Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Wentz updates?


csmopar
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Yes, it's revisionist history for you to say fans who wanted Peyton to stay, were selfish because he won a SB.. Your criticism of fans relies on something that was utterly unknown at the time it went down.... Nobody at that time said, gee, wait... my favorite player, Peyton Manning is going to a team that was 8-8 last year, and 4-12 the year before, so he's destined to win a SB... LMAO.

 

The years 5-6 years before Manning, they averaged 6-7 wins.

The year before Manning, they had 8 wins with Tebow.

The year before Tebow, they had 4 wins.... 

Heck, we didn't have the D Denver did, and did better with Brissett in 2019 lol. 

 

Manning was special, and played out his mind. Only the D side was better than Indy at that time.

Manning made a unknown nobody like 3rd round Eric Decker into a stud (who is still more well known for his girlfriends), and they picked Welker after Manning got there. Indy added TY the year Manning left, so who's to say Manning wouldn't have played out of his mind in Indy... 

 

 

First off, youre completely wrong about Denver and youre not remembering the Colts accurately at all.

 

I knew the minute he went to Denver if he could regain his health they were gonna be a problem. They had a very good receiving core and OL also. 

 

And beyond that, the Colts lost Jeff Saturday, Ryan Diem. Gary Brackett, Joseph Addai, Pierre Garcon, Dallas Clark AND Manning. They wouldve also not been able to resign Robert Mathis and Reggie Wayne had they brought back Manning.

 

THAT is revisionist history man, ignoring all of that. That teams run was clearly over. The cap had caught up with them and age did as well. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

First off, youre completely wrong about Denver and youre not remembering the Colts accurately at all.

 

I knew the minute he went to Denver if he could regain his health they were gonna be a problem. They had a very good receiving core and OL also. 

 

And beyond that, the Colts lost Jeff Saturday, Ryan Diem. Gary Brackett, Joseph Addai, Pierre Garcon, Dallas Clark AND Manning. They wouldve also not been able to resign Robert Mathis and Reggie Wayne had they brought back Manning.

 

THAT is revisionist history man, ignoring all of that. That teams run was clearly over. The cap had caught up with them and age did as well. 

 

Dude, Denver's D in 2011, before Manning showed up wasn't even top half of the league. They ranked 20th..... 

The went from 20th, to 2nd, in one season when Manning arrived.

 

So again.... I'll ask you a simple question....

 

What % of fans thought.... My favorite player who is going to a team with a D ranked 20th, and a team that averaged 6 wins the last two years, was going to quickly win a SB... 

 

You also fail to consider if Indy didn't use the number one pick on Luck, they could have drafted anyone they wanted, or traded back to get multiple 1R picks and some others. But that would require hindsight what ifs lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Dude, Denver's D in 2011, before Manning showed up wasn't even top half of the league. They ranked 20th..... 

The went from 20th, to 2nd, in one season when Manning arrived.

 

So again.... I'll ask you a simple question....

 

What % of fans thought.... My favorite player who is going to a team with a D ranked 20th, and a team that averaged 6 wins the last two years, was going to quickly win a SB... 

 

You also fail to consider if Indy didn't use the number one pick on Luck, they could have drafted anyone they wanted, or traded back to get multiple 1R picks and some others. But that would require hindsight what ifs lol. 

Denver went 8-8 with Tim Tebow. Of course they are contenders with a healthy Peyton Manning. Geez man. Cmon.

 

The funny thing is, you act like adding Manning doesnt guarantee them anything.....but simultaneously act as if the Colts shouldve brought him back because he makes them instant contenders.....And then conveniently ignore all the losses we suffered at that time? Because you think a bunch of rookies are gonna fill them holes? Not likely.

 

You are all over the map, all the time. For some reason in your previous post you trash Eric Decker, who was actually a good WR before he got hurt and had 154 catches and 17 TDs in the two healthy years with the Jets after he left Denver, with poor QB play. Then you forget about a prime Demarious Thomas who was one of the best WR in football. They also had Julius Thomas who was a big time TE prospect at the time whose talent Manning maximized. That offense was loaded. There is a reason Manning chose them.

