Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Mike tanenbaum says colts have worst qb in the division.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 122
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This coming from one if the worst GMs in the league. There's a reason he's on ESPN and not a GM.

As of today, what Tannenba said may be true.   But it doesn’t matter.   We’re not playing games today.   We’re playing games in 6 and a half months.  A lot can and will change between now and then. 

Mike knows QBs. He was the former GM of the Jets....look at all the great QBs they have had.

We don't even know what Trevor Lawrence is, but he has a point. Wentz like Tannerhill is a reclamation project and we're all hoping for similar success.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Stephen said:

Mike said watson, tannehill,  and Lawrence  are all better than Wentz and we gave up too much to get him. He's  a former  nfl gm and said it on espn.

I guess there is a reason he is a former GM and works for ESPN. :dunno:

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


As of today, what Tannenba said may be true.   But it doesn’t matter.   We’re not playing games today.   We’re playing games in 6 and a half months.  A lot can and will change between now and then. 
 

And for what it’s worth...   Tannenbaum might be one of my least favorite ESPN analysts.  Thought he was a bad GM and I think he’s a very poor analyst. 
 

MT’s background is more accounting and legal and much less scouting.   

He was a terrible GM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fortunately, having the best QB in the division sets your team back in terms of salary cap, roster, and usually just plain diva attitude.  So I'll stick with our plan for winning football games instead of what Tanenbaum thinks it takes.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here’s to hoping Watson isn’t even in our division by September.  
 

Also, even as a Buckeye, I’d say Urban hasn’t exactly been a QB whisperer.  If any team can ruin Lawrence’s career, it’s the Jaguars.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Watson is the best in the division at the moment, but the dude might not even play. Tannehill has been good, I'll admit that. He could potentially be the best in the division depending on what happens in Houston. 

 

5 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Fortunately, having the best QB in the division sets your team back in terms of salary cap, roster, and usually just plain diva attitude.  So I'll stick with our plan for winning football games instead of what Tanenbaum thinks it takes.

I agree. I think I'd rather have playmakers across the board instead of just one under center. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Stephen said:

Mike said watson, tannehill,  and Lawrence  are all better than Wentz and we gave up too much to get him. He's  a former  nfl gm and said it on espn.

Former is the key point.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

I highly doubt Watson plays for the Texans in 2021 and Tannehill is not better than Wentz sorry. Lawrence could be a problem but hey its the Jags, if we know anything here about the Jags its that they always manage to screw things up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He is entitled to his own opinion, and it's just that....his opinion.

 

A) We can call him stupid, a former GM, a bad evaluator of talent, which are all  different forms of a personal attacks (some based on his performance as a GM - so it can be fair ground).

 

Or - 

 

B) We can understand that it's really up to the Colts and Wentz to prove him wrong.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Flash7 said:

He is entitled to his own opinion, and it's just that....his opinion.

 

A) We can call him stupid, a former GM, a bad evaluator of talent, which are all  different forms of a personal attacks (some based on his performance as a GM - so it can be fair ground).

 

Or - 

 

B) We can understand that it's really up to the Colts and Wentz to prove him wrong.

 

giphy.gif

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

giphy.gif

We CAN have both, but should we?

 

I personally would rather address a person's arguments rather than attack the person themselves.

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

Right now, our trade is based on potential and optimism, so hot takes that see the glass half empty have just as much right as we do with our subjective optimism. However, I don't think a rookie QB with the Jaguars could have separated himself from Wentz before playing an NFL down but hey, what do I know? :dunno:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, chad72 said:

Right now, our trade is based on potential and optimism, so hot takes that see the glass half empty have just as much right as we do with our subjective optimism. However, I don't think a rookie QB with the Jaguars could have separated himself from Wentz before playing an NFL down but hey, what do I know? :dunno:

feminism GIF

1 minute ago, GoColts8818 said:

The guy could be right but I have no idea who he is so I don’t care.

He once ran the Jets

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Flash7 said:

We CAN have both, but should we?

 

I personally would rather address a person's arguments rather than attack the person themselves.

