Trueman
-
Posts
987 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Trueman
-
-
I'm not going to act like I know much about this guy. There's no way I'm going to take the necessary time to research and study him, but it seems like a promising hire.
I like that he's young and well thought of. Hopefully his personality offsets Reich's a bit , and there's some edge to him.
I want sharp, creative minds throughout organization. We've been too bland and unimaginative for too long. -
2 hours ago, Andrew Luck fan club said:
So most of you know Brad Wells. I’ve always thought he was a *. He’s been pushing this “Peyton to the Colts FO” narrative for a while now. Never believed it honestly. But I have a friend that’s in the loop in the league and he just sent me this:
So Ballard is going to be done in Indy....
Irsay hired Reich without Ballard giving the ok. They were going to have another meeting this morning to talk Toub/Reich for the HC. Irsay just made the move. Ballard is a pro though so he probably makes it work. Issue is, Irsay made this move for Manning.
What the source said is he will be hired on at some point in the Elway role. Keep the GM for a year or two then take those duties fully.
Source also said Ballard just wanted to make the case for Toub one more time.What he’s saying about Reich being Irsays hire and not Ballard’s matches up with Brads tweet. And the picture the Colts tweeted had irsay and Frank, Ballard wasn’t pictured. I’m not saying I believe anything, and this probably sounds all conspiracy theory-like, just thought this was weird and I do trust my friend. What do you guys think lol
I'd love to believe this is total nonsense , because if it's true and we lose Ballard , I'm done with this team.
Straight up. -
On January 18, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Andrew Luck fan club said:
The Colts had a top 2 QB of all time (Peyton), a top 5 WR of all time(Marv), a top 15 WR of all time (Wayne), a top 15 RB of all time (Edge), a top 15 center of all time (Saturday)...and we had a losing record in the playoffs (9-10). Almost all our losses came against a good defense (Pats, Chargers, Jets, Steelers, etc). It was a fun era to watch but underwhelming in terms of championships as we watched the Broncos go to (and win) the same amount of Superbowls as us, with Manning, in only four years.
In Luck's last two full years, the offense has ranked #6 and #8 in scoring. The defense has been 20th or worse the past 4 years.
I'd love to see us not put high draft picks/money toward skill players (like Barkley/Dorsett/Richardson) and please just try to form an elite defense combined with Luck's talents and see where that takes us for a change. I'm looking at Minnesota, Eagles and Jags and imagining how far Luck could go with these defenses (1st, 2nd, 4th ranked) if Keenum/Bortles/Foles-Wentz can get this far. We gotta fix the o-line and fix the defense and let Luck make everyone else look like a stud as he's capable of. Let the skill players come and go like the Pats do, turn the defense into a powerhouse, keep Luck upright with shorter passes and less homerun plays, get that o-line figured out and only have him need to score 21 points to win a game.
I couldn't agree more. People can look back at the Peyton era with nostalgic goggles all they want , but we made massive mistakes.
There is no way Tom Brady should be considered a better QB than Peyton - but he is , because we built our teams wrong and Dungy's defence was WAY too predictable for a certain rival all-time great QB and coach combination.
Dungy's scheme needed great players in specific positions , otherwise we'd get abused by any good team. There was no chess-match , there was no inventive schemes , no exotic blitzes , nor mixing man with zone ; there was literally nothing that masked our deficiencies or confused opposing coaches or quarterbacks. Everyone knew what we were going to run , and THE ONLY reason we won as much as we did was because of Peyton. I don't give a damn what our total defences were ranked in specific years. We all know the symbiotic relationship between offence and defence. You think that defence would have been "ranked" as high as it was (sporatically) if we had anyone other than #18 at QB? The answer is no.
We never had a great defence with Peyton , that's the truth. We had a 4 game hot streak with Booger and Bob Sanders (finally) being healthy. That's not enough to qualify as "great".
How many times did we hear announcers talk about the opposing teams running the ball on us "to keep Peyton off the field"? You think Brady had that issue?! Do you think experts are talking out of their * when they say the run game is vital in the playoffs? Or do I have to hear another asinine retort about how "we build our defence to play with a lead!".... Ugh , it makes me want to puke , another limiting philosophy by Polian....
Or " we play in a dome"! Sweet , so that means you need the best record in the AFC every year for your team to operate properly. Again - LIMITING...
Lets take a look down memory lane:
Sidenote: Keep in mind how different (worse) these stats would be if we had a QB of lesser quality. Hint : Look at the YPA
Polian/Peyton (1998)
Run defences (yards allowed/yards per attempt aka "keeping Peyton off the field) :
1998- Yards allowed (YA): 2nd worst , Yards Per Attempt (YPA): Worst
1999- YA: 14th worst , YPA : 6th worst
2000- YA: 7th worst , YPA: 11th worst
2001- YA: 7th worst, YPA: 3rd worst
Dungy arrives:
2002- YA: 13th worst, YPA: 12th worst. Playoffs : 41-0 loss (New York Jets, Road) 42 carries 180 yards allowed.
