If you can only fire one

[12isthenew18]

Also below feel free to give your #1 reason for you stance. I just want to hear opinions since we're approaching black monday

[Shepman]

If you fire the GM you are basically firing the coach as well.

[Yoshinator]

My vote is to Fire Pagano if that is what you mean. I actually don't mind Grigson too much. He has seemed to learn from his mistakes and although he has caused damage to this team, at the stage he's grown into now regarding the draft, it's better than anything we'll find on the open market. I'm also a bit biased because a decent number of his picks are also guys I've been high on, so I feel he thinks the same as me sometime. 

 

Pagano's goose is cooked. He has regressed from the time he got hired. He is terrible at developing defensive players, which is supposed to be a strength of his. He refuses to learn from his mistakes and has openly said numerous times in press conferences that he wouldn't change anything if he could do it over. He isn't the sort of coach that absorbs knowledge from those that are smarter than him, and if he does, it doesn't show on the field. He's nothing but a motivator at this point. He's lost the locker room, and it's time to make a change.

 

Grigson stays, Pagano goes.

[Colts_Fan12]

Grigson the blown picks and wasted money way out weigh Pagano's coaching 

[YourTearinApartLisa!]

Grigson in my own personal opinion has set this team back years with his busted trades, busted draft picks and his inability or lack of will to construct a defense that doesn't resemble my employment record. So for those reasons he would be my choice. Good and great talent can overcome a lot of coaching errors. It's extremely harder to coach up talent that isn't there.

[tomloge]

Definitely get rid of Grigson.  He picked poor talent for the most part.  

[Jdubu]

Here is my stance on it. If you've essentially told these two guys after re-signing them to new deals, get better results or I'll change you out. If you honestly review this season, who improved at their job?

 

1. Pagano and his decisions and game plans?

 

2. Grigson and his draft choices and meddling in personnel decisions?

 

my answer is overwhelming evidence that Grigson by far outperformed Pagano. Pagano has done nothing new or impressive IMHO. Fire Pagano. Easy choice. 

[Superman]

Pagano. Coaching is the reason this team isn't in the playoffs. That's not to say the roster is good because it's full of holes, but good coaching would have this team at 12 wins right now.

 

• Lions loss -- poor clock management hurt the team's chances of winning
• Broncos loss -- poor play calling hurt the team's chances of winning (not just at the end, but blocking Miller with a TE is a great example
• Jags loss -- poor game planning
• First Texans loss -- inability to adjust to their counter scheme in the second half
• Second Texans loss -- terrible game planning

 

The roster building hit a reset last offseason. Grigson made plenty of mistakes and missed lots of picks, and he should probably be held accountable for that, also. But what's holding this team back right now is poor coaching, so if I had to choose, it's not even a difficult choice for me.

[Flash7]

I say Grigson is the bigger problem. You can coach as hard as you want, but without talent in the NFL, you're just not going to win consistently.

 

It's now year 5 and who is our defensive stud? Who is the defender that other coordinators have to gameplan against? Their isn't even 1 player that strikes fear in the heart of opposing teams. Not ONE.

 

Grigson will not go after difference makers and with that attitude, we will always be mired in mediocrity, regardless who the coach is.

[Smonroe]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

Pagano. Coaching is the reason this team isn't in the playoffs. That's not to say the roster is good because it's full of holes, but good coaching would have this team at 12 wins right now.

 

• Lions loss -- poor clock management hurt the team's chances of winning
• Broncos loss -- poor play calling hurt the team's chances of winning (not just at the end, but blocking Miller with a TE is a great example
• Jags loss -- poor game planning
• First Texans loss -- inability to adjust to their counter scheme in the second half
• Second Texans loss -- terrible game planning

 

The roster building hit a reset last offseason. Grigson made plenty of mistakes and missed lots of picks, and he should probably be held accountable for that, also. But what's holding this team back right now is poor coaching, so if I had to choose, it's not even a difficult choice for me.

 

The other side of all those points could be that the game planning is only as good as the players you have to plan with.  I think everyone would agree that the roster, especially on the defensive side, is horrible.  

 

So you could say the coaches did pretty well considering what they had for talent.  In for a chance to win in all but a couple games.

 

Dorsett alone is enough for me to question Grigson's abilities.  TBF, he has made a few decent picks and FAs, so I don't consider him the worst GM in the league but he's in the conversation. 

