Who likes a challenge? Defend Pagano

[Jason_]

That's a long article. To save some time here's the important part

 

During a scoring play (starting in 2011), turnovers (starting in 2012), or after the two-minute warning of each half, and in overtime, reviews can only take place if the replay assistant, who sits in the press box and monitors the network broadcast of the game, determines that a play needs review; coaches may not challenge during these times

[dw49]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Defending 2012-2014 Pagano is different than defending 2017 Pagano. There was no reason to think about firing Pagano in 2012, or through 2014, really. 

 

I don't think Arians seemed like a better coach in 2012, because he was steering the ship on the course Pagano had spent 8 months setting. I don't think your 2/3 fans claim is scientific at all. And I don't think Irsay was wrong to keep Pagano over Arians; I don't think Arians is as good as people think he is, and I wouldn't have wanted him as the head coach. Still don't; I don't like his offense. They blew a 4th quarter lead yesterday in their Detroit opener, just like the Colts did last year. They won 7 games last year in a weaker division than the Colts, with a better roster. The legend of Bruce Arians is outsized on this board, because people think he should have been kept instead of Pagano. 

 

I'm not making an assumption, my statement is based on facts. You hire your coach in January, he gets sick after three games. All the reasons you hired him still exist.

 

And if you had said Irsay kept Pagano instead of Arians after 2012, I would still disagree, but I wouldn't have called it out. Acting like Irsay has refused to fire Pagano in the years to follow just because he had cancer in 2012 is what I decided to react to. 

 

 

Ehhh .. why should we speculate. Here's what the odds makers had to say before the season started . You actually can bet it . The author of the article thinks Chuck's 8-1 odds offer the most value. I would think his odds dropped a bit Sunday. 

 

http://www.oddsshark.com/nfl/nfl-head-coach-be-fired-betting-odds

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

Ehhh .. why should we speculate. Here's what the odds makers had to say before the season started . You actually can bet it . The author of the article thinks Chuck's 8-1 odds offer the most value. I would think his odds dropped a bit Sunday. 

 

http://www.oddsshark.com/nfl/nfl-head-coach-be-fired-betting-odds

 

That's first to be fired. I don't think he'll be first fired, Jim Irsay doesn't fire head coaches during the season, historically. Do you have odds on whether he'll return in 2018, or is it too early for those lines?

 

I don't gamble, but that's a solid bet, IMO. 

[Andrew Luck fan club]

 

[dw49]

13 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

That's first to be fired. I don't think he'll be first fired, Jim Irsay doesn't fire head coaches during the season, historically. Do you have odds on whether he'll return in 2018, or is it too early for those lines?

 

I don't gamble, but that's a solid bet, IMO. 

 

You're correct on your analysis of those odds. Pagano was not a great bet just for the reason you stated. But I just posted that for entertainment purposes. 

 

Too early for 2018 odds but I also agree with you ... unless somehow Luck comes back and we miraculously win a playoff game. That's just so unlikely. I also think Pagano would have been gone this year if Irsay had found someone who he thought would be a great hire. That's nothing new and has been posted before .. I'm just concurring with that . I really don't post a lot anymore as it's almost like beating a dead horse. Seems like it's just nt going well for us. FA signings are "blaa" and the young guys have yet got show me much. I like Mack (just wanted to throw that in here) and the injury bug has hit our 2 best players .....

[Superman]

52 minutes ago, Xander said:

 

 

OUCH

[Superman]

39 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

You're correct on your analysis of those odds. Pagano was not a great bet just for the reason you stated. But I just posted that for entertainment purposes. 

 

Too early for 2018 odds but I also agree with you ... unless somehow Luck comes back and we miraculously win a playoff game. That's just so unlikely. I also think Pagano would have been gone this year if Irsay had found someone who he thought would be a great hire. That's nothing new and has been posted before .. I'm just concurring with that . I really don't post a lot anymore as it's almost like beating a dead horse. Seems like it's just nt going well for us. FA signings are "blaa" and the young guys have yet got show me much. I like Mack (just wanted to throw that in here) and the injury bug has hit our 2 best players .....

 

There's such a difference sometimes. You look at the Giants get mostly dominated last night, but they played fast and physical from start to finish. 

 

We got throat kicked, and there are very little positives.

