Jump to content

  •  


 
Photo

This team is terrible on paper....Colts a Christmas miricle?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
57 replies to this topic

#41 PatMcAfeeFan

PatMcAfeeFan
  • Member
  • 545 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 11:50 PM

Pat has been excellent punting in the last two games, is he a FA at the end of the season?

Yes Pat is a FA at the end of the season, but I don't think he will be going anywhere.
"Everyone just drink the kool-aid n leap n2 the blue waterfalls of faith...automatic 4the people..the smoker u drink,the player u get!"-Jim Irsay

Game Rewind: Relive every NFL moment…subscribe to Game Rewind.

#42 Jules

Jules

    "All the world's a stage"

  • Member
  • 7103 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:02 AM

This team is beautiful.

"I saw an Angel in the marble and carved until I set it free." ~ Michelangelo


#43 HungarianColtsFan

HungarianColtsFan
  • Member
  • 2527 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:26 AM

I think this team has more talent and heart than anyone may think. Colts are inconsistent as being a young, consisting of partly rookie, partly new players. We can make the key plays and win. We learned how to win, next season we will learn how to play statistical Football (efficient play that also looks good in stats).

+ we may be terrible on the paper but are winning on turf, and that matters no nice numbers.

COLTSTRONG


#44 SteelCityColt

SteelCityColt
  • Member
  • 3358 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:01 AM

Yes Pat is a FA at the end of the season, but I don't think he will be going anywhere.


Ha is that some inside info? Of all the players I'd have thunk Pt would have been one of the more likely to take an interest on here. One of my favorite players certainly, not just for his on field performances, he's an amusing follow on Twitter.

#45 SteelCityColt

SteelCityColt
  • Member
  • 3358 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:19 AM

I'd take Barwin, but I don't know what kind of money he'll want. I doubt Freeney will be here next year also, but I think we'll be okay at OLB, one way or the other. I like the way Grigson sticks to his board, and I expect him to do the same in the next draft. If we get an OLB, great, if not, he'll do something about it. We'll certainly have the cap space and the money.

The Texans only recourse to keep Barwin from coming to the Colts is to sign him themselves, and reports suggest they won't do that. If we want him, we'll have a fair shot. He's on my list of guys to watch next week.


Barwin is a player I like and I think could do a decent job for us in our new system, but as with all the FAs for next year we've got to get value for money. I like you though think Grigson has shown good decision making so far so I have faith that he's not going to saddle us with Haynesworth level FA millstones.

The Texans have to keep D Brown OT before Barwin.. so if it comes to the frantag... I think Brown gets it.

Barwin would be nice at the right price. A lot of really good DL/OLB available this off season. Grigs will get some very capable help in here to go along with the boys.


Aside from Barwin I can't think of too many other 3-4 OLBs on the FA list for next year? Who did you have in mind? Though you right there is some other good DL and MLBs available but I can see the most of the good ones (Melton/Starks etc.) being resigned by their respective teams.

#46 NightHawk

NightHawk
  • New Member
  • 12 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:01 AM

The easy schedule is a rediculous argument. We have 6 games in the division, constant. We have 4 games with another division in the AFC, designed on a rotational basis. We have 4 games with a division in the NFC, designed on a rotational basis. We have 2 games, only two games in the AFC where we face a team who placed the same as us. And our SoS was still tied 14th in the league when the season started. The Redskins had the easier schedule at like 26. That argument is toast before it even comes out of the persons mouth.


Couldn't agree more on that. You know all the analyst that get paid to talk about sports, projected the colts to win probably around 4-5 games this season. Although that is was a reasonable estimate, but it seems people are back-tracking their statement saying, "Well, the colts had an easy schedule" if we had such an easy schedule at the beginning why not say we'd win 9 games or more? Maybe...Just maybe we are better than everyone thought we'd be.

#47 lollygagger8

lollygagger8
  • Member
  • 3483 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:25 AM

New Roster:
According to Arians, before the pats game half the players in the locker room raised their hands to testify it was their first time in Foxboro. However according to Bill Polian the colts are fielding 60% of the players from their last super bowl. According to a CBS statistic shown this weekend Grigson brought in 35 new players. I put that at slightly more than half of our roster is new.


Haters gonna hate. Lol

#48 JoKeR

JoKeR

    And here...we.. GO...

  • Member
  • 6594 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 11:56 AM

We create our own Luck by not giving up. Stats are for those who don't watch games, which is a poor substitute IMO.

