Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Pagano-Grigson Rift/Pagano to be coaching elsewhere next year [Mega-merge]


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 479
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It's all conjecture, but the posts you invoke here are not incorrect. Nothing wrong with formulating an opinion on a hypothetical situation, and adding a caveat to it......

It's confirmation bias. Doesn't matter that the information is unreliable, or that it isn't factually correct. We have a bunch of people already eager to shove somebody -- anybody -- off the train, and so now here's the ammo they needed to feel justified.

I don't know what's going on, none of us do. But I don't have a lot of confidence in regurgitated 'reports' with faulty timelines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is that not logical to you?

If the report is true then Grigson has to go. No coach can succeed under those circumstances.

If it is not true then we have a different output.

Pretty easy, and you're a smart person. Why are you having issues understanding?

You don't have to be smart to realize that this report doesn't add up, factually. Maybe the substance is correct, but at the very least, it's being embellished. Knowing that makes me question the entire story.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have to be smart to realize that this report doesn't add up, factually. Maybe the substance is correct, but at the very least, it's being embellished. Knowing that makes me question the entire story.

 

What is not adding up? I want to help you reach the most logical conclusion with this.

 

If this story is true then Grigson has to go. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is interesting because to hear Andrew talk in his post game interviews he says he loves Pagano, loves playing for him and looks emotional when saying so. Maybe Grigson is the problem if there is one?

 

http://www.sbnation.com/2015/9/22/9370589/andrew-luck-colts-turnovers-problems-chuck-pagano

 

Pagano, in the quotes in this article, is a little hard (honest) on Luck but I think this is just a straight shot at Grigson:

 

"That's been the case for three years now, has it not?," Pagano said when asked about the Colts' weak offensive line. "[Luck] Should be more than comfortable dealing with [it]."

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.sbnation.com/2015/9/22/9370589/andrew-luck-colts-turnovers-problems-chuck-pagano

 

Pagano, in the quotes in this article, is a little hard (honest) on Luck but I think this is just a straight shot at Grigson:

 

"That's been the case for three years now, has it not?," Pagano said when asked about the Colts' weak offensive line. "[Luck] Should be more than comfortable dealing with [it]."

Could be and I have to be honest I have questioned whether or not Pagano is the right guy to take us to the SB but maybe the question should be is Grigson the right GM to do so? If Luck loves playing for Pagano than maybe Pagano needs to stay?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be and I have to be honest I have questioned whether or not Pagano is the right guy to take us to the SB but maybe the question should be is Grigson the right GM to do so? If Luck loves playing for Pagano than maybe Pagano needs to stay?

I've been hard on pagano but no doubt the team loves playing for the guy. I've yet to see a player utter a bad word about him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been hard on pagano but no doubt the team loves playing for the guy. I've yet to see a player utter a bad word about him.

Yeah me too. I try not to get emotional because this is Football but the locker room after the game was telling. Even Gore looked like he was going to cry. I am glad we won, that was big. A win is a win. if it's 7-6 or 40-0, all people remember is the W's and L's in the end. Not anything else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be and I have to be honest I have questioned whether or not Pagano is the right guy to take us to the SB but maybe the question should be is Grigson the right GM to do so? If Luck loves playing for Pagano than maybe Pagano needs to stay?

 

If reports are true that Pagano has little to no say in what players are signed/drafted and how his coaching staff shapes up, I think Grigson is the one who needs to go if it is between the two.

 

To be honest, I think the media is blowing a lot of things out of proportion and even if they are not, I'm a little disappointed in Irsay for not putting that fire out.  Irsay is a dramatic guy though, so he might enjoy all the controversial energy being directed at his organization.

 

Anyway, Pagano has said since day 1 -- 'to win in this league, you have to be able to do 2 things: run the ball, and stop the run'.  Grigson has echoed that sentiment.  Fact of the matter is, the OL has been our weakest link since Grigson/Pagano took over.  4 years later, it is still the weakest link.

 

I personally didn't mind the Dorsett pick, because I think he'll be good for us and will give Luck a very good WR corps for years to come, but if Pagano's mission is to improve the line so we can run the ball and protect the QB, and if he has no say in who he drafts/signs -- I can see why he'd be * at Grigson for drafting a WR in round 1 when we had some pretty glaring holes along the lines.

