Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Aaron Rodgers could become available/Rodgers in Indy (Merge)


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 122
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

By restructuring his contract for salary cap purposes at the end of 2019 season, $14.26 million of Rodgers' 2020 $21.55 million salary was converted into a signing bonus and prorated over his 2019-202

Rodgers only has himself to blame for not running that ball in on 3rd down. He had a clear lane to the EZ.   The decision to go for it should have been mostly irrelevant because 4th down wou

I would rather trade for Love. Rodgers is solid but has 2 to 3 years tops left.

Posted Images

4 hours ago, richard pallo said:

I would rather have Stafford thank you.  Rogers is a prima donna that thinks only about himself.  He got bent just because they decided to draft an eventual replacement in Love.  Can you imagine the nerve of them?  Expect the same reaction wherever he goes. Too much drama. Ballard said our team will never be about one player.  Good luck with that with Rogers as our QB.    I'll take Stafford he's 5 years younger too.  San Fran and NE and the rest of them can have at it.  Please Ballard get the Stafford deal done asap so we can plan our subsequent moves for the off season.  Thank you very much. 

 

 

 

Stafford is a 33 year old QB with ZERO playoff wins 

 

Rodgers is a Super Bowl winning QB who wins playoff games

 

 

BIG DIFFERENCE!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rodgers may blame the coach but I distinctly remember Rodgers going Adams Happy and missing a wide open Lazard for an easy TD in the first half when the Packers were forced to settle for a field goal (similar to Rivers crucially missing Pittman twice in the Buffalo game).  I also remember the Packers abandoning the running game way too early when they got back into the game in the 3rd quarter. A sure fire Hall of Fame QB like Rodgers (just like Rivers) isn’t free of blame in that loss. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Also...  

 

Its important to remember about Rodgers, that his career didn’t really start until his 4th year.    Favre was still playing and Rodgers was on the sidelines.   So his body has much less miles it than you might think it would. 
 

That’s a big plus. 
 

That said....   trading fir him is going to be expensive....     he and Stafford, both. 

Amazing that the Packers have had 2 QBs since 1992.  RIP Ted Thompson

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

Rodgers may blame the coach but I distinctly remember Rodgers going Adams Happy and missing a wide open Lazard for an easy TD in the first half when the Packers were forced to settle for a field goal (similar to Rivers crucially missing Pittman twice in the Buffalo game).  I also remember the Packers abandoning the running game way too early when they got back into the game in the 3rd quarter. A sure fire Hall of Fame QB like Rodgers (just like Rivers) isn’t free of blame in that loss. 

Missing an open receiver under duress in the hustle bustle of live action really isn’t on a par with making a considered coaching decision.

 

That said, I understand why LaFleur made it.  Tough call.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

You’re not the first person to make the claim about Tom Brady and the Colts. 

 

But, to the best of my knowledge,  no one has offered up any proof.   A link that clearly says that.   Any chance you have one?  

I remember hearing he favored the Niners.

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

Missing an open receiver under duress in the hustle bustle of live action really isn’t on a par with making a considered coaching decision.

 

That said, I understand why LaFleur made it.  Tough call.

When you’re at the level of A-Rod and Rivers, you can’t miss those easy ones on the biggest stages like that.  I bet if you ask either they’ll say they regretted missing them.  Both ultimately cost them points in 1 possession games.  And I didn’t say both deserved ALL the blame just SOME.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Arodgers12 said:

I think you guys are going to get Arod next fall. I think he leaves us which I can’t blame him.

That was a tough loss.   your team was so close to a super bowl  that I would think they’d keep him for at least one more year until they know what they have in Love.  
 

Rodgers would be great here of course but he’d continue to be great for gb if he stays.  
 

keep your head up.  I know losses like these are hard to get over for a few days if not longer 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Arodgers12 said:

I think you guys are going to get Arod next fall. I think he leaves us which I can’t blame him.

If Rodgers leaves the Packers and wants to win a Super Bowl, he won't go to an AFC team. There are too many good young QBs in the AFC.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, w87r said:

Rodgers would become my number 1 option.

