ESPN shows a troublesome Colts drafting trend...

[NewColtsFan]

37 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I will voice my opinion regardless of you. The whole forum is full of opinions and you have passed out your fair share. I am not here to abide by your rules or you opinion as to what is said in here. If everyone's opinion and thought process was the same it would be too boring. If you feel the need to argue or chastise my every post feel free because I don't really care one way or another.

 

I'm not trying to stop you or anyone else from voicing your opinions.     You're as entitled to them as anyone else,  and yes,  I've voiced my fair share as well.   

 

I don't care that we don't agree.....     I've disagreed with lots of good people here.....    I have no problem with that.

 

Voice away......      You'll get little push back from me.....      Seriously.

 

 

[jameszeigler834]

1 hour ago, BOTT said:

I hope so, but seems we have been saying that since Luck was drafted.

Ya but we finally did work on the O-line sucks it took Luck getting hurt for that to happen but it is what it is.

[Yoshinator]

We've basically screwed the pooch on drafting defense. Look at New England and especially Denver, what do you see them drafting in the first round pretty much every year? It's not offense, it's a defensive player. They dominate on defense. We should of been doing that every year since we got Luck, and definitely not traded a 1st for Trent. Our defense is just starting to catch up, and we still had to neglect it a lot because of the need of an O-Line. Hopefully, we have our Offense complete, and we can go all defense next draft while getting some pass rushers. This is turning into another version of Manning and the offense with an average defense that may or may not even win 1 SB with Luck. Our team building has to change.

[bleevit]

10 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

To me it does.  I feel teams overpay for free agents.  Value isn't there, and most often they are stopgaps that never integrate fully into the team. Just pluggin a gap until the drafted guy is on the roster and ready. They are poor value.  I feel it is best to draft well, develop them, And sign them when their contract is due. Continuity is important, as is value.

 

You are usually correct about free agents, although some notable exceptions (Reggie White, Drew Brees, Marshall Faulk and even Frank Gore) come to mind.

[BOTT]

3 hours ago, bleevit said:

You are usually correct about free agents, although some notable exceptions (Reggie White, Drew Brees, Marshall Faulk and even Frank Gore) come to mind.

There are tons of FA agents that were worth every penny or bargains.  People only remember the high prices busts.

[SteelCityColt]

I'm surprised that no-one has pointed out that looking at the period of 2010 - 15 is a bit silly. Especially when you're pushing back on the Colts for not having picks from the 2010/11 draft. A change in GM (and defensive scheme to boot) was always going to make it less likely players drafted in the previous regime were retained. 

 

Still doesn't get away from that we've not really heavily invested in the D via the draft (mostly low rounders), and even when we have the talent evaluation has been... lacking. I'm hoping that's been turned around starting with last year but we'll see how it plays out.

[lollygagger8]

 

[ztboiler]

12 hours ago, BOTT said:

The fact that they drafted most of their defensive players late is a problem.  You can't talk about building a monster and then use premium picks on receivers, running backs and pass catching tight ends.

 

doesnt help that the one premium pick on a defense was Werner.

Choices have to be made when you are rebuilding.  If you are drafting a once in a generation talent at QB into a gutted roster with $40M dead cap space, you better work like mad to find enough talent around him to get him established as your franchise QB that everyone believes in.  Mission accomplished.  Not sure how anyone could lament that.

 

In spite of that, if we want to look at meaningful raw numbers for the Grigs/Pagano era, we have 11 defensive players on our roster acquired since 2012 through the draft.  9 directly drafted, and 2 we traded picks for (V. Davis, S. Moore).  That's not unusually low when you look across the league over that time span.  

[Valpo2004]

A lot of that has to do with where those players where drafted.  Most where late round picks.  

 

What is more troubling is the lack of draft investment in the defense.

[ColtsFanMikeC]

16 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

I explained my point of view and my opinion. I didn't know there were rules put in place to prevent that.  Or does that rule just apply to me?

 

No -- you are just purposefully out to get in arguments.  The meat of this thread was about ESPN showing a fact about our team's defensive draft picks and you go off on a rant about how ESPN is out to get us and doesn't like us.  There are plenty of other threads where that would be appropriate (like the video from First Take in another recent thread), but this is not the one.

