JPFolks
-
Posts
2,453 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by JPFolks
-
-
20 hours ago, jvan1973 said:
Paul Maguire was a punter
Yep, you got me.. I even thought about Paul but mistakenly thought he was a kicker. Thanks for the correction. Ironically, Pat might be a modern day version of Paul if I remember him correctly.
-
Landon Collins, Preston Smith & Tyrelle Williams. I've been on the last two all off season, but I wasn't sure Collins would be cut loose. I know they are "talking" to our SS, but he is too injury prone to be more than depth and Collins stepping in to start with Geathers as depth would be awesome. 3 terrific safeties would be a luxury and I have always liked Farley as well.
But does anyone think we'd resign Geathers AND go out and sign Collins? If we do sign Geathers and not Collins or any other safety FA, we need to use a big pick to bring in a top rookie S.
-
Yeah, McAfee is pushing to get himself on MNF crew. I think he would be fun there combined with Booger inside the booth. Two Colts would be fun as well for us and the first Punter to be on a National broadcast team I believe. But he may be too controversial and not PC enough for ESPN. Part of me would hate to see him have to bend the knee to their insane politics.
-
1
-
-
On 3/2/2019 at 10:25 PM, Chloe6124 said:
Luck is the obvious but outside of that is the TE group hands down.
With Doyle in questionable health and injury prone, and all the others either injury prone or gone, I disagree. I would consider picking up a young TE in the draft so we are not caught with only Ebron (or worse imagine if he gets hurt) should Doyle not return to his former self. TE is our most important position after OL and QB, even more than WR in my opinion. We STARTED last season with it as our best group, but limped badly into the post season short handed. I'd love a surprise pick of a stud TE if one fell into our hands.
-
On 3/1/2019 at 9:48 PM, Chloe6124 said:
Does anyone listen to For the Colture podcasts on YouTube. I think they are great. I have been listening to old ones where they did Pagono spoofs and they have me laughing. It’s cool to hear two fans talk about the colts and not some media guys.
I am not quite as high as some of you are. I was surprised to hear they weren't even in Indiana. I think he said they are in New Jersey? So did they just pick the Colts to follow because we didn't have a great YouTube channel on the Colts, or is there some actual connection. I am sure those of you who listen more often/closely to them may know the answer.
I recall them going off on Colts fans when the team was 1-4 and 1-5 screaming about how ungrateful our fans were about not going to the games and I found that a lot of nonsense. Most families can't afford to go to a game. EVER. It isn't like the Pacers, you can go to family night for something like $20-40 dollars for 4 tickets, 4 souvenirs, 4 drinks and 4 hot dogs (I can't remember exactly, but it was the most generous deal I ever heard a team offer to fans). Nothing remotely like that exists in the NFL. Even if you go secondary market, it isn't cheap for nosebleed seats. And watching from home, especially with a large family, is just a better experience for most people. It's a ritual to get the family together to watch, perhaps grill out, etc.
So for them to act like they are bad people for not spending all that money to go see what was at that time either a 1-4 or 1-5 team (I am sure someone will chime in with the exact week, if I am off by one or two, mea culpa) just rubbed me the wrong way and I can't stop thinking about it when they OVERLY praise the team no matter what they do. I realize being fan boys will help them get Colts people to be on the show versus someone who offers pro and con coverage or well argued criticism, but man, lay off the fans. A family wearing Colts gear they got for Christmas while they watch from home are all part of the greater fan base. Tickets are an ultra luxury item for most people.
I find MUCH better and more honest discussion from people on this message board and you get two way communication here. So though most of you seem to think they're awesome, I think they can do a lot better. I am surprised they aren't posters here. (Maybe they are and would like to chime in?)
PS: One of them made a comment during an interview asking about Indianapolis like they had not only never been here, but never really talked to a local about the place. It was weird.
-
2
-
-
On 3/2/2019 at 7:38 PM, Irish YJ said:
IMO, it's too early to get "starter" offers. JB is a tweener at this point. Great back-up and potential starter. Teams looking for a starter are going to see what falls out in the draft, and preferably lock someone in to a rookie contract if possible. Those unhappy with what is available, or those with bigger other needs, will come calling during the draft, or post draft depending on how things shake out.