 

Just MHO.

[chad72]

11 minutes ago, Superman said:

Pagano. Coaching is the reason this team isn't in the playoffs. That's not to say the roster is good because it's full of holes, but good coaching would have this team at 12 wins right now.

 

• Lions loss -- poor clock management hurt the team's chances of winning
• Broncos loss -- poor play calling hurt the team's chances of winning (not just at the end, but blocking Miller with a TE is a great example
• Jags loss -- poor game planning
• First Texans loss -- inability to adjust to their counter scheme in the second half
• Second Texans loss -- terrible game planning

 

The roster building hit a reset last off season. Grigson made plenty of mistakes and missed lots of picks, and he should probably be held accountable for that, also. But what's holding this team back right now is poor coaching, so if I had to choose, it's not even a difficult choice for me.

 

^^^This, clearly.

 

Blocking Miller with a TE in game 2, blocking Clowney with a TE in the second Texans' game, doing the same vs Mack in week 16, that is 15 games worth of offensive game planning with history that makes you wonder if they ever learn something well enough to not repeat the same mistakes over and over again. 

 

It should not take them till the Vikings game to realize calling slants when the DBs play off your speedy wide outs, using Turbin more as a short yardage back and goal line back, helping OL and Luck with enough quick hitters called etc. on the offensive side. 

 

The coaches are not maximizing the talent on this roster and no matter how much of an increase the roster talent gets, the coaches will come up short vs elite teams. We may win the AFC South, but that is the ceiling with this coaches consistently, IMO. Too many periods of inconsistency with the same talent makes you question the coaching. If we are playing with a high floor but coming up short, that would be one thing. But if you are balling on the road vs the Packers and Vikings but then turn around and lay eggs vs the Texans and Raiders, it just tells me that game planning is not sufficient enough for consistency game in and game out.

[OLD FAN MAN]

1 hour ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Grigson the blown picks and wasted money way out weigh Pagano's coaching 

I agree, terrible judge of talent and overpays everyone

[OLD FAN MAN]

10 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

The other side of all those points could be that the game planning is only as good as the players you have to plan with.  I think everyone would agree that the roster, especially on the defensive side, is horrible.  

 

So you could say the coaches did pretty well considering what they had for talent.  In for a chance to win in all but a couple games.

 

Dorsett alone is enough for me to question Grigson's abilities.  TBF, he has made a few decent picks and FAs, so I don't consider him the worst GM in the league but he's in the conversation. 

 

Just MHO.

I concur

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

The other side of all those points could be that the game planning is only as good as the players you have to plan with.

 

I disagree entirely with this. Game planning can be evaluated entirely separate from the quality of the roster.

 

Quote

I think everyone would agree that the roster, especially on the defensive side, is horrible.  

 

It's certainly not as good as it needs to be, and that's an indictment of Grigson. Yet, I sincerely believe that better offensive coaching would have this team in control of the #3 seed right now. Saturday's game very well could have been a battle for a first round bye.

 

The OL struggles in protection, yet the Colts offense is one of the slowest from snap to throw in the league. Poor coaching. We almost never call screens or slants with DBs playing off, or in general; when we do, we beat a great defense for 27 points in the first half.

 

The defense got abused in Oakland, and that's not the first time this year. But then again, Pagano is the defensive minded head coach, and in the second to last game of his fifth season, his defense gave up 210 rushing yards and five straight TD drives.

 

If I had to choose, it's Pagano, for sure.

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, FACE REALITY said:

overpays everyone

 

False.

[Superman]

13 minutes ago, chad72 said:

makes you wonder if they ever learn something well enough to not repeat the same mistakes over and over again. 

 

To sum it up, this ^^^

[will426]

Team is unprepared every week clock management stupid % play calling and accepting and clapping every time there's a penalty with his "at least you showed grit kept chopping wood"  %

[UKColt13]

Grigson part way redeemed himself with the last draft. 

 

What we have is is a culture problem. I like Pagano. He's a great guy. But he's just not what we need. We need a strong coach that can breed a tough culture into this team. 

 

He's the hero Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs.

[Flash7]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I disagree entirely with this. Game planning can be evaluated entirely separate from the quality of the roster.

 

 

It's certainly not as good as it needs to be, and that's an indictment of Grigson. Yet, I sincerely believe that better offensive coaching would have this team in control of the #3 seed right now. Saturday's game very well could have been a battle for a first round bye.

