Are the Colts falling behind?

[MPStack]

4 minutes ago, csmopar said:

I don’t know what people do not listen but Ballard and Irsay have both said repeatedly, we are building for the long term, it’s not gonna be over night. They’ve both said it many times.  

Well said, and Ballard recently said the Colts aren’t there yet. He knows and acknowledges the Colts are not serious SB contenders yet.
 

Mr. Irsay seems to be on board and supports Ballard’s philosophy with almost exclusively building through the draft. How patient Irsay is, is anyone’s guess. I think Irsay will remain patient as long as the Colts continue to improve. 
 

With that being said, I think @DougDewnailed it, by saying if the team doesn’t get better after each draft, then there’s a problem, because Ballard will not sign big name FA’s. 
 

 

 

 

[craigerb]

On 5/3/2021 at 9:12 AM, Indyfan4life said:

There will be at least 10 more posts about the draft before preseason starts,

More like 10 new TOPICS.
The Colts lost 5 starters from 2020 (Rivers, Costonzo, Autry, Houston, Walker, Hooker).
They have replaced 1 from trades (Wentz), 0 from FA and 1 from draft (Paye).

We'll see if re-positioning or home-grown can fulfill the rest.

[Superman]

3 hours ago, Nickster said:

Well it seemed like it to me.  I thought Phantom has a perfectly legitimate, thought provoking topic, and it seems like you have something against the dude and anyone else engaging in the topic which includes me.    Now I'm not up on Colts MB Beef, but you seem to condescend to him quite often in your posts.

 

The reason I engage is because I don't like it when people do that.  If you don't think the topic worthy of discussion then wth do you or anyone else discuss it man?

 

That's patently false. You're wrong. I don't have anything against anyone engaging in this topic, including the OP. My initial response in this thread was to say that I disagree with the premise of it (which I still do), and I was met with a shouty response.

[craigerb]

1 hour ago, craigerb said:

More like 10 new TOPICS.
The Colts lost 5 starters from 2020 (Rivers, Costonzo, Autry, Houston, Walker, Hooker).
They have replaced 1 from trades (Wentz), 0 from FA and 1 from draft (Paye).

We'll see if re-positioning or home-grown can fulfill the rest.

Yikes! Should be 6 starters.

[Superman]

4 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Quite honestly,  there was only one part directed at you.   Just one.   The issue of LT.   (...)

 

(from your other post)

If you're going to say that our 2021 season hangs mostly on the play of Carson Wentz,  and I don't disagree,  then wouldn't you think you'd want his blindside protected as best as you can?    More help, more support,  more tools and toys for Carson.

 

Fair enough. Regarding LT, if the Colts drafted any LT at any spot in this year's draft, they were likely going to have to help him in 2021. Teams often help veteran LTs, as evidenced in a post in the LT thread. It's a basic element of pass protection. It's great to have a guy you don't have to help as much, but that's a luxury. Once AC retired, we don't have that luxury, and short of trading for a great LT, this season was going to require some gameplan adjustments.

 

To the idea that we should help Wentz as much as possible, sure; and we might add a better LT than we currently have. But any QB should get a ton of support, to a reasonable degree. In the Colts case, we have a top ten OL even with a JAG at LT. And we have all those other things I mentioned earlier. Wentz will have plenty of support. That doesn't mean everything has to be perfectly tailored for him; if he can't perform without perfect conditions, he's probably not the right guy. I think Wentz will be fine, even if Te'vi is the starter. 

 

Quote

As for my comments about Day 3 picks...    first, I didn't want a Day 3 LT.  (...)

 

Contrary to popular opinion, I disagree with Ballard plenty. Nothing wrong with that, IMO, as long as it's presented with at least a little perspective. Just saying, I have no issue with you or anyone being critical of him, if it's somewhat reasonable.

 

So you think two picks on Day 3 were reaches. Fair. Shouldn't we just wait and see what those players do, compared to the players you think were better and still available? Especially on Day 3, it's unlikely that those players are going to be major factors for our team in 2021, no matter the position, and no matter what you think of them. And that's especially true if the main dissent is based on the positions they drafted, because needs-based drafting is a flawed strategy.

 

Quote

To your point about saving our money for Q, Darius and Braden

(...)

But none of it, or ALMOST none of it, is going for our current guys.   

 

This is not correct. Irsay said Smith and Leonard, so I'll stick to them for right now. And correcting a misconception, the Colts rarely use signing bonuses, but it's not true that they NEVER use signing bonuses. Stewart's extension had a $5m signing bonus. But if you use the Ryan Kelly extension as the pattern, it had no signing bonus, but included a Year 1 $10m roster bonus, which increased Kelly's Year 1 cap hit by $10m. Assume the Colts use a similar structure for Smith and Leonard in 2021, and you can see where the rest of our cap space is going.

 

Quote

My main objection is that the whole off-season feels like one of teases....    Ballard says his locker room is ready to handle a unique personality, he has money,  then doesn't use it.   And there's no gamble on greatness.   No one who is talented but maybe a little troubled.    It feels like lip service.

 

I don't get this. Why do we need a unique personality, troubled guy? I think reporters keep asking Ballard about whether he'll take a chance on a guy who isn't clean sheet, and Ballard answers that maybe they would if the situation works out, but that doesn't mean he's going to pursue that kind of guy. And why should/would he? Who even falls in this category?

 

Last year, he said they felt comfortable adding some big money guys, and they did. I don't think that means they're going to add big ticket guys every offseason.

