Imgrandojji
-
Posts
1,642 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Imgrandojji
-
-
13 minutes ago, The Fish said:
You've got a stable of backs,
You've got 2 backs, Mack and Hines, that have actual roles, and Wilkins that I'm not actually sure why he exists and I'm not sure he is either.
Mack and Wilkins have skillsets that are too similar. You need a RB2 that can give you a different look to keep defenses guessing. A good stable of backs would have Mack or Wilkins trying to run patiently and a downhill runner to bum rush the gap and catch the defense napping if they get complacent, and would run some 2 back sets to allow the offense to create a shell game and force the D to hedge.
The fact that we don't seem to be capable of using a 2 back set, means that the skillset of our "stable" of backs is fairly limited, or it means that Reich and the OC are both extremely bankrupt for creativity in how to use running backs in an offense.
So I question your first premise right off the bat, and posit that this lack of diversity and/or creativity in the run game is a big reason the running game disappears against disciplined defenses.
13 minutes ago, The Fish said:a few good TE's,
Jack Doyle will be pleased to know he's been upgraded to "a few." Ebron is inconsistent and Allie-Cox is a decent backup. Doyle himself is solid but not a world-beater.
It's not a bad group, the whole group rounds up to an above average TE unit, but it's only as significant a part of the offense as it is for us this year more or less by default.
13 minutes ago, The Fish said:a few WR's not named TY who's a blue chip and a high draft pick in Campbell,
Man I really applaud your effort there. You really put in a good honest try at making our WR situation not look like a complete disaster.
The original plan required everyone to stay healthy and play at about the 75th percentile of their ability. If you can't see why that's a bit overoptimistic -- to put it mildly -- then I'm afraid there's nothing more I can do to help you.
We got lucky when Pascal came through. you put these kinds of odds and ends together in the hope that 1 or 2 of them out of the whole group will stick and become solid contributors. Expecting a stable of spare parts to play like a well oiled machine is an incredible exercise in magical thinking just this side of believing in Narnia.
13 minutes ago, The Fish said:then there's what should be a top offensive line.
Agreed. The offensive line should be a top offensive line and for the most part it is.
13 minutes ago, The Fish said:The talent is there.
The talent is there to not suck. If not sucking is all you want to accomplish, then sure, the talent is there. Not sure the talent is there to be a top team in the AFC. But hey, if you're in on the not-sucking game, then go nuts, enjoy your 7-9 wins every year. If not, then Ballard needs to do a better job building out the core of this offense -- fewer spare parts, more core components, and if he can't do it we need a better engineer.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Thunderbolt said:
This team is fading fast in close games, now they have bank an inconsistent kicker to win close games. Game, set, match. Top five pick for sure.
That ship sailed awhile ago. Team is too talented to finish worse than 7-9. I'm still holding out for 10-6, which we'd need to go 5-2 for but we did that once already this year with some tough games mixed in
-
2 minutes ago, Sumo63 said:
Theres probably some truth in that, and that worries me more than anything.
Folding up camp at the halfway point, with a winning record, in a winnable division is contrary to what we were led to believe this organization is about.
If what you suggest is true the "rivalry is not back on". The idea that theres no quit in this team, top to bottom character matters, that lockerroom culture matters and must be protected, that they prove their way through adversity, and "1,2,3 family" simply wouldnt be true. The culture they've said they're building becomes the palest illusion.
If what you suggest is true the colts are tanking worse than the dolphins, and wont be able to evaluate effectively because they aren't running an organization that believes in it's own professed culture.
If they're just playing out the string it means they've decided to evaluate players in a losing environment not a winning one. They wont see the best of anyone under those circumstances.
Not saying you're wrong but if they're at that point already, under these circumstances.......irsay may as well just fire everyone and move it london. Beckham can kick for us, hes close to 50 right?
