The Offseason Reading Series #14: Is 2017 Pagano's last year in Indy?

[BR-549]

1 minute ago, WoolMagnet said:

I would hope that EVERYONE is being evaluated.  Players, coaches, and even the hotdog vendors.  If not, Ballard isnt doing his job, imo.

Right and I am sure he is, it was just nice to hear him say that especially given that Chuck is not his coach per-se.  I only brought it up because I have never really heard a GM speak of that in a press conference.

 

I like the guy that is for sue... and I don't remember having a bad hotdog in the stadium, but competition is the name of the game I hear.

[WoolMagnet]

2 minutes ago, BR-549 said:

Right and I am sure he is, it was just nice to hear him say that especially given that Chuck is not his coach per-se.  I only brought it up because I have never really heard a GM speak of that in a press conference.

 

I like the guy that is for sue... and I don't remember having a bad hotdog in the stadium, but competition is the name of the game I hear.

Bring in Nathans to compete for the hotdog business.

[southwest1]

On July 24, 2017 at 8:43 AM, crazycolt1 said:

All this long winded stuff could have been avoided had the thread just said lets rag on Chuck. Like we haven't been through all of this?

Sigh...I know you & I are at opposite ends of the Pagano spectrum regarding Chuck's job security after this season CC1, but I need to say this: Discussing Chuck's strengths & weaknesses since he was hired in INDY back in 2012 is a far cry "ragging" on Chuck. And why do Pagano supporters think that he's the best available coach & we couldn't possibly do any better so let's just call everyone else haters & close this thread? 

 

Seriously, that's where I'm at right now. Is CC1 entitled to his opinion? Yes, absolutely he is even if SW1 is diametrically opposed to it. But, I'm getting tired of those in the Pagano keep camp inferring that the rest of us not in Chuck's corner beyond this year as being unreasonable & having it in for the guy. I know; I know now Pagano supporters will claim that I am openly rooting for his failure. LOL! It's about production in the post season & beating Playoff teams to get to a SB & let's not forget as 21 said in his writeup, Chuck was brought here to build a monster defense. That was his own slogan in 2012. 

 

Where it gets tricky is what criteria is Jimmy using to judge success for our franchise? What are his benchmarks that must be met to remain the Colts head coach? I know; I know Pags loyalties will tell me it's beyond a win/loss record & that Ryan Grigson didn't surround with adequate talent on defense. You don't think Jimmy expects a division crown & at least 1 playoff victory minimum because he does given how many years Peyton Manning raised the expectation bar since 2000. 

 

Look, I get it neither faction is moving from their position. I'm just sick & tired of some fans clinging to Pagano like he Chuck Noll or something. There will be an era beyond Pagano. I hate to shatter glass & pull the emergency fire extinguisher, but it's coming folks. It just is. 

[Superman]

On 7/23/2017 at 7:11 PM, 21isSuperman said:

During the 2014 season, Reggie Wayne was slowing down near the end of the year.  His incredible streak of 81 consecutive games with 3+ catches looked like it could be coming to an end.  But Pagano, being a player’s coach, decides to put Wayne above the team.  Despite Wayne’s 1 reception on 7 targets for 8 yards in the week 12 matchup against Jacksonville, Pagano decided the Colts must force-feed Wayne the ball to keep his record alive, putting the individual ahead of the team.  In fact, he did this despite his knowledge that the players would never ask to have their accolades padded.  A couple of weeks later, his streak ended in Cleveland anyway.

 

Forcefeeding someone the ball isn’t something new to Pagano.  During the 2015 season, a clearly ineffective Andre Johnson returned to Houston in October.  The only professional team he had ever played for said he was no longer good enough to play for them.  Is this the recipe for a great story?  Then Pagano’s all over it.  In a very obvious display (obvious enough that I told everyone to pick up Andre Johnson in fantasy football that week), the Colts forced the ball to Andre Johnson near the goal line on two occasions, giving him 6 receptions for 77 yards and 2 TDs in his return back home.  That’ll show Houston what they let go!  That’ll show them a lesson!!  Take away that one game against Houston, and Andre Johnson averaged less than 3 receptions and 30 yards per game during the 2015 season.  But that one game was a great story, right?!

 

There are plenty of more examples of Pagano playing favourites.  Even when a player isn’t playing well, it wasn’t uncommon for Pagano to give him more playing time and keeping a better guy on the bench (though some reports were that Grigson was meddling in Pagano’s business, so whatever you choose to believe).  Do the names Trent Richardson and AQ Shipley (before anyone jumps on me about this, I know Shipley isn’t Travis Frederick, but he was miles ahead of Jon Harrison) ring a bell?  Pagano plays favourites.  When you play favourites, you don’t have accountability.  Richardson knew, despite his abysmal performances, that he’d continue to get the ball.  Not only that, but recent reports are that even the Colts players themselves feel like Pagano doesn’t hold players accountable.

 

Another good post. This series is strong, good work on this.

 

My thoughts: There's plenty to criticize Pagano for. These parts strike me as petty. JMO

 

1) The Jacksonville game was a decisive win. Call it sappy or unnecessary or whatever, but feeding Reggie is not an indication that Pagano is a bad coach, nor did his decision hurt the team. I wouldn't have done it or signed off on it (like I matter), but big picture, this is irrelevant. 

 

2) Andre Johnson having a good game against the Texans isn't a reflection of the Colts force feeding him. First, it was still early in the season (Week 5), and the goal was still to make him a functional part of the offense, as it should have been. Second, this was the second game with Hasselbeck, so the offense was going through major adjustments. Third, this game had significant impact on the division standings, and their reliance on Andre helped us win the game. (As an aside, he played fewer snaps and a smaller percentage of snaps against Houston (40 snaps, 62%) than he did the previous week against the Jags (52 snaps, 67%)) Fourth, if they did force feed him purposely, why does it matter if they won, with their backup QB, on the road, against a division opponent?

 

3) I keep saying it -- Trent Richardson got benched at the end of 2013 and the end of 2014. Especially in 2014, while he was starting, Bradshaw was getting more snaps and touches than Richardson, and Richardson was actually turning in acceptable production as part of a timeshare. It wasn't until the Pats game and then Bradshaw's injury that Richardson's production went completely away, and then he was benched for Boom Herron, who always had a fumbling problem and was a little injury prone. By the end of the year, Richardson was completely shut down, and then they cut him. This is a player that, a year before, they had traded a first rounder for. They tried to get a return on their investment, and then they gave up on him. It's a myth that they gave Richardson too long to get going.

 

4) It's also a myth that AQ Shipley was any good. He had faults of his own, and they turned to a player they thought could perform better. They were wrong, but honestly, if there's ever been a decision that screamed 'Grigson meddling,' it's the Harrison decision. It always seemed weird, despite the fact that Shipley is the most overrated Colt since Mike Hart, or maybe even Roy Hall. 

 

[southwest1]

On July 24, 2017 at 11:42 AM, crazycolt1 said:

No matter what your intent was it will ultimately end up another rag on Chuck thread.

If it will make you feel better CC1, you could start a thread called Reasons Why INDY Needs To Retain Pagano & politely ask forum contributors to only add positive feedback. 

 

I'll even visit that thread & focus on writing something nice about Chuck if you want. 

 

To quote HOF Coach Tony Dungy, are you part of the solution or part of the problem? Translation: A thread like that would provide you with the perfect platform to present Pagano in the best possible light. Just a suggestion my friend. I'm  being sincere here not malicious or sarcastic BTW. 

 

Jason can jot down his thoughts too since you two appear to be in lockstep on Chuck remaining in Indianapolis. 

