Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colts Front Office Grades by Pro Football Network


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

Do you have any stats that suggest it's more brilliance than luck/timing?

 

 

 

Like I said, I think Ballard is top 10. 

That doesn't make the luck/timing that brought Ryan here, brilliant. 

 

The FO, Reich, or media could fart, and it would be a brilliant fart lol. 

The pitch would be perfect. The aroma, better than a fine Pino Noir. 

The wind exerted would be like the butterfly effect, and somehow cause world peace and end famine. 

what did ballard do to you? it seems personal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

Move up, down, doesn't matter. It's simply easy to understand why Cinci and LAC are ranked above Indy. 

 

 

Yes, the Bengals were a crappy team and had top 5 draft picks more.   Maybe the Colts front office should suck for 15 years so they can be ranked higher.  

 

I just have an issue with Cincy's front office getting so much credit when the same front office has a history of putting crap on the field.  I need to see it for another couple years.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/27/2022 at 12:03 PM, shasta519 said:

 

If those moves work out, and the Colts have a great season, I would assume they easily move into the top 10, especially if they go into next offseason as a SB contender.

 

But we haven't seen it play out yet. 

 

This is where I stand.  I’m lukewarm on Ryan.  He’s been a good pro but has always benefitted from a bevy of great and HOF type of pass catchers starting with Roddy White, Tony G, Julio, Ridley, last year was probably his least talented corps wirhbRidley out most of the year, but Pitts is obviously a game changer.

 

the oline and Dline have boatloads invested in picks and salary and performed mediocre to less than average last season.  Dline was young and might develop but vet choices might have been made last year.  If Paye, Dayo, and Yannick excel, then we will look very good.  I am about 50/50 on that.  They need to produce a dominant pass rush along with Buckner.  I hope that happens.  The oline was godawful last season in pass probut that was mostly injury related.  Good still run blocking but I personally don’t think that matters enough in comparison to pass prol over the long haul.  If the LT is at least adequate, nFL mid tier, we will be fine.  If not Ryan will be looking at the sky or dome roof 40 to 50 times..

 

gilmore is not a sure thing with the age.  He needs to be really good if not great in the C3.  But the safeties are the key to a Bradley secondary IMO.  That is a major question mark IMO.  Hooker sure would look good in the single high IMO. 
 

there are too many questions on this squad for me to think CB should be rated higher.

 

this is a make or break season IMO for Ballard.  It will be interesting to see how this all comes together.  
 

looking forward to September.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/27/2022 at 12:53 PM, Myles said:

the Bengals record the past 6 years with the same front office:

2016 - 6-9-1

2017 - 7-9

2018 - 6-10

2019 - 2-14

2020 - 4-11-1

2021 - 10-7

 

And that qualifies for a top 10 spot?    I just do not think so.  The team was awful for 5 of 6 years.   It's no wonder they were able to draft good players.  

That is one way of looking at it.  Another way is the Colts have won 2 less playoff games than Cincy, during the same time period and cinn has turned over an aging pretty good and expensive roster after 2015 and to me look pretty well set up for the future with a great QB and all universe receiving Corps.  Also Cincys division is fairly obviously better during that time.  
 

I haven’t followed Cincys moves closely but looking at the records they stayed competitive at the end of the Lewis era, hovering just under 500, then rebuilt during a couple of bad seasons getting their guy and surrounding him with talent.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Nickster said:

This is where I stand.  I’m lukewarm on Ryan.  He’s been a good pro but has always benefitted from a bevy of great and HOF type of pass catchers starting with Roddy White, Tony G, Julio, Ridley, last year was probably his least talented corps wirhbRidley out most of the year, but Pitts is obviously a game changer.

 

the oline and Dline have boatloads invested in picks and salary and performed mediocre to less than average last season.  Dline was young and might develop but vet choices might have been made last year.  If Paye, Dayo, and Yannick excel, then we will look very good.  I am about 50/50 on that.  They need to produce a dominant pass rush along with Buckner.  I hope that happens.  The oline was godawful last season in pass probut that was mostly injury related.  Good still run blocking but I personally don’t think that matters enough in comparison to pass prol over the long haul.  If the LT is at least adequate, nFL mid tier, we will be fine.  If not Ryan will be looking at the sky or dome roof 40 to 50 times..

 

gilmore is not a sure thing with the age.  He needs to be really good if not great in the C3.  But the safeties are the key to a Bradley secondary IMO.  That is a major question mark IMO.  Hooker sure would look good in the single high IMO. 
 

there are too many questions on this squad for me to think CB should be rated higher.

