Imgrandojji
-
Posts
1,642 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Imgrandojji
-
-
52 minutes ago, Coltsman1788 said:
Kraft calls the shots. Otherwise Jimmy G would be under center in New England by now and Tommy Terrific would be closing out his career in the Bay. Belichick wanted to keep Jimmy G. but Brady went over his head and appealed to Kraft. No way Kraft lets Brady sign with Indy. He’d convince Tom to sign for less to retire a Pat before he lets that happen. I dint think Brady would want to play for this franchise anyway. Too much ill feelings behind Deflategate.
Bob Kraft's position in his own organization isn't what it used to be. He's embarrassed the Patriots more than once in the last 24 months. If you think for one minute that he has any leverage over Belichick at this point in time, you're probably mistaken.
The fact of the matter is there's a lot of rumblings among the fanbase and STH in New England that it's time for Bob Kraft to step aside and let his son Jonathan take over the reins of the organization. That embarrassing scandal he sprung on the franchise last year due to his activities in Florida did not help matters in attempting to resist that transition.
Ever since Myra Kraft died in 2011, there's a very large sense that Robert's been circling the drain even as the franchise he owns has flourished under Belichick. If Bob has any leverage to take a stand against Bill, it isn't very much. kraft is more or less isolated right now. Most of the team personnel are loyal first and foremost to Belichick, second to the Patriots franchise, and only by implication to Robert Kraft.
If Jonathan Kraft chose to do so he could probably push his father aside fairly easily, especially if Jonathan had Bill's support. Corporate coups d'etat have happened before for lesser reasons.
Bottom line, Kraft has probably been a figurehead of the Patriots more than an owner for the last 5 years, and especially in the last 18-24 months. Most of the franchise seems to be waiting for Robert to step down and let new leadership (read:Jonathan) take over, and it's that, as much or more as the decline of Brady, that seems to be putting cracks in the dynasty right now
-
1 minute ago, csmopar said:
You realize that his stats this year are only 1 spot higher than Brissett’s right? With a better team.
Not in any way that matters to a QB
We had a WAY better offensive line, a WAY better rushing attack, WAY better TEs (seriously, I'd take either Doyle or Ebron over anyone NE started at TE this year). Brady started with an incredible receiving unit but that got scattered to the winds even before ours did.
The offensive line woes alone make this comparison imperfect IMHO. Not only did they lose their first string centerman and have to play a backup C all year, but they had Marshall Newhouse inflicted on them at guard until another injured OL, Isaiah Wynn, got back on the field. That's going to hurt any QBs numbers.
That and even with those setbacks they still went 12-4, so I mean, take that QBR and put it in context.
-
2 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:
So was Peyton Manning in 2013 when he torched the league for 5400 yds and 55 touchdowns. Brady's had zero help on offense in NE this year. With a top 5 rushing game, top o-line, good tight ends and playmakers at receiver (we would need to bring a big one in FA for him to even consider coming here), he would be up there in numbers and efficiency. Of course it is a stop gap decision. But it makes more sense to me to get somebody like him, cut Brissett and draft a qb than it does to keep Brissett and draft a qb, or worse don't draft a qb. We would be automatic contender's with Brady under center, guaranteed. We aren't with Brissett or a rookie...
Yeah this is kind of where I am.
Any baseball fans here? When the Rangers signed Nolan Ryan at age 42 I'm sure they weren't expecting 4 solid years of top level starting pitching before he finally broke down.
Brady is as much of a physical outlier as Ryan was. And a top QB is even harder to find than a pitching ace. It's worth the risk.
-
2
-
-
11 minutes ago, CantBeStopped said:
No way I can go from hating this guy for the vast majority of my life to rooting for him on Sundays
See I don't get that attitude. I mean it's one thing if a guy murdered someone or beat his wife or abused his kids or did drugs. Brady broke NFL procedural rules. It's not on the same plane at all to me.
As for hating him -- of course we hate him. He was a thorn in our side because he's a dang good football player. I want that skill on our side for once.
-
2
-
-
8 minutes ago, masterlock said:
IMO, Brady is nearing the end of his shelf life as a QB, and would be nothing more than a temporary, stop-gap solution, if that. I'd rather draft our QB of the future--the next Patrick Mahomes--than extend our mediocrity for another two years.
Edit: Or, start Chad Kelly.
So you'd rather dream than win. Good to know.
-
2
-
-
I'm not entirely sure it's going to happen, but the rumors are a bit too persistent and a bit too grounded in reality to ignore entirely. There is a sense that this might be Brady's last year in New England as the Patriots brace for a new era.
If that's the case, I want the Colts to be in on that and try to make a deal that makes sense.
