Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Grigson on Dakich, taking questions


Recommended Posts

Dakich just wants to show he is not a Grigson lover to his fans, I guess. Just wants to give Grigson the typical Dakich junk thus showing people he does to Grigson what he did to Ballard during his interviews too.

 

Bottom line, it is always going to be about Dakich and not the person interviewed. :) 

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

Dakich just wants to show he is not a Grigson lover to his fans, I guess. Just wants to give Grigson the typical Dakich junk thus showing people he does to Grigson what he did to Ballard during his interviews too.

 

Bottom line, it is always going to be about Dakich and not the person interviewed. :) 

Yep which is why he’s the last local sports talk show host I listen too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Dakich just wants to show he is not a Grigson lover to his fans, I guess. Just wants to give Grigson the typical Dakich junk thus showing people he does to Grigson what he did to Ballard during his interviews too.

 

Bottom line, it is always going to be about Dakich and not the person interviewed. :) 

When was the last time he interviewed RG?  Was he nice to him then?

 

I haven't listened to DD in quite a while but I think he is considered a Radio Personality.  His show has been the same for years and his personality is the consistent theme.  I assume that's why people tune in.  Kind of like Rush Limbaugh.

 

Very few guests are really worth listening too, and he can't have Ballard or Grigson on every week.  I guess maybe he should try to change his personality when the more important guests come on but they are so few and far between that it would not be an easy thing to do. 

 

Personally, since he is opinionated. I'd rather listen to him spew his opinions than 90% of the noncommittal guests he would otherwise have on the show, other than RG or Ballard and maybe a couple more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The million dollar question, how does it feel to know you're responsible for ruining a generational talent.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chad72 said:

Dakich just wants to show he is not a Grigson lover to his fans, I guess. Just wants to give Grigson the typical Dakich junk thus showing people he does to Grigson what he did to Ballard during his interviews too.

 

Bottom line, it is always going to be about Dakich and not the person interviewed. :) 

 

Oh no, the complete opposite in this case. Dakich is and always has been a Grigson apologist, and lately it's turned into trolling over Andrew Luck, Chris Ballard, Frank Reich (in addition to the years-long trolling of fans and the media). He licked Grigson's boots for an hour and a half, accepted questions but was very short and controlling to any of the callers, I'm sure the calls were heavily screened, turned all blame toward Pagano, Luck, and anyone else other than Grigson...

 

It was Dakich pushing propaganda, and Grigson trying to walk the line between giving some sincere, introspective answers and painting his time in Indy with a more favorable tone. I don't mind Grigson's angle. Dakich just made it hard to take seriously. I missed the first half, gonna go back and try to listen, but I don't know if I'll be able to get through it.

 

I actually thought Dakich did a decent job with Ballard. He interrupted and probably cost us some good info at times, and he was a little direct and maybe abrasive about some things, but it was better than I expected. Complete different tone, approach, and objective than he had in this Grigson interview though.

 

Your last line is definitely on the money.

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

 

Oh no, the complete opposite in this case. Dakich is and always has been a Grigson apologist, and lately it's turned into trolling over Andrew Luck, Chris Ballard, Frank Reich (in addition to the years-long trolling of fans and the media). He licked Grigson's boots for an hour and a half, accepted questions but was very short and controlling to any of the callers, I'm sure the calls were heavily screened, turned all blame toward Pagano, Luck, and anyone else other than Grigson...

 

It was Dakich pushing propaganda, and Grigson trying to walk the line between giving some sincere, introspective answers and painting his time in Indy with a more favorable tone. I don't mind Grigson's angle. Dakich just made it hard to take seriously. I missed the first half, gonna go back and try to listen, but I don't know if I'll be able to get through it.

 

I actually thought Dakich did a decent job with Ballard. He interrupted and probably cost us some good info at times, and he was a little direct and maybe abrasive about some things, but it was better than I expected. Complete different tone, approach, and objective than he had in this Grigson interview though.

 

Your last line is definitely on the money.

Yeah that’s exactly why I can’t stand Dakich if you don’t see the world the way he does you are an * and he has no interest in even hearing why you disagree with him just humiliating you for disagreeing with him.  He’s a joke but he gets listeners so he’s not going anywhere so all I can do is just not listen.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Yeah that’s exactly why I can’t stand Dakich if you don’t see the world the way he does you are an * and he has no interest in even hearing why you disagree with him just humiliating you for disagreeing with him.  He’s a joke but he gets listeners so he’s not going anywhere so all I can do is just not listen.

 

I'm not in Indy so it's not something I have to worry about. The only time I listen to any of these guys is if they have on a guest I want to hear from. And usually it's Ballard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm not in Indy so it's not something I have to worry about. The only time I listen to any of these guys is if they have on a guest I want to hear from. And usually it's Ballard.

That’s fair.  It’s awful his time slot is whatever Rush has become without Rush, him and Rome.  If I am out and about from noon to three it’s music time for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chad72 said:

Dakich just wants to show he is not a Grigson lover to his fans, I guess. Just wants to give Grigson the typical Dakich junk thus showing people he does to Grigson what he did to Ballard during his interviews too.

