George Peterson
-
Posts
164 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by George Peterson
-
-
4 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:
It's hard to one up anyone with the qb's the jets keep trotting on the field.
Their efforts to spite the Patriots do not help them overcome their issues as a franchise though.
-
On 2/13/2018 at 3:15 PM, J@son said:
You don't have to have a bell cow back. Just an effective back or corp of effective backs. We don't need Barkley to make RPO work.
Arguably the Eagles didn't have a "bell cow back." They had a stable of 2-3 different guys back there and used them pretty interchangeably. The Patriots used a similar concept although the focus for the Pats was, of course, more on pass catching compared to the Eagles with all of Burkhead, Lewis and White being more than capable of receiving.
The meta in the NFL seems to be moving more and more to having multiple guys to share the load rather than being 1 blown knee away from not really having a running game. Kamara/Ingram, Burkhead-Lewis-White, Ajayi/Blount, all examples of this that went deep into the playoffs helped by their running game
Neither of the two teams in the Superbowl relied on a big name "feature back." Something to think about I think. Frankly I think that style of play can work at times but is mostly a relic of the past and requires a generational talent to sustain for long periods of time.
-
Bit of an unfortunate abbreviation there... kinda hillarious if you were going for it on purpose.
-
1 minute ago, J@son said:
my initial reaction was the same...but I'm not so sure there couldn't be some type of correlation.
Just as likely to be self-fulfilling prophecy IMHO. No one tries it because no one has succeeded trying it... so no one ever tries it and the ice is never broken.
-
There isn't a football team in history that has absolutely no talent at all, except possibly recent interations of the Cleveland Browns. But Ballard's got his work cut out for him if he's going to put the Colts in the playoffs, and he's going to need at least a little bit of good fortune no matter what he accomplishes.
I just think it'd be a pity if the legacy if a great talent like Luck is to go the way of guys like Phillip Rivers who could never put himself in a position to accomplish anything, frequently through no fault of his own,
-
Sounds like one of those overly specific things to me that happens when you cherry pick stats and forget you're looking at disproportionate sample sizes. It's hard to win the Superbowl no matter where you play and how you set up your defensive formations. There's nothing about indoors that makes the 3-4 defense all that difficult, personally I suspect coincidence.
-
5 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:
Well I'm in the minority, but I see a lot of talent in Brissett..He is young and has all the tools to be very good...With good coaching and development I see a high ceiling...Top 10 qb potential in a few years..This new scheme will help everyone..The scheme we were using was terrible considering our defincies in the offensive line..A lot of that had to do with injuries , Brissett not being familiar with playbook, and lack of weapons..
I look at Brissett and I see a lot of similarities to Dak Prescott or Joe Flacco. You can win with that guy, but you have to baby him a little bit, get him all the toys he needs, have success with secondary acquisitions and build a strong roster around him. He can win, but he can't drag a franchise away from obscurity by the scruff of its neck like Luck could when he was healthy. you have to get a lot of other things right to give a guy like that a chance to win.
Brissett in particular is a guy within that teir of quarterbacks that has a lot of good things going for him. He's not prone to panic, he's poised, fundamentally sound, and he tends to make good, smart decisions with the football. But he's not a premium talent and he's not going to save the general manager if he makes a dog's dinner of the rest of the roster the way Grigson did. The swing between Brissett in his prime and a healthy Luck in his prime is about 2-4 games in the regular season and one more postseason win IMHO, if you think this team is 9-7 with Luck, it's 5-11 to 7-9 with Brissett.
-
3 minutes ago, Fluke_33 said:
No. I really believe he would add 6 wins to this team last year. I’m excited for what the new offense will bring.
I know I’m a homer but I think luck is going to prove his value this year. Pre injury he did some amazing things.
Adding 6 wins is plausible considering the number of times the Colts collapsed in the 4th quarter.
However 9-7 isn't even enough to make the playoffs every year. And if you're trying to use Luck as a fig leaf to cover the franchise's problems instead of doing what I really hope Ballard's able to accomplish and fixing these problems, you're just going to get him hurt again.
-
23 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:
How do you think we do with Brissett as starter? I can see 10-6 with good free agency and draft..We easily could have been 8-8 last year with better coaching..
With Brissett as the starter I think the team is 7-9 next year, assuming reasonable but not outstanding success in the draft and FA.
If they can get a breakthrough or two defensively that could go higher, I'm predicating this on the idea that some of the 4th quarter collapses were based as much on the weakness and lack of talent of the defense as the ineptitude of the coaching staff. I think Brissett can take a team to the playoffs in the right conditions, but the Colts roster is badly depleted right now, not sure he could do it here next year.
