why brissett

[NewColtsFan]

52 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

 

 

When did TY Hilton and Donte Moncrief become slow?  The Colts may have lost one of their speed receivers, but saying they lost "their speed receiver" makes it sound like they lost the only one they had, and that's hardly the case.

 

Sorry...   was not trying to imply that either Hilton or Moncrief were slow or lacked speed.     They both have lots of speed and are capable of using it.     I think that's one reason the team was willing to give up Dorsett.      But speed was Dorsett's strength, his specialty.    So I think of him as the team's speed receiver.

 

Hope that clarifies my view.    Sorry for any confusion.  

 

 

[Jason_]

1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Sorry...   was not trying to imply that either Hilton or Moncrief were slow or lacked speed.     They both have lots of speed and are capable of using it.     I think that's one reason the team was willing to give up Dorsett.      But speed was Dorsett's strength, his specialty.    So I think of him as the team's speed receiver.

 

Hope that clarifies my view.    Sorry for any confusion.  

 

 

 

yeah, I pretty much figured there was some confusion involved...my exasperated reaction was to the suggestion they lost "their speed receiver".  Yeah, they lost one of their speed guys, but they still have a couple so it's not like we lost all ability to take the top off a defense.

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, colts2dasuperbowl said:

I don't understand this trade. Dorsett was playing good this preseason too!

Only reason for this trade to make sense is if Luck is not ready to come back any time soon.

If this is true and Luck is not healthy enough to play for weeks to come, my question is... why not put him on PUP?

 

 

If the team put Luck on the PUP then Luck can't play the first six games.

 

By not putting him on him on the PUP the Colts are saying they expect him back at some point in the first 6 games.    At this point, likely closer to game six than game 1.

 

 

[jameszeigler834]

5 hours ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

why did the colts trade for brissett? could it be, luck is not healing fast enough, or there is doubt  he will ever be the same as before, or luck will miss half the season, or the staff did not think our qbs could cut it, or  the staff thinks brissett will be better than luck, or the staff just thought brissett was worth more than dorsett, or are we looking for a long term qb who can carry on if luck gets hurt again, or the staff thinks brissett can take lucks job away from him, or  ballard wants luck to have competition for his job, or all of these things. why? thoughts?

He is a better backup than tolzien is the reason I am going with.

[jimmy g]

Could be as simple as Edelman is out, and Pats offered JB for a reciever.  Ballard jumped on it?

[ProblChld32]

6 hours ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

why did the colts trade for brissett? could it be, luck is not healing fast enough, or there is doubt  he will ever be the same as before, or luck will miss half the season, or the staff did not think our qbs could cut it, or  the staff thinks brissett will be better than luck, or the staff just thought brissett was worth more than dorsett, or are we looking for a long term qb who can carry on if luck gets hurt again, or the staff thinks brissett can take lucks job away from him, or  ballard wants luck to have competition for his job, or all of these things. why? thoughts?

IMO i dont think Ballard saw enough from Morris or Tolzein. I think he wasnt comfortable relying on them being the backup if anything were to ever happen.

[TheMarine]

Brissett, Morris, Tolzien will all take us just as far as the other would - 1 win per every 4 games. Between the O-line, # of new players, and general lack of depth I fail to see how this is even a deal. It really just doesn't matter. Until Pittsburgh, it seemed pretty sure that Dorsett was on the bubble of even making the team, and would probably spend time in Special Teams if anywhere else. Even with Luck I dont see the Colts going better than 8-8 again

[IndyScribe]

1 hour ago, jimmy g said:

Could be as simple as Edelman is out, and Pats offered JB for a reciever.  Ballard jumped on it?

From what I've read, Pats initiated the trade. 

[gacoop1]

Just look at the last preseason game between NE and NY Giants.  The guy(JB) was a beast.  Who throws five TDs in a preseason?  I believe Brissett should start hands down over Tolzien.  

[Virtuoso80]

1 minute ago, gacoop1 said:

Just look at the last preseason game between NE and NY Giants.  The guy(JB) was a beast.  Who throws five TDs in a preseason?  I believe Brissett should start hands down over Tolzien.  

