Kelly Ruled Out

[dw49]

Huh... read that he practiced in full . That's usually a sign for good to go...

 

 

olts C Ryan Kelly (concussion) is out for Week 14 against Buffalo.

He'll miss his second straight game in the concussion protocol. Kelly has a chance to return in Week 15.

 

 

Source: James Palmer on Twitter 

Dec 8 - 6:10 PM

 

[Blueblood23]

It was amazing that Jeff Saturday was able to play every week for years.

[chrisfarley]

will be good to have him back in week 15.  game will be 31 and a little bit snowy (flurries) and a 22MPH sustained wind, so Kelly will be happy to stay back in Indy where it will be a balmy 39 and clear.

[jameszeigler834]

17 minutes ago, chrisfarley said:

will be good to have him back in week 15.  game will be 31 and a little bit snowy (flurries) and a 22MPH sustained wind, so Kelly will be happy to stay back in Indy where it will be a balmy 39 and clear.

 

17 minutes ago, chrisfarley said:

will be good to have him back in week 15.  game will be 31 and a little bit snowy (flurries) and a 22MPH sustained wind, so Kelly will be happy to stay back in Indy where it will be a balmy 39 and clear.

So who starts at center cause his backup is also Questionable with an ankle.

[chrisfarley]

8 minutes ago, jameszeigler834 said:

 

So who starts at center cause his backup is also Questionable with an ankle.

same kid that came in the other day vs. the jags.  our backup got injured and they brought the 3rd stringer in.  wish i could think of his name.

[dw49]

24 minutes ago, chrisfarley said:

same kid that came in the other day vs. the jags.  our backup got injured and they brought the 3rd stringer in.  wish i could think of his name.

 

 

Anthony Fabiano ring a bell ?

 

2nd year guy out of Harvard . This is like his 6th team since Baltimore signed him as an undrafted FA rookie in 2016. 

[Coltfreak]

16 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

 

Anthony Fabiano ring a bell ?

 

2nd year guy out of Harvard . This is like his 6th team since Baltimore signed him as an undrafted FA rookie in 2016. 

Pretty sure it will be Mike Person again.   He played very well last week 

[Nesjan3]

why is it every time we seem to actually draft a good player he spends half the time on the injured list

[dw49]

23 minutes ago, Coltfreak said:

Pretty sure it will be Mike Person again.   He played very well last week 

 

He went out with an ankle injury last week and was replaced by Fabiano. He's been a DNP all week.

 

Actually limited today. He's listed as questionable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[throwing BBZ]

Our prospects for 3-13 are looking up.

[B~Town]

Just put him on IR and let him heal up . 

[aaron11]

1 hour ago, throwing BBZ said:

Our prospects for 3-13 are looking up.

are people still worried that we wont get a high pick?

 

bills- loss

broncos- toss up

ravens- loss

texans- toss up 

 

we will finish 5-11 or worse, i bet it will be 4-12 and 4th-6th overall pick 

[dw49]

31 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

are people still worried that we wont get a high pick?

 

bills- loss

broncos- toss up

ravens- loss

texans- toss up 

 

we will finish 5-11 or worse, i bet it will be 4-12 and 4th-6th overall pick 

 

 

I'm really pulling for 3-13. That would give us a very legit chance of picking 2nd or 3rd as the Giants and 49ers would drop below us with just 1 win. 2nd would no doubt bring us a bevy of picks.

[aaron11]

11 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

 

I'm really pulling for 3-13. That would give us a very legit chance of picking 2nd or 3rd as the Giants and 49ers would drop below us with just 1 win. 2nd would no doubt bring us a bevy of picks.

we will see how much teams want to give up for these QBs

 

its very possible we dont get a trade and end taking the same guy at third as would have at 6th

[HectorRoberts]

I actually think we will win this week if petermen is the starter

[jameszeigler834]

17 hours ago, chrisfarley said:

same kid that came in the other day vs. the jags.  our backup got injured and they brought the 3rd stringer in.  wish i could think of his name.

Fabiano Right?

[TheRustonRifle#7]

I hope this year is an outlier for him as I didn't like the pick to begin with...get well!

[rockywoj]

25 minutes ago, TheRustonRifle#7 said:

I hope this year is an outlier for him as I didn't like the pick to begin with...get well!