 

this is a make or break season IMO for Ballard.  It will be interesting to see how this all comes together.  
 

looking forward to September.

 

 gobbledegook and Hooker stank playing 25 yards deep giving them a 

"free zone" anytime they needed 10-15.   And it is just another season and there is ZERO make or break about it.      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Nickster said:

That is one way of looking at it.  Another way is the Colts have won 2 less playoff games than Cincy, during the same time period and cinn has turned over an aging pretty good and expensive roster after 2015 and to me look pretty well set up for the future with a great QB and all universe receiving Corps.  Also Cincys division is fairly obviously better during that time.  
 

I haven’t followed Cincys moves closely but looking at the records they stayed competitive at the end of the Lewis era, hovering just under 500, then rebuilt during a couple of bad seasons getting their guy and surrounding him with talent.

 

 

The same front office had these win totals:

2016 - 6

2017 - 7

2018 - 6

2019 - 2

2020 - 4

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/29/2022 at 10:02 AM, DougDew said:

Yep, that's how teams win.  But it is dissimilar to the approach the Colts took.  I can't emphasize it enough.

 

They get IMPACTFUL players on cheap rookie deals.  Pro Bowl performances at positions that matter.  Our pro bowl performers on rookie deals were at G (Nelson) and WILL (Leonard).  There's was at QB (Burrow) and WR (Chase).

 

CIN fixed their interior oline for their franchise QB via FA, where they can be found.

 

And now our PB players are off of their rookie deals and are about to get paid.  A window missed, unless we suck and have an opportunity to draft high again.  Although JT is working out well in being both impactful and cheap.

 

And we got lucky with Ryan becoming available...that's about as lucky as Burrow being there.  Where would you rank the FO if Ryan wasn't here?  Hopefully Ryan can take us far. 

Yeah this is something I think the board overrates CB on.  Many thing he swindled the Falcs, cue the greedy cartoon villain laugh and tapping fingers together.

 

when the reality is there wasn’t apparently a high demand for the guy.  
 

he might really work out here but good Lord he was let go along with a crap ton of salary for a 3rd round pick.  Similar proportionally to the mayfield deal just done.  These weren’t highly valued players.

 

it’s kind of like the last thing on the clearance rack.  It’s there.  It’s deeply disctounted.  You buy it.  Most of the time it’s crap but sometimes you get a steal.

 

hope the Colts got a steal rather than another vet that doesn’t really have a future and doesn’t pull us out of mediocrity.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 gobbledegook and Hooker stank playing 25 yards deep giving them a 

"free zone" anytime they needed 10-15.   And it is just another season and there is ZERO make or break about it.      

Yeah man,  take note of how deep the free safety plays in Bradley’s D lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Myles said:

The same front office had these win totals:

2016 - 6

2017 - 7

2018 - 6

2019 - 2

2020 - 4

 

 

 

They had really good teams that got expensive after making the playoffs 6 of 7 years before that with a historically bad franchise.  They were playoff Bengals, but very talented.  Probably just not quite talented enough at QB with Dalton, good but not good enough.  It almost always takes a little while to turn over a roster and be good again after having that much success in the regular year and not immediately hitting on another QB ala Colts with Luck and Pack with Rodgers.

 

they had a 7 year span with late 1st round picks, which kept them from the highest talent pool as us usual for teams that win a lot for an extended time.  They were reasonably competitive in the 1st 3 years you cited and then had to rebuild.  I think they’ve been really good in the rebuild.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Nickster said:

They had really good teams that got expensive after making the playoffs 6 of 7 years before that with a historically bad franchise.  They were playoff Bengals, but very talented.  Probably just not quite talented enough at QB with Dalton, good but not good enough.  It almost always takes a little while to turn over a roster and be good again after having that much success in the regular year and not immediately hitting on another QB ala Colts with Luck and Pack with Rodgers.

 

they had a 7 year span with late 1st round picks, which kept them from the highest talent pool as us usual for teams that win a lot for an extended time.  They were reasonably competitive in the 1st 3 years you cited and then had to rebuild.  I think they’ve been really good in the rebuild.

They averaged 5 wins a year for 5 years, I don't think I would qualify that as "very good".

The Colts have averaged over 8 wins a season the last 5 years and I don't know anyone who says the are a "very good" team.  

If they are consistently good for a couple years I will give the front office some credit, but not now.   This front office, before last season, hadn't won a playoff game since 1990.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Myles said:

They averaged 5 wins a year for 5 years, I don't think I would qualify that as "very good".

