Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

OffensivelyPC

Senior Member
  • Posts

    8,756
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Posts posted by OffensivelyPC

  1. I watched this today at lunch break. Excellent watch. I too liked the fact that Ballard told the camera man to turn it off. Gawd if I could be a fly on the wall in those moments.

     

    But I don’t think there’s any doubt this was the guy we wanted overall, and Ballard read his competitor GMs correctly. He’s made his mistakes, and I’m sure he’s had guys sniped from him a pick or two before. But I gotta give him credit when he deserves it. At the most important position (maybe his most important pick of his career to date?), he got his guy without having to sacrifice collateral picks.

    • Like 2
  2. 5 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

    That  should tell u that don't believe anything u read on the internet. Yesterday everyone was posting Titans  r trading then this came out. All of it is rubbish.

    By your own assertion, we can't believe the Titans aren't trading Henry.  So either they're trading him or they're not.  Obvious statement of the year.  Doesn't mean we don't find it fun to surmise and discuss.  It's lying season.  Everyone reports stuff and it's a lie, it's subject to change in the coming months, but it might be true.  Basically, "[Insert NFL Team] could do anything in the draft."  Still fun to talk about.

    • Like 2
  3. 9 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

    I wonder what the Bears would do if we offered them our 1st pick and Defo for Fields.  That would give them pick 1 and 4 in the 1st round and Defo to start at the 3T.  Straight out reject it?  Think of what they could do with those picks.  Certainly start out with a quarterback they chose instead of inherited.  That are a last place team right now as it is.  I would love to see Ballard poke the Bear with that one.  lol

    I would prefer to keep Buckner, personally.  I also hope they keep Fields so Houston has their choice at QB.  Texans will blow it anyway

  4. 13 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

    Seems plausible.

     

     

    What's funny (maybe ironic funny? I always misuse irony), is I saw Eberflus on the Rich Eisen show and I got the sense that they definitely wanted to keep Fields but that they're "exploring options" with the #1 pick.  And Rich Eisen and his crew were having the conversation on a prior recent show about how it makes so much sense to trade Fields to Houston and get a QB on a fresh new rookie contract and the #2 pick to boot.

     

    I dunno how much sense that makes.  But if they're not sold on Fields, the math of it all makes sense.  But this tweet makes me think teams are not interested in Fields and believe that there's no earthly way the Bears take a QB which essentially means the NFL Draft most valuable pick is the #2 pick.  Either that or the Bears asking price for the #1 overall is just too rich.

     

    That's all speculation, but the closer the Bears get to being on the clock, the price will get higher.  

     

  5. 21 minutes ago, Lurk McGurk said:

    There's way too much smoke for there not to be some truth to all of this, I would guess.  

    Also, I think someone else mentioned it, but I don't think the Colts would be expected to give up 2 futures firsts.  I think that's applicable to the teams "further down".

    Ballard  just isn’t a guy to trade up. I mean he has before. But he loves his draft picks. I just don’t see it, but we haven’t entered the draft in his tenure this QB desperate in decades, really.  I wanna say it’s possible, but I think it’s unlikely.

    • Like 1
  6. 25 minutes ago, stitches said:

    He just released video on Anthony Richardson vs Kentucky(one of Richardson's worst games):

     

     

     

    I want so badly to like Richardson.  But he reminds me of Lamar Jackson.  Far too often he moves when he doesn't have to and bails on the pocket when he smells trouble, even when it's not there and his footwork needs all the work in the world.  He shows inconsistent anticipation, inconsistent ball placement, and he's really only thrown passes in his career last year.  So I mean, can he be coached up?  Yes, and I think we have the guy to do it.  But there's no sugar coating it.  If it is going to work, he's going to need to be holding a clipboard for a little while and working on his technique.  But if you can even trim some of the fat and get more positive consistency in the technique, a lot of the issues fill fix themselves.  Could be an elite quarterback or a complete bust.

     

    As the great Deangelo Vickers said, "You ever play Russian Roulette?  Time to spin the chamber, Boris."

     

    • Like 2
  7. 3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

    Chose to analyze Bennett's worst game. 

