indy1888
-
Posts
1,088 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by indy1888
-
-
Rick Venturi on Dakich now, says in his gut he does believe there are some problems here. Maybe not to the extent that Greenberg is saying, but not totally off base.
-
1 minute ago, Restored said:
Why would the team NOT put Luck on IR if he wasn't going to play at all this year? It doesn't make any logical sense.
Same reason they didn't put Manning on IR the year he never played, same reason they didn't put Luck on IR the year he lacerated his kidney. They want to hold out hope he can return plus not kill business.
-
Greenberg is on Dakich's show right now but i have missed most of it. I did hear Greenberg say he spoke to Lucks agent who did deny it. Dakich then said he has heard that Luck may not play at all this year and Greenberg said he has heard that from several people as well. That i could deffinitely believe. Greenberg is also going to talk about this again tomorrow on his show.
-
14 minutes ago, Major_Adobe said:
Why would topic "luck see's the light? " be closed? It may be just a rumor but it's being talked about heavily by the media on Twitter and was introduced by ESPN this morning. If the forum wants to discuss the idea then we should be allowed to do so.
Change the title and let it be.
Wondered the same thing, there have been PLENTY of rumor threads on here. Heck the Gruden/Manning situation started as all rumor last year and that thread went on for weeks.
-
1 hour ago, J@son said:
When has irsay EVER been one to shy away from spending big money on his team?
When was the last time the Colts needed a rebuild from top to bottom? Irsay admitted they looked at other QB's and the price was too high. I don't know how Jim can make it any more clear for you.
-
1 hour ago, J@son said:
He paid $4 mil for kerry collins to play in 3 games.
On a team that was a title contender with a healthy Manning. Manning never made it back but that was not unreasonable to do that in hopes they could stay afloat until Manning returned. Even with Luck this team isn't even a division winner. Big difference.
-
7 minutes ago, Superman said:
That's a drastic "if," based on what we know.
We know nothing of what goes on behind closed doors, it's speculation on both sides. We have Irsay saying they looked at other options but the price was too high. Take it for what it's worth. Irsay hasn't been afraid to spend in the past, but most of those teams were contending teams and good to great players. I don't think spending for a rental QB in a rebuilding year would have been wise so i give Jim credit.
-
9 minutes ago, J@son said:
I've never said anything to the contrary. In fact in another thread I was debating with someone who said it was Chuck alone and I don't agree with that, Ballard shares some of the blame as well.
Does Ballard and Chuck deserve all the blame if they recommended pursuing another option but the owner refused to spend the money to bring the guy in?
-
11 minutes ago, J@son said:
He clearly said they missed in terms of Tolzien. What else do you want him to say?
He can say whatever he wants, thats what happens here on this message board. In terms of missing on Tolzein, thats not exactly a great look for the first time GM and coach Pagano, agree? Is it concerning that the 2 guys apparently thought Tolzein was the answer when pretty much everyone with any common sense knew that he wasn't? Not like it took a rocket scientist to predict that Tolzein performance on Sunday. Now after one game they finally think maybe they should find another starter? Of course, this is only if you believe that Ballard really thought Tolzein was the answer, which i don't. I think the decision to roll with Mr. T came from up above.
-
16 minutes ago, deedub75 said:
I don't believe they are tanking. I do believe that they either thought Luck was going to be ready for the regular season so it made no sense to go out and sign a veteran QB to fill in only to release him relatively quickly, or they knew Luck was going to miss several games and the team isn't talented enough to win without a franchise QB playing. I also believe Chuck was retained because Irsay couldn't get the coach he wanted so Chuck is here to weather this rebuild.
Pretty much where i stand as well. They knew they weren't good enough without Luck so they made the decision to roll with Scott instead of pay up for another QB and just deal with the punches as they come. Honestly, i can't say that i blame them, this is a rebuilding project and the fastest way to a rebuild is high draft selections coupled with some good free agent pickups. A capable backup QB could keep you competitve, maybe get ya another 8-8 type of season, but is that really in the best interest of the franchise right now? I would say no. And i fully agree with you on Pagano, he is a lame duck coach and his players know it. He wouldn't be here right now had Gruden said yes. He is gone at the end of the season at the latest, might be sooner if we keep taking 46-9's every week. Irsay kept him here becuase he couldn't find his replacement for the 2nd straight offseason and knows this year is a lost cause anyway.
-
1 minute ago, Superman said:
Irsay has never shied away from spending money, and Ballard doesn't make roster decisions on the basis of contract status.
It's very obvious that their evaluation of the QB position led them to believe Tolzien would be good enough to handle the job in the short term. That contributed to not signing another QB to a bigger contract. It's also very obvious that they were wrong about Tolzien.