 

Quote

Then Ballard (and Irsay) say don't worry that we didn't sign a LT in FA,  the draft is where we can address it.   Darrisaw is there for the taking.   And we take Paye.   I love Paye, glad we took him.   But we did nothing else and CB says we were interested in a few other guys,  but they kept getting picked before us.   The moment we took Paye, Ballard, who now admits he wasn't as wild about the LT class as other GM's,  analysts and posters here,  that moment he had to know he'd be in the market to buy a LT this week.   He'd be after Fisher or Okung, or now, Leno.   He had to know.    I know what he said in the post-draft briefing...   I think he said all the right things,  and yet,  I just didn't want to hear it.   It's four months of teases, hints, and promises and so far,  the present under the X-Mas Tree feels like a nice pair of socks.    Sorry,  he's been promising a new bike and a pair of socks is just not going to cut it.

 

This is all fair. I haven't heard all of Ballard's latest comments so I don't know if they're fully in context or not, but the thing about 'prototypical LTs' seems a little less than genuine. Especially after the first round. You can get a guy who can compete at multiple spots, and maybe find a solution. I don't want them to force it for the sake of one position -- and I predicted before the draft that they wouldn't -- but it's hard to see Dayo as the best pick at #54. 

 

And maybe they sign someone who scratches the collective itch in the next couple days. Or maybe not. All three days during the draft, Ballard was asked about LT, and he said 'we're not gonna force it, and we like Te'vi.' That just might be the plan. And while it's not the best outcome, IMO, it's also not the disaster that others think it is, also IMO.

 

And just in general, this sentiment is 'our offseason sucked, we don't have a starting LT,' and that's what I take issue with.

 

Edit: And one last thing, if the Colts went into the draft knowing they didn't have to force it at LT because there were FA options available, then I'm also fine with that strategy. Doesn't mean I agree with all the picks they made.

[Superman]

2 hours ago, MPStack said:

Well said, and Ballard recently said the Colts aren’t there yet. He knows and acknowledges the Colts are not serious SB contenders yet.

 

That's not how I heard Ballard's comment. He was asked early in the offseason whether he thought the Colts were a contender, and he said 'as we sit today, not really, but there's a lot of time left before Week 1.' As in, we're still adding players, let's have this conversation later.

 

So to me, his comments about being a contender or not is viewed in that context.

[jbaron04]

Falling behind in what? The off-season championship awards , you always knows how that turn out when the season 

[shasta519]

5 hours ago, Zoltan said:

 

Don't be dissing socks, they are my favorite Christmas present, a nice pair of wool socks are the best lol

Smart wool and Stance. I ask for 4-5 pairs every Christmas. Great gifts that I wear every day...whether it’s cold outside or I am out on the golf course.

[shasta519]

2 hours ago, jbaron04 said:

Falling behind in what? The off-season championship awards , you always knows how that turn out when the season 

Not always. Most people thought CLE were big winners last offseason...turns out they were. And I think just about everybody thought the same with TB.

[shasta519]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

That's not how I heard Ballard's comment. He was asked early in the offseason whether he thought the Colts were a contender, and he said 'as we sit today, not really, but there's a lot of time left before Week 1.' As in, we're still adding players, let's have this conversation later.

 

So to me, his comments about being a contender or not is viewed in that context.

He has said that he could tell people that...but it’s just words. His evaluation comes after the season. Which is a stance you would expect someone like Ballard to take.

[jbaron04]

2 hours ago, shasta519 said:

Not always. Most people thought CLE were big winners last offseason...turns out they were. And I think just about everybody thought the same with TB.

9/10 times off-season champion flop 

[NewColtsFan]

6 hours ago, Superman said:

1

Fair enough. Regarding LT, if the Colts drafted any LT at any spot in this year's draft, they were likely going to have to help him in 2021. Teams often help veteran LTs, as evidenced in a post in the LT thread. It's a basic element of pass protection. It's great to have a guy you don't have to help as much, but that's a luxury. Once AC retired, we don't have that luxury, and short of trading for a great LT, this season was going to require some gameplan adjustments.

2

To the idea that we should help Wentz as much as possible, sure; and we might add a better LT than we currently have. But any QB should get a ton of support, to a reasonable degree. In the Colts case, we have a top ten OL even with a JAG at LT. And we have all those other things I mentioned earlier. Wentz will have plenty of support. That doesn't mean everything has to be perfectly tailored for him; if he can't perform without perfect conditions, he's probably not the right guy. I think Wentz will be fine, even if Te'vi is the starter. 

 

3

Contrary to popular opinion, I disagree with Ballard plenty. Nothing wrong with that, IMO, as long as it's presented with at least a little perspective. Just saying, I have no issue with you or anyone being critical of him, if it's somewhat reasonable.

4

So you think two picks on Day 3 were reaches. Fair. Shouldn't we just wait and see what those players do, compared to the players you think were better and still available? Especially on Day 3, it's unlikely that those players are going to be major factors for our team in 2021, no matter the position, and no matter what you think of them. And that's especially true if the main dissent is based on the positions they drafted, because needs-based drafting is a flawed strategy.

 

5

This is not correct. Irsay said Smith and Leonard, so I'll stick to them for right now. And correcting a misconception, the Colts rarely use signing bonuses, but it's not true that they NEVER use signing bonuses. Stewart's extension had a $5m signing bonus. But if you use the Ryan Kelly extension as the pattern, it had no signing bonus, but included a Year 1 $10m roster bonus, which increased Kelly's Year 1 cap hit by $10m. Assume the Colts use a similar structure for Smith and Leonard in 2021, and you can see where the rest of our cap space is going.

 

6

I don't get this. Why do we need a unique personality, troubled guy? I think reporters keep asking Ballard about whether he'll take a chance on a guy who isn't clean sheet, and Ballard answers that maybe they would if the situation works out, but that doesn't mean he's going to pursue that kind of guy. And why should/would he? Who even falls in this category?