I would not be shocked to see him go to Miami, TN, or Jax. QB is not deep this year. If I'm a team with a QB need, I'd go JB before I'd reach for 2nd tier in the draft. JB would be much cheaper, and you'd have one year to kick the tires.
I agree that we're most likely to get an offer post draft and/or when a major injury happens. JB is a competent fill in starter worth a draft pick if a high profile team has an injury and wants to try and make the playoffs and their back up is terrible. If Tom Brady got hurt for the season, I bet NE would come calling (not sure we'd answer, but alas...) as one example. But for us to get a really valuable pick (say a second or third rounder as a best case I expect) it would need to be a team who believed he might be their answer as a starter versus an injury rental fill in and I am not sure that happens. In that case I could see a 4th, or a swap for a 2nd for one of our later picks or something of that nature. I am not sure a partial season rental is going to net us a lot. And we get a pick for him if we lose him in free agency (and don't sign more in replacements) don't we? (I think we only get picks for net FA losses right? Let me know, it's always confusing to me) so obviously that might factor in on his value too. Thoughts? If someone doesn't jump on him at all this season, I wouldn't be shocked for him to be back. Luck is, whether we like it or not, an injury prone player. Who would be shocked if JB had to play most or all of a game this season for us? I wouldn't be. I would hate it, but I wouldn't be shocked.
-
On 2/24/2019 at 8:14 PM, crazycolt1 said:
I totally agree.
Ballard has said he liked having Brissett around for insurance in case Luck missed any games. Has said he sleeps better at night.
I am curious as to know if Brissett would stay if Ballard offered him a fair contract? I don't know what that number would be either.
I think we have a lot of good info on his market value, especially if NO ONE comes kicking the tires. If that happens, or we only get back up worthy offers, then he may assess a good paying back up job here looks better than he may have thought.
-
On 2/24/2019 at 9:43 AM, richard pallo said:
I have to agree we should have an inside track on Williams due to Reich's connection in SD. If I remember correctly we thought we had the connection to the Dallas linebacker who went to another team last year, Hitchens I believe, because of Eberflus. The thing we have going for us this time is Luck's reemergence and our upward trajectory not to mention the cap space of course. FA will be interesting to say the least.
Richard, I think now that FA's know Luck is good to go, and they saw how improved the team already is, we should get yes from about anyone we pursue. We obviously have the money to pay someone we want enough to pursue in the first place, so the barriers all seem to be gone. Indy should get ANYONE they go after this year, unless they simply don't want to live in Indianapolis and I doubt we'd want a player with a character flaw like that in the first place. We don't need more Paul George's in Indianapolis, divas who don't dig "the scene" so they bolt. I think we get who we want, and if someone says no, they can't be in it to win, or in it to play for a good team chemistry or even in it for the money because we have those covered.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:
I don't think Grant was a brain fart at all. We have never really seen a healthy Grant. It was worth taking a chance on him at the time he was signed.
You mentioned Inman and he wasn't even on a NFL roster when he was signed in October.
Parker could be one of those players who just needs a change in scenery like Inman.
I do agree with you about Williams but he will be getting offers from a few teams along with the Colts.
I think Humphries and Beasley could be on the Colts radar as well.
Well, let's face it, Ballard isn't perfect (I know, shocking news to some). He waited a year too long to really address the O line (by his own admission) and in my opinion he similarly waited too long to seriously address our WR position. Grant was at best a low end 3 candidate, but he couldn't even hold up that part of it. Similarly, I would suggest they SHOULD have brought Inman in much earlier, we may well have won 2 of those 5 games we lost early. Luck did more with less, much like Brady has always been able to do, but to beat teams like that in the playoffs, the Ryan Grant's of the world can't be part of it, healthy or not. He had a blind spot twice so far (all human's do) so hopefully we'll see him fix the WR corps much like he did the O Line last year. I don't disagree that Humpries and Beasley are the two other FA's that would be worth pursuing, frankly I wouldn't mind him signing Williams and one of those two both and saving the draft pick many expect him to use. It is a weak year all around for WRs, but with our cap space and attractive upward trajectory team wide, there's really no excuse for us not to have a stellar WR group even with the slim pickens. Pascal may be key to that, I think he still has much more to give us and he wasn't bad when he was "on" last year. The only question really is which position group is Ballard most likely to overlook this year? Hopefully he's going to break that trend this year.