 

I think most people are here to discuss football, not to look for arguments (unless they are arguments based on solid evidence regarding football). You, on the other hand, seem to be here with your major goal to stir things up and get away from the topic at hand.

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, ColtsFanMikeC said:

 

No -- you are just purposefully out to get in arguments.  The meat of this thread was about ESPN showing a fact about our team's defensive draft picks and you go off on a rant about how ESPN is out to get us and doesn't like us.  There are plenty of other threads where that would be appropriate (like the video from First Take in another recent thread), but this is not the one.

 

I think most people are here to discuss football, not to look for arguments (unless they are arguments based on solid evidence regarding football). You, on the other hand, seem to be here with your major goal to stir things up and get away from the topic at hand.

Horse feathers. Forum member all the time enter their opinions in just about every thread.

[ColtsFanMikeC]

5 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Horse feathers. Forum member all the time enter their opinions in just about every thread.

 

They enter their opinions, usually when their opinions are actually relevant to the thread.  You do it to get in arguments for no reason whatsoever, other than for the sake of arguing.  This thread is a perfect example. 

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, ColtsFanMikeC said:

 

They enter their opinions, usually when their opinions are actually relevant to the thread.  You do it to get in arguments for no reason whatsoever, other than for the sake of arguing.  This thread is a perfect example. 

 I will keep that in mind next time you bring up your opinion.

[ColtsFanMikeC]

13 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

 I will keep that in mind next time you bring up your opinion.

 

Just do me a favor and make sure it's when I bring it in completely out of nowhere when it isn't even relevant to the actual topic or thread, then if anyone tries to use an argument based on fact or logic against you, please continue to ignore the facts.

 

I'm done with this one.  It is my opinion that it is a waste of time to argue with people who are moronic.

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, ColtsFanMikeC said:

 

Just do me a favor and make sure it's when I bring it in completely out of nowhere when it isn't even relevant to the actual topic or thread, then if anyone tries to use an argument based on fact or logic against you, please continue to ignore the facts.

 

I'm done with this one.  It is my opinion that it is a waste of time to argue with *s.

Sorry to inform you that have don't have any say so or control over what I say. Now you want to call me a name of some sort? Real classy.

[Defjamz26]

On May 22, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Gavin said:

Parry ended up quite bad as the season went on.

Pretty much as soon as Anderson went down. Makes me wonder if he's just a product of Anderson. He's still better than Chapman though.

[BOTT]

12 hours ago, ztboiler said:

Choices have to be made when you are rebuilding.  If you are drafting a once in a generation talent at QB into a gutted roster with $40M dead cap space, you better work like mad to find enough talent around him to get him established as your franchise QB that everyone believes in.  Mission accomplished.  Not sure how anyone could lament that.

 

In spite of that, if we want to look at meaningful raw numbers for the Grigs/Pagano era, we have 11 defensive players on our roster acquired since 2012 through the draft.  9 directly drafted, and 2 we traded picks for (V. Davis, S. Moore).  That's not unusually low when you look across the league over that time span.  

 Couldn't disagree more strongly.  You get a franchise QB the first thing you should do is protect him (and that doesn't include gambling with questionable free agent lineman) and build the defense.  

 

Like I said, the problem is were most of those defensive players were drafted...late.

 

 

[NewColtsFan]

13 hours ago, ztboiler said:

Choices have to be made when you are rebuilding.  If you are drafting a once in a generation talent at QB into a gutted roster with $40M dead cap space, you better work like mad to find enough talent around him to get him established as your franchise QB that everyone believes in.  Mission accomplished.  Not sure how anyone could lament that.

 

In spite of that, if we want to look at meaningful raw numbers for the Grigs/Pagano era, we have 11 defensive players on our roster acquired since 2012 through the draft.  9 directly drafted, and 2 we traded picks for (V. Davis, S. Moore).  That's not unusually low when you look across the league over that time span.  

 

I'm sorry,  while I agreed with you for much of this post,  the "mission accomplished" part is where we disagree.

 

I was OK paying less attention to the defense while we built the offense around Luck.

 

But here it is, Year 5 and we're still building the o-line.    Our attempts to build it failed for 4 straight years.

 

And here it is,  Year 5 and we're still searching for our RB.     Gore may be the guy for another year,  two at the outside.      But the first four years we've had a terrible running game.   

