Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Chloe6124

Inman signs with the patriots

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, KB said:

I would like to wish him the best of luck, but..... ya know.

The best of bad luck since he signed with the hated patriots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't mean to overstate the case for Inman.    I don't pretend to know more than Ballard, nor am I mad about it.    Just a little disappointed.    And I'm sure if Ballard sat me down in his office, he could make a very compelling argument for letting Inman go.    And I'm sure it would be something like we've gotten the best of Inman,  now we need to see what we have with 4-6 other much younger receivers who just might have a higher ceiling,  and a longer career in front of them.

 

I really do get it.

 

But I confess to having a soft spot, a fondness for players who aren't blessed with an abundance of physical tools...    they just know how to play the game and get the most of their ability.    Their pros.    That's some of the secret sauce of New England.    It's not just Brady and Gronk.   It's a lot of other players who know what to do on the biggest stage.     There's a reason one of their Super Bowl video's is called "Do Your Job!"      I think Inman is a guy like that.     And I think every successful team needs guys like that.    They're hard to quantify.    And I think this is true in all sports.  not just football.    Basketball, baseball, hocky,  you name it.    All successful teams need guys like that.    Sorry we lost one this week.    But that's the nature of the beast.   You don't get to keep everyone you want.   And life moves on.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

 

I don't mean to overstate the case for Inman.    I don't pretend to know more than Ballard, nor am I mad about it.    Just a little disappointed.    And I'm sure if Ballard sat me down in his office, he could make a very compelling argument for letting Inman go.    And I'm sure it would be something like we've gotten the best of Inman,  now we need to see what we have with 4-6 other much younger receivers who just might have a higher ceiling,  and a longer career in front of them.

 

I really do get it.

 

But I confess to having a soft spot, a fondness for players who aren't blessed with an abundance of physical tools...    they just know how to play the game and get the most of their ability.    Their pros.    That's some of the secret sauce of New England.    It's not just Brady and Gronk.   It's a lot of other players who know what to do on the biggest stage.     There's a reason one of their Super Bowl video's is called "Do Your Job!"      I think Inman is a guy like that.     And I think every successful team needs guys like that.    They're hard to quantify.    And I think this is true in all sports.  not just football.    Basketball, baseball, hocky,  you name it.    All successful teams need guys like that.    Sorry we lost one this week.    But that's the nature of the beast.   You don't get to keep everyone you want.   And life moves on.

 

The Colts didn’t lose him

 

  he stopped being a Colt when the clock hit zeros in the divisional game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 4:01 PM, NewColtsFan said:

 

No.   It didn’t.

 

Neither of them do what Inman does.

 

Inman gets open.   He doesn’t have great speed or quickness.   But he runs great routes.   He reads defenses.   He catches the ball.   He developed great chemistry with Luck inside of a week.

 

He’s a reliable professional receiver. 

 

There’s almost akways room for a guy line that on any roster.   I’m sorry he’s not on ours. 

 

I am not too thrilled about this. I would like to know the terms. Having a sure handed Inman was a great option to have. Funchess' catch rate does not excite me. Having an accurate QB like Brady will actually amplify Inman's numbers, IMO. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

The Colts didn’t lose him

 

  he stopped being a Colt when the clock hit zeros in the divisional game

 

Lets not get cute...   the Colts wanted him back.   Ballard said so twice this offseason.    It was our decision not to be the highest bidder and we made it.  I’m just making it clear I’m ok with that.   Really, that’s all. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2019 at 1:02 PM, rickybobby said:

do the Colts get any kind of draft pick compensation for someone like Inman?

Unfortunately no...   Inman won’t make a dent in the math formula.   The Colts will not get a compensation  pick on 2020.

 

We have one additional pick in 20.   The 2nd round pick for Washington.  So we’ll have eight overall picks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sucks..

 

but honestly, the Pats have proven all they need is Julian edeleman since he has found a way to be unarguable. They won without Gronk, but without Julian it was a glaring problem..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/12/2019 at 8:41 PM, NewColtsFan said:

 

I don't mean to overstate the case for Inman.    I don't pretend to know more than Ballard, nor am I mad about it.    Just a little disappointed.    And I'm sure if Ballard sat me down in his office, he could make a very compelling argument for letting Inman go.    And I'm sure it would be something like we've gotten the best of Inman,  now we need to see what we have with 4-6 other much younger receivers who just might have a higher ceiling,  and a longer career in front of them.

