VocableLoki
-
Posts
458 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by VocableLoki
-
-
1 hour ago, deedub75 said:
If Pagano has a say in which GM candidate is chosen, we may not get the best one. So is Irsay going to hire the GM who is the friendliest to Pagano or is he going to hire the best candidate?
The best candidate. If Irsay thinks, say, Ballard is absolutely the best but he absolutely won't come if Pagano stays(I don't believe the "report" but neither here nor there) I have to imagine Irsay let's him go.
the only way that happens is if they hate Pagano (doubtful) or if they want Shanahan, as he will likely be the only coach candidate not available going forward.
-
Of course they are meeting with Pags. They probably want to understand his vision going forward.
-
1 hour ago, #12. said:
Free year? Yes, let's blow all our cap space to fill out the defense of a guy who will likely be fishing and searching for Sasquatch in Colorado a year from now.
Eh? Ballard would have a year to evaluate the team without pressure and could still bring in quality defensive players. It's not like we need Pagano specific guys, just talent. Gives him a year to evaluate Pags as well.
Is Sasquatch in Colorado now?
-
56 minutes ago, gnet550 said:
Brad wells reporting he heard Ballard is clear favorite with Paton in second...sticking point is Ballard wants to fire Pagano because Taub is his guy...
dont know what what it's worth Corinth from Brad
This feels dubious. Ballard would take the interview under the assumption that Pagano is the coach for at least this year. Not sure why he would completely dig his heels in the ground over what would essentially be a free year for him (if we don't have a good year, he can just fire Chuck). Seems like another unverified thing that can easily be retracted on, i.e. "they came to an agreement." Doubt Irsay would want this getting out if true, however.
-
4 hours ago, dudeski said:
all of this is wrong
4 hours ago, dudeski said:no i don't
Eloquent
-
2 minutes ago, Jason_S said:
come on now...dollars aren't the only thing that matters to every free agent. Sure that probably applies to the vast majority, but every year we hear about players who took a little less money to go to a contender, or to go to a team with a specific coach they wanted to play for, or they were looking for a team with a solid QB etc etc.
There's a team that specializes in getting players to do this, having trouble coming up with the name. I think their logo looks like a flying elvis.
-
4 minutes ago, Gabriel Alexander Morillo said:
I have a 4 foot long Bosc Monitor living with two Boxers right now. I've seen stranger things...
'Tis a Ghostbusters quote
-
9 hours ago, OffensivelyPC said:
I couldnt even imagine. The reaction would be louder than Trump's election, the guys at ESPN would lose their minds, youd hear the cries of grown men and their wives and children, the earth would reverse rotation, and the magnetic poles reversed.
Cats and dogs living together...mass hysteria!
-
38 minutes ago, Majin Vegeta said:
Bruhhhh he is our coach for 2017! Been said atleast 47 times.
Letspropitup is tweeting a press conference will announce Chuck is out next Tuesday. Bill Belichick is rumored to have met with Irsay about the job...
-
20 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
I would rather be 2-14 with Andrew Luck. At least that would get us Myles Garrett in the draft this year and we'd, in reality, be much better than that with a franchise QB. 8-8 is the worst you can be, just bad enough to miss the playoffs, and just good enough to be out of contention for elite draft picks. We aren't even like a Giants type 8-8 that can possibly beat elite teams. The Pats and Steelers beat us every time, and we don't have much chance against any playoff team.
People bring up the Pats and Steelers record a lot but other than those two (the best teams in our conference) Chuck isn't inept against elite teams. He has a winning record against Denver, Green Bay and Kansas City and has beaten Seattle, Haurbaugh's 49ers, etc.
The consistency isn't there but we have been more competitive against good teams than most would think in the Luck era.
-
8 hours ago, Coltfreak said:
Must have been Pep Hamilton then
So Pep is good for 3 wins and 2 playoff wins? He must be the best coordinator in football, shame we lost him. In all seriousness, our defense has never been good during the Luck era but that defense was certainly better than the one we have now. Offenses seem more or less even, slightly better O-Line now.
-
52 minutes ago, Superman said:
It was too backloaded. They did a six year contract worth $120m, and the cap hit in the first two years only accounted for ~$20m of the total value of the contract. That means the last four years would have to account for $100m on the cap. The Ravens knew full well that they would have to extend Flacco again, and that's what they did. But now they had to give him a raise, and from 2013-16, they've paid him a total of $106m cash ($26.5m/year), and not all of that is on the cap yet... but it will be. That guy threw 20 TDs and 15 INTs this year (but at least he finally hit 4,000 yards!)
He's decidedly average, even above average. When he gets hot, he can have a four game stretch like he did in the 2012 playoffs. They didn't have much choice but to give him a big contract, but they didn't have to backload it so heavily.
I always said they should have structured it with moderate increases each year, not super low hits up front with sharp increases after Year 3. The Packers did a much more balanced contract with Rodgers, and even the Colts with Luck.
Thanks!
-
9 minutes ago, Coltfreak said:
Poor coaching and decision making
We have the same coach?
