Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

KC vs Denver


Gramz

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, JediXMan said:

I’d be worried if I were a Chiefs fan. They got outplayed today if it wasn’t for that fumble return they probably lose this game. That D looks like a problem moving forward.

Yup.  JT get ready! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, JediXMan said:


That’s typical Fangio for you awful decision.

 

Love him as a DC, not so much a HC. 

I think however he'd be fine with a better OC and QB. 

Just hard to grade a D guy (as HC) when it's the O that's holding you back. 

 

I'd take him as an Indy DC in a heartbeat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Nesjan3 said:

Broncos are the best all around roster with the worst quarterback problems. Rather unfair to Fangio if he gets fired. Havnt had a quality starter since Manning.

He is a horrible head coach. He has thrown Lock  under the bus from the beginning after he was really good and then got injured. He might be a good DC he is a awful HC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wentzszn said:

He is a horrible head coach. He has thrown Lock  under the bus from the beginning after he was really good and then got injured. He might be a good DC he is a awful HC. 

What makes you think he is so bad? Lock was never good thats why he got benched and replaced by other not good quarterbacks. Guys dont just get thrown under the bus for the heck of it in the NFL. It was his film thats it.

 

He has never had a decent starting quarterback the entire time he has been the coach. The team sure seems to buy in and like the dude.  Defense has been stellar every year.

 

I just think in this quarterback driven league, when the GM fails to provide the team with a qb thats up to par, the coach becomes a scapegoat, when chances are he had no chance at winning either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could Melvin (Gordon) have made an executive decision, to block, the unblocked Melvin (Ingram)? Lock Had his back turned during that handoff...

Lock would have been left holding the ball (hopefully) on a broken play, and probably sacked...but the result couldn't have been much worse...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wentzszn said:

He is a horrible head coach. He has thrown Lock  under the bus from the beginning after he was really good and then got injured. He might be a good DC he is a awful HC. 

 

The media seem, simplistically, to distill results down to QB, but I doubt if all coaches do that. IF Fangio said (KC, LAC, and LVR) all have 'top shelf QBs',

all of them may have better receivers than Denver.

KC obviously does.

LAC, Allen, Williams, even Guyton and Palmer, and the 3 tight ends are good.

LVR, I'd prefer Woller and Renfro over Fant and Jeudy(who had an early pass through his hands today).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Nesjan3 said:

What makes you think he is so bad? Lock was never good thats why he got benched and replaced by other not good quarterbacks. Guys dont just get thrown under the bus for the heck of it in the NFL. It was his film thats it.

 

He has never had a decent starting quarterback the entire time he has been the coach. The team sure seems to buy in and like the dude.  Defense has been stellar every year.

 

I just think in this quarterback driven league, when the GM fails to provide the team with a qb thats up to par, the coach becomes a scapegoat, when chances are he had no chance at winning either way.

Fangio isn't good. He's a better DC, which is the case for a lot of coordinators. That 4th and 9 call to kick the FG was the dumbest decision he could have made. He's done that a ton since he's taken over. Denver needs a young offensive minded coach. Someone like a Leftwich or Kellen Moore. They have all the talent in the world. They're a legit QB away from being a Super Bowl contender. Lock isn't terrible. He's for sure better than Bridgewater. They gave up on Lock way too early. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, landrus13 said:

Fangio isn't good. He's a better DC, which is the case for a lot of coordinators. That 4th and 9 call to kick the FG was the dumbest decision he could have made. He's done that a ton since he's taken over. Denver needs a young offensive minded coach. Someone like a Leftwich or Kellen Moore. They have all the talent in the world. They're a legit QB away from being a Super Bowl contender. Lock isn't terrible. He's for sure better than Bridgewater. They gave up on Lock way too early. 

I'd never watched him play until last week, in LA, and his QB rating was over 100 in that game.

I didn't know he could run...he was keeping pace, though not overtaiking, former teammate Nick Bolton, nearing the Denver goal line.

I did see, in interviews last year, that he seemed very confident, smug...until Bridgewater was named 2021 starter. Then Lock seemed shocked.

It does seem irrational to have given up on him after less than 2 years.

One current trend seems to be:

1. get a running back/quarterback

2. try to get to the playoffs before he's broken

3. if he breaks...just get another one...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, waterdog said:

 

The media seem, simplistically, to distill results down to QB, but I doubt if all coaches do that. IF Fangio said (KC, LAC, and LVR) all have 'top shelf QBs',

all of them may have better receivers than Denver.

KC obviously does.

LAC, Allen, Williams, even Guyton and Palmer, and the 3 tight ends are good.

LVR, I'd prefer Woller and Renfro over Fant and Jeudy(who had an early pass through his hands today).