 

I really do get it.

 

But I confess to having a soft spot, a fondness for players who aren't blessed with an abundance of physical tools...    they just know how to play the game and get the most of their ability.    Their pros.    That's some of the secret sauce of New England.    It's not just Brady and Gronk.   It's a lot of other players who know what to do on the biggest stage.     There's a reason one of their Super Bowl video's is called "Do Your Job!"      I think Inman is a guy like that.     And I think every successful team needs guys like that.    They're hard to quantify.    And I think this is true in all sports.  not just football.    Basketball, baseball, hocky,  you name it.    All successful teams need guys like that.    Sorry we lost one this week.    But that's the nature of the beast.   You don't get to keep everyone you want.   And life moves on.

 

 

You aren't overstating the case. Luck had a 120 passer rating when targeting Inman...1-2-0...#11 in the NFL. You take away that JAC % show for the whole offense...and it would be even higher. And it's not like it was a super small sample size. Their rapport also happened very quickly. We talk about Luck elevating WRs around him...but he clicked with Inman better than any WR (not TE) since TY and Reggie.

 

Definitely fair to question why he wasn't brought back. The football reasons don't seem to add up. He seemed to have carved out a role as that savvy vet WR...which is very beneficial to have in a WR room that will include basically three rookies. 

 

I know they have a plan for everyone...and age is a factor. But if you are bringing back Hunt because of how he performed (despite his age)...I am not sure why you wouldn't bring back Inman as well.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a bit disappointing.  I think Ballard thinks with Doyle and Ebron at TE and Campbell, Cain, Hilton and Funchess at WR along with the other young WR's currently on the roster, we should be set.  This is good news for Rogers as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2019 at 1:26 PM, PrincetonTiger said:

Not sure DI will make the final 53

 

I appreciate what Inman did here, but there was a reason why we were able to sign him in the middle of the season.  

 

In 5 years in the league, he's had 12 catches, 35 catches, 58 catches, 50 catches and 28 catches.  Not bad numbers, but he is also no superstar.

 

A major part of the reason we brought him in was because Sirianni & Reich coached him in San Diego and knew he'd be able to come in and learn the system quickly.

 

As you already stated, I think he's pretty low on the depth chart to start in New England.  Not saying he won't make the team, but I don't see him making much impact in NE unless they get plagued with injuries.

 

On 5/10/2019 at 2:01 PM, NewColtsFan said:

 

No.   It didn’t.

 

Neither of them do what Inman does.

 

Inman gets open.   He doesn’t have great speed or quickness.   But he runs great routes.   He reads defenses.   He catches the ball.   He developed great chemistry with Luck inside of a week.

 

He’s a reliable professional receiver. 

 

There’s almost akways room for a guy line that on any roster.   I’m sorry he’s not on ours. 

 

I certainly think Inman would have made our roster had we re-signed him, but I don't think he would be playing much of a factor in the offense if guys like Funchess and Campbell do what Reich thinks they can.  

 

Andrew Luck makes those around him a lot better, especially if given time to throw like last year.  We were very thin at WR last year, in part due to injuries and in part due to lack of talent. As you and @Supermanhave discussed he isn't a great route runner and doesn't get great separation, so more likely than not he is catching contested balls.  Inman is 6'3" and a big target with good hands.  Funchess is a bigger target (6'4" and 20 lbs heavier) and a better athlete -- the knock on him has been inconsistent hands.

 

I know it's nice to have big targets, but IMO, this offense will be built a lot on speed and we have plenty of it.  Assuming Funchess and our TEs stay healthy, I don't know that we had much need for another big bodied WR who isn't terribly fast.

 

On 5/10/2019 at 2:35 PM, TonyBungee said:

Agreed.  He was the 2nd best WR on the Colts last year, and it wasn't even close.  Maybe DF & Cain might have outplayed him this year, but I wouldn't bet on it.  I get going with youth, but I still say this year's Colts roster would be better with him than without him.  

 

Our WR group was very weak last year and got hit with some injuries.  There is a reason why 31 other teams hadn't signed Inman until the middle of October.  I agree, he was our 2nd best WR, but that isn't saying a whole lot considering who that bunch consisted of last year.  We also probably would be better with Inman than without him (he would likely be an improvement to Rogers or whoever gets our last WR slot, but with the signing of Funchess, I imagine Inman wouldn't see a whole lot of the field this season).

