Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

ar7

Member
  • Posts

    735
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Uncategorized

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

5,160 profile views

ar7's Achievements

Practice Squad

Practice Squad (2/6)

390

Reputation

  1. I thought the Colts had as bad start to the game (defense and offense) as they could. The only positive at the beginning was the missed extra point by SF. The defense came through and made some big plays. I don't want to go overboard with excitement given they were playing SF and the weather was in their favor but they still deserve credit. (obviously DL comes through with big plays consistently and again last night) I also think it shows how big it is to be playing with a lead and how much it helps your defense. Speaking of the lead, I thought one of the big positives offensively was consistently scoring. The Colts scored every quarter with 4 of the 5 scores being TDs. They had some downs but to keep scoring was one of the big positives, imo. Going into the game I was concerned about getting some bigger plays in the passing game not only because of the weather but without TY and Campbell. They were still able to come away with some so that was great to see.
  2. They haven't been the only ones to complain about the lack of touches for JT on Sunday. I almost posted something about this as I heard Kent Sterling mention it plus others. Will this team need to run the ball more throughout the course of a game to beat the better teams? I think so. Coaching oversight wasn't really the reason for the lack of touches for JT on Sunday though. There were other factors that were really the cause, imo. The Colts had the big TD play with Paris Campbell and some big throws to Hilton and Pittman in the first half. Plus, Fisher had at least 2 false starts in the first half that put the Colts in passing situations. I will say that Hines had 1 additional rush attempt and I believe 1 more target than Taylor in the first half. Hines should never get more rush attempts.
  3. ar7