The Colts have averaged over 8 wins a season the last 5 years and I don't know anyone who says the are a "very good" team.  

If they are consistently good for a couple years I will give the front office some credit, but not now.   This front office, before last season, hadn't won a playoff game since 1990.  

Earth to Myles.  Come in.   Myles.  
 

From 09 to 2015 they won 66 games in seven seasons is what was being referred to when they were good.  They won 4 in 2010 before averaging  10.5 wins for five seasons before the years in your graphic.  They had a very talented roster and a decent but not quite good enough QB and didn’t win a playoff game in all 6 of those season.  Then, they were relatively competitive for 3 more seasons before nose diving, and resetting the offensive roster.  
 

you could fault the FO maybe for hanging on to Marv and not moving on from the red rifle but that is a hard argument to make when they win the division every other year.  Maybe a bold move to drop those 2 was called for but that doesn’t change the fact that they had a lengthy competive window then had to rebuild.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Earth to Myles.  Come in.   Myles.  
 

From 09 to 2015 they won 66 games in seven seasons is what was being referred to when they were good.  They won 4 in 2010 before averaging  10.5 wins for five seasons before the years in your graphic.  They had a very talented roster and a decent but not quite good enough QB and didn’t win a playoff game in all 6 of those season.  Then, they were relatively competitive for 3 more seasons before nose diving, and resetting the offensive roster.  
 

you could fault the FO maybe for hanging on to Marv and not moving on from the red rifle but that is a hard argument to make when they win the division every other year.  Maybe a bold move to drop those 2 was called for but that doesn’t change the fact that they had a lengthy competive window then had to rebuild.

From 2016 to 2020 they finished last in their division 3 times and 3rd the other 2.   I understand 1 or 2 bad seasons can happen, but when it is 5 consecutive bad seasons it is on the front office.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Myles said:

Yes, the Bengals were a crappy team and had top 5 draft picks more.   Maybe the Colts front office should suck for 15 years so they can be ranked higher.  

 

I just have an issue with Cincy's front office getting so much credit when the same front office has a history of putting crap on the field.  I need to see it for another couple years.  

 

Today is what matters. 

We've been average for a long time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:


Only you could claim you think Ballard is top-10 in the same thread in which you claimed the Colts front office is not worthy of being top-10.   And to you, there was no room for disagreement.   
 

But hey….   Keep being you!     :thmup:

The GM is one guy. He is the leader (yet has 4 bosses, and 8-10 key underlings), but he's one guy in the FO. 

 

It's just like the QB is the leader of the offensive. The QB might be top 10, the total O may not be. 

 

Pretty simple concept. 

 

Keep being you!

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

The GM is one guy. He is the leader (yet has 4 bosses, and 8-10 key underlings), but he's one guy in the FO. 

 

It's just like the QB is the leader of the offensive. The QB might be top 10, the total O may not be. 

 

Pretty simple concept. 

 

Keep being you!

so who do you think is worthy of top ten, and who is not worthy of top ten? can you break it down, possibly with stats?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, AustinnKaine said:

so who do you think is worthy of top ten, and who is not worthy of top ten? can you break it down, possibly with stats?

 

I would, if I thought you were actually interested. 

 

I'd start by using key indicators like power ranks, roster ranks, cap health rank, QB of the future status, and playoff attainment.

 

But I'm guessing you'd disagree with any factual and systemic method of grading anyone that counters your worship narrative. 

 

Like I said...  The pitch is perfect. The aroma better than a fine wine, and the wind exerta will end world famine and create world peace. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

The GM is one guy. He is the leader (yet has 4 bosses, and 8-10 key underlings), but he's one guy in the FO. 

 

It's just like the QB is the leader of the offensive. The QB might be top 10, the total O may not be. 

 

Pretty simple concept. 

 

Keep being you!


Again..   yeah, no.    Now you’re making an intellectual argument, but you’re not making a FACTUAL argument.   You can’t name some weak link because you have no idea who that might be.   
 

And ALL OF THIS is because we disagree over the F.O. Ranking.   I think Cincy and LAC are (gasp!) one spot too high and Cleveland perhaps 2-3 spots too high.   But I’ve committed the Cardinal Sin of disagreeing with you so you have to fight till the end to prove me wrong.

 

Remember….  One of us said there’s room for disagreement (hint: it wasn’t you) and one of said there’s no room for disagreement that the view was basically obvious.  (Hint:  it wasn’t me).   And that leaves us back to where we always are, you MUST be right, and the other person MUST be wrong.