 

East, you care way too much about rankings and stats. Its harder to play defense on a team who doesnt have good offense, because you are on the field more and typically give up good field position all the time. And sometimes your ranking lies due to factors like that. 

 

But I dont expect you to understand those things because PFF doesnt tell you that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

Denver went 8-8 with Tim Tebow. Of course they are contenders with a healthy Peyton Manning. Geez man. Cmon.

 

The funny thing is, you act like adding Manning doesnt guarantee them anything.....but simultaneously act as if the Colts shouldve brought him back because he makes them instant contenders.....And then conveniently ignore all the losses we suffered at that time? Because you think a bunch of rookies are gonna fill them holes? Not likely.

Never said he makes us instant contenders.

What I'm saying is, don't say fans were selfish..

A guy going to a 8-8 team with a 20th ranked D doesn't say instant contender either.

You're making assumptions based on how they improved, and who they added once he got there.

The D was helped by Mannings presence big time. The guys like Decker were helped by Mannings presence. 

5 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

 

You are all over the map, all the time. For some reason in your previous post you trash Eric Decker, who was actually a good WR before he got hurt and had 154 catches and 17 TDs in the two healthy years with the Jets after he left Denver, with poor QB play. Then you forget about a prime Damarious Thomas who was one of the best WR in football. They also had Julius Thomas who was a big time TE prospect at the time whose talent Manning maximized. That offense was loaded. There is a reaspn Manning chose them.

Love Damarious. 

Decker was a 3rd rounder. Nobody was thinking he'd be as good as he was once Manning showed up. That's not trashing him. 

5 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

 

East you care way too much about rankings and stats. Its harder to play defense on a team who doesnt have good offense, because you are on the field more and typically give up good field position. And sometimes your ranking lies due to factors like that. 

People always trash stats and ranks when confronted with stats and ranks that don't support their narratives. 

5 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

 

But I dont expect you to understand those things because PFF doesnt tell you that.

Still, simple question...

 

How many fans AT THE TIME MANNING LEFT said he's going to win the SB going to a team with a 20th ranked D, and hasn't won more than 8 games in 5 or 6 years?

 

And why is a fan that wanted Manning to stay, selfish AT THE TIME MANNING LEFT (not in hindsight).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Never said he makes us instant contenders.

What I'm saying is, don't say fans were selfish..

A guy going to a 8-8 team with a 20th ranked D doesn't say instant contender either.

You're making assumptions based on how they improved, and who they added once he got there.

The D was helped by Mannings presence big time. The guys like Decker were helped by Mannings presence. 

Love Damarious. 

Decker was a 3rd rounder. Nobody was thinking he'd be as good as he was once Manning showed up. That's not trashing him. 

People always trash stats and ranks when confronted with stats and ranks that don't support their narratives. 

Still, simple question...

 

How many fans AT THE TIME MANNING LEFT said he's going to win the SB going to a team with a 20th ranked D, and hasn't won more than 8 games in 5 or 6 years?

 

And why is a fan that wanted Manning to stay, selfish AT THE TIME MANNING LEFT (not in hindsight).

 

First off, I will say whatever I want, when I want. 

 

8-8 with Tim Tebow to 4 time MVP Peyton Manning at the most important position in the sport....the real question is who doesnt think Peyton Manning is worth 4 wins alone and makes them 12-4 with home field advantage?

 

You cant argue hes not a huge aquisition and makes you an instant contender and still argue you shouldve passed on Andrew Luck to keep him. Because you dont pass on Luck unless he does that for you.

 

I told you why it was selfish. Because Peyton only had a few good years left, and it wasnt likely he'd regain his prime form. So for him to contend, he needed a more talented roster around him. He left and joined a better team. And it played out exactly how it should have.

 

Im a huge Manning fan. I was happy for him at the time and even happier for him when it worked out. Because the Colts run was clearly over. 

 

So if I think the fans are acting selfishly, I will say so. If you love Manning you want whats best for him and nobody can say with a straight face that ending his career with the Colts was the best thing FOR HIM. 

 

He had his choice. He chose Denver. He chose right. Maybe it wasnt the gamble you make it out to be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

First off, I will say whatever I want, when I want. 