[Superman]

More to the point of the thread, there's a big IF hanging over Pagano's head. I think the Colts have to have a strong year for him to stay beyond 2017.

 

He has to make better situational decisions (like the Detroit timeout). This is something he's struggled with since the beginning, either because he was too conservative in crucial moments, or because he mismanaged the clock or his challenges.

 

The team can't continue to start slow and fall behind, in games or on the season. It's awesome the team can make amazing comebacks, but why don't we start hot more often?

 

The defense has to be top 20 (and that's not a very high bar to clear). Irsay said before last season he expected the offense to have to score 30+ to win, then they did that in the opener and still lost due to one of the worst defensive possessions of the year. (Same thing in the first Houston game.) The defense also has to be better situationally, especially late in games when all you need is one stop.

 

The offense has to protect the QB. This is something I'm hoping Ballard makes an issue of, because the offensive philosophy exposes the OL and leaves the QB vulnerable. Chud and Pagano showed the ability to make good offensive adjustments in 2015, but they don't do this often enough, and fundamentally, the offensive approach asks too much of even a very tough and talented QB in Luck. 

 

Pagano has to come up with good gameplans against good opponents, not giving free reign to the best players on the other team, but actually trying to take them out of the game. In three games over the last three years, Antonio Brown has 23 catches, 342 yards and SEVEN TOUCHDOWNS against the Colts. He's often single covered. This kind of gameplanning is egregious, especially for a former DB coach and defensive coordinator.

 

Unlike others, I think Pagano's personal style is fine. His players will run through a wall for him. There are a lot of supposedly hard-nosed coaches whose players check out on them, for various reasons (Todd Haley, Greg Schiano, etc.) Then there are guys like Mike Tomlin, who is brutally honest when he finds it necessary, but that's congruent with his personality. I don't want Pagano to try to be something he's not, and he's not Mike Tomlin, or Bill Parcells, or Bill Belichick. That said, Pagano's style will grow old if it's not accompanied by results, and after two 8-8 seasons, we'll have to see how the team responds in 2017. 

 

Irsay sad he believes Pagano will have the best coaching season of his career. I hope he does, because I believe the Colts can easily dominate their schedule and make a playoff run if the coaching is strong. If not -- and I think the areas above are the areas Pagano should be closely evaluated in, JMO -- then Pagano will be saying goodbye in early January. 

[Lucky Colts Fan]

11 minutes ago, Superman said:

More to the point of the thread, there's a big IF hanging over Pagano's head. I think the Colts have to have a strong year for him to stay beyond 2017.

 

He has to make better situational decisions (like the Detroit timeout). This is something he's struggled with since the beginning, either because he was too conservative in crucial moments, or because he mismanaged the clock or his challenges.

 

The team can't continue to start slow and fall behind, in games or on the season. It's awesome the team can make amazing comebacks, but why don't we start hot more often?

 

The defense has to be top 20 (and that's not a very high bar to clear). Irsay said before last season he expected the offense to have to score 30+ to win, then they did that in the opener and still lost due to one of the worst defensive possessions of the year. (Same thing in the first Houston game.) The defense also has to be better situationally, especially late in games when all you need is one stop.

 

The offense has to protect the QB. This is something I'm hoping Ballard makes an issue of, because the offensive philosophy exposes the OL and leaves the QB vulnerable. Chud and Pagano showed the ability to make good offensive adjustments in 2015, but they don't do this often enough, and fundamentally, the offensive approach asks too much of even a very tough and talented QB in Luck. 

 

Pagano has to come up with good gameplans against good opponents, not giving free reign to the best players on the other team, but actually trying to take them out of the game. In three games over the last three years, Antonio Brown has 23 catches, 342 yards and SEVEN TOUCHDOWNS against the Colts. He's often single covered. This kind of gameplanning is egregious, especially for a former DB coach and defensive coordinator.

 

Unlike others, I think Pagano's personal style is fine. His players will run through a wall for him. There are a lot of supposedly hard-nosed coaches whose players check out on them, for various reasons (Todd Haley, Greg Schiano, etc.) Then there are guys like Mike Tomlin, who is brutally honest when he finds it necessary, but that's congruent with his personality. I don't want Pagano to try to be something he's not, and he's not Mike Tomlin, or Bill Parcells, or Bill Belichick. That said, Pagano's style will grow old if it's not accompanied by results, and after two 8-8 seasons, we'll have to see how the team responds in 2017. 

 

Irsay sad he believes Pagano will have the best coaching season of his career. I hope he does, because I believe the Colts can easily dominate their schedule and make a playoff run if the coaching is strong. If not -- and I think the areas above are the areas Pagano should be closely evaluated in, JMO -- then Pagano will be saying goodbye in early January. 

 

I agree.  I hope Chuck has all the pieces in place to be successful and gets the job done.  Hopefully injuries won't be a reason for either firing or keeping Pagano, it should be based on job performance.  We just have to wait and see how the season plays out.

 

16 minutes ago, Superman said:

In three games over the last three years, Antonio Brown has 23 catches, 342 yards and SEVEN TOUCHDOWNS against the Colts.

 

I think the Steelers game in week 10 will be a "watershed" game where we see if our team has what it takes.  Pagano is a defensive coach, so he needs to find a way to stop #84 that week.  Let Vontae cover their #2 WR one-on-one and then double Brown with our #2 CB and a safety over the top the whole game, I don't know, just don't let Rothelisberger throw like 6 TDs and 500 yds against us.  Please don't let Darius Butler be our best DB when we play the Steelers.    That game might determine not only Chucks' fate, but the fate of our season...

[King Colt]

This subject has worn out it's welcome.

[21isSuperman]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Another good post. This series is strong, good work on this.

 

My thoughts: There's plenty to criticize Pagano for. These parts strike me as petty. JMO

 

1) The Jacksonville game was a decisive win. Call it sappy or unnecessary or whatever, but feeding Reggie is not an indication that Pagano is a bad coach, nor did his decision hurt the team. I wouldn't have done it or signed off on it (like I matter), but big picture, this is irrelevant.

Appreciate the kind words!  To me, this was a matter of playing favourites.  It's great to have a streak, but when you're force-feeding the guy just to keep the streak, that's over the top, in my opinion.  Put the best guys out there and put the ball in the hands of your best players, period.  If a streak ends, a streak ends.  Your job is to make sure your best players are on the field and helping you win games.  Force-feeding an old and injured Reggie Wayne just to keep his streak going is putting Reggie above the team.  Big picture, it is irrelevant, but I think it's an indication that Pagano can't be impartial and always put the team above the players.  I love how much Pagano cares about his players; it's one of his best qualities.  But at some point, that becomes a fault.

 

Quote

2) Andre Johnson having a good game against the Texans isn't a reflection of the Colts force feeding him. First, it was still early in the season (Week 5), and the goal was still to make him a functional part of the offense, as it should have been. Second, this was the second game with Hasselbeck, so the offense was going through major adjustments. Third, this game had significant impact on the division standings, and their reliance on Andre helped us win the game. (As an aside, he played fewer snaps and a smaller percentage of snaps against Houston (40 snaps, 62%) than he did the previous week against the Jags (52 snaps, 67%)) Fourth, if they did force feed him purposely, why does it matter if they won, with their backup QB, on the road, against a division opponent?

