Mameluc
-
Posts
2,164 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Mameluc
-
-
18 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:
You want Pagano fired. I don't. Enough said.
im baffled that you dont.
What makes you like him? His amazing time management? The fact the team gets embarrased a lot ? they are never ready?
Also calm down, its a forum. People will disagree with you.
-
23 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:
And how many of the players you have listed have been injured and not been able to all play at the same time?
everyteam deals with injuries, including manusky defense.
Excuses
-
2 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:
Offensive line?
So let me get this correct? Pagano is expected to take young inexperienced players and make good starters out of them? He is suppose to take linebackers who lack the talent to play the 3-4 defense? OK, if you say so.
I was talking about the defense because thats where his supposed mastery is coming from. It has been reported he lets chud take over the Offense by holder.
As for inexperienced, id argue simon, hankins, woods, sheard, davis, hooker, rashad, anderson, wilson is better than anything manusky had and they looked less lost. This defense looks like on fthe worst defenses
-
26 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:
He was still handcuffed to Grigson and still is. He still has to try to coach the players Grigson brought in. So Grigsons prints are still all over this team.
Defense starts a around 7-8 new players. He is not coaching a grigson built defense. He is just bad.
-
21 hours ago, rockywoj said:
The premise of what you are saying here, I think is absolutely correct, and here's why.
If you accept the statistical fact that only x% of draft picks actually work out to be a guy, then you take that guy and divide by the expected hit percentage. So for example, if we think that TY is in reality currently a first round talent (which I would say he is, pretty indisputably, based on his body of work), then for fair value you would take 1 divided by the expected hit percentage (in this example, let's say 50% - for I think 50% is about right as a success percentage, conservatively speaking -> I actually think the hit ratio is lower than 50/50, probably more like only 30%).
So any way, you take 1 / .5 = 2 firsts. I think and established player that is a valuable, still young, asset piece on your roster is ALWAYS worth more than a single draft choice. Thus, I would not entertain trading TY unless I am getting close the equivalent of two firsts, or a first - 2nd - and maybe even more. I say this because you need to have the number of picks for the probability of hitting on that pick becoming statistically probable. And even at that, say you trade him for two 1s, but one of those 1s is a fail and the other is a hit, are you really ahead simply giving up one established hit for a different hit?
Exactly, even if you nail ur 1 pick you got you only traded needs. I know there been cases where people trade their best players but thats because it helps them get better overall, in multiple places. Here you are trading one need for another.
And i rather have a 1000 yard WR than bitonio. Or most Guards for that matter. I mean if its so easy to replace a 1000 yard WR with a mid round pick then what the heck. Get a good guard with your 3rd pick.
-
21 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:
Why would you use that pick to get a WR? That's ridiculous. You'd use it on something like an O-Lineman, CB, Pass Rusher or RB. Then you'd draft a WR later and pick one up in FA. That would be the most amateur thing in the world to trade Hilton for a 2nd and to draft a WR with the same pick. I also think Cooks is a bit better than Hilton, btw. He won't have all the huge games like him, but he also won't get shut down as much either. The Pats traded for the right type of receiver for their offense. Cooks is also younger than Hilton and doesn't have his contract.
Regardless if you pick OL or whatever u still need to use a pick on WR because u have no other. You dont get better u just hope you pick correctly so u dont lose out on the trade. Which is why to me it makes no sense u dont gain anything but possiblity of getting better at another position and then having to invest again on WR.
Its stupid. U get rid of a proven asset to maybe get better somewhere else AND THATS IT. NOthing else.
So best case scenario we suck at WR and improve at OL. You still need a WR. U jsut changed needs. Isnt the whole point of trading good players getting better overall? I dont see it with your proposition.
Worse case scenario ur pick is a bust and you lost your only real weapon.
I would at least take 2 picks no way i trade him for bitonio. Or a 2nd.
You people value draft picks a lot liek they are easy replacements...what did the rams did with the rg3 trade?
Browns still looking bad.
If we had more than 1 WR i would MAYBE get it, but not our deal.
