I would argue that Grigson's work over the past 2 years is vastly improved

[Colts_Fan12]

42 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

He had over 1300 all-purpose yards and 12TDs his rookie year in Cleveland. What are you talking about?

What was his ypc? How many times did they hand him the ball? Id expect him to get that many yards when he is the only one getting the ball. pretty sure it's been discussed here often that he barely had a better ypc in Cleveland then he did here. 

[Steamboat_Shaun]

29 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

What was his ypc? How many times did they hand him the ball? Id expect him to get that many yards when he is the only one getting the ball. pretty sure it's been discussed here often that he barely had a better ypc in Cleveland then he did here. 

 

3.6ypc, 17.8 carries/game, 15 games played.

[Hi-Tek]

No. FA has been a disaster and we didn't need another tiny WR--especially in the 1st round. They whiffed when they didn't take a WR in '14 draft which was STACKED with WR talent. Of course, that had to do with the Trent Richardson disaster...which made it even more magnified.

[21isSuperman]

If he only had 2 offseasons under his belt, then yeah, he's great.  But he went a combined 2/12 in the 2013 and 2014 drafts and several of his free agent decisions have been really bad

[SteelCityColt]

8 hours ago, 1959Colts said:

It still comes down to getting the W

 

This is both correct and incorrect at the same time. 

 

You're very much correct in that at the end of the day very few people remember the substance of games when they look back, they see only the final score and the winners. There is no finer concealer in the world of the NFL than a big fat W. 

 

With that in mind it's not hard to see why a lot of people see things in a very black and white way and you get people who are very extreme in their viewpoints on this team. Nuance is a very important thing in this world. That's where it can be incorrect in that a "lucky" team isn't necessarily a good team that's built for long term success. 

 

Applying this to the Colts and where we are now, I think there is a degree of us as fans being spoiled since 2012. 2012 was in fact a prime example of where wins covered up a very talent poor roster that had dead cap issues. When you look at the stats there's no way we should have won 11 games (I mean a negative Points/Game and turnover differential for a season is not a sign of a good team!). 2012 was a huge outlier really, just look at the GB/Detroit games in particular. When you get outliers there's normally a reason and I hate to be the guy to say it but the #Chuckstrong movement really rallied the teams and fans to one united purpose, the power of which shouldn't be underestimated. Throw in a rookie QB playing well above a rookie level and you can get lucky over a short stretch. 

 

Roll onto 2013 and I think we saw the team lying to themselves in terms of how close there were to the SB in terms of roster talent and fell into the trap of making moves to put them over the top. Aside from Trent trade, there was bringing in the likes of Cherlius, Landray, Jean-Francois etc. Sure they weren't marquee players, but compared to 2012 we had FA cash to splash on guys hoping they could make that leap to top tier. None of them really worked out but hey.. 11-5 so it must be all good right? Not really, again I think without some ahem "exceptional" performances such as Mathis getting 19.5 sacks and some more crazy games (Seahawks/Broncos spring to mind) we could as easily been around the 8-8 mark. Remember the Rams blow out? The Cardinals game? That's before we even get onto the KC playoff game. 

 

2014 we start to already feel the pinch of 2013's draft, especially with meh moves in FA again. Losing Bethea was a big hit for us too I felt. But no worries, we lucked out in Luck/Davis having monster years and again some of the most up and down weird games. Shutting out the Bengals but only just beating the Browns. Again the hallmark of a flawed roster, inconsistency.

 

When the chickens do come home to roost and our streak of luck runs out with Luck's injury in 2015 we finally got to see the real Colts in some ways. But oddly, I think it's credit to how the roster improved since 2012 that they were able to go 8-8. Honestly if you'd put the 2012 team out there without the wave of emotion of #Chuckstrong and no Andrew Luck, how well do you think they'd have done? 

 

The flip side to all this? Let's say Grigson/Pagano learnt from their mistakes and realised they can't quick fix a SB. They got extended with a mandate to build a team properly. But being kind, they've had some terrible luck in terms of injuries and also been coin flips away from winning the games we've lost (gross simplification I know), 1-3 and heads are being called for. 2-2 or better and I think the mood and opinion surrounding them would be dramatically different without them having done a darn thing different. 