I don't think it was necessarily a reliance on Andre.  I think, like the Reggie situation, an active decision was made to try and get the ball to Andre on the goal line.  Andre's touchdowns in that game were a 2 yard pass and a 4 yard pass, so it's not like he used his speed or strength to zoom by or bulldoze defenders.  I think what happened was that the Colts got the ball inside the five, then Pagano made the decision (either on the field or during the week of prep) to force the ball to Andre so he can score touchdowns on his old team.  I don't have any direct evidence of this since I'm not involved in gameplanning.  But when a guy has such an explosion in one game, then is pretty much ineffective for the rest of the year, I think something's up.  Like the Reggie situation above, it doesn't have a huge impact overall, but it shows Pagano looks for the stories.  He focuses on providing a good narrative (Reggie's streak continues, Andre dominates against former team), and that's a bad thing for a coach to do.

 

Quote

3) I keep saying it -- Trent Richardson got benched at the end of 2013 and the end of 2014. Especially in 2014, while he was starting, Bradshaw was getting more snaps and touches than Richardson, and Richardson was actually turning in acceptable production as part of a timeshare. It wasn't until the Pats game and then Bradshaw's injury that Richardson's production went completely away, and then he was benched for Boom Herron, who always had a fumbling problem and was a little injury prone. By the end of the year, Richardson was completely shut down, and then they cut him. This is a player that, a year before, they had traded a first rounder for. They tried to get a return on their investment, and then they gave up on him. It's a myth that they gave Richardson too long to get going.

If I recall correctly, many on the forums could see Richardson's ineffectiveness before Pagano did.  He had an awful 2013 and many said it was because he wasn't able to fully learn the playbook.  So let's give him 2013 off and look at 2014.  After the first 5 weeks of 2014, Richardson had 240 rush yards on 70 carries for a 3.43 YPC.  However, the Colts followed this up by giving Richardson 57 more carries over the next 5 games for 193 yards (3.3 YPC).  Point being Richardson continued to get snaps when he showed how ineffective he really was.

 

Quote

4) It's also a myth that AQ Shipley was any good. He had faults of his own, and they turned to a player they thought could perform better. They were wrong, but honestly, if there's ever been a decision that screamed 'Grigson meddling,' it's the Harrison decision. It always seemed weird, despite the fact that Shipley is the most overrated Colt since Mike Hart, or maybe even Roy Hall. 

AQ Shipley is not Travis Frederick by any means.  But the eye test showed me that the line as a whole played better with Shipley than with Harrison.  Again, nearly the entire forum could see the problems Harrison was having and could see that Shipley, while not perfect, was a better option.  But the team continued to play with Harrison.

 

The interesting piece is how one approaches the Grigson meddling stuff.  If you're the head coach, one could argue that you should put the best guys on the field, regardless.  Not saying I agree with that since job security could become an issue if you defy your GM/boss, but it's a valid line of thinking.  On the other hand, I thought you were of the opinion that the Grigson meddling reports were unsubstantiated and untrue.

 

2 hours ago, Superman said:

More to the point of the thread, there's a big IF hanging over Pagano's head. I think the Colts have to have a strong year for him to stay beyond 2017.

 

He has to make better situational decisions (like the Detroit timeout). This is something he's struggled with since the beginning, either because he was too conservative in crucial moments, or because he mismanaged the clock or his challenges.

 

The team can't continue to start slow and fall behind, in games or on the season. It's awesome the team can make amazing comebacks, but why don't we start hot more often?

 

The defense has to be top 20 (and that's not a very high bar to clear). Irsay said before last season he expected the offense to have to score 30+ to win, then they did that in the opener and still lost due to one of the worst defensive possessions of the year. (Same thing in the first Houston game.) The defense also has to be better situationally, especially late in games when all you need is one stop.

 

The offense has to protect the QB. This is something I'm hoping Ballard makes an issue of, because the offensive philosophy exposes the OL and leaves the QB vulnerable. Chud and Pagano showed the ability to make good offensive adjustments in 2015, but they don't do this often enough, and fundamentally, the offensive approach asks too much of even a very tough and talented QB in Luck. 

 

Pagano has to come up with good gameplans against good opponents, not giving free reign to the best players on the other team, but actually trying to take them out of the game. In three games over the last three years, Antonio Brown has 23 catches, 342 yards and SEVEN TOUCHDOWNS against the Colts. He's often single covered. This kind of gameplanning is egregious, especially for a former DB coach and defensive coordinator.

 

Unlike others, I think Pagano's personal style is fine. His players will run through a wall for him. There are a lot of supposedly hard-nosed coaches whose players check out on them, for various reasons (Todd Haley, Greg Schiano, etc.) Then there are guys like Mike Tomlin, who is brutally honest when he finds it necessary, but that's congruent with his personality. I don't want Pagano to try to be something he's not, and he's not Mike Tomlin, or Bill Parcells, or Bill Belichick. That said, Pagano's style will grow old if it's not accompanied by results, and after two 8-8 seasons, we'll have to see how the team responds in 2017. 

 

Irsay sad he believes Pagano will have the best coaching season of his career. I hope he does, because I believe the Colts can easily dominate their schedule and make a playoff run if the coaching is strong. If not -- and I think the areas above are the areas Pagano should be closely evaluated in, JMO -- then Pagano will be saying goodbye in early January. 

Agree with pretty much everything stated here.  Regarding your point about strong opponents, I think it's interesting (and maddening, as a fan) how inconsistent the team has been.  We beat San Fran in 2013, when they were still strong.  We have beaten the Seahawks and Broncos, both of whom have won Super Bowls in the last 5 years.  But then we got stomped by Pittsburgh, New England, Dallas, and even teams like St. Louis.

 

Again, I'd like nothing more than to see Pagano and the Colts win the next 5 Super Bowls.  But basing it off of what Pagano's history shows, I don't see it happening.

[crazycolt1]

9 hours ago, southwest1 said:

Sigh...I know you & I are at opposite ends of the Pagano spectrum regarding Chuck's job security after this season CC1, but I need to say this: Discussing Chuck's strengths & weaknesses since he was hired in INDY back in 2012 is a far cry "ragging" on Chuck. And why do Pagano supporters think that he's the best available coach & we couldn't possibly do any better so let's just call everyone else haters & close this thread? 

 

Seriously, that's where I'm at right now. Is CC1 entitled to his opinion? Yes, absolutely he is even if SW1 is diametrically opposed to it. But, I'm getting tired of those in the Pagano keep camp inferring that the rest of us not in Chuck's corner beyond this year as being unreasonable & having it in for the guy. I know; I know now Pagano supporters will claim that I am openly rooting for his failure. LOL! It's about production in the post season & beating Playoff teams to get to a SB & let's not forget as 21 said in his writeup, Chuck was brought here to build a monster defense. That was his own slogan in 2012. 

 

Where it gets tricky is what criteria is Jimmy using to judge success for our franchise? What are his benchmarks that must be met to remain the Colts head coach? I know; I know Pags loyalties will tell me it's beyond a win/loss record & that Ryan Grigson didn't surround with adequate talent on defense. You don't think Jimmy expects a division crown & at least 1 playoff victory minimum because he does given how many years Peyton Manning raised the expectation bar since 2000. 

 

Look, I get it neither faction is moving from their position. I'm just sick & tired of some fans clinging to Pagano like he Chuck Noll or something. There will be an era beyond Pagano. I hate to shatter glass & pull the emergency fire extinguisher, but it's coming folks. It just is. 

You are sick and tired of fans clinging??  Maybe I am just as sick and tired of those who blame Chuck for every fault this team has?

How can any head coach take a team of nobody defensive players into the playoffs let alone a deep run into the playoffs?

The defensive players that were here in Chucks first three seasons are all gone. The good players either got old or was not retained. Was that Chucks fault? Chuck can only coach the players that Grigson either drafted and signed in free agency. How has that worked out?

You think you know Irsay so well?  Maybe not as well as you think?

