Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colts to Interview McDaniels on Thursday


Steamboat_Shaun

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 581
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

i guess the reason I'm leaning toward the Colts hiring McDaniels is finally getting Luck some consistency with an offensive system. In just a handful of years, Luck has already had to play for three different offensive coordinators and this reminds me of the type of nonsense Alex Smith had to put up with when he was in San Francisco early in his career.

 

I know and have already read about the reservations people on the board have had about McDaniels, especially in regards to his time in Denver. I think he simply was too young (32) to take on what he attempted to take on as both head coach and making personnel decisions.

 

I'd like to believe that making those mistakes, combined with maturing as a person since then, will make McDaniels a stronger and more experienced leader this time around.

 

Plus we already have a GM and hopefully it could be situation that the two can work well together.

 

What Josh could do is be the head coach as well as calling the shots offensively. I would like to see a situation where Luck finally has some offensive system consistency that would be a lot like the situation in San Fransisco many years ago between Joe Montana and Bill Walsh. Offensive coaches can come and go, as they do, but it would still be Josh's system. He wouldn't be going anywhere (If there is much success) as obviously he's the head coach as well.

 

That's what I worry about in going with a defensive hire, or somebody like Toub - in that we get an Offensive Coordinator, that person becomes successful, then becomes the twinkle in some other team's eye and that person gets hired away.

 

I simply want someone that can work with Luck, be successful, and maintain that relationship for many years.

 

The constant coaching turnover will start to kill this franchise as well as Luck's career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/7/2018 at 9:23 AM, Peterk2011 said:

 

My point wasn't Cutler. My point was McDaniels. Why don't you ask what did McDaniels see in Cassell over Cutler?

 

He never traded for Cassel, so it's a bit of a red herring to begin with.

 

Jay Cutler was an entitled and petulant brat in Denver, and when he heard that McDaniels had asked about possibly considering maybe somewhat thinking about trading for Cassel, he had a meltdown and demanded a trade. I'm not saying McDaniels handled it right, but I was always under the impression that Cutler was the bigger issue with that situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

He never traded for Cassel, so it's a bit of a red herring to begin with.

 

Jay Cutler was an entitled and petulant brat in Denver, and when he heard that McDaniels had asked about possibly considering maybe somewhat thinking about trading for Cassel, he had a meltdown and demanded a trade. I'm not saying McDaniels handled it right, but I was always under the impression that Cutler was the bigger issue with that situation.

 

I'm sure there was blame on both sides, but ultimately McDaniels was right to send Cutler packing. He wasn't great to begin with, and once he became a headache for the head coach and started dividing the locker room, there was no reason not to move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

I'm sure there was blame on both sides, but ultimately McDaniels was right to send Cutler packing. He wasn't great to begin with, and once he became a headache for the head coach and started dividing the locker room, there was no reason not to move on.

 

Cutler looked like he might be the real deal at the time. I think if they had made it work, they both would have been more successful. But knowing what we know now about McDaniels' approach and Cutler's personality, it's obvious they weren't a good fit.

 

There were other issues with players at the time, like Marshall's immaturity (we now know he had some significant issues that weren't being treated at the time), some weird beefs with other players like Peyton Hillis and Tony Scheffler, etc. At one point McDaniels was caught on video berating his offense on the sideline, tantrum style. So it wasn't just the Jay Cutler deal that doomed him. McDaniels was clearly a big part of the problem.

 

He's my favorite candidate this year, but I'm not turning a blind eye to his past. If we hire him, everyone will need to cross their fingers and hope that he really has learned how to lead a locker room and manage his players, because he was awful at it in Denver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

Cutler looked like he might be the real deal at the time. I think if they had made it work, they both would have been more successful. But knowing what we know now about McDaniels' approach and Cutler's personality, it's obvious they weren't a good fit.

 

There were other issues with players at the time, like Marshall's immaturity (we now know he had some significant issues that weren't being treated at the time), some weird beefs with other players like Peyton Hillis and Tony Scheffler, etc. At one point McDaniels was caught on video berating his offense on the sideline, tantrum style. So it wasn't just the Jay Cutler deal that doomed him. McDaniels was clearly a big part of the problem.

 

He's my favorite candidate this year, but I'm not turning a blind eye to his past. If we hire him, everyone will need to cross their fingers and hope that he really has learned how to lead a locker room and manage his players, because he was awful at it in Denver.

