Jacoby Brissett making history.

[jvan1973]

Just now, Colts_Fan12 said:

no he doesn't lol he's got a 2 year contract 

He is the starting QB.  

[Colts_Fan12]

Just now, jvan1973 said:

He is the starting QB.  

that's literally being evaluated at this very moment 

[2006Coltsbestever]

21 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

all anyone ever says is "any QB can do that or have that happen" its lazy. you ran rah guys have been shut down by some of the most intelligent posters on this site yet continue to argue it's actually quite funny. they bring super advanced stats and even pictures and plays yet it never seems to work. 

They can bring all the pictures they want and stats they want. I respect that and appreciate it. I can too, I bring watching this game for 42 years to the table and here are my stats = 14 TD's and 3 INT's, we are also 5-2, also JB has the clutch gene - he proved it last week = all facts nobody can ignore. I will put my knowledge up against anyone's in here (I say that not bragging) but I will. My eye test is excellent, just like the clowns that try and say LeBron is better than Jordan - that isn't even a debate. Jordan is way better and Magic is too. I have been around a long time   

[Colts_Fan12]

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

They can bring all the pictures they want and stats they want. I respect that and appreciate it. I can too, I bring watching this game for 42 years to the table and here are my stats = 14 TD's and 3 INT's, we are also 5-2, also JB has the clutch gene - he proved it last week = all facts nobody can ignore. I will put my knowledge up against anyone's in here (I say that not bragging) but I will. My eye test is excellent, just like the clowns that try and say LeBron is better than Jordan - that isn't even a debate. Jordan is way better and Magic is too. I have been around a long time   

I wouldn't say he has a clutch gene after 1 play but if he does more sure lol

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I wouldn't say he has a clutch gene after 1 play but if he does more sure lol

He had the clutch gene at Tennessee too and actually had it at Chargers eventhough we lost that one.

[jvan1973]

8 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

that's literally being evaluated at this very moment 

As is every position.   He is the starting qb for the foreseeable future.    You might as well get used to it

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I wouldn't say he has a clutch gene after 1 play but if he does more sure lol

yeah, clutch gene is a little overboard at this point. way too early for that type of branding.

[2006Coltsbestever]

7 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I wouldn't say he has a clutch gene after 1 play but if he does more sure lol

No biggy man, you already have your mind up so me or nobody will change that. I just hate to see fan like you be so down about this team. 

[Colts_Fan12]

12 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

yeah, clutch gene is a little overboard at this point. way too early for that type of branding.

oh hell we are way past the point of things being too early to tell. dude is a future HOF QB haven't you been reading!!

[Colts_Fan12]

10 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

No biggy man, you already have your mind up so me or nobody will change that. I just hate to see fan like you be so down about this team. 

we have been beating up trash I'm not gonna set myself up for disappointment by getting overhyped by beating bad and depleted teams then watch us get destroyed in the playoffs by real contenders. and I'm sorry but I'm bummed cause with an above average QB we would  probably be undefeated and SB favorites so yeah consider me down on the team knowing we are being held back by pretty average QB play. 

 

and before you say it I know you can win a SB with an average QB but you almost never consistantly compete with an average QB.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

we have been beating up trash I'm not gonna set myself up for disappointment by getting overhyped by beating bad or depleted teams then watch us get destroyed in the playoffs by real contenders.

Only time will tell. You may be right. I am just enjoying the ride because once Luck retired I had us 8-8 and that was wishful thinking. 11-5 is possible now. TY is out so the house just gave me more money because we should be worse  . 

[Colts_Fan12]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Only time will tell. You may be right. I am just enjoying the ride because once Luck retired I had us 8-8 and that was wishful thinking. 11-5 is possible now. TY is out so the house just gave me more money because we should be worse  . 

the fact we are actually struggling to beat the trash teams is what is alarming to me 

[2006Coltsbestever]

9 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

oh hell we are way past the point of things being too early to tell. dude is a future HOF QB haven't you been reading!!