7

Last year, he said they felt comfortable adding some big money guys, and they did. I don't think that means they're going to add big ticket guys every offseason.

 

8

This is all fair. I haven't heard all of Ballard's latest comments so I don't know if they're fully in context or not, but the thing about 'prototypical LTs' seems a little less than genuine. Especially after the first round. You can get a guy who can compete at multiple spots, and maybe find a solution. I don't want them to force it for the sake of one position -- and I predicted before the draft that they wouldn't -- but it's hard to see Dayo as the best pick at #54. 

9

And maybe they sign someone who scratches the collective itch in the next couple days. Or maybe not. All three days during the draft, Ballard was asked about LT, and he said 'we're not gonna force it, and we like Te'vi.' That just might be the plan. And while it's not the best outcome, IMO, it's also not the disaster that others think it is, also IMO.

10

And just in general, this sentiment is 'our offseason sucked, we don't have a starting LT,' and that's what I take issue with.

11

Edit: And one last thing, if the Colts went into the draft knowing they didn't have to force it at LT because there were FA options available, then I'm also fine with that strategy. Doesn't mean I agree with all the picks they made.

 

OK....

 

You have a marathon response to me.   I suspect mine will be very long in kind.   As you can see,  I numbered your paragraphs, so that's how I'll reference them in my response.     And away we go!

 

1.    I basically agree with your comments, my bigger issue is the constant talk of addressing the issue all off-season,  only to have the moment come and go with nothing to show for it.   And act like it's not a big deal when we all thought it was.   We are two days after the draft,  and we're already seriously linked to Leno and Fisher.   It's the way this has all been communicated to the fan base.   I find it a little....   disrespectful.   Honestly.

 

2.   Two points here...   one, you think we're a top-10 OL even with a JAG at LT.   I'd say that's a big leap of faith that I'm not ready to make.   And two,  I'm not wild about falling from a top-5 OL to a top-10 OL.   That's a good fall, and I'm not convinced the fall might not be worse if we tried to go the season with Tevi.

 

3.   If you have disagreed with Ballard in the past,  I don't recall that.   Not to say you haven't.   Only that I don't recall that for whatever reason.   Not that matters, but do you recall the issue?     Just curious.

 

4.   You think Granson is UNLIKELY to be a major part of our offense?    Really?   I thought Burton was perhaps not a major part,  but I certainly thought he was a key part.   And if we didn't bring him back, and we drafted Granson with our third draft pick to replace him,  then, yes,  I think he's going to be a very key part.   We want him to be a key player.   As Frank said Saturday,  they think they have a pretty good idea of how to use a tight end effectively....    so I think Granson is walking into pretty high expectations.    And I read somewhere he is one very confident young man.   Good.    I think he'll need that!

 

5.   OK.  let's talk money here,  and I think you're playing pretty fast and loose with the figures.   Going by OTC, we have $22.4m  and Sptc says we're at $25m.     So, how in the world are we going to give Darius and Braden $10 Mill each in any kind of bonus effective this year?    Coming out of our 2021 salary cap number?   How is that even possible?    Answer,  it's not.   You've got a square peg and a round hole.   It's not going to fit.    So, my assumption is the bonuses,  whichever they are,  won't take effect until 2022 so the $$ don't impact us until then.   The deal gets done in '21,  with lots of guaranteed money,  BUT the $$$ that really impact the cap won't impact us until a year later.   As far as I can tell,  that's the only way to get a long term deal done THIS YEAR,  without impacting our 21 financial numbers and yet still giving the players long term guaranteed security.   Their salaries for at least 3 years will be guaranteed, and whatever bonuses will hit next year,  not this year.   Otherwise, I don't see how this works?    We still have to sign another LT,  and possible other free agents this off-season, plus our rookie class, plus left-over money for in-season transactions.   That's where our $22.4--25m is going to go.  

 

6.   Why do we need a unique personality-trouble guy is the same reason the other 31 teams sign them.   Because there's a risk-reward ratio that sometimes tells you taking a highly talented,  but perhaps unique personality is worth it.    How about OBJ or Marcus Peters,  or Antonio Brown?    Some teams are willing to put up with some crap because the reward is on the field.    Look,  I'm fine if Ballard says he prefers not to deal with players like that and he won't in 99% percent of the cases.  What I'm NOT fine with is Ballard telling the media and fans that yes, his locker-room is now ready to absorb a strong personality because of the benefit he might also bring, when he has 99% no intention of ever doing it.   That's yanking the chain.  It's highly misleading.   And it results in a fan base that, rightly or wrongly,  has grown a little resentful of being told one thing,  yet never doing it,  and looking likes he really has no interest in ever doing it.   Again,  it's disrespectful    I'd rather be told he's likely never going to do it,  and then surprise people to the upside with an unexpected signing.   A year from now, I don't want to be told "yeah, we'll consider this" when it's now clear that they're not.

 

7.  The big money guys last year were Rivers in FA,  and Buckner in a trade.   I wouldn't expect that every year.   Not even close.   But I think our biggest signing this year may have been Rhodes at $6.5.   Is there no mid-price guy to sign that might help?   $7-10 mill per year?    Not one?   Maybe we're about to sign him this week?

 

8.   I confess I'm surprised at you not liking the Dayo pick at 54.   I love it and I think it will be better over the years.   That said,  I guess for LT,  below 34" is the same as below 32" is for corner.   Ballad won't budge.   But I thought we might consider Pat Freiermuth, the TE from Penn State,  especially after (A) Irsay said he wanted a play making TE,  and (B) the word that Doyle is playing his last year.   I thought that might be a logical fit, so I wasn't expecting the Dayo pick.   But once I saw his video and once I heard Ballard talk about him,  I was sold.   And it wasn't hard.