 

Grigson has made some very good moves, with the best move being very obvious (drafting Luck).  He has made other good moves, but really the only 'unexpected' move he has made was to draft TY in the 3rd round.  Of the FA signings he has made -- Redding and Adams have been the only really 2 good ones to date, I'd also argue that D'Qwell was a good signing (at least last year) -- Freeman was an average signing, Walden so far has been an average signing (he was below average his first year, but I think has worked his way up), Art Jones is a good player who hasn't stayed healthy, Toler is an average to good player who can't seem to stay healthy, Cherilus is a good player who couldn't stay healthy for us, and Bradshaw is a good player who couldn't stay healthy for us.  Otherwise, he has failed in the signings of Landry, RJF, Zbikowski, DHB, Nicks, Brandon McKinney, Samson Satele, Donald Thomas, Aubrayo Franklin, and Phil Costa.  He has failed with his trades (Hughes for Sheppard, 1st round pick for T-Rich) and while his draft picks are still to be determined, I believe the only defensive player drafted (not counting this year's rookies) who remains with the team is Werner.

 

Going into this offseason, we all knew OL was a major priority.  What have we done to address it -- lost Cherilus (cut due to injury) and signed Herremans who is already riding the pine.  Today's lineup is the same lineup that many on here bashed for a good chunk of last season and it sure didn't look like Thornton has made much major progress.

 

So, if it is true Grigson is the dictator and if it is true that Pagano really desires to run the ball and protect Luck -- he has every right, IMO, to call Grigson out for not addressing the issue.  It is unfortunate Luck has to be put right in the middle of it, but if we want to see him develop into an all-time NFL great -- we've got to figure out how to protect him and maybe Grigson needs to be called out for not having done much at all to address a position we all were concerned about prior to the season.

 

IMO, neither has done anything worthy of being fired yet, but if I had to chose one to go over the other, I would keep Chuck and say bye-bye to Grigs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If reports are true that Pagano has little to no say in what players are signed/drafted and how his coaching staff shapes up, I think Grigson is the one who needs to go if it is between the two.

 

To be honest, I think the media is blowing a lot of things out of proportion and even if they are not, I'm a little disappointed in Irsay for not putting that fire out.  Irsay is a dramatic guy though, so he might enjoy all the controversial energy being directed at his organization.

 

Anyway, Pagano has said since day 1 -- 'to win in this league, you have to be able to do 2 things: run the ball, and stop the run'.  Grigson has echoed that sentiment.  Fact of the matter is, the OL has been our weakest link since Grigson/Pagano took over.  4 years later, it is still the weakest link.

 

I personally didn't mind the Dorsett pick, because I think he'll be good for us and will give Luck a very good WR corps for years to come, but if Pagano's mission is to improve the line so we can run the ball and protect the QB, and if he has no say in who he drafts/signs -- I can see why he'd be * at Grigson for drafting a WR in round 1 when we had some pretty glaring holes along the lines.

 

Grigson has made some very good moves, with the best move being very obvious (drafting Luck).  He has made other good moves, but really the only 'unexpected' move he has made was to draft TY in the 3rd round.  Of the FA signings he has made -- Redding and Adams have been the only really 2 good ones to date, I'd also argue that D'Qwell was a good signing (at least last year) -- Freeman was an average signing, Walden so far has been an average signing (he was below average his first year, but I think has worked his way up), Art Jones is a good player who hasn't stayed healthy, Toler is an average to good player who can't seem to stay healthy, Cherilus is a good player who couldn't stay healthy for us, and Bradshaw is a good player who couldn't stay healthy for us.  Otherwise, he has failed in the signings of Landry, RJF, Zbikowski, DHB, Nicks, Brandon McKinney, Samson Satele, Donald Thomas, Aubrayo Franklin, and Phil Costa.  He has failed with his trades (Hughes for Sheppard, 1st round pick for T-Rich) and while his draft picks are still to be determined, I believe the only defensive player drafted (not counting this year's rookies) who remains with the team is Werner.

 

Going into this offseason, we all knew OL was a major priority.  What have we done to address it -- lost Cherilus (cut due to injury) and signed Herremans who is already riding the pine.  Today's lineup is the same lineup that many on here bashed for a good chunk of last season and it sure didn't look like Thornton has made much major progress.

 

So, if it is true Grigson is the dictator and if it is true that Pagano really desires to run the ball and protect Luck -- he has every right, IMO, to call Grigson out for not addressing the issue.  It is unfortunate Luck has to be put right in the middle of it, but if we want to see him develop into an all-time NFL great -- we've got to figure out how to protect him and maybe Grigson needs to be called out for not having done much at all to address a position we all were concerned about prior to the season.

 

IMO, neither has done anything worthy of being fired yet, but if I had to chose one to go over the other, I would keep Chuck and say bye-bye to Grigs.

Yeah very insightful post. I kind of think the media is blowing things out of proportion too like they did with the Pats last season after KC blew them out on Monday night. This win was huge and makes things much better but make no mistake we still have to improve a lot. At this point lets just see how it plays out and how we do against teams like the Pats, Broncos, Steelers, etc.. I will say this our Run Defense has been solid so far, I like Parry and Anderson both. Those were Grigson picks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pagano will be back because we'll win the division again. I still believe Grigson is a bigger problem. Take Luck off the Colts and this is a bottom 5 roster. Compare this team to a team like the Bengals and the talent level isn't close. Luck just makes players look better then what they really are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How it works:

 

Reporter: Will you be back next season?

