I wonder what Irsay will say about this team when he comes back?

[conklincolt]

he's there just no paper trails.   You really think he's not in charge?

[Malakai432]

Does anyone remember phase 2?

!

Phase 3 = Profit

[NagelHausForge]

This thread hurts my head... Hey that rhymes!  I suddently feel like Fezzik from the Princess Bride...

 

 

[SteelCityColt]

!

Phase 3 = Profit

 

Phase 4 = Destruction of evidence

[lollygagger8]

Star wars numbers lol.

 

[SteelCityColt]

 

So that's what that "Ackbar! Ackbar! Ackbar!" audible at the LOS was about. No wonder the opposition knew it was going to be a run play.

[AntonMcG]

"We've changed our model a little bit, because we wanted more than one of these," Irsay said before flashing his Super Bowl ring.

 

"You make the playoffs 11 times, and you're out in the first round seven out of 11 times," Irsay said. "You love to have the Star Wars numbers from Peyton and Marvin (Harrison) and Reggie (Wayne).

 

For those who don;t get the context, these comments were made by Irsay in relation to cutting Manning and drafting Luck.

 

The irony lies in the fact that this looks a lot like a Manning team. Great receivers, decent pass blocking but poor run blocking, and an average defense. The differences are this defense is a lot bigger than it was in the past, and whilst we no longer have a great pass rush, we arguably have better coverage. We were never, nor are we now, particularly strong against the run.

 

It will be interesting to see how these similarities and slight differences compare come playoff time.

[Coffeedrinker]

Star wars numbers lol.

Man, if I could, I would arrest you for PUI

 

Posting Under the Influence.

[The Old Crow]

Man, if I could, I would arrest you for PUI

Posting Under the Influence.

You mean IUP ? Oh, that's Indiana University of Pennsylvania.

[HOZER]

Man, if I could, I would arrest you for PUI

 

Posting Under the Influence.

That's not funny considering the current situation we are in!!!!!

Ok it's funny.

[HOZER]

You mean IUP ? Oh, that's Indiana University of Pennsylvania.

Maybe IUPUI? Indiana University Purdue University of Indianapolis?

[The Old Crow]

Maybe IUPUI? Indiana University Purdue University of Indianapolis?

Only in the bizzaro world where Itzy reigns. He is a dark gnome and leader of the anti- matter STLOC forum.

[Jason_]

This thread hurts my head... Hey that rhymes!  I suddently feel like Fezzik from the Princess Bride...

 

[ruksak]

I think you're thinking of ambidextrous.

AHHHH yes. Like frogs. Frogs are ambidextrous. 

[The Old Crow]

"I can shoot with my left, I can shoot with my right, I'm amphibious ."

Charles Shackleford

NC State basketball player

[Narcosys]

This topic is like an Irsay tweet.

It confuses me.

I tried getting him but he whatn't havin none of it WHOOO. PC Beach baby!

[Dark_Indy]

"I can shoot with my left, I can shoot with my right, I'm amphibious ."

Charles Shackleford

NC State basketball player

 

No, no, no that's androgynous. 

[Superman]

"We've changed our model a little bit, because we wanted more than one of these," Irsay said before flashing his Super Bowl ring.

 

"You make the playoffs 11 times, and you're out in the first round seven out of 11 times," Irsay said. "You love to have the Star Wars numbers from Peyton and Marvin (Harrison) and Reggie (Wayne).

 

For those who don;t get the context, these comments were made by Irsay in relation to cutting Manning and drafting Luck.

 

The irony lies in the fact that this looks a lot like a Manning team. Great receivers, decent pass blocking but poor run blocking, and an average defense. The differences are this defense is a lot bigger than it was in the past, and whilst we no longer have a great pass rush, we arguably have better coverage. We were never, nor are we now, particularly strong against the run.

 

It will be interesting to see how these similarities and slight differences compare come playoff time.

 

Just to tack on, Irsay never said he had a problem with the Star Wars numbers, as he put it. He simply said he wanted to pay more attention to having a balanced team that would have a better chance of winning in the playoffs. 