 

9.   If we sign Fisher or Leno in the next few days or weeks,  then I think we have our answer about Tevi.  I think the debate will be comfortably over.

 

10.  I think the sentiment you speak of is more to the point of what feels like a cardinal sin in many lines of work....   

Over Promising and Under Delivering.   That's why I think there's such much pent-up frustration.   I think it's much more than just the LT spot, although it's clearly the top priority concern.

 

11.  As I often say to some posters,  this guy you're complaining about has forgotten more about his subject than you've ever known.   And that also includes me and my frustration right now with Chris Ballard.   My admiration for him knows few bounds.  But I think he's mishandled this off-season in a way I haven't experienced before and I'm frankly stunned by it.   No one is more surprised that I'm frustrated with CB than I am.   Me?   How can that be?   But if we sign a solid LT soon enough,  and it appears we will,  then I'm good.   Our grocery list this off-season was incredibly long and difficulty.  If he solves the LT question,  that's a job well done.

 

Apologies for the length here...   I wanted to address all your interesting points.   I look forward to more back and forth if you want to......

 

 

 

 

[Superman]

38 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

OK....

 

You have a marathon response to me.   I suspect mine will be very long in kind.   As you can see,  I numbered your paragraphs, so that's how I'll reference them in my response.     And away we go!

 

 

Good deal.

 

1, 9 10) These are related. I sometimes think people hear what they want to. I've heard Ballard say that FA isn't over, and there are good players left, and there's a lot of time before the season starts. Seems like other people heard Ballard say we'd have a LT by the draft. (This is similar to the 'unique personality' thing.) And yeah, this is probably about more than LT, and built up frustration with Ballard being more conservative in FA than people would like. But I really think we heard different things, and I said before the draft that I did not expect the Colts to draft edge/LT in the first two rounds, despite everyone's insistence on needs-based drafting.

 

Still, I don't really like his comments about prototypical LTs, especially after the fact. Seems revisionist.

 

2) We'll see how it plays out, but I think the line play without AC last season illustrates the concept.

 

3) Really? I wasn't a huge fan of signing Rivers, I didn't like the JB extension value, I thought they needed more depth at OL last year. Overpaid for Devin Funchess. There are others. I think I was right about some, wrong about others. I try to understand Ballard's approach, I support him and think he's a good GM, doesn't mean I always agree with him. 

 

4) I haven't watched Granson yet, but he seems like a hybrid TE who can't block, so his reps will be limited. I could be wrong, maybe he'll be a bigger contributor. But if you think he's expected to play a considerable role in the offense, and you understand why the team likes him, then what's the problem with where he was picked? You think they reached, but ultimately that's a difference between your opinion of player ratings and the team's, and that's not something I think we should spend a lot of time debating. (See #11.)

 

5) I'll be honest, this irks me. I don't make up stuff about contracts. What I said was use the Kelly contract as a pattern, and look for a similar structure. I didn't say they would give Leonard and Smith both $10m roster bonuses in 2021. They could also use a small signing bonus and a more graduated structure, like they did with Stewart. (Stewart's contract was done in November, Kelly's was done before the season in September. I assume they'll do Leonard and Smith before the season, which suggests the Kelly structure is more likely.) Either way, that would impact the 2021 cap space. 

 

And ultimately, they could just add new years and new money without touching 2021 cap space (like you're suggesting), but that's uncommon and highly unlikely, based on typical player wants, just like a big signing bonus is unlikely based on the Colts preferred contract structure. They could change things up, but that would be a big curve ball. 

 

6) I still don't get it. There's an infatuation with high risk/high reward players, and the Colts obviously aren't into it. Still, Ballard is asked this question every year, and he says 'we'd consider it under the right circumstances,' so now people expect him to seek out a high maintenance player? You watch "With the Next Pick," listen to the entire staff preach about football character and 'we have to be careful about who we bring into the building,' and come away with the impression the Colts would pursue a player like OBJ, or AB? Or even JuJu? I don't think the Colts will ever be in on these 'unique personalities.' Again, I could be wrong, but it doesn't seem like it.

 

Ballard's responses on this have also been lumped in with his comments about paying a FA big money or trading for a highly paid player, which he has done three times in the last two offseasons. You can add really good players without going after guys with 'unique personalities.' (Buckner, for instance.)

 

7) They were more conservative this year than I expected; I thought they'd add somebody at corner or WR, maybe edge. But once the market developed, it was pretty obvious that big money was pricing the Colts out. And I said before FA that the idea that the Colts would throw around big money this offseason was probably misplaced, due to their own pending FAs, and upcoming young players who will get big deals. They're reportedly bringing in Fisher this week; I'm not necessarily thrilled, and who knows how that visit even goes. 

 

8) We'll see. I've watched some of Dayo, he doesn't quite jump off the screen at me, but I see some promise in him. My issue is that I don't think he'll play in 2021, and we used our second rounder on him. I have more concern about this pick than I do about anything we did on Day 3. And again, I could be wrong on every element of this. Just stating my opinion as it is right now.

 

11) That's the perspective that I think people are often lacking in their emotional statements about the Colts decision makers. For example, why would they draft an injured DE at #54 who might not actually be that special even when healthy? Must be that they think he's better than I do (and it should go without saying that they know this stuff better than I ever will, and I defer to their judgment, even though I reserve the right to state my disagreement). Thank you for keeping and expressing that perspective.

[bluephantom87]

10 hours ago, Superman said:

 

That's patently false. You're wrong. I don't have anything against anyone engaging in this topic, including the OP. My initial response in this thread was to say that I disagree with the premise of it (which I still do), and I was met with a shouty response.