[VaAllDay757]

1 hour ago, J@son said:

 

It used to. But coaches cannot challenge on a scoring play or turnover anymore. 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant_replay_in_American_and_Canadian_football

 

 

I know its wiki but I'm sure a more thorough search would return the same results from official sites. 

 

So, all scoring plays and turnovers are automatically reviewed, but they're not all challenged. But that's all determined by officials. If a coach throws the challenge flag on that type of play they'll get a penalty.

No not scoring plays I'm talking just turnovers....like a pick 6 did the player step out of bounds or not or muffed punt who recovered the ball things like that

[dw49]

8 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

There's such a difference sometimes. You look at the Giants get mostly dominated last night, but they played fast and physical from start to finish. 

 

We got throat kicked, and there are very little positives.

 

For sure a valid observation and complaint. The Giants at least played well in many aspects of that game. If you were a Giant fan , you could say "damn our offensive line really played poorly." "If we can fix that , we can be a good team. " We on the other hand looked so bad on both sides of the ball. The young guys don't seem to improve , the new guys are "meh" and IMO this coaching staff could "outreach " any staff in the NFL. I came away with thinking the punt did an OK job and Mack has some promise. I've had the direct TV football package and have missed maybe 2 colt games in all those years. Yesterday was I think the first time I actually just stopped watching the game . 

[life long]

3 hours ago, J@son said:

 

and?  they were still players who came here to the Colts and improved their play while here.  that's the very (simplified) definition of player development, is it not?  Doesn't matter where or how you find them.

Butler was on the pats, Adams broncos, Davis miami, Walden packers. All those defenses weren't as bad as ours have been, which is why we signed them. I am not saying our guys never make plays, but I wouldn't say Pagano has developed much from our guys besides bad decisions, injuries, and bad fundamentals *tackling*.

 

I admit it's hard to develop young talent when we always seem to bring in project players. Like both our first round picks two of the last three years.

[Jason_]

20 minutes ago, VaAllDay757 said:

No not scoring plays I'm talking just turnovers....like a pick 6 did the player step out of bounds or not or muffed punt who recovered the ball things like that

 

If you read the link, turnovers fall into the same category as well as 2 point conversion attempts. 

[Jason_]

8 minutes ago, life long said:

Butler was on the pats, Adams broncos, Davis miami, Walden packers. All those defenses weren't as bad as ours have been, which is why we signed them. I am not saying our guys never make plays, but I wouldn't say Pagano has developed much from our guys besides bad habits, injuries, and bad tackling.

 

Again, who cares? My point is they came here to Indy and got bettet than they were before they got here. 

 

The pats, and belichick, gave up on butler. Playing for pagano he became one of the better nickel CBs in the league until injuries started catching up to him. 

 

Walden had been in the league for I think 9 seasons prior to signing with Indy and he had 9 career sacks. He had more than that in one season here. 32 of his 23 career sacks came here in Indy. 

 

Miami was ready to push davis out the door. Hed dropped on their depth chart and was in danger of being cut. He comes here and now hes been to pro bowls and, when healthy, is one of the better cover CBs in the league..though injuries are catching up to him now too. 

 

The point is these guys came here and became better players than they were before, in large part thanks to pagano and his staff. 

 

I'm still pretty much ready to move on from him. The non challenge was....barf. But people saying he never has and/or cannot develop players is just nonsense. 

[life long]

8 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

Again, who cares? My point is they came here to Indy and got bettet than they were before they got here. 

 

The pats, and belichick, gave up on butler. Playing for pagano he became one of the better nickel CBs in the league until injuries started catching up to him. 

 

Walden had been in the league for I think 9 seasons prior to signing with Indy and he had 9 career sacks. He had more than that in one season here. 32 of his 23 career sacks came here in Indy. 

 

Miami was ready to push davis out the door. Hed dropped on their depth chart and was in danger of being cut. He comes here and now hes been to pro bowls and, when healthy, is one of the better cover CBs in the league..though injuries are catching up to him now too. 

 

The point is these guys came here and became better players than they were before, in large part thanks to pagano and his staff. 

 

I'm still pretty much ready to move on from him. The non challenge was....barf. But people saying he never has and/or cannot develop players is just nonsense. 

