Not so kind words about Grigson from a former Eagles co-worker

[Luck2Hilton4TD]

There's a lot that can be said on Grigson, but what a failed scout said about his former boss? I don't put too much stock into it, seems like there might be some sour grapes spilling over. 

[southwest1]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

What a two-faced hypocrite...

 

To be fair, a lot of posters here were Grigson fans after 2012, then turned on him as the 2013 offseason and the Richardson trade became obvious negatives. But those fans didn't work with Grigson, claim that he was the cat's meow, then go back and try to re-write history.

Superman, 

 

It really doesn't matter that a significant number of INDY fans praised Grigs after 2012 because most of that early praise into his 2nd year was centered around clearing up dead money still on the Colts payroll like LB Gary Brackett. It's not until a GM's 3rd or 4th yr that you can really evaluate their ability to assemble a formidable roster on both sides of the ball. 

 

Revisionist history has nothing to do with it in my estimation. But lacerated kidneys are a darning scarlett letter on his front office tenure for the face of your franchise in any GM's universe. I can't ignore that & the last time I checked; GMs are critiqued every single season based on wins, loses, & the likelihood of success moving forward. 

 

I don't really care if a radio personality now in Tampa sounds bitter or not. When you work in close proximity with Ryan for a couple yrs in Philly, you're gonna pick up on tendencies, strengths, weaknesses, how they deal with stress, & whether or not they own their failures. Grigson always deflects blame like a reflex or he engages in a foolish slogan about teamwork or mental toughness which doesn't answer questions about glaring roster weaknesses that he hasn't fixed in 5 yrs. Ryan needs to go pronto. If you can't protect Luck in 5 yrs, you are deficient in your current capacity. It's as simple as that. 

[jvan1973]

14 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

Superman, 

 

It really doesn't matter that a significant number of INDY fans praised Grigs after 2012 because most of that early praise into his 2nd year was centered around clearing up dead money still on the Colts payroll like LB Gary Brackett. It's not until a GM's 3rd or 4th yr that you can really evaluate their ability to assemble a formidable roster on both sides of the ball. 

 

Revisionist history has nothing to do with it in my estimation. But lacerated kidneys are a darning scarlett letter on his front office tenure for the face of your franchise in any GM's universe. I can't ignore that & the last time I checked; GMs are critiqued every single season based on wins, loses, & the likelihood of success moving forward. 

 

I don't really care if a radio personality now in Tampa sounds bitter or not. When you work in close proximity with Ryan for a couple yrs in Philly, you're gonna pick up on tendencies, strengths, weaknesses, how they deal with stress, & whether or not they own their failures. Grigson always deflects blame like a reflex or he engages in a foolish slogan about teamwork or mental toughness which doesn't answer questions about glaring roster weaknesses that he hasn't fixed in 5 yrs. Ryan needs to go pronto. If you can't protect Luck in 5 yrs, you are deficient in your current capacity. It's as simple as that. 

What does the lactated kidney have to do with anything.  I'm not a huge grigson guy,  But that injury happened down field 

[southwest1]

10 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

What does the lactated kidney have to do with anything.  I'm not a huge grigson guy,  But that injury happened down field 

Grigson's job is to protect the starting QB from injury not go through multiple QBs in a single season not that long ago Jvan. 

 

So, a GM gets a complete pass based on where Luck's injury took place? That's absurd. 

[SaturdayAllDay]

9 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

Grigson's job is to protect the starting QB from injury not go through multiple QBs in a single season not that long ago Jvan. 

 

So, a GM gets a complete pass based on where Luck's injury took place? That's absurd. 

So I guess Mckenzie in Oakland should get the axe as well because he lost two QBs this year to injury. 

 

The point is, injuries can happen regardless of how well you protect a qb. Carr's injury was the only sack given up by Donald Penn all year, yet he's on ir.

How the injury happens absolutely matters. To make it black and white as you suggest is what is absurd. 

[Luck2Hilton4TD]

Luck no doubt gets hit too much in the pocket, but he was scrambling out of the pocket and was running the football when the lacerated kidney occurred when he should've slid. Tony Romo has been knocked out for consecutive seasons behind the best offensive line in football--so let's not take this blame game too far. 

 

The Colts offensive line needs to improve no doubt, but injuries can still happen at any time. 

