Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Ja'Crispy

Ahmad Bradshaw visiting Colts/Colts now in 'heavy negotiations' with Bradshaw again. (merge)

Recommended Posts

oh yes he will. most likely on third down or on passing down. he can be our sproles.

You haven't even seen the guy play yet!! I would say his first job is to make the team which IMO will be work enough for him now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is the man/woman behind this?

FpOqrmk.jpg

Ryan Grigson. I believe he is batting 1.000 at his visits/signings ratio.

Could be wrong but I don't remember any player who was brought in for a visit not ultimately signing with the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ryan Grigson. I believe he is batting 1.000 at his visits/signings ratio.

Could be wrong but I don't remember any player who was brought in for a visit not ultimately signing with the team.

 

We worked out a few veteran tight ends a couple weeks ago, didn't sign any of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ryan Grigson. I believe he is batting 1.000 at his visits/signings ratio.

Could be wrong but I don't remember any player who was brought in for a visit not ultimately signing with the team.

I think Cliff Avril was one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "games played" stat may not correlate to healthiness, fwiw. Just like DeAngelo Williams, who was the beneficiary of a similar thread before he re-signed with Carolina, Bradshaw is shown playing in several games last year despite being banged up and unproductive in them.

Most players in the NFL play "banged up" and they still produce. Just like Bradshaw last year, he is still a proven runningback and if signed would be the most talented rb on our roster. In the games he played, he was still very prodcutive, much more so than any back on our roster. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We worked out a few veteran tight ends a couple weeks ago, didn't sign any of them.

I don't think I ever saw their names...who were they Sup?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We worked out a few veteran tight ends a couple weeks ago, didn't sign any of them.

Oh yup, I forgot about that. But hey that shouldn't really count. There's no way Randy McMicheal was gonna be any higher than 3rd on the depth chart.

Bradshaw, if we sign him, (please,please,please) could come in and take the starting job right out of Vicks hands. He's that good.

PS. those TE's came in on a tryout basis. I Bradshaw isn't here for a tryout. He's here because they know that they are gonna put the rock in his hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I ever saw their names...who were they Sup?

 

Randy McMichael, Donte Rosario, and Cornelius Ingram.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Randy McMichael, Donte Rosario, and Cornelius Ingram.

Camp bodies with a chance to make the roster.

Bradshaw will be hunting Vick down for the starting gig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You haven't even seen the guy play yet!! I would say his first job is to make the team which IMO will be work enough for him now!

 

your right, but I have high expectation for him. hes gonna be an important player in our way towards another championship. I can feel it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Camp bodies with a chance to make the roster.

Bradshaw will be hunting Vick down for the starting gig.

 

now a days theres no such thing as a starting back because you always have someone else getting atleast 10 carries unless your AD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Camp bodies with a chance to make the roster.

Bradshaw will be hunting Vick down for the starting gig.

 

That's a good point. I don't know what the level of interest is in Bradshaw. I read something earlier that said he wants to get on before spring work is up, so maybe he's been holding out for a better offer and is tired of getting passed up. He visited the Broncos, Packers, and Steelers earlier this offseason, and they all added backs in the draft. Maybe he's ready to sign somewhere now. I don't know.

 

I like the idea, even mentioned before the draft that he's somebody I'd like to see us take a run at. I'm just not overly giddy, nor expecting us to ink him right away. 

 

Again, I don't know anything. Just my thoughts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait. We don't like DB because he's injury prone, so we're gunna get all giddy about looking at another injury prone RB?

The difference is that Ahmad Bradshaw is good when he plays. Brown is average to sub-par.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

your right, but I have high expectation for him. hes gonna be an important player in our way towards another championship. I can feel it.

LETS hope your right, A sproles type back would be interesting with the speed and size we have on the outside! Could prove to be a match up nightmare :thmup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most players in the NFL play "banged up" and they still produce. Just like Bradshaw last year, he is still a proven runningback and if signed would be the most talented rb on our roster. In the games he played, he was still very prodcutive, much more so than any back on our roster.

Sorry. I watch the Giants. AB spent a lot of time banged up, and wasn't nearly as productive when he was. See game 2 (5 carries for 16 yards, no receptions or TDs), game 9 (15 for 48), game 14 (11 for 33), and game 16 (9 for 39) as examples.

When he's healthy, he's solid. But he's banged up A LOT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry. I watch the Giants. AB spent a lot of time banged up, and wasn't nearly as productive when he was. See game 2 (5 carries for 16 yards, no receptions or TDs), game 9 (15 for 48), game 14 (11 for 33), and game 16 (9 for 39) as examples.

When he's healthy, he's solid. But he's banged up A LOT.

