Phillip Rivers

[Coffeedrinker 3,537]

37 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Why are you quoting me on this nonsense? Why don't you go back and try reading what I posted in the thread you're talking about, and stop misrepresenting my argument?

Rivers INTs were bad plays no doubt about it.  But if someone looks at the 2 INTs as the reason the Colts lost the game are completely ignoring that somehow the Colts defense allow a mediocre QB like Minshew go 19 of 20 for 3 TDs.

 

I'm not excusing Rivers, his INTs and 3rd down completion percentage need to get better, especially in the 4th quarter.  But the defense was more embarrassing than a QB throwing 2 INTs.

[Superman 9,396]

Just now, Coffeedrinker said:

Rivers INTs were bad plays no doubt about it.  But if someone looks at the 2 INTs as the reason the Colts lost the game are completely ignoring that somehow the Colts defense allow a mediocre QB like Minshew go 19 of 20 for 3 TDs.

 

I'm not excusing Rivers, his INTs and 3rd down completion percentage need to get better, especially in the 4th quarter.  But the defense was more embarrassing than a QB throwing 2 INTs.

 

From the very first defensive possession, they were on skates. At least they tightened up the run D, but never did anything against the pass. At least there were some sacks, but no consistent pressure, and Uncle Rico ate them up all game long. 

[Restored 270]

22 minutes ago, Grigson's Gaffes said:

So you don’t factor in the quality of opponent when evaluating play? That’s insightful. 

 

Where did I say that? Even with that, it's not like the Saints have a top flight defense by any stretch either.

[Myles 4,172]

15 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Rivers INTs were bad plays no doubt about it.  But if someone looks at the 2 INTs as the reason the Colts lost the game are completely ignoring that somehow the Colts defense allow a mediocre QB like Minshew go 19 of 20 for 3 TDs.

 

I'm not excusing Rivers, his INTs and 3rd down completion percentage need to get better, especially in the 4th quarter.  But the defense was more embarrassing than a QB throwing 2 INTs.

That's how I felt.   The INT's were bad, but he was pretty good the rest of the game and on that last "Hilton drops" drive.   

In order of blame for me:

Reich

Eberflus/defense

Rivers

WR's

[Myles 4,172]

2 minutes ago, Restored said:

 

Where did I say that? Even with that, it's not like the Saints have a top flight defense by any stretch either.

Actually most have them as a top 5 defense in the league.   

But I agree that Brady had a much worse game than Rivers.

[Restored 270]

3 minutes ago, Myles said:

Actually most have them as a top 5 defense in the league.   

But I agree that Brady had a much worse game than Rivers.

 

Eh, they weren't that strong last season but who knows where they will be this year. Nonetheless, I agree with your point.

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2019/opp.htm

[Grigson's Gaffes 117]

40 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

You made it personal as well. So, there it is. 

How? I simply stated my opinion, which got me attacked for not falling into the majority or group think on here. There’s 15 football games left, so it could change, but I don’t think I will need all 15 to be proven right.

[Grigson's Gaffes 117]

20 minutes ago, Restored said:

 

Where did I say that? Even with that, it's not like the Saints have a top flight defense by any stretch either.

That’s what you just said. PFF rated them at 13 coming into the season, we will see how the year goes, but I would guess that, barring injuries, The Saints have a higher rated defense than the Jags this year. Brady being washed has nothing to do with Rivers being washed also, which is all I ever stated.

[Myles 4,172]

5 minutes ago, Grigson's Gaffes said:

How? I simply stated my opinion, which got me attacked for not falling into the majority or group think on here. There’s 15 football games left, so it could change, but I don’t think I will need all 15 to be proven right.

or wrong.

[Rackeen305 433]

1 hour ago, chad72 said:

 

So, it is about you being right than the Colts winning, got it!!! 

How sway how? Just because I wanted to go a different direction because of several reasons, where alot of ppl clowned me and called me names right? So now you are still right? Even when wrong? 

 

Just say you will eat crow. Even though I'm not into that. But it's hard for you to admit so far you have been wrong about Phillip.

[Restored 270]

1 minute ago, Grigson's Gaffes said:

That’s what you just said. PFF rated them at 13 coming into the season, we will see how the year goes, but I would guess that, barring injuries, The Saints have a higher rated defense than the Jags this year. Brady being washed has nothing to do with Rivers being washed also, which is all I ever stated.

