TMPHBITEU
-
Posts
345 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by TMPHBITEU
-
-
The board won't implode. In fact the only thing that will happen is there will be different topics to be read as there always is... And there always will be... Forever... Never understood what people are talking about when saying these boards over react. It's just descussions to me. I've been on these boards for the past 6 seasons. My posts don't say it but we had a switch over and it took them all away lol
So you're saying this board won't be destroyed by collapsing on itself? You got me there..
As for what looks like discussions to you, then yes, some of it is logical analysis. Some of it is emotional overkill that resembles naive childlike fantasies and delusions. To some here, that last part is also known as "true fandom".
-
And notice the comment got like 75+ thumbs down, proving outsiders (those that don't follow the Colts on a daily basis) know nothing about our team. I don't agree with the entire statement, but we all know Arians's vertical offense has been PART of Luck's problems of late...emphasis on PART
It only proves that the readers of PFT do not share the same opinion as the guy who wrote under the alias "FJC".
For me, I especially disagree with one sentiment of what was written: "..Luck could start progressing rather than regressing.".
I do not necessarily believe Luck is regressing, although it could appear that way. There are too many factors (especially psychological) to determine whether he's making strides forward or backwards. Unless you have a thorough understanding of the mind of Andrew Luck, you are in no position (yet) to say whether he's regressing or progressing. There simply isn't enough factual evidence. Just because the progression isn't obvious, does not mean it doesn't exist. We simply do not know, since no one here has the essential inside information. All we have is guesswork.
While I think FJC (the real one) might be right in most of his analysis on Bruce Arians and the (current, as in - what can we do to win right now) problems regarding Andrew Luck, long term I'm not sure this won't pan out. I have seen several cases during my time studying psychology, where individuals in a situation appeared to be at a stand-still, yet in time perfectly adapted to their situation and thrived. I have also seen several cases where the individial appeared to be at a stand-still during a long time frame, then had a major change and thrived due to the previous experiences. The most common denominator was the individuals in question often displayed above average human intelligence. I think it's safe to say Andrew Luck would fit that last paragraph.
If I was forced to vote, I'd probably have pressed the "downvote" as well, despite being on these boards daily.
There's of course the possibility that Arians' system will never work (look up older FJC posts regarding this for more information), and that Luck never will beat this system due to its flaws. That may very well be correct. It might not be. Maybe time will tell, maybe it won't. But to say Luck is regressing as a fact shows a lack of knowledge of human psychology.
Note: This isn't exactly intended for you, cmqww. I started writing something, then decided to write something different.
-
Same old, same old FJC ;)
-
Correct me if I'm wrong (don't get excited, I'm arrogant) but the object of an NFL season is to make the playoffs. It's a bad thing when fans are disappointed when their team misses the playoffs: It means they expected a different outcome."
You make it sound like I'm supposed to disagree with your post, based on what I initially wrote. There are no conflicts between our two posts.
You are not wrong though: I corrected your post anyway for a different perspective.
-
Colts fans are generally like pampered children.
If we fail to reach the playoffs next year I believe this board would implode.
-
If we beat Houston next week, while the Broncos and Patriote both win out, Houston will drop to the #3 seed.
There's no way we're sitting Luck.
-
Are we allowed to criticise Luck yet? Or is it still 50% O line 50% Arians 0% Luck fault that the offence is struggling?
Criticism is still not allowed on Luck. Failure to comply will lead to immediate illogical reactions, that could best be compared to the delusional, naive, utopian worshipping we see from vampire-fans (aka *ic teenage girls) these days. Proceed with extreme caution.
-
B- (must stop dropping easy passes, must start making hard catches) not that he hasnt made some tough catches but he needs to step his game up, HOWEVER, he is a rook, so was Garcon. Garcon is much better 2nd 3rd years. i think he's got a high ceiling .... if he gets an A or A+, then he's already great. not the case.
What did I just read?
-
interestingagreedagreedwow
Are you trying to set a new forum post-record?
