stitches

March 17

Just now, NFLfan said:

It defies logic. I keep saying to myself that there must be more to this.

Let me put it like this... if you put Fields in as a RB... he might be more valuable than a 6th round pick...

March 17

8 hours ago, NFLfan said:

@stitches I think they were desperate to free themselves of Fields. I'm not sure why. They received almost nothing in return. Poles did not draft Fields; so, he did not have any attachment to him.

I wonder what Bears fans think. They liked Fields a lot. I think the Steelers got a steal.

Yeah... I didn't think Fields is their guy, but what they got is almost criminal.

March 17

2 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

You realize he has to pass a physical before a trade is official.

Literally all of those signings and trades are conditional on the player passing a physical(including the deals the Colts have signed already). This usually doesn't stop a trade being announced if it is indeed done. My guess at this point is - it's not done and likely not going to get done at all.

March 17

7 minutes ago, Moe said:

That’s one heck of a deal, I’m jealous thinking back to the Carson Wentz trade!

Hell, Darnold was traded for 2nd, 4th and 6th... How the hell does Fields not get you at least one day 2. Picket got better return... Sam freaking Howell got better pick. HOW? :dunno:

March 16

21 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

lol

👀👀

Am I doing this right?

Just now, ColtStrong2013 said:

he speaks for all of us keeping up…

Nice!

March 16

When we know how the Colts and Ballard act on the market IMO it's almost certain that either the deal is done or the deal is not happening at all. I don't think I ever remember any big contract being negotiated by the Colts through the media. This just doesn't happen... like EVER. This is not Ballard's modus operandi. He does everything in the dark. When you hear about the deal it's usually already done. So... this line of thinking kind of gives credence to both versions - either the deal is done and just not announced yet(the more time passes the less likely this is BTW), or the Colts are not as close to a deal as a lot of people think and it's possible either agents or the Chiefs are using the Colts to leverage another team to give more(money and/or picks).

Honestly. I usually believe in what Destin reports, but in this case it kind of looks to me like too much time has passed without official confirmation and at this point if I had to bet my money on something it's probably that the Colts don't trade for Snead at all.

March 16

22 minutes ago, w87r said:

So if that report is true and we are giving up our 3rd and pick next year (likely 3rd or 4th).

The that leaves the first 2 rounds open for WR/TE, LB or S.

Still hoping to bring in a couple vets back there, but maybe they really like Nubin?

Also would love to get Peyton Wilson or Cooper in the 2nd round. Big need.

It's probably conditional of some sort, 3d that becomes a 2nd or 4th that becomes a third if certain condition is met.

March 16

I continue not being a fan of trading premier picks for player that at the same time needs to get paid top of the market money unless it's absolutely elite player. And as good as Sneed is, I'm not certain he's quite at that level. At the same time I would feel like a hypocrite for criticizing Ballard for not addressing pass defense and then when he does, not being happy with the move, so I guess depending on the compensation I might have some mixed feelings if it happens... :dunno:

March 15

March 15

4 hours ago, DougDew said:

Good for HOU. They probably have enough good talent needing to be absorbed already (QB, LT, and 2 EDGES) and will now have more picks to fill support positions and depth.

Does he play RT or LT? I thought he washed as a LT, but maybe not.

He was second team all pro LT in 2022. He's been very good to great for the last 3 years.

March 15

5 minutes ago, NFLfan said:

Of course! And @stitches is dependable. If he will be unavailable for his draft selection, he will send you a list of players that he would like to draft so that you are not waiting for him.

Yah, usually the draft is happening during my sleep time so I have to send the picks in advance to the commissioner. BTW ... With the first pick in the draft the Chicago Bears select Caleb Williams

March 15

Aaron Donald just retired! Wow! The best defensive player of this generation and one of the best ever... Congrats to him for an amazing career.

March 15

For the record I will continue insisting that the biggest problem of this team's defensive philosophy is not Gus Bradley, but rather - Chris Ballard. Ballard is the one who wants to run that type of scheme. This is why he hired Eberflus and then Bradley and this is why he will hire another apple from the same tree even if Bradley is gone.

March 15

March 15

5 hours ago, chad72 said:

If that means Brian Thomas Jr. or Rome Odunze falls to us, I’d be fine with that too

It just means the Chargers are almost for certain picking a WR, because they lost both their best receivers this off-season. And the Cardinals losing Hollywood Brown almost certainly means they will be picking WR too. So... 4 and 5 will be WRs. And if the Pats decide to go with WR over QB then this means all top 3 WRs will be gone by 5. And if not... the Giants at 6 have severe lack of receivers ... Titans... Jets... Broncos...

March 15

5 hours ago, chad72 said:

Keenan Allen traded to The Bears

BTW this is very interesting. The Chargers are losing both of their top receivers this off-season. Wonder what their plan is to provide weapons to Herbert.

