Grigson interview with Dan Dakich

[NewColtsFan]

I couldnt stand Grigson's negativity throughout the interview. I stopped like 5 minutes into it. I felt like I was listening to the socalled "experts" on NFL Network and ESPN. This is the guy that should be the most positive about the team.

 

 

I don't know how to break this to you,  but Ryan Grigson -- whether you like him or agree with him or not -- IS AN EXPERT!!

 

There's no greater expert on the Colts than Ryan Grigson.    And as someone else accurately noted,  how do you know he was negative throughout a 26 minute interview if you only listened to the first 5 minutes.

 

I listened to the whole interview and never got the sense that Grigson was being negative.....

 

Sorry,  but this was a head scratching post on a number of levels....     

[Jason_]

So do you have a bases for that thought? For me I get the impression that Irsay lets his people he hired do their job with little tinkering. In reality we really don't know how much input Irsay has as far as the GMs job. Stuff like that is best left behind closed doors.

 

actually I agree with him.  I think Irsay at least had his hand in the Cherilus contract and I wouldn't be surprised if he influenced the Trent trade.  My reasoning...as far as the Cherilus contract....remember back when Polian was GM.  It was very publicly discussed how they made Freeney and Sanders the highest paid players at their positions, plus what many believed to be an absurdly high contract for Brackett.  Plus each time Manning's contract came up, Irsay would talk about how he was going to make sure Manning was the highest paid player in the league.  And when Cherilus was signed, Irsay took to twitter to brag about making Cherilus the highest paid RT in the league.

 

As for the trade, I'm less sure about that one but I could see Irsay wanting something to happen after he tweeted about the blockbuster trade that was coming.  I really don't think Trent was the original blockbuster he was talking about but then again, he could have been.

[BOTT]

actually I agree with him.  I think Irsay at least had his hand in the Cherilus contract and I wouldn't be surprised if he influenced the Trent trade.  My reasoning...as far as the Cherilus contract....remember back when Polian was GM.  It was very publicly discussed how they made Freeney and Sanders the highest paid players at their positions, plus what many believed to be an absurdly high contract for Brackett.  Plus each time Manning's contract came up, Irsay would talk about how he was going to make sure Manning was the highest paid player in the league.  And when Cherilus was signed, Irsay took to twitter to brag about making Cherilus the highest paid RT in the league.

 

As for the trade, I'm less sure about that one but I could see Irsay wanting something to happen after he tweeted about the blockbuster trade that was coming.  I really don't think Trent was the original blockbuster he was talking about but then again, he could have been.

Think you are reaching. It was kind of a given that Manning would be the highest (or close to it) paid QB, so he was basically stating the obvious. Not sure why Irsay gets the blame for Polian's contracts....he has a history of overpaying his own players going back to Tyrone Poole.

After the Richardson deal Irsay tweeted "Grigson rolling the dice"........doesn't sound like someone who was the force behind it.

[Jason_]

Think you are reaching. It was kind of a given that Manning would be the highest (or close to it) paid QB, so he was basically stating the obvious. Not sure why Irsay gets the blame for Polian's contracts....he has a history of overpaying his own players going back to Tyrone Poole.

After the Richardson deal Irsay tweeted "Grigson rolling the dice"........doesn't sound like someone who was the force behind it.

Yes it was obvious with manning, but not so much the others I mentioned. it just seemed like it was bragging rights for irsay.

[Superman]

Yes it was obvious with manning, but not so much the others I mentioned. it just seemed like it was bragging rights for irsay.

Sure, I agree he likes to brag when he pays guys. But I don't think Irsay told Grigson to go out and Cherilus, "and while you're at it, make him the highest paid RT in the league so I can tweet about it." I think the extent of Irsay's influence was him telling Grigson to prioritize the line, and then greenlighting the $10m signing bonus.

[Jason_]

Sure, I agree he likes to brag when he pays guys. But I don't think Irsay told Grigson to go out and Cherilus, "and while you're at it, make him the highest paid RT in the league so I can tweet about it." I think the extent of Irsay's influence was him telling Grigson to prioritize the line, and then greenlighting the $10m signing bonus.

No, no I agree. That's not what I meant. I didn't mean it like that. I was thinking of it more along the lines of irsay siting in on the negotiation and basically undermining the gm's attempt at playing a little hardball. Like the gm might be trying hard to negotiate dollars or bonus clauses trying to get the player to come down and irsay telling the gm something along the lines of "no that's fine. Go ahead and give him XX"

Hope that makes more sense.

[Superman]

No, no I agree. That's not what I meant. I didn't mean it like that. I was thinking of it more along the lines of irsay siting in on the negotiation and basically undermining the gm's attempt at playing a little hardball. Like the gm might be trying hard to negotiate dollars or bonus clauses trying to get the player to come down and irsay telling the gm something along the lines of "no that's fine. Go ahead and give him XX"

Hope that makes more sense.

 

I figured that's what you meant. I'm not sure that's what the other poster meant, though.

[Jason_]

I figured that's what you meant. I'm not sure that's what the other poster meant, though.

Now THAT is probably true. When I first posted to say I agreed I thought how weird it was because I think that's the closest I've ever come to agreeing with something he's said. So it's definitely possible there were more sinister intentions behind what he said vs what I said lol

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

Yeah, he said the right thing. But if you listen to him, you don't hear the same enthusiasm from when the trade was done. You also don't hear the defiance from this offseason. It was his worst move, and he knows it. 

 

Still, he's not going to say that publicly. If you want to hear Grigson express regret over that trade, you'll have to wait until he's no longer the Colts GM and decides to write a book or something.

He doesn't have to say it publicly, he said AT THE TIME IT WAS A GOOD MOVE! we all make moves at the time that seem right, saying well in hen-site to me is wrong to me you decide what to do with the information at hand at that time period. I wouldn't have done that move, but he thought that it was right at the time then he won't ever say it was bad! Given all that I like the interview,

[sundance75]

I don't know how to break this to you,  but Ryan Grigson -- whether you like him or agree with him or not -- IS AN EXPERT!!

 

There's no greater expert on the Colts than Ryan Grigson.    And as someone else accurately noted,  how do you know he was negative throughout a 26 minute interview if you only listened to the first 5 minutes.

 

I listened to the whole interview and never got the sense that Grigson was being negative.....

 

Sorry,  but this was a head scratching post on a number of levels....     

[masterlock]

Grigson didn't really give a straight answer to the question about whether he regretted the trade for Richardson. Saying it was the right decision at the time doesn't really get at whether he would repeat the decision today, knowing what he knows now. Don't worry Grigsy--I think we all know the REAL.answer.

[Gavin]

Grigson didn't really give a straight answer to the question about whether he regretted the trade for Richardson. Saying it was the right decision at the time doesn't really get at whether he would repeat the decision today, knowing what he knows now. Don't worry Grigsy--I think we all know the REAL.answer.

you wont find your answer until the end of next year, The answer would be in Trents offensive snap counts till then as it should be, Grigson isn't going to come out and rip one his players for the simple fact of how is that going to look to FA's to be this coming year or the next? Would you if you were a player want to play for a GM who rips into ya publicly for inept play? Most wouldn't....Now when Trent is sent packing Grigson will more then likely open up more Im sure but you wont get nothing till then probably

[Superman]

Grigson didn't really give a straight answer to the question about whether he regretted the trade for Richardson. Saying it was the right decision at the time doesn't really get at whether he would repeat the decision today, knowing what he knows now. Don't worry Grigsy--I think we all know the REAL.answer.

 

Which gets at the heart of the matter. Since we all know the real answer, why do we need him to say it?