Maybe Grigson built a better roster than people wanna credit him for

[throwing BBZ]

We were blown out 45-7.  Somehow we beat Denver to get to the AFCCG.  Our preseason rating was always overrated, IMO.

 

2 quality starters out of this coming draft in positions of need will greatly enhance our roster.  I'm hoping pass rusher and CB. 

 

The oline seems to be okay if our QB can release the ball in less than 4 seconds.....

 

 . A bunch of slow footed plodders, none of which is a + pass blocker and lets continue to see if we can get a run game.

 Gotta love yesterdays 1 YPC!  against Atlanta 2.7 YPC  and 3.0 against Denver.

[ClaytonColt]

_{Anyone who thinks Grigson has done a good job in signing FA's, drafts or managing the cap misses the following FACTS:}

 

_{1.  In one year he has made the Colts the oldest team in the NFL.  So much for building any kind of sustainable core of SB caliber players}

_{2.  Our cap two years ago was among the top three in the NFL.  We are now down near the bottom.  Can you say Andre Johnson, Laron Landry, Ricky Jean Francois, ?}

_{3. Two of our last three number one draft choices include T-Rich & Bjorn Werner.} 

_{4.  Because he did not understand the real need to protect Luck, his last number one was a receiver.} 

_{Please, can we stop apologizing for or defending this inexperienced and clueless GM once and for all?  I hope we go all the way but I see us winning ugly all the way to the play-offs}

_{and then getting knocked out early.} 

 

1. This is a fact but we've not ancient by any means. Vinatieri and Hasselbeck obviously skew the average slightly and I would say that our whole starting offence (with the exception of 1 position) and our defensive line are pretty much exclusively players who are yet to reach their peak years and most are still on their rookie contracts or would be if we hadn't extended them early.

 

2. Don't see why this is a big deal, the cap is there to be used. One of the biggest credits I think Grigson gets it's how well he construct veteran contracts so we can get out of them with minimal damage.

 

3. It's a fair point but on the opposite side of the coin he has to receive credit for finding the mid to late round picks that perform better than a lot of teams firsts or seconds. 1st Round picks (which is really just Werner that we're talking about here) aren't the be all and end all when we're looking at such a small sample size.

 

4. Think he does understand it and I think that when you look at the state of the line play around the league our starting 5 aren't as bad as we make out. 

[Restored]

1. This is a fact but we've not ancient by any means. Vinatieri and Hasselbeck obviously skew the average slightly and I would say that our whole starting offence (with the exception of 1 position) and our defensive line are pretty much exclusively players who are yet to reach their peak years and most are still on their rookie contracts or would be if we hadn't extended them early.

 

2. Don't see why this is a big deal, the cap is there to be used. One of the biggest credits I think Grigson gets it's how well he construct veteran contracts so we can get out of them with minimal damage.

 

3. It's a fair point but on the opposite side of the coin he has to receive credit for finding the mid to late round picks that perform better than a lot of teams firsts or seconds. 1st Round picks (which is really just Werner that we're talking about here) aren't the be all and end all when we're looking at such a small sample size.

 

4. Think he does understand it and I think that when you look at the state of the line play around the league our starting 5 aren't as bad as we make out. 

To address your second point, I think the poster is getting at continuity. Building a good football team consists of players that are the core of your team. Outside of Davis on defense, there isn't really a core group of players on that side of the ball. It's reasonable to assume that a lack of defensive success can be tied to the lack of continuity with players over the years.

[Superman]

Our cap two years ago was among the top three in the NFL. We are now down near the bottom.

Not true. The Colts are 11th in available cap space this year, projected at 13th next year.

The cap is fine.

