Nickster
-
Posts
6,348 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Nickster
-
-
15 hours ago, csmopar said:
Exactly. They took the most important regular season game of the year and gave it to Germany?! Wth. If the league wants to play overseas. Create a European league like the NBA did and leave our teams home
Meh. The Colts probably don't have any "important" games next season.
-
34 minutes ago, Smonroe said:
I think it's coming, maybe in the next 5 or 10 years. Probably a couple NFL teams in the cities they're grooming now.
It makes sense to grow globally and the games would be better if the fans are all rooting for a home team.
I'm torn on it, but I do think it will happen.
I say the more the merrier plus you get to watch a game in thw morning and I'm a big morning person.
It would be cool to see international talent too. I liked following the Japanwse and Koream MLB players when they started emerging and the euros in BBall. They brought a new and different style that was interesting to me. There are more people world wide that have the physical tools to play football than there are in the US and it would be an interesting infusion. Of talent. Thw dude didnt work out but the colts tried an Australian rugby star a few years ago.
Bigger talent pool equals better game IMO.
-
4 minutes ago, ColtsGermany said:
Thx so much! I appreciate your call.
It's so tough to get tickets for the game and seeing the colts play in Germany (especially in the city I lived for a few years) would just be incredible!
I'm thankful in advance for all help I can get.
And for real, even if it doesn't work I will be in Frankfurt at that day (or 2 days) anyway and if some of you are here to watch the game, it would be a pleasure to meet you and show you the city.
I won't be coming to Germany, but let me know when they open up and I'll try to get on there and grab some.
So you are saying they sell to Americans over here and then the Germans over there I guess? Separately? If you can find out the time when they go on sale over here let me know.
-
7 minutes ago, superrep1967 said:
Which one? Lol jk
Both. But look at what our actual Germans on here are saying. It's popular. Probably about like soccer here which is increasing in popularity. Lots of bid soccer fans in the US. We go to the Nashville SC park a lot. 35 to 40 grand for every match and very loud and plenty knowledgable.
The world has evolved since this think called the Internets was invented.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, ColtsGermany said:
Anybody here. If there are tickets sold in USA and you are planning to make the trip, would it be ok to get tickets for me, too?
I think it's way harder to get some here in Germany as there are over a million people trying to get some, but only 40k tickets are sold over here.
I'd try to help you out buddy if it's possible. If you get some info PM me and I'll see if I can help.
I CALL ON ALL STATESIDE FANS HERE TO ENTER THE LOTTERY OR WHATEVER WILL HAPPEN AND TRY TO HOOK OUR EUROPEAN FRIENDS UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
3
-
2
-
-
19 minutes ago, Chucklez said:
There are probably some Japanese teams that would like to have a word with you about the baseball side of things - I would know, I lived in Tokyo for 5 years - they are baseball bananas in Japan.
The top Japanese players play here. Many if not most of the best players are not American anymore though.
-
1 hour ago, superrep1967 said:
I know I hate international games because it's hard on the team with all the hours of travel it takes. The timing of game in our time is hard on players I wish the NFL would stop doing this. Will never be as popular over there as soccer is so let it go.
Dude football is very popular in Germany.
-
1
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, MB-ColtsFan said:
But the guy can't seem to keep a job.
I don't know what the hierarchy of roles from him has been, but he's been following around Adolfo-Mensah for the last 3 years. I don't think that necessarily indicative of him not being able to keep a job.
-
33 minutes ago, Superman said:
Yeah, I think the other part of it is that it's easier to move on from a QB who isn't top tier, for a variety of reasons. Attitudes are absolutely changing regarding drafting and developing QBs, no doubt about that.
But I still think the ideal is that when you draft a guy and get working on him, you hope he'll be around for a decade or longer. And we know that using a QB as a featured runner exposes him to more physical risk. To me, that usage is meant to be a temporary bridge, not a long term strategy. And if, after 4 or 5 years, the QB doesn't look like he's capable of excelling from the pocket, you start getting ready to replace him, and now you're not so much worried about the long term with that player. But with a guy like Josh Allen, who looks capable from the pocket, you start reworking your offense so that he's not taking as much abuse, in hopes you can get a full career out of him.
I think the success of the Lamar situation will depend on how effective he can be without being a 1,000 yard rusher, because I don't think he can run like that and stay on the field.
Totally agree with just about everything here.
