Cynjin
-
Posts
6,013 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Cynjin
-
-
12 hours ago, threeflight said:
And I stated 2 weeks ago that I was wrong about Ballard.
Doesn't mean I am wrong here.
The problem is your track record for being right is very poor.
-
Just now, Smonroe said:
I don’t think the refs watched enough of the game to focus on anything.
I can't argue with that.
It is amazing how inconsistent the Refs are, teams should not have to game plan for what referee crew is working a game.
-
Just now, dw49 said:
Just wondering if all those hands to the face may have damaged his neck ?
Supposedly, that is a penalty, and a area of focus for the refs.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
I really do not have anything against Mahomes or Andy Reid. They are both likable guys actually. I have never really disliked the Chiefs for that matter. Back in the day Derrick Thomas (RIP) was one of my favorite players. I guess for me to form any kind of hate toward them they would have to beat us 2 or 3 times in a row in the Playoffs. We have just absolutely owned them in the Playoffs over the years so their fanbase can't stand us.
Their fanbase may not like the Colts, but they are not nearly as obnoxious as the Pats fanbase. The Titans' fan base doesn't like the Colts either, but they are not obnoxious either. The Pats fanbase is just full of terribly obnoxious fans. Now I recognize I am painting with a broad brush here, but in general it holds true.
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:
Is this going to be the new rivalry the next five years. If so I hope we get the upper hand and this doesn’t turn into KC owning us.
I am getting tired of everyone saying Luck is a young QB. He is not. He is in his prime and our window is smaller then the chiefs.
If it is at least it is a rivalry with a team that has a much nicer fanbase overall.
-
6 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
The tweet puts unnecessary pressure on the team to win and it's a brutally tough game already. I get being excited, but this game is far from a given. I was confident in the Texans game, I'm about 55/45 Chiefs here. We have to play perfect.
The tweet puts zero pressure on the Colts to win. The only thing it might do is cause some amount of embarrassment for Irsay if the conditions are poor and the Colts lose, and even that is questionable.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, stitches said:
Wow! I didn't expect that!
It's probably a good decision by Davis, his play this year was down vs last year. If he came out, imo, he was a borderline first round pick. If he can return to how he played the year before or better he could be a top 10 pick.
-
That account is gaining notoriety. Here is an article from the Washington Post.
-
5 hours ago, tikyle said:
They knew when Manning was here that Painter wasn't an NFL QB. Manning was notorious for not letting backups take any snaps even in practice and the Colts had guys backing him up that were not NFL caliber players and everyone knew it. You can call it what you want but if you go into a season with him at starter you are not expecting to win hardly any games at all. If it makes you feel better they didn't tank, but you know deep down from watching Painter even before the season that the Colts were doomed and the team made no real effort to get a starting QB when Peyton got hurt the season prior.
In contrast the Colts traded for Brissett in 2017 before the season to avoid doing what they did in 2012.
And you are right, most coaches and GMs don't tank due to job security. Tanking has to be an organizational decision. And again tanking is not just blatantly losing and laying down. Its not giving your team the best chance to win.
They brought in Kerry Collins that season once they saw what Painter was like in game. Then they brought in Orlovsky, who went 2 and 3. They tried to bring in a better QB, therefore they were not tanking. Your characterization of it as tanking is wrong, they were not losing on purpose.
Also, who decided to tank the 2011 season? Caldwell and Polian sure didn't, they were fired because of that season, many players were no longer employed after that season. Your stance makes zero sense at any level of a football team.
-
2
-
-
21 minutes ago, tikyle said:
Let's be honest, do you really think the Colts couldn't find a better player to trot out there in 2011 than Curtis Painter? They didn't "luck" into the #1. That was tanking. Tanking isn't laying down, rolling over and point shaving. Tanking is actively trotting out there inferior talent when you can do better. Tanking is releasing guys or trading away talent that can help your team (see the 2018 Oakland Raiders).
Now you're just perpetuating a myth. They did try to get a better Qb once they saw what they had with Painter.
Tanking is losing on purpose, coaches and GMs are not going to do that. Why you ask? Because they tend to get fired when they lose. Players are not going to tank for the same reason.
