Venturi's Latest Comments

[ztboiler]

It's a long listen through multiple topics, but what is particularly interesting is his take on the firing of Grigson.  

 

I'll paraphrase:  The roster is poor and the team is poorly coached.  Regardless of any tension, or sour relationships, the record is what fired Grigson....nothing all that interesting about that.  He goes on to discuss the Grigson/Pagano relationship and why players piled on.  He suggests, in essence, that Grigson is the tough guy demanding a higher standard vs. Pagano's soft player's coach style (reflected by a team that plays physically soft).  Something had to give, so the more frictional personality was dismissed.  He seems to lament that the toughness just exited. 

 

 

[life long]

I guess its not only some forum members who think pagano is too soft on his players. 

[BProland85]

Which is why I hope either Ballard or Paton, hopefully the two major horses in the race, really evaluate Pagano this year, and if they deem him to continue to be soft in coaching and struggling to coach up his players, Chuck will be gone after 2017. Then a tougher minded coach who can get the best out of his players will be brought in.

[Jason_]

11 minutes ago, ztboiler said:

It's a long listen through multiple topics, but what is particularly interesting is his take on the firing of Grigson.  

 

I'll paraphrase:  The roster is poor and the team is poorly coached.  Regardless of any tension, or sour relationships, the record is what fired Grigson....nothing all that interesting about that.  He goes on to discuss the Grigson/Pagano relationship and why players piled on.  He suggests, in essence, that Grigson is the tough guy demanding a higher standard vs. Pagano's soft player's coach style (reflected by a team that plays physically soft).  Something had to give, so the more frictional personality was dismissed.  He seems to lament that the toughness just exited. 

 

 

 

wonder where he heard that about Grigson being more stern than Pagano.  I remember a report coming out before they were both signed to their extensions saying that Pagano wanted to be more strict with players but that Grigson wouldn't let him.

[ztboiler]

8 minutes ago, Jason_S said:

 

wonder where he heard that about Grigson being more stern than Pagano.  I remember a report coming out before they were both signed to their extensions saying that Pagano wanted to be more strict with players but that Grigson wouldn't let him.

I remember that as well, and it was specific to Newsome or Andrew Jackson it seems.  

 

Who knows?  Might have just been that one instance, or might not have been the whole story.  Overall, it's not hard to picture Grigs being the more exacting personality.

[Defjamz26]

While I agree that the Colts are soft, I don't think Grigson was the toughness that we needed. Based on what a bunch of players have said he was an arrogant jerk. That's not being tough at all. I agree that the lack of toughness starts with Pagano though. Unlike coaches like Tomlin who are brutally honest and have no problem being critical of the team, Pagano just acts as if everything is okay and that the ball just didn't roll their way when they lose. When he gets blown out he refuses to say he was embarrassed. That's why I'm still on board for Gruden being the next coach. He has the fire that the players need.

[throwing BBZ]

28 minutes ago, ztboiler said:

I remember that as well, and it was specific to Newsome or Andrew Jackson it seems.  

 

Who knows?  Might have just been that one instance, or might not have been the whole story.  Overall, it's not hard to picture Grigs being the more exacting personality.

 

 Or how about the likes of under performers/tubbies Chapman, Montori Hughes, Thornton, K Holmes.

[MacDee1975]

Tough or not, Grigson was woefully inept at utilizing high round draft picks and overall in acquiring talent for this team.  That is the bottom line, that is why he was deservedly fired.

[NewColtsFan]

 

I find this thread to be a head scratcher.

 

In h is interview 5 years ago,  Ryan Grigson made a note on his pad saying players will love playing for Pagano and will run through a wall for him.         That doesn't sound like a soft team to me....

 

And I think in 12, 13 and 14, we weren't soft.        Suddenly we became soft in 15 and 16?     Really?

 

How about we didn't get soft,   how about we got much less talented.     And that's on Ryan Grigson.

 

When you don't have much talent,  opposing teams have a tendency to make you look bad.    They can make you look soft.     