-
While I agree that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, when there's no evidence at all, not just in this case, but in any of the allegations of spying brought by media and other teams against the Patriots, I think it's fair to analyze the pattern and consider the nature of the messengers -- "unnamed sources" and players and coaches from teams bitter at their defeat at the hands of New England, and media men looking for hits, clicks, and sold issues willing to cater to them for the sake of sensationalism.
I mean you guys know the state of the modern mainstream media as much as anyone. It's getting to the point that if it says a thing in the newspaper, and it's not an ironclad indisputable fact, I just assume it either isn't true or the facts are being twisted to the editor's agenda. Journalistic integrity has long been a relic of ancient history as far as the modern media is concerned -- if it even ever existed in the first place. Even the history books can't be fully believed anymore.
-
14 hours ago, our_dbs_rock said:
No, mostly sarcasm.
But I do expect a high draft pick next year. I think this year will be a true rebuilding year. A new offense, a new defense, a lot more roster turnover, etc. I could be wrong and would be happy to be wrong, but I have low expectations.
This is going to be unpopular, I know that, but I'm just gonna say this. Take it for what it's worth.
If you don't think the Colts are going to be highly competitive next year even with Luck, then it may be time to reposition the franchise around a new quarterback and focus Luck's appearances around showcasing him for potential buyers.
I don't see that overwhelming strength on offense, defense, special teams, the run the pass, run D, pass D, nowhere. You have no assets on your roster and nothing to leverage to generate any except money, and your cap situation is decent but not spectacular.
To my outsider's perspective the Colts are honestly below average in every facet of the game. Luck was hiding it to a certain extent but that's part of how he got hurt, the weakness on offense put too much pressure on the poor guy and he got exposed. I really doubt that going back to a situation where Luck granted you the luxury of being able to pretend you had an offense is possible or even smart without a serious restructuring. You've already run him into the ground once. Doing it again would be grounds for the league seizing Luck from your franchise for his own safety in a just world, similar to a CPS raid in an abusive home situation.
Bottom line, you guys have Luck and rather little else, and now you may not actually have Luck. By the time you could draft some guys to fill the holes and they've learned the game and fully come into their own, Luck's going to be 30, 31, 32 and with an injury history. Unless Ballard manages to pull a miracle out of the aether, you're looking at the distinct possibility of wasting the remainder of Luck's prime even if he is healthy.
That doesn't honestly mean I think the Colts can't be competitive, but spending Luck's prime on 9-7, 10-6 one and done seasons would be a tragedy IMO. I think the Colts need a thorough rebuild rather than a rush job, and if you try to do a half-rebuild, you're going to wind up like an elevator stuck between the floors, constantly drafting between 12 and 18 and not making any noise in the playoffs, similar to the situation the Ravens and Titans are in recently where they're not really relevant, but they're too good to break up, and so they just mark time and waste their top talent. That's not where you want to go as a Franchise IMHO. I
-
1 hour ago, Reality Check said:
You don't think Brissett has better knowledge of the Pats offense (& how it works) than Malcolm Butler?
To me, a big part of your justification for bringing in MB is already covered by Brisstett's presence.
You know who you bring in if you want inside knowledge of the Patriots?
You bring in Danny Amendola or Dion Lewis. Those are quality FAs that the Patriots actually care about losing.
-
One team that spends a lot of resources trying to one-up the Patriots is the New York Jets. They did it with Darelle Revis, Bill Parcells and they tried to do it with Bill Belichick.
Have a look at their W-L history in the modern era and tell me if having priorities other than putting the best possible team on the field is a good idea.
If you want to spite the Patriots, build a better team than theirs. That's the only language they speak at the end of the day.
-
10 minutes ago, Reality Check said:
While I was encouraging the Reich hiring the minute McD backed out (check my post history), let's be honest here... To think anyone can establish one's character and/or leadership abilities (as HC in the NFL) based on a brief, introductory presser and a couple of quotes in the newspaper, is WAYYYYY too presumptuous.
If a HC's ability had ANYTHING to do with his press conferences, Belichick would be the worst HC in the history of the NFL.
My assumption here is that Colt's fans are expecting their HC to "win" above & beyond any other expectations...??...
I hope not. Quite frankly the Colts are not currently built to win. I think Indianapolis is in for a 3 year rebuild cycle and if they rush it, they'll regret it. They really need to fundamentally overall almost their entire roster, to the point that even if Luck gets healthy, I wonder if it might be the path of wisdom to find a trade partner willing to bet some assets that he'll stay that way. Otherwise Luck's going to start trending downward just as the new draft picks come into their own.
