Does Anyone Miss Polian?

[Jason_]

Yeah, it got kind of long on me (insert pun). I could have kept going. 

 

[SkyBane]

Yeah, it got kind of long on me (insert pun). I could have kept going.

Not surprising. Grigson has been taking flak for this offseason since it began. I dont know what people expected once Thomas was hurt, but apparently because he did, it means Grigson completely failed to address the O line in the offseason. People like to dismiss the Cerilius contract because of how much it was and saying "hes not worth it", when he has been the most consistent and best guy on the O line by a pretty good margin. Its not like we blew the whole cap on the guy.

In my opinion, sign a center, get healthy, and the o line should fix itself with a little more drafted depth. Wide reciever is the biggest need.

[Ohio Colt]

I liked Polian but Grigs is better. He has only missed on two guys so far, Trent & Bjorn. Bjorn is going to be an enormous bust btw and no one talks about it

[SkyBane]

I liked Polian but Grigs is better. He has only missed on two guys so far, Trent & Bjorn. Bjorn is going to be an enormous bust btw and no one talks about it

Please explain how a rookie adjusting to NFL speed and simultaneously learning an entirely new position and both roles that come with it constitutes a guaranteed bust. He is and always was a project player.

[Ohio Colt]

Please explain how a rookie adjusting to NFL speed and simultaneously learning an entirely new position and both roles that come with it constitutes a guaranteed bust. He is and always was a project player.

Said it when he was drafted he wasn't an impact guy. What are we doing drafting project guys to be honest? Should have taken OL. It's not even really debatable. He has shown nothing.

[SkyBane]

Said it when he was drafted he wasn't an impact guy. What are we doing drafting project guys to be honest? Should have taken OL. It's not even really debatable. He has shown nothing.

He was never even intended to play this year, other than to spell Mathis as rush LB. Hes shown promise and needs to get used to acting instead of thinking. Bjoern was going to take a year or so to get things under his belt, and he was likely drafted to be groomed as Mathis's replacement.

Also Grigson is on the record as hating high round rookie o linemen, he thinks the jump is too big for most to handle in year 1, and would rather build a veteran o line through free agency and farm up linemen behind them.

[Superman]

He was never even intended to play this year, other than to spell Mathis as rush LB. Hes shown promise and needs to get used to acting instead of thinking. Bjoern was going to take a year or so to get things under his belt, and he was likely drafted to be groomed as Mathis's replacement.

Also Grigson is on the record as hating high round rookie o linemen, he thinks the jump is too big for most to handle in year 1, and would rather build a veteran o line through free agency and farm up linemen behind them.

 

That's overstated. He was asked whether he'd rather have a rookie start at offensive line or at corner, and he said that it's more difficult for a lineman. He didn't say he doesn't want rookie linemen to start, and he certainly didn't say he doesn't want to draft linemen in the first round.

[throwing BBZ]

I know he could be stubborn and had his flaws, but it's hard to argue that he wasn't the best talent evaluator and general manager/club president the Colts had ever seen, at least until he started to turn things over to his son Chris towards the end. He didn't like to spend money on free agents and believed in building through the draft. Ten years of excellence and 2 Super Bowls is not easy.

 

I'd say Grigson could learn a few things from him, especially when it comes to trading away draft picks. Building through free agency is fine in moderation, but it will eventually lead to cap problems.

 

He never had $$$ for free agents, wake up! Everyone signs their so called better free agents that they have developed in the system. Irsay had a HABIT of announcing he would make oh, Peyton, Clark, Sanders, the highest paid, Marvin did ok too.

 If irsay gave Bill the same situation Grigson had, I suspect he would have done well.

[Mameluc]

DHB was a mistake, but it was still a risk worth taking imo.  He was signed to a one year, "prove you can be better than you have been" type of contract.  Had he shown he could improve and not have drop issues anymore then he could have probably earned himself  a long-term contract with the colts.  That obviously hasn't happened and I'm sure he won't be back.  Still though, there was no real reason to break the bank for a WR at the time because we already had Hilton and Brazill from last year's draft plus Wayne coming back.  I do think WR will be a much higher priority this coming offseason.

