Reitz signs tender.

[ColtsLegacy]

Lol! Yes it is hard to believe!

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/01/13/2013-offensive-line-rankings/

Sticking with the PFF grades:

2013 73/81 qualifying guards.

2012 81/81 qualifying guards.

So he's just about the worst going by PFF.

[Bobbycovert]

That's asking a whole lot though. I think we would be LUCKY if even 1 of those 3 things happen....let alone all 3 and even that we likely have an avg line at that. Thomas had two injuries and either one could be career threatening depending on how he recovers. Hughes hasn't played 1 NFL game and typically the center calls out all the blocking assignments...thats a critical position for our interior and Thorton did play better towards the end of last season but was far from playing "good". I think he is the best bet for any improvement coming but like I said I don't see high ceilings for any of these guys...and I still think there will be plenty of inconsistancies from our youthful interior. I really doubt Thomas is ready by the start of the season...so it will be interesting to see who starts...probably Costa. If that is the case how confident would people be. If day 1 we have a center that hasn't played and a perceived backup at guard. It isn't like it would be catestrophic...but it isn't a sign of better things to come for Andrew...he will learn a quick release if its the last thing the Colts do...it's like they are training him for it by having a porous OL lol.

 

I'm not saying its all doom and gloom...but I worry for AL. One thing he has is good mobility...but if we keep asking him to take shots...at what point does he take an RGIII hit to the knee and then he becomes a statue the rest of his career.

     Since getting Luck, improving the offensive line should've been priorities 1, 2, and 3.  Hasn't seemed like it so far but injuries have made things tough to judge.  I believe Thornton will be a terrific pro. I'm still skeptical about Holmes and Costa.  Having Satele and McGlynn protect Luck last season was inexcusable.  I worry that the Colts are rolling the dice and trying to out-clever everyone when it comes to the O-line.  You can survive an inconsistent running game and a mediocre defense. These things can be improved over time.  Let your quarterback get hit enough and you risk some pretty ugly outcomes..

[Smonroe]

Sticking with the PFF grades:

2013 73/81 qualifying guards.

2012 81/81 qualifying guards.

So he's just about the worst going by PFF.

 

So, you're saying he's improving each year?

[ColtsLegacy]

So, you're saying he's improving each year?

[NewColtsFan]

     Since getting Luck, improving the offensive line should've been priorities 1, 2, and 3.  Hasn't seemed like it so far but injuries have made things tough to judge.  I believe Thornton will be a terrific pro. I'm still skeptical about Holmes and Costa.  Having Satele and McGlynn protect Luck last season was inexcusable.  I worry that the Colts are rolling the dice and trying to out-clever everyone when it comes to the O-line.  You can survive an inconsistent running game and a mediocre defense. These things can be improved over time.  Let your quarterback get hit enough and you risk some pretty ugly outcomes..

 

The first chance Grigson had to improve/upgrade the o-line was last year and here's what he did.

 

-- Made Cherilus the highest paid RT in pro football.

 

-- Signed Thomas to be our LG.

 

-- Used our 3rd round pick to take Thornton (I believe the plan was to start him at right guard...)

 

-- And used our 4th round pick to take Holmes (I believe the plan is for Holmes to be our center of the future...)

 

So, in one year Grigson committed to four different players to upgrade the o-line.

 

Unfortunately,  only one (Cherilus) really worked out the first year.   And you know what happened with the other three.

 

This year, hopefully the other three upgrade the o-line as Grigson has intended.

 

But it strikes me that he's committed a lot of resources toward fixing a huge problem.    Believe it or not, one year does not show whether the plan has worked or not.

[GoColts8818]

He's solid depth that can play guard or tackle if we need him exactly what you want in a back up lineman.

[lollygagger8]

Honestly, to me, this kind of logic among fans is what is truly baffling.  The NFL, and its scoreboard, are the ultimate zone of "do your job" accountability.  To assume that any decisions about personnel were made outside of the interest of winning right now, is ludicrous.

 

McGlynn and Satele weren't good enough, but that doesn't mean that there was a "shuffle" that the coaching staff thought could immediately solve the problem - especially when history says that continuity among your O-line resources pays dividends over stand alone talent.

 

Oh my bad, I didn't realize you were the O-Line coach. 

[YOUR GM]

The first chance Grigson had to improve/upgrade the o-line was last year and here's what he did.

-- Made Cherilus the highest paid RT in pro football.

-- Signed Thomas to be our LG.

-- Used our 3rd round pick to take Thornton (I believe the plan was to start him at right guard...)

-- And used our 4th round pick to take Holmes (I believe the plan is for Holmes to be our center of the future...)

So, in one year Grigson committed to four different players to upgrade the o-line.

Unfortunately, only one (Cherilus) really worked out the first year. And you know what happened with the other three.

This year, hopefully the other three upgrade the o-line as Grigson has intended.

But it strikes me that he's committed a lot of resources toward fixing a huge problem. Believe it or not, one year does not show whether the plan has worked or not.

