The real culprit in all this is the Owner (merge)

[Defjamz26]

15 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Passive aggressive post is passive aggressive.

 

Releasing Peyton Manning was the right move. It was also a difficult decision to make, yet Irsay made it, owned it, and was right to do so. Why even bring that up?

 

Acting like hiring and retaining Grigson and Pagano is a black mark on Irsay's record is nonsense. First, pretty much every owner has made a bad hire or two. Second, the legend of how awful Grigson and Pagano were/are is way overblown. 

 

You say Colts fans need to stop clinging to the past. I say some need to stop being prisoners of the moment, especially when you're talking about big picture stuff like the way the owner runs the operation. 

I was just listing the Peyton release because it's one of his notable decisions as GM. It was just a part of the timeline. I agree with the move but it was worth listing.

 

And you didn't let me down. I knew someone was going to talk about what "other" owners do. Also a bit of deflection there. You couldn't just say that Irsay made two bad hires or he made mistakes retaining them. You had to throw in that other owners do it too as if that's breaking news to everyone. As if that makes a difference. You're stating things that don't need to be stated, an thus they add nothing to your point.

 

And there's no such things as prisoners of the moment. Not just in football, but life in general is lived in the moment. In football it's in the moment and the future (or at least a forecast of how it looks. In 10 years no one will care about the Brady and BB era if the Pats are going 4-12.

 

The past can't be used to justify the current. And an instance being common occurring does not justify an infraction.

[indy1888]

16 minutes ago, deedub75 said:

 

I don't believe they are tanking. I do believe that they either thought Luck was going to be ready for the regular season so it made no sense to go out and sign a veteran QB to fill in only to release him relatively quickly, or they knew Luck was going to miss several games and the team isn't talented enough to win without a franchise QB playing. I also believe Chuck was retained because Irsay couldn't get the coach he wanted so Chuck is here to weather this rebuild. 

 

Pretty much where i stand as well. They knew they weren't good enough without Luck so they made the decision to roll with Scott instead of pay up for another QB and just deal with the punches as they come. Honestly, i can't say that i blame them, this is a rebuilding project and the fastest way to a rebuild is high draft selections coupled with some good free agent pickups. A capable backup QB could keep you competitve, maybe get ya another 8-8 type of season, but is that really in the best interest of the franchise right now? I would say no. And i fully agree with you on Pagano, he is a lame duck coach and his players know it. He wouldn't be here right now had Gruden said yes. He is gone at the end of the season at the latest, might  be sooner if we keep taking 46-9's every week. Irsay kept him here becuase he couldn't find his replacement for the 2nd straight offseason and knows this year is a lost cause anyway. 

[shakedownstreet]

2 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

If he wanted to be Jerry Jones he could be Jerry Jones all he has to do is appoint himself the General Manager.  

 

He has not done that, he has consistently for years hired someone else to be the GM.  

 

He's made some mistakes, but lets not overstate things here.  He's not trying to be Jerry Jones.  

 

The only person dumb enough to make Jim GM was the late Robert Irsay

[Jason_]

12 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

a bunch of stupid assumptions

 

It's not that people are clinging to the past...it's pointing out that Irsay got it right once and there's no reason to say he can't see his mistakes now and is taking the necessary actions to correct them.  In fact, it's really just pointing out his entire body of work as an owner.  He didn't take over sole ownership of the team until 1997.  He hired Polian in '98, they drafted manning and hired Dungy a couple of years later. 

 

He fired Grigson and brought in Ballard.  He admitted that mistake.  maybe not as quickly as some of you would have liked, but too bad.  Time to get over it.

 

After this season, or possibly even before it's over, he'll be admitting his mistake with Pagano and Ballard will find a new guy.  Again, not admitting that mistake as quickly as some of you would have liked but again, too bad.  Get over it.  You'll get what you've been wanting at the end of this year, possibly sooner.