[Coffeedrinker]

Pump the brakes guys... we've had 1 quality win, (at home none the less).  If we beat Pittsburgh, then sure, you may have a point, but sadly I don't expect it to be close.  We beat Denver.  We've beaten a lot of terrible teams which finished among the worst in the league last year and in most cases will again this year.   We were competitive with Carolina which was probably our best performance of the season.  We got beaten by the Jets, Saints and Bills and heck, some of the worst teams in football have beaten those teams this year, but not us.  So until we finished 10-6 or beat a quality team on the road like Pittsburgh, we're simply the smartest kid in a dumb class.  We've had a lot of 2-3 point type wins and today we beat the team which finished with the worst record in the league last year.  There's a lot of parity,mostly due to injuries, this season.  We're still a long ways away from even making the playoffs unless we win the next two games.  I hope we do, but nothing suggests we have amazing talent.  No running game, a weak O-line all season, a bottom 5 defense, and we've given up more points than we've scored and scored less points than Houston with a myriad of backups cycling through there.  So it's wonderful to be optimistic, but I am not quite ready to credit Grigson with much of anything.  Instead, I think Pagano and his team have gotten the most out of what they have to work with.  

Hilarious.  When Luck was injured you were expecting the Colts to lose and prove that Luck was carrying the team.  Now that they've won a couple with a new OC and back-up quarterback then it's because the Colts were playing bad teams.  To "prove" your point you bring up Tampa's record last year as if that actually has some bearing on this year.  Ignore the facts that before the game the Bucs:  Had the same record as the Colts, had been playing good football and a QB coming off a 5 TD performance.  But that doesn't matter because in 2014 they had the worst record in the NFL.

 

Secondly, I don't recall anyone on this thread saying the Colts have amazing talent, only that Grigs has put together a better team than most on this forum want to believe.

 

Your last comment though is the most funny.  That is what GMs and coaches are supposed to do... GMs are supposed to sign guys that can help the team win games and stay within the salary cap.  Coaches are supposed to get the most out of those guys.  So, it would appear that getting those most of the guys available is good enough to win games.

[ClaytonColt]

To address your second point, I think the poster is getting at continuity. Building a good football team consists of players that are the core of your team. Outside of Davis on defense, there isn't really a core group of players on that side of the ball. It's reasonable to assume that a lack of defensive success can be tied to the lack of continuity with players over the years.

Is our defensive core really that inconsistent? We've rebuilt the line this year to go in a different direction, for the better I would say, but outside of that there is only really Lowery being swapped for the free agent Brown which has been changed in the last 2 to 3 years. Cole's come in but I don't think he's really pushed either Mathis or Walden out of our best defense. Given the transient nature of the league I don't think that's unusual or a barrier to success.

 

Rather than consistency I think the downfall of the defense has been a lack of true star quality but that's much easier to talk about than fix. 

[cbear]

You don't go 4-0 with your back up QB with a horrible roster. Of course this roster still has holes, but maybe its not horrible like many thought it was.

 

He's not the devil, that's for sure.  But he's an easy target.  I'd say average overall.  Hit some, miss some.

[braveheartcolt]

I tend to agree but most of our early season problems rest squarely on the shoulders of the Golden Child Andrew Luck

Luck having a better season than 18. Now go away.

[Superman]

Is our defensive core really that inconsistent? We've rebuilt the line this year to go in a different direction, for the better I would say, but outside of that there is only really Lowery being swapped for the free agent Brown which has been changed in the last 2 to 3 years. Cole's come in but I don't think he's really pushed either Mathis or Walden out of our best defense. Given the transient nature of the league I don't think that's unusual or a barrier to success.

Rather than consistency I think the downfall of the defense has been a lack of true star quality but that's much easier to talk about than fix.

It's a weird criticism, right? We want better players on defense, but we're talking about continuity of personnel? The main change from last year to this year was rebuilding the defensive line, and that's been a definite improvement.

The issue with the defense, like you said, is we don't have enough good, game-changing players. The only way to fix that is to mess up the continuity.

[ColtRider]

I would like to credit Grigson, but I just think our opponents have shot themselves in the foot (especially Atlanta and TB with penalties and turnovers).

Yep, MTC! The Colts also know that feeling very, very well. The difference being, Indianapolis' run on crucial penalties & turnovers pretty much decided many of the first 8 games. That hurt. Man, did that ever hurt.