Here's the problem though... 3 of those 4 players he acquired last year either had poor seasons or did not play at all. Major uncertainty is surrounding Thomas' status going forward, and Holmes' inexperience and lack of reps is concerning. Thornton is a wildcard and can not be penciled in as anything but a body at this point. We honestly don't know if he is ready to be a full-time starter or not. Now, if Grigson wanted to see if these guys will pan out as starters, that's fine. My only issue is, he's basically giving them the job and there's no contingency plan if none of these guys work out. And don't give me "Phil Costa" or "Lance Louis" as competition. We all know these guys are backups and not legitimate competition. I view the optimism surrounding those 2 from some here in the same light as I viewed all of our optimism when we acquired Winston Jusitce, Mike McGlynn and Samson Satele. We had all seen a bunch of bad film on those guys, knew they probably sucked, but blindly hoped they'd somehow transform into gem players who blossomed under our staff's tutelage. It didn't happen. What happened is what we all knew would happen. Those players stunk and are now being replaced.

Their mission statement has been to protect Luck and build a power running game all along. If we're entering into year 4 still trying to "fix" the interior line, Grigson and co have failed on their mission statement, in my opinion, and they're just all talk

[ztboiler]

Oh my bad, I didn't realize you were the O-Line coach. 

Seriously?  You are a good poster and I thought we might be talking some football here.  

 

I disagreed with your logic, which suggested that personnel decisions on McGlynn and Satele were made outside the interest of winning.  That is all.  It is OK if you don't like my opinion, but why take that response path?

[NewColtsFan]

Here's the problem though... 3 of those 4 players he acquired last year either had poor seasons or did not play at all. Major uncertainty is surrounding Thomas' status going forward, and Holmes' inexperience and lack of reps is concerning. Thornton is a wildcard and can not be penciled in as anything but a body at this point. We honestly don't know if he is ready to be a full-time starter or not. Now, if Grigson wanted to see if these guys will pan out as starters, that's fine. My only issue is, he's basically giving them the job and there's no contingency plan if none of these guys work out. And don't give me "Phil Costa" or "Lance Louis" as competition. We all know these guys are backups and not legitimate competition. I view the optimism surrounding those 2 from some here in the same light as I viewed all of our optimism when we acquired Winston Jusitce, Mike McGlynn and Samson Satele. We had all seen a bunch of bad film on those guys, knew they probably sucked, but blindly hoped they'd somehow transform into gem players who blossomed under our staff's tutelage. It didn't happen. What happened is what we all knew would happen. Those players stunk and are now being replaced.

Their mission statement has been to protect Luck and build a power running game all along. If we're entering into year 4 still trying to "fix" the interior line, Grigson and co have failed on their mission statement, in my opinion, and they're just all talk

 

 

Here's the deal,  HBA.....

 

Look at the part of your post I put into bold....

 

Those are your views.    Those may even be my views.     But Grigson and Pagano and the staff inside the complex have an entirely different view.    They have information we don't.    They know Thomas' health.    They know why Holmes' didn't play more.    They can see what he's turning into.    They can project what he'll be.     Same with Thornton.    They know how he improved (or didn't) game to game, week to week.     They have some idea what he'll be.

 

The view of a GM is light year's different than the view of a fan.

 

That's why I don't freak out.    If it doesn't work out,  then there will be Hell to pay.   But Grigson gets the benefit of the doubt from me that things will indeed turn out OK.     I think Grigson has earned that.

 

I've developed this view from being a fan for nearly 50 years and from covering sports professionally for 30 years.    It's just a healthier way for me to live.    It may not work for you.    But it works for me....    

[YOUR GM]

Here's the deal,  HBA.....

 

Look at the part of your post I put into bold....

 

Those are your views.    Those may even be my views.     But Grigson and Pagano and the staff inside the complex have an entirely different view.    They have information we don't.    They know Thomas' health.    They know why Holmes' didn't play more.    They can see what he's turning into.    They can project what he'll be.     Same with Thornton.    They know how he improved (or didn't) game to game, week to week.     They have some idea what he'll be.

 

The view of a GM is light year's different than the view of a fan.

 

That's why I don't freak out.    If it doesn't work out,  then there will be Hell to pay.   But Grigson gets the benefit of the doubt from me that things will indeed turn out OK.     I think Grigson has earned that.

 

I've developed this view from being a fan for nearly 50 years and from covering sports professionally for 30 years.    It's just a healthier way for me to live.    It may not work for you.    But it works for me....    

 

 

Listen, no amount of "inside information" is going to change the fact that Donald Thomas is recovering from an injury that is considered more severe than an ACL tear. He tore tendon in his quad. Tendons, by far take longer to heal than most injuries, and he may not be the same player anymore, regardless of what he was projected to be last year. Not only that, but he tore his biceps as well, which only further complicates things. The fact that the team did not even make the bicep injury publicly known until after the season was well over with, should teach you not to place too much stock in any of Grigson's (or any GM's) comments to the media regarding players and injuries. Of course he sounds positive and optimistic about Thomas' return, because why wouldn't? It's not in anyone's best interest to come out and say the odds are against him coming back by the start of the season, the same player he was before.