 

On 5/10/2019 at 3:00 PM, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

Dude would have been the 1)TY 2)Ebron 3)Mack 4)Doyle 5)Funchess 6)Hines 7)Parris...at best 8th option in the offense, not an issue from an offensive production standpoint. Only worry is a schematic standpoint. If we end up facing them in an important playoff game, does he divulge schematic info? Absolutely. 

 

I agree with you here (though, I have a gut feeling that Campbell will move above Hines and Funchess above Doyle in terms of offensive production).  

 

I get the concern about sharing information about our schemes, but the amount of film preparation being done in the NFL these days, IMO, makes that a non-factor.  Plus, if Campbell and Funchess turn out, and if Doyle's healthy, we're likely to be running a lot of different plays this year because we'll just have a lot more skill/athleticism on the field.

 

On 5/11/2019 at 11:05 AM, Jdubu said:

He was almost the clone of a Wayne type of receiver. Just fast enough, run perfect routes and catches the ball. Not going to run 60 yard patterns but will move your chains. That’s exactly what we seen from him last season and hope we didn’t kick his production to the curb in lieu of a newer shiny toy that struggles. These are the tougher kind of decisions GM’s struggle with. Do I take the new version WR with tons of upside but unknown or stay with a known quantity with known ceiling and floor? Time will tell if we made the right choice on our guys. 

 

Wayne and Inman both ran their 40 yard dashes in the mid 4.4 range -- they are both (well Reggie was) plenty faster than just fast enough.  Inman was a little bigger than Reggie, but certainly didn't run perfect routes or routes close enough to be in the same category as Reggie.  

 

There is obviously something about Funchess that Reich loves.  The only parts of Funchess' game which may not be as good or better than Inman are his straight line speed and his hands (though, as others have pointed out, Funchess catches everything in the slot, where I expect he'll be used often).  

 

 

On 5/14/2019 at 9:41 AM, shastamasta said:

 

You aren't overstating the case. Luck had a 120 passer rating when targeting Inman...1-2-0...#11 in the NFL. You take away that JAC % show for the whole offense...and it would be even higher. And it's not like it was a super small sample size. Their rapport also happened very quickly. We talk about Luck elevating WRs around him...but he clicked with Inman better than any WR (not TE) since TY and Reggie.

 

Definitely fair to question why he wasn't brought back. The football reasons don't seem to add up. He seemed to have carved out a role as that savvy vet WR...which is very beneficial to have in a WR room that will include basically three rookies. 

 

I know they have a plan for everyone...and age is a factor. But if you are bringing back Hunt because of how he performed (despite his age)...I am not sure why you wouldn't bring back Inman as well.

 

I think this is a nice read and makes sense.  https://www.1070thefan.com/blogs/kevins-corner/colts-coverage/how-much-have-colts-improved-wide-receiver-offseason  -- Also points out that Inman had some drop issues before joining Indy.

 

I haven't seen what Inman signed a deal for, but would like to know.  At 2 years, $9 mil we got Hunt for pretty cheap.  My guess on potential of why not bringing back Inman was either a too high of an asking price, or looking for a long term deal (can't blame him either way).  After giving Funchess a pretty hefty 1 year deal, I imagine Ballard was not willing to invest heavily into another bigger WR like Inman, who would essentially be playing the same role as Funchess.  

 

I have also not seen who the other '4 teams at the table' with offers for Inman are... I know Ballard and Inman met several times early offseason and nothing came from it.  For all we know, Inman threw a really high number out and * Ballard off and they decided to part ways after those meetings.  

 

Share this post


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

 

I appreciate what Inman did here, but there was a reason why we were able to sign him in the middle of the season.  

 

In 5 years in the league, he's had 12 catches, 35 catches, 58 catches, 50 catches and 28 catches.  Not bad numbers, but he is also no superstar.

 

A major part of the reason we brought him in was because Sirianni & Reich coached him in San Diego and knew he'd be able to come in and learn the system quickly.

 

As you already stated, I think he's pretty low on the depth chart to start in New England.  Not saying he won't make the team, but I don't see him making much impact in NE unless they get plagued with injuries.

