Ballard and Colts at Crossroads with Offseason Approaching

[NewColtsFan]

1 minute ago, Moosejawcolt said:

41 and  40. Enuff said

You literally have NO IDEA what you’re talking about.   I find myself thinking that most every time you post.   I don’t have time now to elaborate now, but I will later.   
 

But even then, you’ll ignore what I write, as you do with everyone who disagrees with you.    
 

Enuff said. 

[NFLfan]

3 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

It's tough when you can't draft in the top 5.

 

Tell me about it. The Vikings have drafted in the top 5 only once in the 31 years during which I have been a fan. 

[NFLfan]

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

You literally have NO IDEA what you’re talking about.   I find myself thinking that most every time you post.   I don’t have time now to elaborate now, but I will later.   
 

But even then, you’ll ignore what I write, as you do with everyone who disagrees with you.    
 

Enuff said. 

 

No need to elaborate. It will be futile. 

[AKB]

jeez this place is depressing rn. 

[Defjamz26]

15 hours ago, Shive said:

It then goes on to discuss that the issues Ballard identified with the roster last offseason are still the ones that need to be addressed this offseason.

That pretty much sums up the issue with the roster perfectly. New season, same issues. QB, DB, WR, DE, and LT are still huge areas of need. It’s inexcusable at this point because we’ve either missed/not drafted those upgrades in the draft and have passed on most FAs who could be upgrades at those positions. Ballard has dropped the ball in that regard. Part of the reason this team never really makes any progress is because it never makes any significant improvement from a roster standpoint. I think Ballard needs to find some long term answers at at least two of these spots. If 2023 comes around and those issues are still there, I’ll expect Irsay’s tune to change.

[Nickster]

12 hours ago, Four2itus said:

No heat, because it's too far off base. 2 losing seasons in 7 years is so far from being irrelevant, it's absurd.

 

Carry on. 

Marginally relevant then?

[NFLfan]

1 hour ago, AustinnKaine said:

jeez this place is depressing rn. 

 

You can opt to check out the Colts Positive thread that is pinned at the top of the Colts section. 

[NFLfan]

1 hour ago, Nickster said:

Marginally relevant then?

 

What does the Colts being "relevant" mean to you? Perhaps you both have different definitions. If "relevant" means winning a SB, then almost every team is not relevant (or is "marginally relevant"). Right?

 

 

[Four2itus]

13 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

No. But after years and years of similar results, you start to get impatient especially when you hear things like multiple championships and possible dynasty.

I fell in love with the Colts in 1970. It was another 36 years before I experienced another colts Title. Hey, when it all clears away, this is your choice. From my perspective, it appears that you are choosing a reason, that you feel is beyond your control...... so you can complain about the team. 

 

Your choice is disappointment....until you experience the event you feel you deserve. That is on you, brother. Good luck with that. I hope you find happiness and serenity in your sports path. 

[Nickster]

3 hours ago, NFLfan said:

 

What does the Colts being "relevant" mean to you? Perhaps you both have different definitions. If "relevant" means winning a SB, then almost every team is not relevant (or is "marginally relevant"). Right?

 

 

They're relevant to me I'm a Colts fan .

 

But nationally they are not all that relevant.

[Mr.Debonair]

16 hours ago, BlackTiger said:

That guy is the biggest homer ive seen on this board.  3 winning seasons in 7 years is good to them.  one playoff win in that time

 

they get mad when anyone talks about the lack of success on this message board too

Participation trophies for all!!! Maybe we can put up more runner up banners

[Yoshinator]

49 minutes ago, Mr.Debonair said:

Participation trophies for all!!! Maybe we can put up more runner up banners

At this point, it'll be division runner-up banners lol!  

[Yoshinator]

4 hours ago, NFLfan said:

 

What does the Colts being "relevant" mean to you? Perhaps you both have different definitions. If "relevant" means winning a SB, then almost every team is not relevant (or is "marginally relevant"). Right?

 

 

Colts being relevant to me means we are either winning the division most years, or making the playoffs every year. In either case, we are giving ourselves a shot to make the SB every year. Bengals were underdogs and did it, that could of been us. It's possible, but only if you make the playoffs in some fashion.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

18 hours ago, Four2itus said:

No heat, because it's too far off base. 2 losing seasons in 7 years is so far from being irrelevant, it's absurd.

