Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Reich presser 8/21


Chloe6124

Recommended Posts

Goodell did talk about the possibility of shortening preseason recently. The discussion gets brought up most every summer but maybe if enough teams start holding out their starters more it could help lead to that possibility.

Although I think that discussion was also connected with expanding the playoffs, which would just be silly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sucks for the people that shelled out money for that game...thinking they would be able to see some starters (on both sides) for maybe half the game. 

 

The NFL just needs to get rid of half of these games. They aren't even watchable...unless it's your own team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I would say since the Bears aren't going to play any starters then there's no reason for us to have starters out there either. We need to have health guys going forward. Look at last season without Castonzo and some other guys, it was rough until they returned healthy. We fell in a huge hole off the start.

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

Sucks for the people that shelled out money for that game...thinking they would be able to see some starters (on both sides) for maybe half the game. 

 

The NFL just needs to get rid of half of these games. They aren't even watchable...unless it's your own team.

 

Yeah but everyone should know that you're going to see none, if not, very limited gameplay by the starters. If you're shelling out tons of money to haul the family to see a preseason game and hope to see all of your favorites play, then you should rethink things. Preseason games are usually a lot cheaper anyway.

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

 

Yeah but everyone should know that you're going to see none, if not, very limited gameplay by the starters. If you're shelling out tons of money to haul the family to see a preseason game and hope to see all of your favorites play, then you should rethink things. Preseason games are usually a lot cheaper anyway.

 

The 3rd preseason game is typically the warm-up for the regular seasonn...where the starters will play around half of the game. I am sure the schedulers were hoping for that as well.

 

I doubt people shelled out big bucks...but the tickets aren't that cheap. Season ticket holders have to buy them...and right now the cheapest on the secondary market are $25. And even tickets at $20-30 + concessions for a family can get up there. Might be worth it if you got to see a handful of players...or your kids do...because going to a regular season game is really expensive. But paying even that to see Hogan catch passes from Walker...not so much.

 

I just think it's something they will need to fix moving forward.

 

 

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

Sucks for the people that shelled out money for that game...thinking they would be able to see some starters (on both sides) for maybe half the game. 

 

The NFL just needs to get rid of half of these games. They aren't even watchable...unless it's your own team.

I was contemplating going to this game until i saw the prices for them. No way am i paying more than 20-30 bucks a ticket just to watch back ups play

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am ok with this. I thought he played Mack to long in the browns game. Then Hines almost getting killed on that punt seemed kind of silly. As long as no one gets hurt in practice we are actually really healthy to start the season. I would assume Campbell even if he gets back to practice won’t play in the last two games either.

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

 It is time for the 18 game regular season.

I think I saw on ESPN they wanted 18 regular season games, expanded playoffs (8 teams per instead of 6), and shortening the preseason by one or two games.

 

sign me up

Link to post
Share on other sites

Listening to Mike Francesa (WFAN NY radio ) last 2-3 days he has been reporting (and he does not like this ) that his "sources" are telling him that many head coaches in NFL are not playing HEALTHY starters . And he has been spending a fair amount of time (lately) on this specific subject. To him he is wondering if this will be a new trend across the league .

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

I think I saw on ESPN they wanted 18 regular season games, expanded playoffs (8 teams per instead of 6), and shortening the preseason by one or two games.

 

sign me up

I may be old fashioned but I think the NFL should keep everything the way it is except only play 2 pre-season games should be played. Only 6 teams making the playoffs is perfect IMO, it makes the regular season super important. Usually all 6 teams that do make it from each conference are good to great as well. An 18 game regular season is too long, more chance of injury. If the NFL goes to 18 games than records won't mean anything either because today's players would have the advantage compiling bigger stats. Like 55 TD's in one season would be easier to obtain for QB's and QB's may come close to throwing for 6000 Yards. To me those seasons won't mean as much if that happens. 

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

I may be old fashioned but I think the NFL should keep everything the way it is except only play 2 pre-season games should be played. Only 6 teams making the playoffs is perfect IMO, it makes the regular season super important. Usually all 6 teams that do make it from each conference are good to great as well. An 18 game regular season is too long, more chance of injury. If the NFL goes to 18 games than records won't mean anything either because today's players would have the advantage compiling bigger stats. Like 55 TD's in one season would be easier to obtain for QB's and QB's may come close to throwing for 6000 Yards. To me those seasons won't mean as much if that happens. 

