NFL Network Picks Colts Third In AFC South

[AZColt11]

I think some of this is wishful thinking on the part of the media.  They want to see someone else step up and take the division.  If the Jags do finish 2nd then next year they will likely be the hip pick to win it the following year.  BUT........they are doing this off paper.  On paper, they look formidable.  But we all know nothing is won on paper.  It is quite another thing to do it on the field.  They are counting on an awful lot of unproven NFL players.  I will believe it when I see it.  A healthy Luck makes Indy at least 2nd in this division IMHO.  The Texans MAY very well win the division but it will not be easy for them as we saw last year.  Osweiler is decent.  But what has he really proven in his 7 games?  That he can take a really good team and keep them afloat?  He won't have that same luxury in Houston where he will be "the guy".

[southwest1]

4 minutes ago, AZColt11 said:

I think some of this is wishful thinking on the part of the media.  They want to see someone else step up and take the division.  If the Jags do finish 2nd then next year they will likely be the hip pick to win it the following year.  BUT........they are doing this off paper.  On paper, they look formidable.  But we all know nothing is won on paper.  It is quite another thing to do it on the field.  They are counting on an awful lot of unproven NFL players.  I will believe it when I see it.  A healthy Luck makes Indy at least 2nd in this division IMHO.  The Texans MAY very well win the division but it will not be easy for them as we saw last year.  Osweiler is decent.  But what has he really proven in his 7 games?  That he can take a really good team and keep them afloat?  He won't have that same luxury in Houston where he will be "the guy".

I wonder how true that is outside the AFC South though. I mean the Packers tend to dominate the NFC North, the Patriots own the AFC East, the Giants typically dominate the NFC East usually, the Broncos have owned the AFC West under Peyton Manning, the Bengals control the AFC North in recent yrs & the Panthers have taken a strangle hold on the NFC South under Cam's watch.

 

Here's my point: In every other division, most fans or analysts aren't really pulling for a new division foe at the top except maybe in the NFC West which seesaws between Seattle & AZ normally. So, beyond the familiar franchises leading the pack, aside from say NFC West; there usually aren't dark horse team surprises characteristically speaking. 

[krunk]

26 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

Good point. Clowney has been absent from the field for so long that football fanatics tend to assume he's overrated. Now, SW1 is not in that category. I just mean that re-hab & minimal game action often makes fans forget how much promise you had & hold setbacks against the athlete trying to get better, which isn't right.

 

I just keep thinking back to Vick Ballard's injure woes before INDY cut him loose. I know; I know different positions and all. I just know guys on re-hab feel isolated, alienated, & they start to wonder if they can still bring the heat once they are fully healed from surgery. More of a mental strain than a physical one in most cases. 

 

People tend to forget that not everybody blossoms at the time you feel they should. These are human beings we are talking about.  Especially when you ask them to do something that is not the best fit for them.  Clowney is an athletic freak, but he's still a young man with a young mind.  Got to get wrapped around the new circumstances first sometimes.  I think he's starting to come around though. We'll see...

[southwest1]

37 minutes ago, krunk said:

 

People tend to forget that not everybody blossoms at the time you feel they should. These are human beings we are talking about.  Especially when you ask them to do something that is not the best fit for them.  Clowney is an athletic freak, but he's still a young man with a young mind.  Got to get wrapped around the new circumstances first sometimes.  I think he's starting to come around though. We'll see...

True, the quickness & agility is already there. All Clowney has to do is let the game come to him. Both Wilfork & Watt can show him how to 'getter done' with enough time under their tutelage I suppose. 

 

Yep, the lightbulb of awareness doesn't flip on for every player at the same rate or timetable. But, as we all know, this is the real question: Does the light grow brighter, dimmer, or just pop entirely? My money's on additional brightness eventually. 

[21isSuperman]

8 hours ago, bravo4460 said:

Just picking based off of paper. Whoever makes the most moves in the offseason becomes one of the best teams in the league/division right away. 

 

How it works every offseason.

 

 

Since the Colts signed one FA, they "didn't improve."