 

Rodgers

Stafford

Darnold

 

I obviously don't think Watson is an option

0% chance Rodgers comes to Indy. Too many good young QBs in the AFC. If he wants another shot at a Super Bowl, he will stay in the NFC.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Arodgers12 said:

He won’t win anything here. My expectations for the future are win the division, make the playoffs then lose like we always do.

 

You seem bitter after a tough loss.

 

New Orleans is likely to lose Brees (if not a retirement in the coming weeks, likely after next year).  That leaves Tampa Bay, a team you guys could have very well beaten yesterday (dominated time of possession, won the turnover battle, etc... that TD at the end of the half and a few other plays really changed that game, though if you looked at that stat sheet aside from the score, you'd probably have thought GB won).  The rest of the NFC South isn't too big of a threat in the next couple years.  The NFC East is a dumpster fire.  The NFC North is a division you should win for a few more years if Rodgers is your QB.  The NFC West seems like the toughest overall division in the NFC, but they underperformed this year - the Seahawks seem to be on the decline, I don't think Goff is good enough to get the Rams over the hump on an annual basis, not really sure what to think of the 9ers and the Cardinals have a good young coach and QB. 

 

No reason why Rodgers can't at least get back into the SB in the coming years in GB.  The other top QBs in that conference (Brees and Brady) are on the wrong side of 40.  Wilson, Murray and a couple other QBs seem to be a level below those two and Rodgers.  Matt Ryan's getting old, Dak Prescott's coming off a bad injury, and after those 2 I see a pretty big decline in NFC QBs (especially if Stafford leaves the conference).  

 

The AFC on the other hand had 4 QBs who were 26 or younger in the divisional round.  It looks like the Chiefs and Bills with Mahomes and Allen are going to be very tough for a long time coming.  Herbert looks to be the real deal with the Chargers as does Burrow with Bengals, the Ravens and Titans have ridiculous running games and solid Ds and likely will be threats for years to come.  Really, aside from having a hard time believing a few teams (i.e., NYJ, HOU, DEN) will be any good in the foreseeable future (I'd throw Jax in there, but who knows if they get Trevor).  Otherwise, I can see perennial powerhouse PITT declining as Roethlisberger ages/retires.  

 

Overall, I think Rodgers has a much better shot of getting to the SB if he stayed in Green Bay than if he came to the AFC.  The AFC, at least for the next few years, seems like a much stronger conference than the NFC overall and has multiple up-and-coming QBs, whereas several of the top dogs in the NFC have QBs who will likely be retiring before A-Rod does, and definitely before A-Rod is 'washed up'.

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

Rodgers only has himself to blame for not running that ball in on 3rd down. He had a clear lane to the EZ.

 

The decision to go for it should have been mostly irrelevant because 4th down wouldn’t have happened if he did run. And if he doesn’t get there...it’s going to be 4th and short...which makes the case for going for it even stronger.

 

Rodgers is a great QB...but he made a critical mistake.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

Rodgers didn't seem too pleased that GB drafted Jordan Love in the first round in the most recent draft.  Sort of a similar situation to Favre, but Rodgers had never threatened to retire.

 

Rodgers seemed very upset after today's loss (rightfully so).  He especially seemed angry that LaFleur chose to kick a FG inside the 10 yard line late in the game, at least mad enough to say he would probably have tried to run into the endzone on 3rd down if he thought the coach was going to kick a FG on 4th down rather than give him another shot.  

 

It's never a good idea to take someone's words with 100% seriousness in a very bad time (which I'm sure it was for Rodgers after losing that game after an MVP year).  That said, Rodgers did have some serious conviction in his voice when he said everyone's future is uncertain, including his own.  Rodgers has a bit of a right to be perturbed with some of today's play calling, and perhaps more with the Pack drafting Love in the first round in the 2020 draft -- he's playing at a very high level, has no major injury concerns and doesn't look like he's slowing down at all (he's still 6 years younger than Brady) -- the GB mgmt has seemingly ignored his desire to have more playmakers on offense (after D. Adams, he doesn't really have a whole lot) for a good chunk of his career and if I were him (i.e., MVP QB, future HOFer, with a bit of time left, but a window that's closing) I'd certainly have wanted to see that 1st round pick go towards a WR, OL or basically anything to help him rather than his future replacement.  