 

I've never heard of a GM gives a team its toughness.    Never.     Not in 50 years.     UNLESS it's regarding the talent that's brought in.      But Venturi seems to imply that Grigson gave them their toughness by privately kicking some rear end behind closed doors.     And then Pagano undermines it by letting them get away with poor effort and not holding them accountable.     

 

What ever happened to the reports a few years back that Pagano wanted to bench Trent Richardson but Grigson wouldn't let him?    

 

I'm sorry, but this feels like Grigson and Venturi are much friendlier than Venturi is with Pagano and now Venturi gets to trash Pagano publicly to defend Grigson.       This doesn't feel right to me.      Not at all....

 

[luv_pony_express]

1 hour ago, ztboiler said:

I remember that as well, and it was specific to Newsome or Andrew Jackson it seems.  

 

Who knows?  Might have just been that one instance, or might not have been the whole story.  Overall, it's not hard to picture Grigs being the more exacting personality.

 

I'm sure he was.  But that really isn't a GM's role.  Tony Dungy was never known as being particularly tough on players -- and I don't recall reading about Bill Polian insisting that Dungy change that.

 

But, then, both Polian and Dungy are deservedly enshrined in Canton.  Ryan Grigson and Chuck Pagano aren't anywhere close to Canton's radar screen at this point.

 

Grigson should've just focused more on building the best roster he could -- rather than trying to blame others for the team's lackluster results...as if he'd done a great job and Pagano was screwing up what should be a great team.

 

I'm not saying Pagano is the coach we need to get us where we all want to be.  But I am saying that Grigson wasn't the GM we need.

[Coltfreak]

11 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I find this thread to be a head scratcher.

 

In h is interview 5 years ago,  Ryan Grigson made a note on his pad saying players will love playing for Pagano and will run through a wall for him.         That doesn't sound like a soft team to me....

 

And I think in 12, 13 and 14, we weren't soft.        Suddenly we became soft in 15 and 16?     Really?

 

How about we didn't get soft,   how about we got much less talented.     And that's on Ryan Grigson.

 

When you don't have much talent,  opposing teams have a tendency to make you look bad.    They can make you look soft.     

 

I've never heard of a GM gives a team its toughness.    Never.     Not in 50 years.     UNLESS it's regarding the talent that's brought in.      But Venturi seems to imply that Grigson gave them their toughness by privately kicking some rear end behind closed doors.     And then Pagano undermines it by letting them get away with poor effort and not holding them accountable.     

 

What ever happened to the reports a few years back that Pagano wanted to bench Trent Richardson but Grigson wouldn't let him?    

 

I'm sorry, but this feels like Grigson and Venturi are much friendlier than Venturi is with Pagano and now Venturi gets to trash Pagano publicly to defend Grigson.       This doesn't feel right to me.      Not at all....

 

You are going to set a new record in defense of the clapping fool

[jet1968]

Grigson couldn't have been released because he is a poor GM? Who couldn't recognize talent? Who gave up a first round pick for a running back that cant run? Or draft a defensive player in the first round who couldnt play defense? Or draft a receiver in the first round that might not even make most NFL rosters? Or have a personality of a fence post?

[Coltsman1788]

2 hours ago, BProland85 said:

Which is why I hope either Ballard or Paton, hopefully the two major horses in the race, really evaluate Pagano this year, and if they deem him to continue to be soft in coaching and struggling to coach up his players, Chuck will be gone after 2017. Then a tougher minded coach who can get the best out of his players will be brought in.

That's all fine and dandy...but we essentially waste a year in that scenario merely to reaffirm pretty much what many already know.  We need a better head coach. Let the new GM pick his man this year before the season starts and let's get year 1 of this new regime fully under way.  Luck's career is too valuable to keep wasting away.  The Colts are eventually going to have to adjust to a new coach's system in the next year or two anyway...may as well let it happen this upcoming season as opposed to two seasons down the road.   Time is of the essence...we need to maximize our prime years with Luck. 

[DougDew]

This isn't rocket science.  Players aren't going to like the GM, because he's the one that negotiates their contracts down.  That personality stuff parroted by McAfee and Reggie was exaggerated and one-sided.