 

 

I certainly think Inman would have made our roster had we re-signed him, but I don't think he would be playing much of a factor in the offense if guys like Funchess and Campbell do what Reich thinks they can.  

 

Andrew Luck makes those around him a lot better, especially if given time to throw like last year.  We were very thin at WR last year, in part due to injuries and in part due to lack of talent. As you and @Supermanhave discussed he isn't a great route runner and doesn't get great separation, so more likely than not he is catching contested balls.  Inman is 6'3" and a big target with good hands.  Funchess is a bigger target (6'4" and 20 lbs heavier) and a better athlete -- the knock on him has been inconsistent hands.

 

I know it's nice to have big targets, but IMO, this offense will be built a lot on speed and we have plenty of it.  Assuming Funchess and our TEs stay healthy, I don't know that we had much need for another big bodied WR who isn't terribly fast.

 

 

Our WR group was very weak last year and got hit with some injuries.  There is a reason why 31 other teams hadn't signed Inman until the middle of October.  I agree, he was our 2nd best WR, but that isn't saying a whole lot considering who that bunch consisted of last year.  We also probably would be better with Inman than without him (he would likely be an improvement to Rogers or whoever gets our last WR slot, but with the signing of Funchess, I imagine Inman wouldn't see a whole lot of the field this season).

 

 

I agree with you here (though, I have a gut feeling that Campbell will move above Hines and Funchess above Doyle in terms of offensive production).  

 

I get the concern about sharing information about our schemes, but the amount of film preparation being done in the NFL these days, IMO, makes that a non-factor.  Plus, if Campbell and Funchess turn out, and if Doyle's healthy, we're likely to be running a lot of different plays this year because we'll just have a lot more skill/athleticism on the field.

 

 

Wayne and Inman both ran their 40 yard dashes in the mid 4.4 range -- they are both (well Reggie was) plenty faster than just fast enough.  Inman was a little bigger than Reggie, but certainly didn't run perfect routes or routes close enough to be in the same category as Reggie.  

 

There is obviously something about Funchess that Reich loves.  The only parts of Funchess' game which may not be as good or better than Inman are his straight line speed and his hands (though, as others have pointed out, Funchess catches everything in the slot, where I expect he'll be used often).  

 

 

 

I think this is a nice read and makes sense.  https://www.1070thefan.com/blogs/kevins-corner/colts-coverage/how-much-have-colts-improved-wide-receiver-offseason  -- Also points out that Inman had some drop issues before joining Indy.

 

I haven't seen what Inman signed a deal for, but would like to know.  At 2 years, $9 mil we got Hunt for pretty cheap.  My guess on potential of why not bringing back Inman was either a too high of an asking price, or looking for a long term deal (can't blame him either way).  After giving Funchess a pretty hefty 1 year deal, I imagine Ballard was not willing to invest heavily into another bigger WR like Inman, who would essentially be playing the same role as Funchess.  

 

I have also not seen who the other '4 teams at the table' with offers for Inman are... I know Ballard and Inman met several times early offseason and nothing came from it.  For all we know, Inman threw a really high number out and * Ballard off and they decided to part ways after those meetings.  

 

 

I bekueve you misread the drop issue that Bowen write about.   He was talking about Funchess, not Inman.

 

Either what....   it’s water under the bridge...    the ship has sailed and Inman has moved on.   Could we snatch him if New England cuts him?   Sure, but I wouldn't count on that happening.   Life moves on...  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You guys nailed this on the head. 

 

The Patriots signed this guy so they could get some inside info on a team that hasn't beaten them since 2009. 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

 

You guys nailed this on the head. 

 

The Patriots signed this guy so they could get some inside info on a team that hasn't beaten them since 2009. 

 

you showed up right on time to troll good for you 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

you showed up right on time to troll good for you 

Some of the regular Pats posters are quietly passive aggressive...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

you showed up right on time to troll good for you 

 

Yup, this is part of my 10+ year plan to troll you guys.

 

Has nothing to do with the overall quality of your typical Colts fan since 2004. 

 

 

19 hours ago, Four2itus said:

Some of the regular Pats posters are quietly passive aggressive...

 

Haha, nothing passive-aggressive here.