 

In regards to Thornton and Holmes, I say, "You're only as good as what you put on film...." Holmes could be the best practice player ever, but that doesn't amount to anything until we actually see him under center next season in live action. Same thing for Thornton. What we saw from him last year was very inconsistent, and while he should improve this year, I don't ever see him being a strength of this line. It is not unreasonable to be worried about the status of our interior line, given the 3 players projected to anchor it.

 

And while Grigson earned the benefit of the doubt after his 2012 season, his 2013 campaign was bad enough to negate any of that benefit. The Richardson and Hughes trades, the poor free agency spending and the mediocre draft are all cause enough for concern regarding Grigson's evaluation process. I haven't seen any of his moves along the offensive line that suggests to me his evaluation skills regarding the line are above reproach. I'd say that's been his weakest area of scouting and judging talent so far. 

 

I don't pretend to act like I know more inside info than Grigson, but I've seen enough of his recent work to say with confidence that his decision making is not infallible, and his lack of activity with the offensive line this off-season (knowing it's our primary weakness) warrants a bit of criticism, in my opinion. Blind optimism may be blissful, but I deal in realism. A projected starting trio of a second year guard coming off a sub-par rookie season, a (basically) rookie center with no pro game experience and a guard recovering from a potential career altering injury, is not a cause for optimism regarding our interior line, in my opinion. If it makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside, that's your prerogative    

[lollygagger8]

Seriously?  You are a good poster and I thought we might be talking some football here.  

 

I disagreed with your logic, which suggested that personnel decisions on McGlynn and Satele were made outside the interest of winning.  That is all.  It is OK if you don't like my opinion, but why take that response path?

 

ztboiler, on 19 Apr 2014 - 12:28 PM, said:

Honestly, to me, this kind of logic among fans is what is truly baffling.  The NFL, and its scoreboard, are the ultimate zone of "do your job" accountability.  To assume that any decisions about personnel were made outside of the interest of winning right now, is ludicrous.

 

McGlynn and Satele weren't good enough, but that doesn't mean that there was a "shuffle" that the coaching staff thought could immediately solve the problem - especially when history says that continuity among your O-line resources pays dividends over stand alone talent.

 

You can disagree with whatever you want, that's your prerogative. 

 

The fact remains that when McGlynn played better at Center than at guard (which he is abysmal), and he outplays the starting Center, you should shuffle the line and make a change. If Reitz plays better at guard than McGlynn, you shuffle the line and make the change. None of this is rocket science. 

 

We can all look up the grades of each player, but again, Grigson being an O-lineman and seeing how many sacks we gave up last year (30+ even though Luck has had plenty of Houdini moments and has gotten out of many many sacks).....you would think somebody would've stepped in and made the changes (for the better). 

 

This is all in the interest of winning and keeping your QB upright and not getting hurt. 

[ztboiler]

Listen, no amount of "inside information" is going to change the fact that Donald Thomas is recovering from an injury that is considered more severe than an ACL tear. He tore tendon in his quad. Tendons, by far take longer to heal than most injuries, and he may not be the same player anymore, regardless of what he was projected to be last year. Not only that, but he tore his biceps as well, which only further complicates things. The fact that the team did not even make the bicep injury publicly known until after the season was well over with, should teach you not to place too much stock in any of Grigson's (or any GM's) comments to the media regarding players and injuries. Of course he sounds positive and optimistic about Thomas' return, because why wouldn't? It's not in anyone's best interest to come out and say the odds are against him coming back by the start of the season, the same player he was before.

 

In regards to Thornton and Holmes, I say, "You're only as good as what you put on film...." Holmes could be the best practice player ever, but that doesn't amount to anything until we actually see him under center next season in live action. Same thing for Thornton. What we saw from him last year was very inconsistent, and while he should improve this year, I don't ever see him being a strength of this line. It is not unreasonable to be worried about the status of our interior line, given the 3 players projected to anchor it.

 

And while Grigson earned the benefit of the doubt after his 2012 season, his 2013 campaign was bad enough to negate any of that benefit. The Richardson and Hughes trades, the poor free agency spending and the mediocre draft are all cause enough for concern regarding Grigson's evaluation process. I haven't seen any of his moves along the offensive line that suggests to me his evaluation skills regarding the line are above reproach. I'd say that's been his weakest area of scouting and judging talent so far. 

 

I don't pretend to act like I know more inside info than Grigson, but I've seen enough of his recent work to say with confidence that his decision making is not infallible, and his lack of activity with the offensive line this off-season (knowing it's our primary weakness) warrants a bit of criticism, in my opinion. Blind optimism may be blissful, but I deal in realism. A projected starting trio of a second year guard coming off a sub-par rookie season, a (basically) rookie center with no pro game experience and a guard recovering from a potential career altering injury, is not a cause for optimism regarding our interior line, in my opinion. If it makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside, that's your prerogative    

You are certainly not alone in your criticism of Grig's judgment on approach to fixing the O-line, but you are among the most active and vocal, so I'll pose this question to you and any others can chime in as they see fit.

 

 

 

In the NFL, as pertains to sustainable O-line excellence, please identify all the teams that you believe are "getting it right", and the fundamentals that Grigs could employ to be more like them but is otherwise overlooking.  I guess we could call this your business plan proposal for the O-line.

