ColtStrong2013
-
Posts
4,150 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by ColtStrong2013
-
-
4 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:
So you think the Eagles playbook has changed? I would say only tiny adjustments.
What i saw was Atlanta defenders anticipating well and playing really good D.
The same with the Eagles D. BOTH are top SB contenders with Many really good players.
The Bengals D won't be as good, but our miss mash of all NEW with inexperienced players and a limited Lucky SHOULD make their D look very good.Are you putting words into my mouth? Because it looks to me like you are putting words into my mouth.
I not once said their playbook changed nor did I say anything about their playbook. I said their gameplanning looked off and their playcalling was suspect. That's literally all.
But yes, I agree that Atlanta's defense played very well. Tight coverage all game long.
-
I kinda like it.
I do like the buildup to the smacking of the anvil. If we can somehow get to the playoffs and get Peyton back to smack it, it would be pretty dope.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Btw,
Nick Foles numbers in the NFC Championship game
26-33 78.79% 352yards 3 TDs 0 Interceptions 141.4 qb rating.
And in the SuperBowl against Bill Bellichick...
28-43. 65.12% 373 yards 3 touch downs 1 interception 106.1 qb rating
AND the philly special touchdown reception to boot.
Not bad for someone who isn't Wentz.
-
11
-
17 minutes ago, CR91 said:
Foles is not Wentz.
Yeah...
Except I didn't say that he was or anything like that. I said they dont look the same as they did in the superbowl... or the other 2 playoff games for that matter. And if you remember, the quarterback was... drum roll... Nick Foles, not Wentz.
Nick Foles also said that Frank was instrumental in prepping him especially in film.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:
I actually think their offense has looked pretty similar. I don't mean that as a negative, or that Reich didn't have anything to do with their success. I just think the league's had longer to scout their offense and more specifically their Nick Foles led offense, not to mention they've just not been playing that well.
They have struggled all preseason on offense. I'm not sure it's a credit to defenses, as most offenses are kept vanilla. It's more of an execution standpoint, but execution is only consistent if the preparation/planning is on point in this league. I just don't see it to start in this game.
I also realize there was a weather delay, and that affects everybody.
#hopefulthinkingfrankreichisagenius
-
8 minutes ago, tweezy32 said:
Maybe they should put in ajayi more and use him actually. Don't know why there not using him really..
And I have him on my fantasy team so I'm kinda t'd off
Agreed. That's a big component of game planning, and it just seems off to me tonight.
Again hopeful thinking on my part that they are missing Frank to start the season...
-
I know it is the season opener, and teams often struggle a bit to start, but man the Eagles offense doesn't look like the same unit that torched in the SuperBowl just 7 months ago. Playcalling is suspect to open the game with a superbowl MVP under center.
I have great hope that Frank played a bigger role in gameplanning/preparation and playcalling than he was ever given credit for. Can you imagine how quickly the tune will change on the 2018 Colts if our offense comes out Sunday well prepared, well thought out game plan/adjustments, brilliant playcalling, and Andrew Luck firing on all cylinders?
HIGH HOPES. DON'T @ ME.
Thoughts though.?
-
4
-
-
7 hours ago, Superman said:
Two main issues with this viewpoint.
1) It's probably not true that a majority of millennials act entitled. That's a very broad brush, and there's no way to quantify that statement. It comes off as just an insult to a large group of people because of their age.
2) The corporate workplace adjusting to the times isn't a reflection of entitlement. It's just a generational shift. It happens every couple of decades. Workers wanting to have a reasonable dress code, reasonable hours, be paid a reasonable wage and be treated with a reasonable degree of respect isn't a sense of entitlement. It's a sense of self worth.
(A little deeper on #2: A big part of this latest shift in the corporate workplace has to do with the increasing prevalence of telecommuting, and the decreased frequency of dealing with customers face to face. That's a technological shift, more than anything else. It's trickled into more casual office environments, and it's manifested in other ways. It's not just because millennials don't want to dress up for work.)
This exchange between Grigson and McAfee isn't new, nor is McAfee's response. Just like always, and with anything, a person's response to a difficult is partly a reflection of the quality of their alternatives. That's always been the case. If you have options, you can tell your terrible boss to shove it, and go find another job. This is not unique to the millennial generation.
I hate to keep nitpicking at you Superman, because you are a great poster and obviously incredibly wise.
