Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Interesting nugget on why colts didn’t pursue Stafford


Wentzszn
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don’t know if this deserves its own thread or not. Thought it was a interesting nugget when everyone wanted Stafford.

 

On Kevin Bowen radio show this morning he said the colts were not high on Stafford. That someone high in the organization who would of had to sign off on it was not going to sign off on getting him. Thinking that had to be Irsay or Ballard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have preferred Stafford over Wentz.   But the Colts would have had to give up allot for him.  Rams gave Detroit two 1st round picks, a 3rd round pick and a starting QB.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ballard said they hadn't gotten very far in their consideration of him before the Rams got the deal done. Add to that the price the Rams paid, and I don't think it was in the cards.

 

But he would have been my first choice, ahead of Wentz. I think he's going to be excellent with the Rams.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never been high on Stafford I think he's greatly over rated and hasn't won anything. Did he ever make the playoffs with the Lions granted it's the Loins but come on he had megatron some of those years. I'm much more happy with the acquirement  of Wentz I bet Wentz has a much better year than Stafford does hands down barring injury. I don't blame Ballard or whoeve it wasr for not wanting him. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have wanted Stafford’s too….  But that said, I’m very happy with Wentz.    It’s entirely possible the obstacle to our interest was (A) the cost of the trade, and/or (B) Reich’s familiarity with Wentz.    
 

Is it possible we were underwhelmed with Stafford simply based on his resume?   I think it’s possible, but not likely.   That’s more a fans perspective.   

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Myles said:

I would have preferred Stafford over Wentz.   But the Colts would have had to give up allot for him.  Rams gave Detroit two 1st round picks, a 3rd round pick and a starting QB.

Not quite.  Sure they gave up a lot. It wasn't just about getting Stafford. It was also to get away from Goffs horrible contract. Lions could take on the contract as they are in a rebuild. It was more like a 1st and 3rd for Stafford and another 1st just to get rid of Goff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, superrep1967 said:

I have never been high on Stafford I think he's greatly over rated and hasn't won anything. Did he ever make the playoffs with the Lions granted it's the Loins but come on he had megatron some of those years. I'm much more happy with the acquirement  of Wentz I bet Wentz has a much better year than Stafford does hands down barring injury. I don't blame Ballard or whoeve it wasr for not wanting him. 

You think Wentz is going to have a better year than Stafford?    Barring injury I think it’s highly unlikely.   The buzz out here is Stafford looks great. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Wentzszn said:

It all worked out. I would take Wentz over Stafford anyway. Wentz should be more of a long term answer then what Stafford would of been.

That's debatable.   Stafford has only missed 8 games (all 2019) in the past 10 seasons.   He is only 33 years old.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Myles said:

That's debatable.   Stafford has only missed 8 games (all 2019) in the past 10 seasons.   He is only 33 years old.

Which proves my point. Wentz is five years younger. Stafford may only 3 or so more years. With Wentz we should have him the next 8 years. There was a much bigger chance with Stafford we would be out looking for another QB in two years. With Wentz we have someone young enough to go all the way through this teams prime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Wentzszn said:

Which proves my point. Wentz is five years younger. Stafford may only 3 or so more years. With Wentz we should have him the next 8 years. There was a much bigger chance with Stafford we would be out looking for another QB in two years. With Wentz we have someone young enough to go all the way through this teams prime.

But he has missed 12 games in 5 years as opposed to Staffords 8 games in 10 years.  I would much rather have Stafford for the next 4-6 years.   But I'm happy with Wentz.   Hopefully he does well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Archer said:

I think Reich really wanted Wentz once the Eagles were willing to talk trade, so he didn’t want to “settle” for Stafford with Wentz on the table…

Couldn’t agree more. Reich wanted Wentz big time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Myles said:

But he has missed 12 games in 5 years as opposed to Staffords 8 games in 10 years.  I would much rather have Stafford for the next 4-6 years.   But I'm happy with Wentz.   Hopefully he does well.

He has been healthy the last two seasons. I am not that worried about that right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Superman said:

Ballard said they hadn't gotten very far in their consideration of him before the Rams got the deal done. Add to that the price the Rams paid, and I don't think it was in the cards.

 

But he would have been my first choice, ahead of Wentz. I think he's going to be excellent with the Rams.

 

I read that his age was somewhat of a concern, but you're right.  They weren't going to offer what the Rams did.  Plus we didn't really have a QB to give them unless we re-signed Jacoby.

 

I think it worked out for us, but if we would have known that Fields was dropping, I would have preferred him over either guy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Myles said:

But he has missed 12 games in 5 years as opposed to Staffords 8 games in 10 years.  I would much rather have Stafford for the next 4-6 years.   But I'm happy with Wentz.   Hopefully he does well.

 

Wentz has been available for every regular season game the last two seasons.  

 

It's a true moot point right now.  I'm hoping we're super(bowl) happy that we don't have a #1 draft pick next year.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Wentzszn said:

He has been healthy the last two seasons. I am not that worried about that right now.