 

Carry on. 

 

Seasons that hover at or near .500 is the Definition of being Irrelevant. 

[jvan1973]

10 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Seasons that hover at or near .500 is the Definition of being Irrelevant. 

Bengals. 10-7.  .588 win percentage 

[Four2itus]

36 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Bengals. 10-7.  .588 win percentage 

Wait on there.....we would have respect and be relevant if the Colts had a record of let's say....the Packers at 13-3.

 

Er....well....then we might get eliminated by a barely relevant 10-7 team.

 

#NVRMND

[NFLfan]

22 hours ago, Four2itus said:

I fell in love with the Colts in 1970. It was another 36 years before I experienced another colts Title. Hey, when it all clears away, this is your choice. From my perspective, it appears that you are choosing a reason, that you feel is beyond your control...... so you can complain about the team. 

 

Your choice is disappointment....until you experience the event you feel you deserve. That is on you, brother. Good luck with that. I hope you find happiness and serenity in your sports path. 

 

He is not the only one. CR91 still supports his team. There are a lot of fans who complain and want everyone from the owner to the concession people fired if the team does not win every game.  It seems that most fans only get pleasure in winning. 

 

There used to be a fan here who used to put down fans like you who appreciate the team no matter what. (I forgot his name but I recall he loved dogs. I think he used to save dogs.) Anyway, I used to wonder why he would get so worked up after losses. It made no sense to me. But for others, your way and my way of appreciating sports make no sense to them.

 

I have shared this before but in 2000, the Yankees beat the Mets in the World Series. I took my nephew out and I was wearing my Mets cap. He told me that I should be wearing Yankees cap. I told him I'm a Mets fan and losing will not change that. He had a puzzled look on his face. He was too young to understand, I guess.

 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

8 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

Bengals. 10-7.  .588 win percentage 

Lol.....

That's 3 games over .500 and won the division AND WENT TO SUPER BOWL!!!.... colts finished 9-8 and failed to make the playoffs. 

[jvan1973]

2 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Lol.....

That's 3 games over .500 and won the division AND WENT TO SUPER BOWL!!!.... colts finished 9-8 and failed to make the playoffs. 

You do understand how moronic this post is right?      You said hovering around  .500 is the definition of irrelevant.   Guess what .588 is hovering around. 500.      They won one more regular season game than the Colts.   They had a good playoff run.   A month before the season ended the consensus was the Colts were the team no one wanted to play in the playoffs.    I know you are a negative person and rarely post anything positive.   Or accurate.     So when you post hyperbole I'm gonna call you on it.     

[LJpalmbeacher2]

27 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

You do understand how moronic this post is right?      You said hovering around  .500 is the definition of irrelevant.   Guess what .588 is hovering around. 500.      They won one more regular season game than the Colts.   They had a good playoff run.   A month before the season ended the consensus was the Colts were the team no one wanted to play in the playoffs.    I know you are a negative person and rarely post anything positive.   Or accurate.     So when you post hyperbole I'm gonna call you on it.     

 

The Bengals won their division and we're just a play away from winning the super bowl which I would say was a RELEVANT SEASON....

The Colts MISSED THE PLAYOFFS and weren't Relevant, which is the way this thread started going( teams that were relevant ). 

 

But if you are so pleased about missing a expanded playoff format and think the  colts were relevant, Carry on 

 

And speaking of Moronic posts, you think 9-8 and missing the playoffs is relevant AND  just the other day you said coaches try to win every game they play, completely forgetting  the recent story about Huge Jackson getting paid to Tank and Ross wanting Brian Flores to lose. ....when I brought it to your attention you didn't respond. Lol

[jvan1973]

13 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

The Bengals won their division and we're just a play away from winning the super bowl which I would say was a RELEVANT SEASON....

The Colts MISSED THE PLAYOFFS and weren't Relevant, which is the way this thread started going( teams that were relevant ). 

