ColtStrong2013
-
Posts
4,170 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by ColtStrong2013
-
-
Let’s Go!
Congrats Dwight Freeney! I remember the day he was drafted like yesterday. What a career.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, richard pallo said:
If I’m not mistaken we are already the youngest team in the league or very close. This team could use some veteran leadership and experience to help the young players already on the team. Adding those kind of players will help the team more than continually throwing players learning on the fly out there. The window just opened in 2024. It won’t be open long. I think we need to add some experience and leadership to take the next step. If that means trading a pick for a player then that’s what we need to do.
I tend to agree. I’m hopeful Downs continues to improve his game and strengthens the room. I’m not entirely out on Pierce yet. And I think we all know Pittman is good but has limitations and is questionable as our wr1.
I would argue (on the same point as your post) that our two biggest needs are receiver and safety, and finding a veteran pro-bowl talent at both could take this team to the next level in itself. I’d be willing to run it back with AR under center and work to continue improving the current roster developmentally, while bringing some support via FA/draft, if those two pieces could be met early this offseason. To me, it might be the best route. Sign free agent safety, trade for a veteran receiver. Everything else falls in place.
-
1
-
-
47 minutes ago, Dingus McGirt said:
I ignore most all these “proposed” trades. Nothing but silly click bait.
its all we’ve got leading up to the Super Bowl. Lol-
1
-
-
55 minutes ago, Superman said:
Yup. Here's another story, with Jeff Hafley talking about why he left BC as the HC to be the DC for the Packers. Pretty much says he wanted to coach football, not be a fundraiser for NIL money. I'm not even an anti NIL guy, but I get it.
it’s a different business model now. The seasoned veterans in the coaching world are going to either retire or find a place where they can coach the way they are used to. College football is about to change in a way that most cannot even comprehend. It has already started, but once the hands have changed entirely, it’ll be unrecognizable, for better or worse. Business and government is no different. Once the old guard is out, the new will do what they understand and think is best.-
1
-
-
36 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:
I’d rather trade our pick and more to move up for MHJ (ha not happening) or to get Nabers.
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?
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:
No thank you!
Super, super talented, but a HUGE drama queen. He’s the receiver who when the team WINS the big game, he will still complain he didn’t get enough targets and catches. Everything is all about him for Stephan Diggs.
If Buffalo is looking to trade him, there’s good reason for that. No! Thank! YOU!!
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…
1 hour ago, Superman said:Yeah, I think if we want a bonafide #1 WR this year, the best way to get him is by trading.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Superman said:
don't have any inside info, but I read a story recently that included a quote from a college coach, and he said a lot of college coaches and personnel are trying to get on with an NFL team right now. I think his exact quote was 'everyone is trying to get to the league.' I think with the changing landscape of college football, some talented coaches see the NFL as a better environment for them right now. And that thought has been pretty prominent in my mind lately, especially as the Colts have hired some college coaches. There's probably a variety of factors, but this theory makes sense to me.
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.
-
2
-
-
-
On 2/6/2024 at 10:28 AM, Shive said:
I think we'll see some influence on our scheme with the addition of Partridge, but not a huge overhaul.
Zach Hicks wrote a great piece about Partridge, his schematic preferences, and how he sees it being implemented in Gus' scheme:
https://www.si.com/nfl/colts/news/colts-massive-hire-unleash-defensive-line-group
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?”
-
2
-
-
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?
-
6
-
-
7 hours ago, Shadow_Creek said:
we definitely need a new Special teams coordinator
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.-
5
-
-
1 hour ago, NFLfan said:
Yet this analytic shows the great job Steichen did. Imagining how well he will do with Richardson healthy!
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.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:
I think we should all remind ourselves…. That Shane Steichen wasn’t hired until AFTER last year’s Super Bowl. And he was able to put together a good coaching staff by the time the Senior Bowl happens at the end of Feb. So he had maybe 10-12 days.
Also two other things to note…. One, our front office and scouts are in Mobile at the Senior Bowl and we might be doing some interviews down there. Also, with the return of Covid, we might be doing some interviews by Zoom.
I don’t think there’s reason to worry. Yet.
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.
-
41 minutes ago, Superman said:
But I do think Ballard needs to find another gear moving forward, and this offseason seems like the right time to get going.
I can't imagine anyone on this forum does not feel this way and would not be happy with a big offseason.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Superman said:
Sharing this as an example of what I was talking about with Chase Young, the substandard effort and lack of impact.
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...
-
1
-
-
48 minutes ago, Superman said:
If you could guarantee a team a SB trophy in exchange for 3-4 years of mediocrity, I think everyone would take the guaranteed SB. Of course, there is no guarantee.
