Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

ColtsFanMikeC

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    1,676
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

50 Special Teamer

Uncategorized

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

11,296 profile views
  1. Grant failed a physical for Baltimore, which is why that deal didn't go down. Totally missing the point of my post -- he was set to make $7.25 mil/year over 4 years... we got him on a 1 year $5 mil deal. I don't really think he's disappointed. He's playing at the same level as the best year of his 5 year career. The point was, we signed Grant to a low-risk (potentially high-reward) contract to fill a major need on this year's team. When we signed DHB, Andre Johnson, and Hakeem Nicks, it seemed as though the front office and ownership were declaring them as big time
  2. He was offered 4 years/$29 mil ($7.25 mil/year) by Baltimore. He took 1 year/$5 mil from Indy. I really don't think we were expecting him to be more than a 'low level #2.' Maybe some hope he could emerge as a higher tier #2, but I think we really just needed some WR depth. In contrast, we let Moncrief walk and the Jags signed him to 1 year/$9.6 mil. He has 33 catches, 488 yards, 3 TDs in 10 games, compared to Grant with 29 catches, 291 yards, 1 TD in 8 games. The market often dictates what players can sign for. We saved $4.6 mil by signing Grant over Mo
  3. I wouldn't compare Grant to DHB, Nicks or Johnson. We expected all 3 of them to come in and be very productive for us, but none of them wore (Nicks and Johnson had too much wear on their tires and DHB just wasn't good for us). Grant came in to be a role player and, IMO, didn't have near the same expectations placed on him as the other guys. Also, keep in mind -- Grant was brought into compete for snaps in this offense. DHB, Nicks and Johnson were all expected to be sure-fire #1 or #2 WRs and expected to produce at high levels. They were all overpaid, as well. Grant
  4. Haeg has gotten stronger each year. I really don't think that's much of an issue anymore.... if Good was a good as gone, he wouldn't have made the roster this year... Clark seems to have the most upside out of the 3 and would be ideal if he could adjust to the NFL as a RT and move Smith inside. I'm not really sure what you mean by 'elite bla bla bla...' If Glowinski is going to be looking for top dollar after having his first good/above average season in 4 years, we have guys in house that likely can perform at a very similar level without breaking the bank.
  5. Even without Slauson back, we have Joe Haeg, Le'Raven Clark and Denzelle Good (and potentially J'Marcus Webb). I'm really liking what Glowinski's been doing, but if he's demanding a lot of dollars, you would hope Haeg, Clark or Good have developed enough to be able to play either RG or RT and allow for Braden Smith to continue to excel at the other. Or, perhaps, J'Marcus Webb or Slauson will be healthy enough. Haeg's big knock coming out of school was his lack of strength, but he's addressed that and seems versatile enough to play well (probably not great) anywhere on this OL.
  6. I think we could easily be 5-3 with wins over PHI, HOU and CIN. You're correct, the 32 point margin against BUF skews a bit.... but, we were ready to tie or go ahead on CIN and Doyle's fumble which was returned for a TD very late in game takes it from being a win, tie, or 1 score loss to a 2 score loss.
  7. Out of the 15 teams in the NFL with losing records, only the Colts (+18) and Cowboys (+17) have positive point differentials. Obviously, I'd rather have a winning record than a positive point differential, but IMO, this shows we're not as bad as our record reflects.
  8. It doesn't mean Ballard didn't see any value in the trade market. It means he didn't see any short term fix available players worth giving up our future for (e.g., a lot of rumors we were talking to OAK about Amari Cooper, but likely Ballard didn't see him as worthy of throwing away a first rounder on like Cowboys did). Brissett is one of the best back-up QBs in the league. Irsay said before the season that it'd basically be impossible for another team to lure him from us this season with Andrew still untested. Or perhaps Ballard and Co. realize we
  9. We were in great position to win the Cincy and Philadelphia games.... we lost by a FG in overtime after a failed 4th down conversion against Houston and lost by 1 score to NYJ (IMO, our worst loss). We also were gaining momentum against NE before Pascal dropped a ball that hit him right in the hands for a first down and wound up getting picked. We're a young team, so we need to learn how to win and get used to winning. Hopefully these last 2 weeks helped with that. And HOU just got Demaryius Thomas... they're going to be a tough team to defend.
  10. Only $50 mil in cap space.... is a lot to be under the cap. This is why some have criticized Ballard for not going after a few big name/high profile guys in FA because we have the cap to do it, he's just not wasting money on it. @hoosierhawk hit the nail on the head... Grigs didn't say it............... but he went out and overpaid Ricky Jean-Francois, Laron Landry, Samson Satele, Tom Zbikowski, Greg Toler, Donald Thomas, Darius Heyward-Bey, Arthur Jones, Hakeem Nicks, Andre Johnson, Trent Cole, Todd Herremans.... to name a few... and wasted a first-round dr
  11. Barkley is an absolute stud. Darnold may be a franchise QB, but I get the sense the Giants' brass didn't think he'd pan out and it seems like they were very high on Lauletta.... they also had Davis Webb on their roster (a 2017 3rd round pick) that they may have been high on even though he didn't pan out (don't forget, he was brought in under an old coaching regime). Probably a reason why there are people who make 100's of thousands of dollars who get to make decisions for NFL teams and why other people like you and I post on message boards.... Barkley, behind a cruddy
  12. Barkley's one of the best RBs in the league and probably the best player on the G-men right now... that team has a lot of holes across the board.. sure, they need line help, etc.. but Barkley is a once in a generation player and he looks very good so far.
  13. I agree it's tough between Reggie and Edge for what they did on the field. My thought with Edge was that he really was a bell cow and, IMO, one of the 2 best RBs in the league for the majority of his career. Reggie was the 2nd best WR on our team for most of his career, and even though he was here for 14 years, he only had 4 years with 100+ catches and only had a very good season when he was our #1 WR in Luck's rookie year. Edge was exceptional for us from day 1 aside from when he got hurt. Dungy I put on there because he led this team to the most wins by any team in a decade i
  14. Good thing voting for HOF isn't based on off-field issues (I'm sure it is to some extent) or Marv probably would have had to wait longer. I think he should have been first-ballot, based on what he did on the field. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Harrison Look at these records from Marv: Most receptions in a single season with 143, set in 2002 Most receptions in a 7 season period (731), 1999–2005; 8 season period (826), 1999–2006; 9 season period (885), 1998–2006; 10 season period (958), 1997–2006; 11 season period (1,022), 1996–2006 Most gam
  15. Indy alone I think I'd go with: Peyton, Marvin, Edge, Dungy (HM: Reggie, Freeney, Mathis) Although Edge only played for 7 years in Indy (and was injured for a little over half a season), he was a key part of 'the triplets,' which was one of the most dominant offenses in NFL history. Edge, along with LT, represent the 2000-2010 'all-decade' team for the NFL as a whole. Edge, IMO, was the most complete back in the NFL prior to his injury and regained form his last 2 seasons in Indy (He had over 9,200 rushing yards in 7 seasons in Indy, that is 1,300+ yards/season avera
×
×
  • Create New...