Jim Irsay Press Conference Discussion Thread

[WoolMagnet]

3 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Spoiler: I'm on the list, so don't be surprised if I'm picking our players in the draft this year.  

You do know you can't draft Pokemon players , right?

[1959Colts]

1. Jim Osborne ‏@jimosborne45  4m4 minutes ago

   More

   This is a complex puzzle. Irsay either secures Manning now or he's gone. Titans loom large for deal he wants. Matter of time. Browns too.

   0 replies1 retweet1 like

   Reply

    

    

    

   Retweet

    

   1

    

    

   Like

    

   1
2.  

   Jim Osborne ‏@jimosborne45  12m12 minutes ago

   More

   Amy Adams Strunk expected to get NFL approval for equity group to buy out Titans heirs. She would make major play for PM stake in Titans.

[Derakynn]

1 hour ago, WoolMagnet said:

Whats that?

Talked to him for advice on how to proceed with the franchise, not to inquire about becoming the coach. 

[aReggie7]

I have been thinking about what all Irsay said in his press conference and have several thoughts/questions running through my mind.

 

Why Fire Grigson Now?

 

I think that Jim genuinely likes Grigson as a person and don't believe that his dissatisfaction with personnel decisions was the reason Grigson was let go. I think it had to do with Grigson's relationships with others in the building from coaching staff to players. Irsay didn't say this and I don't have proof of it but that's my thinking for the reasoning behind Grigson's firing. It certainly doesn't appear that players liked Grigson based on the reactions of Pat and former players on Twitter. JMV hinted this week that the Grigson/Pagano relationship became even worse.

 

Is A Manning Deal In Place?

 

Listening to JMV, Venturi, and Kravitz I get the impression that Irsay would only fire Grigson and/or Pagano if he had a replacement waiting to take over. I'm not sure if it was those guys or just the bloggers (Wells/Osbourne) who said Grigson only goes if Manning is coming. Irsay denied Manning is in consideration for the GM job but I think Manning would come as part owner/Executive of Football Operations.

 

Is Manning ready to return to football? Have him and Irsay really came to an agreement? Maybe. Or maybe Manning has nothing to do with firing Grigson.

 

I will add this about Peyton and it is that Irsay appears to want him involved with the Colts and Peyton seems open to it. I hate to imagine what the reaction will be if Irsay doesn't land Peyton and he goes to the Titans, Saints, or somewhere else and builds a championship team.

 

Irsay Can't Screw Up The GM Hire

 

I feel that this team is still a good year or two away from drafting/signing/developing players before they are likely to be a strong Super Bowl threat. This is a huge decision Irsay is making. Irsay made it clear he wants at least 2 Super Bowls in the Luck era. I think this GM hire will likely make or break that goal for Irsay.

[MB-ColtsFan]

3 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Just hoping it's not an in house hire get new blood in here that will bring in new scouts and coaches the whole 9 yards

Here's the problem with bringing in a whole new coaching staff: they will probably want to run a new offense.

Some will come back and say "nothing is going to change with the same ol' stupid offensive play calling".

The bottom line here is that Luck will not be able to function in the new offense until at least training camp, so it makes sense to keep the offensive scheme in tact for at least another season.  If you're going to do that then you may as well keep the coaching staff intact as well.  I think this is only logical seeing as Luck won't be able to learn any new system in time for the new season.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

2 hours ago, WoolMagnet said:

Of course you would have..:..

unless pags was fired, then you'd be saying the opposite.

oh come on LJ, you know it's true!

 

No, I wouldn't have.

A bad GM can get lucky in the draft and hit on some FA signings BUT A BAD HC  has to make game plans, in game adjustments, clock management, game decisions etc...etc.

And he has to do it every practice, every game. You can't hide a inferior coach. It's always a up hill struggle when your opponent's HC is superior.

But if you want to get excited about a un-named GM and retaining a below average HC go ahead and have a ball.

[Bluefire4]

5 hours ago, 21isSuperman said:

You have to understand the strengths and limitations of your players and put them in good positions to succeed.  Putting Robert Mathis, Antonio Morrison, or TJ Green in coverage is a terrible idea.  Putting Dwayne Allen on Clowney one on one is a terrible idea.  Despite being a defensive minded head coach, we just had one of the worst defenses in franchise history.  Pagano isn't maximizing this team's talent.

You have to understand that injuries have plagued this team this year. Maybe Pagano wanted Geathers to be the person who went in coverage but with him and many others hurt, it forces the coach to put Morrison and Green in coverage and hope for the best.

 

Also I hate that the offensive line kept Andrew clean for most of that Texans game and the coach gets vilified for one mistake. Nobody's perfect snd its hard to even be good with this roster's lack of depth and overall talent.

[Dark Superman]

The moment Irsay stated that Pagano will be our coach in 2017 is the moment I stopped caring.

[WoolMagnet]

1 hour ago, LJpalmbeacher said:

 

No, I wouldn't have.

A bad GM can get lucky in the draft and hit on some FA signings BUT A BAD HC  has to make game plans, in game adjustments, clock management, game decisions etc...etc.

And he has to do it every practice, every game. You can't hide a inferior coach. It's always a up hill struggle when your opponent's HC is superior.

But if you want to get excited about a un-named GM and retaining a below average HC go ahead and have a ball.

Hard to argue with that.

i'm just not that excited about any coaches out there , realistic ones anyway. Not sold on mcdaniels, or gruden for that matter really.  Maybe the young shenaghan.

 I'm warming to the idea of (unless a better option at coach is clear) giving chuck the reigns for some continuity and the new gm can keep or boot pags next year. Its on pags now, no grigs excuse, fair or not.

 Anyone see any player tweets regarding Pags?