[crazycolt1]

11 hours ago, BR-549 said:

I think he is just tired of this argument against Chuck.  I can see why but to contribute to the discussion...

 

I believe we are closer now to competing with the steelers than we have been since Chuck came to Indy.  Tomlin is not that good of a coach.  So I think we can out coach him once we have our pieces in place.  I wholeheartedly agree with you that settling for a bottom feeder defense is going to send us to nowhere.  Is that Chuck's fault?  I seriously doubt it.  

 

One reason I will give you is.... who is the best defender that Grigson drafted in his tenure and where is he now?  And who was it that couldn't find enough money to keep Jerrell Freeman? (Hint Ryan Grigson)  By the way he ended up being the number one rated ILB in the league last year, did we not need that sort of player?  I don't know the whole reasoning behind him leaving, but I think his heart was in Indy.

 

I am a Purdue guy and I really really tried to like Ryan Grigson, but I gotta say he was way more the problem than Chuck.  I am not a statistician and I hated statistics in college and I don't have any "proof" to back my words up, but it really isn't that hard to tell that I am at least half right.  What did Chris Ballard do when he came?  The very first thing I saw was that he stripped our defense down and pretty much kept the very best people we had and got rid of everyone else.  I would bet that other than Anderson come next year we have zero Ryan Grigson defenders (at least I can't think of any we would keep, maybe Vonte?).  That is a pretty glaring clue of just how poor our defensive roster has been and Chuck was not responsible for those picks, at least not solely .... no way.

 

Lastly, I definitely can't say that I agree with a lot of things that Chuck has done.  And like I said earlier in this thread he has made some real head scratcher calls.  I just think it is fair that he gets an opportunity to coach his team without the fear of Ryan Grigson's intimidating posture and poor roster building.  I am pretty sure that Ballard was saying in his press conference that once the pads come on he will be able to better evaluate players and coaches alike.

 

That is how I feel about it.  I am not a hater and really not an advocate.  I want everyone to be healthy and for Chuck to get a fair shake to do what he said he can do.

Thanks for explaining what I have been trying to say all along.

 

[crazycolt1]

14 hours ago, southwest1 said:

If it will make you feel better CC1, you could start a thread called Reasons Why INDY Needs To Retain Pagano & politely ask forum contributors to only add positive feedback. 

 

I'll even visit that thread & focus on writing something nice about Chuck if you want. 

 

To quote HOF Coach Tony Dungy, are you part of the solution or part of the problem? Translation: A thread like that would provide you with the perfect platform to present Pagano in the best possible light. Just a suggestion my friend. I'm  being sincere here not malicious or sarcastic BTW. 

 

Jason can jot down his thoughts too since you two appear to be in lockstep on Chuck remaining in Indianapolis. 

What you don't understand is what you call a lockstep is not what I am saying or wanting. All I am saying is give Chuck the chance to head coach a team that has the talent for him to be successful. He has not had that talent level for two seasons. When he did he was very successful in his first three seasons.

When me and Jason (or others) ask that Chuck be given a chance you insult both of us by calling us Chucks agent or say derogative things just because we don't agree with your opinion. You my friend are guilty of that and It was insulting not only to me but my intelligence.

Not one time have I made it personal by calling you out and insulting you right here where everyone can read it.

Now you say start another thread when we both know all it will end up being another thread where it ends up just like every thread involving Chuck. No, what we all need is to wait and see how things work out. We have over talked this subject enough as it is.

[NannyMcafee]

My opinion is of the fact that Grigson is no longer present. I think we can all agree, that the last 2 years on defense has been much less than stellar, and we're bottom feeders among defenses. Talent wise, things didn't look good. This primarily falls on Grigson, who knew what pagano wanted to do, and gave him less and less on defense every year. It's like someone says they're a chef, and his boss keeps taking ingredients away as you cook. But then you get fired. If you want pagano gone, then what reason is there for keeping our current DC? None. I see people mention that our defensive coordinator doesn't have anybody on defense to start for him and it was a largely injured group in 2016, no one wants to give that to pagano though? 

 

I am not for or against the firing of pagano. But I'm okay with him being our coach in 2017. If he continues to show error this season, I'll be on the fire bandwagon. 

[Superman]

15 hours ago, 21isSuperman said:

Appreciate the kind words!  To me, this was a matter of playing favourites.  It's great to have a streak, but when you're force-feeding the guy just to keep the streak, that's over the top, in my opinion.  Put the best guys out there and put the ball in the hands of your best players, period.  If a streak ends, a streak ends.  Your job is to make sure your best players are on the field and helping you win games.  Force-feeding an old and injured Reggie Wayne just to keep his streak going is putting Reggie above the team.  Big picture, it is irrelevant, but I think it's an indication that Pagano can't be impartial and always put the team above the players.  I love how much Pagano cares about his players; it's one of his best qualities.  But at some point, that becomes a fault.

I don't think it was necessarily a reliance on Andre.  I think, like the Reggie situation, an active decision was made to try and get the ball to Andre on the goal line.  Andre's touchdowns in that game were a 2 yard pass and a 4 yard pass, so it's not like he used his speed or strength to zoom by or bulldoze defenders.  I think what happened was that the Colts got the ball inside the five, then Pagano made the decision (either on the field or during the week of prep) to force the ball to Andre so he can score touchdowns on his old team.  I don't have any direct evidence of this since I'm not involved in gameplanning.  But when a guy has such an explosion in one game, then is pretty much ineffective for the rest of the year, I think something's up.  Like the Reggie situation above, it doesn't have a huge impact overall, but it shows Pagano looks for the stories.  He focuses on providing a good narrative (Reggie's streak continues, Andre dominates against former team), and that's a bad thing for a coach to do.

 

Just adding the spoiler tag for the sake of length.

 

I think you're making some assumptions, which is fine, and passing them off as substantiated fact, which I am pushing back on. I agree that Pagano obviously forced the ball to Reggie, but I don't think it really matters, big picture.

 

I don't agree that they purposely forced the ball to Andre, at least not outside the parameters of the offense, which they were still trying to make Andre fit into. He was our biggest and most experienced receiver, why is it surprising that they'd target him on the goal line? That's what they intended to do with him. They had just signed him for 3 years, $24m. It was his fifth game. You're suggesting they should have given up on him by then. A month later he had 4 catches, 81 yards and a TD. It's not like this was his only good game. 

 

But you've decided that Andre was force-fed the ball -- a conclusion that I think is forced -- and that it proves Pagano would rather keep his favorite players happy than win games. Andre's good game helped us win. I don't understand how this is a bad thing.

 

Quote

If I recall correctly, many on the forums could see Richardson's ineffectiveness before Pagano did.  He had an awful 2013 and many said it was because he wasn't able to fully learn the playbook.  So let's give him 2013 off and look at 2014.  After the first 5 weeks of 2014, Richardson had 240 rush yards on 70 carries for a 3.43 YPC.  However, the Colts followed this up by giving Richardson 57 more carries over the next 5 games for 193 yards (3.3 YPC).  Point being Richardson continued to get snaps when he showed how ineffective he really was.

 

He was part of a timeshare in 2014. Bradshaw was getting more reps and more touches almost every week. Why are you looking at raw numbers? Up until the Pats game, this timeshare was pretty effective. Two games prior, against the Bengals, Richardson had 14 carries for 77 yards, one of the few times he actually outrepped and outtouched Bradshaw, and Bradshaw still had two TDs. The next week, Richardson sat out with an injury. He got 7 carries the following week against NY.

