Giving Grigson his Due

[Superman]

No, because Seattle is reliant on it's defense and running game. If Grigson put together the roster that Seattle has now, he'd be a good GM, but so far, he hasn't shown the ability too. 

 

It's still a double standard. Seattle was a 7-9 team in one of the weakest divisions in the league, until 2012. To this point, Schneider has had 39 draft picks, to Grigson's 22. He started out with two top 15 picks in 2010 (the Earl Thomas pick was inherited from a 2009 trade, so it's not even like Schneider moved up for a player he loved), kind of clucked off the top of his 2011 draft... but he had two seasons to build a base with some good draft commodities before they became a real playoff contender. Carpenter wasn't a good pick, then he traded for Percy Harvin, which was a bad deal. Last year, they played around with their first rounder, netting Paul Richardson (instead of just taking Jordan Matthews, or picking Jarvis Landry or Davante Adams or another, better WR) and Cassius March.

 

They still don't pass protect very well. They don't have good weapons on the outside. Their coaching staff has put together great systems on both sides of the ball, which has minimized the roster issues that they do have. And Schneider didn't hire the coach; the coach hired him, and has a great deal of influence over roster decisions. They have a great roster, but it's not like Schneider hasn't made his own mistakes. And of course, he's had more to work with because he's been in place two years longer than Grigson has, and works with a better coaching staff.

 

My long-winded point: We spend a bunch of time micro-analyzing Grigson's decisions and undermining his role in the team's success, but then judge guys like Schneider from afar and give him credit for putting together a great roster. Grigson has done much better than you give him credit for.

[Dustin]

 To this point, Schneider has had 39 draft picks, to Grigson's 22. 

 

That's because he keeps trading his picks away. 

 

My long-winded point: We spend a bunch of time micro-analyzing Grigson's decisions and undermining his role in the team's success, but then judge guys like Schneider from afar and give him credit for putting together a great roster. Grigson has done much better than you give him credit for.

 

 

Why wouldn't Schneider (and Carroll is the de facto GM by the way) get credit for building a great roster when he's done exactly that? You're assuming that i don't think a GM is allowed to make mistakes or something. I'm not an *, so I'd appreciate if people stop trying to misrepresent my viewpoint to pretend like I'm saying that.

 

Grigson's misses are close to his amount of "hits". From the 2013 off-season on, it's probably worse, or players who I'm told can't be judged yet (ex. Arthur Jones) have played more like busts so far. He can't draft a single starting caliber defensive player in 3 years. Hasn't had one 6th or 7th round player contribute anything meaningful in 3 seasons. 

[Superman]

That's because he keeps trading his picks away.

 

For the likes of Paul Richardson and Cassius March. Meanwhile, Grigson overhauled 90% of his roster in 3 years, with fewer draft picks and fewer top 60 draft picks.

 

Why wouldn't Schneider (and Carroll is the de facto GM by the way) get credit for building a great roster when he's done exactly that?

 

I never said he doesn't get credit for building a great roster. I said that his great roster has some flaws, he's made mistakes along the way, and the coaching has done a great job overcoming those flaws and mistakes. 

Why doesn't Grigson get credit for 2012? Picks like KJ Wright and Richard Sherman and Earl Thomas are from prior to 2012. If that's the core of their defense, and we're still showing love for those picks, why aren't we showing love for Grigson drafting the core of the offense in 2012?

 

You're assuming that i don't think a GM is allowed to make mistakes or something. I'm not an *, so I'd appreciate if people stop trying to misrepresent my viewpoint to pretend like I'm saying that.

 

When you say Seattle has a great roster, but don't mention his mistakes or the higher quality of coaching, then at the same time magnify Grigson's mistakes on a micro level and give credit to the Colts' coaching, it's a double standard. You're one of the smartest people around here, but also one of the most sarcastic, so it's hard to know when to take you seriously. When you say Grigson doesn't deserve credit for the Colts relative success, my initial reaction is to shrug it off, but then you dig in like you have in this thread. 

 

Grigson's misses are close to his amount of "hits". From the 2013 off-season on, it's probably worse, or players who I'm told can't be judged yet (ex. Arthur Jones) have played more like busts so far. He can't draft a single starting caliber defensive player in 3 years. Hasn't had one 6th or 7th round player contribute anything meaningful in 3 seasons.

