masterlock

Just, "a pretty good quarterback"? Not "great", or "phenomenal", or "elite"? Sounds like a pretty lukewarm endorsement to me.

Based on what evidence?

He was a good man and the players were loyal to him, but no, he wasn't a great coach. Grigson was partly to blame. But Pagano didn't have what it takes 'upstairs' to be a good coach. He exhibited poor judgement. The infamous 'fake punt' is the prime example. No coach in his right mind should have ever allowed that play to take place. There's no excuse. And then there were all the other things, like preparation, play-calling and clock management. Frank Reich is a definite upgrade.

If only. But I doubt the Colts will stink enough next year to get the No. 1 draft pick.

You're comparing different sample sizes.

He had a few misses, but those were toward the end of his career as a GM. But there are so many that he really nailed--and, let's face it, he got us to the Super Bowl. It's rare to find an NFL team that's truly elite on both sides of the ball. Polian made the decision to invest on the offensive side, and so there just wasn't enough money to throw at the defensive side. But even there, we had the likes of Freeney and Mathis, Sanders, and several good linebackers. Ballard has managed to find some gems, like Nelson (no-brainer), Leonard (surprising), and Mack. And I wouldn't say he h

A Polian clone, but without Polian's eye for talent.

If it were a stock, traders would be shorting it.

I don't think the coaching staff will give him a true chance to compete. I think Brissett playing and getting the lion's share of starter reps is pre-ordained, sadly.

I think the Colts' coaching staff would've been afraid of the 'optics', so to speak--that playing Kelly could be interpreted as a sign they lacked confidence in Brissett. So it was never going to happen, even thought I think it should have. I agree with Doyle's characterization of Kelly, that he plays with flair and sizzle--something sorely lacking in Brissett. With Brissett, there's just no excitement, unless you consider 180 passing yards/game and a little over 1 TD/game "exciting". And I don't buy the nagging knee injury as an excuse. I don't know whether Kelly is the future, or whether som

IMO, Brady is nearing the end of his shelf life as a QB, and would be nothing more than a temporary, stop-gap solution, if that. I'd rather draft our QB of the future--the next Patrick Mahomes--than extend our mediocrity for another two years. Edit: Or, start Chad Kelly.

Or as some journalist--don't recall who--recently put it, "Quarterback purgatory," which is to say good enough to win some games, but not good enough to be playoff caliber. Also, bad enough to lose a good number of games, but not so bad that you get high draft picks. So your team remains stuck in a middle ground of mediocrity.

Yeah, he's been a pretty prolific father. You could say he's 'scored' a lot, both on and off the field. :-P

Saying that he "hasn't shown he is a starter" sounds like more of a personal opinion than anything that can be substantiated. I don't think it's really possible to know the Colts' reasons for not giving him a chance. It could be that they were already psychologically committed to JB, and he was going to be the starter no matter what. It could be that they had concerns centered around his character/maturity, and wanted to see evidence that he could stay out of trouble. From what I've seen of his play, he has significantly better QB skills than Brissett, even though that based on a smaller sampl

Brissett isn't the answer, but I think the Colts will stick with him for at least another year, and then move on. Maybe by that time, they'll give Chad Kelly a shot.