Nickster
-
Posts
6,348 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Nickster
-
-
32 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:
Would that maybe have something to do with getting zero pressure on any QB 99% of the game? If your dline isn’t getting pressure, sacks or even hurrying up a QB, what LB will cover any WR or TE well enough to be “good”?
No not really it doesn't effect the grade. It can effect the outcome of the play but the grader would compensate for bad pressure by looking at time in coverage.
LBs are vital in all zone coverage and none of ours are good at it.
Like a LB can get a plus grade on a play for which the guy in his zone catches a TD pass. If a LB had good zone coverage, the play broke down and the QB scramble and makes a play to an improvising pass catcher, then he could still earn a plus grade for that play even when giving up a TD.
Grades don't rely on the team's outcome. They are determined by individual contribution and responsility on each play.
-
16 hours ago, Peter Nova said:
I think mobile and dual threat are different and often confused. P. Mahomes is a mobile QB, but he's a past first QB. Your dual threat, are QBs that strength is running and making plays for with their legs. Historically, those QBs, play well early in there career, but not very long with success. Not to mention, they don't dominate post season or SB play. JMO.
Well Hurts is definitely dual threat. And he put up incredible numbers in the Superbowl, and did than his part to win putting up 35 points.
Newton also went the Superbowl and could have won it.
I agree with you about shorter careers, but there is some real success from running QBs lately, and the league is followoing suit. It's a copycat league. I think teams are willing to experiment and draft guys with a 5 or 6 year window at QB rather than a 10-12 year window as in the past.
I agree with what you are saying but the NFL historical practices have radically changed in the last half dozen or so years especailly at the QB position.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:
If we get Jeudy, I think our WR group can be damn good. Ogletree is coming along nicely. Downs/Jeudy/Pittman/Pierce could really open up the passing game and keep defenders from trying to stack so much at the line.
With that said, everything will depend on AR being healthy and not having such bad luck with hits. He can only get better and better as time goes on.
Matt Gay has been a godsend after all the bad kicking we’ve dealt with since AV.
The oline has really turned it around from last year.
Franklin and Speed have been wildly good, and as Steichen/Bradley said about Leonard, he won’t be normal until November.
Brents has been a nice surprise. I feel like his game will improve more and more as time goes on.
Our LBs aren't that good. They are getting way too much praise here for the actual results. They excel v. the run but are a terrible unit in pass coverage and that is the name of the game these days.
In the 80s, our LB crew would be top notch. Here in the 20s, they are not that good.-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:
Forgot to add that to my OP list.
Adding Matt Gay was money well spent. He's already won us one game. Making a difference in others.
I am somewhat encouraged by Downs. He looks like he might be decent. Brents looks like a decent player.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, John Hammonds said:
"What do we got on the spacecraft that's good?" -- Ed Harris, Apollo 13
In the midst of all of the disappointing things happening with the team, there are GOOD things to note, too!
1 - We're 3-3, and 2-2 in the division. In other words, we're in the thick of it. Did anyone truly predict this during the !@#$%$ show last season?
2 - We have the #10 offense. 14th in rushing, 12th in passing. How bad was our offense last year? Looks like Ballard scored by hiring Steichen.
3 - Zaire Franklin leads the league in tackles with 77. And that's just after 6 games.
4 - The Offensive Line is playing well. Remember how we were doubting Ryan Kelly? And saying Will Fries didn't deserve to start? And wondering if Bernard Raimann was getting up to speed or not. Looks like they are.
This is the best thing for this team right now. 2 lower draftpick tackles getting it done on rookie contracts. Playing good football. One of the most surprising things I've seen in years in athletics is Kelly this year. He's never been THIS good and he hasn't been any good in years.
Line looks good with average guard play, good tackle play, and great center play.
2 hours ago, John Hammonds said:5 - JuJu Brents is up to the task. He got thrown in the deep end, without the benefit of a preseason. And he's got this.
6 - Michael Pittman has 406 yards after 6 games. That's projecting to about 1200 yards for the year. That's a good thing, yes?
7 - Zach Moss has 466 yards after 6 games. He probably won't make 1000 yards, now that JT is back with the team. But it's good, yes?