 

I will not argue that we are in need of better O-line play, but let's put in all out there in terms of solutions that can be executed rather than just identifying the same problems over and over again. Executives in this league do make mistakes - thus the frequency of turnover - so let's get specific about the path we should have taken to get here and the path we should take to achieve the caliber of O-line play you require.

[NewColtsFan]

Listen, no amount of "inside information" is going to change the fact that Donald Thomas is recovering from an injury that is considered more severe than an ACL tear. He tore tendon in his quad. Tendons, by far take longer to heal than most injuries, and he may not be the same player anymore, regardless of what he was projected to be last year. Not only that, but he tore his biceps as well, which only further complicates things. The fact that the team did not even make the bicep injury publicly known until after the season was well over with, should teach you not to place too much stock in any of Grigson's (or any GM's) comments to the media regarding players and injuries. Of course he sounds positive and optimistic about Thomas' return, because why wouldn't? It's not in anyone's best interest to come out and say the odds are against him coming back by the start of the season, the same player he was before.

 

In regards to Thornton and Holmes, I say, "You're only as good as what you put on film...." Holmes could be the best practice player ever, but that doesn't amount to anything until we actually see him under center next season in live action. Same thing for Thornton. What we saw from him last year was very inconsistent, and while he should improve this year, I don't ever see him being a strength of this line. It is not unreasonable to be worried about the status of our interior line, given the 3 players projected to anchor it.

 

And while Grigson earned the benefit of the doubt after his 2012 season, his 2013 campaign was bad enough to negate any of that benefit. The Richardson and Hughes trades, the poor free agency spending and the mediocre draft are all cause enough for concern regarding Grigson's evaluation process. I haven't seen any of his moves along the offensive line that suggests to me his evaluation skills regarding the line are above reproach. I'd say that's been his weakest area of scouting and judging talent so far. 

 

I don't pretend to act like I know more inside info than Grigson, but I've seen enough of his recent work to say with confidence that his decision making is not infallible, and his lack of activity with the offensive line this off-season (knowing it's our primary weakness) warrants a bit of criticism, in my opinion. Blind optimism may be blissful, but I deal in realism. A projected starting trio of a second year guard coming off a sub-par rookie season, a (basically) rookie center with no pro game experience and a guard recovering from a potential career altering injury, is not a cause for optimism regarding our interior line, in my opinion. If it makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside, that's your prerogative    

 

Again.....

 

You're reacting on what you THINK you know.    Grigson is reacting to reality.   He knows everything.

 

He knows the status of Thomas.   He knows what his medical people and trainers are telling him.   As to Thornton and Holmes,  he knows whats going on in games and practices.  He knows what the coaches are telling him.

 

There's no one who knows more than Grigson.    Do I think he's infallible?    Heck no!    I don't agree with everything he's done.  But 23 wins in two years despite his mistakes says the man is doing SOMETHING right?!?    That's not all Andrew Luck.   People like to say Football is the ultimate team game.    Well, if so,  then it can't all be Andrew Luck.   Other players are doing some heavy lifting.    And that's a credit to Grigson and his staff.

 

This path you talk about is only two years old...   we're starting our 3rd year now...   and I think -- on balance -- so far so good.

 

Have mistakes been made?   You bet.   No doubt.   But have enough things been done right to reach the playoffs two years in a row and win 23 games?    Yeah.     And that's no small achievement.   Even with Andrew Luck.

 

We have different ways of looking at things.

 

I'm not saying mine is right and yours is wrong.   I'm saying mine works for me,  and yours appears to work for you.

 

But just as you likely wouldn't be comfortable with my way,  I wouldn't be comfortable with yours.   

 

Hey,  sometimes that happens.............

[ztboiler]

 

ztboiler, on 19 Apr 2014 - 12:28 PM, said:

 

You can disagree with whatever you want, that's your prerogative. 

 

The fact remains that when McGlynn played better at Center than at guard (which he is abysmal), and he outplays the starting Center, you should shuffle the line and make a change. If Reitz plays better at guard than McGlynn, you shuffle the line and make the change. None of this is rocket science. 

 

We can all look up the grades of each player, but again, Grigson being an O-lineman and seeing how many sacks we gave up last year (30+ even though Luck has had plenty of Houdini moments and has gotten out of many many sacks).....you would think somebody would've stepped in and made the changes (for the better). 

 

This is all in the interest of winning and keeping your QB upright and not getting hurt. 

 

Now we're talking.....

 

I too thought our staff was slow to pull the trigger on re-shuffling the line last year, but they chose to deal with the devil they knew and the limitations of those players rather than the uncertainty of their replacements.  

 

It is easy to forget they they did make the move to insert Link over McGlynn and appeared to be moving McGlynn to center over Satele when Link got hurt and they defaulted back to Satele/McGlynn for the playoffs once the dust settled.  In that light, it makes some of your criticism overly simplistic. 

 

I thought it was a longshot for McGlynn to even make the roster last year, but his versatility at center did help us win some games.  That said, Grigs deserves some scrutiny for any line design that includes the possibility of McGlynn playing so many snaps at RG given his known limitations - there was zero potential for development.