 

So, Bill Polian, Ryan Grigson and Chris Ballard are the only 3 GMs that Jim Irsay has hired (from what I can tell) in his position as sole owner of the Colts.  One of those guys is in the HoF, the next guy never will be and now we have Ballard who is TBD.

 

What you don't seem to realize is that the people who disagree with you largely aren't trying to say that Pagano is good, they're trying to say he's not as bad as you and a few others try to make him out to be.  He is not a good HC.  He can develop players, he can coach defense but his game management skills are sorely lacking. 

21 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

 

The past can't be used to justify the current.

 

No one is trying to justify the current.   That's just the way you see it when someone doesn't agree that things are as terrible as you make them sound.  They're trying to explain that Irsay has built a winning team before so he has the football IQ to do it again.  Yes, he made mistakes with Grigson and Pagano, and he's currently in the process of trying to correct them.  Continuing to whine about the fact that they were made in the first place DOES NO GOOD WHATSOEVER, and thus adds NOTHING to your point...instead it detracts from your point because more often than not you come off looking like a petulant child.

[Jason_]

4 hours ago, Hoose said:

The criticism of Pagano and his lousy staff is totally justified. But who is the guy who not only signed him up in the first place, but then gave him a 4 year extension when it was clear that Pagano had serious issues as a head coach? And then gave another 4 years to Grigson when it was clear Grigson stunk in the job! Then fired Grigson one year after that!

The fact is, Jim Irsay has been at the helm of this fast sinking ship, and it has been his awful decision making as the owner that has caused the team to flounder. He is the cause of this current mess, and  so long as he has the reins, it gives me pause to wonder if the team will ever be able to improve enough to become a winner again. I love the Colts, but their owner is destroying this team. 

 

well, long story short is there isn't a damn thing you can do about it.

[Jason_]

1 hour ago, indy1888 said:

 

I never used the word tanking, but when Jim Irsay goes on television and preaches patience, why do you think he does that? Is it because he expects to win a lot this coming season or does he expect to maybe take quite a few beatdowns like we saw this past Sunday?  They didn't miss on Tolzein at all, they know he isn't very good. Everyone in the NFL knows that. He's never won a game for gods sake. Again, if they missed on Tolzein as you claim, what does that say about our GM and head coach, ones that Jim Irsay hired by the way?

 

He clearly said they missed in terms of Tolzien.  What else do you want him to say?

[indy1888]

11 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

He clearly said they missed in terms of Tolzien.  What else do you want him to say?

 

He can say whatever he wants, thats what happens here on this message board. In terms of missing on Tolzein, thats not exactly a great look for the first time GM and coach Pagano, agree?  Is it concerning that the 2 guys apparently thought Tolzein was the answer when pretty much everyone with any common sense knew that he wasn't? Not like it took a rocket scientist to predict that Tolzein performance on Sunday.  Now after one game they finally think maybe they should find another starter?  Of course, this is only if you believe that Ballard really thought Tolzein was the answer, which i don't.  I think the decision to roll with Mr. T came from up above.

[Superman]

45 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

I was just listing the Peyton release because it's one of his notable decisions as GM. It was just a part of the timeline. I agree with the move but it was worth listing.

 

And you didn't let me down. I knew someone was going to talk about what "other" owners do. Also a bit of deflection there. You couldn't just say that Irsay made two bad hires or he made mistakes retaining them. You had to throw in that other owners do it too as if that's breaking news to everyone. As if that makes a difference. You're stating things that don't need to be stated, an thus they add nothing to your point.

 

And there's no such things as prisoners of the moment. Not just in football, but life in general is lived in the moment. In football it's in the moment and the future (or at least a forecast of how it looks. In 10 years no one will care about the Brady and BB era if the Pats are going 4-12.

 

The past can't be used to justify the current. And an instance being common occurring does not justify an infraction.

 

This is such a ridiculous post.

 

First, you listed a good decision as evidence that Irsay's ownership has black marks. That's backward. The Manning decision is evidence of good ownership.