Yes definitely need to hope that his personal interactions have improved.  I listened to an interview with DJ Williams, former Denver linebacker the other day (old interview on youtube).  DJ said (paraphrasing) that he was never more prepared for a game in his life than he was with McD.  He stated that McD's problem was that no one would fight for him due to his inability to relate.  I hope that he has that personal touch fixed if he indeed does become the new Colts HC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Cutler looked like he might be the real deal at the time. I think if they had made it work, they both would have been more successful. But knowing what we know now about McDaniels' approach and Cutler's personality, it's obvious they weren't a good fit.

 

There were other issues with players at the time, like Marshall's immaturity (we now know he had some significant issues that weren't being treated at the time), some weird beefs with other players like Peyton Hillis and Tony Scheffler, etc. At one point McDaniels was caught on video berating his offense on the sideline, tantrum style. So it wasn't just the Jay Cutler deal that doomed him. McDaniels was clearly a big part of the problem.

 

He's my favorite candidate this year, but I'm not turning a blind eye to his past. If we hire him, everyone will need to cross their fingers and hope that he really has learned how to lead a locker room and manage his players, because he was awful at it in Denver.

 

The more I hear about him in Denver, the more he just sounds like a 32 year old HC/GM who had WAY too much on his plate, and once he felt that things weren't working, he started to act out and take things out on the players. Not a good look, but you also have to assume that he's grown quite a bit since then. And it shouldn't be an issue in Indy with Ballard handling GM duties, and with McDaniels having what should be an ideal QB situation (healthy Luck, familiarity with Brissett).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've grown on McDaniels. Everything he's said seems to point to him changing and maturing. I think he was too young at 32 to handle being the HC of Denver with that much responsibility. Yes, he failed, but he learned from his mistakes. Also, he's apologized for how he's handled Cutler as well. If Ballard can prove that he's truly learned from his mistakes, then I would be fine with the hire. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, IndyScribe said:

I've grown on McDaniels. Everything he's said seems to point to him changing and maturing. I think he was too young at 32 to handle being the HC of Denver with that much responsibility. Yes, he failed, but he learned from his mistakes. Also, he's apologized for how he's handled Cutler as well. If Ballard can prove that he's truly learned from his mistakes, then I would be fine with the hire. 

 

A few weeks after arriwing in Denver, he convinced the owner to fire their GM tandem. So he wasn't just a HC, he was practically the "Belichick" of Denver in terms of power.

 

The first rumors about Bowlen's alzheimer disease appeared around the same time, around the firing of Shanahan and the hiring of McDaniels. I can imagine, that Bowlen's disease might played a role in those decisions. Young, self confident prodigys hardly ever refuse power. Many are willing to fight for it. So did McDaniels. He shouldve been under some control, but he wasn't. I think too much power played a big role in his doom there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

A few weeks after arriwing in Denver, he convinced the owner to fire their GM tandem. So he wasn't just a HC, he was practically the "Belichick" of Denver in terms of power.

 

The first rumors about Bowlen's alzheimer disease appeared around the same time, around the firing of Shanahan and the hiring of McDaniels. I can imagine, that Bowlen's disease might played a role in those decisions. Young, self confident prodigys hardly ever refuse power. Many are willing to fight for it. So did McDaniels. He shouldve been under some control, but he wasn't. I think too much power played a big role in his doom there.

Agreed. He tried to be Belichick, but failed. Ballard won't give up control, and hopefully McDaniels recognizes and is ok with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IndyScribe said:

Agreed. He tried to be Belichick, but failed. Ballard won't give up control, and hopefully McDaniels recognizes and is ok with that.

 

Yeah. I think even if Belichick tried to be Belichick at the age of 32, he'd have failed too. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, IndyScribe said:

Not sure if this has been posted: 

https://mobile.twitter.com/tomecurran/status/950418268199714816

 

McDaniels is down to the Giants and Colts, now that the Bears are out. He prefers the Colts. With the connection between Wilks and Giants, it seems likely that McDaniels will probably be the next head coach.

After reading the comments (or retweets?) from above link...

Many seem to think McDaniels may refuse the Colts (due to Irsay) and elect to stay with NE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:

After reading the comments (or retweets?) from above link...

Many seem to think McDaniels may refuse the Colts (due to Irsay) and elect to stay with NE.

I wouldn't pay attention to the comments. Mostly Patriots fans and uninformed people who hate the Colts. Unless McDaniels himself declines the job offer, don't pay attention to what normal people say. They're not insiders, they have no info. McDaniels has already shown interest in the Colts position and would most likely accept the job. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IndyScribe said:

I wouldn't pay attention to the comments. Mostly Patriots fans and uniformed people who hate the Colts. Unless McDaniels himself declines the job offer, don't pay attention to what normal people say. They're not insiders, they no info. McDaniels has already shown interest in the Colts position and would most likely accept the job. 

