Jump to content

Colts Football

All things Colts football

25,171 topics in this forum

    • 2 replies
    • 192 views
    • 3 replies
    • 192 views
  1. The Rules of IR..

    • 4 replies
    • 191 views
  2. Game One Takeaways

    • 4 replies
    • 191 views
    • 6 replies
    • 190 views
    • 0 replies
    • 190 views
    • 0 replies
    • 190 views
    • 2 replies
    • 189 views
  3. Colts Inactives @ Eagles

    • 2 replies
    • 189 views
    • 0 replies
    • 188 views
    • 3 replies
    • 188 views
    • 2 replies
    • 188 views
    • 0 replies
    • 188 views
    • 4 replies
    • 187 views
  4. Bayless

    • 1 reply
    • 186 views
    • 3 replies
    • 186 views
    • 4 replies
    • 185 views
    • 0 replies
    • 185 views
  5. I LOVE our draft

    • 1 reply
    • 183 views
    • 1 reply
    • 182 views
    • 0 replies
    • 181 views
    • 4 replies
    • 181 views
    • 8 replies
    • 181 views
    • 1 reply
    • 181 views
  6. Colts fan on Texans?

    • 1 reply
    • 181 views
  • SEASON TICKETS

    2019 Season Tickets On Sale Now! Visit Colts.com to learn more.
  • Posts

    • I say overachieved because of what you posted here, most everyone had us with a loosing record but still liked where we were heading. I feel we overachieved and we just hit a nice stride 6 game on. That KC game was just a poorly played/game planned game. Ty broken too was a huge factor. 
    • It's interesting - and indeed subjective -, because, IMO the Eagles are indeed the #1 roster at the moment. And it's not even close. The depth of that roster is crazy. If Wentz stays healthy, they are the heavy favourites of the NFC.   (They will pay the price for putting this deep roster together though. In 1, max 2 years that Eagles will be a very different team. A very-very different team.)   Regarding the Colts, the #10 is fair imo. As of june 2019. Which can change very-very quickly. Last year, practically this very same roster - except Houston and Funches and the new rookies - was at the rock bottom of the leauge according to some "experts". I did not agree with them of course, but I had a hard time to put them into the top15. They were rather around #20 on my list. What made them to rise to #10 in one year was mostly the development of their own players. The Nelsons, the Leonards, the Hineses, the Ebrons, the Autrys, etc. Many-many players become better players in one year, than they were before, thus elevating the whole roster.   The good news is, that this Colts roster is still full of self-imrovement potential. Turay, Lewis, Cain, Hooker, Alie-Cox and so on and so on, there's a ton of young players who can still improve. The more they are, the better the chance the team will improve overall.   So, It's not delusional thinking - hoping -, that in june 2020, we - and most experts - will talk about the Colts roster - mostly this current roster, without any major outside addition - and say it's a top5 unit in the NFL.  
    • You cannot separate cap management and player decisions. Player decisions affect the result e.g., the return of investments. If you evaluate an investor, you cannot do it like "let's see, hmm, he had X mills to invest, he bought Apple and GM shares, so he did well". That's not enough, you need to check also, if those Appe and GM shares actually made money or not, don't you?    And those contracts DID kill them cap wise. Not like they ran over the cap, because it never happens, every team must be under the cap. But it stopped them to do moves they could've done, and should've done otherwise. First and foremost, the Jaguars roster became very thin. They have no depth at most positions, other than DL, because they were paralyzed during (and preceding) the FA. Other than the Foles sign, they could do nothing. They lost a bunch of mid tier players, because they could not resign them, or sign someone else in place of them. They had 55 players on the roster in draft week! The average roster size at draft week is usually 65 to 70. In the Colts case it was 74. In addition to Malik Jackson and company - we're speaking about 5-6 or more starting players - the Jags also lost a bunch of rotational pieces, which they could not replace with similar talent. To fill up their 90 roster, they had to add I think 24 UDFA's this year. 24! (The Colts added 8 I think. The better teams added 8 to 12 typically).    And, as a result, other than Foles, this Jags team is a worse team than the 2018 Jaguars was. Quite a lot worse. You don't see it from the distance, because surface - the Ramsey's and Campbells - looks shiny from the distance. But looking at them closer, it is in front of the eye. They are a lot thinner, and they have quite a lot of holes (RB, WR, TE, no OL depth, etc.) They are only 1-2 injuries away (not talking about Foles) from being falling apart.    And this is not even the end of the story, because the majority of the consequences of their bad cap management will hit them in 2020 and 2021. So the worst is not even there yet. But it's inevitably coming. That's the definition of bad cap management.  
    • I didn’t realize how truly annoying that chant is until I saw it live at Memorial Stadium, twice. I feel bad for you Michigan fans on that one. Next time you lose to OSU, just remember at least you don’t root for a Big Ten team in Indiana, lol, it could be worse.
    • I think we did what we were supposed too is why I have no problem with losing at KC against a great Pass Rush, great QB, and good Coach. We didn't underachieve or overachieve IMO. I had us 9-7 (winning 1 playoff game) and getting the 6th spot at the beginning of last year.   If you go by USA Today = Nate Davis who had us 2-14 = worst team, ESPN as a whole who had us 4-12, and the NFL Network who had us 4-12 from the beginning then we overachieved by a mile,  . The NFL Network had us rated 32nd = the worst team. I was on cue with Colin Cowherd and said 9-7 and playoffs + a playoff win. It actually took 10-6 to get in but I was close record wise.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...