 

The funny thing is, Colts fans have basically created what I am at this point. I'm tired of being judged as a human being based on my football rooting interests. I started off being a more balanced and objective fan. Tried to be respectful, tried to be reasonable. But... the overall hostility and nastiness I've received in return has made me realize that being a "nice guy" means nothing to you people. 

 

You are, in general, a bunch of sore losers, and that's all there is to it. Maybe someday your franchise will rise to greater heights. Maybe not. But if it doesn't...

 

I'd say you guys are getting exactly what you deserve, based on the petty, nonsensical reaction most of us have seen here over the years. The crazy thing is that I once respected Indy as a rival. Now? You guys are a sad bunch trying to vindicate your underachieving franchise. Way to go. 

 

 

PS - Even if you're joking, the idea of the Patriots getting "inside info" from Inman is laughable. It has literally been a decade since the Patriots lost a game to the Colts. I can only hope those posters who mentioned it were being sarcastic. You haven't been a true threat in the AFC in over a decade. Sorry. Truth hurts, I'm sure. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, GoPats said:

 

Yup, this is part of my 10+ year plan to troll you guys.

 

Has nothing to do with the overall quality of your typical Colts fan since 2004. 

 

 

 

Haha, nothing passive-aggressive here.

 

The funny thing is, Colts fans have basically created what I am at this point. I'm tired of being judged as a human being based on my football rooting interests. I started off being a more balanced and objective fan. Tried to be respectful, tried to be reasonable. But... the overall hostility and nastiness I've received in return has made me realize that being a "nice guy" means nothing to you people. 

 

You are, in general, a bunch of sore losers, and that's all there is to it. Maybe someday your franchise will rise to greater heights. Maybe not. But if it doesn't...

 

I'd say you guys are getting exactly what you deserve, based on the petty, nonsensical reaction most of us have seen here over the years. The crazy thing is that I once respected Indy as a rival. Now? You guys are a sad bunch trying to vindicate your underachieving franchise. Way to go. 

 

 

PS - Even if you're joking, the idea of the Patriots getting "inside info" from Inman is laughable. It has literally been a decade since the Patriots lost a game to the Colts. I can only hope those posters who mentioned it were being sarcastic. You haven't been a true threat in the AFC in over a decade. Sorry. Truth hurts, I'm sure. 

 

 

 

 

"tried to be a nice guy" lol good onehaha you have done literally nothing but troll us since I joined years ago but go ahead and try to play the victim here 

 

also no matter what you think coming to another teams fan board to gloat is and always will be trolling 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

"tried to be a nice guy" lol good onehaha you have done literally nothing but troll us since I joined years ago but go ahead and try to play the victim here 

 

also no matter what you think coming to another teams fan board to gloat is and always will be trolling 

I know I sound soft but I don't mind him being here. Pats are great, we have been great too for a long time but they have won more SB's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I know I sound soft but I don't mind him being here. Pars are great, we have been great too for a long time but they have won more SB's.

that's fine but he still only shows up to gloat now he wants to cry about being called out for trolling it's just lame 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

that's fine but he still only shows up to gloat now he wants to cry about being called out for trolling it's just lame 

He will be here all year hopefully so we can talk smack finally. This could be our year :thmup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

He will be here all year hopefully so we can talk smack finally. This could be our year :thmup:

we'll see I hope so I'm pumped for the season 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

we'll see I hope so I'm pumped for the season 

I think it will come down to us and them like old times, maybe KC 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/7/2019 at 1:00 PM, GoPats said:

I started off being a more balanced and objective fan. Tried to be respectful, tried to be reasonable. But... the overall hostility and nastiness I've received in return has made me realize that being a "nice guy" means nothing to you people. 

 

You are, in general, a bunch of sore losers, and that's all there is to it. Maybe someday your franchise will rise to greater heights. Maybe not. But if it doesn't...

 

My read on this is you were always to be a respectful poster from a rival fanbase, and now you're trolling Colts fans, for whatever reason you're using as justification. And worse, rationalizing it by saying 'your team isn't good enough for me to respect you anymore, so here's a double barrel, losers.' 

 

And it's interesting that you started off by saying you're tired of being judged by your rooting interests, but here you're claiming superiority on the basis of those rooting interests. No one is giving you credit because you root for a winning team. 