 

The next game was against the Pats, when the running game was completely ineffective. That's the game where Bradshaw got hurt, and after that, the timeshare was busted up and Richardson's production went completely in the toilet. By the Washington game two weeks later, he got 26 snaps, 8 carries, and Boom got 24 snaps, 8 carries, but outproduced him dramatically. Richardson got phased out as the season went on, and he never got more than 9 carries for the rest of the season. He was down to 15 snaps by the last game, and he was benched in the playoffs. 

 

Up to the Bengals game, and before he got hurt, he had 101 carries for 358 yards, (3.5/carry, not great, but better than 2013), and 19 receptions for 173 yards (9.1/catch, pretty good for a back, higher than Bradshaw's 7.9). After that game, his carries reduced by 43%, he had 58 carries for 161 yards, down to 2.7 yards/carry. His time on the field progressively reduced, and he was benched by the end of the year. 

 

You are again arguing that, because Richardson wasn't lighting the world on fire, they should have nailed him to the bench early in the season. This ignores the context to make the point that Pagano forced him on the field when he shouldn't have. In reality, Richardson was already the #2 back in a timeshare, and while he definitely wasn't very good, he wasn't as bad as everyone says. 

 

Quote

AQ Shipley is not Travis Frederick by any means.  But the eye test showed me that the line as a whole played better with Shipley than with Harrison.  Again, nearly the entire forum could see the problems Harrison was having and could see that Shipley, while not perfect, was a better option.  But the team continued to play with Harrison.

 

Again, it was a bad choice, but Shipley had problems himself. The line wasn't great with either of them in. Looking for an upgrade from Shipley isn't a problem. Sticking with Harrison was, but the goal appeared to be to hand it back to Holmes. 

 

Quote

The interesting piece is how one approaches the Grigson meddling stuff.  If you're the head coach, one could argue that you should put the best guys on the field, regardless.  Not saying I agree with that since job security could become an issue if you defy your GM/boss, but it's a valid line of thinking.  On the other hand, I thought you were of the opinion that the Grigson meddling reports were unsubstantiated and untrue.

 

Unproven, and likely exaggerated (like the idea that Grigson forced Pagano to play Richardson, which is based on the false premise that Richardson shouldn't have been playing at all). But I don't know whether they were true or not. The Shipley/Harrison saga, and especially Pagano's responses, are probably the best evidence that Grigson did in fact meddle with lineups. 

[crazycolt1]

5 hours ago, NannyMcafee said:

My opinion is of the fact that Grigson is no longer present. I think we can all agree, that the last 2 years on defense has been much less than stellar, and we're bottom feeders among defenses. Talent wise, things didn't look good. This primarily falls on Grigson, who knew what pagano wanted to do, and gave him less and less on defense every year. It's like someone says they're a chef, and his boss keeps taking ingredients away as you cook. But then you get fired. If you want pagano gone, then what reason is there for keeping our current DC? None. I see people mention that our defensive coordinator doesn't have anybody on defense to start for him and it was a largely injured group in 2016, no one wants to give that to pagano though? 

 

I am not for or against the firing of pagano. But I'm okay with him being our coach in 2017. If he continues to show error this season, I'll be on the fire bandwagon. 

I think that is more than fair enough.

The thing I worry about is if Pagano does do a good job and improvement happens but yet we don't win a playoff game or two there will be a backlash of "I told you so's".  Most of them come from some who think Pagano was and is the problem. In reality this team is in the middle of a rebuild that the Colts want to call a retool when in fact it is still a rebuild. Hopefully we will see enough improvement that we won't have to find a new head coach. If that does happen IMO it will set this team back at least two to three years.

[NannyMcafee]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

I think that is more than fair enough.

The thing I worry about is if Pagano does do a good job and improvement happens but yet we don't win a playoff game or two there will be a backlash of "I told you so's".  Most of them come from some who think Pagano was and is the problem. In reality this team is in the middle of a rebuild that the Colts want to call a retool when in fact it is still a rebuild. Hopefully we will see enough improvement that we won't have to find a new head coach. If that does happen IMO it will set this team back at least two to three years.

 

I can see why you worry about that. But let's say this season is a success and we win at least one playoff game. While pagano doesn't seem to be making as many mistakes as everyone has been noticing in the past. Do we still move on from pags? 

 

The more I learn about Ballard the more I get that feeling he is going to be a successful GM. I know he doesn't even have one season under his belt as GM, but he still shows a hell of a lot more than anyone I have seen. To me the only way to go is up for the man. And that's the way he has been going his entire career in football. Up, up, up. There is no reason to feel otherwise. The reason I bring this up is because whatever decision he makes, I have a feeling will be the right one. I don't see Ballard making the sort of mistake you are worried about. 

 

But, I could obviously be wrong. I am basing all of this off of a "feeling". So it is quite possible I am. 

[BR-549]

20 hours ago, King Colt said:

This subject has worn out it's welcome.

Right... I don't want to wish my life away (or the season) but it would be nice to fast forward to later in the year so we can put this one to sleep.

[crazycolt1]

26 minutes ago, NannyMcafee said:

 

I can see why you worry about that. But let's say this season is a success and we win at least one playoff game. While pagano doesn't seem to be making as many mistakes as everyone has been noticing in the past. Do we still move on from pags? 

 

The more I learn about Ballard the more I get that feeling he is going to be a successful GM. I know he doesn't even have one season under his belt as GM, but he still shows a hell of a lot more than anyone I have seen. To me the only way to go is up for the man. And that's the way he has been going his entire career in football. Up, up, up. There is no reason to feel otherwise. The reason I bring this up is because whatever decision he makes, I have a feeling will be the right one. I don't see Ballard making the sort of mistake you are worried about. 

 

But, I could obviously be wrong. I am basing all of this off of a "feeling". So it is quite possible I am. 

 

27 minutes ago, NannyMcafee said:

 On your question, IMO Irsay will not pull the trigger on Pagano if he sees enough improvement and thinks it would continue.

I think it's Pagano's job now but he has Ballard here so we really don't have a clue at this point. It boils down to Pagano doing a good enough job to impress Ballard and Irsay. IMO opinion I think if Pagano does do a fine job he will get his extension. If not? Bye Bye.

Would I be happy? No not really. It's not the firing of Pagano that concerns me as much as starting over with a new head coach. That would more than likely have an effect on all the other coaches and coordinators.

If Pagano can rekindle the fire of his first three years it would be real nice.

 

[21isSuperman]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

You are again arguing that, because Richardson wasn't lighting the world on fire, they should have nailed him to the bench early in the season. This ignores the context to make the point that Pagano forced him on the field when he shouldn't have. In reality, Richardson was already the #2 back in a timeshare, and while he definitely wasn't very good, he wasn't as bad as everyone says. 

 

 

Again, it was a bad choice, but Shipley had problems himself. The line wasn't great with either of them in. Looking for an upgrade from Shipley isn't a problem. Sticking with Harrison was, but the goal appeared to be to hand it back to Holmes. 

 

 

Unproven, and likely exaggerated (like the idea that Grigson forced Pagano to play Richardson, which is based on the false premise that Richardson shouldn't have been playing at all). But I don't know whether they were true or not. The Shipley/Harrison saga, and especially Pagano's responses, are probably the best evidence that Grigson did in fact meddle with lineups. 

Fair points.  I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on the Andre part.  I still feel like the ball was forced to him near the goal line.  And I don't recall the 2014 season that greatly, but I do remember thinking why Richardson kept getting starts and snaps when he had shown how ineffective he was.  Same with Jon Harrison.  Even if the goal was to give Holmes the starting position back, I was left wondering why they went from Shipley to Harrison, which was an obvious downgrade.