The fact is that if Brady does hit the market we're almost a perfect landing spot. We have a world class offensive line, a lot of good options on the short pass, TY for the long game, and a good run attack. We've also got a good receiving back which is something Brady seems to like having around. We're practically purpose built to take the pressure off an aging but supremely skilled QB
I'm sure this sentiment isn't going to be universally shared. The guy beat us too many times for everyone to love the idea. But me I say that this guy was a match for Manning when both were in their prime, and he's still out there. It might be our only chance to actually bag an elite QB.
And again, this is entirely dependent on the Patriots actually releasing Brady, and Brady not retiring. I think Brady will hit the market if released, but no one has any idea whats' going on in New England at the moment. So I guess we'll see
-
4
-
-
10 hours ago, Four2itus said:
There are statements made in this page of the thread that have no truth in fact by fans.
"his denial with Vinny"
"it would have hurt nothing to see how Kelly performed in the last game or two"
"we can still pick a good one at 13"
These are opinions with no basis in fact.
And after listening to Ballard for several years, I feel more confident about his truth than nearly any GM I have ever listened to. He has stated over and over that he will not reach for a player. If the Colts select a QB with their first pick, it will have zero to do with fans. It will be about the best value, for who's available, and it is a player they truly believe in.
I get that. And I 100% agree. I'm not saying Ballard won't draft a QB, I honestly hope he does -- in the second or third round. I want the first pick focused on either WR or TE, and we badly need some help in key defensive positions.
I feel like Ballard is going to assess the opportunity costs of making various moves and elect not to go balls-to-the-wall for a new QB when they have one under contract.
But then, I'm convinced that Luck's win streak last year was complete unsustainable fool's gold and we're not really all that close to contending right now
-
1 minute ago, Chloe6124 said:
He lost his entire offense. Not just one player. That included the oline too. Not to mention a new scheme and new coach.
Not elevate a team lol. He scored 41 pts in the bowl game with trash weapons. He can’t help his defense is trash.
5 layers
-
This forum is going to go up like Bikini Atoll when Ballard extends Brissett for 2 years in training camp.
I see a tweener contract, something like 10-12M AAV. Something you can move but gives the player a bit of security.
I'm honestly convinced that Ballard is going to assess Brissett based on the totality of the season, and lend a lot of weight to the relatively strong first half when the team was intact, rather than the second half when the personnel on the field weren't even close to what was planned for.
Meanwhile we're all about the second half because recency bias so we're thinking about Brissett at his worst, after his knee went and most of his pass catchers were in the dispensary. The first half might as well be the 18th century.
Just different criteria for assessment but I suspect Ballard is thinking along these lines for real.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:
Well it is Utah State. Their recruiting isn't top-notch. Sometimes, if players are bad, they're just bad.
The fact that you're already 4 layers deep in excuses says it all to me. We don't need an excusemonger QB. We already have two of those, one starting and one playing third string backup
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, MPStack said:
Think Tom would be * if Frank brought in Peyton as the QBs coach?
All indications are Manning and Brady are friends and have a ton of respect for each other.
The honest truth is Manning has more in common with Brady than any of us fans have in common with any active NFL player. Rivalries are mostly fan business.
-
5 hours ago, Myles said:
IN that case, my answer is correct. I think (and fear) it will be Jacoby.
I want it to be Rivers or Carr or another option. I don't really want it to be a draft pick coming in halfway through the season. That tells me that we were not doing good and the season will be a waste.
I'd consider Carr because he's still youngish. I don't want Rivers. at his age Rivers is a guy you go for when you've got all your other ducks in a row and whatever the clutch gene is, Rivers seems to have the exact opposite of it. That said I'd bet against the Raiders ever making him available. When you have a decent QB, you're an * if you let him go for anything short of a king's ransom
-
You guys are forgetting game 1, where he did lead a comeback (although Mack did the heavy lifting) but the team lost in OT.
Also he did lead the team all the way back against the Titans in week 2 IIRC. Once again there was a big run, to set it up but Brissett finished the drive off.
If Vinateiri had been his old self there would have been 2 more comeback wins, one in week 1, another against the Steelers
-
3
-
-
13 minutes ago, Myles said:
Boy, that all sounds great, but I don't buy it. He can't read the field. Sometimes he gets past the first read. He holds the ball for a long time which ends up in him throwing it too hard because he's late. Even when TY was healthy, his YPC went from 16 to 11.
I didn't see much play action from Brissett through the year.
I'm not gonna take that yardage too seriously because we know for a fact that TY had a lower body injury starting in about week 3 this year and was never fully healthy the rest of the year. He was still playing, but he wasn't getting close to hitting that famous top gear of his with a calf injury.
