Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Luck officially out week 2.


NorthernBlue

Recommended Posts

Just now, dodsworth said:

He doesn't need to come back until this line understands how to protect. 

Let's see what Brisset brings to the table.

 

Yep, that's the reason he was brought in.  I just hope he's ready to go by next week.  I don't really think they can afford to play Scott anymore and expect to be competitive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Malakai432 said:

 

Yep, that's the reason he was brought in.  I just hope he's ready to go by next week.  I don't really think they can afford to play Scott anymore and expect to be competitive. 

I would take Brisset with two weeks into the playbook over Tolzien of two years.

Tolzien needs to be cut asap and is unworthy of a roster spot after his play

yesterday. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No surprise. I was watching WTHR's coverage of the Colts last night on there late show and Dave Calabro said he has heard Luck may miss 4 games. I won't be surprised if its longer then that, especially if this season continues to go the way it looks like it will.

 

Also doesn't sound like Chuck has made a decision to replace Tolzein yet due to Brissett not knowing the playbook. Ridiculous they are even in this situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, indy1888 said:

No surprise. I was watching WTHR's coverage of the Colts last night on there late show and Dave Calabro said he has heard Luck may miss 4 games. I won't be surprised if its longer then that, especially if this season continues to go the way it looks like it will.

 

Also doesn't sound like Chuck has made a decision to replace Tolzein yet due to Brissett not knowing the playbook. Ridiculous they are even in this situation. 

i concur

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, dodsworth said:

He doesn't need to come back until this line understands how to protect. 

Let's see what Brisset brings to the table.

I get your point there (and somewhat agree), but the guy has a $140M contract to play football.... he needs to be in the game earning that money.

 

Not saying we, and the coaches, shouldn't be worried when he does, but he needs to play if he can play.

 

9 minutes ago, snkdy said:

Sigh. Well, it can't get any worse than yesterday. At least I hope not. 

Yes it can, lol.  We haven't played anyone yet... remember?  We are in the "easy" part of our schedule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, BR-549 said:

I get your point there (and somewhat agree), but the guy has a $140M contract to play football.... he needs to be in the game earning that money.

 

Not saying we, and the coaches, shouldn't be worried when he does, but he needs to play if he can play.

 

I absolutely HATE the notion that Luck should continue to sit until the line's fully healthy. That's just not how professional football works, at all. Can you imagine Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady sitting out games because their starting center has to miss a few weeks? With the amount of money that he gets paid, the fact that people are actually suggesting that he sits even when he's healthy, it's asinine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, BR-549 said:

I get your point there (and somewhat agree), but the guy has a $140M contract to play football.... he needs to be in the game earning that money.

 

Not saying we, and the coaches, shouldn't be worried when he does, but he needs to play if he can play.

 

Yes it can, lol.  We haven't played anyone yet... remember?  We are in the "easy" part of our schedule.

 

I'm hoping the Rams turn out to be better than we all thought haha 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

Can you imagine Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady sitting out games

 

No, I can't.  And I am sure it would never happen.  I would think that AL wants to play, but this crap about keeping him out at all is just that ... Crap.  

 

The entire dynamics of the game change when he is in as we all know.  That game would not have had the same outcome with Andrew playing, might have still lost but not that badly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BR-549 said:

That game would not have had the same outcome with Andrew playing, might have still lost but not that badly.

 

We wouldn't have lost to that scrub team if Luck was playing. Sure, they're improved over last year's Rams squad, but with a healthy Luck, we would've put up 35+, and those 2 pick 6s that Tolzien threw would've been wiped from the score.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, NannyMcafee said:

Cut tolzien, sign Morris, start brisett

This is exactly what I want to see. It seems like a no brainer. Then we cut Morris loose when Luck takes over 

 

I was a little surprised we did not make any moves today.  

Tolzien and Green have no business on the roster. Ballard goes on and on about competition We have 6 CB's on the roster how did the Green end up at CB ?

 

Monachino should go too not only for starting him but do nothing scheme wise to try to confuse and rattle a QB with only 7 starts. Monachino  talks a good game but that's as far as it goes. He may be the most useless guy on the staff and that's saying something Butler would be put on notice as well 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

We wouldn't have lost to that scrub team if Luck was playing. Sure, they're improved over last year's Rams squad, but with a healthy Luck, we would've put up 35+, and those 2 pick 6s that Tolzien threw would've been wiped from the score.

You do realize we allowed Goff to get over 300 yards?? That has nothing to do with the Web position 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JColts72 said:

So foolish the Colts are. Why not have him on PUP to begin with?as out for about 6 games. Just an ornament on the sideline.

 

So he could practice with the team and be ready to go earlier than if he was on PUP and not practicing with the team until week 7?  I'm assuming he would need a minimum of two weeks practicing with the team before being ready for a game.

Link to comment
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

    • Not really.   There's a theory that Ballard wants to draft an OL high because he said it's important to protect the QB, and Richardson was hurt last year. And the counter was that Richardson's injury/s probably aren't about the level of OL protection, and drafting an OL high wouldn't address that concern.
    • I'm thinking if we can trade to 8 or 9 and draft Odunze , we should do it if the price is reasonable. The value chart shows giving up P 15 and P 46 is the perfect number. Probably won't do it and I would think 2025 2nd for a 2024 4th added to the deal would make it work . That of coarse would depend on Atlanta or Chicago wanting to move to 15 . Obviously , as we all know , it takes 2 to make a trade.
    • I can too. And that will tell us everything we need to know about how the view him. It will tell us their feelings on the tight end room, and what direction they pick from there will tell us even more.    but if they take him at 15, we won’t know much about what might have happened, as they will be landing someone they had rated highly and fell to them. 
    • Glad that’s over…    if I wanted to argue about it, I would have responded far more in depth than pointing out how you were attempting to gaslight me. I did not. Meaning I was ending my part of whatever the argument was. You “putting a finality to it” and then listing bullet points tells me it was the argument you wanted all along, which makes sense why you brought Grigson up in the first place. Bait, hook, gaslight. Almost got me buddy. You are a funny guy, Doug 
    • Putting a finality on an argument you want to have.   There is a theory that Ballard won't draft a OL high because ARs injuries were not caused by a poor oline.  I felt it important to note that since Luck's major injuries were also not caused by his oline, Ballard could still want to improve it like he did in 2018 simply because AR is The Franchise. And its important to point that out because there has been a running (false) narrative for about 9 years that Luck's oline was the (main) reason for his injuries that kept him out of games.  The (false) narrative is based upon, IMO, a detest of Grigson, and not reality about the facts (or strong rumors) behind the kidney laceration and snowboarding shoulder. Therefore, mentioning Grigson and the (false) narrative was germain to the point about Ballard possibly drafting Oline high this draft to protect AR. Mentioning Grigson shouldn't trigger a CB vs RG discussion, unless people reading it are gaslighted by their own reading lens.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...