 

Pagano: I doubt that i know. Only God knows.

 

Media: Pagano says he "doubts" he will return next season.

 

Media always takes things out of context.

 

Good point. Let me try:

Ryan Leaf: "Don't talk to me, alright!?... KNOCK IT OFF!"

Media: "QB phenom says to leaf him alone."

Interviewer: "How do you feel about your team's execution?"

John McKay: "I'm all for it!"

Media: "Head Coach McKay supports capital punishment. Team's execution imminent."

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's becoming more and more clear that Pagano is going to be coaching elsewhere in 2016.  He'd have to at the very least get us to the SB to stay on.

 

The fact that they wouldn't commit to him long term is pretty telling.  

 

Where there is smoke there is fire.  I only hope that Irsay has enough sense to can Grigson as well.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pagano will be back because we'll win the division again. I still believe Grigson is a bigger problem. Take Luck off the Colts and this is a bottom 5 roster. Compare this team to a team like the Bengals and the talent level isn't close. Luck just makes players look better then what they really are.

All of that sounds good because we won. The Pats gm is approaching and thats who we'll be judged against.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.sbnation.com/2015/9/22/9370589/andrew-luck-colts-turnovers-problems-chuck-pagano

 

Pagano, in the quotes in this article, is a little hard (honest) on Luck but I think this is just a straight shot at Grigson:

 

"That's been the case for three years now, has it not?," Pagano said when asked about the Colts' weak offensive line. "[Luck] Should be more than comfortable dealing with [it]."

"Comfortable"? you can only be as comfortable as your rib-cage allows you to be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone considered that perhaps Pagano and Grigson have an agreement that states Pagano gets to focus on the Defensive side of the ball, his specialty, while Grigson picked a guy to handle the offensive side of the ball (Pep)?  Not saying that its working but maybe that's what Pagano wanted... I can't imagine he would have accepted the coaching position if he wasn't ok with that arrangement...

 

Just trying to offer up an alternative to the re-hashed story...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone considered that perhaps Pagano and Grigson have an agreement that states Pagano gets to focus on the Defensive side of the ball, his specialty, while Grigson picked a guy to handle the offensive side of the ball (Pep)? Not saying that its working but maybe that's what Pagano wanted... I can't imagine he would have accepted the coaching position if he wasn't ok with that arrangement...

Just trying to offer up an alternative to the re-hashed story...

That could be the case. But if so, I don't think he wanted Pep. When have you ever heard of a "special assistant to the head coach"? I think he wanted Chud as his OC and Grigs said no, "it'll be easier to go with Pep because Luck has played for him and won't technically have to learn a new system "

I don't think it's hard to see there being a rift. Pagano is in a now win situation. He can't get the players he wants and can't get the coaches he want. That would cause a rift for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is not adding up? I want to help you reach the most logical conclusion with this.

 

If this story is true then Grigson has to go. 

 

In reverse order, the dogmatic conclusion that 'Grigson has to go' assumes that a) this isn't Irsay's directive to begin with, in which case Grigson being gone changes nothing; and b) Grigson is wrong and Pagano is right, which is up for debate, as there's mixed reports on Chudzinski as a coordinator. Those are both significant and complex issues.

 

And what doesn't add up is very simple. I appreciate your being willing to help me with this, but I don't know how you can reconcile the fact that when the Colts hired Pep Hamilton, Rob Chudzinski was the new head coach for the Cleveland Browns. As such, I don't know how you can help me understand this 'report' that claims that when Arians left, Pagano wanted Chudzinski, but Hamilton was forced on him by Grigson. That this 'report' has inaccurate information in it makes me question it entirely.

 

I said earlier, it may be true that Pagano didn't want Hamilton, and it may be true that there's a problem between Pagano and Grigson, but it is NOT true that Pagano wanted Chudzinski to replace Arians. It can't be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is interesting because to hear Andrew talk in his post game interviews he says he loves Pagano, loves playing for him and looks emotional when saying so. Maybe Grigson is the problem if there is one?

 

For a short while I thought it was Pagano until he got sarcastic with the press, which he never does. I sensed some frustration (of course, this is all speculation) with the fact that the O-line has performed poorly.  I'm starting to think that Grigson is the problem as he's surrounded Pagano with players and staff that he may not have selected had he been able to put together a team.  

 

If Pagano is fired and Grigson stays, we're in for more of the same.   Dorsett-decent thus far but could have had him in a later round.  Trent Richar----nevermind.   Werner doesn't fit our scheme but Jerry Hughes would have and he was traded for Kelvin Sheppard, who....  The playcalling, the confused Defense, the O-line that doesn't protect Luck.   If Pagano is fired, then Grigson should go, too.