 

The OL struggles in protection, yet the Colts offense is one of the slowest from snap to throw in the league. Poor coaching. We almost never call screens or slants with DBs playing off, or in general; when we do, we beat a great defense for 27 points in the first half.

 

The defense got abused in Oakland, and that's not the first time this year. But then again, Pagano is the defensive minded head coach, and in the second to last game of his fifth season, his defense gave up 210 rushing yards and five straight TD drives.

 

If I had to choose, it's Pagano, for sure.

The Oakland Raiders O-line physically manhandled the Colts defense. Sure, better coaching and scheme would've helped some, but it wouldn't have stopped the D from getting thrown around like little children. The desparity between the talent in their offense, especially their O-line, was too much for any coaching to have made a difference. 

 

The defense needs playmakers badly.

[Smonroe]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Game planning can be evaluated entirely separate from the quality of the roster.

......

 

I respect your opinion but I totally disagree with that statement.  I'm sure you have more to support it but it's obvious that game planning is wholly based on the quality of the roster.  

 

I know what you mean by evaluating it separately, but if you don't have "win" positions you can't exactly take advantage of them.

[jameszeigler834]

1 hour ago, Jared Cisneros said:

My vote is to Fire Pagano if that is what you mean. I actually don't mind Grigson too much. He has seemed to learn from his mistakes and although he has caused damage to this team, at the stage he's grown into now regarding the draft, it's better than anything we'll find on the open market. I'm also a bit biased because a decent number of his picks are also guys I've been high on, so I feel he thinks the same as me sometime. 

 

Pagano's goose is cooked. He has regressed from the time he got hired. He is terrible at developing defensive players, which is supposed to be a strength of his. He refuses to learn from his mistakes and has openly said numerous times in press conferences that he wouldn't change anything if he could do it over. He isn't the sort of coach that absorbs knowledge from those that are smarter than him, and if he does, it doesn't show on the field. He's nothing but a motivator at this point. He's lost the locker room, and it's time to make a change.

 

Grigson stays, Pagano goes.

One really good draft doesn't make up for 3-4 bad one both go.

[krunk]

17 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I disagree entirely with this. Game planning can be evaluated entirely separate from the quality of the roster.

 

 

It's certainly not as good as it needs to be, and that's an indictment of Grigson. Yet, I sincerely believe that better offensive coaching would have this team in control of the #3 seed right now. Saturday's game very well could have been a battle for a first round bye.

 

The OL struggles in protection, yet the Colts offense is one of the slowest from snap to throw in the league. Poor coaching. We almost never call screens or slants with DBs playing off, or in general; when we do, we beat a great defense for 27 points in the first half.

 

The defense got abused in Oakland, and that's not the first time this year. But then again, Pagano is the defensive minded head coach, and in the second to last game of his fifth season, his defense gave up 210 rushing yards and five straight TD drives.

 

If I had to choose, it's Pagano, for sure.

Where do you think we'd be right now if the defense were better?  I say we win many of those contest we lost if that unit were better.   Denver, Detroit, Jacksonville, 1st Houston game.  Maybe even the Raiders game.   With the talent we've had on that side of the football we've been 25-31st defensively every year of his tenure.   I think if we get that side of the football right, or if we had it right this season we end up with different results.

[luv_pony_express]

I don't think a coaching staff consisting of Bill Belichick, Bill Parcells, Bill Walsh, Don Shula, Chuck Noll, and Vince Lombardi could've made this team a winner.

 

I'm not sold on Chuck Pagano as a coach.  It's hard to tell when he's dealt such an unbalanced roster.  But I'm quite positive that Ryan Grigson will never operate a winning franchise.  Get rid of him first.

[Buddy Lee]

37 minutes ago, Jdubu said:

Here is my stance on it. If you've essentially told these two guys after re-signing them to new deals, get better results or I'll change you out. If you honestly review this season, who improved at their job?

 

1. Pagano and his decisions and game plans?

 

2. Grigson and his draft choices and meddling in personnel decisions?

 

my answer is overwhelming evidence that Grigson by far outperformed Pagano. Pagano has done nothing new or impressive IMHO. Fire Pagano. Easy choice. 

I have to agree with you. Grigson has shown signs of improvement with good drafts the past two years even though he made a bunch of FA mistakes in 2015. His miserable 2013 draft is far enough in the past but it is still hurting the team because of the talent void it created.

