Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

HOF19

WOW Nobody seem to see us winning this Sunday.

Recommended Posts

Sporting News , ESPN, The entire CBS staff...… The entire USA Today staff ….. all picking the Skins to win. Are we being written off already ????????? ( As in it is a wait until next year as far as the national NFL Media is concerned ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, #12. said:

Are you picking the Colts?

The Colts could be losing by 35 points in the 4th Quarter and AS ALWAYS I would still pick them to win .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s an away game for a very young team that gave away 24 unanswered points last week. There are a lot of reasons the Colts aren’t favorites this week. I don’t think we are being “written off.” Just more people to prove wrong while overcoming the odds :thmup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HOF19 said:

The Colts could be losing by 35 points in the 4th Quarter and AS ALWAYS I would still pick them to win .

Yeah, that is just fan boy stuff.

 

Gun to head and without your blue colored glasses - who do you think will win?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say this our present level of play by the defense in the 4th quarter does not bode well  ( if it does not improve )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jskinnz said:

Yeah, that is just fan boy stuff.

 

Gun to head and without your blue colored glasses - who do you think will win?

Well, hopefully nobody puts a gun to my head about it because then I'd have to get my gun and... well it could get messy and then I'd probably miss the Colts game.

 

personally though I am picking the Colts to win this game.  While Kerrigan is better than anyone on the Bengals line, I think overall the Bengals from 7 is better than the Redskins front 7.  I also don't think Washington has any receivers that are going to challenge the safeties which means Geathers can spend more time supporting the run defense.

 

Peterson and Thompson were responsible for 70% of Washington's yards.  Because they are the two best weapons.


There are a bunch of other reasons that, unfortunately (or fortunately depending on how you look at it) I don't have time to go into now.

 

But I think the Colts will win by a 10-14 points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

Yeah, that is just fan boy stuff.

 

Gun to head and without your blue colored glasses - who do you think will win?

Colts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

FWIW colin cowherd loves the colts +6 points.

Cowherd might be a Colt fan. I have read more than  a few other times over the years where he picks the Colts .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

Yeah, that is just fan boy stuff.

 

Gun to head and without your blue colored glasses - who do you think will win?

image.png.4fd86e348479c1eae6fadafc39f0c966.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, HOF19 said:

Cowherd might be a Colt fan. I have read more than  a few other times over the years where he picks the Colts .

He is a Luck fan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listening to 1070 the fan via internet ( I live in NY Metro area ) and they are not sounding exactly confident either . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1070 the fan Just said They felt Colts 7-8 win team. With loss to Bengals they are dropping it to 5-6 .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HOF19 said:

Cowherd might be a Colt fan. I have read more than  a few other times over the years where he picks the Colts .

 

I would guess he's more a Luck fan than colt fan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, HOF19 said:

1070 the fan Just said They felt Colts 7-8 win team. With loss to Bengals they are dropping it to 5-6 .

So one loss equals 2 losses? Is that common core math?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey the Ravens looked good in their opener but they struggled against the Bengals like we did and lost by 11 at the end. So you never always know for sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The public perception is going to be that this team sucks until they see them win more than a few random games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  Bengals | Joe Mixon may need surgery    Fri Sep 14, 04:54 PM

Cincinnati Bengals RB Joe Mixon (knee) may need to undergo arthroscopic surgery on the knee he injured in Week 2, which would sideline him for an undisclosed period of time, according to sources. Mixon is scheduled to receive a second opinion on his knee.

Link to story
Joe Mixon player page

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/apps/news.php

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AP is saying he wants to be the best RB in NFL history. Graveyards are full of people that wanted to live long, healthy lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in year two of the ballard show he has put together a below average talent group this is very clear to the media

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard has already said he is developing this team for next year.  The talking heads know it.  There won't be many games where we will be favored.  That's for sure.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it's just one game, but Washington looks pretty good, great o-line, good defensive pieces, and Alex Smith is underrated. I wouldn't certainly rule out the Colts any given Sunday with Luck, but I also would have to agree with a group of panelists picking the Skins at home.  I'm excited either way, and hope we pull off the upset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be nice, when we can get to the point where Luck can benefit from having some real play makers at his disposal and the defense can stop and create more turnovers. The real confidents builder will  be better production in the red zone instead of stalled drives and field goals 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fans just need to be patient with this team. No one should be shocked with an 0-5 start. The second half of the season will get better as the schedule eases and the team begins to gel. I see a 6-10 or 7-9 season as likely, 8-8 as best case scenario. But this team is going to get better and better, with 2019 the start of winning seasons again. 

