The Grigson / Pagano saga (merged)

[JPFolks]

31 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I just don't see where a grown up man would think that starting an inferior first round draft pick player over a better player would help him save face.  

And yet, it happened right in front of your eyes Doug. 

[DougDew]

8 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

And yet, it happened right in front of your eyes Doug. 

To save face?  How do you know that is the reason?

[JPFolks]

Okay, I will play along, why else would you keep giving the most starts and snaps to a lesser player than the every single other back up RB that played in any game with Richardson?  You said they might get injured... but anyone can get injured on any play... that makes no sense.  So explain why, the entire time Richardson was on our team, he played more than the guys who outplayed him 100% of the time? 

 

When media has been reporting this for years and Kravitz puts his name on the line saying it again, and he is friends with Irsay by the way, I tend to believe the only plausible explanation. He did the same thing with Harrison at Center to the peril of all 3 of our injured QB's.  

[Swan Ronson]

Harrison was undrafted, why would Grigson be playing him over a guy he drafted to save face

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, JPFolks said:

Okay, I will play along, why else would you keep giving the most starts and snaps to a lesser player than the every single other back up RB that played in any game with Richardson?  You said they might get injured... but anyone can get injured on any play... that makes no sense.  So explain why, the entire time Richardson was on our team, he played more than the guys who outplayed him 100% of the time? 

 

When media has been reporting this for years and Kravitz puts his name on the line saying it again, and he is friends with Irsay by the way, I tend to believe the only plausible explanation. He did the same thing with Harrison at Center to the peril of all 3 of our injured QB's.  

If you read the paragraph closely, Kravitz isn't putting his name on the line because he doesn't actually say anything.  He is relaying an opinion of his sources.

 

I am not making any assumption about why he wanted Trich to start, because there may be several.  Others claim so.  Since others are making the claim that TRich started in order for Grigson to save face, they bear the responsibility for defending it other than "somebody told me he did".  So I am asking you to defend your claim.  I'll ask you a question.

 

Why would playing a player that you thought was not as good as other players help you look like you made a good trade?

 

"He did the same thing at center"  What same thing?  Play a UDFA center over his own 4th round draft choice because he wanted to save face?

 

SAVING FACE is the part of the paragraph that I take exception with..not that he meddled in starting personnel decisions.

[JPFolks]

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

If you read the paragraph closely, Kravitz isn't putting his name on the line because he doesn't actually say anything.  He is relaying an opinion of his sources.

 

I am not making any assumption about why he wanted Trich to start, because there may be several.  Others claim so.  Since others are making the claim that TRich started in order for Grigson to save face, they bear the responsibility for defending it other than "somebody told me he did".  So I am asking you to defend your claim.  I'll ask you a question.

 

Why would playing a player that you thought was not as good as other players help you look like you made a good trade?

 

"He did the same thing at center"  What same thing?  Play a UDFA center over his own 4th round draft choice because he wanted to save face?

 

SAVING FACE is the part of the paragraph that I take exception with..not that he meddled in starting personnel decisions.

Saving face is Kravitz's source's explanation.  And he does put his reputation on the line saying HIS MULTIPLE sources confirmed it.  I saw an extensive interview with Kravitz on Cowherds show and he expanded on his article.  Look, feel free to sit in puzzlement about it, I choose to believe Kravitz's informers explanation to describe what any and everyone with a clue saw clearly, lesser players were continually played OVER better players even when results were very poor over and over consistently.  You apparently think it is simply a big mystery.  I took Kravitz seriously and believe his sources and his credibility.  

[DougDew]

11 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

Saving face is Kravitz's source's explanation.  And he does put his reputation on the line saying HIS MULTIPLE sources confirmed it.  I saw an extensive interview with Kravitz on Cowherds show and he expanded on his article.  Look, feel free to sit in puzzlement about it, I choose to believe Kravitz's informers explanation to describe what any and everyone with a clue saw clearly, lesser players were continually played OVER better players even when results were very poor over and over consistently.  You apparently think it is simply a big mystery.  I took Kravitz seriously and believe his sources and his credibility.  

No.  He is not saying his multiple sources confirm his opinion that Grigson is trying to save face.  He is saying that sources have told him that Grigson was trying to save face.  There is a difference.

 

If it turns out differently, he can simply say that his sources opinion was wrong and that he never offered that opinion himself in the first place.