 

So, yea, it'd probably be a bad move for the Packers to part ways with Rodgers, especially if they have to take on that type of monetary hit.. but ultimately, Rodgers has done enough during his time in the league to have some say in his own fate.  If he truly wants out of GB (not saying he does for sure), it's probably more his choice than the Packers' at this point in time.

 

Great sumary, 100% accurate.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Call me crazy, but I don't want to get into another Rivers type situation with Rodgers. Gimme a QB that has at least 3-4 years in them so we can appropriately develop their replacement

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cdgacoltsfan said:

0% chance Rodgers comes to Indy. Too many good young QBs in the AFC. If he wants another shot at a Super Bowl, he will stay in the NFC.

I wouldn't put it at 0% but the chances are low. Hopefully it at least makes Stafford's path here a little easier.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shasta519 said:

Rodgers only has himself to blame for not running that ball in on 3rd down. He had a clear lane to the EZ.

 

The decision to go for it should have been mostly irrelevant because 4th down wouldn’t have happened if he did run. And if he doesn’t get there...it’s going to be 4th and short...which makes the case for going for it even stronger.

 

Rodgers is a great QB...but he made a critical mistake.

Twitch Reaction GIF by Hyper RPG

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

If Reich had gone for it yesterday in the same situation and we didn't get it, some in here would've been bashing him and say he should've took the points. The FG made it a 5 point game and they had all 3 timeouts and the 2 minute warning still = 4 timeouts. I blame GB's defense for this loss, not only did their D stink in the 1st half, they failed to get a stop at the end to give Aaron the ball back. I just find it funny, almost everyone says GB should've went for it but if Reich does it instead of taking the points, he is a bad coach :dunno:

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

Rodgers wouldn't play in Indiana for one.

I don't think Ballard would give Green Bay what it's going to take to get him out of there.

 

He retires or he plays in Green Bay.

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Rodgers isn't coming here but I think Stafford is. Louis Riddick was just on ESPN and said the Colts would be the perfect fit for Stafford and went on about it. Several other have said it as well like Randy Moss and Rex Ryan.

I said it first!

 

lol

 

Frankly I'm concerned because "consensus" is forming and that's a red flag.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would much rather get Rodgers over Stafford, if the compensation given to Green Bay isn't too pricey. With Rodgers already being 38, they shouldn't be asking for a large compensation package in return. And Indy only needs to 2 year QB or so until Eason is ready to take over. Everything I've heard is that Ballard and company really like Eason, he just needs more development. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I seriously am going to keep banging this drum.

 

Why would Stafford and especially Rodgers want to come here when we have no wideouts who are worth a snot?

 

You honestly think that Rodgers would leave Adams and Lazard/MVS/Tonyon for Hilton(if resigned)/Pittman/Pascal/Doyle/Burton/Cox and a chance to throw to Paris Campbell for two weeks before Campbell gets hurt again... Ha!!

 

Not a snowballs chance in a woodstove...

 

Come on... 

 

And to that, what's Stafford going to do with that terrible group of pass catchers....??

 

I'm sorry. I'm the guy that knows we need upgraded pass catchers in a serious way before any excitement can be thrown towards whatever QB might be coming this way.....

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Shive changed the title to Aaron Rodgers could become available/Rodgers in Indy (Merge)
7 minutes ago, Indeee said:

I seriously am going to keep banging this drum.

 

Why would Stafford and especially Rodgers want to come here when we have no wideouts who are worth a snot?

 

You honestly think that Rodgers would leave Adams and Lazard/MVS/Tonyon for Hilton(if resigned)/Pittman/Pascal/Doyle/Burton/Cox and a chance to throw to Paris Campbell for two weeks before Campbell gets hurt again... Ha!!

 

Not a snowballs chance in a woodstove...

 

Come on... 

 

And to that, what's Stafford going to do with that terrible group of pass catchers....??