 

No Nickster was right and once again Superman you're trying to put out a false narrative. (with me anyway) I have absolutely no problem with anyone disagreeing with me on a topic I post because some will see it one way while others will see it totally different. As a matter of fact I come to the Colt's forum for some thought provoking conversation and to engage with fellow fans about the team good or bad. 

 

Where this took a wrong turn was when I gave push back for changing my narrative to one that the team was falling apart (which I NEVER said) and basically from your point of view that talk was getting old and you were tired of it. There's a BIG difference between that statement and what the subject matter was REALLY about in asking the question have they done enough to leapfrog some of the top teams in the AFC or are they falling further back from that group? Go back and look at your INITIAL response to the topic especially the last sentence or two. 

 

Even when I clarified the thought behind the topic you then doubled down and classified the post to be a rant about a LT which it was not. You seem to be a smart man because I've read many of your opinions over the years and tend to agree with most if not all of them. Right now I'm still puzzled by the condensing replies from you because it does appear to be personal. Maybe I shouldn't question any of Ballard's moves so you won't take it as a slight. I will say again I think he is a solid gm that has the potential to become special but the team's resume will determine that. 

[Shive]

14 hours ago, craigerb said:

Yikes! Should be 6 starters.

I wouldn't consider Hooker a starter in 2020, since he was injured for a large majority of it.

[gspdx]

I guess I like to compare this to my military days.  There is a large force of 1st termers (AKA rookies) that are the majority of your force (team)  You count on them to be improving their skills and have the ability to move up and be contributors.

 

Then at the end of their first enlistment (contract)  there is a decision whether that individual will re-enlist or not.  Sometimes that offer isn't there (no contract offered).  But there are certainly some that you want to keep around knowing you will never be able to keep all that you want to keep.  But there are always budget limitations that will prevent you from keeping everyone.

 

So it really is crucial to have a pipeline of young talent that you can train up knowing that many will walk away after 4 years.  

 

Just because you don't see a bunch of starters in this year's draft doesn't mean that every starter we have lost needs to be filled by this draft.  The expectation is many players that are already on the team need to grow and step up to those starting positions.  

 

If Ballard and company aren't doing their jobs well enough in the draft then this process will not work well and I am sure we will all see over of the few years.  But at this point I haven't seen where it isn't working.  I do think this team is getting better.  

 

Since we used draft picks to help bring in guys this has to be considered:

• Ballard brought in a stud DL in Buckner
• Ballard brought in a potential franchise QB in Wentz
• Ballard was able to make those two moves without killing our draft classes this year or over the next few (I think it is important to see how teams fare over the next few years when trying to keep the pipeline of talent coming in when they give up so much draft capital to bring in an unproven QB out of college)
• We have also assembled one of the best O-lines in the NFL (yes - we need to replace Costanzo)

 

I could go on but I think this makes my point.  I think the biggest problem here is we all have access to too much info and so many people think they know better than folks that spend their entire day - day in and day out - involved in this.  Ballard has an entire team that this is their whole job. 

 

I think this team is getting better. just my opinion.  But more needs to be done.  If Wentz flames out we are in trouble and could be stuck in mediocrity for a while.  But if he regains he previous form then overall this team is pretty close I think.

[Nickster]

15 hours ago, Superman said:

 

That's patently false. You're wrong. I don't have anything against anyone engaging in this topic, including the OP. My initial response in this thread was to say that I disagree with the premise of it (which I still do), and I was met with a shouty response.

 

So you disagree with the premise that the Colts might not have kept pace with other teams?  That seems like a fairly narrow promontory on which to stand.

 

In order to do that, then you must believe that the Colts DEFINITELY kept pace with the other contending teams in the AFC.  That would be a neat trick, akin to turning water into wine Supe.  Wouldn't it?  

[Superman]

5 hours ago, bluephantom87 said:

 

No Nickster was right and once again Superman you're trying to put out a false narrative. (with me anyway) I have absolutely no problem with anyone disagreeing with me on a topic I post because some will see it one way while others will see it totally different. As a matter of fact I come to the Colt's forum for some thought provoking conversation and to engage with fellow fans about the team good or bad. 

 

Where this took a wrong turn was when I gave push back for changing my narrative to one that the team was falling apart (which I NEVER said) and basically from your point of view that talk was getting old and you were tired of it. There's a BIG difference between that statement and what the subject matter was REALLY about in asking the question have they done enough to leapfrog some of the top teams in the AFC or are they falling further back from that group? Go back and look at your INITIAL response to the topic especially the last sentence or two. 

 

Even when I clarified the thought behind the topic you then doubled down and classified the post to be a rant about a LT which it was not. You seem to be a smart man because I've read many of your opinions over the years and tend to agree with most if not all of them. Right now I'm still puzzled by the condensing replies from you because it does appear to be personal. Maybe I shouldn't question any of Ballard's moves so you won't take it as a slight. I will say again I think he is a solid gm that has the potential to become special but the team's resume will determine that. 

 

This is demonstrably false. You claim to only be interested in thought provoking conversation, but then engage in shouty ad hominem attacks about blind Ballard followers, and accuse me of being condescending... 

 

If your initial OP wasn't about LT (even though you zeroed in on the Colts not addressing their biggest need at LT in the OP, but if you say so...), then my bad in assuming LT was heavy on your mind. Still, there's been plenty of discussion in this thread, including from me, about things other than LT. I even asked you to clarify your issue, and you didn't respond. But now you're acting like I'm taking out some kind of personal vendetta against you, even though it's you that have locked in on me, including with personal attacks, because I disagree. You could easily have just responded to any of my posts that are talking about the state of the team, but you're perpetuating these false ideas about me.

 

I'm here for all the discussion, disagreement, and argument about the team, or else I wouldn't post in this kind of thread. But I'm not going to allow anyone to attack me and misrepresent me without responding directly.

