OffensivelyPC
-
Content Count
8,420 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Calendar
Blogs
Posts posted by OffensivelyPC
-
-
I think this is a fine stopgap. I am not seeing eye to eye with the notion that he might not play all year. I mean I guess it's possible, but it would take several setbacks or if we rushed him into the lineup before he's ready (which Reich said he wouldn't do). He'll play this year, just the question is whether or not he can get back to form and hope he doesn't reinjure it.
-
And it's these sorts of threads that pay this guy's check. Seems like the majority complain about Doyel, but we keep talking about his opinions. we're basically asking for him to stay in the Indy spotlight. Meh..., we'd be better off talking about paint drying.
-
Ken Dilger was a favorite of mine. Played TE as a kid. Dilger was Dallas Clark before we even knew what a Dallas Clark was.
Roosevelt Potts was another rando favorite. Maybe romanticizing him as a child, but dude always got the tough yards. He left and that was it.
But probably Marshall Faulk was the most bad*** of them all. I'd still take him over LaDainian Tomlinson. Still have all his rookie cards I ever collected as a kid.
-
1
-
-
We took some unnecessary draft picks from a needs based perspective rules. I hope thats the worst I can say, but I really cant confirm, is that we got everything we need. We need Wentz to play well.
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:
The latter. Plus, there is still time and nothing is set yet. We'll see roster cuts, we'll see FAs. I wouldn't panic.
It';s a bit amusing, i remember how much fans discounted Castonzo. Seemed like most of his years, he was knocked until the last couple years. The Colts will be fine.
The QB is mobile right? lol
I am not really worried. I just think that they missed out on the 1st 2 rounds for a left tackle and I don't think that It's likely that were going to find a starting left tackle this late in the draft. So that just tells me That they are OK with who they have already.
-
2
-
-
We obviously are seriously considering Nelson at LT or have faith in our OT signings.
-
On 4/22/2021 at 2:18 PM, Dogg63 said:
Jim's suffered from depression over the years and lost, perhaps the love of his life, a few years back, right before his arrest. His push for the Colts organization to work hard to de-stigmatize mental illness is impressive. Too many are lost to suicide when they cannot admit their affliction and get some help. This is a worthy effort.
Note: lots of Colts greats are featured in the video
I once heard that in most cases, suicide is death by depression and it changed the way I thought about it. When my wife and I lost our firstborn and saw a therapist I saw what it was to live with it... really for the first time. There's a lot of learning how to cope and helping those who struggle with depression cope. It takes a lot of time and it's different for everyone. But it definitely starts with looking at it differently.
I'll be the first to admit how wrong I was about depression and how to treat others struggling with it. But I am glad I did learn because my wife once told me she was driving and just felt like undoing the seatbelt and running off the road. Had I ignored that, there might've been a day where it was too late. And who could live with themselves knowing that, changing nothing, and then have it actually happen? I know that that's often the question for those affected by the suicide of a loved one.
Initiatives like this are the start and I'm sad to see that it's necessary to have a "Kick the Stigma" week in the same way that we even have to have a breast cancer awareness or black lives matter movement. We shouldn't have to teach people that these things matter. But I am still glad people cared enough to start supportive movements like Kicking the Stigma.
-
4
-
-
On 4/19/2021 at 5:38 AM, cdgacoltsfan said:
Aaron Bailey hangs onto that hail Mary in 95 AFCCG
This gets my vote. I was more heartbroken after that game than the super bowl loss to the Saints. That season was magical. We were such big underdogs, but almost every game came down to the wire. No one took us seriously and before then, it was just the Indy Motor Speedway and the Pacers. But in 1995, the Colts commanded attention and was one drop away from going to our first SB since they moved to Indy.
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, EastStreet said:
Very few true TEs are "quick twitch"
MAC had pretty good separation stats all year.
I'll never know why we didn't give him more snaps running routes. At least in the red zone. It was like Trey Burton got healthy and MAC got dog housed or something. Burton missed the first month and still had 20 more snaps running routes. Which was weird since he was like, the highest rated TE by PFF standards at one point. By the end of the season he was still ranked in the top 5,
-
1
-
-
The Colts giving up a first for Craig Erickson was pretty disastrous with the benefit of hindsight. He lost the job to Jim Harbaugh and fell as low as 3rd string.
At least with the Jeff George trade we got a return getting a couple of first and a third, That future first we got from Atlanta netted us Marvin Harrison. With Erickson, we got a starter for a game and a half and the pick we gave up still had Ray Lewis on the draft board.
Trent Richardson was a bad trade, but it doesn't come close in my estimation. There just weren't a ton of prospects around the 26th pick in the 2014 draft that, even looking back on their careers, would have been better off. Maybe Davante Adams or Demarcus Lawrence? But we'd have probably been up in arms about it if we drafted either of at 26 instead of trading down. That class was pretty top heavy looking back.