[Grigs build the lines plz.]

It appears his draft is looking very promising, gotta give him credit.

[Defjamz26]

Why not?

It's misleading. For one, we run multiple fronts at time, so it's not as if we're set at those positions. Second, we still need Defensive lineman. Langford is good but he's on the wrong side of 30. Plus you could always use depth. Wynn and Kerr are solid, but if they have to step in for an injury, who rotates in for them?

Bottom line is that we're not "set" on the defensive line. We have good starting players but could use some depth.

[The Peytonator]

Grigson makes a lot of decisions that I loathe (Richardson/Werner/Dorsett), a lot of decisions that I love (Anderson/Davis/Moncrief), and a few decisions that I doubt him on only to be proven wrong (Langford). That's probably how a lot of fans feel about their team's GM. I really don't like the idea of him meddling with the starting lineups though if that's true.

[Superman]

It's misleading. For one, we run multiple fronts at time, so it's not as if we're set at those positions. Second, we still need Defensive lineman. Langford is good but he's on the wrong side of 30. Plus you could always use depth. Wynn and Kerr are solid, but if they have to step in for an injury, who rotates in for them?

Bottom line is that we're not "set" on the defensive line. We have good starting players but could use some depth.

 

Your post: 

You can't say we have a starting NT and DT.

 

No one said we're set at those positions, or argued that we're not, including you, up to the above comment. You basically said we don't have a starting NT and DT. We absolutely do. Aside from Anderson's injury, our starting DL has been pretty good, and with two of the three players being rookies that you can count on getting better in Year 2.

 

And if the argument is that 'we're not set' at those positions because we could use depth, then you can make that statement about every position.

[DougDew]

  . A bunch of slow footed plodders, none of which is a + pass blocker and lets continue to see if we can get a run game.

 Gotta love yesterdays 1 YPC!  against Atlanta 2.7 YPC  and 3.0 against Denver.

Its what you get with 3rd and 4th round draft choices.  NE seems to be able to scheme and execute away from their lack of talent, considering they've invested no higher draft picks or money into their OL

 

I think Detroit drafted Larry Warford with a near 1st round pick, and they barely got off the schneid this year.  Its mainly because their playmaker, Calxin Johnson is not the player he once was 

 

Despite all of the talent and high investment in their oline...the Cowboys without Romo and Dez Bryant stink. 

[FanFromtheWasteland]

No I'm glad we have Luck, but he hasn't been downright awful this year and has regressed big time.

Could have fooled me. Seems like every post of yours I read is full of negativity and spite. Makes me wonder why you are still a colts fan. And btw your golden boy who has 10 1 and dones in the playoffs, took him 6 years to win his first playoff game has 17 int this year and is most likely toast. Luck will be here for another 8 to 10 tears

[peytonmanning18]

Luck having a better season than 18. Now go away.

 

What does Peyton Manning have to do with Luck having a terrible season?

[peytonmanning18]

Could have fooled me. Seems like every post of yours I read is full of negativity and spite. Makes me wonder why you are still a colts fan. And btw your golden boy who has 10 1 and dones in the playoffs, took him 6 years to win his first playoff game has 17 int this year and is most likely toast. Luck will be here for another 8 to 10 tears

 

That tends to happen when you're trying to play football when you're 40 years old.

 

Also I'm not sure why everyone brings up Peyton Manning when I say that Luck has been awful this year.  I'm not sure what one has to do with the other.

[Stephen]

the talent has never been the problem it was just we were beating ourself with penalties earlier in the year.

[OffensivelyPC]

What does Peyton Manning have to do with Luck having a terrible season?

How is the answer to that question not more obvious to you?

[bababooey]

What if no one beats the Pats in the playoffs (again), should those other teams fire their GMs and HCs as well?

No, just ours.

