Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum


Senior Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by CurBeatElite

  1. I see where you are coming from to some extent... but don't fully agree. I think if you ask just about anyone who follows football and has for a long time to name the top 3 QBs ever, both Brady and Manning will be mentioned. There are 23 QBs from the modern-era in the Pro Football HOF. Several of those guys were not the best at their position at any point in their career. Troy Aikman won multiple superbowls on absolutely loaded teams, but he was never a first or second team all-pro and was only a 6x pro-bowler (Rivers has gone to 8). Aikman never lead the league in any major pa
  2. Rivers was also forced to do virtual learning/meetings with his new team and coaching staff due to covid. The Rookies on this team had very little NFL experience compared to years past (Pittman was the #2 WR and Taylor has become the number #1 RB this season). If I recall correctly, Luck played very little in preseason games that year... but this year Rivers and his teammates didn't even get to play preseason games. Also, through 6 weeks Rivers has lost his RB 1 (Mack), WRs 2 and 3 (Pittman and Campbell), and has seen all 3 of his TEs (Doyle, Burton, MAC) miss games.
  3. I'm not really sure that Rock is a 'weak link.' Personally, I think Willis is the 'weak link' of our secondary. That said, Rhodes seems like he's back to probowl form after a down year last year and I imagine after his pick six and other INT that teams are more likely to pick on Rock that Rhodes. Agreed -- though, the problem with Kenny Moore is he is really not very good when he has to line up outside. I know he typically only does that if an injury happens, but he becomes a liability out there (IMO). However, as a nickelback, I think he's one of the best in the enti
  4. No, in your first post you say stats aren't important without post-season success. Then you use a very poor example by comparing Rivers to Kenny Anderson. Your logic in this post was very flawed. Then you suggest I don't realize today's NFL is more passer-friendly than it was when Kenny Anderson played, which you were wrong about. Then you come back with another post suggesting that stats do matter and use a list with 75% of the guys you named not having a superbowl ring (only Marv has 1). Then you lie about your statistics, so not only were you trying to reverse you
  5. Didn't you say in your previous post that stats don't mean anything? QB is a different position than WR, obviously. And if you read my post, I'm saying I think Rivers has the credentials to be first-ballot but he'll have a lot of competition with guys who will be retiring at or near the same time as him and who will likely be on the ballot at the same time. This all comes into play with the selection committee. And then let's get to the facts... Rivers is going to be top 5 in passing yards and most likely passing TDs when he retires. Right now he is one of only 6 QBs
  6. Only team I could think of would potentially be New England if Cam and the Patriots don't turn it around and if Belichick comes back. The only reason I say that is because Jacoby is a disciplined player who doesn't turn the ball over much and he has familiarity with NE. I think Belichick could win with him being basically a game manager, and if NE drafts a QB who they want to develop, I could see Jacoby making sense for them as a short-term solution. Highly doubt we could trade Jacoby for a 3rd. I don't think he's any better than Dalton, anyway.
  7. By the end of this year, barring injury, Rivers will definitely be top 5 All-Time in Passing Yards. He'll likely be top 5 in passing TDs. I am with you, the HOF has a lot of factors, but they aren't selecting 'teams' they are selecting individual players. The fact Rivers doesn't have a SB will likely hurt him in the eyes of some voters, and it's the only thing I think which could keep him from being first ballot (potentially along with his retiring class and who else is on the ballot). Eli likely won't return to the NFL, so he'll be eligible at least one year prior to Rivers - I don't see
  8. Your initial post read: "I don't know. I kinda put him in the Kenny Anderson category. Great QB with stats to back it up, but no or little success in the post season. He'll get in, but not before Eli and Ben" Kinda seems like stats mean something. And your logic is totally flawed. The HOF has a lot of factors and it is for individual players, not for teams. Therefore, stats do matter. If the HOF selection criteria was based mainly on playoff success, like you suggest in this post (contradicting your first post), then Trent Dilfer, Mark Rypien, Jeff Hostetler, Brad Johnson and J
  9. Eli also won two SB MVPs and beat Brady both times. That is kinda huge. Well Eli will be eligible at least 1 year earlier than Rivers, so highly unlikely Rivers beats him in. Rivers has better career stats than both of them, more pro-bowls than both of them, in 2008 Rivers was the NFL passing TD leader and passer rating leader, in 2010 he lead the league in passing yards, in 2013 he lead the league in completion percentage. Big Ben 2x had the most passing yards in his career, but never close to best completion percentage, TDs or completion percentage. As
  10. What @Superman said -- he was putting his XP's perfectly down the middle. Not really sure if his power increased or not, but his accuracy was insane. I'd like to see one of those 'ghost' videos they do w/ bowlers to see how close each one of his kicks were to the others, to me it seemed like every kick hit the net directly in the middle (between the uprights), but I'd like to see if they were all hitting the same height on the net. Yes, I think it's pretty inevitable that our defensive ranking will decline as we play better offenses. Aside from being inter
  11. Thanks, sorry I screwed that up. People had responded before I caught it so I couldn't edit.
  12. Yes, the DL is definitely a solid unit. Hopefully we get Turay back and it improves further. I agree with you about the pass rush being more consistent... though, considering we rarely blitz (I think we send non-DL players after the QB the least out of any team in the league), it's really not too bad (granted we haven't had much experience this year against top-notch OLs).