Again, hindsight is 20/20 and all that and we obviously wouldn't have made those trades if we had a crystal ball, but to think that in 96 we could've had Marvin Harrison AND Ray Lewis?
-
1
-
-
On 4/13/2021 at 9:28 PM, NFLfan said:
I wish I could, but the last few years I've followed the draft less and less. Got 2 young kids that eat up most my spare time I'd usually spend on watching film and studying prospects. Thanks anyway! I definitely miss these.
-
1
-
-
On 4/13/2021 at 9:28 PM, NFLfan said:
I wish I could, but the last few years I've followed the draft less and less. Got 2 young kids that eat up most my spare time I'd usually spend on watching film and studying prospects. Thanks anyway! I definitely miss these.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, stitches said:
I disagree the draft players are total unknowns. There is plenty of tape on most of them to know what you are getting as traits and attributes. From then on it's on Ballard and Reich to figure out if they have it all up there and put it all together.
And that's why I think we've got a better chance with getting more return on investment with Wentz. Frank's done it with Wentz already. Not sayiing he can't do it with a rookie, but the thing about rookie QBs (or really any NFL player), there's an element of development that rests solely with the player and whether they can turn into an effective QB. Some do, but the majority don't, and it never becomes apparent to us until he's benched or replaced. Sometimes a draft pick doesn't work out. The odds of drafting a QB that pans out in my eyes are worse than the odds of Wentz being back with Frank Reich pan out. And that's, in large part, because Wentz and Frank have done it before.
QuoteI think the risks with the rookie QBs are similar but you are paying them a lot less and to a huge degree they are a blank canvas you can develop as you see fit. Rookie at pick 7 for example gets about one quarter of Wentz' salary. You can allocate that extra money too help your QB with weapons or protection or even with defensive impact players if you want.
Eh, but how much are you paying to move up to 7? That's gotta be at least #21, a future first, a second and maybe another pick. But I think at the endo f the day, it ends up being a wash or perhaps even more expensive salary cap-wise because now let's say you sign a couple of above average FAs on offense and/or defense to help your 7th overall QB. You're still spending $25 million per year. Giving up high picks, which have the highest possible chance to help at several positions of need makes it just that much more likely that you have to fill those positions of need in free agency. I mean, maybe you hit on those positions of need, LT, DE, CB, possibly WR with Day 2 and 3 draft picks but the odds of doing that, and hitting on the QB you pick cannot be any better than the odds of trading Wentz and still having the Day 1 and Day 2 draft capital to use on those draft needs and Wentz playing at a level he's already done under his current coach.
-
1
-
-
On 3/20/2021 at 11:43 PM, stitches said:
Entering the draft with a glaring need/hole at LT is a disaster. Teams will abuse you and push you around in the draft knowing exactly what u need. I would love a LT from the draft, I just wish we got a reasonable starter before so this can open up our draft for all possibilities...
The weird thing is... Our "saving grace" might actually be the fact that it's not just LT that we have a glaring need at. EDGE is arguably even a more serious need right now.
Still time to address both but the options are fewer and fewer every day.
It's a good thing that this is a really solid draft class for OTs. Teams might try to make a trade lopsided, but knowing another team's needs isn't much of an advantage when you're drafting the best players as opposed to drafting for team need. Teams jump you which is something that always happens every draft. But it also happens that teams maximize their draft trade values and may call the Colts to see if they can offer adequate compensation iwthout having to move down as far as the team trying to jump you. And if you draft well, you can find a starter at a position of need anywhere in the draft. Add to that, teams can offer you shotty trades in their favor, but they're competing against other bids for the same pick if they're wanting to trade up/down for our pick.
I'm not really concerned that we do'nt have plans for a starting LT at this very moment in time. I'll be concerned when we draft one that doesn't pan out.
-
1
-
-
11. That's 11 pages On an old thread about what number will a football player wear... Can we just let this thread die?
-
3
-
1
-
-
I just heard on the radio that Kenny Moore siad just bring back Marlon Mack and I guess TY tweeted that's all you? Kenny Moore responded we already got you back. So maybe we gettin TY too?
-
He has the versatility that Ballard likes, but I'm just not sure he'd be a fit for our defense. He's mostly an edge guy, who added some off the ball LB skills to his skillset while in NE and MIA used him very similarly so that he wasn't just a sub-package player. My question is, does he add that much value over what we already have? Especially if we take a DE high in the draft? I think you gotta pass. He'll cost more than he's worth or just go somewhere that will pay him more because of his fit.
-
Well and there's always good ol' supply and demand. In drafts like potentially the 2021, people might think it'd take mortgaging the next 3 drafts to get Trevor Lawrence and that might be true if he were the only true 1st round prospect. But teams these days seem to be getting better at developing QB talent, at least in the short term - we'll see how well that translates to longer term development and staying power for guys like Justin Herbert or Lamar Jackson. Not to mention health, it could be that the expected QB lifespan is shortened by 5 years given how dual threat QBs are used. But I digress back to draft value...