I hear what you're saying, and I don't disagree. I'm reacting to the message Ballard's recent actions in particular are sending. I'm not saying I agree or even like it very much
-
1
-
-
On 11/11/2019 at 7:23 PM, CanuckColt said:
We fans should not all be "settling for" Brissett as our QB of the future and hoping he improves. We need to be holding Ballard's feet to the fire and demanding that he does something dramatic in acquiring a high pick (the highest pick even).
that's exactly what we should not be doing.
have you ever heard the phrase "perfect is the enemy of good?" Well until the perfect quarterback comes around I'm perfectly satisfied with the good one we already have. And I really think that squandering the draft assets to chase an ephemeral perfect Qb will hamstring us in other areas.
The microscope some of you guys hold Brissett under is abolutely ridiculous, expecting him to do things that maybe 4 QB in the entire league are actually capable of or you dismiss him as "average" or "a career backup." It's honestly pathetic at this point.
Exactly 0 of the QBs that won Superbowls in the last 15 years were guys drafted to be the perfect QB. 15 of those 15 teams had a QB with flaws -- even Manning had his share of flaws by the time he won one, with his age mounting and his health starting to deteriorate.
We wasted a lot of time in the Manning era chasing Superbowls with a QB heavy team and living in denial about how bad certain areas of the team were, especially on D, because Manning bailed it out. Cost us over and over again against the Patriots until 06 when we finally managed to eke one out against them.
Then we draft Luck and repeat those same mistakes until we break Luck down and wear him out trying to cover for all the flaws we refuse to admit are there until he retires.
There IS a reason our internet nickname is "the Glue Factory." We are not kind to our horses at times, and overoptimistically expect too much of key producers while providing too little support. And our solution to any problem, especially at QB, is to throw it away and draft another one. The whole league is bad about this but we're among the worst.
Just once I'd like to see the fans of this franchise admit that there's more to winning football games than having a QB and that the solution to all team problems is not to throw the QB into the woodchipper and draft another one.
It's infuriating to be the fan of the second worst team in the league when it comes to this attitude (second only to the Jets) and watch it unfold in realtime again and again. And they DON'T learn, and they will NEVER learn unless they're called out, and probably not even then.
-
38 minutes ago, Sumo63 said:
The colts, in general, and Reich specifically are definitely putting their credibility on the line for Vinny. Nobody: coaches, players, or fans can seriously buy the "get 1% better every day" mantra anymore. We're not climbing the mountain we're resting at base camp and if we make some progress well that's ok too.
This looks worse than pagano calling guys "a rolling ball of butcher knives" and hoping it looks true long enough to allow you to exit the situation gracefully. (It didnt with chuck).
I always try to side with the people that know the situation best when decision making but this one rings hollow. I dont think any of them have the utmost confidence in Adam (including adam) or that 46 year old athletes go thru "phases". Its written all over their faces and embedded in their speeches.
I hope Vinny can turn it around long enough to get through the season tho. I get it, I understand what is being held up here, but it's the wrong message IMO because its contrary to the message being pushing to the 52 other dudes you're developing.
It'll be telling how much more the "analytics" will suggest going for it on 4th or trying for 2pt conversations.
I'm really afraid that if adam misses anything of value in the next three weeks its gonna damage the credibility and performance of this entire organization for the remainder of the season.
Next year isnt going to be affected, as we're probably going to see alot of turnover in the off season....
I just dont see there being a better look for adam at the end of the year than there is right now. I'm kinda baffled, how does the risk not outweigh the reward on this one?
Oh well, I can just hope I'm proven wrong, and gladly admit it come the end of December.
Just remember not to "boo". We know how that one plays out.
Sorry gang, confused, meandering, half hearted rant over. Lol.
I think what's going on is that the organization took a good hard look at the team and decided that this wasn't the year.
If they felt this was a prime contending season they probably wouldn't stick with AV as it is, if they think we're more or less just playing out the string this year, you might as well let him finish with the team.
We had a good chance this year, but ran into some nasty injuries and I honestly think we are just playing out the string now. At least unless Brissett might have other ideas and begin to inject some life back into the team.