Don't know what posts you have been reading but I read a lot he is a below average QB and we are winning despite JB. See how that works. I am stating true facts. Actually I can say this without a doubt, not 1 person in here has ever said JB is a future HOFamer. I have always said he is above average and will never be as great as Andrew Luck.

[Colts_Fan12]

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Don't know what posts you have been reading but I read a lot he is a below average QB and we are winning despite JB. See how that works. I am stating true facts. Actually I can say this without a doubt, not 1 person in here has ever said JB is a future HOFamer. I have always said he is above average and will never be as great as Andrew Luck.

yeah you have but his super duper fans are way out there 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

the fact we are actually struggling to beat the trash teams is what is alarming to me 

Denver had a great defense and KC and Houston are good all-around.

[Imgrandojji]

43 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

all anyone ever says is "any QB can do that or have that happen" its lazy. you ran rah guys have been shut down by some of the most intelligent posters on this site yet continue to argue it's actually quite funny. they bring super advanced stats and even pictures and plays yet it never seems to work. 

 

Well when people stop trying to hold Brissett up to a standard that at least 2/3 of the QB in the entire league would fail, we can have this conversation. 

 

This argument usually comes out when people point out that there are occasionally open receivers that brissett didn't target and use that to justify skepticism on Brissett's ability. 

 

The fact that this happens on every single individual play of every single individual quarterback seems to be a mystery to the people making these arguments.

 

Personally I think it's a red herring, you can't really establish anything by microanalyzing individual plays like this -- no more than that one play against the Broncos.

 

Microanalysis is to find tendencies a QB needs to improve on.  Systemic issues.  Mechanics, decisionmaking, tells, etc.  And a standard of evidence needs to be established to make sure you're following a trend rather than  chasing outliers or seeing ghosts in the noise

 

.  At the moment it's virtually impossible to clear this hurdle because the sample size is so small, and the margin of error is so correspondingly huge, that microanalysis gets lost in the noise.

 

In other words, it's 1 part paralysis by analysis, 1 part red herring, and 2 parts begging the question.

 

6 hours ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Were we behind at any point in either game? I think you misunderstand what I'm saying. 

 

Why is that required to be considered "putting the team on his back?"  Seems like a completely atbitrary stipulation

[Colts_Fan12]

8 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Denver had a great defense and KC and Houston are good all-around.

KC  I'll give you even tho Pat was hurt Hou was missing damn near all their DBs and their pass D isn't very good honestly.

[EastStreet]

9 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

we have been beating up trash I'm not gonna set myself up for disappointment by getting overhyped by beating bad and depleted teams then watch us get destroyed in the playoffs by real contenders. and I'm sorry but I'm bummed cause with an above average QB we would  probably be undefeated and SB favorites so yeah consider me down on the team knowing we are being held back by pretty average QB play. 

 

and before you say it I know you can win a SB with an average QB but you almost never consistantly compete with an average QB.

 

Houston is a solid team. It was a good team win, and Jacoby did good. Sure they have a bad pass D, but JB did exactly what you are supposed to do vs a solid team with a bad pass D. That's really their only hole. I know our schedule has been weak, but NE's is a lot weaker. I personally don't think JB will end up being a great QB, but I also figured there was no way we'd make the playoffs last year at 2-5.  Stranger things have happened.

 

While I certainly have opinions on JB, I do think he deserves more time to be evaluated prior to final judgement. Personally I was giving him 8 games to come along slowly and make mistakes. That time is about up. After that, 4 more to see sustained improvement and consistent production. After that, if he's not cutting it, I'd like to see what CK has before the year is over. Everybody has a different view, and those that aren't sold yet likely have different clocks. Too early for me right now..... I've set and tempered my expectations, and enjoying the ride.

[Colts_Fan12]

8 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

 

Well when people stop trying to hold Brissett up to a standard that at least 2/3 of the QB in the entire league would fail, we can have this conversation. 