This is the truth.  The media likes to see splash moves.  Last year, we signed well-known names in Trent Cole and Andre Johnson, and the media was predicting us to make it to the Super Bowl.  This year, we make some great moves to fortify our offensive line, and no one says a word.  Don't worry about what the media says. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

I will be a homer and pick us to win the Division. 10-6 will get it done. A lot of people are in love with the Jags and they haven't proven anything on the field. Brock Osweiler is still unproven as well and that is why it is difficult to pick the winner in this Division. I think we will be decent and can win 10 games so I will roll with us, I trust Andrew Luck more than I do the other QB's in our Division.

[NewColtsFan]

 

Over on ESPN.com.....    the four reporters who cover the AFC South have made their very early pre-season picks.         Two picks the Texans and two picked the Colts.

 

And fans who voted in have voted the Colts as the most likely to win the AFC South.

 

Not everyone has jumped off the Colts bandwagon.

 

Here's your story.....

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/16897010/predicting-nfl-division-winners#AFC S 

[2006Coltsbestever]

24 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Over on ESPN.com.....    the four reporters who cover the AFC South have made their very early pre-season picks.         Two picks the Texans and two picked the Colts.

 

And fans who voted in have voted the Colts as the most likely to win the AFC South.

 

Not everyone has jumped off the Colts bandwagon.

 

Here's your story.....

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/16897010/predicting-nfl-division-winners#AFC S 

Yeah it's 2-2, the Colts and Titans reporters took the Colts and the Texans and Jags reporters took the Texans. The fan voting was real close between the Colts and Texans. Colts got 41% of the fan vote = 13,000+ while the Texans got 36% = 11,000+. Kind of odd how the Jags own reporter doesn't pick the Jags if they are supposedly suppose to be good. This is probably the first fair article I have read regarding the Division and the first one not bashing the Colts in a while. I can see the Colts and Texans both winning 10 games if Osweiler is good. If OZ plays similar to how Fitzpatrick played for them they will go 9-7 IMO. Jags will win 8 or 9 games IMO, Titans probably go 5-11.

[Gramz]

Awesome.  Last year we were picked to win the SB...  and well.......we see how that prediction panned out.

 

I always say,  I prefer being the underdog and proving them wrong.  Bring it on guys..  

 

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, Gramz said:

Awesome.  Last year we were picked to win the SB...  and well.......we see how that prediction panned out.

 

I always say,  I prefer being the underdog and proving them wrong.  Bring it on guys..  

 

 

I like being the underdog as well, less pressure. I don't really care for articles bashing our team though but it is what it is as of now after the season we had.

[CanuckColtsFan]

12 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

The Colts went 8-8 because Luck wasn't playing, they did it because of Hasselback, they would of done worse if Luck was playing.

That is preposterous, the preponderance of poor assement in your pontificating is plainly obvious. If luck was 100 percent healthy we would have beat Houston at home. We beat Denver when he came back, went toe to toe with Carolina. It's just not right to come out and say what you're saying like its some kind of fact. It's hyperbole at best and inflammatory garbage at worst.

[Solon]

1 hour ago, CanuckColtsFan said:

That is preposterous, the preponderance of poor assement in your pontificating is plainly obvious. If luck was 100 percent healthy we would have beat Houston at home. We beat Denver when he came back, went toe to toe with Carolina. It's just not right to come out and say what you're saying like its some kind of fact. It's hyperbole at best and inflammatory garbage at worst.

Stephen A. Canuck

[krunk]

1 hour ago, CanuckColtsFan said:

That is preposterous, the preponderance of poor assement in your pontificating is plainly obvious. If luck was 100 percent healthy we would have beat Houston at home. We beat Denver when he came back, went toe to toe with Carolina. It's just not right to come out and say what you're saying like its some kind of fact. It's hyperbole at best and inflammatory garbage at worst.