-
21 hours ago, dw49 said:
Cooks is only 24 years old and has a base salary of 1.5 for this year and 8.5 for next year. TY is 3 years older and has base salaries of 8 mil this year , 11 mill next year and 13 mill the following year. I use base salary as the team that traded for TY would not be responsible for anything more than his base going forward. What I think is relevant here is a team trading for TY might very well want him to "alter" his contract a bit. So with the age difference and TY getting very expensive after this year , you lose a little value
But hilton has had much more success than brandin had up to that point...so that drives his price up
-
On 10/26/2017 at 2:18 PM, richard pallo said:
DQ was a guest on GMFB today. He has a few interesting comments. He doesn't think TY should apologize the the OL. Thinks TY, being one of the leaders on the team, has the right to make his comments and it could actually motivate the OL. He thinks the OL is a problem and Brissett would improve faster with a better line. He thinks Luck should go to Irsay and the FO and demand they fix the line. He thinks he needs to assert himself more. He doesn't think Luck will be back this year. He doesn't think they use Gore enough. He is one of our better players. He also said Pagano is beloved by the players. He is an excellent coach and very respected for his knowledge of defenses in particular. He thinks the problem with the coaching is not Pagano but he thinks his assistant coaches have let him down. Interesting interview.
this is not against you i know you are just reporting the interview but...
so every coordinator has let him down? Monachino, Chud, Manusky, Pep? So another scapegoat? He has practically changed the complete coaching staff and still we look worse. Even if he is a genious and his assistants blow that still reflects soo poorly on him because it means he cant choose a correct coaching staff. which is also his job
-
49 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
Botonio would be my choice to trade him for. If we can't do that, I'd like to get the Browns 2nd round pick. WR is the most easily replaceable position besides RB in the NFL. The reason our WR's are so bad is because of Chud, not necessarily because we have been missing so bad on every WR. The playbook he runs is specialized towards Hilton and Doyle, and the rest are left out, and Hilton isn't a true 1 because of his size and how he avoids contact, so it doesn't work most of the time, not to mention a simple double team eliminates him every time.
Also, a lot of people assume that if we trade Hilton for a second rounder, we'll just draft a second round receiver to replace him and he won't be as good. In reality, we'd probably draft an O-Lineman, a CB, or a pass rusher. We might even draft a franchise RB to pair with Luck. WR's are a dime a dozen, and if we trade Hilton, we'll probably sign a top WR in FA, and draft another one in the middle rounds, both of which should be better after Chud is gone.
a 2nd? why would you trade him for a second? or just for bitonio?
Brandin cooks got a 1st we should at least get a 1st. I dont get why cheapen our most valuable asset on the offense besides Luck. Also i would expect more than 1 pick cause otherwise you are just using that pick to get a WR so i dont get the point of trading him in that scenario, since we have no other WR.
-
19 hours ago, Superman said:
No offense, but I don't think you've thought this through.
I just spent five minutes on OTC getting the Chiefs to $30m+ in cap space, then keeping Berry and Poe. I cut Foles, Charles, and a June 1 release for Johnson (yes, Johnson is still okay, but would you keep him if it meant losing Berry or Poe?), restructured Houston to create $6m in cap space, restructured Smith to create $3.5m.
I tagged Poe at $13.5m. Then I signed Berry at five years, $62.8m, with $40m guaranteed. This is just higher than Tyrann Mathieu's contract with a similar structure, and makes Berry the highest paid safety in the league. His 2017 cap hit is $9m (I could go as low as $5m in Year 1, but I like a more balanced structure). I'm now at $9.4m going into FA and the draft. I could get rid of Maclin and create another $10m. And I still have until 7/15 to get Poe done long term and reduce his cap hit. Prior to Poe and without my draft picks, I've committed less than $150m in 2018.
Will they do this? It's debatable. No one knows what actually happens. My point is that, if they want to keep them, they absolutely can. If it were up to me, I'd make Poe and Berry my first priorities, and figure out everything else. I want to keep my best players.
I wont pretend to watch a ton of KC games but from what i have read isnt Poe kinda going a bit downhill? Like injuries had made him kinda not so great slam dunk player?
Anyways, im more of a Jonathan Hankins sign type of guy and he would be much cheaper
-
On 8/2/2017 at 10:44 AM, Superman said:
I agree. I want to lock down RG and let Haeg and Clark work at RT. Reitz and Good are still here for depth.
And of course, better play calling.
