Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
CR91

Blackmon one of top Run defender S according to PFF

Recommended Posts

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PFF hasn't always proved to be reliable. Just my experience the past 3 - 4 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rackeen305 said:

PFF hasn't always proved to be reliable. Just my experience the past 3 - 4 years.

When PFF is off, they're not off by a lot.  They don’t call someone who is bad and say he’s good.   They have various levels.  They might be off by one level, but they’re not going to be off by several levels.  
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m anxious to see this kid on the field.  He has a tremendous burst needed for the position.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our Division is becoming a run oriented Division, not so much a deep ball or 50 pass attempt Division.  We need DBs who can tackle.

 

Although, I think he's a bit light to be the main DB to take on Derrick Henry.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Our Division is becoming a run oriented Division, not so much a deep ball or 50 pass attempt Division.  We need DBs who can tackle.

 

Although, I think he's a bit light to be the main DB to take on Derrick Henry.

 

Can't be any worse then this haha

EODDFdNVUAADQnY.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

I’m anxious to see this kid on the field.  He has a tremendous burst needed for the position.

I like this guy too; he's really talented with a very high ceiling. Just hope he's healthy enough to make an impact this year, because they'll need him. The Colts' secondary is an unknown beast. It could be much improved.......or not. Its one of the few remaining question marks on the team. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

Our Division is becoming a run oriented Division, not so much a deep ball or 50 pass attempt Division.  We need DBs who can tackle.

 

Although, I think he's a bit light to be the main DB to take on Derrick Henry.

 

I don't necessarily agree with that. It might not be a 50 pass attempt division...but HOU is loaded with pass catchers and has Watson...TENN just gave Tannehill a huge extension (after he basically helped transform the passing game) and they drafted a pass catching back to pair with Henry...and JAC has made several moves towards being more of a passing team (Chark, Oliver and Shenault) in recent years...and Jay Gruden will throw when he has a QB...as he did with Cousins.

 

I do agree that the Ss need to be able to tackle though. Interestingly, the guy directly ahead of Blackmon on this list...beyond having an awesome name...was All-SEC with 4 INTs and 9 PBUs last year...and went UNdrafted. Two Ss that seem so similar on paper (stats, measureables) and on tape...completely different evaluations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Hoose said:

Its one of the few remaining question marks on the team. 

Until the Colts make a serious playoff push, there will be question marks at every position. I feel as though accepting divisional titles as a W is what hamstring this organization, to not making more Superbowls. 

 

2000s Colts - "We have owned the division for 10 years" (1 Superbowl ring w/arguably the greatest QB of all time)

 

Meanwhile: 

Pats/Steelers/Ravens/ - Multiple SB rings (we know Seattle got robbed 1 ring) if not deep playoff runs. So I believe we have many question marks. 

 

You aren't playing against your own second string in order to make the playoffs/SB. You are playing against other teams 1s (Jackson, Mahomes,Brees, Wilson), so with that in mind we have alot of question marks.

  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

Until the Colts make a serious playoff push, there will be question marks at every position. I feel as though accepting divisional titles as a W is what hamstring this organization, to not making more Superbowls. 

 

2000s Colts - "We have owned the division for 10 years" (1 Superbowl ring w/arguably the greatest QB of all time)

 

Meanwhile: 

Pats/Steelers/Ravens/ - Multiple SB rings (we know Seattle got robbed 1 ring) if not deep playoff runs. So I believe we have many question marks. 

 

You aren't playing against your own second string in order to make the playoffs/SB. You are playing against other teams 1s (Jackson, Mahomes,Brees, Wilson), so with that in mind we have alot of question marks.

Ummm...if not for a botched onside kick recovery, the Colts would have won 2 as well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, cdgacoltsfan said:

Ummm...if not for a botched onside kick recovery, the Colts would have won 2 as well.

 

 Right. I remember that pick 6 that ended the game.