[YOUR GM]

You are certainly not alone in your criticism of Grig's judgment on approach to fixing the O-line, but you are among the most active and vocal, so I'll pose this question to you and any others can chime in as they see fit.

 

 

 

In the NFL, as pertains to sustainable O-line excellence, please identify all the teams that you believe are "getting it right", and the fundamentals that Grigs could employ to be more like them but is otherwise overlooking.  I guess we could call this your business plan proposal for the O-line.

 

I will not argue that we are in need of better O-line play, but let's put in all out there in terms of solutions that can be executed rather than just identifying the same problems over and over again. Executives in this league do make mistakes - thus the frequency of turnover - so let's get specific about the path we should have taken to get here and the path we should take to achieve the caliber of O-line play you require.

 

 

That's a very loaded question with a number of possible responses. I don't feel there's some magic formula to developing an offensive line. The common denominator in all the teams that do have good line play, however, is talent. I don't want bad football players on this team, no matter how cheap or "versatile" they may be. Guys like McGlynn and Costa being brought in really serve no purpose. Yes, they were/are cheap, but that's because they have no business playing significant reps in this league. They are plan C players, not even plan B. The notion that a player has more value because they can play equally bad at multiple positions is mind-boggling to me. 

 

Other successful teams (regarding line play) have staffs that are smart enough to identify positional weaknesses and improve upon them. Grigson got half of it right by releasing Satele and letting McGlynn walk, but he's repeating his same mistake in bringing in more players of similar caliber (only less durable), and hoping they pan out. Now, I'll give him credit for not overpaying for these turds... but a 2 dollar turd is still a turd. Why even buy it at all? There is literally no upside to having Phil Costa here. He's just as weak as Satele, with the same short arms, can't snap the ball and has only played 6 games in 2 seasons. He probably won't even be on the roster at the end of the year, so if they were planning on throwing away 1 million dollars, they should've just donated it to charity.  

 

In regards to what I think the Colts need to be a successful line?

 

1. A fair system in place that gets the best 5 on the field, where accountability and reward-merit is fostered. Playing favorites and allowing outside factors determine who gets on the field is not good business, or good football.

 

2. An organic, ever-changing scheme that shifts according to the talent on the roster (i.e, not trying to force a power run scheme when your starting RG is weaker than many tight ends are)

 

3. Talent from leadership positions. What I mean when I say this is, Satele and McGlynn (for example) were considered the leaders of our line the past 2 seasons. For as experienced and "savvy" as they were, they sucked, no way around it. How are the younger players going to learn sound technique from our veteran leaders when our veteran leaders don't even display sound technique? Or how can a young guy take Satele yelling "hustle up!' seriously when he has to watch him quit on his blocks consistently, from the sideline? Your leaders have got to be able to ball out. The words of those who can lead by example always carry more weight than those who just bark orders

 

4. A constant restock of talent through the draft. Even when you're able to land a stud left tackle, odds are he's gonna walk after his rookie contract in free agency to the highest bidder. His replacement should already be on your roster a year or 2 in advance, so there's little drop-off. New England has mastered this, and I'd wish we'd start doing it as well. I'm of the opinion that, much like pass rushers, you can never have too many quality offensive linemen. If you're a Colts fan, you should know that depth (or a lack thereof) along the offensive line can be the difference between you playing an extra week in the post season or not

 

Overall, I would have been happy with Grigson this off-season regarding the offensive line if he would have brought in 1 player who could start on the majority of teams in this league. That would show he's serious about improving the line this coming season. He has not done that so far, and it doesn't appear he's planning to invest any of our earlier picks to addressing it either. I'm sure his plan after the 2013 draft was to have Holmes, Thomas and Thornton be our starters by the start of this coming season. I feel like he's ignoring his better judgement and just sticking with that original plan rather than assessing whether or not those players are still on schedule to be those starters he projected them to be. That, to me, is problematic and seems like a pride move more than a rational one.

 

Hope I answered your question(s). I tried, anyways. lol  

[YOUR GM]

Again.....

 

You're reacting on what you THINK you know.    Grigson is reacting to reality.   He knows everything.

 

 

 

 

Then why even have an opinion? Sheesh

[YOUR GM]

Wow, and now Costa just retired.

Maybe this will make Grigson actually address the center position now

[Gavin]

Wow, and now Costa just retired.

Maybe this will make Grigson actually address the center position now

That still leaves Holmes and Thomas....Not that that is encouraging

[NewColtsFan]

Then why even have an opinion? Sheesh

 

I don't care.....   have an opinion.   Hey, I'm not stopping you!    Have all the opinions you want!

 

Just as long as we're all on the same page.....   our opinions,  all of our opinions -- including mine -- might be well informed,  but they don't come close to the actual knowledge of what the GM's and coaches know.

 

What was Jim Mora's famous quote about you don't know didly-pooh...   and you might think we know...   but you don't know.... and you never will.    There's a lot of truth to that.

 

Doesn't mean GM's are always right and they don't make mistakes....   it just means there's more to decisions than meets the eye.

[YOUR GM]

I don't care.....   have an opinion.   Hey, I'm not stopping you!    Have all the opinions you want!