 

I'm waiting and seeing with Rivers and Brady before I declare either one of them truly washed up. Will Rivers throw bad INT's occasionally? Sure, but that doesn't mean he's washed up. Luck threw plenty of INT's and no one was calling him washed up. Rivers was asked to throw 46 times and played pretty well outside of those two picks. The coaching staff and defense was more to blame for the Colts loss than Rivers was.

[2006Coltsbestever 22,272]

To keep it short and simple, Rivers isn't why we lost. I don't think I need to explain if you know football.

[Rackeen305 433]

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

To keep it short and simple, Rivers isn't why we lost. I don't think I need to explain if you know football.

But just last year, first game of the season, Colts lose to Rivers and Chargers by 3 points. Did you blame AV for missing FGs or did you call out JB? Same thing with Pittsburgh game where JB gets hurt. So why not Rivers? Have a great season. Just be consistent with your POV.

[Coffeedrinker 3,537]

6 minutes ago, Grigson's Gaffes said:

How? I simply stated my opinion, which got me attacked for not falling into the majority or group think on here. There’s 15 football games left, so it could change, but I don’t think I will need all 15 to be proven right.

I'm sorry but quit being such a whiner.  I remember you posting that.  A few items to note, some disagreed with you but just as many people agreed with you, so don't act like you were the lone voice of reason.  Lastly, if I remember correctly, people started of disagreeing with you, and you attacked them and they attacked back.  So quit playing the victim.

 

Also it's funny, you mention there are 15 games left in the season but it only took you one game to come on here beating your chest claiming you were correct.  That says more about you than any poster that attacked you (which you can look back, I was not one that attacked either the Rivers haters or the Rivers lovers.)

[2006Coltsbestever 22,272]

12 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

But just last year, first game of the season, Colts lose to Rivers and Chargers by 3 points. Did you blame AV for missing FGs or did you call out JB? Same thing with Pittsburgh game where JB gets hurt. So why not Rivers? Have a great season. Just be consistent with your POV.

You must not read my posts closely because I was one of a few that had JB's back and defended him in the Chargers and Steelers loss. I have posted countless times that I thought if we had JB for the whole game we would've beat the Steelers. We also beat the Dolphins with him. You have me mixed up with someone else. We have so many JB haters it is understandable though  

[Coffeedrinker 3,537]

13 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

To keep it short and simple, Rivers isn't why we lost. I don't think I need to explain if you know football.

I will modify it a bit, Rivers, alone, is not why the Colts lost.  The defense was horrid but River's INTs did not help.

[Grigson's Gaffes 117]

20 minutes ago, Myles said:

or wrong.

Ahhhh

[Grigson's Gaffes 117]

14 minutes ago, Restored said:

 

I'm waiting and seeing with Rivers and Brady before I declare either one of them truly washed up. Will Rivers throw bad INT's occasionally? Sure, but that doesn't mean he's washed up. Luck threw plenty of INT's and no one was calling him washed up. Rivers was asked to throw 46 times and played pretty well outside of those two picks. The coaching staff and defense was more to blame for the Colts loss than Rivers was.

I think that’s a pretty fair take. Rivers having to throw 46 times is not going to be a recipe for success. Also, the velocity for Rivers on his throws has clearly diminished. If the Colts are to have success it would be with him in a game manager role. The best thing for the franchise though is that they end up with Trevor Lawrence, but I don’t know how realistic that is.

[OffensivelyPC 1,117]

32 minutes ago, Grigson's Gaffes said:

How? I simply stated my opinion, which got me attacked for not falling into the majority or group think on here. There’s 15 football games left, so it could change, but I don’t think I will need all 15 to be proven right.

From your first post of yours I saw with Kermit post on youve been passive aggressive posing as a victim. Spare us the routine and just walk away from the computer. You're hardly the first of your type here and you arent going to be the last.

[Grigson's Gaffes 117]

10 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I'm sorry but quit being such a whiner.  I remember you posting that.  A few items to note, some disagreed with you but just as many people agreed with you, so don't act like you were the lone voice of reason.  Lastly, if I remember correctly, people started of disagreeing with you, and you attacked them and they attacked back.  So quit playing the victim.

 

Also it's funny, you mention there are 15 games left in the season but it only took you one game to come on here beating your chest claiming you were correct.  That says more about you than any poster that attacked you (which you can look back, I was not one that attacked either the Rivers haters or the Rivers lovers.)

