Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Grigson says Luck's contract affects Colts Defense


lollygagger8

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 270
  • Created
  • Last Reply

 

I've been a strong Grigson supporter since the day I arrived.

 

And I only jumped off the bandwagon in early January when it appeared that Pagano would be fired and Grigson might retain his job.     I thought that was unfair and said so.

 

But once both guys were kept,  I was fine.

 

I've been mostly, but not entirely supportive of him this year.    But I've made no calls for his head.    I haven't even called for him to be fired now.     I've just said I thought his comment was monumentally stupid and not in the best interest of the Colts.

 

I'm just blowing off steam.    Seriously.     If Luck can live with it and Irsay can live with it and Pagano too,   then I can live with it as well.    

 

I know my rant isn't popular with some here.     If this blows over,  and I suspect it will,  then I'll be done with it as well.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"When you pay Andrew what we did its going to.....to take some time to build on the other side of the ball so we got young players like Clayton Geathers, TJ Green, Henry Anderson has played some really good football for us. David Parry whos a starter. We got a lot of players on that side of the ball that are on the come but nothings ever perfect. There are no utopias in an NFL team. We just have to keep trying to do better every year. Our coach has won a lot of football games"

 

Grigsons exact words. For the record I don't think Grigson is intentionally placing blame on Lucks for where we are at currently. I can see where it comes off  that way easily. What I hear from him when I listen to that interview is a guy that's still very much learning on the job

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well, for once he is right about something. Luck's contract is insane and it will be impossible for them to build a team for years to come since they're strapped down to this massive contract to a quarterback, who is very prone to getting injured again. Luck already is under poor protection as evident from the four games this season. All that money was paid to a QB who could easily get hurt in the next game and then that's a bunch of wasted money. 

 

Look at Baltimore after Flacco's massive deal or the Saints after Brees big contract. And Luck got paid more than both of them and he don't have a Super Bowl ring or the stats to truly defend such a crazy contract. Luck is 3-8 as a starter since that epic stomping they had in the AFCCG 2 years ago. There is absolutely nothing to justify that insane contract whatsoever. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Superman said:

Good heavens...

 

I just listened to the interview. The one little comment about Luck was almost a throwaway line. It's a nearly 11 minute interview, and he said that one thing about Luck's contract. His point had nothing to do with Luck.

 

I'll say again, bang Grigson for all his mistakes. But anything about this interview is nonsense.

I didn't take it as him taking a shot at Luck. I took it as him using the Luck contract as a scapegoat. While admitting his shortcomings in the draft he tries to lead us to believe that they couldn't go after top shelf FAs. While it will be hard to sign guys like that going forward, it doesn't explain the 3-4 years before his deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If this season does not end successfully then Grigson has to go. This is a pathetic attempt to pacify the situation. He had all kinds of money in years two and three.

 

I am on board with the plan until the excuses come. Excuses can be a sign of giving up. It's quite possible that Grigson is mentally checking out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Rodney Johnson said:

Grigson is the worst G.M ever. Elway built a deffense with Peyton. All Grigson has is excuses for his ineptness

 

Maybe. But he's giving Matt Millen a run for the race to the bottom for being a GM.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

I didn't take it as him taking a shot at Luck. I took it as him using the Luck contract as a scapegoat. While admitting his shortcomings in the draft he tries to lead us to believe that they couldn't go after top shelf FAs. While it will be hard to sign guys like that going forward, it doesn't explain the 3-4 years before his deal.

 

I don't believe he was trying to. That's why he said it will take some time to build. He's specifically talking about moving forward.

 

And his comment was about the state of the roster now. Says they feel the offense is in good shape, and while they have some young guys on defense that he named, they still need more. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Derakynn said:

Remember when being a a member of the media was actually respectable? True journalism is all but dead nowadays.

Never have truer words been written IMO. Nothing but click-bait for the most part. They used to be there to report the news and now they wanna give their own biased views on everything as if it's the end-all, be-all!

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Bogie said:

 

Well, for once he is right about something. Luck's contract is insane and it will be impossible for them to build a team for years to come since they're strapped down to this massive contract to a quarterback, who is very prone to getting injured again. Luck already is under poor protection as evident from the four games this season. All that money was paid to a QB who could easily get hurt in the next game and then that's a bunch of wasted money. 

 

Look at Baltimore after Flacco's massive deal or the Saints after Brees big contract. And Luck got paid more than both of them and he don't have a Super Bowl ring or the stats to truly defend such a crazy contract. Luck is 3-8 as a starter since that epic stomping they had in the AFCCG 2 years ago. There is absolutely nothing to justify that insane contract whatsoever. 

 

 

 

I concur

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Of course it's different.

 

You can't claim, as you and I have for years,  that the Colts had the money to re-sign Allen and Coby Fleener.... plus...