[Nickster]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

This is demonstrably false. You claim to only be interested in thought provoking conversation, but then engage in shouty ad hominem attacks about blind Ballard followers, and accuse me of being condescending... 

 

If your initial OP wasn't about LT (even though you zeroed in on the Colts not addressing their biggest need at LT in the OP, but if you say so...), then my bad in assuming LT was heavy on your mind. Still, there's been plenty of discussion in this thread, including from me, about things other than LT. I even asked you to clarify your issue, and you didn't respond. But now you're acting like I'm taking out some kind of personal vendetta against you, even though it's you that have locked in on me, including with personal attacks, because I disagree. You could easily have just responded to any of my posts that are talking about the state of the team, but you're perpetuating these false ideas about me.

 

I'm here for all the discussion, disagreement, and argument about the team, or else I wouldn't post in this kind of thread. But I'm not going to allow anyone to attack me and misrepresent me without responding directly.

 

Maybe consider that some of your posts are passive aggressive and dismissive Supe.  Just some free advice.  

[chickenMan]

I would argue that the Colts are a top three team in the AFC IF Carson Wentz returns to form. If we get the old Wentz back, I could easily see us in the title game vs the Chiefs

[Nickster]

15 minutes ago, chickenMan said:

I would argue that the Colts are a top three team in the AFC IF Carson Wentz returns to form. If we get the old Wentz back, I could easily see us in the title game vs the Chiefs

 

I think right now, we are worse off than we were last year going into the season.  Our schedule is a lot more difficult in all likelihood.  I'd be surprised if we won 11 this year.

 

I am not sure if Wentz back to form will be as good as Rivers was last year.  PR really steered a team in tons of flux at a very high level.  PR is a HOF guy, and I think it showed. 

 

Our oline will be worse than last year unless Q slides over and plays all pro LT.  

 

The Colts are certainly not looking at their draft picks as replacements for Houston and Autry starting off the season.  Paye is raw and Dayo won't be playing.  I doubt that the FO thinks Paye will produce more than Houston did last year in his rookie season.  Unless we look elsewhere, we will be worse off at DE than last year.  That's pretty huge IMO with our struggling secondary.

 

Blackmon is going to be a huge factor.  If he doesn't improve in coverage, we are in tremendous trouble unless we have someone to replace him.  He was terrible at the end of the year, and there really isn't any other way to look at that.  If he becomes NFL average in coverage, we should have some dynamism to our D that we haven't really had since Sanders.

 

I lost faith in RYS last year, and hope to be surprised at a turnaround.

 

On the positive side, Pitt should develop and Campbell might be like a nice, FA signing if he produces.

We should have perhaps the league's best running game.

Wentz will be able to run plays Rivers could not.

 

Weighing all this, I think we are looking at 8-8.  I hope Wentz proves me wrong.  

[Superman]

1 hour ago, Nickster said:

 

Maybe consider that some of your posts are passive aggressive and dismissive Supe.  Just some free advice.  

 

Thanks.

[bluephantom87]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

This is demonstrably false. You claim to only be interested in thought provoking conversation, but then engage in shouty ad hominem attacks about blind Ballard followers, and accuse me of being condescending... 

 

If your initial OP wasn't about LT (even though you zeroed in on the Colts not addressing their biggest need at LT in the OP, but if you say so...), then my bad in assuming LT was heavy on your mind. Still, there's been plenty of discussion in this thread, including from me, about things other than LT. I even asked you to clarify your issue, and you didn't respond. But now you're acting like I'm taking out some kind of personal vendetta against you, even though it's you that have locked in on me, including with personal attacks, because I disagree. You could easily have just responded to any of my posts that are talking about the state of the team, but you're perpetuating these false ideas about me.

 

I'm here for all the discussion, disagreement, and argument about the team, or else I wouldn't post in this kind of thread. But I'm not going to allow anyone to attack me and misrepresent me without responding directly.

 

Ok Supes I call it truce on this one because I feel I did clarify it a couple of times for you but oh well. With that being said I will be the bigger man and apologize since you feel that I attacked your character (not my intent) but I also feel the same way in return. So on this we can agree to disagree and leave it at that. No need for two Colt fans to be bickering about the draft or FA because neither one of us control the daily functions of the team. Cheers...

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, bluephantom87 said:

 

Ok Supes I call it truce on this one because I feel I did clarify it a couple of times for you but oh well. With that being said I will be the bigger man and apologize since you feel that I attacked your character (not my intent) but I also feel the same way in return. So on this we can agree to disagree and leave it at that. No need for two Colt fans to be bickering about the draft or FA because neither one of us control the daily functions of the team. Cheers...

 

Cool.

 

Why are you so bullish on other teams' offseasons? I posted the below yesterday, what about those teams' moves makes you think they might be pulling away?

 

Quote

Those other teams didn't have super impressive offseasons, IMO. The Chiefs replaced a couple of OL, and will be mostly the same team they were last year; they're banking on health. The Bills added a receiver and some rotational guys, and are banking on the development of their guys. The Steelers added a guard, and lost other players, and their roster is kind of hanging by a thread. The Ravens added a receiver, and shuffled their OL, but will only go as far as Jackson can take them. The Dolphins added Will Fuller, who is never healthy, and they don't know if they have a QB. The Browns signed some noteworthy players, and the Titans shuffled and probably improved their roster, but I feel like their offseason is a little overstated also.

 

[chickenMan]

53 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

I think right now, we are worse off than we were last year going into the season.  Our schedule is a lot more difficult in all likelihood.  I'd be surprised if we won 11 this year.