Without getting into a case-by-case (because there are plenty of disagreements, but they aren't really relevant, and neither of us is changing his mind), I'll just say that I think it's overly critical of Grigson to say things like "the roster is terrible" and "Grigson would be fired if not for Luck." You even quoted Brad Wells being critical of one of Grigson's best draft decisions. Good moves like Mike Adams are undermined. Freeman, who has played better than you'd expect a 6th or 7th rounder to play, is being marginalized, while you complain about no notable 6th or 7th rounders (not to mention that three of them have made stupid off field mistakes that cost them their spot on the roster).

I don't think I've put words in your mouth. I certainly haven't suggested that you think a GM isn't allowed to make mistakes. But I don't think you're grading him fairly.

[TKnight24]

The only people who think Andrew Luck is the only reason we've had any success over the past three years are the ones who work very hard to see it that way.

You honestly don't believe this is an 11-5 team without the Neard do you?

Omg you're killing me!

[TKnight24]

The idea that Grigson has not done a great job is so laughable on so many levels, it removes the opportunity to even discuss it. IMO, he is not at a make or break year, he has not been carried by the selection of Luck, and he has done a stellar job of finding back of the draft and FA talent.

I wonder how many of those who are throwing him under the bus or seriously doubting his future now, were also throwing him under the bus for trading up to get Hilton...

I love the NFL draft....but I hate how it turns fans into armchair GM's who prejudge before it's due, and who use revisionist history as a bully pulpit to vent negativity.

He drafted a project player in the 1st round

Not saying fire the man, but don't praise him like he's the best thing like sliced bread

[Colts_Fan12]

Everyone gets upset when Dustin says the roster is terrible when honestly it's the truth without him bailing us out on offense our D would look even worse then it does now. Our O line would look worse then it already does without Lucks mobility and pocket awareness. Without our elite QB we would be a ver bad team IMO. We have what? 1 real elite playmaker on D in Vontae everyone else is old or average at best. I think jones is good when fully healthy but we will have to wait and see.

[Dustin]

 

For the likes of Paul Richardson and Cassius March. Meanwhile, Grigson overhauled 90% of his roster in 3 years, with fewer draft picks and fewer top 60 draft picks.

 

 

I think you misread my comment. Grigson had fewer picks because he kept trading them away. It's not like there's some magic lottery where Goodell comes out and decides which teams get so many picks. Each of them started on a level playing field with a full array of draft picks. And Grigson has traded his away for the likes of Trent Richardson and Montori Hughes.

 

This works under the assumption that this is impressive. Turning over 90% of your roster isn't impressive. Any bad GM can do that. But his actual construction of the roster has been sub-par.

 

We can go through and put a microscope on every signing or draft picks he's made, but the fact of the matter is that the defense isn't much better than it was during 2012. The 2012 defense gave up 40+ points, 2 fewer than 2014. We have 1 starting defensive player who was drafted by Grigson. He's traded away a guy who's now a premier pass rusher and now one of the highest paid players in his position in favor of an edge "rusher" who's barely more athletic than a lot of defensive tackles.  

 

Oline is still going to be subpar. We'll either be forced to draft a new RT high or roll with the one with the degenerative knee injury who got the biggest contract ever at his position. Both of our centers are terrible. Our RG spot is a competition between 3 more mediocre player. We're lukcy Polian drafted Costanzo or we likely wouldn't even have a starting LT on the roster. 

 

When Grigson got here he said his goals were to "Stop the run and build the best oline in the NFL" and neither of those things are close to coming to fruition.

 

Why doesn't Grigson get credit for 2012? Picks like KJ Wright and Richard Sherman and Earl Thomas are from prior to 2012. If that's the core of their defense, and we're still showing love for those picks, why aren't we showing love for Grigson drafting the core of the offense in 2012?

 

 

Of course he can. His 2012 draft was great. My point is that that looks more like an outlier than what he's actually about. Everything since then has been average to bad.

 

 When you say Seattle has a great roster, but don't mention his mistakes or the higher quality of coaching, then at the same time magnify Grigson's mistakes on a micro level and give credit to the Colts' coaching, it's a double standard.

