TE Jack Doyle expected to be placed on I.R.

[Smoke317]

2 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

If Stanley really meant to start a multi-thread discourse to rile up half the forum members with the simple use of the word "meh"... well, my hat's off to him , because it worked like a charm! 

 

I think that would qualify for the Troll-Of-The-Year award.

 

Hopefully he didn't actually mean to do that and he's just more like this guy:

"Hmmm, yes, everything is quite meh, I do say.  Quite meh.  I'm in the mood for a good old fashioned filibuster.  Yes, quite."

You got to give him some credit.  He got the pitchforks and torches out in mass numbers.

[Smoke317]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Its not a debate.  From my point of view, it was an opinion with support for it when challenged.

 

Others see it as a debate because they are uncomfortable to read a different opinion and must make sure opposing opinions are converted.  That's what a debate is and that's why people who think like that would call it a debate, and why debates are often bucketed as being won and lost.  See the difference, and where you fit in?

I personally can't speak on you but when opinions are so contrarian they often have no merit.  I often engage in playing the devil's advocate.  I'll make a statement that I truly don't believe to elicit a response or spark a conversation.  I haven't bothered to read through all the these threads and your posts but the ones I have read, you have shown nothing of merit as to why you have your "opinion". 

 

So you are correct.  There is no debate because your opinion has no merit. You can say and think what you want.  Be it foolish, contrarian, or trollish.  And I do indeed "fit in" on the opposite side of all those things.  That is unless I'm trying to intentionally spark conversation or get a response out of people by making a statement that is exactly those things...  Which I think is exactly what your "opinion" has done.  Hell even I responded 2-3 times.  Well played.  Well played indeed.  

[braveheartcolt]

To this ongoing debate, I say 'meh', which is actually synonymous with good. I checked it out in the dictionary, so DD was correct. It was the Klingon Dictionary mind you. 

[Lucky Colts Fan]

5 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

Well played.  Well played indeed.  

 

It's definitely been a roller-coaster ride the last few days.

 

Like a great Shakespearean play, there was confusion, anger, laughter, tears.

 

Anyone that followed along FELT something.  It even brought lurkers out of the woodwork to comment.  It elicited a response.  BRAVO @DougDew!

 

 

[DougDew]

19 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

I personally can't speak on you but when opinions are so contrarian they often have no merit.  I often engage in playing the devil's advocate.  I'll make a statement that I truly don't believe to elicit a response or spark a conversation.  I haven't bothered to read through all the these threads and your posts but the ones I have read, you have shown nothing of merit as to why you have your "opinion". 

 

So you are correct.  There is no debate because your opinion has no merit. You can say and think what you want.  Be it foolish, contrarian, or trollish.  And I do indeed "fit in" on the opposite side of all those things.  That is unless I'm trying to intentionally spark conversation or get a response out of people by making a statement that is exactly those things...  Which I think is exactly what your "opinion" has done.  Hell even I responded 2-3 times.  Well played.  Well played indeed.  

Getting back to your Norwitski example.  Did you actually use an adjective (Power) to better describe what he does compared to the other Forwards, then at the same time criticize the concept of calling Ebron a receiver, which better describes what he does compared to guys like Doyle?

 

That's amazing!

 

Hey, you swooped in. 

 

Did you know, contrary to popular belief, there is no such thing as a writer eliciting a response?  That's simply a popular fabrication offered by readers who can't help themselves.

[Superman]

12 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

Anyone that followed along FELT something

 

I felt nothing. 

 

 

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

contrary to popular belief

 

This should be your signature.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Did you know, contrary to popular belief, there is no such thing as a writer eliciting a response?  That's simply a popular fabrication offered by readers who can't help themselves.

 

Meh

[DougDew]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I felt nothing. 

 

 

 

This should be your signature.

Accurate, but not intentional. 

 

Maybe the mob would  be comforted if I slipped in a "Grigson sucked" or a "Ballard is a genius" comment as an appeasement whenever my opinion goes against them, you know, to let them know my mind is in the right place.  Of course, the fact that I refuse to do that gives no indication of what my actual opinion is.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Maybe the mob

 

Stanley, has your house been burned down with you in it?  Are you full of pitchfork holes right now?