 

Carry on!!   :thmup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Again..   yeah, no.    Now you’re making an intellectual argument, but you’re not making a FACTUAL argument.   You can’t name some weak link because you have no idea who that might be.   
 

And ALL OF THIS is because we disagree over the F.O. Ranking.   I think Cincy and LAC are (gasp!) one spot too high and Cleveland perhaps 2-3 spots too high.   But I’ve committed the Cardinal Sin of disagreeing with you so you have to fight till the end to prove me wrong.

 

Remember….  One of us said there’s room for disagreement (hint: it wasn’t you) and one of said there’s no room for disagreement that the view was basically obvious.  (Hint:  it wasn’t me).   And that leaves us back to where we always are, you MUST be right, and the other person MUST be wrong.

 

Carry on!!   :thmup:

 

lol. Dude you fail both intellectual and factual arguments daily. 

You're bent because I disagree on a few spots. You get triggered every single time someone criticizes Ballard and Reich. 

 

If we're going to cruise down memory lane....

Remember what I've told you several times.... you don't have to reply or comment on my posts. You don't have to passive aggressively be the emoji poker lol.... I believe I actually asked you a few times to simply ignore all my posts and stop emoji'ing them..... , and I would reciprocate. You weren't able to do that. Offer is still on the table. 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/29/2022 at 12:41 PM, shasta519 said:

Grigson's approach still had success

LOL

 

omg dude my drink dang near came out of my nose. Pls don't do that again. Grigson was an incompetent  s c h m u c k. His "approach" got wins despite itself thanks mostly to the no-brainer Andrew Luck pick. He made countless dumb moves following that, not the least of which was totally ignoring the OL and so failing to protect a franchise QB with HOF written all over him, which ultimately caused us to lose him. He is easily the worst GM the Colts ever had. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:


Again..   yeah, no.    Now you’re making an

2 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

lol. Dude you fail both intellectual and factual arguments daily. 

You're bent because I disagree on a few spots. You get triggered every single time someone criticizes Ballard and Reich. 

 

If we're going to cruise down memory lane....

Remember what I've told you several times.... you don't have to reply or comment on my posts. You don't have to passive aggressively be the emoji poker lol.... I believe I actually asked you a few times to simply ignore all my posts and stop emoji'ing them..... , and I would reciprocate. You weren't able to do that. Offer is still on the table. 

but you’re not making a FACTUAL argument.   You can’t name some weak link because you have no idea who that might be.   
 

And ALL OF THIS is because we disagree over the F.O. Ranking.   I think Cincy and LAC are (gasp!) one spot too high and Cleveland perhaps 2-3 spots too high.   But I’ve committed the Cardinal Sin of disagreeing with you so you have to fight till the end to prove me wrong.

 

Remember….  One of us said there’s room for disagreement (hint: it wasn’t you) and one of said there’s no room for disagreement that the view was basically obvious.  (Hint:  it wasn’t me).   And that leaves us back to where we always are, you MUST be right, and the other person MUST be wrong.

 

Carry on!!   :thmup:

 

2 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

lol. Dude you fail both intellectual and factual arguments daily. 

You're bent because I disagree on a few spots. You get triggered every single time someone criticizes Ballard and Reich. 

 

If we're going to cruise down memory lane....

Remember what I've told you several times.... you don't have to reply or comment on my posts. You don't have to passive aggressively be the emoji poker lol.... I believe I actually asked you a few times to simply ignore all my posts and stop emoji'ing them..... , and I would reciprocate. You weren't able to do that. Offer is still on the table. 

 

I try and stay away from Intellectual arguments/conversations.....

    :funny:

 

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

I try and stay away from Intellectual arguments/conversations.....

    :funny:

 

 

If you're good at handicapping, we know you have good grey matter though lol

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

If you're good at handicapping, we know you have good grey matter though lol

 

Yeah,, but I had a "sure winner", or so I thought, and bet my neurons in the grey matter and my dog got bumped and lost! .....but still have my white matter neurons. haha

 

But seriously, can you imagine the things going on inside of Einsteins brain???

 

Theory of relativity, time dilation etc...etc.... Amazing......and he liked the cutie's too. Lol

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Yeah,, but I had a "sure winner", or so I thought, and bet my neurons in the grey matter and my dog got bumped and lost! .....but still have my white matter neurons. haha

 

But seriously, can you imagine the things going on inside of Einsteins brain???