Remember that there was a very strong sense at the beginning of the season that this was an evaluation year. I think that's still true, at least in the executive suite. Brissett pulled together some games and had us outperforming for awhile, and that is a very good sign going forward,, but I think Ballard had made the decision that a regression to the mean was likely no matter what he did, and kept his powder dry for the offseason. And after watching the last 2 weeks of football I can't say he was wrong.
-
23 hours ago, mirobi48 said:
Malik Hooker we were told, still waiting for him to make some plays like, you know like Minkah Fitzpatrick who came to a team with no training camp and has turned there defense around
I'm not sure what the point of this conversation is. Our secondary is made of good pieces and Hooker is one of them. They're literally the least of our worries right now.
-
1 hour ago, The Fish said:
The offense is supposed to be built, by in large and when circumstances are good (going against average D's) JB can operate, but the question is what's his ceiling and will that facilitate winning a title or hinder it. It's still sort of up in the air, and it's not clear cut that he should just be penciled in. Honestly, I think the Jag's D is going to give him hell and I can't shake the feeling.
I disagree that the offense is built. If Ballard actually thinks that this offense is built and that this is what a complete offense looks like I'd like to take the good look at the inside of his head sometime.
Our OL is the only part of the offense that I would honestly call top of the line. Everything else has the air of an emergency field repair,, duct tape and baling wire and praying it will hold for 1 game at a time. That's not a "built" offense. The phrase I'd use for that kind of offense is "barely adequate."
Our running game? Average. Maybe a little above average. No consistency from week to week and very limited ability to impose its will against high level defenses. This was supposed to be our top offensive weapon. Honestly it really hasn't been. With a little luck on a good day our run game might be top 15. I can't rate it better than that. I certainly wouldn't consider Mack and company to be capable of leading an assault against a playoff team.
As for the throwing game, it's one of those things that insurance would write off an act of God. The plan was good. A bit optimistic, but good. you just can't plan around that magnitude of attrition very easily.
But at the same time, the optimism at the core of the thinking around assembling the receiving corps is alarming. Everywhere after TY there are guys who you have to qualify their skillsets. "on a good day, he can..." "if he can stay healthy, he will..." "One year he..." having a few guys like that on the periphery of the offense is fine, building an offense out of them is not, an Ballard is guilty of the latter.
Quite frankly I've become concerned about Ballard that he might have a tendency to overthink things try too hard to be perfect. To hit home runs on the cheap every time. Gambling on broken pieces and average guys with upside is a decent way to supplement a strong core but you can't build a football team like that. Not even Belichick would go to war with Edelman and a bunch of spare parts and expect to win anything. Thats more or less what Ballard tried to do this year.
Perfect is the enemy of good, and if you ignore good decisions to chase perfect ones the usual result is mediocricy. A little concerned here that Ballard may wind up learning that the hard way at our expense.
-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, jameszeigler834 said:
Love is a project that probably wont ever be the answer I would take Hurts over him.
There isn't a single QB in this draft that I want to see starting over JB next year. That being the case this is something of a moot point.
Honestly think we need to spend the first round pick on either a top RB or some help up the middle defensively.
Getting starry eyes for a QB at this point is probably putting the cart before the horse. We are not Jameis Winston, Josh Rosen or Ryan Leaf away from winning anything.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, chad72 said:
Parris Campbell is not the project that Deon Cain is, IMO. Far more talented to call him a project.
What we need to avoid, IMO, is going down the same well and sucked into 1 year rentals like Donnie Avery, Hakeem Nicks, Andre Johnson, Devin Funchess etc. that end up not giving us much in return. Signing a guy like Adam Humphries to a 3 or 4 year deal would have been nice, IMO. Tyrell Williams would also have been nice but we have swung and missed in free agency a lot, which means the market is willing to overpay and Ballard needs to adjust eventually.
TY was a 3rd rounder, if you forgot. Parris Campbell will make that sophomore jump, I have a good feeling about it.
Free agency with a "moneyball" GM is an exercise in watching a brilliantly intelligent executive repeatedly outsmart himself.
-
On 11/11/2019 at 4:35 PM, Colts1919 said:
Soooo .. no discussion of putting Newton behind a good offensive line - getting another receiver, adding more D in the draft and Winning a Super Bowl???