 

So, while we've been paying less attention to the defense,  it took, much, MUCH longer to build the offense than anyone has anticipated.    And I'm including everyone in the Colts front office from Irsay to Grigson to Pagano and everyone else.     No one thought it would take this long.      We are behind schedule.    To your point,  there's plenty to lament.

 

Which is why at Year 5,  we have a roster that is not very highly thought of at this point.    We're still building.

While I expect to make the playoffs,  I'm not expecting a deep run.     I hope I'm wrong,  but that's what I see in late-May.

 

[chad72]

Hopefully we turned around a corner in 2015.

 

That is my glass half full approach I am taking

[ztboiler]

11 hours ago, BOTT said:

 Couldn't disagree more strongly.  You get a franchise QB the first thing you should do is protect him (and that doesn't include gambling with questionable free agent lineman) and build the defense.  

 

Like I said, the problem is were most of those defensive players were drafted...late.

I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with other than that you wanted more early picks used on D. I can accept that, and we can all find opportunities in the last 4 drafts that we could have made different choices.  Those are simply choices that had to be made along the way - acceptable trade offs with scarce resources.

 

I didn't say or imply that we had adequately protected Luck, I said that we had succeeded in establishing him - that is the main goal that any franchise should have for their young QB.  Yes, protecting him should be included, but those that want to pick apart what hasn't been done to their satisfaction are completely missing the point of how difficult it is to get your franchise QB established as an elite player that the league and his teammates see as a threat to win any game against any team.  We now have that.  I don't see how anyone can lament that, or fail to give credit to coaches and staff that supplied the resources to make it happen. All evidence in the NFL suggests that it doesn't happen in a vaccuum.

 

If by questionable free agent O-linemen you are referring to Todd Herremans, who started all of 2 games here, then OK, that was a miss (at a very low cost).  If you are referring to Cherilus and Thomas, then I guess you are referring to bad luck, and maybe some poor medical advice.  I get that the efforts to build an O-line haven't yielded a top 10 group yet - and people have a right to be frustrated by that - so be it.  That is simply a position group where results will always lag inputs, and often by a year or more.  QB may be the toughest position to develop in sports, but O-line has to be the toughest position group to develop.  The Colts are among the majority of teams - even winning teams - that have only been able to make marginal O-line improvement since 2012.

 

11 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I'm sorry,  while I agreed with you for much of this post,  the "mission accomplished" part is where we disagree.

 

I was OK paying less attention to the defense while we built the offense around Luck.

 

But here it is, Year 5 and we're still building the o-line.    Our attempts to build it failed for 4 straight years.

 

And here it is,  Year 5 and we're still searching for our RB.     Gore may be the guy for another year,  two at the outside.      But the first four years we've had a terrible running game.   

 

So, while we've been paying less attention to the defense,  it took, much, MUCH longer to build the offense than anyone has anticipated.    And I'm including everyone in the Colts front office from Irsay to Grigson to Pagano and everyone else.     No one thought it would take this long.      We are behind schedule.    To your point,  there's plenty to lament.

 

Which is why at Year 5,  we have a roster that is not very highly thought of at this point.    We're still building.

While I expect to make the playoffs,  I'm not expecting a deep run.     I hope I'm wrong,  but that's what I see in late-May.

 

 

Most of this I addressed above with BOTT, no need to restate here.  However, you have taken me out of context.  I said that we have established Luck as a franchise QB - that is the Mission Accomplished.  That is what I don't think anyone can lament.  It's hard to do, and required a commitment of resources that have coagulated effectively to produce a great result....we have the QB that everyone wishes they could build their future around.  That is certainly to Luck's credit, but it is very much to the Staff's credit as well.  

 

This is not NFL Utopia.  Its simply the NFL, and winning is a messy business. 

 

I genuinely feel the sense of urgency that I think drives you.  You are understandably a Luck fan first and a Colts fan second, just as I am a Drew Brees fan first and a Saints fan 2nd (or 3rd in this case).  Time/Age is undefeated, and you feel the clock starting to tick on Luck's prime.  Your tolerance for the messy business of winning has finally worn thin and yielded to a desire for football Utopia.  

 

How frustrated would you be if you were an Aaron Rodgers Packers fan?  Their clock is ticking fast, and they are in danger of bungling his multiple superbowl winning potential, just as the Colts did with the Manning years.  It happens, because that is the nature of the beast.