 

Second, the point in noting that other owners make bad hires is simply a fact of the business: no one is perfect.

 

Third, I don't think Grigson and Pagano were bad hires. I think it was a mistake to retain them, but I think they contributed significantly to the quick turnaround, and they generally get no credit for what they did in 2012-14, which is, again, nonsense. I absolutely would have moved on after 2015, based on criteria that we all discussed prior to that season -- namely, are these the guys that are going to lead the Colts to perennial title contention, and I felt the answer was no after 2015. But I said and still believe they were the right guys for the turnaround, even though they made plenty of mistakes. It's hard for me to argue with a regime that goes from 2-14 to 11-5, three years in a row, with playoff wins. 

 

It's also rich to say there's no such thing as being a prisoner of the moment. If a loved one says something hurtful, it doesn't mean they don't love you. Life is not lived in the moment, relationships aren't built or destroyed in individual moments, and any evaluation of any meaningful relationship or role should not be based on the most recent thing that happened, alone. To do so is to be a prisoner of the moment.

[Jason_]

13 minutes ago, indy1888 said:

 

He can say whatever he wants, thats what happens here on this message board. In terms of missing on Tolzein, thats not exactly a great look for the first time GM and coach Pagano, agree?

 

I've never said anything to the contrary.  In fact in another thread I was debating with someone who said it was Chuck alone and I don't agree with that, Ballard shares some of the blame as well. 

 

Quote

  I think the decision to roll with Mr. T came from up above.

 

[Superman]

1 hour ago, Hoose said:

You are too eager to write off the fact that this team has the worst head coach in the NFL--- And that this debacle under Pagano hasn't really degenerated into a miserable situation right now. Pagano is a terrible coach. His player evaluation is very poor. Irsay  has reigned over Pagano's  mess for what, 6 years now? I will grant you that Ballard seems to be a breath of fresh air and it does give me some hope. But unless Irsay gets out of the way and let's Ballard do his job, I do fear for the team's  future. That means letting Ballard get the coaching staff in here that he believes can turn the corner and guide the team back to respectability. If Irsay can let go of the reins, things can change for the better. If not.......

 

This team doesn't have the worst head coach in the NFL. Even if it does, Ballard accepted the job with the directive to evaluate the coaching staff without the influence of Grigson. The staff appears to be headed for a series of pink slips in January, based on what's happened so far. 

 

If it were up to me, we'd have hired a new GM and head coach in 2016. I'll give you that Irsay has been more patient than I think he should have, but that doesn't mean he's in the way. He believes in continuity, but he's never been shy about making moves he thinks need to be made, spending money, or supporting the staff he hires.

 

By the way, the national perception of Jim Irsay is that he's impatient, impetuous, and unpredictable. You're arguing that he's waiting too long to get rid of Pagano. I'm arguing Irsay is letting things play out because he wants to do what's best for his team, and that's based on his 20+ years as primary owner of the team.

[indy1888]

9 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

I've never said anything to the contrary.  In fact in another thread I was debating with someone who said it was Chuck alone and I don't agree with that, Ballard shares some of the blame as well. 

 

 

 

Does Ballard and Chuck deserve all the blame if they recommended pursuing another option but the owner refused to spend the money to bring the guy in?  

 

 

[DougDew]

The real culprit is the inability to follow Polian.  Polian drafted some very good players that were very good for a long time, beyond 10 years even.  Manning, Saturday, Clark, Bethea, Mathis, Freeney, Wayne, ....Harrison and Glenn were drafted a few years before but were here for a long time. 

 

The only players that looks like they will have that type of quality and longevity is Luck and maybe Kelly, maybe TY.  That failure is on Grigson, so far.

 

Maybe Hooker or Wilson will be that kind of player.

[BOTT]

I like Irsay but keeping a boob like Chuck around for 6 seasons has been mystifying to me.