 

That was my impression as well.

 

Should also note that the Giants had one of the best lines in the league for a couple years there, and Bradshaw surely benefited from that. Hopefully our line has taken a step or two forward, but that's still really where the improvement will come from our run game. The backs are auxiliary in my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly you guys are overrating his "injury plaguedness" The guy only missed 2 games last year, and has been very healthy when compared to other NFL players. In my mind if we sign him he would be competing for the starting job and i believe that he would win it fairly easily from Ballard.

His right foot has been operated on 3 times....his most recent being this off season when they replaced a screw in his foot with an even bigger screw. He has also had procedures on his left foot and both ankles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last Season in 14 games Bradshaw averaged 4.6 YPC and had a single drop in the receiving game. The last 3 years he's stayed in for over 500 pass attempts and surrendered only 10 pass pressures.

 

He's the premier pass blocking RB and a great pass catcher to boot. He would make a very valuable 3rd down back. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was my impression as well.

 

Should also note that the Giants had one of the best lines in the league for a couple years there, and Bradshaw surely benefited from that. Hopefully our line has taken a step or two forward, but that's still really where the improvement will come from our run game. The backs are auxiliary in my mind.

So the only way to improve the running game is improve the line?...A better running back will do BETTER regardless of the line, and our line is going to be significantly better anyways....That's like saying Peterson or Martin would come here and not do any better than Brown because of our line....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this guy's game and if he's healthy? Total upgrade. He was the x factor for the Giants' offense imo. Can catch, can block, slithery, tough, runs hard and doesn't go down easy.  But...

 

His right foot has been operated on 3 times....his most recent being this off season when they replaced a screw in his foot with an even bigger screw. He has also had procedures on his left foot and both ankles.

 

Yep. His feet and ankles are a mess apparently. That's why the Giants released him. Giants fans seem to love to the guy.  Coughlin loves the guy.  And they still let him go. So...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry. I watch the Giants. AB spent a lot of time banged up, and wasn't nearly as productive when he was. See game 2 (5 carries for 16 yards, no receptions or TDs), game 9 (15 for 48), game 14 (11 for 33), and game 16 (9 for 39) as examples.

When he's healthy, he's solid. But he's banged up A LOT.

Sorry. Whether you want to admit it or not Bradshaw is still a better back than Ballard, a man that is as banged up as you say still getting impressive yardage totals and per carry average(4.6last year), and tough goaline tds. That is pretty darn impressive for someone banged up as much as you say. So from the stats you gave me ill take that as when hes healthy=Great back, top 10, when hes banged up=hes average. If he were to used in tandem with Ballard i'd be willing to bet he wont be banged up as much and will put up some nice numbers for us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the only way to improve the running game is improve the line?...A better running back will do BETTER regardless of the line, and our line is going to be significantly better anyways....That's like saying Peterson or Martin would come here and not do any better than Brown because of our line....

 

Not what I'm saying. I'm saying I'm not worried about devoting significant resources to better backs unless we improve our offensive line. Because fact of the matter is that better backs still won't perform optimally behind a poor offensive line, whereas the backs we already have will perform better if we improve the line play.

 

So my preferred approach is: a) fix the line; b) see what our backs look like; c) if our backs aren't performing adequately behind an improved line, then replace the backs.

 

I'm not opposed to bringing in a new back on a reasonable deal. I just think the better strategy is to focus on the line play first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! I'm shocked. I think he would be a great addition to the team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry. I watch the Giants. AB spent a lot of time banged up, and wasn't nearly as productive when he was. See game 2 (5 carries for 16 yards, no receptions or TDs), game 9 (15 for 48), game 14 (11 for 33), and game 16 (9 for 39) as examples.

When he's healthy, he's solid. But he's banged up A LOT.

You watch the Giants so you should know that as tough as Bradshaw is, he was never meant to be the "man". His size doesn't allow it. I cant remember any RB as small as he is be the work horse except for maybe Emmitt.

Now before you mention a guy like Ray Rice, remember, he also had McGahee and Ricky Williams as hard nosed runners that could spell him for an entire series if needed.

The same will bode for Donald Martin if the Bucs don't find another capable runner to spell him.

The loss of Brandon Jacobs forced the heavy load onto Bradshaw and his body couldn't take it. They tried with Andre Brown but he got hurt too.

Basically what I'm trying to say is, I'd rather have a productive when healthy Bradshaw as opposed to a Not productive at all Donald Brown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too think he'd be a great addition, but considering the huge difference in line talent he played behind I'm not certain he'd be an upgrade over Ballard.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When he's healthy,  he's unstoppable...    I would think it's a gamble worth taking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too think he'd be a great addition, but considering the huge difference in line talent he played behind I'm not certain he'd be an upgrade over Ballard.  