2003- YA :13th worst, YPA: 10th worst. Playoffs: 41- 10 Win (Denver @ the Dome) 26 carries 146 yards
38-31 Win ( Kansas City , Road) 30 carries 196 yards
24-14 Loss (New England, Road) 32 carries 112 yards
2004- YA: 9th worst, YPA: 2nd worst. Playoffs: 49-24 Win (Denver @ the Dome) 21 carries 78 yards
20-3 Loss (New England, Road) 39 carries 210 yards (we had 46)
2005- YA : 16th , YPA: 5th worst. Playoffs: 21- 18 Loss (Steelers @ the Dome) 42 carries 112 yards
(Pittsburgh had 10 more minutes of possession , and Ben made 14 pass completions, LOL)
2006- YA: Worst, YPA: Worst (#18 is incredible) Playoffs: 23-8 Win (KC @ the Dome) 17 carries 44 yards
15-6 Win (Baltimore, Road) 20 carries 83 yards
38-34 Win (New England @ the Dome) 24 carries 93 yards
29-17 Win (Chicago , Superbowl) 19 carries 111 yards
2007: YA: 15th , YPA : 7th Best Playoffs: 28-24 Loss (San Diego @ the Dome) 33 carries 99 yards (we had 44)
2008: YA: 9th Worst, YPA: 13th Worst Playoffs: 23-17 Loss (San Diego, Road) 33 carries 167 yards (we had 64)
2009: YA: 9th Worst, YPA: 14th Worst Playoffs: 20-3 Win (Baltimore @ the Dome) 19 carries 87 yards (we had 42)
30-17 Win ( Jets @ the Dome) 29 carries 86 yards
31-17 Loss (Saints , Superbowl) 18 carries 51 yards (Brees 32 of 39)
2010: YA: 8th Worst , YPA: 7th Worst Playoffs: 17-16 Loss ( Jets, @ the Dome) 38 carries 169 yards
Peyton is injured for the year /Polian's final:
2011: YA: 4th Worst , YPA 17th
Now, this doesn't include the simplistic nature of our pass-defence either , but I thought it was a pretty good indication on what #18 had to overcome.
Conversely, lets look at Brady:
2001: YA: 13th worst , YPA: 11 worst. Playoffs : Win (77 yards Oakland), Win (58 yards Pittsburgh) Win (90 yards St.Louis). Superbowl Ring
2002: YA 2nd worst , YPA 4th worst Miss the Playoffs. .... Oh, wonder why?
2003: YA 4th best, YPA 6th best. Playoffs : Win (84 yards Titans) , Win (98 yards Colts) , Win ( 92 yards Carolina)
Superbowl Ring
2004: YA 6th Best, YPA 11th best. Playoffs: Win (46 yards Colts) , Win (163 yards Pittsburgh), Win (45 yards Philly)
You guessed it , Superbowl.
2005: YA: 8th best , YPA: 4th Best . Playoffs: Lose to Denver
2006: YA: 5th best , YPA: 10th Best. Playoffs: Lose to Colts
2007: YA:10th best, YPA: 5th Worst Lose to Giants in SB
2008: YA: 15th, YPA: 15th go 11-5 with Matt Cassel LOL
2009: YA: 13th Best, YPA: 10th Worst. Playoffs: Lose to Baltimore
2010: YA: 11th Best , YPA: 15th. Playoffs: Lose to Jets
2011: YA: 17th, YPA: 8th Worst. Playoffs: Lose to Giants in SB
2012: YA: 9th Best, YPA: 6th Best. Playoffs: Lose to Baltimore
2013: YA: 3rd Worst, YPA: 7th Worst. Playoffs: Lose to Denver
2014: YA: 9th Best, 10th best. Playoffs: Win SB vs Seattle
2015: YA: 9th Best, YPA: 15th Playoffs: Lose to Denver
2016: YA: 4th Best, YPA: 10th Best. Playoffs: Win Superbowl
2017: YA: 17th , YPA: 2nd Worst. Playoffs: TBD
You know why we won the Super Bowl? Because Polian FINALLY got a good DT (Booger), after years and years and years. He finally used another avenue besides the draft to get a good player. What a novel idea! Imagine if the Patriots only relied on the draft for a decade ? Jesus, there's no chance Belichick would limit himself like that.--It's asanine.
Polian's refusal to be creative in the free agent or trade market , Dungy's beyond basic and player-reliant Tampa 2 , our over-investment in skill positions, Polian's reliance on the draft for improvement EVERY YEAR - (which means when he had a poor draft WE DIDN'T IMPROVE ---outside of existing players improving).