 

Besides JP, be logical, nobody can ever KNOW WHY somebody else made a decision, unless the person making the decision told them directly.  Just bringing up WHY Grigson meddled is Kravitz' way of fueling a fire that has already been started.  That Grigson does things out of ego...and not because he is trying to make the best decision for the team in the long term. (I'm not defending that they are the right ones)

[rono8275]

I'm sure this has been said before, but a coach can only do so much with the players he's given.  Grigson is the one who needs to go.  He's made very bad personnel decisions for three years.  Give Coach Pagano a two or three year contract extension and a new GM who will give him some players to work with - offensive and defensive line players, safeties, wide receivers, etc.  Then let's watch the Colts go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Mr. Irsay, I hope you see this!

[chrisfarley]

4 hours ago, JPFolks said:

That is NOT what is being reported.  Grigson has been accused by multiple reporters with inside contacts to be making decisions on who plays and forcing them on Pagano.  Apparently he was essentially calling all the personnel shots.  And there's really nothing else to explain what we all saw.  

It just boggles the mind to think that it really happened that way.  I just can't believe that would be the case. A coach on the field sees what he sees, and it was ugly, but I attribute that to his bad coaching, not being a puppet on Grigson's strings.  It's one thing to acquiesce draft & non-draft player personnel decisions, but to even suggest that Grigson would manipulate who starts or plays certain lineman positions or the worst of all, force someone to continue to run a dead lamb in TRich, well, that's just unconscionable. And I am not going to believe a reporter who is trying to fuel a non-fire unless there is more evidence of that, which I do not believe there is.  It's just hearsay.

[mahagga73]

On Friday, January 01, 2016 at 11:08 AM, ColtRider said:

 

Please define Luck's huge part in this trainwreck. Injury? 

[mahagga73]

I think it's almost certain Pagano is gone. I agree with the poster who said that there is no way Grigson had that much sway over personnel decisions, sounds outrageous and unlikely to me. Pagano is a decent coach, but his ability to adjust and GameDay decisions are often lacking and bizarre. To me,  if the Colts want to really win it all they need a coach that can match wits with the best .Pagano should gave taken that extension, he gambled and lost. 

[bluebombers87]

Cowher just said he thinks Pags should stay...

 

But I guess he doesn't know as much as some posters here.

[ALL BLUE]

48 minutes ago, mahagga73 said:

I think it's almost certain Pagano is gone. I agree with the poster who said that there is no way Grigson had that much sway over personnel decisions, sounds outrageous and unlikely to me. Pagano is a decent coach, but his ability to adjust and GameDay decisions are often lacking and bizarre. To me,  if the Colts want to really win it all they need a coach that can match wits with the best .Pagano should gave taken that extension, he gambled and lost. 

The question would be who is that coach?

[mahagga73]

I personally really like Sean Payton a lot. If we can maintain a decent defense I think the Colts will be back in the playoffs soon, next year probably. 

[mahagga73]

24 minutes ago, ALL BLUE said:

The question would be who is that coach?

 

On Saturday, January 02, 2016 at 1:17 PM, crazycolt1 said:

How did hiring Jimmy Johnson work out for Miami? Jimmy Johnson made maybe the best blockbuster trade in NFL history and that is what made the Cowboys who they were.

Not too bad if you look at it.

[csmopar]

When will we know?

 

Anyone care to make a guess?

[Andrew Luck's Beard]

And keep Pagano! He wants to stay, and he's not the problem!

 

We saw what the defense could be with the proper players. Our d-line is actually decent now. The LBs can make plays as shown by today's game and past games. The secondary could be good if Grigs could actually bring more people in instead of trash corners.

 

And offense isn't Chuck's specialty, so Grigs should be given more fault here. O-line! That is a part of an offense! And we have done little to nothing that's worked! A former lineman should be able to judge talent at that position at least...

 

The WR corps has been spent heavily on and hasn't really turned out well at all. Outside of TY and the occasional Moncrief, Grigs' additions have been very ineffective so far. Dorsett has been hurt a lot, but DHB and Andre haven't been great for us. It seems like despite all we try to do, our WRs have failed to live up to the hype they were given and don't even get open at all! This may be scheme related, but Grigs still has to be held accountable a little bit.

 

Finally, Grigs's attitude towards the coach simply will NOT work, whether we keep Chuck or switch to a new coach. The COACH is given the responsibility to choose what players play, and the GM should NOT be able to interefere with what the coach thinks is best. I doubt any new HC would like Grigs butting in on all of their decisions, either.

 

Grigs is the problem! Give Chuck another chance!

[azcolt]

35 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

Cowher just said he thinks Pags should stay...

 

But I guess he doesn't know as much as some posters here.

So tell me when any coach or former coach has stated that he thinks a colleague should be fired.

[buck_hunter21]

Grigson is the main issue...I am 100% behind showing him the door. 

[GoColts8818]

9 minutes ago, csmopar said:

When will we know?

 

Anyone care to make a guess?

