What do you do now?

[Colts_Fan12]

7 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

No.

 

What tells you we were getting better is that we went further in the playoffs our first three years.    Teams that are getting worse don't do that.

 

We're not becoming the Cleveland Browns.     That is so amazingly wrong,  it's beyond belief that anyone would even think that....

 

I don't suppose you've noticed how often you're spectacularly wrong,  have you?

 

Why do I even bother?         

Ok genius please do tell how the path we are on right now is a good thing?? And none of us said we will be the Browns overnight it's a possibility with the 2 jack * running our team I to the turf. But yeah I'm always wrong coming from someone who thinks struggling to make it to 500 is a good out look for our team. Sorry I get your new and not used to winning like the rest of us have with our franchise squeaking into the playoffs to you seems like a great accomplishment.

 

I guess you also can't tell how much of a * you have become over the years 

[Pacergeek]

It's really lose-lose. If we don't make the playoffs, and get a high draft pick, Grigson cannot be trusted to draft a good player with the high draft pick. If we do make the playoffs, we will not have a high pick, and Grigson cannot be trusted to draft a good player with the lower draft pick. Too many holes on the team. Cannot be fixed with one draft. Need to start over. Have a GM with his own strategy and can draft his own players. 

[esmort]

41 minutes ago, tfunky14 said:

So what is your point then?

lose?

 

Losing would be better than barely winning just enough games against bad opponents to squeak into the playoffs to get embarrassed on top of the lower draft pick. This is a team in bad need of talent that would benefit far more from high draft picks than a few bad wins.

[oldunclemark]

.we need to sweep Houston...sweep Tennessee...beat KC in Indy...win at Oakland and beat Jacksonville.

 

That's 9-7...

If we don't do that..we have to beat Pittsburgh or Green Bay (highly unlikely) .

..win at Minnesota...(seriously???) or win over the Jets in NY....

 

If we split with Houston,. we have to beat the Jets...

[Pacergeek]

1 minute ago, esmort said:

 

Losing would be better than barely winning just enough games against bad opponents to squeak into the playoffs to get embarrassed on top of the lower draft pick. This is a team in bad need of talent that would benefit far more from high draft picks than a few bad wins.

I disagree. You are assuming that Grigson would draft good players with high draft picks. Grigson is not good at draft. If we have new GM for the draft, I would agree with you. As long as Grigson is GM, Colts will be bad team

[BOTT]

4 minutes ago, Pacergeek said:

It's really lose-lose. If we don't make the playoffs, and get a high draft pick, Grigson cannot be trusted to draft a good player with the high draft pick. If we do make the playoffs, we will not have a high pick, and Grigson cannot be trusted to draft a good player with the lower draft pick. Too many holes on the team. Cannot be fixed with one draft. Need to start over. Have a GM with his own strategy and can draft his own players. 

if the colts miss the playoffs Grigson is probably gone.  Even if they make the playoffs Grigson could be gone.

[Colts_Fan12]

1 minute ago, BOTT said:

if the colts miss the playoffs Grigson is probably gone.  Even if they make the playoffs Grigson could be gone.

We can only hope....

[rock8591]

14 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

That's like saying we were 2 bombs away from losing World War II

 

Or one snowstorm in Stalingrad.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, JPFolks said:

Every season with Luck is priceless..to waste even one of them for a single first round player (remember, picking 1st verses 32nd is really the difference of 1 player.  One you get to pick 32, you choose ahead of Pick 1 the rest of the draft.  At best it is 1 player and that's assuming the biggest possible spread.  Since nearly half of first rounders are considered busts, that's risking a full season with Luck for a single maybe player. On top of that, none of the top draft picks from this most recent year would have won us the games we lost.  So it would be pointless. Who won the game for us today? A late 3rd round receiver in my view.  The only way for us to get better is with much better personnel from the top of the draft to the bottom plus the right FA's.  Grigson has failed.  You can't polish a turd and make it gold.  Every media person has blamed the bad personnel.  Sure, they are not always right, but there seems to be a lot of film to watch to support the notion this is a very poorly constructed team.  For example, we easily could have drafted the kid Howard from IU...he went in the 5th round.  We needed a quality young running back to go with Gore's likely final season...imagine how much he could have learned from and supplemented Gore.   But we didn't pick him.  He looks very promising.  That's just a tiny example.  I recall a discussion where board members said if we couldn't get Elliot in the first round, Jordan would be a great pick later.  If fans can see it, why not Grigs?  