 

8-8 with Tim Tebow to 4 time MVP Peyton Manning at the most important position in the sport....the real question is who doesnt think Peyton Manning is worth 4 wins alone and makes them 12-4 with home field advantage?

 

You cant argue hes not a huge aquisition and makes you an instant contender and still argue you shouldve passed on Andrew Luck to keep him. Because you dont pass on Luck unless he does that for you.

 

I told you why it was selfish. Because Peyton only had a few good years left, and it wasnt likely he'd regain his prime form. So for him to contend, he needed a more talented roster around him. Heeft and joined a better team. And it played out exactly how it should have.

 

Im a huge Manning fan. I was happy for him at the time and even happier for him when it worked out. Because the Colts run was clearly over. 

 

So if I think the fans are acting selfishly, I will say so. If you love Manning you want whats best for him and nobody can say with a straight face that ending his career with the Colts was the best thing FOR HIM. 

 

He had his choice. He chose Denver. He chose right. Maybe it wasnt the gamble you make it out to be?

 

He had a choice in team, not a choice to stay.

4 wins? Tebow was worth 4 wins from 4-8 to 8-8 lol... 

You're using hindsight and ignoring a lot of things. 

 

You're also assuming Indy wouldn't have been better keeping Manning the next few years, and using that #1 pick to fill some holes. Heck, we went 11-5 with a green Luck that had 18 INTs. And could have used that #1 to get multiple starters on D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember in Luck’s first and even second year thinking it was best that Manning left, as I thought there is just NO WAY Mannng could’ve survived that atrocious offensive line.  Luck was a physical marvel and few QBs could have survived and thrived like he did.  I honestly think things worked out perfectly for both Manning and the Colts.

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

9 minutes ago, rockywoj said:

I remember in Luck’s first and even second year thinking it was best that Manning left, as I thought there is just NO WAY Mannng could’ve survived that atrocious offensive line.  Luck was a physical marvel and few QBs could have survived and thrived like he did.  I honestly think things worked out perfectly for both Manning and the Colts.

Definitely worked well for Manning lol. 

He was always elite at not getting sacked even when our OL was bad.

I remember the musical chairs on the OL some of the years before he left. Wasn't as rosie as many like to remember. Mediocre guys like Johnson and Ugoh... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

 

He had a choice in team, not a choice to stay.

4 wins? Tebow was worth 4 wins from 4-8 to 8-8 lol... 

You're using hindsight and ignoring a lot of things. 

 

You're also assuming Indy wouldn't have been better keeping Manning the next few years, and using that #1 pick to fill some holes. Heck, we went 11-5 with a green Luck that had 18 INTs. And could have used that #1 to get multiple starters on D.

And youre ignoring the fact that the NY Giants won the SB in 2011 with the 25th ranked scoring defense and pretending its a prerequisite to have a high ranked defense to win the SB, which is some nonsense stat guys do all the time. 

 

 

Luck was not green, he was great and won most of the games we won that year by putting the team on his back and coming from behind constantly. He also had Mathis and Wayne to help him out, which Manning wouldnt have had. Luck, Wayne and Mathis were the reasons we won as many games as we did. As great as Manning was he couldnt have done what Luck did that year. He took a pounding and made some spectacular plays that year Manning simply could never make. He was the perfect QB for that team. 

 

So you think we couldve traded the pick to get "multiple starters on defense"......but that is a HUGE projection. But suggesting Manning makes the Broncos a contender is unreasonable? Seriously?

 

Bro we had NO cap space. Trading Luck for multiple picks doesnt address all the holes on that roster even if every rookie pans out. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Definitely worked well for Manning lol. 

He was always elite at not getting sacked even when our OL was bad.

I remember the musical chairs on the OL some of the years before he left. Wasn't as rosie as many like to remember. Mediocre guys like Johnson and Ugoh... 

Charlie Johnson was a good player.

 

Dude why are you constantly %ting on good players because they arent great players?

 

Tony Ugoh played for us for like 2 years and yeah he stunk, but not only did we still have a good line, we also had depth. Charlie Johnson was a fantastic backup lineman and a stop gap starter.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GoatBeard said:

And youre ignoring the fact that the NY Giants won the SB in 2011 with the 25th ranked scoring defense and pretending its a prerequisite to have a high ranked defense to win the SB, which is some nonsense stat guys do all the time. 

