ColtRider
-
Posts
2,381 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by ColtRider
-
-
8 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
The Steelers were in the SB in 1995, they lost to the Cowboys that season so they have been in 8 total just like the Patriots = 1974/1975/1978/1979/1995/2005/2008/2010. The Broncos have also been in 8 total = 1977/1986/1987/1989/1997/1998/2013/2015. The Cowboys have also been in 8 total = 1970/1971/1975/1977/1978/1992/1993/1995. The Steelers have won 6 and the Cowboys 5 so both franchises are better than the Patriots all-time as the Patriots have won 4 of the 8 they have been in.
Should've been us in '95, doggone it.
Pittsburgh got too many breaks in that 4th quarter of the AFCCG.
-
I like 'em. However, if they toned down the shades of "rush" color/vividness it might be more accepted. How you do that with "all white"? I have no clue.
-
12 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:
I'm not denying his skills but the Colts have no use for Ragland. They need someone who can cover. He cant.
There's no sense in me trying to convince you or others about him. Preconceived notions are just that. We disagree. That's fine. His play in the NFL will dictate the outcome. I can wait.
-
4 hours ago, RockThatBlue said:
I don't understand the dislike of Ragland on here. He's not my first choice but he will be a fine NFL player more than likely.
Ragland's dominating play & leadership in the SEC was enough for me to conclude being a Top 1-2 LB. Jack, Smith, Wright, & Jones all fall behind this kid by "total package" LBs. Whoever ends up with RR has a potential game-changing/wrecker of a LB. And most likely sooner than later.
-
2 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:
Here's what I posted in another thread-
As far as draft for need vs. BPA, if the need guy is pretty close in grade to the BPA guy, go for the need player. But if there is a notable difference in grade, you really must go BPA within the first 3 rounds, IMO. Here is why-
Drafting the best available player over need in at least the draft’s first three rounds leads to an overall higher level of talent for the team roster. Many teams (including Grigson) employ this method, trusting in their scouts and their own scouting capability for playing grade assessment.On the other hand is the “need-based” type draft team. I have quite a few issues with this:
1. You will always pass up more talented players (which your opponent greedily accepts) in the name of short term fixes.
2. Your needs today will not be the same as your needs tomorrow. In a game as violent as professional football, one play, one injury often changes that “needs assessment” drastically.
3. Draft pick misses are magnified, as your focus was so narrow (1-3 positions), you ignored other players with star potential at other positions.
4. You limit your trade options, and you limit your flexibility.
Dorsett wasn't a 'need' last year. But this year he might well have been, but we already have him, so we can move on.
Most NFL teams & their boards will try and stick to the formula of :
BPA + Need = BGA. By sticking to your scouts, judgment, and overall grading system of your team and not reaching for either one (depending on scale & grade) this usually works out best. Temptations can get to the best of the best. By adhering to your draft plan before the board goes up (barring catastrophe/major change) & staying true to that board from then on, thwarts making mistakes. Very rarely does a pick work out according to need only. The combination of all the variables going into the draft should be recognized beforehand, thus making for a good draft.
Most fans do not realize how much time & effort the entire selection(s) process takes from start to finish. It's a TON of work by the scouts, coaches, GM & owner, to land a common consensus that eventually scripts out the final goal on draft day.
By reading Superman, ColtsBlueFL, & NewColtsFan posts in this thread will bode well for all wanting to know how drafts work for most NFL teams.
-
Ragland bashers : Better hope this guy doesn't land in the AFC South if Colts can't grab him.
-
17 hours ago, RockThatBlue said:
I saw that pic of the browns jersey with all the qbs they've been through since 1999 and its unreal. It made me realize how lucky we've been to go through the Peyton years and now the Luck era.
Could you imagine nearly 30 different starting QBs in about a 20 year span? Unbelievable.
Sure the Colts aren't perfect but the last 15+ years have been amazing.