 And how we won a SB with good defense and a running game. Not Until!
  We had more Regular Season MVP wins than anyone though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, cdgacoltsfan said:

Ummm...if not for a botched onside kick recovery, the Colts would have won 2 as well.

It doesn't matter. If you, Colts fans, Jim Irsey believe that Peyton Manning is one of the greatest to ever do it, Colts should have had more than 1 ring to show for it. Jim Irsey even said this. That's why Jimmy stated he wanted like 3 in a row (something of that sort) or Championship dynasty.

 

Jim Irsey: "the goal is to win three in a row."

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://coltswire.usatoday.com/2019/04/03/indianapolis-colts-jim-irsay-super-bowl-3-in-a-row/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwiw0pWomOHpAhVQm-AKHWscD_oQFjAMegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw2MyBiVLfpYEwTsiTSc_Vcx&ampcf=1&cshid=1591034273453

 

The NFL even changed rules favoring the offense. Can't jam beyond 5 yards, etc. I know that Peyton alone couldn't couldn't win it all, however, we are talking about Peyton freaking Manning here. Honestly, no excuse. The Miami Dolphins would've sold their stadium to get Peyton Manning with their defense and team which could only beat the Pats.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

It doesn't matter. If you, Colts fans, Jim Irsey believe that Peyton Manning is one of the greatest to ever do it, Colts should have had more than 1 ring to show for it. Jim Irsey even said this. That's why Jimmy stated he wanted like 3 in a row (something of that sort) or Championship dynasty.

 

Jim Irsey: "the goal is to win three in a row."

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://coltswire.usatoday.com/2019/04/03/indianapolis-colts-jim-irsay-super-bowl-3-in-a-row/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwiw0pWomOHpAhVQm-AKHWscD_oQFjAMegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw2MyBiVLfpYEwTsiTSc_Vcx&ampcf=1&cshid=1591034273453

 

The NFL even changed rules favoring the offense. Can't jam beyond 5 yards, etc. I know that Peyton alone couldn't couldn't win it all, however, we are talking about Peyton freaking Manning here. Honestly, no excuse. The Miami Dolphins would've sold their stadium to get Peyton Manning with their defense and team which could only beat the Pats.

 

I think the 3 in a row was in response to what would define the greatest team in the salary cap era. Irsay did say he wanted a team with multiple SB wins when Luck was drafted, and some felt like he was throwing shade at Peyton, maybe yes, maybe not.

 

There were instances I defended Peyton where it felt like he had little margin for error in playoff games and then instances where I felt he missed some reads and got "happy playoff feet Peyton" in key moments leading to "playoff Peyton" jokes. It was a mixed bag with him but the ultimate stat to me was Peyton's record vs playoff teams in the regular season hovered around .500, against playoff Ds. So, when that record manifested itself in the playoffs, it was not surprising. But people were surprised because a lot of our 12 win seasons were padded with wins against middle of the road teams and the Peyton hype led to higher expectations too. 

 

Plus, the other ignored aspect is with a lot of teams on par at the playoff level, the differences in coaching shined a bit more come playoff time and I do not believe we had a great coaching staff on defense and special teams consistently. Then, they let them play with a little more contact from DBs in the Peyton era come playoff time than the regular season, which was disruptive for a timing offense with a "not so" rocket arm from Peyton, even in his prime compared to a Favre or even Brady.

 

Factor all of the above factors, our playoff record with Peyton was as expected. The only time we beat a #1, #2 and #3 scoring D was when we ran well, giving our undersized but speedy D a shot to play at max. efficiency and allowing us to minimize our weak special teams.

Share this post


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

 

 

I don't necessarily agree with that. It might not be a 50 pass attempt division...but HOU is loaded with pass catchers and has Watson...TENN just gave Tannehill a huge extension (after he basically helped transform the passing game) and they drafted a pass catching back to pair with Henry...and JAC has made several moves towards being more of a passing team (Chark, Oliver and Shenault) in recent years...and Jay Gruden will throw when he has a QB...as he did with Cousins.

