Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

A Good, All-Around Team Effort


Recommended Posts

Sshhhh.  Judging from the comments around here we're still terrible no matter what because of our schedule.  We blew the Jags game so our entire season is lost, Frank is an *, and Ballard likes the smell of his own farts.  TY is decrepit, our OL is bottom 5, and Taylor/Pittman are massive busts.  Did you know our opponents combined record is 1-8?  F'n Embarrassing!  *kicks trash can*

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the good teams win games in different ways.  The one-trick ponies are the ones that fade out because once you can slow down the one thing they do well, you can beat them.  If this team can continue to be well-rounded, they don't need to be lights out in any one area.  In this league, you lose games more than you win them, and you lose them by having too many weaknesses.  Be well-rounded in all areas and you have a shot to win any game.  So far, so good for this team.  Let's see if they can maintain this pattern as the competition grows, starting Sunday.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, AZColt11 said:

I think the good teams win games in different ways.  The one-trick ponies are the ones that fade out because once you can slow down the one thing they do well, you can beat them.  If this team can continue to be well-rounded, they don't need to be lights out in any one area.  In this league, you lose games more than you win them, and you lose them by having too many weaknesses.  Be well-rounded in all areas and you have a shot to win any game.  So far, so good for this team.  Let's see if they can maintain this pattern as the competition grows, starting Sunday.

Yes, the key here is that all three phases of the ball will need to play hero at different times during the season to win important games. I can easily see this upcoming Bears game as a classic slugfest. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, CheezyColt said:

Sshhhh.  Judging from the comments around here we're still terrible no matter what because of our schedule.  We blew the Jags game so our entire season is lost, Frank is an *, and Ballard likes the smell of his own farts.  TY is decrepit, our OL is bottom 5, and Taylor/Pittman are massive busts.  Did you know our opponents combined record is 1-8?  F'n Embarrassing!  *kicks trash can*

Sarcasm aside, and I’ve said it before, I think there is a strangely large number of people on this board that don’t understand the difference between constructive and destructive criticism.

 

Are there doom and gloom’ers? Sure. But don’t lump everyone who points out areas needed to improve into that category.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, CheezyColt said:

Sshhhh.  Judging from the comments around here we're still terrible no matter what because of our schedule.  We blew the Jags game so our entire season is lost, Frank is an *, and Ballard likes the smell of his own farts.  TY is decrepit, our OL is bottom 5, and Taylor/Pittman are massive busts.  Did you know our opponents combined record is 1-8?  F'n Embarrassing!  *kicks trash can*

Exactly.  I chalk that loss to the Jags as our warm up game.  Does our offense need some work? Sure.  But did we demolish some bad teams like good teams are supposed to do?  Yes we did.  I'm feeling much better about this year than last year already. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

Sarcasm aside, and I’ve said it before, I think there is a strangely large number of people on this board that don’t understand the difference between constructive and destructive criticism.

 

Are there doom and gloom’ers? Sure. But don’t lump everyone who points out areas needed to improve into that category.

Of course there's a difference. In the JT thread you can find me agreeing with some of Nickster's criticism on him and taking his side when people wanted to call him a troll for daring to post something that wasn't overwhelmingly positive.

 

The fact is that there's MUCH more activity on this board when things go wrong than there is when things go right. And even when things go right, plenty of people are quicker to dismiss it.

 

There's a nice chunk of posters here that are only happy when they're upset.  Their posts are not constructive and amount to basically saying ir implying that players, coaches, scouts, and management are * because of impossible standards. THAT is who my post was geared toward. Not those who actually provide value to the forum.

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

Of course there's a difference. In the JT thread you can find me agreeing with some of Nickster's criticism on him and taking his side when people wanted to call him a troll for daring to post something that wasn't overwhelmingly positive.

 

The fact is that there's MUCH more activity on this board when things go wrong than there is when things go right. And even when things go right, plenty of people are quicker to dismiss it.

 

There's a nice chunk of posters here that are only happy when they're upset.  Their posts are not constructive and amount to basically saying ir implying that players, coaches, scouts, and management are * because of impossible standards. THAT is who my post was geared toward. Not those who actually provide value to the forum.

Let them. Doesn’t mean you have to engage with them.

 

The alternative is that you run the risk of not fostering an inclusive environment for all opinions, even the bad ones.

 

To be clear I agree with your points about the negative nancy types. I’ve been here long enough to see that it’s pretty much the natural order of things.

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.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • We don't have a qb,  so no we don't need a wr more than a qb
    • My pick for QB would be Michael Gallup. Oh wait, he's a WR. Yeah then I will still take Michael Gallup as we need receivers more than a QB right now.   Send Rock to Dallas for Gallup. 
    • Gus Johnson is a play by play guy.   Romo is color commentator.   They don't have the same job.    Both are very good at what they do,  but they do different things
    • I see many of the draft "experts" talk about what the Colts will do in the draft.   The draft process on the QB position, even with all the improved scouting techniques is a highly flawed .   If you look at history some interesting facts come out. Drafting a QB in the first round is a high risk endeavor    In the past 9 Years 20 QBs have been drafted in the first round.  I wanted to come up with some metrics to see the % that have worked out with the team that they drafted them   I am "measuring" the results with the simple question,   Would the NFL team make the same draft decision, at their position in that years draft, in hindsight - Its a YES/NO decision   For the ones that are still TBD (last few years) I counted these as YES. The selection of Goff as a "NO" is not that he is a horrible QB, but a simple question.... If you could do the pick again would you take Goff at number 1 overall.....  my guess is the Rams would have gone another way   2012 Draft Round 1 1st Andrew Luck - YES 2nd Robert Griffin - NO 8th Ryan Tannehil - NO 22nd Brandon Wheedon - NO   2013 Draft Round 1 16th EJ Manuel - NO   2014 Draft Round 1 3rd Pick Blake Bortles - NO 22nd Johnny Manziel - NO   2015 Draft Round 1 1st - Jameis Winston - NO 2nd Marcus Marriota  - NO   2016 Draft Round 1 1st Jared Goff - NO 2nd Carson Wentz - YES 22nd Paxton Lynch - NO   2017 Draft Round 1 2nd Mitch Trubiski - NO 10th Pat Mahomes - YES 12th Deshaun Watsun - YES   2018 Draft Round 1 1st Baker Mayfield - YES 3rd Sam Darnold - NO 7th Josh Allen - YES 10th Josh Rosen - NO 32nd Lamar Jackson - YES   With this data, drafting a QB in the first round is a 30% hit rate   The folks that want to give up 2 or 3 first round picks to move up to get Fields or Wilson may want to think deeper on this   From my perspective, and looking at the analytics it would appear that drafting the best BPA OL, DL , CB, or even WR,  available at 21 is the safest approach   And going with an extremely low risk/ low cost FA (Winston) or if the deal is decent, offering a trade to get Matthew Stafford. (Stafford route is my first choice), but I wouldnt want to  get fleeced in the trade.   If the right LT isnt there at 21, there are a few FA OTs that we could pick up       Let me know your thoughts...........      
  • Members

    • Blindside

      Blindside 23

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CoachLite

      CoachLite 400

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Fluke_33

      Fluke_33 2,360

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • drums1st

      drums1st 0

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • RollerColt

      RollerColt 2,349

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ScotColt

      ScotColt 179

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ponyboy

      ponyboy 62

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Blueblood23

      Blueblood23 327

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • colts8718

      colts8718 125

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • BSteph1

      BSteph1 37

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