[Jules]

Nice breakdown, very fair. However over time I do think too much can be made of the "build the monster" slogan. I mean yes we all took it to heart getting excited, but a lot of this is just motivational tactics and coach speak that anyone can do. I think sometimes we look too deeply into these generic slogans and inspirational tactics. Also because back in 2012 we were coming into a unique situation after releasing Manning and a fanbase and team that needed to believe again after 2011.

 

As for Pagano, I don't know what happens. Nobody does. I am rooting for him to kick butt this year and prove everyone wrong. I hope he does. But if we have another shaky year and miss the playoffs I wonder if Irsay will be forgiving again. If there are excuses like if Luck misses time etc. I also wonder if that will be taken into account.

 

The only thing is, if we do fire Pagano.........someone better has to be in mind since you CAN get worse.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

I think once again Pagano's future as HC for the Colts will be who is available to replace him. If once again no big name coach wants to come here then he may again stay another season.

[Superman]

12 hours ago, Jules said:

However over time I do think too much can be made of the "build the monster" slogan. I mean yes we all took it to heart getting excited, but a lot of this is just motivational tactics and coach speak that anyone can do. I think sometimes we look too deeply into these generic slogans and inspirational tactics.

 

Agreed. Of all the things to criticize a coach for, coachspeak isn't one of them. 

[southwest1]

On July 26, 2017 at 4:52 AM, crazycolt1 said:

You are sick and tired of fans clinging??  Maybe I am just as sick and tired of those who blame Chuck for every fault this team has?

How can any head coach take a team of nobody defensive players into the playoffs let alone a deep run into the playoffs?

The defensive players that were here in Chucks first three seasons are all gone. The good players either got old or was not retained. Was that Chucks fault? Chuck can only coach the players that Grigson either drafted and signed in free agency. How has that worked out?

You think you know Irsay so well?  Maybe not as well as you think?

I hear this obsolete argument all the time CC1. Boo hoo! Leave Pagano alone because other than Vontae Davis we have no elite production in the secondary. Can Chuck improve our LB corp since 2012? How bout that? He played a role in molding Ray Lewis's career while he was in Baltimore. Can he bring the same intensity to Indy? Or was Ray Lewis carrying Chuck? Hmmmm...

 

Also, why do Pags supporters treat Chuck like he's mute & unable to pound the table & say to Grigson who he really wanted drafted? Look, I get in every evaluation there's some give & take between the owner, GM, & HC regarding the draft, free agency, bringing in fresh bodies, & signing vets off the street, but come on CC1, stop treating Chuck like he's a helpless child & with no role in the roster configuration at all. You're being ridiculous. 

 

Your last 2 sentences are a bit touchy. Did I strick a nerve or something, You spend several posts complaining about how the world is picking on Chuck unfairly in your eyes & you have the audacity to imply that I & other Pagano detractors are being unreasonable. Please. Show many any post where I said I was clairvoyant about either the owner or Pagano. Lighten up. 

[a06cc]

Grigson is gone. If we make the playoffs this season Chuck stays. The players however need to be held accountable. Regardless of who’s on the field. Chuck can’t be responsible for missed tackles, assignments, or interceptions. The only thing I question about Chuck is his usage of timeouts. 

[southwest1]

On July 26, 2017 at 9:43 AM, crazycolt1 said:

What you don't understand is what you call a lockstep is not what I am saying or wanting. All I am saying is give Chuck the chance to head coach a team that has the talent for him to be successful. He has not had that talent level for two seasons. When he did he was very successful in his first three seasons.

When me and Jason (or others) ask that Chuck be given a chance you insult both of us by calling us Chucks agent or say derogative things just because we don't agree with your opinion. You my friend are guilty of that and It was insulting not only to me but my intelligence.

Not one time have I made it personal by calling you out and insulting you right here where everyone can read it.

Now you say start another thread when we both know all it will end up being another thread where it ends up just like every thread involving Chuck. No, what we all need is to wait and see how things work out. We have over talked this subject enough as it is.

Chuck has been here since 2012 & it's 2017 now. You act like he's only been here for a yr or something. Most coaches in the NFL usually get a 4 yr window to demonstrate what they can do & he technically was already given an extension. 

 

So, let me get this straight CC1 [What I highlighted in red.] I offer a suggestion to start a thread where you make your case why Pagano should be allowed to stay in INDY & I promise to leave only positive feedback in that post & all you can say is "We both know all where that will end up...involving Chuck." 

 

So, in other words, even when a regular poster suggests a thread devoted to highlighting what Pagano does well [good relationship with players, good relationship with the media, perhaps a good teacher of game day fundamentals] you automatically think it will get derailed so why even try? Seriously? Man, you throw in the towel quickly CC1. 

 

Even when you get the perfect platform to make the strongest case in favor of Chuck. You refuse to even try at all? Wow. 

[crazycolt1]

6 hours ago, southwest1 said:

Chuck has been here since 2012 & it's 2017 now. You act like he's only been here for a yr or something. Most coaches in the NFL usually get a 4 yr window to demonstrate what they can do & he technically was already given an extension. 

 

So, let me get this straight CC1 [What I highlighted in red.] I offer a suggestion to start a thread where you make your case why Pagano should be allowed to stay in INDY & I promise to leave only positive feedback in that post & all you can say is "We both know all where that will end up...involving Chuck." 

 

So, in other words, even when a regular poster suggests a thread devoted to highlighting what Pagano does well [good relationship with players, good relationship with the media, perhaps a good teacher of game day fundamentals] you automatically think it will get derailed so why even try? Seriously? Man, you throw in the towel quickly CC1. 

 

Even when you get the perfect platform to make the strongest case in favor of Chuck. You refuse to even try at all? Wow. 

Do you ever get tired of beating a dead horse?

No matter what me, you or anyone else thinks Pagano does have the opportunity to show what he can do. If he fails he is gone. If not, he gets extended. It's simple and don't need 4 paragraphs to explain.

[Defjamz26]

I think he's done here. Playoffs or improved record, he's not the guy to bring the Colts a Lombardi. That much is obvious.

 

With rumors that Ballard would like Toub (whose a strong candidate who has had HC interviews in the past) and Gruden admitting that he's already spoken to teams about returning to coaching, there are other options. Pagano isn't terrible but he isn't great either. He's underwhelming to say the least.

 

 

*

[i am yoda]

On 7/23/2017 at 10:11 PM, 21isSuperman said:

This is it.  This is the final installment of the ORS.  With training camp less than a week away, I hope these readings have kept you entertained over the offseason and given you something to talk about during a quiet time for football fans.

 

Previous ORS installments

ORS1: The best Indianapolis Colts team ever

ORS2: Which Indianapolis Colt are you?

ORS3: Dissecting the 15th overall pick

ORS4: Choose your contract

ORS5: Which Simpsons characters are the Indianapolis Colts?

ORS6: The best trash-talking moments of Peyton Manning's career

ORS7: My favourite Andrew Luck throws

ORS8: Changes the NFL needs right now

ORS9: Projecting Moncrief's contract

ORS10: The NFL's MVP award

ORS11: So you want to draft a running back

ORS12: My case for Peyton Manning as the GOAT

ORS13: Do playoff byes matter?

 

In this installment, we discuss the polarizing head coach of the Colts, Chuck Pagano.  Some people say he's great, pointing to 22 wins in his first two full seasons as a head coach.  Others say he's made too many bad decisions to forgive.  I'm in the latter group, and I think 2017 will be Chuck Pagano's final year as head coach of the Colts.  Let me explain why...