8 - JT is back with the team. A lot of us, including me (including JT!!) thought that the relationship with the team was irretrievably broken.
9 - We have three DLine guys with 3 or more sacks after 6 games. That projects to 9 to 12 sacks for the year. For three different guys. Definitely exceeding my expectations!
10 - Josh Downs has 276 yards through 6 games. That's a projection of 750 yards for the year. For a rookie slot receiver. I'm down with that.
11 - Blake Freeland has had to start at both RT and LT already. And he's not sucked. Nobody expected he would have to do this, nor that he would play as well as he has.
Again, this is great.
2 hours ago, John Hammonds said:Yes, there are good things happening this year. Might as well celebrate them too.
The Oline is the only thing I see that is positve without really working hard to look for postive things.
EDIT: The kicker is really good too.
-
1
-
1
-
-
39 minutes ago, DougDew said:
Dabears had Bobby Douglas. But he was white.
todays qbs have to still be great passers. But maybe not every throw
so between their wheels and their arms, the nfl is starting to look like a boxing match between two opposing superhero’s with a bunch of rotational role players filling in the other positions.
if you don’t have the superhero. You’re not even in the ring
it’s evolving away from being interesting Jmo
It was Vince Evans whom I was thinking about. Just remembered him. That was my dawning as a football fan kid of Da Bears back in the early days of Sir Walter.
I agree about the QB thing and interst BTW.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, RollerColt said:
I was actually legit curious on who you wanted to draft, there wasn’t any ulterior motive or gotcha stuff tied to it.
I’ll be really curious to see how everyone plays out next year and in ‘25.
I get your point on QBs who can dance around a bit. That indeed does look like the future for the NFL.
It's more than dance to me that is going on, there have been scrambling QBs back to the days of Fran the man and Roger the Dodger. What has changed dramatically over the course of the last couple few years is QBs who are drafted to be runners not scramblers like LJ, Fields, Hurts, Allen etc. The game changed in that respect. None of these guys would have been drafted high even 10 years ago. You had one once in a blue moon. I think you are younger than me.
The Bears had a QB back in the day can't remember his name, black dude though when I don't think there had been any black QBs yet, that ran a lot. Then there was Young for a couple years and Randall Cunning ham, then Vick, then NEwton, and now a bevy of guys. Point is there have only been a few times in NFL history when there have been running Qbs have any success and now there are a few.
-
Just now, RollerColt said:
Nothing but testing over here this week as well. I’ll probably be stepping off of the site more in the future as we ramp up curriculum. Gotta get ready for all of the observations…
Yeah dude and when I say call out, my panties aren't in a bunge. This is the type of thing I want to do on this site. Go back and forth talking ball.
You literally though asked me about my ideas on AR and must misremember what we discussed because there is one good example of a guy in allen who recently fixed some of the accuarcay issues and I said as much early on. I'm not sure if allen would be a great NFL QB without the running/scrambling too.
It just seemed strange to me that a dude asks your opinion, you give it, then show that he was inaccurate on your viewpoints and then somehow you are the one arguing lol.
No big deal. Just interesting to me.
-
1 minute ago, RollerColt said:
I’m not calling you out on anything. I actually respect you quite a bit as one fellow teacher to another.
Take care.
All right man. Hey we had PSAT yesterday and something else today. I've had a lot of time at the ole computer these last couple days lol. These are the good ones sometimes.
-
11 minutes ago, RollerColt said:
I think it’s possible.
I’m not sure what point you’re making anymore. It feels like you’re arguing with me just for the sake of arguing. I can say one thing, you’ll disagree and say I’m not talking about whatever point you’re making.
Have a good day.
Dude seriously this takes the cake. I didn't respond to you, wasn't arguing with you, I think the fundammental disagreement is that AR can be a tradtional drop back QB in retrospect.
You call me out and then I'm the one arguing.
Jesus skin is paper thin these days.
-
8 minutes ago, RollerColt said:
I think it’s possible.
I’m not sure what point you’re making anymore. It feels like you’re arguing with me just for the sake of arguing. I can say one thing, you’ll disagree and say I’m not talking about whatever point you’re making.
Have a good day.
