Nickster
-
Posts
6,348 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Nickster
-
-
3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
This place is full of different personalities. What is funny is, some of the people on here I don't agree with a lot or debate a lot with, might be the best people you meet in person
Oh I’m pretty much the same in person Bestie.
Difference is I don’t always go around asserting my opinions in real life.
But Jeebus Bestie, isn’t that what an open forum message board is for?
-
7 hours ago, cdgacoltsfan said:
Totally wrong. You're dealing with humans and nobody knows for sure how they will perform at the NFL level. Look up the success rate for first round picks.
Nobody knows CD but there are probabilities that are higher.
you look up the success rate of 1st rounders, it’s much higher than 2nds , which is much higher than 3rds and so on. There’s exceptions like Tom Brady and to a lesser extent Brock Purdy but it’s not random dude.
I really don’t know how to play craps but what I do know fo shizzle is that it’s a higher probability to shoot a 7 than any other outcome followed by a 6 or 8, then a 5 or 9, etc.
Drafting NFL players is not blind luck. It’s probability and luck and other stuff.
-
2 hours ago, jvan1973 said:
Well, you have a losers mentality. I don't care for people that would rather lose than win. You and I will never agree. Some folks like to win some people are losers.
Yeah but I love dirt tracking. Them dudes are animals.
-
1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
I guess Nick doesn't care for my authority (sarcasm)
you all right Bestie.
-
1 hour ago, Dunk said:
I get what you are saying. Butttttt and its a huge but. I can't stand to see my team lose week in week out. Too competitive.
I had a hard time as a Dad letting my kids win.
And Dunk I used to be like that with people that I love in certain kinds of games we’d play and quite frankly I’d almost always win and it would cause resentment. Kinda like my debating and reasoning skills on this message board lol.
Then an old wise man (seriously an older guy who was really wise) taught me to let the old lady win at scrabble most of the time, and let’s just say the outcome of that practice was in the ole Nickster’s favor. 😉
Winning is not as important as we think it is in certain areas. Between the lines competing as effectively as you can is, and outside the lines training and treating your body to be as competitive as you can be is.
don’t know how old you are man but if you just beat your kids down, you are likely to make them give up easily and/or make them negatively over competitive.-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Dunk said:
I get what you are saying. Butttttt and its a huge but. I can't stand to see my team lose week in week out. Too competitive.
I had a hard time as a Dad letting my kids win.
Lol. Well I was super competitive on a personal level. And as coach lol. Anyone who knows me when I competed and coached knows I was pretty into winning lol.
As a parent with my athlete sons, winning isn’t as paramount. I have one son who is a good soccer player for a top 5-10 program in Indiana, and he’s sometimes overly competitive to where losses hurt him more than is good and he feels like a loser. I have another son who just had better talent in areas outside of athletics.
as a fan of a pro team I just want the best possible outcome. Best possible outcome in 97 was losing. Best possible outcome in 2011.
If we are out of the race in 3 weeks the best possible outcome is to lose more games to draft higher.
I understand how some feel, but I don’t much deal in feelings when it comes to watching grown men I have no relationship play ball lol. That really seems like it should end by the end of high school to me lol. I mean I have no input into the team with the exception of 4-8 cheap tix a season lol.
So if we drop out of the race, I think the best thing for the future of this club would be the best possible draft position and it doesn’t affect me when anonymous internet posters think that’s a losers’ mentality.
Makes me think they never competed much themselves because if they had and had any success at all, they’d likely know the difference lol.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, NFLfan said:
Please quit writing "Jvan". You have written that at least three times. It looks like baiting. Just stop.
Thanks.
Huh? That’s his screen name. I call everyone by their screen name .
-
4 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:
Increases odds, yes. Not worth tanking though
Well what is the definition of tanking?
Of course you want your players to play their best. Even if you disagree about GM and AR for which I think as things stand GM is more conducive to winning.
But lets say that you were going to have AR start on the sidelines and come in halfway through the season, even if your team was say 3-4 and 4-5 but 3 games out of first. Would you scrap the plan of developing your rookie? I wouldn't. Winning would not be as important as development. Is that tanking?
Me I for one was very glad we kept losing after it was obvious in whatever it was 2012 or so when we got the 1st rounder and Luck.I don't think "developing younger talent" is necessarily tanking when you are out of a race.
If we are out of it after theses next 3 games I hope we lose lose lose.
If not, I'm going to be rooting to win, but I think it might decrease our chances of being really competitive in the future.
-
13 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:
For 40 years?
Well basically yeah.
The old Brown franchise (current Ravens) was competive in the 80s and early 90s and have been the most of this millineum.
So it's really been about 25 years since the new Browns existed and the best two QBs they had were Couch and Mayfield, both #1 overall, and neither particularly good. They've tried several other QBs since then including a few mid to late 1st rounders.