 

Do I feel happy with where we are as a team compared to 2012? No. Do I think mistakes have been made? Yes. I'm by no means laying out a defense for them. But.. I do feel people just look at the W's in the column and make a knee jerk reaction without taking the effort to analyse a lot of the time. When you get groups of people with that mentality on different sides of the fence it tends to drown out the more moderate considered thinkers in the community. Ironically I think we've had the best offseason since 2012 in terms of the draft and I liked a lot of the coaching roster changes, the results sadly are still paying the tab of previous seasons.  

[SteelCityColt]

2 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

What was his ypc? How many times did they hand him the ball? Id expect him to get that many yards when he is the only one getting the ball. pretty sure it's been discussed here often that he barely had a better ypc in Cleveland then he did here. 

 

11th most attempts with 267 for an average of 3.6 yards. He did show himself to be a decent goal line back though with a return of 11TDs. He was almost respectable as a weapon in the passing game with 7.2 yards per reception (70 targets, 51 reception).

 

You can see why people might have been fooled with the train of thought of well if he can do that against a stacked box, he's going to be a monster without facing them. Shame that this was actually him playing at his highest level. Talent wise I do honestly think he had it, but mentally? Nope. 

[BOTT]

3 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

He had over 1300 all-purpose yards and 12TDs his rookie year in Cleveland. What are you talking about?

 

Go watch the tape of him in Cleveland.  He wasn't impressive at all.

[BOTT]

39 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

11th most attempts with 267 for an average of 3.6 yards. He did show himself to be a decent goal line back though with a return of 11TDs. He was almost respectable as a weapon in the passing game with 7.2 yards per reception (70 targets, 51 reception).

 

You can see why people might have been fooled with the train of thought of well if he can do that against a stacked box, he's going to be a monster without facing them. Shame that this was actually him playing at his highest level. Talent wise I do honestly think he had it, but mentally? Nope. 

It's a myth he was facing stacked boxes in Cleveland.  They ranked something like 16th in amount of time facing a stacked box.  

[BOTT]

3 hours ago, bababooey said:

 

 

He had a pretty good rookie year when everybody still knew he'd be getting the ball. And you are talking about TODAY's NFL in your opinion, not 2013's NFL, when we were a year removed from him being selected 3rd overall. His failure in Indy is the reason today's NFL avoids RBs early with the exception of Elliot.

They avoid running backs early because it's a passing league and their careers tend to be short if you make them every down backs.

[BOTT]

4 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

He offered Freeman pretty much the same deal Chicago did, and he chose Chicago. 3years/$12mil is a pretty decent offer for a 30 year old LB. I'm not sure how comfortable I would've been had he offered him anything more than that. Sure in hindsight, it'd be nice to have Freeman right now, but at the same time, he's been pretty up and down so far this year with the Bears, and through 4 games he has zero sacks. If the Colts would've offered him $5mil a year, and he stayed and had zero sacks through 4 games, EVERYONE would be saying that Grigson should've let him walk.

 

As far as Robinson goes, he's been meh so far, but he's also missed 2 games with a concussion. I still don't know if he was a good signing or not, but I know everyone seemed pretty happy with it when it happened.

Freeman actually talked to the colts after Chicago offered him that deal, and Grigson pretty much told him he should sign with the Bears.

[ColtStrong]

20 hours ago, Hoose said:

The thing this Board needs to accept is that this is a rebuild from the hot mess that was years one through three.

 

And who's fault was that? Grigson. The O-Line should be fixed by now. We have one of the worst O-Lines year after year. He's had 4 years to fix it, and hasn't. 

[JRoss1997]

6 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Please gtho with this crap. Stop grading this dirtbag only on drafts he has literally threw 100 million in cap in the trash he deserves fired for that alone not even bringing up trading a 1st for a RB or drafting Werner or his other picks that have been useless 

Don is that you?

[bababooey]

56 minutes ago, BOTT said:

They avoid running backs early because it's a passing league and their careers tend to be short if you make them every down backs.

So, the same thing that I just said.