Not Ballard, but head and shoulders better than anyone else we have..He will be the #2 we have needed, and if healthy possibly the #1...They will each probably get 12-15 carries a game and will stay fresh all year....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i highlihted what i meant in my first post, and i'll do it again.. if at camp we go with ballard, williams, bradshaw and one fb, that means brown is no longer on the team at camp?

 

and there's no need to be condescending, like your respond to my question.. just makes you look lame..

 

 

 

I am still dumfounded. Is it possible that when I say "we go with " that you assume I mean we go "to camp' with ? If that is the case it's a simple misunderstanding. By no means to I intend to suggest that we should cut Brown right after signing Bradshaw. I only mean to suggest that I agreed with the poster that said it's possible if the Colts sign him , that Brown is the guy that goes. It's like saying "we'll probably GO WITH " nine offensive lineman. That wouldn't mean we "go to camp" with 9 .. we will go with probably 13-14. 

 

If above is the case , I understand your first post and this subsequent one. If not , I just have no clue as to what you are talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not Ballard, but head and shoulders better than anyone else we have..He will be the #2 we have needed, and if healthy possibly the #1...They will each probably get 12-15 carries a game and will stay fresh all year....

I agree with this entire post except for 1 thing.

I think these Colts will try to average 40-45 runs per game. At least I hope so. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive always agreed with jshipp on our RB situating unlike many here. . Although Vick is good he's not near the caliber back as AB and and brown is like a race horse in that he is really fast but has blinders on. I also believe Carter should stay due his goaline running\short yardage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry. Whether you want to admit it or not Bradshaw is still a better back than Ballard, a man that is as banged up as you say still getting impressive yardage totals and per carry average(4.6last year), and tough goaline tds. That is pretty darn impressive for someone banged up as much as you say. So from the stats you gave me ill take that as when hes healthy=Great back, top 10, when hes banged up=hes average. If he were to used in tandem with Ballard i'd be willing to bet he wont be banged up as much and will put up some nice numbers for us.

He's been in a tandem (with Jacobs and more recently Andre Brown), so no change there.

I'd say I'd still like to see what the guys we have can do with the other improvements being made, but it isn't up to me. If the FO deems it necessary to add another back, Bradshaw is as decent an option as I've seen proposed to date.

I just like that Ballard is coming off a solid rookie season, and has room to improve - over Bradshaw who is coming off another ankle surgery, and is likely already past peak.

And I stand nearly alone in the camp that wants to see how OLine changes impact DBs (and the rest of the stable's) game before spending money on more RBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grigson ignites this forum once again. Just when things start to slow down since it's the off-season, BOOM........ he gives us something new to talk about

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with this entire post except for 1 thing.

I think these Colts will try to average 40-45 runs per game. At least I hope so. ;)

I figure Havili and Williams will get some carries as well, 40-45 seems too much to me considering the QB and TE's and WR's we have, we are still gonna throw a lot , but the threat of the run is going to just open it all up and make us so much more dangerous...I think we will be able to run when we need to in bad weather, playoffs, and to close out games....Our play-action is gonna be deadly, and Bradshaw is probably the best blocking back in the league which will help Luck as well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's been in a tandem (with Jacobs and more recently Andre Brown), so no change there.

I'd say I'd still like to see what the guys we have can do with the other improvements being made, but it isn't up to me. If the FO deems it necessary to add another back, Bradshaw is as decent an option as I've seen proposed to date.

I just like that Ballard is coming off a solid rookie season, and has room to improve - over Bradshaw who is coming off another ankle surgery, and is likely already past peak.

And I stand nearly alone in the camp that wants to see how OLine changes impact DBs (and the rest of the stable's) game before spending money on more RBs.

How will there be no change there?? Ballard would get the majority of the carries and Bradshaw would get the rest and spell Ballard. This makes him less likely to get an injury. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Williams will only make the team for punt/kick return abilities. I believe hell prove himself and maybe in a couple ears it can be ballard bradshaw and williams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be a great addition IMO. He'd be our 2nd string, I'd think. With Ballard starting, Bradshaw is a better blocker/catcher than Brown.


 


Brown should be worried...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this guy's game and if he's healthy? Total upgrade. He was the x factor for the Giants' offense imo. Can catch, can block, slithery, tough, runs hard and doesn't go down easy.  But...

 

 

Yep. His feet and ankles are a mess apparently. That's why the Giants released him. Giants fans seem to love to the guy.  Coughlin loves the guy.  And they still let him go. So...