 

You can drop the "mob" stuff.  If you have a "unique" opinion (as you have admitted), it shouldn't be a surprise that you're the only one with that opinion.

 

The rest of us telling you that we don't agree with your opinion doesn't make us a mob, so you're not a victim of mob-mentality, amigo.

[aaron11]

4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Accurate, but not intentional. 

 

Maybe the mob would  be comforted if I slipped in a "Grigson sucked" or a "Ballard is a genius" comment as an appeasement whenever my opinion goes against them, you know, to let them know my mind is in the right place.  Of course, the fact that I refuse to do that gives no indication of what my actual opinion is.

stop calling us a mob please

 

when no one agrees with you it doesnt mean the rest of us are a mob.  i dont actually care what others think of your posts, but i do disagree with some of them on my own 

[Superman]

6 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Accurate, but not intentional. 

 

Maybe the mob would  be comforted if I slipped in a "Grigson sucked" or a "Ballard is a genius" comment as an appeasement whenever my opinion goes against them, you know, to let them know my mind is in the right place.  Of course, the fact that I refuse to do that gives no indication of what my actual opinion is.

 

I occasionally remind you that this stance of yours is nonsensical and condescending. I figure now is a good time to do that again.

[DougDew]

Just now, Superman said:

 

I occasionally remind you that this stance of yours is nonsensical and condescending. I figure now is a good time to do that again.

Actually, I see many contrarian posts about various topics by many people, who often slip in a similarly appeasing comment as an aside to their contrarian point. 

 

OTOH, I just make my contrarian point and move on.

 

 I assume because I don't follow the pattern of making that appeasing comment is why I get attacked over stupid things like expressing an opinion of meh over what others think is an amazing Ballard decision.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

Actually, I see many contrarian posts about various topics by many people, who often slip in a similarly appeasing comment as an aside to their contrarian point. 

 

OTOH, I just make my contrarian point and move on.

 

 I assume because I don't follow the pattern of making that appeasing comment is why I get attacked over stupid things like expressing an opinion of meh over what others think is an amazing Ballard decision.

 

Martyr-Complex 101

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Actually, I see many contrarian posts about various topics by many people, who often slip in a similarly appeasing comment as an aside to their contrarian point. 

 

OTOH, I just make my contrarian point and move on.

 

 I assume because I don't follow the pattern of making that appeasing comment is why I get attacked over stupid things like expressing an opinion of meh over what others think is an amazing Ballard decision.

 

No.

 

Being contrarian and defending your contrarian viewpoint is not the problem. Many do just that, and I've been one of them as much as anyone else on this site. 

 

What's nonsensical and condescending is your insinuation -- shoot, it's an outright statement at this point -- that those who disagree with your contrarian viewpoint are incapable of thinking for themselves, afraid to go against "the mob," or are only Ballard fanboys.

[DougDew]

10 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

stop calling us a mob please

 

when no one agrees with you it doesnt mean the rest of us are a mob.  i dont actually care what others think of your posts, but i do disagree with some of them on my own 

A mob reacts irrationally.  

 

I'm waiting for many who criticized by opinion of meh to answer a rational question.

 

Did we switch coaches to McDaniels then Reich to, in a big part, modernize the offense to where scheme helps receivers get open?

 

I think there are about 5 members who have yet to show us they are not part of an irrational mob.  

[DougDew]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

No.

 

Being contrarian and defending your contrarian viewpoint is not the problem. Many do just that, and I've been one of them as much as anyone else on this site. 

 

What's nonsensical and condescending is your insinuation -- shoot, it's an outright statement at this point -- that those who disagree with your contrarian viewpoint are incapable of thinking for themselves, afraid to go against "the mob," or are only Ballard fanboys.

Its a logical conclusion to make about others when they refuse to answer the question I have posed.  And that's just an example in this particular thread.  

[ColtsBlueFL]

36 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I felt nothing. 

 

 

I’ve read nothing (even the little I did)

[Lucky Colts Fan]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Its a logical conclusion to make about others when they refuse to answer the question I have posed.  And that's just an example in this particular thread.  

 

That cuts both ways, friend.  You are an expert at not answering questions that might detract from your argument.

