Flash7
-
Posts
4,129 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Flash7
-
-
I don't think that anyone's pushing Manning out of the door. If Manning was healthy, this all would be a non-issue and the chances of the Colts trading the first pick would be great. But with Manning's health still a concern, the Colts are now in a bind and have to make a really difficult decision.The big question is how would u feel if u were manning and u did all that for a team and they our pushing u out the doorThks for 13 years bye luck u ready
If I were Manning, I would understand this. The Colts paid me my salary to NOT play this year in hopes that I could recover. What more could I expect from my team?
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, and please forgive me if I misintepreted your statement, but it appears to me that you are saying that most Super Bowls have not been won by a #1 pick. You also stated that there is talent outside of the first pick.
I addressed both of your statements by stating that if most Superbowls are now won with the first pick, then we and all other teams shouldn't covet the first pick. It's obviously not going to help win a SuperBowl according to your argument.
To address your statement about there being talent outside of the first pick, I provided logical and statistical reasoning of why that's such an obvious statement.
It looks to me that you may be inferring that it's a better course to trade the pick than to chose first overall?
-
If he did talk to Manning, he wasn't going to acknowledge that in a press conference because the next questions would be- what did you guys talk about? How is he doing? Will he return next season? Will you trade him? Will he coexist with Luck..etc...
It's easier to say that they haven't talked and Grigson will let Irsay deal with the Peyton Manning questions when the time is right.
-
By that logic, no one should ever choose first. We should continuously trade the pick amongst ourselves.Most SuperBowls are not one be the #1 overall pick, that is the correlation and trend that should JUMP out at us.... this means there is talent outside of the #1 pick.
Also, of course there is other talent outside of the #1 pick just by statistical reasoning. There is only 1 first overall pick each year and numerous subsequent picks. The odds are, there is a ton of talent outise of the #1 pick. It doesn't mean that that you cannot choose first and still land a great prospect at #1.
-
How about we let Peyton decide his future? I've heard on various threads that we should hire him as an assistant coach, head coach, QB coach, and now an administrative position.
I'm not sure that Peyton wants to do anything else right now other than play QB for the Colts. Let's leave it at that for now.
Pardon the tone of this response, I am saying this with respect.
-
Manning does deserve a chance to come back a Colt. On March 8th he is due a huge bonus. It's become sort of a deadline. We will need to know for sure by then that he has fully recovered. Irsay has paid Manning this year even though Manning didn't play. He paid him to evaluate his recovery. Before March 8th Irsay will have to decide if he is willing to continue paying an unhelathy Manning, which will adversely affect the team's cap situation. I think it's simple. If Manning is not healthy, we may be forced to cut him.Sure, but his knee will never be as strong as it once was and is more prone to it tearing again. And your sarcasm is dually noted.
why so quick to dump off the 4 time leauge MVP for an unproven rookie? I think he deserves a chance to try and come back a colt, dont you?
-
If Manning is not healthy, then that drastically changes the picture. We would be forced to move ahead without him. Irsay paid Manning this year in hopes that we can evaluate his recovery. I doubt that if Manning isn't healthy enough to play next season, that Irsay would pay his salary and bonus for an additional year just to find out if he has recovered.And what if Manning is not 100% healthy in 7 short weeks? He's not 100% now and that date is fast approaching. Do you give a 28 million dollar bonus to Manning on the CHANCE that he will fully recover? That's a huge gamble and a big chunk of change that could be used to improve in other areas. That's why I think they are headed in the direction of releasing him. I hope he plays with Luck as backup but shouldn't we have heard some news of profound improvement in his recovery by now? If I were Peyton and my arm was close to normal arm strength I would be shouting from the rooftops that I will be back. No news in a long time on his recovery is what really concerns me and March 8 is practically right around the corner.
What we have been hearing from Archie and Irsay is the term "If he is healthy..." I was hoping to hear a more definate tone from them in regards to Manning's health, especially as we approach March 8th. This has me really worried.
-
It's a very valid argument to want to trade the pick for a stock pile of draft picks. It sure would help to build the team at a more rapid pace. But I feel that we would be leveraging our future for gratification now. I know that there will be other great QBs coming out of the draft. What I don't know is our ability to get that next great QB. We may not have the first pick again. It just so turns out that this year is a fluke, we get the first pick, and coinsidentaly the best college prospect since Manning is available.How about this...
