esmort
-
Posts
3,572 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by esmort
-
-
6 hours ago, stitches said:
I don't consider Carr one of those long-term high end starters, so no. I think he's extremely average while commanding a very high salary and this is one of the situations we have to avoid - paying a ton for average QB play. You have to really be in 2 situations - you either have to pay little for average to great QB play(rookie scale QB), or you have to pay a ton for great QB play(franchise QBs on non-rookie contracts). This way you get a bit of a margin of error to construct the rest of the roster. Great QB play gives you margin of error elsewhere, and low QB salary gives you margin of error/additional resources to strengthen the roster elsewhere. Carr gives you none of those.
On your second question - to me anything past R2 is taking a wild shot that doesn't really have high success rate historically. Just the best prospect don't usually fall that far. There of course are exceptions, but they are few and far between and the huge majority of the ones drafted R3 or day 3 don't amount to anything more than backups. That's why I said, even if he drafts one late, it doesn't mean much because you cannot rely on that QB panning out... huge majority of those don't.
I don't know how realistic Carr being available is ... but his contract really doesn't seem that bad considering where contracts are at/going. He's ~#11 QB right now and when Mahomes, Watson, Prescott, etc ... do their contracts in the next year or so he will probably be right around mid-pack ~#16 or so and is locked in for 3 more years. The QBs making less will consist mostly of Rookie contracts and backups. I doubt you get any decent vet for much less ... Foles , Alex Smith, are in the same range, and decent chance someone like Bridgewater cashes in for a similar amount. JB is carrying a $21.375 cap hit; Carr is $21.5 mil.
-
1
-
-
39 minutes ago, Four2itus said:
Never in my life, have I seen more discussion about a 3rd string practice player.
Ever.
Never in my life have I seen so much discussion/excuse making on why a back up QB disguised as a very below average starter should keep his job.
Ever.
-
5
-
2
-
-
9 hours ago, aaron11 said:
Tua is expected to make a full recovery. i know a lot of people are worried about the hip, but i would not be with that prognosis
hes going to declare and is the best QB imo that we have a shot at imo
According to a DR being interviewed the other day they wont know for sure until after draft ... right now its not a prognosis its a guess.
-
4 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:
That is what will be interesting. If a QB and DT are both there with first round grades what do they do. That’s why I hope we can get a DT in FA. What if they love both.
I think you have to go QB if there is one there, because even though the good ones are going to be crazy expensive good DTs hit FA far more frequently than good QBs.
-
Going back doesn't seem like a smart decision as long as he expects to go in the 1st. The odds seem far greater he costs himself money going back. He isn't going to know until after the draft if he is going to recover 100% (he can probably cash in and get drafted before anyone knows if he is going to have a permanent injury); if he doesn't and does have permanent injury his NFL career is over. If he goes back and gets hurt again his stock will plummet. He goes back and has a bad season his stock tanks. Seems like a huge risk; I'm taking the guaranteed money even if it's less. I dont know why he didn't take out draft protection insurance before the season that makes no sense.
-
19 minutes ago, Orioles22 said:
My point was the two quarterbacks we drafted No. 1 were as close to sure things as you can get. We won't always have sure things, but we don't need to reach when we have needs in several other areas.
We don't have the #1 this year and odds are we aren't getting the #1 next year so we are going to have to take a chance and gamble at some point on a lower ranked QB. Taking a chance isn't the same as reaching. Holding out until we get a chance at another "guarantee" like Manning, Luck, etc... dooms the team to indefinite mediocrity.
-
5
-
-
5 hours ago, Orioles22 said:
Who was the last good quarterback we drafted that wasn't the No. 1 pick?
I'm not impressed with anyone but Burrow. I think we should pick up a veteran for a year or two and hope for a stronger class next year. Ballard made a point to talk about not "reaching" for a quarterback. Teams do that all the time and it rarely works out.
Your logic is baffling... We have only drafted 2 QBs in the last 20 years so how many we have drafted that wasn't #1 doesn't prove anything. How many current top starting QBs were drafted #1? That info is far more relevant.
-
4
-
-
6 hours ago, Orioles22 said:
Ballard made it clear the Colts weren't going to "reach" for a quarterback. Anyone but Burrow is a reach. We need a defensive tackle, receiver and offensive tackle (even with Costanzo) with those top three picks. We can draft a quarterback next year when, hopefully, there is more depth. If we fix most of our other problems this year we could go all in on a quarterback in 2021.