I respect your opinion. However my opinion was they were the best players we had, so of course they made plays. Still for me to say Pagano made them better is near impossible. I know our guys don't move on and play better elsewhere, but it's not like when any of them were considered serviceable it reflected as success for our defense. If anything the longer those guys have played under Pagano they have become gradually worse as a unit. Obviously we don't agree but I never said he cant, I said he is not bad at it. No one is perfect in that aspect but IMO he has not proven as much you are hinting. Obviously this is all my opinion, I expect no one to care but I know my opinion is not just nonsense... 

 

As you stated all those guys weren't going to stay relevant in their old teams. Yet they came here and were our best defenders for the most part. Still those defenses never had been as poor as ours. So to say those players for better for the Colts seems like semantics.

[Jason_]

Just now, life long said:

I respect your opinion. However my opinion was they were the best players we had, so of course they made plays. Still for me to say Pagano made them better is near impossible. I know our guys don't move on and play better elsewhere, but it's not like when any of them were considered serviceable it reflected as success for our defense. If anything the longer those guys have played under Pagano they have become gradually worse as a unit. Obviously we don't agree but I never said he cant, I said he is not bad at it. No one is perfect in that aspect but IMO he has not proven as much you are hinting. Obviously this is all my opinion, I expect no one to care but I know my opinion is not just nonsense... 

 

Yes they were the best players we had, but players dont make plays if theyre not good enough to make them. The team isnt gifted a certain number of sacks per year so...somebody gotta get em. The QB doesnt rub iutside the picket saying, "this ones gonna be a sack guys, first one here gets it" and then Walden was just the least slow of the group so he got there first. Walden got double digit sacks last year because thats how many times he beat the man across from him (well, I'm sure there was an unblocked or 2 in there but still)    

 

 

THIS opinion of yours is ridiculous. I'll give you this though, it would work in the case of jerrell freeman... except that he still played at the same level the next year with Chicago. 

 

[life long]

15 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

Yes they were the best players we had, but players dont make plays if theyre not good enough to make them. The team isnt gifted a certain number of sacks per year so...somebody gotta get em. The QB doesnt rub iutside the picket saying, "this ones gonna be a sack guys, first one here gets it" and then Walden was just the least slow of the group so he got there first. Walden got double digit sacks last year because thats how many times he beat the man across from him (well, I'm sure there was an unblocked or 2 in there but still)    

 

 

THIS opinion of yours is ridiculous. I'll give you this though, it would work in the case of jerrell freeman... except that he still played at the same level the next year with Chicago. 

 

It may be ridiculous but I find it ridiculous to think Pagano made these players better, when every year our d became gradually worse. Development would mean they improved their side of the balls play IMO. Those players were brought here to improve the D, based on results I would say that never happened. I hope they improve more this season than previous seasons, but the trend is not pointing that direction after week 1.

[Jason_]

16 minutes ago, life long said:

It may be ridiculous but I find it ridiculous to think Pagano made these players better, when every year our d became gradually worse. Development would mean they improved their side of the balls play IMO. Those players were brought here to improve the D, based on results I would say that never happened. I hope they improve more this season than previous seasons, but the trend is not pointing that direction after week 1.

 

Hey I actually think we're getting close. It is entirely possible that these specific players did get better while the defense as a whole got worse. 

 

Take Walden for example. Yes pagano did help Walden become a better player. But Walden was essentially replacing robert Mathis. The improved walden was still not even close to Mathis.  

 

Butler and vontae became better players as individuals, but they can only do so much with guys like Greg Toler, laron Landry, and all of the other talent-free DBs grigson brought in over the years. 

 

 Not to mention the supporting players around these guys kept progressively gettong worse. 

 

Also, none of this really speaks to Pagano's abilities as a head coach. These are things he'd have done as a position coach or coordinator.  And he obviously wasnt doing any of this on his own...he had staff around him that helped.  So admitting that maybe I have a valid point does not mean that youre admitting hes a better HC than you thought. He can still be just as bad a head coach, but maybe hes still a pretty good coordinator....or...at least positional coach.

 

[Moe]

Paganao is a likeable guy , But dang who didn't see this coming?

[rockywoj]

9 hours ago, jameszeigler834 said:

Well then pagano should have challenged that horrendous call then.