 

 

This thread isn't about Seattle, that's why I didn't go more in depth. The bottom line is that Seattle has a great roster in spite of mishaps. Grigson doesn't. 

 

Your failures aren't magnified a lot when your defense is comprised of player like Richard Sherman, Kam Chancellor, Bobby Wagner, Byron Maxwell, Michael Bennett, and Cliff Avriil as opposed to when your defense is comprised of D'Qwell Jackson, Ricky Jean-Francois, and Laron Landry. 

 

 I'll just say that I think it's overly critical of Grigson to say things like "the roster is terrible" and "Grigson would be fired if not for Luck."

 

 

But those things are true. This is not a good team if you put an average QB here. If the Colts traded for Nick Foles tomorrow, do you think this team would break 7 wins? 

 

Freeman, who has played better than you'd expect a 6th or 7th rounder to play, is being marginalized

 

 

Because he's an ok backup player being kept in a starting role. He's not a starting caliber player. 

[Dustin]

Colts trade for Nick Foles tomorrow and your forced to bet everything you own on whether or not the Colts break 7 wins. You taking the over? 

[Colts_Fan12]

Colts trade for Nick Foles tomorrow and your forced to bet everything you own on whether or not the Colts break 7 wins. You taking the over?

hell no

[BOTT]

The idea that Grigson has not done a great job is so laughable on so many levels, it removes the opportunity to even discuss it. IMO, he is not at a make or break year, he has not been carried by the selection of Luck, and he has done a stellar job of finding back of the draft and FA talent. 

 

I wonder how many of those who are throwing him under the bus or seriously doubting his future now, were also throwing him under the bus for trading up to get Hilton...

 

I love the NFL draft....but I hate how it turns fans into armchair GM's who prejudge before it's due, and who use revisionist history as a bully pulpit to vent negativity.

I find the fact that you think Grigson has done a great job laughable. With the selection of Luck, grigson is like the kid who was born on 3rd base, but you guys act like he hit a triple. He's been OK, nothing more.

[BOTT]

Colts trade for Nick Foles tomorrow and your forced to bet everything you own on whether or not the Colts break 7 wins. You taking the over?

You are asking the wrong fanbase. Many on this forum thought the Colts would win 9 games when Peyton went down lol

[Gavin]

No reason to believe Foles cant get 7 wins I think if that happened. I'd actually expect to be a playoff team with him. Outside of the San Francisco game last year he wasn't bad

[BOTT]

No reason to believe Foles cant get 7 wins I think if that happened. I'd actually expect to be a playoff team with hm. Outside of the San Francisco game last year he wasn't bad

Meh, when I saw him play he always left a lot of plays on the field....including against the colts.

[Tracy Denton]

Colts trade for Nick Foles tomorrow and your forced to bet everything you own on whether or not the Colts break 7 wins. You taking the over? 

Oh yeah, 7 wins easy. Just because of the "weak" divison that you are always saying we are in.

[Dustin]

Oh yeah, 7 wins easy. Just because of the "weak" divison that you are always saying we are in.

7 wins because of the quality of the division, not on the merit of the roster?

[Superman]

I think you misread my comment. Grigson had fewer picks because he kept trading them away. It's not like there's some magic lottery where Goodell comes out and decides which teams get so many picks. Each of them started on a level playing field with a full array of draft picks. And Grigson has traded his away for the likes of Trent Richardson and Montori Hughes.

 

And Vontae Davis, but that doesn't support your thesis.

 

With all the moves and trades both teams have made, they both average about 7-8 picks per draft. The simple fact that the Seahawks have two years on us gives them this advantage, not better pick management. They gave up more for Harvin than we did for Richardson and Hughes combined.

 

This works under the assumption that this is impressive. Turning over 90% of your roster isn't impressive. Any bad GM can do that. But his actual construction of the roster has been sub-par.

 

Doing so after taking over a 2-14 team with hardly anyone worth holding over, and still having three 11 win seasons is worthy of some recognition. Unless you give all the credit to the QB (who wouldn't have had anyone to throw to if Grigson had drafted the way everyone thought he should in 2012).