So yeah Jvan.The last 25 years of Brown futiltiy is likely attributable mostly to bad QBs.
-
7 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:
The years between Pagel and Manning were very lean. We had the top 2 picks in 92. Still barren for years. No matter how bad we are this year, they aren't taking a QB in the first round next year. I would rather see wins than losses this season
For 40 years?
No one claims high draft picks guarantee anything Jvan. Who are you debating that with?
You don't think that having a high pick increases your chances of drafting a great QB, EDGE, etc?
-
25 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
I would rather make the playoffs every year because winning is fun and it also shows we are a relevant team by doing so - not a team that other fanbases just laugh at, and still pick high, like around 20th. Then eventually you may win a SB. To me unless you are picking #1 in the draft and have a Peyton Manning or Andrew Luck coming out, picking 10th or 20th isn't much different. The 20th player picked in the draft could easily be better than the 10th player being drafted. You should root for your favorite team to win not lose unless like I said, you have the #1 pick that can change your franchise. This is why some of your take's blow me away. I could not imagine watching a game with you and you rooting for another team to beat us because you want a higher draft pick. I don't have any friends that I watch with or have been to games with that have ever thought like that.
I mean if all people are hoping for is a high draft pick every year what the purpose of even watching every week? That is basically hoping we lose every week. Then if we are start off 1-5 the next season, you are in the same position again of hoping for a high draft pick again. What fun is that? Might as well just watch the draft and hope we lose every week.
Why do you think you are an authority on what people should do or shouldn't do? I think you must have an overinflated sense of righteousness.
It's in the interest of winning sometimes that it's good for the club to lose. Short term loss for long term gain.
It's not fun to lose. But sometimes in the NFL it's necessary in order to reset the roster. Not quite, but almost without exception, bad rosters, bad teams, bad orgs are only reset by a great QB and other top of the draft type of talent. Sometimes this type of talent falls later.
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:
The browns have had high draft picks for years. It hasn't translated into many wins.
And another thing JVAN, the main two reasons that this club has been competive at all for this millinuem is that they happened to be the worst team in the league the years before Manning and Luck were drafted with the #1 picks.
If we would have drafted Leaf and RG3 for instance after earning a 2nd pick in those years, then I shudder to think of what this last two decades would have been like. Probably like being a fan of the Lions.
-
1
-
-
Just now, jvan1973 said:
The browns have had high draft picks for years. It hasn't translated into many wins.
The Browns keep swinging and missing at QB.
It's not a guarantee of success. But it helps.To me the two best things a club can do is draft a great QB and a great EDGE. Sometimes great QBs are drafted later, but usually the top EDGE players are from the top.
-
2
-
-
10 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
I am an optimist, but I am also going to keep it real. After losing this past week, we have back ourselves into a corner. I felt we got cheated but it doesn't matter because we are 3-4 now, nothing is going to change that. In order to make the playoffs I think we need to win the next 3 games. All are winnable games is why and that would put is 6-4. 6-4 compared 5-5 is huge because our schedule gets harder after that.
I am not an optimist and I see no virtue in being an optimist personally. In my line of work, so-called "optimism" has led to a bunch of real dumb stuff that effects people long term.
Truth is I would rather us be the worst record in the league then to sneak in the post. I think holding the top draft pick would be in the long term interest of this ball club that I root for. I think we need high end talent and maybe even a QB of the future. Not out on AR but not totally in either.It doesn't matter to me when people object to this outlook either.
But what I think has been happening to us for about decade now is that we haven't been competive enough to be a true contender, but we've been too competitive to "earn" high draft picks, which has doomed us to the Hell of Mediocrity IMO. I think high end talent in the most important positions is what we need. That usually comes from the top of the draft. We've been marginally competive for several years now and with our draft capital and money spend focused on players in middle of the field, we've been just good enough not to be bad enough to get high impact talent in wide positions and it's hurting us IMO.
So I'd rather be terrible than OK for a year or two. That said, my theory only goes so far. If we aren't bad enough to be at the very top 3 or 4 of the draft, then I'd rather see us sneak into the post.
So for me it's kind of like an unwanted preventive medical procedure. No one wants it, but sometimes it enhances life.-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, cdgacoltsfan said:
I think we have all that covered except feared pass rusher and maybe WR1. I think the young CBs will be fine when healthy.
I am not high at all on our coners. Maybe on the QB. Hopefully.
Raimann is at the least good enough if not a budding star player. And like you, I don't think we have the EDGE we need.
-
24 minutes ago, cdgacoltsfan said:
Drafts are a total crapshoot. Colts lead to reestablish a winning culture. The only way to do that is to.....umm....win.
I think the best way to establish a winning culture is to acquire the best possible players starting with QB, then EDGE, then LT, then WR, then DT, then CB.
