coltsfeva

Rick Venturi on JMV

Recommended Posts

  I respect Rick Venturi. I don’t  care for him patting himself on the back every few minutes; “I said this three weeks ago”,etc but I have to admit, he is interesting to listen to.

   However, I couldn’t disagree more when he devalues character and insist talent alone is what you want.

   Why does it have to be either/or? Can’t a kid have talent and be of good character?

  Ballard believes in second chances i.e. Tyreek Hill, but only is someone owns their mistakes and has made some changes.

  The reason I think character is important is, when things start to go wrong, you get the tweets and comments that can tear a team apart. Or you have players getting suspended (Kareem shunt, for instance).

    I like Ballard’s philosophy of going after talented players that are mature, humble and unselfish. Those that understand they are but one small part of a team, no matter how talented they are. Develop those players and make them household names.

   Leave the cancerous FAs to other teams. 

 

https://www.1070thefan.com/theridewithjmv

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you...they can have both.  I believe players with character, but not as much talent, are better overall.  That character will drive them to become better players.  Talented players who don't have character tend not to last as long.  As you mentioned, when the going gets tough, they can "check out" and never regain the talent edge they had.

 

There are lots of talented players out there who had careers cut short, because they had character issues, etc.

Share this post


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

  I respect Rick Venturi. I don’t  care for him patting himself on the back every few minutes; “I said this three weeks ago”,etc but I have to admit, he is interesting to listen to.

   However, I couldn’t disagree more when he devalues character and insist talent alone is what you want.

   Why does it have to be either/or? Can’t a kid have talent and be of good character?

  Ballard believes in second chances i.e. Tyreek Hill, but only is someone owns their mistakes and has made some changes.

  The reason I think character is important is, when things start to go wrong, you get the tweets and comments that can tear a team apart. Or you have players getting suspended (Kareem shunt, for instance).

    I like Ballard’s philosophy of going after talented players that are mature, humble and unselfish. Those that understand they are but one small part of a team, no matter how talented they are. Develop those players and make them household names.

   Leave the cancerous FAs to other teams. 

 

https://www.1070thefan.com/theridewithjmv

 

 

 

I like listening to  Venturi and I like his break downs.  That said, one must keep in mind, he flamed out badly in this league as a coach so anytime he starts into coaching or personnel issues, gotta take them with a spoonful of salt.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I like listening to  Venturi and I like his break downs.  That said, one must keep in mind, he flamed out badly in this league as a coach so anytime he starts into coaching or personnel issues, gotta take them with a spoonful of salt.  

You couldn't be more wrong...unless continuous coaching employment in the NFL for 25 years is flaming out.

  • Like 3
  • Confused 1

Share this post


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

You couldn't be more wrong...unless continuous coaching employment in the NFL for 25 years is flaming out.

Head coaching record:

1–31–1 (college)
2–17 (NFL)

 

And the teams he's been an assistant on haven't been, well, consistently good teams either.

his record speaks for itself.

 

That said, I do like his breakdowns like I said about.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's easy to dismiss character concerns when you don't have to deal with that "character" every day. 

 

The Colts had a razor thin margin for error this season. They started poorly, and had to scratch and claw their way back into the mix; one bad attitude in that locker room might have torpedoed the entire season. 

 

The other, bigger issue, is that the Colts are rebuilding their roster (yes, still). It's not really the time for risks, they need players that they can rely on and don't have to worry about them getting in trouble, being suspended, etc. I say the same thing about players with significant injury history.

 

Every once in a while, Venturi says something insightful. Most of the time, he's repeating the same things he says every week.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is a difference in judging character based upon what someone did in the past and what someone is currently doing.  I believe they call that concept repentance in Sunday school.

 

Someone who had a DV problem years ago may in fact present less of a character issue than someone who tweeted something yesterday, despite the disparity of the issues.

 

I guess Venturi is saying that if you can keep character issues isolated so they don't impact the locker room, I guess they don't matter.  In a vacuum I agree, but I think its pretty tough to do that.  