Because Cam Newton has won so many Superbowls.
This myth that elite QBs win Superbowls needs to die. See sig for the truth.
I'd have some interest in signing Newton is he was willing to move to RB. But that shoulder is cooked. It is a dead shoulder.
-
I remain extremely satisfied with Brissett's performance. As flaws and holes appear on the roster it becomes more and more clear that Brissett is doing things with this team that not very many other QBs could do.
JB may or may not be elite but the man's a leader who makes good decisions on the field and he won't cost you points out there with boneheaded errors. . That's a valuable skillset whether or not he ever develops into an elite thrower.
He's been good for 2-3 wins this year that we might not have gotten without him. He's more than pulling his weight out there, just not in the way we're used to. And I wish that fans would be quicker to recognize that.
Now that we've seen some of the things we took for granted with Brissett not happening on the field without him (turnovers, lack of focus, etc) IMHO it should become pretty obvious that he's our QB for the time being. Replacing that skillset is not going to be easy.
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:
I mean it makes sense though. Think about it. Pressures are definitely important but the elite players have pressures and sacks. Nowadays with these QBs who can create when they get pressured and make something out of nothing, it’s important to actually bring the QB down. Pressures don’t always result in negative plays. Sacks do
Pressures force quarterbacks to make lower precentage plays. The fact that those plays occasionally work is beside the point. You're more likely to keep a QB off the scoreboard if you get pressures regardless of whether you get sacks.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Blueblood23 said:
I would agree being OK, still believe roster needs more fire power than Cain.
yep but I don't think we're getting it this year.
I expect Ballard to look at mid tier pieces in the offseason, at LB, DE and WR, to try to toughen our pass game and run D.
We aren't quite there this year, but we're also not far from it. We still have the ability to sneak into the playoffs if we can turn it around and go 4-3 or so in the last 7 games. Very doable with Brissett in there. so the whole thing hinges on him getting healthy.
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:
I think ballard is trying to build a good foundation before spending on a young high priced FA. Fans aren’t patient and want instant gratification.
I fell for that trap, because I felt we were close enough to stringing together a run that it was worth a shot. I guess Ballard saw then what we're seeing now. Looks talented, but not quite ready to put it all together.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:
So a topic that I’ve heard discussed on some of the podcasts I listen too is how a lot of teams are now no longer putting all their eggs in the draft basket and are instead trading draft capital for proven players.
"now?" Teams have been building both ways since the dawn of the NFL Draft
Teams can succeed without drafting extremely well but if you struggle in the draft it's really hard to collect a strong roster and get everything you need under the cap.
Ballard has had some early success in the draft. not surprising if he slightly overvalues draft picks. He's young for a GM, he'll find a balance as he matures in his role.
That's something we're going to be saying about a lot of our guys in this organization, the second-year HC, the GM,, the QB, most of the D. The only old fart in the entire organization is Irsay, who's the guy who turned the organization on its head in the first place, and he's done an admirable job of keeping his mouth shut this year and letting his executives grow.
This is very much an organization from the ground up still figuring out what it actually is. Appearances notwithstanding we have made very significant progress this year, especially on D. Just didn't quite come together for us to make a big run. It was long odds to begin with TBPH.
I think we can be comfortable letting Ballard do his work. I wish he'd invested in this year but I guess he saw at the deadline what we're now seeing 2 weeks later, too many fatal flaws.
The only overall concern I have is with Reich, and that's mitigated by the fact that he's clearly in a teaching mode right now, and still winning more football games than he loses.
Overall the organization looks solid, even with the steps backward they took in the last 2 weeks factored in. We're still in the playoff hunt, a quick turnaround will see us in the Wild Card round.
-
10 hours ago, coltfaninnewyork said:
I think the biggest question is,Jacoby the long term franchise quarterback ? I'm not sure and maybe the colts aren't either .
