequate weapons" is an easy upgrade. Lack of success due to "hit by pass rushers 15 times/game" could result in multiple starts for Curtis Painter or re-signing Kerry Collins or Mark Brunell. Sell season tickets for THAT, Irsay.

*-well, not so secret now. But anyone who couldn't figure that one out is going to have a hard time anyway.

**-Colts' line qualifies there. But at least he'll have quality skill position guys ("weapons") to watch him get carted off the field.

aliveandkickin wrote:

Why isn't Denver a contender with Manning? Not a Denver fan, they beat my beloved Steelers in the playoffs, but not a Bronco hater either. Denver has a good running back, and a good defense. Not too sure about their offensive line or their receivers but if they can make the playoffs with a rookie as their QB I'm prone to think they can make some noise this season..

BTW, I'll need to lookup the Broncos defense to see just how good they were. Maybe they were middle of the pack, dunno.

As far as the Steelers: They're always a contender. I read they got an "A" on their drafting report card- think they got a linebacker and O lineman as their first two picks.... just not into the NFL draft like the NBA draft.

In theory, I agree with Troll's response. And, if Manning is truly unhampered by his season-long injury, I don't see any negatives to Denver grabbing Manning for a few end-of career years from Manning. So, you both may be right about Denver.

But, I'm not convinced Manning will come back from his year-long rest in a young and healthy Manning fashion. Although the NFL is taking a strong stance in trying to prevent head injuries (due, in part, to recent suicides), I'm not sure Manning is above-the-shoulders healthy enough to survive the current NFL season. A neck injury is a serious injury. I haven't researched much as to the tiny details involving Manning's injury, but, a neck injury could impact Manning's on-the-grass ability to scan the field-- and it could put Manning one helmet to helmet play away from a career-ending injury.

I agree about Manning making WRs much better. And when he's healthy, it's run with the pass and score score score (which helps all the Fantasy players on that team). One thing I don't want to see is Manning sustaining a major injury that ruins the rest of his life. It definitely won't help the fantasy league if Manning goes down, but, since we're talking about real people, I might stop supporting the NFL altogether if a lot of really bad things keep happening.