Tomorrow at the latest for Pagano

[bluebombers87]

Just now, azcolt said:

So tell me when any coach or former coach has stated that he thinks a colleague should be fired.

Nah, don't think I will.

 

What I will say is that Cowher is one of the coaches many here have said they would either love to have or someone like his personality/knowledge. He could have very easily said something not specifically stating he thinks Pags should stay.

[ColtsBTM12]

If they get rid of Pagano, they should get rid of Grigson too. Grigson is more to blame IMO.

[will426]

Rumors are gruden may be interested

[VaAllDay757]

grigs aint going nowhere

[bluebombers87]

1 minute ago, will426 said:

Rumors are grudges may be interested

Gruden? Not sure if I'd be sold on him. He's more of an offensive guy. Though maybe that's what we need more than a fire and brimstone kinda coach

[ColtsBTM12]

3 minutes ago, will426 said:

Rumors are gruden may be interested

Where are the rumors coming from?

[will426]

Just now, ColtsBTM12 said:

Where are the rumors coming from?

Eh Bleacher Report lol

[Andrew Luck's Beard]

2 minutes ago, VaAllDay757 said:

grigs aint going nowhere

I don't know what he did to become Jim's butt buddy, but Jim's gotta get him out.

[will426]

2 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

Gruden? Not sure if I'd be sold on him. He's more of an offensive guy. Though maybe that's what we need more than a fire and brimstone kinda coach

Yeah he's is offensive and he kinda knows Andrew a bit but I like how he is a no nonsense kind of guy 

[Jules]

Grigson is way more on my BL then Pagano is.

 

 

[Nesjan3]

If Irsay cant see that Grigson is the problem and he decides to keep him and fire Chuck...then this team has far bigger issues than a crappy GM and medicre roster

[aReggie7]

14 minutes ago, Andrew Luck's Beard said:

I don't know what he did to become Jim's butt buddy, but Jim's gotta get him out.

 

I think the rumor is that one of Irsay's daughters has a good relationship with Grigson and trusts him. 

[shakedownstreet]

keep grigs! fire pags!!

[ALL BLUE]

1 minute ago, adamr said:

 

I think the rumor is that one of Irsay's daughters has a good relationship with Grigson and trusts him. 

OMG..................................

[tomloge]

Agree 1000%.  Fire Grigson, Keep Pagano!  

[antipatriot]

Grigs needs to go period.....I would keep Pags over Grigs I am 100% Grigs is the architect of this demise.

[masterlock]

2 minutes ago, shakedownstreet said:

keep grigs! fire pags!!

I think this forum needs an "Dislike this" button.

[SilentHill]

EH'

 

They are both the problem, Chuck is bad at clock management, and he is way way too soft.

 

If he could toughen up and get out of Grigson's control then maybe, but I want a hard nosed coach with no nonsense. Let's not forget that Reggie Wayne quit the Patriots because he said they were all business, that speaks VOLUMES to the atmosphere in Indianapolis, and it's one I don't like.

[Jules]

5 minutes ago, adamr said:

 

I think the rumor is that one of Irsay's daughters has a good relationship with Grigson and trusts him. 

 

If this has any truth to it and I have heard this rumor then no wonder this team is so SLUGGISH.

[TD]

31 minutes ago, Andrew Luck's Beard said:

And keep Pagano! He wants to stay, and he's not the problem!

 

We saw what the defense could be with the proper players. Our d-line is actually decent now. The LBs can make plays as shown by today's game and past games. The secondary could be good if Grigs could actually bring more people in instead of trash corners.

 

And offense isn't Chuck's specialty, so Grigs should be given more fault here. O-line! That is a part of an offense! And we have done little to nothing that's worked! A former lineman should be able to judge talent at that position at least...

 

The WR corps has been spent heavily on and hasn't really turned out well at all. Outside of TY and the occasional Moncrief, Grigs' additions have been very ineffective so far. Dorsett has been hurt a lot, but DHB and Andre haven't been great for us. It seems like despite all we try to do, our WRs have failed to live up to the hype they were given and don't even get open at all! This may be scheme related, but Grigs still has to be held accountable a little bit.

 

Finally, Grigs's attitude towards the coach simply will NOT work, whether we keep Chuck or switch to a new coach. The COACH is given the responsibility to choose what players play, and the GM should NOT be able to interefere with what the coach thinks is best. I doubt any new HC would like Grigs butting in on all of their decisions, either.

 

Grigs is the problem! Give Chuck another chance!

I had to laugh at one comment that favored Grigson...it said it came from a SMART PHONE.  Now really?  I have to question that because NO SMART PHONE could issue such a statement, and if it was possible it probably came from a Pat's Fan.