 

I am not sure if Wentz back to form will be as good as Rivers was last year.  PR really steered a team in tons of flux at a very high level.  PR is a HOF guy, and I think it showed. 

 

Our oline will be worse than last year unless Q slides over and plays all pro LT.  

 

The Colts are certainly not looking at their draft picks as replacements for Houston and Autry starting off the season.  Paye is raw and Dayo won't be playing.  I doubt that the FO thinks Paye will produce more than Houston did last year in his rookie season.  Unless we look elsewhere, we will be worse off at DE than last year.  That's pretty huge IMO with our struggling secondary.

 

Blackmon is going to be a huge factor.  If he doesn't improve in coverage, we are in tremendous trouble unless we have someone to replace him.  He was terrible at the end of the year, and there really isn't any other way to look at that.  If he becomes NFL average in coverage, we should have some dynamism to our D that we haven't really had since Sanders.

 

I lost faith in RYS last year, and hope to be surprised at a turnaround.

 

On the positive side, Pitt should develop and Campbell might be like a nice, FA signing if he produces.

We should have perhaps the league's best running game.

Wentz will be able to run plays Rivers could not.

 

Weighing all this, I think we are looking at 8-8.  I hope Wentz proves me wrong.  

Jokes aside, I’m much more optimistic. But maybe I’m just biased. Hoping for the best either way!

[GoColts8818]

Some seem to be working from the idea that everything for the Colts foes is goring to work out perfectly while everything for the Colts is going work out as bad as it can.  That’s just not likely just like it’s not likely that everything the Colts did this off season will go perfectly and everything their foes did will fail.  It’s probably going to be in between.  
 

Have the Jags gotten better?  On paper without question but they have a large amount of ground to make up and they are taking a bit gamble on Meyer.  It could pay off really well or it could crash and burn like other good college coaches have in fairly recent NFL history.

 

I think the Texans are a walking tire fire and maybe the most screwed up team in the league right now.  Even with Watson they were awful a year ago and I don’t see them making a major jump forward.

 

That leaves the Titans in the division.  Frankly I think the line between the Colts and Titans is so close it’s going to come down to which team hit on more off-season moves this off-season and there is just no way to know that right now.
 

As for the rest of the conference I don’t think the Colts are there yet but I don’t think they are expected to be yet.  Again you need to win your division first and I think that’s the Colts focus right now.  Once they conquered that step they will turn their attention to over coming the Ravens, Browns, the Chiefs, and Bills, etc.

[Nickster]

4 minutes ago, chickenMan said:

Jokes aside, I’m much more optimistic. But maybe I’m just biased. Hoping for the best either way!

 

35 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Some seem to be working from the idea that everything for the Colts foes is goring to work out perfectly while everything for the Colts is going work out as bad as it can.  That’s just not likely just like it’s not likely that everything the Colts did this off season will go perfectly and everything their foes did will fail.  It’s probably going to be in between.  
 

Have the Jags gotten better?  On paper without question but they have a large amount of ground to make up and they are taking a bit gamble on Meyer.  It could pay off really well or it could crash and burn like other good college coaches have in fairly recent NFL history.

 

I think the Texans are a walking tire fire and maybe the most screwed up team in the league right now.  Even with Watson they were awful a year ago and I don’t see them making a major jump forward.

 

That leaves the Titans in the division.  Frankly I think the line between the Colts and Titans is so close it’s going to come down to which team hit on more off-season moves this off-season and there is just no way to know that right now.
 

As for the rest of the conference I don’t think the Colts are there yet but I don’t think they are expected to be yet.  Again you need to win your division first and I think that’s the Colts focus right now.  Once they conquered that step they will turn their attention to over coming the Ravens, Browns, the Chiefs, and Bills, etc.

I think the OP mentioned teams outside the division primarily.  

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

20 hours ago, Nickster said:

 

I think right now, we are worse off than we were last year going into the season.  Our schedule is a lot more difficult in all likelihood.  I'd be surprised if we won 11 this year.

 

I am not sure if Wentz back to form will be as good as Rivers was last year.  PR really steered a team in tons of flux at a very high level.  PR is a HOF guy, and I think it showed. 

 

Our oline will be worse than last year unless Q slides over and plays all pro LT.  

 

The Colts are certainly not looking at their draft picks as replacements for Houston and Autry starting off the season.  Paye is raw and Dayo won't be playing.  I doubt that the FO thinks Paye will produce more than Houston did last year in his rookie season.  Unless we look elsewhere, we will be worse off at DE than last year.  That's pretty huge IMO with our struggling secondary.

 

Blackmon is going to be a huge factor.  If he doesn't improve in coverage, we are in tremendous trouble unless we have someone to replace him.  He was terrible at the end of the year, and there really isn't any other way to look at that.  If he becomes NFL average in coverage, we should have some dynamism to our D that we haven't really had since Sanders.

 

I lost faith in RYS last year, and hope to be surprised at a turnaround.

 

On the positive side, Pitt should develop and Campbell might be like a nice, FA signing if he produces.

We should have perhaps the league's best running game.

Wentz will be able to run plays Rivers could not.

 

Weighing all this, I think we are looking at 8-8.  I hope Wentz proves me wrong.  

i am looking at 8 and 8 and third in our division behind jax and tenn

[The Fish]

25 minutes ago, DEFENSE said:

i am looking at 8 and 8 and third in our division behind jax and tenn

Two 8-8 predictions.. that'd suck. 

 

If the team was trending like that, does anyone sit Wentz before the clause that sends a first to Philly next year is met and if that happened, would that represent pulling the plug on him- I only ask, because he was really bad last year and if he's anything like that, 8-8 is realistic (as is him being better and the team making a playoff push).

[MPStack]

16 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Two 8-8 predictions.. that'd suck. 

