dw49

I've been watching for 60 years but in all fairness , didn't see many games until the NFL package came out. This was bad indeed and no one mentioned the ridiculous holding call on Fries that negated a big gain and led to the blocked 60 yard attempt. This was bad as you say but was it as bad as the Matte playoff loss vs Green Bay in the late 60's. I was watching and could plainly see that Chandlers last minute FG to tie the game was wide right.

Your probably right as to where that one originated.

I think that one is utterly insane. Colts would be all over that one is its were real...

I don't think he has a lot of pocket presence . Hard to protect the ball when you have no clue a hit is coming.

No one mentioned the extremely "chintzy" holding call on Fries. Huge play as it negated a 1st and 10 at around the 20 yard line. This lead up to the blocked FG and at the least a 6 point swing. Plus changed the momentum ...

They also had a big lead ....

Pretty much zero chance the Colts pick at 1.1. They have 3 wins and 8 games remain where they will be favored or small underdogs. That said , I think they would trade the pick (1.1) as they would get a boatload . Trading AR could be a little tricky considering the injury.

Looking for snap counts for the game. Pretty sure Ogletree never had a target .

What kind of fish in your lake ?

Looks like a unique city to say the least.

Are you in Saskatoon ? I used to do a fly in to Lake Walston yearly for 6-7 years. We would fly into Saskatoon and spend a night there and then fly into the fishing camp the next day. I tried like heck to catch a 50" pike and did come close at 48.5. Truly a beautiful province .. loved it there.

You would think that would be the case.

I can recall Irsay saying something to the effect that Ballard would work it out but not a directive for Ballard to get a deal done. I'm pretty certain that was never said.

I would think a great deal of the poor tackling grades were due to chasing a very elusive QB . Pretty tough guy to defend...

He did just that.....

Strange that the line went from Colts-1 to Colts +2. Seems with that injury report , the line should have gone back down ?

Here we go again... where are you getting the information "Colts don't want to trade JT unless a team gives so much more than market value. Obviously, no team would send that and that's exactly what Colts want. " The only thing I saw that I can believe was a quote from the Miami . " From the Dolphins side, GM Chris Grier was more open about the discussion with Indy, adding he had "exploratory" talks with Colts general manager Chris Ballard, but there was “no exchange of offers from either side.” That's from the miami GM , which I think is believable. He says nothing about outrageous demands. Furthermore , I have really no idea of what "market value" is for a RB that cannot practice due to a simple procedure that normally takes 3-4 weeks to heal. Anyway.. you are welcome to believe that the Colts asked for what boils down to more than 2 first round picks. I'll continue to not believe what I consider pure garbage reporting.

Hard to believe the Colts asked for that. One source says the Dolphins and Colts never even made any legitimate offers or counter offers. Another source claims Miami offered their second. All different reports on all aspects of this whole debacle. That above report really makes a lot of sense. The Colts "were said" to be looking for a first round pick , which is believable. Now I'm suppose to believe their price was a good RB , a monster WR and a first round pick ? Please....

Since the Chiefs picked last , I'm thinking we lost Rush to the last team that could have claimed him. Bummer......

I get it now that I read it again. What was confusing me is the line that says he is "inactive as of the 6th game and inactive during the regular season and post season. I believe the rule is he comes off the PUP list after the first 4 games and then has until the 6th game to become active. If not he is out for the year. I wasn't realizing that after 6 games he's out for the year.

Thank you

Are you sure that means what you say. It says "perform football activities"after the first 4 weeks. Then states that he doesn't play the season. Very ambiguous and I'm not sure what it exactly says

No doubt last year that our WR often seemed to never be open. Let's hope it was a Reich failure.

I think it going to be better this year. Pierce looks improved , Downs is a stud and without MAC in the mix the TE group should be way better. What I will give you is , we don't have a solid #1 as Pittman IMO is a good #2.