 

Do you know how many of the questions I've posed to you over the last few days that you just glossed over or outright refused to answer?

 

Quite a few.  If anything, you're a one-man-mob at this point.

[Superman]

11 minutes ago, DougDew said:

A mob reacts irrationally.  

 

 

Just because something has wings doesn't make it a bird.

 

And why are you the arbiter of what is and isn't rational?

[Superman]

12 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Its a logical conclusion to make about others when they refuse to answer the question I have posed.  And that's just an example in this particular thread.  

 

Is the answer to your question painfully obvious? It's possible people are ignoring you at this point due to the condescension. 

[DougDew]

Just now, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

That cuts both ways, friend.  You are an expert at not answering questions that might detract from your argument.

 

Do you know how many of the questions I've posed to you over the last few days that you just glossed over or outright refused to answer?

 

Quite a few.  If anything, you're a one-man-mob at this point.

And that's your answer?

 

In my defense, I've been responding to about 15 swooping dive bombers, so if you asked a reasonable question in a reasonable tone, I'm sorry I missed it.

 

But also note, I have not attacked anyone who offered the opinion that its amazing.  I have not badgered them for support.   I simply offered mine.  Its not a debate.  I don't care if you think the way I do or not.  There is no conversion.  There is no judgment of won or lost.

 

I've got a guy upstream who said I was a fool for thinking it was a meh signing.  Swoops in, says that, and expects to leave.  That's not disagreement, its akin to a mob.

[DougDew]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Is the answer to your question painfully obvious? It's possible people are ignoring you at this point due to the condescension. 

Its possible.  But its more likely they don't want to admit the answer.

 

Again, the theme here is, its what I do that causes others to do or not do something.  Fat chance.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

And that's your answer?

 

In my defense, I've been responding to about 15 swooping dive bombers, so if you asked a reasonable question in a reasonable tone, I'm sorry I missed it.

 

But also note, I have not attacked anyone who offered the opinion that its amazing.  I have not badgered them for support.   I simply offered mine.  Its not a debate.  I don't care if you think the way I do or not.  There is no conversion.  There is no judgment of won or lost.

 

I've got a guy upstream who said I was a fool for thinking it was a meh signing.  Swoops in, says that, and expects to leave.  That's not disagreement, its akin to a mob.

 

So what's your endgame here, Stanley?  Do you want a cookie?

 

Do you think you're going to get an apology from everyone that's disagreed with you?

 

It should tell you something when the "Meme-guy" is the one telling you this:  Grow Up.

[Luck 4 president]

@DougDew be like:

[Superman]

35 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Its possible.  But its more likely they don't want to admit the answer.

 

Again, the theme here is, its what I do that causes others to do or not do something.  Fat chance.

 

Goodness, man. If you ask a question, yes, it's going to elicit a response, or non-response. Is that really newsworthy?

 

Also, it's not hard to admit that coaching and QBing are helping Ebron. I think you're stuck in faulty gear here.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

Dear Jack Doyle,

 

    Hopefully you never read this thread.  But if you do, sorry for what we have turned it into.  Shame on us.

 

Get well soon,

Your fans

[DougDew]

Just now, Superman said:

 

Goodness, man. If you ask a question, yes, it's going to elicit a response, or non-response. Is that really newsworthy?

 

Also, it's not hard to admit that coaching and QBing are helping Ebron. I think you're stuck in faulty gear here.

I only asked one question in this entire three week epic, IIRC. Obviously a question elicit responses.

 

Funny how they respond to every other comment I make, but don't respond to the post that actually elicits a response.  Golly, I guess that's my fault and not theirs.

[cbear]

2 hours ago, NagelHausForge said:

 

One biiiiiiiig problem, Amigo.... Hewitt, Swoope and Cox are all malingering on the injury report.  Unless that changes this week the Colts will have 1 active TE.

 

True.  I was speaking more in terms of who the remaing TEs are.  But until they are available, Doyle's absence will be felt greatly. 

[Coffeedrinker]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Accurate, but not intentional. 

 

Maybe the mob would  be comforted if I slipped in a "Grigson sucked" or a "Ballard is a genius" comment as an appeasement whenever my opinion goes against them, you know, to let them know my mind is in the right place.  Of course, the fact that I refuse to do that gives no indication of what my actual opinion is.