[Gavin]

1 hour ago, BOTT said:

It's a myth he was facing stacked boxes in Cleveland.  They ranked something like 16th in amount of time facing a stacked box.  

He just wasn't good at reading blocks. He didn't have to do a lot of it in Alabama

[BOTT]

4 minutes ago, bababooey said:

So, the same thing that I just said.

What?  Didn't you say teams avoid them because of Trent's failure in Indy?  Maybe I misunderstood.

[Colts_Fan12]

1 hour ago, BOTT said:

 

Go watch the tape of him in Cleveland.  He wasn't impressive at all.

This guy gets it!!

[OLD FAN MAN]

19 hours ago, AZColt11 said:

I would concur with most of the original post.  His first draft was even decent with Luck and Hilton.  The problem, as has been pointed out, was the 2 years after where he got very little.  That set the team back at LEAST those 2 years.  The Richardson trade, which gave up a first-rounder also hurt BUT i almost don't blame him too much for that one as many thought it was good at the time, perhaps he gave up too high of a draft pick when he may have been had for a 2nd or 3rd rounder instead, not the trade itself.  That would be my argument.  His last couple of drafts HAVE been better.  But when you are comparing them to the awful 2013 and 2014 drafts it is hard to tell what good really is.  I think this past draft MAY have been his best work but it is way too early to tell yet.  And I still feel like he may be in a bit over his head frankly.

agreed

[dudeski]

13 hours ago, csmopar said:

What are you smoking?

All 22

[OLD FAN MAN]

13 hours ago, JPFolks said:

3 straight 11-5 years were a "hot mess" to you? Since then we're 9-11 while losing the division and missing the playoffs?  Sure, injuries etc. can always be an excuse, but I sure would trade another appearance this year in the AFC Championship game for what happened last year or appears to be waiting for us this year.  It all looks like regression.  Sure, he's added a lot of starters, but those collective starters are viewed as the worst lineup outside of Luck, Hilton and Davis in the league by a large number of people who know more than both of us about the NFL.  So starters who can't win don't inspire me to believe in huge improvements over past lineups.  I think sometimes we're too close to our own players to see how bad they really are, and I am guilty of that myself in some cases.  I think it was, however, clear to many of us who posted pre-draft, how desperately we need to upgrade not only the line (duh) but the Linebackers inside and out and the defensive backfield.  Signing on FA (who is still pretty questionable) seemed insane and once the predictable injury bug happened, we were in dire straights and that lack of depth likely handed us our 0-2 start.  Luck, with the terrible overall line play, couldn't overcome the high scores of our opponents and even when he did (Detroit) the defense gave it away in less than one minute.  

 

I think the info posted by the OP is interesting, but I think the conclusion doesn't match the actual results.  If we were a "hot mess" going 33-5 in the regular season and 3-3 in post season in those years, what is the word for now?  We still have ancient and ineffective vets on the team and aside from a couple young players, a lot of weak play from everyone not named Luck.  

I agree

[Superman]

54 minutes ago, BOTT said:

Freeman actually talked to the colts after Chicago offered him that deal, and Grigson pretty much told him he should sign with the Bears.

 

Yeah, that's not what the story has been since March. Holder's breakdown was different, but Freeman says Grigson basically told him to kick rocks. Both Holder and Freeman say that the Colts were given the final opportunity -- whether that was to match or it was to beat, that's the question. If Freeman said 'the Bears are offering this, I'll stay if you beat it,' then that's one thing. If he gave the Colts the chance to match, and Grigson declined, that's another.

 

I wanted him to stay, would rather have him than any other LB we have. But I'm not devastated that he left. Right now, it sucks, but a year or two from now, meh.

[Gavin]

14 hours ago, csmopar said:

What are you smoking?

Go back and watch him get blown off the ball multiple times vs double teams vs Jax alone

[1959Colts]

2 hours ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

This is both correct and incorrect at the same time. 

 

You're very much correct in that at the end of the day very few people remember the substance of games when they look back, they see only the final score and the winners. There is no finer concealer in the world of the NFL than a big fat W. 