 

Without the Tuck Rule, the Pats might not have 1 Superbowl, let alone 4.  The Tuck Rule cleared the path for the Pats to establish Brady.  It seems far fetched now, but there is no guarantee that Brady becomes the trusted winner that he has if that call doesn't bounce in his favor, and he doesn't go on to lead the game winning drive in the Superbowl.  

 

Establishing your QB is the first piece of the mission.  We have the best closer in the game, and his teammates believe it.  Mission accomplished.

 

[Superman]

12 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

And here it is,  Year 5 and we're still searching for our RB.     Gore may be the guy for another year,  two at the outside.      But the first four years we've had a terrible running game.

 

Just to pick at this one point, I don't think the Colts' problem with running the ball has been about the backs. They've had serviceable backs throughout, and it's not hard to find a good one if you really want to. Besides the Richardson saga, the problem with the backs has been injury -- Ballard, Bradshaw, even Brown was always nicked up. This is not a high level problem for the Colts, IMO. 

 

The problem has been a) the offensive line, and b) the play calling. I think there's reason to believe both of those will be better moving forward.

 

Your point -- it took four years to make these corrections -- is well taken.

[NewColtsFan]

7 hours ago, ztboiler said:

I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with other than that you wanted more early picks used on D. I can accept that, and we can all find opportunities in the last 4 drafts that we could have made different choices.  Those are simply choices that had to be made along the way - acceptable trade offs with scarce resources.

 

I didn't say or imply that we had adequately protected Luck, I said that we had succeeded in establishing him - that is the main goal that any franchise should have for their young QB.  Yes, protecting him should be included, but those that want to pick apart what hasn't been done to their satisfaction are completely missing the point of how difficult it is to get your franchise QB established as an elite player that the league and his teammates see as a threat to win any game against any team.  We now have that.  I don't see how anyone can lament that, or fail to give credit to coaches and staff that supplied the resources to make it happen. All evidence in the NFL suggests that it doesn't happen in a vaccuum.

 

This is not NFL Utopia.  Its simply the NFL, and winning is a messy business. 

 Mission accomplished.

 

 

Sorry, ZTB,  I'm more confused than ever before.    The part I put in to BOLD doesn't make sense to me.   Luck was established as a franchise QB after Year 1 under Arians.      Since then here's what we've NOT been able to do.

 

Failed at building an OL,   that includes Holmes, Thornton,  Thomas and Cherilus as well as Herremans and I may be missing someone else.       

 

Failed at building a running game.     That includes Bradshaw and Brown,  both of whom are very good complimentary backs,  but neither of whom are even average every down backs.     Neither can hold up as the #1 RB  on any team.     They're either injured or they wear down.

 

Failed at the 3rd WR slot.    Look at the list...  Avery,  Hayward-Bey,  Nicks and Johnson.    Four straight veteran candidates for the 3rd WR spot and all were judged to be not worthy of bringing back after just one season.

 

Failed at properly coordinating our offense.     Pep was an OK coordinator but we needed better. 

 

That's a LOT of failure.

 

So here we are in Year 5 and while we have our established franchise QB,   but we have failed SPECTACULARLY at surrounding him with the proper talent.      We are STILL trying to build a proper offense around Luck and while that process has taken longer than we hoped and expected,   we put off building the defense until that was done and so we're behind schedule on both sides of the ball.

 

There's plenty to lament.     We're not where we should be.     And now that we've officially stopped building via free agency (we may sign 1 or 2 lesser free agents like Robinson a year,  but not more expensive guys)   then since we're focusing only on the draft,  that slows the process even more.     I think we're 1-3 years away from being a serious contender.     

 

I'm sure that won't be a popular view and I hope I'm wrong about that.    But I don't see much reason for optimism here.....    I'm expecting the process to be slower than anyone here would like...      again,  I hope I'm wrong.

 

[crazycolt1]

22 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Sorry, ZTB,  I'm more confused than ever before.    The part I put in to BOLD doesn't make sense to me.   Luck was established as a franchise QB after Year 1 under Arians.      Since then here's what we've NOT been able to do.

 

Failed at building an OL,   that includes Holmes, Thornton,  Thomas and Cherilus as well as Herremans and I may be missing someone else.       

