Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Recommended Posts

Nice write up and predictions. I’d agree with most this too. OT concerns me a lot, huge gap here with zero room for an injury. I absolutely can’t believe that CB will go into the season with a Canadian OT that nobody ever heard of until UDFA started. It is almost as bad as going into a season knowing Luck just retired and you have no back up currently on your roster worth starting. He has to be hoping for a vet cut or trade that has starters experience. 
 

TE, I’m not as concerned with this year as I think those 3 will suffice since we now have our big WR and MAC should be able to take the step up this season. If nothing else, we have a bigs package for redzone. 
 

on the defense, we have a nice core of players at each level but that supporting cast and the second group I’m not as sure about. Lots of just good enough to worry about losing and picking a slightly worse guy. I think Buckner is going to make every guy in the cb room look much better this season. If Turay is back and on his curve we seen last year before injury, those ends will be 10+ sack guys each (Turay and Houston that is). 
 

the kicker spot has taken on much interest from the fans. 3 guys who could legit be starters in the league if they perform as we hope for. Vinny won’t start here, there is no chance for that imho. Chase did well in Vinny’s finally long awaited removal from a crappy season last year, I like the kids potential. I know knowing about the new phenom that we’ve picked up but outside of some miss to lose a game in college last year, I have only seen glowing comments on him. Will he be able to stand up to the nfl pressure of kicking and what’s his kickoff leg like? Iirc, Chase didn’t put many on the back line of the end zone during his brief kicking stint. Maybe I’ve recalled wrong but didn’t seem like he did, maybe I’m mixing his leg with Vinny’s?? 
 

overall, we have on paper, a well shaped team that will very much depend on how well Rivers meshes with his new teammates and gets in synch quickly. OT is the biggest glaring weakness for back ups right now, that’s just huge because who believes this team will have all 5 starters not miss a game that’s played this season again? Not me, I’m doubtful that CB is banking on that as well. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Only read a little, but good stuff. Will read the rest when I get back. A buddy of mine called me last night to talk way too early depth chart stuff, and we hit some of the same stuff. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard has done a masterful job in creating depth when there was none when he took over.  O-line and TE seem like the weak spots on the depth chart.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

Kelly would be picked up by another team

I doubt it, there's a glut of QBs this year. Other than that, I agree with your assessments. Well done!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Hark said:

I agree with the concern about OT. I think Ballard is going to wait for a vet to get whacked on cut down day. 

 

Good point, I imagine we'll bring someone else in there at some point.  There are a few decent OT's out there now, but all on the wrong side of 30.  

 

Also, I think the FO and coaching staff may have more faith in LeRaven Clark than some on this board.

 

4 hours ago, Dogg63 said:

I doubt it, there's a glut of QBs this year. Other than that, I agree with your assessments. Well done!

 

Good point, though there are still several teams with QB mysteries.  I think if Kelly didn't have all the off-field stuff, he'd be on a roster now.  Ballard's said in numerous interviews it isn't Kelly's physical ability, it's the fact that he has to earn trust from the coaches and front office that he can show up and work hard each day and stay out of trouble off the field.  He has been good for a while now (at least in terms of staying out of trouble off the field)... I'd have to check his PS eligibility but if he doesn't wind back up on our practice squad, I bet he's at minimum on another team's (if eligible) if not on another team's 53 (55?) man roster as a backup or 3rd stringer.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dogg63 said:

I doubt it, there's a glut of QBs this year. Other than that, I agree with your assessments. Well done!

Not many that would come as cheap as Kelly.   I don't know that he would get signed, but probably get some serious looks.   He's kind of in that sweet spot.  A couple years in the league to improve.  This is favorable over a rookie UDFA many times.   Hasn't played poorly in games to drive teams away.  Has kept out of trouble for some time.   

 

https://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/ranking_each_teams_qb_situation_after_the_nfl_draft/s1__31879748#slide_4

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good thoughts.

The roster has come a long way,  but the topteams have back-ups at 4-6 positions as good as the starters.  Ideally you:

1. Draft,

2. develop,

3. maximize value on rookie contract,

4. dump (or trade) before big contract and replace with next guy in line.We’re getting towards that slowly.  Some special ones you pay and keep  of course.
  I think you do somewhat over-value our cast-offs tho.  Especially at WR.  
I think if 5 Or 6 (overall) of our castoffs are picked up after cuts, i’d be surprised.

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

Good thoughts.

The roster has come a long way,  but the top teams have back-ups at 4-6 positions as good as the starters.  Ideally you:

1. Draft,

2. develop,

3. maximize value on rookie contract,

4. dump (or trade) before big contract and replace with next guy in line.We’re getting towards that slowly.  Some special ones you pay and keep  of course.
  I think you do somewhat over-value our cast-offs tho.  Especially at WR.  
I think if 5 Or 6 (overall) of our castoffs are picked up after cuts, i’d be surprised.

I'm not sold at that.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Chappal did a break down over the draft weekend on how every single Ballard pick is still in the NFL somewhere.  Then looked Grigson going into his fourth class and how many guys were already out of the NFL.  No question Ballad has an eye for talent.  The depth is better today although still a little shallow on the oline, especially as tackle.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Right now the back up olinemen I see them keeping (and this could and probably will change) are Painter, Clark, Patterson, and Eldrenkamp.  
 

Not great depth there, especially at tackle.

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

Sold at what?

Your comment:

" but the top teams have back-ups at 4-6 positions as good as the starters"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Overall I like your assessment. I would like to see more depth on the O line. It would be a big boost if our WRs and DBs could stay healthy this year for the most part. I liked many of the selections in the draft and Ballard did spend some free agent cash this year so between free agency and the draft i do think we obtained more depth and got more physical. Hopefully we hit on some of those draft picks. I even see some potential in the later picks in the 6th round. Maybe they won't be able to contribute right away but I see at least 3 players that should add to Special Teams. Hopefully the Colts can stay relatively healthy this year. I would love to see what Campbell and Fountain can do if given some time.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

Good thoughts.

The roster has come a long way,  but the topteams have back-ups at 4-6 positions as good as the starters.  Ideally you:

1. Draft,

2. develop,

3. maximize value on rookie contract,

4. dump (or trade) before big contract and replace with next guy in line.We’re getting towards that slowly.  Some special ones you pay and keep  of course.
  I think you do somewhat over-value our cast-offs tho.  Especially at WR.  
I think if 5 Or 6 (overall) of our castoffs are picked up after cuts, i’d be surprised.