 

I do agree that the Ss need to be able to tackle though. Interestingly, the guy directly ahead of Blackmon on this list...beyond having an awesome name...was All-SEC with 4 INTs and 9 PBUs last year...and went UNdrafted. Two Ss that seem so similar on paper (stats, measureables) and on tape...completely different evaluations.

Maybe the pass attempts will still be high, but we won't be seeing the Marino, Fouts, Big Ben , Arians/Coryell type of bombs away attacks, IMO.  Its going to be more underneath stuff, which requires DBs having certain skills that are more pronounced than the skills needed to defend the offenses of the past.

 

Maybe it was an anomaly,  but Watson's ball velocity was like 50 mph at his combine.  Hardly even NFL caliber.  So while he may be able to chuck it with accuracy down field a few times, he doesn't have the arm to run a deep out or bombing attack style of offense, and he has to open up passing game with the threat of his legs and escapability.  Even that also requires DBs with tackling skills. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

It doesn't matter. If you, Colts fans, Jim Irsey believe that Peyton Manning is one of the greatest to ever do it, Colts should have had more than 1 ring to show for it. Jim Irsey even said this. That's why Jimmy stated he wanted like 3 in a row (something of that sort) or Championship dynasty.

 

Jim Irsey: "the goal is to win three in a row."

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://coltswire.usatoday.com/2019/04/03/indianapolis-colts-jim-irsay-super-bowl-3-in-a-row/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwiw0pWomOHpAhVQm-AKHWscD_oQFjAMegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw2MyBiVLfpYEwTsiTSc_Vcx&ampcf=1&cshid=1591034273453

 

The NFL even changed rules favoring the offense. Can't jam beyond 5 yards, etc. I know that Peyton alone couldn't couldn't win it all, however, we are talking about Peyton freaking Manning here. Honestly, no excuse. The Miami Dolphins would've sold their stadium to get Peyton Manning with their defense and team which could only beat the Pats.

Since the 2000 season we are tied for the 3rd most wins in the NFL with the Packers (2000-2019/20 seasons). Only the Pats and Steelers have more wins in that time frame. Regarding SB championships you make it sound like a team winning 2 SB's is miles better than winning 1. 2-1 is a slight margin. Only the Patriots who have won 6 have a huge margin over all teams. Ravens and Giants have won 2 SB's since 2000 but we have more wins. Steelers have 2 as well and more wins so they deserve being ranked the 2nd best franchise since the 2000's. Colts along with the Packers have only won 1 and have the same amount of wins. Like I said 2-1 is a slight margin in championships won. 6-1 is a big margin like the Pats have but the Pats have the upper hand on every team since the 2000's. It really doesn't bother me. Had we recovered a simple onsides kick vs the Saints, we would've had 2 but we didn't, it would've never came down to Peyton's INT trying to rally us again putting everything on him again, crap happens.  

 

Since 2000 (20 seasons) the best franchises have been IMO:

1. Patriots (*belongs here though because of the cheating they have done)

 

2. Steelers

 

3. Packers - same amount of wins as the Colts and a SB win like the Colts.

 

Tied for 3rd. Colts - I put us over the Ravens and Giants who did win 2 SB's simply because we have many more wins and have made the playoffs a lot more than the Giants did. Winning the 1 SB combined with that puts us tied for 3rd. The Seahawks and Broncos have won 1 SB too but we have more wins than those teams since 2000 as well. Without Regular Season wins you don't even make the playoffs, the Regular Season is very important. If someone wants to say we underachieved regarding winning SB's, I can buy that but It is what it is. 

