Irsay tweet about QB (MERGE)

[OffensivelyPC]

6 hours ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

 

Qwery convinced Holder on the radio.  He didn't think anything of it until Qwery said something.  I love Qwery and Holder, but I thought this was so far fetched.  He made the assumption that the "clarification" at the end about having willingness and meeting God halfway translated to vaccination being God sending the car, the boat and helicopter and we just have to get in to save ourselves.  

 

It was an assumption that never needed to be made.  Dude just told a story that is already well known and his takeaways.  Could have been something that Irsay just wanted to put out there, maybe he had some sort of personal thing happen where that story really spoke to him, or maybe he's just doing some bible devotion and that story came up?  Who cares why, but don't just start throwing out ridiculous assumptions for no reason. The words, Carson Wentz, football, Colts, COVID and vaccination never came out of Jim's mouth.   

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Just now, OffensivelyPC said:

Qwery convinced Holder on the radio.  He didn't think anything of it until Qwery said something.  I love Qwery and Holder, but I thought this was so far fetched.  He made the assumption that the "clarification" at the end about having willingness and meeting God halfway translated to vaccination being God sending the car, the boat and helicopter and we just have to get in to save ourselves.  

 

It was an assumption that never needed to be made.  Dude just told a story that is already well known and his takeaways.  Could have been something that Irsay just wanted to put out there, maybe he had some sort of personal thing happen where that story really spoke to him, or maybe he's just doing some bible devotion and that story came up?  Who cares why, but don't just start throwing out ridiculous assumptions for no reason. The words, Carson Wentz, football, Colts, COVID and vaccination never came out of Jim's mouth.   

Holder wasn’t on the radio this morning. Joel Erickson was.

[Indyfan4life]

Some people should go ahead and admit they just don't like Rodgers instead of saying "Frank and Chris wouldn't like this, blah blah blah."

 

If you wouldn't take Rodgers over Wentz, then you're absolutely out of your mind in denial. This team instantly becomes a top 5 team PERIOD with Rodgers commanding the offense. No one is scared of Wentz. Rodgers changes an entire defensive play and scheme.

[Indyfan4life]

3 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

It’s not the same thing. 

It's not the same thing? You're right. 38 isn't 45.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

4 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:

Some people should go ahead and admit they just don't like Rodgers instead of saying "Frank and Chris wouldn't like this, blah blah blah."

 

If you wouldn't take Rodgers over Wentz, then you're absolutely out of your mind in denial. This team instantly becomes a top 5 team PERIOD with Rodgers commanding the offense. No one is scared of Wentz. Rodgers changes an entire defensive play and scheme.

Me not wanting Rodgers has nothing to do with his play or him personally. I don’t want someone who we have to give draft picks up when we may only have one year. Therefore not putting us in any better position we are now. That’s all. He plays then retires after a year and we don’t have a draft pick to even draft a QB. Then where do we go. This was could be just like Rivers.

[GoColts8818]

1 minute ago, Indyfan4life said:

Some people should go ahead and admit they just don't like Rodgers instead of saying "Frank and Chris wouldn't like this, blah blah blah."

 

If you wouldn't take Rodgers over Wentz, then you're absolutely out of your mind in denial. This team instantly becomes a top 5 team PERIOD with Rodgers commanding the offense. No one is scared of Wentz. Rodgers changes an entire defensive play and scheme.

Do I like some of what Rodgers has said?  No.  Would I take him as the Colts QB?  In a heart beat.  Do I think he’s coming here?  No.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Just now, Indyfan4life said:

It's not the same thing? You're right. 38 isn't 45.

Brady has 7 rings and never talked about retirement or not wanting to put in the offseason work like Rodgers has.

[Colt.45]

58 minutes ago, Les Poulains said:

Irsay's somewhat right but not really. The Niners may get to the Super Bowl with Jimmy G for the second time in 3 years. Goff was in the Super Bowl the year before. You can get away with not having a top QB, but they can't lose you the game. The problem with Wentz is he loses you games.

 

It's why I had said down the stretch; Wentz needed to be made into a game manager. If you don't have a great QB, that's your path to win in the playoffs. Limit mistakes, don't have your QB lose you the game.

 

That's why the Titans won playoff games the last few years, they didn't let Tannehill throw the ball. Then this year, Henry wasn't fit meaning he had to throw it, and guess what; 3 picks. Lost them the game.

You can get to the SB with a game manager, 100% right. However, the complementary pieces must be around them.

 

The Niners and Rams got there with defenses that could rush the passer and protect the back end? Can we do that? Not remotely close. We've been searching under the trashcan for pass rush for years.

 

The Niners and Rams had ELITE weapons on offense. Gurley was the best RB in the league back then BUT he also had the complement of Brandin Cooks and Robert Woods. The Niners had best (or top 2) TE in the league plus Deebo. Do we have guys who can claim to be the best at their pass catching positions? Not even close. Pittman might be a top 30 WR in the league. Maybe.

 

So, for sure, you can get to the promised land with a game manager but when you say we had to make Wentz into that, it's just that if you make your QB a game manager and you've got nothing else, you get beat by the likes of the Raiders and JVille when your playoff life depends on it. The way Reich called plays showed a distrust of the QB....rightly so.

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:

It's odd. Brady is about to be 45, and no one say's anything about his age. Some people here act like Rodgers being 38 is too old to play. Doesn't make any sense.

 

You think no one says anything about Brady's age? It's a constant topic.

 

Also, Brady is an extreme outlier. No other QB has ever played at such a high level at 44 years old. Most QBs don't play at such a high level at 34 years old. Brady's main rival for most of his career was Peyton Manning, who is one year older than him, was falling apart at 38, and has now been retired for six full seasons. In that time, Brady has won three more SBs and an MVP (and probably could have won another MVP this year). Even Brett Favre, he had a great 40 year old season, then came undone the next year.

 

Tom Brady is not the model. He is the model buster.

 

Now, Rodgers actually looks like he could play another 5+ years if he wanted, assuming no major injuries. But you don't expect a 38 year old QB to be a long term solution, which is my point.

[OffensivelyPC]

1 minute ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

Holder wasn’t on the radio this morning. Joel Erickson was.

I always mix up Kevin Bowen and Stephen Holder and for the life of me I know know why.  Anyway.  It doesn't really change anything I said - because Jake Query brought it up before that tweet and whether he bought Query's explanation or independently thought the same idea, I feel the same way about both their opinions - unnecessary and grasping at straws.

[Fisticuffs111]

43 minutes ago, NDWentzFan said:

Kenny Moore should worry about covering Hunter Renfrow

Fair point.

 

Still, doesn’t seem like Wentz has the confidence of everybody in that locker room. That’s all my point was. I’m sure this is the case for a lot of locker rooms without an elite QB though. 

[DougDew]

4 hours ago, Two_pound said:

Didn't we have a stretch of like 8 consecutive games last season where we did score over 30 a game? After the 0-3 start we were one of the highest if not the highest scoring team in the league over the next 10 weeks. Those last four games the coaches and players must not have been on the same page. 

Yes.  When Irsay says we need a QB and an offense that scores 30 pts, and a defense to keep a team under 30, he was describing the Colts for nearly all season long.

 

The downturn in the offense coincided with the increase in hype over JT.  Not that it was the cause, but the timing was about the same.

 

If Frank somehow bought the narrative that JT was/should be the focus of the offense, I wonder how that impacted preparation and game planning.

 

Hey, maybe showing how the QBs lit up the weekend is Irsay's way of saying that JT should not be the focus of the offense.  Calling out the JT focus as being not the way to go.

[Scott Pennock]

From a stability standpoint I think they will finish out Wentz's contract BUT he may have Ballard try to draft a toolsy QB in the 2nd round to groom for a year? I HIGHLY doubt anyone would trade for Wentz unless they too, are a former Eagle coach who thinks they can win with him.....

 

OR.....

 

We trade Wentz for a bag of balls and start Sam all year, finish 3-14 and draft 1st overall in 2023 and have our pick of what is supposed to be a decent QB class.....lol <------- sarcasm alert, sarcasm alert, sarcasm alert

[Indyfan4life]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

You think no one says anything about Brady's age? It's a constant topic.

 

Also, Brady is an extreme outlier. No other QB has ever played at such a high level at 44 years old. Most QBs don't play at such a high level at 34 years old. Brady's main rival for most of his career was Peyton Manning, who is one year older than him, was falling apart at 38, and has now been retired for six full seasons. In that time, Brady has won three more SBs and an MVP (and probably could have won another MVP this year). Even Brett Favre, he had a great 40 year old season, then came undone the next year.

 

Tom Brady is not the model. He is the model buster.

 

Now, Rodgers actually looks like he could play another 5+ years if he wanted, assuming no major injuries. But you don't expect a 38 year old QB to be a long term solution, which is my point.

I should have worded that better. Brady being 45 is a constant topic on the national media, along with his longevity. Rodgers being 38 is a topic here where people feel he's "too old" and we'd only have him for 1 year. I don't buy that. Could he come undone at any moment? Sure. Baring some type of bad injury, I don't see that happening.

[TimetobringDfence!]

9 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:

Some people should go ahead and admit they just don't like Rodgers instead of saying "Frank and Chris wouldn't like this, blah blah blah."

 

If you wouldn't take Rodgers over Wentz, then you're absolutely out of your mind in denial. This team instantly becomes a top 5 team PERIOD with Rodgers commanding the offense. No one is scared of Wentz. Rodgers changes an entire defensive play and scheme.

We would have to give up some serious assets to land Rodgers, we don't have the WR weapons they do. AR12 doesn't want to come to Indy with where there is less WR talent. We aren't in position to help an aging QB win a few before retirement...we would have to give up Leonard or DeFo to get considered. By the time we land Rodgers we won't have much left to win with...

[DougDew]

3 hours ago, NDWentzFan said:

Loud Words !!!!!  Loud Words !!!!  Such a strange statement. 

 

Rodgers lead offense this season 26.5 PPG

Wilson lead offense this season 23.2 PPG

Jimmy G lead offense this season 25.1 PPG

Carr lead offense this season 22.0 PPG

 

Wentz lead offense this season 26.5 PPG 

 

Only 2 teams in the NFL averaged over 30 PPG that was teh Cowboys and the Bucs both at home for championship weekend. 

 

Rams scored 460 PTS and 27.1 PPG

Bengals scored 460 PTS and 27.1 PPG

Colts scored 451 PTS and 26.5 PPG  

Yes.

 

Irsay's tweet was about the obvious.  What he saw this weekend and what tends to happen every post season.  In the PLAYOFFS you need a QB and an offense that can get you 30 pts and a defense that can keep the other QB from getting 30 points.

 

He did not say that Wentz couldn't do that.  He didn't give anybody a ringing endorsement, (because that wasn't the subject of the tweet) but the tweet is NOT a call out of Wentz.  It was an obvious summary of what he saw this weekend.

 

If Irsay said anything between the lines, he said that playoff teams don't advance by running the ball 25 times to a feature RB.

 

This thread is over the top.

[Miles]

Forgive me is this has been mentioned but there’s a legit possibility that Rodgers is released. The Pack are 40 mil over the cap and save 20 by releasing him. 
 

If he refuses a trade and refuses to play for them, they aren’t going to just eat that 20 mil so he can ride the bench. He can force their hand if he wants. 
 

I don’t want him if we’d have to trade but if he’s a FA… different ball game. 

[Superman]

1 minute ago, Indyfan4life said:

I should have worded that better. Brady being 45 is a constant topic on the national media, along with his longevity. Rodgers being 38 is a topic here where people feel he's "too old" and we'd only have him for 1 year. I don't buy that. Could he come undone at any moment? Sure. Baring some type of bad injury, I don't see that happening.

 

I think he's too old to look at as a potential long term option.

 

Even setting aside his age, he's apparently considering retirement now, which isn't something to ignore. At the same age, Brady was talking about playing until he was 45, then a couple years later said he could probably play until 50. Brady has mostly seemed like an insatiable football nut, while Rodgers has been openly exploring other options for some time now.

 

Rodgers is also ... enigmatic? ... on a personal level. Easily offended, tends to rub people close to him the wrong way, leaves broken relationships behind him, etc. That's before his duplicity earlier this season. 

 

So looking at Rodgers as a very short term option is reasonable. Viewing him through any long term lens is a mistake, IMO. So if you want him, and are open to the possibility that he might be one and done with you, then you just factor that into the cost/risk analysis and move on. 

[Colt.45]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

Yes.

 

Irsay's tweet was about the obvious.  What he saw this weekend and what tends to happen every post season.  In the PLAYOFFS you need a QB that can get you 30 pts and a defense that can keep the other QB from getting 30 points.

 

He did not say that Wentz couldn't do that.  Didn't give anybody a ringing endorsement, but the tweet is NOT a call out either.  It was an obvious summary of what he saw this weekend.

 

This thread is over the top.

 

When your team isnt in the playoffs, and fans are antsy about how the season ended, there'll be reactions to every little comment dropped into the Colts universe.  I think it's not too bad, beats folks being morose and apathetic  

I think a couple more seasons like last season would bring about that. Irsay knows it too, it's why he's trying to jolt his fanbase and front office into action. Also, more than anyone, he knows finding a franchise QB aint easy....he got comfortable with Peyton and started talking nonsense that he came to regret, but he knows what he's doing here. No doubt about that. No one wants fans who're not engaged, it's bad business.

[Superman]

1 minute ago, Miles said:

Forgive me is this has been mentioned but there’s a legit possibility that Rodgers is released. The Pack are 40 mil over the cap and save 20 by releasing him. 
 

If he refuses a trade and refuses to play for them, they aren’t going to just eat that 20 mil so he can ride the bench. He can force their hand if he wants. 
 

I don’t want him if we’d have to trade but if he’s a FA… different ball game. 

 

In theory, maybe. In practice, they won't release him. 

 

First, they openly said they want him back and it's up to him. Second, if he still wants to play, he's a tradeable asset. Third, they wouldn't want him in the division, or even in the conference if he does want to be traded. Lastly, if he retires, just put him on the retired-reserve list and save the cap space anyway, but he can't go to another team without your permission.

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think he's too old to look at as a potential long term option.

 

Even setting aside his age, he's apparently considering retirement now, which isn't something to ignore. At the same age, Brady was talking about playing until he was 45, then a couple years later said he could probably play until 50. Brady has mostly seemed like an insatiable football nut, while Rodgers has been openly exploring other options for some time now.

 

Rodgers is also ... enigmatic? ... on a personal level. Easily offended, tends to rub people close to him the wrong way, leaves broken relationships behind him, etc. That's before his duplicity earlier this season. 

 

So looking at Rodgers as a very short term option is reasonable. Viewing him through any long term lens is a mistake, IMO. So if you want him, and are open to the possibility that he might be one and done with you, then you just factor that into the cost/risk analysis and move on. 

Of course he wouldn’t be a long term solution. Which is why giving up picks would not be smart because it restricts them from finding a successor. This could end up no different then rivers except then we don’t have a first for a QB.

[Indyfan4life]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

I think he's too old to look at as a potential long term option.

 

Even setting aside his age, he's apparently considering retirement now, which isn't something to ignore. At the same age, Brady was talking about playing until he was 45, then a couple years later said he could probably play until 50. Brady has mostly seemed like an insatiable football nut, while Rodgers has been openly exploring other options for some time now.

 

Rodgers is also ... enigmatic? ... on a personal level. Easily offended, tends to rub people close to him the wrong way, leaves broken relationships behind him, etc. That's before his duplicity earlier this season. 

 

So looking at Rodgers as a very short term option is reasonable. Viewing him through any long term lens is a mistake, IMO. So if you want him, and are open to the possibility that he might be one and done with you, then you just factor that into the cost/risk analysis and move on. 

Do you personally and beneficially think it's worth him being here? Say for two or three years tops? Again, I know the odds of landing Rodgers isn't something that should be viewed as a serious thing happening, but wilder things have happened in this league.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

5 minutes ago, Miles said:

Forgive me is this has been mentioned but there’s a legit possibility that Rodgers is released. The Pack are 40 mil over the cap and save 20 by releasing him. 
 

If he refuses a trade and refuses to play for them, they aren’t going to just eat that 20 mil so he can ride the bench. He can force their hand if he wants. 
 

I don’t want him if we’d have to trade but if he’s a FA… different ball game. 

He said today he didn’t think that would happen. 

1 minute ago, Indyfan4life said:

Do you personally and beneficially think it's worth him being here? Say for two or three years tops? Again, I know the odds of landing Rodgers isn't something that should be viewed as a serious thing happening, but wilder things have happened in this league.

Can’t guarantee 2 or 3 years.

[Fisticuffs111]

3 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

Of course he wouldn’t be a long term solution. Which is why giving up picks would not be smart because it restricts them from finding a successor. This could end up no different then rivers except then we don’t have a first for a QB.

I’m fine if we don’t go after him, and I don’t think we will. But I’d be lying if I said I wouldn’t be excited if we did trade for him. 
 

And I say that as somebody who’s found him kind of annoying and off putting recently.

[Indyfan4life]

2 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

He said today he didn’t think that would happen. 

Can’t guarantee 2 or 3 years.

You can't guarantee two or three years with any player.

[Nickster]

25 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:

It's not the same thing? You're right. 38 isn't 45.

So you feel Tampa considers Brady their long term solution?

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

5 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:

You can't guarantee two or three years with any player.

Well when you have a 38 year old who is talking about retiring it has to be brought up and the consequence it could have.

[AnotherQB]

I dont think anyone is saying Wentz > Rodgers.   Or anyone is saying that if Rodgers wants to come to the Colts the Colts wouldn't make that happen.  But after watching that interview Rodgers sure doesn't seem like he wants to leave GB by his answers concerning the offseason.  If he goes to a new team then he needs the offseason to get on the same page with the offensive staff as well as the players.  So the Colts may want AR but I dont think AR wants the Colts. 

[John Waylon]

Yeah, 38 isn’t 45. 
 

Also, Aaron Rodgers isn’t Tom Brady. 
 

Even if you use them in the same breath as much as you can. 

[Tsarquise]

7 hours ago, Colt.45 said:

He pi$$ed away Andrew Luck. The QB who he sacrificed Peyton for.

That's on Jim.

 

I bet you he's leaning HARD on Ballard to get a guy in the draft class.

He didn't * away Luck. Luck chose to retire on his own volition.

 

He * away having exclusive rights to Manning's legacy.  

. 

[Indyfan4life]

1 minute ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

Well when you have a 38 year old who is talking about retiring it has to be brought up and the consequence it could have.

If you think Rodgers is the only guy who talks about retirement, then you're just blatantly choosing to deny things. I guarantee A LOT of players talk about retirement. The only difference is Rodgers publically spoke about it instead of keeping things private. We thought that Luck would be around for several more years, and boom. He just ended things. No warning. No prior speak. Nothing. You don't know what every player thinks or talks about in private. Rodgers could retire tomorrow. He could decide to play another 5+ years. We just do not know, and doing nothing but arguing and speculating about it is kind of pointless right now.

[Stoney]

36 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

Me not wanting Rodgers has nothing to do with his play or him personally. I don’t want someone who we have to give draft picks up when we may only have one year. Therefore not putting us in any better position we are now. That’s all. He plays then retires after a year and we don’t have a draft pick to even draft a QB. Then where do we go. This was could be just like Rivers.

You still don't understand that it would be discussed with Rodgers about how much longer he plans to play before a trade is made. If Rodgers doesn't seem too sure then i doubt a trade would happen. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

2 minutes ago, Stoney said:

You still don't understand that it would be discussed with Rodgers about how much longer he plans to play before a trade is made. If Rodgers doesn't seem too sure then i doubt a trade would happen. 

He can say what he wants. Things change.

 

John Clayton just said on JMV Wilson won’t be traded.

[Stoney]

22 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

Of course he wouldn’t be a long term solution. Which is why giving up picks would not be smart because it restricts them from finding a successor. This could end up no different then rivers except then we don’t have a first for a QB.

We need a QB, and these next 2 drafts have horrible QB prospects. So what does it matter if we have those picks or not? Atleast we would be getting a guy that we know can compete against the Mahomes of the world.

[Stoney]

4 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

He can say what he wants. Things change.

 

John Clayton just said on JMV Wilson won’t be traded.

If he changes his mind because of another injury that's 1 thing. But that goes for any player. If Rodgers tells a team that he plans on playing for 2 or 3 years more before they trade for him I would bet he would honor his word, unless something drastic happens.

 

Also, I didn't say anything about Wilson.

[jvan1973]

1 hour ago, PRnum1 said:

Don't get me wrong.  I wasn't judging him.

 

I've drunk tweeted plenty myself.

Do you not know about his struggles with addiction?   I'm not judging you if you didn't.    But he is a struggling addict..   Hopefully he is staying sober

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

1 minute ago, Stoney said:

If he changes his mind because of another injury that's 1 thing. But that goes for any player. If Rodgers tells a team that he plans on playing for 2 or 3 years more before they trade for him I would bet he would honor his word, unless something drastic happens.

 

Also, I didn't say anything about Wilson.

I know I was just adding that at the end of my comment because o am listening to the radio. Sorry I wasn’t saying you did.

John Clayton just said he thinks Rodgers will end up in Denver.

[IinD]

Rodgers would probably benefit going somewhere warmer to play like TB did. It's probably a bitch to play in places like NE or Green Bay as you get older.

 

Come to Indy and give us the Rogers rate and all is good 

[jvan1973]

3 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

I know I was just adding that at the end of my comment because o am listening to the radio. Sorry I wasn’t saying you did.

John Clayton just said he thinks Rodgers will end up in Denver.

For someone that is done with this team your posting history says otherwise.   Good lord.    It's not even February yet.    Relax

[Tsarquise]

5 hours ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

I actually agree with this.

 

 

You mean the medias covid agenda? Rodgers didn't have a covid agenda. That's the whole point of him saying "immunized" – to get the heat off of him.