Absolutely.  There is NO excuse whatsoever for not looking at that play again.  Just really, REALLY B-A-D bad coaching blunder.  

 

Sadly, his tenure has seen FAR too many such blunders.  First couple of years, as a new head coach, you can maybe look the other way, trusting that he learns from his mistakes.  Six years in, though, amateurish coaching blunders are pretty much unforgivable in my book, short of always winning despite them.  Obviously, Pagano does not have, and has not had for a couple of years now, the benefit of a dominant winning team.

 

pretty sad, though, that only one (pathetic) game in, the fire Chuck sentiment is already being widely discussed.  That's what happens when your team gets blown out c/w continued blunders and bad scheming.

[rockywoj]

8 hours ago, RollerColt said:

Over Chuck's guidance, we have only won one season opener: 2013 against the Raiders...

 

2012: Loss against the Bears

2013: Win against the Raiders

2014: Loss against the Broncos

2015: Loss against the Bills

2016: Loss against the Lions

2017: Loss against the Rams

 

Pretty sad honestly. The statistic doesn't mean too much in the grand scheme of things, but dang it would be nice to win a season opener again. 

Especially when, generally speaking, those games are against inferior teams (Broncos excepted).

[AZColt11]

Waffles.  He likes them.  That's about all I got.

[rockywoj]

3 hours ago, Xander said:

 

To me, that's a pretty darn telling statistic as it relates to game preparedness.

[Imrryr]

My only question is who is out there that uld do a better job and come here?

[gacoop1]

Josh McDaniel, Dave Toub, Haley, Wade Phillips, just to name a few.  They are above, better than what we have now....

[Imrryr]

I am not big on daniel cause the patriots thing from what ive seen not many coaches have been succesful aaway from there not to familiar woth the other two (havent really looked at other coaches till yesterday) and why would wade phillips even consider here when he could go to a team with some talent beyond like 5 guys.

[MackAttack]

Pagano obviously should not even be on an nfl sideline ever. How that man has 1 of 32 possible nfl head coaching jobs just boggles my mind. I wish we could fire Jim Irsay too

[MackAttack]

7 hours ago, rockywoj said:

Especially when, generally speaking, those games are against inferior teams (Broncos excepted).

none of those teams are inferior teams to us. The Bills rolled over us we were their only easy win that whole year.

[rockywoj]

1 hour ago, MackAttack said:

none of those teams are inferior teams to us. The Bills rolled over us we were their only easy win that whole year.

When I say inferior, I mean based on preseason expectations combines with previous season records.  The Colts were largely expected to be better than most of those steams.  Even this year, I think it's fair to say that a majority of people expected last year's 8-8 Colts to be an improved team, better than the Rams, who were one of the worst teams last season.

[rockywoj]

6 hours ago, gacoop1 said:

Josh McDaniel, Dave Toub, Haley, Wade Phillips, just to name a few.  They are above, better than what we have now....

I would be making inquiries to Jim Harbough to gauge if he'd entertain a return to the NFL after this year's college season ... and discuss with Ballard about GM compatibility with such a headstrong character.

[csmopar]

10 minutes ago, rockywoj said:

I would be making inquiries to Jim Harbough to gauge if he'd entertain a return to the NFL after this year's college season ... and discuss with Ballard about GM compatibility with such a headstrong character.

No.... Peyton, Gruden, Jim H, in that order.

[csmopar]

13 hours ago, J@son said:

That's a long article. To save some time here's the important part

 

During a scoring play (starting in 2011), turnovers (starting in 2012), or after the two-minute warning of each half, and in overtime, reviews can only take place if the replay assistant, who sits in the press box and monitors the network broadcast of the game, determines that a play needs review; coaches may not challenge during these times

it wasnt ruled as a scoring play though.... so he could challenge.....

[Jason_]

57 minutes ago, csmopar said:

it wasnt ruled as a scoring play though.... so he could challenge.....

 

Yes, I know. Go back further in the conversation

[Fisticuffs111]

Going back to the OP, I'm actually thinking a good amount of people will defend Pagano after the Cardinals game. I think the fact that we got beat so badly could almost help Chuck's image in some fans' eyes depending on how the Cards game goes.