Hasslebeck was mostly awful in that Atlanta game. Took a full team effort. A nice chunk of that game was the team rebounding from his mistakes. Luck would have been better without question, especially under Chud. Hasslebeck didn't even play against Tennessee in the finale. Luck most certainly would have beaten Tampa under Chud and we darn sure would have won that Houston game in Indy. Also would have won that Jax game in Jax. Probably still would have lost the Pitt game but not by such a wide margin. No way we were better off with Hasslebeck. Every QB at some point goes through a season like that. You just got to stick with em and keep coaching because you know guys like Luck will eventually correct the problem. There were times before Dungy came to the Colts when I wished somebody told Peyton to sit his interception throwing butt down! I was watching that game when Mora went off about "Playoffs". That was crazy.

[King Colt]

One comment; If Luck gets protection they will be an entirely different team to the point it may not matter how much the other teams have improved. It will be a new offense. Not saying I guarantee anything but it sure would be nice to see Luck control the offense instead of trying to survive despite it. This will have a big impact on their defense as well.

[AZColt11]

I think its good the media are overlooking Indy.  Seems when they think they will be a top team they fall flat and vice versa.  Let them have low expectations.  The Colts tend to surprise.  And they have not had back-to-back bad seasons since the 97-98 years.  Every time they did since it was injuries.  2001 was Edge.  2011 was Peyton.  Last year was Luck.  But know what?  Every year after they had double digit wins.  Every time.  I'm ready for them to surprise the media again.  I think it's gonna be a decent year.  I really do.

[crazycolt1]

8 hours ago, CanuckColtsFan said:

That is preposterous, the preponderance of poor assement in your pontificating is plainly obvious. If luck was 100 percent healthy we would have beat Houston at home. We beat Denver when he came back, went toe to toe with Carolina. It's just not right to come out and say what you're saying like its some kind of fact. It's hyperbole at best and inflammatory garbage at worst.

What you are saying it's horse dung?  

[crazycolt1]

11 minutes ago, King Colt said:

One comment; If Luck gets protection they will be an entirely different team to the point it may not matter how much the other teams have improved. It will be a new offense. Not saying I guarantee anything but it sure would be nice to see Luck control the offense instead of trying to survive despite it. This will have a big impact on their defense as well.

I am thinking the same thing. (hopefully)  I think Colts offense will improve as the season goes along with the O-Line getting used to each other and the rookie or rookies get more experience. Getting a player or two back from injury wont hurt either.

[CR91]

Same people that picked us to win a super bowl after signing two thirty somethings. What I find amusing is that we did everything these so called "experts" said we needed to do to get better and they still think we'll suck.

[CR91]

20 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

yes I do, it's called a brain. Luck was injured and he was struggling. Also with your defensive effeciency, it means nothing to me because the Colts can't generate a pass rush to save their lives. At least the Jaguars can rush the passer some, and that was before the players they gained. You are handpicking stats to fit your narrative. I like this team probably more than you, but I'm a realist, and I want to see an improvement. Not these slow future fixes that will take 5 years. We are barely improving every year, it's not good enough with someone the quality of Andrew Luck at QB.

 

Let's see, luck is healthy and will have the best line he's ever had, colts got 21 sacks in 4 games not to mention we have three young pass rushers to develop along with a dline that can get after the qb

[Indianapolis-Colts-Fan]

22 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I do agree that rookies struggle early, but I trust my evaluations of these guys as well, and Jalen Ramsey was the only special player I saw in the draft. Jack, Ramsey, and Fowler are all top 5 guys (Jack would of been), these aren't guys who struggle like common rookies, they are blue chip players. They are on a curve. I hope we can beat them up, but it will be a dogfight, and unfortunately, they have the best possible improvements possible. Kelly will help, I believe in him. I don't believe in the right side of the line though, I haven't seen us start off quick in games. I have legit concerns. 

 

If Luck is 100%, we can win the division. We basically have 1 new starter on offense, they have 4 big pieces on defense. They countered us well, it's like a chess game. I hope some guys break out in training camp for us, we need a surprise or two to keep up with them. A great defense beats a great offense.

 

The colts offense (when it looks like they know what they're doing) don't have a problem handling good defenses. Hopefully this oline coach, and "new" OC can bring the consistency we so richly desire to see. 

 

Man I hate the offseason.

[BOTT]

22 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

The Colts went 8-8 because Luck wasn't playing, they did it because of Hasselback, they would of done worse if Luck was playing.