 

Bottom line, it is always going to be about Dakich and not the person interviewed. :) 

I'm guessing you don't know dan

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had to listen to this. He actually took responsibility for Luck getting destroyed. He did mention a lot of it was the system the colts played with a lot of 5 and 7 step drops and no quick passing.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wentzszn said:

I had to listen to this. He actually took responsibility for Luck getting destroyed. He did mention a lot of it was the system the colts played with a lot of 5 and 7 step drops and no quick passing.

Which is more blame than Dan is willing to give him.  If you listen to Dan, Grigson gave Luck amazing people and Pagano didn’t know how to use them and Luck got himself hurt all those times.  

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Which is more blame than Dan is willing to give him.  If you listen to Dan, Grigson gave Luck amazing people and Pagano didn’t know how to use them and Luck got himself hurt all those times.  

I was actually pretty impressed with Grigson. He seems to have learned from his rookie mistakes. I think everyone should go listen to it.

 

I had to laugh when Dan asked him if Luck hurt his shoulder snowboarding. Pretty funny to hear Grigson admit it. Although he said he actually made it worse in the snow boarding accident. Was supposed to be rehabbing it. Makes you wonder if Luck did something stupid in the 2019 off season to hurt his ankle.

 

Dan kept ragging on ballards record. Saying he don’t care about drafts. But what Dan doesn’t stop to realize is the two years Ballard had a good QB we went to the playoffs. Ballard has had to deal with a lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I ain't got no time for that. Look, Grigson missed on more than a few picks (TY and Kelly being solid, but Kelly was staring at Grigson) and from all reports had all the ego that Luck didn't, essentially, because of Luck's performance.

 

He wasn't good for the franchise. The end. 

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

I was actually pretty impressed with Grigson. He seems to have learned from his rookie mistakes. I think everyone should go listen to it.

 

I had to laugh when Dan asked him if Luck hurt his shoulder snowboarding. Pretty funny to hear Grigson admit it. Although he said he actually made it worse in the snow boarding accident. Was supposed to be rehabbing it. Makes you wonder if Luck did something stupid in the 2019 off season to hurt his ankle.

 

Dan kept ragging on ballards record. Saying he don’t care about drafts. But what Dan doesn’t stop to realize is the two years Ballard had a good QB we went to the playoffs. Ballard has had to deal with a lot.

Yeah give Ballard a healthy Andrew Luck and the time Grigson had and this is a Super Bowl team.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Which is more blame than Dan is willing to give him.  If you listen to Dan, Grigson gave Luck amazing people and Pagano didn’t know how to use them and Luck got himself hurt all those times.  

I’m embarrassed to have read this.   Glad I don’t have to listen to Dakich on a daily basis.   He’s tolerable to me when he interviews  Ballard.   Seems respectful to him.  But on a day to day basis, he’d be really tough to listen to. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I’m embarrassed to have read this.   Glad I don’t have to listen to Dakich on a daily basis.   He’s tolerable to me when he interviews  Ballard.   Seems respectful to him.  But on a day to day basis, he’d be really tough to listen to. 

I think Ballard has the personality to really mesh well with Dan when he interviews him. Dans bluntness makes Ballard laugh and it seems to work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GoColts8818 said:

Yeah give Ballard a healthy Andrew Luck and the time Grigson had and this is a Super Bowl team.

plus the division was a joke during grigsons first 3 seasons .   that gave the colts 6 easy games those 3 years plus most of the wins were by slim margin with a lot of them just plain old lucky breaks .   even those 3 winning seasons the colts ranked near the bottom in defense , run game and offensive line .   grigson hit on 3 picks in 6 drafts while ballard has nearly every draft pick making the team and staying beside a couple of players .  grigson is a horrible drafter and without luck his teams would be 2-14

Link to post
Share on other sites

player development was non existent under grigson which he admitted in the interview he never had a crew to work with young players .    the worst part of the interview is when grigson said he knew after the first season he needed to build luck a line but did not want to put a rookie on the o line with luck .   he thought the his roster was one step away from being a super bowl team and instead chose to buy veteran players in free agency who were old to get over the hump .   how does a pro gm look at the colts 2012 roster and say we are a super bowl team if we add a couple aging veterans ?    the team had a horrible defense and o line  and instead of bringing in young talent and taking his time he wanted to buy the locker room and stuff it with aging players .  ballard is patient and will not spend money and make trades until the roster is one step away not before like grigson.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, coming on strong said:

player development was non existent under grigson which he admitted in the interview he never had a crew to work with young players .    the worst part of the interview is when grigson said he knew after the first season he needed to build luck a line but did not want to put a rookie on the o line with luck .   he thought the his roster was one step away from being a super bowl team and instead chose to buy veteran players in free agency who were old to get over the hump .   how does a pro gm look at the colts 2012 roster and say we are a super bowl team if we add a couple aging veterans ?    the team had a horrible defense and o line  and instead of bringing in young talent and taking his time he wanted to buy the locker room and stuff it with aging players .  ballard is patient and will not spend money and make trades until the roster is one step away not before like grigson.