[Coffeedrinker]

AHHHH yes. Like frogs. Frogs are ambidextrous. 

I thought frogs were aquarious

[Cynjin]

Hey, what happened to Itsy.

Sadly Itsy has become Irsay.

[Jason_]

Hey, what happened to Itsy.

Sadly Itsy has become Irsay.

 

Yep, itsy is gone.  I don't wanna play anymore. 

[AntonMcG]

Just to tack on, Irsay never said he had a problem with the Star Wars numbers, as he put it. He simply said he wanted to pay more attention to having a balanced team that would have a better chance of winning in the playoffs. 

 

He didn't say it no... be he made no effort to ensure that it could not be construed that way. It is hard not to see it as a bit of a dig to Manning. But people will interpret as they will/

 

My point was that he wanted a more balanced team, but this year seems to be in a similar situation as in the Manning years.

[Superman]

He didn't say it no... be he made no effort to ensure that it could not be construed that way. It is hard not to see it as a bit of a dig to Manning. But people will interpret as they will/

 

My point was that he wanted a more balanced team, but this year seems to be in a similar situation as in the Manning years.

 

Meh, I think the point was that he wants the team to be more balanced. Not that he has a problem with a good passing attack, but that he also wants a good rushing attack, and he wants a good overall defense. We're still a work in progress, but this is only the third year of the new administration.

 

And really, the only similarity is that we have a really good QB. The team is a work in progress, but this defense can actually stop the run, and has spent considerable resources building the offensive line. 

 

I don't think Irsay's comments were a dig at Manning. If anything, I think they were a shot at Polian and maybe Dungy for the way they constructed the roster, a roster which had the same basic limitations for several years. I know there was a lot left open to interpretation, but I don't think his comments were about Manning at all.

[NewColtsFan]

Meh, I think the point was that he wants the team to be more balanced. Not that he has a problem with a good passing attack, but that he also wants a good rushing attack, and he wants a good overall defense. We're still a work in progress, but this is only the third year of the new administration.

 

And really, the only similarity is that we have a really good QB. The team is a work in progress, but this defense can actually stop the run, and has spent considerable resources building the offensive line. 

 

I don't think Irsay's comments were a dig at Manning. If anything, I think they were a shot at Polian and maybe Dungy for the way they constructed the roster, a roster which had the same basic limitations for several years. I know there was a lot left open to interpretation, but I don't think his comments were about Manning at all.

 

Thank you.

 

I've been saying it for a year now.

 

The owner's comments were a shot at Polian,   not Peyton Manning.

 

Even Polian thought they were a shot at him.....     Manny wisely refused to be drawn into the discussion.....

[NewEra]

So I guess the spider got washed out...poor guy.

I agree with Irsays comments. We need to have a more balanced team. Need to be able to run and stop the run. I actually think we have been doing a really good job stopping the run. Can't wait to get Jones back in there.

[Superman]

So I guess the spider got washed out...poor guy.

I agree with Irsays comments. We need to have a more balanced team. Need to be able to run and stop the run. I actually think we have been doing a really good job stopping the run. Can't wait to get Jones back in there.

 

Agree, especially about the run defense. We've given up some runs, and we're still vulnerable to read option, but we've been shutting down the traditional rushing pretty well. 

[alawai]

You guys are giving me a headache! Think I'll go into my circle and sit in the corner!

[AntonMcG]

Meh, I think the point was that he wants the team to be more balanced. Not that he has a problem with a good passing attack, but that he also wants a good rushing attack, and he wants a good overall defense. We're still a work in progress, but this is only the third year of the new administration.

 

And really, the only similarity is that we have a really good QB. The team is a work in progress, but this defense can actually stop the run, and has spent considerable resources building the offensive line. 

 

I don't think Irsay's comments were a dig at Manning. If anything, I think they were a shot at Polian and maybe Dungy for the way they constructed the roster, a roster which had the same basic limitations for several years. I know there was a lot left open to interpretation, but I don't think his comments were about Manning at all.