 

If the team was trending like that, does anyone sit Wentz before the clause that sends a first to Philly next year is met and if that happened, would that represent pulling the plug on him- I only ask, because he was really bad last year and if he's anything like that, 8-8 is realistic (as is him being better and the team making a playoff push).

I doubt the FO would pull the plug on Wentz, if the Colts aren’t playing well. And I do think, it’s a real possibility the Colts play worse in 2021. However, they won’t give up on Wentz after just one season. How well the Colts play in 2021, will heavily depend-on Wentz. Are the Colts getting the 2017 version of Wentz is the question.  That was four years ago. 
 

 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

On 5/4/2021 at 3:46 PM, csmopar said:

Ballard and Irsay have both said repeatedly, we are building for the long term, it’s not gonna be over night. They’ve both said it many times.  

 

Long term?

More like 'Long Time', the kind they use when describing the universe and stuff lol.

Ballard's  had 5 off seasons & Drafts and still says that we're not there yet  meaning we're not a SB contender. 5 YEARS!!!

 

Building a championship team is not linear... you can't expect to incrementally improve every year and then one year 10 years down the road your a Championship team. 

 

Teams jump to serious contenders in 1 & 2 year spans these days. With all the movement in FA and raiding the best teams coaching staffs teams talent level fluctuates year to year. 

 

Irsay doesnt say what Ballard says and says we are SB contender and many felt, as did Irsay, this was a good year to elevate our team with playmaking weapons and close the gap with teams like KC...... and we didn't.... mostly or probably a money issue.

 

And after year 5 Ballard takes the pressure off himself and says WE'RE NOT THERE YET. 5 years and we're still not there with the greatest GM in the history of sports! Lol

[LJpalmbeacher2]

2 hours ago, DEFENSE said:

i am looking at 8 and 8 and third in our division behind jax and tenn

 

I'm sorta leaning that way too but we play 17 games I think...

 

Tenn. 10-7

Jax.    10-7

Colts     8-8-1

 

My early predictions are only penciled in and are subject to change. 

 

 

[EastStreet]

Current Vegas Win totals (o/u).....

 

Colts - 10

Titans - 9.5

Jags - 6.5

Texans - 4.5

 

--------------------------

My opinion

Colts 10

Titans 9

Jags 8

Texans 8 (assuming Watson stays), 4 if he leaves

 

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

5 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Long term?

More like 'Long Time', the kind they use when describing the universe and stuff lol.

Ballard's  had 5 off seasons & Drafts and still says that we're not there yet  meaning we're not a SB contender. 5 YEARS!!!

 

Building a championship team is not linear... you can't expect to incrementally improve every year and then one year 10 years down the road your a Championship team. 

 

Teams jump to serious contenders in 1 & 2 year spans these days. With all the movement in FA and raiding the best teams coaching staffs teams talent level fluctuates year to year. 

 

Irsay doesnt say what Ballard says and says we are SB contender and many felt, as did Irsay, this was a good year to elevate our team with playmaking weapons and close the gap with teams like KC...... and we didn't.... mostly or probably a money issue.

 

And after year 5 Ballard takes the pressure off himself and says WE'RE NOT THERE YET. 5 years and we're still not there with the greatest GM in the history of sports! Lol

great post facing reality

[ColtV]

I'm not so sure that the Colts have taken a step back, but I know this: the AFC is going to be a dogfight. So many great young quarterbacks, followed by so many good young quarterbacks, followed by so many potentially good young quarterbacks. Only Houston seems to be a consistent dumpster fire you can pencil in as a W in the conference...my gods, even the Jets are loaded with top picks the next few years(not that it's ever helped them before). 

 

From top to bottom, the Conference may be stronger than any point since the 70s. 

[07dleigh]

Let's assume what I think we should assume: 

-We get at least average QB play from Wentz (We should assume this because he's only had one bad season and has been a top 3-8 QB all the others) (Wentz at his "average" is already more dynamic than Rivers)

-We have a healthy JT/Mack combo

-We sign a LT that gives us at least average LT play

-Kwity/Turay are at least average 

-Campbell.... well... yeah nevermind LOL

 

Tell is back giving us more depth/flexibility, Blackmon is second year and is a bonafide playmaker. Did we lose vets? yes. Are we more dynamic? yes.

 

I think the floor is the slightest bit lower and I think the ceiling is a lot higher. I mean if we get 2019 Wentz, we're going to the SB. I do NOT get why I'm reading that we apparently suck now 

[07dleigh]

I know the original post was more so relative to the rest of the conference (that is a lot better now). I know. It's a fair question. I just don't get why some people are saying we've fallen off a cliff lol. 

 

I think we edge the division over TEN and make it to AT LEAST the second round. I worry about KC, BAL, and Buffalo. Kinda CLE, but not too much. Kinda LV lowkey, but not much. The Chargers don't scare me JUST yet. Jags, not yet. Steelers fell off I think.

[07dleigh]

Do you see how our CULTURE and team mindset jumps off the screen? And now we're getting more athletic. We not falling behind anything.

[The Fish]

6 hours ago, 07dleigh said:

Do you see how our CULTURE and team mindset jumps off the screen? 

I don't see anything jumping off the screen.. I must not have done enough.. 

Culture is a weird one in sports, it can't suck, but it's not going to make up for talent deficit. 

[07dleigh]

On 5/7/2021 at 3:20 PM, The Fish said:

I don't see anything jumping off the screen.. I must not have done enough.. 

Culture is a weird one in sports, it can't suck, but it's not going to make up for talent deficit. 

 

Respectfully, I don't know which team you've been watching if it's not apparent to you. Also it won't totally make up for a lack of talent, but it DOES make a tangible difference. A close 4th quarter can be decided by very very little.