 

We go back many years. We had many good back and forths, here and on other boards. Your posting has changed, dramatically so, mostly as a result of Deflategate (you weren't nearly this antagonistic even after Spygate; don't tell me it's because the Colts were actually beating the Pats back then, as that has nothing to do with your posting style). It's a head scratcher to me. 

 

I agree, a lot of times Colts fans, including on this board, are overly concerned with the Pats and their fans, there's an inferiority complex (not just related to the Pats, it also includes media coverage, NFL preference, etc., real or perceived), and thoughts like 'they signed Inman to get intel on the Colts' are a reflection of that. And your post in this thread isn't even that bad, in light of all that.

 

But combine it with other posts on other topics -- including your weak and rancid attempt at deflection from Kraft's prostitution issues to Irsay's addiction issues -- and it's disappointing, to say the least, that a poster who used to bring the quality up around here is now dragging it down. A jab like 'you guys haven't beat us in ten years, we don't need Inman to beat you' isn't as off-putting when you actually have quality contributions in other areas. Right now, it's just another indication that your only objective in showing up here is to demean the Colts, and the fans. In that light, you're posting is, by definition, trollish.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2019 at 5:44 PM, Douzer said:

"Hoodie" wants the Colts playbook, schemes, routes, concepts & insights.

 

He gets Inman & intel...

 

5888745ff49fc787.png

 

We don't even play the Pats this year, right? Texans do?

 

On 6/6/2019 at 3:39 PM, GoPats said:

 

You guys nailed this on the head. 

 

The Patriots signed this guy so they could get some inside info on a team that hasn't beaten them since 2009. 

 

 

Hmmm...  you're now off the board in 'Goodwill" poster of the week...  :(

 

On 6/7/2019 at 4:37 PM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

He will be here all year hopefully so we can talk smack finally. This could be our year :thmup:

 

Ummm, as long as the rules of the forum are followed.  We generally aren't, and do not allow, "Smack" talk here.  Just a preemptive shout...

 

http://forums.colts.com/guidelines/

 

On 5/14/2019 at 2:17 PM, Myles said:

It is a bit disappointing.  I think Ballard thinks with Doyle and Ebron at TE and Campbell, Cain, Hilton and Funchess at WR along with the other young WR's currently on the roster, we should be set.  This is good news for Rogers as well.

 

Here we go, the intro into a nice fresh, somewhat more holistic look.  You have to assume T.Y. at Z, Funchess at X.  Either Doyle or Ebron as TE.  Now look at personnel groupings, and who fills them.  Are we a 12 personnel team, or 11?  We can decide that by who is better for that 3rd receiver in the formations.  In 12 personnel we have TY, Funch at WR, Doyle and Ebron at TE.  In 11 Personnel we have TY, Funch, Campbell, and either Doyle or Ebron. Which is better, and when?

 

I think Frank and Nick will use opponents strengths/tendencies plus ability for Colts to create mismatches against their personnel will go a long way whether we run two tight end packages (which doesn't mean two on the line, they may split one out after their D has sent in the group to defend it, etc.) or 3 wideouts.  Until Campbell and Cain develop in the system, I think the Colts are a better 12 personnel team and will use it more often early in the year.  If Campbell catches on to the playbook and excels in development, we may well see more 11 personnel as the season progresses.

 

Another reason for 12 personnel preference?  If they bring in bigger guys and stack the box, then Luck motions one TE out wide into 11 personnel and gets the mismatch against large linebackers of their D meant to stuff the run.  If their D stops subbing in bigger defenders to better match up, then motion the split TE back in and then run some running plays against their smaller nickel packages. Then add in the RB, and their capability to run, pass block, or get out in pattern as well.

 

I'm trying more often to look at things as to what are we going to do with the guys Ballard and Reich kept rather than lament on what we perceive to have we given up...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/7/2019 at 4:00 PM, GoPats said:

You are, in general, a bunch of sore losers, and that's all there is to it. Maybe someday your franchise will rise to greater heights. Maybe not. But if it doesn't...

 

I'd say you guys are getting exactly what you deserve, based on the petty, nonsensical reaction most of us have seen here over the years. The crazy thing is that I once respected Indy as a rival. Now? You guys are a sad bunch trying to vindicate your underachieving franchise. Way to go.

 

You did it again.

 

You threw an insult at the Colts for "not beating the Pats in a decade", then get defensive when people respond to the insult, and then make generalizations about all Colts fans because you think we're "attacking" you.

