BPindy
-
Posts
887 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by BPindy
-
-
I’d be kind of interested in Martavis Bryant. JuJu has firmly taken his spot on that team and if the organization is a good influence on him, he could thrive here imo
-
1 hour ago, Narcosys said:
Its not good news.
He can be as close as he wants but we don't know if he can throw or not and we won't know if he needs a surgery until he throws.
Thats not necessarily true at all. It may determine how slow they need to take the process or how to progress him, but there’s plenty of tests/measures/imaging to be done to see if the tissue is properly healed. If the bicep tendon wasn’t healing by now he would’ve had another surgery.
Im not exactly taking this as good news until he’s practicing again, but it’s not bad news.
-
1 minute ago, Superman said:
Yeah, I'm with you there. But I do think we need three new starters, and I don't want to continue relying on Clark, Haeg, Vuj, Good in any meaningful capacity.
We've suffered enough, I agree! If Vuj even makes the roster I'll be pretty disappointed.
-
2 minutes ago, Superman said:
Why not have a good OL and a good scheme?
Not to mention the importance of run blocking, especially in short yardage situations.
Oh I'm all for both! I was mainly speaking to the people I've seen/talked to that think we need to spend all of our money and draft capital on the O-line. Like throw money at Norwell, Pugh, and spend 2 of our first 3 picks on it. Bringing in Norwell would be huge, and then with some decent upgrades this offense would thrive. Luck being back and with a better scheme will do just as much for running lanes as FA acquisitions will.
-
I am all for breaking the bank for Norwell (assuming the Panthers don't find a way to keep him), but he's the only one. A couple draft picks for the line, and then let McDaniels go to work constructing the quick-pass offense. We won't need to try and spend all of our resources on the o-line if the offense is actually tailored to take pressure off of them like it should.
-
1 hour ago, MB-ColtsFan said:
Well, to be Phair, he did make it to a SB, lol.
Fixed it for you!
-
2 hours ago, Narcosys said:
Cool thanks for all the feedback. That's enough to kill it. It was just a thought really. You all put up some great info and I really appreciate.
No worries, I appreciate all the thought you put into this league!
-
18 hours ago, chad72 said:
I disagree with the bolded statement. Most good teams score consistently to a certain average. If Hulce was so good, he should have been able to control what his team scored better. On average Team Trueblood scored more, period. 2 out of 3 losses for Hulce, he scored 98.4 and 101.6, well below his season average, also the weeks his opponent scored 144 and 163 respectively, thus making the PA lop sided in his favor if we were to agree to your theory. So, he was not even competitive, I could clearly make that argument there. Since Week 5, Team Trueblood has not scored below 137.
Since teams change, and there is a lot of flux during the course of a season with waiver moves and trades, we are not talking about same teams over the course of a season either. So, the only true gauge of how a player has adapted is how they have continued to score and improve i.e. control their own team. PA is just as much chance in reality as PF but PF is something a team GM can control to an extent by playing match ups.
That is why PF should remain as tie-breaker over PA, IMO. Again, since teams change so much, the strength of schedule changes too if a good team goes bad or if a bad team goes good. The safest barometer is PF. That is my vote.
@Narcosys I also agree with this
-
48 minutes ago, Btown_Colt said:
Not sure I had an argument. Just offered you a trade. Ok, I have and will trade you the Jaguars D, Eagles D, Succop, and Gostkowski for your #1 WR and #2 RB. That’s the #1 and #2 D along with the #3 and #4 kickers. A 4-2 player trade.
now you’re just being purposefully ignorant man
-
2 hours ago, Btown_Colt said:
Ok, I’ll trade you my kicker for your #1 WR or RB anytime you’d like. Heck I’ll even throw my D in as well for icing on the cake! Seriously no kicker is worth Julio Jones....
Well Forbath is currently averaging more points than Ajayi and only 3 less than Jones, so I don’t really see how that helps your argument. Obviously no one would do that straight up, but it was a part of a 4-2 player trade.
And by by the way, defenses have single handedly won me a few games.
-
44 minutes ago, Narcosys said:
What about defensive scoring and removing divisions?
There is also the idea of lottery selection.
Similar to selecting by reverse standings except it's like the nba draft with lottery. The worse you did, the more entries you have.
I’m fine with defensive scoring as it is. As for divisions, I like how my other league does it. The divisions stay so you still face those teams twice, but playoff seeding is best overall records.
I wouldnt be opposed to lottery system, but it seems unnecessary to me
-
And with the prior discussion, I’d vote for getting to pick your position based on reverse standings.
-
1 hour ago, Narcosys said:
Ok. Well I will be sure to avoid the trade and be sure to notify everyone beforehand and give ample opportunity to give opinions. Thanks for your input.
I didn’t see any problem with it at all. Kickers get criminally undervalued by some people
-
1 hour ago, FalseStart said:
Is he really a rare gift? Only two QBs I would put in the category. Rodgers and Brady... How many games has he or will he have missed in his career? ~20-30... IMO that is tradeable. With his health record 9-10 years would be a stretch. Thanks for your input though... Go Colts!