Adding Nelson to the OL equation come draft time, Kelly will spearhead a dominant interior O-line for the next decade, hopefully.  ;)

[dw49]

3 hours ago, aaron11 said:

we will see how much teams want to give up for these QBs

 

its very possible we dont get a trade and end taking the same guy at third as would have at 6th

 

Probably we won't get to pick 1.2 and that's more then likely where we'd need to be. As long as Darnald comes out , I think picks 1 and 2 will have the big premium . Not sure there's another past him and Rosen.

[TheRustonRifle#7]

16 minutes ago, rockywoj said:

Adding Nelson to the OL equation come draft time, Kelly will spearhead a dominant interior O-line for the next decade, hopefully.  ;)

Ok.....if Kelly and Nelson were drafted in the bottom of the 1st...I would be happier.  I hope your weekend is going well?  Finally received some cool weather down here...:-)

[#12.]

A prospective coach objectively looking at this roster?  It's possibly the worst situation in football.  If Luck's health is in any way in question, it most certainly is.  Practically every player on this roster who has shown something... anything - any promise whatsoever - is either on IR or is injury prone.  

[rockywoj]

7 hours ago, TheRustonRifle#7 said:

Ok.....if Kelly and Nelson were drafted in the bottom of the 1st...I would be happier.  I hope your weekend is going well?  Finally received some cool weather down here...:-)

Finally cool weather?

 

I am in Winnipeg ... this time of year it’s nothing but cold, brutally cold.  Warmth, please!  Can’t wait to get back to my Mexican retreat!

[Introspect]

I think we should be concerned with Kelly and concussions. Just think his career may suffer at a position that has a lot of head to head contact.

 

He may see his future as being more important than 5 more years in this league.

[Superman]

On 12/9/2017 at 3:15 PM, #12. said:

A prospective coach objectively looking at this roster?  It's possibly the worst situation in football.  If Luck's health is in any way in question, it most certainly is.  Practically every player on this roster who has shown something... anything - any promise whatsoever - is either on IR or is injury prone.  

 

...

 

Same roster being shaped by the guy who has been a hot commodity for GM jobs for a while now, who will have $90m in cap space, and have a top 5-ish draft pick. 

[Superman]

On 12/9/2017 at 11:14 AM, dw49 said:

 

 

I'm really pulling for 3-13. That would give us a very legit chance of picking 2nd or 3rd as the Giants and 49ers would drop below us with just 1 win. 2nd would no doubt bring us a bevy of picks.

 

A few weeks ago I wondered whether Denver would ever win another game. Now they look competent again, winning 23-0 today, and they get us on a short week after we got beat up in OT in a foot of snow. Probably doesn't matter because our team and coaching staff can't finish a game to save their lives. 

 

I figured this game would be in our favor, but not anymore. Could still win, because Denver's QBing is that bad (and that's the key for the Colts this season) and weird things happen on Thursday night, but Baltimore is a legit team that will probably roll us. Leaves just Houston, and they probably know just how to beat us; Savage was awful in that game, but has mostly played better since. 

 

I'd say the Colts have about a 20% chance of winning another game this season. 

[dw49]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

...

 

Same roster being shaped by the guy who has been a hot commodity for GM jobs for a while now, who will have $90m in cap space, and have a top 5-ish draft pick. 

 

The cap space is massive as you say but this FA class is horrendous. Looks to me like all that money teams had to spend locked up most of the good players ? There will be a lot of money chasing a very thin class.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, dw49 said:

 

The cap space is massive as you say but this FA class is horrendous. Looks to me like all that money teams had to spend locked up most of the good players ? There will be a lot of money chasing a very thin class.

 

I wouldn't say it's horrendous, but it's not very deep. And we're three months from free agency, so it will be even less deep by the time March rolls around. Maybe it will be horrendous by then... 

 

Still, based on how it looks right now, there are 4-5 guys I'd really like to see the Colts target. And there will be cap casualties from good teams like the Chiefs, Eagles, Steelers, Ravens, maybe Pats, Seahawks, Falcons, etc. Maybe the Eagles have to cut Brandon Brooks or Brandon Graham, if so, I'd be interested in both.

 

And obviously they will have a ton of flexibility in terms of contract structure.

[NewColtsFan]

4 hours ago, Superman said:

 

...