 

Yes, I think Ballard's said all along - 'draft, develop, plug in fair FAs when you need...'

 

I think the pick of Taylor may be getting at your point 4 (perhaps it was done so we don't need to resign Mack to a hefty contract).

 

If healthy, guys like Q and Leonard will be around here their whole careers, I imagine.  Though, other guys who are more expendable can be let go after rookie contracts and replaced by young blood.

 

In terms of castoffs -- I don't think I'm too far off.  We'll see... but in my opinion TY, Pascal, Campbell will make this team along with Pittman.  Those being the 4 locks.  I think Patmon has real potential to be a solid WR for us.... then Fountain (if healthy), Dulin, and Johnson (if healthy) have all shown they can play in this league (Dulin has mainly be a STer, but I think he's quite capable of being a 5th or 6th WR on another team).  

 

48 minutes ago, Myles said:

I'm not sold at that.  

 

Nor am I.  There's a reason why there are starters and back-ups.  It's good to have units which are strong enough to not miss too much of a beat if a starter goes down (e.g., OL -- you'd think with Castonzo, Q, Kelly, Glow, and Smith that if Glow went down we'd still be strong enough there to plug and play a back up without dropping off the overall production of the OL too much).  Some teams can get away with a back-up RB coming in and not dropping off if they have a well balanced offense and a good OL (look at Edge and Dominic Rhodes -- Edge was far superior, but Rhodes was still able to get >1,000 yards here due to how solid our O was, but still, IMO, a big drop off in talent).  

 

Almost no team (especially top teams) have back-up QBs as good as the starter (rare instances when a Bledsoe goes down, a guy like Brady steps up and doesn't give the job back --- but if Brady went down in his prime, there were only 1-3 other QBs in the league who you would expect to take over and not miss a beat -- Peyton, Brees, Rogers -- most other starters in the league would have been significant downgrades).  Almost no teams with top WRs have back-ups as good (e.g., we saw what happened with TY last year and you could argue he's not even a top 10 WR in the league anymore).  

 

 

 

45 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Chappal did a break down over the draft weekend on how every single Ballard pick is still in the NFL somewhere.  Then looked Grigson going into his fourth class and how many guys were already out of the NFL.  No question Ballad has an eye for talent.  The depth is better today although still a little shallow on the oline, especially as tackle.  

 

I doubt any other GM in the league has had everyone of his draft picks still in the league over the past 3 years.  That is very, very rare.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Chappal did a break down over the draft weekend on how every single Ballard pick is still in the NFL somewhere.  Then looked Grigson going into his fourth class and how many guys were already out of the NFL.  No question Ballad has an eye for talent.  The depth is better today although still a little shallow on the oline, especially as tackle.  

That brings up an intetesting point.  Should someone have seen the possibility of an early retirement in Luck’s personality?  We have that “questions guy” now, but i’m curious .

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

Yes, I think Ballard's said all along - 'draft, develop, plug in fair FAs when you need...'

 

I think the pick of Taylor may be getting at your point 4 (perhaps it was done so we don't need to resign Mack to a hefty contract).

 

If healthy, guys like Q and Leonard will be around here their whole careers, I imagine.  Though, other guys who are more expendable can be let go after rookie contracts and replaced by young blood.

 

In terms of castoffs -- I don't think I'm too far off.  We'll see... but in my opinion TY, Pascal, Campbell will make this team along with Pittman.  Those being the 4 locks.  I think Patmon has real potential to be a solid WR for us.... then Fountain (if healthy), Dulin, and Johnson (if healthy) have all shown they can play in this league (Dulin has mainly be a STer, but I think he's quite capable of being a 5th or 6th WR on another team).  

 

 

Nor am I.  There's a reason why there are starters and back-ups.  It's good to have units which are strong enough to not miss too much of a beat if a starter goes down (e.g., OL -- you'd think with Castonzo, Q, Kelly, Glow, and Smith that if Glow went down we'd still be strong enough there to plug and play a back up without dropping off the overall production of the OL too much).  Some teams can get away with a back-up RB coming in and not dropping off if they have a well balanced offense and a good OL (look at Edge and Dominic Rhodes -- Edge was far superior, but Rhodes was still able to get >1,000 yards here due to how solid our O was, but still, IMO, a big drop off in talent).  

 

Almost no team (especially top teams) have back-up QBs as good as the starter (rare instances when a Bledsoe goes down, a guy like Brady steps up and doesn't give the job back --- but if Brady went down in his prime, there were only 1-3 other QBs in the league who you would expect to take over and not miss a beat -- Peyton, Brees, Rogers -- most other starters in the league would have been significant downgrades).  Almost no teams with top WRs have back-ups as good (e.g., we saw what happened with TY last year and you could argue he's not even a top 10 WR in the league anymore).  

 

 

 

 

I doubt any other GM in the league has had everyone of his draft picks still in the league over the past 3 years.  That is very, very rare.

So excited for this year...... if it happens.  Lol

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

That brings up an intetesting point.  Should someone have seen the possibility of an early retirement in Luck’s personality?  We have that “questions guy” now, but i’m curious .

 

I don't really think so.  Luck was a very fierce competitor.  He played through a lot of pain, but he put it on the line every day.  I think someone could have looked at him and said "this is a bright young man w/ an engineering degree from Stanford, who may want to bail out in his early 30s instead of play into his 40s, but we can still get 7-10 solid years from him."  

 

I could be wrong, but I think Luck excelled on almost all the testing (especially mental testing) he was required to do to get to the NFL.  In a lot of ways, I think Luck really just couldn't put his body through it anymore.  Grigs did not provide him with an adequate OL.  He wound up having to find personal doctors to treat his shoulder (seems like the Colts either had an incompetent medical staff or could have been slightly dishonest with Luck -- doesn't help when Luck was publicly called out by Irsay about his toughness).  The medical staff could not give him an accurate assessment about what was going on with his lower leg injury, etc.  