-
On 2/22/2019 at 8:45 AM, aaron11 said:
the WR market is extremely thin, and that seems to be true most years. teams are not letting good ones get away. there are some in the draft, but its going to take a high pick to get them.
that said im not all in on parker or anything, but i would be interested
There's no point in bringing in a guy who has had plenty of time to show you who he is. I was shocked when they brought Grant in because he was underwhelming in DC. I think with their inside connection with Tyrell Williams, we're going to snag him and he's going to do well. He's always been talented, he was just in the deepest WR room in the NFL I think. When called upon, he delivered. He would clearly be our second best receiver and you add in Inman and we have a reliable and explosive WR corp with our young guys in tow. Of course there's rumbling about two big name receivers but I just can't see us signing either. Full court press on Tyrell, bring our injured rookie from last year back in the fold, resign Inman and draft a guy if he's there when we pick whether it be round 2 or 3 etc. They may find a guy later than that even. Ballard seems to have his finger on the pulse, hopefully Grant was just a brain fart.
-
On 2/20/2019 at 1:14 PM, chad72 said:
He is very streaky, from what I remember. He will show up for 1 big game and have 3 or 4 duds in a row.
1 year take it or leave it deal like Ryan Grant. He would be an upgrade over Ryan Grant and if Ryan Grant is not re-signed, I'd be fine with DaVante on a 1 year deal. Then, we go from there to see if it was the WR or the QB that was the problem.
ack.. there are much better FA's out there than Parker. Why crowd the room with more dead wood? Same with Grant.. I wouldn't want him back for free.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Larry Horseman said:
One thing to consider is that I actually think Ballard wants the D to play more aggressive coverage packages so I'm not sure the "cover 2 CBs are a dime a dozen" argument holds weight. Not saying PD is worth a big contract, but I don't think the cover 2 rational is why.
Well, we can speculate on him changing philosophy but it's a baseless guess either way. We'll never know what he has planned until he goes there. Even if he SAYS it, it doesn't mean that much until it happens. I actually like the idea of being more versatile between Man and Zone than I think we were last year. Perhaps Desir is just the guy to achieve that. But it would only be a "wish" on my end that that happens. If they stick with and build on the fundamentals that they did last year, then it seems like Corner isn't a position of value. And it is impossible to value all positions at once. It is a give and take. That is why most fans want big time receivers by default but cooler heads say, sure, we'll take the right guy at the right price, but we're building our fundamentals first and foremost and if we're going to overpay somewhere, it will be in those areas. That and (in my opinion) our own guys worthy of being resigned who play in those key areas. I like Desir, hope he stays. For whatever that is worth. I don't want him to spend money on him that we need elsewhere more.
-
5 hours ago, krunk said:
Ballard let Desir walk last year and he came right back to us after he saw nobody would pay him. I still don't think the year he had last year was better than what Melvin did and Melvin couldn't get any more than a 1 year deal on the market.
Shhhh.... don't talk about cold hard reality. Even if Desir gets some huge deal offer and walks (more like runs) to that team, Ballard already proved he knows what his value truly is. I am not against a longer term contract with fair terms to reward potential (last year was meaningless, he got paid for that, but what are you going to give me worth a pay increase and guaranteed money?). Good post Krunk.
-
On 2/6/2019 at 9:20 AM, boo2202 said:
Mentioned something similar to this in draft forum. Ballard knows to truly compete for a Super Bowl, we need talent/depth along the lines. Also he’ll invest in the secondary on defense. I’ve been a big advocate on drafting a wr early, but coming around on stacking the lines and adding secondary help. I believe with the scheme coach Reich runs we can find players to fit his system in later rounds.