 

 I feel being unhappy right now is like finding a $50 bill and complaining it wasn't a $100. 

[WoolMagnet]

2 hours ago, MB-ColtsFan said:

Here's the problem with bringing in a whole new coaching staff: they will probably want to run a new offense.

Some will come back and say "nothing is going to change with the same ol' stupid offensive play calling".

The bottom line here is that Luck will not be able to function in the new offense until at least training camp, so it makes sense to keep the offensive scheme in tact for at least another season.  If you're going to do that then you may as well keep the coaching staff intact as well.  I think this is only logical seeing as Luck won't be able to learn any new system in time for the new season.

Some good points in there

thats probably why 80% here didnt Post them.

[Jason_]

6 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Pagano and Grigson's understudy

 

Which part are you having trouble with? "Literally" or "exactly the same"?

[Colts_Fan12]

17 minutes ago, Jason_S said:

 

Which part are you having trouble with? "Literally" or "exactly the same"?

Nevermind 

[Mr Coffee]

8 hours ago, Coltsman1788 said:

All Irsay said was that Chuck is our coach going into 2017.  He also said that the new GM once brought onboard will evaluate everything.  Same thing he said when Grigson was hired before he ultimately fired Caldwell.  Irsay is just leaving that decision to the new GM.  Chuck may stay or could still go...we will just have to wait and see.

Gotcha.  I was working and only caught part of the press conference.  Thanks for the clarification.  Makes sense.

[SaturdayAllDay]

9 hours ago, Mr Coffee said:

I was kind of ticked off when Irsay said that Chuck will be the coach in 2017.  However, after thinking about it and reading some of your guys' responses, it does make sense to keep him in a way.

 

Irsay is all about continuity.  I'm sure that he realized that the Grigano combo is a sinking ship, but he probably didn't want the players to have to deal with a new GM AND a new coach.  Even though Chuck is not a good coach (in my opinion), I think that Irsay realized that the upcoming draft is crucial for the next few years of this franchise.  Add in the fact that we have a decent amount of cap room to play with, it makes sense that he fired Grigs and maybe kept Pagano for the sake of continuity.  For 2017, I really believe that having a good GM is more important than a good coach.   My guess is that we will have a new coach in 2018.  We shall see.

Also the important thing to remember is that luck just got put on a shelf for possibly 6 months. A new coach won't get much time to get luck acclimated to a new offense. If anything the continuity may be for Luck's sake this year, which is why they will revisit the Pagano decision again next year. 

[CoachLite]

9 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

When you have a QB like Luck the job will always be appealing.

 

Apparently you haven't had an extremely high-paying job working in a dysfunctional hell-hole. Having a few very talented people and having it under-perform only makes hell worse.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, CoachLite said:

 

Apparently you haven't had an extremely high-paying job working in a dysfunctional hell-hole. Having a few very talented people and having it under-perform only makes hell worse.

With a couple of Good Drafts and the right GM we are closer to being Good than you think. The worse we have been is 8-8. Look at Atlanta who was 8-8 last season, we even beat them with Hasselbeck in Atlanta, they are now playing in the Title Game. Too many people really overreact in here and are way to negative. Panthers went 15-1 and made the SB in 2015 and then went 6-10 this season. Every year is different and yes the GM job is appealing with a QB like Luck on your team. He is a Franchise QB that has already played in a Title Game.

[21isSuperman]

14 hours ago, Horse Shoe Heaven said:

The talent on defense is a 1 and we won 8 games. I think thats pretty good!!!

We won 8 games because Andrew Luck had a career year.  The defense had nothing to do with it

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

1 hour ago, 21isSuperman said:

We won 8 games because Andrew Luck had a career year.  The defense had nothing to do with it

I disagree the are 2 sides of the ball and the Colts had to do it on defense with smoke and Mirrors because the talent is lacking. If that was the case we could give every team free points and then hand the ball to Luck!!

[21isSuperman]

15 minutes ago, Horse Shoe Heaven said:

I disagree the are 2 sides of the ball and the Colts had to do it on defense with smoke and Mirrors because the talent is lacking. If that was the case we could give every team free points and then hand the ball to Luck!!

The 2016 defense was literally one of the franchise history.  They had nothing to do with us winning games.  They let Stafford drive down the field in the final minutes to win the game.  They gave up a 14 point lead to Brock Osweiler in 4 minutes.  They were awful due to bad coaching and a lack of talent

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

5 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

The 2016 defense was literally one of the franchise history.  They had nothing to do with us winning games.  They let Stafford drive down the field in the final minutes to win the game.  They gave up a 14 point lead to Brock Osweiler in 4 minutes.  They were awful due to bad coaching and a lack of talent

I said they are bad NO Doubt, But they still have to play and make stops!! As the year went on they were a little better. IMO the coaches did all they could do with this group. Honestly it started with not resigning Freeman, Thinking Moore, or Irving could do the job, both getting cut. Grigson. Then signing Robinson the CB hes not that good, Grigson. Having to play T J Green clearly not ready not having a quality back up Grigson! Anderson Injury, Jones suspended and then injured, rookies playing IIB the CB play HORRIBLE talent. Cutting Smith the Cb a high pick really GRIGSON, Waldon 11 sacks is due to scheme he not that great of a pass rusher, Mathis clearerly not himself due to age and injury. Trent Cole do we need to go there Grigson, Vontee even IMO was not as good this year, It goes on and on. Look I have played and coached  college ball and you can only coach them up so much, but to deliver and preform the game plan is a talent thing. You either have it or don't and the Colts defense is lacking it badly!! And by the way this was only Lucks 2nd best statistical year. & honestly he could have and should have played better too he isn't without fault, missing open guys regularly, and some ill advised INT's at bad times.