JMO

Share this post


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

Since the 2000 season we are tied for the 3rd most wins in the NFL with the Packers (2000-2019/20 seasons). Only the Pats and Steelers have more wins in that time frame. Regarding SB championships you make it sound like a team winning 2 SB's is miles better than winning 1. 2-1 is a slight margin. Only the Patriots who have won 6 have a huge margin over all teams. Ravens and Giants have won 2 SB's since 2000 but we have more wins. Steelers have 2 as well and more wins so they deserve being ranked the 2nd best franchise since the 2000's. Colts along with the Packers have only won 1 and have the same amount of wins. Like I said 2-1 is a slight margin in championships won. 6-1 is a big margin like the Pats have but the Pats have the upper hand on every team since the 2000's. It really doesn't bother me. Had we recovered a simple onsides kick vs the Saints, we would've had 2 but we didn't, it would've never came down to Peyton's INT trying to rally us again putting everything on him again, crap happens.  

 

Since 2000 (20 seasons) the best franchises have been IMO:

1. Patriots (*belongs here though because of the cheating they have done)

 

2. Steelers

 

3. Packers - same amount of wins as the Colts and a SB win like the Colts.

 

Tied for 3rd. Colts - I put us over the Ravens and Giants who did win 2 SB's simply because we have many more wins and have made the playoffs a lot more than the Giants did. Winning the 1 SB combined with that puts us tied for 3rd. The Seahawks and Broncos have won 1 SB too but we have more wins than those teams since 2000 as well. Without Regular Season wins you don't even make the playoffs, the Regular Season is very important. If someone wants to say we underachieved regarding winning SB's, I can buy that but It is what it is. 

JMO

To make it short. My point and question is this. Who is Peyton Manning, and why does he have 1 ring in Indy. From the onset, if someone told you that by drafting PM you would be guaranteed to win 1 ring, is that good or bad. BTW Eli has 2 with same team. We we all know that Eli is good but he ain't the fk Sheriff (ask Jon Gruden).

 

If someone told you that PM won 1 ring in 10+ years with Indy, "most" would question why only 1 with Indy. And may even say that that's a fail.  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

To make it short. My point and question is this. Who is Peyton Manning, and why does he have 1 ring in Indy. From the onset, if someone told you that by drafting PM you would be guaranteed to win 1 ring, is that good or bad. BTW Eli has 2 with same team. We we all know that Eli is good but he ain't the fk Sheriff (ask Jon Gruden).

 

If someone told you that PM won 1 ring in 10+ years with Indy, "most" would question why only 1 with Indy. And may even say that that's a fail.  

A lot of the reason why Peyton only has 1 ring is because he couldn't beat the Pats early in his career (2003/2004). Also sometimes teams have bad luck, in 2009 we were clearly the best team but couldn't recover an onsides kick. Many great players have won 0 SB's. Dan Marino never won one. If someone would've told you Marino would've played 16 seasons and never won a SB, nobody would believe that. Jim Kelly and the Bills lost 4 straight SB's. Sometimes circumstance like a missed FG or an onsides kick, dropped pass in a SB can screw everything up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

A lot of the reason why Peyton only has 1 ring is because he couldn't beat the Pats early in his career (2003/2004). Also sometimes teams have bad luck, in 2009 we were clearly the best team but couldn't recover an onsides kick. Many great players have won 0 SB's. Dan Marino never won one. If someone would've told you Marino would've played 16 seasons and never won a SB, nobody would believe that. Jim Kelly and the Bills lost 4 straight SB's. Sometimes circumstance like a missed FG or an onsides kick, dropped pass in a SB can screw everything up. 

Dan Marino while one heck of a QB, Is 1B, to PM, 1A. All I'm saying is if Colts as a team are not making a deep playoff run, then Colts have more question marks than answers. What's gonna happen is the same as when PM was here, be complacent with divisional titles. You don't see Pats/Chiefs enamoured with division titles.

 

BTW, for clarity sake, I come from a football program UM where it's national championship or bust every year. And all the great programs ala Clemson, Ohio State (they owe us 1 ring) has the same goal.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

Dan Marino while one heck of a QB, Is 1B, to PM, 1A. All I'm saying is if Colts as a team are not making a deep playoff run, then Colts have more question marks than answers. What's gonna happen is the same as when PM was here, be complacent with divisional titles. You don't see Pats/Chiefs enamoured with division titles.