Happens more often than not in the NFL because GMs tend to be blinded by what they want to see from their guys than admitting maybe they have flaws.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Wentzszn said:

I had to listen to this. He actually took responsibility for Luck getting destroyed. He did mention a lot of it was the system the colts played with a lot of 5 and 7 step drops and no quick passing.

This is obvious to many.  Since he could not fire Pagano, I'm not sure why he did not bring in different OCs.  Of course, I'm not sure if that quick passing game was in vogue at the time he was here, and I don't know what OC candidates would have implemented it.  Seemed like the candidates were just a bunch of old school retreads at the time.

 

The west coast offense was known for exposing its QBs to injury, so that shorter quicker passing offense was not the answer.

 

Can only hire what the market produces.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DougDew said:

This is obvious to many.  Since he could not fire Pagano, I'm not sure why he did not bring in different OCs.  Of course, I'm not sure if that quick passing game was in vogue at the time he was here, and I don't know what OC candidates would have implemented it.  Seemed like the candidates were just a bunch of old school retreads at the time.

 

The west coast offense was known for exposing its QBs to injury, so that shorter quicker passing offense was not the answer.

 

Can only hire what the market produces.

One thing that stuck out was he said he didn’t have a good supporting cast around him helping him make decisions. Irsay would of given him anything if he asked. This is why Ballard is so good. He surrounded himself with great people who keep him accountable. He even said the assistants and scouts at the end of the season get to review his job performance as a GM. He said they bust his balls lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Wentzszn said:

One thing that stuck out was he said he didn’t have a good supporting cast around him helping him make decisions. Irsay would of given him anything if he asked. This is why Ballard is so good. He surrounded himself with great people who keep him accountable. He even said the assistants and scouts at the end of the season get to review his job performance as a GM. He said they bust his balls lol.

I simply don't know how much authority he ever had.  I'm not sure anybody does.

 

It sound like he was simply a guy who was plucked out of a job In Philly, maybe having narrow duties, but did not have the managerial instincts and NFL connections to be able to assemble a non Polian staff. 

 

Still, did Irsay help him in this aspect or just let him sink?

 

It always seemed like a weird authority structure.  Starting right off with Irsay handling the PM situation, deciding to draft Luck, wanting a 34 defense, not allowing RG to fire Pagano, and I wonder who made the call to either keep Arians or Pagano after the ChuckStrong campaign but the team flourishing under Arians.  Not that there was a real choice, but I always wondered if Irsay and Grigs had a talk about that after season 1 and what each thought about each coach and why.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I simply don't know how much authority he ever had.  I'm not sure anybody does.

 

It sound like he was simply a guy who was plucked out of a job In Philly, maybe having narrow duties, but did not have the managerial instincts and NFL connections to be able to assemble a non Polian staff. 

 

Still, did Irsay help him in this aspect or just let him sink?

 

It always seemed like a weird authority structure.  Starting right off with Irsay handling the PM situation, deciding to draft Luck, wanting a 34 defense, not allowing RG to fire Pagano, and I wonder who made the call to either keep Arians or Pagano after the ChuckStrong campaign but the team flourishing under Arians.  Not that there was a real choice, but I always wondered if Irsay and Grigs had a talk about that after season 1 and what each thought about each coach and why.

i dont know where your getting the information irsay would not let him fire chuck or wanting the 3-4 defense .   watching a couple of interviews of ryan after getting fired he claimed jim irsay was hands off and let him make his own choices .  ryan hired chuck because he wanted to and he was a fan of the 3-4 defense .  jim has always been hands off with his stafff only giving advice .  ryan clearly said he wanted to make things work with chuck and chose  not to fire him .   after ryan was fired jim let chris ballard make the choice on chuck , just like ryan made the choice on jim caldwell .    chris ballard knew luck was not gonna be ready until maybe the end of the 2017 season so he wanted to keep chuck in place to tank for more draft picks to trade back .

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, coming on strong said:

i dont know where your getting the information irsay would not let him fire chuck or wanting the 3-4 defense .

I watched it with my own eyes both times, which is where I usually get my information rather than read somebody else's internet filter.

 

After firing Polian and before hiring RG, Irsay said that he wanted a "defense like the Steelers and the Chargers", which were the tough 34s that gave PM fits.   He did not say a tough defense like the Tampa D.

 

I'm sure RG got hired by Jim if RG expressed a liking for the 34, which Jim said he also liked.

 

When Irsay extended both RGs and CPs contracts, he said they were joined at the hip. When one goes they both go.  But then Irsay did not abide by his own statement and fired RG a couple of years later.  I assume that meant that he reserved for himself the right to fire either, but not for RG to fire CP.

 

Maybe you weren't around then to actually watch it. 

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.

×
×
  • Create New...