 

Failed at building a running game.     That includes Bradshaw and Brown,  both of whom are very good complimentary backs,  but neither of whom are even average every down backs.     Neither can hold up as the #1 RB  on any team.     They're either injured or they wear down.

 

Failed at the 3rd WR slot.    Look at the list...  Avery,  Hayward-Bey,  Nicks and Johnson.    Four straight veteran candidates for the 3rd WR spot and all were judged to be not worthy of bringing back after just one season.

 

Failed at properly coordinating our offense.     Pep was an OK coordinator but we needed better. 

 

That's a LOT of failure.

 

So here we are in Year 5 and while we have our established franchise QB,   but we have failed SPECTACULARLY at surrounding him with the proper talent.      We are STILL trying to build a proper offense around Luck and while that process has taken longer than we hoped and expected,   we put off building the defense until that was done and so we're behind schedule on both sides of the ball.

 

There's plenty to lament.     We're not where we should be.     And now that we've officially stopped building via free agency (we may sign 1 or 2 lesser free agents like Robinson a year,  but not more expensive guys)   then since we're focusing only on the draft,  that slows the process even more.     I think we're 1-3 years away from being a serious contender.     

 

I'm sure that won't be a popular view and I hope I'm wrong about that.    But I don't see much reason for optimism here.....    I'm expecting the process to be slower than anyone here would like...      again,  I hope I'm wrong.

 

Oh, the sky is falling and we are all doomed. Sounds like you are describing the Browns.

[BOTT]

11 hours ago, ztboiler said:

I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with other than that you wanted more early picks used on D. I can accept that, and we can all find opportunities in the last 4 drafts that we could have made different choices.  Those are simply choices that had to be made along the way - acceptable trade offs with scarce resources.

 

I didn't say or imply that we had adequately protected Luck, I said that we had succeeded in establishing him - that is the main goal that any franchise should have for their young QB.  Yes, protecting him should be included, but those that want to pick apart what hasn't been done to their satisfaction are completely missing the point of how difficult it is to get your franchise QB established as an elite player that the league and his teammates see as a threat to win any game against any team.  We now have that.  I don't see how anyone can lament that, or fail to give credit to coaches and staff that supplied the resources to make it happen. All evidence in the NFL suggests that it doesn't happen in a vaccuum.

 

If by questionable free agent O-linemen you are referring to Todd Herremans, who started all of 2 games here, then OK, that was a miss (at a very low cost).  If you are referring to Cherilus and Thomas, then I guess you are referring to bad luck, and maybe some poor medical advice.  I get that the efforts to build an O-line haven't yielded a top 10 group yet - and people have a right to be frustrated by that - so be it.  That is simply a position group where results will always lag inputs, and often by a year or more.  QB may be the toughest position to develop in sports, but O-line has to be the toughest position group to develop.  The Colts are among the majority of teams - even winning teams - that have only been able to make marginal O-line improvement since 2012.

 

 

Most of this I addressed above with BOTT, no need to restate here.  However, you have taken me out of context.  I said that we have established Luck as a franchise QB - that is the Mission Accomplished.  That is what I don't think anyone can lament.  It's hard to do, and required a commitment of resources that have coagulated effectively to produce a great result....we have the QB that everyone wishes they could build their future around.  That is certainly to Luck's credit, but it is very much to the Staff's credit as well.  

 

This is not NFL Utopia.  Its simply the NFL, and winning is a messy business. 

 

I genuinely feel the sense of urgency that I think drives you.  You are understandably a Luck fan first and a Colts fan second, just as I am a Drew Brees fan first and a Saints fan 2nd (or 3rd in this case).  Time/Age is undefeated, and you feel the clock starting to tick on Luck's prime.  Your tolerance for the messy business of winning has finally worn thin and yielded to a desire for football Utopia.  

 

How frustrated would you be if you were an Aaron Rodgers Packers fan?  Their clock is ticking fast, and they are in danger of bungling his multiple superbowl winning potential, just as the Colts did with the Manning years.  It happens, because that is the nature of the beast.

 

Without the Tuck Rule, the Pats might not have 1 Superbowl, let alone 4.  The Tuck Rule cleared the path for the Pats to establish Brady.  It seems far fetched now, but there is no guarantee that Brady becomes the trusted winner that he has if that call doesn't bounce in his favor, and he doesn't go on to lead the game winning drive in the Superbowl.  