 

BTW, for clarity sake, I come from a football program UM where it's national championship or bust every year. And all the great programs ala Clemson, Ohio State (they owe us 1 ring) has the same goal.

You seriously think the Colts were “complacent with division titles”?  During the years with Manning, the other Hall of Fame players, a Hall of Fame General Manager in Polian and Irsay who wants desperately to win it all and you think those people were satisfied Coming up short?!?

 

Dear God...   what a fan base...     :facepalm:

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

You seriously think the Colts were “complacent with division titles”?  During the years with Manning, the other Hall of Famers, a Hall of Fame General Manager in Polian and Ursay who wants desperately to win it all and you think those people were satisfied Coming up short?!?

 

Dear God...   what a fan base...     :facepalm:

No fan base was. I echoed what Jim stated, which was similar to my thoughts. Multiple rings. Another poster stated that Colts have few question marks. My response, If you aren't going deep inside playoffs, Colts have more questions than answers.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

You seriously think the Colts were “complacent with division titles”?  During the years with Manning, the other Hall of Famers, a Hall of Fame General Manager in Polian and Ursay who wants desperately to win it all and you think those people were satisfied Coming up short?!?

 

Dear God...   what a fan base...     :facepalm:

I gave him a LIKE because he has PM 1A. haha . I agree though, winning the division back then was a given. Our goal was always SB or bust with Manning. Irsay was sick when we lost to Pitt in 2005.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I gave him a LIKE because he has PM 1A. haha . I agree though, winning the division back then was a given. Our goal was always SB or bust with Manning. Irsay was sick when we lost to Pitt in 2005.

It is that way in every sport at almost every level

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I gave him a LIKE because he has PM 1A. haha . I agree though, winning the division back then was a given. Our goal was always SB or bust with Manning. Irsay was sick when we lost to Pitt in 2005.

Missed FG. Haven't seen Mike Vanderjach since.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I gave him a LIKE because he has PM 1A. haha . I agree though, winning the division back then was a given. Our goal was always SB or bust with Manning. Irsay was sick when we lost to Pitt in 2005.

BTW, I say things objectively. Fan or not. If the team at any point sucked, failed, or is labeled the worst thing "soft" by other teams, fans, I will make it known. I look at things especially sports as they are. Good, bad, or other.

 

I mean if one is just a casual fan then much won't be expected. But if you are a real fan then short comings, areas of improvement should be mentioned. If not, the team would be the next coming of the Cleveland Browns or something.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

BTW, I say things objectively. Fan or not. If the team at any point sucked, failed, or is labeled the worst thing "soft" by other teams, fans, I will make it known. I look at things especially sports as they are. Good, bad, or other.

 

I mean if one is just a casual fan then much won't be expected. But if you are a real fan then short comings, areas of improvement should be mentioned. If not, the team would be the next coming of the Cleveland Browns or something.

Oh...didnt realize you are a "REAL FAN"

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eberflus stated you need to be able to tackle to play in this defense. Having Blackmon and Willis on the field should be a treat, especially when it comes to tackling. 

Share this post


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

Oh...didnt realize you are a "REAL FAN"

Yep. And you are the casual one.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

Yep. And you are the casual one.

What ever you say..."REAL FAN"

Just an FYI for ya..the owners name is spelled Irsay...not Irsey. 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rackeen305 said:

It doesn't matter. If you, Colts fans, Jim Irsey believe that Peyton Manning is one of the greatest to ever do it, Colts should have had more than 1 ring to show for it. Jim Irsey even said this. That's why Jimmy stated he wanted like 3 in a row (something of that sort) or Championship dynasty.

 

Jim Irsey: "the goal is to win three in a row."