However, I disagree with you reverting to the entitlement remarks, as if that is the root of this whole thing. I just don't see it that way. I don't think pat thought he was entitled to be treating like Peyton Manning like someone mentioned on here. I don't think he felt he was entitled to get away with breaking rules. I think he felt he was entitled to be treated a little better than dog crap, which is what Grigson treated he, pagano, and apparently several others in the Colts franchise. Pat had the gonads to stand up to him finally and ultimately walk out. That's not entitlement, that is having guts to make a point.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, SilentHill said:
Not all, but a majority, and i'm not trying to paint them in a negative light. Change is good. There is a shift happening right now in workplace culture. In order to attract young talent, companies are changing their dress code, making the hours flexible, and ditching the kind of shenanigans that Ryan Grigson allegedly pulled on Pat McAfee, because if they don't? Millennials are more than willing to turn down boatloads of cash and tell their employer to hit the road, and they are going to make it known why they are leaving, and why they feel wronged, because they want transparency.
Pat took it another step further when he yelled at Pagano (which was not acceptable), but the Exchange between him and Grigson is a fairly common struggle in old fashioned work environments, and it is happening more and more. Of course as a result you end up with corporate change, which is exactly what happened in Indianapolis.
And this is relevant to this franchise... extremely relevant. Top free agents, and especially your own draft picks looking for an extension, do not stay in bad environments. If people can't see the difference between how Ballard communicates and runs this organization now versus how Grigson did, they never will.
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, DougDew said:
I can grasp it. But the comment cited was that "the only reason you're here is because the owner wants you", makes it sound spiteful, and not being based on a football decision.
So maybe Grigson thought he could spend less for a punter and that those few million dollars saved would offset the lost profit on Jersey sales.
Or do we just want to keep going with spite being the reason?
Undoubtedly. He thought he could easily replace Pat with someone much cheaper. The problem with that is, he could not have. Irsay knew that, and he shut the conversation down. Therefore it was Grigson being spiteful at Pat and looking for everything little (like a stupid picture that was against his rules...is that in Andrew Luck's contract? Or just Pat's I wonder?)
-
3 minutes ago, DougDew said:
What do you and NCF not understand about what I write? Then make some comment that I'm dumb or don't get it.
I basically said the same thing as your last paragraph, that he wanted to find a cheaper alternative at punter.
When you say he wants to "make a case for firing him", that implies Grigson wants Pat off the team because he doesn't like his personality, despite thinking he's a good punter worth the money.
No. Grigson is saying that he doesn't think Pat is worth the money (the basis of the contract dispute prior to this) and the only reason Pat is on the team is because Irsay likes his personality.
I understand what you write... I dont agree with it.
Grigson didn't think he was worth it from a football perspective solely. Irsay realized that his personality and his play brought money to the organization in form of merchandise and possibly even ticket sales (because let's face it, when #12 was out, there was very little to look forward to on the field... and Pat McAfee was it for some people.) You guys can't grasp this. He was valuable, on the field for the team and for the organization in media relations, fan base, merchandise sales, etc. He felt that his value to the team was a lot more than the nothing thag Grigson thought he was worth (and subsequently treated him like)
-
...and with that, I am done talking about Ryan Grigson.
He was bad. He got fired. For good reason. And he's gone forever.
Moving on.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, DougDew said:
Why do you say that....that RG was looking for a reason? That RG harbored some sort of animus towards Pat and would replace him with less of a punter because of that? At the expense of the team on the field?
Maybe RG sincerely thought he was the easiest to replace. Our current punter is pretty good. Maybe Pat wasn't replaceable at the time, but I assume that's what Grigson thought.
If this story is true, and not one former player has come out and stood behind Grigson yet (we can wait if you'd like) then I would say it is pretty apparent he was looking for a reason to fine him, make a case for firing him/driving him out of the business.
It was well known that Grigson wanted Pat McAfee off the team and bring his own, cheap alternative in from the start. Read between the lines.
-
1
-
-
49 minutes ago, Superman said:
The article points to an 8% increase in web traffic for the pro shop, not 8% growth in revenue. It points to a 9% increase in sales at brick and mortar stores. However, it's impossible to tie either of those increases to McAfee alone. In 2014, the Colts were looking like the next AFC contender. The article also doesn't speak to any increases in sales for other players. With McAfee being #2 on the team in jersey sales, it's fair to include him as a reason for an increase. It's not reasonable to conclude that he was THE reason for the increase, and we have no data with which to reach a reasonable conclusion on that.
