ColtStrong2013

I would agree. I would rather trade whatever it takes to get Justin Jefferson and make it work with AR’s rookie deal than a 30 year old Diggs. that seems to have been the theme with rookie qbs. Trade for a young top receiver and roll during the rookie qb contract. Diggs to the bills with Allen. Tyreek to the Dolphins with Tua. Jefferson to the patriots was proposed by Corwerd this week. There’s a lot of talk about the Vikings moving him instead of paying him. I don’t see any of it happening. It’s more likely we find a receiver in the draft (whether 15 or later) and pair him with Pitt. Spend the money in other spaces. But I, like @Superman, see Ballard being more aggressive than we’ve seen. He’s set the stage for that and it may be necessary for his future as a General Manager- here or elsewhere. Will anyone be sad if a big move is made?

I don’t want him, but not necessarily because of these reasons (although not to be dismissed). I just don’t see him as a longterm solution, so I don’t see a point. I’d rather have Pittman, quite frankly. but- I do agree with Superman on this…

I was coming on to write this very thing, but from a different source. https://pittsburghsportsnow.com/2024/02/05/vukovcan-pitt-screwed/#google_vignette “The University of Pittsburgh realized this, and it was the reason that whenever other major programs such as Alabama, Miami, Florida (you get the point) tried to poach Partridge, Pitt came up with the necessary money and titles to keep him. It’s not always about money and unfortunately, Pat Narduzzi and Pitt found that out today as Partridge decided to head to the Indianapolis Colts in the NFL. From all the information that I’ve gathered, this move had nothing to do with finally making it at the NFL level, money or being unhappy at Pitt, Partridge just wanted to escape the cesspool of college football. It’s that simple.” It reminds me of IU basketball fans thinking they were going to get Brad Stevens or Billy Donavan to leave the nba to come back to college ball. lol. Yeah right… Who in their right mind would do such a thing? Leave a coaching world of luxury to getting back on the road to recruit? who knows what kind of value some of these college coaches can bring. When they are used to grinding and driving all day and night to recruit, maybe honing in on the bigger picture can bring some brilliance out. I hope we found a gem in Partridge.

https://www.si.com/nfl/colts/news/stefon-diggs-nfl-trade-rumors Fire away.

I read Zach’s piece. He has done a really nice job following the colts. The big question I’m asking I guess is if Partridge might have a future (sooner than later too) as the defensive coordinator for this franchise. Could it be Bradley’s last year? I don’t see that as an impossibility. I don’t think Partridge views this as a giant leap in jobs. He was co-defensive coordinator and could have undoubtedly been a true defensive coordinator of a larger program, based on everything I have read. I can’t imagine he couldn’t have jumped to the nfl at some point with his resume. Could this move signal the future of the Indianapolis Colts defense? I read it in an article, might have been Zach’s, that when Bradley got aggressive, he got really aggressive- specifically against the Browns when Watson went down. To me, it feels like the organization is going to focus on the secondary this offseason and give him the tools to be more aggressive. Perhaps he isn’t, and perhaps this is his last season here…

After reading a bit about this guy, I pose this question: could this be a move that signals Steichen’s preference in d. coordinator and defensive style? It sounds like Pittsburgh used an entire different approach on defense. One of the highest blitz percentages in college football. Partridge was co-defensive coordinator. or could it be Gus saying “beef up the secondary and we’ll be far more aggressive?”

Sounds like we found a winner at D-line. And one that is a heck of a recruiter too. Perhaps killing two birds with one stone? A guy that can coach and develop the d-line while offering valuable input on prospective defensive lineman going forward?

I don’t think so. I think there was definitely mistakes and inconsistency, but they had some real shining moments too. In Ballard’s press conference, he blamed himself for not having the players that the special teams needed. But he also said he liked our punter and kicker, so he definitely meant the supporting cast on special teams, which he thinks will be much better next year.

im not disputing that- I think he did an incredible job. I think we’ve only seen a baseline of what he’s capable of. His playbook will be fine tuned and open up more and more as Richardson progresses/stays healthy. If they can be successful in putting the talent he wants around AR, then that baseline just keeps rising. throughout the season, I would watch highlights from the all-22 shots, and it was remarkable to envision AR and JT in the backfield, instead of minshew and Moss. The strain that was being put on defenses with those guys was already obvious at times- I couldn’t even picture adding the 5/28 dynamic back there. An absolute nightmare for defenses. I was essentially stating that he wasn’t even entirely focused on the season at hand, because of the injury. He was coaching his future qb on the sideline. That’s not 100% locked in on what is on the field. Not by any stretch. The best is yet to come.

Senior Bowl is Sunday... I just read that new head coach Brian Callahan and GM Ran Carthon are staying back from the Senior Bowl to conduct interviews, so I'd say this is a hot time for that process.

I can't imagine anyone on this forum does not feel this way and would not be happy with a big offseason.

I saw in real-time, and then have seen numerous posts online about it. I cannot fathom this kind of effort (lack of) in a championship game...