 

There's talent out there in every round available to all.  Our guys just rarely find enough of them.

I agree. Why waste any season with Andrew Luck. If we make the Playoffs at 9-7 and then lose to the Pats or Steelers than it is what it is. At least we can say we had a winning season and won the Division, then we can keep improving. We would be losing to a better team anyway playing the Pats or Steelers and pick 21st instead of picking around 6th-10th if we go 6-10, so I say so what. It's 1 pick and unless you have an Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning sitting there who cares where we pick in Round 1. The media and other fanbases make fun of your team when you cant even make the Playoffs, I am not about that!

[Pacergeek]

2 minutes ago, BOTT said:

if the colts miss the playoffs Grigson is probably gone.  Even if they make the playoffs Grigson could be gone.

The thing is, Irsay is a stubborn arrogant owner, just like Grigson. If Irsay was going to make a move, last year was the perfect opportunity to do so. For whatever reason, maybe Grigson supplies Irsay with drugs, Grigson is untouchable. 

[BOTT]

1 minute ago, Pacergeek said:

The thing is, Irsay is a stubborn arrogant owner, just like Grigson. If Irsay was going to make a move, last year was the perfect opportunity to do so. For whatever reason, maybe Grigson supplies Irsay with drugs, Grigson is untouchable.

[BOTT]

2 minutes ago, Pacergeek said:

The thing is, Irsay is a stubborn arrogant owner, just like Grigson. If Irsay was going to make a move, last year was the perfect opportunity to do so. For whatever reason, maybe Grigson supplies Irsay with drugs, Grigson is untouchable. 

 

That's a little extreme.  

[Dark Superman]

If the Colts don't win the division I expect the Colts to fire both Grigson and Pagano.

Irsay isn't going to be patient with these guys.

 

[JCPatriot]

21 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Just cause our record was better don't mean we were improving the line always sucked now and the D is even worse. We have been headed down since right after lucks first year

 

I agree.  I was talking to a guy at work early this past week that is a Broncos fan and he asked me, "What is up with the Colts?  I just can't figure that team out."  I told him, "Where have you been the past four years?  Nothing has really changed with them; they're just not getting a break here and there and coming out on the short end of the score more often.  Before, they were a mediocre team that was winning more games than they should have.  Right now, they are the same mediocre team but they're losing more games than they should.  It'll probably even out as the season goes on."

 

 

12 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Ok genius please do tell how the path we are on right now is a good thing??

 

What you seem to fail to understand is that there is a difference between not being on a good path and being on a path to become the Browns.  I agree that the Colts are not on a good path right now.  I think the idea that they are a path to become the Browns is just sensationalism, though, which seems to be all that people are capable of in this day and age.  People are only capable of talking in extremes.

[Pacergeek]

2 minutes ago, BOTT said:

 

That's a little extreme.  

I know. I doubt Grigson is Irsay's drug dealer. This situation is bizarre though. Seems like there has to be another connection, besides football, for these two men. If Ryan Grigson was being judged strictly on performance of GM/player personnel decisions, he would have been canned last year

[Dark Superman]

People who want to keep Pagano are insane. The guy just isn't a good coach at all.

Why isn't our new QB Coach being discussed. Luck is playing very well under Schotty.

[Pacergeek]

1 minute ago, SupermanLuck12 said:

People who want to keep Pagano are insane. The guy just isn't a good coach at all.

Why isn't our new QB Coach being discussed. Luck is playing very well under Schotty.

I'm not a huge Pagano fan, but I don't think any coach could win with the players he has to work with. It's possible that he could be a good coach if he had good players. 

[Colts_Fan12]

2 minutes ago, JCPatriot said:

 

I agree.  I was talking to a guy at work early this past week that is a Broncos fan and he asked me, "What is up with the Colts?  I just can't figure that team out."  I told him, "Where have you been the past four years?  Nothing has really changed with them; they're just not getting a break here and there and coming out on the short end of the score more often.  Before, they were a mediocre team that was winning more games than they should have.  Right now, they are the same mediocre team but they're losing more games than they should.  It'll probably even out as the season goes on."

 

 

 

What you seem to fail to understand is that there is a difference between not being on a good path and being on a path to become the Browns.  I agree that the Colts are not on a good path right now.  I think the idea that they are a path to become the Browns is just sensationalism, though, which seems to be all that people are capable of in this day and age.  People are only capable of talking in extremes.