#49 PrincetonTiger

PrincetonTiger
  • Memb ns
  • 11414 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 11:59 AM

Can you say Clutch
Onward Princeton Forward Princeton

PrincetonTiger77

#50 shakedownstreet

shakedownstreet
  • Member
  • 5818 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 12:08 PM

Can you say Clutch


5 speed transmission

#51 The Peytonator

The Peytonator
  • Member
  • 2801 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 12:26 PM

New Roster:
According to Arians, before the pats game half the players in the locker room raised their hands to testify it was their first time in Foxboro. However according to Bill Polian the colts are fielding 60% of the players from their last super bowl. According to a CBS statistic shown this weekend Grigson brought in 35 new players. I put that at slightly more than half of our roster is new.


:lol:

Old Bill would try to take some credit for this season. What a joke. Bethea, Brown, Wayne, Vinatieri, Freeney, Mathis, Johnson....

7/53 = 60%

#52 BleedingBlue

BleedingBlue
  • Member
  • 1010 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 12:40 PM

Haters gonna hate. Lol


Yea, i found it odd that Bill was trying to take credit for this success, thats why I've been looking for the real stat on how many players were new. CBS listed it out by acquisition (# of dps, fa, cfl etc...) and it really showed Grigs ability to put together a winner.

:lol:

Old Bill would try to take some credit for this season. What a joke. Bethea, Brown, Wayne, Vinatieri, Freeney, Mathis, Johnson....

7/53 = 60%


yep, totally.

We create our own Luck by not giving up. Stats are for those who don't watch games, which is a poor substitute IMO.


Thats why I made the post. I've been watching the games and I couldn't believe the numbers were this bad from watching the games. But when you look at the numbers, especially the TO differential, you can't believe we're winning. I don't think any team in history has had such a bad TO diff and such a good record.
Calvin Johnson drops 2 passes in the 4th Quarter? Really?

#53 Narcosys

Narcosys
  • Member
  • 1465 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 02:55 PM

We have a princess schedule in a cupcake conference.

in your own words....

"4 games against NFC teams...."

Love it when people null their own arguments while talking....


How does this null my own argument?
Packers: .692
Bears: .615
Vikings: .538
Lions:.308
Texans: .846
Titans: .308
Jags: .154
Patriots: .762
Dolphins: .385
Jets: .462
Bills: .385
Chiefs: .154
Browns: .385

= .456 average. but probably end at around .460 or above.

Again, we had the 14th hardest schedule with 7 games against quality opponents.
And if the princess division your talking about is the NFC North then your nuts. They are the 2nd best, if not the best division in the NFC right now. So please explain where i nulled my own argument?

#54 Narcosys

Narcosys
  • Member
  • 1465 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:20 PM

You are smart enough to know the answer to this question, but I'll take the bait anyway...

We are in arguably the worst division in the NFL (the AFC west could be considered).
We play a 2-11 and a 4-9 football team, twice.
The combined record of all the teams we have played is 67-86.
We played a total of 4 games against NFC teams.
Playing the Texans twice in 3 weeks at the end of the season - with the last game being on the last week - removes us from having to the face the most elite team on our schedule at full throttle at least once.


We can only say that NOW. What about when the season first started, when people were saying we had a difficult schedule? Why the flip flop? You couldnt have imagined that the teams we went up against were going to do worse than they did the year prior. Your saying, oh we have a weak schedule, but only AFTER seeing what was going down. Thats like trying to place a bet on the Texans vs Patriots game AFTER halftime. Not really a fair deal, its given to you. You have to place your bet before the game, just like judging SoS before a season.

Your argument and logic makes no sense. Good job.

Heres a rundown of the probable SoS rankings for next year.

Titans 142 115 0.555 cardinals 140 116 0.547 Lions 139 117 0.543 Dolphins 135 221 0.527 Vikings 135 221 0.527 rams 134 122 0.523 Ravens 134 122 0.523 Cowboys 132 124 0.516 Bears 131 125 0.511 Packers 130 126 0.508 panthers 130 126 0.508 Jags 130 126 0.508 Eagles 129 127 0.504 49ers 129 127 0.504 Jets 129 127 0.507 Giants 128 128 0.5 Browns 128 128 0.5 chiefs 128 128 0.5 Seahawks 127 129 0.496 Saints 126 130 0.492 Bills 125 131 0.488 Steelers 124 132 0.484 Redskins 122 134 0.477 bucs 122 134 0.477 Texans 120 136 0.469 Bengals 118 138 0.461 raiders 118 138 0.461 Patriots 111 145 0.433 chargers 116 140 0.453 Colts 114 142 0.445 Broncos 108 148
0.422 falcons 105 151 0.41

#55 Superman

Superman
  • Forum Moderator
  • 13159 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 05:41 PM

You are smart enough to know the answer to this question, but I'll take the bait anyway...