[dgambill]

4 hours ago, Flash7 said:

Personally, I don't care either way about Middlekauf's comments, as it does not change my opinion of Grigson.

 

I do think however, that people act differently in different roles. During 2013, MiddleKauf was employed by Comcast Sports Net in the Bay Area, and in 2014 he was employed by '95.7 The Game', a Bay Area radio talk show. It was as a public figure that he praised Grigson on Tiwitter. In other words, he played the nice guy, didn't want to ruffle any feather, and tried to gain followers, etc...

 

His most recent comments have come out when he is not employed by 95.7 -- when he does not have anyone to report to. He doesn't have to be the 'Nice guy' and can tell people what he really thinks. I'm not sure that this is the case, but it's not unreasonable. It's still not a good look though.

I agree. It wouldn't be unusual for someone to be two faced given the position they are in. Staying on Grigsons good side perhaps getting insider info using his connections to suck up by saying good stuff to be fed insider info that he can use on his show wouldn't strike me as unusual. It also wouldn't equally strike me as unusual when he has nothing on the line to give his true feelings or pile on when a guy might be on the hot seat. Doesn't mean his info is true or false or mixed. To me it just makes the guy disingenuous. But then who in that profession really is genuine. With any info like this you have to cross reference and fact check to come to your own informed decision. I don't take him at face value. I also don't just dismiss it either. I would say I would have to say given this guys background and ability I'm not going to put much into it. Even if some is true Grigson wouldn't be the first guy to get a promotion that catches coworkers by surprise or they feel him unqualified. It also doesn't mean that person can't succeed at the job either. I've been surprised many times on how some people turn out. The GM thing I think has a steep learning curve and also takes a little luck too. But sometimes eventually it just clicks and we see it really come together. Hopefully 2016 was that for Ryan and we see a quick increase in the quality of his work...and hipefully we get a little lucky too. Right free agent or guys stay healthy a pick fall to us whatever I'll take any of it. Ryan's made many decisions I second guess and anyone can go back and look at what I've said...but as long as he is here I want him to succeed. He has both done just enough to stay and easily enough to be let go but this is our guy until he isn't.

[John Waylon]

And Peyton Manning will tell you to your face that Jim Caldwell is a great coach.

Point being (because I've gotta boil it down so some don't miss the point) opinions aren't always all that reliable.

*

[southwest1]

50 minutes ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

So I guess Mckenzie in Oakland should get the axe as well because he lost two QBs this year to injury. 

 

The point is, injuries can happen regardless of how well you protect a qb. Carr's injury was the only sack given up by Donald Penn all year, yet he's on ir.

How the injury happens absolutely matters. To make it black and white as you suggest is what is absurd. 

Mckenzie was also instrumental in creating a stout offensive line to protect Derek Carr so your example in using Oakland to flip my argument on it's head was a misguided & disingenuous one SAD. 

 

Also, I seem to recall multiple QBs getting hurt under Ryan's watch not just Chewbacca. Grigson has been here 5 yrs. Tell me, what other GM allowed their starting QB to get a lacerated kidney among 31 other teams in that same timespan? Hmmm...

 

And the Grigson apologists keep coming....

 

In addition, your OL example in Oakland just adds fuel to my fire that their GM actually makes practical moves to protect their QB while our GM, a former lineman himself, still hasn't mastered the art of protecting Luck. Thanks for strengthening my primary argument BTW. Much obliged SAD. 

[SaturdayAllDay]

Just now, southwest1 said:

Mckenzie was also instrumental in creating a stout offensive line to protect Derek Carr so you example in using Oakland to flip my argument on it's head was a misguided & disingenuous one SAD. 

 

Also, I seem to recall multiple QBs getting hurt under Ryan's watch not just Chewbacca. Grigson has been here 5 yrs. Tell me, what other GM allowed their starting QB to get a lacerated kidney among 31 other teams in that same timespan? Hmmm...

 

And the Grigson apologists keep coming....

Im in no way a grigson apologist....

 

Just pointing out that you can't blame a GM for injuries. Oakland lost two QBs in two weeks behind a stout offensive line. Romo has been hurt several times behind the best line in football. 

 

I'm saying things aren't simply black and white. Luck was scrambling on that play so regardless of how good the line was he could have been in the exact same situation. 

