Jump to content
CR91

NFL Schedule

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, DamianWayne said:

I will finally be going to my first Colts game! Opening week against the Chargers and I hope will come out with a W. I'm so geeked; I can't wait for the season to start!

Sounds like there will be a few of us there. @CR91 also attending. I will be in Vancouver but trying to work out a trip to LA for the game. Who knows when I'll be on that side of the world again.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

You seem too confident.   The Steelers have a knack for putting good quality teams on the field nearly every year.  Brown could end up being an addition by subtraction thing.  

They also have a lot of draft picks.    I haven't researched these signings, but it doesn't appear that this is the same team minus AB.    Moncrief and Schuster are a pretty good WR duo.   

 

APRIL

04/09

Signed DL Casey Sayles to a one-year contract.

04/08

Signed free agent CB Kameron Kelly, free agent LB JT Jones and free agent DT Winston Craig to one-year contracts.

04/05

Signed free agent C J.C. Hassenauer and free agent DB Jack Tocho to one-year contracts.

04/01

Released S Morgan Burnett.

MARCH

03/19

Signed LB Mark Barron to a two-year deal through the 2020 season.

03/15

Agreed to terms with DT Daniel McCullers on a two-year deal through the 2020 season.

03/14

Signed WR Eli Rogers to a new two-year deal through the 2020 season.

03/14

Signed WR Donte Moncrief to a two-year deal through the 2020 season.

03/14

Signed CB Steven Nelson to a three-year contract through the 2021 season.

03/13

Agreed to terms with P Jordan Berry and LB Anthony Chickillo on new two-year deals through the 2020 season.

03/13

Acquired a sixth-round draft selection (No. 207 overall) in the 2019 NFL Draft via trade with the Arizona Cardinals in exchange OT Marcus Gilbert.

03/13

Acquired a third- and fifth-round draft selection (No. 66 and 141 overall) in the 2019 NFL Draft via trade with the Oakland Raiders in exchange WR Antonio Brown.

 

 

You are really really reaching... 

 

Let's face it, we can and should be able to beat them. They're just not that good this year. Now of course this is pre-draft, but unless they have a 2018 Colts kind of draft, I don't think they'll be too much for us. Big Ben is washed, and is looking more and more like that every year. They just lost a top 5 RB and a top 10 WR. They're looking dysfunctional, quite the opposite of what we're used to seeing from them. I think there are several Colts fans and even nationally a lot of people who are way overrating these Steelers

Share this post


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

 

 

You are really really reaching... 

 

Let's face it, we can and should be able to beat them. They're just not that good this year. Now of course this is pre-draft, but unless they have a 2018 Colts kind of draft, I don't think they'll be too much for us. Big Ben is washed, and is looking more and more like that every year. They just lost a top 5 RB and a top 10 WR. They're looking dysfunctional, quite the opposite of what we're used to seeing from them. I think there are several Colts fans and even nationally a lot of people who are way overrating these Steelers

Their history is enough for me to not underestimate them.  On the road, it is not a gimme game by any means.  They haven't had a losing season since 2003.  I think they have earned some respect in their ability to rebuild on the fly.  Ben competed 67% of his passes for over 5100 yArds Nd 34 TDs last season.   Not as bad as you think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2019 at 12:28 PM, ColtsArmy84 said:

Every team gets TNF.

 

So we will get that plus 3 more Primetimes. I say 2 SNF vs Saints and Chiefs and 1 MNF vs HOU

I think I heard the Bengals and Dolphins have no Thursday Night Game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, RNGDShobby said:

Sounds like there will be a few of us there. @CR91 also attending. I will be in Vancouver but trying to work out a trip to LA for the game. Who knows when I'll be on that side of the world again.

I hope to see some fellow Colts fans at the game. I don't see that many out here in California.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2019 at 9:59 PM, Myles said:

Their history is enough for me to not underestimate them.  On the road, it is not a gimme game by any means.  They haven't had a losing season since 2003.  I think they have earned some respect in their ability to rebuild on the fly.  Ben competed 67% of his passes for over 5100 yArds Nd 34 TDs last season.   Not as bad as you think.

 

They haven’t looked this bad in a decade. OR dysfunctional. You can’t base this off of history.

 

Big Ben had fancy stats, but that was with 2 of the top 10 WRs in the league. Plus he also led the NFL in INTs.

 

I just don’t follow the logic. They went 9-6-1 and missed the playoffs. Then They lost a top 10 WR. And you’re claiming they’re some big juggernaut on the level of the Chargers, chiefs, and Saints??

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BigQungus said:

 

They haven’t looked this bad in a decade. OR dysfunctional. You can’t base this off of history.

 

Big Ben had fancy stats, but that was with 2 of the top 10 WRs in the league. Plus he also led the NFL in INTs.

 

I just don’t follow the logic. They went 9-6-1 and missed the playoffs. Then They lost a top 10 WR. And you’re claiming they’re some big juggernaut on the level of the Chargers, chiefs, and Saints??

Who said any of that crap?  I'm just saying that the Steelers are never a gimme game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2019 at 10:31 PM, Myles said:

Who said any of that crap?  I'm just saying that the Steelers are never a gimme game.  