 

We can go through and put a microscope on every signing or draft picks he's made, but the fact of the matter is that the defense isn't much better than it was during 2012. The 2012 defense gave up 40+ points, 2 fewer than 2014. We have 1 starting defensive player who was drafted by Grigson. He's traded away a guy who's now a premier pass rusher and now one of the highest paid players in his position in favor of an edge "rusher" who's barely more athletic than a lot of defensive tackles. 

 

Also played a first place schedule, and a better NFC division. Same sorry AFC South. And still, the defense gave up fewer points per game, despite the handful of bad performances. Only the bad is relevant though...

 

Oline is still going to be subpar. We'll either be forced to draft a new RT high or roll with the one with the degenerative knee injury who got the biggest contract ever at his position. Both of our centers are terrible. Our RG spot is a competition between 3 more mediocre player. We're lukcy Polian drafted Costanzo or we likely wouldn't even have a starting LT on the roster.

 

When Grigson got here he said his goals were to "Stop the run and build the best oline in the NFL" and neither of those things are close to coming to fruition.

 

Ha. We're lucky Polian drafted one position player in the last ten years that's good enough to still be on the roster. Wow. That's what Grigson inherited.

 

I'm not as eager to write off a center who has started 6 games in his career. But yes, the OL and DL aren't as good as they should be. Knock Grigson all you want for bad decisions there, including Jerry Hughes. That's different from saying that he deserves no credit for the team's successes.

 

Of course he can. His 2012 draft was great. My point is that that looks more like an outlier than what he's actually about. Everything since then has been average to bad.

 

No, 2014 wasn't bad. It was just undermined by a bad decision in 2013. That's actually a strong draft haul, considering there was no first rounder. 

 

This thread isn't about Seattle, that's why I didn't go more in depth. The bottom line is that Seattle has a great roster in spite of mishaps. Grigson doesn't.

Your failures aren't magnified a lot when your defense is comprised of player like Richard Sherman, Kam Chancellor, Bobby Wagner, Byron Maxwell, Michael Bennett, and Cliff Avriil as opposed to when your defense is comprised of D'Qwell Jackson, Ricky Jean-Francois, and Laron Landry.

 

There's still a need for perspective. No front office is judged in a vacuum. Unless you compare what one team has done with what another has done, you're just howling at the moon. And if you're not going to grade them in the same manner, you're using a double standard.

 

But those things are true. This is not a good team if you put an average QB here. If the Colts traded for Nick Foles tomorrow, do you think this team would break 7 wins?

 

No, I don't. That's a hypothetical; we know based on historical fact that the Seahawks are no better than a 7 win team without Russell Wilson. That's with a better coaching staff, in a bad division (at the time).

 

Because he's an ok backup player being kept in a starting role. He's not a starting caliber player.

 

Yeah, I think Freeman is better than you do, based on how he played in 2013. He's a decent starter. You're making him sound like he's lucky to be on an NFL roster. But still, what you do expect a CFL player to be? And doesn't he -- along with UDFAs and salvage acquisitions like Butler, Herron, Kerr, etc. -- make up for not having noteworthy 6th and 7th rounders? Do we really judge a GM on the basis of how many late round guys he takes anyways?

[Tracy Denton]

7 wins because of the quality of the division, not on the merit of the roster?

lol, it was sarcasm. The only way I would want Foles would be for a backup.

[CR91]

anyone that thinks going from the 1st pick of the draft to one game away from the super bowl in three years is not a tremendous job is spoiled rotten. go back and look at that 2012 roster and I bet there wasnt a single person that truly believed we'd win more then 5 games yet we won 11 after starting 1-2, had a coaching change, and beat teams the likes of the packers lions and texans. 2013, had zero talent around luck once allen ballard bradshaw and wayne went on IR yet finished a few calls short of going to the AFC championship game, 2014 with no first round pick, we got three tremendous additions to our team in mewhort, moncrief and newsome. now is grigs and pags perfect. heck no they've both made their share of mistakes, however we have accomplished so much from being the laughing stocks of the nfl in 2011 and its not just because we have luck or because we're in a weak division no matter how much a bunch of you want to believe that. we have beaten some of the best teams in the nfl every single year with the so called mediocre roster grigs have put together. if you cant see that grigs has done a great job from where we were in 2011 then hes not the problem, you so called "fans" are

[NewColtsFan]

That's because he keeps trading his picks away. 