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://coltswire.usatoday.com/2019/04/03/indianapolis-colts-jim-irsay-super-bowl-3-in-a-row/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwiw0pWomOHpAhVQm-AKHWscD_oQFjAMegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw2MyBiVLfpYEwTsiTSc_Vcx&ampcf=1&cshid=1591034273453

 

The NFL even changed rules favoring the offense. Can't jam beyond 5 yards, etc. I know that Peyton alone couldn't couldn't win it all, however, we are talking about Peyton freaking Manning here. Honestly, no excuse. The Miami Dolphins would've sold their stadium to get Peyton Manning with their defense and team which could only beat the Pats.

What the ?????

 

First you claim Jim Irsay and Peyton  Manning and everyone else were satisfied with winning the division.

 

And now you link a story with Irsay saying he wants to win three Super Bowls in a row.   Do you even realize you just contradicted yourself?

 

I think you’ve conflated a number of issues into one to express your frustration that the Colts with Manning only won one Super Bowl.   But to conclude that the team was satisfied with only winning divisional titles is incomprehensible.   Why would any fan think that of some of the worlds most competitive athletes?   It’s a complete mystery... 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

What the ?????

 

First you claim Jim Irsay and Peyton  Manning and everyone else were satisfied with winning the division.

 

And now you link a story with Irsay saying he wants to win three Super Bowls in a row.   Do you even realize you just contradicted yourself?

 

I think you’ve conflated a number of issues into one to express your frustration that the Colts with Manning only won one Super Bowl.   But to conclude that the team was satisfied with only winning divisional titles is incomprehensible.   Why would any fan think that of some of the worlds most competitive athletes?   It’s a complete mystery... 

As a fan I wish we would've won more SB's with Peyton but I am still happy we got 'the 1'. 'The 1' justifies the greatness the Colts had at least winning the most Regular Season games during the decade of the 2000's. I look at teams in a lot of sports that haven't won any that had great teams. Examples are - Dan Marino and his Dolphin teams, the Jim Kelly Bills from 1990-1993, the Utah Jazz with Stockton and Malone for years. IMO 2 is not much better than 1 but 1 is miles better than 0 because you won 1.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys completely objective, tell it like it is..... And has Peyton labeled the CLEAR 1a....... Over his obvious 1b Marino..... You lost me when making rankings mr. Objectivity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Shafty138 said:

Guys completely objective, tell it like it is..... And has Peyton labeled the CLEAR 1a....... Over his obvious 1b Marino..... You lost me when making rankings mr. Objectivity.

I think the top 3 QB's are in any order Brady, Montana, and Peyton. A lot of people think Marino belongs in there though like the poster you are referring too. I personally thought Elway was better than Marino but that is my opinion. Elway was more clutch but that is an eye test thing with me. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, w87r said:

I just need to figure out how to stop seeing certain people's post.

It's pretty easy. At the top right of the page, click on your name and a menu will drop down. Click on Ignored Users and then add that person's name. From then on, the forum will skip their posts when you are browsing. It shows that they have posted, but you have to click on the post to see what they said. I have a couple scalawags ignored, just to keep my blood pressure under control. :D

 

First forum in over 30 years of internet chatting that I've put folks on ignore.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

As a fan I wish we would've won more SB's with Peyton but I am still happy we got 'the 1'. 'The 1' justifies the greatness the Colts had at least winning the most Regular Season games during the decade of the 2000's. I look at teams in a lot of sports that haven't won any that had great teams. Examples are - Dan Marino and his Dolphin teams, the Jim Kelly Bills from 1990-1993, the Utah Jazz with Stockton and Malone for years. IMO 2 is not much better than 1 but 1 is miles better than 0 because you won 1.

As a Vikings fan with no big hope for the near future, I can attest you're absolutely right. 

 

Yeah, one could always look at how they're team could've won more. 

 

But only few have the presence of mind to know how winning that one is such a big feat. 

 

If Randy Moss had won one for the Vikings especially '98 season, fans would think he should have got us more. But, now we know even getting there in the big game is not a given for all greats. It's difficult to think from that perspective after you have won 1 or more.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, VikingsFanInChennai said:

As a Vikings fan with no big hope for the near future, I can attest you're absolutely right. 