Well, relatively he is. When you go from Favre to Rodgers or Manning to Luck it's easy to get spoiled, but to the Jets, Browns, Jags, etc he absolutely is a rare gift. There are a lot of teams that haven't had a franchise guy in years, and that's because the draft is a dart board for the most part. I agree that Luck isn't in a league of his own or anything and has missed a lot of games, but he's still precious cargo from other teams' perspectives.
-
1 hour ago, Jared Cisneros said:
I think the only real area we differ is the number of years that we expect Luck to play here still. You are hoping 9-10, while I expect only 5-6, which is the main reasoning behind me wanting to possibly trade Luck. If Luck was healthy, this wouldn't even be a discussion. Unfortunately, he isn't though.
Fair enough!
-
38 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
Basically, my plan would be too get a QB 7 years younger in the best QB class in a long time. Have Ballard do his due diligence, and pick the right one. The top defensive player we receive will be a hit, and we can use the extra two 1st rounders to build the O-Line. I just don't have confidence Luck can overcome this offensive line how it is. If it had improved, then I'd be all for going for it with Luck, but without one, he is susceptible to injury again, and he takes a long time to release the ball as it is. Would rather rip the band-aid off and start over with a chance at Darnold. Of course, with Luck having a setback, we may get a high pick anyway, and it'll work itself out.
In a perfect world, sure. But the line wouldn't be "fixed" in time for whatever QB we bring in, and he would be just as likely to get injured as Luck behind our line. I'm just not on board trading a sure thing at the most important position in sports when drafted QBs are so hit and miss
-
36 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
See, that's the thing, people assume we will have him another 10 years and that's not likely to happen. First, he'll have to play til he's 38-39, and that's not real likely. Second, The fact that he's gotten knocked around like a pinball for the first 5 years of his career has already taken a massive toll on his body. It's unlikely he'll make it 10 more years. Third, Luck isn't getting much better, if at all. He still holds on to the ball too long, is somewhat turnover prone, and is very susceptible to slow starts in games. That may not be fixable even if Pagano goes. Lastly, he may not want to stay with us 10 more years. We can franchise tag him and all that, but that may work against us actually winning a SB at the end of his career, and that'll truly be Luck's ultimate goal before his career is all said and done.
Luck had his most efficient year last year, and that was playing through this shoulder injury. I'm more confident in him playing well for even another 5-6 years than I am picking up another solid franchise QB in the draft. So many busts/journeyman types that don't prove anything. Hence why the Jags and Browns have been stuck for years.
Just as you say we can't know that Luck will play another 10 years, we absolutely don't know that those hypothetical 3 first rounders (which no one would give us) will get us another QB.
Im all about everyone having a price, except when it comes to a QB of Lucks caliber
-
20 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
Honestly, probably not, but anyone is tradeable for the right price, and as a GM, that's how Ballard should look at it. Just by seeing how people are flat out saying no shows they couldn't succeed as a GM in the NFL. Always entertain offers, the number 1 rule. For three 1sts and a top defensive player (Leonard Williams as a hypothetical example), I'd do it in a heartbeat. Luck is 28, and he'll be 29 before we are in shape to do anything meaningful. If you can get the value, do it.
If you have the rare gift of having a legitimate stud franchise QB for another 9-10 years, you absolutely do not trade him.
-
1 hour ago, Sikma said:
I had labrum surgery years ago on my throwing shoulder when I was in my 50s. Hurt the shoulder from baseball and lifting heavy weights. My recovery was much less than 6 months. This latest news is disturbing.
Welcome to the forum first of all!
The shoulder is a very complicated joint. No two tears are the same, especially for the labrum, and it depends on where the labrum was torn. Two different people will also heal differently. Just because Andrew is taking longer to get back doesn't mean he's screwed
-
2 hours ago, King Colt said:
EVERYONE....forget Luck he is not the Messiah. The Colts are poorly recruited, poor drafted, poorly trained poorly coached and poorly owned.
With Luck we are 4-2. No one is forgetting him.
-
Can't really say a player is regressing when he only gets two carries to prove himself.
As for Hooker, he will have highs and lows all season. Can't expect a rookie to look like an all pro all year
-
The excuse will be that he can't pick up blitzes. What he CAN do though is catch screens that neutralize blitzes...
-
2 minutes ago, Andrew86 said:
You really think Andrew Luck alone is going to be enough to fix the disaster that this team is? I don't think so but I hope you are right. I believe this team is a lot worse than people on this forum think.
I mean it happened his 1st 3 years. The defense is better than it was. If the offense could sustain drives the D would be fine
-
I cannot fathom Pagano being kept after this season. Won't be gone before then sadly. This team just can't play for 60 mins in any game.
now you’re just being purposefully ignorant man
Which WR do you go after??
in NFL Draft, Scouting, and Free Agent Talk
Posted
Yeah I know, and it’s probably just wishful thinking that he would suddenly be a model citizen here. He just has so much potential and would come cheap (because no one is buying him high - no pun intended)