Quote:
Originally Posted by GoBigBlue88
I just can't get with an OG at 6.
Look, Nelson may well be a very good player. May be an All-Pro. There's no sure thing at any position, OL included (cough Jonathan Cooper or Chance Warmack cough), so I won't say for sure. I won't be surprised if he's very good.
But let's say Nelson is amazing and the RG/RT situation is still Slauson/Haeg or something like that. Luck is still in mortal danger, and defenses will still shut down your run game because it will be so damn easy to load up on the left side. Does a great OG really have any impact, in that situation?
Let's say Reich's scheme emphasizes quick passing decisions. Isn't an OG's impact neutralized in that situation?
I guess I just look at a lottery OG as a total luxury pick in today's NFL. Is the difference between Nelson and Hernandez or Wynn, for instance, really that big? Is Nelson really going to make more plays for the Colts than a Roquan Smith or Tremaine Edmunds?
The only way you can sell me on an OG that high for the Colts is by telling me this is a cultural statement and trendsetter, and even that feels a bit elusive as a justification.
I still think Day 2 is set up to go very well, and again, none of this is saying Nelson will be a bad player. But I am just philosophically opposed to an OG at 6 the same way many of you are opposed to a RB at 6.
|
I get what you are saying and I don't necessarily disagree. The anti-Nelsons on this board have made some good arguments why the pick was bit of a reach. However, I don't think that he was a reach in the traditional sense that no one else would have selected him this high, as I suspect he would have been chosen no later than 8 had the Colts taken someone else.
As to your argument that the opposing team could neutralize his effect by focusing on other areas of the line, wouldn't that thinking apply equally to an OT selected this high? I only ask because it is fairly commonplace for OTs to be taken in the top 5 or 6 picks, and I've never heard anyone use your argument to say that's a mistake. So is your criticism more about selecting an offensive lineman rather than a defensive player? I realize that OTs generally have to deal with better athletes at DE and OLB, but there are lots of tough DTs around too and Nelson should provide an immediate upgrade to our anemic run game.
While I would have been more excited about selecting Chubb, I personally like that we are adding someone who is expected to start and play at a high level from day 1, as I think (barring further Luck problems) that we will compete in 2018.