 

I agree it was mostly Pats fans slamming Irsay. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:

After reading the comments (or retweets?) from above link...

Many seem to think McDaniels may refuse the Colts (due to Irsay) and elect to stay with NE.

If he wasn't interested he most likely would have withdrawn his name by now. I don't know why Irsay would stop him. He doesn't fire coaches quickly.  If you hit it off with Irsay you are going to have a chance to succeed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IndyScribe said:

I wouldn't pay attention to the comments. Mostly Patriots fans and uniformed people who hate the Colts. Unless McDaniels himself declines the job offer, don't pay attention to what normal people say. They're not insiders, they no info. McDaniels has already shown interest in the Colts position and would most likely accept the job. 

But it is possible for Belichick to leave, maybe next year? If NE talks him into it, McDaniels could be tempted to stay?

I have to admit, I am not sold on him taking the job and working for Irsay

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, richard pallo said:

If he wasn't interested he most likely would have withdrawn his name by now. I don't know why Irsay would stop him. He doesn't fire coaches quickly.  If you hit it off with Irsay you are going to have a chance to succeed. 

Agreed. Irsay isn't the problem, and neither is Ballard. I think Irsay would be fine with the hire. McDaniels is shown to be selective with his interviews and coaching jobs. The fact that it's progressed this far with him is a good sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 1959Colts said:

But it is possible for Belichick to leave, maybe next year? If NE talks him into it, McDaniels could be tempted to stay?

I have to admit, I am not sold on him taking the job and working for Irsay

I highly doubt Belichick would leave. He's more likely to retire than leave. I think NE wants McDaniels as the successor, but McDaniels wants what is best for him. Patriots without Belichick is not as much of a sure thing as the Colts with Luck. Brady is old and only getting older. He can probably play for a few more years. After that, who knows? Patriots future is uncertain and they might be stuck in rebuild mode. I don't think he has a problem with Irsay. If anything, he should be glad that Irsay is patient(a little too patient).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Boiler_Colt said:

People in the football world think much much higher of Irsay than fans do. Especially Pats fans. Irsay will not be an issue with any potential coach.

Yeah, it's really just fans of other teams that slam on Irsay. Irsay is definitely not the worst owner out there and has proven to be patient, which any potential coach will like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

If he wasn't interested he most likely would have withdrawn his name by now. I don't know why Irsay would stop him. He doesn't fire coaches quickly.  If you hit it off with Irsay you are going to have a chance to succeed. 

Many posters here (Colts fans) have a favorable view of Irsay. But across the nation, I feel he is mostly viewed as unfavorable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 1959Colts said:

But it is possible for Belichick to leave, maybe next year? If NE talks him into it, McDaniels could be tempted to stay?

I have to admit, I am not sold on him taking the job and working for Irsay

 

Sounds like NE has plenty of disfunction in their own house. I don't know if McDaniels necessarily wants to inherit the job, knowing that Kraft may keep Brady beyond his prime and he made BB trade JG. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 1959Colts said:

Many posters here (Colts fans) have a favorable view of Irsay. But across the nation, I feel he is mostly viewed as unfavorable.

Sure, among fans. Fans aren't the one hiring McDaniels. Executives and other brass have a favorable view of Irsay. He's shown himself to be patient as well, which is a boon for anyone looking for a HC position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 1959Colts said:

Many posters here (Colts fans) have a favorable view of Irsay. But across the nation, I feel he is mostly viewed as unfavorable.

When Hall of Famers like Bill Polian and Tony Dungy say that Jim is one of the best and most knowledgeable owners in football, I think that speaks volumes. I think maybe you are letting your unfavorable opinion of him breed misconception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Boiler_Colt said:

When Hall of Famers like Bill Polian and Tony Dungy say that Jim is one of the best and most knowledgeable owners in football, I think that speaks volumes. I think maybe you are letting your unfavorable opinion of him breed misconception.

I have not seen any favorable mention of Irsay lately outside of posters here. He appeared to be drunk in his last press conference

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, IndyScribe said:

Agreed. He tried to be Belichick, but failed. Ballard won't give up control, and hopefully McDaniels recognizes and is ok with that.

 

I actually think he tried to be Belichick, but not in the sense you guys talk about. He might have tried the cold, results above all Belichick that can fire anyone not performing to his standard. But only Belichick can do that, and McDaniels tried to be someone he probably wasn’t, or at least didn’t have the backstory to succeed as. People sensed that, and it fell apart. 