Funny thought: Trade him to the Bills, just to spite the Patriots. Putting a good to great quarterback in Buffalo would make the AFC East much less of a cake walk. The Bills just made the playoffs more or less without a quarterback, give them a good one with their defense and they could give TB12 a run for his money.
-
1 hour ago, GoPats said:
Sure, I've been to Gillette and had to SMH at times... like I said, I think in every fan base, there are good sorts and bad sorts. It's just that the bad sorts get more attention because they tend to be louder, lol...
I grew up splitting my time between the Boston suburbs and the White Mountains. Even within New England, the cultural/regional differences are prominent. As a Mainer I'm sure you don't share all the same traits as a person your age and at your stage of life living in Cambridge or Somerville or something.
I guess I just have big issues with generalizations.
You're talking to the wrong person for that. I can be two different people on two different days. My attitude is very mercurial and I don't even know what I'm going to think from one moment to the next.
-
To clarify what I mean about mistakes, Belichick pounces on coaches that are unprepared for their own success against him.
Pete Carroll is a really good coach, and the Kearse catch caught his team so flat footed that it probably did more harm than good. I can't think of a single play the Seahawks made after the Kearse catch that struck me as being disciplined or well put together. Hightower shed 2 blockers to get to Lynch at the 1, then they wasted a time out because Wilson couldn't coordinate the team on the field, then Wilson made a sloppy pass to Lockette that he telegraphed a good 30 seconds before the play was even snapped.
The Seahawks stopped playing to a gameplan and started thinking, and thinking on the field is never a good idea. You need to have your game plan in mind and be able to stick with it even when you're excited and the finish line is in sight. Lack of focus led to the mistakes that allowed Butler to pick that ball far more than the playcall (which I still maintain was not bad but merely average, that play was let down by execution, not the playcall itself).
As for the Falcons, after the Patriots got a couple stops and put some points up on them, they got tight and kept trying to fight for momentum rather than playing to the situation. They were trying to break the game back down in their own favor and it kept not working because the Patriots weren't letting up the pressure. By the end of the third quarter the Falcons offense in particular was seriously second guessing itself and the whole Falcons team was in neutral and coasting downhill at a steadily increasing pace. Again, lack of focus, instead of staying on mesage, the team relaxed with a big lead and started to give the game away.
This is the mistake the Eagles avoided. They played to the gameplan, were physically prepared to play with the Patriots for 60 minutes, and took the opportunity to make the big stops when needed. Full credit to the Eagles coaching staff who clearly did a lot of very hard work to carefully prepare their team.
-
56 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
The Eagles won the SB
Doesn't actually follow that the fake walkthrough was a reason why.
They won because they were the better team on the field, made the 1 or 2 key plays that made the difference, and because they didn't make the mistakes Belichick usually manages to pounce on. They were very well coached and their coaches didn't try to play guessing games with Belichick, and stayed within their game plan. That's how you beat the Patriots.
The key play of the game was the strip sack on Brady in the 2 minute drill. Brady is frankly almost untouchable in the 2 minute, getting the stop there isn't something that happens to Brady very often, I think the last time he was kept out of the scoring area with the game on the line in the 2 minute other than a few last minute hail marys was when the Colts picked him in '06. Fake walkthroughs didn't make that play happen. A defensive line that was well coached and physically conditioned to play for 60 minutes made that happen.
-
On 2/13/2018 at 4:26 AM, DaveA1102 said:
Interesting, it is one of the worst uniforms.
What do people think of the Colts uniform? I like it but feel its a little plain, and have always preferred the blue helmets.
I actually like the Colts uniform. It's practical, simple and a pretty classic design. Overcomplicated jerseys are the ones that get old on people after awhile. There's something to be said for elegant simplicity.
I don't think it's the best uniform in the league, but I don't see a huge reason to change a uniform that's more or less looked the same since the days of Johnny Unitas. The Colts got their jerseys right from day 1, and don't really need to mess with the formula very much IMHO.
-
10 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
No it has a lot to do with the Thread because Deflategate was brought up. I was responding to George Peterson regarding Deflategate. GP is the one that keeps saying the Pats never cheated. All I am saying in response to that is, it was important for Tom to get absolved of any wrong doing and not be suspended. Any Patriots fan would tell you that as well. By him getting suspended 4 games, the commissioner found him of wrong doings.
Yes, which means one of two things. Either the Commissioner is wrong, or Brady is wrong.