 

I'm sorry. I'm the guy that knows we need upgraded pass catchers in a serious way before any excitement can be thrown towards whatever QB might be coming this way.....

 

 

Yes I'm sure that's the reason Stafford doesn't wanna come here.

 

Come On Reaction GIF by NBA

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

I seriously am going to keep banging this drum.

 

Why would Stafford and especially Rodgers want to come here when we have no wideouts who are worth a snot?

 

You honestly think that Rodgers would leave Adams and Lazard/MVS/Tonyon for Hilton(if resigned)/Pittman/Pascal/Doyle/Burton/Cox and a chance to throw to Paris Campbell for two weeks before Campbell gets hurt again... Ha!!

 

Not a snowballs chance in a woodstove...

 

Come on... 

 

And to that, what's Stafford going to do with that terrible group of pass catchers....??

 

I'm sorry. I'm the guy that knows we need upgraded pass catchers in a serious way before any excitement can be thrown towards whatever QB might be coming this way.....

 

 

T.Y and two high pick guys and there's a FA class, Hines and TE's

 

This isn't a great point

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Yes I'm sure that's the reason Stafford doesn't wanna come here.

 

Come On Reaction GIF by NBA

What does this even mean? THESE PASS CATCHERS ARE TERRIBLE. Absolutely none of them scare anybody. That is a major problem. Again yall can love love love the possibility of having all these big name QBs it doesn't change the fact that these wideouts are terrible

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

T.Y and two high pick guys and there's a FA class, Hines and TE's

 

This isn't a great point

TY Hilton is a shell of what he was. He is over. How can his name even be brought up here? What do you mean two high pick guys? Are you referring to the possibility of the Colts drafting two wideouts early? Or are you referring to the selection of Campbell and Pittman? 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Indeee said:

TY Hilton is a shell of what he was. He is over. How can his name even be brought up here? What do you mean two high pick guys? Are you referring to the possibility of the Colts drafting two wideouts early? Or are you referring to the selection of Campbell and Pittman? 

 

 

You watched the team you're a fan of. You know there's guys named Michael Pittman and Paris Campbell on the team- 2 high picks from the last two drafts? I mean I know you know they're here, you just named them.

 

Bad TY take. Since you watch the team and know JB can't throw and Rivers wasn't playing deep this past season, TY's skill set wasn't utilized to it's maximum. But hey, "he's done" because you say so..

 

I'm not persuaded that the offense is so bad that Stafford, wanting out of Detroit, wouldn't come here. 

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

If Reich had gone for it yesterday in the same situation and we didn't get it, some in here would've been bashing him and say he should've took the points. The FG made it a 5 point game and they had all 3 timeouts and the 2 minute warning still = 4 timeouts. I blame GB's defense for this loss, not only did their D stink in the 1st half, they failed to get a stop at the end to give Aaron the ball back. I just find it funny, almost everyone says GB should've went for it but if Reich does it instead of taking the points, he is a bad coach :dunno:


I hated the punt call...but I also hated see the game end on a penalty they didn’t call all game. They let that go and GB gets it right back.

 

I would say Rodgers bears a lot of blame for that loss. The defense was bad in the 1st half (most notably on that Miller TD). But in the 2nd half...the only TD that TB got was off a fumble inside GB’s 10. Then they picked off Brady 3x in a row....which gave Rodgers (3) drives to make up an 11 point deficit (including 2 in a row down by 5).  And the defense later held TB to a FG to keep it an 8 point.

 

Rodgers is Rodgers...but he got tunnel vision near the EZ. And I am still baffled that he didn’t try to run the ball in on 3rd down...that was a classic game-winning play...and instead he forced it into triple coverage.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Fish said:

You watched the team you're a fan of. You know there's guys named Michael Pittman and Paris Campbell on the team- 2 high picks from the last two drafts? I mean I know you know they're here, you just named them.

 

Bad TY take. Since you watch the team and know JB can't throw and Rivers wasn't playing deep this past season, TY's skill set wasn't utilized to it's maximum. But hey, "he's done" because you say so..