[BOTT]

Three things are true

Chud has made this a much better team

Colts have played better than I thought without Luck

They have gotten very lucky schedule wise

[Superman]

Its what you get with 3rd and 4th round draft choices.  NE seems to be able to scheme and execute away from their lack of talent, considering they've invested no higher draft picks or money into their OL

 

I think Detroit drafted Larry Warford with a near 1st round pick, and they barely got off the schneid this year.  Its mainly because their playmaker, Calxin Johnson is not the player he once was 

 

Despite all of the talent and high investment in their oline...the Cowboys without Romo and Dez Bryant stink. 

 

Warford went #65. And he was a good pick.

 

I'll also say that the Dallas OL is good, with or without Romo and Dez. Whatever issues they have, bad line play isn't really one of them.

[Superman]

Chud has made this a much better team

 

I'm gonna nitpick and say that Pep was making this team worse. Not sure Chud is doing anything noteworthy so far. Of course, he took over a battered and bruised offense halfway through the season, so I didn't really expect 40 points/game. 

[NewColtsFan]

I'm gonna nitpick and say that Pep was making this team worse. Not sure Chud is doing anything noteworthy so far. Of course, he took over a battered and bruised offense halfway through the season, so I didn't really expect 40 points/game. 

 

Hmmmm?            

 

He's winning with the back-up QB and a suspect OL and a suspect running game.

 

You sure Chud's not doing anything noteworthy thus far?!?                 

[Gavin]

Hmmmm?            

 

He's winning with the back-up QB and a suspect OL and a suspect running game.

 

You sure Chud's not doing anything noteworthy thus far?!?                 

Matts a former 2 time pro bowler who at this stage is far superior to Luck when it comes to getting rid of the ball faster and reading defenses, We got a back up who while was never elite he had a couple pretty good years  who knows how to execute quick on time in rhythm passes, He has been in a WCO basically almost his whole career till now, Before it was often Luck trying to make the big plays now its often Matt saying to his receivers Ill get you the ball and you make the plays, Though some of that is playcalling

[Superman]

Hmmmm?

He's winning with the back-up QB and a suspect OL and a suspect running game.

You sure Chud's not doing anything noteworthy thus far?!?

I'm talking specifically about his playcalling and gameplans. I'm excited about the wins, and Chud gets credit for keeping things rolling despite all the issues. Especially the penalties basically disappearing overnight.

But let's not give him too much credit. The defense has been good, and MH is playing well. The team is winning, not just Chud.

[#12.]

Matts a former 2 time pro bowler who at this stage is far superior to Luck when it comes to getting rid of the ball faster and reading defenses, We got a back up who while was never elite he had a couple pretty good years who knows how to execute quick on time in rhythm passes, He has been in a WCO basically almost his whole career till now, Before it was often Luck trying to make the big plays now its often Matt saying to his receivers Ill get you the ball and you make the plays, Though some of that is playcalling

Let's break down this three game stretch. Luck won the first game. Against Atlanta, Hasselbeck turned the ball over twice and was hit repeatedly. In the past two games, he's been sacked five times. Hasselbeck's quick release being the difference? I don't see it. I do see a major difference in the situational play calling,

[JPFolks]

On 11/30/2015 at 7:53 PM, LuckIsAwesome said:

You don't go 4-0 with your back up QB with a horrible roster. Of course this roster still has holes, but maybe its not horrible like many thought it was.

Giving up 50+ two weeks in a row begs to differ.  Playing some of the worst teams in the league is why they were able to get wins, nothing more.  When they faced a real team, it was all over.  Without Luck, the Colts, as I stated many times over the years, would be a bottom dweller in the AFC fighting the other bottom dwellers in the AFC South for the division.  Sort of like now. 

[Jonathan24]

Yup won a couple of games and they want to say Grigs is competent.. Wins cover up flaws but when the joke of the AFC south puts up 50 points on you thats bad.  Fire grigs and chuck.. Its sad Luck will have to learn a new offense AGAIN

[Jason_]

6 minutes ago, Jonathan24 said:

Yup won a couple of games and they want to say Grigs is competent.. Wins cover up flaws but when the joke of the AFC south puts up 50 points on you thats bad.  Fire grigs and chuck.. Its sad Luck will have to learn a new offense AGAIN

 

Jags are 5-8, Titans are 3-10. How are the Jags the "joke of the AFC South"?