 

Same roster being shaped by the guy who has been a hot commodity for GM jobs for a while now, who will have $90m in cap space, and have a top 5-ish draft pick. 

 

$90 million?

 

I thought the figure you've been using for months has been roughly $72 mill?    So where did the other $18 mill come from?

 

Still, whatever number we end up with the bottom line is that there isn't much to buy, so the best guys will likely be badly over priced...   

 

Bad year to have a lot of money to spend in free agency...

 

 

[Superman]

11 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

$90 million?

 

I thought the figure you've been using for months has been roughly $72 mill?    So where did the other $18 mill come from?

 

Still, whatever number we end up with the bottom line is that there isn't much to buy, so the best guys will likely be badly over priced...   

 

Bad year to have a lot of money to spend in free agency...

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/indianapolis-colts/cap/2018/

 

This projection is assuming a salary cap of $168m in 2018. The 2017 salary cap is $167m. It's been going up 7-8% each year. Let's assume it goes up 7% in 2018, the salary cap will be around $177m, leaving the Colts with over $90m, before any moves are made.

 

Free agency is always overpriced, and this year won't be an exception. I don't know what players will actually hit the market, or who Ballard will be interested, or who will be interested in the Colts. But I think the Colts are in good position to upgrade their roster significantly in 2018.

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/indianapolis-colts/cap/2018/

 

This projection is assuming a salary cap of $168m in 2018. The 2017 salary cap is $167m. It's been going up 7-8% each year. Let's assume it goes up 7% in 2018, the salary cap will be around $177m, leaving the Colts with over $90m, before any moves are made.

 

Free agency is always overpriced, and this year won't be an exception. I don't know what players will actually hit the market, or who Ballard will be interested, or who will be interested in the Colts. But I think the Colts are in good position to upgrade their roster significantly in 2018.

 

Good info....   and encouraging that we might have more money than expected...   but while FA is always over priced the difference is that in most years there are good players to buy...     doesn't look like that for 2018....

 

Back around October,  ESPN.com had a story about a first look at 2018 FA.     The 9th and 10th best free agents were Vonte and Gore.    That's a scary thought...

 

Oh, and your find at guard, the guy from Carolina is way up on my early list.   Great find!    Thanks!

 

 

[dw49]

15 hours ago, Superman said:

 

A few weeks ago I wondered whether Denver would ever win another game. Now they look competent again, winning 23-0 today, and they get us on a short week after we got beat up in OT in a foot of snow. Probably doesn't matter because our team and coaching staff can't finish a game to save their lives. 

 

I figured this game would be in our favor, but not anymore. Could still win, because Denver's QBing is that bad (and that's the key for the Colts this season) and weird things happen on Thursday night, but Baltimore is a legit team that will probably roll us. Leaves just Houston, and they probably know just how to beat us; Savage was awful in that game, but has mostly played better since. 

 

I'd say the Colts have about a 20% chance of winning another game this season. 

 

 

It "feels" like 20 % is reasonable but the actual odds would probably be something like a 65 % to 70% chance that we win at least one more. And that would be giving us zero chance at winning at Balt. It's a complicated formula to figure out the actual odds and not worth trying to walk myself through it. 

 

But here's is at least part of it.. 

 

Right now Denver opened as a 2 point favorite , Vegas also has what they call a "money line ." That line gives you the betting odds if you bet a team with no point spread involved. The line for that right now you lay $130 to win $100 if you want to bet Denver. If you want the Colts you bet $100 to win $110. So if you take away the Vig (commission to Vegas), they are saying the odds are 11-10 that Denver wins. So the Colts have around a 45% chance of beating Denver. I would think right now Houston might be the same type favorite ? So again , if you believe the Vegas odds are anything close to right , the Colts would have around a 45% chance of winning that game also.

 

Calculating the actual odds of them winning 1 of these 2 games is complicated. I think it would be in the "neighborhood" of around 65 % chance of winning one of those 2 games. Then to be really fair , you should add in a bit for the game at Baltimore.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, dw49 said:

 

 

It "feels" like 20 % is reasonable but the actual odds would probably be something like a 65 % to 70% chance that we win at least one more. And that would be giving us zero chance at winning at Balt. It's a complicated formula to figure out the actual odds and not worth trying to walk myself through it. 

 

But here's is at least part of it.. 