 

Yeah, one could always look at how they're team could've won more. 

 

But only few have the presence of mind to know how winning that one is such a big feat. 

 

If Randy Moss had won one for the Vikings especially '98 season, fans would think he should have got us more. But, now we know even getting there in the big game is not a given for all greats. It's difficult to think from that perspective after you have won 1 or more.

Out of the franchises that have never won a SB, to me it comes down to 3 teams that were the best = the 1984 Dolphins, 1990 Bills, and your 1998 Vikings. Those teams had would it took but just didn't finish. We didn't finish in 2005 but did in 2006 thankfully. I hate losing, when we lost in 2005 I even had my doubts we would win 'The 1'. Besides being great, it takes a lot of luck to win 1. Look at the Colts run in 2006, 5 Vinny FG's at Baltimore, come from behind win to beat the Pats after being down 21-3. It was just meant to happen. When Bob Sanders came back I knew deep down we were the favorites but the AFC was so deep that year I didn't want to jinx it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Out of the franchises that have never won a SB, to me it comes down to 3 teams that were the best = the 1984 Dolphins, 1990 Bills, and your 1998 Vikings. Those teams had would it took but just didn't finish. We didn't finish in 2005 but did in 2006 thankfully. I hate losing, when we lost in 2005 I even had my doubts we would win 'The 1'. Besides being great, it takes a lot of luck to win 1. Look at the Colts run in 2006, 5 Vinny FG's at Baltimore, come from behind win to beat the Pats after being down 21-3. It was just meant to happen. When Bob Sanders came back I knew deep down we were the favorites but the AFC was so deep that year I didn't want to jinx it.

That's so true. When it happens, it is meant to happen. When it doesn't, it's not. Even above what players could control...

 

(That's not to be taken as excuse for some teams, but it's true for some great teams).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, VikingsFanInChennai said:

As a Vikings fan with no big hope for the near future, I can attest you're absolutely right. 

??

 

I know your hate for Kirk is real, but man.

 

I have Vikings and Saints in my NFC title game right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, w87r said:

??

 

I know your hate for Kirk is real, but man.

 

I have Vikings and Saints in my NFC title game right now.

Kirk is good, I have either the Bucs vs Seahawks in the NFC Title Game or Vikings in there instead of Bucs. happy star trek GIF

  • Like 1

Share this post


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.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Not trying to be argumentative but you simplifying this issue is not the reality of it all. Not only are there 53 players plus 10 practice squad players (90 in training camp) there are how many others around a NFL team? Doctors, trainers, coaches, assistant coaches, coordinators and whoever else. Just the sheer space need to keep social distance is impossible.  All of these people have families away from a locker room so it's not like they are going to be quarantined.  How about the mental aspect of the players? Can the players put all of this out of their thought process when their mindset has to be 100% about the game itself?  We are always reminded about distractions in the locker room and how it can have a negative effect.  IMO this goes much deeper than what can and can't be controlled.   
    • Its funny you say that.... I feel the same......   Strange times......
    • I would tend to agree   There is significant $$ moving around so I believe there will be a season of some sort.... maybe shortened.....   I think the NFL union may hold the players back from competing until there is a resolution or some protection.   We are seeing a crazy jump in new cases in Texas. (My daughter just tested positive   she is ok now)    If we are in mid August and the new cases in Covid starts to drop AND the death rates are dropping we may see a season.....   If not..... we may see a start in Oct......   Who knows....    
    • There is a big difference. After they all get initially tested the chances of it spreading among players is low. With the amount of times they will be tested and the fact none are going to even get in the facility with even a slight cough until they are tested the chances of it spreading is pretty small. Yes initially there will be some. I don’t even believe there are all these asystematic  cases. I think there are a lot of false positives. Which is why the nfl has a different protocol for them.
  • Members

    • ClaytonColt

      ClaytonColt 499

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 8,940

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • JPPT1974

      JPPT1974 930

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jmac_48

      jmac_48 524

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Architects08

      Architects08 306

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...