I literally have no idea what you are talking about. Didn't you respond to one of my posts? Or call me out on what we went "round and round about"? lol. I never said I don't think AR cant' be a good NFL QB. I doubt and still doubt his ability to be good without the running.
I don't think it's very likely that AR or Allen or LJ and Newton was proven not to be able to be a great NFL QB without the wheels.
-
5 minutes ago, RollerColt said:
We’ve gone round and round earlier this year on this topic of whether accuracy can be improved. We didn’t agree then and won’t agree now. It is what it is.
I think you are missing the point. And in the long quote above back when he was drafted I said he might imporve his accuracy. I also believe one of those quotes or maybe it was another one discusses how Allen broke the established NFL belief that inaccracy can't be improved. So I am not sure what you are referencing on that.
The point I was making in the quote your above response addresses is that it might not be necessary to be that accurate of a passer with his qualities.
So you can actually envison a scenario that AR blows a knee and permantly loses his athletic ability and becomes a great drop back traditional QB?
I can't envision that personally.
-
56 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:
Agreed. Bill Walsh always said that wr is the last position you draft in building a team. I think this team might be lucky to win 2 games moving forward. It is going to be tough . The Oline is going to face loaded boxes. It is basically going to be on Minshew to win games and I don't have a lot of faith in him as a starter. Plus, the wr talent on this team is very average except for Downs who has shown some big play ability.
Bill Walsh coached in a different era when running the FB was much more important than it is now. I couldn't disagree with Bill Walsh more on this one if he still believes this. RB would be the last postion you'd draft when building team these days. WR should be near the top After QB, interspersed with LT, EDGE, and WR/pass catching TE.
-
4
-
-
45 minutes ago, RollerColt said:
Fair enough. I think he has the ability to be an NFL QB throwing-wise. Time will tell.
For the good of the jury, I actually wanted Stroud but knew we weren't going to get him.
I don't think that AR is ever going to be an accurate enough thrower without the designed runs, scrambles, roll/sprint outs.
But I've also said that that might not be necessary any more with the running QB. Like over and over, I've said AR might work out running with JT (even though that didn't make any differnce.)
-
Just now, Superman said:
I guess if you have a good enough QB, any roster can be a playoff roster. I don't think our roster is that impressive.
I agree with this a gazillion percent.
Just now, Superman said:The big thing we were all looking forward to was watching Richardson play, and hopefully improve as the season went on. It sucks that we won't get anymore of that.
Yeah, there really isn't that much to be excited about I guess.
I still think there is an outside chance we can compete in the division this year, even though I don't think we have an impressive roster. We are playing a lot of not good teams. If not after a week or two, I won't be overly interested in the games.-
3
-
-
20 hours ago, Stephen said:
Maybe we should have drafted levis in the second to go along with Richardson like irsay said lol
I wanted them to do that. I wanted them to double dip.
-
2 hours ago, RollerColt said:
He was starting to look like himself again against a good defense in the Seahawks. Was his 2nd half great? No, but Joe has always had quiet quarters. What matters is his ability to elevate the team around him. Let's see how he looks after a much needed bye week.
@Nickster: who were you wanting the Colts to draft? Obviously not Richardson.
IF you were really interested in what I was thinking about AR and the other prospects, here's a history of what I said lol.
Here's what I said around the combine on March 10
You didn't ask me but I like Stroud and Levis. I like Stroud's accuracy and Levis release.
Young is a munchkin. I have said a few times in threads here though that if there was a ever time a small guy like that could be good it's now with the QB friendly rules.
AR is an incredible athlete. Other than the deep balls, he looked terribly in accurate throwing the FB against air at the combine.
He could be a great runner that learns to throw accurately though.
I've never watched Hooker play or throw, but from what I understand from reading he played in no read/1 read system and that always turns me off when translating to THE League.
But I don't have real strong opinions on any of these guys. I gave up projecting college QB talent to the NFL over a decade ago lol. Tough business.
THIS was my quote about AR the day before he was drafted on april 27. I don't watch much CFB. I was unimpressed with his accuracy during the combine, but I'll spare you the quote.
"Watching this vid Chugga. Sure. Effortless. But also. Too high. too low. Behind the pass catcher. And short throws almost never in stride so that the receiver can get YACS.