 

I don't think that acknowledging his track record equates to attacking him. I think it's relevant. 

 

His comment was overblown and sensational, and it's sparked a sensational response.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

My two cents...

 

I am lukewarm on Wentz but this is low risk, high reward move by the Colts.  If he regains any of his lost form, it will be a home run and likely make the Colts contenders for the immediate future.  On top of that, it was cool last week to see the enthusiasm on a national scale for the Colts.  We had not seen that in some time.

 

But I also think the narrative got skewed a bit because the common theme was the Colts roster is ready to win now and that both their O'line and defense were top notch and ready to win now.  I am just not sure that is the reality.  The holes on the roster are well documented in this forum including LT.  The defense was no where near high end the last 6-7 games of the season.  

 

And Tannebaum's comments are not that far out there.  Based on what is on tape from just 3 months ago, I would say he is spot on.  Does not mean anything now but let's not immediately dismiss the opinion as clueless because it is anything but.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I don't think that acknowledging his track record equates to attacking him. I think it's relevant. 

 

His comment was overblown and sensational, and it's sparked a sensational response.

Will Smith Applause GIF

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok... Did he prefer us to re-sign Brissett or have Eason start? I think we did the best we could with our current situation. Watson is on his way out, Lawrence is an unknown, and Tannehill was once a gamble QB for the Titans as well.

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

 

I don't think that acknowledging his track record equates to attacking him. I think it's relevant. 

 

His comment was overblown and sensational, and it's sparked a sensational response.

Acknowledging his track record is "fair grounds" as I mentioned. But logically, it's possible that he can be wrong about everything in life, but still be right about this one topic. So, it makes more sense to address the argument, IMO. And, as I've mentioned, we really can't do anything about it. It's up to the Colts and Wentz to prove him wrong.

 

Also, I don't think his opinion is sensational. Tannehill and Watson are playing well in the span of time that Wentz hasn't been. And we've seen with Luck that a highly touted college QB can become one of the better QBs in the division within the first year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not offended. Watson is elite, Lawrence is the best QB prospect in a generation, and Tannehill has finally lived up to his draft status as a first rounder with Tennessee. Our guy was just traded away because he played like hot garbage last year.
 

Still, that’s where we are now but the offseason hasn’t even begun yet. Let’s see where we are this time next year when Watson appears to be completely tapped out in Houston and Lawrence has yet to be drafted let alone show up to a mini camp for perennial punching bag Jacksonville. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Peytonator said:

I am not offended. Watson is elite, Lawrence is the best QB prospect in a generation, and Tannehill has finally lived up to his draft status as a first rounder with Tennessee. Our guy was just traded away because he played like hot garbage last year.
 

Still, that’s where we are now but the offseason hasn’t even begun yet. Let’s see where we are this time next year when Watson appears to be completely tapped out in Houston and Lawrence has yet to be drafted let alone show up to a mini camp for perennial punching bag Jacksonville. 

