AV perfect in week 3

[SteelCityColt]

19 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

It’s called a practice (noun not verb here) because it is the act of working at a profession.

 

My original tongue in cheek comment was to illustrate that not many occupations allow a 20% success rate.

 

Being pedantic probably but doctors and other such roles (e.g pilots) have a boatload of process, as well as checks and balances around them to allow for human error and stop it all being on one man. 

 

With a kicker it’s pretty much all on you. 

[bluebombers87]

13 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Being pedantic probably but doctors and other such roles (e.g pilots) have a boatload of process, as well as checks and balances around them to allow for human error and stop it all being on one man. 

 

With a kicker it’s pretty much all on you. 

Pilots would’ve been a better choice than a doctor. Good call.

 

Either way you’re right. Kickers are on an island. Like a qb if they mess up, it can mean worse things than if a lineman does, most of the time. 

 

In keeping with football, had JB thrown multiple picks, would you understand if fans were asking for a change? If in three games his completion rate was at 20%, would fans be wrong to question his starting position?

[compuls1v3]

23 hours ago, MFT5 said:

 

mid he was doing his job we wouldn’t be talking about him he’s been playing like crap he had better made everything 

I'll admit, I've been skeptical of him the past few weeks, but to be fair, in the grand scheme of things, he's been kicking well for a long time, and it definitely seemed to be a mental thing.  All players have bad games.  When you are so good, that the exception is to be great, all the time, it gets amplified when things go wrong.  One game down, the rest of the season to come.  Until he proves to fail in the clutch of a game winner, I'm still glad he's our kicker for now.

[SteelCityColt]

15 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

Pilots would’ve been a better choice than a doctor. Good call.

 

Either way you’re right. Kickers are on an island. Like a qb if they mess up, it can mean worse things than if a lineman does, most of the time. 

 

In keeping with football, had JB thrown multiple picks, would you understand if fans were asking for a change? If in three games his completion rate was at 20%, would fans be wrong to question his starting position?

 

I can totally understand, he looked done to me after game 2.

[Orioles22]

5 hours ago, Imgrandojji said:

BTW thanks to those Colts fans for helping us all earn the right to refer to this team as "we."

We can refer to them however we choose. I didn't realize that was a problem for some people until today.

 

[Coffeedrinker]

Two things, I'm glad AV had a good game, it was needed for the Colts and him.  But one good game does not erase the two really, really bad games he has had this year.

 

Two, I'm not sure where the "we" comment came from.  Personally, I don't use pronouns like "we", "us", or "our" when referring to the Colts.  The reason is simple, I am not doing anything to contribute to the wins or losses.  I spend money, but I do that at a lot of places.  I pay my electric bill every month, but when I call them I don't say, "We need to lower our rates."  Same reason I do not buy "authentic" jerseys.  Those guys work hard to earn that jersey, to me it cheapens it if I were to go buy one.

 

That being said, I know the owner likes that fans say things and "we" and "our".  They are literally banking on that type of fan.  And I'm sure that some players get weekly or monthly reports to see how their jersey sales are going.

 

of course, I don't knock other people who say "we" or "our", nor people who buy jerseys, it's just how I feel.

[Four2itus]

29 minutes ago, Orioles22 said:

We can refer to them however we choose. I didn't realize that was a problem for some people until today.

 

Just for clarity, I use the term "we" as well. It was that you used "we" when stating that "we" needed to see a 50 yarder from him, and I need nothing of the sort. He is all good in my eyes. 

 

All good, my friend.  

[Orioles22]

11 minutes ago, Four2itus said:

Just for clarity, I use the term "we" as well. It was that you used "we" when stating that "we" needed to see a 50 yarder from him, and I need nothing of the sort. He is all good in my eyes. 

 

All good, my friend.  

Fair enough. People use the term we quite often though and it's up to the reader to determine if he/she is in that group.

After almost 50 years, the Colts/Orioles/Wizards are very much we to me even though I realize I don't have a roster spot.

[aaron11]

6 hours ago, Imgrandojji said:

BTW thanks to those Colts fans for helping us all earn the right to refer to this team as "we."

 

I like to think of it as a collective we. we are not on the team, but we support it and thats enough for me to say that.  dont see many players pushing back about it either, they know its a business 

[Four2itus]

52 minutes ago, Orioles22 said:

Fair enough. People use the term we quite often though and it's up to the reader to determine if he/she is in that group.

After almost 50 years, the Colts/Orioles/Wizards are very much we to me even though I realize I don't have a roster spot.

Thanks. For me, it's Colts, Blazers, and Beavers. Almost 50 years for me too. 

[strt182]

21 hours ago, bluebombers87 said:

Like doctors?

Well they call it Medical PRACTICE for a reason. 

 

oops guess others beat me to it .