 

I don't like grigson, and he has MANY faults, but to blame him for things way out of his control is shortsighted at best.  I don't get it. Grigson has a laundry list of reasons why he isn't a good gm, why grasp at flimsy excuses when there are much better arguement to make. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

Isn't it odd that the 2 teams that have the best Offensive Lines lost their QB's for the season. 1st Romo, then Carr. Anything can happen in this league.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, southwest1 said:

Superman, 

 

It really doesn't matter that a significant number of INDY fans praised Grigs after 2012 because most of that early praise into his 2nd year was centered around clearing up dead money still on the Colts payroll like LB Gary Brackett. It's not until a GM's 3rd or 4th yr that you can really evaluate their ability to assemble a formidable roster on both sides of the ball. 

 

Revisionist history has nothing to do with it in my estimation. But lacerated kidneys are a darning scarlett letter on his front office tenure for the face of your franchise in any GM's universe. I can't ignore that & the last time I checked; GMs are critiqued every single season based on wins, loses, & the likelihood of success moving forward. 

 

I don't really care if a radio personality now in Tampa sounds bitter or not. When you work in close proximity with Ryan for a couple yrs in Philly, you're gonna pick up on tendencies, strengths, weaknesses, how they deal with stress, & whether or not they own their failures. Grigson always deflects blame like a reflex or he engages in a foolish slogan about teamwork or mental toughness which doesn't answer questions about glaring roster weaknesses that he hasn't fixed in 5 yrs. Ryan needs to go pronto. If you can't protect Luck in 5 yrs, you are deficient in your current capacity. It's as simple as that. 

 

I don't see how any of this is pertinent to my post. 

[southwest1]

40 minutes ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

Im in no way a grigson apologist....

 

Just pointing out that you can't blame a GM for injuries. Oakland lost two QBs in two weeks behind a stout offensive line. Romo has been hurt several times behind the best line in football. 

 

I'm saying things aren't simply black and white. Luck was scrambling on that play so regardless of how good the line was he could have been in the exact same situation. 

 

I don't like grigson, and he has MANY faults, but to blame him for things way out of his control is shortsighted at best.  I don't get it. Grigson has a laundry list of reasons why he isn't a good gm, why grasp at flimsy excuses when there are much better arguement to make. 

A lacerated kidney is a flimsy excuse? I never inferred, implied, or accused Grigson of maliciously harming Luck on purpose SAD. 

 

Look, it's real simple, if Ryan gets credit for being on the Colts staff & INDY is playing in the AFC Championship Game vs NE in 2015; then by virtue of just being on the front office staff...If Luck get sidelined for a significant length of time...Ryan can't escape criticism for that fact either. It's how the real world works sir. I hate to break it to you man, but that's reality. 

 

Don't give me scenarios from other teams. Romo probably injured his back by playing golf, which certainly didn't help his back either I imagine. I specifically asked you how many other GMs in 5 yrs had their face of the franchise suffer a lacerated kidney BTW. Yes, I know injuries happen. I get that. My point is GMs get credit when things go well & they get crucified when things go bad. It comes with the territory. I don't pardon Grigs over his failure to protect Luck & I don't believe I am exaggerating the circumstances either. 

 

I apologize if I mischaracterized you as a Grigson apologist SAD. I just feel like too many fans use every justification imaginable to keep Ryan around & I am growing weary on this trend that's all. 

[RockThatBlue]

Meh, this is a non issue. You could find people that have said bad things about anyone, even people who were/are really good at what they do.

[southwest1]

21 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I don't see how any of this is pertinent to my post. 

I didn't realize I was creating any ambiguity & I thought I was being clear in my post. My bad. SW1 take 2. 

 

Alright, let's see if I can clear the fog here. Here's goes: I took issue with your final sentence: " But those fans didn't work with Grigson, claim that he was the cat's meow, then go back and try to re-write history." 

 

Maybe you were merely zeroing in on the Trent Richardson trade in a vacuum whereas as I devoted my attention to what the Tampa Bay radio personality who worked closely with Grigson in Philly said about his personality/management style. That's what I thought you were referring to with your 'revisionist history' classification regarding unflattering words directed toward Ryan. 

 

I just felt that simply because a guy is no longer an NFL scout; it doesn't necessarily mean his criticism of Ryan is totally without merit that's all. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

10 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

I would agree with you if it had happened 2 or 3 years ago. However, given Grigson's recent track record, it is a peculiar choice of words from a co-worker nevertheless. Besides, it was in context of the other guy Riddick being praised.