I don’t have a problem with what was said but the timing 

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

    • Another reason why I think the Steelers might be ideal second trade partners is that they have a 4th Round compensation pick 13 picks later but no pick in Round 5.   Do like the Walker Little pick and hope he does slide to say the 4th and we could nab him.
    • JB is not my favorite QB. But even I would never compare him to the likes of the guys on that list. He is much more in the Hasselback group.    But I also disagree with putting Grigs on that list as well. He wasn’t a disaster or an embarrassment...he was just a disappointment in the end. A guy who couldn’t evaluate talent nearly as well as he did early in his career. And he was an unlikeable guy (which has always made me wonder how he sold Irsay on giving him the job).    But plenty of GMs fail to get there with a star QB...especially early in that QB’s career. Only one team gets to win the SB each year.    I mean...just look at Polian. He got there eventually...but he was gifted PFM...and didn’t win a playoff game until the 6th season. Grigs had won 3 by his 3rd season...and had just as many playoff appearances (3) as Polian over their first 5 seasons. Polian is a HOFer...but my point is that it’s not easy even when you get a great QB.   And as I have said before...Luck was great and my favorite player of all time...but he wasn’t quite Mahomes or Rodgers good...they are true Ferraris. He made mistakes and also didn’t exactly light it it up in January either. I think his prime would have been something to behold and maybe he would have taken his game to a new level...but injuries unfortunately derailed that (which I think many parties are to blame for...not just Grigs).   The guys on that list brought nothing to this org...Grigs at least managed to oversee a winning roster for years. A 49-31 record (.612 winning %) with a 3-3 playoff record, in 5 years, is far from a disaster. If you want to see what a true disaster looks like...it’s what has happened in HOU...where their FO has wasted a QB who (IMO) might be even better than Luck.   So far, Ballard has been superior in just about every facet. But the results are still the results. We can discount 2017...but without it the Colts are still just 28-20 (a .583 winning %) and 1-2 in the playoffs so far. Yes, he has only had Luck for one of those seasons...but that’s just another way of saying he needed Luck to win more games (to win more playoff games). And that’s the argument I always hear to vilify Grigs...that he only won because of Luck. Seems like a double standard...and not the only one.   I think most Colts fans have become huge fans of the process...and that’s great. It’s might be my favorite part of sports. But there are those that are still results-oriented...and I can understand why some might be asking what does it all without the results? This season will be huge to answering that question. 
    • Relax....i was paraphrasing a Bill Tobin quote . Tobin went off on Kiper when the Colts drafted Trev Alberta instead of Trent Dilfer. 
    • @Superman   @w87r   So, among many things, I get e-mail from Sports Illustrated every day.   And the other day,  there was this article written by Andew Brandt, who used to handle the contracts and salary cap issues for the Packers for 10 years.    And one thing he wrote jumped off the page at me.     Now, here's why I remind our two resident Salary Cap experts I noted above about something they have both talked about,  but I haven't seen either of them talk about this year.   Roll Over.   According to Brandt,  the Colts have the MOST SALARY CAP ROLLOVER in the NFL.   $30 MIl.    So, whatever the general 2021 team salary cap turns out to be,  you can add $30 Mill for the Colts.     I'm going to do two things.     I'm going to link the entire article for everyone.    It's free, non-premium,   and I'm also going to cut and paste the key section for everyone to read right here.      OK....    here's the article...      And just for discussion purposes,  Brandt uses a projected salary cap of $185.   He's NOT saying that's what the final number will be,  only his own hypothetical number for his article.   https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/03/02/business-of-football-understanding-the-salary-cap-dead-money?suid=5cc1cc3a3f92a475c0234f43&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=SI Extra 030221&utm_term=SI Extra - USE THIS - List     Here is the key text:   Myth: Every NFL team’s cap number is going to be $185 million   No. Actually, no team’s cap number is going to be $185 million (or whatever the final cap number is). The 2011 CBA, for the first time, allowed teams to carry over unused cap room from one year to the next. In managing the cap for the Packers, we did not have that option; it was use it or lose it. I had to negotiate * incentives—such as a clause giving our third-string quarterback $20 million if he threw seven touchdowns in our last game—to carry over cap room. (When he didn’t earn the incentive, we would get it as a credit toward the next year.) Now teams don’t have to play those games. As per NFLPA numbers, every team in the league has carried over 2020 cap room, from a low of roughly $500,000 for the Ravens to a high of more than $30 million for the Colts. Teams carrying over $20-plus million of cap include the Jets, Browns, Eagles, Cowboys and Jaguars. Thus, although the team cap is $185 million, the Colts’ adjusted cap will be around $215 million, and so on. And again, these teams have been preparing, or should have been preparing, for this reduced cap for months.   What say you both, Superman and w87r?     What do you think of what Brandt has written?    Does everyone have to re-do their off-season mocks reflecting a team figure of $215?     I look forward to hearing from both of you and others!
  • Members

    • OhioColt

      OhioColt 99

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DaColts85

      DaColts85 403

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DiogoSales

      DiogoSales 75

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Nadine

      Nadine 6,430

      Administrators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • cdgacoltsfan

      cdgacoltsfan 576

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