That's one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. You don't even know where they are going to be drafted or in what order yet. A year or two down the road it may turn out Burrow wasn't even the best QB in the class.
-
2
-
-
37 minutes ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:
Come on. Can we not stay on topic for more than a few posts. I was generally interested in what people think of Gordon. On a stampede blue podcast it was discussed that Pat McAfee really liked him also. If he can be had for a late 2nd or 3rd rounder. We jump at it and let him compete and develop.
I admittedly have only watched him in the Cheez-it Bowl he seemed OK, but definitely nothing that really jumped off the TV and screamed NFL QB... But like I said I haven't watched him in any other gamed.
-
4 hours ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:
Can we cut the crap about 2017. He was traded to the Colts on September 2nd and started his first game on September 10. The fact he was even able to run the playbook is amazing and shows his intelligence.
This is the equivalent of someone switching jobs and getting the employee handbook in a different language and then getting a quiz on it 7 days later.
Yeah as soon as he stops making the same mistakes he made in 2017 and people stop trying to make him out to be a rookie.
More like someone switching companies in the same industry, but staying in the same position. The structure and goals of the new company are basically the same and your handbook is in the same language just the policies and procedures are a bit different. But not only could you not do your job the 1st year you were still a sub-standard employee who didn't get it 3 years later; and that's after you took your 2nd year off to do nothing but train, be coached, and watch someone do the job how it is supposed to be done... sounds to me like an employee that should be fired, or at least demoted to a job they can handle.
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:
For what it’s worth.....
Don’t know if you’ve listened to the Ballard tape yet.... but he almost literally said what I said: That he doesn’t count 2017 against JB and that he considers this past season as JB’s first year as a starter. This is a professional evaluation. Not a fan’s.First I don't take anything GMs and Coaches say in press conferences at face value and regardless of what Ballard said at a press conference and what you choose to take away from it (and he kind of danced around exactly how he wanted to word that answer) .... comparing JB to a rookie is ridiculous.
Even if you want to go with "JBs first year as starter" that still doesn't equal rookie, and regardless if you want to throw 2017 out of your actual "evaluation" (which I think is nonsense I don't care what Ballard "official response" was) a bad year still has benefits that are not in the stat line or how well the team did. He still got experience with speed of the game, diagnosing defenses, and got to make mistakes with much less pressure than would be typical of the position for the exact reason everyone is wanting to throw it out.
How can you not count his year in NE as a legitimate rookie season, are we going to start putting some defined number of not just games or even games started, but "X number of games started under ideal circumstances" before someone is no longer considered a rookie. If that's the criteria you'll end up with guys in the NFL for years who retire as "rookies"
-
15 minutes ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:
Everyone keeps saying Irsay better get used to empty seats. If Jacoby shows even a slight improvement, Chase shows a slight improvement in the kicking game( which he already has), then the Colts will probably go 10-6 and make the playoffs. People will show for a playoff team
You are overly optimistic ... they may stop the bleeding on season ticket holders, but they won't be picking up many either. Single game sales will be down as well. I usually go to ~3 games a year; I might go to 1 if JB is QB and I have talked to others of thinking similarly.
-
1
-
-
On 12/30/2019 at 11:10 AM, Orioles22 said:
All of you "draft a quarterback" guys seem to think whoever we get will be fine. It doesn't work that way. Burrow looks like he has a good shot at being very good, but it's probably 50-50 on any of the rest.
The best move is to get Luck back. We know that will work.
Otherwise, we need to draft a defensive tackle and receiver in the first 34 and find a veteran and-or look for a guy we can develop later in the draft. That may or may not work, but we do not want to waste our top pick on a guy with question marks.
If they like a guy and there is a 50% chance he is a franchise QB you jump on him. You aren't going to get better odds than that.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, WoolMagnet said:
Agreed. Looking closer at potential draftable QBs, taking one at 13 or moving up could severely hurt the team more than potential help.
I just heard them talk about how many QBs were drafted in the 1st and the low number of ultimate “good” QBS. Cincinnati has been thru it too. Mason Rudolph (pitt’s 1st rd pick) is lookin kess than effective, etc.
JB can be better, especially with weapons added and back from injury. JB may not be the long-term (he could also), but i really dont want Ballard reaching either. If value at QB isnt there, and Ballard and Co arent thrilled with any this year, then we just gotta look at FA and have competition with Jb and whoever else IS here. One of the best things about Ballard is he doesnt handicap the future of the team. He’ll have ideas. Its his job.
Mason Rudolph was a 3rd round pick.