 

What has me puzzled, Grigson is still involved in the game, Middlekauff (who never played football, college or NFL) and Riddick (medai) are presently not.  Those in the business will be able to tell about a guy after just a couple years, and who'll make it and who wont.

[chrisfarley]

15 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

What has me puzzled, Grigson is still involved in the game, Middlekauff (who never played football, college or NFL) and Riddick (medai) are presently not.  Those in the business will be able to tell about a guy after just a couple years, and who'll make it and who wont.

can you imagine what Grigson is saying about this guy behind closed doors  , whoa,  

[RockThatBlue]

1 hour ago, chrisfarley said:

can you imagine what Grigson is saying about this guy behind closed doors  , whoa,  

I doubt Grigson cares what they think.

[jvan1973]

7 hours ago, southwest1 said:

Grigson's job is to protect the starting QB from injury not go through multiple QBs in a single season not that long ago Jvan. 

 

So, a GM gets a complete pass based on where Luck's injury took place? That's absurd. 

Luck was running down field.  They could have had the cowboys o line and they couldn't protect him.    The o line and grigson haven't been good,   But that injury isn't on grigson

[tikyle]

15 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Yeah.....    all Irsay has done is lead a franchise to the 2nd most win of any NFL franchise for the last roughly 20 years.        

 

What a disgrace!          

 

Did you know that when you make a post,  other people can actually read it?     

 

Just asking....       

 

The team had arguably the greatest QB of all time.  HOF players all over the place and made only 2 SB's in that run.  Did Irsay luck into that situation or did he build that?

 

With less talent in those last 20 years the Steelers, Patriots, Giants, Packers, Seahawks and Broncos have had more or similar success.  Yes the Colts have more regular season wins but overall success we don't have more than any of those teams.  And none of those teams had the talent that we did.

 

Just asking was that luck or did he create the entire situation?

[VocableLoki]

6 minutes ago, tikyle said:

 

The team had arguably the greatest QB of all time.  HOF players all over the place and made only 2 SB's in that run.  Did Irsay luck into that situation or did he build that?

 

With less talent in those last 20 years the Steelers, Patriots, Giants, Packers, Seahawks and Broncos have had more or similar success.  Yes the Colts have more regular season wins but overall success we don't have more than any of those teams.  And none of those teams had the talent that we did.

 

Just asking was that luck or did he create the entire situation?

During Manning's career in Indianapolis only the Steelers and Patriots had more success (assuming you are defining success by Super Bowl wins). The Giants went to and won one and none of those other teams won while Manning was in Indy. 

[Defjamz26]

9 hours ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

So I guess Mckenzie in Oakland should get the axe as well because he lost two QBs this year to injury. 

 

The point is, injuries can happen regardless of how well you protect a qb. Carr's injury was the only sack given up by Donald Penn all year, yet he's on ir.

How the injury happens absolutely matters. To make it black and white as you suggest is what is absurd. 

As long as you take initiative, you get a pass. It's the same reason no one gives Dallas grief for Romo's injuries (plus Romo's body is broken down anyways). If you at least build a good O-line you get the benefit of the doubt. Ish happens.

 

But if you have a line like the Colts have had the past couple of years and an injury happens, of course people will be on you. It's only fair.

[tikyle]

Just now, VocableLoki said:

During Manning's career in Indianapolis only the Steelers and Patriots had more success (assuming you are defining success by Super Bowl wins). The Giants went to and won one and none of those other teams won while Manning was in Indy. 

 

No the original post said the last 20 years.  Why define Irsay by only the Manning run?  Irsay is a good owner.  He is far from a bad owner (or at least he WAS we have to wait and see how he does from this point on).  But riding the Manning wave any owner could do that.

 

I would like to see what Kraft does when Brady and (possibly) Belichick go.  Will he panic when the team hits a bad patch?  Will he hold on to staff too long to see if they come around?  It's easy for an owner and NFL team to ride the wave of a great QB and get all the credit.  The question is though did you maximize your potential when you had him?  The Giants don't have a HOF QB in my opinion.  They still put enough around him to win 2 SB's.  The Ravens don't (and never) had one either and they won two as well.  The Broncos just won one with a HOF QB well past his HOF caliber years.  The Steelers won one with a HOF QB well before he was even considered good.  The Seahawks went to two and won one with a (potential) HOF QB before he reached HOF heights.  To me that is maximizing your potential.  The Patriots did the same.  They won 2 SB's before Brady became BRADY.  The next 2 they won he was BRADY.