 

 

[DougDew]

2 hours ago, ztboiler said:

It's a long listen through multiple topics, but what is particularly interesting is his take on the firing of Grigson.  

 

I'll paraphrase:  The roster is poor and the team is poorly coached.  Regardless of any tension, or sour relationships, the record is what fired Grigson....nothing all that interesting about that.  He goes on to discuss the Grigson/Pagano relationship and why players piled on.  He suggests, in essence, that Grigson is the tough guy demanding a higher standard vs. Pagano's soft player's coach style (reflected by a team that plays physically soft).  Something had to give, so the more frictional personality was dismissed.  He seems to lament that the toughness just exited. 

 

 

He said the record got Grigson fired, not necessarily his decisions, and not his personality.  He seems to be implying that Pagano is more of the problem than Grigson, which is something I've always thought.

[ztboiler]

48 minutes ago, luv_pony_express said:

 

I'm sure he was.  But that really isn't a GM's role.  Tony Dungy was never known as being particularly tough on players -- and I don't recall reading about Bill Polian insisting that Dungy change that.

 

But, then, both Polian and Dungy are deservedly enshrined in Canton.  Ryan Grigson and Chuck Pagano aren't anywhere close to Canton's radar screen at this point.

 

Grigson should've just focused more on building the best roster he could -- rather than trying to blame others for the team's lackluster results...as if he'd done a great job and Pagano was screwing up what should be a great team.

 

I'm not saying Pagano is the coach we need to get us where we all want to be.  But I am saying that Grigson wasn't the GM we need.

Whoa now.  Re: Dungy.  

 

Do not ever confuse Dungy's tone of voice with his incredibly high exacting standards.  You don't have to yell to be tough.  If you didn't produce, you didn't play for Dungy.

 

He and Polian were sharing a brain in terms of a standard of excellence and discipline.

[VaAllDay757]

2 hours ago, life long said:

I guess its not only some forum members who think pagano is too soft on his players. 

Whoever thought differently just doesn't want to see it

[superrep1967]

59 minutes ago, luv_pony_express said:

 

I'm sure he was.  But that really isn't a GM's role.  Tony Dungy was never known as being particularly tough on players -- and I don't recall reading about Bill Polian insisting that Dungy change that.

 

But, then, both Polian and Dungy are deservedly enshrined in Canton.  Ryan Grigson and Chuck Pagano aren't anywhere close to Canton's radar screen at this point.

 

Grigson should've just focused more on building the best roster he could -- rather than trying to blame others for the team's lackluster results...as if he'd done a great job and Pagano was screwing up what should be a great team.

 

I'm not saying Pagano is the coach we need to get us where we all want to be.  But I am saying that Grigson wasn't the GM we need.

 

Yeah, Very well put very good post. I totally agree!

[dw49]

1 hour ago, Coltfreak said:

You are going to set a new record in defense of the clapping fool

 

I guess the "problem" starts with the roster and that's why Grigson is gone ?  We all know JP is not a top echelon coach but I really don't see the problem as being our guys are too "soft." I think the talking heads often just love to hear themselves. 

 

I think Irsay probably looked at what was available and decided best to give him another year and then make a change if he so desires. You do want some continuity and rather than fire coach P and replace with a small upgrade IMO makes giving him another year a reasonable decision by Irsay. You really don't want to replace your coaching staff again in 2 years...

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, Coltfreak said:

You are going to set a new record in defense of the clapping fool

 

And yet, I've already said a number of times times in the last few weeks that if Irsay wakes up tomorrow and moves on to a new coach I'll be OK with it.

 

I often offer unpopular opinions.     I rarely like joining the mob with the pitch forks and torches.     I think there's often another side to a story.    People here like to reduce whoever they're angry with to a two dimensional cartoon character.       They did it with Grigson,  and they do it with Irsay and Pagano, and whichever coordinator is unpopular at the moment.      I'm not a fan of that.

 

So, I'm sorry it bothers you that I defend Pagano.      I like him (but don't love him)  and I'm aware that we could hire worse --- much worse.

 

 

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

5 hours ago, ztboiler said:

It's a long listen through multiple topics, but what is particularly interesting is his take on the firing of Grigson.  