So, yeah, the Skins are favorites. And should be. But this team is going to bust out in 2019. So be patient and enjoy the ride. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um excuse me was Washington in the playoffs last year or something?  I don't really understand this scaredy cat mentality in this thread. People pronouncing Ls before the game is even played. I can't buy into that type of thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless we run the ball better this week we will get blown out specially if that 4th quarter defense shows up so the chance of a win will depend on if the colts can run the ball with any success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, krunk said:

Um excuse me was Washington in the playoffs last year or something?  I don't really understand this scaredy cat mentality in this thread. People pronouncing Ls before the game is even played. I can't buy into that type of thing.

This is a very poor matchup for the Colts. I don't believe we are going to lose every game or anything, but they just match up extremely well vs us. Alex Smith is a lot like Russell Wilson in he's mobile and accurate, but with a better O-Line. They have Peterson, who seems to have a year left in him (all he needs is one more game at this point to affect us), Reed and Thompson are healthy and mismatches against us in the passing game. We have no running game and they have a top D-Line. It's in Washington. We also have very little pass rush.

 

Like I said before, Luck will have to carry the team again, except we're against a much bigger mismatch at QB than Dalton. They shut David Johnson down, we aren't running the ball. This match is a trap game for uninformed Colt football fans who are optimistic, and it will be very difficult come Sunday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

This is a very poor matchup for the Colts. I don't believe we are going to lose every game or anything, but they just match up extremely well vs us. Alex Smith is a lot like Russell Wilson in he's mobile and accurate, but with a better O-Line. They have Peterson, who seems to have a year left in him (all he needs is one more game at this point to affect us), Reed and Thompson are healthy and mismatches against us in the passing game. We have no running game and they have a top D-Line. It's in Washington. We also have very little pass rush.

 

Like I said before, Luck will have to carry the team again, except we're against a much bigger mismatch at QB than Dalton. They shut David Johnson down, we aren't running the ball. This match is a trap game for uninformed Colt football fans who are optimistic, and it will be very difficult come Sunday.

They didn't shut Johnson and Arizonas run game down.   Arizona had like 90 yards on them by the 2nd quarter.  That team is about in the same realm as Cincy probably less.   Grass always looks greener from TV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, krunk said:

They didn't shut Johnson and Arizonas run game down.   Arizona had like 90 yards on them by the 2nd quarter.  That team is about in the same realm as Cincy.   Grass always looks greener from TV.

http://www.nfl.com/teams/statistics?team=ari

 

Arizona had 68 rush yards the whole game vs Washington. David Johnson had 9 carries for 37 yards and a td. He did nothing besides a td. Bradford got shut down as well for 153 yds no tds and 1 INT. They completely shut Arizona down, no idea what you are thinking on this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

http://www.nfl.com/teams/statistics?team=ari

 

Arizona had 68 rush yards the whole game vs Washington. David Johnson had 9 carries for 37 yards and a td. He did nothing besides a td. Bradford got shut down as well for 153 yds no tds and 1 INT. They completely shut Arizona down, no idea what you are thinking on this one.

Who exactly Sam Bradford?  You act like Bradford is something close to good.

There offense is terrible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, krunk said:

Who exactly Sam Bradford?  You act like Bradford is something close to good.

There offense is terrible. 

David Johnson is terrible? Larry Fitzgerald is terrible? I don't think so. Bradford isn't great or anything, but they abused him. Also kinda funny how you just ignored the running stats after I pointed them out to you. If David Johnson can't run on the Redskins, what chance does Mack, Wilkins and Hines have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

This is a very poor matchup for the Colts. I don't believe we are going to lose every game or anything, but they just match up extremely well vs us. Alex Smith is a lot like Russell Wilson in he's mobile and accurate, but with a better O-Line. They have Peterson, who seems to have a year left in him (all he needs is one more game at this point to affect us), Reed and Thompson are healthy and mismatches against us in the passing game. We have no running game and they have a top D-Line. It's in Washington. We also have very little pass rush.

 

Like I said before, Luck will have to carry the team again, except we're against a much bigger mismatch at QB than Dalton. They shut David Johnson down, we aren't running the ball. This match is a trap game for uninformed Colt football fans who are optimistic, and it will be very difficult come Sunday.

What?????? This is why I can't ya'll serious about football....smith is nothing like wilson....smith is on the wrong side of 30 he's not that mobile and he's only accurate on short passes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

http://www.nfl.com/teams/statistics?team=ari

 

Arizona had 68 rush yards the whole game vs Washington. David Johnson had 9 carries for 37 yards and a td. He did nothing besides a td. Bradford got shut down as well for 153 yds no tds and 1 INT. They completely shut Arizona down, no idea what you are thinking on this one.