Either way, you're still making the mistake of comparing Brissett to Luck. Brissett's best isn't going to be as good as Luck's best no matter what Brissett does. If you can't assess Brissett's strengths and weaknesses without trying to compare him directly to 2 of the best QB in NFL history, then we're probably done here because the only QBs who could stand up to that level of scrutiny are guys who wouldn't have been waiting in the wings as backups in the firsst place.
As for the play action thing, I'm beginning to come to the conclusion that you might be blind. They did a ton with Brissett on play action, which stands to reason when your primary method of attack on offense is the run. In fact that's the whole point of playing QB on a run heavy team, because the D has to stack the box a play action works particularly well. -
1 hour ago, Nickster said:
What can Brisett do in your opinion?Sell the play action, run a little, scramble and execute some deep passes while on the move. We're geared up and schemed up for a pocket passing mid range QB but Brissett is a generalist who's better as a read option QB.
Pocket passing has never been Brissett's forte. He CAN pass but that's never been his forte, Brissett's usually better off when he can use his wits and his powerful arm, sell the play action and snap off a few deep throws to an area... unfortunately the only gut we had on the roster that could allow Brissett to do what he did best was TY and he wasn't always on the field.
The short to medium passes that Reich was insisting on just aren't where Brissett lives. It's the area he's struggled with the most traditionally meaning the Colts were literally playing right into Brissett's weakest area. But Reich was forced to insist on them because our WR unit got decimated and we had to do what we could with the talent we had.
If we can get our deep unit back in line, Brissett's ability to sell the play action -- which he's actually very, very good at -- will allow us to scheme guys open deep and allow JB to put some throws into areas where only his guys can go get them. That's his game. He's pretty solid at that.
This dunk and dunk stuff, mid yardage accuracy and timing plays, that's something Brissett isn't good at and probably never will be. Although if he can get some experience and confidence based on other facets of his game I would expect him to find a way to figure this stuff out to a certain degree and at least not be one of the worst starting QB in the league at it.
-
12 hours ago, James said:
Aaaaaaand Frank thinks Brissett gets unfair criticism.
He's gonna be the Colts starting QB next year, isn't he?
Brissett DOES get unfair criticism. That doesn't mean he's suddenly a world beating talent, but people are comparing Brissett to what we're used to, and what we're used to is Manning and Luck. 2 incredibly tough acts to follow.
And they're frequently not remembering that Brissett was thrust into the starting job because our starter quit in the middle of training camp.
Personally I'm interested to see if there's some possible improvement that could be achieved with a roster built around what Brissett can do, rather than built around Luck and hastily adjusted for a guy who definitely is not Luck
-
1
-
-
Kelly is fool's gold. If you weren't dissatisfied with our starter you wouldn't give a damn about Chad Kelly.
-
1
-
-
I think it would be a mistake to go hell for leather for a QB in the first round. None of the guys on the board in round 1 really impress me, and we have an even more pressing need at WR right now. I'd rather go for a first round wideout and a second round QB, there's usually gonna be some decent talents that don't go in round 1.
-
4
-
-
3 minutes ago, ColtsUrUs said:
I just asked the question was TB better than JB. And w/o our Kicker who lost about 2 or 3 by himself we would be 9-7 so that would've made us 11-5 for TB.
you have to give that credit to JB too. It was Brissett that was robbed of those same 2-3 games. That's the difference between failure and squeaking into the playoffs.
-
5 minutes ago, kornstar said:
I think they truly like him and are all in on him. I think we’ll hear about the injury a lot to justify why they will stick with him as our franchise QB.
I don't think they see him as their franchise QB. But what I do think is that Ballard's going to assess the viable alternatives at QB, and the cost of making roster moves required to bring them here, and decide that Jacoby is still the best value and the best solution to the problems he presents is to draft and groom a successor behind him -- which they can do with Jacoby just as easily as anyone else.
I expect the Colts to draft, not a first round megatalent, but an understudy QB who has tools and can be molded over the course of a year or two. Sort of like the way Mahomes understudied Alex Smith.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, ColtsUrUs said:
I just think JB holds on to the ball to long and that will be his downfall.
So the reason you want to throw money at Bridgewater is Jacoby sucks.
No effort to actually assess whether Bridgewater would actually improve the team.
That's about what I thought, and it disappoints me.
Bridgewater might give us 1-2 games of improvement. Moving us from 7-9 to maybe as high as 9-7. Not seeing the imperative here.
1 minute ago, ColtsUrUs said:Injuries doesn't make a QB take longer to read a Defense.
Since when?