Behaving as if the Commissioner could not be wrong does not do your intelligence any favors, considering the nature and character of this particular Commissioner.
Given the way the legal battle actually panned out, where Goodell had to concede every single material matter of the case and fall back on "I can dole out punishments as I see fit under the CBA" as his only legal justification for continuing to punish Brady, I don't think it takes a Pats fan to believe that the commissioner was wrong and sustained the suspension mostly as a way to refuse to admit his mistake.
-
On 2/9/2018 at 9:13 AM, King Colt said:
Correct me if I'm wrong here but yesterday the guarantee was 74 million and this morning on Golic & Wingo the amount is 90 million per the on screen ticker tape banner. Garappalo is 5-0 with SF and he is the highest paid layer in the history of the NFL? 5-0??!!
On a team that before he got there was 1-10. He's young, a lot more experienced than "7 games played" would indicate, and he's spent 3 years apprenticing for the best in the business. His intangibles are through the roof. He also has a skill that makes him uniquely tough to defend, I don't ever think I've seen a quarterback with a faster release time on short to medium throws, making the job of defense planners trying to deal with the guy that much harder. That makes it much less likely that he's a one year wonder compared to most young quarterbacks.
I know people are looking at Garoppolo and seeing Cassel, Hoyer and Mallett, but I think there's a huge difference. The Patriots were actually seriously considering going to Jimmy G themselves. He was their Brady contingency plan in a way Hoyer, Cassel, Mallet were just not.
The reason they didn't go to Jimmy themselves is that Brady made it impossible by remaining at an MVP level until Jimmy G was ready to start demanding some serious money.
No matter how old Brady is, if he's still putting you in the thick of the Superbowl hunt, and there's nothing physically wrong with him other than the ordinary wear and tear of a regular football season, it's impossible to flip that switch away from that guy. You guys ought to know what I'm talking about, the Colts waited for Peyton Manning to be injured before pulling the plug, but for the neck injury he might still be in Indy. Brady hasn't given the Patriots the same reason/excuse. That's the only reason Jimmy G is not still in New England IMHO
Point being, no one in New England was exactly expecting Cassel, Hoyer or Mallett to succeed Brady unless something pretty catastrophic happened. Those guys were injury replacements. Jimmy G was the apprentice, similar to Favre and Aaron Rodgers up in Green Bay. His chances of inheriting Brady's job were high enough that Brady had to take steps to prevent it. I think that says something all on its own, right there.
-
7 hours ago, Buck Showalter said:
LOL...
Sneaky sneaky AM, catfishing a football forum, that's a new one. How many aliases are you up to now???
Who the hell is AM?
The irony here is that I signed up for this forum using my Facebook account. Only time I've ever done that. This forum probably knows more about my actual identity than any other forum I've ever signed up for, and this is the forum where I get accused of being a sock puppet? And a female sock puppet at that. Oh that's just delicious. Anyone visiting this forum could probably steal my identity, and this is the forum where I get accused of not having one.
Needless to say the face in my profile pic is my face. I certainly wouldn't present such an ugly mug to the world if it wasn't. Look elsewhere for sock puppets and alts. I am what I appear to be -- a massively overweight fellow who lives in Maine, lost his job as a call center supervisor a year ago, volunteers as online tech support for the LDS Church, makes jam for the food bank as a hobby, lives with his parents due to complications from his clinical depression and probably spends way too much time on various Internet forums as a result.
-
1 hour ago, horseshoecrabs said:
That's what being a fan of one team's about
But is that the only way to be a fan of football?
-
1 hour ago, horseshoecrabs said:
All I can say is good luck with that, But I know I wouldn't go on the Patriots website and try to play the devil's advocate. Unless you just like abuse. You might want to decide which team you like the most and give the other one up.
See things from only one perspective? How boring...
-
I'm sorry if I've been causing problems. I'm just here to talk football. But like all fans of a team, I have my buttons, and Deflategate in particular is one of them.
Eagles long snapper said Eagles ran fake walk through
in NFL General
Posted
So because the broncos cheated, the Patriots absolutely definitely 100% are dirty filthy rotten cheaters?
The Broncos have their own rap sheet of illegal behavior and it's far longer than NEP's if you compare their entire history and not just this century. The Broncos are historically one of the worst "problem children" in the entire NFL, right up there with the Steelers and the Jets. Their PED rap sheet is as long as the next 5 worst teams combined. A HC from the Broncos cheating isn't any kind of evidence of Patriot malfeasance, even if the head coach at the time was a Patriots alum. The Broncos' legacy of complete disregard for the rules is all their own.