[Jonathan24]

...

Edited December 15, 2015 by Jonathan24
Didnt quote the person I was responding to

[Jonathan24]

22 minutes ago, Jason_S said:

 

Jags are 5-8, Titans are 3-10. How are the Jags the "joke of the AFC South"?

 

Only reasons the Titans are what they are is because of a rookie QB.. even with that being said Titans were in alot of the games they lost, with that being said all of the titans games was against worthy teams at that particular time of the season they played them. They beat Miami, Buffalo (without Tyrod) Baltimore, Tennessee and Colts (without) luck and other starters.

[COLTS449]

Luck will bounce back next year. In FA and the draft we need to bring in. In order an Edge Rusher, CB, ILB, Center, and IMO Safety. Then it'd be nice to pick up a veteran guard to backup. It looks like Mewhort and Thornton may be the answers at guard but we still need a quality backup.

[Corndog]

1 hour ago, Jason_S said:

 

Jags are 5-8, Titans are 3-10. How are the Jags the "joke of the AFC South"?

You're right, let's correct it, the AFC South is a joke.  

[JPFolks]

On 11/30/2015 at 4:48 PM, Coffeedrinker said:

Hilarious.  When Luck was injured you were expecting the Colts to lose and prove that Luck was carrying the team.  Now that they've won a couple with a new OC and back-up quarterback then it's because the Colts were playing bad teams.  To "prove" your point you bring up Tampa's record last year as if that actually has some bearing on this year.  Ignore the facts that before the game the Bucs:  Had the same record as the Colts, had been playing good football and a QB coming off a 5 TD performance.  But that doesn't matter because in 2014 they had the worst record in the NFL.

 

Secondly, I don't recall anyone on this thread saying the Colts have amazing talent, only that Grigs has put together a better team than most on this forum want to believe.

 

Your last comment though is the most funny.  That is what GMs and coaches are supposed to do... GMs are supposed to sign guys that can help the team win games and stay within the salary cap.  Coaches are supposed to get the most out of those guys.  So, it would appear that getting those most of the guys available is good enough to win games.

I just revisited your response here.  Since you made this response, we've lost 2 games and given up 50+ each time.  I was right.  With Luck, we beat undefeated Denver, took undefeated Carolina to OT and finished back a touchdown to undefeated at the time NE.  Without Luck, we're likely not making the playoffs in the worst division in football.  Luck is the only reason we've been 11-5 the past 3 years but the team got older and worse this year and he simply couldn't overcome it with injuries suffered due to our heinous o-line play where he was getting pounded every week.  Now that same heinous o-line has gotten Hasselbeck hurt as well.  The defense is a sieve.  I was right, contrary to your diatribe. Amazing what a little more evidence uncovered. 

[krunk]

15 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

I just revisited your response here.  Since you made this response, we've lost 2 games and given up 50+ each time.  I was right.  With Luck, we beat undefeated Denver, took undefeated Carolina to OT and finished back a touchdown to undefeated at the time NE.  Without Luck, we're likely not making the playoffs in the worst division in football.  Luck is the only reason we've been 11-5 the past 3 years but the team got older and worse this year and he simply couldn't overcome it with injuries suffered due to our heinous o-line play where he was getting pounded every week.  Now that same heinous o-line has gotten Hasselbeck hurt as well.  The defense is a sieve.  I was right, contrary to your diatribe. Amazing what a little more evidence uncovered. 