Curious as to whether anyone thinks before the draft ends that Ballard takes another o-lineman? That or signs a solid guy in FA? One injury to Castanzo and our entire line will suffer dramatically. QN same problem. We might be able to survive the other three positions, but we must go into the season with someone better than what we have backing up left tackle and left guard. I like Haeg as the most versatile guy on the line, but he's no long term LT. Thoughts from anyone?
-
13 hours ago, Myles said:
Many on here are over-valuing the value we could get in return. I think we would get a 4th or possibly a 3rd. Now we may be able to get a trade for a player that a team wants to get rid of.
Really? You don't think we could pull a two out of someone? He was obviously on a losing team but I can only recall a couple games that season that he cost us, and we were in most of the games he started but the line was the worst in the NFL and I doubt Luck would have gotten us much above the same 8-8 of the previous two seasons and he's considered a top 5 QB by many. Beyond soldiering through a brutal season, I am not sure what else he could have done really. I also wonder how much they wanted to win, especially once they knew Luck was out for the season (and who knows how long they knew THAT) and perhaps it was a bit of a tank job by management to get a high pick. If we're only getting a 4 we should laugh and move on with him all season.
-
1
-
-
46 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:
So I ran across something the other day and I admit it made my heart skip a beat or two..... and NOT in a good way.
Bill Barnwell is one of ESPN's top football writers. He's going division by division talking about key decisions each team has to make. And he reached the AFC South. And here's what he wrote about the Colts. I'll put into bold the part that jumps out at me.
"1. Bring back Pierre Desir and Clayton Geathers. Desir was the standout corner for a surprising Colts defense last season. After losing his job with the Browns amid one of their many regime changes and bouncing around practice squads, he has found a home in Indy over the past two seasons. The Colts let starting corner Rashaan Melvin leave for the Raiders after the 2017 campaign, but I don't think they'll be as comfortable moving on from the 6-foot-1 Desir, whose size will interest teams like the Falcons in free agency. Kyle Fuller picked up a four-year, $56 million offer as a restricted free agent in 2018 after one good season as a corner, and Desir might angle for a similar sort of deal.
Indy will hope to get Desir signed for less than that, and bringing back Geathers would allow the Colts to keep their starting secondary intact. Geathers is a highlight-reel hitter, but the concern is health; the 2015 fourth-rounder has missed 22 games over the past three seasons, mostly with a neck injury. The Colts shouldn't be treating their 2018 team as a precious, irreplaceable group of players, but Geathers is a useful box safety and could even be a hybrid linebacker in nickel packages. If the team does re-sign Geathers, it will likely want to try to build his deal around per-game roster bonuses and prepare for the possibility that Geathers gets hurt during his deal.
General manager Chris Ballard also will have the ability to sort through some of the bargain-bin finds he has made over the past couple of seasons. He already has re-signed Mark Glowinski, but the Colts will have to decide whether they want to bring back veterans such as Margus Hunt, Najee Goode and Dontrelle Inman for 2019 or try to upgrade."
Holy Crap! Even if Barnwell is wrong about a possible $14 Mill a year offer, how far off can he be? My fear is even if the $$$ don't reach that high, they might just reach $10 Mill per year. And if they get that high, I think we can all waive goodbye to our top corner. Hard to see Ballard paying that kind of money to a corner, even one who completely shutdown Hopkins of Houston --- twice!
That would be disappointing. My hunch is Ballard would like to do a 3-year deal for $20-25 Mill. He might be open to that. But $10 Mill-plus over 4 or more years? Gonzo. Remember, free agent money can get crazy. Seriously, crazy!
And then we're either looking to sign a FA type and hope we hit as we did when we signed Desir, and possibly also draft a Corner with a Day 2 pick.
I understand your points and concern. In our scheme, as stated already above this, these positions aren't as valued as man. The point I want to add is that Hopkins was the walking wounded in the playoffs, (can't recall for sure, but wasn't he banged up in the second game too?) so that didn't count for much really. He was mostly just a lame duck decoy that game.
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, BlueShoe said:
We don’t need to pay a cover 2 corner big money. They’re the easiest to find. We are not asking them to protect an island all day like we did Vontae in our old man scheme.
Our defense requires our corners to be physical and they will take a beating. So will our safeties.