 

The guy is a bright young man -- and even since him joining the league a lot more has come out about guys suffering brain damage shortly after retiring the NFL and more and more you hear stories about guys who can barely walk when they're in their 30's or 40's.  At some point, you can't really blame Luck -- the guy could have had a 6 figure job using his brain at 22 years old with his degree from Stanford.  He has millions in his bank, can still get advertising money for various commercials, etc. I'm sure he could get a job in an NFL front office or go become an executive in a large engineering firm if he wanted.  He also will probably be able to live a long, healthy life.

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

RB: Mack, Taylor, Hines, Wilkins, Williams -- whether we keep 3 or 4, I imagine the last guy (or 2 guys) gets picked up elsewhere.

 

Williams is already gone, and he hasn't been signed yet. So at most 1 of these would be picked up.

 

21 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

WR: TY, Pittman, Campbell, Pascal, Patmon, Dulin, Fountain, M. Johnson, Chad Williams, Artavis Scott, Malik Henry, Rodney Adams, DeMichael Harris,  -- I don't see us keeping more than 6, but if healthy, the I think we'll see between 2-5 guys we wind up cutting make another roster.

 

I think there is a better chance of us picking up someone off waivers than someone claiming one of our cast-offs. Certainly the most I can see be claimed is 2, and that is with us only keeping 5 on the active roster. Who are the possible 5 you see getting picked up? Biggest one for me is either Patmon or Fountain. Johnson was a free agent and we just signed him back recently so I assume there wasn't too much interest from other teams.

 

21 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

OT: Castonzo, Braden Smith, Carter O'Donnell, Andrew Donnal, Brandon Hinter, Cedrick Lang, Travis Vornkahl -- Again, our depth isn't great here -- don't know that anyone we cut will have great odds at winding up on another team's 53.

 

OG: Quenton Nelson, Glowinski, LeRaven Clark, Chaz Green, Jake Eldrenkamp, Danny Pinter -- not a ton of great depth here, so don't know if the guys we cut will wind up elsewhere.

 

C: Ryan Kelly, Javon Patterson -- we'll need to keep at least 2 C's... big Q could play C if needed, but as of now (if Javon Patterson is healthy) I don't see us cutting a C on the current roster.   

 

I 100% agree with this.

 

All in all, we are a lot closer to the 10 than before Ballard got here. It's a total reversal really, with Grigson signing multiple waiver wire cuts every year.

 

I wish I was as optimistic on the wide outs as you though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, C0LT5 said:

 

Williams is already gone, and he hasn't been signed yet. So at most 1 of these would be picked up.

 

 

I think there is a better chance of us picking up someone off waivers than someone claiming one of our cast-offs. Certainly the most I can see be claimed is 2, and that is with us only keeping 5 on the active roster. Who are the possible 5 you see getting picked up? Biggest one for me is either Patmon or Fountain. Johnson was a free agent and we just signed him back recently so I assume there wasn't too much interest from other teams.

 

 

I 100% agree with this.

 

All in all, we are a lot closer to the 10 than before Ballard got here. It's a total reversal really, with Grigson signing multiple waiver wire cuts every year.

 

I wish I was as optimistic on the wide outs as you though.

 

Thanks on pointing out Williams not having been resigned, I missed that for some reason -- I guess Darius Jackson and Bruce Anderson II I left out.  Jackson's been bouncing around practice squads for 4 years and Anderson for 1.  So yes, I think we'll keep 4 RBs (Mack, Taylor, Hines, Wilkins), but if we cut one of Wilkins or Hines, they'll definitely wind up somewhere else.  DJ and BA2 probably another practice squad at best.

 

As for WRs.  

 

I think for sure we keep TY, Pittman, Campbell, Pascal.  If we keep 5, it'd be between Patmon, Dulin, Fountain, M. Johnson, Chad Williams, Artavis Scott, Malik Henry, Rodney Adams, DeMichael Harris for the last slot.

 

My guess is Patmon would be our 5th if we only kept 5.  That'd leave Fountain, Dulin, M. Johnson, Chad Williams, Artavis Scott, Malik Henry, Rodney Adams, DeMichael Harris.

 

If healthy, I think Fountain finds a home.  I think Dulin finds a home, not only because of his WR ability as a 4-6 WR, but because he is pretty darn good at STs as a gunner.  If healthy, I think M. Johnson finds a home -- late in the season when he had 3 catches for 105 yards and a TD with Jacoby as his QB, I'm sure teams saw that... the guy runs a 4.39 forty, is very strong, has pretty good size and is a very good athlete, his issue has been his ability to stay healthy, but he can for sure find his way on a roster as a 4-6 WR.  

 

Those 3, regardless of if they're with us or not, I believe will be on an NFL roster (so if we keep 5, that's 3 guys on other teams, if we keep 6, that's 2 guys on other teams).  IMO, this is the most likely scenario.

 

Of the rest of the guys I think 3 have potential to make it somewhere -- Chad Williams has pretty good size at 6'2" 205 lbs with a 4.43 forty.  He is a former 3rd round pick and started 7 games in 2018 with the Cardinals who have a pretty good WR squad.  He undoubtedly has the physical ability to play in this league.  I don't know why his production hasn't been up to par, but I could see a team signing him.

 

Rodney Adams, at 6'1" 190 with a 4.44 has pretty good size/speed.  I think he had a pretty rough go w/ his mom dying in college and him becoming the legal guardian of his younger brother.  I believe he left the NFL early to try modeling or something like that.  He was a very productive college player and has very solid athletic traits.  If his head's on right, this guy can play in this league.  https://theathletic.com/1745768/2020/04/15/colts-rodney-adams-refused-to-stick-to-the-script-and-is-living-his-dream-again/

 

DeMichael Harris, the UDFA we just signed, is an absolute burner.  He went back and forth between RB and WR in college.  He excelled as a return man.  He's raw and from a small school, but the kid is a very solid athlete and he can fly.  If I had to guess, I'd see him on our practice squad -- but, if he shows in preseason that he can take kicks to the house (and we have to choose among him, Hines and Isaiah Rodgers to keep a roster spot, my guess is Hines/Rodgers have more value because they can contribute better on O&D).  I could see this guy getting picked up by a team who needs a flex option in their O and a KR/PR.