 

I'm not persuaded that the offense is so bad that Stafford, wanting out of Detroit, wouldn't come here. 

Ok that is your opinion and that is fine. I will say that you're assessment on TY, imo, is a little naïve. TY has disappeared from all areas of his game, not just deep routes. He ultimately is a ghost and guys like Adams and Hopkins as example WANT the ball when they realize the others around them are not up to the challenge, they don't disappear. As far as Campbell, he's always in the trainers tent and Pittman so far shows no real consistency in being able to separate from defenders at this level. I know Pittman is young so not really fair to spotlight him but so far I have seen nothing in small sample that tells me this guy is a gamebreaker and that's my point/opinion. These wideouts scare nobody, they are just a bunch of JAGS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Indeee said:

I seriously am going to keep banging this drum.

 

Why would Stafford and especially Rodgers want to come here when we have no wideouts who are worth a snot?

 

You honestly think that Rodgers would leave Adams and Lazard/MVS/Tonyon for Hilton(if resigned)/Pittman/Pascal/Doyle/Burton/Cox and a chance to throw to Paris Campbell for two weeks before Campbell gets hurt again... Ha!!

 

Not a snowballs chance in a woodstove...

 

Come on... 

 

And to that, what's Stafford going to do with that terrible group of pass catchers....??

 

I'm sorry. I'm the guy that knows we need upgraded pass catchers in a serious way before any excitement can be thrown towards whatever QB might be coming this way.....

 

 


If they did make a move for Stafford...I think Kenny G is a very strong possibility...or some other FA WR. And then they would draft a TE.

 

They definitely need to add weapons this offseason...regardless of what they do at QB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

he would never say it out loud, but you can read between the lines when he goes on Pat Mcafee. The whole world knows they needed help at a lot of positions, but they chose to draft a Quarterback with the first pick. The one spot they were actually set at. That has to feel like to anyone that would be on that team for 2+ years that the organization is not in "win now" mode. I would be upset as well.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, shasta519 said:


If they did make a move for Stafford...I think Kenny G is a very strong possibility...or some other FA WR. And then they would draft a TE.

 

They definitely need to add weapons this offseason...regardless of what they do at QB.

Kenny G? Yea that's what we need a saxophone player catching passes.......:lol:

 

I'm not sure the Lions wouldn't resign Golliday, especially seeing as Jones will be headed out as well

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Smoke317 said:

Rodgers may blame the coach but I distinctly remember Rodgers going Adams Happy and missing a wide open Lazard for an easy TD in the first half when the Packers were forced to settle for a field goal (similar to Rivers crucially missing Pittman twice in the Buffalo game).  I also remember the Packers abandoning the running game way too early when they got back into the game in the 3rd quarter. A sure fire Hall of Fame QB like Rodgers (just like Rivers) isn’t free of blame in that loss. 

 

Rodgers takes sacks and is a selfish guy when it comes to pass distribution. How many years have you seen him keying in on Adams or try to play hero and take sacks? I think Stafford is a better fit for what we do because he will not come with the HUGE ego that Rodgers has. 

 

Brady and Peyton distribute/distributed the ball far better, IMO. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, chad72 said:

 

Rodgers takes sacks and is a selfish guy when it comes to pass distribution. How many years have you seen him keying in on Adams or try to play hero and take sacks? I think Stafford is a better fit for what we do because he will not come with the HUGE ego that Rodgers has. 

 

Brady and Peyton distributed the ball far better, IMO. 

I just don’t get why he didn’t try to run it in for a Touchdown on that last drive.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, shasta519 said:


I hated the punt call...but I also hated see the game end on a penalty they didn’t call all game. They let that go and GB gets it right back.

 

I would say Rodgers bears a lot of blame for that loss. The defense was bad in the 1st half (most notably on that Miller TD). But in the 2nd half...the only TD that TB got was off a fumble inside GB’s 10. Then they picked off Brady 3x in a row....which gave Rodgers (3) drives to make up an 11 point deficit (including 2 in a row down by 5).  And the defense later held TB to a FG to keep it an 8 point.