I think it was 4 passing tds and 1 rushing td

[Bluesmith]

I think I read somewhere where Ballard was keeping an eye on Brissett as a possible cut.  It was one of the players he was tracking.  I think they were going to cut Dorsett regardless, when BB calls up to inquire about Dorsett, it was a no brainer trade to get the player they wanted (Brissett) and avoiding the chance that a team with a lower waiver priority snatches him up if/when Patriots release Brissett.

 

There is a chance that Dorsett does better in the Patriots system/WR situation.  That does not equate to him being able to replicate it with the Colts.

 

Brissett was never going to unseat Garrapolo, but has a great chance to eventually unseat Tolzien.  If you take this trade on its merits and the individual parts.  This trade makes a lot of sense for both teams.

 

Icing on the cake is that we will have a backup QB costing next to nothing for the next three years.

[Luck 4 president]

Just wish we would've traded to get more protection for Luck so we don't have to worry about having a good backup

[NagelHausForge]

Because brisket is delicious... Oh, wait you said Brissett.... Carry on.

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, Bluesmith said:

I think I read somewhere where Ballard was keeping an eye on Brissett as a possible cut.  It was one of the players he was tracking.  I think they were going to cut Dorsett regardless, when BB calls up to inquire about Dorsett, it was a no brainer trade to get the player they wanted (Brissett) and avoiding the chance that a team with a lower waiver priority snatches him up if/when Patriots release Brissett.

 

There is a chance that Dorsett does better in the Patriots system/WR situation.  That does not equate to him being able to replicate it with the Colts.

 

Brissett was never going to unseat Garrapolo, but has a great chance to eventually unseat Tolzien.  If you take this trade on its merits and the individual parts.  This trade makes a lot of sense for both teams.

 

Icing on the cake is that we will have a backup QB costing next to nothing for the next three years.

 

I think there was zero chance that the Colts would cut Dorsett OR that the Pats would have cut Brissett.

 

That said,  I agree that it's a good trade for both teams.     Win-win.    And the Colts now having a quality back-up at QB for a cheap price is important.

 

 

[Jason_]

7 hours ago, gacoop1 said:

Just look at the last preseason game between NE and NY Giants.  The guy(JB) was a beast.  Who throws five TDs in a preseason?  I believe Brissett should start hands down over Tolzien.  

 

Well there's this little thing called 'he needs to learn the playbook first'

[Jason_]

6 hours ago, Luck 4 president said:

Just wish we would've traded to get more protection for Luck so we don't have to worry about having a good backup

 

Bill polian called to say he thinks that would be a bad idea.

[colts2dasuperbowl]

On 9/6/2017 at 6:37 PM, J@son said:

 

You made a statement and then proved yourself wrong in the very next comment.  If Luck were not going to be ready to play then they WOULD have kept him on PUP.  What possible reason could they have for not keeping him on PUP if they knew he wouldn't be ready for at least 6 weeks?  There is absolutely no logical reason why they would do that.

 

Brissett has already shown the potential to be a better QB than Tolzien.  Brissett is now under contract with the Colts through 2019.  Brissett's average annual salary is around half of Tolzien's. 

 

So, Ballard gave himself the opportunity to upgrade the QB2 spot and lock that position up for 3 years at half the cost of his current, lesser backup.  Now, do you want to revisit that whole, "only reason for this trade to make sense is if Luck is not ready to come back any time soon" comment?

What I was trying to say was that if Luck is not ready in a week or two, then don't rush him back, just put him on PUP so he can be fully healed. IF he is coming back within a week or two, then why trade our young wr for a back up QB that is going to play for 1 game?

Brissett really hasn't proved anything other than game 4 of preseason. If we didn't want Tolzien to be our 2nd QB then why not pick someone up in free agency? There are at least 2 or 3 veterans that are better than Brissett that can give us a chance to win.  Also, I never liked the idea of trading for a backup QB because backup QBs rarely gets a chance to play when your starting QB is healthy. Other positions needs depth, but QB is the only position that doesn't really need depth. If your #1 QB is hurt and hurt for the most of the season, then the team probably won't make it to the Superbowl. Tom Bradys and Kurt Warners don't come to you very often.