IF Peyton Manning is healthy, I say we can try to trade the first round pick to a team in desperate needs for (i.e. Washington Redskins) for mutiple first round picks for future years. Dan Snyder is the next Al Davis and we might be able to pull a great deal. And even if Luck turns out to be great, he would be in the NFC, so I don't think it would hurt us that bad. And Washington is in a pretty tough division and still have to face giants, cowboys, and eagles twice a year so we would have chance to have high draft picks for future year.
We can start rebuilding for the post-Manning era with the draft picks, while Peyton gives us the chance to compete for the Superbowl at the same time. There's always gonna be a good QB in the draft, may not be as good as Andrew Luck, but we can improve other positions and draft a qb later round of this year or next year to learn under Peyton Manning.
I know people don't want to pass on Andrew Luck, but I just think that this could be a better option instead of just releasing Peyton Manning for nothing.
Just my thoughts....
If we trade the pick, we could definitley build a more balanced team. What I am afraid of is being a team like the Jets that seam to have all of the pieces but are missing a Super Bowl Caliber QB.
-
I'd like to get everyone's take on this. What if we keep Manning and draft Andrew Luck with the first pick? Would this be so bad? I am aware of the amount of money spent on one position, and that we have so many holes to fill. But, let's talk this through.
Here's what I'm wondering. If Manning had played this year, what would our record have been? I think that we would have had a winning record and could have won our division and would've made it to the play offs. This tells me that we're not too far off from being a serious contender with Manning.
Moving forward, we have to address Reggie Wayne, Pierre Garcon, our O-line, Mathis, and many positions on defense. Couldn't we re-sign Mathis, Garcon, and then look address some other key positions either through FA or the draft? I am assuming that Wayne may want to be paid like a top grade receiver. And we can do this not just this year, but over the next few years, as Manning is under a 4-year contract. We can move forward thinking that Manning gives us the best shot to win now. We will continue to re-build the team, and when Manning retires we could move forward with Luck.
For those that say Luck will not sit behind Manning, we have no proof of that. In fact, he has said that he is willing to if that is the case. I'd prefer not to turn this into a Luck thread and focus on Manning, with Luck as his eventual successor.
I basically want to know if this is possible and a safe way for the Colts to proceed.
-
I would think that as a GM you are aware of the decisions related to personnel. I am sure that he and Irsay have had several conversations about Manning. It's only logical that they would. Irsay may have the final say, but that doesn't mean that Grigson doesn't know what the outcome may be. When he was asked about Manning, it was evident that he was careful to not leak out any information and was very calculated and nervous. Obviously it's the biggest decision the franchise has to make.Just watch that press conference. The subsconscious mind has fascinating ways to display the conscious thoughts in body language. Grigson was fluid at times, even Galdiator like at the end. But when the one time Peyton was brought up it was a quick "no" folllowed by a literal "washing of the hands clean". Was his subsconscious clearly not comfortable? That grinding of the hands is his tell! He is hinding something. You dont get this job without knowing what you are doing with the face of THE NFL.
-
When it comes to the decison on Manning, I think that Irsay will have the final say, however, not without discussion with Grigson. Grigson cannot be in charge of all other personell matters with the exception of Manning. The decision behind keeping manning will have an effect on any other decision that Grigson can make. As both Grigson and Irsay discussed, they are looking for a more balanced team. If Grigson is to make a decision on wether to keep Mathis or not, he would need to know if there is cap room. We all know how Manning's contract effects the cap situation.Grigson said that was a decision that would be between Jim and Peyton. Not him.
My point is that although he may not make the final decision, he will know ahead of time what the decision will be.