 

I doubt Artavis Scott or Malik Henry have a shot at much more than practice squad guys somewhere.... so I'd more likely guess 2-3 WRs, but potentially up to 5 (or even 6) depending on how many we keep and what guys like Harris and Dulin can show in terms of contributing on STs during pre-season.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

Ballard said last year that you know you're building a very good team when you make cuts from 75 men to 53 men and 10 or more of those players go on to play for another team.

Yup. It's also going to be harder for Ballard to look great at drafting. The roster was pretty weak when he took over, so it was a bit easier to look good. He's done a great job raising the overall level of talent and building depth.

 

That said, it's going to be harder for some of the drafted rooks to make the team. Even the PS should be a lot more competitive this year. 

 

And... good stuff CBE. Finally got a chance to read it all.

22 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

Right now:

 

QB: Rivers, Brissett, Eason, Kelly --- I know Kelly was just a P.S. guy most of last year, but I imagine even if we keep 3 QBs (Rivers and 2 of the remaining 3 -- my guess would be Rivers/Brisset/Eason) that Kelly would be picked up by another team.

As far as Kelly is concerned, I think it will be a coin flip. There's such a glutton of QBs this year. Cam Newton still available. Dalton still an unknown. And Kelly is an unknown to just about everyone but us lol... I'd bet he'd make it on the PS. Trying to think of a team that would go after him. Belichick would probably do it just be * lol. 

22 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

RB: Mack, Taylor, Hines, Wilkins, Williams -- whether we keep 3 or 4, I imagine the last guy (or 2 guys) gets picked up elsewhere.

I think we'll keep 4. I like both Wilkins and Williams, but I'd probably keep Williams. I like him more than Wilkins between the Ts.

22 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

WR: TY, Pittman, Campbell, Pascal, Patmon, Dulin, Fountain, M. Johnson, Chad Williams, Artavis Scott, Malik Henry, Rodney Adams, DeMichael Harris,  -- I don't see us keeping more than 6, but if healthy, the I think we'll see between 2-5 guys we wind up cutting make another roster.

I think Hilton, Campbell, Pittman, and Pascal are locks. I think we keep 6, and I think Fountain and Dulin have legs up for the final 2 spots. Wouldn't count out Johnson and Patmon though. I still haven't researched Harris. Makik Henry is interesting to me as well. But I absolutely agree, a few could make rosters else where.

22 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

TE: Doyle, Burton, Mo Alie-Cox, Bunting, Grimble, Lengel, Farrod Green -- personally, I think this might be our weakest position in terms of depth (maybe Burton will surprise me)... and at this point my guess would be we keep Doyle, Burton, MAC -- not sure if any of the others are good enough to make the 53 of another team, though Bunting, Grimble and Lingle all have freakish size.

 

FB: Roosevelt Nix -- I think we could go ahead and lump him in with the TE group.  Chances are, if we have to cut him (and he's healthy) the 7 year vet will land elsewhere.

I see Doyle, Mac, and Burton as locks. I don't think Nix's odds are good since we picked up Burton. I see Burton as more H-back or bully slot, and just don't think we need Nix given Burton's full profile. As far as guys and other rosters, I have no clue on Bunting, Grimble, and Lingle. They're on my list to research too.

22 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

OT: Castonzo, Braden Smith, Carter O'Donnell, Andrew Donnal, Brandon Hinter, Cedrick Lang, Travis Vornkahl -- Again, our depth isn't great here -- don't know that anyone we cut will have great odds at winding up on another team's 53.

I think Clark goes here. Since he didn't log a snap last year, not sure what to think of his developement. The other guys are wild cards too, but Ts are always bouncing from team to team for depth.

22 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

OG: Quenton Nelson, Glowinski, LeRaven Clark, Chaz Green, Jake Eldrenkamp, Danny Pinter -- not a ton of great depth here, so don't know if the guys we cut will wind up elsewhere.

 

C: Ryan Kelly, Javon Patterson -- we'll need to keep at least 2 C's... big Q could play C if needed, but as of now (if Javon Patterson is healthy) I don't see us cutting a C on the current roster. 

Again, don't know enough about the guys beyond starters. We just don't know a lot given lack of snaps. I do think Pinter will likely cross train at both G and C. If the FO doesn't like OT depth, he could cross train at T and G. Either way, I think they will use him as a swiss army guy. I'd prefer it be G/C. Hoping Patterson is working out.

22 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

On Offense:  If healthy, I think at least 4-6 guys we cut will play on another teams 53 man roster (not  bad -- looks to me like OL depth and TE depth are the two major areas of concern right now).

I think several of our WRs and RBs would be picked up quickly. OTs too even though they are mysteries. And we have to have the best overall depth at QB in the league except maybe NO.

 

I agree that OL and TE depth are the biggest concerns on O. It's just hard to grade depth that you've never seen.

22 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

DT: Buckner, Sheldon Day, G. Stewart, Autry, T. Lewis, Rob Windsor, Kameron Cline, Chris Williams:  not too sure on some of the rookies, but I think between this group and our DE group (I expect guys like Lewis, Autry, Cline, even Buckner to see time inside and outside) we'll see at least a few guys making other rosters that don't make ours.

 

DE:  Houston, Turay, Banogu, G. Green, J. Jegede, A. Muhammad, K. Coleman -- again, we typically keep 8-9 total d-linemen.  Not sure on the young guys.. but with Houston, Turay, Banogu, Buckner, Day, Stewart, Muhammad, Autry, Lewis -- we already know we have 9 guys who can play in this league.  Of the new comers, K. Cline excites me most, and I think we'll see improvement from Gerri Green.  I think we'll see at least 1-3 of our DL who get cut make another roster.

I think you and I had this discussion before. I only see Autry as a true swing guy (DE and DT). I think Buckner is inside except on goal-line / short yardage downs.

 

Standard Passing Downs

Houston / Autry / Buckner / Turay

 

Nascar Downs

Benogu / Houston / Buckner / Turay

 

Standard Run Downs

Houston / Buckner / Stewart / Autry

 

Goal Line or Short Yardage

Buckner / Day / Stewart / Autry

 

Why so excited about Cline? Only 4 sacs at a small school? I really like Green and hope he works out. Hoping he hit the weights hard over the off season. Both he and Banogu need to show something this year IMO.