 

As for RJF, I don't know what you mean by ", but  he is no role he plays all downs.".  Role players aren't necessarily one or two down players.  Some role players are 3 down guys.  In a 3-4 front he is more a role player than anything because the DL, in our defense, is meant to command double teams first and make a play if they can second.  However in a 4 man front in a nickel or dime package then his first priority, like everyone else on the DL in that situation, is to get to the QB.  So he's kind of a role player/playmaker hybrid similar to Redding.  And RJF started the season kind of average but he's improved from week to week to the point that he got his 2 sacks and a pass defensed against the Cardinals.  IMO he so far has earned every penny of his contract and if he continues to improve going forward and can maintain the level of play he had against the cards then there really shouldn't be anyone complaining about his contract.

thats may point he is not a role players he plays all 3 downs and they expect him to stand his ground...so how is that role player lol? he does both thtas basically not a role D:.

Im not complaining about him specifically, I actually like him, but the DL is nowhere dominant.

my point is he is ok but thats like all we got on Defense..just OK guys. 

 

Honestly, when you watch the Defense, whats the thing you are hoping for?  a sack by mathis, thats it. thats all the defense has as far as momentum swinger/making plays.  I like Vontae, but he is incosistent you can't expect him to make plays every day.  But maybe add vontae to possibly intercept the ball, then what?  there arent playmakers on Defense and thats just lack of talent on the defense and that is on the FO.

 

I understand coaching has blame I mean, when you see Freeman covering Wright(Titans) thast only Manusky's/Pags  fault. But when people are not winning their matches (on DL) or losing their matches individually, 1 on 1 (secondary as a whole) thats just lack of talent.

[Mameluc]

Great post. I'm seriously confused by all the complaints about how we attacked this offseason. I'm gonna get a few things off my chest here:

 

RJF has been a really good addition to our front. He gets penetration, he's an every down guy, he can play two or three different positions on our line. What's the problem? People complain about how we focused so much on stopping the run, but then say we should have signed Terrance Knighton instead of RJF?

 

DHB doesn't even matter at this point. The signing didn't work out, and in hindsight, we'd have been better off having a backup plan to bringing in a questionable player like him. But this move hardly set the team back, and if not for Reggie's injury, it wouldn't be such a sore spot. 

 

I've seen people here and throughout the blogosphere complaining about Cherilus and Thomas. Like others, I would have loved to see us sign another guard, but Thomas was one of the league's best before he got hurt. That signing is not a mistake. I'd have loved to upgrade the other guard spot, but not for Levitre money, and Vasquez evidently wanted to go to the Broncos. We also drafted two interior linemen, and while Thornton hasn't been great, he's been decent. Complaining about decent play from a rookie guard is kind of silly. I think people ought to leave Cherilus, Thomas and Thornton out of their criticisms, and focus on Satele and McGlynn. But even then, if Thomas were still on the field, maybe we'd have gotten Thornton on the field and replaced Satele or McGlynn eventually.

 

And of course, there's the Erik Walden complaint. Even now, after seeing how poorly our other OLBs were on the edge against the Cardinals, people are still complaining about $4m/year for Walden. Firstly, that's slighly above average for a Sam backer equivalent in a 3-4. Look at Paul Kruger's contract vs. his production. Get over the money. Second, Walden has done what he was brought here to do, and in recent weeks, has even shown some pass rush ability that I didn't expect. When you're hoping for the big name -- Kruger, Avril, etc. -- and you get Erik Walden, there's outrage. But it was highly misplaced to begin with, and the residual outrage is even worse, now that we've seen how well he fits our defensive front. Colts fans, stop complaining about Erik Walden. It makes you look silly.

 

To me, the two big mistakes Grigson and Pagano made were 1) trading a first for Richardson, and 2) hiring Pep Hamilton. I hope both of these guys improve as time goes on, since we're so heavily invested in them. I don't want to get into a turnstile coordinator situation, so I'm in favor of keeping Hamilton next year. But he has to evolve as a coordinator, and quickly. And Richardson is a good back; I don't have a problem with the player, just the cost, and it's too late to do anything about that at this point. I also think we should have kept Jerry Hughes as a rotational pass rusher. Mathis is the only real edge rusher we have, and that hurts our pass rush. (To be fair, we obviously hoped that Sidbury and Werner could help in that area, and injuries have hampered that significantly. But that's why they say you can never have too many pass rushers. There was no reason to get rid of Jerry Hughes.)

