Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

If We Had A Decent Backup, In 2011


Manning2Wayne

Recommended Posts

Even if we won 8 games we would need to reload. Several players are getting old. Some are free agents and may not want to return. Some are injured and should not return. If Peyton was healthy, this past year has still shown us that we desperately need another QB. With Peyton gone and if Luck is drafted we still need another QB. If Luck got hurt the offense would still suffer without a competant backup. Chris Polian seemed to some people to be a polarizing force in the front office and needed replacing. A lot of people wanted Caldwell replaced. A lot of things happened to bring Irsay to his decisions. Since we did not win more games than 2 why not use the opportunity to draft Manning's replacement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So many FA with so little money. Even if Peyton did stay we probably would have faded into mediocrity anyways. Actually we already started fading in 2010. Peyton deserves better than that anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we had a few more wins in 2011, then yeah, we wouldn't be in this situation. But how do we know that we wouldn't have been worse off? Say Peyton comes back and plays a few more years and we end up drafting late again each year. Finding the next QB will be difficult to do and we will likely have to go through a bad season (like we did this year) or give up a lot to trade up (hurting the future of the team) and draft a QB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd put it more on having a competent enough coaching staff to put an offense on the field that the QB's could run.

Jim Caldwell & Clyde Christensen failed this team more than the QB trio of Collins/Painter/Orlovsky.

I think Orlovsky gets an exemption from that group. He did what the other two couldn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And we would not be drafting in the 1 spot and a replacement QB would cost a kings randsome with no extra wiggle cap room or draft picks for a supporting cast. I agree with Phil J Invest now.

We didn't need the "best ever" to be successful in coming years after Peyton. Later picks statistically perform better in the NFL. Peyton and Eli are the only two first rounders to win a Super Bowl in recent years. Stafford, Rodgers, Brady, Brees were not all "the greatest prospect ever." I'll give Luck my full support, but accepting mediocrity because of our owners ego isn't what seems best for the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We didn't need the "best ever" to be successful in coming years after Peyton. Later picks statistically perform better in the NFL. Peyton and Eli are the only two first rounders to win a Super Bowl in recent years. Stafford, Rodgers, Brady, Brees were not all "the greatest prospect ever." I'll give Luck my full support, but accepting mediocrity because of our owners ego isn't what seems best for the team.

Is this serious post? You do realize there is a much bigger pool to choose from when talking about later picks. If you look at it as a percentage, the early first rounders are a lot more succesful

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this serious post? You do realize there is a much bigger pool to choose from when talking about later picks. If you look at it as a percentage, the early first rounders are a lot more succesful

You mean the five Super Bowl appearances by the 199th rounder? The 11th pick that went to three? The 32nd pick that brought a city their first?

I mean I guess I'm being harsh on top 10 picks. It must've felt good for the Browns when Tim Couch brought home the trophy. Same for the Raiders and Jamarcus Russel, Leaf and the Chiefs, Sanchez and the Jets, Akili Smith and the Bengals, Vick and the Falcons, Harrington and the Lions, Palmer and the Bengals, Smith and the Niners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thats why in another post i said try to draft kellen moore if he is available in the 5th 6th or 7th round. and then sign orlovsky or kerry collins to a small 1 yr contract to teach these kids.

Kellen moore is already small, he doesn't have to be taught that. He has no chance in the nfl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean the five Super Bowl appearances by the 199th rounder? The 11th pick that went to three? The 32nd pick that brought a city their first?

I mean I guess I'm being harsh on top 10 picks. It must've felt good for the Browns when Tim Couch brought home the trophy. Same for the Raiders and Jamarcus Russel, Leaf and the Chiefs, Sanchez and the Jets, Akili Smith and the Bengals, Vick and the Falcons, Harrington and the Lions, Palmer and the Bengals, Smith and the Niners.

There are 250+ picks every year. Not counting UDFAs and top ten picks, You have 240+ chances that one of them will be succesful vs 10 in the top 10. If you look at it as a percentage, top 10 picks are a lot more likely to succeed.

and Leaf played for the chargers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are 250+ picks every year. Not counting UDFAs and top ten picks, You have 240+ chances that one of them will be succesful vs 10 in the top 10. If you look at it as a percentage, top 10 picks are a lot more likely to succeed.

and Leaf played for the chargers

Since 1998 there was an average of 13/14 quarterbacks drafted each year. Half don't even see playing feel or little playing time. A third are within the top 10. Then that would leave the sixth that include your Brees', Bradys', and Rodgers'.