Interesting thing. In the last 20 years there have been 2 "mobile QBs" or so (the def of mobile is subjective) to win the Big Bowl. Wilson in 2013 and Mahomes in 2019. Mahomes was not a mobile QB last playoffs with the injuries. Both of these guys are pass first guys with few if any designed runs.
There have been 2 what I would call running QBs play in the Big Bowl in last 8 years. Newton and Hurts.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Superman said:
Understood. Do you think a team that has a good QB would typically want to move on from him after 6-8 years for any reason other than health?
No. Of course not. You'd want the keep him for 16 or 18. But I think many teams would take a high level of production for 6-8 knowing that the guy would be likely to break down at the end of it. The number one pick in the draft is a tiny little guy by NFL standards who weighs 206 with a couple gallons of water in him.
Attitudes are shifting about the QB position is the bulk of the point I'm making.
I think the Jackson contract is borderline insanity, and I'd be absolutely shocked if that works out for BALT very well.
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Superman said:
Worth it? In hindsight, sure. But going in, I would say I'd expect more. They hit a peak, which is good, but I don't think they maximized a special talent. Part of that might be the player not developing, but I think strategically they failed in some ways. And still got an MVP season and SB appearance, so it's not a failure overall, but still disappointing to an extent.
Right now, I'm hoping for more than six seasons and a short peak from Richardson.
Supe I'm not discussing what I would want or what I have wanted in the past. I mean right now I'd take Mahomes, Burrow, Herbert, and then Hurts I guess. I don't love that running QB at all. Kinda like Snoop Dog and garden tools. Jackson would be way down on my list. I don't believe in that LJ kinda thing.
What I am saying is that I don't think teams are looking at the 10 year window necessarily. I think QB might, not will now but might, start to become a position that teams are willing to turn over if the running thing continues to progress. It might be judged to be prudent to use up guys at QB like is don't at other positions. and then get a new guy.-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Superman said:
Cam almost perfectly illustrates what I'm talking about. He reached significant heights -- MVP, SB -- but he never quite became a proficient pocket passer. And about six years in, injuries started taking their toll. If he was a better pocket passer, he could have changed his game along the way, maybe avoided some of the injuries, and prolonged his ability to be a high level QB.
He's both an encouraging precedent and a cautionary tale for a guy like Richardson. It shows how we can deploy a player like that, but also warns us not to turn him into a battering ram for half a decade.
but was the draft pick and the six years worth it? I think so really. SB appearances are rare.
look at this way, would you take an SB appearance from AR in a couple years and several competitive knowing AR would be ineffective at the end of it? I would. It’s been pretty dry in recent history for Colts fans. In six years my 8th grader will be in his 2nd year of undergrad and my sophomore should be in med school if things continue the way they’re going. That’s quite a while. 6 years ago the 8th grader had no front teeth and the soph was not yet pubescent. It’s a pretty significant amount of time in a human lifespan.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Superman said:
First thing for me is that I don't have a problem with them running from the QB position. But I think that style of play will take its toll over time. In fact, Lamar has been hurt in each of the last two seasons, and Hurts got hurt last year. The idea that those guys -- or anyone -- can continue to play that style at QB and not be punished seems crazy to me. And I think everyone involved knows it.
I see the money commitment, but I assume that both teams expect those QBs to evolve as time goes on. And both of them are much better in traditional QB areas than they were at the beginning of their careers. I think they both still have some work to do, but the contracts are a bet by the teams that they'll continue to improve in their ability from the pocket. I don't see the contracts as an indication that they intend to keep using them in the same way. Josh Allen's comments support that idea.
I don't necessarily agree that accuracy is valued less. I think teams see the athleticism as a mitigating factor, while the QB develops. With new offensive approaches, you can function as an offense even if your QB isn't ready to work from the pocket. And it's better for his development because he's getting live reps, and in theory, his mobility can help protect him at times. But I don't think that's meant to be the final form, not for the offense, nor for the QB himself.
That's why I think a guy who is as raw as Richardson, who probably doesn't even get drafted as a QB ten years ago, could go at #4. That's why the Bears are willing to play Fields, even though they can't put together a functional passing game. (And BTW, I think the Bears have been doing it wrong; they need to get the passing game going, because Fields is basically a glorified RB at this point. If the passing game doesn't click in this season, he could be out by 2024.) The ability to get a developing QB on the field sooner while still competing as a team is now fully demonstrated, so more teams will commit to that strategy, even using high picks along the way.
