RockThatBlue

What would need to happen for you to consider 2017 a successful season?

Recommended Posts

Thought this would be an interesting thread...

 

How would you consider 2017 a success? AFC South champs? A few playoff wins? Super bowl or bust(I'm not but I know some people are like that)?

 

For me, I'd say AFC South champs, with a few playoff wins would be a successful year for Pagano/Ballard. Anything short of that, would be a failure. JMO.

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Making the PO's would be huge. Winning the south would be an even bigger accomplishment, especially considering we cleaned a lot of the house, so to speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, J@son said:

Have to win the SB AND the pro bowl. Otherwise, clean house!

lol

 

ill definitely be furious if we lose the pro bowl.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Superman said:

In 2017, we need to win 5 of the next 7 Super Bowls. 

That's ridiculous Supe. 

 

 

 

We need to win all 7. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, RockThatBlue said:

Thought this would be an interesting thread...

 

How would you consider 2017 a success? AFC South champs? A few playoff wins? Super bowl or bust(I'm not but I know some people are like that)?

 

For me, I'd say AFC South champs, with a few playoff wins would be a successful year for Pagano/Ballard. Anything short of that, would be a failure. JMO.

 

 

Welp I bet a friend 500 that they'd win 10 games so that's it for me.  But really making the playoffs would make me happy

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to leave out team records and winning the division because it's still pre-draft and anything could happen. I'm going much more complex, though, saying that we need to get at least 40 sacks while our offensive line lets up less than 25. We need to get at least 25 takeaways from our defense (INT and FR combined), and also allowing under 100 rushing yards per game. Our offense needs to let up less than 15 turnovers and rush for 120 ypg. Oh, and finally, we need to keep Luck healthy.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, RockThatBlue said:

That's ridiculous Supe. 

 

 

 

We need to win all 7. 

 

I'm "content with mediocrity," haven't you heard?

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm "content with mediocrity," haven't you heard?

 

Its mediocrity, man.  What's not to be content with?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The yearly goal of every team/organization is to win the Super Bowl.  Successful year is to get better/improve from the previous year.  Now if we dwell on successful year then we'd be what Superman stated - mediocrity!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, WarGhost21 said:

I'm going to leave out team records and winning the division because it's still pre-draft and anything could happen. I'm going much more complex, though, saying that we need to get at least 40 sacks while our offensive line lets up less than 25. We need to get at least 25 takeaways from our defense (INT and FR combined), and also allowing under 100 rushing yards per game. Our offense needs to let up less than 15 turnovers and rush for 120 ypg. Oh, and finally, we need to keep Luck healthy.

25 sacks is A LOT Ghost.  Way too many to be considered a good number. I'd like to see the rest happen though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say nothing less than a nail biting divisional round loss is a successful season, and i'm only being this generous because Ballard is cleaning house.

 

2018 Superbowl or bust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like winning as much as the next guy.... but for me seeing our defense make a noticeable improvement would be a two step or almost leap forward type of progress...

 

Winning the AFC South is awesome, but at the same time I cringe at the years we did that with PM and then politely bowed out of the playoffs to San Diego or whomever.

 

Winning two games in the PO's generally puts you in the AFCCG and we all know how that would end.

 

For now I am for eating an elephant one bite at a time until we get some guys here that will be difference makers ( Freeney/ Mathis) .... 

 

It would just be nice to be in the conversation of those who are expected to win again instead of what we have been doing in the Luck Era... 

 

Doesn't mean I wouldn't love to go 11-5 or  12-4  .... lets see some competitive football this year for a change!!

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should win our Division considering Houston's QB situation but we didn't last season. We let Brock sweep us, pretty embarrassing. Having said that with a healthy Luck I never think we will go worse than 8-8 and always have a chance at 11-5. Have to win our Division games and most of our close games. I at least hope we win our Division/make the Playoffs, if not that would be disappointing.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

We should win our Division considering Houston's QB situation but we didn't last season. We let Brock sweep us, pretty embarrassing. Having said that with a healthy Luck I never think we will go worse than 8-8 and always have a chance at 11-5. Have to win our Division games and most of our close games. I at least hope we win our Division/make the Playoffs, if not that would be disappointing.

