Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Restored

Senior Member
  • Posts

    2,874
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Restored

  1. 4 hours ago, EastStreet said:

     

    It's really all about what Ballard does next. It's likely a career defining draft for him. In the draft (QB), he's going to get some time and a long leash (and likely forgiveness if it doesn't work out). If he makes a bad decision with a FA QB or stands pat with JB, it could be detrimental to his career. GMs always get more grace/latitude in the draft with QBs so long as the rest of the draft and finances are good. It'll be his first huge personnel call. 

     

    I agree. The leash is certainly shortened if he misses in FA with a QB or stands pat with JB but I also think he has to been given a little more leeway than other GM's in his position. With Luck retiring abruptly and McDaniels backing out, the team could have easily floundered given either or both events but Ballard weathered the storm and kept the team afloat. Because of this, he has earned himself a little more credit in my opinion.

     

    I'm of the opinion that he should take a QB in the draft (Love preferably but Herbert is fine too). Additionally, I would be fine with Rivers as a stop-gap for the next season or two as well. The Colts historically have understood the importance of the QB position and how much it means to a team's ability to succeed. Hopefully Ballard gets it right.

    • Like 2
  2. 51 minutes ago, Indeee said:

    My friend, Rivers is 38, not 30. Contention means nothing in this case as if we win a couple more games as you suggested with JB that puts us in contention. I.e. Making playoffs. That's my point, no need to spend on a 38 yrs. Old QB for 1-2 years just to get us in contention. 

     

    You're missing the point. Rivers on this team immediately makes them a contender. Winning the SB is very hard but I wouldn't discount the Colts odds if they do indeed get Rivers. This is all without considering what could be added in free agency, the draft and younger players becoming better.

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
  3. 11 hours ago, EastStreet said:

    His W/L record is simply due to JB (Luck being hurt and then Luck retiring). His financial management and talent evaluation has been spot on. And the JB years were out of his control for the most part, and he gets a pass. He'll more or less get a blank slate with a new QB.

     

    Drafting a QB isn't going to put him on the hot seat regardless of boom/bust. There's always risk/reward in the draft, teams do it every year, and owners know the %s. As long as his overall report card is good, he really has nothing to worry about. Signing a FA who is a known quantity that fails, or sticking with JB (also a known quantity) and failing, would put him on the hot seat because he's making a conscious decision with known quantities.

     

    Good point to the bolded. I always love when people try to bring up Ballard's W-L record. Lynch with the 49ers still has a losing record even after this year's SB run. Are people going to say he's a bad GM too?

    • Like 1
  4. 3 hours ago, Indeee said:

    I just haven't had anyone answer this directly yet, AND MAKE SENSE, so here goes.

     

    Explain to me how having Rivers as a 1-2 year stop gap any different or virtually better than using Kelly as the stop gap to ultimately see if he could become our franchise QB.

     

    If you sign Rivers for 2 years and he and this team makes the playoffs but doesn't go deep in the playoffs then you have wasted money on Rivers. If it really fails, Rivers will be gone in 2021. 

     

    If you let Kelly play for 2020 and this team makes the playoffs but doesn't go deep in the playoffs then you have at least witnessed the potential of Kelly moving forward for many years as our QB. If it really fails, Kelly will be gone in 2021.

     

    ** I left out drafting a QB, as that scenario is the same as the Kelly scenario with exception of the rookie being gone in 2021, from above as I view a rookie and Kelly virtually having the same amount of playing time HERE in INDY. Based on playing time experience as a Colt ONLY, Kelly and a rookie would be both considered rookies from a PLAYING TIME standpoint only. So forget the rookie scenario and concentrate on Rivers vs. Kelly

     

    Do you see why Rivers vs. Kelly is basically the same scenario?

     

    I started a thread earlier that asked the question about the Colts winning the SB under it's current state. A good number said no. If that is the case then why bring Rivers here? In my mind, based on his age, and experience, bringing Rivers here is like the Broncos having Manning for 2 years. The Broncos did that to win a SB and ultimately did. What's different about that situation and the one here in Indy is that the Broncos were ready to win a SB and it was evident as the rest of the team helped aid Manning when he was declining. That is not what is going to happen here if Rivers comes. This team is not strong enough in every facet and Rivers is NO Manning.

     

    So again, Why sign Rivers if you can't win a SB now? Explain to me how signing Rivers is better then letting Kelly play if the scenario outcomes are identical either way with each player in regards to how it would play out this 2020/21 season.

     

    To me, Rivers is nothing more than a waste of money/money dump, if the SB CAN'T BE WON in 2020. **

     

    Explain to me why this ** wouldn't be the case? Because right now, I'm shocked at a good number of you who are okay with having Rivers.