 

The defense

Chuck Pagano came from Baltimore in 2012 after spending one year as their defensive coordinator.  Upon his arrival, one of the first things he talked about was Building the Monster

 

 

  

 

Unfortunately, 5 years into his head coaching career, there isn’t anything monstrous to look forward to with Pagano.  Because of the unfortunate leukemia diagnosis in 2012, I will give Pagano that year off and I’ll give him 2013 off so he can have a full year to establish his defense.  But from 2014 to 2016, the Colts’ defense has been terrible by nearly every measure.  In the graph below, I used statistics from NFL.com to compile how the Colts’ defense has performed throughout those three years in a variety of categories.  The y-axis is NFL rank; 1st is best and 32nd is worst.

 

 

Some interesting things to note:

1) The defense ranked worse in every category in 2016 than they were in 2014

2) From one year to the next, the ranking for any category gets worse six times, it remains the same twice, and it improves twice.  Of the times it improves, the improvement is insignificant: 32nd to 31st in penalties per game from 2015 to 2016, and 25th to 22nd in points per game from 2015 to 2016.

3) The Colts never rank in the top 10 for any of these categories.

 

Let’s take a look at this past year.  The Colts had the privilege of facing Blake Bortles and Brock Osweiler for 4 (well, 3 + a meaningless week 17) games this year.  Brock Osweiler averaged an abysmal 5.80 yards per attempt (30th in the league) while Bortles was 28th with 6.25.  Andrew Luck ranked 5th with 7.78.  In terms of adjusted net yards per attempt, Osweiler was 30th with 4.34 and Bortles was 26th with 5.23; Luck was 10th with 6.84.  The Colts’ record in those 4 games?  1-3, with the one win coming in a meaningless week 17 victory against the 3-13 Jags, which Pagano thought meant the future was bright. 

 

 

 

Long story short: Pagano was given a top 10 QB and lost to bottom 6 QBs.  Not only did he lose to them, his defenses were downright embarrassed; the Colts allowed Brock Osweiler to score 14 points in 4 minutes.

 

The 2016 defense was downright pathetic.  They gave up the most yards out of any team in Indianapolis Colts history…that's 33 years!

 

 

 

You’ve certainly built a monster, Pagano, because that defense is terrifying Colts fans everywhere.

 

The lack of accountability

Chuck Pagano is a player’s coach.  He always has his guys’ backs.  You’ll never hear him criticize them in front of the cameras.  In fact, he’s more likely to overinflate the value of his players by calling them rolling balls of butcher knives, or comparing them with well-established and successful veterans.  While I appreciate this approach and I think it's best to keep all issues in-house, at some point, this becomes a fault…like when giving the people a feel-good story becomes a goal over performance and winning.

 

During the 2014 season, Reggie Wayne was slowing down near the end of the year.  His incredible streak of 81 consecutive games with 3+ catches looked like it could be coming to an end.  But Pagano, being a player’s coach, decides to put Wayne above the team.  Despite Wayne’s 1 reception on 7 targets for 8 yards in the week 12 matchup against Jacksonville, Pagano decided the Colts must force-feed Wayne the ball to keep his record alive, putting the individual ahead of the team.  In fact, he did this despite his knowledge that the players would never ask to have their accolades padded.  A couple of weeks later, his streak ended in Cleveland anyway.

 

Forcefeeding someone the ball isn’t something new to Pagano.  During the 2015 season, a clearly ineffective Andre Johnson returned to Houston in October.  The only professional team he had ever played for said he was no longer good enough to play for them.  Is this the recipe for a great story?  Then Pagano’s all over it.  In a very obvious display (obvious enough that I told everyone to pick up Andre Johnson in fantasy football that week), the Colts forced the ball to Andre Johnson near the goal line on two occasions, giving him 6 receptions for 77 yards and 2 TDs in his return back home.  That’ll show Houston what they let go!  That’ll show them a lesson!!  Take away that one game against Houston, and Andre Johnson averaged less than 3 receptions and 30 yards per game during the 2015 season.  But that one game was a great story, right?!

 

There are plenty of more examples of Pagano playing favourites.  Even when a player isn’t playing well, it wasn’t uncommon for Pagano to give him more playing time and keeping a better guy on the bench (though some reports were that Grigson was meddling in Pagano’s business, so whatever you choose to believe).  Do the names Trent Richardson and AQ Shipley (before anyone jumps on me about this, I know Shipley isn’t Travis Frederick, but he was miles ahead of Jon Harrison) ring a bell?  Pagano plays favourites.  When you play favourites, you don’t have accountability.  Richardson knew, despite his abysmal performances, that he’d continue to get the ball.  Not only that, but recent reports are that even the Colts players themselves feel like Pagano doesn’t hold players accountable.

 

 

While Garofolo did state that Pagano is usually willing to come down hard on guys and criticize them, the previous evidence tells me he doesn’t.

 

The rest

There are a host of other issues with Pagano.  Slow starts, bad gameplans, players put in bad spots where they can’t be successful (see: Antonio Morrison or TJ Green in coverage), a team that doesn’t try to mask its weaknesses, undisciplined play (see penalties trend in above graph), celebrating ugly team performances, being exceptionally conservative, his choice of offensive coordinators/the type of offense he wants to run, and his belief that today’s NFL is that of the 1980s.  I think he was a great choice to lead the rebuild in 2012.  We were bringing in a lot of young players and they needed a leader to show them how to be a pro and how to go about their business.  Pagano fit that role perfectly.  However, that time has come and gone.  Pagano has stayed in Indy at least one season too long.  If the Colts want to become championship contenders, I don't think Pagano is the guy to get them there.

 

Lastly, there have been reports that Chris Ballard prefers Dave Toub to be his head coach.  While their relationship appears to be good, and it seems like Ballard is happy with Pagano, it's hard to know much of this is GM-speak and how much is legitimate.  Are these guys just being professionals, or is Ballard genuinely happy with sticking with Pagano?  If you ask me, I think Ballard really prefers Toub and it will take an exceptional season for Pagano to remain Indy's head coach.  When you combine this report that our GM prefers/preferred another coach, and the poor performances and decisions Pagano has displayed, I think Pagano's time is limited.

 

In Pagano's defense, he hasn't always had the greatest talent to work with.  It's no secret that Ryan Grigson made several mistakes with personnel.  Some of Pagano's fans will say this is the reason why his teams haven't done so well.  However, I'm of the opinion that at the end of the day, you're either getting the job done, or not getting it done.  Pagano simply isn't getting it done.

 

And with that, the ORS is complete!  Many thanks to everyone who participated in the discussions.  Hopefully they helped make the long offseason feel a bit shorter and give everyone a little dose of football when there are no games on.  Bring on the 2017 season!  Go Colts!!

 

I think this piece places far too much emphasis on Pagano and not nearly enough emphasis on Grigson.  The roster stinks, especially on the defensive side!

[southwest1]

22 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Do you ever get tired of beating a dead horse?

No matter what me, you or anyone else thinks Pagano does have the opportunity to show what he can do. If he fails he is gone. If not, he gets extended. It's simple and don't need 4 paragraphs to explain.

It's not about deceased equestrian animals at all CC1. Yes, I have acknowledged several times in our Pagano exchanges that neither the keep or release camp will ever change their mind about the fate of Chuck. In addition, I also said more than once that you are entitled to your position on retaining Pags beyond this yr. 

 

Look, just because I or any other forum member suggest that a person start a thread you are under no obligation to proceed with it. I know that. I never want anybody to do anything they do not want to do of their own freewill. 