 

With that in mind it's not hard to see why a lot of people see things in a very black and white way and you get people who are very extreme in their viewpoints on this team. Nuance is a very important thing in this world. That's where it can be incorrect in that a "lucky" team isn't necessarily a good team that's built for long term success. 

 

Applying this to the Colts and where we are now, I think there is a degree of us as fans being spoiled since 2012. 2012 was in fact a prime example of where wins covered up a very talent poor roster that had dead cap issues. When you look at the stats there's no way we should have won 11 games (I mean a negative Points/Game and turnover differential for a season is not a sign of a good team!). 2012 was a huge outlier really, just look at the GB/Detroit games in particular. When you get outliers there's normally a reason and I hate to be the guy to say it but the #Chuckstrong movement really rallied the teams and fans to one united purpose, the power of which shouldn't be underestimated. Throw in a rookie QB playing well above a rookie level and you can get lucky over a short stretch. 

 

Roll onto 2013 and I think we saw the team lying to themselves in terms of how close there were to the SB in terms of roster talent and fell into the trap of making moves to put them over the top. Aside from Trent trade, there was bringing in the likes of Cherlius, Landray, Jean-Francois etc. Sure they weren't marquee players, but compared to 2012 we had FA cash to splash on guys hoping they could make that leap to top tier. None of them really worked out but hey.. 11-5 so it must be all good right? Not really, again I think without some ahem "exceptional" performances such as Mathis getting 19.5 sacks and some more crazy games (Seahawks/Broncos spring to mind) we could as easily been around the 8-8 mark. Remember the Rams blow out? The Cardinals game? That's before we even get onto the KC playoff game. 

 

2014 we start to already feel the pinch of 2013's draft, especially with meh moves in FA again. Losing Bethea was a big hit for us too I felt. But no worries, we lucked out in Luck/Davis having monster years and again some of the most up and down weird games. Shutting out the Bengals but only just beating the Browns. Again the hallmark of a flawed roster, inconsistency.

 

When the chickens do come home to roost and our streak of luck runs out with Luck's injury in 2015 we finally got to see the real Colts in some ways. But oddly, I think it's credit to how the roster improved since 2012 that they were able to go 8-8. Honestly if you'd put the 2012 team out there without the wave of emotion of #Chuckstrong and no Andrew Luck, how well do you think they'd have done? 

 

The flip side to all this? Let's say Grigson/Pagano learnt from their mistakes and realised they can't quick fix a SB. They got extended with a mandate to build a team properly. But being kind, they've had some terrible luck in terms of injuries and also been coin flips away from winning the games we've lost (gross simplification I know), 1-3 and heads are being called for. 2-2 or better and I think the mood and opinion surrounding them would be dramatically different without them having done a darn thing different. 

 

Do I feel happy with where we are as a team compared to 2012? No. Do I think mistakes have been made? Yes. I'm by no means laying out a defense for them. But.. I do feel people just look at the W's in the column and make a knee jerk reaction without taking the effort to analyse a lot of the time. When you get groups of people with that mentality on different sides of the fence it tends to drown out the more moderate considered thinkers in the community. Ironically I think we've had the best offseason since 2012 in terms of the draft and I liked a lot of the coaching roster changes, the results sadly are still paying the tab of previous seasons.  

 

My point is...

That whether you think Grigson has done some good things, or if one believes he has messed things up,

unless this team starts winning games and improves their record.

 

Grigson will continue be be criticized. 

[crazycolt1]

25 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:

 

My point is...

That whether you think Grigson has done some good things, or if one believes he has messed things up,

unless this team starts winning games and improves their record.

 

Grigson will continue be be criticized. 

Grigson will face criticism no matter how many wins or losses we have. The Colts could win a super bowl but Grigson wouldn't get the credit because arm chair GMs can do a better job.