 

You also claimed and even laid-out with facts and figures how we could sign Nndomican (sp?) Suh to a huge contract,  and also sign Andrew Luck.     Which you did.

 

And you're now defending Grigson and Irsay saying apparently we didn't have enough to do all that.   That Grigson is telling the truth when he says Luck's deal has caused us to slow the pace of building the defense.

 

Those comments collide with each other.    They contradict each other.

 

It's one or the other,   it's not both.    It can't be both.

 

If money is tight now due to Luck's contract,  then signing Fleener and Suh was never possible.    Not even close.

 

 

You're losing sight of some important details. Understandable, because my cap projections always include multiple moving parts. Let me lay some out for you.

 

1) My cap projections going into the 2016 offseason relied on a few assumptions -- like the Colts releasing Arthur Jones, Trent Cole and maybe D'Qwell Jackson. I also didn't anticipate the Colts giving Dwayne Allen $12m (cash) in 2016, or even $44m (cash) to Luck. Under those circumstances, they could have kept Allen and Fleener, if they wanted, but I think you'll remember that I never really anticipated they would keep both.

 

2) I never wanted Suh. During the 2015 offseason I did some cap projections about Suh at ~$15m, showing how the Colts could make that work, but I wasn't in favor of adding him (I think Dustin was). However, that was before they signed Cole, Andre and Gore.

 

3) You're probably thinking about my projections for Mo Wilkerson (http://forums.colts.com/topic/46207-how-the-colts-can-sign-mo-wilkerson-in-2017/). This was specific to the 2017 offseason, and if you look closely at my post, you'll see that I acknowledged the heavy cash burden this would create even next year. The caveat is a) the Colts will have that one offseason to make a big splash, due to whiffing entirely in the 2013 draft, and b) I think a player like Mo would be worth it. It's immaterial now that Mo re-upped with the Jets, but that was the basis for my projection, and it was for a future offseason.

 

4) I'll say this again, which I've already said multiple times in this thread alone: My comments about the Colts not being able to go on a spree due to the Luck commitment are specific to the 2016 offseason. It would not have been prudent for the Colts to commit a bunch of cash in 2016 free agency when they had Luck's contract on the way, knowing that they would be making a major cash commitment to him. I know NFL owners are billionaires, but cash flow is a real consideration for any business. It's how they stay solvent. I believe the Colts restricted themselves in free agency because they wanted a clear path to the Luck deal, which wasn't done for another three months. 

 

5) Moving forward, not just in 2017 but beyond, the Colts will be fine on the cap. Luck's deal isn't going to decimate their cap, and all my comments to this effect have been to contrast the extremism that everyone seems to be given to. All the comments about Luck's deal being a cap hog that will sink the team, how no team can win with their QB taking up a big portion of the team's cap, etc., all that stuff that I think is dead wrong... when I say the Colts will be fine, even with Luck's deal, I mean that they will be more than capable of retaining their key free agents each year, and they'll even have some cap space to add some free agents each year, if they want.

 

6) I have always said that the key to the Colts building and maintaining a quality roster is to nail the draft, and I have always said that this becomes even more critical once Luck's deal is on the books. Like Grigson said -- and I believe he was speaking strictly in terms of the future -- it will take time to build the defensive side of the roster because they want/need to do it through the draft. I also said, in this very thread, that they will have the ability to make a splash in 2017 if they want, and I think they should. But still, roster building, especially on defense, will be done through the draft. Without Mo on the market, I'm not even that excited about anyone that might be available coming up.

 

I hope that clears things up. I'm not talking out of both sides of my mouth. I've always maintained that the Colts HAVE TO nail the draft, and that Luck's contract will reduce their margin for error. But I've also maintained that they aren't going to be in cap hell just because they have a highly paid QB. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Superman said:

This is a fair and accurate headline that reflects what Grigson actually said.

 

 

 

That's true.....    

 

But having blown as many draft picks and free agency moves as Grigson has has set back the efforts at least two years......

 

We should be much further along than where we are.     By any reasonable measure,  this roster should be much more talented than what it currently is.

 

We've all talked about it for years......     too many misses,  not enough hits.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I've been a strong Grigson supporter since the day I arrived.

 

And I only jumped off the bandwagon in early January when it appeared that Pagano would be fired and Grigson might retain his job.     I thought that was unfair and said so.

 

But once both guys were kept,  I was fine.

 

I've been mostly, but not entirely supportive of him this year.    But I've made no calls for his head.    I haven't even called for him to be fired now.     I've just said I thought his comment was monumentally stupid and not in the best interest of the Colts.

 

I'm just blowing off steam.    Seriously.     If Luck can live with it and Irsay can live with it and Pagano too,   then I can live with it as well.    

 

I know my rant isn't popular with some here.     If this blows over,  and I suspect it will,  then I'll be done with it as well.