It is true that McAfee represented a financial gain for the Colts. I'm not suggesting he didn't have value to the team, on and off the field. I also agree that I don't think the Irsays would appreciate or condone having their players treated that way. But I don't think that his value to the team was relevant in that discussion.
If any player knowingly violated team rules, it doesn't matter whether they were a cash cow or team MVP, they should be held accountable. This was petty of Grigson, but that's not because McAfee was #2 on the team in jersey sales or because he was a good punter. Grigson probably treated him this way because he disliked him, which is wrong coming and going. But anyone acting like they are beyond being fined because they have good jersey sales is missing the point. Grigson was wrong to be a jerk to any player, jersey sales notwithstanding. I feel like Pat's response about his value and making money for the team is somewhat arrogant and a little conceited.
Hence the reason I said there will never be context that shows what he brought financially. #2 in Jersey sales with a 9% growth in sales tells me he was pretty valuable.
It does have a lot to do with the discussion, you just continue to disagree and repeatedly say that it had no correlation.
"I feel like Pat's response about his value and making money for the team is somewhat arrogant and a little conceited." Yeah, you have said that several times now.
-
As I said before, I won't defend Pat any longer, as he isn't a member of this team. But I sure appreciated him while he was here. For many reasons. I support the Colts and the players that make it what it is. I supported Grigson while he was here. I cannot support him any longer.
-
2 minutes ago, DougDew said:
Just pointing out, but I think the overall comment by Pat wasn't part of a sincere discussion about his value to the company, it sounded like he was just digging at Grigson because Grig was about to call him out for some conduct policy. As was Pat's comment about RG being responsible for not protecting the QB.
I'd think his value to the Colts would come up calmly by his agent during contract talks, not in this particular heated conversation.
I don't dispute that. He consistently has dug at Grigson since his abrupt retirement... He has repeatedly said Grigson flat out told him from day 1 he was the low man in the organization and he'd be gone/replaced if it weren't for Jim Irsay. Problem is with an organization this size, you don't get direct privileges with the owner... you get them with the manager. And in this case the manager was looking for anything and everything to justify his case of getting rid of Pat. You and I would both take issue with that.
-
2 hours ago, braveheartcolt said:
He's always had an overinflated opinion of himself. As a player. A television personality. As a swimmer. This article just cements his overinflatedness.
He had an overinflated opinion of himself as a player? Not sure on that one. He knew his self worth as a punter, especially with an offense that often stalled and relied on his field position magic to stay in ball games. He truly helped win some games with his brilliant onside game (2 in the same Houston game if I remember correctly.)
He also took the damage of kickoffs so Vinny could have an extended career (would love to hear his take on Pat on this forum... would undoubtedly be more positive than most on here.)
-
2 hours ago, Superman said:
I would like some context on some of those numbers, but either way, the point is that it struck me as arrogant and petty on Pat's part.
https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2014/11/07/Marketing-and-Sponsorship/McAfee.aspx
I doubt we'll ever see context of Jersey sales. But here is an article that quotes the Indianapolis business journal saying McAfee's sales helped an 8 % growth for colts pro shop ecommerce and 9% for their brick and mortar stores.
I understand why people see it as arrogant, but I see it in a different fashion. He had hard proof that he was valuable to the organization, extremely valuable in my own opinion (on the field, salary to revenue potential, and off the field in his media relations/charitable work) and he was completely underappreciated by management while Grigson was at the helm. No way that the Irsay family is proud of that, as they have always been appreciative of the players that help make their Billion dollar empire what it is.
-
2 hours ago, Superman said:
Number 2 in jersey sales spoke more to the fact that the Colts had basically no marketable personalities on the team (and that's accepting as fact that he was #2 in jersey sales, which I haven't attempted to verify). My point is that whatever he was bringing in was likely a drop in the bucket, and him acting like his jersey sales were a significant part of the operation is a laugh, IMO.
And his personality getting national attention was kind of a two-edged sword. By this time period, he had lived down the arrest, but that was and still is his primary claim to fame.
Again, I'm not knocking Pat because of his personality, his arrest, his being a punter, or anything like that. I'm saying that his own version of this story makes him look bad, the way he told it makes him look bad, and him telling it now, two years later, makes him look bad. I'm certainly not claiming this makes Pat a bad person, or any of the other nonsense that others are peddling. But my reaction to the story was 'wow, Pat, that's kind of petty and arrogant of you.'