 

I'm not a blind Ryan Grigson supporter. He's made mistakes, and that's not surprising. But I think he's done an excellent job of attacking the team's weaknesses, using his assets to bring in players, and spreading his resources around in a way that leaves him with future flexibility. He's confident, without being arrogant. He works his butt off. We can be critical of some of his moves, for sure, but comparing him with someone like Polian, who refused to adjust his approach and let his team erode, is just silly. Again, it makes Colts fans look bad.

 

Grigson's focus for 2014 should be as follows: 1) Upgrade the offensive line; 2) Find another receiver; 3) Add a safety to take over for Bethea; 4) Find another pass rusher; 5) Add another corner. The foundation for the team is sound. We just need better line play and some playmakers at various positions.

Like i said to Jason i get that when you have Freman vs Wright thats just on coaching but lets just be real... we have faced fitzpatrick, clemens, Tannenhill, Pryor, Palmer, kaepernick, Gabbert, Wilson, PM, Rivers and Keenum. thats a grand total of 4-5 team playing witouth their starting qb. Like i said i get the coaching part, im not a fan of Manusky. and we have been torched by most of those 4-5 teams, not to mention the starters.

At some point, you look at talent, and when we spent as much money as we did on D and we had as much money as we had you would expect better talent than what we have. The Defense only has lost 1 player, Toler, thats it and 2nd stringers are making us look bad. 

I dont have a problem with the FA class individually, i dont have a problem with RJF, Toler, Landry, etc. as a group i think we could have done better thats all. Specially when you signed 2 players with a long injury history to your most depleted unit (secondary). i mean 1 guy is injured and we are back to vaughn.Thats a mistake IMO on Grigson

 

Also i was one of the few how actually liked Thomas, i actually called that sign before it happened so i was happy. But you are going way overboard on him... the dude played 1 game and a quarter, no way you can say he was one of the best on the league.

 

I like Cherilus.But again, 1 injury and the OL is gone to hell again. no depth. Satele and Mcglin were grigs picks.

 

never wanted, for a single minute anything to do with Paul Kruger...Avril i was kinda 50 50.

 

i dont have a problem with Walden. but if you are going to bring a guy to only play the stop the run role (which he sucked at first but has been MUCH better recently) you are putting way too much into your plate because the moment you got sidbury as your pass rusher FA option it probably means you already knew you need a passrusher on draft day. And when that passrusher is taking time to develop (im not giving up on werner so dont even mention it) it means you made a bad decision...either at draft day or the FA, because YOU KNEW you only had 1 pass rusher and you cant live with only 1. thats on grigson.

 

My whole point here is we had loads of money, we spetn loads of money and i dont think that has been reflected on the team. Why? Look at where he spent much of the money: OL, Secondary, stop the run...Can we do any of those?

The sad part is that im looking like a grigson hater which im not. I LOVED his draft last year, i LOVED his draft this year...but they havent produced and i think he was expecting them to produce. I LOVED that he didnt just wated the money on big FA names, a la Redskins, but i cant just say here he had an excelent FA. I get the injuries, but honestly who can take over the game on this team?Luck and Mathis and tahts why too much on Luck this young. Even if Allen was back, Ballard, do you honestly think we would be MUCH better offensively? i like ballard but is brown that much of a drop off? I get Wayne was crucial i wont argue that one.

 

and on D?

 

I know I know, we are rebuilding we need more time. I agree, i always thought it would takes 3 drafts to be competetive. But teh FO isent the wrong signs and IMO, the wrong moves. They traded future picks when they should be stockpiling them since we needed more talent. The moment you made the vontae trade it probably sent the message we believe we can compete. When you traded a first rounder in the middle of the season for a RB it sends the message "this is the missing piece". NO WAY we were close to a missing piece. it sent the wrong message and when, like i guess you are going to say, we need more drafts to really solidify the roster...then why the heck we use our good picks?