 

Establishing your QB is the first piece of the mission.  We have the best closer in the game, and his teammates believe it.  Mission accomplished.

 

Luck established himself....despite the having poor offensive coordinators and lackluster protection.

 

Cherilus wasn't bad luck at all.  The guy had maybe 1.5 good seasons before being sign by the Colts and had a bad knee.  Thomas, while it was bad luck that he was injured, was far from a proven NFL player.  In several NFL season Thimas had how many quality starts?

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Oh, the sky is falling and we are all doomed. Sounds like you are describing the Browns.

 

Perfect.      This is keeping with our tradition.

 

I listed FACTS.         You don't like the facts so you take a shot with your OPINION.

 

That's just how you and I roll.....

 

[crazycolt1]

16 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Perfect.      This is keeping with our tradition.

 

I listed FACTS.         You don't like the facts so you take a shot with your OPINION.

 

That's just how you and I roll.....

 

You listed all the fails with out one time mentioning the successes. No team goes three 11-5 seasons with out something being right. I agree things should be better but it is not all doom and gloom as you make it. The base of those three 11-5  teams are still here.  I am not disputing anything you are saying but concentrating on just what you bring up is not looking at the whole picture. It was no fluke this team made the AFC championship game when they did. Even when the Colts were going thru what they did last season they still had fight in them. You say you deal with facts? We call all leave out the facts that dont show the big picture if we care to. Facts do not tell the whole story or the whole truth.

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

You listed all the fails with out one time mentioning the successes. No team goes three 11-5 seasons with out something being right. I agree things should be better but it is not all doom and gloom as you make it. The base of those three 11-5  teams are still here.  I am not disputing anything you are saying but concentrating on just what you bring up is not looking at the whole picture. It was no fluke this team made the AFC championship game when they did. Even when the Colts were going thru what they did last season they still had fight in them. You say you deal with facts? We call all leave out the facts that dont show the big picture if we care to. Facts do not tell the whole story or the whole truth.

 

Look at how long my post is.       Seriously, it's a really long post.

 

If I listed all the good things (and I have in countless other posts over the years)  then my post would read like War and Peace.      No one looks at a post that size and reads all of it.      It's a waste of everyone's time.

 

I've written what you written to me countless times over the years.    But I think things have changed.    So I'm more skeptical this year.      My hope lies with the new coaches we brought in to get the most out of our players.

 

I have publicly predicted we're going to win 10 games this season..    Though I did add that I would not be surprised if we only won 8.      But I'm not predicting 8 wins.       The only other negative thing I've added is that I don't see a deep run in the playoffs.        Make the playoffs --- yes.      Go far in the playoffs --- I don't see it.

 

And as I try to do when I make what could be viewed as a negative post,  I try to add that I hope I'm wrong.    I'd rather be wrong and the team does well than be right and the team do not as well.      I have my ego,  but it's not THAT out of control.      I'd like the team that I cheer for to do as well as it can.    Even if it means I'm wrong.

 

[crazycolt1]

4 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Look at how long my post is.       Seriously, it's a really long post.

 

If I listed all the good things (and I have in countless other posts over the years)  then my post would read like War and Peace.      No one looks at a post that size and reads all of it.      It's a waste of everyone's time.

 

I've written what you written to me countless times over the years.    But I think things have changed.    So I'm more skeptical this year.      My hope lies with the new coaches we brought in to get the most out of our players.

 

I have publicly predicted we're going to win 10 games this season..    Though I did add that I would not be surprised if we only won 8.      But I'm not predicting 8 wins.       The only other negative thing I've added is that I don't see a deep run in the playoffs.        Make the playoffs --- yes.      Go far in the playoffs --- I don't see it.

 

And as I try to do when I make what could be viewed as a negative post,  I try to add that I hope I'm wrong.    I'd rather be wrong and the team does well than be right and the team do not as well.      I have my ego,  but it's not THAT out of control.      I'd like the team that I cheer for to do as well as it can.    Even if it means I'm wrong.

 

I think both of us have valid points.

[crazycolt1]

On ‎5‎/‎23‎/‎2016 at 6:45 AM, BOTT said:

There are tons of FA agents that were worth every penny or bargains.  People only remember the high prices busts.

