Report: Colts held players-only meeting as front office tension continues

[K-148]

Yeah, that's not the case. I don't care what pff has them ranked

But when you want Grigson to sign Mathis, Franklin, Levitre you do? Try to clock Luck next game, esp. when he throws INT, fumbles the football or is sacked. When QB sacked after 6 seconds in the pocket, something wrong with QB, not with the pocket.

[TKnight24]

But when you want Grigson to sign Mathis, Franklin, Levitre you do? Try to clock Luck next game, esp. when he throws INT, fumbles the football or is sacked. When QB sacked after 6 seconds in the pocket, something wrong with QB, not with the pocket.

Don't even have to watch next game. 2nd drive of the Panthers game after the Harrison fumble snap

On the INT to Peanut Tillman, Luck had all day to throw. And threw a pick out of all choices he had

Luck is the worst person on this team right now which is bad. Your best player shouldn't be your worst player at anytime

[DougDew]

Obviously Grigson forced Chuck to start 2 guys he signed for 1 year vet minimums, Louis and Herremans, over a guy he signed for 3yrs $9 million, Reitz. Thornton's Injury, Louis positive grades in preseason, and Mewhort's ability to play RT probably led Chuck to go with the starting lineup that he chose to begin the season.

Maybe Grigson forced Chuck to put Boom in at kick returner.

I'm sure we can think of something if we have to.

[Coltsman1788]

Why doesn't Chuck get blame for being weak. What other coach would agree to this?

Sir/Miss are you a control freak?

 

 

 

 

 

If YourNextGM...inquiring minds would like to know.

[jvan1973]

Why doesn't Chuck get blame for being weak. What other coach would agree to this?

You understand grigson is his boss right?

[K-148]

Don't even have to watch next game. 2nd drive of the Panthers game after the Harrison fumble snap

On the INT to Peanut Tillman, Luck had all day to throw. And threw a pick out of all choices he had

Luck is the worst person on this team right now which is bad. Your best player shouldn't be your worst player at anytime

What about second INT (to Coleman)? 5 seconds in the cleanest pocket I've ever seen.

[K-148]

Yeah, that's not the case. I don't care what pff has them ranked

If you do care what pff has them clocked, they are Top-4 unit.

[TKnight24]

What about second INT (to Coleman)? 5 seconds in the cleanest pocket I've ever seen.

Just numerous awful throes by him

I knew Luke was due for a INT. He flirted with Luke way too much. So of course it's only fitting he gets the game winning INT. Luck needs to learn how to throw the ball away out of bounds not to the other team

[DougDew]

It states in the article players would come to Chuck with suggestions, and they would give the answer "we can't do that because we don't have the power to."

Its nicer than Chuck saying "You know, that suggestion is really dumb."

[Superman]

Yes, the contract scuttlebutt could absolutely be Pagano's way of saying I won't go forward in this role the way it is, just as it seems to be Irsay and Grigson's way of saying that we are unconvinced that you can take us where we want to go.  

 

What makes no sense to me is the assumption by many that Pagano is purely a victim rather than part of a two way street.

 

I always assumed that Pagano turning down the one year extension was him betting on himself. If this stuff is true, it's probably more than that. 

 

I will point out that coaches who get the reputation of being insubordinate and troublesome tend to get blacklisted in the NFL. If Pagano has any intention of working anywhere else, I can understand him not rocking the boat too much. But like you say, IF this is all true, he's not just an innocent victim. He's basically enabled it. I'm hopeful that the coordinator change is an indication that the balance of power is being handled appropriately. 

[Superman]

Please see the article for my source. It states in the article players would come to Chuck with suggestions, and they would give the answer "we can't do that because we don't have the power to." 

 

It's never been Chuck. 

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000574231/article/report-chuck-pagano-forced-into-lineup-decisions

 

The source in this article is the Indy Star article, which is being discussed in another thread. So I'm merging. 

[JColts72]

Ny yankees 1978 bronx zoo this is not.

[ztboiler]

I always assumed that Pagano turning down the one year extension was him betting on himself. If this stuff is true, it's probably more than that. 

 

I will point out that coaches who get the reputation of being insubordinate and troublesome tend to get blacklisted in the NFL. If Pagano has any intention of working anywhere else, I can understand him not rocking the boat too much. But like you say, IF this is all true, he's not just an innocent victim. He's basically enabled it. I'm hopeful that the coordinator change is an indication that the balance of power is being handled appropriately. 

I think your way of putting it is much more balanced and realistic.

[braveheartcolt]

I'd like to call a posters only meeting here. To ensure we stop all the crazy defeatist knee-jerk alarmist claptrap which we see on a regular basis.

No forum mods, no community mods, no trolls and most importantly, no Patriots fans.

9pm ET, Saturday.

Let's turn this Forum around. Posters on 3...1, 2, 3....Posters!

Apologies to all for missing this meeting. I missed my flight.