 

 

Also the directive from both Pagano and Grigson has always been "stop the run/ run the ball" which we cant do...if the coach and GM agree on that and they building a team that way, and you handpick players for that...and you cant do any of those thats a mistake. By both. from coaches philosphy to GM vision of the team.

 

maybe thats also Irsay input.

[Superman]

He never had $$$ for free agents, wake up! Everyone signs their so called better free agents that they have developed in the system. Irsay had a HABIT of announcing he would make oh, Peyton, Clark, Sanders, the highest paid, Marvin did ok too.

 If irsay gave Bill the same situation Grigson had, I suspect he would have done well.

 

That's not true at all. Polian rejected free agency as a rule. He chose to pay his own guys, and it wasn't because Irsay wanted to make guys the highest paid. He's only said that in advance about one player, Peyton Manning.

 

If Polian wanted to change his approach, he would have had Irsay's approval. It's the same money, no matter who you're giving it to. And by the way, at a certain point, Grigson's approach will become more inclusive by necessity.

[Superman]

Like i said to Jason i get that when you have Freman vs Wright thats just on coaching but lets just be real... we have faced fitzpatrick, clemens, Tannenhill, Pryor, Palmer, kaepernick, Gabbert, Wilson, PM, Rivers and Keenum. thats a grand total of 4-5 team playing witouth their starting qb. Like i said i get the coaching part, im not a fan of Manusky. and we have been torched by most of those 4-5 teams, not to mention the starters.

At some point, you look at talent, and when we spent as much money as we did on D and we had as much money as we had you would expect better talent than what we have. The Defense only has lost 1 player, Toler, thats it and 2nd stringers are making us look bad. 

I dont have a problem with the FA class individually, i dont have a problem with RJF, Toler, Landry, etc. as a group i think we could have done better thats all. Specially when you signed 2 players with a long injury history to your most depleted unit (secondary). i mean 1 guy is injured and we are back to vaughn.Thats a mistake IMO on Grigson

 

Also i was one of the few how actually liked Thomas, i actually called that sign before it happened so i was happy. But you are going way overboard on him... the dude played 1 game and a quarter, no way you can say he was one of the best on the league.

 

I like Cherilus.But again, 1 injury and the OL is gone to hell again. no depth. Satele and Mcglin were grigs picks.

 

never wanted, for a single minute anything to do with Paul Kruger...Avril i was kinda 50 50.

 

i dont have a problem with Walden. but if you are going to bring a guy to only play the stop the run role (which he sucked at first but has been MUCH better recently) you are putting way too much into your plate because the moment you got sidbury as your pass rusher FA option it probably means you already knew you need a passrusher on draft day. And when that passrusher is taking time to develop (im not giving up on werner so dont even mention it) it means you made a bad decision...either at draft day or the FA, because YOU KNEW you only had 1 pass rusher and you cant live with only 1. thats on grigson.

 

My whole point here is we had loads of money, we spetn loads of money and i dont think that has been reflected on the team. Why? Look at where he spent much of the money: OL, Secondary, stop the run...Can we do any of those?

The sad part is that im looking like a grigson hater which im not. I LOVED his draft last year, i LOVED his draft this year...but they havent produced and i think he was expecting them to produce. I LOVED that he didnt just wated the money on big FA names, a la Redskins, but i cant just say here he had an excelent FA. I get the injuries, but honestly who can take over the game on this team?Luck and Mathis and tahts why too much on Luck this young. Even if Allen was back, Ballard, do you honestly think we would be MUCH better offensively? i like ballard but is brown that much of a drop off? I get Wayne was crucial i wont argue that one.

 

and on D?

 

I know I know, we are rebuilding we need more time. I agree, i always thought it would takes 3 drafts to be competetive. But teh FO isent the wrong signs and IMO, the wrong moves. They traded future picks when they should be stockpiling them since we needed more talent. The moment you made the vontae trade it probably sent the message we believe we can compete. When you traded a first rounder in the middle of the season for a RB it sends the message "this is the missing piece". NO WAY we were close to a missing piece. it sent the wrong message and when, like i guess you are going to say, we need more drafts to really solidify the roster...then why the heck we use our good picks?