I could go on and on, but it boils down to Belichick being far more intelligent than Dungy and Polian. Every year the Patriots would make bold moves and reinvent themselves , while we continued to the same thing over and over , putting everything on Peyton's shoulders.
You guys can look back at Peyton's time and want to replicate it all you want. And to some extent I understand that , because it beats the hell out of the Grigson/Pagano/Luck era , but we should look back at that time fondly AND critically. There's a lot of mistakes, we as fans, and the Colts organization itself, can learn from that era if we choose to.
I'm * off that Peyton won't be unanimously thought of as the best of all-time , because personally, I think it could've been prevented.
And another thing , I think Andrew still has the potential to be the best QB in the game. How about we don't make the same mistakes?
You surround a great QB with a defence and an O-line, and you can win anytime , anywhere. We shouldn't have to bank on getting homefield throughout every year. It's limited thinking.
Build your damn team to win on any field , in any city.
-
On January 8, 2018 at 5:31 PM, Indeee said:
Giants... Keep Eli and sign Blake Bortles
No.
-
6 hours ago, HectorRoberts said:
R1 Malik Hooker S
R2 Quincy Wilson CB
R3 Terrel Basham OLB
R4 Zach Banner OT
R4 Marlon Mack RB
R4 Grover Stewart DT
R5 Nate Hairston CB
R5 Anthony Walker MLB
Over all I give this an B+ almost everyone has done well and I look forward to seeing what the future holds for them.
Hooker: A
Wilson: B
Basham: Too soon
Banner: F-
Mack: B+
Stewart: Too soon
Hairston: A
Walker: too soon
With everything considered , Ballard did a nice job , imo. This coming draft should lead to better immediate results.
-
22 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:
Worst case scenario we grab Nelson 3rd, and he ends up being the safest pick in the draft.
Even though Guard is a much more pressing need , I'm not sure I could justify taking one 3rd overall, regardless of how special he is.
The chances we get a pick this high in the Luck era again are pretty low, and if we can't get a tackle or pass-rusher worthy of the 3rd overall selection , I don't see the point in the selecting this high. We've got to leverage this pick into more selections (in this draft or the next). This is probably going to be the best trading chip Ballard will have to work with in his time here--we have to maximize it's worth.
I know you prefaced by saying worst case scenario, but this scenario is almost unacceptable, imo.
No one is going to take a guard that high , I'd almost rather take Barkley than Nelson if I absolutely had to choose between the two.
To me, it comes down to how highly Ballard and his team value Chubb. If they think Chubb can be that franchise altering pass-rusher, I think they keep the pick. If they think he'll just be really good, I think they trade down.
-
9 hours ago, Rally5 said:
Am I the only one that see's something really special in Marlon Mack? Do we not agree running backs need holes to run through? Imagine for a minute Luck purveying the field with time to throw! Can we not have another year where all the discussion is about our OLine! I get an edge rusher and their value, I really do and I get Barkley is a nice back but I swear give me a monster Oline with Luck, TY, Doyle, Mack, Rogers, and Moncrief and I'll take that all day long! I truly hope Ballard does what the sign on his desk says and isn't influenced by uninformed media or Irsay for that matter! Some media nut case has us taking a safety with P1..if that happened I would retire my fandom!
I wouldn't consider Mack having "special" potential, but he's certainly got a chance to be a really good player. I agree that when you consider Luck's entire career as a Colt, the prospect of drafting a running-back , doesn't really excite me.
To me, I don't want to replicate the Polian ethos at all. I want a team with great lines on both sides of the ball , and a team with balance.
I don't want a team that needs home field advantage, or a predictable defence with serious flaws, and an offence loaded at the skill positions.
I want a team with a good defence and a good O-line. That's how you surround a star QB who can make skill players better than their talent.
I don't want us to make the same mistakes that we did with Peyton. -
4 hours ago, Shadow_Creek said:
People are probably thinking about Mr. irsays comment when he mentioned the colts would get a special kind of player in the first round. However lets not forget that our GM after last years Draft fired pretty much all of the scouts that were under grigs. That being said, with this new staff we have i just don't see Ballard hiring them to just stand back and applaud without doing there part. No i believe that he hired them to find the right pieces and the best possible choices to pick at 3
Picking at 3 would be easy for Ballard , though. If you really want to test the quality of your scouts , and not have them "stand back and applaud" , trading down would be the far more beneficial decision towards testing their capabilities.
Your logic makes no sense.
-
Whilst I don't disagree that productive running backs can be acquired throughout the draft , this rationale makes no sense at all. I'm not sure how the National Title game changes anything.
However, I think I'd rather trade down than draft Barkley. There's just too many holes that were created by Grigson's brilliance , imo.
We don't need a superstar running back , we need a star on either of our lines.
Your Favorite Colts Team and Non-Colts Team?
in Colts Football
Posted
2004 Colts
1999 Rams or 02 Bucs