     

    Oh and don't use Rivers as a mentor nonsense. As based on Ballard's approach to coaching he has always believed that "Coaches Coach" so they can mentor and teach a young QB(rookie). Not buying the Rivers Mentor junk.

     

    Couple of issues I have with what you're saying.

     

    1. Rivers puts this team into contention:

     

    You're saying that if the Colts, don't win a Super Bowl with Rivers that it's a waste of money. This is the wrong way to think about it. Rivers will likely only command the type of salary gets for 1-2 years. Thus, there are no long-term ramifications associated with his salary. Putting the Colts into contention now and the long-term is what Ballard and co. are likely thinking and this allows for that to happen. And as we see in the league, if you make it to the playoffs, you have a chance to go far.

     

    Additionally, the Colts won 7 games with Jacoby last year and could easily have won 10 had some overt kicking issues not come into play. The Broncos before they got Peyton Manning were an 8-8 team. This Colts team has many qualities that lead me to believe they aren't that far away:

     

    -Great offensive line

    -Solid running game

    -Young, defensive core that should grow

    -Possible free agent acquisitions (Ballard himself said that the locker room is ready for a big-time free agent)

    -Draft acquisitions (For instance, the draft is loaded with talented WR's who could come in and have an immediate impact)

     

    2. The Rivers mentor issue:

     

    Irregardless if Rivers operates as "true" mentor to whoever the QB below him is, the QB will still learn in an invaluable way. He can learn by just watching Rivers, being in meetings, practicing etc. Sure, the ideal situation is an Alex Smith-Patrick Mahomes type of relationship but even if its not, there's nothing to say that the QB wouldn't still gain valuable knowledge just by observing for a season or two.

     

     

  5. 13 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

     

    I absolutely believe they pinged him, and thought they would since day 1. It's the smart thing to do. 

     

    That said, highly doubt he comes back, but funnier things have happened. Hoping he is tired of growing his dad bod, and bored of book club.

     

    BTW, Sileo is a bit of nut. Google his history and you'll see what I mean. He also reported Miami was going to trade up to #2.


    I agree. The timing and nature of Irsay’s tweet and then Sileo’s lead me to believe they did reach out. Beyond that is anyone’s guess.

    • Like 1
  6. 8 hours ago, stitches said:

    That's fair... but this is NOT my point. The point is that I have my own favorite, but I am NOT advocating for drafting him specifically(I understand reasonable people can have reasonable disagreements about players and I will be happy with multiple different QBs drafted by Ballard even if they are not my favorite).

     

    My point is... whoever is your favorite QB in this draft, your position shouldn't be - oh well, doesn't matter if we miss on him, as long as we can get a DT in R1 and WR in R2... 

     

    And if your QB of choise is not worth a 1st or early 2nd pick, I kind of feel like he's probably not good enough anyways. To me, most R3+ QBs are just wild shots without much pressure for him to pan out. This is the type of shot you should be taking once you already have your franchise QB in the building, not relying on him to be your franchise QB of the future. That's why I think I would prefer Ballard not draft a QB at all if he doesn't like a QB early or if the QB he likes gets taken before our pick. 

     

    I guess my ultimate point is - if a QB you like is there in the first and you think he's worth that pick, you don't horse around with it. You take him. Ahead of a DT, ahead of a WR, ahead of any other position player.

     

    And about speculations and discussions on this forum - yes, even after the combines and workouts, most of it is still just for fun. At least for me... for fun and for connecting and engaging with other fans of the team. 

     

    I agree.

     

    It's a bit baffling to me that we have people on this forum that believe that adding pieces at other positions while still having a huge question mark at QB is going to make a huge difference. Taking a flyer in the later rounds on a QB that will likely wash out isn't going to fix the problem. With the Colts current QB situation, they would need atleast two+ drafts plus a good amount of injury luck and some other breaks to be in championship contention. Acquiring a QB (like Love) who might pan out after a season of learning would accelerate that and more obviously, put the team in contention for years to come.

     

    I think some of the fans on this forum have forgotten just how hard it is to find a good QB and what that process usually involves.

    • Like 1
  7. 43 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

     

    Spent the day watching.   40 minutes this afternoon...   the other 30 minutes tonight.

     

    Worth every minute.     Is there GM speak in there?    Of course,  it's to be expected.

     

    But Chris Ballard is as forth-coming an executive as you're going to find.    Ask and he will try to answer.    And if h can't, he'll say that too....

     

    Hope you'll watch.   It's on the front page of the website.    Thanks to ZTB for starting this thread.

     


    This is the way.