 

Just as long as we're all on the same page.....   our opinions,  all of our opinions -- including mine -- might be well informed,  but they don't come close to the actual knowledge of what the GM's and coaches know.

 

What was Jim Mora's famous quote about you don't know didly-pooh...   and you might think we know...   but you don't know.... and you never will.    There's a lot of truth to that.

 

Doesn't mean GM's are always right and they don't make mistakes....   it just means there's more to decisions than meets the eye.

 

You don't know what Grigson knows anymore than I do, for that matter. He might be blowing smoke up all our butts with the optimistic pressers he's had about Thomas' status and Holmes' progression. That's all I'm getting at. Just because the GM says something doesn't necessarily mean those are his true feelings or intentions. Coaches and GM's have a lot more to lose telling the truth to the media than they do telling lies.

 

I weigh their comments into consideration but i'm going off what I've seen, heard and read. And from what I've read, Thomas' injury is an uphill battle. He's not going to just show up 100% the same player from day one. It might even take him the entire season to regain form (if he ever even does) and that's barring he doesn't re-injure anything. It would've been in the team's best interest to have insurance in place (LEGIT insurance, not Lance Louis) just in case he's not ready to go. That's even more so the case when you factor in the fact that we'll be having a rookie center calling protections for Luck next year.

 

I don't need to talk to the athletic trainers at the Colts facility to know that recovering from a tendon tear and muscle tear in the same off-season is not a stroll in the park. So it's not a reach for me to say that maybe we shouldn't be relying on that player to start the season this year. But if you need to hear that from Grigson in order to understand it, so be it 

[NewColtsFan]

You don't know what Grigson knows anymore than I do, for that matter. He might be blowing smoke up all our butts with the optimistic pressers he's had about Thomas' status and Holmes' progression. That's all I'm getting at. Just because the GM says something doesn't necessarily mean those are his true feelings or intentions. Coaches and GM's have a lot more to lose telling the truth to the media than they do telling lies.

 

I weigh their comments into consideration but i'm going off what I've seen, heard and read. And from what I've read, Thomas' injury is an uphill battle. He's not going to just show up 100% the same player from day one. It might even take him the entire season to regain form (if he ever even does) and that's barring he doesn't re-injure anything. It would've been in the team's best interest to have insurance in place (LEGIT insurance, not Lance Louis) just in case he's not ready to go. That's even more so the case when you factor in the fact that we'll be having a rookie center calling protections for Luck next year.

 

I don't need to talk to the athletic trainers at the Colts facility to know that recovering from a tendon tear and muscle tear in the same off-season is not a stroll in the park. So it's not a reach for me to say that maybe we shouldn't be relying on that player to start the season this year. But if you need to hear that from Grigson in order to understand it, so be it 

 

You've lost it.    Again.

 

I don't have to know how much Grigson knows.   All I have to know is that he knows MORE THAN you and me and everyone else here.

 

I don't care if what he says publicly doesn't match up to what is going on privately.   I expect some of that from any and all GM's.    That comes with the job.

 

As for Thomas and his injury,  what you don't know is how it's coming along.   You don't know what the trainers and medical people are telling Grigson.   You don't know if they're saying he'll be fine for training camp.    Or, he may not be and can't be counted on.    You don't know.   

 

But Grigson does.

 

And boy, that seems to drive you nuts!

 

Your posts are getting crazier and crazier.....   

 

As for Lance Louis and LEGIT insurance....    I guess it hasn't occurred to you that all the crappy lineman that used to play for the Colts and no longer do,  have all been picked up by other teams.    That's the modern NFL....   there simply aren't enough quality lineman for 5 starters and 3-4 back-ups for all 32 teams.

 

There are weak back-ups on every team in the NFL.    That's the way it goes.    So, your outrage over having Lance Louis just shows -- again -- how much you don't know, and how much it bothers you that Grigson doesn't see things your way.

 

You've made this personal.    Like I said,  this is getting embarrassing.     You'd think the guy's record as a GM was 12-23 and not 23-12.     

 

Poor you.....    It's.  Just.   Not.   Good.    Enough.      And it never will be.

 

If the Colts win a Super bowl,  you'll be the guy posting here we should have won more.     And if we win more,  it still won't be enough.    You'll find SOMETHING to complain about.    Guys like you always do.

 

Good luck.

[YOUR GM]

You've lost it. Again.

I don't have to know how much Grigson knows. All I have to know is that he knows MORE THAN you and me and everyone else here.

I don't care if what he says publicly doesn't match up to what is going on privately. I expect some of that from any and all GM's. That comes with the job.

As for Thomas and his injury, what you don't know is how it's coming along. You don't know what the trainers and medical people are telling Grigson. You don't know if they're saying he'll be fine for training camp. Or, he may not be and can't be counted on. You don't know.

But Grigson does.

And boy, that seems to drive you nuts!

Your posts are getting crazier and crazier.....

As for Lance Louis and LEGIT insurance.... I guess it hasn't occurred to you that all the crappy lineman that used to play for the Colts and no longer do, have all been picked up by other teams. That's the modern NFL.... there simply aren't enough quality lineman for 5 starters and 3-4 back-ups for all 32 teams.