 

 

Hey, if you like, since you hate Grigson's trades so much....   how about we do this....

 

We could contact the team that we traded with in 2012 to get TY Hilton.    (I think it was San Francisco, but it doesn't matter)

 

We could call them and say....  "Hey,  we gave you a 4 and a 5 to trade up to the bottom of the 3rd for Hilton.   If you like, we'll reverse the trade.    We'll give you Hilton, and you can give us back the 4 and a 5"

 

Or, we could call Miami and offer Vonte Davis back for the 2 Grigson sent them.

 

Would that make you feel better?

 

Yeah.......    I didn't think so.

 

Indy hasn't made less picks than Seattle because,  as you put it,  "Grigson keeps trading his picks away"

 

Seattle's front office has had 5 years to build,  the Colts have had 3.   

 

Those two years pretty much accounts for the difference in the number of picks -- NOT Grigson's trades.

 

This might be one of the silliest arguments you've ever made.

[Yoshinator]

Grigson hasn't done terrible in the draft, TBH. 2012 was a great haul. Luck, Fleener, Allen, Hilton, Chapman and Ballard. 2013 was bad, but I don't think more than 5 teams had 3 or more contributers in that draft. 2014 was the mistake. I wasn't on here at the time, so I don't know how you guys reacted, but you don't trade a 1st round pick for a rb, even if he was the 3rd overall pick the year before. If it was for someone like Morris Claiborne, who was the 6th pick BUT A CB, NOT A RB, Grigson would get a lot less flack. He has done a tremendous job in the draft, and even though he has missed on every 6th and 7th rounder he's had, he's done a tremendous job in rounds 2-5 and with the UDFA's. I think that this is a make or break year even though people will deny it, but this will be the year for Grigson to build the Colts defense through the draft. I would be happy with Defense in the first three rounds and hopefully Grigson is thinking defense for his sake and for the next step of the Colts. If Grigson gets us 2 or 3 great defensive players in the draft, he will definitely earn some respect. He's a good GM, but he has to improve our defense this year or he deserves to go soon.

[BlueShoe]

Colts trade for Nick Foles tomorrow and your forced to bet everything you own on whether or not the Colts break 7 wins. You taking the over?

We might win 7 games. Hell we might win 8 because of our division.

Luck gives us the chance to be great at times.

Our defense revolves around Vontae.

If either one of them go down then say goodbye to their respective side of the ball.

[ColtRider]

I've read this entire thread. Seems to me the entire argument evolves around Luck. (with the exception of Superman & Dustin going to further lengths of said argument team, picks, draft, trades, et.al)

Here's the rub and crux of this argument as I see it.

1. Without Luck as the Colts QB - very bad to mediocre team

2. With Luck as the Colts QB - exceptional team to playoff caliber every year

Now, with that being said ... I have one small question. Take one half (or all of them for that matter) of the higher caliber teams in the NFL and remove their QBs and what do you get? The answer is obvious. Now, take those teams and remove their MVP what do you get? Let's go further and remove the players that are markedly valuable to each team whether on offense or defense by selection of the GM, owner, coach, et.al. My point is ... The NFL is a __TEAM__ sport. Period. You can cut, slice, dice, mince and throw away all other aspects of singularity. Does it help? Most certainly. Is it going to give you titles based on that reasoning? No. So, what's left? I think everyone here in this argument knows the answer ...

O N E ... That's it. Nothing else. Nuff said.

[Dark Superman]

All of that and you get that? We kept Landry longer than we should have. He got himself cut due to the suspensions and all

Suspensions and inconsistent play. He played out half his contract, so I really wouldn't consider that "keeping him longer than we should have" I think we cut him at the perfect time actually.

[ColtsBlueFL]

The only people who think Andrew Luck is the only reason we've had any success over the past three years are the ones who work very hard to see it that way.

 

If only this were true- 

 

"The Patriots could still be competitive without Brady. But if you take Luck away from the Colts, they're not good enough to win the AFC South, one of the worst divisions in the NFL."   