 

I'll paraphrase:  The roster is poor and the team is poorly coached.  Regardless of any tension, or sour relationships, the record is what fired Grigson....nothing all that interesting about that.  He goes on to discuss the Grigson/Pagano relationship and why players piled on.  He suggests, in essence, that Grigson is the tough guy demanding a higher standard vs. Pagano's soft player's coach style (reflected by a team that plays physically soft).  Something had to give, so the more frictional personality was dismissed.  He seems to lament that the toughness just exited. 

 

 

Humm Last I checked Pete Carroll is a players coach, hes pretty good, & on Grigson Toughness plus being arrogant and an *doesn't make you good. Ventura is a blow hard!! I like the Polli comment.  

 

[esmort]

59 minutes ago, Horse Shoe Heaven said:

Humm Last I checked Pete Carroll is a players coach, hes pretty good, & on Grigson Toughness plus being arrogant and an *doesn't make you good. Ventura is a blow hard!! I like the Polli comment.  

 

 

Carroll and Pagano shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence. Pagano is an average coach (at best) I don't know why you waste so much time defending him.  There is a difference between being a "players coach" and a "players coach who is also soft", Pagano is the latter.

[Surge89]

5 hours ago, Coltfreak said:

You are going to set a new record in defense of the clapping fool

 

"Rolls eyes" he literally just stated the facts and re-spoke what has been said on this forum for the past 12 months... how is that setting records for defending Pagano?

 

And let me be clear I've adamantly stated that Pagano isn't good enough.  But I think your sipping hard on the Jshipp cool aid who is as delusional as can be when it comes to firing Pagano.

 

I dont recal anyone complaining about the softness of this team when we were winning in Pagano's first 3 years until the New England whooping.  Which is exactly what NCF said.  

 

I also don't recall ever hearing a GM being vital to team toughness either... Venturi is making a fool of himself here and NCF is pointing that out.  So instead of immediately labeling him take the time out to think about what is in front of you.  Just because this fits your narrative of fire Pagano doesn't mean it has sound logic behind it.

[DougDew]

3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

And yet, I've already said a number of times times in the last few weeks that if Irsay wakes up tomorrow and moves on to a new coach I'll be OK with it.

 

I often offer unpopular opinions.     I rarely like joining the mob with the pitch forks and torches.     I think there's often another side to a story.    People here like to reduce whoever they're angry with to a two dimensional cartoon character.       They did it with Grigson,  and they do it with Irsay and Pagano, and whichever coordinator is unpopular at the moment.      I'm not a fan of that.

 

So, I'm sorry it bothers you that I defend Pagano.      I like him (but don't love him)  and I'm aware that we could hire worse --- much worse.

 

 

Great post.

 

As for Irsay, the tide here was swinging badly towards him when he was "delaying" his decision....being called an incompetent owner for not doing the obvious competent thing and fire Grigson.  Now the forum seems relieved that he has displayed competence by making the obvious (in their mind) correct choice to fire Grigson.

 

As far as personalities, I don't care that McAfee thinks Grigson is a jerk.  I think McAfee is annoying, so I wouldn't use his opinion as a judge of someone else's personality.

[esmort]

12 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Great post.

 

As for Irsay, the tide here was swinging badly towards him when he was "delaying" his decision....being called an incompetent owner for not doing the obvious competent thing and fire Grigson.  Now the forum seems relieved that he has displayed competence by making the obvious (in their mind) correct choice to fire Grigson.

 

As far as personalities, I don't care that McAfee thinks Grigson is a jerk.  I think McAfee is annoying, so I wouldn't use his opinion as a judge of someone else's personality.

 

It wasn't just McAfee who called out Grigson. 

[deedub75]

6 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I find this thread to be a head scratcher.

 

In h is interview 5 years ago,  Ryan Grigson made a note on his pad saying players will love playing for Pagano and will run through a wall for him.         That doesn't sound like a soft team to me....

 

And I think in 12, 13 and 14, we weren't soft.        Suddenly we became soft in 15 and 16?     Really?