Yep, and it seems the high priced types are the ones most Colt fans want.

[LockeDown]

Irsay believes in Grigson.  He must be willing to let him struggle a bit and learn from his mistakes.  After all, he is trusting him with his most prized possession, Luck, and that is no small deal.  Ultimately, I trust Irsays instincts.  I loved this draft personally and believe that the Irsay/Grigson/Pags powwow righted the ship.  The past is prologue...as Polian used to say.

[ztboiler]

15 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Sorry, ZTB,  I'm more confused than ever before.    The part I put in to BOLD doesn't make sense to me.   Luck was established as a franchise QB after Year 1 under Arians.      Since then here's what we've NOT been able to do.

 

Failed................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

 

That's a LOT of failure.

 

-Luck was established year 1....

-But then Luck was established as a playoff winning QB in year 2....

-Then Luck was established as a QB that could make a deep run, winning a playoff game on the road and advancing to the AFC Championship.

 

That's an awfully deep reservoir of success to draw from amidst all that failure that you describe.

[NewColtsFan]

4 hours ago, ztboiler said:

-Luck was established year 1....

-But then Luck was established as a playoff winning QB in year 2....

-Then Luck was established as a QB that could make a deep run, winning a playoff game on the road and advancing to the AFC Championship.

 

That's an awfully deep reservoir of success to draw from amidst all that failure that you describe.

 

Yes.....    agreed.....   but it's been all about Andrew Luck lifting up a very poor team that was around him.

 

Still building the OL.     Still looking for RB's and a running game.

 

Still building a defense.       We're behind schedule from where we thought we'd be.  

 

Too many misses in FA --- which is why we're going away from FA.

 

Too many misses in the draft.         Hopefully,  we've done better with the last two drafts,  15 and 16.    If so,  then we'll do alright this year....    Let's hope so....

 

I've predicted 10-6 for 16.....      I hope I'm right.      But I'm a little skeptical about my own projection....

 

 

[ztboiler]

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Yes.....    agreed.....   but it's been all about Andrew Luck lifting up a very poor team that was around him.

 

Still building the OL.     Still looking for RB's and a running game.

 

Still building a defense.       We're behind schedule from where we thought we'd be.  

 

Too many misses in FA --- which is why we're going away from FA.

 

Too many misses in the draft.         Hopefully,  we've done better with the last two drafts,  15 and 16.    If so,  then we'll do alright this year....    Let's hope so....

 

I've predicted 10-6 for 16.....      I hope I'm right.      But I'm a little skeptical about my own projection....

 

 

These have been very poor teams that Luck has rescued?  I know you don't even believe that.

 

Luck has made those around him better, and he has been an extraordinary playmaker with the game on the line.  Best closer in the game for my money.  Very poor teams, however, don't win playoff games.

 

2015 was a painful regression, and a memory that won't fade until expunged in 2016, but never mistake the way things are right now for the way things really are....

 

Our offensive roster is well fortified.  Our D lacks name brand playmakers, but we have young talent emerging at every level.

 

If you simply need more time to vent until the 2016 season starts....then that is understandable. We all get * sometimes.  Have at it.

 

This time of year, we fans are slaves to our feelings as there is no evidence to contradict or support our individual notions of expected results for the coming season.  So, we wait....

 

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, ztboiler said:

These have been very poor teams that Luck has rescued?  I know you don't even believe that.

 

Luck has made those around him better, and he has been an extraordinary playmaker with the game on the line.  Best closer in the game for my money.  Very poor teams, however, don't win playoff games.

 

2015 was a painful regression, and a memory that won't fade until expunged in 2016, but never mistake the way things are right now for the way things really are....

 

Our offensive roster is well fortified.  Our D lacks name brand playmakers, but we have young talent emerging at every level.

 

If you simply need more time to vent until the 2016 season starts....then that is understandable. We all get * sometimes.  Have at it.

 

This time of year, we fans are slaves to our feelings as there is no evidence to contradict or support our individual notions of expected results for the coming season.  So, we wait....

 

 

 

If you think I understated the quality of the team around Luck --- fine.

 

Then,  if not poor,   at best,   average.