Lets hope we get a D put together that gives Luck more time of possession.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jay Kirk said:

Lets hope we get a D put together that gives Luck more time of possession.

So far I like what we have done in Free Agency by getting younger and the Hankins signing was huge!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jay Kirk said:

Lets hope we get a D put together that gives Luck more time of possession.

Well Chud gotta gameplan better and our offense can't go 3 and out for entire first halfs either. That would help our time of possession too. I'll take both of those scenarios happening. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a top half ranked defense in yards allowed and points allowed. Get rid of the slow starts in most games.  Make the playoffs, and win a playoff game. That would put us on the right track.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

So far I like what we have done in Free Agency by getting younger and the Hankins signing was huge!

Hope we boost secondary bigtime in draft.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

Well Chud gotta gameplan better and our offense can't go 3 and out for entire first halfs either. That would help our time of possession too. I'll take both of those scenarios happening. 

I hear what you are saying , however our LB's as a whole were terrible. No pass rush. If Anderson is healthy should be a boost, as well as the athletic LB's we picked up in FA.We must force 3 and outs.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Jay Kirk said:

I hear what you are saying , however our LB's as a whole were terrible. No pass rush. If Anderson is healthy should be a boost, as well as the athletic LB's we picked up in FA.We must force 3 and outs.

I agree. Our pass rush has been the worst I can remember.  And our linebacking corps was easily the weakest unit on the team. We definitely need improvement on both sides of the ball.  Our D is much farther away than our O. That's why our O is more frustrating to me. With the offensive weapons we have, we should never show up looking unprepared. 

 

Even with a terrible defense we should should be able to win our terrible division. But not with a terrible defense, too inconsistent offense, and injured Luck. A bad defense, inconsistent offense, and healthy Luck is good enough to win the South. A good defense, consistent offense, & healthy Luck and we're serious contenders...  3 out 3 isn't likely. But 2 out of those 3 scenarios happening (healthy Luck being a must lol) and we're back on the track where we were after deflategate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Superman said:

In 2017, we need to win 5 of the next 7 Super Bowls. 

 

I don't think you're asking enough!

 

I think we need to win 7 of the next 5 Super Bowls!!

 

(Did I have ever tell you that Math was not a particularly strong subject of mine?!?)         :thmup:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'd like to see the Colts win the AFC South.  

 

I think that would be a step in the right direction.    If we could add at least one playoff win,  that would be gravy for me.

 

If we could dethrone the Texans and hold off Tennessee and Jacksonville, I think that would make '17 a nice comeback year....

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Win AFC South with at least 10 wins AND beat at least one of the elite teams AND at least stay competitive in the games we lose. It's all good to win the AFC South, but I'd like to see that the Colts aren't just a big fish in a small pond.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prying the South from the hearts of all the Texans fan base(Too dark?), and knocking the Pats out of the playoffs would be a great start!! :)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Smoke317 said:

25 sacks is A LOT Ghost.  Way too many to be considered a good number. I'd like to see the rest happen though. 

Considering we gave up 41 last season, I'd happily take under 25

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Smoke317 said:

25 sacks is A LOT Ghost.  Way too many to be considered a good number. I'd like to see the rest happen though. 

 

???

 

That is an average of 1.56 sacks a game, well below average. In fact, it sounds too good to be true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11-5+ 

Divisional Round minimum

No Luck injury

Defensive improvement/player leaps (TJ Green, Dorsett, etc)

 

We're not that far away from being the team who made it to the AFCCG; we may be even better

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, rock8591 said:

 

???

 

That is an average of 1.56 sacks a game, well below average. In fact, it sounds too good to be true.

I want that number below 20. But considering our line is still maturing, 25 isn't terrible. And it is much better than 41. Lol. But I still want below 20. Even if we have to go to a quicker hitting passing attack to accomplish it.  

 

We've seen too many hits, sacks, and injuries on Luck.  Feels like he's already endured a career's worth. And he's as big and tough as they come... I want to be in the top 5 for fewest sacks allowed per season.  