 

Reading around it looks like it might have been largely a salary cap move by the Giants and that he should be ready to practice in full right about now with the more stable screw.  At least according to Ian Rapport in this vid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sigh...........   This is beyond really frustrating.    You're accusing me of things I literally haven't done.     That's very Irish of you.    Really annoying.      You ask for benefit of the doubt while never giving it out yourself.   I've put certain things into bold.   I'll try taking them one at a time.   Your first bold...   that this is not me saying that teams that aren't doing this are stupid.    I'm sorry, but when you declare that you've come up that you think is clearly and obvously better,  that you think you've re-invented the wheel and sliced bread,  it certainly feels like you're casting a disapporving eye toward any team that's not doing things your preferred way as a matter of course.   Then you claim,  that I want Ballard in the building ASAP,  but not before January.    Let me see if you understand this word.....   NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!   Was that clear enough for you?       If Irsay had decided in the spring of 16 to fire Grigson and hire Ballard in the spring, I would've been ok with it.   It's not desirable,  but if Irsay made that call THEN,  I'd be ok with it.     Where YOU mis-read me,  is that roughly 95 of owners make this decision during the season.    They see things they don't like and they decide during the season to make a change -- typically when the season ends.    Sometimes, an exec will be fired during the season and someone like Dorsey comes in during the season to oversee things and learn about the organization.    I'm fine with that.  There's no record of me opposing that.   I start with January,  because that's when the business season starts for front office and coaches.   Period.   The NFL views it as preferrable.    But making the switch in the spring is doable, as I've said in every post, and which you have ignored or confused badly.    But if Ballard had been hired in the spring of 16,  I'd have been fine with it.   This isn't the first time I've said some version of this.    This is not some ah-ha moment.   As to the bold declaring that there are tons of qualified guys and that CHOOSING the best guy is another story.   Here's my reponse to that.   No.   nonsense.     They are the same story.    They are connected.    Because you play down the fact that most GM's and most HC's fail.   They get fired before their 4 or 5 year contracts expire.   The owner has seen enough and makes a change.   Saying there are always qualified guys is meaningless.    Because FINDING the best guy who will succeed, isn't just important,  it's EVERYTHING.   All 32 teams can announce they hired a qualified guy.    That isn't hard.    But the vast majority of teams are introducing his successor in a few years.    That's why a franchise like Pittsburgh has very little turnover either in HC or the front office.   While franchises like the Jets or Buffalo or Miami are introducing someone new so often, you can practically set your watch to it.     Generally speaking,  the new GM has a long history of scouting and evaluating talent.   The new HC has a history of success, both as a position coach and a coordinator.   They can easily be called qualified,  (though new guys like Kliff Kingsbury and Zack Taylor do NOT have a long track record of success)  But the vast majority of hires...   are soon enough fired.   That doesn't speak well to their qualifications.      As to you meaning what you're saying...   Of course you mean what you say and I stated that clearly.  I don't know why this should rub you the wrong way.  I literally wrote that I know you mean what you say.    I said what I said as a rhetorical point,  not an attacking point.    My ultimate point was made at the end of my first post to you.   You typically write persuasive arguments.    You're able to frequently made me see your viewpoint.    But not here.    You accuse me of not considering your argument.    I'm sorry,  I am considering what you write.   But I don't see the typical high quality Superman argument.   I don't see points that connect.    Your argument feels like the one you'd make for doable.   It doesn't convince me at all that it's preferable.  
    • Yeah, Ballard said he's a patient guy, and he doesn't mind waiting to pick. We almost traded back from 34 as well if Rock wasn't there. I personally love the "trade back" strategy at the end of round 1, and wouldn't mind doing it in most every draft. A late 1st for a mid-second and early/mid second (from the Redskins) over two drafts is fine with me!
    • Haven't done research on the 2020 draft yet, but if it ends up having an elite WR or OT, I wouldn't mind trading up this year. We'll have to see where we finish (hopefully 32 ), and make a decision from there. Ballard landing the Redskins 2nd rounder may be a brilliant move.
    • I had us 9-7 just based on guessing/hoping/predicting Luck would be healthy and play great. I was right but a lucky guess, I guess  . I thought that would get us a 6th seed. We won 10 games which got us in.
    • For the first time in a while, I am impressed with the Colts development of players. If this current trend continues, a lot of opinions will change. 
  • Members

    • Nate!

      Nate! 44

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • coltsfeva

      coltsfeva 1,110

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • IndyEric07

      IndyEric07 8

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • coltsfanej

      coltsfanej 159

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Kirie89

      Kirie89 22

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CoachLite

      CoachLite 369

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...