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
  8. 2 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

    He also admitted in a way that Luck covered up a lot of holes on this roster.


    Every franchise QB covers up holes on a roster.

     

    The truth is, every team has holes that the QB either covers up or does not. If every team in the league had the same level of QB play, we’d see there is even more parity than we already see today.

     

    That’s why I give Ballard and the staff somewhat of a pass this year. The holes in the roster obviously were more exposed this year but had the team had their franchise QB, many of the blemishes this team has would be covered up.

    • Like 3
  9. 35 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

    I was definitely a Mr. Luck fan. I hope you are not insinuating that he was an underachiever. He was 11-5 his first 3 years with no OL and limited support elsewhere but so be it.Your opinion is your opinion and I respect it although I may not agree with it.

    I would disagree that Harbaugh was a game manager but he was, in my opinion, a real 'Gamer'. He may not have been the most gifted but he willed his team to win. Other than almost getting to the Super Bowl his record with the Colts was meh.


    Honestly, Ryan Fitzpatrick reminds me of Harbaugh for some reason.

    • Like 1
  10. 10 minutes ago, #12. said:

    "Going into the offeason, we have to proceed as if Andrew is officially retired," owner Jim Irsay told NFL.com recently. "So that's how we operate now".

     

     

     

    That's a pretty interesting quote.  One thing is certain, if he wants to play, they would welcome him back and Luck would have his job back in a second.


    I agree that Andrew would be welcomed back with open arms. I also understand Irsay’s approach since you can’t hold out hope that he returns.

     

    This is speculation on my part but I think he has had conversations with Andrew during the season so far and he doesn’t anticipate Andrew coming back this offseason but might leave the door open for after that.

     

    it would certainly make for an interesting scenario if the Colts draft a QB this offseason and then Andrew comes back somewhere down the road.

  11. 3 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

     

    It was not long ago a team with the #3 overall pick traded up one spot to #2, while giving up their 3, 67, 111, and the following year 3rd round pick.

     

    Their choice?  Mitchell Trubisky

     

    Mahomes went 10th, Watson went 12th. No other first rounders were QB.  In the 2nd round, only Deshone Kizer.  Davis Webb and CJ Beatherd in the 3rd.

     

    For #2 overall, I expected more. Maybe Trubisky turns the corner at some point, but he is stuck at the light presently. And shows how easy it possibly is to feel great on draft day, and then scratching your head almost 3 years later.

     

    Teams in the NFL today greatly overvalue the QB position. It's no surprise to see what the Bears did that year given that atleast one team usually makes this type of move each year.

     

    Trubisky likely should have been taken later than he was given how he has played to this point.

     

    The Colts could easily move up into a similar position that the Chiefs and Texans did that year to get the QB they have their eyes on. I know we like to think Ballard is all about trading back and acquiring picks but I would not be shocked to see him utilize that capital to move up and get the QB that he wants.

  12. 14 hours ago, LuckyHorseShoe§ said:

    So let's say there are roughly four tiers of QBs in the NFL:

    Elite- Rodgers, Wilson, Mahomes, etc

    Good- Cousins, Stafford, Brady (at this point in his career), etc

    Mediocre- JB, Cam Newton, Andy Dalton, etc

    Bad- Jameis Winston, Trubisky, Flacco, etc

     

    Now, regardless of where you think those guys actually fit, if we were to trade draft capital from only this year and snag a QB that could end up at least in the good tier, I would consider that completely worth it. I haven't watched the QBs in college too much this year, but from what I've seen only Burrow is elite, but there are a lot of good options. I would trade our second round picks if we could snag one of them, and then we could have JB and Hoyer tutor them their first year. Plus, they would have a great OL, a good RB room, and at least one elite WR and an excellent TE (assuming we resign either Doyel or Ebron) as well as a stout D. If we could achieve this in the draft, we could absolutely be competing for the AFCS with the cows next year.


    I agree. It’s just hard to predict if any of the QB’s in the draft (Burrow included) will pan out. I do agree however that the risk is worth taking. Otherwise, the Colts will be stuck in mediocrity. 

  13. 2 minutes ago, LuckyHorseShoe§ said:

    Well out of the teams below us, Burrow is going to the Bengals, the Dolphins will take a QB, Redskins will probably take Chase Young, Jets don’t need a QB, Browns don’t need a QB, Tampa might want a QB, AZ doesn’t want one, Lions don’t want one, Bears need one, Giants probably won’t take one, Broncos will want one, Jags probably won’t want one.