Agreed. Being in the right place at the right time has served the franchise well over the last 17 years. No matter how you got there, it happened. The second aspect to all of this is, these two QBs being in the right place at the right time if you're a ColtsFan. So, it's a double luck parlay, having the worst losing record for the #1 selection and Manning & Luck happen to be standing there in each of their respective draft years. 1998 & 2012.
If we're not lucky, please define it.
-
27 minutes ago, NorthernBlue said:
Thats............That's not cool man
Yep. That would've been one NASTY & heart-stopping AF joke.
-
1 hour ago, jvan1973 said:
This is actually far more believable
Imagine this title at 7:00am today ...
LUCK & COLTS : "Contract Dispute!" according to Agent
-
Thought it was a great April Fools joke. Forgot all about it. That makes 3-4 of us admitting it. Was a little skeptical at "Fully". Still, a good one ...Thanks csmopar.
-
Just now, krunk said:
Hey Gore ain't bad and I like some of the backs we've been looking at lately too so who knows....
True. I remember watching the '90s Cowboys with my daughter (she was 11-16 years old during that period) never forgetting her statements that she could "pad-up" behind that O-Line & get yards for Dallas. To this day, we still laugh about it. Heck, she was probably correct on some of those occasions. Some of those holes were bigger than the Grand Canyon.
But seriously, hope Frank has a lot more in his tank. So, like you said, who knows?
-
4 minutes ago, krunk said:
It's probably going to be more similar to the 90s Cowboys or todays zone running version of the Cowboys. One very good tight end, 3 very good receivers. Run focused and deep passing game.
If that ends up being the plan, wouldn't mind that a bit. But remember, the '90s Cowboys had one great asset behind that great O-Line. A guy named, Smith.
-
2 minutes ago, krunk said:
Seems to me in most Chudzinski offenses there is usually only one Top level tight end and everybody else is kind of support role. There's usually not two really good tight ends from what I can tell. Seems to be more 3 WR 1 TE focused. Not sure how much 2 tight ends we'll be doing with him.
Gotcha. Understood. Was taking the approach of protecting Luck more from the ends.
-
1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:
There will be 90 players in training camp. Need I say anymore?
True enough. It's just the TE position that caught me a little off guard. With Fleener gone, and Doyle/Swoope behind Allen. 2TE sets the norm maybe?
-
4 hours ago, CptHooligan said:
I think I speak for everyone on the forum when I say....
"Who?"
More of a "What?" (IMO) Someone tell me, other than a backup basis, what this is all about? Allen, Doyle, Swoope, (Clear?), now McFarland. I get the replacement status. I would assume they're basing this on his USF tenure?
Splain Lucy. Splain. Anyone really know about this move?
-
5 minutes ago, Gavin said:
If anything the FA acquisitions we made over the last couple years set a couple of our rookies (at the time) back in a clear attempt to win now.
Herremans in for Thornton at RG before Herremans flopped
Trent Cole replacing Werner/Jonathan Newsome
Josh Robinson 17 carries in 5 games before benched and then let go
I agree. To me, that's been a major factor that disrupts long term goals. With the addition of the new blooded coaches and draft direction from Irsay, I'd like to think they've turned down the road of success again, instead of band-aiding what we saw from FA last year.
-
6 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:
Are you under the impression that this topic has been discussed before?
If you and I had a dollar for every time this has been talked about, we'd all be rich!
The Colts.com website people talk about it too. They recently had a story from Irsay and Pagano about how Luck needs to be smarter and slide when he runs.
This horse has been completely beaten to death.
True enough. I'm just as guilty of the ad nauseam as well. Hope the upcoming season leaves this topic dead & buried without exhumation in the future.
-
5 hours ago, jchandler7 said:
IMO its a team effort. Luck is to blame for some of it and the O-line is to blame for alot of it. However,what alot of people fail to mention is our receivers. Our WR's need to do a better job getting open as well. I seen far to many games where our receivers where blanketed and couldn't get any separation, hence Luck holding onto the ball to long, taking sacks and throwing ints.