 

I don't know JP. I'm sure you can count on 5 fingers out of all the teams in the NFL who could go 11-5 without their starting QB in the game for several games. Most teams slip up quite a bit when their starter is out. Doesn't mean it's a bad team.  Hasslebeck took all this supposed "bad personnel" and won 2 out of 4 games with it.  Would have won more if Hasslebeck himself wasn't screwing us over to be honest.  Lately he's been the main reason why we haven't finished drives.  I don't think it has been due to bad personnel overall.  After you go 3 and out so many times how long can you expect the D to hold up on any team?

[JPFolks]

The ancient H-man is a Grigson player too... so if he's giving up the ghost as you suggest, perhaps having a 40 year old QB isn't such a smart move after all.  

 

Grigson's bad moves have been ongoing his entire tenure. Most analysts have agreed that we have one of the worst rosters in the NFL outside of a healthy Luck.  Why someone would argue otherwise is beyond me, but we're seeing what life without Luck is like.  Frankly, this year's roster was so bad that even Luck was struggling winning with it. I think the wins we've had are more a credit of the coaches getting the most out of what they had using mostly smoke a mirrors.   Chuck makes some really dumb calls, but with terrible Defensive talent and terrible o-lines, he's actually done a lot to cobble together, with the help of a healthy Luck, teams playing game plans that got wins.  Grigs is the weakest link.  Chuck will pay for it and frankly he's made some epically bad calls this year especially, so it may be a clean house sweeping and starting all over.  I just hope it isn't with an aged college coach looking to save his NFL credentials before he retires. 

Edited December 16, 2015 by JPFolks
this was a response to Krunk above.

[krunk]

21 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

The ancient H-man is a Grigson player too... so if he's giving up the ghost as you suggest, perhaps having a 40 year old QB isn't such a smart move after all.  

 

Grigson's bad moves have been ongoing his entire tenure. Most analysts have agreed that we have one of the worst rosters in the NFL outside of a healthy Luck.  Why someone would argue otherwise is beyond me, but we're seeing what life without Luck is like.  Frankly, this year's roster was so bad that even Luck was struggling winning with it. I think the wins we've had are more a credit of the coaches getting the most out of what they had using mostly smoke a mirrors.   Chuck makes some really dumb calls, but with terrible Defensive talent and terrible o-lines, he's actually done a lot to cobble together, with the help of a healthy Luck, teams playing game plans that got wins.  Grigs is the weakest link.  Chuck will pay for it and frankly he's made some epically bad calls this year especially, so it may be a clean house sweeping and starting all over.  I just hope it isn't with an aged college coach looking to save his NFL credentials before he retires. 

 

So JP tell us who would have been a better backup?  You're that dug in to the Grigson hate that you're even pointing fingers at the backup. Come on JP, most backups eventually play very similar to what Hasslebeck has done the past two weeks and you know it.  And injury can happen to any player young or old.   When it comes to Luck he's been pretty bad this year and most of the blame is on him and the other portion we've thrown on Pep.  How about being a bit even with the criticism instead of blaming it all on Grigson?

[Coffeedrinker]

1 hour ago, JPFolks said:

I just revisited your response here.  Since you made this response, we've lost 2 games and given up 50+ each time.  I was right.  With Luck, we beat undefeated Denver, took undefeated Carolina to OT and finished back a touchdown to undefeated at the time NE.  Without Luck, we're likely not making the playoffs in the worst division in football.  Luck is the only reason we've been 11-5 the past 3 years but the team got older and worse this year and he simply couldn't overcome it with injuries suffered due to our heinous o-line play where he was getting pounded every week.  Now that same heinous o-line has gotten Hasselbeck hurt as well.  The defense is a sieve.  I was right, contrary to your diatribe. Amazing what a little more evidence uncovered. 

There isn't anything in my post that was wrong.  The talent on the team is there. 

 

Additionally, the "same line" did not get MH hurt.. different LT, different center, different RT and a different RG for one game.  But I'm sure somehow replacing 80% is considered "the same"

 

So your premise is wrong (that Luck is the only reason the Colts were 11-5, this year with Luck the Colts are 2-5 with MH they are 4-2), your conclusions are wrong and your assumptions are wrong.  Only in your mind would that make you right.