[IndyScribe]

1 hour ago, colts2dasuperbowl said:

What I was trying to say was that if Luck is not ready in a week or two, then don't rush him back, just put him on PUP so he can be fully healed. IF he is coming back within a week or two, then why trade our young wr for a back up QB that is going to play for 1 game?

Brissett really hasn't proved anything other than game 4 of preseason. If we didn't want Tolzien to be our 2nd QB then why not pick someone up in free agency? There are at least 2 or 3 veterans that are better than Brissett that can give us a chance to win.  Also, I never liked the idea of trading for a backup QB because backup QBs rarely gets a chance to play when your starting QB is healthy. Other positions needs depth, but QB is the only position that doesn't really need depth. If your #1 QB is hurt and hurt for the most of the season, then the team probably won't make it to the Superbowl. Tom Bradys and Kurt Warners don't come to you very often.

There were no good options in FA. Brissett is young and cheap. He can probably be the backup for the forseeable future, or flipped for picks if he really plays well. Putting Luck on PUP would mean he can't practice, which is bad. Brissett was a long term move. Even if Luck were to come back soon, Brissett would still be a backup for the future.

[Jason_]

4 hours ago, colts2dasuperbowl said:

What I was trying to say was that if Luck is not ready in a week or two, then don't rush him back, just put him on PUP so he can be fully healed. IF he is coming back within a week or two, then why trade our young wr for a back up QB that is going to play for 1 game?

Brissett really hasn't proved anything other than game 4 of preseason. If we didn't want Tolzien to be our 2nd QB then why not pick someone up in free agency? There are at least 2 or 3 veterans that are better than Brissett that can give us a chance to win.  Also, I never liked the idea of trading for a backup QB because backup QBs rarely gets a chance to play when your starting QB is healthy. Other positions needs depth, but QB is the only position that doesn't really need depth. If your #1 QB is hurt and hurt for the most of the season, then the team probably won't make it to the Superbowl. Tom Bradys and Kurt Warners don't come to you very often.

 

Well one reason to trade for brissett instead of signing a vet is money. By acquiring brissett via trade, that means we also acquired his contract. There was nothing to negotiate. Hes under contract for 3 more years and its his rookie contract at that.  

[colts2dasuperbowl]

1 hour ago, J@son said:

 

Well one reason to trade for brissett instead of signing a vet is money. By acquiring brissett via trade, that means we also acquired his contract. There was nothing to negotiate. Hes under contract for 3 more years and its his rookie contract at that.  

I understand that...but for me, it would've been better this way.

 

#1 Trade Dorsett for Brissett + Draft Pick; or

#2 Sign FA QB (i.e. Tony Romo, Luke McCown, Matt Shuab, etc...) for 1 year, Trade Dorsett if you must but trade for next year's draft pick, and draft rookie back up QB in the late rounds next year.

 

Only reason I hate this trade is because I believe we could've had more for Dorsett than just Brissett.

 

[MacDee1975]

Who cares why they targeted Brisset?  They upgraded the backup qb position, and all they gave up was a guy who was likely going to get cut.  How is that a bad move?

[aaron11]

5 minutes ago, MacDee1975 said:

Who cares why they targeted Brisset?  They upgraded the backup qb position, and all they gave up was a guy who was likely going to get cut.  How is that a bad move?

i think people are just disappointed that we gave up on dorsett 

 

personally i think he has pretty much peaked and would be a back up on most teams 

 

 

[akcolt]

On 9/6/2017 at 4:53 PM, NewColtsFan said:

 

I know.....   but TY has never had that kind of average....    and Dorsett was only in year 2.

 

I was expecting a jump in performance from him....    I hope he doesn't do that for New England.

 

TY has never had that type of average? You are wrong about that the fact is TY has averaged over 16 yards per catch 3 of his 5 years in the league and one of the years he came up short he was at 15.9 ypc. 