 

But if you are so pleased about missing a expanded playoff format and think the  colts were relevant, Carry on 

 

And speaking of Moronic posts, you think 9-8 and missing the playoffs is relevant AND  just the other day you said coaches try to win every game they play, completely forgetting  the recent story about Huge Jackson getting paid to Tank and Ross wanting Brian Flores to lose. ....when I brought it to your attention you didn't respond. Lol

The Bengals won 1 more game than the Colts.    

 

Of coarse every coach tries to win every game.   The fact that you bring up Flores and Ross proves my point.    If the accusations are correct, Flores chose to win games and not tank..   Thanks for proving my point

[LJpalmbeacher2]

8 hours ago, NFLfan said:

 

He is not the only one. CR91 still supports his team. There are a lot of fans who complain and want everyone from the owner to the concession people fired if the team does not win every game.  It seems that most fans only get pleasure in winning. 

 

There used to be a fan here who used to put down fans like you who appreciate the team no matter what. (I forgot his name but I recall he loved dogs. I think he used to save dogs.) Anyway, I used to wonder why he would get so worked up after losses. It made no sense to me. But for others, your way and my way of appreciating sports make no sense to them.

 

I have shared this before but in 2000, the Yankees beat the Mets in the World Series. I took my nephew out with and I was wearing my Mets cap. He tells me I should have a Yankees cap on. I told him I'm a Mets fan and losing will not change that. He was too young to understand, I guess.

 

There's nothing wrong rooting for your team even though they had a bad season or are not a very good franchise over the years. The fans that root only for successful teams in successful seasons aren't truly their fans. I've certainly seen plenty of bad colt seasons since Bert Jones.

But saying a team is relevant after only 1 playoff win and no division titles in 7 years is imo  not true and somewhat dilusional haha.

 

And btw, the Mets making the world series in 2000 is relevant, regardless losing to the Yankees, who were great then.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

7 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

The Bengals won 1 more game than the Colts.    

 

Of coarse every coach tries to win every game.   The fact that you bring up Flores and Ross proves my point.    If the accusations are correct, Flores chose to win games and not tank..   Thanks for proving my point

 

Hugh Jackson got paid to lose and he did!!! He admitted it!!!

Flores didn't lose on purpose like Ross wanted him to, THAT'S WHY HE WAS FIRED!!! ..... How many other times has this happened before and the coaches do what they are told or else get fired like Flores was???. ....does anyone really believe these are isolated events? ? ?

 

The Bengals season was Relevant....the colts season wasn't....but if it makes you happy to think other wise, carry on 

[AKB]

 people keep pointing to the bengals like its normal lol

[Nickster]

3 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

The Bengals won their division and we're just a play away from winning the super bowl which I would say was a RELEVANT SEASON....

The Colts MISSED THE PLAYOFFS and weren't Relevant, which is the way this thread started going( teams that were relevant ). 

 

But if you are so pleased about missing a expanded playoff format and think the  colts were relevant, Carry on 

 

And speaking of Moronic posts, you think 9-8 and missing the playoffs is relevant AND  just the other day you said coaches try to win every game they play, completely forgetting  the recent story about Huge Jackson getting paid to Tank and Ross wanting Brian Flores to lose. ....when I brought it to your attention you didn't respond. Lol

Didn’t really seem that hard to figure out to me LJ.

[Yoshinator]

3 hours ago, AustinnKaine said:

 people keep pointing to the bengals like its normal lol

You are right. It isn't normal. However, you have to make the playoffs to give yourself a chance. As a Braves fan in baseball, I know this all too well from last year. The Colts are never going to be the best team in the AFC like the Manning days again for the forseeable future. We aren't even the best team in the division right now. Our only hope is to do something like what the Bengals did. Get into the playoffs at 10 wins either winning the division with some luck, or as a wildcard and get a lucky run. They made it to the SB and beat a loaded AFC to get there. That's what we will have to do. Normal no, but it's our path to the SB with no franchise QB, so it's our normal unless we trade for or draft an elite QB that gets developed.

[DougDew]

10 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

The Bengals won their division and we're just a play away from winning the super bowl which I would say was a RELEVANT SEASON....

The Colts MISSED THE PLAYOFFS and weren't Relevant, which is the way this thread started going( teams that were relevant ). 