You do realize Johnson only had 9 attempts and he averaged 4.1 with those attempts. He didn't get shut down. He was making nice runs right up the gut when I was watching portions of that game.  Probably would have gotten more if the offense wasn't crappy.    I was off on the numbers, but I remember the announcer making that statement during the game.  And Edmonds the other back averaged 6.1 with his carries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I wouldn't consider #10 a diss..... but I have a bit of an issue with the Cowpies ranked #2 at the same time.   We not only shut them out last season, we out manned, out-muscled and intimidated them in a way that none of us have seen a Colts team do to any team in a long, long time.   You could say "well its only one game".... and that's true.   But that was a statement game, and I just don't see how Brandt can justify a #2 ranking for Dallas given each team's additions this off-season....not to mention all those other teams he has them ranked ahead of.   As for the Colts...on our own merits.... I would have us closer to the middle of the pack on this list, around 7th and certainly ahead of Dallas.
    • His mom sounds awesome.  
    • Sigh...........   This is beyond really frustrating.    You're accusing me of things I literally haven't done.     That's very Irish of you.    Really annoying.      You ask for benefit of the doubt while never giving it out yourself.   I've put certain things into bold.   I'll try taking them one at a time.   Your first bold...   that this is not me saying that teams that aren't doing this are stupid.    I'm sorry, but when you declare that you've come up that you think is clearly and obvously better,  that you think you've re-invented the wheel and sliced bread,  it certainly feels like you're casting a disapporving eye toward any team that's not doing things your preferred way as a matter of course.   Then you claim,  that I want Ballard in the building ASAP,  but not before January.    Let me see if you understand this word.....   NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!   Was that clear enough for you?       If Irsay had decided in the spring of 16 to fire Grigson and hire Ballard in the spring, I would've been ok with it.   It's not desirable,  but if Irsay made that call THEN,  I'd be ok with it.     Where YOU mis-read me,  is that roughly 95 of owners make this decision during the season.    They see things they don't like and they decide during the season to make a change -- typically when the season ends.    Sometimes, an exec will be fired during the season and someone like Dorsey comes in during the season to oversee things and learn about the organization.    I'm fine with that.  There's no record of me opposing that.   I start with January,  because that's when the business season starts for front office and coaches.   Period.   The NFL views it as preferrable.    But making the switch in the spring is doable, as I've said in every post, and which you have ignored or confused badly.    But if Ballard had been hired in the spring of 16,  I'd have been fine with it.   This isn't the first time I've said some version of this.    This is not some ah-ha moment.   As to the bold declaring that there are tons of qualified guys and that CHOOSING the best guy is another story.   Here's my reponse to that.   No.   nonsense.     They are the same story.    They are connected.    Because you play down the fact that most GM's and most HC's fail.   They get fired before their 4 or 5 year contracts expire.   The owner has seen enough and makes a change.   Saying there are always qualified guys is meaningless.    Because FINDING the best guy who will succeed, isn't just important,  it's EVERYTHING.   All 32 teams can announce they hired a qualified guy.    That isn't hard.    But the vast majority of teams are introducing his successor in a few years.    That's why a franchise like Pittsburgh has very little turnover either in HC or the front office.   While franchises like the Jets or Buffalo or Miami are introducing someone new so often, you can practically set your watch to it.     Generally speaking,  the new GM has a long history of scouting and evaluating talent.   The new HC has a history of success, both as a position coach and a coordinator.   They can easily be called qualified,  (though new guys like Kliff Kingsbury and Zack Taylor do NOT have a long track record of success)  But the vast majority of hires...   are soon enough fired.   That doesn't speak well to their qualifications.      As to you meaning what you're saying...   Of course you mean what you say and I stated that clearly.  I don't know why this should rub you the wrong way.  I literally wrote that I know you mean what you say.    I said what I said as a rhetorical point,  not an attacking point.    My ultimate point was made at the end of my first post to you.   You typically write persuasive arguments.    You're able to frequently made me see your viewpoint.    But not here.    You accuse me of not considering your argument.    I'm sorry,  I am considering what you write.   But I don't see the typical high quality Superman argument.   I don't see points that connect.    Your argument feels like the one you'd make for doable.   It doesn't convince me at all that it's preferable.  
    • Yeah, Ballard said he's a patient guy, and he doesn't mind waiting to pick. We almost traded back from 34 as well if Rock wasn't there. I personally love the "trade back" strategy at the end of round 1, and wouldn't mind doing it in most every draft. A late 1st for a mid-second and early/mid second (from the Redskins) over two drafts is fine with me!
    • Haven't done research on the 2020 draft yet, but if it ends up having an elite WR or OT, I wouldn't mind trading up this year. We'll have to see where we finish (hopefully 32 ), and make a decision from there. Ballard landing the Redskins 2nd rounder may be a brilliant move.
  • Members

    • Shadow_Creek

      Shadow_Creek 416

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CoachLite

      CoachLite 369

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Jared Jammer

      Jared Jammer 97

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Surge89

      Surge89 965

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Jcrane

      Jcrane 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • SVFD Colts Fan

      SVFD Colts Fan 37

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Nadine

      Nadine 7,322

      Administrators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Old Colt

      Old Colt 292

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • pacolts56

      pacolts56 3,035

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • gnet550

      gnet550 219

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