In my mind, we should only pay big money to our quarterback, the front seven and the offensive line. Every other position we need to get at a bargain or we let walk.
Hardcore and to the point.
-
1
-
-
On 2/18/2019 at 6:34 PM, Lucky Colts Fan said:
Are we, as Colts fans, overvaluing or undervaluing Jacoby Brissett?
It probably depends on how you look at our backup QB. If you are looking at him compared to other backup QBs around the league, you are probably undervaluing him. I could make the argument that he is the most valuable backup in the NFL. And I think Ballard agrees.
However, if you're looking at Jacoby as trade-bait, you might be overvaluing him. A team trading for Jacoby would want him to be their starter. Granted, this article is written by David Carr for NFL.com, so take it with a grain of salt, but he has at least 10 other QBs ranked ahead of Brissett for other teams to consider drafting, signing as a FA, or trading for.
I expected to see Brissett on that list. When I didn't, I wondered if I'm overvaluing our backup by viewing him through my blue-colored glasses...
And I think the draft-stock of the QB prospects will only increase leading up to the draft. I just don't see a team offering Ballard enough to part ways with Jacoby at this point.
First off, thoughtful post!
I think it's just a matter of VALUING him because our philosophy seems to be (unless I missed something) get better at every position on the 53 man roster. Of course it is all about realistic slotting of value too. It's a super tough decision to weigh market value versus security of having a chance to win even if Luck goes down... but ONLY for one season. And that is the rub. If this was a case where we could keep paying him like a back up, we'd likely NEVER get rid of him through Luck's career, because as back-ups go, he's perfect. He fits in with the culture, he's competent and prepared, he's a leader in the locker room and very well liked by his peers and coaches. He plays his roll, but he's no wallflower either. His value is very high to our team and he's likely as good (especially since he's in the system and ready) as any back-up QB in the league and better than probably 10 or more of the starters. I am not sure I would want him as our full time, long term QB, but if Luck were gone, we could certainly do much worse. So in keeping with making our team the best it can be, within the salary cap and culture, he's the man. But the man for a year means we must already find his replacement from other QB's in the league, or later round talent in the draft. This year I doubt that replacement even exists at a lower round. (perhaps some of our draft geeks can point to someone). But a "sure thing" who is perfect for what is needed in that position against enough value in a trade to ensure we either get a better replacement for 4 years OR enough draft capitol to trade for someone or draft someone who improves our team in another position of need with similar certainty. It's like a lot of things, you'll only know the offer necessary when you see it in reality. The offers can then be used in a value assessment of all of the above.
I doubt they trade him. I think with this year's draft class being pretty weak (well, that is only my opinion, but it has been some time since it was this weak) I have no doubt they will only trade him for something that would produce us a likely starter in the draft, or perhaps an ACTUAL starter in a trade versus a crap shoot. I can't think of a solid (not "star" but solid) starting pass rusher or wide receiver who would be available, but I would love to hear from anyone who has someone in mind. Without that as a minimum, a mid to high second round pick seems like a minimum. That is likely something Ballard can turn into a starter.
I'd rather keep him for his final year, (well, okay, perhaps consider a high pick in an emergency trade mid season to a team with an injury before the trade deadline) and instead sign Preston Smith and Tyrell Williams and look forward to the draft! That way we cut the risk (of Luck going down without a back up) for a large part of the season and get a much higher pick to supplement the next draft when there will likely be a better back up available on the cheap. By then we might find some of the young QB's have worn out their welcome already in other cities and might pick up someone with untapped potential that way as well.
It's fun to speculate. Thanks for the post LCF!
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Superman said:
Did you look up "machismo?" Macho is 'one who exhibits machismo,' and machismo is 'an exaggerated masculinity.'
And as for the incident with the media man, I think you're spot on. It's unprofessional
Well, that is part of the definition yes. The first part of the definition is ":a strong sense of masculine pride :an exaggerated masculinity :an exaggerate or exhilarating sense of power or strength. I'd say likely all those things all apply to Nelson, but thank goodness they do or he likely wouldn't be a great football player, at least in my view. Unprofessional behavior is another matter. Let's hope that part is a rarity. I hadn't even heard that part of the story until your post. Thanks for that. It may be a tiny postage stamp sized flag, but a flag nonetheless.