And while the Eagles are okay with 24 year old Jalen Hurts running the ball 160 times, that doesn't mean they intend to have 27-28 year old Jalen Hurts running the ball that much. Teams might be willing to turn over the QB position more frequently than in the past, but historically, most QBs don't last as full time starters for a decade anyway. Only the really good ones. But I don't think you even get 6-8 years from a 'featured runner' QB before they get run down, if not seriously injured. If you transition that guy into a more traditional passer, who is still athletic enough to selectively hurt the defense as a runner, you can get a lot more out of him. So 2-3 years from now, Hurts might still be able to have a huge playoff game as a runner, but probably won't be used as a 'featured runner' all season.
Ultimately, I think you still have to be able to win from the pocket. Whatever their limitations, Hurts and Jackson are still capable from the pocket, and a lot more accurate than Richardson is at this point. I think it would be a mistake to look at them and think the lesson is that pocket passing and accuracy aren't important anymore.
All the evidence forever has been pocket passers. I just don’t think Jackson and possibly Hurts though it’s early for him would be viable pocket passers without the benefits of their running threats.
Yeah man I’m not sold on the strategy either personally, it just looks like some teams are trying it. So I’m not saying it will work, I’m just saying it appears that some teams are trying it.
Running the ball in the NFL is probably one of the worst possible jobs an American can have for his body and his brain.
It is counter to everything we’ve seen in the past, Newton seems like pretty good evidence against doing it, but he had a few productive years and made the big bowl playing that way.
Time will tell Supe. Time will tell.
-
17 minutes ago, Superman said:
2) I think the 'featured runner' aspect can help bridge the gap as the QB develops as a passer. The Hurts path is a great blueprint for the Colts to follow. But I don't think a QB can hold up long term being a featured runner. The new Hurts contract signals, IMO, that the Eagles expect him to hold up over the next few years, and I would expect that they'll also begin to reduce his role as a runner. That might happen right away, based on how they've loaded up on all purpose RBs.
I've tended this type of thinking too. But Boy Baltimore and Philly just bet on it big time with the money they gave to these guys. I don't think either one of these guys would be very successful without the running game they bring to the table. Franky, Josh Allen probably fits that bill too. Will any of these guys be viable dropback guys when and if they lose the mobility?
I don't think you sign either Jackson or Hurts if you don't count on their running game. Running less, maybe, but it remains to be seen.
17 minutes ago, Superman said:There's undoubtedly a trend toward more mobile QBs who can play a role in the run game. But I don't think that's necessarily a trend away from QBs who can perform from the pocket. It's just a determination to weaponize the QB's mobility while he develops as a pocket passer. I could be wrong, but I don't think the traditional notion of accuracy is being devalued. I think teams have gotten better at using mobile QBs as they develop.
I definitely think the value of accuracy is valued less. I don't see Jackson as an NFL QB without the wheels. Do you?
Fields doesn't go that high and neither does AR.
17 minutes ago, Superman said:So I think Richardson's athleticism can help make up for his accuracy issues for a period of time, but eventually, he has to be much better in accuracy, including from the pocket.
I was without a doubt right there with you until probably this year. Hurts takes many if not most of their most important runs and they run a lot. Jackson, he's certainly not making a living between the tackles and man is he ever making a living. Fields. and more.
I think we might see a little more turnover man. It is not as time consuming to learn how to run RPO and zone read stuff. More guys are likely going to be able to do this than can drop deep, scan full field, read, and get the ball out. Teams might be willing to pay these running guys to play for 6-8 years an be used up like many of the other positions. 32 or so was usually the downside of the career. I think guys like Brees, Manning, and Brady have kind of jaded us into seeing top play in mid to late 30s. 8 years of top play from a running type of QB would be just fine with me.
I
-
15 minutes ago, krunk said:
Not the question. His question was "Can he hit a Wr in stride doing slants/ins/outs.." My answer is it can be seen in his film that he can. What we need to know is can he increase the consistency? That's the real question, but it's pretty unfair to say a 20 year old who hasn't had that much work in the passing game will not be able to improve with slants and outs. And what is the plan for our passing game anyway? How much of these throws that you/he wants to see will our passing game consist of? For instance I don't recall us throwing many slants in the Air Coryall we had with Chudzinski. Will Steichen be similar? Im not sure.