 

Denver has Sutton too. Tim Patrick is a very good WR too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It's very telling that nobody actually came out and said that Stroud's published test score was inaccurate. Yes there was pushback about the scores, but they all were very general and non-specific. "I've seen published scores that aren't correct", "Those scores miss a lot of context", etc.    And especially when Stroud himself was asked about those scores. Do you remember what his answer was? He didn't dispute any of it. He just said he's not a test-taker, he's a football player.    I think several big time reporters/analysts reported it. I think I first heard it from Zierlein. But can't find the original. Here's Pelissero reporting on it too: https://www.nfl.com/news/2023-nfl-draft-pro-execs-scouts-coaches-rank-and-evaluate-the-qb-class           There have been some suggestions that the Panthers took Bryce Young over Stroud partially because of the S2 test, because they valued it highly.    Yeah, I don't remember if it was reported as players refusing it or their agents not allowing them to take it, but this is what one of the podcasts I listen to reported. Not 100% sure which one it is because I consume a lot of those draft podcasts.    They probably can... not sure if the players would do it. But if the teams knew it in advance they might have better idea of whether development in certain areas is even possible. 
    • I don't think I agree that it's revisionist. Last year, some scores leaked, and then Stroud's scores got aggregated and the story was sensationalized. But all along, there was pushback about the scores -- were they accurate, was there missing context, was there an incomplete leak designed to make people discount Stroud, was someone trying to gain leverage for a trade, etc. There was skepticism from reputable people, and even though it was noted that many teams value the S2 test, I don't think anyone ever expected or predicted that Stroud's draft stock was significantly affected by whatever his score was.    I don't remember reading that he took the test multiple times. That's an interesting variable, if it's true.   There can be value in the test, but like with any other piece of information, how do you apply what's learned to your evaluation process? Like you said, there's a lot of work to figure out how this testing correlates to a player's ability to perform in the NFL, same as with any other datapoint. I don't know if it should be dismissed, but I don't think any team is letting S2 scores rule over their scouting process. Not even for QBs.    I haven't heard that any QBs are refusing to take the test, but I have read that agents are recommending that they don't. I think that's alarmist; Stroud went #2, which is basically what most people expected. Is it established that the scores hurt him? I'd say they did not. But I might not want a player I represent to be subjected to the media/Internet scrutiny, especially since it's clear that players pay attention to what's being said about them, and sometimes react to it.   To the bolded, if a team wants to use S2 results for planning, why can't they draft their QB, and then ask him to take the test? Now there's no pressure, he can test under controlled circumstances, and the team can use the data to help develop their player. 
    • The most important stat is late 20's in defense. Then the eternal test. We can get a sack that puts them in long situations and they quickly pick apart our poor coverage. 
    • To me all this sounds like revisionist history. There were TONS of reports at the time about how much teams valued the S2 test, how some execs were worried about his S2 scores... how he took it MULTIPLE TIMES in attempt to get better score(very far from the assumption that he didn't give full effort).    It's OK if a test doesn't 100% predict performance. It's on those GMs and execs that they put so much weight on it. At the end of the day Stroud is just another datapoint in the dataset of 1000s players that took that test. And the discrepancy between his score and his performance might help further improve the correlation matrix. Maybe the certainty last year wasn't warranted and from now on teams and execs will read more carefully into what that test is saying and what it isn't saying and how much they should value it.    My guess is... the pendulum might swing the other way too much(into completely devaluing the test).    BTW I heard on a podcast that this year's QBs have been refusing to take the test precisely because of how Stroud was treated last year and teams are now * off because that test is not only used for evaluation purposes, but also for planning of future development. 
    • From Albert Breer/SI: https://www.si.com/nfl/2024/02/26/draft-preview-combine-cheat-sheet-questions     A lot of good info in there, but I really noticed that people are stressing how deep they think the draft is at positions that everyone wants the Colts to target. And it makes me think that there will be value on Day 2, at WR and CB especially, and OL. The positions that are probably at more of a premium in the first round will be DT/DE. DT especially lines up with a major roster need for the Colts, and aligns with Ballard's philosophy of building the trenches.   One more snippet:  
  • Members

    • Tsarquise

      Tsarquise 1,211

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ChuggaBeer

      ChuggaBeer 1,694

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NJFanatic

      NJFanatic 45

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Mr. Too Proud

      Mr. Too Proud 50

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Yoshinator

      Yoshinator 8,668

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Restinpeacesweetchloe

      Restinpeacesweetchloe 41,448

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • KB

      KB 1,001

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Reboot

      Reboot 42

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 18,261

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Smonroe

      Smonroe 6,174

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