Nickster
-
Posts
6,348 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Nickster
-
-
5 minutes ago, DougDew said:
We would have been competing for the SB if we had Luck, and SF would have been 2 and 7 down the stretch if they played with JB instead of JG, is that what you're saying?
So Lucks' retirement basically prevented our roster from performing like SFs and SFs roster would have performed like the Colts' if they had JB?
I don't see that, and I see choosing to make those assumptions as being an alternative reality.
That sure seems to be what happened to them last year only they were 4-12 down the stretch. THen they got perhaps the most impactful edge guy as a bonus.
They'd probably be more like 7-9 with JB, when teams realzed that there was absolutely no passing threat whatsoever.
-
1
-
-
Last 10 games last year. Luck 2801 23 TDs
Last 10 games this year. Garrapolo 2664 21 TDs
Reich was trying to build the exact same kind of offense. Game manager doesn't mean the QB sucks. JB is a game manager who sucks.
-
1
-
-
Just now, DougDew said:
That's fine. You should post that info in one of the JB threads to help explain why we were 2 and 7 down the stretch. Most think that it was JBs fault, and use low passing stats to prove it.
Because he is a terrible QB Doug. That simple. Luck actually did play game manager in a lot of those 10 wins last year.
Game manager is more about game plan than a QBs ability. Reich insisted on more game manager role than last year and would have had it IMO. How much better do you think the already prodigious Colts running game would be with Luck than JB?
When Luck needed to throw, he threw. WHen he didn't he managed. Garrapolo did that this year. Prodigious passing numbers v. NO when they needed it and Arizona.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, DougDew said:
Were talking about the 49ers and the Colts only, right? And how Luck's retirement relative to that is or isn't relevant.
Relative to the QB, SF has made the SB with a Qb that has played like a game manager. He may have the talent to be more than that, but the talent he could have used but didn't use isn't really relevant. Did SF have to give a second to get the level of QB play they've gotten?
The Colts have never been built to win with a game manager. We have been built to support a performance by an elite QB. I don't see how Luck's retirement is relevant to the discussion of rosters, unless you say that Luck's retirement exposed the roster and our strategy.
We either had a good 52 roster or a bad 52 roster whether Luck was here or not. That's just the way I was looking at it. That's reality, the part about assuming what we could have had was the alternative reality.
So Doug how do you account for SFs crap season last year?
Now you shouldn't have to think to hard here.
-
38 minutes ago, DougDew said:
Nah, not when the subject is the building of a team. His retirement changed our w/l record, but didn't have much impact on the rest of the team.
We were 2 and 7 down the stretch, 7 and 9 total. Sure we would have played to more wins, but looking at how Luck always carried this team, by how we won shootouts around the centric performance of a QB, and comparing that with how JG threw 11 passes in the ch
ampionship game, says a lot about each teams roster.
And Doug go back and look at Luck's game log from last year. Starting with the 1st game of the 10 out of 11 streak, Luck only threw for 300 yds. twice and had 2 games under 200.
Before last year's 10 out of 11 I agree, we needed hero ball from Luck. Not last year.
In the playoff win v Houston. Luck threw for only 222.
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, DougDew said:
Nah, not when the subject is the building of a team. His retirement changed our w/l record, but didn't have much impact on the rest of the team.
We were 2 and 7 down the stretch, 7 and 9 total. Sure we would have played to more wins, but looking at how Luck always carried this team, by how we won shootouts around the centric performance of a QB, and comparing that with how JG threw 11 passes in the championship game, says a lot about each teams roster.
The team is in decent shape IMO. They just suck at QB. SF has built a D by drafting top 5 talent because they sucked. They spent a buttload on a top 3rd QB and can run because they have a passing threat.
The quality of talent on Dlines is almost always toward the top. The Colts have not had the luxury to draft top 5 talent.
I think it's difficult to argue that the Nelson pick wasn't a great pick.
What did SF do without JG and Bosa last year Doug? cripe is what they did. I think they won 2 games all year. So do you think their rebuild plan was to have their high priced FA QB go down, be the worst team in the leauge and draft a trancendent young pass rusher? I doubt it. They are good partly because they've been so bad for so long. And had the good fortune to be able to tank last year.
