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.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Remember,  we are not debating whether Spring is doable.   I've stated from the beginning that I agree.    It's not as bad as some here think it is.    It's doable,   No question.   We are debating whether Spring is preferable, or desireable.    So, when you write,  that you don't think you have to say more about an issue,  any issue,  I'm sorry,   but NO!     You DO have to say more.  A heckuva lot more.    Because YOU have the burden of proof.    My position is the Industry Standard.   Your's has, by comparison,  a handful of examples.   Some are recent.   That's great.   But I view that as a nod to the position that it's doable.    You view it as a possibility that it might soon become the norm.   I'm happy to wait until that actually happens.   As to your primary argument.....    that all the prep work has been done,  and if you make the changes in winter,  that the GM is not up to speed on what the current scouts and player personnel people have done.    Except there is this......   Your argument that you yourself use to others here who complain that changing in the spring is bad.   To quote you....   it's just one draft.    One free agency period.    And there will soon be another,  and then another....   and another.   One season is nothing in the grand scheme of things.   That is what you wrote (roughly) to posters who think making the GM change in the spring is outright terrible and stupid.    Which I strongly disagree with their positin.   Your argument makes my argument for me.    I want the new GM in the building ASAP.    So he can sooner evaluate his players.    His front office.    His scouts.    The entire program.   Waiting until May or June just delays that.    I want it to begin ASAP.   I'd expect that he can and would be able to make some level of difference in his first free agency and draft.    Plus,  I think you way, way over-dramatize the handicap the new GM has arriving in January.   He's the GM.    He's already got a ton of information in his head,  and in his notebooks, his binders.    He's not in as much of a bind as you like to portray.     So, with your desired scenario, this draft could be used for a system that the new GM doesn't even want to run.    Like Chuck running a 3-4,  when Ballard wants to run a 4-3.    Like Chuck wanted to run a power running game and a deep pattern passing game.    While Ballard favors a zone running game and a get rid of the ball quick, move the chains offense.     In your preferred scenario,  you're the one who is burning the first year the GM has,  not me.     I see little of the benefits and mostly an approach that screams....   "Gee,  I hope this works out."   By the way,  I didn't want this post to end without addressing one of your main points.   Your paragraph that starts with this:   My Point:  There are always good candidates...   same is true for head coaches and coordinators.    I'm sorry,  but I'm going to STRONGLY disagree with that argument.  And I think you'll retract that.    Every so often you'll see an article about how did the class of GM's from a previous year turn out?   Or head coach hires?    I used to tell posters here who hated Pagano that the class of head coaches that included Chuck,  that all of the other coaches got fired before Chuck.    That Chuck was the best of his class.   And that happens with GM's too.   A class gets hired,  and quite often most of them, sometimes all of them don't work out.   I believe my position has far more facts to back that up.    There isn't always a Sean McVey.  There isn't always a Kyle Shannahan.   There isn't always a Josh McDaniels.   There aren't 32 good GM's, or 32 good head coaches,  or 32 good offensive or defensive coordinators.   That's why so many teams struggle for years to get those spots right.   So, no, I absolutely reject the idea that there are always good candidates.    Sorry.   I know you believe what you're writing.   But honestly, this feels like one big thought experiment. Like you're trying to make a case for something you really don't believe,  but you're trying to see if you can make a good argument anyway.   And yet I know that's NOT the case.    That you really, honestly do believe this.    That's what I find so astonishing.    There's lots of opinion,  and not a lot of evidence to back this up.    As I've said from the get-go....   I think this is doable.    I just don't think it's desireable or preferable.  
    • To your last paragraph....   yes,  I agree that if a GM,  any GM, inherits a bad roster,  then no matter how OK his draft picks may be,   they will likely stick on the roster.   But if you're a GM inheriting a poor team,  and you draft players that are only somewhat better than what you originally had,  then the improvement in the team will only be so good.   Again,  from 4 wis,  to perhaps 6-7.    That wouldn't be bad.    That would be reasonable.   But when you suddenly pop to 10 wins,  including 9 of the last 10 in the regular season,  and you win on the road in the playoffs,   then there's got to be something more there than just the GM's new guys.    Those guys have got to be good.    You can't do that well simply because they're better than the previous guys.    They're much better.    Yes, the coaching staff is better and the systems the team is running are better,  but so are the players.    They have to execute.    And we did.   Better than we thought possible.    Certainly better than when we were 1-5 and looked like a candidate for a top-10 or even a top-5 draft pick.    The players are good.   They may not be great yet,  but they're really good and much better than what we had.    The results are all the proof you need.   Again,  thanks for the exchange....  
    • I missed the first couple innings, was keeping track on phone, didn’t realize things got chippy with the benches clearing after the Contreras HR! Seems the Cubs were playing with a little extra edge tonight, I love it!!! 
    • and then NE goes into KC and throws for 350 and Sony runs for 100+ on them. our O, and O game plan just sucked.   i get KC was good, but our O just sucked.
  • Members

    • SOMDColtsfan

      SOMDColtsfan 420

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Nadine

      Nadine 7,321

      Administrators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Nate!

      Nate! 44

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Franklin County

      Franklin County 452

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NFLfan

      NFLfan 7,668

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Smonroe

      Smonroe 9,354

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