 

How about we didn't get soft,   how about we got much less talented.     And that's on Ryan Grigson.

 

When you don't have much talent,  opposing teams have a tendency to make you look bad.    They can make you look soft.     

 

I've never heard of a GM gives a team its toughness.    Never.     Not in 50 years.     UNLESS it's regarding the talent that's brought in.      But Venturi seems to imply that Grigson gave them their toughness by privately kicking some rear end behind closed doors.     And then Pagano undermines it by letting them get away with poor effort and not holding them accountable.     

 

What ever happened to the reports a few years back that Pagano wanted to bench Trent Richardson but Grigson wouldn't let him?    

 

I'm sorry, but this feels like Grigson and Venturi are much friendlier than Venturi is with Pagano and now Venturi gets to trash Pagano publicly to defend Grigson.       This doesn't feel right to me.      Not at all....

 

 

Winning covers up a lot of ills.  

[DougDew]

1 minute ago, esmort said:

 

It wasn't just McAfee who called out Grigson. 

Yeah I know.  The only thing that was really said is that he didn't talk much, not that he was a put-down artist.  I said before, Grigson would probably be best suited for communicating with a more quiet coach like Dungy or Blinky, than dealing with gregarious people like McAfee and Pagano and who ever else.

 

I gotta look at the personalities of the people calling the quiet guy arrogant before I would want to take them at their word. 

[NewColtsFan]

27 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Great post.

 

As for Irsay, the tide here was swinging badly towards him when he was "delaying" his decision....being called an incompetent owner for not doing the obvious competent thing and fire Grigson.  Now the forum seems relieved that he has displayed competence by making the obvious (in their mind) correct choice to fire Grigson.

 

As far as personalities, I don't care that McAfee thinks Grigson is a jerk.  I think McAfee is annoying, so I wouldn't use his opinion as a judge of someone else's personality.

 

I think it's also worth noting that every player who went public with their issues with Grigson had issues with their contract with Grigson.

 

Wayne,  Freeman,   McAfree,  and I think I'm forgetting an one or two others.      Each had serious issue with Grigson.       That said,   Grigson did his business poorly, because,  as has been noted elsewhere,   you never see this kind of reaction when a GM gets fired.    The reaction remains in house, behind closed doors.     It didn't with Grigson and that should speak volumes.

 

[NewColtsFan]

12 minutes ago, deedub75 said:

 

Winning covers up a lot of ills.  

 

Absolutely.      Always does.      Good point.

 

[esmort]

13 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yeah I know.  The only thing that was really said is that he didn't talk much, not that he was a put-down artist.  I said before, Grigson would probably be best suited for communicating with a more quiet coach like Dungy or Blinky, than dealing with gregarious people like McAfee and Pagano and who ever else.

 

I gotta look at the personalities of the people calling the quiet guy arrogant before I would want to take them at their word. 

 

Reggie usually isn't outspoken. 

[DougDew]

7 minutes ago, esmort said:

 

Reggie usually isn't outspoken. 

Reggie said that he didn't say hi to him in the hall way until late in the year.  When I try to picture what that means, I don't get it.

 

Did Reggie say hi first, then Grigson ignored him, or was Reggie expecting Grigson to say hi first (which would be arrogant and a bit diva-ish on Reggie's part) but Grigson didn't say hi first so Reggie assumes Grigson is arrogant.

 

So if neither said hi, and they both passed each other in the hallway for months without saying hi, why is Grigson the arrogant one and not Reggie?

 

See, what a bunch of nonsense.

[esmort]

9 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Reggie said that he didn't say hi to him in the hall way until late in the year.  When I try to picture what that means, I don't get it.

 

Did Reggie say hi first, then Grigson ignored him, or was Reggie expecting Grigson to say hi first (which would be arrogant and a bit diva-ish on Reggie's part) but Grigson didn't say hi first so Reggie assumes Grigson is arrogant.

 

So if neither said hi, and they both passed each other in the hallway for months without saying hi, why is Grigson the arrogant one and not Reggie?

 

See, what a bunch of nonsense.