    Injuries

    I feel but for Paris as he has had just the worst luck with injuries. Really a shame too because I think your offense can be way different when you have receivers like Pittman, Hilton, and Campbell. Campbell hasn't produced consistently in the NFL but his speed/talent is there and things are just different when you have those 3 on the field vs the other receivers.
  4. I am probably not appreciating everything that Pascal brings to the table enough but I think he gets too many snaps/targets over other receivers. He can help and should be getting snaps but I think other receivers (mainly Campbell but also Dulin and potentially Strachan) can create mismatches and provide some dynamic plays that just isn't what Pascal does. This offense needs more of that. MAC certainly should be involved more. I'd be very curious to know why he isn't. Really glad TY is back. He should help just being on the field and drawing attention. I think he also is still something to go to when you need a play. On a personal level I really wanted to see him reach 10K yards. Probably his last year in Indy and it's unlikely he reaches that mark after his injury.
  5. That's fair and all good. My only points were I thought some of the comments from others were overblown about Wilson. He is just a fan tweeting about the Colts like we get on this board to post about them but others brought up him writing for SB which I didn't find relevant. My other point was I think some people are critical of Wilson for using stats to say Wentz is average are silent about anyone who has thrown out stats to make a different point. I don't necessary disagree with the laziness part but I think that laziness goes both ways regardless if you are trying to say he is average or great.
  6. I'd be much more comfortable giving up a 1st for Stafford absolutely. As far as him "aging" Stafford is 33 years old. QBs are continuing to play well into their late 30s. 33 is not old for a QB and it's not like he is 8-10 years older than Wentz. More importantly he hasn't shown signs of declining. He threw for over 4,000 yards last year. It's reasonable to expect that the Rams are going to get 5-7 years out of him. Plus, i'm pretty sure part of the pick value the Rams gave up was for the Lions to take on Goff and his contract. Everything I have read suggests the Colts were bidding against themselves for Wentz. You say it wasn't hard to project him being near the top 10 like it was a sure thing. If it was a sure thing there would have been interest from other teams in need of a QB. Maybe I missed it but all I saw about other teams and Wentz was potentially the Bears but they never made an offer. And other QBs have dealt with injuries and bad oline play but they don't decline to the point of getting benched. When a team has a sure thing at QB they look to fix the problems around the QB and not trade the QB. We can agree to disagree but I think Wentz was more of a gamble thus why I think the cost to get him was a little higher than it should have been.
  7. I disagree to some extent on the bolded part. I think there are two questions about the Wentz trade, any trade for that matter, that should be answered separately. 1) Are the Colts happy with trading for Wentz? Ultimately this will be answered in how he plays. 2) What price should the Colts have paid to acquire him? This is about his value and demand for him at the time the trade was made. To put it another way, I might make a purchase and be happy with it but it doesn't mean I didn't overpay for said purchase. Or to put it more in line with football some people are happy the Colts drafted Nelson and Kelly but didn't think it was great value for where they were picked. When you trade for a veteran a big part of the appeal is you know what you are getting. Even if you think there is some upside/untapped potential you usually are not using 1st round picks on veterans unless they are a sure thing. Coming off the season he had in 2020 Wentz was not a sure thing. I will say the answer to question 1 is more important than question 2 but I still think what they gave up is a bit much for him considering the situation.
  8. I thought that I was pretty clear when I stated that I thought that we should wait to put any stock into the numbers. My last post was really in regards to the personal attacks on Wilson. Some acted like people were indicated that his opinion carries weight because at one time he wrote for Stampede Blue. Who cares if he wrote for a blog? It is ok to disagree with someone without making it personal. And it's interesting that people take issue with Wilson using stats to push a narrative that Wentz is average but yet some people have used stats to put a positive spin on Wentz and that's ok. Just seems hypocritical. Look, I agree that there is context that should be considered but that context goes both ways. I'm not going to dismiss Wentz based on how he played at the start with such limited practice but i'm also not going to crown him based on his play vs a crappy Dolphins team or having 400 yards agains the Ravens. It's great that he did that but it seems unreasonable to expect that out of him on a regular basis.
  9. Spot on. Just look at the QBs in the AFC...Mahomes, Allen, Jackson, and now Herbert. Yikes. You can't settle at this position and think you will be a serious contender. Granted, football is still a team game and it's not all on the QB BUT there is no position that impacts the game as much as the QB and no position that can make his teammates better like the QB. Being say a top 15 QB isn't likely to cut it if you want to be a serious contender. The bar is higher than ever for what you need out of a QB. In his 5 years in Philly there were a number of questions about Wentz to raise doubts as to whether or not he is a franchise QB. Perhaps some are unfair but they were there. That's not normal for franchise QBs at all. 5 years into a career you almost always know what you have. IMO 5 games is not enough to crown him.
  10. I think that going from good to great comes from the draft and takes some luck. A good example of what helped make the Colts great was drafting Reggie Wayne. He was drafted towards the end of the first round in 2001. I didn't really follow things that closely then but i'm pretty sure there were people who didn't think the Colts should draft a WR. But Reggie was a great player and IMO will be a HOF at some point. When you have the chance to draft a great player then you do it. That's easier said than done though because teams are always trying to fill needs. It also becomes more difficult to do this as you get further along in the draft. It becomes easier to take a need. I say it takes some luck because every draft is different and there might not be a great player when you pick. (production does not automatically = great) You also need great players at key positions. QB, skill position, DE, and CB. It's often said that the red zone, and I think critical moments of the game, becomes about players and not plays. So you want a couple of your great players to be at those key positions. Another important part of it is player leadership. I think it's something you have to be looking for from the start though and not just when you are trying to go from good to great. It's important in all teams whether it's a football team or a team within a business. I think part of leadership is doing your job at a high level but it's also about accountability. I think a good example of this is a story Pat McAfee told about Austin Collie. He attempted to catch a pass with one hand and didn't. As he is coming back towards the huddle Peyton just pointed to the sideline. After the offense was off the field Manning made it clear to Collie that he better not try any more one handed catches. We can't really see the player leadership or measure it but I think of this story as an example of it. It's difficult for a lot of people to hold others accountable though because it's tempting to avoid potential conflict.
  11. I'm certainly not opposed to a WR but I think it could also be a TE. The WR group is obvious more unstable. We can't rely on Campbell to stay healthy, could use a more dynamic player than Pascal, and it's likely Hilton's last year in Indy. However, i'd be equally pleased if the Colts could land a dynamic receiving TE. I suspect this could be Doyle's last year. I really like MAC and don't want to write off Kylen Granson either. I just think a dynamic TE would help this offense as much, maybe even more so, than another WR. There are other needs too I agree with that BProland85 mentioned. Another playmaker stands out to me which I think can be a WR or a TE. (though I think CB is VERY close behind)
  12. Funny you mention that. McAfee has Pagano on his show on Wednesdays. When he was asked about that he joked how it was 3 when he was there so Irsay has lowered it. As a general note, I never thought i'd say this but that segment McAfee does with Pagano is really good. It's great to hear him speak without being limited by the boundaries of being a head coach.
  13. Has anyone claimed that WIlson is a "star" and his "talent" means his opinion carries more weight? I don't understand why some people are attempting to turn this into a debate about Wilson personally based on the type of website he wrote for and the way it's monetized. I'm pretty sure Wilson isn't writing for SB any longer. I think he stopped awhile ago. He obviously still tweets about the Colts but it's really no different from those of us on here sharing our opinion. It's fine to disagree with what he tweeted or push back on whatever point he was attempting to make. I myself think 5 games is premature to put stock into the numbers one way or the other. It's really too small of a sample size and anyone can put whatever spin on them they want to push the preferred narrative. I just don't understand the mindset to personally attack him just because you disagree with him. I don't even follow the guy on Twitter but some of the reactions from those who disagree with him have been overblown.
  14. Yeah Bowen has been talking about needing accountability from Reich and i've wondered exactly what he means. He did mention on the Tuesday show how he was speaking with a former player who played mostly for Pagano. (I took it for Reich too) The player felt that accountability was an issue with Pagano and again with Reich. My impression is he is referring to Reich as a coach not holding players accountable though and not accountability in terms of his job status as the head coach.
×
×
  • Create New...