-
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.
-
-
Thread of the Week
-
-
Topics
-
-
Posts
-
By Mitch Connors · Posted
Not directed at either above comment just a general thought about this... Do you think Chris Berman, Tony Gonzalez, Jim Nanz, etc watch all 16 NFL games each week or do you think they watch 2 or 3 and someone (an intern) watches the games and provides them summary notes? I wonder if a personality, like Phil Simms, actually does know more about the Colts than a regular fan. Guys like Nate Burelson make me think they watch all or at least most of the games but others I'm not so sure. Thoughts? -
Not really. The overall talent level right now with Rivers and our IR'd skill players is about the overall same level as when he had a more talented QB, less talent on defense, and Donald Thomas and Gosder Cherilous on IR back then. The main difference is that back then, we were maxed out at getting over the hump because we spent to the maximum Cap number just to get into the playoffs (but didn't mortgage the future), whereas now we still have room to maintain our talent level while adding more. So we will resign the good players, and add more rookies who can (hopefully) play. And then we'll be in position to win just like every other sports league team that wins and is pressed against the cap...they get rookies who are in their 2nd 3rd or 4th years to vastly contribute more to the team than the level of salary they are being compensated at in their rookie contracts. Its either done that way (like SEA did when they got those young drafted defensive players and Wilson pre-big contract) or you simply load up on FAs to win now and mortgage the future (which doesn't seem to work out well in the NFL) -
By Shadow_Creek · Posted
nah after last weeks game Trevor went on twitter thanking all his Clemson fans for his final home game there -
I'm fine with that. Not upset at all because we're not disagreeing. You just continue to misunderstand what I'm talking about. My original comment wasn't comparing the rosters without the QB. It was comparing the talent of the team responsible for the play on the field, which includes the QB. Overall its about the same. We play well at times, and lay stinkers at times, but for different reasons. Our defense was worse then, but we now don't give up as many short field interceptions as we did then. We don't come back as well now as we did back then. Now we score by probably taking more time off of the clock than we did back then. Different paths, same results so far. Neither team was complete, but for different reasons. Back then, we had a lot of holes at less important positions. Now we have fewer holes, but at more important positions. My original comment gathered quite a few Likes. Consider the possibility that you simply misunderstood what I was saying.
-
I can agree with Buckner. 32 may be second for me, before Leonard . He seems to make everyone in the secondary better like you see with the top tier free safeties. MAN he was sooooo close to making that play on MVS in the 4th.
-
-
Members
-
Recommended Posts