 

Rodgers is Rodgers...but he got tunnel vision near the EZ. And I am still baffled that he didn’t try to run the ball in on 3rd down...that was a classic game-winning play...and instead he forced it into triple coverage.

 

 

Losses like this are hard to recover from. I don’t think the team ever recovered from the 2014 NFC Championship loss in Seattle 

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

Ok that is your opinion and that is fine. I will say that you're assessment on TY, imo, is a little naïve. TY has disappeared from all areas of his game, not just deep routes. He ultimately is a ghost and guys like Adams and Hopkins as example WANT the ball when they realize the others around them are not up to the challenge, they don't disappear. As far as Campbell, he's always in the trainers tent and Pittman so far shows no real consistency in being able to separate from defenders at this level. I know Pittman is young so not really fair to spotlight him but so far I have seen nothing in small sample that tells me this guy is a gamebreaker and that's my point/opinion. These wideouts scare nobody, they are just a bunch of JAGS.

Naïve is thinking past performance is indicative in total of future performance with guys who aren't 2 years into a career yet. You could be right, but you don't know, because it hasn't happened. Pittman was a fine rookie. Maybe Campbell is bust, or maybe the folks who are around him everyday who "love him" are right and he's going to make some waves. 

And there is a FA and the draft so I'm certain more names will be added to the mix. Will they be Julio Jones? Probably not, but in the universe of SB winners, seldom do those teams have the 1A WR. Even Brady tossing to Moss didn't pan out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Indeee said:

What does this even mean? THESE PASS CATCHERS ARE TERRIBLE. Absolutely none of them scare anybody. That is a major problem. Again yall can love love love the possibility of having all these big name QBs it doesn't change the fact that these wideouts are terrible

Playing behind our OL and overall better D is reason enough to come here.