 

Right now Denver opened as a 2 point favorite , Vegas also has what they call a "money line ." That line gives you the betting odds if you bet a team with no point spread involved. The line for that right now you lay $130 to win $100 if you want to bet Denver. If you want the Colts you bet $100 to win $110. So if you take away the Vig (commission to Vegas), they are saying the odds are 11-10 that Denver wins. So the Colts have around a 45% chance of beating Denver. I would think right now Houston might be the same type favorite ? So again , if you believe the Vegas odds are anything close to right , the Colts would have around a 45% chance of winning that game also.

 

Calculating the actual odds of them winning 1 of these 2 games is complicated. I think it would be in the "neighborhood" of around 65 % chance of winning one of those 2 games. Then to be really fair , you should add in a bit for the game at Baltimore.

 

Yeah, obviously Vegas handles that from a different perspective, including how they think the money will come in. I assume Vegas comes out way ahead on Thursday night in general. If Denver -2 brings in even money this week, I'd be surprised. I bet that line moves in favor of Denver over the next couple days. If I were picking five games this week, the Colts wouldn't be one of my picks.

 

But I'm basically just thinking about how likely the Colts are to beat any of the three remaining opponents. I think 45% is generous for Denver, I'd say more like 30%, and let's say the same 30% against Houston. And I'll say they have a 10% chance of beating Baltimore, based on how both teams look right now.

 

Divide that between three games, and you get 23%. Again, I know that won't be reflected by the oddsmakers, but I'm not optimistic that they'll actually win any of these three games, and if I were into betting on NFL games, I'd bet against them each week individually. If I were betting collectively on whether they win one out of the next three, I think the smart money would be on them, not against.

[The Fish]

Who's capable of playing worse than the Colts? The Texans could really not show up again, that's week 17?

TY could go insane in Denver. I wouldn't count on it, but that's how they'd win that.

Same with Baltimore.

 

I wouldn't pick them to win any of them, but bank on them being in two of the three, looking like they'll win it and then not. That's almost a given.

[dw49]

43 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, obviously Vegas handles that from a different perspective, including how they think the money will come in. I assume Vegas comes out way ahead on Thursday night in general. If Denver -2 brings in even money this week, I'd be surprised. I bet that line moves in favor of Denver over the next couple days. If I were picking five games this week, the Colts wouldn't be one of my picks.

 

But I'm basically just thinking about how likely the Colts are to beat any of the three remaining opponents. I think 45% is generous for Denver, I'd say more like 30%, and let's say the same 30% against Houston. And I'll say they have a 10% chance of beating Baltimore, based on how both teams look right now.

 

Divide that between three games, and you get 23%. Again, I know that won't be reflected by the oddsmakers, but I'm not optimistic that they'll actually win any of these three games, and if I were into betting on NFL games, I'd bet against them each week individually. If I were betting collectively on whether they win one out of the next three, I think the smart money would be on them, not against.

 

Ahh .. you're a smart guy but I don't think betting , odds and probability is your strong suite. 

 

Why would you "divide that between the three games ? " No way that is right. Think about it , if they have a 30% chance of beating Denver and then play 2 more games ... how could you have just a 23% chance of winning 1 of those 3 games ? That's why I said it's complicated to figure the true odds. I'll sick with somewhere around 60% of winning one game. 

 

At first I thought you would calculate the odds of winning Denver . Sat that was 35%. Then calculate the odds of winning Houston , say that was 30% . Then give 10% the odds for winning Balt. If added all 3 together , you would have a 75% chance of winning 1 game. What blows that apart is if say you added a 4th game where you were say even money (Cleveland) and then said what are the odds of winning 1 of those 4 games , I see you can't just add them u as I first thought. You would get 75% plus the 50% of winning Cleveland and that would mean you have better than a 100% chance of winning 1 out of 4 games... which obviously is flawed. It's some crazy formula that I don't understand . 

 

Anyway I think if you look at each game individually , we have a nice chance to finish 3-13 .. even though the odds favor us to get 1 more win. Think of it this way...when the season started everyone knew Cleveland was the worst team , but the odds were probably 98 % that they won 1 game. 

[Superman]

37 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

Ahh .. you're a smart guy but I don't think betting , odds and probability is your strong suite. 

 

Why would you "divide that between the three games ? " No way that is right. Think about it , if they have a 30% chance of beating Denver and then play 2 more games ... how could you have just a 23% chance of winning 1 of those 3 games ? That's why I said it's complicated to figure the true odds. I'll sick with somewhere around 60% of winning one game. 