That's a stretch.......a huge stretch. One game under Chud and the Colts defeated the super bowl champs.  And Hasselbeck didn't really look all that good

 

* I see this has already been pointed out. Carry on.

[Indyfan4life]

I'm just ready for football to start. I really don't care what the media or anyone that only looks for FA signings has to say. Luck is healthy, the oline is improved, the defense should be improved and I'm curious to see how well Dorsett, Hilton and Moncrief work together under this new offense. 

[Hoosiernsavga]

This division is getting better with as bad as it's been for so long all the early draft picks and FA acquisitions are finally catching up. 

But unless Luck goes down with an injury again the Colts will win the division. The Jags are finishing second and it wouldn't shock me at all if Houston is dead last by the end of the year. But I do think they will just get past Tennessee for third place barely! 

[Yoshinator]

18 hours ago, CanuckColtsFan said:

That is preposterous, the preponderance of poor assement in your pontificating is plainly obvious. If luck was 100 percent healthy we would have beat Houston at home. We beat Denver when he came back, went toe to toe with Carolina. It's just not right to come out and say what you're saying like its some kind of fact. It's hyperbole at best and inflammatory garbage at worst.

I didn't say anything about Luck being healthy we lose, I said Luck how we was, I guess no one pays attention. We were 2-5 with Luck when he was injured. We weren't having a winning record with him last year, you can't just say if he was healthy, he wasn't healthy.

[Yoshinator]

8 hours ago, BOTT said:

That's a stretch.......a huge stretch. One game under Chud and the Colts defeated the super bowl champs.  And Hasselbeck didn't really look all that good

 

* I see this has already been pointed out. Carry on.

Luck also lost to the Jets and Bills as well as other mediocre opponents. The main point was he was playing hurt, and he wasn't leading us to the playoffs in the condition he was in. Hasselback was a better choice last year.

[krunk]

50 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Luck also lost to the Jets and Bills as well as other mediocre opponents. The main point was he was playing hurt, and he wasn't leading us to the playoffs in the condition he was in. Hasselback was a better choice last year.

Hasslebeck was hurt for most of his starts as well. He played bad football for pretty much all his starts outside of the Houston game. Once teams figured out he could not throw the deep ball they just sat on all the short routes. Hasslebeck really wasn't that great of an option either. He was barely average to terrible in both Jaguars games. Terrible against Atlanta. Awful against Pittsburgh, bad against Houston in the second game, barely could finish the first half against Miami. He was so so against Tampa and he did not even play against the Titans. Hasslebeck really wasn't that great due to his injuries. And when healthy he was mostly so so. I dont think he really was the better option.

[Yoshinator]

27 minutes ago, krunk said:

Hasslebeck was hurt for most of his starts as well. He played bad football for pretty much all his starts outside of the Houston game. Once teams figured out he could not throw the deep ball they just sat on all the short routes. Hasslebeck really wasn't that great of an option either. He was barely average to terrible in both Jaguars games. Terrible against Atlanta. Awful against Pittsburgh, bad against Houston in the second game, barely could finish the first half against Miami. He was so so against Tampa and he did not even play against the Titans. Hasslebeck really wasn't that great due to his injuries. And when healthy he was mostly so so. I dont think he really was the better option.

Luck was 2-5 last year, hasselback was 6-3 if I remember right. Besides the Broncos game what did Luck do to show he could of played through his injuries? Hasselback was bad for sure, but he was doing what a decent QB could do. How can you say Luck was the better option based on how he was playing? It was obvious he was hurt. No way he should of been out there, and he would of suffered more damage to himself.

[Bluefire4]

I can see it. I'm very pessimistic about this season.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 hours ago, Bluefire4 said:

I can see it. I'm very pessimistic about this season.

Obviously anything can happen like Andrew getting injured again, Oz playing out of his mind, Jags becoming a Top Defense in the league, etc.. I am not betting against Andrew Luck though until he shows a bad trend like 2 injury riddled seasons in a row. With a better O.Line and Moncrief and Dorsett with experience led by Chud now I see no reason why Andrew cant play similar to how he played in 2014. Until Oz and a team like the Jags prove their play on the field, I am more optimistic about the Colts than I am the Texans or Jags. JMO's.