Not saying you did, but the things that I pointed out were apparent to me with Rivers last season were on full display Sunday. He’s not getting velocity back, the instant upgrade in O-Line was overrated and it’s doubtful the Colts offensive line stays completely healthy again like last year. Is the season young? Yes. We’ll see what happens, leaving the door open I could be wrong but I highly doubt it. I only got personal after I was personally attacked. I’m not going to let people who have only played football on Madden and admittedly don’t watch football talk down to me and say I know nothing.

[Grigson's Gaffes 117]

1 minute ago, OffensivelyPC said:

From your first of yours I saw with Kermit,post on youve been passive aggressive posing as a victim. Spare us the routine and just walk away from the computer. You're hardly the first of your type here and you arent going to be the last.

That Kermit post was just good, clean fun. I’ll admit when I’m wrong and hold others accountable when they’re wrong. I’m not playing the victim, I’m standing up for myself.

[Restored 270]

17 minutes ago, Grigson's Gaffes said:

I think that’s a pretty fair take. Rivers having to throw 46 times is not going to be a recipe for success. Also, the velocity for Rivers on his throws has clearly diminished. If the Colts are to have success it would be with him in a game manager role. The best thing for the franchise though is that they end up with Trevor Lawrence, but I don’t know how realistic that is.

 

I didn't see a major drop off on the velocity of his throws compared to previous years and it really wasn't relevant to his INT's that he threw either.

 

Of course, ending up with another potential generational talent QB is good for the franchise but let's put this to bed right now. This team is not bad enough to end up with the number one pick. And even when you are bad enough as a team, there still has to be things that go wrong a number of times throughout the year to end up in that spot. The Colts aren't near that. The floor is maybe 6-9 wins depending on a litany of factors but finishing with the number 1 pick is not the floor by any stretch of the imagination.

[Coffeedrinker 3,537]

9 minutes ago, Grigson's Gaffes said:

Not saying you did, but the things that I pointed out were apparent to me with Rivers last season were on full display Sunday. He’s not getting velocity back, the instant upgrade in O-Line was overrated and it’s doubtful the Colts offensive line stays completely healthy again like last year. Is the season young? Yes. We’ll see what happens, leaving the door open I could be wrong but I highly doubt it. I only got personal after I was personally attacked. I’m not going to let people who have only played football on Madden and admittedly don’t watch football talk down to me and say I know nothing.

  Ok tough guy.  Well as someone who has played football and coached it, I do have a question.  Rivers threw 46 passes completed 36 of them for 346 yards and a TD but only his 2 INTs prove he's bad?  Especially considering that neither INT had anything to do with velocity but were just poor decisions.  Doesn't seem to quite fit your narrative.

[Myles 4,172]

8 minutes ago, Grigson's Gaffes said:

I think that’s a pretty fair take. Rivers having to throw 46 times is not going to be a recipe for success. Also, the velocity for Rivers on his throws has clearly diminished. If the Colts are to have success it would be with him in a game manager role. The best thing for the franchise though is that they end up with Trevor Lawrence, but I don’t know how realistic that is.

Lawrence isn't an option.   The Colts will win 8-10 games and draft in the teens.   Either Rivers will be back or Eason may get his chance.  Another free agent is an option too.  

[Myles 4,172]

3 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

  Ok tough guy.  Well as someone who has played football and coached it, I do have a question.  Rivers threw 46 passes completed 36 of them for 346 yards and a TD but his 2 INTs prove he's bad?  Especially considering that neither INT had anything to do with velocity but were just poor decisions.  Doesn't seem to quite fit your narrative.

I agree.   I think he had a pretty good game.  

[2006Coltsbestever 22,272]

Just now, Myles said:

I agree.   I think he had a pretty good game.  

Rivers played good and we moved the ball well. Of course the 2 INT's weren't good. My main take away from the game was the defense letting Minshew complete 19-20. That is just unacceptable.

[Coffeedrinker 3,537]

1 minute ago, Myles said:

I agree.   I think he had a pretty good game.  

Pretty good is the best way to describe it.  When he was in his game manager mode he looked really good.  But when he had to try to create something he wasn't so good.  Get JT to learn to run behind his pads rather than making college RB moves that won't fly in the NFL so the Colts can get back to their running game and the Colts will be fine.

[Bolts2Colts 303]

https://twitter.com/benbbaldwin/status/1305556409703161856?s=21

 

Very interesting graph on QB efficiency in Week 1.  Guess where Rivers and Minshew landed among all QBs?

