Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Recommended Posts

On 3/3/2020 at 8:27 AM, Myles said:

Who do you want long term?   Bridgwater, Mariotta, Foles?    If it is in the draft, do you want them to start right away?   Just curious.   

I agree that Dalton would not even be a good bridge QB for the team.  

I prefer draft. If sit one year to , so be it

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Jacoby is better than Dalton, I never want to see Dalton in a Colts jersey not even as a back-up

The Colts are going to be linked to any QB out there because they have money and assists and need a QB.

Almost like there are a bunch of individuals with varied opinions... strange.

Posted Images

I’ve watched Dalton for most of his career, and there is a reason he is often called the prime meridian of franchise QBs. He can make plays during games that leave you thinking “wow, he’s got some potential. Not bad.” 
 

He has all the abilities to make NFL throws. But something with him is just off.

 

He can’t read defenses very well. It becomes evident when a blitz leaves him surprised and he panics.  
 

He also has trouble with ball placement. A large portion of his career interceptions are from him not putting it where only his receivers can get it. 
 

His footwork can get him in trouble. Several times every game he doesn’t set his feet when he throws. This leads in to the ball placement issue. This may also be a product of playing behind a consistently bad offensive line for years. 
 

Dalton reminds me of Mark Sanchez in a way. Very successful in the early days of his career, but eventually flamed out.  
 

He’s an interesting player. He does just enough to leave intrigue on the “what if?” scenario, and can show up in a big way. Is he better than Brissett? Yes, absolutely. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, relkins said:

Rivers would last maybe two years

I think that is a huge benefit with him.  We'd have an end date already defined.  It'd give the team 2 years to have the future QB ready.

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

I’ve watched Dalton for most of his career, and there is a reason he is often called the prime meridian of franchise QBs. 
.........

 

Is he better than Brissett? Yes, absolutely. 

And this is the first step in a process to improve the position. 

 

Ya can't always get what you want, but sometimes ya get what ya need.

 

Nothing wrong with securing what you need before you get what you want, and doing so is a balance of need and price.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DougDew said:

And this is the first step in a process to improve the position. 

 

Ya can't always get what you want, but sometimes ya get what ya need.

 

Nothing wrong with securing what you need before you get what you want, and doing so is a balance of need and price.

I mean if there are no other options, yes?

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

I mean if there are no other options, yes?

Maybe.  Sometimes options close quickly and you just have to gamble and pull the trigger before they do.

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

Maybe.  Sometimes options close quickly and you just have to gamble and pull the trigger before they do.

True, risk vs. reward but there’s no reward if you do nothing. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

True, risk vs. reward but there’s no reward if you do nothing. 

I know.  As you pointed out, Dalton is an upgrade to JB.  Probably many game manager QBs are an upgrade to JB, especially if they can be a GREAT game manager as a opposed to a merely competent game manager.

 

Not that Dalton is either, but the problem with going with something more than a game manager, like Rivers say, is that it comes with their share of interceptions.  And if you're defense isn't very good, picks lead to scores and losing games.

 

Rivers could lead to better passing stats, but I'm not sure to more wins.   Isn't LAC drafting before us?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2020 at 12:51 AM, Stephen said:

They were both on worse teams with bad olines

 

Interesting. I know Charlie Weis had said he felt the Chargers had the most talented roster from top to bottom entering 2019

 

Meaning they messed up worse than the Colts. A lot of that was bad QB play too. I remember rumors about benching Phillip in Nov/Dec last year.

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

 

Interesting. I know Charlie Weis had said he felt the Chargers had the most talented roster from top to bottom entering 2019

 

Meaning they messed up worse than the Colts. A lot of that was bad QB play too. I remember rumors about benching Phillip in Nov/Dec last year.

Their oline didn't  click well while passing.  Rivers occasionally  has a 20 int season

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Interesting. I know Charlie Weis had said he felt the Chargers had the most talented roster from top to bottom entering 2019

 

Meaning they messed up worse than the Colts. A lot of that was bad QB play too. I remember rumors about benching Phillip in Nov/Dec last year.

I heard 3 teams had the best overall roster from top to bottom last season. Colts, Chargers and Cowboys. All of us finished terribly.  What’s up with that. 

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

I heard 3 teams had the best overall roster from top to bottom last season. Colts, Chargers and Cowboys. All of us finished terribly.  What’s up with that. 

For the Colts it was no Luck....with injuries. If you get my drift. 