[AZColt11]

57 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Obviously anything can happen like Andrew getting injured again, Oz playing out of his mind, Jags becoming a Top Defense in the league, etc.. I am not betting against Andrew Luck though until he shows a bad trend like 2 injury riddled seasons in a row. With a better O.Line and Moncrief and Dorsett with experience led by Chud now I see no reason why Andrew cant play similar to how he played in 2014. Until Oz and a team like the Jags prove their play on the field, I am more optimistic about the Colts than I am the Texans or Jags. JMO's.

I'm with you.  Honestly, I don't see how the rest of the division can be so optimistic but the Colts, who won the division when Luck was healthy his first 3 seasons, can't?  Assuming Luck's healthy and full go, it would seem to me the Colts should be as optimistic as anybody.  Sure, other teams have appeared to have improved on paper, but so to have the Colts appeared to improve their weakest link last year on the OL.  You can't say the other teams, who haven't proven anything yet, will be better because of paper additions but say the Colts newcomers haven't proven anything yet.  Nobody else has either.  I don't get that dichotomy.

[RockThatBlue]

19 minutes ago, AZColt11 said:

I'm with you.  Honestly, I don't see how the rest of the division can be so optimistic but the Colts, who won the division when Luck was healthy his first 3 seasons, can't?  Assuming Luck's healthy and full go, it would seem to me the Colts should be as optimistic as anybody.  Sure, other teams have appeared to have improved on paper, but so to have the Colts appeared to improve their weakest link last year on the OL.  You can't say the other teams, who haven't proven anything yet, will be better because of paper additions but say the Colts newcomers haven't proven anything yet.  Nobody else has either.  I don't get that dichotomy.

Its honestly amazing. The media every year absolutely ridiculed Grigson and the Colts for not fixing the o line. This offseason we have appeared to have shored up our weakest unit that the media killed us for, now that same media is pretty much saying we are going to suck? It makes no sense to me.

[2006Coltsbestever]

30 minutes ago, AZColt11 said:

I'm with you.  Honestly, I don't see how the rest of the division can be so optimistic but the Colts, who won the division when Luck was healthy his first 3 seasons, can't?  Assuming Luck's healthy and full go, it would seem to me the Colts should be as optimistic as anybody.  Sure, other teams have appeared to have improved on paper, but so to have the Colts appeared to improve their weakest link last year on the OL.  You can't say the other teams, who haven't proven anything yet, will be better because of paper additions but say the Colts newcomers haven't proven anything yet.  Nobody else has either.  I don't get that dichotomy.

I think the people that are pessimistic or not picking us to win the Division are worried Andrew will get injured again. That and they have no faith in our Defense getting key stops against the better teams. I can see the worries but Andrew getting injured was a fluke IMO and it wont happen again. Our Defense wont be Great but it could be middle of the pack if Mathis goes out guns a blazing, which he could and Vontae Davis stays healthy all season. We had a ton of injuries last season to key players and still went 8-8. 

[superrep1967]

On 7/15/2016 at 0:32 PM, Jared Cisneros said:

Texans aren't that great IMO, Osweiller is still unproven, and Clowney is absolute crap. Watt and Hopkins can't do it all, and even though I may draft Lamar Miller in fantasy because he is very good, the Texans don't have the QB to be a huge threat. They also don't have the defense to make up for the below average QB play. 

 

The real threat IMO, is the Jags. They got Jalen Ramsey and Myles Jack, and they have Dante Fowler back from injury, which is basically like adding 3 first round picks to the defense. We can rave about Ryan Kelly and an improved offense, but with those 3 and Malik Jackson, they easily cancel us out. I don't know which of the two teams will win the division, but it will be a slobberknocker. 

 

Luck better learn fast how to tweak his game, or Bortles and the Jags will take over the division. The offense is a mini version of the Colts and the defense is twice as good.

You guys are putting a lot of faith in rookies. Why can't they at least play a down first in the NFL before we put them in Hall of fame come on man. 