 

 

Also the directive from both Pagano and Grigson has always been "stop the run/ run the ball" which we cant do...if the coach and GM agree on that and they building a team that way, and you handpick players for that...and you cant do any of those thats a mistake. By both. from coaches philosphy to GM vision of the team.

 

maybe thats also Irsay input.

 

Like I said, we can be critical of certain moves that Grigson has made. If you want to add not signing another corner, that's fine. We have the benefit of hindsight, of course, but even before the season I thought we needed another corner. I don't think I would even have retained Vaughn, much less put my team in a position to have to rely on him if one guy got injured. So if I could go back and change some of the things Grigson did, that would be on the list, but probably 5th or 6th on the list. 

 

I have no problem with signing Landry. And we had Lefeged and Howell as depth. When needed, Howell played really well. Lefeged had experience, but lost the trust of the front office and coaching staff with his arrest, and now he's not here anymore. But Landry was a Pro Bowler last year, didn't miss any games, and has been really good for us, despite the games he missed. I understand being reluctant to sign a player with an injury history, but Landry is a difference maker, and if you criticize that move, you have to give me a reasonable alternative, either in free agency or in the draft. A lot of people here were slobbering over Ed Reed. Were you one of them? Dashon Goldson is really the only other safety that switched teams, and he signed for way more money than Landry, and I don't think he's as good. And he's missed three games this year.

 

Cherilus is a good signing. Thomas is a good signing (if you think I'm overstating how good he was, that's fine, but let's not pretend that his injury is evidence that Grigson didn't address the line like he should have). In a perfect world, Grigson drafted the replacements for Satele and McGlynn, and the staff was hoping that one of those two would be ready to step in at some point this year. As it stands, Thornton was forced in at a different position than he prepared for all offseason, and has been learning on the job, but still playing well enough. Holmes hasn't played, but really, Satele shouldn't suck as much as he does. Hang that on Grigson, but it's really hard to replace four of five linemen in one offseason. At this point, I'm more irritated at the coaching staff for not benching Satele yet. We've seen configurations that are better than what we're using now.

 

I agree that we should have kept another pass rusher. I mentioned that all offseason, and while the defense has shown the ability to penetrate the middle at times this season, and while the secondary has shown the ability to cover tightly at times, the two units have not do so consistently enough and at the same time for that to be the basis of your pass rush. And we traded away Jerry Hughes, who I think fit that situational rusher role. So yes, put that on Grigson. But stop complaining about Walden (not directed at you, but at these fickle fans who only complain about him because he's not the person they wanted back in March). He plays a different position, he's not the answer to the lack of a pass rusher, but he wasn't meant to be, and he's done his job just fine. 

 

Maybe some Colts fans don't quite understand the nature of free agency. I'm not calling anyone in particular ignorant, but it seems that some people think that if you spend money to fix a problem, the problem ought to be fixed immediately. You certainly hope so, but that's not the way it works in reality. We added players, and those players are individually better than what we had at those positions last year, but the units have to play together, the coaches have to deploy them effectively, and of course, health is the great equalizer. Our free agent additions have played reasonably well, overall, even though our team still has some issues. But with the injuries -- not just the major ones, but all of them -- the team depth has been depleted and it's forced fringe guys into playing. So I don't think it makes sense to look at the raw stats and say "we spent money trying to fix the run defense, but we're still not a dominant run stopping team, so Grigson failed." That's unreasonable. 

 

I don't care about the signals and messages the front office and coaching staff sent. I love the Vontae Davis trade, and I dislike the Richardson trade, whether we're ready to contend or not. If you think we were three seasons away, then sitting two games up in our division two thirds of the way through Year 2 is pretty good, don't you think? We're ahead of schedule. We need another draft, and it sucks that we don't have a first rounder, but we can compensate for that. And hopefully, our brain trust has learned their lesson. We have a bunch of cap space in 2014. And we have a talented roster, even if we have a handful of glaring holes. And if we can get the offensive line going, we have two really good backs under contract for two more seasons (yes, Richardson is a good back, even if he's not playing well). 