There are weak back-ups on every team in the NFL. That's the way it goes. So, your outrage over having Lance Louis just shows -- again -- how much you don't know, and how much it bothers you that Grigson doesn't see things your way.

You've made this personal. Like I said, this is getting embarrassing. You'd think the guy's record as a GM was 12-23 and not 23-12.

Poor you..... It's. Just. Not. Good. Enough. And it never will be.

If the Colts win a Super bowl, you'll be the guy posting here we should have won more. And if we win more, it still won't be enough. You'll find SOMETHING to complain about. Guys like you always do.

Good luck.

Actually, you've made this personal with multiple attacks at my character. You can't seem to think for yourself so there's no point in even talking to you further.

"You're one of those guys" that needs confirmation to breathe

[NewColtsFan]

Actually, you've made this personal with multiple attacks at my character. You can't seem to think for yourself so there's no point in even talking to you further.

"You're one of those guys" that needs confirmation to breathe

 

I can't think for myself?!?

 

Really?!?

 

Who's doing the thinking for me?!?

 

You want to put a pause on our exchanges??    Fine by me............

 

This stopped being rational a long time ago.......

[YOUR GM]

I can't think for myself?!?

Really?!?

Who's doing the thinking for me?!?

Grigson

[a06cc]

Reitz is like Thomas. Backups who can't stay healthy. I hate saying it. I hope they can stay healthy throughout the season. We need to address the guard depth in the draft.

[jskinnz]

That's a very loaded question with a number of possible responses. I don't feel there's some magic formula to developing an offensive line. The common denominator in all the teams that do have good line play, however, is talent. I don't want bad football players on this team, no matter how cheap or "versatile" they may be. Guys like McGlynn and Costa being brought in really serve no purpose. Yes, they were/are cheap, but that's because they have no business playing significant reps in this league. They are plan C players, not even plan B. The notion that a player has more value because they can play equally bad at multiple positions is mind-boggling to me. 

 

Other successful teams (regarding line play) have staffs that are smart enough to identify positional weaknesses and improve upon them. Grigson got half of it right by releasing Satele and letting McGlynn walk, but he's repeating his same mistake in bringing in more players of similar caliber (only less durable), and hoping they pan out. Now, I'll give him credit for not overpaying for these turds... but a 2 dollar turd is still a turd. Why even buy it at all? There is literally no upside to having Phil Costa here. He's just as weak as Satele, with the same short arms, can't snap the ball and has only played 6 games in 2 seasons. He probably won't even be on the roster at the end of the year, so if they were planning on throwing away 1 million dollars, they should've just donated it to charity.  

 

In regards to what I think the Colts need to be a successful line?

 

1. A fair system in place that gets the best 5 on the field, where accountability and reward-merit is fostered. Playing favorites and allowing outside factors determine who gets on the field is not good business, or good football.

 

2. An organic, ever-changing scheme that shifts according to the talent on the roster (i.e, not trying to force a power run scheme when your starting RG is weaker than many tight ends are)

 

3. Talent from leadership positions. What I mean when I say this is, Satele and McGlynn (for example) were considered the leaders of our line the past 2 seasons. For as experienced and "savvy" as they were, they sucked, no way around it. How are the younger players going to learn sound technique from our veteran leaders when our veteran leaders don't even display sound technique? Or how can a young guy take Satele yelling "hustle up!' seriously when he has to watch him quit on his blocks consistently, from the sideline? Your leaders have got to be able to ball out. The words of those who can lead by example always carry more weight than those who just bark orders

 

4. A constant restock of talent through the draft. Even when you're able to land a stud left tackle, odds are he's gonna walk after his rookie contract in free agency to the highest bidder. His replacement should already be on your roster a year or 2 in advance, so there's little drop-off. New England has mastered this, and I'd wish we'd start doing it as well. I'm of the opinion that, much like pass rushers, you can never have too many quality offensive linemen. If you're a Colts fan, you should know that depth (or a lack thereof) along the offensive line can be the difference between you playing an extra week in the post season or not

 

Overall, I would have been happy with Grigson this off-season regarding the offensive line if he would have brought in 1 player who could start on the majority of teams in this league. That would show he's serious about improving the line this coming season. He has not done that so far, and it doesn't appear he's planning to invest any of our earlier picks to addressing it either. I'm sure his plan after the 2013 draft was to have Holmes, Thomas and Thornton be our starters by the start of this coming season. I feel like he's ignoring his better judgement and just sticking with that original plan rather than assessing whether or not those players are still on schedule to be those starters he projected them to be. That, to me, is problematic and seems like a pride move more than a rational one.

 

Hope I answered your question(s). I tried, anyways. lol

I give you credit for consistency. I have tried to stay out of your exchanges of late because we disagree and it seems unlikely that we will change each other's mind.

But your last line paragraph is just absolute nonsense. Must be that hyperbole you admitted to in a debate we had.

1) Your comment about showing that he is serious about building the offensive line is just funny. Somehow you think he is not serious about it because he has gone about it in a different way than what you think? Comedy gold there.