Exactly. No doubt you would also have to increase the size of the active roster past 53. That or teams would treat it like the NBA and have planned rest certain games. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, krunk said:

I'm taking it that if I don't see JB play too much in this one, then it's a good sign Luck is starting week 1.

I would think it’s the opposite. They wouldn’t take a chance of him getting injured if they were worried about luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, adubb84 said:

Exactly. No doubt you would also have to increase the size of the active roster past 53. That or teams would treat it like the NBA and have planned rest certain games. 

Yeah last season's regular season was real exciting because it was basically a playoff game from mid season and on. If 8 teams were allowed to make it in, we would've made it with no problem. I loved that we had to beat Houston, Dallas, Giants, and Tennessee just to get in. That was some drama.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is Reichs press conference. Does anyone else think he kind of just confirmed Luck will play. He said him not practicing this week does not impact who starts week 1 , but if that goes in to next week they will have to reconsider. That sounds to me like he is playing.

 

 

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

I would think it’s the opposite. They wouldn’t take a chance of him getting injured if they were worried about luck.

I don't see them trotting Brissett out there for game 1 with no real reps with the starting group.  I think they would play him against the bears for a few series. 

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

I don't see them trotting Brissett out there for game 1 with no real reps with the starting group.  I think they would play him against the bears for a few series. 

If he got injured though then your looking at walker If there was not a chance of luck playing.  

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

If he got injured though then your looking at walker If there was not a chance of luck playing.  

Yikes!

Any way we can appeal Kelly's suspension or get it postponed?

We don't lose much when he replaces Brissett.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Take the 37 players (90 - 53 = 37) who aren't going to make the team, put them out there for the whole game, and let them showcase their talents in case other teams want to pick them up. Yes, we might lose 120 - 0, but it's only a preseason game anyway - no big deal. It might be kind of entertaining to see a lineman playing quarterback, a wide receiver playing center … who knows?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

I'm fine with that. Getting out of the PS healthy should be priority #1. I had a feeling Reich wouldn't be playing the starters a lot in the 3rd game.

 

I could see that becoming the norm around the league soon.

I like this move don't risk the health of your starters in a meaningless game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I may be old fashioned but I think the NFL should keep everything the way it is except only play 2 pre-season games should be played. Only 6 teams making the playoffs is perfect IMO, it makes the regular season super important. 

 

I understand the sentiment, but I can't see that happening.  The owners are not going to give up the kind of revenue they get with 2 pre-season games.  If they cut the pre-season down to 2 games, which would be fine by me, they are going to want to make up that revenue somewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I don't see Ballard trading a boatload of picks to move up and draft a QB.  Not with this team.  I believe he thinks he can win a SB with Rivers right now.  Rookies and rookie QB' carry so much risk.  I don't see him mortgaging the franchise on one.  He doesn't have the time. Both Ballard and Irsay know we are SB contenders right now.   Eason is his developmental QB. We drafted him for that reason.  As long as he progresses I don't see him moving up to try and get another.  As long as Rivers shows he can get the job done he's the guy.  But if he can't then it's more likely we trade for a veteran until Eason shows he is or he is not the guy long term.  Ballard's not afraid to trade a pick for a premium player but I doubt he would trade multiple premium picks for a rookie QB.  He loves draft picks.  He has said it many times.  I don't think that would be a path he would go down.  
    • There is one guy that we need to include while proposing hypotheticals. Aaron Rodgers. If the Packers go on a downward spiral and want to hedge their bets on Jordan Love, I think we could prolong his career better than taking our chances with Philip Rivers again, IMO. He can at least do roll outs and add a few things that Rivers cannot, like not throwing INTs and make plays down the field.   I would give up a first and a 2nd for Rodgers in a heartbeat.
    • 24% under center (broken down 79% run / 21% pass) 76% shotgun (broken down 32% run / 68% pass)    
    • Excellent response, and thank for taking the time. Yes, this is and has been your stance, but it helps this discussion greatly. This is exactly what I hope to see more of in this thread. 
    • 1s in 21 22  as well as several 2s and 3s 
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...