-
You are absolutely right about that, which is why I was very careful not to take that approach. I understand a big portion of our offense is in the hands of Manning, however, this year it was not. This year I did not see anything that slightly resembled good coaching. It was confusing to me that we knew Manning wasn't going to play and our game plan was to throw the ball as much as we did. And we did this continously, with Collins, then Painter, and then Orlovsky. None of these QB's should have thrown as much as they did. We kep the same offense had hoped that these sub-par QB's could run Manning's offense. That's poor coaching. Look at Denver. A Quarter of the way through the season they changed QBs. With the QB change came a whole new style of offense, which helped them into the play offs. That's good coaching.So which ones of the offensive plays are Caldwell's calls and which are Manning's calls you don't know only they do half of the time so it's impossible to say which one of those plays are planned by which. So no I can' tell you which were Caldwell's call but that doesn't mean you can claim that all of the good calls were Manning's and the bad ones were Caldwell's
-
Look at it this way. The Colts were 14-2 with Manning. Then Manning is out for a year and Caldwell has a chance to prove that he is a good head coach. Instead, he takes a team that went 14-2 and leads us to a 2-14 season.
You can say that of course we were goint to lose without Manning. Then that would tell you that Caldwell also didn't have much to do with the wins the previous year.
Knowing that Manning was not going to play, he should have drastically changed the offense and simplified our approach. Instead, he tells Painter to go out there and throw forty times a game. Yes, because that's playing to our strengths, right?
-
When it comes to Caldwell, I don't see coaching brilliance. I can name several times when he actually cost us a game due to his poor decision making, and cannot name a time when I thought we won a game directly because of a decision that he made.
Let me give you a few examples:
In the Super Bowl against the Saints, it was clear that he was out-coached by Sean Payton. Coach Payton made a bold decision to go for an on-side kick after half time. That was a bold move and worked in his favor. That's an instance where if you are a Saint fan, you can say that you won that game because of coaching.
This weekend, the Forty Niners were trailing the Saints in the fourth quarter. They ran a bootleg, which caught everyone off gaurd, and they scored on that play. It was a brilliant play call. You can argue that the Niner's won due to their coaching.
When have we won because of a coaching decision by our coaching staff?
Also, the argument that the players like Caldwell is not a good arguement. We as Colts fans can see that Norv Turner is not a good head coach, right? However, the players want to keep him in SD. It's because people don't like change.
-
Can we please stop calling Luck a Future Hall of Famer? I like Luck, but calling him a Future HOF'er takes away any credibility in our arguement. Can we also stop calling him a bust? He hasn't even played yet.
What I find really funny is the following arguement:
Character 1- "I think Luck is very good!"
Character 2 " Well, are you a professional scout? Do you evaluate players for a living? No? Then you have no credibility."
Character 1- " Most of the professional scouts also think that Luck is very good.
character 2- "They are wrong because they thought JaMarcus Russel and Ryan Leaf were good prospects too. you can't trust professional scouts. They have no credibility."
I guess no one has any credibility?
-
He will be attending Stanford which has a very balanced running attack. He will be very utilized in the rushing attack. He is also a very good receiver, so look for him to be very effective on screen passes. If he gets into the open field, he can take it all the way.
-
Barkley will most likely be a very high draft pick, probably number 1 next year. All we would be doing is gaining picks and then giving them away for a lesser QB in Barkley.Like Barkley which would be good also. :highfive:
-
A lot of the highlights in this video are from his junior year in high school. He was hurt part of his senior year. He went to Stanford clinic to have it looked at and fell in love with Stanford. So an unfortunate event like an injury helped him to decide on which college to attend. I work at Stanford, so I am very excited that I'll have a chance to watch him as Barry Sanders was my all-time favorite runningback.
-
Ironically, RGIII would be a better fit for Cleveland's system than he would be for the Colts. They use many roll outs for their QB's because they had worked with McCoy and Wallace. Cleveland may actually want to stay in their 4th spot and draft RGIII.RG3 could be the top draft choice of the Colts if they trade the No1. pick to Clevaland for their 2 No.1s...
If Ryan Grigson wants RG3....he can get him AND another No.1 (and maybe an extra No.2)
RG3 wont be the Number oen overall pick,,,but I agree with the sentiment behind these comments..
RG3 wants to come to play indoors for a powerhouse with a full set of experienced recivers..
he may sit 4 years..but even if he does..he would then be a high-priced free agent/
RG3 also knows he has much to learn about playing pro QB
-
I feel that Washingtom may be a wild card in this year's draft. Shanahan coached Elway, and now Luck is the next most "pro ready" QB since Elway. He and Dan Snyder may feel it's worth it to leverage their future drafts for a QB like Luck. They would have to make a pretty great offer.The problem with all this speculation right now is, we don't know for sure who would really be willing to trade away the boat load of picks that we should be able to get for Luck. The only viable trade partner for what I believe would be necessary would be Cleveland and they have a good chance of landing RGIII without trading.