I guess I just think the poster meant can he do it consistently . I'm 51 but still have a pretty good arm after about 30 warm ups and up until last year I would throw to my son who played HS football. So I fit that first part. I can hit a WR in stride doing slants/ins/outs. Unless your arm is shot or you could never throw a FB well I'd bet you can too. At an NFL level of consistency? of course not.
So I don't think it's that lawyerly type of breakdown of the exact wording that's important here. If you do, touche'. Congrats counselor.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Superman said:
1) I think it's almost certain he'll become more accurate. It's hard to imagine any young QB not getting somewhat better with the right circumstances. But whether he will improve enough to be a reliable passer is the concern for me. I wouldn't say I'm skeptical, but I'm definitely not blindly optimistic.
2) It absolutely matters. Maybe his athleticism can help bridge the gap while he refines his passing, but eventually, like everyone else, his success will depend largely on his ability to be productive and efficient from the pocket. Can't do that without at least a moderate baseline of passing accuracy.
1. Accurate enough then.
2. Well matters as much then. Point of the post is can he and others be successful with less accurate arms as a featured runner ala Jalen Hurts and Philly? Hurts is the featured runner in that attack. The question is out there as to whether the traditional notion of accuracy is going to be as important going forward when the QBs running is such a threat. ie. guys are going to get open easier as more emphasis defensively is going to be put on the QB out of the backfield.
-
27 minutes ago, shasta519 said:
Yeah...I didn't mean to imply that it would shake the entire world of scouting. But it would have to open up some eyes, wouldn't it?
Josh Allen certainly did. And I consider AR to be an even more extreme example, at least according to the metrics. The people who watch tape might see it differently. But if I had to guess, there are quite a few NFL scouts throughout the league that would have passed on drafting AR, at least in R1.
But if he develops into an elite franchise QB, that perception will be heavily challenged. And the NFL is a copycat league, so I think you will start seeing other college players dubbed the "next AR" and so on...younger, athletic QBs that fit that mold. Will it push them up draft boards and therefore push some of them to declare earlier than usual. I would think it's certainly possible.Mahomes was pretty much awesome in college. I didn't really look at QBs back then because Luck was here. But I have gone back and watched some of his tape. And even though it's impossible to watch without some hindsight I think you can just see it...the off-platform throws, the arm, the angles. I think his issues stemmed somewhat from being an Air Raid QB, which much like inexperience and accuracy, was a previous red flag for QBs.
Agreed about Mahomes. I think it was the non NFL type of O as much as anything else that had GMs passing on him.
-
1 hour ago, krunk said:
If you could be shown any of this on film would you stop with this? Or does it matter?
Yeah but if you watch much of his film, of which I watched a fair amount, he's startlingly inaccurate, even not when under pressure, for a top QB pick.
If someone hasn't seen that then they haven't watched much film or has some weird bias.
Of course some of his passes are accurate. Duh. No one would say that he never hits the target. He's very inconsistent with the accuracy and no one except apparently you and a couple other guys on this board are saying anything to the contrary.
There are two questions about this then.
1. Can he become more accurate? No one has any way of knowing this until it happens one way or the other.
2. But further, does it matter with a guy with his athleticism? This is a very interesting question.
But he's certainly unprecedented as a high draft pick having this bad of accuracy issues. He also had no real success in CFB. The talent level is low for FL apparently, but still it's unique that an under 500 CFB QB with stark accuracy issues was a top 4 pick.
People cite Vick. Vick was plenty accurate compared to his peers for the way the game was played back then. He actually led the nation in passing efficiency his 1st year and led VT to the title game with an undefeated record. That's quite a bit different than AR.
I'm not against the pick. I would have tepidly preferred Levis but I am not disappointed with the pick. Most QBs bust. Even top picks so it's likely that AR busts and it's likely that Young, Stroud, and Levis all bust too. I don't think all of them will, but if you take any of the 4 individual the smart bet most of the time is that the player is not going to end up being great.
AR is intriguing and it will be an interesting watch to see how he develops. I wouldn't be surprised either way if he flops completely as a viable NFL franchise QB, or becomes a star in this league. We've never seen anything like it.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, shasta519 said:
The results of this AR experiment potentially could change a lot.
If it works, it's a massive data point for the idea that teams can just grab just any uber-athletic QB with a big arm and mold him into an NFL-caliber passer. I mean...if you can fix/develop a QB that young with that type of short-area accuracy, in theory, you could fix/develop just about any QB (assuming they have the drive).