-
5 minutes ago, ColtJax said:
Before JB comes back I'd rather see us get Carr,
Raiders are not gonna replace Carr until they have a replacement in hand
5 minutes ago, ColtJax said:Dalton,
I thought you wanted to NOT have mediocre QBs
5 minutes ago, ColtJax said:Rivers
I didn't know it was suddenly 2005 again, why don't people let me know these things?
5 minutes ago, ColtJax said:or a number of back ups.
We have a backup right now. Why do we need more?
5 minutes ago, ColtJax said:That being said, we could trade up and get Tua or Hubert, both are better options than JB..
Not out of the box they aren't. None of the top QBs in this draft are plug and play players. Throw them into the fire and they will burn up.
-
5 minutes ago, ColtsUrUs said:
So do you think Jacody is better than Teddy Bridgewater?
The difference isn't worth what desperate teams will throw at Bridgewater this offseason.
-
1
-
-
If we start with obvious needs, the big one is another TE to replace Ebron. I don't really want Ebron back, he's just not consistent enough as a target to do what we're used to seeing TEs do. I'd rather have a pure run/pass blocking TE out there than a guy who's almost dependable sometimes as a target.
One thing we need to bear in mind is that since Brissett is probably gonna be our QB to start the season next year. this offense is not going to be built around the passing game. It's probably going to be built around the run, and efforts will be made to make the run game as efficient as possible.
That means a good blocking TE unless they think Mo-Allie Cox is that guy (and he might be, he's a decent blocker). That means ooking at whether you want to take the plunge and invest in a Fullback. And most of all, that means keeping the OL as strong as possible.
The idea here is that we know we don't have an all world QB, but the replacement options available at the moment don't look like significant upgrades, so instead of spending draft assets trying to get the team back into a shape we're used to, efficient use of assets would be to strengthen the team as it actually is -- accentuate the run, and accentuate run blocking and run scheming.
I do however think we need to invest in a good handsy WR who can be trusted to make catches in traffic. Brissett was having issues making throws into traffic and I'm convinced it hurt his confidence and led to some of the undesirable results in the second half of the year.
TY is good at in traffic catching, but we need a couple of other targets who can go into dirty areas and let the QB be unafraid to take ordinary risks. that, and additional valid targeting options would help keep TY in the lineup a bit more than he's been in the last 2 years when he's kinda been the only guy defenses have to worry about.
So from my perspective, our offseason goals:
1: Draft a QB in the second or third round with an eye towards training them behind Brissett this year and starting them next year when Brissett's contract expires. Don't be afraid to let this QB take over if he looks good, but don't rush anything.
2: Investigate what personnel changes need to be made to create the best possible rushing game. We have a good rushing attack but we got shut down at a couple key points last year and that ultimately exposed Brissett to more pressure than he can handle
3: Prioritize bringing in reliable, professional targets that get into an easy rhythm with quarterbacks. I want to target Danny Amendola if possible as a major target for this team, I think he brings everything we need as a high level depth wideout, and he actually has experience working with Brissett.
And I also one a first or second round pick to be spent on a WR who plays a very workmanlike style. Less of a focus on speed or raw toolsets, since TY has that covered, but we need pass catchers in the 5-15 yard range with p oise and reliability to keep the pressure off both TY and Brissett. I'd definitely rather draft for coachability and poise than get the next Dorsett or Cain with raw tools and no idea how to use them
4: This is going to sound weird because it seems like a strength for us but I want to see more speed in the linebacker corps. We need a versatile unit of linebackers who can drop back in coverage and help prevent the secondary from being exposed. A good pass rush is very useful, but first and foremost I want coverage sacks. Since our pass game is questionable and we're relying on a possession offense, we need our secondary to be top notch. I think we have the personnel to do that with our CB and S groups, but we're a little heavy-footed at LB IMHO.
5: Look into whether acquiring and scheming for a Fullback fits team plans. I think that if you're going to be rushing a lot, a good fullback can take pressure off your RBs and increase yardage efficiency enough to be worth having on the roster.
I wouldn't suggest this if we had a good air game, but we don't, we'll be trying to gain a lot of our offense on the ground, and while Mack is great, he's not top 10 and his efficiency suffered against more physical front 7s. IMHO that means means a FB could help us.
Building a team like the Titans, Bills,
in Colts Football
Posted
I tried to argue that earlier and got shut down because we can always use Jack Doyle as a TE.
Nevermind the fact that Doyle has his own job to do if we're trying to run block, or that a lot of teams use 2 tights and a FB on the same play, or that Reich was desperate enough to try Q as a fullback even when we still had Doyle and Cain :p
Frankly the team that Reich wants to build is perfectly suited for a FB. But we've been so used to the air based game that people are struggling to truly process the new era of Colts football Reich is trying to bring about.