From the film I've seen and the combine session, I can't believe this kid is near the conversation of a top 5 pick.
Not saying he won't be good with the athleticism and he seems like a smart kid and quick processer I guess fromt he S2 test.
But good lord he's an erratic thrower of the football right now.He's kinda like Ebby Nuke Laloosh. Great velocity, horrible accuracy.
Maybe he'll wear some Women's lingerie and get accurate.
I am very skeptical of this kid being a NFL caliber thrower of the football. Something drastic has to change for that to the case. But the talent package is there no doubt. "
Here's what I said the day after he was drafted April 28
Steichen probably sees an even more explosive version of Hurts.
Hurts played 4 years of CFB and was a much more polished passer with actual success in college. I get that.
I don't know how it will play out, but I really think CB and SS think they can develop this guy into a stud. I think they probably think the guy is too good to pass up.
I have serious doubts about the kid as an accurate enough passer of the football at the NFL level, but he's still 20. Football has changed dramatically. Hurts is a run first QB and just put up 35 in the the big bowl. It's a reality. It's different.
But AR will be perdy good Day 1 running the mesh with JT if we get minimally competent line play. I don't think he will start right away, but I expect to see him taking some snaps in Game 1.
Don't know Doug. I'd really like to see us go for Levis or Hooker in R2. I think we could likely convert a pick like that into a nice draft pick in year or two when we are really ready to compete and have a better handle on where our needs are going to be when and if AR is ready to be a good QB. Will the austrian work out at LT? Will our young Pass catchers develop? will our Dline with all the investment improve? Lots of unanswered questions that will also take a year or two to judge.
There will likely be even more QB desperate teams next season than this season IMO.
-
2 hours ago, RollerColt said:
He was starting to look like himself again against a good defense in the Seahawks. Was his 2nd half great? No, but Joe has always had quiet quarters. What matters is his ability to elevate the team around him. Let's see how he looks after a much needed bye week.
@Nickster: who were you wanting the Colts to draft? Obviously not Richardson.
why is that obvious? I'm not anti-Richardson.
-
2 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
I really don't know how to explain it to you, of course his QBR is 26th right now because he has struggled, so yes that particular stats is factual as of today regarding Burrow. The misleading thing is, he is a lot better than being the 26th best QB. Has he played good this year - no, but anyone that follows football would still rank him in the top 5 QB's in the league. A few bad games does not mean he is who the QB he is. That is about the only way I can explain it. If you disagree with me that is fine because I can't find a way to explain it any better lol.
Bottomline is, I just think using 1 thing to measure how good a QB is, doesn't tell the whole story. One thing I have learned from stats people is, they never factor in a QB's presence/leadership, fear factor, or clutch factor - those things do not show up on a stat sheet. It is just all about stats. I am even a stats guy to an extent, but I would take Joe Montana over Drew Brees all-time and that would be an easy decision but statistically by almost any measure, Brees was better. No matter how I explain things I doubt you will get my point, but I tried.
Well Dude I don't know what to tell you other than the QBR for Burrow seems to be a pretty good indicator of how he is playing. Yeah, leadership yada yada yada. Not to say it's not important, but Burrow is leading the WORST OFFENSE STATISTICALLY IN THE NFL. In two of there three wins they scored less than 20 points per game and have only scored 3 TDS combined.
I guess he led the defense lol?
So I am not even clear on what you are arguing. I guess OK QBR isn't everything. You are shadow boxing on that because I've never that that it was everything.
But overall it's a good indicator of how a dude is playing. Burrow is playing bad on terrible offense right now. The QBR reflects that. the fact that Burrow has a low QBR is a reflection of how QBR is effective at judging play overall not a reflection of how it's flawed the play of Joe Burrow.
In the simplest terms, Cincy offense and Joe Burrow are not playing well right now as is indicated by the QBR of their QB.
-
4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
Joe Burrow has struggled but you know as well as I do by the end of the season he and his team will make the playoffs. In reality he isn't the 26th best QB in the league. My point is, stats can be misleading as can QBR. I just think someone that says AR isn't good because his QBR is 45 is a little misleading. That is just my opinion. I am not trying to knock your opinion but a lot of different factors determine how good a QB is.