 

This argument usually comes out when people point out that there are occasionally open receivers that brissett didn't target and use that to justify skepticism on Brissett's ability. 

 

The fact that this happens on every single individual play of every single individual quarterback seems to be a mystery to the people making these arguments.

 

Personally I think it's a red herring, you can't really establish anything by microanalyzing individual plays like this -- no more than that one play against the Broncos.

 

Microanalysis is to find tendencies a QB needs to improve on.  Systemic issues.  Mechanics, decisionmaking, tells, etc.  And a standard of evidence needs to be established to make sure you're following a trend rather than  chasing outliers or seeing ghosts in the noise

 

.  At the moment it's virtually impossible to clear this hurdle because the sample size is so small, and the margin of error is so correspondingly huge, that microanalysis gets lost in the noise.

 

In other words, it's 1 part paralysis by analysis, 1 part red herring, and 2 parts begging the question.

 

 

Why is that required to be considered "putting the team on his back?"  Seems like a completely atbitrary stipulation

stop treating him like some rookie being thrown to the wolves lol he's like a damn 4 year player with a year and a half starting 

[Imgrandojji]

49 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

no he doesn't lol he's got a 2 year contract 

He's gonna get re-signed dude.   Probably to a 3 year extension.  And probably THIS offseason, not next.

 

There's no way that any QB we'll be in a position to draft is going to beat him out over the remainder of this year plus next year.   Ballard knows that.  That being the case we have something to lose if we play games with Brissett's roster spot, and Ballard doesn't strike me as likely to take that kind of risk

 

We secure our future most effectively by securing Brissett.  We need that spot filled if we want to compete in the short term.  Ballard knows that too.

 

The  last guy with a chance to supplant him before the end of the year was Chad Kelly.  We all watched that end.  Kelly is not a threat to Brissett, if he ever actually was.

 

Even if we draft a guy this offseason, which is the earliest we could possibly do it, They're not going to throw away a guy who's at least 80% of what they want for the sake of a freshly-drafted rookie.  They're going to play the rookie behind Brissett and let him play mentor.

 

They're also not going to ask Brissett to play next year on a lame duck deal, that's just not done with QBs unless negotiations break down.  It's too big an asset to risk losing to FA.  They're going to extend him.

 

The only question in my mind is AAV and if they extend him for 3 years or 4.  My guess is they'll trade years to lower the cost.

 

But as far as that level of "the Brissett question" we've already got our answer.  The only question now is how good our QB is.  Not WHO it is.  At least not for the next handful of years

[2006Coltsbestever]

11 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

KC  I'll give you even tho Pat was hurt Hou was missing damn near all their DBs and their pass D isn't very good honestly.

Pat was hobbled but still played the whole game and we were a huge road underdog. Watson, Hopkins, and Watt played the whole game for Houston vs us as well. 2 solid wins IMO. I guess if we lose to Pitt this week than I can say it was because we are missing our best WR? I won't though.

[Imgrandojji]

1 hour ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

that's literally being evaluated at this very moment 

No it isn't.  

 

Quite frankly Ballard and Reich committed to Brissett after Luck retired.  The only question is whether they would reaffirm that commitment in this coming offseason.

 

And at this point it would take a pretty disastrous collapse to put that question in any doubt

 

The only people doubting this are the fans.  The brass are all in on Jacoby Brissett.

 

Calling it now,  Brissett will be extended for at least 3 seasons following this year, almost (not quite but almost) regardless of the outcome.

[EastStreet]

8 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

 

Well when people stop trying to hold Brissett up to a standard that at least 2/3 of the QB in the entire league would fail, we can have this conversation. 

 

This argument usually comes out when people point out that there are occasionally open receivers that brissett didn't target and use that to justify skepticism on Brissett's ability. 

 

The fact that this happens on every single individual play of every single individual quarterback seems to be a mystery to the people making these arguments.

 

Personally I think it's a red herring, you can't really establish anything by microanalyzing individual plays like this -- no more than that one play against the Broncos.