 

Also, if someone has a character problem in their personal life, that's not the same thing as doing something that's detrimental to the team.  Again, the disparity of the issues aside, I do tend to agree with him if that's what he means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This team fights for each other and not themselves, this is a team 

and not a bunch of individual players on a roster. Once they mature

and not get "cow eyed" in the playoffs, look out.

 

A culture is in place for success for many years to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Head coaching record:

1–31–1 (college)
2–17 (NFL)

 

And the teams he's been an assistant on haven't been, well, consistently good teams either.

his record speaks for itself.

 

That said, I do like his breakdowns like I said about.

 

 

 

 The Peter Principle perhaps as a head Coach? Obviously he is only partly responsible for his own job on a team because he would need good players. 
 So because he didn't win quickly he doesn't know football?
 Not a fan of your points.
  His brealdowns help us couchies see more, understand better.
 If some good football minds would get together to compile a good DVD of this stuff from this Colts season i would buy it. Rick, Baldy, Orlovsky, whoever.
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 The Peter Principle perhaps as a head Coach? Obviously he is only partly responsible for his own job on a team because he would need good players. 
 So because he didn't win quickly he doesn't know football?
 Not a fan of your points.
  His brealdowns help us couchies see more, understand better.
 If some good football minds would get together to compile a good DVD of this stuff from this Colts season i would buy it. Rick, Baldy, Orlovsky, whoever.
 

Good Grief.  Go re-read my posts.  I never once, not a single time, did I say he didn't know football.   As for not being a fan of my points, fair enough but before you come to that conclusion, you might wanna make sure you read what I actually typed.

 

I simply said that I take his criticisms on coaching and personnel with a grain of salt due to his coaching records, both as a head coach and an assistant.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I think there is a difference in judging character based upon what someone did in the past and what someone is currently doing.  I believe they call that concept repentance in Sunday school.

 

Someone who had a DV problem years ago may in fact present less of a character issue than someone who tweeted something yesterday, despite the disparity of the issues.

 

I guess Venturi is saying that if you can keep character issues isolated so they don't impact the locker room, I guess they don't matter.  In a vacuum I agree, but I think its pretty tough to do that.  

 

Also, if someone has a character problem in their personal life, that's not the same thing as doing something that's detrimental to the team.  Again, the disparity of the issues aside, I do tend to agree with him if that's what he means.

 

 And i think Ballard believes if he floods the locker room with high character people, those that have growing up issues, poor habits, etc., they can make friends in his locker room that can help them on and off the field. Be there for each other and hold each other accountable. The thing a good parent should have done, and how many don't get that? 
 Having issues away from the field isn't something Ballard wants his team to look away from. Know your teammates and lift each other up. Life is hard right? 

Share this post


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

 

 And i think Ballard believes if he floods the locker room with high character people, those that have growing up issues, poor habits, etc., they can make friends in his locker room that can help them on and off the field. Be there for each other and hold each other accountable. The thing a good parent should have done, and how many don't get that? 
 Having issues away from the field isn't something Ballard wants his team to look away from. Know your teammates and lift each other up. Life is hard right? 

Yeah.  Just taking Venturi's comment and others comments about Venturi's comments, I don't know if everybody's definition of character issues is the same.   I'd have to listen to an example of a specific situation for me to really opine that Venturi and Ballard's point of view is remarkably different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have to keep an open mind on these character concerns.  Especially for Brown and Bell.  I don't think it's a coincidence they both play for Pittsburgh.  A cheap organization who doesn't want to pay it's star players unless it's a QB and an atmosphere and culture that cultivates "me first".  A change of scenery for both of these players would probably do wonders for their careers.  Especially if they can find teams with a good culture and players with strong character to be around.  Two stars in the prime of their careers are becoming available.  That rarely happens.  And from the same team.  I can't think of any time that occurred.   A good GM should investigate these opportunities and I think Ballard will.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

