Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Miami hopefuly is not a trap game.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 138
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

No such thing as a trap game. Nonsense really. It's like your wife having a 'trap' birthday. Like, it's her 37th and you don't bother with a present. Wooooosh. Doghouse here I come. Etc.

He and everyone else on the planet thinks that.

Posted Images

20 minutes ago, VaAllDay757 said:

Ok if you think so

 

Trust me, he's not the only one

 

On 11/22/2018 at 10:25 PM, VaAllDay757 said:

.500 is even and that's not on the negative side soooooo if it's not negative then it's positive

.500 is not negative....so again we're on the plus side

 

Do you not see how this makes no sense? If you believe this, you could just as easily make the argument that ".500 is even and that's not on the positive side sooooo if it's not positive then it's negative"

 

Maybe you should quit this one while you're... well, way, way behind.

 

Anyway that was a really ugly win, but I'll take it. This team is simultaneously both frustrating and encouraging. It's not so much that we sometimes play poorly that is frustrating, it's how we play poorly that is. You can tell that this team has a lot of potential when you watch them, so it's hard to watch them play poorly due to sloppiness and lack of discipline. However, this is also encouraging, because these issues should hopefully be fixable. I don't think we're too far off from being a dangerous team and legit competitor

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I guess those darn Jags will be a trap game with the mighty Blake Bortles :funny:

You never know, facing a team with a better record is always good motivation to help you snap out of your spiraling team's play this season. Not to mention dashing that team's hope for a better record at their expense. Of course there is always the chance that they are ready to tank the rest of the season for a higher draft choice. If the latter is the case, then it should be an easy win. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, horseshoecrabs said:

You never know, facing a team with a better record is always good motivation to help you snap out of you spiraling team's play this season. Not to mention dashing that team's hope for a better record at their expense. Of course there is always the chance that they are ready to tank the rest of the season for a higher draft choice. If the latter is the case, then it should be an easy win. 

Yeah I am just having fun now with this season because really hardly anyone thought we would be good. We are 6-5 which is respectable, they are a Divisional rival and Ramsey is always out to prove something. We just have to stay focused.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah I am just having fun now with this season because really hardly anyone thought we would be good. We are 6-5 which is respectable, they are a Divisional rival and Ramsey is always out to prove something. We just have to stay focused.

When I think how we went into this season, and all of the unknowns from Luck, coaching, roster, etc...  I am relieved on how we have done so far. The rest of the season can be just icing on the cake for progressing this year. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AZColt11 said:

May have been a trap game after all but they escaped the trap...…..this time.

Again I don’t think this was a trap game.  This was a team who entered today with the same record as the Colts coming off a bye getting their starting QB back.  It was what it should have been, a close hard fought football game.  

 

The Colts didn’t play well for three quarters but they hung around and were the better team in the fourth.  That is so refreshing of the past year and a half of it being the reverse.  

 

Next week is a trap game.  Coming off a three game home stand, ridding a five game winning streak playing a floundering Jags team on the road the week before they go to the divison leader.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/22/2018 at 2:56 PM, VaAllDay757 said:

5-5 is a winning a record.....anything .500 and above is winning

 

On 11/22/2018 at 3:45 PM, VaAllDay757 said:

Anything on the positive side is winning so how is being at .500 not winning??? Anything below .500 is losing

 

On 11/22/2018 at 10:25 PM, VaAllDay757 said:

.500 is even and that's not on the negative side soooooo if it's not negative then it's positive

.500 is not negative....so again we're on the plus side

 

On 11/22/2018 at 10:27 PM, VaAllDay757 said:

5-5 is not losing tho....it's either winning or losing there's no in between

 

On 11/23/2018 at 2:36 PM, VaAllDay757 said:

It's not losing....anything is better than losing so .500 is on the plus side

 

8 hours ago, VaAllDay757 said:

It's not a losing record....there is no tied record it's either a winning record or losing record

 

5 hours ago, VaAllDay757 said:

No at .500 and above is winning

 

4 hours ago, VaAllDay757 said:

All I seen is opinions nothing concrete to back up ya'll arguement

 

200w.gif?cid=19f5b51a5bfb8c38694d786455f

 

Stifle yourself there would ya?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Luck 4 president said:

They’re not opinions lol. Yours is an opinion. What everyone else is saying is a fact. It should be common sense but apparently it’s not. 

No it's really not and again nothing has been shown differently so keep talking about nothing then

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, VaAllDay757 said:

No it's really not and again nothing has been shown differently so keep talking about nothing then

 

Ok, so since you want evidence to prove you wrong, where is the evidence to prove you right? 

 

Surely there’s a scientific formula out there in this crazy old mixed up world that will prove your theory at least valid. I think we’d all like to take a peek at it. 

 

Or we’ll make it even easier than that. Just find us someone of significance that will echo your drivel. Surely there’s a well respected coach, player, or analyst out there who will have said the same thing. 

 

This is 2018. If you’re as right as you claim you are certainly you won’t be the only one out there making this claim, so back it up.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, John Waylon said:

 

Ok, so since you want evidence to prove you wrong, where is the evidence to prove you right? 

 

Surely there’s a scientific formula out there in this crazy old mixed up world that will prove your theory at least valid. I think we’d all like to take a peek at it. 

 

Or we’ll make it even easier than that. Just find us someone of significance that will echo your drivel. Surely there’s a well respected coach, player, or analyst out there who will have said the same thing. 