That is my biggest worry.   I wouldn't place a bet that Wentz will be healthy and start every game the next couple seasons.  I like Wentz, but his health worries me greatly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

I read that his age was somewhat of a concern, but you're right.  They weren't going to offer what the Rams did.  Plus we didn't really have a QB to give them unless we re-signed Jacoby.

 

I think it worked out for us, but if we would have known that Fields was dropping, I would have preferred him over either guy.

More than likely the Lions would have gotten more picks from the Colts than what they did from LAR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Myles said:

That is my biggest worry.   I wouldn't place a bet that Wentz will be healthy and start every game the next couple seasons.  I like Wentz, but his health worries me greatly.

A lot of Wentz health will be on Reich. He has to get him to not hold the ball long and not take to many hits.  He plays a lot like luck did and it got him injured. Reich helped Luck a ton in this area I think he can do the same for Wentz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I would have wanted Stafford’s too….  But that said, I’m very happy with Wentz.    It’s entirely possible the obstacle to our interest was (A) the cost of the trade, and/or (B) Reich’s familiarity with Wentz.    
 

Is it possible we were underwhelmed with Stafford simply based on his resume?   I think it’s possible, but not likely.   That’s more a fans perspective.   

I was definitely wishing we could get Stafford, but to be honest, there was really nobody else at that time, which is why I was so hyped to get him.  I like him as a player though.  I think LA will prove to be a good change of scenery for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stafford is not a great fit for Reich's O, IMO.  He strikes me as a deep out pattern thrower, and not a crossing route thrower. 

 

That may not make much sense to some, but the patterns Stafford throws are not really the same patterns that are a staple of Reich's offense.

 

The rumor was that Goff had problems with INTs and INCs on the deep and intermediate outs because his motion was slow and it telegraphed the throw.  In comes Stafford.

 

For that matter, Eason strikes me more like Stafford than Wentz/Ehlinger.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, superrep1967 said:

I have never been high on Stafford I think he's greatly over rated and hasn't won anything. Did he ever make the playoffs with the Lions granted it's the Loins but come on he had megatron some of those years. I'm much more happy with the acquirement  of Wentz I bet Wentz has a much better year than Stafford does hands down barring injury. I don't blame Ballard or whoeve it wasr for not wanting him. 

 

1 hour ago, coming on strong said:

Stanford is overrated in my opinion he had Calvin Johnson Marvin Jones and plenty of other great weapons and failed to make the playoffs most years . 

 

Good God u can't tell you how happy I am that the guys in charge of running this team don't judge qbs like you 2.  Making the playoffs is a team effort. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

You think Wentz is going to have a better year than Stafford?    Barring injury I think it’s highly unlikely.   The buzz out here is Stafford looks great. 

The buzz around here says Wentz looks great for somebody who hasn't had very much practice time.  I believe Reich will get the best out of him they have a great relationship. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

 

Good God u can't tell you how happy I am that the guys in charge of running this team don't judge qbs like you 2.  Making the playoffs is a team effort. 

They must think like we do because they didn't bring him in

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Stafford is not a great fit for Reich's O, IMO.  He strikes me as a deep out pattern thrower, and not a crossing route thrower. 

 

That may not make much sense to some, but the patterns Stafford throws are not really the same patterns that are a staple of Reich's offense.

 

The rumor was that Goff had problems with INTs and INCs on the deep and intermediate outs because his motion was slow and it telegraphed the throw.  In comes Stafford.

 

For that matter, Eason strikes me more like Stafford than Wentz/Ehlinger.

 

I don't think there's a throw that Stafford is incapable of making, in any offense. He would have fit just fine in Reich's offense.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No thanks on Stafford. Hope he finds success on the backend of his career.  Glad the Colts got Wentz instead.  I can’t wait until towards the end of the season and the offense is humming and everyone is happy.  Colts will be a tough team to beat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

I don't think there's a throw that Stafford is incapable of making, in any offense. He would have fit just fine in Reich's offense.

I agree.  I think it came down to price.  We'd be paying for a guy who could threw the deep out as a staple of his game when that level of talent isn't necessary.  Ultimately it comes down to expense because the capital you use for luxury items takes away from capital you can use for necessities.  If we got a luxury QB on a cheap deal, then it works.  If we're paying for that elite QB who can do it all very well, I think that takes away from how Ballard is trying to build a more balanced team roster.

 

In the end though, I think guys like Stafford, and Luck for that matter, are going to look down field more than maybe what suits Frank's plan and I could see the reasoning behind the notion that Frank may not have wanted Stafford over Wentz.  

 

It sounds odd, but I think Stafford fits into more of a quick strike, high scoring offense, and I really think that a big part of Frank's offense is simply playing four-corners keep away.  Giving the ball up too quickly even when scoring a TD, I think rubs Frank wrongly.  You need to be able to score quickly when you have to, but that's not every drive.  I think he likes 8 minute drives over 3 minute drives, to put it simply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i wish Stafford the best of luck under McVay. He is a warrior and showed that against us last year even after injuring his finger. However i feel something different having wentz on our team as if were definitely going places 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...