I think you have to keep an open mind on these character concerns.  Especially for Brown and Bell.  I don't think it's a coincidence they both play for Pittsburgh.  A cheap organization who doesn't want to pay it's star players unless it's a QB and an atmosphere and culture that cultivates "me first".  A change of scenery for both of these players would probably do wonders for their careers.  Especially if they can find teams with a good culture and players with strong character to be around.  Two stars in the prime of their careers are becoming available.  That rarely happens.  And from the same team.  I can't think of any time that occurred.   A good GM should investigate these opportunities and I think Ballard will.  

i agree but it seems like people have made up their minds that these two are locker room cancers.  thats pretty unfair towards bell imo, no top tier player wants to be tagged twice.  cousins and the redskins relationship went to crap over the same thing.  there are other examples too

 

as for brown, hes no saint, but hes not a bad guy either.  ty has called out the locker room before too, but everyone forgot about that i guess

 

the biggest problem in the steelers locker room is ben if you ask me.  i feel bad for these two having to deal with him 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yeah.  Just taking Venturi's comment and others comments about Venturi's comments, I don't know if everybody's definition of character issues is the same.   I'd have to listen to an example of a specific situation for me to really opine that Venturi and Ballard's point of view is remarkably different.

 

 True. If we sat and lstened to them talk to each other about it they would be very agreeable to each other's points. It does become a question of how to support each individual on their journey. And that is why Ballard wants high character teammates there for each other away from football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Imped said:

OP, you said Tyreek Hill and I believe you meant Kareem Hunt.

  Tyreek Hill had issues before the draft and Ballard said they took him anyway, knowing young guys make stupid mistakes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I simply said that I take his criticisms on coaching and personnel with a grain of salt due to his coaching records, both as a head coach and an assistant.  

I agree with this. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Pittsburgh Steelers should be an example of what pure talent alone gets you. 

Share this post


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

  Tyreek Hill had issues before the draft and Ballard said they took him anyway, knowing young guys make stupid mistakes.

Not sure I would classify what Hill did as a "stupid mistake".  Although it appears to have worked out for all in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

The Pittsburgh Steelers should be an example of what pure talent alone gets you. 

 they made the playoffs when they had brown and bell, then missed out this year without them

 

bell did nothing wrong either. palmer and cousins were in a similar spot and they made similar moves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

 they made the playoffs when they had brown and bell, then missed out this year without them

 

bell did nothing wrong either. palmer and cousins were in a similar spot and they made similar moves

The evidence is certainly there. But if egos and money weren't at play, and they were on the field giving it their all, the Steelers would probably be at least in the running for the championship game if not the Super Bowl. No one can deny their talent and impact when they're on the field. 

 

Its what they do and how they respond to adversity. A person's character and will are going to outlast pure raw talent. Every single year another player with immense talent enters the league. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this  teams character speaks for itself. Nothing short of spectacular.  Nelson and Leonard are loaded with character and talent.  We will get both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s your choice but I think you guys are wasting your time pining for Bell and or Brown.  Ballard has said so many things that points to him NOT doing this.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the character thing matters but I also think majority of the people on this site over blow it. Guy has one outburst on the sideline and some here make it seem like its the worst thing ever.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

On the question of talent vs character concerns. I have to agree with Ballard and you on this one. I do think talent ultimately matters most, BUT... it only matters if the character of the team can absorb a player with character concerns without this detracting and subtracting from the collective talent of the team. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I listened to both JMV and Dakich on youtube yesterday. I am glad these people aren’t the GM. The fact they think you can go our and by one player and win a super bowl was nauseating. I know a lot of it is just venting after the loss but it was so over the top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, coltsfeva said:

  I respect Rick Venturi. I don’t  care for him patting himself on the back every few minutes; “I said this three weeks ago”,etc but I have to admit, he is interesting to listen to.

   However, I couldn’t disagree more when he devalues character and insist talent alone is what you want.

   Why does it have to be either/or? Can’t a kid have talent and be of good character?

  Ballard believes in second chances i.e. Tyreek Hill, but only is someone owns their mistakes and has made some changes.

  The reason I think character is important is, when things start to go wrong, you get the tweets and comments that can tear a team apart. Or you have players getting suspended (Kareem shunt, for instance).