 

No GM is perfect. I'm fine with being critical of Grigson. I'm a Grigson fan, and I've been plenty critical of him over the last year. What I don't like is holding a team builder up to a standard of perfection -- not excellence, but perfection -- with the benefit of hindsight. And that's what happens whenever we lose a game. The title of this thread is a perfect example. 

 

I think the way we played last year made a lot of people think the team is more talented than it actually is. Our record wasn't indicative of the actual state of the roster. For us to play a second place schedule against a much improved NFC division and be 7-4 is fine, overall. I don't like the way the last month has gone, but the team is playing like a team that's in the second year of a reshaping. Still not a perfect roster, we've been hit with some really painful injuries, and the coaches seem to be a step behind right now. But if you keep perspective about where the team was in 2011 and where it should be now, I think we're doing fine.

[GoColts8818]

I am grateful for what Polian did here and think he did a good job but it was time to move on. I can't say I miss him and I am happy with Grigson but I am thankful for Polians time here.

[Mameluc]

Like I said, we can be critical of certain moves that Grigson has made. If you want to add not signing another corner, that's fine. We have the benefit of hindsight, of course, but even before the season I thought we needed another corner. I don't think I would even have retained Vaughn, much less put my team in a position to have to rely on him if one guy got injured. So if I could go back and change some of the things Grigson did, that would be on the list, but probably 5th or 6th on the list. 

 

I have no problem with signing Landry. And we had Lefeged and Howell as depth. When needed, Howell played really well. Lefeged had experience, but lost the trust of the front office and coaching staff with his arrest, and now he's not here anymore. But Landry was a Pro Bowler last year, didn't miss any games, and has been really good for us, despite the games he missed. I understand being reluctant to sign a player with an injury history, but Landry is a difference maker, and if you criticize that move, you have to give me a reasonable alternative, either in free agency or in the draft. A lot of people here were slobbering over Ed Reed. Were you one of them? Dashon Goldson is really the only other safety that switched teams, and he signed for way more money than Landry, and I don't think he's as good. And he's missed three games this year....

We are moving on from game so im moving on also ;) this shold be the last post on this cause i geuss we can agree we all have our points/way of thinking.

 

as far as " but Landry is a difference maker, and if you criticize that move, you have to give me a reasonable alternative, either in free agency or in the draft. A lot of people here were slobbering over Ed Reed. Were you one of them?" No no on Ed.Honestly I dont have a problem with Landry. I like him and i agree wtih you that he is a difference maker. I dont think he has shown that consistenly but he is pretty good IMO. Again i dnot have a problem with 1 singluar player (meaning i dont have a problem with toler or Landry) my problem is you took 2  guys for the secondary with a big injury history...in other words i was fine with landry but i would tried another CB...or fine with Toler but another safety, like Goldson that you mentioned....but being honest, i would be ok with Landry and another corner...maybe DRC?  maybe pull for Aqib Talib /(not sure if he ever took any offer). I was a fan of keenan lewis so i would have been very happy with lewis and landry

 

I said that Thomas was fine in my opinion and no, i dont blame grigson on that one cause there was no injury history...at least not as known as landry/toler. I guess my issue with OL is that we had no depth and if we had only 1 injury we were back to last years OL...which is exactly what happened. overall im agreeing with you, but like you said, i was hoping for 1 more guy...even if it was just for depth.

 

i guess we agree on the lack of pass rushers. 

 

Maybe some Colts fans don't quite understand the nature of free agency. I'm not calling anyone in particular ignorant, but it seems that some people think that if you spend money to fix a problem, the problem ought to be fixed immediately. You certainly hope so, but that's not the way it works in reality. We added players, and those players are individually better than what we had at those positions last year, but the units have to play together, the coaches have to deploy them effectively, and of course, health is the great equalizer. " thats fair and good point. I guess i was expecting more of the fa class.