You will just ignore this post, so I know I shouldn't bother but here is the thing.

 

Two thins:

 

One, you crying about this "mob" is quite funny and a little sad.  Just because multiple people disagree with you, you lump it in as a mob.  Perhaps it's just multiple people disagreeing with you.

 

Two, for me perosnally, I have no problem with a differing opinion, as long as that opinion is backed up by sound reasoning and reality.  And that is where your stance on Ebron and Ballard is sorely lacking.  You say many players could do what Ebron has done this year but the fact is no one else is and then you say, well of course not how many other players have reich as a head coach and luck as a QB?  You call Ebron a receiver and wonder why he's compared to TEs.  When it's pointed out that it's because he's a TE, you act like that doesn't matter.  Believe or not, Ebron blocks in the running game... not a lot, but he does.  So you are the one that makes general statements then when people disagree with it, you cry foul and that it's a "mob" or you change the criteria.

 

On Ballard, people point out good things that he has done and you are very quick to jump in and say he has not done anything special as a GM or that he just does what every other GM does.  That does pass the logic test, if it were true then no GMs would ever get fired.  Just like in everything else, there are good ones and bad ones.  Ballard is not the only good GM in the league, but he is proving to be one of the good ones.

 

Here is the last point.  You want to play innocent and claim you are only posting your opinion and the "mob" just jumps in and starts attacking.  Then you post things like, (praphrase)maybe they should quit responding to my posts (end paraphrase).  But the fact is, anytime there is a positive post or thread about Ballard or Ebron, you are quick to jump in there and tell the poster that their opinion is wrong, that Ballard was not that great of a signing or that Ballard is just doing what every other GM does.  You love the stir up people (I don't know, some people are just like that) and then once you stir them up you cry that they are attacking you.

 

I'm not one to tell a person what posts they should and should not respond to, but since you said people should stop responding to your posts and you want to cry mob when more than one person disagrees with your post, maybe you should stop responding to posts about Ballard or Ebron. 

 

I don't think you will, you love the attention too much.

[Lawrence Owen]

I took time out to look up some darn good stats from Doyle this year and make a pick to show him how much Colts fans will miss him.  And to remind everyone what he really meant to the team. The Run Block Grade FYI,...tops in NFL among TE's.

[Coffeedrinker]

40 minutes ago, Lawrence Owen said:

I took time out to look up some darn good stats from Doyle this year and make a pick to show him how much Colts fans will miss him.  And to remind everyone what he really meant to the team. The Run Block Grade FYI,...tops in NFL among TE's.

Yeah, I think the ground game is going to suffer some without him in there, especially the runs between the tackles.

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, Coffeedrinker said:

You will just ignore this post, so I know I shouldn't bother but here is the thing.

 

Two thins:

 

One, you crying about this "mob" is quite funny and a little sad.  Just because multiple people disagree with you, you lump it in as a mob.  Perhaps it's just multiple people disagreeing with you.

 

Two, for me perosnally, I have no problem with a differing opinion, as long as that opinion is backed up by sound reasoning and reality.  And that is where your stance on Ebron and Ballard is sorely lacking.  You say many players could do what Ebron has done this year but the fact is no one else is and then you say, well of course not how many other players have reich as a head coach and luck as a QB?  You call Ebron a receiver and wonder why he's compared to TEs.  When it's pointed out that it's because he's a TE, you act like that doesn't matter.  Believe or not, Ebron blocks in the running game... not a lot, but he does.  So you are the one that makes general statements then when people disagree with it, you cry foul and that it's a "mob" or you change the criteria.

 

On Ballard, people point out good things that he has done and you are very quick to jump in and say he has not done anything special as a GM or that he just does what every other GM does.  That does pass the logic test, if it were true then no GMs would ever get fired.  Just like in everything else, there are good ones and bad ones.  Ballard is not the only good GM in the league, but he is proving to be one of the good ones.