-
5 hours ago, Superman said:
But what has started to bother me is this cult following for Nelson, where this "macho" attitude or whatever it is is being lauded and applauded, and I kind of don't like it.
Hmmm. I wondered what is the opposite of "macho" exactly, and who among NFL players meets that criteria?
I looked it up on Merriam-Webster online and saw the synonyms included "manliness" and antonyms included "femininity" followed by more. I don't think it is his "machismo."
Perhaps a better description of his on the field comment might have been-
"asking that they do not compliment the other team, because you should be focused on playing the game and your own teammates and it's not helpful to boost up your opponent in-game"
-which is up for debate, though it doesn't seem to fall under the "things to be worried about" criteria. Frankly it is more a laugh and nod to earlier days in sport in our cupcake world.
Attacking the media guy? THAT is something worth being concerned about Superman, I agree. There's a word for that however. Unprofessional. He should be expected to be better than that with staff and other personnel as well as the public. THAT should not be tolerated by any employee of the Colts. Period. To use a colloquialism: "Do the crime, do the time" or in this case "Do the crime, pay the fine." THAT would be closer to "macho."
Repeated acts like that can result in a much more derogatory word applying, first coined in 1810. Thug. Let's hope he becomes a better professional off the field beyond just his stellar on field play.
-
There's a few quality FA's who would be cheap (relatively speaking) and which in at least one case I think maybe they have inside scoop. Was Frank around SD still when Tyrell Williams was there? I'd be all for him coming here to team up with his old buddy Inman.
-
On 2/11/2019 at 8:19 PM, CurBeatElite said:
Yes, that is what I was trying to get at.. TY is a very good player and one of my favorites, but he isn't a big guy (and part of that is why I worry a bit about injuries as he gets older ... see around 0:58 of this video --
).
As I said in previous post, I expect him to come back fully from his sprained ankles, but as he gets older it will be harder and harder to get up from hits like the one in that video (which, IMO, are at least in part a product of his size).
He's got a very good chemistry with Luck, he's a smart player and knows how to find free space, and he is a crafty route runner, so when he does lose a step he'll still be able to produce some, but I don't think he'll still be considered up near an elite WR (see week 17 and playoffs, he had a good first couple drives in week 1 in playoffs but once that ankle acted up and slowed him down, he became pretty much a non-factor).
I agree with you on Luck being underrated his first 3 years. His numbers (the years he has been healthy) have also been very good. He needs to stay healthy another 8-10 years and I think his numbers alone will put him over the top ... good for him is hopefully Brady and Brees are done soon and Rodgers seems to be declining. I think in 2-3 years, Luck and Mahommes will be hands down considered the best 2 QBs in the league (at least for a little bit, depending on how some young guys develop)... this should help his chances at getting more individual awards (and without Brady, hopefully we can get over that NE hump and get Andrew a couple rings).
As far as TY, I think he's very much a long-shot to get into the HOF. I like him a lot and he'll probably be around top 60 in receiving yards after next year. However, he (IMO) just doesn't have the reception numbers or the TDs. He'll have to play 5-6 more years and have each year basically be equal to or better of his best year so far which was 2016 to rack up numbers to allow him to 'whiff' the NFL HOF. Also, Edelman and TY are way different players. Edelman is more of a slot WR and a possession guy, TY has played most of his snaps lined up outside and his deep threat is his main weapon. Don't think it's a fair comparison.
After 7 years into his career Marvin had 635 receptions/8,800 yards/73 TDs (Marv had 4 years with over 100 receptions in his first 7 years, and 8 total years with over 10 TDs with a total of 128 TDs in regular season). Marv wasn't even a first-ballot (though I thought he was deserving).
After 7 years into his career Reggie Wayne had 494 receptions/6,984 yards/47 TDs (along with 2 years of 10 or more TDs and 1 year of >100 receptions). Reggie got off to a slow start, but the best stretch of his career were years 7-12, which is pretty rare for a skill player to start improving that late (he had 3 more years of >100 receptions and 1 more year >10 TDs during that span). Reggie also has some of the best post-season stats of any WR in NFL history (behind only Rice and Edelan for receptions, and 5th in receiving yards, and 9th in receiving TDs.