 

Sometimes I find myself thinking that Pagano makes one offensive game plan to last for the season and then makes halftime adjustments based on the failed first halfs. Let's see. Start out with a double tight end power formation. Hand off to Gore. Three yard gain. Repeat but this time only a one yard gain. Third and six. A throw to Doyle or Gore out of the backfield. It's close to a first down. We'll have to see where the officials spot the ball. Hey, at least Luck gets credited for a vast number of come from behind 4th quarter drives. (sarcasm)

[BOTT]

I consider Chuck to be a complete boob, but my choice would be Grigson and it's not even close.  Grigson is absolutely horrible.

[GoColts8818]

I've seen growth from Grigson, especially with this years draft class.  I just shake my head when I hear Pagano talk and at some of his decisions.   I'd keep Grigson.

[OLD FAN MAN]

34 minutes ago, Flash7 said:

I say Grigson is the bigger problem. You can coach as hard as you want, but without talent in the NFL, you're just not going to win consistently.

 

It's now year 5 and who is our defensive stud? Who is the defender that other coordinators have to gameplan against? Their isn't even 1 player that strikes fear in the heart of opposing teams. Not ONE.

 

Grigson will not go after difference makers and with that attitude, we will always be mired in mediocrity, regardless who the coach is.

 

43 minutes ago, tomloge said:

Definitely get rid of Grigson.  He picked poor talent for the most part.  

agreed

[CoachLite]

This topic presents an artificial choice. Fire them both and get on with it.

[BOTT]

10 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

I've seen growth from Grigson, especially with this years draft class.  I just shake my head when I hear Pagano talk and at some of his decisions.   I'd keep Grigson.

I have seen growth from Chuck.  His "ya know" count has gone down from year one.

[Superman]

25 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

I respect your opinion but I totally disagree with that statement.  I'm sure you have more to support it but it's obvious that game planning is wholly based on the quality of the roster.  

 

I know what you mean by evaluating it separately, but if you don't have "win" positions you can't exactly take advantage of them.

 

Game planning isn't based on the quality of the roster, it's based on matchups. At least, it should be.

 

To that point, the Colts have "win" positions, and they have "lose" positions. They should be doing everything they can to weaponize their QB and WRs, which are the actual strengths of the roster. And they should be actively trying to minimize the weaknesses in protection, at which they are worst. Our gameplans didn't do this effectively most of the season, and the couple times it did, we blew teams out. This is indicative of bad coaching.

 

Those blowouts prove that the Colts -- with this flawed roster and weak defense -- are good enough to beat other flawed, weak teams. Losing twice to the Texans is a coaching failure. Losing to the Jags is a coaching failure. Use the MN gameplan in those three games, and you probably come away with 3 more wins.

 

Again, this is not a defense of the roster or of Grigson. 

[Iancolts]

I would give Grigson the Santa clause BOOT!!!  Grigson took a playoff team short of a couple players to go further and destroyed it by being too smart for his own good.  Yes he gives out good contracts but to average players at best in FA!!  And he also misses way way too much in the draft.  Honestly Pagano needs to go too.  Pagano is a great coordinator at best and that's it! 

[Superman]

45 minutes ago, krunk said:

Where do you think we'd be right now if the defense were better?  I say we win many of those contest we lost if that unit were better.   Denver, Detroit, Jacksonville, 1st Houston game.  Maybe even the Raiders game.   With the talent we've had on that side of the football we've been 25-31st defensively every year of his tenure.   I think if we get that side of the football right, or if we had it right this season we end up with different results.

 

Of course we'd have won more games with a better defense. 

 

But I go back to the Bill Parcells "groceries" analogy. He wanted to pick the groceries and cook the meal, right? Well, Grigson picks the groceries for the Colts, and they're not great right now. But they're good enough to put together a decent meal on a weekly basis.

 

Pagano's staff and their gameplans burned several meals this season. You might take issue with the cheap menu and the unappealing sides, but when you look at the charred results on the plate, it's undeniable that a better chef would have produced better meals, even with those substandard groceries.

 

Most would agree, though, that we need a new shopper and a new chef. But it's hard for me to ignore all those burnt meals.