They had crap QBing and not near as good on the D line.
Truth is, the best thing the Colts to do is to bring back Painter and go winless, and draft Lawrence. This would be following the SF plan.
-
2
-
-
One of the things I think people are not considering is that SF sucking last year helped the team immensely. I doubt they are where they are without Bosa. He's a game changer. You might get lucky on a Bosa type down the draft, but usually these elite edge guys are top couple of 3 picks.
Anyone who says that Luck retiring is irrelvant to this particular discussion is in an alternative reality.
He reset the whole organizational strategy with that bombshell.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, DougDew said:
OK, I'll get accused of being a Grigson lover, but I just want to point out your point about strategy. "Swung hard in FA" "Made brave trades when the opportunity arose." Those are two things you should do when you have an elite QB on the roster. Because, frankly, when you have that QB, you always have a chance to advance through the playoffs. You tend to be in "win now" mode. BB did that each of the last 5 years with an old Brady, and it paid off. I think RG tried the same thing.
The player selections were bad, but I think the strategy was the correct one for the situation.
You're not really worried about building a core group of young players. Hopefully that happens via the draft, but that's not really a strategy for winning while you have the QB.
Ballard has stated he wants to build through the draft. That's going to take time (maybe Luck didn't want to stick around getting beaten up waiting for the team to arrive. Maybe AC won't either).
But since we don't currently have the QB, and our GM is intent on building through the draft trying to get a core group of young players, its probably best just to think that we are in full blown rebuild mode that will take some time.
Grigson lover.
-
2 hours ago, DougDew said:
Goodness. All QBs scramble at times, but Luck was viewed as a pocket passer that needed a clean pocket....like most NFL QBs. The best way to protect the QB is to keep him in the pocket. That is the reason Ballard drafted "the last starting caliber G on the board" at 37 even after drafting the best starting caliber G on the board at pick 6.
Traditional positional value was put aside to solve a more important need at the time.
Throwing the ball away is the option used by pocket passers to avoid injury. Scrambling exposes them to injury, but it extends the play, giving them an opportunity to make something out of nothing when the pocket collapses in 2 seconds. Ballard wanted a 5 second pocket even though he had a very athletic QB who could scramble.
Nelson was a no brainer in my opinion. Even though his position has less value, he is so good that it makes up quite a bit of ground. Smith pick has been fantastic. He's playing at a high level at a higher valued position.
It sucks that the org was in a position to have to spend so much draft capital on interior linemen, but that was where they were weakest by far. Luck used to get pummeled right up the middle. It is amazing how good he played when he was getting all that pressure in his face. It is hard to scramble well when the pressure comes directly from between the tackles.
I think everyone is underestimating some of the effectiveness of the players on this team because of the terrible QB play and the collapse of a young defense during the last month.
Prior to the last month the D was very good.
The rushing offense is fantastic on this one dimensional team.
Doug the elephant in the room is that we went from a great QB to a crap one. It is impossible to discuss everything else without getting into Jacoby.
With Luck, we could be playing in 2 weeks IMO. I am not saying that for sure, but I think it would be possible for the team to show up better than KC. We might have even had homefield advantage. Their run D is subpar and probably we could have exploited that. I think it would have been probable that the Colts would have improved more than KC improved since the playoff game a year ago.
I think it would be tough, but I also think that beating KC is a daunting task for anyone.
I think anyone counting out Rock is short sighted. He played relatively well with the exception of that one game. I think he's a good one.
I agree we need a DT, but who doesn't? SF and a couple other teams maybe.
Again, I think an above average guy, a top 3rd QB would have this team right up there. I think we would need to fill a couple of other needs to be on KC, SF, maybe NO level.
-
2
-
-
Might be looking at what changes management will make.
-
Arians offense is still turnover prone, but don't think this guy is a good fit. If its Brissett or Winston. No brainer Winston.
-
1 minute ago, CR91 said:
If I had to guess, Brady is better off going to Chicago. Great defense and run game and pretty good weapons in Robinson and Gabriel
He would do fine here I think. He'd find Hines and Mack a lot out of the backfield and TY would be a great fit for him.
I am not a big believer in what he has left, but if it's him or JB. The choice should be obvious IMO.