 

Microanalysis is to find tendencies a QB needs to improve on.  Systemic issues.  Mechanics, decisionmaking, tells, etc.  And a standard of evidence needs to be established to make sure you're following a trend rather than  chasing outliers or seeing ghosts in the noise

 

.  At the moment it's virtually impossible to clear this hurdle because the sample size is so small, and the margin of error is so correspondingly huge, that microanalysis gets lost in the noise.

 

In other words, it's 1 part paralysis by analysis, 1 part red herring, and 2 parts begging the question.

 

 

Why is that required to be considered "putting the team on his back?"  Seems like a completely atbitrary stipulation

I personally want a QB in the top 1/3..... While some teams have won SBs with QBs in the bottom 2/3s, it's much harder and it's blue moon type of stuff. Enough planets already have to align to win a SB, and not having a 1/3 QB makes the mountain all that much higher.

 

BTW, I get it, you don't like stats and analysis. Ballard has substantially increased the size of his nerd/analysis team each year he's been here. If you don't think JB is getting screenshots of missed WRs every week in film study, you're fooling yourself. A lot of high schools consider that a basic... 

[Imgrandojji]

Actually I love stats and analysis.  What I hate is predetermined conclusions where people go mining for "stats" and "analysis" that prove "facts" that coincidentally happen to support their bias.

 

There is very little actual analysis that happens in a forum like this.  The gateway to analysis, and the difference between true analysis and cherry-picking, is the acceptance that you might be wrong, and I just don't see that here outside a handful of people, myself not necessarily included

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

They can bring all the pictures they want and stats they want. I respect that and appreciate it. I can too, I bring watching this game for 42 years to the table and here are my stats = 14 TD's and 3 INT's, we are also 5-2, also JB has the clutch gene - he proved it last week = all facts nobody can ignore. I will put my knowledge up against anyone's in here (I say that not bragging) but I will. My eye test is excellent, just like the clowns that try and say LeBron is better than Jordan - that isn't even a debate. Jordan is way better and Magic is too. I have been around a long time   

I do want to clarify I am not calling anyone in here a clown with my post  . Just people that think LeBron is better than Jordan , regarding JB I respect all opinions and see both sides of everything. Please do not bring up Kelly though, dude isn't the answer - 

[Imgrandojji]

25 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

stop treating him like some rookie being thrown to the wolves lol he's like a damn 4 year player with a year and a half starting 

What a silly argument.

 

That argument went out the window when Brissett started winning games against playoff contenders.

 

The fact is that JB has played like a veteran all year.  He's made very few mistakes that one could consider rookie mistakes.  And he's made more than a handful of veteran quality plays over the course of the year

 

No one's treating him like a rookie when they mention that we're light at WR and that the offense was still built around Luck could do in the first few weeks of the year.

 

That's not making excuses.  That's just understanding the situation

[Fisticuffs111]

36 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

No it isn't.  

 

Quite frankly Ballard and Reich committed to Brissett after Luck retired.  The only question is whether they would reaffirm that commitment in this coming offseason.

 

And at this point it would take a pretty disastrous collapse to put that question in any doubt

 

The only people doubting this are the fans.  The brass are all in on Jacoby Brissett.

 

Calling it now,  Brissett will be extended for at least 3 seasons following this year, almost (not quite but almost) regardless of the outcome.

Regardless of what I think of Brissett, which I'm still in wait and see mode until the end of the season...one thing I will say is that I'd bet Reich is perfectly fine if not fully behind Brissett as the starter long term. They seem to have a connection and a lot of mutual trust.

I am curious as to what Ballard thinks though. Not that I don't think he's behind Brissett by any means. Just that I wouldn't be surprised if, while he ends up re-signing Brissett, he drafts a QB in the early-mid rounds to potentially compete down the line. Especially now that we know first hand how important it is to have a good backup QB.

[NannyMcafee]

2 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

sure lol

 

The value of this comment is overwhelming. 