[Crunked]

I say fire Grigson, Pagano is an average coach and an average coach (in my opinion) can win with superior talent......but even the best coach in world would be limited by the talent on the field (ex. taking 8-8 talent and finishing with a 10-6 record) . <----that answers this thread, but ultimately both Grigson and Pagano are average, and 8-8 one could argue is their "norm".

[CoachLite]

2 minutes ago, crunked said:

I say fire Grigson, Pagano is an average coach and an average coach (in my opinion) can win with superior talent......but even the best coach in world would be limited by the talent on the field (ex. taking 8-8 talent and finishing with a 10-6 record) . <----that answers this thread, but ultimately both Grigson and Pagano are average, and 8-8 one could argue is their "norm".

Both Grigson and Pagano have shown the statistical phenomenon "regression to the mean". In the long term, their norm is also their ceiling.

[The Peytonator]

Fire Pagano and relegate Grigson to WR scout.

[chad72]

When you know a team has a few strengths and those strengths end up beating you pretty much MOST of the time, you know your game planning is bad.

 

1. Antonio Brown has to be taken away, everyone and their mother knows he has to be, but let us play him 1-on-1 with a banged up or healthy Vontae, no match every single time.

2. Texans have a lousy QB, they can only beat us with Lamar Miller and that running game. Guess what, every single time, Lamar Miller and that running game beat us.

3. Patriots beat us with those wham blocks and their running game, so let us do something about it, guess what they kill us every single time with that running game. 

4. If we have any aspirations of HFA in the AFC, we should not start 0-2 in the season if we can help it but guess what...0-2 it is from 2014-2016, 3 years in a row, it was 1-2 the previous 2 years. Never did I think 1-2 would be the best we'd do with 5 years of Pagano.

 

Expecting the coaches under Pagano to do something different is the definition of insanity.

 

While I do not trust Grigson whatsoever with the salary cap room that we have, the roster we have is enough to win the PUTRID AFC South, IMO. Yes, Mr. Irsay, we could have easily been 11-4 or 12-3 right now with a few games going our way but digging holes with inferior game plans is CLEARLY not helping.

 

Grigson thinks he can get a bunch of Honda Accords to race with a few Porsches on the Autobahn (comparing our roster to elite teams here). He does not realize that if you invest in a defensive playmaker, that can make the others better as a group. Much like the effect a Von Miller or a J.J.Watt has on the rest of the D-line etc. Yes, it may be OK to have a bunch of decent floors but you have to fork the money for a high ceiling every once in a while instead of investing in the middle of the road that end up run-of-the-mill like Cherilus, Donald Thomas, Toler, Robinson etc. Thankfully, Luck's big contract has opened his eyes to not ignore the holes of the roster masked by winning. OL and DL have started being addressed, just a few years later than we all wanted.

[Colts_Fan12]

9 minutes ago, The Peytonator said:

Fire Pagano and relegate Grigson to WR scout.

Idk if I trust Grigson as a writer scout either took Dorsett in the first 

[Superman]

18 minutes ago, chad72 said:

3. Patriots beat us with those wham blocks and their running game, so let us do something about it, guess what they kill us every single time with that running game. 

 

The Pats game last year, the staff did a good job addressing their blocking scheme. Unfortunately, the staff made other mistakes in that game...

[indyagent17]

Grigson goes, The lack of talent on this team is 100% his issue. Pagano coached us to 11-5 three years in a row and 3 playoff wins. He is not the greatest coach but he is acceptable plus a new GM will most likely bring a new coach anyway

[bradgt04]

5 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

My vote is to Fire Pagano if that is what you mean. I actually don't mind Grigson too much. He has seemed to learn from his mistakes and although he has caused damage to this team, at the stage he's grown into now regarding the draft, it's better than anything we'll find on the open market. I'm also a bit biased because a decent number of his picks are also guys I've been high on, so I feel he thinks the same as me sometime. 

 

Pagano's goose is cooked. He has regressed from the time he got hired. He is terrible at developing defensive players, which is supposed to be a strength of his. He refuses to learn from his mistakes and has openly said numerous times in press conferences that he wouldn't change anything if he could do it over. He isn't the sort of coach that absorbs knowledge from those that are smarter than him, and if he does, it doesn't show on the field. He's nothing but a motivator at this point. He's lost the locker room, and it's time to make a change.

 

Grigson stays, Pagano goes.

It also seems to me that he doesn't hire the best available coaches.  It looks like he likes to hire his buddies