Out of that third-ish 2 have won a Super Bowl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Orlovsky gets an exemption from that group. He did what the other two couldn't.

Yes, after what 10? 12? 16 weeks if you count the preseason/training camp that it took this masterful staff to make some philosophical changes with the offense. Changes that should have been made week 1.

Even then. Collins was working on what 2 weeks to start with trying to run an offense that it took Manning 13 years to cultivate? With changes early on he would have been more productive.

The same thing for Painter, he had no business trying to run that offense.

Orlovsky had the most success but he also had the benefit of having some changes made, so yes he doesn't deserve to be grouped with Painter, but all that poor kid was doing was trying to tread water with one foot in a shark's mouth. It still falls on Caldwell/Christensen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firm believer if we won another couple games.... Manning would be under center! It is hard to say goodbye to the GOAT.... and to think of what could be without Manning, but hopefully we have learned from this. A better Defense is needed, a better O-Line is needed, and a Backup QB who can do more than just hold a clipboard, just in case your QB does go down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firm believer if we won another couple games.... Manning would be under center! It is hard to say goodbye to the GOAT.... and to think of what could be without Manning, but hopefully we have learned from this. A better Defense is needed, a better O-Line is needed, and a Backup QB who can do more than just hold a clipboard, just in case your QB does go down.

I really don't think so, I actually think the decision to get rid of him would have been easier. If they win more games, Irsay and FO would realize that maybe they could live without him and if they're in draft position to get RG3, they would have dumped him earlier. Now if they win more games, and RG3 + Luck are off the board, then yes they keep him. It all depends on how many more games they win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kellen moore is already small, he doesn't have to be taught that. He has no chance in the nfl.

i wouldnt really go as far as saying he dont have a chance, small or not the kid still has an arm, and knows how to handle the ball and keeping it in his possesion. he may have played in a weak conference most of his career, but games against teams like OU and TCU he showed he could get the job done. and TCU was not a team with a weak defense, they had a very good defense. Moore would be the perfect back up with any team. and to be honest and i cant really believe im saying this, but if the colts kept manning and drafted moore id be happy with it. I think moore will shock the NFL if given the chance. like new orleans back up chase daniels i thought the redskins should have kept him, he could be a very good QB. and moore would be good for the colts spread offense (that is if the new OC sticks with it, really hope he dont move to the WC offense, that offense isnt to productive)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We didn't need the "best ever" to be successful in coming years after Peyton. Later picks statistically perform better in the NFL. Peyton and Eli are the only two first rounders to win a Super Bowl in recent years. Stafford, Rodgers, Brady, Brees were not all "the greatest prospect ever." I'll give Luck my full support, but accepting mediocrity because of our owners ego isn't what seems best for the team.

You do realize that Rodgers was a 1st rd. pick......Right!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i wouldnt really go as far as saying he dont have a chance, small or not the kid still has an arm, and knows how to handle the ball and keeping it in his possesion. he may have played in a weak conference most of his career, but games against teams like OU and TCU he showed he could get the job done. and TCU was not a team with a weak defense, they had a very good defense. Moore would be the perfect back up with any team. and to be honest and i cant really believe im saying this, but if the colts kept manning and drafted moore id be happy with it. I think moore will shock the NFL if given the chance. like new orleans back up chase daniels i thought the redskins should have kept him, he could be a very good QB. and moore would be good for the colts spread offense (that is if the new OC sticks with it, really hope he dont move to the WC offense, that offense isnt to productive)

you can believe that, but I'm not buying it. He was an amazing college QB, but sadly that won't cut it at the next level. He has poor arm strength, short height, and is rated very low on the list of project QB by professional scouts. He's lucky to even make the cut to even get a shot at 3rd string. That's a bet I would comfortably bet the farm on too.