 

The Colts two SB appearances Manning was well full into being MANNING.  He was at the time the best (or 2nd best if you lived in the northeast) QB in the league and that was pretty unanimous.  You are supposed to win a SB with the best QB on the planet.  One is pretty much expected.

[Coffeedrinker]

14 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

I always find it funny how defensive fans get when the FO is criticized by notable football people and not just "uninformed fans". 

 

Its like people spent so much time talking about how well respected Grigson is around the league and how he's not as bad as he's made out to be, that now that there's a negative opinion out about him from someone who actually worked with him (making it credible) people can't swallow it.

I find it funny that so many people thing someone with a twitter account is a notable football person.

 

My response would have been the same even if he praised Grigson.  He is not a well spoken person and he's a failed scout.

[Defjamz26]

3 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I find it funny that so many people thing someone with a twitter account is a notable football person.

 

My response would have been the same even if he praised Grigson.  He is not a well spoken person and he's a failed scout.

So his opinion has no merit because he's a failed scout? Even though he worked with the guy? Interesting.

[VocableLoki]

15 minutes ago, tikyle said:

 

No the original post said the last 20 years.  Why define Irsay by only the Manning run?  Irsay is a good owner.  He is far from a bad owner (or at least he WAS we have to wait and see how he does from this point on).  But riding the Manning wave any owner could do that.

 

I would like to see what Kraft does when Brady and (possibly) Belichick go.  Will he panic when the team hits a bad patch?  Will he hold on to staff too long to see if they come around?  It's easy for an owner and NFL team to ride the wave of a great QB and get all the credit.  The question is though did you maximize your potential when you had him?  The Giants don't have a HOF QB in my opinion.  They still put enough around him to win 2 SB's.  The Ravens don't (and never) had one either and they won two as well.  The Broncos just won one with a HOF QB well past his HOF caliber years.  The Steelers won one with a HOF QB well before he was even considered good.  The Seahawks went to two and won one with a (potential) HOF QB before he reached HOF heights.  To me that is maximizing your potential.  The Patriots did the same.  They won 2 SB's before Brady became BRADY.  The next 2 they won he was BRADY.

 

The Colts two SB appearances Manning was well full into being MANNING.  He was at the time the best (or 2nd best if you lived in the northeast) QB in the league and that was pretty unanimous.  You are supposed to win a SB with the best QB on the planet.  One is pretty much expected.

Your post stated: "The team had arguably the greatest QB of all time.  HOF players all over the place and made only 2 SB's in that run.  Did Irsay luck into that situation or did he build that?" Which would suggest the Manning years. Seems disingenuous to tack on the Luck years when we have not had a Super Bowl caliber team during those years and Luck is not a HOF QB at the moment. 

 

If we are including the Luck years then every team you mentioned has more talent than the Colts during those years.

[Mameluc]

42 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

So his opinion has no merit because he's a failed scout? Even though he worked with the guy? Interesting.

His Opinion has no merit because he first acted like RG was great, implying he knew it from this eagles times and now he gets to say he was always bad and everyone laughed and couldnt believe he got the job. 

 

Its one way or the other or you are just not valid a source of info. You can change your opinion, that is fine but he is not changing his opinion he is just throwing shade now that grigson looks bad.

[Coffeedrinker]

1 hour ago, Defjamz26 said:

So his opinion has no merit because he's a failed scout? Even though he worked with the guy? Interesting.

Nice way to try and put words in my mouth.

 

No, the guy sounds like a complete buffoon, I'm sorry (no, I'm not sorry) when someone sounds like at * when they talk chances are that person is an * and yes the opinions of *s have no merit.  Whether or not he's an * or just appears to be one is still up in the air.

 

Do they not teach critical thinking and source evaluation in school anymore?

 

The guy claims to have worked with Grigson... that much appears to be true.