The point of the post is most see keeping the path we are on currently is not gonna get us any better. Irsay keeping Grigson and Pagano year after year is accepting mediocrity and that is what the Browns have done over the yearsand that's what made them the Browns. I'm not saying we will be as bad but as another poster said aside from luck the Browns roster isn't far from ours and that is a big problem.

[JCPatriot]

3 minutes ago, Pacergeek said:

I know. I doubt Grigson is Irsay's drug dealer. This situation is bizarre though. Seems like there has to be another connection, besides football, for these two men. If Ryan Grigson was being judged strictly on performance of GM/player personnel decisions, he would have been canned last year

 

There is something to be said for stability.  There has been a lot of talk in this thread about "becoming the Browns" and one path to making that actually happen is to constantly fire and replace your GM and head coach when you have some down times.  That is how you get into a perennial cycle of losing.  I am a firm believer that once you select a GM and head coach, you have to take a wait-and-see approach and give them the time to build their team and train their guys, even if you have to endure some bad seasons.  That can take several years and there is some risk involved because if the GM and head coach truly are incompetent, you won't be able to correct that for several years.  However, constantly replacing the GM and head coach when things aren't going well just doesn't work, so what you have to do is pick the best guys that you can and then just give them time.

 

Now, in my opinion, we've already waited and seen with the current regime, and it's not looking good.  If I was calling the shots, I would have made a change after last season.  Irsay, apparently, felt that it was prudent to give them a little more time.  Only time will tell whether or not he is right, but I don't have a lot of confidence.

 

With that said, though, I am rooting for the Colts to win every game that they play.  I don't want them to lose just to make Irsay see the light.

[jvan1973]

3 hours ago, bap1331 said:

That goes down as one of the ugliest wins in Colts history. We dont want to lose but if we keep winning, were just helping Grigson and Pagano keep their jobs...

Not close to one of our ugliest wine.

 

 

Another awesome thread by you

 

[Rally5]

There's no bigger waste of a topic than the idea of 'losing on purpose because I'm tired of losing' or to improve draft position, especially after week 5 with the division lead on the line next week.  That's exactly how you become the Browns. The idea of tanking in the NFL to gain draft picks is utterly absurd if for no other reason than there are zero guarantees in any draft pick.  Remember Steve Emtman or Jeff George?  It's about who you pick not where you pick and we should know that better than any other fan base based on our run during the Polian years.  I can't stand Grigson and Pagano is a below average coach but losing on purpose is silly, a waste of energy, and will never happen in the NFL anyway.  Guys play for contracts, incentives and nobody on the field or staff cares about next year's team so why do we have these posts year after year?  It shows a total lack of understanding how the league works.

 

 I'd rather talk about how Pagano went right into a predictable shell on the last possession because he suddenly thought we could 'run' out the clock instead of going for the throat and putting the game away!

[JCPatriot]

15 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Irsay keeping Grigson and Pagano year after year is accepting mediocrity and that is what the Browns have done over the yearsand that's what made them the Browns.

 

The Browns are at a point where mediocrity would be a welcome improvement.  They haven't had a winning season since 2007.  They have won 5 or fewer games 7 out of the last 8 seasons.  They have finished dead last in their division 7 out of the last 8 seasons, and the one season that they didn't finish dead last they finished 3rd.  The Colts played five different QBs last season and ended the season 8-8, which is a better season than the Browns have had in any season since 2007.  This is why I say that I agree that the Colts are not on a good path, but I think that it is ridiculous sensationalism to say that they are on a path to become the Browns.

[Mr Coffee]

2 hours ago, zibby43 said:

Yeah, the Colts should intentionally lose so they can draft a few slots higher.

 

Are you kidding me?  Unless you are picking top 10, accumulating a high number of picks is far, far more valuable than just moving up a few spots in the same round.

 

It looks like the Steelers, Broncos, Patriots, Cardinals, Bengals, and Packers, to name a few, have done just fine with winning AND using their picks wisely/accumulating picks.

 

I literally cannot believe some of the logic, if you can even call it that, that I have seen on display in this thread.

More than anything, we want Grigs and Pags to be shown the door like they should've been last year - but you're not getting that, and a few of you probably never will until Luck is 33 and on the tail end of his career with nothing to show for it.  