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/indianapolis-colts/post/_/id/10527/colts-wont-be-a-super-bowl-team-without-better-talent-around-luck

 

"Luck was certainly part of the problem versus the Patriots, laying the biggest egg of his nascent career. It has been evident, however, for three years running that this is five-win team without the game's best young quarterback."

 

"The onus is on the Colts to stop pretending and start responding to teams that punch them in the mouth. To compete with the Patriots, general manager Ryan Grigson must replenish his roster with another home-run draft class after whiffing on too many recent trades and signings."

 

NFL.com article - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000460593/article/colts-need-talent-infusion-to-compete-with-patriots

 

There's more but no need to continue with what others thinks...  we are really trying to overcome the few mistakes made during the rebuild and monster creation.  Grigson hitting one out of the park in this draft goes a long long way into dispelling the Luck is the reason this team wins.

 

EDIT: I'm one still in favor of Grigson overall, but I realize he's had issues during his inauguration time...

[GoColts8818]

If only this were true-

"The Patriots could still be competitive without Brady. But if you take Luck away from the Colts, they're not good enough to win the AFC South, one of the worst divisions in the NFL."

http://espn.go.com/blog/indianapolis-colts/post/_/id/10527/colts-wont-be-a-super-bowl-team-without-better-talent-around-luck

"Luck was certainly part of the problem versus the Patriots, laying the biggest egg of his nascent career. It has been evident, however, for three years running that this is five-win team without the game's best young quarterback."

"The onus is on the Colts to stop pretending and start responding to teams that punch them in the mouth. To compete with the Patriots, general manager Ryan Grigson must replenish his roster with another home-run draft class after whiffing on too many recent trades and signings."

NFL.com article - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000460593/article/colts-need-talent-infusion-to-compete-with-patriots

There's more but no need to continue with what others thinks... we are really trying to overcome the mistakes made during the rebuild and monster creation. Grigson hitting one out of the park in this draft goes a long long way into dispelling the Luck is the reason this team wins.

like I said Grigson has had his misses, show me a GM in a sport that has never made a mistake. With that said Andrew Luck is not the only good player on this roster that Grigson has brought here. He isn't the only reason why the Colts went from 2-14 to the AFC Championship game in three years. Is he the biggest reason? 100%. Is he the only reason? No. Despite what some have argued in this thread Grigson has made other good moves then just drafting Andrew Luck.

Also just because Mike Wells thinks this a 5 win roster without Luck doesn't make it fact. With that said as I also said earlier in this thread no team built around a super star QB is going to withstand losing that super star QB for the season. The Pats without Brady were an exception not a rule. The Colts are built around Luck. Everything they do on offense is based on him and he's clearly their best player. It's not saying much to say they would struggle without him. If they could withstand losing him they wouldn't be getting ready to give him one of if not the richest contract in NFL history in about a year.

[Warhorse]

He drafted a project player in the 1st round

Not saying fire the man, but don't praise him like he's the best thing like sliced bread

As soon as you show me a long term GM that has not a had a first round failure, I'll concede you have an argument.

[ColtsBlueFL]

like I said Grigson has had his misses, show me a GM in a sport that has never made a mistake. With that said Andrew Luck is not the only good player on this roster that Grigson has brought here. He isn't the only reason why the Colts went from 2-14 to the AFC Championship game in three years. Is he the biggest reason? 100%. Is he the only reason? No. Despite what some have argued in this thread Grigson has made other good moves then just drafting Andrew Luck.

Also just because Mike Wells thinks this a 5 win roster without Luck doesn't make it fact. With that said as I also said earlier in this thread no team built around a super star QB is going to withstand losing that super star QB for the season. The Pats without Brady were an exception not a rule. The Colts are built around Luck. Everything they do on offense is based on him and he's clearly their best player. It's not saying much to say they would struggle without him. If they could withstand losing him they wouldn't be getting ready to give him one of if not the richest contract in NFL history in about a year.

 

Not much to quarrel with here, except everything mentioned flies in the face of the things Irsay mentioned upon the Manning departure and the Grigson / Pagano era.  Remember these?