 

DE: Houston, Autry, Turay, Banogu, Muhammad

3T: Buckner, (Autry), Lewis

NT: Stewart, Day

 

22 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

LB:  Leonard, Walker, Okereke, Franklin, Adams, Speed, Moore, Glasgow, Wellington -- here we have been keeping 6 LBs with Ballard as coach.  Among Leonard, Walker, Okereke, Franklin, Adams, Speed -- we already know we have 6 guys who can form a solid LB corps for us.  I think Skai Moore can find a team in this league.  Not sold on Glasgow as an LBer (though Ballard seems to think he could be a STs ace) and don't know anything about the UDFA Wellington...  my guess would be at least one guy we cut at LB will wind up on another roster.

I've looked a little into Wellinton. Seems like another undersized STs guy. Out of all the fringe guys, I like Moore the best.

 

I think it's 

Will - Leonard, Speed

Mike - Walker, (Oke)

Sam - Oke, ?

 

I honestly don't think we need to carry 6 since we don't use SAM a bunch. If I had to pick my 5th, it would be Moore. If I had to pick my 6th, it would be Adams.

 

That's why I don't have very high hopes for Glasgow. I already think Franklin is expendable, and doubt Wellington really competes for a true LB spot. I do think Wellington is probably a better athlete than Glasgow is we're looking for a pure STs guy.

 

Of all of the potentially expendable guys, I think Franklin would be best poised to win a roster spot assuming we keep Moore and Adams.

22 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

CB:  Ya-Sin, Rhodes, Moore II, Tell III, TJ Carrie, L. Pitts, J. Porter, Travis Reed, Isaiah Rodgers -- last year we kept 5 CBs (5 S's for 10 total DBs), I imagine Ya-Sin, Rhodes, Moore II, Tell III, and Carrie all have good shots.  Don't know enough about Pitts, Porter or Reed, but I also imagine Rodgers has a decent shot.  That's 6 CBs I think who are NFL caliber with 3 I don't know enough about -- so if we keep 5, I think at least 1 guy makes another NFL roster.

CB1 - Ya-sin, (Rhodes)

CB2 - Rhodes, Tell

NB - Moore, Carrie

 

Those would be my 5. I'd keep 6 this year though with the added spots. And Tell could move to S in a pinch if we needed, so might be good to keep a 6th anyway. Not sure who would make another roster though. I'd love it Rodgers showed enough to get a spot (not just a return guy).

22 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

S:  Hooker, Willis, Milligan, Odum, Blackmon, Rutlege Jr -- Not one of our deeper positions right now (IMO).  Won't be shocked if Tell moves back over to this group... but again with the first 5 guys there, I think we have 5 NFL caliber guys with little knowledge on Rutledge.  Let's say here, who we cut doesn't make an NFL roster.

FS - Hooker, Odum

SS - Willis, Milligan, (Blackmon PUP)

 

Rutledge is a long shot from GA Southern. Like you, wouldn't be shocked to see Tell move, but really envision him playing a hybrid role on Dime packages.

 

Depth, and SS in general concerns me. I don't like Willis in coverage.

22 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

On D -- that's 5-7 guys we cut being very capable of making other rosters.

 

K: Rodrigo Blankenship, Chase McLaughlin -- I think both of these guys will be somewhere in the NFL next season.

 

P: Rigoberto Sanchez -- no cuts here

 

LS: Luke Rhodes -- no cuts here

 

On ST -- 1 guy we cut on another roster (potentially 2 if for some reason we bring Vinny back).

 

--- Obviously it's too early to tell, don't know enough about some of the later round rookies/UDFA signings, and don't know who will stay healthy -- but on the low end, I think we'll see 10 guys we cut make another roster, on the high end around 14 guys.

 

In a short time, Ballard's done a very good job of making this a pretty deep and well rounded football team. 

Not sure 10 guys would make rosters, but close. Between rosters and PS, we have a good amount though, more than most. And I agree, good job by CB. Going to be tougher for him to keep looking like a draft king though.

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

Yup. It's also going to be harder for Ballard to look great at drafting. The roster was pretty weak when he took over, so it was a bit easier to look good. He's done a great job raising the overall level of talent and building depth.

 

That said, it's going to be harder for some of the drafted rooks to make the team. Even the PS should be a lot more competitive this year. 

 

And... good stuff CBE. Finally got a chance to read it all.

As far as Kelly is concerned, I think it will be a coin flip. There's such a glutton of QBs this year. Cam Newton still available. Dalton still an unknown. And Kelly is an unknown to just about everyone but us lol... I'd bet he'd make it on the PS. Trying to think of a team that would go after him. Belichick would probably do it just be * lol. 

I think we'll keep 4. I like both Wilkins and Williams, but I'd probably keep Williams. I like him more than Wilkins between the Ts.

I think Hilton, Campbell, Pittman, and Pascal are locks. I think we keep 6, and I think Fountain and Dulin have legs up for the final 2 spots. Wouldn't count out Johnson and Patmon though. I still haven't researched Harris. Makik Henry is interesting to me as well. But I absolutely agree, a few could make rosters else where.

I see Doyle, Mac, and Burton as locks. I don't think Nix's odds are good since we picked up Burton. I see Burton as more H-back or bully slot, and just don't think we need Nix given Burton's full profile. As far as guys and other rosters, I have no clue on Bunting, Grimble, and Lingle. They're on my list to research too.

I think Clark goes here. Since he didn't log a snap last year, not sure what to think of his developement. The other guys are wild cards too, but Ts are always bouncing from team to team for depth.

Again, don't know enough about the guys beyond starters. We just don't know a lot given lack of snaps. I do think Pinter will likely cross train at both G and C. If the FO doesn't like OT depth, he could cross train at T and G. Either way, I think they will use him as a swiss army guy. I'd prefer it be G/C. Hoping Patterson is working out.

I think several of our WRs and RBs would be picked up quickly. OTs too even though they are mysteries. And we have to have the best overall depth at QB in the league except maybe NO.

 

I agree that OL and TE depth are the biggest concerns on O. It's just hard to grade depth that you've never seen.

I think you and I had this discussion before. I only see Autry as a true swing guy (DE and DT). I think Buckner is inside except on goal-line / short yardage downs.