[csmopar]

34 minutes ago, Gavin said:

Go back and watch him get blown off the ball multiple times vs double teams vs Jax alone

Still, he's a 2nd yr player who has had more good games than bad. Yeah, he's not JJ Watt or Mali Jackson but hes no Josh Chapman either

[Patagonia Chris]

I think you overrated the talent on a few of his draft picks. So his players start for the Colts, but at this point what kind of compliment or reason for praise is that? You have to judge whether or not they are starting caliber on a Super Bowl contender. Would Denzelle Good or David Parry be playing, let alone starting, for Pittsburgh, New England, Minnesota or Seattle? No. The only reason this is a rebuild is because he squandered the best opportunity in the NFL...Andrew Luck on a rookie contract. Look at the amount of draft value that he squandered on players like Trent Richardson and Montori Hughes, or the guys that he gave big contracts to who are no longer in the NFL. D'Joun Smith was a bust because he was injured? Everything I've read has made it seem like he had a lot more problems than that. Should Pagano be fired? Yeah, probably. But there is almost no reason that Ryan Grigson should be here, either.

[Gavin]

Just now, csmopar said:

Still, he's a 2nd yr player who has had more good games than bad. Yeah, he's not JJ Watt or Mali Jackson but hes no Josh Chapman either

Well no he isn't Fatman but that's basically because Parry has the stamina to be bad on more snaps on average that Chapman had stamina to be bad on less snaps, Neither are good. Parry is just bad on more snaps.

[bababooey]

1 hour ago, BOTT said:

What?  Didn't you say teams avoid them because of Trent's failure in Indy?  Maybe I misunderstood.

It's what we both said, his failure in Indy due to him/his production breaking down so quickly has stopped almost everyone but Jerry Jones from selecting a RB early since.

[BOTT]

Just now, bababooey said:

It's what we both said, his failure in Indy due to him/his production breaking down so quickly has stopped almost everyone but Jerry Jones from selecting a RB early since.

That's not what I said.

[Coltswarriors]

Boom. Yes.

 

Grigson isn't great by any means, but Pagano is just an awful head coach. The team is never prepared.

[bababooey]

28 minutes ago, BOTT said:

That's not what I said.

But...he was a starting RB who didn't catch much out of the backfield....

[gacoop1]

You can't put all the blame on Pagano, but give some credit of the failure of this organization to Grigson.  The draft picks, free agent pick ups, undrafted free agents, and the pick up north (Canada) yielded for the most part negative results,. Now, the team is on Panic Mode with 1-3 record.  Totally unacceptable with these two being the architect of this team.

[deedub75]

He never laid the groundwork for this team and I think his drafting strategy changed only because it had to.  

[gacoop1]

Front office usually get the blame, rightfully so as accentuated by Reggie  Wayne's comments. He was accurate in his assessment on this team's dismal performance and pretty much alot of fans agree including myself.  So, Grigson if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. 

[Carlos Danger]

I generally agree. I don't think it's shocking to think that a young, rookie GM would get better at his (insane) job with experience. 

 

It's tough to wrap your head around, but, to me, the team is trending in the right direction. Our rebuild was set back by the "SB or bust" mistakes from Grigson's first two years, but I think that many of us were excited to have a GM that was willing to swing for the fences. The results were mixed at best.

 

However, the last two off-seasons have shown me that Grigson is willing to use a more conservative approach to team building and that he's actually not bad at it. If we had the Grigson of today back in 2012, we might be on the other side of the mountain (of course the 2013 draft was brutal for almost everyone, not just Indy). 

 

The bad news is that we have to take our lumps for the time being. The good news is that we are building a solid young foundation and we play in the worst division in football. I don't think it will be 3 years before we dominate the South again. 

 

I know that I said some negative things in another thread after the loss in London, but I don't think I'd be pleased if Irsay fired Grigson after the season based on what might be a poor W/L record... Even coming into this year we knew that there was a good chance we'd struggle early with all of the new coaches and young players... Then the injuries hit us hard on defense.

 

It's not like we can't still win the division, either. After all, we are two games out with 12 to play and 5 division games left... It is still perfectly conceivable that we are in first place in two weeks... 

 

Side Note: It only took 3 days for my inner homer to take back over after a tough loss, so the sky apparently hasn't fallen yet. 

 

 

[JPFolks]

7 hours ago, Superman said:

I wanted him to stay, would rather have him than any other LB we have. But I'm not devastated that he left. Right now, it sucks, but a year or two from now, meh.