 

""We've changed our model a little bit, because we wanted more than one of these," Irsay said before flashing his Super Bowl ring.  (Just how have we made changes, in the grand scheme of things?)

 

"You love to have the Star Wars numbers from Peyton and Marvin (Harrison) and Reggie (Wayne). "Mostly, you love this."Another flash of the ring..,

 

 

And his recent mandate-

 

"When you get to this level, this championship level, we have to be able to be a tougher team,’’ Irsay said, via Mike Chappell of RTV6 in Indianapolis. “We have to be able to stop the run. We can’t turn it over. “What’s missing is trying to continue to bring in a team that I talked about, which is a really tough defensive team. A team that can run the ball..."

 

Then you look at the big picture of this team, then compare it to the Polian / Manning teams and the Grigson / Luck squad...  and besides the names, the big key difference is...   ???

 

And that team was always deemed a 5 win team without Manning.  I can see why there is still temptation for outsiders to draw the line right on to this team.

 

The owner of the team has noticed, as have those the listened to him and his vision and believe the 'Build the Monster' mantra...

[TKnight24]

As soon as you show me a long term GM that has not a had a first round failure, I'll concede you have an argument.

One thing to take a top player and they be a bust

Another thing to take a project and already know it'd be a bust

[Superman]

One thing to take a top player and they be a bust

Another thing to take a project and already know it'd be a bust

 

You liked the Werner pick at the time. Stop it.

[ColtRider]

Not much to quarrel with here, except everything mentioned flies in the face of the things Irsay mentioned upon the Manning departure and the Grigson / Pagan era. Remember these?

""We've changed our model a little bit, because we wanted more than one of these," Irsay said before flashing his Super Bowl ring. (Just how have we made changes, in the grand scheme of things?)

"You love to have the Star Wars numbers from Peyton and Marvin (Harrison) and Reggie (Wayne). "Mostly, you love this."Another flash of the ring..,

And his recent mandate-

"When you get to this level, this championship level, we have to be able to be a tougher team,’’ Irsay said, via Mike Chappell of RTV6 in Indianapolis. “We have to be able to stop the run. We can’t turn it over. “What’s missing is trying to continue to bring in a team that I talked about, which is a really tough defensive team. A team that can run the ball..."

Then you look at the big picture of this team, then compare it to the Polian / Manning teams and the Grigson / Luck squad... and besides the names, the big key difference is... ???

And that team was always deemed a 5 win team without Manning. I can see why there is still temptation for outsiders to draw the line right on to this team.

The owner of the team has noticed, as have those the listened to him and his vision and believe the 'Build the Monster' mantra...

Nice, ColtsBlueFL! It's no secret around these forums that I am a huge fan of Ryan Grigson. With that being said, I do feel that in order to hit that home run at the 29th pick and beyond starts with obvious defensive picks. That's where the major holes are. The Colts have surely put emphasis on that with the "Mandate to Stop the Run" campaign. Of which, yours truly, has climbed the highest mountain screaming from the top of my lungs that this takes place." Protecting Andrew Luck" is priority 1 with me. Herremans will certainly contribute to that most assuredly. Then we come to number three, "Create the Run"! Frank Gore and the RBs behind him are certainly going to be formidable concerning that aspect. So in conclusion, "Building the Monster" in all of its forms do have occasional hits and misses. That's life in the NFL. It's not going to change.

Sometimes you're the windshield ... and sometimes you're the bug! Consistency (there's that word again) dictates and defines quantity of each.

Right now, Ryan Grigson needs all the Windex he can get his hands on.

[Defjamz26]

Dustin, that is the truth most Colts fans will never admit.

All truths. We are winning a lot of games because:

1. We have an elite QB.

2. We play in a very weak division.

3. More often than not, our coaches are better than our opponents.

Getting a fan to admit all of those 3 will be hard to do, but it's the absolute truth.

I am disappointed in our front office for not going all in with Pagano. It is a very bad idea for us to leave Chuck as a lame coach this year. It doesn't send the right message to the team, the fans, or to the coaching staff. Jim Irsay is playing with fire right now.

Irsay is losing patience I think. How he mandated that we stop the run. I think as an owner, he's embarrassed at how bad the Patriots expose the Colts.