[Grigson's Gaffes 117]

12 minutes ago, Restored said:

 

I didn't see a major drop off on the velocity of his throws compared to previous years and it really wasn't relevant to his INT's that he threw either.

 

Of course, ending up with another potential generational talent QB is good for the franchise but let's put this to bed right now. This team is not bad enough to end up with the number one pick. And even when you are bad enough as a team, there still has to be things that go wrong a number of times throughout the year to end up in that spot. The Colts aren't near that. The floor is maybe 6-9 wins depending on a litany of factors but finishing with the number 1 pick is not the floor by any stretch of the imagination.

Agree with all of that.

[Grigson's Gaffes 117]

10 minutes ago, Myles said:

Lawrence isn't an option.   The Colts will win 8-10 games and draft in the teens.   Either Rivers will be back or Eason may get his chance.  Another free agent is an option too.  

Probably not, but you never know. Anything can happen in the NFL, a few injuries or someone gets sick and things change pretty quick.

[zibby43 1,314]

 

Pretty darn impressive.  Would've been even better without the 2 picks. 

[Grigson's Gaffes 117]

38 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

  Ok tough guy.  Well as someone who has played football and coached it, I do have a question.  Rivers threw 46 passes completed 36 of them for 346 yards and a TD but only his 2 INTs prove he's bad?  Especially considering that neither INT had anything to do with velocity but were just poor decisions.  Doesn't seem to quite fit your narrative.

I’m not acting like a tough guy. If you dig back in the archives, the velocity is just part of the issue. Rivers has always had a knack for late game turnovers, especially last year. That issue happened again yesterday. Rivers has always been a gambler, as he loses velocity, those gambles get a lot more risky. We saw it yesterday with Brady, for example. He threw an out route that, 10 years ago, he probably completes. Instead, it was a pick 6. Rivers struggled at times in a game where he wasn’t sacked and didn’t face much pressure. It was also one of the worst defenses the Colts will face. That arm strength isn’t coming back, which isn’t good a combo with his penchant for throwing off of his back foot.

[Grigson's Gaffes 117]

4 minutes ago, zibby43 said:

 

Pretty darn impressive.  Would've been even better without the 2 picks. 

 17 of the 30 were check downs to RB’s. 

[Myles 4,172]

9 minutes ago, Grigson's Gaffes said:

 17 of the 30 were check downs to RB’s. 

Is that bad?   Brissett could barely hit those.  His game has always included short throws to RB's.  That's part of what he brings and the Colts needed that.   Especially with Hines.

Fact is, Rivers had 2 INT's but still had a pretty good game.   We lost for other reasons.   

[zibby43 1,314]

3 minutes ago, Grigson's Gaffes said:

 17 of the 30 were check downs to RB’s. 

 

 

It was refreshing to see checkdowns go for positive yardage this year, instead of sacks or throwaways by JB.

 

 

[Grigson's Gaffes 117]

1 minute ago, Myles said:

Is that bad?   Brissett could barely his those.  His game has always included short throws to RB's.  That's part of what he brings and the Colts needed that.   Especially with Hines.

Fact is, Rivers had 2 INT's but still had a pretty good game.   We lost for other reasons.   

Again, I don’t think the loss is on Rivers. I think there is enough accountability to go around, but Rivers is far from the savior people predicted he would be. That’s been my point.

[Grigson's Gaffes 117]

3 minutes ago, zibby43 said:

 

 

It was refreshing to see checkdowns go for positive yardage this year, instead of sacks or throwaways by JB.

 

 

[King Colt 957]

He threw three INTs one was called back by a Jags penalty.

[chad72 7,372]

1 hour ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I'm sorry but quit being such a whiner.  I remember you posting that.  A few items to note, some disagreed with you but just as many people agreed with you, so don't act like you were the lone voice of reason.  Lastly, if I remember correctly, people started of disagreeing with you, and you attacked them and they attacked back.  So quit playing the victim.

 

Also it's funny, you mention there are 15 games left in the season but it only took you one game to come on here beating your chest claiming you were correct.  That says more about you than any poster that attacked you (which you can look back, I was not one that attacked either the Rivers haters or the Rivers lovers.)

Preach it CD!!! Spot on.  

[Coffeedrinker 3,537]

4 minutes ago, King Colt said:

He threw three INTs one was called back by a Jags penalty.

Then it doesn't count. That is what penalties do, they negate the play.