[Superman]

18 minutes ago, indy1888 said:

 

Does Ballard and Chuck deserve all the blame if they recommended pursuing another option but the owner refused to spend the money to bring the guy in?  

 

That's a drastic "if," based on what we know. 

[indy1888]

7 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

That's a drastic "if," based on what we know. 

 

We know nothing of what goes on behind closed doors, it's speculation on both sides. We have Irsay saying they looked at other options but the price was too high. Take it for what it's worth.  Irsay hasn't been afraid to spend in the past, but most of those teams were contending teams and good to great players.  I don't think spending for a rental QB in a rebuilding year would have been wise so i give Jim credit.

[Jason_]

35 minutes ago, indy1888 said:

 

Does Ballard and Chuck deserve all the blame if they recommended pursuing another option but the owner refused to spend the money to bring the guy in?  

 

 

 

When has irsay EVER been one to shy away from spending big money on his team? 

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

When has irsay EVER been one to shy away from spending big money on his team? 

 

Never.

[Jason_]

9 minutes ago, indy1888 said:

 

We know nothing of what goes on behind closed doors, it's speculation on both sides. We have Irsay saying they looked at other options but the price was too high. Take it for what it's worth.  Irsay hasn't been afraid to spend in the past, but most of those teams were contending teams and good to great players.  I don't think spending for a rental QB in a rebuilding year would have been wise so i give Jim credit.

 

He paid $4 mil for kerry collins to play in 3 games. 

[Coltsman1788]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Occam's razor. They thought Tolzien was better than he is. It's not that difficult or complicated. 

If that's true Supes then they are asinine.  Joe Blow fan on the couch could see Tolzien was garbage.

[Coltsman1788]

33 minutes ago, BOTT said:

I like Irsay but keeping a boob like Chuck around for 6 seasons has been mystifying to me.

Agreed...I didn't get the decision to keep Chuck for this season. It just slows the rebuild process and adds another year to it as the team has to get adjusted to a new coach next year rather than this year.  Only thing I can offer in Irsay's defense is perhaps they didn't really feel any better coaching candidates were available this past offseason. But  I bet Ballard had a few ideas if given the opportunity.

[Superman]

1 minute ago, J@son said:

 

He paid $4 mil for kerry collins to play in 3 games. 

 

He paid Manning $26.4m to play in zero games. 

[Superman]

7 minutes ago, Coltsman1788 said:

If that's true Supes then they are asinine.  Joe Blow fan on the couch could see Tolzien was garbage.

 

I don't think anyone on the couch knew what they were talking about. Tolzien played worse Sunday than he's ever played before, preseason, regular season, other teams, whatever. 

[Jason_]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

He paid Manning $26.4m to play in zero games. 

 

Not to mention, what was it, $15mil to freeney that final season?

[Superman]

1 minute ago, J@son said:

 

Not to mention, what was it, $15mil to freeney that final season?

 

$14m, but who's counting?

[Jason_]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I don't think anyone on the couch knew what they were talking about. Tolzien played worse Sunday than he's ever played before, preseason, regular season, other teams, whatever. 

 

Problem is people like bayless that are intentionally sensationalist, outrageous and hyperbolic (and I realize that's pretty redundant, but...emphasis) and then the folks at home take them literally and repeat the same stuff because, hey if the guy on TV said so then it must be true especially since it validates my feelings...though I doubt they actually know that's why they do it. 

[Coltsman1788]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

I don't think anyone on the couch knew what they were talking about. Tolzien played worse Sunday than he's ever played before, preseason, regular season, other teams, whatever. 

He set a new low for himself...that's for sure. A lot of fan's worst fears about Tolzien being at the helm came true is how I see it.  The Colts deserve what they get for the dumb decisions they make.   

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, Coltsman1788 said:

He set a new low for himself...that's for sure. A lot of fan's worst fears about Tolzien being at the helm came true is how I see it.  The Colts deserve what they get for the dumb decisions they make.   