You kind of have to behave as if he is for now. More than one successful rebuild has started with a decent-to-good QB before it found its great one. Thinking of Maddux to Roethlisberger and Bledsoe to Brady when I say this.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Quarterback is far from our worst problem right now. We need 2 dependable receivers, at least 1 linebacker and possibly an additional CB before we go for a QB.
At this point I'd spend that #1 pick on an LB, WR, or heavy duty RB because Mack has been anything but consistent against good defenses.
Right now to me Marlon Mack looks like a #1B RB, that needs a heavier guy to play #1A.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, shastamasta said:
I think Alex Smith...with less athleticism...is likely his ceiling....which can be a solid QB...just not one that I am sold on him winning a Super Bowl.
This team has a lot of work ahead of it before the Superbowl is our bottleneck
-
44 minutes ago, IndySouthsider said:
Well???? He played well????
LAST week he played well. Read the whole post.
-
1 minute ago, colts8718 said:
I remember those Painter days
Like a yearlong tooth extraction, IIRC
-
Just now, colt18 said:
I can’t believe some of you really thought Hoyer was good....we just lost to the damn Dolphins because of him. That game was a must win. We are probably out of the playoffs now.
Probably not quite that bad, but we've got to win the next few games to make sure we're more than a bubble squad
-
2 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:
I doubt Brissett sits next week, but if he does, I wanna see some $wag at this point. At the very least I think we would've seen some big gains on the ground from him.
Easy to overreact to a game like this when Hoyer played well last week, but it is what it is. Hoyer is a literally average backup QB, if you put those guys on the field, they can do this to you in any single game.
Entirely possible that Kelly does the same thing to us, but at least if you gamble on raw talent you have a chance to be pleasant surprised. Brissett is one thing, Hoyer should not be the reason Kelly isn't starting, and again I find myself chafing at the archconservatism of the Colts' braintrust.
-
2 minutes ago, jbaron04 said:
Hoyer should took the check down u don’t have to get it all in one like make it 3-5 or 4-5 not got to endzone in double coverage 3 times and make it 4-10
Really stupid because Hoyer is not a big arm. Checkdowns should be where he makes his living.
It's enough to make me wonder whether the OC or HC interfered with Hoyer's gamecalling because at this age, Hoyer really ought to know this stuff.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, MarquisJ said:
Kaep > Hoyer
I comfort myself that it looks like Brissett is on the way back maybe as early as next week. Because I never want to see Brian Hoyer start for the Colts again.
That was a must win game.
What quarterback in the 2020 draft do you want to lead this team
in Colts Football
Posted
We just watched 5-2 slip through our fingers and Ballard seem to be content to sit there and watch it happen. Patience is going to be in short supply at the moment, and it's not hard to see why.
It was not hard to figure out that this team needed a rental wideout. to this day I'm not sure there's any rumor that Ballard even picked up the phone and talked to a single NFL GM about acquiring one.
It wasn't until hours before the deadline that there was any rumors about any activity at all by Ballard. If he was visibly scouring the phone lines for help with his 5-2 team trying to mend the team's worst flaws and try to nurse a contending year out of them despite some obvious issues, and just couldn't get anything done, that might be one thing. But that's not what I saw and I doubt I'm unique here. I saw a white flag go up with the bare minimum of due diligence done, and the team go from division favorites to bubble team in a hurry afterward
Even with Campbell, we still would have needed help at WR. Even if you give us a perfectly healthy Campbell that's been effective all year and on pace for 500-700 yards receiving we would have been a bit light at WR.
Zach Pascal should never have been put in a position where he's 2 injuries away from trying to carry this offense. And yet that's the position Pascal found himself in largely as a result of Ballard's actions/inaction
Our WR group, if everyone stayed healthy, had a distinct chance to be non-mediocre. "really good" is a huge stretch, Chloe, even for you.
And expecting to go through a year of NFL football without any injuries at all to the entire wideout corps is such a delusional thought that I honestly hope Ballard isn't high, drunk, and/or insane enough to consider it a serious possibility
We need all those things, but more importantly than all of them we need enough talent at WR to sustain 2 injuries and still field 3 credible threats to beat NFL defenses to the ball. We haven't been even close to that at any point this season.