And again, this is not a defense of Ryan Grigson, nor does Pat getting into an argument with Grigson bother me.
Pat's Jersey sales were big on the women's market. Personally, every lady in my family had a Pat McAfee jersey... accounting for as many as 20. Wearing #1 probably went a long way with that, as was his humor, but he was appealing to the female base of Colts fans. He was genius to capitalize on his charisma/humor combined with his swimming event. He built a brand, which is remarkable for a punter in the NFL. He wasn't just #2 in Colts Jersey sales... he was #17 in the league at one point in 2014. That's a fact. And that is why I am going to have to disagree with you in his Jersey sales not being a part of the operation. He brought in more revenue than anyone with his salary. He had a larger fan base than anyone with his salary.
-
1
-
-
I think we can all agree that things weren't good in the Grigson/Pagano organization. I blame that on management. Pagano was suspect as a coach. But he was dealing with far more than anybody in the league was dealing with... especially with management of the team. Really sad.
At the end of the day regardless of the outcome of his career, Chris Ballard will walk away with respect from the players and coaches, and take full responsibility for the results. Grigson couldn't and wouldn't. It was always someone else's fault and he had no accountability whatsoever. Bad management.
-
39 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:
JMO
The story was not needed
It makes Pat look “childish”
I won't defend Pat anymore after this, because he can defend himself. However, this story was needed. People have been pressing him why he quit football for a while now. Now they are pressing him on why he's leaving barstool sports... He gave them the true answer to both, and it's that he's tired of working for people that apparently don't appreciate him.
I dont blame him. People can blame the millennial generation for being entitled, unloyal, whatever. Kudos to a great deal of them for not taking years of nonsense like many of the generations before them that were too scared to leave a company they needed to leave behind.
-
2
-
-
17 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
This kind of story makes me wonder how many times Grigson treated other players like this besides Pat? I would almost bet this wasn't the only incident between Grigson and Pat either. It's not like this was probably a 1 time thing. Boss or not, nobody should be treated like garbage so I don't blame Pat at all. If my boss called me into his office and was cussing and acting like a raving maniac I wouldn't put up with it either. My guess is, Pat had several run ins with Grigs over petty stuff like a picture being taken and Pat just basically said I am done with this franchise. A couple of years ago on Twitter, Reggie Wayne also had said Grigs was rude to the players as well so right there alone proves it wouldn't just a Pat problem.
Grigson was on a power trip 100% of the time and this story just adds to that narrative. Grigson was mad that he had to keep Pat from the start, when he wanted a cheaper alternative... He was constantly looking for things to justify getting rid of him, or in this case driving him out. Ironic it was the same time frame things were going south fast for the entire organization under his command. I'd say many players had similar stories, and this is pretty much why Grigson was fired and Pagano wasn't. Pagano had stories to show what bad management looked like, and had the players to back him on that end.
Pat's not a prima donna millennial. He was an underappreciated employee that was valuable to the organization he brought a lot of money to. 2nd best selling Jersey, top 25 in the league at one point (ahead of Cam Newton)... and being threatened of losing a large chunk of his salary by a crap manager that no one got along with... for no good reason. Good employees don't leave companies, they leave bad managers. Period.
-
7
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, WoolMagnet said:
Kickers.
i like the "i dont wanna make money for these guys anymore"
talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Does anyone miss him on the field? No. Rigaberto has been as good for far less money.
i always liked Mcafee, but the guy occasionally goes off the rails..... like WAYYYYYY off the rails.
i had my doubts about barstool. I just didnt see a future.
Rigaberto is a great young replacement for Pat, but not even in the same conversation. Pat wasn't just top 3 every year, he was one of the best ever. Clutch punter. Incredible off the tee, specifically with onside kicks.
I can assure you we will miss Adam Viniateri when he is gone.
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:
I see a number of the same Usual Suspects of Complaining are in mid-season form....
Amazing the Colts don’t employ these Geniuses!
Business as usual. Carry on! Dilly, Dilly!!
Complaining in misery, Dilly Dilly!
Eagles offense minus Frank Reich
in Colts Football
Posted
...to keep this relevant to the Indianapolis Colts and Frank Reich so it doesn't get moved over to the NFL section, I ask this question and expect full participation:
Which aspects of Philly's offense do you like, and expect Frank to carry over and utilize here? RPO's (lord help us if we are on national television with cris collinsworth's amazing commentary)?