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.-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, Superman said:
the idea that the Colts way of handling player salaries saves the team money compared to other teams is not supported by the facts
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.23 minutes ago, Superman said:But yeah, there's a significant difference between Ballard's Colts and the Rams. Even when both teams bottomed out in 2022, they weren't as low as the Colts, mostly because they have an established QB.
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...
-
1 hour ago, Superman said:
This is the common belief. I don't think it holds up to scrutiny.
The Colts cash spending from 2019-2023, in millions: $192.8, 221.1, 222.6, 218, 236.7. In those five years, total cash spent on player contracts: $1,091.2.
The Rams cash spending from 2019-2023, in millions: $188.7, 215.3, 192.4, 283.8, 183.5. Total cash spend on player contracts: $1,063.7. The bolded is the year they went "all in" for a SB. You'll see they spent less in cash than the Colts that season, but paid for it the following year.
The Colts spent $28.5m more, in cash, than the Rams, over these five years. So the bolded isn't actually true. Irsay isn't saving money. Maybe the schedule of cash flow is where Irsay has to be more conservative -- funding signing bonuses and guarantees -- but without seeing balance sheets and doing a cash flow analysis, we can't know that.
Also, I think NFL owners have access to major lines of credit that pretty much allow them to do whatever they need to do from a cash flow standpoint. Whether or not it's financially prudent in the long run is a different story, especially in a new environment of high interest, but without gross mismanagement and outright corruption, it's hard to imagine any NFL team having trouble maintaining cash flow. The Colts are well established, have a sweetheart arena deal, etc. I think if they wanted, the Colts have the financial standing to be less conservative with contract structure.
However, because the Colts manage their contracts and cap the way they do, they have a steady outlay from year to year, and never have to take drastic actions to get under the cap, like the Rams did in 2023. Think about that: in a raising salary cap environment, the Rams spent less cash on player contracts in 2023 than they did five years ago. And that's a result of their more aggressive cap management strategy.
Some might argue that they got more bang for their buck, and winning a SB makes that hard to argue against.
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.
-
1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:
U cannot use the argument any longer regarding the idea that he inherited a lousy roster. He has had 8 years and here we are. I always tell people to dismiss the offence and lets give his supporters the excuse that he lost Luck and sent his franchise into a tail spin. Other teams have recovered and have built up some good teams. I would like an answer to this question and have not gotten one yet. Lets just simply grade Ballard on the construction of this defense and the scheme that he apparently loves. 8 years in please show me the elite D players that he as drafted? Provide evidence to show that his defense has been anything more than average after 8 years. He has put a ton of assets into the D line and the only player of any significance that he accumulated was Buckner who was drafted by another team. No elite D lineman, no elite safety's, no elite corners and the only elite D player he has drafted was Leornard , who was a linebacker. Probably the least valuable position on any D. Plus, I have always said that his system is LB friendly. I maybe hard on Ballard, but for people to put give him a pass after 8 years, is kind of mind boggling.
ok -
8 hours ago, ArmchairQB said:
If someone would have swooped in to 3 for Richardson like the Vikings were trying to Ballard would have drafted Levis. I doubt he would have traded back and risked not getting at least Levis had it come to that.
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.-
1
-
-
20 minutes ago, ArmchairQB said:
Bryce Young was a consensus number 1 pick in most people’s eyes at the time. I know we’re all looking at this with hindsight after seeing what happened this past season. Have you ever heard a GM say they didn’t get their guy? Of course not. The optics of that would be awful.
Stroud was the logical pick at 2 for Houston so it’s not as though they had to take a huge leap of faith. I think Ballard was comfortable enough that one of the three consensus top 3 would still be there at 4 so there was no need to trade up. Had Richardson gone at one or two we would have ended up with whomever didn’t. I know he says otherwise but I don’t believe Ballard would’ve taken AR at 1 but that’s just my opinion.
We were all cautioned that AR would be a project and to have patience. Nothing wrong with him acknowledging that maybe he’s not as much of a project as we thought.
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.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, #12. said:
But that's not how people define a stacked era - just looking at one team. You need multiple champions and multiple teams consistently competing. See the AFC in the 2000s and 70s. Currently, you have none of that. The Bills consistently make the playoffs. That’s about it.
The whole "the AFC is stacked" thing was born out of the AFC West free agent frenzy last year where people were calling it the greatest division ever. That obviously didn't materialize. The AFC West was mediocre at best.
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.
-
1
-
Proposed trade for Stefon Diggs to Colts
in Colts Football
Posted
This is assuming Ballard feels he can risk missing on another receiver. Pittman and Downs were good picks, but no one else has panned out. Does he feel he has the time/leash to miss or pick someone that takes time to develop into what they need? If not, then the idea of swinging big for a vet receiver (preferably a younger one than Diggs) isn’t such a wild concept. It’s not unprecedented with qbs on rookie deals.