Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Superman

  1. I'm very excited about the proposition of Andy Dalton making the Colts a 9-7 team in 2020. That really gets me going. (By the way, the 2019 Colts had a strong shot at being 9-7 or better if JB isn't hurt.) Dalton is JB with a quicker release, the same amount of playmaking, and a different name. There are a ton of successful QBs who have sat for a few weeks, some for a year, some multiple years. Drew Brees, Philip Rivers, Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Eli Manning, Jared Goff, Lamar Jackson (so the two most recent MVPs), Dak Prescott, etc. And then there are QBs who started right away with success. But you acting like not starting a guy right away is a bad thing is not based in reality.
  2. You're not making a rule about when and how to start a young QB. And I'm fine with that. I've said plenty times, if we draft a QB and he is ready in Year 1, put him on the field. For some reason, nuance is lost on some people. Everyone wants to deal in extremes. All I'm saying is that the reason for not wanting to force a young QB into the action isn't because everyone is trying to recreate the Patrick Mahomes experience. It's because QB is a really difficult position to play. It's a tough transition from college -- even though teams throw a lot more now, QBs are not put in charge of the offense, they run 90% check-with-mes, practices and gameplans are different, defenses are different, competition level is different, game speed is different, etc. Just because a guy is talented and has a high ceiling doesn't mean he's ready to play in the NFL. It's a case by case situation. I have no problem with starting a rookie, but there are a lot of factors to consider.
  3. QBs also fail right away. More often than they succeed. I've watched plenty Bengals games. I've even seen them in person. (Haven't you said several times that you don't really watch games??) Dalton is a paragon of mediocrity. His efficiency, adjusted yards/attempt, deep ball effectiveness, red zone efficiency, production from a clean pocket vs under pressure, etc., all basically the same as JB. The one thing he does better than JB is get rid of the ball quickly, but that doesn't lead to him making plays. He's mediocre. The only times he's ever been anything worth talking about is when he had AJ Green at the height of his powers.
  4. That's not true. The point is you don't throw a young QB to the wolves, especially if he still needs work. You can kill a young QB very easily. Oxymoron. I'm dumbfounded by the desperation for mediocre QBs whose only attraction is that they are not named Jacoby Brissett.
  5. This is an absurd angle for you to take. Having a great OL doesn't guarantee you a winning record, but it's obviously better to be good at OL. What's the complaint here? It's especially strange from a Colts fan, when we suffered through a decade of bad OL play.
  6. The market is drying up on him. The Giants are hiring Joe Judge, Panthers job is gone, Washington is gone, Dallas is gone. It's down to Cleveland, and because it's Cleveland they'll probably hire him.
  7. I was prepared for the OL to take a step back this year, at least superficially. Only allowing 18 sacks in a season, including however many games they went with no sacks, isn't sustainable. But outside of some early issues, the line was great. And I think those early issues are probably more related to changes in the SOP, with a new OL coach and a new QB. Separate but related, the guy who the Colts fired, leading to a fandom freakout, went to Miami. They gave up 58 sacks. And now he's gone in Miami. I'm thinking maybe he wasn't as integral to the success of the OL as people thought.
  8. Weren't the pitchforks out for Chris Strausser a few weeks ago?
  9. I was wrong on this. Seemed like he was going back, but when I read he was doing a presser this morning I got the feeling he would declare. Good for him. It's kind of scary because his most meaningful medical checkup won't come for a few more weeks, and if his imaging doesn't look good it might scare teams off. I don't think anyone is worried about him potentially missing 2020, but if he winds up needing another operation or something like that, it could get messy.
  10. Neither can I, but Metcalf had a great game, and has a handful of other good games this year.
  11. It's fair that you weren't impressed by Campbell's routes. I'm not calling him a route running maven. But he does have better routes on tape than DK. I'm talking about traits. DK has his gifts, but he's also stiff, has mediocre change of direction and limited route running ability, doesn't really create any separation unless he's at full speed running in a straight line. And he doesn't have the technical savvy to make up for those shortcomings. There's a lot of recent history of receivers with his profile being drafted high, then not working out in the NFL. And that was my pre-draft issue with Metcalf, that I wasn't in love with his HWS or his tape, and especially the first round hype that came with it. And I don't think it's skillful or nuanced to run past, over or through a DB who is significantly smaller. It's raw athleticism, and it typically doesn't translate into a long, productive career. Then there's Campbell. Great speed, great change of direction, ability to make defenders miss, quickness and agility. He ran an impressive 40 himself, and jumped well, and while he's not as big and beastly as DK, he has a good size profile for a pro receiver. Different traits, on which I place more value. And when projecting, I think a player with Campbell's traits is more likely to develop as a route runner and technician. DK might be amazingly diligent, and he's obviously working hard and doing something right. And Campbell might be a slacker who doesn't put in the work and never realizes any of his potential, or he might never be able to stay healthy and produce (I'm not saying either of those things is true of Campbell, just a hypothetical.) So far, though, what we've seen on one hand is DK Metcalf, mostly healthy, in a great situation, making the most of those circumstances. And on the other hand, Campbell, mostly injured, in a bad situation, struggling. I don't think it's a reasonable, fair or helpful comparison to make at this point, and I'd be saying the same thing if the tables were turned. I think it's especially strange to undersell the difference is circumstances between the two. What I hoped for from Campbell is what we saw from Deebo Samuel. Similar production to DK, but on 19 fewer targets, much better YAC, more red zone catches, high yards/target (with 16 fewer deep targets), he gets less cushion but creates more separation... Good for him that he was able to stay healthy, and was in an offense that could use his abilities.