 

 

 

He basically just said that they missed on several draft picks & FA acquisitions , and now that they've paid Andrew, he has to do a better job drafting, because there's no margin for error now. I still don't understand the amount of butthurt surrounding these comments. It's 100% true.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

He basically just said that they missed on several draft picks & FA acquisitions , and now that they've paid Andrew, he has to do a better job drafting, because there's no margin for error now. I still don't understand the amount of butthurt surrounding these comments. It's 100% true.

 

The comment is not helpful to the Colts organization.

 

I did a sweep of media outlets yesterday....   ESPN,  NFL.com...   CBS Sports,  NBC Sports,  Bleacher Report...

 

Everyone says Grigson looks like he's blaming Luck for Grigson's failures.     

 

That's why the butt-hurt.        This is a self-inflicted wound.      It was not necessary.     The Colts have enough problems surrounding the franchise at 1-3,  that we didn't need to pour gasoline on our own fire.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

The comment is not helpful to the Colts organization.

 

I did a sweep of media outlets yesterday....   ESPN,  NFL.com...   CBS Sports,  NBC Sports,  Bleacher Report...

 

Everyone says Grigson looks like he's blaming Luck for Grigson's failures.     

 

That's why the butt-hurt.        This is a self-inflicted wound.      It was not necessary.     The Colts have enough problems surrounding the franchise at 1-3,  that we didn't need to pour gasoline on our own fire.

 

Everyone?  No, just the media. If you listen to the whole interview it is not a self inflicting anything. It was a truthful assessment of himself and he admitted he has missed on some picks.

The only way any gasoline is being poured on any fire is by those who want to push their own agendas by taking the whole thing out of context.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 12to13 said:

If he's still very much learning, he must have been absolutely clueless when he was hired. 

I'm sure he had some idea in some areas, Being a GM your still doing some scouting and able to watch some tape and go check out guys personally. your still doing some scouting but being a GM your also taking on added responsibilities which he had no experience doing before. Your also making many other decisions that can affect on field performance and the cap. But he made some bad decisions. I blame some of them on the win now mentality he took and not being patient

 

I also think he hasn't put a premium on guys with good play recognition skills or awareness. Sure he takes them into account but I think he goes under the assumption those things can be taught by our coaching staff now or in past years. He places a premium on speed which he should but I think he has done that in some instances over the fundamentals and other more important qualities or at their expense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Everyone?  No, just the media. If you listen to the whole interview it is not a self inflicting anything. It was a truthful assessment of himself and he admitted he has missed on some picks.

The only way any gasoline is being poured on any fire is by those who want to push their own agendas by taking the whole thing out of context.

 

 

By everyone,  I was referring to the media.....

 

As to agendas.....

 

The Indianapolis Colts are more than just the organization and its fan base.

 

The Colts are 1/32nd of the NFL.     There are 31 other teams and their fan bases.   When the GM says something like what Grigson said publicly,  the whole NFL community responds.  

 

Right or wrong,  fair or not,   that's what happens.

 

To pretend no one else should be bothered simply because you're not bothered misses the Big Picture.         And the big picture says it was not helpful,  but worse, it hurts the organization.     And it simply wasn't needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I don't believe he was trying to. That's why he said it will take some time to build. He's specifically talking about moving forward.

 

And his comment was about the state of the roster now. Says they feel the offense is in good shape, and while they have some young guys on defense that he named, they still need more. 

Yeah he specifically named Geathers and talked about Morrison's potential which I liked.

 

 I just don't get why after he said "Bottom line, we've missed in the draft and I have to do a better job with that" he didn't just follow up and say "And we've missed on some FAs as well and that's also something I have to get better at, but it'll be a little harder". It came off as him not willing to admit that some of the old FAs he brought in didn't work out. It's obvious that they have to be more careful now with the Luck contract but the Colts aren't the only team with a big contract QB.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

The comment is not helpful to the Colts organization.

 

I did a sweep of media outlets yesterday....   ESPN,  NFL.com...   CBS Sports,  NBC Sports,  Bleacher Report...

 

Everyone says Grigson looks like he's blaming Luck for Grigson's failures.     

 

That's why the butt-hurt.        This is a self-inflicted wound.      It was not necessary.     The Colts have enough problems surrounding the franchise at 1-3,  that we didn't need to pour gasoline on our own fire.

 

 

You and I have disagreed on many things in the past, but this is not a topic we will disagree much on.

 

You're absolutely correct. There was no point in Grigson making the comment. It's a weak attempt to shift the blame from himself. We all have to own our mistakes. Grigson is obviously not owning his mistakes. Had Grigson added that he did not do enough before Luck's big contract, then the comment would have sound merit. 

 

Only a fool would phrase that the way he did.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BlueShoe said:

 

You and I have disagreed on many things in the past, but this is not a topic we will disagree much on.