 

Here is the last point.  You want to play innocent and claim you are only posting your opinion and the "mob" just jumps in and starts attacking.  Then you post things like, (praphrase)maybe they should quit responding to my posts (end paraphrase).  But the fact is, anytime there is a positive post or thread about Ballard or Ebron, you are quick to jump in there and tell the poster that their opinion is wrong, that Ballard was not that great of a signing or that Ballard is just doing what every other GM does.  You love the stir up people (I don't know, some people are just like that) and then once you stir them up you cry that they are attacking you.

 

I'm not one to tell a person what posts they should and should not respond to, but since you said people should stop responding to your posts and you want to cry mob when more than one person disagrees with your post, maybe you should stop responding to posts about Ballard or Ebron. 

 

I don't think you will, you love the attention too much.

As you've mentioned, these conversations and opinions carry through many threads, so that is the context I respond with.  So when I'm responding to 15 members dive bombing, I can't possibly take them one at a time, so I lump them together.  It saves time....and....it is NOT inaccurate to do that since, as you said, the same underlying subjects carry over from thread to thread.

 

So, other than TE stats, what exactly makes, in your opinion (and I assume you're speaking for others who share it), Ebron amazing, and the signing?  How is he different from Kelce, Etrz, etc, who....keep in mind...I believe all of whom get their stats manufactured by scheme more than other players who regularly score TDs, like WRs.  

 

Could they play TE in a non two TE offense?

 

As far as not that hard to replace...what does Ebron do....or guys like him do....that they couldn't do if they were 20 pounds lighter?  IOW, could  some tall fast tweener WR that often slips through the cracks of a roster get relatively the same numbers if they didn't block and lined up next to the OT?  Why not?  If it hasn't been tried, how do you know it would fail?

 

Keeping in mind of course, that your responses are simply your opinion and not facts.  As are mine.

 

As far as Ballard, I'll say it again.  I think Hooker was overvalued by the Forum.  Saying that I might consider drafting a true zone S is not an intentional shot.  Its perceived that way because those who hyped early him invested deeply into that opinion, and anything not consistent with that hype sounds contrarian to them.  My Hooker opinion is apparently their buzzkill.

 

As far as Nelson.  I can't see where a G can pancake the DT, LB, and S to pave the way for a RB, so I didn't see the value at #6 given the alternatives.  I've always thought OTs are more important than any one G, so looking back at the draft, looking at our roster and ahead to this one, and how many competent Gs can be found, Mike McGlinchey was the pick. IMO.

 

Pointing this out is not anti Ballard.  Its my opinion.  As I said to SuperMan, what I don't do is give out the appeasing "Ballard is better than Grigson vibe" when I give my opinions that are less favorable than the Forum consensus, because frankly, I think its silly to be still talking about that.  The rest of the forum should grow up about Grigson before I need to slip them the appeasement verbage.

 

Edit: Frankly, I perceive a strong atmosphere that many members invested heavily in Ballard being better than Grigson the moment he was hired, and constantly look for reinforcement of that despite Grigson being gone two years now.  Them possessing that psychological phenomenon has nothing to do with me. I can't go out of my way to help them find that reinforcement.

[Lawrence Owen]

2 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Yeah, I think the ground game is going to suffer some without him in there, especially the runs between the tackles.

Reich's a smart man. He'll probably adjust with more 2-1, 2-1 middles blocks, and short pulls.

[Lawrence Owen]

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

As you've mentioned, these conversations and opinions carry through many threads, so that is the context I respond with.  So when I'm responding to 15 members dive bombing, I can't possibly take them one at a time and lump them together, it saves time....and....it is NOT inaccurate to do that since, as you said, the same underlying subjects carry over from thread to thread.

 

So, other than TE stats, what exactly makes, in your opinion (and I assume you're speaking for others who share it), Ebron amazing, and the signing?  How is he different from Kelce, Etrz, etc, who....keep in mind...I believe all of whom get their stats manufactured by scheme more than other players who regularly score TDs, like WRs.  

 

Could they play TE in a non two TE offense?

 

As far as not that hard to replace...what does Ebron do....or guys like him do....that they couldn't do if they were 20 pounds lighter?  IOW, could  some tall fast tweener WR that often slips through the cracks of a roster get relatively the same numbers if they didn't block and lined up next to the OT?  Why not?  If it hasn't been tried, how do you know it would fail?