 

This is 2018. If you’re as right as you claim you are certainly you won’t be the only one out there making this claim, so back it up.  

Show me where they even mentioned anything about having a "tied" team record?

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

You either have a winning record or losing record

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, VaAllDay757 said:

Show me where they even mentioned anything about having a "tied" team record?

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

You either have a winning record or losing record

 

Oh boy. 

 

Wikipedia as a reference? 

 

200w.gif

 

Wikipedia falls squarely between the homeless guy who told Jimmy Haslam to draft Johnny Manziel, and a book from 1812 in terms of reliability on any subject. 

 

Of course in this case that’s actually neither here nor there because you referenced an article about how winning percentages are calculated. 

 

There was precisely 0 about a .500 record being considered winning. 

 

I find it frightening that in a world where everyone refers to a .500 record as... well, a .500 record that there is one lone nut in the forest claiming it’s a winning record. And yet somehow despite being the only one to claim such he actually believes that everyone else is wrong and he is right. 

 

Curious to say the very least. 

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

Oh God yall are still talking back and forth about this .500 record stuff!

 

I guess it's because some people won't listen to logic.

Just now, gspdx said:

 

I guess it's because some people won't listen to logic.

 

Or maybe I should say one person won't listen to logic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, John Waylon said:

 

Oh boy. 

 

Wikipedia as a reference? 

 

200w.gif

 

Wikipedia falls squarely between the homeless guy who told Jimmy Haslam to draft Johnny Manziel, and a book from 1812 in terms of reliability on any subject. 

 

Of course in this case that’s actually neither here nor there because you referenced an article about how winning percentages are calculated. 

 

There was precisely 0 about a .500 record being considered winning. 

 

I find it frightening that in a world where everyone refers to a .500 record as... well, a .500 record that there is one lone nut in the forest claiming it’s a winning record. And yet somehow despite being the only one to claim such he actually believes that everyone else is wrong and he is right. 

 

Curious to say the very least. 

It's better than nothing you asked for it and I gave it to you so nothing I said changes anyway

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Nadine locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I remember it like yesterday, then read the reasons shortly after the selection, and they made sense.  Edge played at The U, which ran the stretch, and the Colts were running it as well.  Edge also had fewer miles on his legs, due to being in running back by committee for most of his career there.  Lastly, Edge was the better receiver and pass blocker.    I sometimes wonder if Ditka thought about making that insane offer to the Colts first? 
    • I don't care how he tested (especially this year, when all those pro-day tests are under serious question)... I care how he plays and how he looks on tape. Players that didn't test off-the-charts are some of the best playmakers in football - Mahomes ran 4.82 with 30 inch vertical. I'd take him over any of the best athletes in the league making plays on the move. With that said... I don't see Mac Jones in similar light even though they tested very similarly. I don't think he's stuck in mud in the pocket. But I do not think he has enough mobility to scramble when needed. He will be one of the worst scrambling starting QBs in the league IMO. I think him scrambling will be extremely rare in the league. I just don't think he has the mobility and physical talent to do it while launching the ball downfield.    I like him too. But there are levels to this thing. I like him as a late first-second round QB. I think he can be a good productive QB in the right system(Shannahan system for example). I don't like him enough to give up 3 1st round picks + 3d for him, though. This is my whole contention here. He's just not THAT type of player IMO. Lance and Fields are. 
    • You may end up being right, but I hope that we add some talent here   As a HUGE Ohio State fan....  I WANT Lewis to step up....  He seemed to improve a bit, but, in my opinion there needs to be a talent influx on the DE   I have a recurring nightmare of Patrick M........ getting 30 seconds to throw...
    • Also, just because I'm starting to feel some kind of way about this, Mac Jones is getting short changed these days. He's a really good prospect, and people are treating him like he's an unathletic bum with no arm.   Blake Bortles went #3 in 2014. Sam Darnold went #3, and Josh Rosen went #10 in 2018. None of them were unable to succeed due to athletic shortcomings. Mac Jones tested just as good, if not better, than all of them. (Bortles was actually pretty good as a scrambler, despite his mediocre testing.) I already used the Jared Goff comparison; he went #1 in 2016, and went to the SB in 2018. Mac Jones tested as good as Goff.   He doesn't have super speed or quickness, but he's not stuck in mud. He moves well enough to stay alive in the pocket, and he has enough movement ability to scramble when needed. He doesn't have a cannon of an arm, but his arm is not deficient. He's very good from the pocket, he processes well, not a one-read thrower, very accurate, and tough.    If Bortles, Darnold and Goff could go top five in the last 7 years, so can Mac Jones. Of course, he needs to be better than them to live up to that draft status, but again, their issues weren't about lacking athleticism.    Just saying, again, the anti-Mac stuff is getting a little overboard. I like Fields and Lance better, but Mac Jones being desirable isn't entirely outrageous.
    • I am a little confused?  So you are advocating a less talented edge at 21 than more talented OT?  Or am I just reading this incorrectly?  Because I believe the difference in OT quality and Edge quality at 21 clearly favors the OT.
  • Members

    • Solon

      Solon 94

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DeepseaColt

      DeepseaColt 3

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • TonyBungee

      TonyBungee 181

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • coltsfan_canada

      coltsfan_canada 253

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • pgt_rob

      pgt_rob 739

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • JediXMan

      JediXMan 546

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • AwesomeAustin

      AwesomeAustin 697

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • lester

      lester 49

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • JPPT1974

      JPPT1974 839

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • GoColts8818

      GoColts8818 4,690

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