Best regards,

Ryan Mallett

[crazycolt1]

Speaking of JMV .... does he not take long pauses in between sentences?....It nearly drives me nuts. (But not even close to the voice and dramatic word usage by Ron Wolfley, AZ Cards announcer)

The problem with JMV is too many bud lights and hot chicks. You listen to his show and it's more about partying than about sports. Don't get me wrong, I like a few bud lights and being around hot chicks just as much as any male but he offers little about sports.

[Coffeedrinker]

A head coach owes it to himself, his staff and his team to grab control over who plays on gameday since it is very much implied by the definition of the role.  If he doesn't have that authority then he's not being subverted, he's not really the coach.

I think you are assuming I like Pagano as a HC and I don't.   But the facts are:

• We don't know if any of this is true
• We don't know if this has always been the case
• We don't know if Grigs assumed some power after Pagano got cancer.  Which seems to make the most sense.  Perhaps when Pagano got cancer they split up his duties and since it worked fairly well (11-5 and a post season appearance) they kept it that way after Chuck got back,  It would be an easy thing to sell... keep going the same way in case he has  relapse.  And while I may not like Pagano much as a coach he does seem like a man of integrity and a man of integrity does not walk out on a contract just because he doesn't like the situation.

[CoachLite]

I've easily found the listings for Colts front office personnel. One of the things I can't find anywere is an org chart - the hierarchy of who reports to whom. There seems to be a mysterious "operational" relationship between Jim Irsay, Jimmy Raye III, Ryan Grigson, and the coaching staff - especially Chuck Pagano. Regardless of what it shows on paper hidden away in a file cabinet somewhere, it *seems* like Jim Irsay is at the top of the hierarchy, with Grigson and Pagano each reporting to Irsay. I may be very wrong on this however, and Pagano may report to Grigson - but that wouldn't make good business sense. Long, linear chains of command are not very strong. If right, this would allow Pagano and Grigson (as equals) to collaborate, with Irsay as a tie-breaker and ultimate decision maker. It also *seems* that Jimmy Raye III serves in a consulting capacity to Irsay, but is not in a direct supervisory role to on-field operations.

 

Pete Ward, COO, whose been around a long time, seems to play a very general role and consults with Irsay. Mike Bluem (legal) *seems* to serve a consulting role to both Grigson and Irsay, but again this is murky.

 

The assistant coaches, and I won't get into the obvious dysfunctional dynamics that have been seen in great clarity at this level, may be a result of "benign neglect" at these higher levels (known as "lassez faire management"). So all this is mere guess on my part, but it certainly could explain how things have "gone south" - and no one is really to blame because it always worked in the past (or so everyone thought). If any of this holds, the problems are easy to fix. Adhere to the structure, don't turn a blind eye to the problems, actively discuss and address the problems, and everyone just do their jobs (gawd, sounds like Belichick). That will probably filter down to our substantial on-field talent, and everyone - players, coaches, front office, other stakeholders, and the fans - will be less grumpy

 

One of the "bad" things that can happen in an organization is when people don't adhere to the "functional" organizational structure. This would be indicated if some of the rumors are true and there are "power grabs" at play.

[ztboiler]

 

I think you are assuming I like Pagano as a HC and I don't.   But the facts are:

• We don't know if any of this is true
• We don't know if this has always been the case
• We don't know if Grigs assumed some power after Pagano got cancer.  Which seems to make the most sense.  Perhaps when Pagano got cancer they split up his duties and since it worked fairly well (11-5 and a post season appearance) they kept it that way after Chuck got back,  It would be an easy thing to sell... keep going the same way in case he has  relapse.  And while I may not like Pagano much as a coach he does seem like a man of integrity and a man of integrity does not walk out on a contract just because he doesn't like the situation.

 

I agree with everything you just said.  Very well balanced.  

 

My guess on the real truth is two-fold.  First, Yes, the sickness changed things.  Second, after a full season of Pagano in 2013, Grigson and Irsay discovered that Pagano had a tendency to stay a little bit too loyal to underperforming veterans when making line-up decisions, but they liked his overall leadership.  Consequently, they made some line-up decisions for him in the interest of long term roster development....and it was probably necessary that they did. 

[Corndog]

But those powers have to be written into someone's contract. This should have been a #1 question for Pagano.

Good point, but he was probably just happy to get a head coaching job and didn't even consider that situation.  Guarantee in his next contract as a head coach(if he doesn't end up as a coordinator), he will have it in the contract.  

[Narcosys]

Good point, but he was probably just happy to get a head coaching job and didn't even consider that situation. Guarantee in his next contract as a head coach(if he doesn't end up as a coordinator), he will have it in the contract.

For some reason I read/heard this would be Pagano's last coaching job, he doesn't want to do it anymore.

[John Waylon]

Dis season tho...

[Coffeedrinker]

I agree with everything you just said.  Very well balanced.  

 

My guess on the real truth is two-fold.  First, Yes, the sickness changed things.  Second, after a full season of Pagano in 2013, Grigson and Irsay discovered that Pagano had a tendency to stay a little bit too loyal to underperforming veterans when making line-up decisions, but they liked his overall leadership.  Consequently, they made some line-up decisions for him in the interest of long term roster development....and it was probably necessary that they did. 

That makes as much if not more sense then most other things I've read about it.