 

I have faith in Richards and maybe im naive, but im hoping next year he silences everyone. I trhink everyone agrees that he is a good players but he hasnt shown it so...as for the message, i think the message mattrs because thats why you see tons of people kinda disapointed, so this threads

 

"If you think we were three seasons away, then sitting two games up in our division two thirds of the way through Year 2 is pretty good, don't you think? We're ahead of schedule" Just as clarification..i mean 3 drafts, starting Luck drafts...so we are 2 seasons in it. and yea we are still ahead of schedule IMO....and no, i dont pretend to be right, thats what i tought but had no evidence to support it or anything lol that was just my assumption of how much would it take to rebuild this team.

 

but yea pretty happy about we are ahead of schedule, having said that, i dont like the trade of future draft picks and why im kinda like 50 50 ont he FA unit

 

"I think the way we played last year made a lot of people think the team is more talented than it actually is. Our record wasn't indicative of the actual state of the roster. " I 100% agree on this. But i think Grigson was caught on this too, which is why i disliked the trent trade.

 

 

just to be clear, i blame coaching as much as you do, but I think i also share the blame with Grigson whcih i think you dont. thats just different viewpoints.

[Modern]

I miss Chris Polian. His football resume was impeccable.

[MaoBerry]

Please explain how a rookie adjusting to NFL speed and simultaneously learning an entirely new position and both roles that come with it constitutes a guaranteed bust. He is and always was a project player.

 

 

You don't take "project player's" in the first round, when your O-LINE is putrid. I almost vomited, when werner's name was called. We should've traded back and gained additional picks and selected warford and keenan, along with never trading up to select hughes. Our draft was horrid to say the least, with werner,hughes, the alcoholic guy and holmes being epic flops thus far. The thornton pick looks like a good depth pick though. I added holmes, because i've already seen him play and he's another satele.

[Superman]

 

just to be clear, i blame coaching as much as you do, but I think i also share the blame with Grigson whcih i think you dont. thats just different viewpoints.

 

Good thoughts all around. Thanks for articulating your viewpoint.

 

I'm just going to respond to this, because it's kind of the gist of my point. I don't think there's much to blame anyone for. I think our team is in a good spot. I don't like the last month, but we all know that a team can fix deficiencies and make a deep playoff run, even if they spend a month looking like a terrible team. Our weaknesses are being exposed right now, and it's up to the coaches to fix that. I expect they will, eventually. But I also expect the front office to continue to build on what they've started, even if they've made some mistakes and shot themselves in the foot with trading away a future first rounder for a running back. 

 

I guess we can look at some of the roster weaknesses and assign blame, but I don't believe in the notion of a perfect roster, so I don't really play that game. I'm excited about this team's prospects, even if I think we're fatally flawed for the 2013 season. Coaching has to improve, and Grigson has to fix some of his mistakes. I just don't think that because we're not the dynamic contender that people thought we could be after the Denver game, that it means Grigson has failed.

 

By the way, my original response was heavily flavored by a disdain for some of the articles around the Internet right now talking about how wrongheaded the team's approach has been for the past two years. That's why I've been defending the approach so much.

[CanuckColt]

No, but I miss BA now!

Yeah, I'll vote for that one......twice.

[CanuckColt]

Ha, ha, ha....."miss Polian"....ha, ha, ha....not possible.

[Bluboy]

Please explain how a rookie adjusting to NFL speed and simultaneously learning an entirely new position and both roles that come with it constitutes a guaranteed bust. He is and always was a project player.

 

There is the problem. You do not draft a "project" player in the first round. I agree the poster that Werner will be a bust and if Polian had made that pick, people would be screaming and pointing out who we could have had. I am also not sold on drafting Fleener and Allen either but the jury is still out on those picks.  

[Franklin County]

There is the problem. You do not draft a "project" player in the first round. I agree the poster that Werner will be a bust and if Polian had made that pick, people would be screaming and pointing out who we could have had. I am also not sold on drafting Fleener and Allen either but the jury is still out on those picks.  

Where have you been OleBlue? We missed you....

[Bluboy]

Where have you been OleBlue? We missed you....

 

I missed all of you too. I am trying to be back with a kinder more gentle approach. I have alerted the mods about who I am and I have attempted no disguise. That post is probably the most controversial that I have made.  It was OlBlu by the way.....  I kept my little symbol just to let everyone know who I was.... 