2) Where in the world do you get the idea that he will not address the line with early picks. I guarantee that he has not said that anywhere publicly. That is just sticking to the narrative you have created. Defend it against at all costs.

[NewColtsFan]

Grigson

 

Oh.....   why didn't I think of that?!

 

Of course....   I couldn't...    my mind is under the control of Grigson!

 

I know it may not come across this way when I get short with you,  but there's part of me that really does like you.    You know football and you're passionate about sharing it here....  and I always like that....

 

But sometimes I think you're just way, way too smart for your own good, and just over-think things quite badly.

 

I guess it takes all kinds to make the world go around....

[a06cc]

I'm putting most of the faith on our 3rd QB. He needs to start taking over some of the calls. In college Stanford's run game was so potent because Luck knew when to dial in a run play.

[ztboiler]

That's a very loaded question with a number of possible responses. I don't feel there's some magic formula to developing an offensive line. The common denominator in all the teams that do have good line play, however, is talent. I don't want bad football players on this team, no matter how cheap or "versatile" they may be. Guys like McGlynn and Costa being brought in really serve no purpose. Yes, they were/are cheap, but that's because they have no business playing significant reps in this league. They are plan C players, not even plan B. The notion that a player has more value because they can play equally bad at multiple positions is mind-boggling to me. 

 

Other successful teams (regarding line play) have staffs that are smart enough to identify positional weaknesses and improve upon them. Grigson got half of it right by releasing Satele and letting McGlynn walk, but he's repeating his same mistake in bringing in more players of similar caliber (only less durable), and hoping they pan out. Now, I'll give him credit for not overpaying for these turds... but a 2 dollar turd is still a turd. Why even buy it at all? There is literally no upside to having Phil Costa here. He's just as weak as Satele, with the same short arms, can't snap the ball and has only played 6 games in 2 seasons. He probably won't even be on the roster at the end of the year, so if they were planning on throwing away 1 million dollars, they should've just donated it to charity.  

 

In regards to what I think the Colts need to be a successful line?

 

1. A fair system in place that gets the best 5 on the field, where accountability and reward-merit is fostered. Playing favorites and allowing outside factors determine who gets on the field is not good business, or good football.

 

2. An organic, ever-changing scheme that shifts according to the talent on the roster (i.e, not trying to force a power run scheme when your starting RG is weaker than many tight ends are)

 

3. Talent from leadership positions. What I mean when I say this is, Satele and McGlynn (for example) were considered the leaders of our line the past 2 seasons. For as experienced and "savvy" as they were, they sucked, no way around it. How are the younger players going to learn sound technique from our veteran leaders when our veteran leaders don't even display sound technique? Or how can a young guy take Satele yelling "hustle up!' seriously when he has to watch him quit on his blocks consistently, from the sideline? Your leaders have got to be able to ball out. The words of those who can lead by example always carry more weight than those who just bark orders

 

4. A constant restock of talent through the draft. Even when you're able to land a stud left tackle, odds are he's gonna walk after his rookie contract in free agency to the highest bidder. His replacement should already be on your roster a year or 2 in advance, so there's little drop-off. New England has mastered this, and I'd wish we'd start doing it as well. I'm of the opinion that, much like pass rushers, you can never have too many quality offensive linemen. If you're a Colts fan, you should know that depth (or a lack thereof) along the offensive line can be the difference between you playing an extra week in the post season or not

 

Overall, I would have been happy with Grigson this off-season regarding the offensive line if he would have brought in 1 player who could start on the majority of teams in this league. That would show he's serious about improving the line this coming season. He has not done that so far, and it doesn't appear he's planning to invest any of our earlier picks to addressing it either. I'm sure his plan after the 2013 draft was to have Holmes, Thomas and Thornton be our starters by the start of this coming season. I feel like he's ignoring his better judgement and just sticking with that original plan rather than assessing whether or not those players are still on schedule to be those starters he projected them to be. That, to me, is problematic and seems like a pride move more than a rational one.

 

Hope I answered your question(s). I tried, anyways. lol  

 

 

 

Some very well thought out stuff there....like points 3 and 4.   Talent among your leaders is an insightful point.  This is one of the areas where Grigs hit a home run with Cherilus and has an emerging leader in Castonzo.  Cherilus is producing and is a natural, vocal leader.  As you point out, it is also where Satele and McGlynn were void.  As for the conspiracy theory of #1....well, to each their own.  #2 is coaching and getting the most of your talent....good idea, but I wouldn't presuppose that is being done poorly, we are simply in the next phase of program building.

 

 

 

Overall it appears you believe in the acquisition of talent and character with a long enough incubation cycle to mature and reach full development....and that you actually like Grigson's plan, whether you realize it or not. In your best points above, you acknowledge, in principle, that there is a lag time to building a sustainably successful O-line.  We are in the lag....and it seems that your main objection is really his willingness to allow his plan to mature with pieces already in place rather than short circuit it with an acquisition you approve of.  

 

We didn't take much of a look around the league yet, but it is helpful if you are ever looking for a little perspective on the topic.  It would be hard to fill out five fingers if you are counting the teams that have arrived as an O-line.