    I like Ballard’s philosophy of going after talented players that are mature, humble and unselfish. Those that understand they are but one small part of a team, no matter how talented they are. Develop those players and make them household names.

   Leave the cancerous FAs to other teams. 

 

https://www.1070thefan.com/theridewithjmv

 

 

 

I disagreed with it but I also did agree a little bit with him.  I do think people in general do tend to romanticize it.  I remember for years Pats fans would always talk about the next big name free agent, whoever it was, would want to come there and would do it gladly at a discount because of who Bill and Brady are.  As if they are doing them a favor by signing them. 

 

Team culture is a component of the success of any team - and by extension, what attracts suitors.  But like any complex group of people working towards a common goal, you've got to not only function, you've got to function such that you are constantly progressing toward that goal.  The ones that get noticed the most are the ones that do it better than everyone else.  Just a simple fact of life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

I listened to both JMV and Dakich on youtube yesterday. I am glad these people aren’t the GM. The fact they think you can go our and by one player and win a super bowl was nauseating. I know a lot of it is just venting after the loss but it was so over the top.

That one guy on Dakich that was talking about the half heated field though was hilariously out of his mind, though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

I always wondered where that was coming from.  I just chalked it up to the fact that I really only heard him on Monday's at 5pm.  Thought maybe he said that on other shows.  Still, in the back of my mind, I always thought, "Usually, it's the person who doesn't say that who says 'told ya so,' or it's the person that gives 10 different takes and reminds us of the time he did tell us without giving us the context of his other 9 opinions." 

 

It wouldn't surprise me at all if he either never said it, or did, but in a very different context than the one he claims in the moment.  That doesn't mean he doesn't know what he's talking about or that I still don't enjoy listening at all.  But I get the skepticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe in Ballard. Rick is right to a degree but when you (dare I say) rebuild a team you are also rebuilding the culture.  You have to give culture equal if not more representation.  Once that has developed, which I would presume it has now, then adding one or two knuckleheads shouldn't sink the ship. Rick is just prognosticating more than anything for the reason he can come back next year and say I TOLD YOU in January you needed to bring in talent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What drove me crazy with Venturi yesterday is he was basically saying that almost every position especially the oline needs looked at. That maybe it’s not as good as we thought. He never once mentioned maybe we were out of gas and things just crashed. With the way things went with every single phase crashing my guess for this loss was more that we just crashed and burned after being in playoff mode for 11 weeks.  He kept saying forget about the weak teams we played we need to evaluate on the NE and KC game. I think that is totally unfair.

 

I don’t care what anyone says we are not that much worse then KC.  If this had been a game coming off a bye and the field was better we would not of looked that bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

What drove me crazy with Venturi yesterday is he was basically saying that almost every position especially the oline needs looked at. That maybe it’s not as good as we thought. He never once mentioned maybe we were out of gas and things just crashed. With the way things went with every single phase crashing my guess for this loss was more that we just crashed and burned after being in playoff mode for 11 weeks.  He kept saying forget about the weak teams we played we need to evaluate on the NE and KC game. I think that is totally unfair.

 

I don’t care what anyone says we are not that much worse then KC.  If this had been a game coming off a bye and the field was better we would not of looked that bad. 

 

I agree with Rick here.  We cannot be looked at as an up and comer anymore.  He is measuring us against the elites as the next step in our evolution and saying we still have work to do. OL depth has to be a priority along with Edge rusher and WR.  KC just showed us how small our margin of error was through this whole playoff run. 

Share this post


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

 

I agree with Rick here.  We cannot be looked at as an up and comer anymore.  He is measuring us against the elites as the next step in our evolution and saying we still have work to do. OL depth has to be a priority along with Edge rusher and WR.  KC just showed us how small our margin of error was through this whole playoff run. 

 

2 minutes ago, Blindside said:

 

I agree with Rick here.  We cannot be looked at as an up and comer anymore.  He is measuring us against the elites as the next step in our evolution and saying we still have work to do. OL depth has to be a priority along with Edge rusher and WR.  KC just showed us how small our margin of error was through this whole playoff run. 