 

Standard Passing Downs

Houston / Autry / Buckner / Turay

 

Nascar Downs

Benogu / Houston / Buckner / Turay

 

Standard Run Downs

Houston / Buckner / Stewart / Autry

 

Goal Line or Short Yardage

Buckner / Day / Stewart / Autry

 

Why so excited about Cline? Only 4 sacs at a small school? I really like Green and hope he works out. Hoping he hit the weights hard over the off season. Both he and Banogu need to show something this year IMO.

 

DE: Houston, Autry, Turay, Banogu, Muhammad

3T: Buckner, (Autry), Lewis

NT: Stewart, Day

 

I've looked a little into Wellinton. Seems like another undersized STs guy. Out of all the fringe guys, I like Moore the best.

 

I think it's 

Will - Leonard, Speed

Mike - Walker, (Oke)

Sam - Oke, ?

 

I honestly don't think we need to carry 6 since we don't use SAM a bunch. If I had to pick my 5th, it would be Moore. If I had to pick my 6th, it would be Adams.

 

That's why I don't have very high hopes for Glasgow. I already think Franklin is expendable, and doubt Wellington really competes for a true LB spot. I do think Wellington is probably a better athlete than Glasgow is we're looking for a pure STs guy.

 

Of all of the potentially expendable guys, I think Franklin would be best poised to win a roster spot assuming we keep Moore and Adams.

CB1 - Ya-sin, (Rhodes)

CB2 - Rhodes, Tell

NB - Moore, Carrie

 

Those would be my 5. I'd keep 6 this year though with the added spots. And Tell could move to S in a pinch if we needed, so might be good to keep a 6th anyway. Not sure who would make another roster though. I'd love it Rodgers showed enough to get a spot (not just a return guy).

FS - Hooker, Odum

SS - Willis, Milligan, (Blackmon PUP)

 

Rutledge is a long shot from GA Southern. Like you, wouldn't be shocked to see Tell move, but really envision him playing a hybrid role on Dime packages.

 

Depth, and SS in general concerns me. I don't like Willis in coverage.

Not sure 10 guys would make rosters, but close. Between rosters and PS, we have a good amount though, more than most. And I agree, good job by CB. Going to be tougher for him to keep looking like a draft king though.

 

Thanks for your response.  I didn't realize until @C0LT5 pointed out that we haven't resigned Williams at RB.  My guess is we'll keep 4 with Mack, Taylor, Hines and Wilkins -- but either way, if we cut any of those guys they'll wind up on another team (assuming they are healthy).

 

I agree with you on our QB Depth.  We may not be the most talented, but we are very deep.  I wouldn't be shocked if we traded Jacoby (potentially to the Pats, as rumors fly around) for a draft pick.  I would be shocked if we cut Eason, he's got a lot of potential and he's in a very good situation to learn behind Rivers and under the tutelage of Reich.  I wouldn't be shocked if we kept 3 QBs this year with Rivers, Eason and Jacoby/Kelly.  I understand about Newton still being available and Dalton being an unknown... that said, those guys are both going to be way too expensive (and old) for a lot of teams as back-up QBs.  Kelly is a cheaper/younger option.  IMO, if he didn't get drunk at Von Miller's party that night and get arrested, he'd probably still be a Bronco.  At worst, he'll wind up on a practice squad somewhere, but if I had to bet, some team will sign him to be 2-3 string QB (lol, and yes, he does seem like someone Belichek could sign and probably turn into a decent starting QB).

 

On WR -- I agree with TY, Pittman, Campbell, Pascal being locks.  I think we'll keep 6.  He's always had healthy issues, but Marcus Johnson has impressed me in glimpses when he is healthy enough to be on the field -- same with Fountain.  I like Dulin coming out of college, he's very raw but very athletic.  Ballard mentioned him several times last year and how impressed he was with his ST play.  Then Patmon, just because of his size/speed, I think has a legit shot.  Among TY, Campbell, Fountain, and Johnson, my biggest concern at WR is keeping guys healthy.  I think we'll have fantastic competition from 4-5 guys for the last 2 spots, which is a good thing (last year after Funchess and Campbell went down it was kinda the same 4-5 guys fighting for the 2nd and 3rd WR spot -- hopefully it's those guys fighting for the 5th and 6th spot instead this year).

 

Agree on TE and your comment on Nix.  Now, what surprises me, is I know Ballard values STers, and he's said in the past things like 'we kept Q. Wilson as a scratch b/c he can't contribute on STs like some of the other DBs... etc.' -- this is the only year I have heard him say stuff about liking a guy specifically due to his ST talent.  I don't know if the roster expansion is playing a role in that, or what -- but Nix was a solid ST guy... my guess would be, Burton outcompetes him and both can play similar roles.

 

OL, yes, I think Clark can play T/G.  Pinter played T at Ball State but at 6'4" 305, and from his scouting report, he may be the new 'Haeg' of our OL, but it seems like he'd be better suited to play inside as a backup G or C than at T.  I was high on Patterson last year before he got hurt.. if he's healthy, I think we have a very solid backup C with him. Like you said, hard to judge the rest as I've seen very little of them.

 

On DL, Buckner played outside at times on the SF D -- and I agree, I don't think we see him moving over there often, but on goal line and rush downs, I can see (and agree with your packages).  I think this is 100% the put-up-or-shut-up training camp for Tyquan Lewis.  What excites me about Cline is that he's a pretty good athlete -- I also read he went from 6'4 ~270 lbs to about ~295 lbs recently and has really added a lot of strength and size.  He's not as big as Stewart, but he reminds me some of Grover due to the fact he is from a small school, but athletic and raw -- I don't think we'll see him be a huge contributor from the start, but could see him spending a year on the PS or stashed on the bench and developing into something pretty solid down the line.  I get that Windsor from PSU has a big motor, but I have a hard time thinking he's got a great shot at making this roster.

 

For LB -- I think for sure we'll see Leonard, Walker, Okereke and Speed.  I agree, we could probably get away with keeping 5, though we have typically kept 6 under Ballard.  As much as I want to agree with you on Moore, and I thought he'd be a total steal coming out of college (for some reason I still think he is more athletic than Adams/Franklin), he hasn't really produced in the NFL.  Again, Glasgow, I don't see him really contributing as a defender on this team but maybe with roster expansion, Ballard's really serious about him making it just to be a ST ace.