 

I've seen good posts from you in the past, but recently you've become a very toxic member of this community.  :scorebad:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One year for belicheck to get the information he needs about our plays and schemes. Smart. Trashy, but smart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/7/2019 at 9:00 PM, GoPats said:

 

 

Haha, nothing passive-aggressive here.

it wasn't, it was pretty straightforward

 

 

Quote

 

 

 

PS - Even if you're joking, the idea of the Patriots getting "inside info" from Inman is laughable. It has literally been a decade since the Patriots lost a game to the Colts. I can only hope those posters who mentioned it were being sarcastic. You haven't been a true threat in the AFC in over a decade. Sorry. Truth hurts, I'm sure. 

 

Is it really beyond the realm of possibility, considering everything belicheck has done in the past to gain an advantage? I don't think it's unreasonable to believe he would approach Inman about the topic if the time comes.

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.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I rewatched the game as I thought this would be pretty strange as well.  He did not play in the fourth except for his usual special teams slot.     I was confused as well by those who say he had a bad game.  He gave up one completion where he got turned around.  Other than that he was glued to his man as usual.    I think he's still having trouble living down his reputation from his rookie year. 
    • depth wise, S, OL, and iDL are my biggest concerns. if folks were grading positions ( starters and depth), i'd be surprised if many graded safety in the top half.  outside of Hooker, lots of questions, at least to me. i definitely don't agree with Venturi. ESPN doesn't either. Hopefully the starters stay healthy, and Willis grows into a stud.
    • lol... you wrote a novel. while i didn't read it all, i did skim. the mock draft stuff, it wasn't a poll. it was a well defined systemic grading. if you're mom can do well on the 1st round, why didn't your favorite guys? lol. on the wide receiver study, it was laughable. no defined parameters, no comparative cross position stats, etc.. not even Busch league stuff.  like i said, legend in your own mind.   in terms of who can dish it out, but can't take it, look at your reaction above to a "sad".... what a rant/tantrum.....  self awareness is obviously not your strongest trait. feel free to "crush" me anytime... gives me a good laugh.
    • very astute observations!!
    • You live your life like the Coyote chasing the Road Runner....    and you keep running into the mountain side,  or running off the cliff....     OK....    you're not going to change....   So, I'll take apart your nonsense --- again.    This will be the longest post I've ever made,  trying to answer all your nonsense.    Doubt you'll read it.    But here it comes....     Of course we know if Luck's injury, whatever it is,  ISN'T minor.   What minor injury do you know lasts four months?    He barely participated in any off-season program.    Does that sound like a minor injury?    The Colts have NEVER, EVER called it minor.   Not once.  The only thing they've said is he hopes to be back by certain deadlines,  and he's missed almost every one.    Does that sound like a minor injury?    This paragraph may confuse you.   It's full of common sense and logic.   I don't know how you got the nerve to try to argue that no one knows.   Unbelieveable!   Nope.   No Tantrum from me.   Just pointing ot what should be obvious,  but apparently the obvious isn't obvious to you.     By the way,  while you were giving me a sad on my post to my friend CBE,   do you know who was giving me a "like"?    CBE.    I criticized his post and he still gave me a like.    He know while we may not agree,  he knows I'm not trying to pound him.   I'm  trying to be as honest and factual as I can.    No wonder you can't see for yourself.   What triggered me, was your latest attempt to sound like you know what you're talking about.   You judged Willis on half of the first pre-season game.    That's all you've got.    That's it.   Doesn't even occur to you that that is.....   NOTHING!    Hello?    And you present it like it should be taken seriously,  when it should be laughed at.    Goodness gracious, you want to go back to the media draft comparison?    I was hoping for your sake that you wouldn't.    But since you insist.     Did you ever really look at that poll?   Seriously,  did you look at the four category breakdown?    Did you see what was actually involved?    If you did,  you shouldn't have been crowing about it.    First,  what I care about from guys like Kiper and McShay and Jeremiah and others isn't just the first round.   My  momma can do a decent job on the first round, and she's been dead for nearly 30 years!    I care about their view on ALL ROUNDS.   And your survey was only about the first round.   That's it.   There were four categories.    In three of them,  the leader got no more than 50%.   That's it.   The best person in three of the four categories scored no more than 50 percent.   When the top guy is scoring no more than 50 percent and everyone else is close behind,  then no one really knows anything.    And the one category that the winner did well in --- one category --- he scored in the 90's.   