The Lions would trade just a try at a superbowl for more years of mediocrity. I couldn't believe the collapse last night and felt for the fans.

while I did say Irsay may have to be more cautious with cash spent than other owners, I never compared Ballard’s way of saving money to another team. I just stated that he saved Irsay money. And going back to the beginning of his tenure, there is little to argue that he hasn’t. A great deal of the cash spent was to players he drafted, which was the plan from the beginning and one that Irsay was obviously fond of since he hired him with that plan. they were 1 game away from being as low as the colts on the only metric people pay attention to, and you mostly supported my point even when disagreeing. It is about having an established qb. They had the Goff/Mcvay connection and the Stafford/Mcvay connection throughout all of Ballard’s tenure with the colts. The difference between the wins and losses of the two teams has been exactly that + Aaron Donald. We will never have a player like Aaron Donald. I’m not sure there will be one again. He’s that good. My biggest argument to the Ballard hate on this forum (not accusing you, I know where you stand) is that what we have done versus the expectation is literally the quarterback position. Yes it’s his knock, it didn’t get solved, we can argue it all day long. But in my opinion, there has not been a significant difference in the colts and the rams- it’s two players. And it makes up the difference in a few games give or take each year.

He's going to have to step up his commercial game for that to happen in my eyes...

I guess it's convenient to leave out his first two years, which were most frugal, to illustrate your point. Where do you find the cash spending? What does 2017 and '18 look like. I'm not really interested in what other teams are doing, quite honestly. I'm more curious as where the Colts sit year to year compared to where Ballard's predecessor had them. How far back can you look at cash spent? Obviously with an ever increasing cap and reveue stream, it's not exactly comparing apples to apples, but I'd like that to be the gauge of if he's saving the Irsay's money instead of versus what another team is doing. And as far as the Rams are concerned, they have had the best/most disprutive defensive player in the league for the past decade and they have had a top tier qb (or at least in my eyes). That's it. That's the difference. It took them being on the right side of a coin toss to beat this Colts team with a rookie under center. The superbowl year aside, are we really that far off from where the Rams have been and currently are? They have been a few wins give or take better than us every year since 2018. Again- difference is at qb and a premier defensive disrupter.

ok

There weren’t many teams left that was pressing for qb. I think he could have traded back several spots at the very minimum and got a pretty good haul as well as Levis in that situation. But the video that showed his face when the trade was announced tells me they were fully expecting Richardson to be there at 4 unless someone jumped them for him. There were too many good players available. Look at the production the non-qb players in the top 10 this year- Anderson and Witherspoon went 3 and 5 and were pro bowlers. Bijan Robinson. Tyree was considered by many to be the better pass rusher in the draft (not by me- that was Anderson imo, but nevertheless) two offensive tackles and a stud in Jalen Carter.

Yeah. And the fact that Houston didn't trade up to #1 to ensure Stroud tells me a lot. They likely had similar thoughts on the class/the value of not trading up, as Ballard did. They just happened to get the best guy. The Panthers are the ones having to deal with the debating. I don't necessarily believe we would have taken Richardson either. I think Stroud would have been the pick. However, I think they saw enough from both players, whatever that was throughout their evaluations that said getting one of them would be worth not spending the amount of capital it would have required to get the other. I don't believe we were in the Bryce Young conversation unless he was what was left at #4, which was never going to happen. I think the Colts felt good about the odds of getting Richardson at #4 and that's why they sat.

To criticize the afc this year is interesting, considering how many teams played without their starting qb. Even with that, I think the afc was still superior to the nfc. They had a 58% win rate against the nfc this year. 46-34. That is up there with the 2000s afc head-head with nfc. I think you are looking to criticize an era that is still super young, so it's kind of hard to predict what they will end up being viewed as over time. Lamar Jackson is 27. Josh Allen is as well. Peyton was 30 when he won a superbowl. I think some of the best young qb's in the league are in the AFC and will continue to elevate. If Pat continues to dominate the conference and the league in the postseason for the next decade, do you think people will look at the conference and say "well no one else won a superbowl, so he must have played bad competition." Or will they realize he just dominated the conference enough that they look at other variables.

you are right. All we have is the police report. And the police report appears to show they didn’t have all the facts either.

Well considering this conversation seems to have three people right now and you are the only one that feels that way about his comments, I'd disagree with you. He didn't have to say it, you are correct. But he said it to emphasize the point, which you are ignoring for what he said his concerns were. The point was that he is farther along than they thought he was as a passer, which was their only concern. Everything else are strengths that had no concern. His intellect, his drive, his leadership, humbleness, his arm strength, his clear alien athleticism. All strengths. He had one concern by all accounts, his accuracy and his raw passing ability. It's been addressed, as far as Ballard's concerned. Also, Stroud wasn't available to us. Could we have traded for the first pick? Possibly. But he wasn't available where we were picking. They clearly didn't value trading up to #1 for him over sitting put and getting Richardson, or they would have undoubtedly done it. Everything regarding that at this point is hindsight bias. And just because they said he was their main pick doesn't mean they didn't have the same ability to trade up a spot to ensure they got him, which they did not. Tells me they felt the same about their options. They might have wanted him, but they were willing to gamble and take whoever was next on the board had the Panthers taken Stroud.

I'll give the San Francisco 49ers their credit. They turned it on, had some luck go their way, but ultimately made big plays when they mattered most (those 4th down stops especially). Purdy used his legs extremely well tonight. Look forward to seeing what they do against the Chiefs. Two teams that have recent superbowl history with one another. And I still stand by my comment... Had they not turned it around tonight, there would undoubtedly have been question marks. But they got it done, so that discussion is over.

The football Gods spoke tonight.

Every player had concerns. The concern for stroud was not his passing, it was his ability to grasp bigger concepts at the nfl level, by all accounts. Little man Young's was just that, his size. Richardson's was his accuracy (not his arm) and it was due to being so raw. Of course he was concerned about his passing. That was his only knock. He's admitting he was concerned and thought it would take time to develop, and he doesn't think that anymore.