You're twisting this into a tanking conspiracy, when the simple and easy to understand explanation is that they missed badly on Tolzien.
I never used the word tanking, but when Jim Irsay goes on television and preaches patience, why do you think he does that? Is it because he expects to win a lot this coming season or does he expect to maybe take quite a few beatdowns like we saw this past Sunday? They didn't miss on Tolzein at all, they know he isn't very good. Everyone in the NFL knows that. He's never won a game for gods sake. Again, if they missed on Tolzein as you claim, what does that say about our GM and head coach, ones that Jim Irsay hired by the way?
-
4 minutes ago, Superman said:
Occam's razor. They thought Tolzien was better than he is. It's not that difficult or complicated.
LOL, if thats the case then they are in even more trouble then we think. He was so good they are considering starting a guy who has been here a little over a week in the 2nd game of the season. What does that say about our player evaluation then? I stand by my opinion that Ballard isn't that dumb, they looked at other QBs and Irsay didn't wanna spend the money, he admitted that.
-
I actually agree and i say that as someone who likes Irsay as an owner. The Polian/Dungy days are long gone and i think the last few years Irsay messed around too much in some personnel decisions. What made the Polian era so good was that Bill Polian ran the show and Jim Irsay stayed out of it and let him do it. IMO, i think our current QB fiasco has Irsay's prints all over it as well. If not, then we should all be very worried that our new GM managed to screw up the biggest position on the team in his first year. I think it's more likely Ballard was not allowed to make the move because Irsay didn't wanna spend the money on a QB in what he views as a lost season with possible high draft picks coming as a result. He was fine with taking his beatings with Tolzein. The lack of any urgency over the QB position all offseason is completely baffling if this team had any real commitment to at least trying to be competitve.
-
No surprise. I was watching WTHR's coverage of the Colts last night on there late show and Dave Calabro said he has heard Luck may miss 4 games. I won't be surprised if its longer then that, especially if this season continues to go the way it looks like it will.
Also doesn't sound like Chuck has made a decision to replace Tolzein yet due to Brissett not knowing the playbook. Ridiculous they are even in this situation.
-
The Colts can't even take points when they are being handed to them. Sad.
-
27 to 3 at half? Oh boy, i can't wait to see what it's like when they actually play a good team.
-
No need for me to admit that, i have know it for a long time. His last 3rd down throw needs to be a completion, doesn't have the arm to get the ball in there. Another quick 3 and out. Wont be much longer and this game will be an absolute beatdown. Hopefully i am wrong and as Pagano says Tolzein can "manage" us into a respectable defeat.
-
Pagano in mid season form already. Wow. Guy is absolutely worthless as a head coach.
-
1 minute ago, DaColts85 said:
On PUP he could not practice though. It would have been a bigger setback having him miss those 6 weeks plus another 1 or 2 due to practice.
That's true, but many people think him coming off PUP was fact that he will not miss all that many games. I don't buy that. Him coming off PUP was an easy decision. You want to keep the interest of the fan base before the season starts. You could make an argument that if he doesn't play the first 6 weeks that you simply wasted a roster spot. I won't argue that however because it's a rebuilding year anyway and the guy taking his spot likely wouldn't have made much a difference. The chance that Luck might come back is worth keeping him off PUP.
-
Not a chance. He's not even practiced and once he starts he will likely need several of them to be game ready. I won't be surprised if he misses more then the 6 games that PUP would have covered, although my official prediction is week 5 at home versus the 9ers if everything goes right.
-
4 minutes ago, J@son said:
because yeah, the Colts would have definitely made sure Luck was on the active roster week 1 if they thought there was still a chance he wouldn't even play this year.
Wasn't Manning on the active roster the year he didn't play a game?
They left Luck on the active roster the year he lacerated his kidney as well, and he never played another game.
The Colts will put there starting QB on the active roster if there is a chance he might play, doesn't always mean he will.
-
20-3 Rams
-
1 minute ago, IndyScribe said:
Ballard said that he was being really conservative with Luck and that they would monitor his progress. Ballard also described his a in great shape mentally.
Which is a bit contradictory to what Irsay was saying the other night on the broadcast. Irsay kinda hinted that some of the issue was mental.
-
No surprise at at all. I think he misses 4 games, comes back in the home game against the 9ers, right before all the divisonal games start. Ballard said he is in the "training stage" currently.
The crazy notion that Luck is unhappy....../ Luck Rumor not true/ Clearing the air ( (merge))
in Colts Football
Posted
No, it's not entirely different. Manning suffered his setback before the regular season even started. They knew the problem they had with him. They could have easily put him on I.R. Sure, they "thought" Luck might return in 2015, kinda like they "think" Luck might return this year.