[tfunky14]

54 minutes ago, esmort said:

 

Losing would be better than barely winning just enough games against bad opponents to squeak into the playoffs to get embarrassed on top of the lower draft pick. This is a team in bad need of talent that would benefit far more from high draft picks than a few bad wins.

Wow, really clueless to want your team to lose. 

[Douzer]

2 hours ago, bap1331 said:

 

5 games into the season and you are still defending Patrick Robinson?

Yes.

[zibby43]

Just now, Mr Coffee said:

More than anything, we want Grigs and Pags to be shown the door like they should've been last year - but you're not getting that, and a few of you probably never will until Luck is 33 and on the tail end of his career with nothing to show for it.  

 

What you and others don't seem to get is that wins and losses are not the only criteria upon which Grigson and Pagano are evaluated and judged.

 

If the team merely makes the playoffs, and then gets bounced in the first round via an embarrassing loss, there is no guarantee whatsoever that Pagano and Grigson return.

 

If the same problems continue to plague the team, irrespective of what shows up in the W and L columns, Grigson and Pagano could be gone.

 

Furthermore, I don't think Pagano is the problem.  Grigson may be, but his 2012 draft class was solid and so were the past 2 (these classes constitute most of the starting lineup).

 

Almost the ENTIRE coaching staff has changed with new coordinators and position coaches this year.  The Colts have a former OC/HC as the offensive line coach. 

 

Do you think, maybe, at this point, the players are the problem? 

 

So if the players are the problem, what is the problem with winning and then drafting better, just like all the other winners in the NFL do?

[Mr Coffee]

2 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

No actually I'm not happy about mediocre franchise and last I checked we're not one. Are we playing mistake free football? No, but we're also not getting blown out in games. We've been every game and could have even beaten the champs, but no no one wants to see that and just wanna point to the record. 

In the words of a great coach, "You ARE what your record says you are." Since when is this fan base happy with moral victories and mediocrity?  I'm glad that you are thrilled with barely losing games to putrid teams and "almost" beating the champs as you put it.  Sad.  

[Mr Coffee]

3 minutes ago, zibby43 said:

 

What you and others don't seem to get is that wins and losses are not the only criteria upon which Grigson and Pagano are evaluated and judged.

 

If the team merely makes the playoffs, and then gets bounced in the first round via an embarrassing loss, there is no guarantee whatsoever that Pagano and Grigson return.

 

If the same problems continue to plague the team, irrespective of what shows up in the W and L columns, Grigson and Pagano could be gone.

 

Furthermore, I don't think Pagano is the problem.  Grigson may be, but his 2012 draft class was solid and so were the past 2 (these classes constitute most of the starting lineup).

 

Almost the ENTIRE coaching staff has changed with new coordinators and position coaches this year.  The Colts have a former OC/HC as the offensive line coach. 

 

Do you think, maybe, at this point, the players are the problem? 

 

So if the players are the problem, what is the problem with winning and then drafting better, just like all the other winners in the NFL do?

By your line of reasoning it's the players fault and we should draft better.  You trust our GM to do this?

[zibby43]

5 minutes ago, Mr Coffee said:

By your line of reasoning it's the players fault and we should draft better.  You trust our GM to do this?

 

No offense but did you read my entire post?

 

I said that Grigson may be the problem, but it's impossible to say for sure when the 2012 draft class, plus the last 2, have turned out to be good.

 

2 bad draft classes and 1 terrible free agency spending spree really hurt this team, but those mistakes are in the past and it takes time to repair those mistakes properly (i.e., via the draft).

[esmort]

21 minutes ago, tfunky14 said:

Wow, really clueless to want your team to lose. 

 

Yeah it's clueless to be OK taking a few extra losses in a year when it's blatantly obvious we are not going to be competitive in the playoffs; let alone have a chance at a SB to put the franchise in a position to significantly improve through the draft and win more games (and more meaningful games)  in the future.  

 

IMO it's clueless to not be able to see past the current season, and realize that sometimes you have to sacrificein the short term to achieve long-term success. 

 

 

[Gabriel Alexander Morillo]

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

No.

 

What tells you we were getting better is that we went further in the playoffs our first three years.    Teams that are getting worse don't do that.

 

We're not becoming the Cleveland Browns.     That is so amazingly wrong,  it's beyond belief that anyone would even think that....

 

I don't suppose you've noticed how often you're spectacularly wrong,  have you?

 

Why do I even bother?         