 

He might never be a Pagano with regards to player relations, but less can do it. But you cannot copycat Belichick. He has to be his own, and both Ballard and Irsay will lock onto any issues in that regard with ease. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 1959Colts said:

I have not seen any favorable mention of Irsay lately outside of posters here. He appeared to be drunk in his last press conference

We get it, you hate Irsay. That doesn't change the fact that the rest of the football world does not. Polian, Dungy, Manning, guys like Rick Venturi have all gone to bat on how good of an owner they think Jim is. If you haven't seen it, you aren't looking. I'm not saying you have to come around and change your stance on Jim. By all means, you are entitled to believe what you want. But just because you have an opinion does not mean that is is shared by people in the league who matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:

 

I actually think he tried to be Belichick, but not in the sense you guys talk about. He might have tried the cold, results above all Belichick that can fire anyone not performing to his standard. But only Belichick can do that, and McDaniels tried to be someone he probably wasn’t, or at least didn’t have the backstory to succeed as. People sensed that, and it fell apart. 

 

He might never be a Pagano with regards to player relations, but less can do it. But you cannot copycat Belichick. He has to be his own, and both Ballard and Irsay will lock onto any issues in that regard with ease. 

 

He worked for BB before his stint as Denver's HC, so he only knew about BB. It's no surprise why he wanted to emulate BB. It's not surprising that it failed, either. I agree that McDaniels needs to be his own coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:

I have not seen any favorable mention of Irsay lately outside of posters here. He appeared to be drunk in his last press conference

 

I think it was declining health not being drunk... which is unfortunate because I think he is a great owner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think mcdaniels already has the job, but we can't say anything because of league rules. Nagy was really his only threat and he's going to Chicago. Richard could be hired at anytime, wilkes defense isn't that good, and we didn't even ask to interview toub

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yeah... Richardson needs players who can separate and who can get open deep. IMO "give the inaccurate QB a contested catch receiver with large catch radius" is one of the tropes that hasn't proven to work well. Contested catches have about 50-55% success rate even with the best of contested catch receivers and with relatively accurate QBs... now if you think AR's accuracy is not good, drop that rate even more. The best way to give a relatively inaccurate QB better chance to complete passes is to give him a WR who separates and and who is open so the QB would have more of a margin for error to throw the ball a little behind or ahead or a little higher or lower than ideal. (we are not talking about uncatchable balls here... those will be uncatchable for anyone really). In that regard, one thing I would agree about is - we need WRs who have good hands and have good ball skills.   And this is ignoring that AR has indeed been pretty good with his accuracy on passes at intermediate and long range. His biggest problem coming into the league was the short stuff and he was already showing improvements in that deparment before he got injured.    And Worthy is the WR who created the most separation from anybody in this draft :   
    • Richardson  accuracy  on deep balls is his strength.  Hence why you pair an elite deep threat in worthy.
    • No.   You weren’t.   If you were the least bit sincere, we’d be having these conversations in private.  But you’ve repeatedly ignored my efforts to do that.  Your call.      Then you avoid me until I’m in an uncomfortable conversation with another poster.   You use that awkward moment as an excuse for you to come in with some sincere friendly advice.   The problem is, you’re neither sincere, nor friendly.  And you’ve been doing this for months now.  This is not new.   The pattern is clear and obvious.     And the shame of it all is that even with our different views on Ballard we have enough in common that we should be friendly.  Maybe not friends, but friendly.  You wouldn’t need to address me as “Sir.”    “Good deed going unpunished”.  You flatter yourself.     But your actions speak much louder than your words.   There’s no reason for me to trust you.  And here we are.  A real shame.      
    • In a year when the Colts were in serious need of a QB and in position to draft one, Ballard came up in front of the media 3 days before the draft and straight up said something to the effect of "That guy everybody in media is talking about(Levis), we are not taking him". I don't know why you think the Colts are trying to throw us off the scent this year specifically. They are not trying to give us away the pick(thus the vagueness), but I also don't really think they are trying to mislead anybody. This usually becomes specifically apparent in retrospect after the draft when you look back at a lot of those quotes in the videos they release pre-draft... and they were talking precisely about players we ended up drafting, which they reveal in the post-draft video by extending some of those quotes(they did that with AR last year for example).    And about why people are doing it(guessing who they are talking about) - because it is fun. Nobody has the illusion that we will be right in our guesses 100% of the time... or anywhere close really... but it's still fun. And it's part of why the Colts release those videos with those quotes - to create engagement with the fanbase... part of which, and the entirety of which that 70 pages thread and whole board is about in the offseason. is to guess who the Colts might take and how they might feel about specific prospects.
  • Members

    • Dark Superman

      Dark Superman 1,778

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NewColtsFan

      NewColtsFan 21,150

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • krunk

      krunk 8,290

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Fingers

      Fingers 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Yoshinator

      Yoshinator 9,176

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...