That is fine. But you also can’t forget what they did all year. Yes we can look at those games and see where we need to improve. But to just forget what they did all year is silly.  Especially when it’s clear the injuries and us just running out of gas was a big factor in this loss. You can’t say someone is bad or good based on two games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

 

That is fine. But you also can’t forget what they did all year. Yes we can look at those games and see where we need to improve. But to just forget what they did all year is silly.  Especially when it’s clear the injuries and us just running out of gas was a big factor in this loss. You can’t say someone is bad or good based on two games. 

They played great no doubt and the offense and defense fed off each other.

Luck can hide a teams true colors. This why I dont believe he gets the attention he deserves.  Twice now he has taken a bottom dweller team to the playoffs. 2-14 in 2011 and 4-12 in 2017.

I think most people see it for it it is now that history has repeated itself.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Venturi on JMV is great. He's the only post-loss commentary I have listened to. He made some great points. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

If this had been a game coming off a bye and the field was better we would not of looked that bad. 

 

But would we have won? That's what I care about. The Chiefs are better than the Colts; the Pats are better; the Chargers are better; several teams in the NFC are better.

 

I didn't listen to Venturi this week, and judging by some of the snippets being posted, I probably won't waste my time. But to the idea that this team needs to improve basically across the board, I fully agree.

 

I think a lot of fans are enamored with the 10 wins in 12 games, the statistical improvement of the defense, the 18 sacks allowed, two All Pro rookies, etc. And there's certainly a lot to be proud of, and a lot more to look forward to. I'm very happy with the performance of the team -- they're a year ahead of schedule, at least -- and the direction of the team, with Ballard and Reich running the show. Sign me up, these guys are doing what I think needs to be done, on and off the field. Big picture, no complaints.

 

But on a micro level, our roster does not match up with the championship contending teams in the NFL. And when you look closely at our opponents in the second half of the season -- especially the offenses and QB -- it's pretty obvious that we benefited from playing an easy schedule and in a bad division. On a micro level, it's impossible to miss that we got shut out by a listless Jaguars team a month and a half ago. It's impossible to miss that the Chiefs toyed with our defense. Or that we struggled to beat the Giants and Dolphins, or that we couldn't put the Jags away in the first matchup, etc. 

 

I said a week ago that I think we need 7-9 new starters. I want to get better on the right side of the OL, I want better pass rushers, another corner, a better LB, we probably need a new strong safety, etc. I agree that every player and every element of the operation should be honestly evaluated, and that's not because we lost to the Chiefs.

 

It's like Ballard said just yesterday: the hardest step is to go from good to great, and we don't want to be a momentum organization. Everyone should be working hard to get better, and every aspect of the team needs to find ways to get better.

 

Big congrats to the team, but they still have a lot of work to do.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

 

That is fine. But you also can’t forget what they did all year. Yes we can look at those games and see where we need to improve. But to just forget what they did all year is silly.  Especially when it’s clear the injuries and us just running out of gas was a big factor in this loss. You can’t say someone is bad or good based on two games. 

  To be fair to Rick; he was trying to point out a benchmark the Colts will be going against for the next few years, if not longer. I really didn’t have a problem with that but to your point, Ballard said they would painstakingly look at every player over the course of the year.

   Like I said, Rick does have some good points, but none of these guys (including Venturi) know what Ballard and his staff know, when it comes to player assessments. Not JMV, the crew from Stampede Blue, Dan Dakich, Mike Wells, Steven Holder, Mike Chappel or the National Media. They all make good points at times but many buried the Colts after six games.

    

 

    

    

     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, coltsfeva said:

  Tyreek Hill had issues before the draft and Ballard said they took him anyway, knowing young guys make stupid mistakes.

 

Same with Marcus Peters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it was more in the way they were saying it.  I was just getting tired of all the over reaction. Yes we need more playmakers and each player should be evaluated. The way they talked about brown like you get him your going to win the SB. I know they were just venting and blowing off steam but so much of it seemed like a over reaction.

Share this post


Link to post
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.