I agree, just let those 2 battle out RT and consolidate ol with RG I like Warford or Leary for that positoin. Maybe tj lang also cause of Philbin? Whatever the case is any of those 3 would be fine IMO
-
I kinda like the idea of larry warford or TJ Lang and both should be maybe a bit cheaper?
I know we all love the idea of the young guys but we have no depth in case of injuries and as much as we love them they are still uknowns. I can agree to a RG signing this offseason
-
To me its:
1.-OLB
2.- ILB (really close to OLB IMO)
3./ RB. We all love gore but this offense would look so elite if safeties had to worry about us breaking a long rune. Gore has great patience and vision, but he has 0 explosivness so safeties/defenses are not really worried about the rushing not only because we suck at it, but because they are simply not afraid of explosive plays.
4./ CB
5.- NT
6.- OG...we have no depth, i like haeg and whatever but mewhort will be coming back from injury and even if he is healthy by start of season, we have 0 depth in case of future injuries.
7.- S
8 OT
-
42 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:
So his opinion has no merit because he's a failed scout? Even though he worked with the guy? Interesting.
His Opinion has no merit because he first acted like RG was great, implying he knew it from this eagles times and now he gets to say he was always bad and everyone laughed and couldnt believe he got the job.
Its one way or the other or you are just not valid a source of info. You can change your opinion, that is fine but he is not changing his opinion he is just throwing shade now that grigson looks bad.
-
3 hours ago, chad72 said:
I would agree with you if it had happened 2 or 3 years ago. However, given Grigson's recent track record, it is a peculiar choice of words from a co-worker nevertheless. Besides, it was in context of the other guy Riddick being praised.
eh i mean i cant take anything that guy says seriously. I remember, like the poster "Everyone" attached on his screenshots when he was all praising Grigson and now this?
-
43 minutes ago, Everyone said:
This what my last post was about...
-
I mean the guy was first all in love with Grigson and then he is an *? LOL
-
On 10/1/2017 at 1:08 PM, NannyMcafee said:
You failed to build a team in 5 years. And it's rebuild again. If you have to rebuild twice you are a failure as a coach/GM. This is the reason so many people, including myself, are so upset. I suppose you have to give people second chances. At this point it would have been better to let Andrew sit behind Peyton.
I dont disagree. Im just stating my opinion into what Irsay might have been thinking
-
On 5/1/2017 at 11:58 AM, Gavin said:
My fellow Colts fans I say this with the utmost respect and sincerity but its time to except that Irsay made his decision last year and that decision is Grigson and Pagano will be here through the remainder of there contracts and not a day shorter
i think the plan always was 2 years with hopes of the full contract. I think they went into this year knowing it was a rebuilt, knowing hte defense will suck (all the ocmments that we hear like "we cant fix everything in one offseason" "we wont take shortcuts" etc).
I think Irsay was always gonna give them last year as "free" but next year i dont think they will be here if they still suck.
Having said that, i can see public pressure do some havok in their plan.
-
I hate his scheme
-
9 minutes ago, Jason_S said:
whats to applaud? is year 6 and the roster is still gutted. its not like they havent beeng given fair time.
we went 3rd in afc south...afc south...3rd.
-
22 hours ago, 21isSuperman said:
I liked the Clark and Kelly picks, but I was against the Green pick from the start. I think he was the lowest ranked safety in pass coverage in college, but I feel like Grigson fell in love with his physical attributes and had pipe dreams of turning him into Kam Chancellor 2.0. Ridgeway has shown promise too
i think pagano is as guilty as him on this.
-
11 hours ago, Superman said:
For example?
its actually REALLY common here in mexico with soccer teams. But i dont know if it translates to NFL.
its really different how teams are run in soccer, and mexico.
-
bah...I really wnated Kyle Shanahan. Imagine Luck on that system...
Lucks current Injury: Caused by Indy
in Colts Football
Posted
exactly i dont know or get whats the hold up.
The hope is that with only rehab he would be able to be just fine and if not then they will open again. He is not throwing anyways for ac ouple of months, his season is over. Get Certainty. Open him up again check everything is fine and if there is an issue correct it NOW.
If there isnt anything, then he will only have to stop rehab for 3+- weeks, which i guess its frustrating but i mean seriously, is 3 weeks worth it?
I dont get it.