[Jay Kirk]

I think it comes down to coaching.  We have talent, but we don't put it on the field.  Satele is not the option at C and I believe we saw McGlynn play really well at C in the San Fran game.  For whatever reason, the OL seems to perform really well without Satele; I remember some really good OL play last year when Shipley played C.  And for some reason, the coaches refuse to take Satele out.  Play calling could also be an issue.  Trent is clearly very explosive and hard to tackle, so why not run some screens and flares with him to get him the ball in space?

 

I do think we went a little overboard in FA and I'm not a fan of that.  But I don't think it's deniable that many of the players have been good additions.  Cherilus has been a huge improvement over Link/Winston Justice; Walden might have been overpaid, but there's a big drop off from when he plays to Werner getting the start last game; Howell and Landry have both played really well at SS.

 

My issue on both sides of the ball is coaching.  Pep's play calling has shown flashes, but isn't always there.  Trent is talented, but not properly utilized.  Brown is definitely the hot hand right now, but the coaches don't give him much playing time even though he can pass block and can catch the ball.  On the defensive side of the ball, it's terrible.  We can generate a pass rush, but our CBs are nowhere to be found when receivers catch a ball.  And the match ups are brutal; in the Titans game alone, I remember seeing Freeman and Angerer continually burned by Wright and Walker.  And yet, Manusky didn't make any changes.  I think coaching is holding the team back right now.

 

Well said!

Satele is a major problem ,hes not good calling schemes or protection on the line and gets beat a lot.McG Is our answer for this year at C.Some of us were preaching this last year as well as this year.Stubborness by coaching staff is not going to take us very far. IMO a tweek here and there this teams very good.

[The Fish]

Every time I see this thread I think we're talking about some young lady in Bill's family...

[Poster X]

Simply put... no.

[Crunked]

I don't miss his nepotism, I don't miss his arrogance, I don't miss his one sided team builds....I do miss his talent evaluation. I get the feeling we do it by committee more so now than in the past, and committees can make mediocrity out of just about anything. The whole cap situation changed the dynamic of team building with the new CBA, so its hard to compare the contrasting styles.

[bap1331]

He told irsay our season was over back in our 2006 super bowl run after losing to the jags or something. Irsay kept the team together.

I don't miss his negativity. I like Grigson allot better and it's not his fault for all the injuries

[pacolts56]

My main issue with Polian was his revolving door at OG and his lack of success in addressing DT.

 

It wasn't that he didn't try to address DT....but for the most part he struck out. At OG....I believe he simply considered it one of those positions that he'd try to get by on the cheap with. He had to do that somewhere with our cap as it was....but it did cost us.

 

During the regular seasons in Polian's tenure....Peyton and the skill position guys plus Mathis/Freeney on defense were able to mask those shortcomings very impressively, but when the playoffs rolled around we would often get out-muscled at the interior of both lines.

 

Our rushing attack in the playoffs....especially short yardage failures at key moments, and our run defense in general need no further reflection....they simply did not stack up against playoff competition, and the number of Super Bowl wins was the result.

 

No GM bats 1000...but despite his quirks I do think Polian overall ranks among the top NFL GMs.

 

When Irsay let him go it was the right move at the right time.

 

Grigson has been on the job for less than 2 years.....something we need to remember.

[colts8718]

I know he could be stubborn and had his flaws, but it's hard to argue that he wasn't the best talent evaluator and general manager/club president the Colts had ever seen, at least until he started to turn things over to his son Chris towards the end. He didn't like to spend money on free agents and believed in building through the draft. Ten years of excellence and 2 Super Bowls is not easy.

 

I'd say Grigson could learn a few things from him, especially when it comes to trading away draft picks. Building through free agency is fine in moderation, but it will eventually lead to cap problems.

Polian liked to pay his guys and at the end we had cap problems his son really ruined him at the end he was clueless . I liked that he built through the draft I don't like to much free agent pickups . I like that Grigson is aggressive but I think he need' s to go more though the draft this is where he could learn from Polian  In the end I think Manning covered up a lot of Polian mistakes and some bad picks