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

    • Yeah, it'd probably end up being a top 40 pick. Detroit would do it because they have 1st round picks in 2022 and 2023. So it'd be a win-win for both teams. Wouldn't mind pulling the trigger!  
    • Knowing Ballard though, like he did with the Redskins, he could get a future 2nd from Detroit Lions instead of their current 3rd. That is how that man rolls.  
    • I doubt it will be a big vet. They aren’t going to want to compete with Eason. But I do think they might bring someone in to make sure Eason earns it. They have one other QB on the roster. From what I understand the media guys have mentioned the colts are fine with Eason and if he looks bad in the preseason there will be a vet that they can sign later.
    • That works. This draft is deep. We could do a lot with all those picks!  
    • 12:30 eastern today. Might not be up yet...   But it's not that he downgraded the position or suggested they're not interested. He just doubled down on the idea that they aren't going to reach, they aren't going to force it (at LT or edge), and that they want competition. Combine that with my thoughts on the tackle class and the way the board seems like it's going to fall, I don't see them having a great option there at #21. Like you said, maybe they feel great about Jenkins, but I don't...    I haven't listened to Irsay. I read some of his comments. Don't know if it's an indication of what they're going to do in the first round. I think corner might be one of the best positions this year, so that probably means they'll have plenty of options at #21, but even a trade back probably still gets them a good prospect at that position. And everyone internally has acknowledged that Rock still is a work in progress, but they're all still encouraged by his raw ability and his hard work. So Irsay saying we have two but want three is kind of just an obvious statement to me.   I still think they trade back. Maybe not totally out of R1, depending on what kind of offers are out there, but I'm still betting they don't pick at #21. Ballard was kind of coy when asked about whether they want more picks. 
  • Members

    • MPStack

      MPStack 3,527

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Four2itus

      Four2itus 5,063

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • chad72

      chad72 7,573

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Mitch Connors

      Mitch Connors 314

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Superman

      Superman 9,415

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jskinnz

      jskinnz 1,893

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Jared Cisneros

      Jared Cisneros 3,950

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • HoosierHero

      HoosierHero 65

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 8,450

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Coltpwr

      Coltpwr 0

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