After 7 years into his career, TY has 507 receptions/8,097 yards/40 TDs with 0 seasons having >10 TDs or >100 receptions (only 1 season over 90 receptions). He's slightly better than Wayne in regular season receptions, better in yards and worse in TDs. I have a hard time believing TY is going to put together the best 5 year stretch of his career starting now, like Reggie did and TY's post-season numbers don't touch Reggie's (and TY is playing in a more passer/WR friendly league). Reggie, I think, will get into the HOF in his 4th or 5th try and part of that is due to lack of other stars around that time (Isaac Bruce should get in next year, then Reggie really has at least 2 years on the ballot before he's got major competition from other WR's who include Andre Johnson and Steve Smith). TY, if he doesn't go on a tear for 5+ more years, simply won't have the numbers to be HOF worthy -- plus he's going to have guys like Julio Jones, Antonio Brown, etc. to compete with in terms of being voted in.
Great info. I guess my point was they were the only two non rookies that appear to have any chance at the HOF going forward. Unless we import a superstar like Brown, it is either Luck or TY. Neither is a lock, I hope TY can product enough to put him in range. His problem is that he's always double covered because we haven't had a good #2 since Reggie and he was waning by then. If we could have found a solid #2 who could separate, I think Hilton's numbers would go up. If we had Brown (unlikely and not sure if I want him) I bet TY's numbers would skyrocket. Anyway, thanks for the response and excellent info.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:
My thing is not so much injuries but as players age they start to lose a step, they can't run as fast as they used to.
TY's main weapon is as you say speed. He ran like a 4.3 forty. What happens when he doesn't have that anymore and his 40 is more like 4.5.
A lot of guys that are bigger can still use their size as a weapon. But TY doesn't have size.
So I think we certainly have to consider that TY may only have a few good years left in him.
Easy, he uses his veteran savvy and route running... he'll still be WAY better physically than a guy like Edleman so I think he's got 3 more good years in him. 4-5 he'd have to be at a discount, but for a Colts All Timer (only he and Luck, if they win at least a SB have any shot at HOF left in their career from the guys prior to this newest batch). I think TY could pump his numbers up enough to get a sniff at it and Luck needs an MVP and a Super Bowl win minimum to get a whiff. I hope he does even more than that. But for some reason, the league and media never credit him with a fraction of the credit he deserved those first 3 seasons. He's was ROTY his first year by a mile over the overhyped RGIII, what a rip off that was. Let's hope he wins a couple MVPs and a couple Super Bowls as Irsay predicted and it's all a moot point. Are there any other non-rookie (i.e. Nelson and Leonard) potential HOFers on this team? (And I didn't think I needed to say Vinny who is already a lock first ballot HOFer).
-
I think Dallas Clark should be right up there. He was a TEINO... Tight End in name only.
-
1
-
What free agents would you like to sign.
in NFL Draft, Scouting, and Free Agent Talk
Posted
Yeah, if you're right and Geathers is cheap, then I'd be disappointed if they didn't go after Collins.
I think this year is soooo much different than last year where Ballard admitted some FA's turned them down. Luck, a proven coach and the upwards direction of this team should mean that ANY FA we got after we should get, unless they are more worried about geography than football. in which case we likely wouldn't bother with them in the first place.
As an aside, these athletes who just "must" live in LA etc. are a joke and I include Lebron in that. He looks like he doesn't care about basketball this year, he only cared about LA and his "other" careers where he can throw his fame and power and money around. And he'll have that culture eating out of his hands no matter what he produces, it's a good laugh watching them fawn over and it won't matter if his side projects are any good or not, they'll all line up to buy what he's selling. Football players who wouldn't want to come to Indy or any other NFL city because of location aren't worth pursuing. Their eyes are on everything outside of football.
So if we want someone, we are GETTING them. So the fun will be seeing who Ballard WANTS. Let's hope he's at least a little bit in a shopping mood to get a high profile dominant and young player to add to our other young dominant players.