Colts owner Jim Irsay recently hinted his team **would be interested in drafting a quarterback** if the opportunity presented itself, saying, "Even if that means that guy sits for three or four years, you'd certainly think about taking him." Indianapolis is 0-5 and looking likely to have a pick very near the top of Round 1 next April. With Peyton Manning aging and injured, should the Colts spend a high first-round pick on a QB in 2012?
<div class="removeformobile" style=" width: 225px; font-family: arial; margin-right: 5px; margin-bottom: 5px; font-size: 11px; border: solid 0px #ccc; padding-left: 10px; margin-top: 5px; float: right; background-color: #ffffff; padding-right: 10px; margin-left: 5px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-top: 10px;">
<div style=" padding-left: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; border: 1px solid #eee; font-family: arial; padding-top: 0px; font-size: 11px; padding-right: 0px;">
<div style=" padding-left: 5px; padding-bottom: 5px; background-color: #dddddd; padding-top: 5px; margin-bottom: 3px; font-size: 12px; padding-right: 5px;">
**Brooks: Luck's the real deal**
</div>
<div style=" padding-left: 5px; padding-bottom: 5px; padding-top: 5px; padding-right: 5px;">
!
**Bucky Brooks** explains what's so impressive about Stanford's
Andrew Luck, and it goes beyond the quarterback's numbers.
**More ...**
»
Rank: Colts top Bottom 6
If a wealthy investor finds a great deal on a waterfront mansion, even if he has no intention of living in it for five years, it would only be reasonable to invest in it if that person still has plenty of money to maintain their lifestyle in the meantime.
That's what the Colts would need to decide: Is this year's winless record based entirely on Manning's absence? Or do the Colts need more than a quarterback to improve next season? The Packers spent the 24th overall pick on Aaron Rodgers -- not the No. 1 pick. So while the Colts could justify choosing Andrew Luck based on the huge impact Manning's return will have on their win-loss record, they'd better be sure another player in the draft won't be the difference-maker when it comes to getting to the Super Bowl.
After all, there's no reason to invest in the future if you're too poor in the present.
The Colts likely would shop the choice, but they did pretty well the last time they drafted a quarterback with a high pick. Sure, it could be a course dynamic with Manning still in house, but that's a reality that will have to be dealt with at some point anyway. So if you have a chance to draft Andrew Luck or a premium QB, do it and let him sit a year or so behind Manning and then transition. Manning is also a pro. He knows he can only play for so long, so he'll handle things well.
The Colts would be idiots not to explore this option, especially if they're anywhere around Luck Land, which they seem destined to be.
Remember, the Colts spent plenty of man hours evaluating quarterbacks in the 2011 draft and dabbled with the idea of taking one on the first day or two last April.
With Manning's future in some question and the need for QBs always great, it's a no-brainer. If you flip him for picks down the road or whatever, than so be, but a team in the woeful straights the Colts find themselves in has no business passing on a potential franchise quarterback
Completely depends. If they have the top overall pick, yes. But if Indy finishes 5-11, and gets the fifth, sixth or seventh choice, then I'm not so sure. What's the point of developing Curtis Painter, or having him on the roster in 2009 and 2010? Do we absolutely know for certain he isn't a viable long-range answer? No. Don't laugh at that. Rich Gannon, Kurt Warner, Dan Fouts, Phil Simms, Joe Theismann, and Trent Green all took time and became great players. Either way, Bill Polian must have a long-term plan in place to replace Manning.