 

But if you are so pleased about missing a expanded playoff format and think the  colts were relevant, Carry on 

 

And speaking of Moronic posts, you think 9-8 and missing the playoffs is relevant AND  just the other day you said coaches try to win every game they play, completely forgetting  the recent story about Huge Jackson getting paid to Tank and Ross wanting Brian Flores to lose. ....when I brought it to your attention you didn't respond. Lol

You made the mistake of applying a fairly specific numeric winning percentage to a subjective concept like "relevant".  It leaves the WordSmithers, who hopelessly read posts very literally, the opportunity to pounce on you and point out where the words you wrote were wrong.

 

You and I know that you are right, the Colts have been pretty irrelevant the past few years.  And the media's love for Ballard and previous praise for him that they do not easily back away from kind of gives the Colts a high floor when subjectively evaluating the team.

 

As far as context of this season and the Bengals, anybody who watched football would know that a team that posts a 10-7 record in the AFC North is a much more NFL relevant team than a team who posts a 9-8 record in the AFC South.  

[NFLfan]

10 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

And speaking of Moronic posts, you think 9-8 and missing the playoffs is relevant

 

If you follow the thread, he did not say 9-8 makes a team relevant or irrelevant. You wrote that hovering around .500 makes a team irrelevant. He just pointed out that the Bengals "hovered around .500" and that did not make them irrelevant, as they went to the SB. He is just trying to help you see it another way. I understood what you meant. If the Colts "hovered around .500" but won the SB like the Giants did in 2007 and 2011, they would not be described as "ireelevant". They were both 9-7, I believe.

 

Btw, I never called the 2000 Mets "irrelevant". I see how you could think I did.  No team is "irrelevant". JMO

[Myles]

12 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

 

The Bengals season was Relevant....the colts season wasn't...

I disagree with that.   Every season is relevant.   For the Colts, last season showed some wholes that need filled and coaches duties that need redefined.  

[LiveAndLetAddai]

On 2/26/2022 at 7:39 AM, NFLfan said:

 

What does the Colts being "relevant" mean to you? Perhaps you both have different definitions. If "relevant" means winning a SB, then almost every team is not relevant (or is "marginally relevant"). Right?

 

 

Lucy, don't be so ridiculous! ;)

 

[LiveAndLetAddai]

  Please fellow Colts fans, last season did not end well...we had a rough start, and then an incredible rise to the point where the Colts were the "team no one wants in the playoffs".  Then the wheels fell off, mostly due to happenstance, i.e.: Covid.  Let's not fight amongst ourselves, please.  Better days are ahead

 

[jvan1973]

12 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Hugh Jackson got paid to lose and he did!!! He admitted it!!!

Flores didn't lose on purpose like Ross wanted him to, THAT'S WHY HE WAS FIRED!!! ..... How many other times has this happened before and the coaches do what they are told or else get fired like Flores was???. ....does anyone really believe these are isolated events? ? ?

 

The Bengals season was Relevant....the colts season wasn't....but if it makes you happy to think other wise, carry on 

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/05/sport/hue-jackson-nfl-cleveland-browns-not-paid-spt/index.html

[throwing BBZ]

5 minutes ago, LiveAndLetAddai said:

  Please fellow Colts fans, last season did not end well...we had a rough start, and then an incredible rise to the point where the Colts were the "team no one wants in the playoffs".  Then the wheels fell off, mostly due to happenstance, i.e.: Covid.  Let's not fight amongst ourselves, please.  Better days are ahead

 

 

  Every now and then i actually learn something interesting here. 

 But what i enjoy the most, what i search for, is the friendly banter, and

  the very funny humour some of you are so good at.

  My ignore list is always waiting for THAT off the rails poster. 

   It is like waking up to a warm, sunny, spring day not having to sift through those endless strange takes on football reality.

 Hey, we All have a few but...

  It is ALWAY GO COLTS!!   

   

[throwing BBZ]

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

You made the mistake of applying a fairly specific numeric winning percentage to a subjective concept like "relevant".  It leaves the WordSmithers, who hopelessly read posts very literally, the opportunity to pounce on you and point out where the words you wrote were wrong.