I am surprised at this comment coming from you.  There isn't a single football issue outside of maybe Luck and his career, that won't be "meh" two years from now.  We have a win now league and fandom.  2 more years put's Luck on the peak heading towards downside of his career already.  2 years (right now) is his absolute peak.  There's nothing "meh" about squandering that.  Or course in two years an older player we lost is irrelevant no matter the name or circumstance.  But we had him, he was a great Colt player and wanted to stay here.  We kept all the inferior LB's and sent him packing.   (It reminds me of what they did to Reggie, though I believe you disagree with that).  You are either a Grigs guy and will get to play even if you don't merit it, or you are not a Grig's guy and he'll run you out of town on a rail.  

[crazycolt1]

2 hours ago, JPFolks said:

I am surprised at this comment coming from you.  There isn't a single football issue outside of maybe Luck and his career, that won't be "meh" two years from now.  We have a win now league and fandom.  2 more years put's Luck on the peak heading towards downside of his career already.  2 years (right now) is his absolute peak.  There's nothing "meh" about squandering that.  Or course in two years an older player we lost is irrelevant no matter the name or circumstance.  But we had him, he was a great Colt player and wanted to stay here.  We kept all the inferior LB's and sent him packing.   (It reminds me of what they did to Reggie, though I believe you disagree with that).  You are either a Grigs guy and will get to play even if you don't merit it, or you are not a Grig's guy and he'll run you out of town on a rail.  

What has Reggie have to do with this? Reggie was done as a player and everyone but you seems to know this.

[theanarchist]

On 10/4/2016 at 2:00 PM, Hoose said:

Grigson gets a lot of blame, and for his first couple of years, it was well deserved. But lets examine the past two years with regard to the Draft, Free Agents, and UFAs. 

 

2015 DRAFT

1. Dorsett. Should prove to be a solid player through the years. Needs to step up a level over the next few weeks. I think he will. 

2. D'Joun Smith. A miss. But only because he's never healthy. 

3. Henry Anderson. A big time win. Lets hope he gets back to playing shape by mid season. He's still slowed by the knee a bit. Great player.

4. Clayton Geathers. A big time win. Should be a starting safety for years to come. 

5. David Parry. Solid player. May be playing out of position at NT. Would like to see him at DT. But a keeper. 

6. Josh Robinson and Amarlo Herrera. Gone and forgotten. 

7. Denzelle Good. A huge win. Getting a starting offensive lineman in the 7th round? Very rare. 

 

2016 DRAFT

1. Ryan Kelly. Should be an anchor at Center for years to come. 

2. TJ Green. So far, so good. Should pair with Geathers to anchor the safety position in a high performing manner. 

3. Le'Raven Clark. An intentional pick for the future. Time will tell if it was a worthwhile gamble but he has the intangibles. 

4. Hassan Ridgeway. So far, so good. This is a position that takes time to master. Solid for a 4th rounder. 

4. Antonio Morrison. Needs to improve his coverage skills but for a rookie he shows genuine promise. 

5. Joe Haeg. Another 5th round gem and appears to have the skills to develop into a solid starter. 

7. Trevor Bates. Practice squad. Could be good. No clue yet. 

7. Austin Blythe. Needs work but for a 7th rounder they have a potential long time backup at Center and Guard. 

 

These two drafts have been strong. Grigson should get some credit for that, given all the appropriate criticism he received for his first few efforts. 

 

Recent Free Agents

1. Mike Adams. A defensive anchor. Where the D would be without him I don't want to imagine. 

2. Kendall Langford. Still banged up a bit but a very solid player last year and likely will re-emerge this year when fully healthy. 

3. Frank Gore. I love the guy. But this is probably his last year. Still a quality running back. 

 

Undrafted Free Agents. 

1. Quan Bray

2. Edwin Jackson

3. Curt Maggitt

4. Josh Ferguson

5. Chester Rogers

6. TY McGill

 

Again, these free agents are significant improvement over prior efforts, and the UFAs represent great value outside the draft. 

 

That's 23 new players on the roster in the past 2 seasons. Many starting. 