Bestie you lose me sometimes man.
I don’t think Burrows QBR is misleading. He hasn’t been good.
Hes a top 5ish QB but hasn’t produced this year. QBR doesn’t measure what a player should do but what he does.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
You posted "Why? He didn't win ANY games lol".
I simply said that is false and I am right, it is a fact. The starter rule and only playing 1 or 2 Qtrs is an NFL rule, not something I made up. It is actually a good rule because if a QB starts and leaves with lead, at that point if his team loses, it isn't his fault.
Let's go to QBR. Do you realize that Trevor Lawrence has a QBR almost equal to Mustache. It is 54.4 to 54.2 and that is even after the game on Sunday where Mustache was awful. Joe Burrow is 26th in QBR at 39.9 so by your logic, AR is better than Joe Burrow by a lot at 45.
. See where QBR IS FLAWED. There isn't 5 QBs better than Joe Burrow in the whole league. I actually watch the games and see how players play, so I know who is bad, average, above average, good, very good, or great.
burrow hasn’t been very good this year. He has an anemic 5.3 Yds per completion and has been sacked 14 times. Where do you think he should rank this year so far ? -
7 hours ago, Chucklez said:
i notice how you rather conveniently left out part of my comment which covered how those teams had prepared for richardson during the week.
Then we get the team that prepared for Minshew, and they demolished him.I didn’t forget I just don’t think it’s that significant. There may be some effect but Minshew doesn’t do anything you need special prep for. If you went from prepping for GM and then to AR, that would be much more significant IMO.
But the Shew didn’t get to prep for the D either with 1st team reps. Did you convenient forget that lol? -
4 hours ago, Dunk said:
I always felt that Minshew was more of a I won't wow you, but I won't make the big mistake kind of guy.
That's why Sunday's game shocked me.
I don't blame him for the strip sack, but had never seen him throw passes directly to defenders. Is Jville that good that they fooled him 7 or 8 times, or was it just a freak bad day at the office?
One of those passes just got away from him. He just like threw it to the backstop.
I’ve said this a few times today so if you’ve seen it sorry lol. But Minshew has 50 combined pass and rush TDs and 21 combined TOs. So his 4 TO performance Sunday was almost 25% of his total career TOS. That’s really something. It should be anomaly.
If not. Oof.
-
3 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
False, Pro-Football Reference shows every stat to every player. Even a QB's W/L record before his numbers. He is 2-2 as a starter, he got credited for the wins over Houston and Tennessee because he started and when he left the Colts were ahead in both games. Having said that, after watching AR play in the 1st 4 games it was obvious to me that teams feared him more than Mustache because of his ability to run (he has 4 Rushing TDs) + he has a stronger arm so he at least can throw deep on occasion. AR was also playing much better than I thought he would, despite what his QBR says. He is damn near 3-1, he led a comeback down 23-0 vs the Rams to send it into OT, he never got a chance in OT because they won the coin toss and scored. If that Rams game didn't get you excited about AR then nothing will.
I’m not excited about AR yet. I like some of what I see. Visually, he’s stunning, both physically and with his elusiveness in the pocket.
Looking at him throw, I’m unconvinced.
You seem to read everything on here so you might recall me saying that it may no longer be that the deciding prerequisite to be a quality NFL QB you had to be able to attack the boundary from the pocket. There’s nothing that I’ve seen from AR on film from college or at the combine yet this year that makes he over confident that he’ll ever do that consistently.
However it might not matter as much. AR can attack the boundary running and or throwing on the roll out, sprint out or scramble.
He’s gonna miss a lot of development with this apparently pending surgery. He will have to relearn to throw and that may or may not be a bad thing.
He doesn’t learn how to get down, he won’t last. You can’t play QB like you're superior to these animals on NFL fields no matter how good you are. He needs the fall coach someone was mentioning.
Colts Positivity Posts Here
in Colts Football
Posted
Yeah that's funny. Some of us were talking the other day about things "back in the 1900's" being the way young people would be thinking about our era.
When do decades become the nickname for that century?
In the 2030s will it be the 30s or will the 30s still refer to the 1930s?