And everyone else was right behind him.    So, most everyone did well in ONE OUT OF THE FOUR categories.   Big stinking deal.    I tried to tell you this silly survey didn't support what you believed but you wouldn't listen.   No surprise there.  All you cared about the results.   The fatal flaw.     Finally,  without a single fact,  you offered this opinion in that post.    I remember it like it was yesterday,  that your new age guys were doing a better job than the more traditional scouts.   Based on one poll.   One poll of one round.    And you said the older guys like Kiper and company were resting on their laurels and not working as hard.   Nope, the old guys were covering all seven rounds.    Most of your guys,  covering one round.   You have no facts to support that, but that's your view.    When logic and common sense would tell you that the guys I prefer make a ton more money and have their reputation at stake.    They have more to lose.    There's no way they're resting on anything.    But you'll say ANYTHING to try and prove a point.   There's no argument you won't twist to try to win an argument, no matter how foolish the argument is.   I've told you publicly and privately,  you're not interested in honest debate.   You're the least honest poster here.  You're only interested in winning and you'll do anything, say anything to do that.      As to the WR study.    You got crushed.   I'm talking about a bank safe fell on you and your response was to talk about cherry picking stats.    Either English is a second language or you don't know the meaning of the words.     I made two links for you.    One was almost identical to yours.    Yours covered 25 years dating back to a time when passing rules were dramatically different so comparing a receiver from 1990 to one from 2018 was silly.   We're playig a different game now.    My first link covered 20 years from 1995 to 2014 .   There was great over-lap in the two studies.  But the conclusions were entirely different.   The only reason I used it was your post said roughly 60% percent of 1st Round WR's were successes.    Mine said roughly 40%.   Guess which one you preferred?    Surprise!   Then the second link was one of my own making.    I listed every 1st round WR since Luck came into the league in 2012.  That's 7 years.   The last 7 years.   I put into bold each 1st Round WR who was clearly a success.   It came to 41%.   It also showed how few WR's have been taken in the last few drafts.   That's the NFL talking, in case you weren't paying attention.    You didn't dispute one WR.    Not one.   But you called it cherry picking.   Clearly you don't know how to use that expression correctly.    And now you throw out a list of criteria as if you're making the rules here.   Here's another free tip.   You're not.   Never have.   I'm not surprised you don't recognize the facts I put into posts.   You don't use them.   You're all about the opinion.   Most posters here are.   Because that means every single poster can simply say.....    "I'm entitled to my opinion."    Yes, they are.   Everyone is,  even you, who has no need for facts.    But what you're not entitled to is your own facts.    Just like you stated Funchess was a terrible signing based on your facts,  and it never even occured to you that Ballard and Reich had other facts that showed DF could be useful to us.    You actually thought you knew more than they did?!?    Again, unbelieveable.   You had no facts to support your nonsense about Reich being a poor play caller.   You had one game.   And I called you on it.   You've been doing a very bad back-peddle ever since,  but that's your view, with no facts to support it.   In fact all the facts support the exact opposite view.   Yet, you still try to claim victory.   It's so intellectually dishonest that it's nauseating.   And so I observed,  that with almost nothing to base it on,  you thought Willis has inconsistancies.    Thanks, Capt. Obvious.    Tomorrow will likely be sunny during the day,  turning to widely scattered darkness at night.    Anymore obvious insights?   Funny, how you now publicly call for me to ignore your posts,  when a few days ago,  in a thread I was barely even in,  you took a completely uncalled for shot at me.    Or does the phrase "legend in his own mind" not mean anything to you?      Bottom line....    you can dish it out,  especially when you think no one is looking.....   but you can't take it.   Glass ego.   I call a fraud a fraud.   
  • Members

    • Fluke_33

      Fluke_33 837

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • MikeCurtis

      MikeCurtis 1,265

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ManningGM

      ManningGM 515

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • coltsfeva

      coltsfeva 1,181

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NFLfan

      NFLfan 7,795

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • SteelCityColt

      SteelCityColt 6,908

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jskinnz

      jskinnz 5,348

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ar1888

      ar1888 292

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • TonyBungee

      TonyBungee 198

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Melancholie

      Melancholie 3

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