 

At first I thought you would calculate the odds of winning Denver . Sat that was 35%. Then calculate the odds of winning Houston , say that was 30% . Then give 10% the odds for winning Balt. If added all 3 together , you would have a 75% chance of winning 1 game. What blows that apart is if say you added a 4th game where you were say even money (Cleveland) and then said what are the odds of winning 1 of those 4 games , I see you can't just add them u as I first thought. You would get 75% plus the 50% of winning Cleveland and that would mean you have better than a 100% chance of winning 1 out of 4 games... which obviously is flawed. It's some crazy formula that I don't understand . 

 

Anyway I think if you look at each game individually , we have a nice chance to finish 3-13 .. even though the odds favor us to get 1 more win. Think of it this way...when the season started everyone knew Cleveland was the worst team , but the odds were probably 98 % that they won 1 game. 

 

I understand what you're saying. If they have a 30% chance of beating Denver, then that should mean they have at least a 30% chance of winning at least one more game. Like you said about the Browns, the odds wouldn't favor them going 0-16 at the beginning of the season, even though they wouldn't be favored in any individual matchup.

 

But as you said, looking at each game individually provides a different picture. Individually, there's no reason to pick the Colts straight up in any of the remaining three games, based on how each team looks right now. And as each game goes by, their chances of picking up another win go down, due to fewer opportunities. Obviously an oddsmaker would come up with a way different figure, and there are other variables they would consider as well. But just from a 'will they win another game' standpoint, with so few games remaining and having so much info on the remaining opponents, I couldn't see putting any money on the Colts to pick up another win this year. I think we agree on that.

 

The Colts are coming into the Denver game in a bad situation. Can't see very many taking the Colts in that game, which is why I don't think the Denver -2 line will hold up. If the Baltimore line came out 10+ (and it probably won't, that's too high, IMO), I could see someone making a run at that spread, but straight up, no one would pick the Colts to beat Baltimore right now. Home vs Houston is more interesting, that's probably their best chance of getting another W. 

[dw49]

12 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I understand what you're saying. If they have a 30% chance of beating Denver, then that should mean they have at least a 30% chance of winning at least one more game. Like you said about the Browns, the odds wouldn't favor them going 0-16 at the beginning of the season, even though they wouldn't be favored in any individual matchup.

 

But as you said, looking at each game individually provides a different picture. Individually, there's no reason to pick the Colts straight up in any of the remaining three games, based on how each team looks right now. And as each game goes by, their chances of picking up another win go down, due to fewer opportunities. Obviously an oddsmaker would come up with a way different figure, and there are other variables they would consider as well. But just from a 'will they win another game' standpoint, with so few games remaining and having so much info on the remaining opponents, I couldn't see putting any money on the Colts to pick up another win this year. I think we agree on that.

 

The Colts are coming into the Denver game in a bad situation. Can't see very many taking the Colts in that game, which is why I don't think the Denver -2 line will hold up. If the Baltimore line came out 10+ (and it probably won't, that's too high, IMO), I could see someone making a run at that spread, but straight up, no one would pick the Colts to beat Baltimore right now. Home vs Houston is more interesting, that's probably their best chance of getting another W. 

 

 

Yeah .. if you want to say this is 1 bad football team and good chance they lose all 3 , it's not a bad thesis. It's roster is bad , the injuries are many and the coaching staff doesn't make too many decisions that win ball games. Take yesterday , would you have called a time out when Buffalo was willing to run the clock out ? If it was like 2 and 20 or 3rd and long , I could see it . But why not just let the half end instead of "pushing things " when you had no real advantage. Not saying it was horrible just saying probably was close to a 50-50 decision and when it goes bad it goes bad. Same to not trying to get AV a little closer on the game winner ? Just nothing about the 2017 Colts that isn't bad ? Special teams ... maybe.

[Superman]

17 minutes ago, dw49 said:

Same to not trying to get AV a little closer on the game winner ?

 

Yeah, just a bad decision. Not focused on the result, only on the process. I thought AV would hit it, but didn't understand not lining it up better with a safe run play when you still had a down left to spike. I'm not mad because Pagano made him miss, I'm upset because they didn't play it right, make or miss.