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.
  • Popular Now

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I don't think there's anything wrong with McGinn's report, or with unnamed sources. We love these anonymous insights when we agree with them, it's only when there's some dissonance that we start complaining about unnamed sources.    It seems factual that AD Mitchell has had some challenges with managing his diabetes, and that it has affected the way he presents himself and interacts with other people. It's also had an affect on how he practices. And there's nothing particularly surprising about that. Everyone has been "hangry" before, and everyone has experienced a food coma. Diabetics can experience extremes of those two feelings, and it can happen very quickly. Once you put it into context, it's just something AD and his circle will have to manage meticulously. And the Colts feel confident that he can do that, which is all I really care about.   So the reports bringing this information to light don't really bother me. What makes these reports look worse is the way they get aggregated. Because it's the most sensational soundbites that get snipped and spread around the Internet, and then we don't seek out the full context or try to understand what's actually being said. In McGinn's report, even the source that was most harsh in speaking about AD followed up with good things about him. But all that sticks is 'unnamed source drags AD Mitchell,' and then everyone runs with it.   There might be smear campaigns at times. Sometimes people push negative information to serve an agenda. And really, fans and media fuel the fire, in a variety of ways. So I understand Ballard's frustration, and I think he was right to defend his player. I also think it's obvious from AD's recent quotes that Ballard's choice to go after these sources endeared Ballard and the Colts to AD, which is a good thing. And now AD has to prove Ballard and the Colts right, which is a good thing. 
    • https://www.golongtd.com/p/part-1-wrte-hall-of-fame-talent-at?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web   "Like Harrison and Bowers, Mitchell was a junior who spent only three seasons in college. His resume, however, wasn’t as impressive because of limited playing time and a high-ankle sprain during his two years at Georgia.   Coming off a 55-reception, 11-touchdown season at Texas, Mitchell did everything at the combine other than the short shuttle, the 3-cone and the bench press. And, after his blazing 40 of 4.35 and exceptional distances in the jumps, his decision to work at the combine appeared to be paying off.   Then Mitchell, wearing the WO19 jersey, started running the various routes in line with other wide receivers. His performance was insufficient, to say the least.   “He blew that 40 out, which didn’t surprise me,” one veteran scout said. “But then his position workout might have been the worst I’ve seen by a top receiver. He was falling over. He dropped balls. He had to keep redoing. It seemed as if he didn’t know how to run routes. He just seemed out of it.   “Generally, I don’t get alarmed by a combine. That was alarming.”   Based on television coverage, Mitchell staggered and fell during the gauntlet, dropped the first two slants, dropped an out and either messed up the route or failed to make the catch on his next three attempts. His performance was adequate after that.   “He was very linear, very straight line,” another scout said watching Mitchell at the combine. “Which surprised me, because in my limited exposure, for a fast guy, I thought he could actually bend and get in and out of his cuts.   “After running fast, the position stuff didn’t match. It wasn’t terrible. It wasn’t fatal. But it definitely raised some alerts with me. He didn’t have a great combine.”   Mitchell stood on his combine numbers and did positio"n drills March 21 at Texas pro day, leaving the bench press and shuttles void."     This one?
    • Uncoachable ?   He was coached by a very tough disciplinarian coach in Kirby Smart, the head coach at UGA for 2 years.   Anyone that knows Coach Smart knows he's a no nonsense guy that doesn't put up with any nonsense.   Look if Colts fans want to believe this nonsense thats fine.  There is nothing I can do to talk you all out of it.   But his record at UGA and on the field speaks for itself.  He wasn't "uncoachable" at all.   Kirby loved him, the coaches loved him, the players loved him and most importantly the fans loved him.   But lets go ahead and believe an "anonymous scout"
    • No, no. It's the multi part one. The part about the WRs/TEs is part 1. Don't know what happened with the diabetes part. It just seems to have vanished. Or it's in a separate part that's behind a paywall, but I found links to this one (part 1) that were quoting the diabetes parts from April. Weird all around.
    • Thank you guys for sharing these links. Having seen the full column now, I'd say the columnist had a responsibility to get someone on Mitchell's side of the story to comment before printing this report. That's how journalism is supposed to work. He should have talked to Mitchell, his parents, and/or his college coaches to put these stories about Mitchell not managing his diabetes well (which I understand can be very challenging) into context and find out more about whether they are true. How can you report that a player is almost uncoachable without talking to his coaches? That's unprofessional. 
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...