[superrep1967]

7 hours ago, AZColt11 said:

I'm with you.  Honestly, I don't see how the rest of the division can be so optimistic but the Colts, who won the division when Luck was healthy his first 3 seasons, can't?  Assuming Luck's healthy and full go, it would seem to me the Colts should be as optimistic as anybody.  Sure, other teams have appeared to have improved on paper, but so to have the Colts appeared to improve their weakest link last year on the OL.  You can't say the other teams, who haven't proven anything yet, will be better because of paper additions but say the Colts newcomers haven't proven anything yet.  Nobody else has either.  I don't get that dichotomy.

Well Dion Sanders and Michael Irving hate us and there's some strong for you. 

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, superrep1967 said:

You guys are putting a lot of faith in rookies. Why can't they at least play a down first in the NFL before we put them in Hall of fame come on man. 

Quote me where I said they'd be hall of famers? I study tape before the draft, so I'm more aware than the average fan that seems to clump all the rookies together like yourself. I know how good these guys are and how much trouble they will give us. I also don't rave about every top pick as I bash a ton of them, Clowney was a big example that I celebrated when the Texans drafted him on these boards in 2014.

[Archangel]

 

IMO if correct I believe luck was injured during the first game of the season against Buffalo, And also If I may say That pep Hamlitons offensive schemes was total garbage and this is why he got fired.  I  for one could not predict how luck would of done last year, So lets go into this year training camp and see what we got and see what improvements have been made before their are any predictions. We do have a new OC and line coach, Plus we have a new DC, 

 

[Yoshinator]

8 minutes ago, Archangel said:

 

IMO if correct I believe luck was injured during the first game of the season against Buffalo, And also If I may say That pep Hamlitons offensive schemes was total garbage and this is why he got fired.  I  for one could not predict how luck would of done last year, So lets go into this year training camp and see what we got and see what improvements have been made before their are any predictions. We do have a new OC and line coach, Plus we have a new DC, 

 

Definitely looking forward to training camp. Would like to see Moncrief and Dorsett on top of their game and developing some chemistry with Luck. Ryan Kelly comfortable, and maybe some draft picks other than him show some early potential. Also, the earlier Henry Anderson returns, the better.

[superrep1967]

1 hour ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Quote me where I said they'd be hall of famers? I study tape before the draft, so I'm more aware than the average fan that seems to clump all the rookies together like yourself. I know how good these guys are and how much trouble they will give us. I also don't rave about every top pick as I bash a ton of them, Clowney was a big example that I celebrated when the Texans drafted him on these boards in 2014.

Well I for one am not worried about any rookies putting hurt on us in this division. Maybe those rookies will develop into something next year or two but not worried about them this year that's for sure.  

[AZColt11]

1 hour ago, superrep1967 said:

Well I for one am not worried about any rookies putting hurt on us in this division. Maybe those rookies will develop into something next year or two but not worried about them this year that's for sure.  

I think they'll make some plays here or there but I think some of our rookies will too.  What I don't get is people saying this teams' rookies will be better than our teams' rookies.  How do you know?  Just because of where they were drafted?  So you're telling me Tom Brady never happened?  You can't get good or even great players after the 1st round?  I think people need to hold the phone on these young guys.  All I know is when Luck was healthy and played a full season Indy hasn't lost the division.  And STILL hasn't.

[Yoshinator]

1 hour ago, AZColt11 said:

I think they'll make some plays here or there but I think some of our rookies will too.  What I don't get is people saying this teams' rookies will be better than our teams' rookies.  How do you know?  Just because of where they were drafted?  So you're telling me Tom Brady never happened?  You can't get good or even great players after the 1st round?  I think people need to hold the phone on these young guys.  All I know is when Luck was healthy and played a full season Indy hasn't lost the division.  And STILL hasn't.

Obviously you completely ignored what I said and a good majority of people as well. I said the Jaguars rookies would be good because I studied the tape on them, not because they are 1st round picks or top 5 picks. My reasoning is based on hours of watching tape, your reasoning that our rookies will be as good is homerism, pure and simple. The Texans also won the division in 2012, so your last sentence isn't true either.