 

Here's my issue though. Hypocrisy for lack of a better word. If any Colt fan levels any criticism against our current HC constructive or not you seem to think that Pagano critics are treating him like a piñata to swing a symbolic baseball bat at & pulverize into several pieces just to torment Chuck & make his life miserable. Nothing could be further from the truth. Look, say Chuck takes us to 11-5, 13-3, or 12-4, undoubtedly, he's staying in INDY & SW1 gets to eat crow & admit that I was wrong. It's a slim reality, but it's there. I know that. 

 

CC1, you're a good dude & I have nothing against you personally, but when somebody offers you an opportunity to make your best case for why Chuck deserves another extension & you decide to walk away from the opportunity entirely simply because you fear that the trajectory of a positive Pagano thread will spiral off in a negative direction it's bizarre approach to take, let's be honest. Most people who believe strongly in a coach will jump at the chance to defend him & put into their own words reasons why a specific individual needs more time to prove himself & not be released, dismissed, or fired. 

 

Okay, maybe you're really not that into Chuck as our head coach & you simply want to be supportive of the current guy in that role like the Beach Boys song "Be True To Your School" or favorite NFL team in this case. That's admirable. Hades even noble. Except that you usually defend Chuck every chance you get [which is your right of course] while often claiming some version of the world is out to get Chuck when you feel the criticism is going overboard or hits too close to home for your satisfaction. 

 

"If he fails, he is gone."

 

Well, what do ya know; common ground & something we can agree upon. Nice. I'll take it CC1. 

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, southwest1 said:

It's not about deceased equestrian animals at all CC1. Yes, I have acknowledged several times in our Pagano exchanges that neither the keep or release camp will ever change their mind about the fate of Chuck. In addition, I also said more than once that you are entitled to your position on retaining Pags beyond this yr. 

 

Look, just because I or any other forum member suggest that a person start a thread you are under no obligation to proceed with it. I know that. I never want anybody to do anything they do not want to do of their own freewill. 

 

Here's my issue though. Hypocrisy for lack of a better word. If any Colt fan levels any criticism against our current HC constructive or not you seem to think that Pagano critics are treating him like a piñata to swing a symbolic baseball bat at & pulverize into several pieces just to torment Chuck & make his life miserable. Nothing could be further from the truth. Look, say Chuck takes us to 11-5, 13-3, or 12-4, undoubtedly, he's staying in INDY & SW1 gets to eat crow & admit that I was wrong. It's a slim reality, but it's there. I know that. 

 

CC1, you're a good dude & I have nothing against you personally, but when somebody offers you an opportunity to make your best case for why Chuck deserves another extension & you decide to walk away from the opportunity entirely simply because you fear that the trajectory of a positive Pagano thread will spiral off in a negative direction it's bizarre approach to take, let's be honest. Most people who believe strongly in a coach will jump at the chance to defend him & put into their own words reasons why a specific individual needs more time to prove himself & not be released, dismissed, or fired. 

 

Okay, maybe you're really not that into Chuck as our head coach & you simply want to be supportive of the current guy in that role like the Beach Boys song "Be True To Your School" or favorite NFL team in this case. That's admirable. Hades even noble. Except that you usually defend Chuck every chance you get [which is your right of course] while often claiming some version of the world is out to get Chuck when you feel the criticism is going overboard or hits too close to home for your satisfaction. 

 

"If he fails, he is gone."

 

Well, what do ya know; common ground & something we can agree upon. Nice. I'll take it CC1. 

If you read all the comments I made right here in this thread you will see I said I didn't want Pagano fired. With that said I also said his firing wasn't what worried me the most. What worries me the most is starting the team with a new head coach and setting this team back for 2 quite possible 3 years by starting over. A new head coach would effect most of the coaches and coordinators. Does Luck need a change and start over with a new offensive coordinator. Is it worth gambling going into Lucks 6 or 7 year and still no progress? Me not wanting Pagano fired goes much deeper than your accusations of what you perceive as a man crush on Pagano.

I have seen where the old saying be careful of what you wish for has backfired. (the grass is always greener)  

I am glad Pagano is going to have his chance to show if he can catch some of the fire this team had his first three seasons. The thing is with all the new faces is this team going to be able to gel in it's first season together and if not where does that leave Pagano?

A division crown and a playoff run may not be in the cards for the Colts this year. I mention that because there are some that has said if those things don't happen Pagano needs to be fired. IMO that all depends on his coaching and not the final record of the team. (Irsay has already said the teams record would not be the determining factor is Chuck stays or goes)

If Pagano gets fired I will back who ever takes his place. The is the NFL and there are changes made by teams owners and we as fans really don't have that much impact on their choices.

[southwest1]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

If you read all the comments I made right here in this thread you will see I said I didn't want Pagano fired. With that said I also said his firing wasn't what worried me the most. What worries me the most is starting the team with a new head coach and setting this team back for 2 quite possible 3 years by starting over. A new head coach would effect most of the coaches and coordinators. Does Luck need a change and start over with a new offensive coordinator. Is it worth gambling going into Lucks 6 or 7 year and still no progress? Me not wanting Pagano fired goes much deeper than your accusations of what you perceive as a man crush on Pagano.

I have seen where the old saying be careful of what you wish for has backfired. (the grass is always greener)  

I am glad Pagano is going to have his chance to show if he can catch some of the fire this team had his first three seasons. The thing is with all the new faces is this team going to be able to gel in it's first season together and if not where does that leave Pagano?

A division crown and a playoff run may not be in the cards for the Colts this year. I mention that because there are some that has said if those things don't happen Pagano needs to be fired. IMO that all depends on his coaching and not the final record of the team. (Irsay has already said the teams record would not be the determining factor is Chuck stays or goes)

If Pagano gets fired I will back who ever takes his place. The is the NFL and there are changes made by teams owners and we as fans really don't have that much impact on their choices.

 

I don't know. Losing coordinators doesn't scare me that much. It's par for the course when a new regime comes in. I'd hate to lose Joe Philbin on the OL sure, but the Chud being released wouldn't crush more or anything like that. Not really. There's also the possibility that some new blood in the building ignites new passion, renews focus on cleaning up penalties or mental errors, prompts Luck to have faster reads & a quicker release; I just don't buy into the idea that we never alter coaching philosophies because it might set our franchise QB back & force them to regress.

 

At a certain point, there's enough body of work to judge from a head coach's perspective as an owner & GM. Okay sure, it's possible that Irsay & Ballard read the direction of the Colts differently then I do. It's not like I have vast knowledge as a scout or matchup game day guru. I will own that. I just think that after a certain point...An owner knows what he has or doesn't have as a head coach like when Falcons owner Blank fired Mike Smith & hired Dan Quinn. Or to be blunt, an owner can tell sooner rather than later who can take them to the Lombardi Promiseland & who just can't. 

 

"If Pagano gets fired, I will back who ever takes his place." 

 

I know that. I would never dream of questioning your INDY loyalty buddy. Not in a million yrs my man. Just like I hope you know that SW1 takes no pleasure in any head coach or coordinator getting a pink slip. It sucks having to sell yr house, move, & say goodbye to all the friends you, your wife, & your kids made while they lived here. It blows. I just wanna win more rings & I don't don't Chuck can pull that difficult feat off. Could I be wrong? Sure. I never thought Jim Caldwell would win a ring after he was let go after the 2011 season with the Ravens & I got egg on my face. But, even if Pagano won a Championship in another city for another team, I don't live in a state of fear or regret. when a decision has been made; I move forward & I don't worry about the past or what might have been. Just focus on the team goals & aspirations in front of me. 

 

It is true that Jimmy calls the shots & we fans have no final say in what ultimately happens CC1. No argument there. I'm just grateful that Jimmy really listens to his fanbase. He values what we think as loyal Colt followers & takes what feedback we have under advisement.