I believe with Cleveland, if they would give us both of their #1s this year, and a #1 and #3 next year, the trade could work to our benefit. I would take Devon Still, DT out of Penn State with the #4 pick and then the best available DB with the second #1. I would then use pick #34 for Nick Foles of Arizona for our QB of the future. He could sit behind Peyton and learn for 2-3 years.
This all depends on Peyton being healthy and Cleveland being willing to trade. Don't think Holmgren will do it though.
-
People are assuming tht Luck will be the first overall pick in the draft. RGIII no doubt is aware of this. Since the Colts have the first overall pick, if RGIII has any shot of being the #1 pick in the draft, he has to say things that would please the Colts. He's playing his cards right.Just saw on ESPN First Take where RG3 would asked if he would be comfortable sitting behind Peyton Manning for a while if drafted by Indianapolis. He said he would do it gladly because of his respect and admiration for Manning and that he didn't want to be the guy that sent Peyton packing. He also said Manning should be allowed to play as long as he wants in Indy.
Sounds like a more humble guy and someone who is more willing to sit and learn than Andrew Luck to me.
-
This is a hypothetical situation with a view point skewed towards the Luck supporters.
It's clear that we are in a situation where a very tough decision has to be made. At the end of the day, the most prudent decision would be to draft Andrew Luck. Mainly because if we are currently dealing with facts, we would have to ask ourselves:
1. Who is our current starting QB? The answer is NOT Manning, rather it's Orlovsky.
2. What is Manning's status? He is rehabbing from his 3rd surgery. All signs are showing a recovery, but still uncertainty remains.
3. If Manning were to return, what can we expect from him? Logically, we would have to expect a dropp-off in performance due to not playing in a year. We have seen Manning take time off and return rusty. (Doogan, your logic of an increase in performance because he would be pain free may have some merrit, however, the logic of him playing like a 31/32 year old does not hold water.)
4. What can we expect from the team? It appears that we can expect change in many different ways, from coaching to players leaving via FA and retirement. It's hard to say what we can realistically expect in 2012.
Now, with all of these uncertainties, we should trade the pick? Knowing that our current QB is Orlovsky, we shouldn't draft Manning's successor?
Imagine if this were to play out.... It turns out that Manning hasn't fully recovered yet and he may have to miss out on part of the upcoming season. Wouldn't we all be complaining that the red flags were clearly evident, yet the GM managed not to do anything about the QB situation?
-
This is purely just for kicks, but what if Jim Irsay hasn't canned Caldwell yet because our next head coach is still in the play-offs? Once harbaugh and the Niners are out of the playoffs, Jim Irsay proposes a trade of Peyton Manning to the Niners for Jim Harbaugh. Yes, a player for a coach.
The Niners would get their missing piece of the puzzle for a legitimate shot at the Super Bowl and we would get a coach that has played for the Colts and has now proven that he can take a losing team to the playoffs. And of course, Jim harbaugh would coach Andrew Luck, who already has a head start running his system.
Okay, keep in mind this is just for fun....and now let me have it.
-
That's not how leverage works. It's about the bargaining chip that you have, and Luck would be that bargaining chip. If we came out and said we absolutely will not draft Luck because we already have Manning and we will trade the pick to the highest bidder, guess what? The demand for Luck would still exist. In fact, by saying that, we may even create a bidding war.Do any of you understand how a smokescreen works?Do you...seriously?This is like a game of bluff(like playing cards).If i wanted to raise the jackpot(trade value of 1#pick),then i would also say things that make it seem i'm going to take luck or peyton might not be ready for the start of the season.I'm guessing this is a form of damage control on archie's part,because of his previous statements about them(luck/manning)not being able to co-exist.We're just trying to drive the value UP.If we come out and say that we're not interested in luck,then we have NO LEVERAGE in this situation.
Irsay Says Manning's Health Will Not Impact If They Take A Qb
in Colts Football
Posted