  12. I'm not minimizing what Metcalf is doing. I'm saying what he's doing is not based on any skill. The only question that's been answered about him is whether an NFL team will use his physical gifts to create production in the NFL (and really that wasn't a question, we know it's possible, it just doesn't happen that often). He's the same raw, unpolished guy that he was coming out, and those guys usually don't produce. Even if they have a good year or two, they usually fall off. As for Campbell, again, let's talk about traits. Campbell ran plenty of routes in college, and while most of them were from the slot, that doesn't undermine his ability to run them. He has change of direction ability, he can flip his hips, and he can produce yards after the catch. He's just as fast as Metcalf. What I don't understand is the inclination to write off a rookie receiver who was injured all year, and who played with Jacoby Brissett. (Hilton's yards/target went from 10.6 to 7.3, and we all know why.) (Here's one of the gifs I saved showing Campbell running a corner from the slot. https://thumbs.gfycat.com/ClosedFamiliarGallinule-max-1mb.gif )
  13. When a team uses raw size and speed well, you get Metcalf's 2019 season. Great job by everyone involved. But 75% of the time, raw HWS receivers don't produce like that at any point in their careers. They are the players everyone gets enamored with after the Combine because 'you can't teach size/speed', but that's just a platitude, and usually they don't live up to that hype. And I do think he was really unpolished in college. He still only runs three routes, his hands are shaky, he doesn't really high point the ball... he's still unpolished. He's a one trick pony, and it just so happens that his trick is working well so far. And good for him and Seattle, but having a strong rookie season with some splash plays is only the beginning of the story.
  14. I don't care about Metcalf's size or build. That and his speed are basically his entire profile. Nothing wrong with any of that, but I don't think any of those traits translate to good NFL receiver play at a high rate. Too many HWS prospects bomb in the NFL for me to care about those factors. His tape is subpar, and he is very raw. Even on his splash plays in the NFL, there are no routes being run, he's just beating guys down the field. He doesn't even make high point plays. Maybe he'll get there, but I don't think very highly of his skill level, and without the skill, his physical gifts won't be maximized. Like I said, he wound up with the right QB.
  15. He was hurt, and wound up in a system that couldn't use his skills even if he was healthy. I still think he has high level traits, and needs to improve his consistency as a pass catcher. Everything else I thought of him is still in play.
  16. Those camps are for high school QBs, being tutored by college QBs. I'm not sure if JB ever attended, either as a learner or a counselor...
  17. Metcalf has exceeded my expectations as a rookie. I'm still not impressed with his skill, and maybe that comes, but he's had more production than I expected, including some big moments. It helps that he was drafted by a team that has the most efficient deep ball passer in the NFL. Meanwhile, Campbell was injured all year, and played with a substandard QB. I wouldn't have drafted Metcalf over Campbell, so far be it from me to criticize Ballard for his decision. What gets me is that people think one season in which Campbell was hurt and Metcalf made some plays is conclusive. Based on traits, I still value Campbell over Metcalf.
  18. I think JB remains on the roster and has a shot at the starting job in 2020, and if I had to bet on it today, I'd say he's the Week 1 starter. So there's that. But that's about as "all in" as they're getting with him. He's under contract, specifically a two year deal so they could secure the spot and evaluate him, and they're clearly not sold on him as the long term starter at this point, but they're not exactly pulling the plug either. I think that's a reasonable place to be. To the bolded, I disagree strongly. Let's say you want Derek Carr, let's not undersell the cost in draft picks and salary. And I start with him because I think he's the best of the bunch, but he just QB'd a seven win team also. To the second bolded, that's really the crux of our disagreement, I think. I don't believe Rivers improves the Colts enough to make it worth the move. It's not about whether Rivers is better than JB; he is. It's a question of whether Rivers makes the Colts a contender. For me, the answer is probably not, so Rivers is a non-starter. Last bolded, my preferred approach is not ignoring the problem. It's fixing the problem in what I think is the best way, rather than panicking because we're not ready to contend in 2020.
  19. It's not that drafting a guy is off the table. The entire disagreement from me is with the idea that bringing in a vet FA would be enough of an improvement over JB to help the Colts get back to contention. I don't think the guys available will be good for the Colts. I also don't see that path as the best for getting a rookie ready asap. And the couple guys who might actually represent an improvement over JB are most likely too costly, especially if you want to draft a guy. Trading for Carr is a non-starter if you also want to draft a guy in 2020. The Foles option is highly unlikely (and is also a question mark, Foles really struggled in 2019). We talked about Rivers already. This is the disagreement. Who makes the Colts better? Who salvages us from a wasted season? I don't see it. And I feel like my angle is being misrepresented as 'you're okay with a wasted season with JB,' which is false. First, I don't think the result of 2019 is representative of the Colts ceiling with JB, given all the injuries. Second, I don't think that bringing in one of those other QBs salvages the 2020 season.
  20. You guys are ignoring the point. You're forcing this 'anyone but JB makes the Colts better,' and that's the actual disagreement. I don't think the also-rans everyone is trotting out there make the Colts better. Even those who might, I don't believe they take the team from 'wasted season' -- which is a dramatic way of saying the team isn't ready to contend, so we can lay it at the feet of the QB, which I'm not sure I agree with -- to serious contender. The point is that the best way to fix the QB position, now and future, is to draft the next guy. The patchwork solution isn't attractive to me. That's not saying I'm fine with wasting time on JB, just that we need to find the next guy in the draft.
  21. Agreed with that take. I shot that to stitches because we've been having a back and forth about this topic all season, and we both wondered whether Ballard would be willing to move up for a QB. But yeah, it's not a blanket determination that he wouldn't, not at all.
  22. He'll ultimately be judged on his ability to build a team, but his ease with the media makes him easy to root for and like.
  23. I'll say this, the Jags need to get better at QB just like we do.
  • Create New...