 

You write our offensive roster is well fortified.    That's despite the fact that we have yet to build an average o-line (maybe we get it right this year)   and we have yet to establish a decent running game (maybe we get it right this year)      That doesn't sound like a well fortified offensive roster this year.

 

Final thought.....    I hope this exchange has been come across as argumentative.    That was a not my intent.

I wanted only to offer a different perspective.    I have great respect for your opinion but wanted to note that on this particular issue,  we don't see this one the same way.....

 

 

[ztboiler]

39 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

 

If you think I understated the quality of the team around Luck --- fine.

 

Then,  if not poor,   at best,   average.

 

You write our offensive roster is well fortified.    That's despite the fact that we have yet to build an average o-line (maybe we get it right this year)   and we have yet to establish a decent running game (maybe we get it right this year)      That doesn't sound like a well fortified offensive roster this year.

 

Final thought.....    I hope this exchange has been come across as argumentative.    That was a not my intent.

I wanted only to offer a different perspective.    I have great respect for your opinion but wanted to note that on this particular issue,  we don't see this one the same way.....

 

 

You are a seasoned, smart football guy.  We'll always have a healthy exchange.  It will just be better when your frustration yields to perspective....like it used to.

[Superman]

This "trend" is the reason the Colts always have cap space.

 

Once Luck's deal is done, the Colts will have committed somewhere around $130m in 2017. Against a cap that could easily be $170m. And that's with Jackson, Jones and Gore still on the roster, which I doubt all three of them stay for 2017. 

 

Free agents in 2017: Thornton, Cole, Mathis, Adams, Walden, Butler, Moore, Doyle, etc. No one that should be commanding big money.

 

Same thing in 2018: Besides Mewhort and Moncrief, no one is left from the draft class, but Vontae is up, as is AV and Irving. I assume AV will be retiring.

[NewColtsFan]

4 hours ago, ztboiler said:

You are a seasoned, smart football guy.  We'll always have a healthy exchange.  It will just be better when your frustration yields to perspective....like it used to.

 

I've been packing my posts with fact after fact after fact.      Those facts overwhelmingly support my view.

 

And yet,  you think that this is somehow shaped by my frustration and lacks perspective?!?!?

 

I confess,   that's a head scratching thing for you to say......

 

[southwest1]

What was the topic of this thread again? Oh yeah, according to ESPN, INDY's achilles heel of failing to draft dominant defensive players over a 6 yr. window. I can't blame either CC1 or NCF for getting sidetracked in a difference of opinion since SW1 has been known to take threads in a new direction myself when the mood hits me just right as well. 

 

Both CC1 & NCF are cool guys that I've disagreed with before. I'm not a huge fan of ESPN either other than Jeff Saturday. I just accept the premise that the Colts are never gonna get much love from the NFL masses & move on. Like Carlos said, INDY always takes players on defense in later rounds in the draft. It's who we are; it's what we do as a franchise. 

[IndySouthsider]

On May 22, 2016 at 3:43 AM, NewColtsFan said:

 

Because the fact was correct.     There was no bad journalism involved here.    They simply stated a fact.

 

There is tons and tons of HATE for ESPN on this website.     And most of it,  it badly thought through.

 

I don't care if you dump on them for crap that they do.....    I don't like "First Take" either.   And I hate Skip Bayless and I'm thrilled he's leaving.        But they do plenty of good stuff which goes unnoticed here.....

 

I try to save being angry for legitimate issues and not fabricated ones.

 

 

 

It's a useless fact without background. Now if the story is the colts haven't drafted  Defense as an early priority. Point taken. 

 

Just saying their 5-7th round picks are no longer on the team? Hmm ok how many teams have their 5th-7th round guys still? That's the quality of reporting that used to exist. Today's journalist is lazy!

 

Facts can he manipulated in any manner.

[Coffeedrinker]

Thanks Douzer for finding and posting this.  When stats don't supports someone's preconceived ideas they say stats are meaningless but this is one of those stats that is not meaningless.  IT is very telling.

 

I'm just not sure if it's a good trend or a bad trend.  One, I'm not sure why the 2010 and 2011 draft are in there, that was a different regime and you would expect those players to be let go.  It does show that the Colts decided that none of the defensive players drafted in those positions are worth a spot which indicates bad drafting.  But it could be good in that it also could indicate the team is not afraid to cut their losses when they make a mistake.