 

I don't think they were specific to Manning, he clearly was not happy with the old philisophy, which is somewhat a collective dig at Polian, Dungy and Manning... who I always assumed had a big input when it came to personnel and offensive gameplanning. Again, that is down to interpretation, but he made few attempts to quel the media-fire after the quotes were sensationalized.

 

Your points about wanting a better rushing attack and defense and fairly obvious... no team doesn't want that. Did we not spend considerable resources on the offensive line under Polian? We did... they were just misses more often than not.

 

We had a good rushing attack up until the latter years of Manning's career, when the run blocking diminished, similar to how it is now.

 

The only major difference I can see is the defensive move to a (variation of the) 3-4 and the bigger bodies. We still are not great against the run, but I admit we have improved. Of course there are differences between the Manning era than now... but this thread brought to light the similarities after Irsay explicitly stated that we were becoming something different in an attempt to win more SBs.

[Superman]

I don't think they were specific to Manning, he clearly was not happy with the old philisophy, which is somewhat a collective dig at Polian, Dungy and Manning... who I always assumed had a big input when it came to personnel and offensive gameplanning. Again, that is down to interpretation, but he made few attempts to quel the media-fire after the quotes were sensationalized.

 

Your points about wanting a better rushing attack and defense and fairly obvious... no team doesn't want that. Did we not spend considerable resources on the offensive line under Polian? We did... they were just misses more often than not.

 

We had a good rushing attack up until the latter years of Manning's career, when the run blocking diminished, similar to how it is now.

 

The only major difference I can see is the defensive move to a (variation of the) 3-4 and the bigger bodies. We still are not great against the run, but I admit we have improved. Of course there are differences between the Manning era than now... but this thread brought to light the similarities after Irsay explicitly stated that we were becoming something different in an attempt to win more SBs.

 

We did have a good rushing attack, up until 2008, but going back to 2003, we failed in short yardage against good defensive teams. We couldn't run the ball in inclement weather in the playoffs. Etc. So there was still something lacking, but it's hard to complain about the offense overall through 2007. And situationally, we were pretty good in 2009, until the Super Bowl. 

 

Anyways, yeah, I didn't think it was a dig at Manning at all. I think the point was that we required Manning to do too much, and he wanted to have a better support system around his next franchise QB. Like you said, I think his comments were sensationalized.

 

Also, to the bolded, I don't think we are what we intend to be, not yet. Just started Year 3 of a rebuild. We've had some setbacks, especially with Mathis on IR. The line didn't do what we hoped it would last year, and the offense stalled, not to mention the injuries to skill guys. And again, it's the first half of Year 3. I think we'll continue to get closer to a complete team as time goes on, even though we're still missing a couple of foundational pieces on defense.

[AntonMcG]

We did have a good rushing attack, up until 2008, but going back to 2003, we failed in short yardage against good defensive teams. We couldn't run the ball in inclement weather in the playoffs. Etc. So there was still something lacking, but it's hard to complain about the offense overall through 2007. And situationally, we were pretty good in 2009, until the Super Bowl. 

 

Anyways, yeah, I didn't think it was a dig at Manning at all. I think the point was that we required Manning to do too much, and he wanted to have a better support system around his next franchise QB. Like you said, I think his comments were sensationalized.

 

Also, to the bolded, I don't think we are what we intend to be, not yet. Just started Year 3 of a rebuild. We've had some setbacks, especially with Mathis on IR. The line didn't do what we hoped it would last year, and the offense stalled, not to mention the injuries to skill guys. And again, it's the first half of Year 3. I think we'll continue to get closer to a complete team as time goes on, even though we're still missing a couple of foundational pieces on defense.

 

I actually agree that we are going in the right direction and addressing things as they should be addressed. It's just funny that, barring perhaps the 49ers game last year, most our success has come on the back of Luck's arm, late comebacks... and this year, Manning-like numbers.