     

    If you don't follow UGA football...and I'd wager hardly anybody here does....it might seem like he chose to show us a representative game.

     

     

    I mean, okay.  That doesn't mean there aren't positives to also show.  It doesn't mean much of anything particularly when there are lots of other people who do the same stuff, not to mention you can verify by just watching the game yourself.  You're really writing something off for the pettiest of reasons instead of just hearing out the whole opinion and then agreeing or disagreeing based on what you already know.  And that''s fine, but it's nothing if it's not petty.

  8. 5 minutes ago, DougDew said:

    LOL.  People here are rank amateurs when it comes to understanding media tricks.

     

    I stopped watching 5 seconds into the video...5 seconds..... He chose to analyze Bennett's Missouri game.  Anybody who knows UGA football knows that was the worst game of his career.

     

     

    I mean, the guy was an NFL quarterback.  Not necessarily "from the media."  He at least knows a little better than the guys writing articles about the NFL and using "media tricks"

  9. 50 minutes ago, chad72 said:

     

    After looking at fan sentiments recently, Peyton Manning is thinking "Boy, am I glad I was drafted when QBs took years to make it to or win a SB because fan expectations sure are unrealistic nowadays hoping for quick results now."

     

    A big part of it is the rookie salary cap which started with Cam Newton in 2011. Teams started making quicker turnarounds with 1 player, namely QB, not being a huge part of the salary cap.

    That and teams figuring out how to develop plays for the "mobile" quarterback.  For a long time, mobile QBs, while not absent in the NFL's history, were looked as the black sheep of the quarterback.  You had to be a pocket passer and if you weren't, all the speed in the world wouldn't save you behind the LOS if you couldn't fit into the system.  

     

    But with the introduction of the shotgun formation and the read option, that opened the door for guys like RGIII and Colin Kaepernick to gain relevance when, without it, they didn't fit necessarily into the pure pocket passer.  Over time, teams have added concepts into the RPO game and have amended what they look for in QBs and drafted and developed accordingly.  Just that process would have inevitably required time if your 2012 self were trying to project it.

     

    EDIT: Meant Pistol formation.  I don't know if I've seen anyone really use it except for the 2012 and maybe 2013 season.  Do teams still use that?

    • Like 1
  10. 5 minutes ago, philba101 said:

    A report was just released that the Titans are shopping Derrick Henry. Could they use that as leverage to get to the top of the draft if they have a QB they love?

    https://nfltraderumors.co/report-titans-have-shopped-derrick-henry-in-trade-talks/

    Nah.  What's he going to be?  29 years old?  The wheels are gonna fall off sooner or later and rare are the days when RBs over 30 are still playing at a high level or getting big contracts, let alone move up 7 or 8 spots in the draft to a top 3 or 5 pick.

  11. 14 hours ago, richard pallo said:

    This wouldn’t be the first time a team did not design their offense to take advantage of a quarterback’s strengths.  That’s all they are saying.

    That makes a little more sense I guess.  But the phrasing is just so weird.  It's the "Situation likely easier at the next level" part that threw me off.  Like nothing about the NFL is easier than college, so why even add that remark.  Just say, "Scheme is important and having the right staff will help development"?  I know I'm being a mite petty, but still.

  12. Question:  What the hell does this even look like?  How does anyone put this in their notes on their film review?  Honest Question.

     

    In PFF's NFL Draft Guide they just released, for Tanner McKee the third note under the positives ("Pros") it says "Stanford offense did him no favors schematically.  Situation likely easier at the next level."

     

    What in the insane impossible to understand language does that mean?  Like I feel like I wanna unsubscribe and withdraw my monthly fee for that comment alone...?  I don't even know what I could ever see on a pass drop back/pitch/catch that would ever make me have this thought.

  13. 1 hour ago, PRnum1 said:

    This photo is causing quite an uproar. Mina is only 5'3

     

     

     

    She said she's 5'7" and with heels, closer to 5'11".  But this is really not newsworthy TBH.  kid can play ball and throwing over the OL hasn't been a problem so there's no reason to expect him to all of the sudden struggle with it in a way that he never has before.

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...