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

    • I don't know who else we really need to have a bounce back year, especially on D.  Along our DL, we either need to bring back Houston and Autry or figure out how to replace them - but both had pretty solid years.  Lewis was better than he had been his first couple years.  Buckner was a stud and Stewart was solid.  Having Turay come back healthy and seeing Banogu improve would be helpful, but they both played so little last year and hadn't done enough previously to indicate last year was a 'down year'.  At LB, Leonard was a first-team all pro again and very solid.  Walker was solid but saw his snap count decrease and Oke had his ups and downs while seeing his snap count dramatically increase (as @EastStreet pointed out,  not only did his snaps go way up compared to his rookie year but the way he was used was different).  I doubt we see Walker back, so it'd be nice to see Oke improve for sure.  Then in the secondary we had solid play from Rhodes, Carrie, Willis and Moore for the most part.  Blackmon was solid (especially early on, but he seemed to digress as the year went on - IMO, to be expected as he was raw coming in and was coming off a knee injury, I don't think he was supposed to get near the snaps he did last year, but we know what happened with Hooker and sort of forced Blackmon into the fire).  RYS had a down year, but I don't see why he can't bounce back - he's got the physical traits - I tend to think he battled some mental demons after some P-Int penalties, and hopefully he can refine his technique some and come back strong.     In all, on the D, I think we're in good shape.  Keep in mind, it seemed like 'Flus called the D a bit differently last year than he had in earlier years here.  We are, overall (aside from Houston, Autry, Rhodes) very young on D.  We had a very weird off-season last year, which (IMO) is critical for younger guys.  I can't help but think it didn't help the likes of guys like RYS and Oke who saw their roles increase and change (IMO, OKe's change was more than a 'slight' change) between their rookie year and year 2.     On O, ideally we'll see solid QB play from Wentz (I won't go as far as to saying he needs a 'bounce back' year as he hasn't been in Indy before and it sounds like there was a lot of toxicity in Philly, hopefully all he needs in a change of scenery and a reunion with Reich).  Our OL was solid, so as long as we can replace AC at LT I think we'll be OK there.  We had pretty consistent play from Hines and Wilkins throughout the year and JT got dramatically better as the season wore on -- I think if those guys can start up where they left off, we're more than fine at RB.  TY didn't have his best year, but he's be declining for about 3 years now, so if we bring him back, all we can do is hope he stays healthy and I think we'll be in OK shape.  Pittman missed some time with his leg compartment syndrome, but was solid down the stretch, so I don't think we need him to 'bounce back', just continue on his trajectory and he's gonna be solid.  Pascal was solid and I think we've pretty much seen his ceiling, so he just needs to stay solid.  It would be sweet to see Campbell and/or Patmon to emerge, but don't think we need them to 'bounce back' as we've never gotten high level results from them to begin with.     Then on STs, we were pretty solid all around.  Would like to see Blankenship add a bit more umphf to his kicks, but he was solid and Sanchez was solid punting.  The coverage and return units were solid overall.   So really, I think we need a comeback or bounce back year from RYS and maybe Oke... but overall, I don't think we need a 'bunch of them.'       I agree, pretty much  have to temper expectations on Speed being from a small school.  He did really improve on STs last year and he got his praise any time Ballard or any coaches spoke about him.  I get the feeling Ballard and staff are willing to use patience with project players (Ballard states that fairly regularly).  With Oke, Walker, Leonard and then Franklin who has more playing experience at LB - I don't think there was really much need to rush Speed into an LB role last year.  He got plenty of ST snaps and did well there, hopefully boosting his confidence that he can play at NFL level while still refining his LB technique in practices and the film room.     While I would rather see guys like Adams and Glasgow on STs - I don't think it is terrible to have them on the roster primarily as STers but being our 5th and 6th ranked LBs on the depth chart as well.  Meaning, if we went into the season with Leonard, Oke, Speed and Franklin as our top 4 with Adams and Glasgow as STers but listed as 5 and 6 on depth chart, I don't think it'd be the worst thing (especially considering we predominantly play with only 2 LBers on the field).  So, sure it'd be nice to bring in a mid-late round draft pick or sign a decent FA for fairly cheap, but I'd rather see us dishing out money to bring in a solid LT, a playmaker at TE (and maybe WR), retain Rhodes, ensure the DL was solid (either by bringing back Houston and Autry or by getting a guy like Bud Dupree/JJ Watt/etc.), and add OL depth.  In otherwords, regardless of if we bring Walker back or not, I don't think LB is a top 5 position of concern right now.   I don't think Walker is going to command a ton, but he was 15th in the NFL in tackles in 2018 (124), tied for 28th (105) in 2019 and in the top 50 in 2020 (92).  He's a pretty productive player and a solid one - so he's going to demand significantly more than he was getting as a 5th round pick on his rookie contract.  And yes, he definitely wants to play more and I think his biggest issue here is his lack of athleticism.  You're right, he'll probably play more in a 3-4 D and he will likely be offered more money by a team where he'll play a lot than what Ballard will offer him.    See the last line from Ballard in this article:  https://www.colts.com/news/chris-ballard-philip-rivers-ty-hilton-xavier-rhodes-2020-season-press-conference (Ballard on Linebacker Anthony Walker: "I have a special relationship with Anthony Walker. Selfless. Team guy. Rare leader. I hope he gets into coaching one day or scouting. Mark my words on this: if Anthony Walker gets into coaching, he will be a head football coach in the National Football League. And if he gets into scouting, he'll be a general manager. He's brilliant — absolutely brilliant, and he's made of the right stuff. I know Anthony wants to play more. We value Anthony. We'll see how it works out. I want good for Anthony."   My guess is Walker is gone.  
    • It's basically just monitoring one thread (general thread), then updating the big board and pick thread with every pick. So 32ish real time updates per night. Not hard, just tedious.
    • Let me know when you need me to assist. 
  • Members

    • NewColtsFan

      NewColtsFan 8,313

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Hoose

      Hoose 1,084

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CurBeatElite

      CurBeatElite 1,308

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • AustinnKaine

      AustinnKaine 285

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • wig

      wig 150

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • JoeThornburg

      JoeThornburg 27

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Sumo63

      Sumo63 594

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Zoltan

      Zoltan 541

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Indy Fan

      Indy Fan 12

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DaColts85

      DaColts85 395

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