 

 

Luck was not green, he was great and won most of the games we won that year by putting the team on his back and coming from behind constantly. He also had Mathis and Wayne to help him out, which Manning wouldnt have had. Luck, Wayne and Mathis were the reasons we won as many games as we did. As great as Manning was he couldnt have done what Luck did that year. He took a pounding and made some spectacular plays that year Manning simply could never make. He was the perfect QB for that team. 

 

So you think we couldve traded the pick to get "multiple starters on defense"......but that is a HUGE projection. But suggesting Manning makes the Broncos a contender is unreasonable? Seriously?

 

Bro we had NO cap space. Trading Luck for multiple picks doesnt address all the holes on that roster even if every rookie pans out. 

LOL.. you talk about Denver being so much better, now your arguing the opposite saying their jump from 20th to 2nd in D rank has nothing to do with it because of an unrelated NYG's D. That's called bad faith debating lol.. 

 

Luck wasn't elite at avoiding sacks, He caused a lot of it himself. Manning was elite at avoiding sacks, even with jag LTs like Ugoh and Johnson. Don't forget we also would have had TY had Manning returned, who I'm sorry, but was much better than Decker.

 

You're relying on all kinds of hindsight, ignoring stats, and you want to be critical of me suggesting we might have been able to parlay the #1 pick in the draft into multiple starters? lol.. A #1 is roughly worth a #10 + #15 + #25.... and that's straight DC capital, which is almost always on the conservative side.

 

We can agree to to disagree. No use debating

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GoatBeard said:

Charlie Johnson was a good player.

 

Dude why are you constantly %ting on good players because they arent great players?

 

Tony Ugoh played for us for like 2 years and yeah he stunk, but not only did we still have a good line, we also had depth. Charlie Johnson was a fantastic backup lineman and a stop gap starter.

Charlie Johnson was not a good starting LT. He was a good guy though. Saying he wasn't a good starter is not sheeting on someone.....

 

He was mediocre and bounced around the OL filing holes from injuries. He only got a start at LT because Ugoh was so bad. We chose not to resign him. He went to MN who tried to use him at LT, and ended up moving him to LG because he couldn't handle it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

LOL.. you talk about Denver being so much better, now your arguing the opposite saying their jump from 20th to 2nd in D rank has nothing to do with it because of an unrelated NYG's D. That's called bad faith debating lol.. 

 

Luck wasn't elite at avoiding sacks, He caused a lot of it himself. Manning was elite at avoiding sacks, even with jag LTs like Ugoh and Johnson. Don't forget we also would have had TY had Manning returned, who I'm sorry, but was much better than Decker.

 

You're relying on all kinds of hindsight, ignoring stats, and you want to be critical of me suggesting we might have been able to parlay the #1 pick in the draft into multiple starters? lol.. A #1 is roughly worth a #10 + #15 + #25.... and that's straight DC capital, which is almost always on the conservative side.

 

We can agree to to disagree. No use debating

 

 

So you were gonna trade Luck to a team with 3 number 1s?

 

Bro did anyone have those picks and want a QB?

 

wth are you talking about?

 

So keeping Manning couldve made us better than we were with Luck.......which was 11-5 and a playoff team.......but youre not saying he makes us contenders?

 

I really have no idea what you are talking about at this point. Its a circle of convoluted stats and hypothetical nonsense.

 

We wouldve had TY Hilton, who is a deep threat, but Manning is gonna avoid sacks by getting the ball out quicker while simultaneously hitting TY deep, at will?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, EastStreet said:

Charlie Johnson was not a good starting LT. He was a good guy though. Saying he wasn't a good starter is not sheeting on someone.....

 

He was mediocre and bounced around the OL filing holes from injuries. He only got a start at LT because Ugoh was so bad. We chose not to resign him. He went to MN who tried to use him at LT, and ended up moving him to LG because he couldn't handle it. 

You dont have to have front line starters at every position. 