 

I won't argue with that. 

[krunk]

Even clipboard Jesus looked better than Tolzien did.

[RockThatBlue]

4 hours ago, Superman said:

they missed badly on Tolzien. 

Understatement of the century right there.

[Defjamz26]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

This is such a ridiculous post.

 

First, you listed a good decision as evidence that Irsay's ownership has black marks. That's backward. The Manning decision is evidence of good ownership.

 

Second, the point in noting that other owners make bad hires is simply a fact of the business: no one is perfect.

 

Third, I don't think Grigson and Pagano were bad hires. I think it was a mistake to retain them, but I think they contributed significantly to the quick turnaround, and they generally get no credit for what they did in 2012-14, which is, again, nonsense. I absolutely would have moved on after 2015, based on criteria that we all discussed prior to that season -- namely, are these the guys that are going to lead the Colts to perennial title contention, and I felt the answer was no after 2015. But I said and still believe they were the right guys for the turnaround, even though they made plenty of mistakes. It's hard for me to argue with a regime that goes from 2-14 to 11-5, three years in a row, with playoff wins. 

 

It's also rich to say there's no such thing as being a prisoner of the moment. If a loved one says something hurtful, it doesn't mean they don't love you. Life is not lived in the moment, relationships aren't built or destroyed in individual moments, and any evaluation of any meaningful relationship or role should not be based on the most recent thing that happened, alone. To do so is to be a prisoner of the moment.

No re-read the post again. I listed his highlights/notable moves as GM the last couple years. 

 

And yes we know no one perfects but when you throw that out here every time there's criticism it comes off as dismissive. And that's the theme here. People make assertions about the team and people can only defend it with statements that sound dismissive. Why does it need to be stated that other Owners make mistakes too when talking about Irsay? I don't think I've ever seen someone say "Irsay is a bad owner because he makes mistakes that no other GM in the league makes". It's as if every time our owner, GM, or coach does something wrong we have to be reminded that other people make mistakes too. What other people do doesn't matter. Grigson not being as bad a GM as let's say Matt Millen doesn't excuse being bad. And that's unfortunately how the conversations always go. 

 

-"Pagano has been bad in Indy"

-"Well Gus Bradley won less games in almost the same amount of time"

 

-"Grigson is bad"

-"Well look at the Browns GMs the last years"

 

Im fine with differing opinions, but the arguments are always redundant because you can't have a debate without hearing about other players who were exceptions to the rules, other coaches who were bad but got it turned around, other GMs who are worse, another team who has been way worse than the Colts, etc... The day someone makes a decent defense here without having to reference someone/thing from the past or another player/coach/GM is the day I'll be impressed.

 

If we're defending why a player/FO person isn't bad, it should be by only referencing that persons history. The minute you have to refer to someone outside of the team, the argument is invalid IMO. Any adult knows that each individual person takes ownership. You don't get passes because of what others do or didn't do. I can defend any of the points I make using that very rule.

[RockThatBlue]

4 hours ago, HungarianColtsFan said:

 

 

OK, everyone raise their hands who hadn't ever made poor...even terrible decisions in her/his life!!!

I did once...but only once. 

[GoColts8818]

57 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

When has irsay EVER been one to shy away from spending big money on his team? 

Irsay said in the pre-season they didn't pursue a certain vet option at QB this off-season because the cost was too high.

 

now I'll agree we don't know if he was talking cash or a trade.

[RockThatBlue]

5 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Irsay said in the pre-season they didn't pursue a certain vet option at QB this off-season because the cost was too high.

 

now I'll agree we don't know if he was talking cash or a trade.

No way to know for sure but it was probably Jay Cutler, seeing the deal Miami gave him. 

[Jason_]

2 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Irsay said in the pre-season they didn't pursue a certain vet option at QB this off-season because the cost was too high.

 

now I'll agree we don't know if he was talking cash or a trade.