[EastStreet]

7 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Regardless of what I think of Brissett, which I'm still in wait and see mode until the end of the season...one thing I will say is that I'd bet Reich is perfectly fine if not fully behind Brissett as the starter long term. They seem to have a connection and a lot of mutual trust.

I am curious as to what Ballard thinks though. Not that I don't think he's behind Brissett by any means. Just that I wouldn't be surprised if, while he ends up re-signing Brissett, he drafts a QB in the early-mid rounds to potentially compete down the line. Especially now that we know first hand how important it is to have a good backup QB.

I think it will have as much to do with ticket sales as anything honestly. It'll be interesting to see what impact the QB situation has. While FO folks might be "behind" him (publicly) even if we run off the tracks late season, it only takes a revenue drop or two to get people to change their minds....

 

Many people suspect the FO has held back injury info so that ticket sales wouldn't be impacted, so not far fetched to think it would not drive decisions at least partly in this case too.

[SteelCityColt]

1 hour ago, Imgrandojji said:

 

Well when people stop trying to hold Brissett up to a standard that at least 2/3 of the QB in the entire league would fail, we can have this conversation. 

 

This argument usually comes out when people point out that there are occasionally open receivers that brissett didn't target and use that to justify skepticism on Brissett's ability. 

 

The fact that this happens on every single individual play of every single individual quarterback seems to be a mystery to the people making these arguments.

 

Personally I think it's a red herring, you can't really establish anything by microanalyzing individual plays like this -- no more than that one play against the Broncos.

 

Microanalysis is to find tendencies a QB needs to improve on.  Systemic issues.  Mechanics, decisionmaking, tells, etc.  And a standard of evidence needs to be established to make sure you're following a trend rather than  chasing outliers or seeing ghosts in the noise

 

.  At the moment it's virtually impossible to clear this hurdle because the sample size is so small, and the margin of error is so correspondingly huge, that microanalysis gets lost in the noise.

 

In other words, it's 1 part paralysis by analysis, 1 part red herring, and 2 parts begging the question.

 

 

Why is that required to be considered "putting the team on his back?"  Seems like a completely atbitrary stipulation

Of course it’s arbitrary because the whole thing is very much in the eye of the beholder. But If we must, more than 7 points makes it much less likely that you can rely on defensive holds and FGs to win the game. QB is going to have to make plays. The further behind, the more chunk plays and quicker you’re going to have to do them. 
 

Surely that’s not that contentious an idea.

[Colts_Fan12]

54 minutes ago, NannyMcafee said:

 

The value of this comment is overwhelming. 

I have seen legitimate evidence of his struggles from other posters and you think they have no leg to stand on? that's why your comment was pointless and deserved a pointless response lol

[NannyMcafee]

1 minute ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I have seen legitimate evidence of his struggles from other posters and you think they have no leg to stand on? that's why your comment was pointless and deserved a pointless response lol

 

No one said he isnt struggling. Every player in the league does. And to say that isnt a cop out like you act like it is. 

[Colts_Fan12]

2 minutes ago, NannyMcafee said:

 

No one said he isnt struggling. Every player in the league does. And to say that isnt a cop out like you act like it is. 

it is tho when they use it as an excuse for every damn thing hes doing wrong lol

[Imgrandojji]

1 hour ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Regardless of what I think of Brissett, which I'm still in wait and see mode until the end of the season...one thing I will say is that I'd bet Reich is perfectly fine if not fully behind Brissett as the starter long term. They seem to have a connection and a lot of mutual trust.

I am curious as to what Ballard thinks though. Not that I don't think he's behind Brissett by any means. Just that I wouldn't be surprised if, while he ends up re-signing Brissett, he drafts a QB in the early-mid rounds to potentially compete down the line. Especially now that we know first hand how important it is to have a good backup QB.