 

This isnt Madden with the cap off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

And youre ignoring the fact that the NY Giants won the SB in 2011 with the 25th ranked scoring defense and pretending its a prerequisite to have a high ranked defense to win the SB, which is some nonsense stat guys do all the time. 

 

 

Luck was not green, he was great and won most of the games we won that year by putting the team on his back and coming from behind constantly. He also had Mathis and Wayne to help him out, which Manning wouldnt have had. Luck, Wayne and Mathis were the reasons we won as many games as we did. As great as Manning was he couldnt have done what Luck did that year. He took a pounding and made some spectacular plays that year Manning simply could never make. He was the perfect QB for that team. 

 

So you think we couldve traded the pick to get "multiple starters on defense"......but that is a HUGE projection. But suggesting Manning makes the Broncos a contender is unreasonable? Seriously?

 

Bro we had NO cap space. Trading Luck for multiple picks doesnt address all the holes on that roster even if every rookie pans out. 

Mathis and Wayne could have been kept if the would have released Freeney.  They actually would have had more cap space in 2012 if they kept Peyton and cut Freeney

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jvan1973 said:

Mathis and Wayne could have been kept if the would have released Freeney.  They actually would have had more cap space in 2012 if they kept Peyton and cut Freeney

Ok but again, Andrew Luck was staring us in the face and at the time Dwight Freeney was viewed as our best defensive player. Peyton was also coming off neck surgery.

 

I really dont see how this is even a hard decision really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GoatBeard said:

Ok but again, Andrew Luck was staring us in the face and at the time Dwight Freeney was viewed as our best defensive player. Peyton was also coming off neck surgery.

 

I really dont see how this is even a hard decision really.

Well the guy that was cut took it pretty hard.    He wanted to stay

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jvan1973 said:

Well the guy that was cut took it pretty hard.    He wanted to stay

Ok but is that how you make decisions if youre running the team?

 

Of course he wanted to stay.

 

We didnt want him to leave either.

 

That doesnt mean you allow emotions to influence a clear business decision. Thats all im saying.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

So you were gonna trade Luck to a team with 3 number 1s?

 

Bro did anyone have those picks and want a QB?

 

wth are you talking about?

Dude, you're embarrassing yourself. Everyone wanted Luck. 

 

The Redskins gave up 2x first rounds and 2x second round picks to get RG3 right after we picked Luck.

 

And Luck was worth far more.

20 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

 

So keeping Manning couldve made us better than we were with Luck.......which was 11-5 and a playoff team.......but youre not saying he makes us contenders?

 

I really have no idea what you are talking about at this point. Its a circle of convoluted stats and hypothetical nonsense.

 

We wouldve had TY Hilton, who is a deep threat, but Manning is gonna avoid sacks by getting the ball out quicker while simultaneously hitting TY deep, at will?

We had Wayne and Hilton that year, and 2 good TEs

 

Manning could do whatever he wanted. Throw quick, and if he saw he had time, he could let plays develop. He's one of the best at doing that.

 

He made OL's look much better than they were.

18 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

You dont have to have front line starters at every position. 

 

This isnt Madden with the cap off.

We're talking LT, easily the most important OL position. And we had jags for several years. Manning made them look much better than they were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

Ok but again, Andrew Luck was staring us in the face and at the time Dwight Freeney was viewed as our best defensive player. Peyton was also coming off neck surgery.

 

I really dont see how this is even a hard decision really.

lol... stop twisting your narrative.

first Manning is and instant contender maker, and now he's worth less than a declining Freeney?

Freeney only had 5 sacks that year, and we let him walk anyway after that year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, EastStreet said:

lol... stop twisting your narrative.

first Manning is and instant contender maker, and now he's worth less than a declining Freeney?

Freeney only had 5 sacks that year, and we let him walk anyway after that year.

No actually he had 8.5 and 19 QB hits when that decision wouldve been made stat boy. Surprised you didnt know that.

 

 Again youre using hindsight and using his 2012 numbers and pretending you knew he was gonna have that decline when you didnt.

 

I didnt say Manning made US an instant contender, I said the opposite actually. Its YOU twisting my narrative, because yours sucks so bad.

 

Drafting Luck was a no brainer at the time. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Dude, you're embarrassing yourself. Everyone wanted Luck. 