 

I have never heard any rumors of Reggie being arrogant (not even anything  like the few things that floated around about Marvin having some quirks)... So I am inclined to believe that Grigson had the arrogant personality that many are claiming.  He always seemed arrogant to me, I mentioned on here a long time ago (long before the end of the season). 

[DougDew]

15 minutes ago, esmort said:

 

I have never heard any rumors of Reggie being arrogant (not even anything  like the few things that floated around about Marvin having some quirks)... So I am inclined to believe that Grigson had the arrogant personality that many are claiming.  He always seemed arrogant to me, I mentioned on here a long time ago (long before the end of the season). 

I can't tell if a guy is simply the type that's annoyed by small talk and tries to repel it by keeping quiet (hoping the small talk goes away), or if he doesn't speak because he thinks others aren't worthy enough to hear his opinions.  I don't think there are too many people in the world that fit into the latter category frankly.  OTOH, gregarious people are generally the champions of irrelevant small-talk.

 

He may be arrogant, but Reggie said almost verbatim that he didn't like Grigson because he "didn't say hi to him for many months".   Not sure what to make of that or how that situation unfolds. 

[knuckles]

6 hours ago, dw49 said:

 

I guess the "problem" starts with the roster and that's why Grigson is gone ?  We all know JP is not a top echelon coach but I really don't see the problem as being our guys are too "soft." I think the talking heads often just love to hear themselves. 

 

I think Irsay probably looked at what was available and decided best to give him another year and then make a change if he so desires. You do want some continuity and rather than fire coach P and replace with a small upgrade IMO makes giving him another year a reasonable decision by Irsay. You really don't want to replace your coaching staff again in 2 years...

At the beginning of the 2016 season the Colts were the 27th ranked roster in the NFL. Pagano coached them to a 8-8 season. Give him one more year with a new GM, healthy QB, and a rebuilt defense and if the results aren't better move on. Continuity is important. Sometimes the best move is the one not made.

×

[Buck Showalter]

Wow this thread has got a lot of speculation, coupled with a lot of black & white thinking, and it's All topped off with an over abundance of over analyzing...

 

 

 

 

[CS5959]

Something very interesting I read is that Chris Ballard would likely bring the KC Chiefs special teams coach with him as his head coach, here is a link on the guy looks like a very interesting head coach prospect. https://www.google.com/amp/www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/the-12-best-nfl-coaching-candidates-and-the-one-that-teams-are-too-scared-to-hire/amp/?client=ms-android-att-us

[braveheartcolt]

'Grigson wouldn't let him'. Pathetic. Manage your own way, or be damned. If true (debatable), then Chuck should be fired on the spot.

[jskinnz]

14 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

And yet, I've already said a number of times times in the last few weeks that if Irsay wakes up tomorrow and moves on to a new coach I'll be OK with it.

 

I often offer unpopular opinions.     I rarely like joining the mob with the pitch forks and torches.     I think there's often another side to a story.    People here like to reduce whoever they're angry with to a two dimensional cartoon character.       They did it with Grigson,  and they do it with Irsay and Pagano, and whichever coordinator is unpopular at the moment.      I'm not a fan of that.

 

So, I'm sorry it bothers you that I defend Pagano.      I like him (but don't love him)  and I'm aware that we could hire worse --- much worse.

 

 

 

Love this post.

 

The pitch forks and torches crowd - often some of the more uninformed lot.

 

Unpopular does not by definition make it wrong.

 

 

[ztboiler]

7 hours ago, Buck Showalter said:

Wow this thread has got a lot of speculation, coupled with a lot of black & white thinking, and it's All topped off with an over abundance of over analyzing...

 

 

 

 

If I didn't know better I'd think you were describing an Internet fan forum with shielded identities 

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

17 hours ago, esmort said:

 

Carroll and Pagano shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence. Pagano is an average coach (at best) I don't know why you waste so much time defending him.  There is a difference between being a "players coach" and a "players coach who is also soft", Pagano is the latter.

Your right Carroll is better than Pagano. If Pagano is so soft Irsay would have gotten rid of him too! Pagano will win next year!! Oh and by the way he has never had a losing season, even with the % he has been given for something resembling a defense.