That's going to change. On all fronts. An OL in the draft/rest of FA/ along with upgrading the defense. A more important aspect of answer might just reside in the newly acquired coaches across the board. Luck will be a lot better making decisions IMO coupled with an improved OLine. If ZBS is the solution & direction, I think we'll be in decent shape. It's the defense that worries me. We've got to improve & lance out the old scheme with the addition of Monachino. That'll come with new players & existing roster stays/exits that conform to his new scheme/style of play/system.
-
4 hours ago, BOTT said:
I tend to side with Satan, but that's another thread.
Whoa! Okay. And you're correct. A thread, that in all likelihood, we do not see on this forum. Gotta be honest with you, man. That startled me.
-
11 hours ago, Gavin said:
I don't think its an either or situation. I think you can have both. As a matter of fact I think you need a balance of both but at the end of the day you can more easily scheme a Linebacker like Jones for example into being affective as a down hill thumper provided he's a good tackler. There is no defensive scheme on the planet a Coordinator can think up that will save him if he has a roster full of Linebackers that cant cover and have no awareness in a short zone or god forbid in Man coverage. I also don't think those guys just go in the first couple rounds(Speaking of Linebackers that can do both cover and play the run). What separates the best coordinators on defense from middle of the line or below coordinators is the best D Coordinators use the players strengths that they have to benefit the entire defense as a whole
Agree with your last sentence. Man, do I ever agree. But, the Colts haven't enjoyed a hard knocks LB or corps since the likes of Mike Curtis & Ted Hendricks IMO. Gary Brackett was a good LB, but not on par with the greats. This is what my anticipation is all about. A very good to great defense for the Colts. I've just been of the mindset for quite some time that the LB corps is the ignition & starting point for that reality to happen.
Like you've stated, it really comes down to what type of defense & coordinator the franchise wants to employ. So, there are several thoughts on this. My thought is grabbing a formidable LB who can play & provide a hard-hitting mentality from sideline to sideline while exuding great leadership & offensive reads, and spilling that notion & inspiration into the other defensive players.
Whatever type of LB can do that? I'm all in on.
-
13 hours ago, BOTT said:
Praise Jesus
I do. Everyday.
-
3 minutes ago, BOTT said:
boy, the bullshipp is getting deep in here.
I have neither the time or inclination.
-
Lions fans are hurt far more by Barry Sanders retiring early than Calvin Johnson. Sanders made Detroit a playoff contender year in & out. The guy was phenomenal. Only in the league 10 seasons. Incredible.
By the way -- Swann, Alworth, Biletnikoff, Warfield, C. Branch, Maynard, S. Smith, Fitzgerald, Rice, Moss, Irvin, Berry. Oh no, that's 12, not 10, better than Calvin IMO.
By the double way -- Nothing wrong with being a homer by fanaticism.
-
4 hours ago, Gavin said:
One of my favorite players in the draft. These alignments best describe how he should be used to be most affective in my opinion http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000375711/article/big-nickel-package-emerging-as-nfls-hottest-defensive-trend
That was a good read on the big nickel Ds. How far the NFL gets away from empty backfields on a continual basis via the pass-happy league is anyone's guess. It's trendy right now. And, in a lot of situations it works. The faster and more agile LBs are all the rave. However, I'll take a guy like a "downhill-thumping, hole-plugging, sideline to sideline monster" any day of the week. These are the guys who have won SBs. And in some cases, multiple ones. Guess I'm too old-schooled NFL.
Pittsburgh got too many breaks in that 4th quarter of the AFCCG.
I have neither the time or inclination.
Predict: What Need Doesn't Get Adressed
in NFL Draft, Scouting, and Free Agent Talk
Posted
Like you Defjamz26, it just may be the RB position. A lot of holes to fill. It is my sincerest hope that this draft culminates with heavy defense & some OL help. I've stated this for years about intensifying the defense with playmakers. Without it, the road to Super Bowls might as well be covered with razor blades.