I don't think there is much else to it at the NFL level.-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, J@son said:
well I guess we're even then.
Actually I don't really want to discuss this topic, and I don't need to read your other responses...I've already seen them and took no issue really with anything else you posted. I simply wanted to point out that your comparison was absurd. You cherry picked the years of Reich that you wanted to use for comparison by excluding Sam, Matt and Jacoby which left only Luck, Wentz and Rivers to compare to Shane's first 7 games with a rookie AR and Minshew. Then in a later post you said you didn't think it was a good comparison to include Reich's time with Carolina because his QB seems in over his head. All of that together created a bubble of absurdity.
that's it. End of story. That was all I wanted to do, and I did. So now, I'm done here. Thanks for playing and have a great day.
You too Jason lol.
Don't really want to discuss the topic lol. Jeezus.
-
Just now, J@son said:
Yes, as long as he had a high level talent at QB. You your self said
Most coaches look better than they really are when they have a high level talent at QB.
then you should avoid talking into the mirror.
If you seriously want to discuss this topic. Look at some of my other responses in this thread. Reich won 7 games with Jacoby and and had his name in the MVP discussion lol.
You don't want to understand the point.
I've said over and over that if SS starts putting up 30+ a game then it will be clear. But this game so far is anamolous. Plus I watched the game. The Browns for whatever reason had several blown coverages, especially on Josh Downs. He made a couple of nice plays, but most of his yardage came from 2 blown coverages, on the TD and about another 35 yarder that he did nothing special on. The Browns left his zone uncovered. The Pittman TD was a nice play by MBJ, but they shouldn't have let him loose for 75 yards. They had several guys in the area.
Now it's possible that the Brown's blown coverage was because of SS outscheming them. IDK.If he keeps causing defenses to break down, then it will become obvious.
Minshew played really really well. That longer TD run of his was pretty surprising.We averaged 23 points before the outburst on Sunday. That's not bad, but it's nothing special. Frank averaged that with JB and Hoyerable.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, J@son said:
Who cares if the roster is vastly different or not. The difference in QB play/ability from Luck/Wentz/Rivers is night and day compared to AR/Minshew. If you can't comprehend that, then I can't help you with your football knowledge, or lack thereof.
So all you did was point out that Luck/Rivers/Wentz were better than AR/Minshew are right now. Which....duh lol
Incorrect. I pointed out that Reich did a pretty good job here.
Thanks for playing. Good afternoon, good evening, and Good night.Completly uninterested in bombastic, half wit, personal responses like yours.
-
34 minutes ago, J@son said:
.but you thought it was a good comparison to make comparing Reich's points per game only when he had either Luck or Rivers to Steichen with a rookie AR and Minshew? gtho lol
No, no one needs to explain anything to you. You're comparing Reich's offense with either Luck, Rivers or Wentz at QB to Shane's offenses this year with a rookie AR and Minshew. That might and probably is the most absurd thing you've posted on here.
do you think Reich as coach with Minshew at QB would have put up 38 points on the Browns?
You think that this roster is vastly different than it was with Wentz or last season with Ryan? I do not.
The point of the ppg with Luck and Rivers which is certainly farther away from this team no doubt is simply to point out that Reich did a good job here. That his offenses were good here and that I am not sold on SS being clearly better for us than Reich was for us.
You don't comprehend my point? Can't help you with your lack of reasoning skills.
-
I still don't think this is a playoff caliber team. But it's no longer a strong feeling.
With the apparent weakness of schedule we may have a chance at the post.
In three more weeks I will have a solid opinion on this topic. If we lose the next three games we'd be effectively out of the race, and at that point I'd be for losing and getting high draft captal.
If we sweep or go 2-1, then we are legit playoff contenders and I'd be all about it.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
I actually don't think you are Troll but I knew I could get you to respond to my Homer post. You have had several takes I don't agree with but that doesn't make you a troll, I was just messing with you
Me too. But the Troll Hunters are boring and interfere with good discussion in my opinion.
4 minutes ago, lester said:I'll take, "Tell me you don't follow the Colts closely without telling me that you don't follow the Colts closely."
Unimportant minutiae. Even though he did finish one game the point that he isn't finishing games is valid.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
Self Identification is kinda funny.
-
19 hours ago, FanFromtheWasteland said:
I was called a troll for committing the mortal sin of suggesting we may have to start considering looking past AR after his 3rd and season ending injury
Lotta self righteous, self appointed troll hunters here Wasteland. It gets frustrating.
Plenty of people here who like to talk ball though.
-
1
-
Remainder of the Season. Want vs Need
in Colts Football
Posted
Takes 2 to tango and more than one to argue, unless one is schizophrenic.
And yes I love argumentation and debate. I absolutely love it and I think it’s good for the ole neurons and can also be a way to gain knowledge.