 

Hopefully for the rest of his career. He deserves it. The body can only take so much punishment and so many injuries before it starts to give out. Luck is on that path and we need to correct it now before it's too late. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

I want that number below 20. But considering our line is still maturing, 25 isn't terrible. And it is much better than 41. Lol. But I still want below 20. Even if we have to go to a quicker hitting passing attack to accomplish it.  

 

We've seen too many hits, sacks, and injuries on Luck.  Feels like he's already endured a career's worth. And he's as big and tough as they come... I want to be in the top of 5 fewest sacks allowed per season.  Hopefully for the rest of his career. He deserves it. 

 

Below 20 a season is a realistic as trading a compensatory 7th rounder in the year 2050 for JJ Watt, who we then sign to $5.15 per hour minimum wage. 20 sacks a season, 16 games a season - that's barely higher than 1 per game! Think of a defense that can only sack a QB once a game. That is the definition of disaster.

 

I don't think you're aware of sacks per season allowed by offensive lines in this league.

 

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/qb-sacked-per-game

 

The lowest is an average of 1.2 sacks per game in the past 2016 season, which is 19 per season. (rounding numbers appropriately) That is an extreme outlier and abberation, something that is not even shown by #2 or #3s on the list.

 

The highest number of sacks allowed was 4.1 per game, or 66 a season.

 

The median number was 2.2 per game, or 35 a season.

 

 

 

25 would be well into the best 5, not "too high".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    •   Overall, an excellent post, but I really want to focus on this part. Though even if Barkley didn't have this issue, I still wouldn't take him at #3.. I don't think RB is worth it.   Barkley doesn't hit lanes inside hard, with violence of someone like Gurley who was just savage at it in college. He tries to bounce outside, to an open space, where he is absolutely fantastic so it's understandable. Just as a pure runner, I don't think he's the best RB prospect to come out in recent years. If the hole isn't there inside, he has bad tendency to stop moving his feet. As you said, can it be coached out of him? And why does it happen. Is he little soft? Overcompensating for bad O-line? Or something else that can be coached out of him?   College football is different than NFL and though Barkley obviously had bad OL, the decision making before LOS for RB is crucial imo. That's one thing where prospects can be evaluated equally, no matter what scheme, competition or OL talent they run behind.   So.. Maybe Barkley won't be bell-cow back? But more like Reggie Bush? Reggie Bush didn't become a great runner until later in his career when his athleticism had declined. How soon will it happen with Barkley? However, there is no denying his athleticism and talent as a receiver. So the ideal usage for him might be more similar to how many scatbacks are used.. But he would probably be even bigger mismatch in the passing game and better runner than best scatbacks in the game today (Lewis, White, Riddick etc.). Or just bigger, more athletic and better pure runner than McCaffrey. I'd actually be more willing to use high pick on that kind of player than RB like Gurley, Elliott and Fournette.
    • It's a different situation because they didn't have the quarterback. We (hopefully!) do.   Look at the way the league is trending. It's all about building a defense that can limit the opposition or having a quarterback who can elevate the play of those around him. If you have both them you're basically the Pats.    Between 2011 and 2016 we spent only 5 of a possible 18 high draft picks on defense (with 4 of those being 3rd rounders!!!) and we've basically been swimming again at the tide of the NFL.   I've never seen a fan base so occupied with offense. It's time to look at what the Championship teams are doing and replicate it.
    • Unless they value the top 3 QBs exactly the same it would be stupid to take Saquan 1st overall and be left with 2nd or 3rd choice at QB. 
    •   Thanks, I was wondering whether they were using this or not. Seems to be the perfect tool to train a QB to pick up different defensive schemes etc. Could be good for defense players too.   I would strap it to Green and hope that it would eventually increase his awareness! 
  • Members

    • Swan Ronson

      Swan Ronson 174

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CopenhagenColt

      CopenhagenColt 88

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ReMeDy

      ReMeDy 2,319

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ColtsAC

      ColtsAC 54

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ty4atd

      ty4atd 57

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • KelownaColtsFan

      KelownaColtsFan 47

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NannyMcafee

      NannyMcafee 624

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • KB

      KB 222

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Carlos Danger

      Carlos Danger 921

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ClaytonColt

      ClaytonColt 223

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active: