Irsay tweet about QB (MERGE)

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, Moosejawcolt said:

case in point Tennesee??

You just made my point. If Wilson or Rodgers played for Tennessee on Saturday they would've walked away with a win. Their D was great and they had over 100 yards rushing but Tannehill sucked a big bag of eggs like I predicted  

[Moosejawcolt]

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

You just made my point. If Wilson or Rodgers played for Tennessee on Saturday they would've walked away with a win. Their D was great and they had over 100 yards rushing but Tannehill sucked a big bag of eggs like I predicted  

yah but if they played for the Titans what would they have had to give up to get say Rodgers?  Simmons, Landry..?

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

You just made my point. If Wilson or Rodgers played for Tennessee on Saturday they would've walked away with a win. Their D was great and they had over 100 yards rushing but Tannehill sucked a big bag of eggs like I predicted  

oh and add in AJ brown lol

\

[throwing BBZ]

14 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:

Reich isnt throwing the football. 

 

Also, you're arguing for medium/short routes while there's another group of former arguing that the HC was too conservative. Which is it?

Wentz was taking the concepts he likes, that's not on the HC. Rivers was here and threw to the RBs a lot, made Hines $. 

 

 

 Just pointing out that Reich didn't forget how to design plays that spread out defenses. For Wentz he created lots of quality oportunities in the short to medium game. Wentz came here with things to fix, and clearly he just doesn't have the head, mechanics, touch, accuracy to get it done consistently.

 lol Reich/Wentz fixing it.
 Maybe the light comes on and Wentz will go All-In getting the kind of professional help he needs to get better.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Just pointing out that Reich didn't forget how to design plays that spread out defenses. For Wentz he created lots of quality oportunities in the short to medium game. Wentz came here with things to fix, and clearly he just doesn't have the head, mechanics, touch, accuracy to get it done consistently.

 lol Reich/Wentz fixing it.
 Maybe the light comes on and Wentz will go All-In getting the kind of professional help he needs to get better.

Me personally I would love to see Wentz succeed - I am a Colts fan so I want to win. I was on his band wagon until what happened in Jacks. I wasn't for the trade but then he won me over, then that crap happened at Jacks. So not sure how anyone can trust him. The Raiders loss bothers me just as bad, he had TY wide open for a TD and missed him badly. That would've been ball game.

[Superman]

26 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Let me ask a question of the members on this board. For those so high on Ballard as the GM and the fact that he has assembled a talented roster. Suppose Greenbay and Seattle were willing to trade Wilson and Rodgers. What players do you  think those teams want back in a trade from the Colts? Now think it through carefully!!

 

Let me tell you why this is a dumb question.

 

1) It's a false premise. Any time a good/great QB is traded, the foundation of the trade compensation is premium draft picks, not current players. Joe Montana, Drew Bledsoe, Brett Favre, Donovan McNabb, Matt Stafford (plus Goff, whose contract arguably cost the Rams another pick), Wentz, etc. The Alex Smith trade included a cornerback in return, but that was in addition to a pick. The Rams didn't give up any good players at other positions, and they had Jalen Ramsey, Aaron Donald, Cooper Kupp, etc.

 

2) When a team is trading for a good/great QB, the intention is for the QB to provide what that team is missing. So the team acquiring the QB isn't interested in giving up their other foundational players.

 

So this exercise of yours fails from the start. 

[throwing BBZ]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Me personally I would love to see Wentz succeed - I am a Colts fan so I want to win. I was on his band wagon until what happened in Jacks. I wasn't for the trade but then he won me over, then that crap happened at Jacks. So not sure how anyone can trust him. The Raiders loss bothers me just as bad, he had TY wide open for a TD and missed him badly. That would've been ball game.

 

 He is going to have to come to a great revelation that he must change his thinking. Take what the D gives you which to me is quickly dumping the ball frequently and letting them go for yac. And making better reads so he can throw aggressively downfield with his Big Boom arm. He can't run like Josh Allen but he could make some of those big throws.

[gspdx]

36 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Colts are a 500 team. 

 

Not saying that I agree or disagree with all of the discussions going on but I would say this is the case for most of the teams in this league minus their franchise QBs.  When I look at the top 8 or so teams if you subtract their QB I could see all of them as right around a 500 team.  

 

I am not saying this to support or attack anything else anyone is saying.  I am saying this to emphasis the importance of a franchise QB and what that means to a team.

 

If the Colts had picked up Stafford last year - without losing a significant player - could the Colts have won 11 or 12 games?

If the Colts still had Luck this year could the Colts have won 11 or 12 games?

If the Colts had Allen, Mahomes, etc. could the Colts have won 11 or 12 games?

 

Every team out there has holes/weaknesses.  If Tampa Bay still had Winston the last 2 years how many games would they have won?  I think they would still be a middle of the pack team.

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

8 minutes ago, gspdx said:

 

Not saying that I agree or disagree with all of the discussions going on but I would say this is the case for most of the teams in this league minus their franchise QBs.  When I look at the top 8 or so teams if you subtract their QB I could see all of them as right around a 500 team.  

 

I am not saying this to support or attack anything else anyone is saying.  I am saying this to emphasis the importance of a franchise QB and what that means to a team.

 

If the Colts had picked up Stafford last year - without losing a significant player - could the Colts have won 11 or 12 games?

If the Colts still had Luck this year could the Colts have won 11 or 12 games?

If the Colts had Allen, Mahomes, etc. could the Colts have won 11 or 12 games?

 

Every team out there has holes/weaknesses.  If Tampa Bay still had Winston the last 2 years how many games would they have won?  I think they would still be a middle of the pack team.

 

With Luck we win 12 games and I am not even being biased but we will never know for fact. We would've won the division as well because we would not of been swept Tennessee. 

[Captain_Colts1317]

7 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

With Luck we win 12 games and I am not even being biased but we will never know for fact. We would've won the division as well because we would not of been swept Tennessee. 

With Luck Pascal, Moe Allie, Hines, etc all would have looked a lot better. Imagine him with Taylor and Pittman ? Would have been awesome. 

[RollerColt]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Oh i get why the teams want them out of the NFC.  I'm saying that if the QB has any say in where they go, and Rodgers does because he could just retire, I'd think he'd want to stay in the NFC.    Seems like a future standoff brewing, but there are rumors that Rodgers would like Denver.  Not sure that would be a short term winning strategy though.

One important team would not be in his way during a path through the AFC: The 49ers. They've left him broken 4 times now in the playoffs. Could that be enough for him to find an AFC team? Maybe... 

 

If (and it's a ridiculously big if) Aaron were to come to Indy, and I am in no way endorsing it or saying it will happen, one positive for him would be facing the other AFC South teams for divisional games. 

 

We aren't going to know anything for a bit though. I feel like a lot of teams and players are watching and waiting to see which domino falls first. 

[DougDew]

45 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Let me tell you why this is a dumb question.

 

1) It's a false premise. Any time a good/great QB is traded, the foundation of the trade compensation is premium draft picks, not current players. Joe Montana, Drew Bledsoe, Brett Favre, Donovan McNabb, Matt Stafford (plus Goff, whose contract arguably cost the Rams another pick), Wentz, etc. The Alex Smith trade included a cornerback in return, but that was in addition to a pick. The Rams didn't give up any good players at other positions, and they had Jalen Ramsey, Aaron Donald, Cooper Kupp, etc.

 

2) When a team is trading for a good/great QB, the intention is for the QB to provide what that team is missing. So the team acquiring the QB isn't interested in giving up their other foundational players.

 

So this exercise of yours fails from the start. 

He's already said that the Colts do not have a 2022 first round pick, which is what a team would want to start with. 

 

Young players are what teams get with draft picks, so JT or Pitt could be demanded in lieu of the 2022 first rounder we don't have. 

[gspdx]

6 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

With Luck we win 12 games and I am not even being biased but we will never know for fact. We would've won the division as well because we would not of been swept Tennessee. 

 

I would agree.  And I am not saying "Wentz is the problem" or anything like that.  This was a really weird year.  Started out slowly and we all know the reasons why.  Then had a pretty good stretch with an incredibly huge collapse the last 2 games.

 

So I think this team overall isn't as bad as some like to say.  I think with a QB that can elevate this team and take the game on his shoulders at times we would be very successful.  A top QB would make our receivers better, would protect the oline by not holding the ball too long, by using his outlets when it is needed.

 

If Wentz continues to play the way he did this year he will not elevate this team.  He must get better.  But in my opinion I think the team is good enough.  Would like it to be better in many areas, but every fanbase for teams that are now out of the playoffs are probably saying the same thing.

[DougDew]

9 minutes ago, gspdx said:

 

I would agree.  And I am not saying "Wentz is the problem" or anything like that.  This was a really weird year.  Started out slowly and we all know the reasons why.  Then had a pretty good stretch with an incredibly huge collapse the last 2 games.

 

So I think this team overall isn't as bad as some like to say.  I think with a QB that can elevate this team and take the game on his shoulders at times we would be very successful.  A top QB would make our receivers better, would protect the oline by not holding the ball too long, by using his outlets when it is needed.

 

If Wentz continues to play the way he did this year he will not elevate this team.  He must get better.  But in my opinion I think the team is good enough.  Would like it to be better in many areas, but every fanbase for teams that are now out of the playoffs are probably saying the same thing.

The way to beat BUF and KC is to play soft zone while you attack the QB.  And hold the ball on offense to keep the number of offensive possessions in a game to a minimum.  The Colts's offense is built to do that, if the QB will get with the program.

 

BUF and KC played a shoot out at the end, when the defenses were tired.

 

So there is an issue with the structure of the team to question whether or not it can hold up in the 4th qtr when things get stressed and physically compromised.  History shows that despite the Colts best efforts to hold teams down and to stay with them, the opponent seems to be able to make plays when they have to.

 

The most QB-centric team in the NFC, GB, only scored 10 points.  It would be best to know how GB is different from KC and BUF, or if the difference was SF.   LAR is built like KC and BUF, and SF has beaten them twice, IIRC.

[Superman]

14 minutes ago, DougDew said:

He's already said that the Colts do not have a 2022 first round pick, which is what a team would want to start with. 

 

Young players are what teams get with draft picks, so JT or Pitt could be demanded in lieu of the 2022 first rounder we don't have. 

 

Did you miss his point? Did you miss mine?

 

He's arguing the Colts roster is bad because we don't have any players to trade for a good QB (which isn't true either), so that means Ballard is a bad GM. 

 

The reality is that the foundation of trades for good QBs is premium draft picks.

 

Also, the Rams managed to get Stafford without a current year premium pick. In 2021, they traded a 2021 third, a 2022 first, and a 2023 first. And they probably paid extra to get the Lions to take Goff's contract. The Colts could make that offer in 2022 if they wanted.

 

So even though that's not the point that was being argued, this is also a false statement. If the Colts wanted, they could put together a competitive trade offer for a good QB. They would have to sweeten the deal due to their lack of a 2022 first, but they could still get it done.

[stitches]

Yeah... I don't get this argument either. We do have plenty of assets to trade if we really want a QB... we have all our future picks with the exception of the 2022 1st... and we have some good players that might serve as sweeteners in a deal. The assets is not what's stopping us from getting a QB. It's the availability and the willingness to meet a certain price when one is actually available... be it in the draft or in the trade market. 

[throwing BBZ]

56 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

see that is the error with everyone's thinking around here. It is not about Wentz going up against Mahommes and Allen. It is about the Colts team going up against them. I just dont think they are built in the right manner to take them on right now.

 

 You make no sense.

 Of course it is about Wentz's ability. He came here with a few years of experience with Reich. Understood the offense.
 He must be able to consistently read defenses well, be quick and decisive with his checkdowns, and complete tight window passes under pressure at a high enough level. 
 Somebody got squat out of TY, Hines, Pascal,  and our TE's in the "Wrongly Built" PASSING game. Yes it's a shame Ballard "wrongly" picked Campbell.
 I hope the fog clears someday, for all our sakes.

[DougDew]

27 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Did you miss his point? Did you miss mine?

 

He's arguing the Colts roster is bad because we don't have any players to trade for a good QB (which isn't true either), so that means Ballard is a bad GM. 

 

The reality is that the foundation of trades for good QBs is premium draft picks.

 

Also, the Rams managed to get Stafford without a current year premium pick. In 2021, they traded a 2021 third, a 2022 first, and a 2023 first. And they probably paid extra to get the Lions to take Goff's contract. The Colts could make that offer in 2022 if they wanted.

 

So even though that's not the point that was being argued, this is also a false statement. If the Colts wanted, they could put together a competitive trade offer for a good QB. They would have to sweeten the deal due to their lack of a 2022 first, but they could still get it done.

He was asking who the Colts could offer since we don't have the most premium of premium picks.  Prompting people to actually think instead of wish. 

 

If Wentz = Goff, DET traded away their star QB to to get a starter in return, because they were a rebuilding team.  If SEA and GB want Wentz in return, then SEA would need to be rebuilding and GB would have to ignore Love on their roster.  Wentz is useless to GB and I doubt that Wentz' so called personality baggage would fly in such an enlightened area as SEA.   He's not a piece in the AR or RW trade argument like Goff was for LAR.

 

We can go point by point, but the reality is that the Colts have few assets compared to other teams to land a QB.  We have no first round pick and our best young players have expensive new contracts.  Bad timing for a trade. 

 

If people want to link that reality back to Ballard, then they are having an argument with themselves that maybe they don't like having.

[Superman]

10 minutes ago, DougDew said:

He was asking who the Colts could offer since we don't have the most premium of premium picks.  Prompting people to actually think instead of wish. 

 

If Wentz = Goff, DET traded away their star QB to to get a starter in return, because they were a rebuilding team.  If SEA and GB want Wentz in return, then SEA would need to be rebuilding and GB would have to ignore Love on their roster.  Wentz is useless to GB and I doubt that Wentz' so called personality baggage would fly in such an enlightened area as SEA.   He's not a piece in the AR or RW trade argument like Goff was for LAR.

 

We can go point by point, but the reality is that the Colts have few assets compared to other teams to land a QB.  We have no first round pick and our best young players have expensive new contracts.  Bad timing for a trade. 

 

If people want to link that reality back to Ballard, then they are having an argument with themselves that maybe they don't like having.

 

To the bolded, this is moosejaw's stated argument, plain as day. 

 

As for the rest, mental gymnastics in an effort to pretend that the Colts can't make a deal if they wanted. (Seattle would be rebuilding if they got rid of Russell, btw.) As I said, the Colts would have to sweeten the deal to really compete. And if a team with multiple 2022 firsts (Eagles, Giants, Jets) got involved, the Colts would be outbid. Other than that, they can work a deal for a QB, if they want.

 

Yes, it would be more difficult because we don't have a 2022 first. (And ultimately I don't think it's in the cards in the first place.) But the idea that I'm responding to -- that the Colts don't have any players to offer in a trade for a QB -- is wrong from the start. The Colts actually do have players to trade, but more importantly, QBs aren't traded for other players.

[gspdx]

16 minutes ago, DougDew said:

The way to beat BUF and KC is to play soft zone while you attack the QB.  And hold the ball on offense to keep the number of offensive possessions in a game to a minimum.  The Colts's offense is built to do that, if the QB will get with the program.

 

BUF and KC played a shoot out at the end, when the defenses were tired.

 

So there is an issue with the structure of the team to question whether or not it can hold up in the 4th qtr when things get stressed and physically compromised.  History shows that despite the Colts best efforts to hold teams down and to stay with them, the opponent seems to be able to make plays when they have to.

 

The most QB-centric team in the NFC, GB, only scored 10 points.  It would be best to know how GB is different from KC and BUF, or if the difference was SF.   LAR is built like KC and BUF, and SF has beaten them twice, IIRC.

 

How do you hold the best teams to 10 points?  Tough ask.  Neither the Bills or Chiefs did that.  We were 9th in the league in points allowed this year - 365 points total for an average of 21.5 points per game.  That is pretty respectable.  I don't think our Dline is as bad as some here say.  If our young DEs progress next year the line could be pretty good.  I don't actually think we need a complete overhaul of the defense. Some incremental improvement could create a significant difference.  If you get of the field on 3rd downs a few more times over the course of the year it then puts more pressure on your opponent.  I don't think this needs revolutionary improvement - just evolutionary improvement.  If we have a bit of improved CB and safety play what would the overall impact be?  Do we need at least one new guy in the defensive backfield to elevate that play?  Would 1 additional CB that is a really good cover corner be enough?  As our young DEs improve could they take some of the pressure off of the interior lineman?  Could we cut the points per game down by a field goal - down to 18.5 PPG?  That doesn't guarantee victory but it would be elite by this year's standards.

 

On offense we were also 9th with 26.5 ppg and 451 total.  With the struggles from the Oline, the average WR squad and erratic QB play we weren't that far off.  Same type of thing as above.  If the Oline can gel again next year and avoid injuries that would be great.  If we solidify the left tackle we do have good depth which is a huge bonus.  If we could pick up one WR or TE that is explosive and use Hines more in the passing game and Wentz improves - not to become Mahomes - where he can use the checkdowns, make better decisions, and improve his accuracy where would be be then?  Same thought as above.  If we improve to 29.5 ppg  what would that mean?

 

I just don't know how so many people are acting like this team is junk.  I am not sure Wentz is the guy, but I wouldn't feel any better with some of the suggestions being thrown out here.  I don't think we are that far away from being a formidable opponent every week. I would rather role with Wentz one more year.

[Moosejawcolt]

45 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Did you miss his point? Did you miss mine?

 

He's arguing the Colts roster is bad because we don't have any players to trade for a good QB (which isn't true either), so that means Ballard is a bad GM. 

 

The reality is that the foundation of trades for good QBs is premium draft picks.

 

Also, the Rams managed to get Stafford without a current year premium pick. In 2021, they traded a 2021 third, a 2022 first, and a 2023 first. And they probably paid extra to get the Lions to take Goff's contract. The Colts could make that offer in 2022 if they wanted.

 

So even though that's not the point that was being argued, this is also a false statement. If the Colts wanted, they could put together a competitive trade offer for a good QB. They would have to sweeten the deal due to their lack of a 2022 first, but they could still get it done.

Okay so lets say Seattle offers Wilson. Now they want you 2 1sts and a player say Pittman or Taylor. Now you make the trade and you have no 1st this year and no 1st for 2023 and 2024 and also had to give up Taylor. Now you have Wilson and who else? If Wilson goes up it will be at least 2 1sts and then..........................

[WoolMagnet]

On 1/25/2022 at 9:37 AM, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

Then you have this taking a shot at Carson and his faith and not being vaccinated. There were a lot of stats not vaccinated. This is such a low blow by Irsay.

 

 

I’m sure his wife had no meds during childbirth either, right?

  I just dont understand why GOD has such a problem with the vaccine. Not Carson’s fault.  He’s just following orders.

[DougDew]

26 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

To the bolded, this is moosejaw's stated argument, plain as day. 

 

As for the rest, mental gymnastics in an effort to pretend that the Colts can't make a deal if they wanted. (Seattle would be rebuilding if they got rid of Russell, btw.) As I said, the Colts would have to sweeten the deal to really compete. And if a team with multiple 2022 firsts (Eagles, Giants, Jets) got involved, the Colts would be outbid. Other than that, they can work a deal for a QB, if they want.

 

Yes, it would be more difficult because we don't have a 2022 first. (And ultimately I don't think it's in the cards in the first place.) But the idea that I'm responding to -- that the Colts don't have any players to offer in a trade for a QB -- is wrong from the start. The Colts actually do have players to trade, but more importantly, QBs aren't traded for other players.

I didn't realize that the argument some are having is that the Colts couldn't make a deal for a QB if they wanted to.  I thought it was around the likelihood that a reasonable deal would be made specifically with one of two teams.

 

I thought the question deserved an answer.   Assuming that Ballard would not want to do an unreasonable thing and give away multiple  future first round draft picks in lieu of a 2022 draft pick...which he could do if he wanted to go "All In" next season, what players do the Colts have to offer GB or SEA in a trade package?

 

Last spring during the Wentz negotiations when there were rumors of other players being involved, I was hoping Ballard would include both Willis and Oke in the trade package and save a 1st round pick,  maybe the third rounder this year instead of the first, if possible.  I don't know if their play this season and being one year closer to the end of their rookie contracts has elevated or diminished their trade value.  Hmmm.

[NewColtsFan]

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I didn't realize that the argument some are having is that the Colts couldn't make a deal for a QB if they wanted to.  I thought it was around the likelihood that a reasonable deal would be made specifically with one of two teams.

 

I thought the question deserved an answer.   Assuming that Ballard would not want to do an unreasonable thing and give away multiple  future first round draft picks in lieu of a 2022 draft pick...which he could do if he wanted to go "All In" next season, what players do the Colts have to offer GB or SEA (not just "any QB" in theory) in a trade package.

 

Last spring during the Wentz negotiations when there were rumors of other players being involved, I was hoping Ballard would include both Willis and Oke in the trade package and save a 1st round pick, if possible.  I don't know if their play this season has elevated or diminished their trade value.  Hmmm.

Youre not being serious or sincere when you say “what players do the Colts have to offer?”   Like you don’t know their names.  
 

Then you follow up with two players who don’t have enough value with….  Hmmm.

 

You already tipped your hand about Ballard when you attempted to defend @Nickster

You’re questioning Ballard.   Fair enough.  From perhaps the only poster left here who think Grigson got a raw deal and Ballard hasn’t done enough.  
 

Your rhetorical questions reveal your views. 

[DougDew]

25 minutes ago, gspdx said:

 

How do you hold the best teams to 10 points?  Tough ask.  Neither the Bills or Chiefs did that.  We were 9th in the league in points allowed this year - 365 points total for an average of 21.5 points per game.  That is pretty respectable.  I don't think our Dline is as bad as some here say.  If our young DEs progress next year the line could be pretty good.  I don't actually think we need a complete overhaul of the defense. Some incremental improvement could create a significant difference.  If you get of the field on 3rd downs a few more times over the course of the year it then puts more pressure on your opponent.  I don't think this needs revolutionary improvement - just evolutionary improvement.  If we have a bit of improved CB and safety play what would the overall impact be?  Do we need at least one new guy in the defensive backfield to elevate that play?  Would 1 additional CB that is a really good cover corner be enough?  As our young DEs improve could they take some of the pressure off of the interior lineman?  Could we cut the points per game down by a field goal - down to 18.5 PPG?  That doesn't guarantee victory but it would be elite by this year's standards.

 

On offense we were also 9th with 26.5 ppg and 451 total.  With the struggles from the Oline, the average WR squad and erratic QB play we weren't that far off.  Same type of thing as above.  If the Oline can gel again next year and avoid injuries that would be great.  If we solidify the left tackle we do have good depth which is a huge bonus.  If we could pick up one WR or TE that is explosive and use Hines more in the passing game and Wentz improves - not to become Mahomes - where he can use the checkdowns, make better decisions, and improve his accuracy where would be be then?  Same thought as above.  If we improve to 29.5 ppg  what would that mean?

 

I just don't know how so many people are acting like this team is junk.  I am not sure Wentz is the guy, but I wouldn't feel any better with some of the suggestions being thrown out here.  I don't think we are that far away from being a formidable opponent every week. I would rather role with Wentz one more year.

I don't think there is an argument to the notion that the Colts are close to getting over the hump.  But some are saying that there may be a ceiling with the current roster construction that puts the Colts just short of the crest.  Comes up short at critical times.

 

Apparently, this thread is about taking that next step in getting a better QB.  

 

There was a time when Ballard said "its not about one guy".  Now in the last presser, he seems to be saying that the QB needs to win you a game.  Sure, the close games is where the QB needs to carry the team.  How do you separate those few important games from the other games played during the season?  Seems like if the QB is good enough to win you the games....playoff games?...at critical times, he need to be "that one guy" playing all season long.

[gspdx]

On 1/25/2022 at 6:37 AM, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

Then you have this taking a shot at Carson and his faith and not being vaccinated. There were a lot of stats not vaccinated. This is such a low blow by Irsay.

 

 

 

Maybe I missed something.  Did Irsay target this at Wentz?

 

[DougDew]

4 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Youre not being serious or sincere when you say “what players do the Colts have to offer?”   Like you don’t know their names.  
 

Then you follow up with two players who don’t have enough value with….  Hmmm.

 

You already tipped your hand about Ballard when you attempted to defend @Nickster

You’re questioning Ballard.   Fair enough.  From perhaps the only poster left here who think Grigson got a raw deal and Ballard hasn’t done enough.  
 

Your rhetorical questions reveal your views. 

He's asking others to list players that could be included in a trade package for an elite QB.  I listed Pitt and JT as having value.

 

I said others who might be of value just signed (or will sign) expensive contracts, so they are likely not attractive to other teams.  

 

I don't get what the beef is here?

 

So if its so obvious, list the players and their trade values....like he asked.

 

Why are people reading into the question, then bashing the question?  Just answer it.  I came up with 2 players.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

4 minutes ago, gspdx said:

 

Maybe I missed something.  Did Irsay target this at Wentz?

 

I think it was a target at all the unvaccinated players.

[DougDew]

9 minutes ago, gspdx said:

 

Maybe I missed something.  Did Irsay target this at Wentz?

 

The way he chose to present it, it seems like he's stuck on some sort of broader social issue, a faith-ignores-science internal debate he may have lingering with him from growing up in the 1970s.  He should focus on being an owner and not the rock star collection cool guy or science preacher.  

[gspdx]

Just now, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

I think it was a target at all the unvaccinated players.

 

OK - could be targeted against unvaccinated players.  Not just Wentz. But there is nothing in that video that targets anything at anyone.

 

[gspdx]

Just now, DougDew said:

Seems like he's stuck on some sort of broader social issue, a faith-ignores-science internal debate he may have lingering with him from growing up in the 1970s.  He should focus on being an owner and not the rock star collection cool guy or science preacher.  

 

People could probably say we should focus on being fans and not on being coaches, GMs or owners.

 

Just sayin'

[DougDew]

Just now, gspdx said:

 

People could probably say we should focus on being fans and not on being coaches, GMs or owners.

 

Just sayin'

I'm not in a position to influence the players, GMs, or fans.  So our opinions are given more freely.    

[gspdx]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

I'm not in a position to influence the players, GMs, or fans.  So our opinions are given more freely.    

 

Still - all I heard was be wise with your faith.  I didn't hear him trying to lean on anyone to do a certain thing.  He has every right to post that opinion.

 

 

[Crush22]

[DougDew]

16 minutes ago, gspdx said:

 

Still - all I heard was be wise with your faith.  I didn't hear him trying to lean on anyone to do a certain thing.  He has every right to post that opinion.

 

 

Right.  He raised an issue of faith and wisdom being in conflict.   As an NFL owner and guitar collector as his primary achievement in life, I don't think he knows any more about vaxs or how to make decisions than Bill Tobin's postman.  But the concern and the willingness to give advice is a nice gesture.

 

I like him as an NFL owner and sort of that fun guy billionaire who loves the city, but whenever he deviates from that role he's kind of an embarrassment to the team. 

[Superman]

19 minutes ago, gspdx said:

People could probably say we should focus on being fans and not on being coaches, GMs or owners.

 

This whole "focus on" angle needs to stop. People can spend time and attention on more than one thing, we all do. We have jobs, family, hobbies, etc., and we balance our time and energy between them all. It's a trademark of a well rounded adult human.

 

The 'he should stop doing x, and focus on y' argument is disingenuous, shallow, and petty. Not just about Irsay. Always.

[ChuggaBeer]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Right.  Too much faith compromises wisdom, is the assumption.   As an NFL owner and guitar collector as his primary achievement in life, I don't think he knows any more about vaxs or how to make decisions than Bill Tobin's postman.  But the concern and the willingness to give advice is a nice gesture.

 

I like him as an NFL owner and sort of that fun guy billionaire who loves the city, but whenever he deviates from that role he's kind of an embarrassment to the team. 

He was a GM and did grow up around football his whole life.  I'd guess he knows more abut football than all of us combined   

[jvan1973]

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Right.  Too much faith compromises wisdom, is the assumption.   As an NFL owner and guitar collector as his primary achievement in life, I don't think he knows any more about vaxs or how to make decisions than Bill Tobin's postman.  But the concern and the willingness to give advice is a nice gesture.

 

I like him as an NFL owner and sort of that fun guy billionaire who loves the city, but whenever he deviates from that role he's kind of an embarrassment to the team. 

No he isn't.   Stop

[DougDew]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

This whole "focus on" angle needs to stop. People can spend time and attention on more than one thing, we all do. We have jobs, family, hobbies, etc., and we balance our time and energy between them all. It's a trademark of a well rounded adult human.

 

The 'he should stop doing x, and focus on y' argument is disingenuous, shallow, and petty. Not just about Irsay. Always.

In the position that he is in, he should be cautious about appearing to take sides, even if he is not.  Giving advice to a camera inherently makes certain assumptions about the audience.  First off, that they need advice from him.

 

If he's giving advice to someone who brought up a concern about their specific situation, that's different.  But that wouldn't be on a Twitter video.

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

He was asking who the Colts could offer since we don't have the most premium of premium picks.  Prompting people to actually think instead of wish. 

 

If Wentz = Goff, DET traded away their star QB to to get a starter in return, because they were a rebuilding team.  If SEA and GB want Wentz in return, then SEA would need to be rebuilding and GB would have to ignore Love on their roster.  Wentz is useless to GB and I doubt that Wentz' so called personality baggage would fly in such an enlightened area as SEA.   He's not a piece in the AR or RW trade argument like Goff was for LAR.

 

We can go point by point, but the reality is that the Colts have few assets compared to other teams to land a QB.  We have no first round pick and our best young players have expensive new contracts.  Bad timing for a trade. 

 

If people want to link that reality back to Ballard, then they are having an argument with themselves that maybe they don't like having.

 

DET also had just hired Brad Holmes to be their GM, who had spent his entire nearly two-decade career in the Rams org, including the past 7 years as Director of College Scouting. So not only were their relationships in place, but perhaps Holmes still saw something in Goff, as he did when they picked him #1 overall in 2016.

 

Even if Brown or Dodds get a GM role somewhere, I don't think that will really help facilitate a Wentz trade. In just about every scenario, Wentz probably has varying levels of negative value in trade, considering he is owed $22M next season.

 

They could still get a trade done, but Wentz won't help the situation.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

This tells you how hard it is to find a QB lol.

Ben is a Denver media guy.