 

Who said it's a gimme game? I said we'll win. Could I SEE us losing to them? Yes. Do I think we'll lose to them? No. They were slightly above average last year. Chances are they'll be mediocre this year. We should be able to beat them

Share this post


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

 

Who said it's a gimme game? I said we'll win. Could I SEE us losing to them? Yes. Do I think we'll lose to them? No. They were slightly above average last year. Chances are they'll be mediocre this year. We should be able to beat them

I'm about 50/50 on winning a road game in Pittsburgh, so I guess we are closer to thinking the same than many would have thought.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Myles said:

I'm about 50/50 on winning a road game in Pittsburgh, so I guess we are closer to thinking the same than many would have thought.    

 

Yeah. I forgot it's at Pittsburgh and Heinz field is a tough place to play, so it may be tougher than I thought, but I still think we'll win

  • Like 1

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.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I wouldn't consider #10 a diss..... but I have a bit of an issue with the Cowpies ranked #2 at the same time.   We not only shut them out last season, we out manned, out-muscled and intimidated them in a way that none of us have seen a Colts team do to any team in a long, long time.   You could say "well its only one game".... and that's true.   But that was a statement game, and I just don't see how Brandt can justify a #2 ranking for Dallas given each team's additions this off-season....not to mention all those other teams he has them ranked ahead of.   As for the Colts...on our own merits.... I would have us closer to the middle of the pack on this list, around 7th and certainly ahead of Dallas.
    • His mom sounds awesome.  
    • Sigh...........   This is beyond really frustrating.    You're accusing me of things I literally haven't done.     That's very Irish of you.    Really annoying.      You ask for benefit of the doubt while never giving it out yourself.   I've put certain things into bold.   I'll try taking them one at a time.   Your first bold...   that this is not me saying that teams that aren't doing this are stupid.    I'm sorry, but when you declare that you've come up that you think is clearly and obvously better,  that you think you've re-invented the wheel and sliced bread,  it certainly feels like you're casting a disapporving eye toward any team that's not doing things your preferred way as a matter of course.   Then you claim,  that I want Ballard in the building ASAP,  but not before January.    Let me see if you understand this word.....   NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!   Was that clear enough for you?       If Irsay had decided in the spring of 16 to fire Grigson and hire Ballard in the spring, I would've been ok with it.   It's not desirable,  but if Irsay made that call THEN,  I'd be ok with it.     Where YOU mis-read me,  is that roughly 95 of owners make this decision during the season.    They see things they don't like and they decide during the season to make a change -- typically when the season ends.    Sometimes, an exec will be fired during the season and someone like Dorsey comes in during the season to oversee things and learn about the organization.    I'm fine with that.  There's no record of me opposing that.   I start with January,  because that's when the business season starts for front office and coaches.   Period.   The NFL views it as preferrable.    But making the switch in the spring is doable, as I've said in every post, and which you have ignored or confused badly.    But if Ballard had been hired in the spring of 16,  I'd have been fine with it.   This isn't the first time I've said some version of this.    This is not some ah-ha moment.   As to the bold declaring that there are tons of qualified guys and that CHOOSING the best guy is another story.   Here's my reponse to that.   No.   nonsense.     They are the same story.    They are connected.    Because you play down the fact that most GM's and most HC's fail.   They get fired before their 4 or 5 year contracts expire.   The owner has seen enough and makes a change.   Saying there are always qualified guys is meaningless.    Because FINDING the best guy who will succeed, isn't just important,  it's EVERYTHING.   All 32 teams can announce they hired a qualified guy.    That isn't hard.    But the vast majority of teams are introducing his successor in a few years.    That's why a franchise like Pittsburgh has very little turnover either in HC or the front office.   While franchises like the Jets or Buffalo or Miami are introducing someone new so often, you can practically set your watch to it.     Generally speaking,  the new GM has a long history of scouting and evaluating talent.   The new HC has a history of success, both as a position coach and a coordinator.   They can easily be called qualified,  (though new guys like Kliff Kingsbury and Zack Taylor do NOT have a long track record of success)  But the vast majority of hires...   are soon enough fired.   That doesn't speak well to their qualifications.      As to you meaning what you're saying...   Of course you mean what you say and I stated that clearly.  I don't know why this should rub you the wrong way.  I literally wrote that I know you mean what you say.    I said what I said as a rhetorical point,  not an attacking point.    My ultimate point was made at the end of my first post to you.   You typically write persuasive arguments.    You're able to frequently made me see your viewpoint.    But not here.    You accuse me of not considering your argument.    I'm sorry,  I am considering what you write.   But I don't see the typical high quality Superman argument.   I don't see points that connect.    Your argument feels like the one you'd make for doable.   It doesn't convince me at all that it's preferable.  
    • Yeah, Ballard said he's a patient guy, and he doesn't mind waiting to pick. We almost traded back from 34 as well if Rock wasn't there. I personally love the "trade back" strategy at the end of round 1, and wouldn't mind doing it in most every draft. A late 1st for a mid-second and early/mid second (from the Redskins) over two drafts is fine with me!
    • Haven't done research on the 2020 draft yet, but if it ends up having an elite WR or OT, I wouldn't mind trading up this year. We'll have to see where we finish (hopefully 32 ), and make a decision from there. Ballard landing the Redskins 2nd rounder may be a brilliant move.
  • Members

    • 2006Coltsbestever

      2006Coltsbestever 21,095

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ClaytonC

      ClaytonC 23

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • PeterBowman

      PeterBowman 2,807

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Shadow_Creek

      Shadow_Creek 416

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CoachLite

      CoachLite 369

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Jared Jammer

      Jared Jammer 97

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Surge89

      Surge89 965

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Jcrane

      Jcrane 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • SVFD Colts Fan

      SVFD Colts Fan 37

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Nadine

      Nadine 7,322

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