-
6 minutes ago, Superman said:
I think the Vikings have a very strong roster, especially based on their draft picks over the last five years. They are QB challenged, and they have some other issues, like health of their best players. But I happen to like what they've done in the draft -- a lot of their players I've had highly rated, from top picks to later guys -- and I like their free agency decisions.
As for DeCosta, I think the Ravens got old, and they structured their Flacco contract poorly, which has kind of limited them. Their scouting/drafting is still on point, IMO.
My reservation about both of them is they come from front offices that are more reserved, kind of nervous about free agency, etc. But they both come from good personnel departments.
Specific to the Flacco issue: I thought it was a bad contract at the time too but it's a tough position to be in having to renegotiate after that playoff run. Is there some other way they could have structured it to make it less heavy? I'm no good at understanding contracts.
-
23 hours ago, Coltfreak said:
There is more talent on this yrs squad that there was the r we went to the AFCCG
Hard to argue an 11-5 that won two playoff games has more talent than an 8-8 one that beat one(?) playoff team all season.
-
17 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:
Colts want to interview Ravens’ Eric DeCosta for G.M. job
...Would DeCosta have any interest in working for the Colts when he has shown little interest in leaving Baltimore for other teams? He might, for a couple reasons.
For one, he has a good relationship with Colts head coach Chuck Pagano, who was a Ravens assistant for four years before he went to Indianapolis. For another, the Colts have Andrew Luck, which would mean the hardest part of a G.M.’s job — finding a franchise quarterback — is already done in Indianapolis.
Still, getting DeCosta to Indianapolis seems like a long shot...
Good relationship with Pagano? Not interested.
-
Ben likes to let everyone know when he's hurt, when things aren't going well, etc. This seems doubtful but would change power in the AFC if it comes true.
-
4 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
You are pretty much correct, I don't like Pagano. Raye I'm indifferent at. I don't have an opinion of him because I know nothing about him. The only reason I'm so against him being GM is his relationship with Pagano, and I don't believe Pagano will be motivated to coach as well as he would if a different GM came and was down his throat every game. I don't want another wasted year, and if Raye shows up, we'll probably get that from Pagano. I don't dislike Raye. He probably wouldn't be the weak link, Pagano would. Even if Raye is a solid upgrade at GM, it would make Pagano a downgrade as Coach even from the last two years. I don't want Raye by association with Pagano, that's all. he could be great.
Hasn't it been said that Raye was one of the only guys to consistently take a stand against Grigson? I don't think there's a lot of reason to think that Raye isn't going to hold Pagano to high standards, especially given that he will have a lot of prove as a new GM here.
A lot of your statements are working under the assumption that Pagano is a sly person, which just could not be farther from how he acts most of the time. It's more likely that he endorsed Raye because Pagano thinks he will be a good GM.
-
1 hour ago, HOF19 said:
We can talk Pagano.....Grigson.......yada....yada.....yada..... all the live long day. I live in NY metro area. Fell in love with Johnny U in 1963. Been die hard Colt fan since. Feel helpless because very possibly have THE WORST OWNER IN ALL OF PROFESSIONAL SPORTS IN THIS COUNTRY !!! To work myself up to have hope for a good future( lets say next 10 years) with this team..... with THIS OWNER requires a lot of hard ...hard..........HARD !!! WORK. Will an Irsay owned team ever set foot in another Super Bowl ??? That's what every Colt fan on this planet must ask themselves !!!
-
20 minutes ago, stitches said:
Yep, I don't think the overall record SHOULD be the main part of Pagano's grade as a coach, but this has been the case for the last 5 years. He's been feasting on weak division and then getting annihilated by the best teams in the league. Irsay himself used the 11-5 thing as a reason why Pagano and Grigson did good job just the other day on his press-conference. What makes us think that he's really evaluating Pagano on his performance vs the best, rather than his overall record? And if he hasn't done it before, what makes us think he will do it in the future?
I don't think it is this easy, otherwise Pagano would probably not have made it this long. The problem is that he flashes the ability to put together good game plans and compete with good teams (Broncos, Seahawks, Packers, etc) it's just not at a consistent level. The problem is that our team gets blown out or wins in close games against these teams, not a lot of "respectable losses."
-
8 minutes ago, Majin Vegeta said:
He better take the interview, and pass it with flying colors.
I don't know anything about him but Minnesota has done a good job putting talent together in the last 4 years or so. It seems like they have mostly been really unlucky with injuries this past season.
-
-
Must be easy to lob shots when your dad owns a great NFL team and your coach/GM built it for you.
-
2 hours ago, ColtsAC said:
Concerning the comments that Pagano is the worst Colts coach ever...look up Rod Dowhower and Frank Kush among others. Pagano most definitely is not the worst.
He's not even the worst coach of the past twenty years here.
GM Candidates, including Jimmy Raye (merge)
in Colts Football
Posted
Since Pagano has been in the league 4 coaches, which could be 5, have won a Super Bowl. I think about 6 current head coaches have won a Super Bowl in their career. Either a vast majority of coaches cannot take a team to the promised land, or it's a poor way to judge a coach.