 

The Redskins gave up 2x first rounds and 2x second round picks to get RG3 right after we picked Luck.

 

And Luck was worth far more.

We had Wayne and Hilton that year, and 2 good TEs

 

Luck could do whatever he wanted. Throw quick, and if he saw he had time, he could let plays develop. He's one of the best at doing that.

 

He made OL's look much better than they were.

We're talking LT, easily the most important OL position. And we had jags for several years. Manning made them look much better than they were.

You said we could trade him for 3 first in the same draft, you even listed hypothetical numbers lol

 

Dude wth is wrong with you lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

No actually he had 8.5 and 19 QB hits when that decision wouldve been made stat boy. Surprised you didnt know that.

 

 Again youre using hindsight and using his 2012 numbers and pretending you knew he was gonna have that decline when you didnt.

 

I didnt say Manning made US an instant contender, I said the opposite actually. Its YOU twisting my narrative, because yours sucks so bad.

 

Drafting Luck was a no brainer at the time. 

 

keep grasping at straws. He was 30+ and declining.

He had 8.5 in 11. yes the decision would have likely been made at the time. I said he had 5 that year (but you know that)

He also was in his 10th season. You know how many 30+ year olds there are in the top 30 sack leaders... 4

We just let Houston go who is at a similar age... who had just had 8 sacks for us... lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

You said we could trade him for 3 first in the same draft, you even listed hypothetical numbers lol

 

Dude wth is wrong with you lol

We don't know what we could have got. 

We could have got players. We could have got draft capital. 

I listed a hypothetical DC value. So what.

Now you're just trying to pick at everything. 

Fact is there was a ton of value if we wanted to trade. 

Didn't have to be all picks, could have been people + picks, could have been 2013 picks.. 

They all would have helped Indy the next couple years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, EastStreet said:

keep grasping at straws. He was 30+ and declining.

He had 8.5 in 11. yes the decision would have likely been made at the time. I said he had 5 that year (but you know that)

He also was in his 10th season. You know how many 30+ year olds there are in the top 30 sack leaders... 4

We just let Houston go who is at a similar age... who had just had 8 sacks for us... lol

So was Manning and he was coming off neck surgery. So was Mathis and he had 19.5 sacks in 2012.

 

Nothing you say ever really makea sense. Its always a bunch of nonsense that contradicts other things you say.

 

Why would we cut a guy who was viewed as our best defensive player at the time to pass on the best QB prospect in a generation to make room for an aging QB coming off neck surgery to appease everyones feelings and not win anymore games?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

We don't know what we could have got. 

We could have got players. We could have got draft capital. 

I listed a hypothetical DC value. So what.

Now you're just trying to pick at everything. 

Fact is there was a ton of value if we wanted to trade. 

Didn't have to be all picks, could have been people + picks, could have been 2013 picks.. 

They all would have helped Indy the next couple years.

Manning had time for that?

 

Youre trying to rebuild around an aging QB coming off neck surgery with future draft picks. Not a good plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

So was Manning and he was coming off neck surgery. So was Mathis and he had 19.5 sacks in 2012.

 

Nothing you say ever really makea sense. Its always a bunch of nonsense that contradicts other things you say.

 

Why would we cut a guy who was viewed as our best defensive player at the time to pass on the best QB prospect in a generation to make room for an aging QB coming off neck surgery to appease everyones feelings and not win anymore games?

Freeny was 30+, he was declining. He was huge cap wise. We just let our 8 sack DE walk from last year and he wasn't even a huge cap hit. 

 

30 year old QBs are different from 30 year old DEs.

6 of 10 QBs in the top 10 in yards last year were 30+. As I shared, only 4 30+ DEs in the top 30 of sacks.

Pretty simple

 

You've said a ton of stuff that contradicts your own narrative. I'd be happy to do a recap if you want lol...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

Manning had time for that?

 

Youre trying to rebuild around an aging QB coming off neck surgery with future draft picks. Not a good plan.

We started this whole debate with you calling fans selfish... lol..

You insinuate it was obvious that Manning could take an 8-8 team with a 20th ranked D to the SB.

Yet we have to "rebuild" if Manning came back? I didn't use the word rebuild. I said we could fill some holes.