I don't agree we're going to be the browns and quite frankly I didn't quote you to start an argument but I just want to know something. 

 

Do you really look at our team and see us getting better? We literally have nothing positive going on in terms of every linebacker spot and somehow our offensive line has gotten worse. How did that even happen lol? Hopefully they're just gelling. 

 

Man, even our secondary somehow looks worse. I'm excited about Green and Geathers but Corners 2-4 are just as important as the safeties IMO and Robinson looks, frankly, terrible so far .  I'm of the belief he'll be better as the season goes on somehow.  

[tfunky14]

10 minutes ago, esmort said:

 

Yeah it's clueless to be OK taking a few extra losses in a year when it's blatantly obvious we are not going to be competitive in the playoffs; let alone have a chance at a SB to put the franchise in a position to significantly improve through the draft and win more games (and more meaningful games)  in the future.  

 

IMO it's clueless to not be able to see past the current season, and realize that sometimes you have to sacrificein the short term to achieve long-term success. 

 

 

Then go root for the Browns, obviously that's who you should be rooting for. 

[CR91]

41 minutes ago, Mr Coffee said:

In the words of a great coach, "You ARE what your record says you are." Since when is this fan base happy with moral victories and mediocrity?  I'm glad that you are thrilled with barely losing games to putrid teams and "almost" beating the champs as you put it.  Sad.  

 

 

[esmort]

8 minutes ago, tfunky14 said:

Then go root for the Browns, obviously that's who you should be rooting for. 

 

Your comment makes no sense... the scenario I described in no way describes the Browns.  Maybe you should be the one rooting for them since you obviously seem ok with mediocrity as long as your team gets a few ugly meaningless wins.

[IinD]

21 minutes ago, esmort said:

 

Your comment makes no sense... the scenario I described in no way describes the Browns.  Maybe you should be the one rooting for them since you obviously seem ok with mediocrity as long as your team gets a few ugly meaningless wins.

Just because you give up 500 yards of offense, have zero sacks on D and get your QB sacked 5 times and get 10 penalties called on you doesn't make you bad.

 

We're starting to gel.

[AZColt11]

9 minutes ago, IinD said:

Just because you give up 500 yards of offense, have zero sacks on D and get your QB sacked 5 times and get 10 penalties called on you doesn't make you bad.

 

We're starting to gel.

And the Colts are relatively healthy on D, right?  Wow, if this is as good as it is going to get katy bar the door when we play a really GOOD offensive team.  Just not feeling the optimism tonight.

[BOTT]

2 hours ago, JCPatriot said:

 

There is something to be said for stability.  There has been a lot of talk in this thread about "becoming the Browns" and one path to making that actually happen is to constantly fire and replace your GM and head coach when you have some down times.  That is how you get into a perennial cycle of losing.  I am a firm believer that once you select a GM and head coach, you have to take a wait-and-see approach and give them the time to build their team and train their guys, even if you have to endure some bad seasons.  That can take several years and there is some risk involved because if the GM and head coach truly are incompetent, you won't be able to correct that for several years.  However, constantly replacing the GM and head coach when things aren't going well just doesn't work, so what you have to do is pick the best guys that you can and then just give them time.

 

Now, in my opinion, we've already waited and seen with the current regime, and it's not looking good.  If I was calling the shots, I would have made a change after last season.  Irsay, apparently, felt that it was prudent to give them a little more time.  Only time will tell whether or not he is right, 

 

[tfunky14]

41 minutes ago, esmort said:

 

Your comment makes no sense... the scenario I described in no way describes the Browns.  Maybe you should be the one rooting for them since you obviously seem ok with mediocrity as long as your team gets a few ugly meaningless wins.

No, you want to tear down a team, fire all coaches, lose all games with only playing 5 games so far. 

Thats called "**ic sense"!

 

Again, go root for the Browns with those ideas. 

[BOTT]

2 minutes ago, tfunky14 said:

No, you want to tear down a team, fire all coaches, lose all games with only playing 5 games so far. 

Thats called "**ic sense"!

 

Again, go root for the Browns with those ideas. 

Meh, I just want them to lose enough games to get Chuck and Grigson fired.  Shoot me

[tfunky14]

1 minute ago, BOTT said:

Meh, I just want them to lose enough games to get Chuck and Grigson fired.  Shoot me

You want your team to lose? 

Why are you even a fan then?

A real fan does not want their team to lose ever period.

 

what we call this is a "fair weather fan"