 

Personally, I'd like to see Pagano stay.  I'm starting to think that he's doing what he can with what he has.   I'd like to see him more in charge of our Defense, especially pass coverage (I think he was a DB coach) at least until we can find a new DC.  Chud can take Pep's spot for now.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

For a short while I thought it was Pagano until he got sarcastic with the press, which he never does. I sensed some frustration (of course, this is all speculation) with the fact that the O-line has performed poorly.  I'm starting to think that Grigson is the problem as he's surrounded Pagano with players and staff that he may not have selected had he been able to put together a team.  

 

If Pagano is fired and Grigson stays, we're in for more of the same.   Dorsett-decent thus far but could have had him in a later round.  Trent Richar----nevermind.   Werner doesn't fit our scheme but Jerry Hughes would have and he was traded for Kelvin Sheppard, who....  The playcalling, the confused Defense, the O-line that doesn't protect Luck.   If Pagano is fired, then Grigson should go, too.

 

Personally, I'd like to see Pagano stay.  I'm starting to think that he's doing what he can with what he has.   I'd like to see him more in charge of our Defense, especially pass coverage (I think he was a DB coach) at least until we can find a new DC.  Chud can take Pep's spot for now.

Dorsett couldn't have been had in a later round

Link to post
Share on other sites

For a short while I thought it was Pagano until he got sarcastic with the press, which he never does. I sensed some frustration (of course, this is all speculation) with the fact that the O-line has performed poorly. I'm starting to think that Grigson is the problem as he's surrounded Pagano with players and staff that he may not have selected had he been able to put together a team.

If Pagano is fired and Grigson stays, we're in for more of the same. Dorsett-decent thus far but could have had him in a later round. Trent Richar----nevermind. Werner doesn't fit our scheme but Jerry Hughes would have and he was traded for Kelvin Sheppard, who.... The playcalling, the confused Defense, the O-line that doesn't protect Luck. If Pagano is fired, then Grigson should go, too.

Personally, I'd like to see Pagano stay. I'm starting to think that he's doing what he can with what he has. I'd like to see him more in charge of our Defense, especially pass coverage (I think he was a DB coach) at least until we can find a new DC. Chud can take Pep's spot for now.

I'm for anyone taking Pep's job at this point. Watching the Packers right now just makes me envy their play calling soo bad! Every blitz they have an automatic blitz beating short throw or WR screen. It's like we have all the plays we need in the playbook; yet, we never seem to have the right formation and play package in the game at the right time... I vote that we just copy every blitz beating play they use right now. I mean we could literally open our next game play for play how the Packers have called this game haha. Couldn't be worse than how we start games... Sigh

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to point out that there's a pretty substantial list of free agents that have come to or stayed with the Colts primarily because of Pagano. That list includes Reggie Wayne in 2012, and Johnson and Gore in 2015. So the idea that Pagano has no influence over personnel is also not a complete telling of the story.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For a short while I thought it was Pagano until he got sarcastic with the press, which he never does. I sensed some frustration (of course, this is all speculation) with the fact that the O-line has performed poorly.  I'm starting to think that Grigson is the problem as he's surrounded Pagano with players and staff that he may not have selected had he been able to put together a team.  

 

If Pagano is fired and Grigson stays, we're in for more of the same.   Dorsett-decent thus far but could have had him in a later round.  Trent Richar----nevermind.   Werner doesn't fit our scheme but Jerry Hughes would have and he was traded for Kelvin Sheppard, who....  The playcalling, the confused Defense, the O-line that doesn't protect Luck.   If Pagano is fired, then Grigson should go, too.

 

Personally, I'd like to see Pagano stay.  I'm starting to think that he's doing what he can with what he has.   I'd like to see him more in charge of our Defense, especially pass coverage (I think he was a DB coach) at least until we can find a new DC.  Chud can take Pep's spot for now.  

 

If you get rid of Grigson, a new GM is going to want the ability to hire a new coaching staff if he so chooses. The only realistic way to keep Pagano but not Grigson, especially long term, is to empower Pagano in the hiring of the new GM and give him more influence in the draft room. We're talking Jeff Fisher / Pete Carroll kind of status for Pagano, where there's a GM in charge of personnel, but the coach has a lot of say. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you get rid of Grigson, a new GM is going to want the ability to hire a new coaching staff if he so chooses. The only realistic way to keep Pagano but not Grigson, especially long term, is to empower Pagano in the hiring of the new GM and give him more influence in the draft room. We're talking Jeff Fisher / Pete Carroll kind of status for Pagano, where there's a GM in charge of personnel, but the coach has a lot of say. 

 

You're correct.  I'm starting to think that he's got more of a sense of what the team needs than Grigson does.  

 

I think Pagano is better for the locker room.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...