Chargers? Injuries and a serious slip in performance by Rivers. 

Cowboys? Really bad coaching. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/3/2020 at 8:24 AM, Myles said:

You want a rookie to learn how Brissett runs the offense?    Are you sure about that?   He can learn the 1 read pass.    

Ahhh he would be learning from the coaches as all players do regardless of position. As if we draft Love that’s his weakness as he always sticks with his first read. So sure I guess 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2020 at 7:14 PM, Superfly said:


A better option than Dalton, but I’d rather roll with Rivers or Winston. JMO

Haha.

Those two would be near the bottom of my list.

Kinda funny how the views vary so greatly on the best course of action at QB moving forward.

  This board is all over the place.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/7/2020 at 10:10 AM, DougDew said:

I know.  As you pointed out, Dalton is an upgrade to JB.  Probably many game manager QBs are an upgrade to JB, especially if they can be a GREAT game manager as a opposed to a merely competent game manager.

 

Not that Dalton is either, but the problem with going with something more than a game manager, like Rivers say, is that it comes with their share of interceptions.  And if you're defense isn't very good, picks lead to scores and losing games.

 

Rivers could lead to better passing stats, but I'm not sure to more wins.   Isn't LAC drafting before us?

Calling any QB a game manager is as disrespectful as calling an office manager a secretary.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

Calling any QB a game manager is as disrespectful as calling an office manager a secretary.

I use the term only because its a popular label.  Others here seem to disparage any QB who is not capable of producing a top 5 passing game.

 

I think a team should build around whatever kind of QB they have instead of perpetually looking for only one kind of QB, which they hardly ever find, then being in QB purgatory most of the time.  A game manager QB is fine with me, if he can lead the offense in the last two minutes of each half.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DougDew said:

I use the term only because its a popular label.  Others here seem to disparage any QB who is not capable of producing a top 5 passing game.

 

I think a team should build around whatever kind of QB they have instead of perpetually looking for only one kind of QB, which they hardly ever find, then being in QB purgatory most of the time.  A game manager QB is fine with me, if he can lead the offense in the last two minutes of each half.

Part of the problem with a lot of Colt fans are they are used to having Manning and Luck over the last 20 years. Yes it is exciting to watch a QB that puts the ball in the air all over the place. 

The down side to that is one super bowl win in those 20 years. 

Super bowls are won by teams, not a QB that can throw the ball all over the place..

Manning won his last super bowl even though he had one of the worst seasons of his career with Denver. He was a game manager at that point of his career. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WoolMagnet said:

Calling any QB a game manager is as disrespectful as calling an office manager a secretary.

Game manager is a label for a QB who don't lose you games. It's not meant as disrespectful. 

Can you call Brady a game manager when a lot of his games he dinks and dunks most of the game?  

No, I call it doing what it takes to win games and I will take that over the QB throwing for 300 plus yards and still losing the game. 

In the end the only stat that matters is in the win-loss category. 

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

Haha.

Those two would be near the bottom of my list.

Kinda funny how the views vary so greatly on the best course of action at QB moving forward.

  This board is all over the place.


Who’s your one or two suggestions Einstein? 
 

 

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

Haha.

Those two would be near the bottom of my list.

Kinda funny how the views vary so greatly on the best course of action at QB moving forward.

  This board is all over the place.

 

Almost like there are a bunch of individuals with varied opinions... strange.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Almost like there are a bunch of individuals with varied opinions... strange.

 

What an antiquated American concept.  There should be only two opinions, and many people are in favor of eliminating one of those.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Part of the problem with a lot of Colt fans are they are used to having Manning and Luck over the last 20 years. Yes it is exciting to watch a QB that puts the ball in the air all over the place. 

The down side to that is one super bowl win in those 20 years. 

Super bowls are won by teams, not a QB that can throw the ball all over the place..

Manning won his last super bowl even though he had one of the worst seasons of his career with Denver. He was a game manager at that point of his career. 

 

Whenever I hear the 1 SB in 20 years argument, I kind of laugh.

#1, Only 4 teams have won more than 1 in the past 20 years.

#2, only 1 team has one more than 2.

#3, 20 teams haven't won a SB at all. 

#4, NE is a unicorn with a QB/Coach combo that we still question who it actually is that's responsible for all the wins.

  

Only winning 1 SB in 20 years wasn't a Manning problem. It was a GM and/or a coaching problem.