 

You're absolutely correct. There was no point in Grigson making the comment. It's a weak attempt to shift the blame from himself. We all have to own our mistakes. Grigson is obviously not owning his mistakes. Had Grigson added that he did not do enough before Luck's big contract, then the comment would have sound merit. 

 

Only a fool would phrase that the way he did.

 

I wasn't aware that we had disagreed on "many" things....     only, perhaps,  "some" things....

 

Honestly,  I'm OK with people disagreeing with me.     I'm not always right.    I'm wrong plenty of times.    And sometimes I learn that through disagreements with other posters.

 

As for Grigson.....     I'm more bothered by the fact that he said what he said, than thinking it.

 

As Pagano rightly says.....    we keep things behind closed doors.     And that's the type of comment that should remain out of the public domain.

 

I know my comments have bothered some here.     I'm speaking not just as a Colts fan,  but as a former media guy.      

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

 

By everyone,  I was referring to the media.....

 

As to agendas.....

 

The Indianapolis Colts are more than just the organization and its fan base.

 

The Colts are 1/32nd of the NFL.     There are 31 other teams and their fan bases.   When the GM says something like what Grigson said publicly,  the whole NFL community responds.  

 

Right or wrong,  fair or not,   that's what happens.

 

To pretend no one else should be bothered simply because you're not bothered misses the Big Picture.         And the big picture says it was not helpful,  but worse, it hurts the organization.     And it simply wasn't needed.

 

 

 

He should have slowed down and made his point more clearly and effectively. If he had said 'and now that we've done Luck's new contract, we absolutely have to be better in the draft as we build the defense, we can't afford to miss picks moving forward...' it would have come across differently.

 

Like I said, I feel like the Luck comment was a throwaway line. It wasn't untrue, but I don't think he expected it to catch fire like it has. If he did, he likely wouldn't have said it. Still, I think what he said was fine, and is being twisted and blown out of proportion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I wasn't aware that we had disagreed on "many" things....     only, perhaps,  "some" things....

 

Honestly,  I'm OK with people disagreeing with me.     I'm not always right.    I'm wrong plenty of times.    And sometimes I learn that through disagreements with other posters.

 

As for Grigson.....     I'm more bothered by the fact that he said what he said, than thinking it.

 

As Pagano rightly says.....    we keep things behind closed doors.     And that's the type of comment that should remain out of the public domain.

 

I know my comments have bothered some here.     I'm speaking not just as a Colts fan,  but as a former media guy.      

 

Correct. It was a comment that did not need to be publicly said. Everyone knows that "because of Luck's contract" it will be tougher to build the team moving forward. We have known that day was coming ever since the day we drafted him. Grigson had about 4 years to build the team around an underpaid (in comparison to production) quarterback. 

 

Why cry about it now? He sure wasn't mentioning how much Luck's contract helped him when he was "only" making 5-6 million per year.

 

The dude comes off as if he is crying, and I don't like it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Yeah he specifically named Geathers and talked about Morrison's potential which I liked.

 

 I just don't get why after he said "Bottom line, we've missed in the draft and I have to do a better job with that" he didn't just follow up and say "And we've missed on some FAs as well and that's also something I have to get better at, but it'll be a little harder". It came off as him not willing to admit that some of the old FAs he brought in didn't work out. It's obvious that they have to be more careful now with the Luck contract but the Colts aren't the only team with a big contract QB.

 

Because after he said 'we've missed in the draft,' he went on to talking about the state of the roster, not the details of all his mistakes. He started with the offense, which he said he thinks looks good. Then he talked about the defense, mentioned some of the young guys, but said it's going to take time to build because they want to do it through the draft.

 

To me, his comment was about what they have to do moving forward. It wasn't about what they messed up in the past, although he did acknowledge their mistakes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Because after he said 'we've missed in the draft,' he went on to talking about the state of the roster, not the details of all his mistakes. He started with the offense, which he said he thinks looks good. Then he talked about the defense, mentioned some of the young guys, but said it's going to take time to build because they want to do it through the draft.

 

To me, his comment was about what they have to do moving forward. It wasn't about what they messed up in the past, although he did acknowledge their mistakes.

He shouldn't have made the comment at all then. What he said about what needs to be done moving forward is obvious. It's the past that he needs to fully set the record straight on.

 

The defense isn't going to take awhile to build because Luck has a big contract. It's going to take awhile because for the 4 years Luck was on a rookie contract he's failed to hit on his draft picks as he mentioned, and failed in FA. Lucks contract is only a recent hinderance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/7/2016 at 2:37 PM, lollygagger8 said:

 

Yeah but they knew they would have to fork over big bucks sooner or later to him. And that affected them putting a good D together 4 years ago. hahahahahaha

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...