 

Fans are often times uneducated and tend to see things the way the want. The numbers don't lie. We didn't lose our speed WR. The fact is we have plenty of speed at the position. Dorsett under performed and was going to get cut.  Here are the numbers : 

2012 50 rec 17.2 ypc,

2013 82 rec 13.2ypc  

2014 82 rec 16.4ypc  

2015 82 rec 16.3ypc  

2016 91rec 15.9ypc

 

Dorsett  2015 18rec 12.9ypc  

              2016 33 rec 16.0ypc

[NewColtsFan]

1 minute ago, akcolt said:

TY has never had that type of average? You are wrong about that the fact is TY has averaged over 16 yards per catch 3 of his 5 years in the league and one of the years he came up short he was at 15.9 ypc. 

 

Fans are often times uneducated and tend to see things the way the want. The numbers don't lie. We didn't lose our speed WR. The fact is we have plenty of speed at the position. Dorsett under performed and was going to get cut.  Here are the numbers : 

2012 50 rec 17.2 ypc,

2013 82 rec 13.2ypc  

2014 82 rec 16.4ypc  

2015 82 rec 16.3ypc  

2016 91rec 15.9ypc

 

Dorsett  2015 18rec 12.9ypc  

              2016 33 rec 16.0ypc

 

Yes,  the stats have been pointed out to me by others.

 

But where do you get this nonsense that Dorsett was going to get cut?

 

All you have to support that is your opinion.      And there's nothing to justify that.

 

Underperforming as a first round draft pick does not equal getting cut.       

 

Brissett wasn't going to be cut by the Pats,  and Dorsett wasn't going to be cut by the Colts.     We traded one assett for another.

 

[Dark Superman]

On 9/6/2017 at 4:49 PM, OLD FAN MAN said:

why did the colts trade for brissett? could it be, luck is not healing fast enough, or there is doubt  he will ever be the same as before, or luck will miss half the season, or the staff did not think our qbs could cut it, or  the staff thinks brissett will be better than luck, or the staff just thought brissett was worth more than dorsett, or are we looking for a long term qb who can carry on if luck gets hurt again, or the staff thinks brissett can take lucks job away from him, or  ballard wants luck to have competition for his job, or all of these things. why? thoughts?

He's cheap and is under contract for the next 3 years.

The Colts don't see Tolzien as a long term solution.

Luck's health issues are always a concern.

Ballard thinks Brisset can help this team win if Luck is one the sidelines.

 

I like the trade..

[Douzer]

Dorsett...  go back and watch him on running plays.

Watch and you'll notice that aside from making no contribution or blocks, he makes no real effort. The more I watched him, the clearer it became that he doesn't want to risk physical contact. Might get his uniform dirty. Simply put, he's soft. The more I saw, the more I believed he's a manicure and skin cream treatment away from being a Macy's model. He's was not part of the solution, he was part of the problem. No Grit! 

[OLD FAN MAN]

1 hour ago, Colt-King 24 said:

He's cheap and is under contract for the next 3 years.

The Colts don't see Tolzien as a long term solution.

Luck's health issues are always a concern.

Ballard thinks Brisset can help this team win if Luck is one the sidelines.

 

I like the trade..

i concur

[colts2dasuperbowl]

On 9/8/2017 at 6:09 PM, MacDee1975 said:

Who cares why they targeted Brisset?  They upgraded the backup qb position, and all they gave up was a guy who was likely going to get cut.  How is that a bad move?

 

1. Dorsett was performing well in preseason imo, hence it could've been his break our year or we could've traded him to a team that needs WR and more value out of him. idk..

2. I dont mind trading him but we could've traded him for a late rd draft pick

3. Backup QBs are overrated. If your starting QB is injured then your team probably won't win a lot anyways. If we really wanted to win, then we could've signed FA vet who have had some starting experience over an unproven rookie QB.

4. I will be very disappointed if the organization took Luck out of PUP just for the purpose of selling seats. If Luck is not healthy enough to play by Week 4, then they did it to sell tickets, nothing more. That is the only way to explain this f'd up QB situation.