 

NE     6

BAL   2

PIT    2

NYG  2

IN      1

DEN  1

PHI   1

GB     1

SEA   1

NO    1

TB     1

KC     1

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

Only winning 1 SB in 20 years wasn't a Manning problem. It was a GM and/or a coaching problem.

You completely overlooked the jest of my comment.

Everyone is so consumed with stats and how a QB can be like Mahomes because he is the new cool aid flavor.

My point a QB does not have to be top 5 in the league to win games. 

He also doesn't have to be a MVP type player to win games either.

(we have been in that scenario before)

Super bowls are won by teams, not QBs. 

Some may disagree but IMO we are not that far off from having a complete team at this point. 

Yes it would be great to find a QB that can fill the shoes of Manning, Luck or Brady. But it's not happening no matter how many stats some can throw together. 

I just don't agree that signing a QB in the twilight of his career will bring us those wins. Could I be wrong? Of coarse I could.

If Ballard thinks there is a QB worth the #13 pick I will have no problem at all. I just don't feel the need to move up in the draft because I just don't think there is one worth it and the draft capital it would take to make that move. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

You completely overlooked the jest of my comment.

Everyone is so consumed with stats and how a QB can be like Mahomes because he is the new cool aid flavor.

My point a QB does not have to be top 5 in the league to win games. 

He also doesn't have to be a MVP type player to win games either.

(we have been in that scenario before)

Super bowls are won by teams, not QBs. 

Some may disagree but IMO we are not that far off from having a complete team at this point. 

Yes it would be great to find a QB that can fill the shoes of Manning, Luck or Brady. But it's not happening no matter how many stats some can throw together. 

I just don't agree that signing a QB in the twilight of his career will bring us those wins. Could I be wrong? Of coarse I could.

If Ballard thinks there is a QB worth the #13 pick I will have no problem at all. I just don't feel the need to move up in the draft because I just don't think there is one worth it and the draft capital it would take to make that move. 

I'm just responding to your comment about one SB in 20 with PM. It's a lazy premise.

 

I've also responded to you on mid/late rounds QBs. It's not a strategy when you have an existing bad starter, and are looking to solve for the future. 

 

But no, you don't need a top 5 stat guy to win, and I don't see many saying we do. But conversely, it's extremely rare to win with a bottom half guy, and we currently have a bottom 5 guy. 

 

And again, I'm not on the move-up for a QB band wagon.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Part of the problem with a lot of Colt fans are they are used to having Manning and Luck over the last 20 years. Yes it is exciting to watch a QB that puts the ball in the air all over the place. 

The down side to that is one super bowl win in those 20 years. 

Super bowls are won by teams, not a QB that can throw the ball all over the place..

Manning won his last super bowl even though he had one of the worst seasons of his career with Denver. He was a game manager at that point of his career. 

 

Yes.  And PMs other SB win, with the Colts, was during a playoff run where he put his stat generation aside and handed the ball off to Dominic Rhodes, who some argue was the real MVP of our SB.  Grossman's pick six...trying to do too much...and PMs pick six in 2009 SB against NO were two game sealing plays.  Between Brees and PM, it was the pick six and the onsides kick that were really the deciding factors, not to mention Garcon...a 6th round quality WR...dropping a 3rd down pass in the first half.

 

All you need is superior mental ability and command of the offense in the last two minutes of each half.  Don't need much physicality.  No need to sling it up and down the field for 56 minutes.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

I'm just responding to your comment about one SB in 20 with PM. It's a lazy premise.

 

A lazy premise? 

No, it's a factual premise. Like I said you overlooked the intentions of my comment pertaining to a QB that has huge numbers in relation to wins. (and losses especially in the playoffs)

Look we all have different opinions and don't look at things the same way. It's as simple as that. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

A lazy premise? 

No, it's a factual premise. Like I said you overlooked the intentions of my comment pertaining to a QB that has huge numbers in relation to wins. (and losses especially in the playoffs)

Look we all have different opinions and don't look at things the same way. It's as simple as that. 

 

The only thing factual is that we won only one SB in the last 20 years. Any implications solely based on that are lazy. 

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

The only thing factual is that we won only one SB in the last 20 years. Any implications solely based on that are lazy. 

Sorry you can't or don't want to comprehend my comment and the meaning of it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

The only thing factual is that we won only one SB in the last 20 years. Any implications solely based on that are lazy. 