 

Yeah, cost can mean a lot of things. Based on his history I don't think it came down strictly to dollars, unless it was something ridiculous like "I want the remaining balance of your salary cap"

 

He could have been talking about kaep and the media and fan reaction was the cost. Might have even been brissett (he is technically a 1 year vet) and the pats wanted a draft pick along with dorsett. Then Edelman gets hurt and they decide to drop their price. So they have to reach out to the colts with the new offer and now either can say the other initiated the trade and neither are technically wrong.

 

Most likely he meant that the dollar value vs. How long they anticipated needing him didn't match up. If it was a true vet then I believe their salary becomes guaranteed once the season starts. Is that right? Because I'm thinking with collins they paid him the full 4mil even though they cut him after 3 games. 

 

A lot of speculation there, granted...I'm basing my opinion on his overall history. People do change though. 

[CoachLite]

4 hours ago, HungarianColtsFan said:

 

 

OK, everyone raise their hands who hadn't ever made poor...even terrible decisions in her/his life!!!

 

Regression to the mean. First, Fredd Young and now Chuck Pagano.

[Superman]

11 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

Yeah, cost can mean a lot of things. Based on his history I don't think it came down strictly to dollars, unless it was something ridiculous like "I want the remaining balance of your salary cap"

 

He could have been talking about kaep and the media and fan reaction was the cost. Might have even been brissett (he is technically a 1 year vet) and the pats wanted a draft pick along with dorsett. Then Edelman gets hurt and they decide to drop their price. So they have to reach out to the colts with the new offer and now either can say the other initiated the trade and neither are technically wrong.

 

Most likely he meant that the dollar value vs. How long they anticipated needing him didn't match up. If it was a true vet then I believe their salary becomes guaranteed once the season starts. Is that right? Because I'm thinking with collins they paid him the full 4mil even though they cut him after 3 games. 

 

A lot of speculation there, granted...I'm basing my opinion on his overall history. People do change though. 

 

I'm pretty sure it was a FA, and it was money. He said "we had a number, the guy wanted more than the number."

 

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2017/08/14/insider-who-colts-owner-jim-irsays-mystery-qb/564992001/

 

Jay Cutler is the most likely candidate, IMO.

 

Still, that they didn't give whoever it was whatever he wanted doesn't mean they moved on because Irsay didn't want to pay. If the coaching staff said 'we can't win with Tolzien, we need someone else,' they would have done something different at backup QB. The issue is not 'Irsay didn't want to spend, so we're stuck with Tolzien.' 

[Defjamz26]

1 hour ago, BOTT said:

I like Irsay but keeping a boob like Chuck around for 6 seasons has been mystifying to me.

And he's had more than one opportunity to get rid of him. He didn't have to extend him after the 2015 season. He also could have gotten rid of him this year when he got rid of Grigson. 

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

I don't think anyone on the couch knew what they were talking about. Tolzien played worse Sunday than he's ever played before, preseason, regular season, other teams, whatever. 

 

Without defending Tolzein one bit,   I will say to everyojne here, and not just to Superman because he's not making ths argument....

 

That just because Tolzein was terrible doesn't automatically mean Morris would've been better.      As hard as it might be to believe,   Morris could've been worse., or certaily just as bad.

 

Again,  this post is for everyone....

 

[Defjamz26]

4 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Without defending Tolzein one bit,   I will say to everyojne here, and not just to Superman because he's not making ths argument....

 

That just because Tolzein was terrible doesn't automatically mean Morris would've been better.      As hard as it might be to believe,   Morris could've been worse., or certaily just as bad.

 

Again,  this post is for everyone....

 

I actually agree with this. Morris wasn't exactly proven either.

[HectorRoberts]

I truly have no clue why fans stand by irsay. He's a poor excuse of an owner, the only reason he has this team is because daddy gave it to him. All he's done is pop pills, get high and make bone head decisions. It's going to be a beautiful day when he no longer owns this team.