We are in arguably the worst division in the NFL (the AFC west could be considered).
We play a 2-11 and a 4-9 football team, twice.


Same for the Texans, except we play them and they play us. Do they have a weak schedule?

The combined record of all the teams we have played is 67-86.


The Texans opponents combined record, so far, is 78-82. That difference is accounted for with just two games, the placement games (and we still have one left to be played, by the way). It's not that big of a deal.

We played a total of 4 games against NFC teams.


So does every other AFC team. And, as a matter of fact, we play arguably the best division in the NFC, and we're 3-1 against them. How does this weaken our schedule?

Playing the Texans twice in 3 weeks at the end of the season - with the last game being on the last week - removes us from having to the face the most elite team on our schedule at full throttle at least once.


Maybe. (Actually, no, the most elite team on our schedule is the Patriots, and we earned that butt-whoopin.) But we're already at nine wins.

What do people want? Should we vacate the wins we have against teams that aren't at least .500?

The schedule is what it is. It's on a formula, and aside from two games, it's the same as the first place schedule.
LET'S HUNT

#56 BleedingBlue

BleedingBlue
  • Member
  • 1010 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:27 PM

Same for the Texans, except we play them and they play us. Do they have a weak schedule?



The Texans opponents combined record, so far, is 78-82. That difference is accounted for with just two games, the placement games (and we still have one left to be played, by the way). It's not that big of a deal.



So does every other AFC team. And, as a matter of fact, we play arguably the best division in the NFC, and we're 3-1 against them. How does this weaken our schedule?



Maybe. (Actually, no, the most elite team on our schedule is the Patriots, and we earned that butt-whoopin.) But we're already at nine wins.

What do people want? Should we vacate the wins we have against teams that aren't at least .500?

The schedule is what it is. It's on a formula, and aside from two games, it's the same as the first place schedule.


First of all, to everyone on this thread quoting me (not just superman) I'm not championing the cause that we are winning because we have an easier schedule, obviously we have beaten good teams and lost to some bad teams - but I do think we have an easier schedule than most teams in the NFL and that is the point of my previous replies regardless.

IMO the AFC is a much weaker conference and it has been so for the last few years. Because AFC teams only play AFC teams (with the exception of 4 games) that makes any AFC teams' schedule harder than 16 teams in the NFC. So by default they are already on the bottom of the rung in terms of difficulty.

From there we can then compare it to the schedule of other AFC teams, sorting the list by division. We arguably are in teh weakest division with the exception being perhaps the AFC west.

This is nothing new, we've been benefiting from being in the worst division of the worst conference for a long time, even when PM was here.

To answer your question, yes the Texans have an easy schedule because they are also in the AFC south. I also believe that the Broncos have an easy schedule as the AFC West is also weak. Just like the AFC East was weak several years back and the Pats benefitted from feasting on teh hapless Jets, Dolphins and Bills twice a year.

Some of my comments were also made before the Pats destroyed the Texans also.
Calvin Johnson drops 2 passes in the 4th Quarter? Really?

#57 hawkeyes

hawkeyes
  • Member
  • 1558 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:39 PM

Yep just the way the ball bounces ... last year 2-14 this year 9-4 through 13 .... if the ball bounces the other way we are 2-11 right now. Pretty amusing how many actually think a 9-4 record means the Colts have fewer issues than last year.

:blueshoe: Lets Go Colts! :blueshoe:

 

*** DB ALL DAY ***


#58 braveheartcolt

braveheartcolt
  • Member
  • 4145 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 04:02 PM

Yep just the way the ball bounces ... last year 2-14 this year 9-4 through 13 .... if the ball bounces the other way we are 2-11 right now. Pretty amusing how many actually think a 9-4 record means the Colts have fewer issues than last year.


Was it 2009 when we had 8 x 4th Quarter comeback wins within 1 score? It happens all the time. Better teams win more games than bad teams, irrespective of lucky bounces. If you are really implying we are no better than last year, then you are implying we as good as our SB team of 2009, with your hero at the helm.

Or are you still missing Bob?
"If I make a comment and it is not backed up by factual evidence, take it as my opinion, and my opinion only"....






COLTS TICKETS!

Join the Season Ticket Wait List!

Sign up today
Game Rewind: Indianapolis Colts

Recent Status Updates

  • Photo
      23 Apr
    BrentMc11

    'possibly' having a re-do on my right eye tomorrow depending on the risk. It is still too far-sighted. I am too young to not have it done with a better script. Hoping it is easy...may have stitches this time with bigger incision.

    Show comments (9)
View All Updates