But this is a very flawed team. I we need to stop defending everything by saying "but he drafted Hilton and traded for Vontae" it's been 3 years now. I was a fan of his FA but the draft is how you really judge GMs.

[Warhorse]

One thing to take a top player and they be a bust

Another thing to take a project and already know it'd be a bust

You knew? Got it. Did you stay at a Holiday Inn?

[ColtRider]

Irsay is losing patience I think. How he mandated that we stop the run. I think as an owner, he's embarrassed at how bad the Patriots expose the Colts.

But this is a very flawed team. I we need to stop defending everything by saying "but he drafted Hilton and traded for Vontae" it's been 3 years now. I was a fan of his FA but the draft is how you really judge GMs.

I can guarantee you this, Defjamz26 ... Ryan Grigson is fully alert and aware of draft status where he's concerned. Nailing draft picks every single time is unrealistic by anyone's standard worth their salt in NFL prodigy projection. The guy had taken a team that was virtually destitute 3 years ago and turned out amazing numbers to me. Some say it's all "Luck" (no pun intended). 11-5 every season since the inception? One QB is not responsible for that many wins without help. THAT is also another guarantee. This year's draft will certainly be an important one where RG is concerned, but not the one and only defining job security IMO.

[Superman]

 we need to stop defending everything by saying "but he drafted Hilton and traded for Vontae" it's been 3 years now. I was a fan of his FA but the draft is how you really judge GMs.

 

It's not a defense, but a statement of fact, and it stands in stark contrast to those who insist that he's done nothing to make the common sense Luck pick. And the 2014 draft was good, also. 

 

The roster does have issues. Those can obviously be hung on Grigson, especially when we identify some of the mistakes he made in 2013.

[amfootball]

After reading this thread you would have thought this was a Jets forum. Although even their fans are more optimistic right now and they won 4 games last year. Grigson has made his mistakes but man, AFC champ game last year and a post season road game win on top in Denver which is one of the hardest venues to win at on the road. The arrow is pointing up, not down with your GM.

[throwing BBZ]

I cant believe your serious. So most everyone is wrong but you? Even ESPN, the NFL network and Fox sports are all wrong. Sorry, like I stated in my opinion. Your knowledge of how a NFL team is put together and the ins and outs of dealing with the cap space is completely lost on you. I think you make these comments just trying to stir the pot because you like that kind of stuff. We also have quite a few Patriots fans who loves the same stuff.

 

 Give last years roster any NFL QB outside of one of the top ten best QB`s, and we would have been a below .500 team. A strong probability, IMO. . And if so, being in the AFC South to boot, that is pretty sad.

[throwing BBZ]

One thing to take a top player and they be a bust

Another thing to take a project and already know it'd be a bust

 

 Werner has actually come along nicely, Better than the two OLB`ers drafted way ahead of him that draft.

Bet you threw away Jerry Hughes too, even after he played well for us the 1st season he got a chance. Bo don`t know football!

[bababooey]

After reading this thread you would have thought this was a Jets forum. Although even their fans are more optimistic right now and they won 4 games last year. Grigson has made his mistakes but man, AFC champ game last year and a post season road game win on top in Denver which is one of the hardest venues to win at on the road. The arrow is pointing up, not down with your GM.

The Jets did lose 7 games by 1 score, including a combined 3 points to NE over two games. With no QB, WR1, or secondary. They got a WR1, a great secondary, a serviceable QB in Fitzpatrick, and a top draft pick. They should be optimistic.

 

When you have a solid team that gets run over constantly by the same team every year coupled with all the defensive players that were at the top of everyone's off-season wish list went to other teams it will warrant some complaints...

[ColtRider]

Give last years roster any NFL QB outside of one of the top ten best QB`s, and we would have been a below .500 team. A strong probability, IMO. . And if so, being in the AFC South to boot, that is pretty sad.

Depends on which way you look at it.

[ColtRider]

After reading this thread you would have thought this was a Jets forum. Although even their fans are more optimistic right now and they won 4 games last year. Grigson has made his mistakes but man, AFC champ game last year and a post season road game win on top in Denver which is one of the hardest venues to win at on the road. The arrow is pointing up, not down with your GM.

Exac-a-lac-ly, amfootball!