1 SB win over the last 20 seasons (but we got the 1 that validates all the wins) but what some people overlook is, we also have had the 2nd most overall wins - playoffs included in the last 20 seasons which means for the most part our product has been great for 2 decades. Only the Pats have won more games.

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

1 SB win over the last 20 seasons (but we got the 1 that validates all the wins) but what some people overlook is, we also have had the 2nd most overall wins - playoffs included in the last 20 seasons which means for the most part our product has been great for 2 decades. Only the Pats have won more games.

Yup. IMO, we were a few GM decisions away from another SB or two. Also, Manning won another one with Denver lol... And the great majority of teams that won SBs the last 20 years, had top 16 QBs stat wise. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

Yup. IMO, we were a few GM decisions away from another SB or two. Also, Manning won another one with Denver lol... And the great majority of teams that won SBs the last 20 years, had top 16 QBs stat wise. 

Yeah even Flacco played great during his SB run in 2012 so did Foles in 2017. Really since 2000 only Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson have won the SB being pure game managers. Having said that the 2000 Ravens and 2002 Bucs had incredible defenses. Some could call Peyton a game manager in 2015 but his presence being out there was overwhelming at times for other teams to handle.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah even Flacco played great during his SB run in 2012 so did Foles in 2017. Really since 2000 only Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson have won the SB being pure game managers. Having said that the 2000 Ravens and 2002 Bucs had incredible defenses. Some could call Peyton a game manager in 2015 but his presence being out there was overwhelming at times for other teams to handle.

Overwhelming?   Seriously?

 

Wow...   didn’t see that coming.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah even Flacco played great during his SB run in 2012 so did Foles in 2017. Really since 2000 only Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson have won the SB being pure game managers. Having said that the 2000 Ravens and 2002 Bucs had incredible defenses. Some could call Peyton a game manager in 2015 but his presence being out there was overwhelming at times for other teams to handle.

Those 2 Ds were crazy good. Dilfer was dumped after their SB lol... Manning as a game manager is a bit weird, but if anyone could be a perfect game manager (with diminished skills), it was PM. Flacco is a very debatable case, and yes, he certainly didn't play like a game manager during that run, and neither did Foles. Johnson is just a really strange one, with a long career of bouncing around and up and down performances. He was definitely not a game manager some of the time. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Overwhelming?   Seriously?

 

Wow...   didn’t see that coming.

I honestly do not think the Broncos would've got by the Pats without Peyton. His presence was huge that day. BO would've crapped his drawers against that team in an AFC Title Game IMO. Just Peyton being on the field makes other coaches think more and take more chances is my point.

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.


  • Popular Now

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • This is going to come off as homerish, but to have the things happen to him at the start, (luck and mcdaniels), and to have the team where we are now is nothing short of spectacular.    Hes shown that he isnt married to a strategy and is flexible, which is a super rare trait. For example, multiple years of trading down, then outright taking a risk and trading your 1st all together for an all pro DT.    The only knock you could make imo is his DE prospect evaluation. I haven't liked any of the edge rushers we've picked, and none of them have ever really made an impact. 
    • Dallas could back into winning a bad division, but Jerry is smart enough to know it would be a mere consolation prize.  I see a rebuild, probably thinks McCarthy was the problem in GB.   I think Jerry wants to keep all of his picks, and not waste one on a backup QB.
    • Mack can get $10-15M? No way he gets that right now. The only way Mack can get that is if he can come back, stay healthy for a season and produces big.   I can't see any team committing that type of money to a RB coming off an achilles tear...who has had prior injury issues. Guys like Lendale White, Mikel Leshoure, Kendall Hunter...played for a year and then were pretty much done. Arian Foster was older...but it was basically the end of his career as well. There will be teams that roll the dice on a one-year deal...but not a normal RB FA deal.    It really sucks for Mack...maybe he can buck the trend.
    • He has not been perfect, but he has been very good. I never used to see former Colts players on other teams even going back to Polian days, it just seemed like after the Colts they jus faded out of the league. Now you see ex Colts all over.    The Vinny thing was a mistake for sure and the Rivers saga is still playing out with a bit of a rough start.   I see some people saying were SB contenders this year. I dont believe that to be true after seeing the real contenders vs our team play. If he continues with the GREAT drafts, and fee agent signings and manages to find a franchise qb for the next 10 years we could have a real shot at winning a few in the next decade.
    • I think Mack will definitely check the free agent market before he would settle for a much discounted deal in Indy.  
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...