-
If the choice is either him or Jacoby Brisett.
-
It doesn't matter what kind of DT we get if we don't improve at QB.
I hope hire a vet to run the team the next year or two AND draft a QB with the 1st pick if there is a guy available at 13.
-
1
-
-
50 minutes ago, Myles said:
Very good, but not the best int he league.
5th in yards allowed (11-pass, 6-rush)
3rd in points allowed
13th in rushing yards per attempt - 4.0
11th in passing TD's
But what made them great that year was 18 defensive TDs on 44 TOs
-
1
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, aaron11 said:
the bears team the colts played in the super bowl was worse imo
that could be considered a different era by now too
Man they had an all time type of D.
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:
Their defense is legitimate super bowl caliber, their run defense in particular. Kinda crazy considering nobody really has really talked about it or any particular player on their team. But they win the turnover margin, stop the run very well, and that ended up exposing the Ravens. Their pass D is pretty average I think.
It'll be interesting watching them play the Chiefs. I'm not even going to try to make predictions, because it could go either way. I can't really bet against Mahomes though. While Derrick Henry and Tannehill have been playing extremely well, I think most of us believe they are overperforming. When does the bottom fall out? Or do they go on some Flacco-esq 4 game Herculean run to a Super Bowl win? I dunno. But look at it this way, for the first time in like 5 years, there is no concern about anyone having to go through the Patriots anymore. Been a while since I could enjoy the NFL playoffs.
I like the D but it isn't statisically impressive. They were 21st in the league in yds allowed and 12 in points allowed. Colts by comparison were 18 and 16 comparitively. The Colts were also better against the run and pass yardage wise.
-
Definitely not with Brisett. Taking him out of the equation, I'd say it's close. They will be much better than us next year if the current QB situ is the same for both teams.
-
On 1/11/2020 at 5:51 PM, TimetobringDfence! said:
After watching the playoffs so far the team winning are the ones with the best olines and dlines hands down. We need to Build our dline to match our oline, then get a good a QB and we will be on the path to success.
I don’t think KC fits that narrative, but yeah.-
1
-
-
Tannehills regular season was a fairly prolific passing one.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, runthepost said:
Even the great Bill had a few misses
The Sanu trade appears to be ridiculous.
-
Actually just saw that Brady had an elbow injury. That would kinda prove my point that it looks like he can't throw wide anymore.
Brady averaged 379 yds in the 2016-2017 playoffs without Gronk.
-
43 minutes ago, DougDew said:
I guess I was comparing it to what would have been said about him last year, that he looks like he can get it to the boundary. I guess if they are both reserved statements, it was about, what?, 60/40 last year and 40/60 this year? I was just thinking the presence/nonpresence of Gronk being 100/0 and 0/100 had more to do with any significant drop off in Brady's performance. A misunderstanding. I said I was sorry once. Again, Sorry.
I think that Brady has less arm strength this year than last year yes. I think the Pats are hurt by no Gronk yes. However, a couple of seasons ago they won the SB without him and last year he had less than 700 yds receiving so it opens the possiblitly that Brady's diminshment might have other causal factors doesn't it Doug?
-
2 minutes ago, DougDew said:
Sorry. I guess I was thinking the word ANYMORE being synonymous with NEVER. Taking the extreme to one side as a base, then juxtapose it with the other extreme, that would be ALWAYS. My bad.
Come on Doug Quixote. Here is my quote. "I don't know man. It doesn't look like Brady can get the ball to the boundary anymore." Seems pretty qualified and reserved to me rather than absolute.
Look at what San Francisco has done in 3 years
in Colts Football
Posted
I thought so too until I watched them the last two weeks. Their offense is 4th in the league in total yds. and scoring. Last year their D was worse than Indy. Bosa changed that around.
Look at the last 4 games in the regular season. The offense carried them the last month just like they did Sunday.
The Colts main issue is that their top tier QB retired and left them with a back up caliber QB.
SF main issue last year is that their top 3rd QB was out for the season and they didn't have Nick Bosa.
Give us Bosa and Garappolo. Good chance we are playing next Sunday IMO. THem with JB. They don't make the playoffs IMO>