Oh sure, I'd expect Ballard to do that regardless of what he thinks of Brissett.  Just like the Patriots drafted a long line of QBs including Hoyer, Brissett and Garoppolo to play behind Brady, 

 

And every other franchise worth its salt would do that too.   Well everyone but the Steelers who let Roethlisberger get away with throwing tantrums about drafting any backup QB he perceived as a threat.  And we saw how that's working out for them

 

Anyone here think Montana would have been as awesome if he wasn't constantly fighting to keep his job with Steve Young breathing down his neck?  I don't think we can keep that dynamic going indefinitely in a cap world, but if we can create it, I think it will make everyone better.

 

Besides you never put all your eggs in one quarterbacking basket.  What happened to the Chiefs after Mahomes got hurt should put the lid on that idea as well as anything.  Always have someone in training behind your guy.  If for no other reason than so that you have a fighting chance if your guy comes up lame

[Imgrandojji]

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

I think it will have as much to do with ticket sales as anything honestly. It'll be interesting to see what impact the QB situation has. While FO folks might be "behind" him (publicly) even if we run off the tracks late season, it only takes a revenue drop or two to get people to change their minds....

 

Where would that drop in revenue come from?  From fickle fans who don't know good football if it bit them in the rumpus? 

 

You realize you're cutting off your own nose to spite your face making this argument, you're basically claiming that Colts fans are so fickle they don't have the attention span to watch or come to games if there's not a superstar QB to draw them, while yourself being a Colts fan.

 

 

[Imgrandojji]

1 hour ago, SteelCityColt said:

Of course it’s arbitrary because the whole thing is very much in the eye of the beholder. But If we must, more than 7 points makes it much less likely that you can rely on defensive holds and FGs to win the game. QB is going to have to make plays. The further behind, the more chunk plays and quicker you’re going to have to do them. 
 

Surely that’s not that contentious an idea.

Not as such, but remember that Reich's offense isn't based on scoring big points.  It's based on scoring enough points and then controlling TOP.  Reich isn't trying to blow other teams out, so you don't see a lot of chunk plays.  He's playing to win, just not in the way that we're used to.

[NannyMcafee]

59 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

it is tho when they use it as an excuse for every damn thing hes doing wrong lol

 Every damn excuse? What is he "doing wrong" ? Seems to me no one can put a finger on if its play calling, the WRs, or JB. Or do you know more than literally everyone else on this forum? I find that hard to believe. 

 

I think you're just butt hurt that your favorite player Andrew Luck retired and you cant move on. 

[EastStreet]

4 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

Where would that drop in revenue come from?  From fickle fans who don't know good football if it bit them in the rumpus? 

 

You realize you're cutting off your own nose to spite your face making this argument, you're basically claiming that Colts fans are so fickle they don't have the attention span to watch or come to games if there's not a superstar QB to draw them, while yourself being a Colts fan.

 

I'm not cutting off anything. It's fact. Renewals dropped to 85% in 2017, and farther to 82% in 2018, and the Colts front office blamed both team performance and anthem protests. Since the Colts didn't have any anthem issues besides Cromartie (and nobody cared about him), I doubt anthem stuff had a lot to do with given all the other Colts-centric things going on.

 

There were also articles about retail and hospitality (food/hotel/etc.) revenue dropping, and the pressures on the FO to "do something"

 

And regardless how you feel personally, a large portion of the fanbase is very much accustomed to a QB driven offense due to our QBs the last two decades. You may not identify with that, but many do.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

3 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I wouldn't say he has a clutch gene after 1 play but if he does more sure lol

Chargers he took  team down the field and left only a few seconds on the clock to tie the game and threw for that TD. Against Atlanta we finished with the ball on offense. Against TN he threw the go ahead TD.  Last week he had that great play. Don’t tell me he doesn’t have the clutch factor.

[EastStreet]

13 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

Not as such, but remember that Reich's offense isn't based on scoring big points.  It's based on scoring enough points and then controlling TOP.  Reich isn't trying to blow other teams out, so you don't see a lot of chunk plays.  He's playing to win, just not in the way that we're used to.

Reich had plenty of chunk plays with the Eagles. Look at Wentz's pre-injury pass charts and Foles playoff pass charts.