 

You and I know that you are right, the Colts have been pretty irrelevant the past few years.  And the media's love for Ballard and previous praise for him that they do not easily back away from kind of gives the Colts a high floor when subjectively evaluating the team.

 

As far as context of this season and the Bengals, anybody who watched football would know that a team that posts a 10-7 record in the AFC North is a much more NFL relevant team than a team who posts a 9-8 record in the AFC South.  

 

  Bolderdash Doug!  Anybody who followed football KNEW that going into the last two games our COLTS were very likely going to be In the Playoffs.

 THAT alone would make Any team quite relevant. 

   And Irsay has made the failure to do so Relevant.

  And we were relevant last season.

[DougDew]

11 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  Bolderdash Doug!  Anybody who followed football KNEW that going into the last two games our COLTS were very likely going to be In the Playoffs.

 THAT alone would make Any team quite relevant. 

   And Irsay has made the failure to do so Relevant.

  And we were relevant last season.

Again, the term relevant is a subjective term.  I would define it as being seriously considered for a divisional title year after year.  Sneaking into the playoffs one year might make that one season relevant, but the team over time really hasn't been relevant, IMO. 

 

Last season, the Colts were not talked about at all until JT had a few good games mid season.

 

In many ways, the Colts were a bad and irrelevant team all year long that had a good winning chunk in the middle of the season when they relied upon JT to make some big plays in the running game.  Until that flamed out.

[Four2itus]

5 hours ago, DougDew said:

You and I know that you are right, the Colts have been pretty irrelevant the past few years. 

Well, there you have it. If we need to witness rightness, thank goodness someone can provide it for us. 

 

Or......either one of you could have simply said, "The Colts have been irrelevant for the past years...to me". Guess what happens then,........a different or perhaps no response to one's self perceived rightness.....because it's stated as an opinion, rather than a fact.

 

Example............"The Colts have been relevant in my eyes since Manning entered his second season". That's called an opinion. 

[DougDew]

26 minutes ago, Four2itus said:

Well, there you have it. If we need to witness rightness, thank goodness someone can provide it for us. 

 

Or......either one of you could have simply said, "The Colts have been irrelevant for the past years...to me". Guess what happens then,........a different or perhaps no response to one's self perceived rightness.....because it's stated as an opinion, rather than a fact.

 

Example............"The Colts have been relevant in my eyes since Manning entered his second season". That's called an opinion. 

Huh? You accuse others of being that which you are being.

 

What you said means nothing because you put a double wishy-washy into your sentence.  "relevant" and "in my eyes" .

 

The only way that it does say something is if we all have the same definition of relevant....yours!   

 

I thought I had basically said that my entire post was "in my eyes" when I said that the term "relevant" was subjective.  I said that we know that the Colts are not relevant to the guy who defines relevant the same way.

[NFLfan]

9 hours ago, LiveAndLetAddai said:

Lucy, don't be so ridiculous! ;)

 

Lol. Your signature is an example of what I was trying to convey.  "If you ain't first, you're last."  With that mindset, any team that does not win is irrelevant. 

 

[LiveAndLetAddai]

2 hours ago, NFLfan said:

 

Lol. Your signature is an example of what I was trying to convey.  "If you ain't first, you're last."  With that mindset, any team that does not win is irrelevant. 

 

All in jest, humbly....

[throwing BBZ]

On 2/26/2022 at 6:11 AM, Defjamz26 said:

That pretty much sums up the issue with the roster perfectly. New season, same issues. QB, DB, WR, DE, and LT are still huge areas of need. It’s inexcusable at this point because we’ve either missed/not drafted those upgrades in the draft and have passed on most FAs who could be upgrades at those positions. Ballard has dropped the ball in that regard. Part of the reason this team never really makes any progress is because it never makes any significant improvement from a roster standpoint. I think Ballard needs to find some long term answers at at least two of these spots. If 2023 comes around and those issues are still there, I’ll expect Irsay’s tune to change.

 

 chuckle

  Ballard and his boss likely felt good about QB, LT, AND DE going into last season. With reason.

 Not sure they didn't feel reasonably good at DB.

  We will see where we are come mid season at ALL of these positions next season. Guess you missed it, IRSAYS tune has already changed. Yawn!