    That makes it 12 teams that will likely end up below us, and out of those twelve I’d say Bengals, Dolphins, Broncos, and Bears all need/want a QB, with the Giants, Tampa, and Jags maybe considering it. If we really want a shot at Herbert, Fromm, or Tua, we need to lose out imo

     

    Or package up a decent deal to move down and get one.

    • Like 1
  14. On 11/22/2019 at 3:17 PM, MarylandTerrapin said:

     

    This. ^

     

    Furthermore, when Luck retired in August, if someone told us we would end up going 10-6 and not lose any games by more than 7 points, I think we would be thrilled.  We quickly forget how often this team was blown out during the Pagano/Grigson era.   

     

    The truth is that the fan base is going through withdrawal pains.  The addiction was having an elite QB for 20 years.  It got us one Super Bowl title.

     

    Einstein stated that insanity was born from doing the same thing over again and expecting different results.  Lofty offensive stats by Colt players won many fantasy leagues, but they didn't lead to sustained success in the post season. Ballard and Reich are building this team the right way - we just have to get used to having a complete team for a change instead of expecting an elite QB to carry the team.

     

    With the toxic atmosphere on this forum, there has been a sharp drop in insightful posts and I haven't posted as much.  I just wanted to thank you for taking the time to break down your projections on teams in the playoff hunt.   It was appreciated.        


    It wasn’t about relying on the quarterback. It was about the quarterback NEEDING to be relied on, especially in the postseason. Manning had a running game till about midway into the 2007 season but never again after and Luck never had one until last year. Add that into the fact that Manning had a good defense only a handful of times and Luck didn’t until last year, you get why there was only one Super Bowl win between both of them.

     

    Elite QB’s are the only ones playing and winning Super Bowl’s for the most part so you still very much need one. They get you wins in the regular season that you wouldn’t win with a mid or low tier QB which can mean the difference between having homefield advantage vs. being a wildcard team. Yes, there’s the Foles and Flacco exceptions but otherwise, it’s been all top-tier QBs playing in and winning the Super Bowl.

     

    At the end of the day, a team needs to have a top-tier QB to have a shot each and every year. Otherwise, you’re heavily relying on the rest of your roster to be great from top to bottom to win a championship. And history has shown that this happens very rarely.

    • Like 1
  15. 3 hours ago, The Old Crow said:

    In the total scheme of things, I think Frank is a very good coach, and Ballard has done a good job as GM. The loss of Luck was huge, because with him it could have been a Super Bowl contender. The overall talent on the Colts roster, particularly the defense , is much better than past Colt teams. I think it’s fair to say that the Colts have had more injuries than most teams. 
    I think JB is a QB in the style of Joe Flacco. You can win with a good game manager , but he’s no Andrew Luck. With game managers you must have a good o line, running game , and good receivers. You have elements of all of these. 
    The playoffs are still within reach, as the Texans are shaky. Long term, if I were Ballard, I would be looking to draft a young QB. I’m thinking Ballard held onto draft picks and didn’t trade this year  , to possibly move up in the draft, if the right QB presented himself. 


    I agree with this. Brissett is a great leader and is capable of showing flashes and having a great game or two but his limitations as a passer are becoming more and more apparent.

  16. 7 hours ago, Perfect_Clark said:

    Well, this blows. Marlon Mack is one of my favorite Colts players to watch and I would've loved to see him on TNF.

     

    I'm also big on Khari Willis and wanted to see him against Watson and the Texans.

     

    These injuries are getting ridiculous.


    I agree.

     

    love the Smallville avatar by the way.

  17. 36 minutes ago, life long said:

    I went to over a decades worth of home games between RCA and Lucas oil stadiums and I have been saying this exact thing since the first game against the bears at LOS. People have denied it but it is validating to see several posters come out and agree. I've been told by fellow season ticket holders to not block their view or yell too loud many times.... I was told I was ruining their experience but my dad and I always took pride in standing and yelling on every single defensive play. It was not uncommon for the two of us to be the only ones doing so in our section. 

     

    I completely agree with this and it's been my experience as well. I'm sorry but if people just want to sit around and act like they're at a tennis match, then they should stay home. And definitely don't tell fans who are cheering and paid money for their tickets to sit down because its too loud.

  18. The Colts running game hasn’t been able to consistently produce for four weeks now and the pass protection has been spotty at times as well. And against one of the worst defenses in the league this week, it came to a head.

     

    In my opinion, this is attributed mostly to the offensive line while Mack has left some decent runs on the field as well.

     

    This team’s offensive identity is tied to its offensive line and the ability to the run the ball, which has been lacking as of late. Brissett coming back won’t change that either.

     

    It’s really starting to look like they made a mistake in letting DeGugliemo go.

    • Like 3
×
×
  • Create New...