How does that impact the top of the draft? Will more QBs go in R1? Or will teams start taking a lot more Day 2 swings on traitsy QBs?
Also, what does that mean for QBs in college? If a QB can just get paid and get drafted by a team eager to develop him with NFL coaching, why go back? What value is there in trying to put another college season on tape if teams are already fine with betting on upside? I imagine we would see a lot more guys coming out after 3 years, regardless of how well that season went.
It's very interesting. Like any sport, there are traditionalists that probably hate it.
Yeah, me I used to be a traditionalist. I liked 3 yds and a cloud of dust. I didn't like the downfield passing game and then started enjoying it with manning. Didn't like running QBs because none ever won a title. Pocket passers were the ones that always wion .Now I just want to win. Get the ball across the line by any means necessary.
Hurts was a fairly good passer in CFB, and he looks great. I don't consider Mahomes in the new mold. He's a pocket passer who can move and use arm angles, but there have been guys like that before, not as good but similar.
If AR can score the football with primarily a running attack, the whole league will jump on the bandwagon. It will be interesting to see.
-
4 hours ago, shasta519 said:
That's a refreshingly objective analysis.
A Hurts timeline is probably the best case scenario. AR gets some run his first year and starts year 2. Takes off year 3.
Hurts was one year older as a rookie than AR will be. But Hurts also had played 30 more college games at that point, including a season with Lincoln Riley. And then he got an entire 2nd season to develop with Steichen before breaking out last season.
I just don't think there is going to be a cheat code for AR's lack of experience. It's going to take time.
That 1st paragraph. Oof.
The game has changed though. But oof.
-
3 minutes ago, stitches said:
I think he was being lighthearted and joking around with the media when he said that(it was at the combine). He also said in that same interview just a minute or two earlier that "you cannot muscle every throw in" and he was talking about what he's been working on with his mechanics.
Got it. I actually didn’t hear it either. I read it. I don’t watch much Tv FB news. Can’t deal with the constant hype and drama lol. Almost all my news is what’s posted here.
there is a difference if he’s joking and knows he has the issue. I think it’s important that guys know there flaws.
-
1
-
-
Just now, stitches said:
Yep. Agreed... he looks uncomfortable throwing with touch. He looks awkward when he needs to take something off the power of his throw. I think he even said something to the effect in one of his interviews - he said that when he tries to throw a slow ball it affects his accuracy. Lets see what our coaches can do with him.
One thing concerned me I heard him say predraft was the the guys just need to catch it or something to that effect. T hat is definitely not true. Lots of routes need a catchable placement . He will be coached that and at least seems humble enough to learn that.
he seems to want to let it rip rather than laying it in there short. But that’s probably cause he’s not good at it and it’s frustrating.
-
10 hours ago, IanColts22 said:
I read somewhere though that you can teach a QB footwork delivery but you can't teach accuracy? I don't know if that's true or not but I'm hoping it isn't!
It’s been conventional wisdom. Doesn’t make it true. Lots of conventional FB is proving wrong. If there is a technique flaw though it would seem to be correctable.
Lots of posters here are equating accuracy and completion %. They aren’t equal. Drops are obvious, ints and pass break ups can be accurate too. Ie. The throw goes where it was intended but it shouldn’t have been throw there. You could theoretically complete 20 of 20 short passes and not one would catch the receiver in stride and they would all 20 be inaccurate throws.
-
3 hours ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:
To the bolded, I don’t believe so at large. I just think people are trying to get some hope going that the accuracy issues are either not as critically bad as some of the most negative reviews suggest or that there is hope to get it fixed based on what other similar QBs have been going through.
We obviously won’t know for some time how fixable the flaws is, but I wanted to get your opinion on this question: So you see his technique/mechanics being worse on the short/medium range than the longer throws where he seems to more success rate?
I guess I might have to go back and re-read your draft review one more time.
To me he looks really uncomfortable when not throwing the fastball. He seems to guide the ball. My Dad would say that to me pitching in the back yard. Throw it don’t guide it.
he doesn’t see to have that Mahomes/Rodgers or Shortstop type of ability to change arm angles and hips, legs, feet at different angles and be accurate short. It seems as if he’s almost afraid of letting it go short like he doesn’t trust it.
-
1
-
Colts going to Berlin!
in Colts Football
Posted
Registered friend. I’ll be looking for it. @stitches mentioned me in the post is how I heard about the site to enter.