[Trading 2014 1st for 2013 2nd]

Buck, thanks, I saw that I had switched the records accidentally, but couldn't see a way to correct the error.  Do you get the ability to self edit once you have enough posts? And I wanted to make that second part a new post but don't qualify yet.  

 

Do you see us going better than 10-6 with next years schedule? 

 

Brian

[Trading 2014 1st for 2013 2nd]

I would never trade a #1 for a #2 straight up.  Perhaps a 1 for a #2 and a #4 or even a #5 and only IF there was a key player of need that fell into our reach unexpectedly.  As for the argument on our record and likely picking order: 

 

I think even with a BETTER team, we will likely drop to 10-6 or 9-7.  But... I think that might still win us the division.  The reason is the divisions we play this year versus last year.  We went 2-2 against the NFC North and 3-1 against the AFC East.  We also beat the two 4th place teams from the AFC Central (Browns) and AFC West (KC).  Our schedule THIS year is BRUTAL!  We have to play the AFC West where Denver and KC are dramatically improved.  Even if we beat Oakland and San Diego that's 2-2.  Next, we have to play the NFC West.  BRUTAL!  We have Seahawks and Niners, as well as St. Louis, all far superior than they were last year.  I expect 1-3, or if we catch a flyer, perhaps 2-2.  Next, we play the Bengals and Miami.  Cincy is dramatically better than Cleveland and Miami is dramatically better than KC.  It's likely we go 1-1.  Even if we sweep the improved Titans and Jaguars and split with the Texans, That's a likely 9-7 or maybe 10-6.  And that's performing, in my view, at a MUCH higher level than last year to achieve that.  One or two bad breaks and we could easily go 8-8 or even (ack!) 7-9.  

 

We have a brutal schedule folks.  I am hoping for 10-7.  Remember the Texans have to play the depleted Ravens and the Patriots, and would likely go 1-1 against them like we would the Bengals and Dolphins.  We'd have to count on them losing one we don't or perhaps having a dead heat tie.  Unexpected wins and loses usually come with similar frequency, canceling each other out.  Like we lost to the Jaguars and beat the Packers for example last year.  I think expecting to win more than 10 games is unrealistic and even that will require us to be MUCH better than last year.   I hope I am all wrong and we do better, but I fear I am far too optimistic.  

 

Anyone disagree with this logic? 

 

Brian

[NFL talks about changing Pro Bowl?]

They used to have those Saturday afternoon Battle of the NFL Stars" (not sure the real title, but you likely know what I am talking about if you are over 40) where they'd do running, relays and other track style events, some actual football skills events and my all time favorite, they'd get two rival teams for tug of war and those battles would go on for more than an hour (they edited it all down for TV).  It was fun well beyond the Pro Bowl game.  I also like the idea of including some harmless events where specific team fans (of any age or athletic shape) could compete (pinball or bowling or razor kit fighting etc.) along side their favorite player from each team.  I bet people would LOVE to watch a 32 team tourney of guys playing Madden down to the Superbowl.  In fact, you could do that in place of the real game and it would be more enjoyable with more realistic action.  The product tie ins could be HUGE.  

 

They also used to have similar battles of Football, Baseball, Basketball, Hockey players (could add Golf, Tennis, Racing etc.) in events where the range of events would include the sports of the others but you had to sit out when your actual sport came up.  

 

All this kind of stuff could be done in a low injury/high fun and bragging rights list of events and folks would LOVE it.  Playing harder in a Pro Bowl is fine (certainly was better this year though an early blowout) but one serious knee injury of YOUR teams best player isn't worth the risk right? 

[Worst Colts Free Agent Signings Of All Time.]

Worst draft choice was close between George and Steve Emtman!!!!  FA's are tough since we signed so few that had any expectations coming with them.  Satele for me has been the worst in the past 10 years.  

[Irsay's latest tweet (Saturday 3/16)]

I spent all night reading all the posts.  Some great attempts to decode Irsay.  The only way to decode the most recent Tweet is that it was a Larry Fitzgerald trade which "sunk" to the tune of the Edmund Fitzgerald.  I have to say his tweets have been entertaining, and I am hopeful that this last one was simply another playful attempt to eliminate Larry from the discussion.  At the very least I am convinced that has happened.  Whether that was to get folks back onto Cruz remains to be seen, but it sure was a downer tweet to be sure.  

 

A young receiver like Cruz makes more sense than the God-Like talent of the again Larry F.  We want someone to be Luck's Reggie Wayne (with Reggie playing the Marvin role, I sure hope he has 3 more quality years in him though didn't he only sign for 2 years in the first place?).  I think it make sense to sign a couple of the younger FA's that have the most talent left on the available list and then go after a Pass Rusher or Receiver in the first round and third round.  We won't break the bank and Grigson is good enough to find us both I believe.  And if needed, one or two FA's could hold us over a year or two more while we look for a new Reggie to go with our new Marvin (TY if he keeps developing and stops being the second worst pass dropper in the league).  

 

Something to keep in mind is that our new OC believes in pounding the run and throwing short passes meaning Cruz as a slot could have worked well, but TY can likely do that and Allen is a brilliant talent with great hands and skills for a short passing game.  Larry is Box Office, but for all his dominance, he's not a dink and dunk kind of receiver and his talents would be wasted in that offense I believe.  By the time Luck is in his PRIME, Larry will be ending his career.  Cruz would fit.  Reggie and a couple short term veteran WRs can be our cover until we find the rest of our receiving corps in the draft.  

 

Nice to find you all, looking forward to a lot of fun chats here going forward! -Brian

[Ed Reed? Forgive if this has already been covered....]

Gosh.. why not get Ed Reed and Pollard while we're at it if everyone is getting hurt?   I thought Reed would at least be considered, but frankly my already high respect level is even higher for Pagano and Grigson by NOT going with EMOTION and making good decisions.  If we had room still, or if we were drafting some young guys Ed Reed would make tons of sense.  Bethea and Landry don't need mentoring.  I'd love some int's, but stopping the run will be really nice this year as well.