And we could have easily filled several holes via a trade of that #1 pick, be it with draft capital or players received.

 

Pretty simple. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

Freeny was 30+, he was declining. He was huge cap wise. We just let our 8 sack DE walk from last year and he wasn't even a huge cap hit. 

 

30 year old QBs are different from 30 year old DEs.

6 of 10 QBs in the top 10 in yards last year were 30+. As I shared, only 4 30+ DEs in the top 30 of sacks.

Pretty simple

 

You've said a ton of stuff that contradicts your own narrative. I'd be happy to do a recap if you want lol...

 

Sure go ahead. It will be a bunch of nonsense.

 

My narrative is pretty simple.

 

Denver was a better football team than we were at the time and provided Manning a better situation. 

 

Luck was a better QB for us at the time as well, as adding him allowed us to keep Freeney, Mathis and Wayne to provide veteran leadership and help with our rebuild.

 

Letting Manning go was a better decision, for Peyton Manning especially. 

 

Players over 30 arent dead.

 

Charlie Johnson was a good player for us. Wish we had him the last two weeks.

 

Stats dont mean very much. Especially looked back on 10 years later with zero context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

We started this whole debate with you calling fans selfish... lol..

You insinuate it was obvious that Manning could take an 8-8 team with a 20th ranked D to the SB.

Yet we have to "rebuild" if Manning came back? I didn't use the word rebuild. I said we could fill some holes.

And we could have easily filled several holes via a trade of that #1 pick, be it with draft capital or players received.

 

Pretty simple. 

 

Yes because again, we were the worst team in football the year before with Tim Tebow level QB play and we released most of our veteran leaders on top of that.

 

Again, we had no cap space East. We couldnt take back good players in a trade. And your trade is completely hypothetical anyways so you couldnt possibly know what we couldve done in your hypothetical scenario. 

 

I know exactly what we couldve done under my scenario because we actually did it.

 

Those fans ARE selfish. They give no thought to whats best for Peyton Manning. Only themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill Polians drafts were atrocious in the years leading up to all of this which is partially why it was such a mess, but East wanted us to stand pat and trust that hes gonna nail a bunch of picks to add pieces around Peyton Manning and try to win another SB in a window of about 3 years.

 

And if all this happened, he would be sitting here today suggesting we dropped the ball and screwed Manning over because that is what he essentially does. He uses retrospect to act like hes smarter than everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

So anyway back to Wentz, saw he’s on track to play Sunday.  Good news.  Hopefully the line takes him getting hurt personally and blows the Titans off the ball Sunday.  I’ve been impressed with Wentz under fire id love to see what he can do with time and a running game.

Yeah I agree,I have been happy with CW also. The line needs to straighten things out, and hopefully all will be good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In our pick thread, I picked us to win. Wentz has played above average to good football IMO. I don't see us starting 0-3 either, we are a good football team and usually good teams don't start with 0-3 when their starting QB plays in all 3. Tennessee is good as well but at this point we are the more desperate team at 0-2. Contain Henry to around or below 75 Yards and we will win, easier said than done but the Cards did it in week 1 at Tennessee. Tannehill is an above average QB/sometimes good but far from very good or great, make him him beat us I say. Lets see how much Julio really has in the tank because I am not sold on him either being the Julio from 2 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Definitely worked well for Manning lol. 

He was always elite at not getting sacked even when our OL was bad.

I remember the musical chairs on the OL some of the years before he left. Wasn't as rosie as many like to remember. Mediocre guys like Johnson and Ugoh... 

 

I always though Ugoh sounded like a really bad car model. 

 

But you're 100% right in that the very best QBs can make lines look much much better than they are from their speed of read and just getting the ball out so fast. Physicality at the position is massively overrated IMO. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, bertjones7 said:

Thread is way off track again.  Mods please fix this.

This is ...

 

It's a forum where people talk Colts. A conversation busted out again...darn.

 

What Wentz update are people thinking they're missing? He's likely going to play tomorrow as long as his thoroughbred ankles don't twist up walking to the fridge today.  

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Shive locked and unlocked this topic
  • Shive locked this topic
  • Shive unlocked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...