Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Belichick's AFC South


King Colt

Recommended Posts

Just now, King Colt said:

Anyone notice the head coaches for three of the four AFC South teams are lead by former Hoody players/assistants? It makes one wonder why so few in the past have had success as head coaches.

None had a decent qb.....much less a Tom Brady. If you don't have a qb you don't have much. I'm not saying Tom Brady makes that organization but even a pro bowl caliber qb I don't think any have had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dgambill said:

None had a decent qb.....much less a Tom Brady. If you don't have a qb you don't have much. I'm not saying Tom Brady makes that organization but even a pro bowl caliber qb I don't think any have had.

I don't think it coincidence that McDaniels, Patricia and Vrabel all left for teams with a QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In part that's due to going from assistant to head coach

A head coach has to be a leader of the entire team.

 

Of the two leaving now I would put my money on Patricia. He was involved with the offense early in his career and he knows the entire game very well and is a leader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, -JJ- said:

In part that's due to going from assistant to head coach

A head coach has to be a leader of the entire team.

 

Of the two leaving now I would put my money on Patricia. He was involved with the offense early in his career and he knows the entire game very well and is a leader.

The leader part I think very likely....but let's be honest here. Belichick is a defensive genius...how much of those defensive game plans are him and how much are Patricia. But like you said....you put other people in charge of those things now...and its about setting culture and leadership and running the whole team now...not just one unit...Patricia may very well be better at all that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Mangini and McDaniels (first time around) both erred in the sense that they tried to just basically replicate Belichick's world. But if you don't carry the panache for that sort of thing, it comes off as disingenuous. 

 

I'm sure McD will do better this time around. Older, wiser, etc. Lessons learned. 

 

I also think Patricia will do well. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, GoPats said:

 

Mangini and McDaniels (first time around) both erred in the sense that they tried to just basically replicate Belichick's world. But if you don't carry the panache for that sort of thing, it comes off as disingenuous. 

 

I'm sure McD will do better this time around. Older, wiser, etc. Lessons learned. 

 

I also think Patricia will do well. 

 

 

Also McDaniels I think had a little too much control the first time. Working with Ballard I think will help keep some of that attitude in check but also lend validation to his moves and his leadership knowing he has Ballards and Irsays blessing. Too much too fast I think for McDaniels.....but honestly other than Tebow his roster moves made a lot of sense....I do believe the video scandal hurt him a lot there in Denver too. I agree sometimes being the change agent can backfire....especially if those in the organization aren't behind the agent. I think McDaniels will do a much better job here. I agree...at least both have a starting qb that should allow them to be in any game. When you don't have a good qb then you are really starting in a hole. It will be interesting to see how their intensity fares...obviously Pagano and Caldwell I would probably classify as on the quiet soft spoken end of the head coaching family. Players will have to get used to a different type of leadership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎26‎/‎2018 at 8:43 PM, Jules said:

Kinda scares me with all this Pats influence in the AFC South now. Still have to give the edge to the Jags heading into next season though. 

Yep...Coughlin has the right plan down there in Jacksonville. He has the answer to beating the Pats....difference though this time was he had Bortles leading his team and not Eli....who made some of the most clutch plays in SB history on those two game winning drives against Bill.....Bortles couldn't complete a third down to save his life in that second half....and that's the difference between winning and losing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, dgambill said:

Yep...Coughlin has the right plan down there in Jacksonville. He has the answer to beating the Pats....difference though this time was he had Bortles leading his team and not Eli....who made some of the most clutch plays in SB history on those two game winning drives against Bill.....Bortles couldn't complete a third down to save his life in that second half....and that's the difference between winning and losing.

 

Jaguars give me sort of a vibe of those old Ravens teams, well when the Ravens had Ed Reed and Ray Lewis and were still knocking people around including NE. I know everyone hates Bortles, but I am not convinced that if you tossed in Alex "boring" Smith they would be that much dramatically better either. And Eli is getting up there in age.....

So I dunno........sometimes you can't have it all in today's NFL. The mega defense AND QB it seems. Giants just had that run there with Eli when their D line was lights out a lot in the postseason.

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...