-
WHY ON EARTH WOULD YOU HOPE FOR SUCH A THING, STEPHEN?!?!
-
stopping stafford to johnson is like stopping manning to harrison. its not happening
Oh, no you didn't!
-
http://prod.www.colt...27-159502596d06
Actually he is.
Well, you're right about him leading the NFL in receptions.
I wouldn't be basing that off a november 14th-article, though.
-
If the above isn't intentional, I don't know what is.
-
RGIII aint better than Andrew Luck and he will never be.
We have the best young QB in the league and on the best team with the best fans in football, everyone who's a real colts fan knows this, everyone but you (RG3isnumber1) and with that name you are no real colts fan.
Alene fordi du er Colts-fan bør ikke betyde at objektivitet ikke længere er relevant. Vi kalder heller ikke Nicklas Bendtner for verdens bedste fodboldspiller på grund af hans nationalitet.
To everyone else: I apologize - I felt a need to write the letters æ, ø and å on these boards at least once.
Translation: Just because you're a Colts fan doesn't mean objectivity goes out the window.
-
Maybe he will respond.
Even though Detroit was not allowed to have the play reviewed, it still could have been reviewed if a ruling would have benefitted Houston
-
Saying "Not a troll post" doesn't make it any less so.
-
To me either team throwing the flag is delaying the next snap since it's set to be reviewed anyway.
Either team throwing the flag would be a delay of game, yes.
However, the key is the fact that the play went against Detroit. Thus Houston throwing the flag would not be met by this restriction as the play did not go against Houston (as referenced in bold in my previous post).
-
I'm not sure that is the same exact scenario.
Truth be told the rule book doesn't seem to adequately address that the review process is eliminated no matter who throws the red flag...
This is the pdf published by the NFL and not the pocket-sized book you can buy at Barnes & Noble.
It is the same scenario by an interpretation of the purpose of the rule.
The logic is this:
The booth will review any play as mentioned under reviewable plays. The line @ 22 is a restriction to this rule meant to prevent teams from getting a reward from making a penalty.
If we look at the wording of the following: "He must initiate a review before the next legal snap or kick and cannot initiate a review of any ruling against a team that commits a foul that delays the next snap."
That means if Houston had opted to throw the red flag, it would still be reveiwable seeing as the play went against Detroit.
-
I heard the broadcasters mention it and I think they said something similar in the Atlanta game last week, and didn't Pagano do the same thing early in the year?
The rulebook doesn't seem to say anything about any team benefiting.
So who knows.
".. and cannot initiate a review of any ruling against a team that commits a foul that delays the next snap." @ line 22.
-
I haven't read the rule, so I'm not sure about the following.
But I seem to rememeber someone say the reason it couldn't be reviewed, was the fact that the team that throws the flag cannot benefit from the unsportsmanlike conduct off a wrongly thrown flag.
Meaning that in the example you mentioned, the play would be reviewed regardless of the other team throwing the flag.
-
what a wasted draft pick
That comment is a waste of space on the Internet.
-
The referees didn't blow this one.
There was reasonable doubt on the play: The correct call was to let the play go on. The fact that Schwartz messed up doesn't mean the referees are to blame.
They can't go against the rule book on the call afterwards. What were they supposed to do? Make up an imaginary "fair play" rule on the spot?
-
People run out because they "like" every little thing they agree with. I only give one when something jumps out at me.
I agree with this little thing.
-
Andrew Luck seemed almost over-the-top angry with himself after this game.
I may be delusional, but I expect a blow out in this game based on the psychological factors, which for once does not relate to ChuckStrong. I think this game will tell us a lot of what to expect in the future from Mr. Luck.
What happens next season?
in Colts Football
Posted
"Who is to say one is right over the other?" - That's a difference of opinions - a matter of perspective. Neither is right or wrong objectively.
"This board is not for "logical analysis's" It is for discussion of NFL/Colts football." - Logical analysis is part of any reasonable discussion.
"The Forum will not collapse on itself." - You missed the sarcasm. ;)