Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts

Tsarquise

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    1,786
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Tsarquise


  1. 42 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

     

    People said the same thing about Ebron.

     

    And the point is that this is all premature complaining.

     

    Why don't we wait to see the results on the field before passing judgement?  :thmup:

    It's not about the potential; he could be great. Based on this players history, and past one year WR deals the Colts have done that are similar to this one, there is no argument to consider this a great signing. 

     

    And no one has to wait a year to say they don't like the signing. Lol. It just doesn't look good. 


  2. 11 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

     

    Yes indeed.

    It's is Great News that the colts won't be adding one of the Best players in a much needed position. And for 2 mid round picks. 

     

    We can only pray to bring back the highly talented Inman. Lol

    Hey, man, he fits the culture lol. The culture will be even stronger next year, which will take us past the Chiefs and Patriots. 


  3. On 2/21/2019 at 4:37 PM, hoosierhawk said:

    He also stated that the culture within the building is remarkable. Thanks Mr Ballard.

    Wouldn't it be more Frank Reich's doing? 


  4. 42 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

    So you completely disregard what Ballard has been saying since day one?

    This mindset of signing every free agent or trading for every free agent with any talent will not get a ring.

    That has been tried by a few teams but please list me the teams it has worked for.

    Big names do not automatically get you rings.

    The Kansas City game shows we have to have a better core of guys before we dabble in big names. We are not there yet.

    Denver did a good job with free agency, so has New England to an extent. 

     

    Those are just the ones off the top of my head. 

     

    Kansas City game showed we needed playmakers, specifically WR, and pass rush. 

    • Like 1

  5. 4 hours ago, 18to87 said:

     

    We never will. Although could you imagine the effect BB (if cloned) would have had on a team like the Steelers. Of course, Big Ben has two rings anyway, but with BB they would not have had the mid-season slumps that have inevitably taken them out of playoff and HFA contention. Big Ben would have more rings than Brady if there were two BB's in the AFC. 

    You will probably need to clone Ernie Adams too FWIW. :headspin:

    Can you imagine BB with Manning and the Colts!? :woah:

    • Like 1

  6. 6 minutes ago, Superman said:

    Also, think about this: What kind of gameplan would Belichick employ against Brady, and how would Brady do against it?

     

    Point being, not only has Brady always benefited from Belichick's coaching, he's also never had to face Belichick's coaching in a game. Manning has, Brees has, Rodgers has, Rivers has... Belichick's defenses beat HOFers like Jim Kelly, John Elway and Kurt Warner in the SB, and put several others out of the playoffs. 

    An absolute great point. 

     

    I hope we get to see this one day; I doubt it, but I hope. 

    • Like 1

  7. 5 minutes ago, tweezy32 said:

    Cheating is big for me. You never know,  they could have cheated every year that they won the super bowl and I could actually believe that just because of them getting caught. Take away their cheating and maybe they don't win half of their super bowl at least? 

    I think the cheating talk is absolute nonsense. Whether their past cheating gave them a significant advantage or not, the Patriots have proven that they can still win with out pushing the envelope in the ways that they had in the past. 


  8. 6 minutes ago, Superman said:

     

     

    This era? Going back to the early '90s, I'd take Brady over Aikman, Young, Favre, Brees, without any hesitation.

     

    I think Manning was a better passer in his prime, and I think Rodgers is the most talented QB of my lifetime. But Brady now has just as much statistical prowess as Manning, and a longer and more impressive resume than Rodgers. Taking either of them over Brady is a matter of personal preference, IMO. 

     

     

    That's certainly a legitimate discussion. But it's also a big "what if."

    Definitely a big what if. Too bad we can't access alternate realities... :(

     

    I would argue that even his statistical prowess has a lot to do with his great coach. Their gameplans are just top notch, and he benefits greatly from his YAC receivers, don't think I have seen a other team get some much many YAC. 

     

    Once again, (and this isn't aimed at you) Brady is one of the all time greats;  there is no doubt about that, but the idea -- which seems to have been created by the media-- that he has a firm grasp on the GOAT throne due to his rings is ridiculous, and it is what irks a lot of people in this thread. It personally annoys me because it seems to marginalize the great coaching and team effort that was made to have such success. 

     

    I hope when Brady retires Belichick stays so we can see what he does with a other QB, or I hope he gets cut, and we get to see Brady play with another team. 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  9. 10 minutes ago, Superman said:

     

    You're arguing against a premise that I don't agree with. 

     

    I think championships are a part of the argument, but when you look at Brady's body of work, he has a legit claim to the throne. It's not just rings.

     

    Ten years ago when Pats fans and media heads said "Brady is better than Manning," that was just about rings. And that was nonsense. Manning was the better passer, was more in control of his offense, better statistically, more dominant individually, but on a team that wasn't as balanced or well coached, and his team hadn't performed well in the playoffs. 

     

    Since then, Brady has won two league MVPs, he's now top four in career yards (and will be #2 next year), top three in TDs (will be #2 next year), top four in passer rating, top three in INT %, #6 in TD% among modern QBs... He has career longevity that guys like Young and Aikman can't touch, he's aging gracefully unlike Manning and Elway, he doesn't turn the ball over like Favre. He has dominant, signature performances, regular season and playoffs, record-breaking streaks, etc.

     

    Nothing about this is conclusive. But his body of work stands on its own against everyone else in the GOAT conversation, without even bringing up the rings. The argument has changed from ten years ago. Brady now has just as impressive a regular season resume as anyone else.

     

    I'll argue against the "rings" argument all day long. It's bogus. But Brady's body of work doesn't rely on the rings anymore. 

    It's arguable that he is the greatest, but not undoubtedly so, and that's the issue, the media, and the average football fan have been citing him as the greatest ever since he won his 4th ring. 

     

    Bill Belichick has the largest role responsible for the Pat's success. 

     

    Would you take him over any QB of this era, assuming they're all in their prime? 

    • Like 2

  10. 21 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

    Really it isn't Tom's fault these other QB's suck butt in the clutch = Wilson getting picked at the 1 yard line with a sure win, Ryan just not handing off and the ATL kicking a FG to go up 11, or Goff's craptastic performance tonight lmao. Hey if teams can't beat them, not his fault. The Manning's could beat him, Peyton 3-1 in AFC Title Games, Eli 2-0 in SB's, everyone else MEH.

    These are coaching gaffs. 

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...