The rest of it, it's just one guys blathering... there is no supporting evidence, no corroborating statements from others, no reason for his tirade.  So then you look at motives for saying it now.  And it seems obvious, a former co-worker is up for a GM job, it appears to be some brown nosing. And it may go even further, perhaps Riddick and Grigs didn't get along, so he figured he would score some additional brownie points by bad mouthing Grigs while complimenting Riddick.

 

Who knows at this point, as it has been shown in this thread, the guy definitely talks out of both sides of his mouth so that would tend to discredit his opinion.

[chad72]

19 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Nice way to try and put words in my mouth.

 

No, the guy sounds like a complete buffoon, I'm sorry (no, I'm not sorry) when someone sounds like at * when they talk chances are that person is an * and yes the opinions of *s have no merit.  Whether or not he's an * or just appears to be one is still up in the air.

 

Do they not teach critical thinking and source evaluation in school anymore?

 

The guy claims to have worked with Grigson... that much appears to be true.

The rest of it, it's just one guys blathering... there is no supporting evidence, no corroborating statements from others, no reason for his tirade.  So then you look at motives for saying it now.  And it seems obvious, a former co-worker is up for a GM job, it appears to be some brown nosing. And it may go even further, perhaps Riddick and Grigs didn't get along, so he figured he would score some additional brownie points by bad mouthing Grigs while complimenting Riddick.

 

Who knows at this point, as it has been shown in this thread, the guy definitely talks out of both sides of his mouth so that would tend to discredit his opinion.

 

He is trying to go where the wind is trending because he "needs" a job and is envious that his comrades are reaping their rewards while he is out of a scouting job. So he is hedging his bets in a public fashion probably on the Riddick wagon because Riddick is hot now (just like talking through the other side of his mouth for Grigson a few years ago). If I am Riddick or Grigson, I stay as far away from this guy as possible at this point in time.

 

What he does not realize is while it gets people to talk more about him, it also sheds any "scout worthy" credibility/residue he may have had in the eyes of other scouts/head of scouts paying attention. He got his 15 minutes of fame, time to move on from him, that will end up being the prevalent consensus eventually.

[Superman]

12 hours ago, southwest1 said:

I didn't realize I was creating any ambiguity & I thought I was being clear in my post. My bad. SW1 take 2. 

 

Alright, let's see if I can clear the fog here. Here's goes: I took issue with your final sentence: " But those fans didn't work with Grigson, claim that he was the cat's meow, then go back and try to re-write history." 

 

Maybe you were merely zeroing in on the Trent Richardson trade in a vacuum whereas as I devoted my attention to what the Tampa Bay radio personality who worked closely with Grigson in Philly said about his personality/management style. That's what I thought you were referring to with your 'revisionist history' classification regarding unflattering words directed toward Ryan. 

 

I just felt that simply because a guy is no longer an NFL scout; it doesn't necessarily mean his criticism of Ryan is totally without merit that's all. 

 

It's evident you completely misunderstood my comment, so let me clear it up.

 

This guy is a two-faced hypocrite who is acting like he's always been anti-Grigson, never thought he was good, and is now trying to claim credit for knowing from the beginning that Grigson shouldn't have been hired. And that's crap specifically because he publicly and without being prompted PRAISED Grigson's work as a GM in 2013. He is selling revisionist history, and it's garbage, and because of that alone -- not because he's no longer an NFL scout, that has nothing to do with it -- I place no value in any of his comments on this matter.

 

On the other hand, some fans were Grigson supporters, and as it became obvious that he wasn't doing a good job, they stopped being Grigson supporters. There is nothing wrong with that, as long as they aren't acting like they called it from the beginning that Grigson wouldn't be a good GM. If they did call it from the beginning, then they are free to take credit for that. 

 

There's nothing wrong with anyone changing their mind as more information is made available. I just don't like the hypocrisy coming from this guy.

[NewColtsFan]

5 hours ago, tikyle said:

 

The team had arguably the greatest QB of all time.  HOF players all over the place and made only 2 SB's in that run.  Did Irsay luck into that situation or did he build that?

 

With less talent in those last 20 years the Steelers, Patriots, Giants, Packers, Seahawks and Broncos have had more or similar success.  Yes the Colts have more regular season wins but overall success we don't have more than any of those teams.  And none of those teams had the talent that we did.

 

Just asking was that luck or did he create the entire situation?

 

He's the owner.      He hired the right GM and the right HC's.      He's an involved and hands-on owner, so he gets his share of the credit.