The #1 pick might be 5,000 points if there were teams to get in a bidding war over the #1 spot. But there are, for now, 3-5 QBs who could easily be drafted in the top 10, and it's not out of the realm of possibility that QBs go 1-2-3. Depending on how teams feel about their staff and the prospect, The #1 pick loses some value, I think. Especially when you consider that there's no such thing as a can't miss prospect, let alone QB. Maybe a GM who's desparate might go all in. It really just goes to show that the best teams are those that move up and down the draft and maximize value based on whatever their own scales tell them.
-
I kinda had to lower my expectations when I saw the summarized above the chart, "Thanks to one draftee, the Chiefs have had the best multiple drafts."
-
22 minutes ago, stitches said:
About the questions - I don't think they understand the game beyond the most surface level. IMO in order to ask some incisive questions about players, roles, schemes, you have to be comfortable talking about those things and I don't think most of them are. I think their understnading is at the level of - "Rivers completed 65% of his passes and went for 290 yards.... TY dropped a pass and Buckner had 2 sacks"... Nothing but surface level. I don't think they know better in order to ask better questions. That's why they keep going back to the same question again and again and again asking it in 5 different ways, begging for a quote they can put in a story. They just have nothing else in their bag of tricks.
When the demands of the job exceed the time it takes to do the job well, you get the same results as a sophmore in high school who crammed the night before the test. It's really not a surprise to me anymore, or an excuse for that matter.
-
55 minutes ago, Superman said:
Colts didn't have a lot of competition on this trade, but they still made a legitimate offer. A first and a third is more than I initially thought it would take.
You think they put too much on the table? I mean, you never truly know how much another team is willing to jump you. I wonder if that was the Colts initial offer and once competition started phasing out, they pull the, "well the deal has changed" card. Is that even feasible? I mean you can offer what you want, but is it wise to change your offer after other potential trade partners drop out? It'd prolong negotiations and I suppose for Ballard, if you feel you can rehab Wentz, keep the offer competitive and the deadline so you absolutely know how to prepare for FA and the draft. I guess I just answered my own question, but I've typed enough that I'm not deleting it lol.
-
12 minutes ago, Superman said:
If Wentz's agent told the Colts 'we'll resist a trade to any other team, so just make your best offer and sit tight,' that would be problematic. But that would be mostly impossible to prove, unless someone was careless in the process.
Short of any actual evidence, I don't know why anyone would go down that path. The Eagles got fair value for Wentz, based on precedent. And if the Bears wanted Wentz, they could have just made a better offer and gotten the deal done. Reports say they never actually made an offer.
And there is no evidence right now. I wouldn't like that sort of gamesmanship, if you can call it that, from the Colts. But sometimes it feels like things worked out a little too nicely. But then again, the value in this trade depends on Wentz, so we've officially won nothing as of this moment.
-
21 hours ago, Superman said:
Yeah, the idea that Wentz wasn't good enough to draw more interest isn't something I agree with. The combination of his cap number + a lot of teams being over the cap, the Eagles setting their initial asking price high to weed out looky-loos, and Wentz's stated preference to go to Indy, I think those combined factors eliminated potential suitors from consideration right off the bat. And good for us.
The first thing about any negotiation you need to know is: who's got what leverage? Colts knew the market and the other serious contenders. The Eagles only leverage walked out the door when the Bears tapped out. They were wishing upon coins before flipping them into the fountain at that point.
It honestly would not surprise me at all if there was some collusion claim against Reich and the Colts for tampering with Wentz and his agent to ensure a move to Indy. Maybe it was all circumstantial, but uhh... Ballard and Reich aren't stupid. I mean, I might try to throw floaters out there to assist in eliminating the Bears competition - hence Wentz' agent stating Indy as his preference. It's a natural conclusion to jump to in the first place, so like I said, maybe there were never any "unofficial" conversations. Just saying, wouldn't surprise me if it happened either.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Arodgers12 said:
You think Rivers had anything more left in the tank?
Ehhh. He was decent enough. Most of his damage was done pre-snap. A lot of dink and dunk. When he had to throw the ball 50 yards, sometimes it was spot on, and aother times he'd miss a guy 3 paces ahead of the FS. I don't think he'll ever be able to shake off that cloud over his head that he could never come up big in the 4th quarter of the playoffs.
He was average to above average. But there were only a few games where I thought man, glad Rivers plays and not Brissett.
-
1
-
Colts the favorites to land Julio Jones
in NFL Draft, Scouting, and Free Agent Talk
Posted
It's fun to dream up stuff. It's another thing to make it reality. I don't see Ballard being a potential buyer.