 

 

If i may put my 2 cents in this, then i'll happily withdraw.  Even though i like Ebron and his signing, (and hope he gets and extension next year) I'll tell you what he can do that Ertz and Co. can't/don't do,...Be 4th in the NFL in dropped passes with 5.

[gspdx]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

In my defense, I've been responding to about 15 swooping dive bombers, so if you asked a reasonable question in a reasonable tone, I'm sorry I missed it.

 

Dive Bomber here.  20 years in the Air Force.  I don't agree or disagree with you.  But so many of your posts come off the same way!  If you asked a reasonable question in a reasonable tone, I'm sorry I missed it.

 

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

Its possible.  But its more likely they don't want to admit the answer.

 

So what you are saying here is that it is not just your opinion, but that you are right!  It's possible that people don't answer your questions because they are condescending, but you don't believe that is the case. We don't want to admit the answer because you are right.  In other words, it is a debate in your head even though you say it isn't.  

 

[Coffeedrinker]

31 minutes ago, DougDew said:

As you've mentioned, these conversations and opinions carry through many threads, so that is the context I respond with.  So when I'm responding to 15 members dive bombing, I can't possibly take them one at a time, so I lump them together.  It saves time....and....it is NOT inaccurate to do that since, as you said, the same underlying subjects carry over from thread to thread.

I didn't mention that but I see what you are saying.

Quote

 

So, other than TE stats, what exactly makes, in your opinion (and I assume you're speaking for others who share it), Ebron amazing, and the signing?  How is he different from Kelce, Etrz, etc, who....keep in mind...I believe all of whom get their stats manufactured by scheme more than other players who regularly score TDs, like WRs.  

 

Could they play TE in a non two TE offense?

It's not different than Kelce or Ertz.  They are amazing TEs as well.  What makes it an amazing signing is because Ballard understood exactly what Reich needed it for that position and when that player became available he signed him.  There were other places Ebron could have gone and there are other places he could have gone and done extremely well but by Ebron's own statement, Ballard was a big reason why he came to Indy.  Free agent signings don't always work out well (see the Colts Grant and Goode), but this one did and he has exceeded everyone's expectations that is what makes it an amazing signing.

 

As far as their stats being manufactured by scheme, that is true for any position, would Cam Newton have as many rushing yards if the offensive scheme didn't allow for him to rush?  Would Harrison have had as many catches if the scheme with the Colts was not pass heavy?  Scheme only does so much.  It's not scheme when Ebron catches a TD with a DB hanging on his back.  It's not scheme (totally) when Ebron breaks right as soon as the LB turns his hips to the left.  That is talent.  yes he plays in a scheme that can take advantage of that talent... but again that is what a GM does, he finds players that have the necessary attributes the coaching is looking for.  When he finds one that is a perfect fit, that is an amazing signing.

Quote

 

As far as not that hard to replace...what does Ebron do....or guys like him do....that they couldn't do if they were 20 pounds lighter?  IOW, could  some tall fast tweener WR that often slips through the cracks of a roster get relatively the same numbers if they didn't block and lined up next to the OT?  Why not?  If it hasn't been tried, how do you know it would fail?

 

Keeping in mind of course, that your responses are simply your opinion and not facts.

Other than the fact that Ebron is a TE, I have never stated otherwise.

Quote

 

As far as Ballard, I'll say it again.  I think Hooker was overvalued by the Forum.  Saying that I might consider drafting a true zone S is not an intentional shot.  Its perceived that way because those who hyped early him invested deeply into that opinion, and anything not consistent with that hype sounds contrarian to them.  My Hooker opinion is apparently their buzzkill.

So?  Your thought on whether the Hooker was worth the investment is really too much information.   I will say though, I'm nto sure who "them" is but I have also expressed some concerns that I thought Hooker was drafted too high and I'm not put into an anti Ballard, contrarian, buzzkill category.

Quote

 

As far as Nelson.  I can't see where a G can pancake the DT, LB, and S to pave the way for a RB, so I didn't see the value at #6 given the alternatives.  I've always thought OTs are more important than any one G, so looking back at the draft, looking at our roster and ahead to this one, and how many competent Gs can be found, Mike McGlinchey was the pick. IMO.