I would argue that as the team matures, the quality of play will absolutely improve. This is a VERY YOUNG TEAM for the most part interspersed with some old timers. 

 

Add in another solid draft and getting a top quality pass rusher in free agency and this team has potential. Its just that the growing pains are rough. 

Grigson, I would argue, is doing his job the past two seasons. And doing it well. 

 

Pagano, on the other hand, is a really good guy..................and a lousy head coach. Show him the door at the end of the year. 

I highlighted some names and I'll give you my opinion on them so far

 

Parry: Decent player, hard worker but not a difference maker. Lunch pale type of guy but he is not an above average DL.

Good: Hard to say but he has some potential but so far he has not played well, below average.

Clark: Seems to be another guy who could have potential but some believe he doesnt have what it takes to be an NFL offensive linemen.

Morrison: have not been impressed with him so far. Especially this last game. He's a rookie but I honestly don't see a lot of potential is this guy.

Bates: No idea. Showed good in college tape at OLB now he's playing ILB.

Blythe: Love the guy, great Hawkeye but he's getting pushed around a lot. I don't see him on the roster long term.

Bray: nice return guy but don't see him being anything other than that long term

The rest of the UDFA you mention are, in my opinion other that TY McGill, spot players/depth guys with no long term potential.

 

Just because they stick on the roster doesnt mean they are players that are going to help you win. That's the goal, keep players that will play well and help you win. But, in the two drafts that you just listed I don't see one true difference maker yet. There's potential for a couple: Kelly, Henry Anderson, Green? But even with those guys you have Anderson coming off of an ACL injury and Green who is a huge question mark in coverage. BTW, I find it really funny that a guy who has 4.3 speed has trouble in coverage. IDK, just seems odd to me.

 

I disagree with your whole topic. I think Grigson has done a terrible job overall. He's not had success bringing in talent that makes a difference. In the NFL you need 3-4 difference makers on your team in order to compete for 1) division 2) championship. Right now we have 2 IMO: Luck and Hilton and Hilton is iffy. In the days of yore we had difference makers a plenty: Peyton, Harrison, Reggie, Mathis, Freeney, Glenn and when healthy Bob Sanders.

 

As this roster sits we have a situation with the RB, OL, LB that I think is probably bottom 5 in the NFL if not worse. Maybe I'm over reacting but I don't think I am.

[MSColtsFan]

The problem I have with Grigson is he seems to be reactionary.  It feels, to me, like he chases positions in his drafts  Missing on Thornton (good draft pick, productive, but in 32 of 48 possible games - so not the solution) and Holmes (not to mention Cherilus) results in chasing OL a couple years later.  Using more picks to cover his misses just a couple years ago.  Same for DT.  Same for Edge rusher.  Same with CB.    What kills me is the use of picks on positions for a second or third time in a handful of years.  It makes the misses cost so much more.  Four of eight picks on OL is not a formula for long term success.  As much as it had to happen.  What's next year, 4 LBs out of 7 picks?  Chasing it kills depth, creates voids which make you have to continue the method which created it in the first place... Reactionary. 

[rockywoj]

19 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

What was his ypc? How many times did they hand him the ball? Id expect him to get that many yards when he is the only one getting the ball. pretty sure it's been discussed here often that he barely had a better ypc in Cleveland then he did here. 

 

As I recall, he also made the NFL Network top 100 players list (No. 71) on the merit of his rookie performance.  At the time I thought the price paid for him was steep, but at the same time, I thought it would really fill a need.  Turns out I was both right and wrong, in the wrong way, sadly.

[rockywoj]

17 hours ago, Hi-Tek said:

No. FA has been a disaster and we didn't need another tiny WR--especially in the 1st round. They whiffed when they didn't take a WR in '14 draft which was STACKED with WR talent. Of course, that had to do with the Trent Richardson disaster...which made it even more magnified.

 

3	90	Indianapolis Colts	Donte Moncrief	WR	Ole Miss	SEC

Seems that they DID take a WR, one that was a starter this year before injury, whom several around the NFL were expecting to have a breakout year.  Looks like it was NOT a whiff as you claim.