Teams gamble because having a good QB is essential and the draft is usually the only place you are going to get franchise level QBs (and I said usually so you don't have to list off the rare exceptions), and even though many 1st round picks are busts the hit rate outside the 1st is even lower. I don't want them to take someone at 13 if they absolutely think there is no chance of him being a franchise QB; but even if you are 50/50 on thinking he may/may not be the one you have to take the shot, and if there is someone you love and you can actually get to them for a reasonable price you absolutely pay the piper and move up. Even if you use your first round pick every couple of years to take a shot at a QB until you find one its not going to hurt the team nearly as bad as not having a franchise QB.
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, GoColts8818 said:
I don’t know if either of their situations have as much to do with who the QB is as much as fans want it too.
I think TY was frustrated with a frustrating season.
I think AC is deciding if he still wants to play or not and that would have probably happened regardless of the QB.
I don't think it is only QB, but I do think the QB and how long the team is going to be mediocre/non-competitive play a big part in it.
-
I haven't noticed that much more Ballard hate. Mostly the same posters that whine that we are not getting every big name free agent and/or to trade for every big name that hits the block are the same ones complaining about Ballard. Ballard isn't making those big moves so they complain. They just seem louder than normal now because everyone is venting about the season; plus add in a few posters who just opened accounts within the last couple of weeks to complain and they aren't even sure what they need to complain about, so they complain about everything.
-
3
-
-
A loss last week and we could have been picking 9th ... I hate useless wins.
-
8
-
1
-
-
.01 from the 12th ugh
-
Does Denver win move us up?
-
Get TY, Leonard, etc .. out of this game no since in taking a crazy injury
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:
How many games do you need to see?Do you decide on a rookie quarterback after his first year? Because that’s what you’re doing. 2017 means almost nothing. Bad team, weak talent, poor coaching. Arrived late and had no time to learn a QB unfriendly system.
This is as close as JB had to a rookie season. I don’t pretend to know how good he can be, but I’d expect him to improve next season. I just don’t know how much better....
Im not arguing for JB long term. I favor drafting a QB with a first or second round pick. I just think judgements are being made on Brissett as if it’s impossible for him to be better. I would strongly caution against that.
Unless we acquire someone like Foles, or Carr, then JB is highly likely to be the guy next year. The rookie we draft will need a redshirt year. He’ll get the keys to the car in 2021. I’m hoping JB does well and makes the decision hard.
Not the "hes essentially a rookie" excuse. He's so far removed from a rookie. The fact that 2017 was a bad year doesn't mean you get to dismiss it, plenty of rookie QBs come into bad situations and that was his second year. What about his real rookie year he got to spend with the Patriots learning and getting playing time. Three years in, he has had plenty of time to develop and learn. I will be very surprised if he makes any significant improvement.
-
1 hour ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:
How short your memory is. Our worst loss was to Saints. Let’s not forget in the NFL anyone can lose. We beat the Chiefs and Texans in back to back weeks.
Ah Yes ... Two games the JB cheer team like to keep on speed dial.
1. The Chiefs were missing players and Mahomes was hobbled when we beat them. Let's not pretend that game was indicative of how good both teams really are. If we played the Chiefs tomorrow it would look like the Saints game.
2. Texans was a division game; those games are often close regardless of talent. How many times did we have trouble with the Jags over the years even when we were much better.
Yes any given Sunday and all that, but we have gotten worse while most playoff teams have gotten better and are trending up. Just look at the Titans (not a playoff team yet, but win and in), they held their own against the Saints and manhandled us the 2nd time we played.
The Colts are not a playoff caliber team, and likely won't be as long as JB is QB.
-
Just now, MikeCurtis said:
Im watching LSU trounce Oklahoma 49 -14 at the half
I BET they wish they would have missed....... What an embarrasment
The Colts, now that the defensive coordinators understand how to stop us would lose round one
Exactly, look at the teams in the playoffs, then look what the Saints did to us... The Colts would be in for a curb stomping if they had made the playoffs.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Chloe6124 said:
We will probably miss the playoffs by one game. How many kicks did AV miss. Not to mention the two games Jacoby missed that were very winnable.
This team has no business in the playoffs.
Ideal QB Situation
in Colts Football
Posted
I wasn't saying the Saints will necessarily be the ones to pay Bridgewater. Personally I am not a big Bridgewater fan, but I think there is a good chance some team will give him a big contract.
As far as Taysom Hill goes he is an interesting player, I am not sure about the Steve Young comparisons, but I am definitely curious to see if Sean Payton can do something with him.