 

Just like Jerry Jones gets credit during the bad years and the good years for the Cowboys.    He did fire Tom Landry and he did hire Jimmy Johnson and he did give Johnson the freedom to do what he thought best.

 

You gotta give Robert Kraft the credit for hiring Bill Belichick and letting him run the operation as he thought best.   Kraft didn't do anything on a day to day level,    but he certainly hired the right guy, so he gets the credit.

 

People who aren't giving Irsay credit think of him like a cartoon character because of his personal problems and they're upset now because they want the GM and the HC fired YESTERDAY.      He hasn't done it so suddenly he's a bad owner who doesn't care about his team anymore.    I've read that one a number of times.

 

That's the world of the fan......

[Jason_]

8 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

Luck was running down field.  They could have had the cowboys o line and they couldn't protect him.    The o line and grigson haven't been good,   But that injury isn't on grigson

 

^^ THIS.

 

14 hours ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

Grigson has a laundry list of reasons why he isn't a good gm, why grasp at flimsy excuses when there are much better arguement to make. 

 

^^ and THIS

[Coffeedrinker]

How can someone blame Grigson for Luck's lacerated kidney?  It's football, it's an aggressive, hard hitting sport, injuries happen.

 

Now if Grigs was walking down the hall way trying to slice an apple with his pocket knife, slipped at stabbed Luck in the back and lacerated his kidney then it would be his fault.

[SaturdayAllDay]

7 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

As long as you take initiative, you get a pass. It's the same reason no one gives Dallas grief for Romo's injuries (plus Romo's body is broken down anyways). If you at least build a good O-line you get the benefit of the doubt. Ish happens.

 

But if you have a line like the Colts have had the past couple of years and an injury happens, of course people will be on you. It's only fair.

I do agree with this, and i think had the arguement originally been that grigson didn't address the line properly then I would have agreed there as well. 

But to specifically blame the GM for a play in which a player got hurt while running upfield (which has nothing to do with the o line blocking) is a little short sighted. Especially when the arguement was that regardless of how it happened the GM should lose his job for letting multiple QBs get hurt in a season. As you even allude to in your post, context does matter. Which was really the only arguement I was making. 

 

Like I said, there are a dozen better arguements as to why grigson isn't (or at least hasn't previously) been getting it done at gm. It's like having a car with a blow transmission, 4 flat tires and a missing battery and saying that it can't be driven cuz the passenger side mirror is busted. 

[indyagent17]

On 1/12/2017 at 2:32 PM, DougDew said:

As a sign of the times, it sure seems that a lot of people with a media account are going out of their way to forage for material to attack someone they don't like.

you said it Doug!, this generation loves to smear everybody

[BOTT]

I'm obviously the most respected and knowledgeable poster on this forum, but I'm sure you can find 1, maybe 2, people on here that don't like me....

[VocableLoki]

7 minutes ago, BOTT said:

I'm obviously the most respected and knowledgeable poster on this forum, but I'm sure you can find 1, maybe 2, people on here that don't like me....

If you compare Bott's scouting reports to Superman's, it's shocking he will be the next Colts GM.

[BOTT]

1 minute ago, VocableLoki said:

If you compare Bott's scouting reports to Superman's, it's shocking he will be the next Colts GM.

 

No need to disparage superman 

[VocableLoki]

Just now, BOTT said:

 

No need to disparage superman 

It's alright, I'll reverse my position when I need a job.

[dgambill]

19 hours ago, John Waylon said:

And Peyton Manning will tell you to your face that Jim Caldwell is a great coach.

Point being (because I've gotta boil it down so some don't miss the point) opinions aren't always all that reliable.

*

I'm not sure of that. I've heard different reporters saying Peyton on several occasions has either written letters or called owners on the behalf of Jim and Adam. I don't think he would do that if he didn't believe it 100%. Peyton is pretty loyal but I don't think he will stake his reputation without actually believing what he is saying. From what I've seen both Adam and Jim have turned out to be pretty good coaches with what they have. Jims time in Detroit has been much more impressive to me than even his time leading a pretty well put together franchise. Maybe I'm still missing your point but I wouldn't put Peyton anywhere near this guy...this guy says whatever suits the situation and will benefit him the most when he says it. When Peyton is putting that information out there he is actually trying to support a friend and someone he believes in by using his stellar reputation.