 

I agree with pretty much all you say on the secondary.  Though, I think Isaiah Rhodes has a good shot to make it.  Just watching his tape, he is a play maker whether it's returning kicks or on defense.  He plays (on D) well above his size and he is very quick to close on the ball and seems to be good at forcing turnovers.

 

And finally, yes, while Ballard has been perfect (well not every player has made the Colts, but they've all made it somewhere in the NFL) with his drafts, it's going to be harder and harder for him to keep his draft picks on our roster.  This year alone, I imagine Blackmon starts on PUP, I won't be shocked if any/all of our 6th round picks (Windsor, Rodgers, Patmon, Glasgow) don't make the squad.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, WoolMagnet said:

Good thoughts.

The roster has come a long way,  but the topteams have back-ups at 4-6 positions as good as the starters.  Ideally you:

1. Draft,

2. develop,

3. maximize value on rookie contract,

4. dump (or trade) before big contract and replace with next guy in line.We’re getting towards that slowly.  Some special ones you pay and keep  of course.
  I think you do somewhat over-value our cast-offs tho.  Especially at WR.  
I think if 5 Or 6 (overall) of our castoffs are picked up after cuts, i’d be surprised.

 

Really?

 

Can you give examples of that?     I like quality depth as much as the next person.   Everyone does.    But who has depth "as good as the starters."

 

I confess I'm very curious.....

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

I don't really think so.  Luck was a very fierce competitor.  He played through a lot of pain, but he put it on the line every day.  I think someone could have looked at him and said "this is a bright young man w/ an engineering degree from Stanford, who may want to bail out in his early 30s instead of play into his 40s, but we can still get 7-10 solid years from him."  

 

I could be wrong, but I think Luck excelled on almost all the testing (especially mental testing) he was required to do to get to the NFL.  In a lot of ways, I think Luck really just couldn't put his body through it anymore.  Grigs did not provide him with an adequate OL.  He wound up having to find personal doctors to treat his shoulder (seems like the Colts either had an incompetent medical staff or could have been slightly dishonest with Luck -- doesn't help when Luck was publicly called out by Irsay about his toughness).  The medical staff could not give him an accurate assessment about what was going on with his lower leg injury, etc.  

 

The guy is a bright young man -- and even since him joining the league a lot more has come out about guys suffering brain damage shortly after retiring the NFL and more and more you hear stories about guys who can barely walk when they're in their 30's or 40's.  At some point, you can't really blame Luck -- the guy could have had a 6 figure job using his brain at 22 years old with his degree from Stanford.  He has millions in his bank, can still get advertising money for various commercials, etc. I'm sure he could get a job in an NFL front office or go become an executive in a large engineering firm if he wanted.  He also will probably be able to live a long, healthy life.

I dont really have an opinion or judgement toward Andrew.

I am bummed he never reached his potential in football.

I just remember, in hindsight, when drafted how many described him as “different” and having other interests besides football.  I dont remember it spoken as a negative, but rather a positive.  But also, in hindsight, would a Manning , Brady, Elway, or whoever  do the same?  Just walk away.  
  I also wonder sometimes the full extent offAndrews injuries, emotional state, etc. when he made decision.

 

sidenote:  as i typed about injuries and retirement i could hear Peyton’s voice in my head...”JUST RUB SOME DIRT ON IT!”

Seriously....: that just happened.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Really?

 

Can you give examples of that?     I like quality depth as much as the next person.   Everyone does.    But who has depth "as good as the starters."

 

I confess I'm very curious.....

Think Pittsburgh... every year it seems they lose a STUD LB and have another stud waiting.  They do draft LBs higher regularly.  Pittsburgh always seems to plug in WRs, DTs, RBs, OL.   NE has always done this. They are the masters actually.  Baltimore has also been very good under Ozzie and it looks like the new guy gets it too.  If i went team by team i could probably come up with 6 or 8 or so maybe.
  Typically, if you look at the top teams.  The ones that are always kinda in it.  The ones with stability.  The stability also aids in this longer-term approach and is important.  But you still gotta make good picks that fit what you are trying to do.  Kinda what Ballard preaches actually.

 

edit:  i assume you realize i dont mean equal to the top 5 -10 guys on the team.  You dont have a manning or brady behind a manning or brady obviously.  Tho NE has done pretty well with at keast a temporary “Brady #2”.  But starters none the less.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WoolMagnet said:

Think Pittsburgh... every year it seems they lose a STUD LB and have another stud waiting.  They do draft LBs higher regularly.  Pittsburgh always seems to plug in WRs, DTs, RBs, OL.   NE has always done this. They are the masters actually.  Baltimore has also been very good under Ozzie and it looks like the new guy gets it too.  If i went team by team i could probably come up with 6 or 8 or so maybe.
  Typically, if you look at the top teams.  The ones that are always kinda in it.  The ones with stability.  The stability also aids in this longer-term approach and is important.  But you still gotta make good picks that fit what you are trying to do.  Kinda what Ballard preaches actually.

Interesting response...

 

I'd say those backups are good.  But I don’t think they’re as good as the starters.   
 

I think the better, stronger argument is the backups on those great teams are better than our back ups, better than the backups on the other teams.  So when injuries inevitably hit,  the fall off in team play is less on those great teams than the falloff on everyone else.  Us included.

 

Ballard is 4 years in.  3 years if you give him a pass on 17, the Pagano year.  He’s building the starting roster and is trying to upgrade the backups.  Ballard knows he has to do this.  Said so in his year end meeting with the media in early January.   I think what you want is happening right now.

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

Interesting response...

 

I'd say those backups are good.  But I don’t think they’re as good as the starters.   
 

I think the better, stronger argument is the backups on those great teams are better than our back ups, better than the backups on the other teams.  So when injuries inevitably hit,  the fall off in team play is less on those great teams than the falloff on everyone else.  Us included.

 

Ballard is 4 years in.  3 years if you give him a pass on 17, the Pagano year.  He’s building the starting roster and is trying to upgrade the backups.  Ballard knows he has to do this.  Said so in his year end meeting with the media in early January.   I think what you want is happening right now.

I wasn't comparing stats ir anything.  But i see players inserted that are “on the same level.”  Less experience perhaps, but similar skills and overall contribution.  I notice it with Pittsburgh all the time mainly  because most of my crazy family are steeler fans.