Not that I think we'll win, but we could go out and get beat by 2 scores and I think there will be people who give praise that "at least it wasn't as bad as the Rams game." Not that I'll be singing that praise with them, just wouldn't surprise me.

[Myles]

17 hours ago, Xander said:

 

I'll second that OUCH!

 

This is another stat that condemns Pagano.  I have to think most of those (if not all) were the result of his poor starts.   Not being prepared for games.   

[Jason_]

7 hours ago, MackAttack said:

Pagano obviously should not even be on an nfl sideline ever. How that man has 1 of 32 possible nfl head coaching jobs just boggles my mind. I wish we could fire Jim Irsay too

 

That's just not true.  He's still a good position coach and could be a good coordinator (might be, just hard to say considering the talent he had to work with in his 1 year as DC in Balt)...but he shouldn't be in the HC spot on the sideline

[1959Colts]

https://www.fanragsports.com/colts/chuck-pagano-not-leader-colts-deserve/

[MackAttack]

12 hours ago, J@son said:

 

That's just not true.  He's still a good position coach and could be a good coordinator (might be, just hard to say considering the talent he had to work with in his 1 year as DC in Balt)...but he shouldn't be in the HC spot on the sideline

Yea maybe for the lions or browns like the other colts castaways 

[NewColtsFan]

On 9/11/2017 at 4:50 AM, Myles said:

I'm not sure I can anymore. 

 

I'm still flabbergasted by that rushed call to avoid the Mack TD.  

 

I don't find it a challenge at all.      My view won't be popular,  but my viewpoint is this....

 

When Pagano has some talent to coach,  he's done pretty well.     His record says so.

 

Coaches don't get dumber.    Typically when the team doesn't do as well,  it's a talent issue.    Ask John Harbaugh in Baltimore....   or Mike Tomlin in Pittsburgh...      Sean Payton in New Orleans,  Ron Rivera in Carolina,   Mike McCarthy in Green Bay,   Andy Reid in KC,   Jason Garrett in Dallas,  or even Gary Kubiak when he was in Denver/Taxas.

 

Those are all coaches who have great success with their respective franchises.    And yet,  not enough to satisfy many fans becauß´they haven't won enough.    And have suffered through some leaner years than fans would like.    That's 8 coaches.     25 percent of the NFL.

 

Chuck Pagano is, IMO,  an average coach.  When he had a modest amount of talent plus Andrew Luck,  he won.   When he had less than desirable talent,  he won less.    This year,  it doesn't look promising.     But he's not terrible,  he's not as good as we need.    Why is that so hard to buy into?     The Colts need a top coach.      There aren't many of them,  but the Colts have to find one of them.

 

Either at some point this season,  or perhaps no later than the end of this season,  unless there is an unexpected miraculous rebound,  Pagano will be let go at the end of the year.    The team needs a new coach,  a new voice,  a new direction.     Ballard deserves to be able to hire his own guy.     Pagano will have had six years, and it's time for a change.

 

That's my view of Chuck Pagano.     I'm sure it changed few, if any minds.     People are set in their ways.     I've never found it hard to defend Chuck.     I don't think it was hard this time either.    But we're well past that.    The time for change will come soon enough and people here will be happy to be rid of Pagano.    

 

Now they just have to hope they approve of Ballard's new HC.

 

Of course, there's always the ABC crowd.      Anybody But Chuck!!    

 

 

 

[oldunclemark]

On ‎9‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 6:50 AM, Myles said:

I'm not sure I can anymore. 

 

I'm still flabbergasted by that rushed call to avoid the Mack TD.  

Pagano doesn't pick the players yet he's never had a losing season.

 

That's pretty much a ringing endorsement.

[oldunclemark]

22 hours ago, MackAttack said:

Pagano obviously should not even be on an nfl sideline ever. How that man has 1 of 32 possible nfl head coaching jobs just boggles my mind. I wish we could fire Jim Irsay too

In the real world,  Chuck Pagano has never had a losing season..

Is there any head coach in the NFL who can say that.?

 

Anyone?

[BOTT]

1 hour ago, oldunclemark said:

Pagano doesn't pick the players yet he's never had a losing season.

 

That's pretty much a ringing endorsement.

According to Rick Venturi fans would be shocked at the number of draft picks during the Grigson era that were made by Chuck.  True or not, I have no idea.