  13. Well, Doyle's fumble on our half of the field on the first offensive drive certainly didn't help any yesterday. Kinda similar to the Browns game, the D started kinda sluggish but really clamped things down as the game went on. Agreed with you, Burrows is a very solid QB. He also has a very solid set of guys around him between Higgins, Boyd, Green, Mixon and Bernard.
  14. We had a slow start on O yesterday... otherwise, we've been starting faster on O this year than we have in many years scoring TDs on our first drive in 4 of our first 6 games. Versus Minnesota Rivers threw a pick (that was the ball which bounced of MAC's chest right around the goal-line) at the end of a very solid drive and then the Colts scored a TD on their second drive.
  15. Two of our most effective plays were Taylor's run out of the shot-gun today.. it was effective when it needed to be.
  16. Makes sense! (Grammar-wise, did you go to Princeton?)
  17. Was that a HS or Ivy League team you grew up in or coached? In the NFL, you don't run very much when you're down 21-0.
  18. That's fine.. we won the game... if you're the coach and we're down 21-0 are you going to try to run every play or are you going to pass? If you choose the former, I don't want you as my coach.
  19. He averaged 5 YPC and almost 15 yards per catch today. He had >110 total yards from scrimmage. We were down 21-0 to start the game. Of course he isn't going to get a ton of carries at that point. He had two very nice carries from shotgun formation when the D wasn't expecting the run. I don't think he was under-utilized given the circumstances.. we did what we had to win. If we were up 21-0 and he got 12 carries, that's a different story. The run game was effective today. Very effective. Hines didn't run once. Wilkins had 1 carry. Taylor had 5 yards per carry.
  20. I'm far from against Rock. That suplex was kinda ridiculous, and if you look at the angle from the play on Higgins he bit early to try to move in (Burrows made him bite). Otherwise, he was far from terrible today. He had 2-3 not-so-good/bad plays today. He was fine for the rest of the game.
  21. Not the prettiest win, but a very good win. Positives: Rivers didn't play a perfect game, but he played very well. The safety made a good play on that INT -- maybe Rivers shouldn't have thrown the ball there, but I was fine with the decision looking back at it, it wasn't a perfect throw and got picked, but it wasn't anything like the INTs versus Cleveland. He didn't panic, the team rallied behind him even when we were down 3 scores. IMO, that'll go a long way in the future, having the faith of his teammates when we're in a hole (I didn't see that so much in our previ
  22. Yes... His first catch and his run after it was very nice. The 2nd catch was nice, but he ran out of bounds when I thought he could have turned it up field and got the first down instead of leaving us in a 3rd and 2 situation (Rivers looked like he saw what I saw). His 3rd catch, ran out of bounds when we were trying to kill the clock. __________________ The guy is definitely explosive and gives a new wrinkle to our offense. I like him, I hope he sticks around. He'll need to improve some decision making moving forward, but his explosiveness and playmakin
  23. Yes, Harris is much more a hybrid of Hines and Campbell than Patmon is... still, they must really see something in Patmon -- for example, why would the bring up M. Johnson 2x and revert him back to PS after he played pretty well both games? Obviously, they either thought other teams weren't interested in him or that they wouldn't be hurting if someone grabbed him.
  24. Cain also had a major injury in year, not really a fair comparison. My guess is they think he's got potential to be a decent WR for us, but just needs time to develop. They have to have some sort of fear that he'd get signed to another team if we put him on PS. In other words, they must think he's got more 'long term potential' than the guys they are bringing up, activating and sending back to the PS while they are keeping Patmon on the roster but keeping him inactive.
  25. I think we'd be better with Blackmon and Hooker than we are with Blackmon and Willis.... also, not sure if I can agree that we are a '2nd half team'.... sure Reich's first year, when we had Luck, we started 1-5 and went on a hot streak... last year we were 5-2 after 7 games and lost 7 of the last 9. Not a 'must win' game, but it's an important game and we may be in a bit of trouble if we don't win it.
  • Create New...