Again, so?  You don't like a guard at #6 and you explain why.  And I don't think anyone has every called you anti Ballard because you thought The Q was drafted too high.  McGlinchey would not have been a bad pick but Nelson is definitely the better lineman

Quote

 

Pointing this out is not anti Ballard.  Its my opinion.  As I said to SuperMan, what I don't do is give out the appeasing "Ballard is better than Grigson vibe" when I give my opinions that are less favorable than the Forum consensus, because frankly, I think its silly to be still talking about that.  The rest of the forum should grow up about Grigson before I need to slip them the appeasement verbage.

Look back at all my responses to you, I've never said you are anti-Ballard.  The only thing I've stated is that Ballard is way better than Grigson.

[DougDew]

9 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I didn't mention that but I see what you are saying.

It's not different than Kelce or Ertz.  They are amazing TEs as well.  What makes it an amazing signing is because Ballard understood exactly what Reich needed it for that position and when that player became available he signed him.  There were other places Ebron could have gone and there are other places he could have gone and done extremely well but by Ebron's own statement, Ballard was a big reason why he came to Indy.  Free agent signings don't always work out well (see the Colts Grant and Goode), but this one did and he has exceeded everyone's expectations that is what makes it an amazing signing.

 

As far as their stats being manufactured by scheme, that is true for any position, would Cam Newton have as many rushing yards if the offensive scheme didn't allow for him to rush?  Would Harrison have had as many catches if the scheme with the Colts was not pass heavy?  Scheme only does so much.  It's not scheme when Ebron catches a TD with a DB hanging on his back.  It's not scheme (totally) when Ebron breaks right as soon as the LB turns his hips to the left.  That is talent.  yes he plays in a scheme that can take advantage of that talent... but again that is what a GM does, he finds players that have the necessary attributes the coaching is looking for.  When he finds one that is a perfect fit, that is an amazing signing.

Other than the fact that Ebron is a TE, I have never stated otherwise.

So?  Your thought on whether the Hooker was worth the investment is really too much information.

Again, so?  You don't like a guard at #6 and you explain why.

Look back at all my responses to you, I've never said you are anti-Ballard.  The only thing I've stated is that Ballard is way better than Grigson.

Yes, and citing Cam Newtons rushing stats to measure his prowess as a QB is like saying RG111 should be a high pick, in part, because he can run a 4.4 forty.  Context is important when citing stats.  How the data points got there is really what we want to know.  Not just looking at the data points.

 

My less favorable comments than forum consensus about Ballard tends to stem from draft picks, which Hooker and Nelson are a big part of it.  Funny thing is, I graded both drafts As at the time so I have no reason to look at subsequent facts like I need to validate a bad grade.  So yeah, some of the attacks about my opinion of Ballard or Grigson come completely from left field ignorance and false assumptions.

[crazycolt1]

Trying to read all this horse dung gives me a head ache.

[Coffeedrinker]

52 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yes, and citing Cam Newtons rushing stats to measure his prowess as a QB is like saying RG111 should be a high pick, in part, because he can run a 4.4 forty.  Context is important when citing stats.  How the data points got there is really what we want to know.  Not just looking at the data points.

You're not comparing the same thing.  I'm not saying Cam Newton is a good QB because he runs fast.  But he is a good QB in the Panthers scheme because the scheme uses is physical and mental talents; some of which are his running ability and knowing when to run vs when to pull up and pass the ball.

 

As far as stats, yes stats in an of themselves mean very little (that is why football bases wins and losses on a score rather than stats) and some stats are more important than others.  On the flip side though, what you call "data points" (although why you would use a software term for football stats is beyond me) then you are claiming that no football player can be compared to another football player because the data points are all different.  But the reality is football players have to be compared to other similar players, they have to be compared for probowl, all probowl consideration, players of the week, year, MVP, drafting, contract negotiations, etc.  And just as an FYI, the argument you have tried to use for Ebron, Jimmy Graham tried to make that argument in 2014, Saints placed the Franchise tag on him and he wanted to be considered an WR because the average salary of the top 5 WRs was much higher than the average salary of the top 5 TEs.  The arbitrator ruled that he was a TE.

 

[C0LT5]