Your assertion that the Colts tanked in 2011 is just silly.
-
2
-
-
34 minutes ago, Luck is Good said:
I’m not doubting Alabama still being elite. They’ll still be great year in and year out. But I’m talking about Clemson. Trevor Lawrence is the real deal. He’s a true freshman QB. What he did last night was absolutely incredible. They could lose a game here or there. I’ll believe it when I see it though
He did look great. It is still early, but assuming he comes out after his Junior year he looks like a number one pick overall.
-
2
-
-
58 minutes ago, tikyle said:
There are many ways to tank other than "quitting." People think tanking is going out there and basically point shaving. You can tank by sitting healthy players in lieu of younger guys you want extended looks at (which can benefit by developing guys who during a normal year not get much PT). You can tank by running overly aggressive or overly conservative plays. There are many ways to do it other than going out there and just laying down. And we "earned" those picks by losing and losing a lot.
Maybe it's your use of the word tanking that is the issue. Tanking is losing on purpose, which is not what most people want the team they root for to do.
-
2
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Luck is Good said:
Clemson probably won’t lose the next two years
I doubt that, but it would be remarkable if they do.
Alabama still recruits as well as anyone and considering how many players and coaches that have left, in the last 4 years, it is impressive that they can still compete for a national championship each year.
Clemson will start to lose some of their assistant coaches to other programs. I do believe Dabo will be able to keep them playing at a high level.
Can any other programs start to compete with Clemson and Alabama? Georgia has shown they can, but I hope to see more programs step up.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, Luck is Good said:
This is a changing of the guard. Clemson will now be the dominant program
I don't know about a changing of the guard. Those two teams have pretty much been 1 and 1a for the past 4 years.
-
Well that was a disappointing game, I was hoping for a competitive one. Congrats to Clemson, I do like the Lawrence kid even more since I heard he wears #16 because on Peyton Manning.
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:
Most people who know about football don't consider a pancake block "falling over" but I realize you like be contrarian on most posts.
I will also say I have not heard of a lineman on any level hurting his wrist on a pancake block. Not saying it hasn't happened just that it is so rare as to be practically unheard. Now on the flip side I have seen and heard many lineman driving a guy at the line or down field get their leg rolled up on and suffering a sever injury. So you claim to be worried about injury but the block you want him to do more of leads to more injuries than pancake blocks.
I wish you luck in trying to explain anything to that poster. Pancake blocks are now a negative, smh.
-
1
-
-
Interesting thread.
-
Just now, SteelCityColt said:
Holding holding and more holding.
More inconsistencies by the refs.
-
1
-
-
-
9 minutes ago, threeflight said:
I already said in the other thread today that I was wrong about CB's draft overall.
Said I would gladly eat crow.
However that doesn't mean I wouldn't rather have Hurst than the 2 WRs.
Well it is good that you said that, but not unlike during the draft threads, it is still to early do determine what Cain and Fountain will be. Hurst was more than likely off the Colts board. Cain getting injured was probably the biggest disappointment for me. After seeing Cain play in college and what he had reportedly been performing in camp, I was very interested in seeing if he could play at the pro level. Fountain, imo, was a project when they drafted him and remains that today, hopefully he turns into a productive wr.
-
35 minutes ago, threeflight said:
I still think this is where CB messed up. I would rather have Hurst than Cain and Fountain.
Hurst showed he was healthy and really came on this year.
You would come across better if you would just admit how wrong you were.
"Sorry, but imo he has totally blown this draft."
Your opinion on the draft was really wrong.
-
9 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:
Most likely a planned induction. This is their second child.
More than likely, yes.
-
1
-
-
49 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:
Aww isn’t he cute. Remember when TY had his baby born right before a game.
That's good planning by them to not have the baby on a game day.
-
1
-
-
47 minutes ago, PeterBowman said:
as long as the calls are fair and even, I'd have no problem.
I agree, as long as they are consistent I have no problem with the refs. I do wish that there was more consistency from one crew to the next.
Trust Ballard
in Colts Football
Posted
Don't hold your breath on that hope.
I'm betting that he won't stop.