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

Nice write up and predictions. I’d agree with most this too. OT concerns me a lot, huge gap here with zero room for an injury. I absolutely can’t believe that CB will go into the season with a Canadian OT that nobody ever heard of until UDFA started. It is almost as bad as going into a season knowing Luck just retired and you have no back up currently on your roster worth starting. He has to be hoping for a vet cut or trade that has starters experience. 
 

TE, I’m not as concerned with this year as I think those 3 will suffice since we now have our big WR and MAC should be able to take the step up this season. If nothing else, we have a bigs package for redzone. 
 

on the defense, we have a nice core of players at each level but that supporting cast and the second group I’m not as sure about. Lots of just good enough to worry about losing and picking a slightly worse guy. I think Buckner is going to make every guy in the cb room look much better this season. If Turay is back and on his curve we seen last year before injury, those ends will be 10+ sack guys each (Turay and Houston that is). 
 

the kicker spot has taken on much interest from the fans. 3 guys who could legit be starters in the league if they perform as we hope for. Vinny won’t start here, there is no chance for that imho. Chase did well in Vinny’s finally long awaited removal from a crappy season last year, I like the kids potential. I know knowing about the new phenom that we’ve picked up but outside of some miss to lose a game in college last year, I have only seen glowing comments on him. Will he be able to stand up to the nfl pressure of kicking and what’s his kickoff leg like? Iirc, Chase didn’t put many on the back line of the end zone during his brief kicking stint. Maybe I’ve recalled wrong but didn’t seem like he did, maybe I’m mixing his leg with Vinny’s?? 
 

overall, we have on paper, a well shaped team that will very much depend on how well Rivers meshes with his new teammates and gets in synch quickly. OT is the biggest glaring weakness for back ups right now, that’s just huge because who believes this team will have all 5 starters not miss a game that’s played this season again? Not me, I’m doubtful that CB is banking on that as well. 

Um if I recall right, Chase didn’t handle kick offs, Sanchez did

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

I don't really think so.  Luck was a very fierce competitor.  He played through a lot of pain, but he put it on the line every day.  I think someone could have looked at him and said "this is a bright young man w/ an engineering degree from Stanford, who may want to bail out in his early 30s instead of play into his 40s, but we can still get 7-10 solid years from him."  

 

I could be wrong, but I think Luck excelled on almost all the testing (especially mental testing) he was required to do to get to the NFL.  In a lot of ways, I think Luck really just couldn't put his body through it anymore.  Grigs did not provide him with an adequate OL.  He wound up having to find personal doctors to treat his shoulder (seems like the Colts either had an incompetent medical staff or could have been slightly dishonest with Luck -- doesn't help when Luck was publicly called out by Irsay about his toughness).  The medical staff could not give him an accurate assessment about what was going on with his lower leg injury, etc.  

 

The guy is a bright young man -- and even since him joining the league a lot more has come out about guys suffering brain damage shortly after retiring the NFL and more and more you hear stories about guys who can barely walk when they're in their 30's or 40's.  At some point, you can't really blame Luck -- the guy could have had a 6 figure job using his brain at 22 years old with his degree from Stanford.  He has millions in his bank, can still get advertising money for various commercials, etc. I'm sure he could get a job in an NFL front office or go become an executive in a large engineering firm if he wanted.  He also will probably be able to live a long, healthy life.

As much as I blame Grigson for Lucks injuries and early retirement, Lucks last two injuries weren’t not foot ball related. They were injuries suffered from snow boarding. The shoulder and the lower leg both. 
 

but enough about luck, he’s gone, it’s time to move on.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, csmopar said:

As much as I blame Grigson for Lucks injuries and early retirement, Lucks last two injuries weren’t not foot ball related. They were injuries suffered from snow boarding. The shoulder and the lower leg both. 
 

but enough about luck, he’s gone, it’s time to move on.

 

I realize this will be an unpopular opinion because it doesnt destroy Grigson but...

You did watch Luck play right? Do you recall how he lacerated his kidney (in addition to the 2 you mentioned)? What do those have to do with Grigson and/or the offensive line? 

 

Im not saying Grigson was the best GM but lets not act like Luck avoided contact, threw the ball away and got down when a hit was coming. 

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

 

I realize this will be an unpopular opinion because it doesnt destroy Grigson but...

You did watch Luck play right? Do you recall how he lacerated his kidney (in addition to the 2 you mentioned)? What do those have to do with Grigson and/or the offensive line? 

 

Im not saying Grigson was the best GM but lets not act like Luck avoided contact, threw the ball away and got down when a hit was coming. 

I agree. And that was my point. Everyone puts the blame solely on Ryan Grigson, who I also blame and dislike for his lack of management and other skills. But Luck brought a lot of his issues on himself. Especially given his snowboarding injuries.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, csmopar said:

I agree. And that was my point. Everyone puts the blame solely on Ryan Grigson, who I also blame and dislike for his lack of management and other skills. But Luck brought a lot of his issues on himself. Especially given his snowboarding injuries.

As much as I liked Luck as a football player I have to go the other direction as far as him not being forthright about his off field injuries.

Then he walked away with only two weeks before the start of the season. He not only put this team behind the 8 ball he put Ballard in a no win situation. 

I can't blame him for retiring but it could and should have been handled different. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, csmopar said:

I agree. And that was my point. Everyone puts the blame solely on Ryan Grigson, who I also blame and dislike for his lack of management and other skills. But Luck brought a lot of his issues on himself. Especially given his snowboarding injuries.

 

My apologies. I mistook your direction. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

As much as I liked Luck as a football player I have to go the other direction as far as him not being forthright about his off field injuries.

Then he walked away with only two weeks before the start of the season. He not only put this team behind the 8 ball he put Ballard in a no win situation. 

I can't blame him for retiring but it could and should have been handled different. 

Agree

32 minutes ago, Mitch Connors said:

 

My apologies. I mistook your direction. 

No worries

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

As much as I blame Grigson for Lucks injuries and early retirement, Lucks last two injuries weren’t not foot ball related. They were injuries suffered from snow boarding. The shoulder and the lower leg both. 
 

but enough about luck, he’s gone, it’s time to move on.

I’ve never herd nor read that about the Luck injuries anywhere.   Can you provide a link?   I’d love to read that...

 

Thanks. 

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.

×
×
  • Create New...