March 15

6 hours ago, ArmchairQB said:

Generally speaking week one is where all the sexy FA’s get overpaid. Unless he sees something so important he needs to throw all caution to the wind I think it’s not terrible to let the dust settle.

Like... backup nose tackle...

March 15

5 hours ago, chad72 said:

He sent a fax that wasn’t received (Faxgate) j/k

What was the expression... Fax don't care about your feelings... or something like that...

March 15

3 hours ago, VikingsFanInChennai said:

I think he was with Shanahan in 49ers before that, he was a good WR4... competition in camp, and could serve in designed plays and few snaps every game.

@stitchescould switch team if he desires. And, at this rate, he may not have any picks left to draft anyway

No worries... I will see this through despite Ryan Poles' best efforts to deprive me of every pick... BTW... it's possible by the end of it I might have just a couple of picks

March 15

3 hours ago, NFLfan said:

4th round pick. @stitches You have one less pick for the Bears. Hopefully the Bears trade Fields for picks.

:woah: .... :Cry:

March 14

16 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Interesting…. You think CSMOPARS post supports your position. I thought he supported my position.

If it turns out Irsay said he wanted to draft a young QB shortly after the Luck retirement I think that would be a terrible look for Irsay and he’d lose whatever credibility he had. Because he’s made public comments to the contrary.

I think it's normal for the owner to support his GM in public with whatever decision they are making in the moment. Irsay supported Ballard and Reich about Wentz publicly too, but we now know that behind the scenes he was not sold on Wentz from the start. I guess we would never know for sure if Irsay really wanted us to draft a QB after Luck retired, or if what he's saying 2 years later is revisionist history to make himself look better. :dunno: I guess it's up for everybody to decide for themselves whether to believe Irsay or not.

March 14

5 minutes ago, csmopar said:

There was a creditable report but it was post Wentz debacle. Otherwise, I’ve not see. Any

I think you are correct... it was after the Wentz thing and it was either in a Holder or Keefer piece where they had a lot of quotes from Irsay, but yah... the report was that Irsay supposedly preferred us to draft and develop our next QB pretty much from the start. I might try to find it later, but it's hard to do 2 years later...

March 14

9 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Him and Frank AND Irsay too. That’s important. The team was built to win then, and they needed a veteran QB and not a rookie.

There were reports that Irsay wanted us to draft and grow our next QB pretty much from the start after Luck retired, but he trusted Ballard and Reich and let them proceed with their plan.

March 14

1 minute ago, Goatface Killah said:

But your big example is Frankie Luvu who doesnt even fit our scheme and was on the worst team in the league last year.

Has he ever been on a winning team? So why would he help turn us into a winning team then if we are so bad? I honestly dont get it.

And Joe Thomas never was on a winning team and still he was the best OT of his generation. There are good players on bad teams. Frankie Luvu is just the easiest and most obvious example about the difference of what I think we needed vs what we got. I'm not stuck on him specifically. There are other LBs that could have helped with coverage and disrupting the passer more than Franklin.

1 minute ago, Goatface Killah said:

For every team you can point to that builds a team the way you think it should be built, and is successful, I can point to 2 that are complete failures and have the same philosophy.

It only works if you have the QB. Thats just about all that truly matters. These teams are all very close to one another in overall talent. The QB is usually the difference. The Chiefs arent 2x defending champs because they have Chris Jones or Travis Kelce. They are 2x defending champs because they have Patrick Mahommes. Thats it. The 49ers are way more talented than them offensively and still lost to the Chiefs because of 1 guy. Mahommes. Thats how big of a deal it is. And they get solid QB play.

On that I can agree to some degree... the QB is the most important piece bar none. But still ... the QB is still less than half of the equation here. Hitting on a QB affords you opportunities and the QB can cover for a lot of shortcomings of your roster. But still... hitting on a QB doesn't absolve you from the responsibility of building a good roster... because when you go to the playoffs, you will meet other teams with great QBs ... and some of them will have strong rosters in addition to the strong QB.

1 minute ago, Goatface Killah said:

We have been playing with poor to average QB play. Thats why we havent been better. Our record is not an indictment of our overall talent level. We have avoided being horrible most years regardless because the rest of our team is actually pretty good.

QB play has a strong impact on our play on offense. On D, our roster construction and talent, defensive philosophy and coaching are the things that matter most. Majority of this is on Ballard.

BTW not having a great QB play is on Ballard too. And this is not hindsight, either. The moment Luck retired my contention has been that we need to go find our next QB from the draft ASAP. This is another philosophical disagreement I had with Ballard for the 3 years after Luck's retirement. Him and Reich wanted vets...

March 14

4 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

That's all I wanted to hear from Flacco. Right now having a vet backup with the experience and desire to work with our young QB is very important and he seems to be excited about that possibility. :thmup:

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Gallery

Events

Blogs

Posts posted by stitches