 

Theory of relativity, time dilation etc...etc.... Amazing......and he liked the cutie's too. Lol

 

Einstein was crazy brilliant, and also had a next level love life lol... Married his student, married a first cousin, affair with a Russian spy, +++++++. Read several books on him, but it's been a long while. I enjoyed some of his non-science takes as well. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

I would, if I thought you were actually interested. 

 

I'd start by using key indicators like power ranks, roster ranks, cap health rank, QB of the future status, and playoff attainment.

 

But I'm guessing you'd disagree with any factual and systemic method of grading anyone that counters your worship narrative. 

 

Like I said...  The pitch is perfect. The aroma better than a fine wine, and the wind exerta will end world famine and create world peace. 

 

I'm just trying to figure out who you think is bad in the front office. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, AustinnKaine said:

 

I'm just trying to figure out who you think is bad in the front office. 

 

Folks don't have to be "bad" to be ranked behind Cinci and LAC right now. 

 

                                       CIN              LAC              Indy
Power Rank                     8                  3                  15
Roster Rank                    8                   3                  15
3 Year Cap Health           1                  5                   4 
QB of the future?            Y                  Y                   N
 

And while I list Cap health in the above, it's not a metric to hang your hat on alone. 

GB and LAR are bottom 10 in cap health (have been regularly), but still seem to always be in the SB conversation.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/8/2022 at 4:29 AM, Jared Cisneros said:

I'm definitely not a fair weather fan. I've supported these teams since I was 6 years old. In fact, ironically, the latest of the 4 (and most bandwagonish) I started supporting was the Colts in 1998 when I was 10 and they got Peyton. My teams just happened to win 2 championships within the span of a year. Also, I live in Colorado, so the "fair weather" thing is a strange comment coming from you who knows this already. If you want to question why I don't root for the rockies, my little league team was the Braves when I was 6, and I didn't want to root for an expansion team in the Rockies at that time in 1993.

 

Honestly, I'm just sick of the band-aids at QB, and yes, I'm sick of Frank Reich. I felt the draft was good by Ballard, but as good as it was, we had no 1st round pick, so our ceiling is more limited unless we get lucky. I'm also annoyed that we didn't take a developmental QB like a Willis or a Ridder in the 3rd round, and the cherry on top is when Willis retired, that took the wind out of my sails. I feel that we have very little chance at a franchise QB in next years draft because we'll probably pick in the 20s, and the whole situation is getting tiresome when we are in the AFC. We don't care or focus on the passing game that much, and I feel that the whole offense is outdated. Hines is used ineffectively, and I don't trust Reich. We're basically in a 2 year window, and then we have to pay Nelson, Taylor, and Pittman. Don't see how we keep everyone even if we draft a QB on a rookie contract.

 

Sorry for the rant, it's just very refreshing for me to enjoy other sports right now. To me with the Colts, it's a "I'll believe it when I see it" type of thing. When I see a pattern for 5 years and notice the landscape of the AFC, nothing can convince me this team is going to make a run until it happens. They could, and it happened with the Bengals, but I have to see it. I said the same with the Braves though after they lost to the Dodgers in the NLCS after being up 3-1, so maybe lightning strikes twice. 

 

 

You knew at 6 years old you didn’t want to root for an expansion team? Impressive 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

Folks don't have to be "bad" to be ranked behind Cinci and LAC right now. 

 

                                       CIN              LAC              Indy
Power Rank                     8                  3                  15
Roster Rank                    8                   3                  15
3 Year Cap Health           1                  5                   4 
QB of the future?            Y                  Y                   N
 

And while I list Cap health in the above, it's not a metric to hang your hat on alone. 

GB and LAR are bottom 10 in cap health (have been regularly), but still seem to always be in the SB conversation.

 

 

 

this isnt any more significant of information than you've already provided.

 

you specifically stated the GM can be top 10 while the entire staff is not.. so I'm asking you to specify who is good and who is bad. Since you've made the assertion that you can discern these facts. 

 

Also if you're gonna mark yes on Stafford, might as well mark yes for Ryan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, AustinnKaine said:

 

this isnt any more significant of information than you've already provided.

 

you specifically stated the GM can be top 10 while the entire staff is not.. so I'm asking you to specify who is good and who is bad. Since you've made the assertion that you can discern these facts. 

 

Also if you're gonna mark yes on Stafford, might as well mark yes for Ryan

 

What you are attempting to do is simply find any crack in which you can whine about my post lol.

 

The original discussion was if Cinci and LAC should be ahead of Indy. And it's easy to see they should by the simple ranks and fact that they have a very good QB of the future. But like you and a few others, you're more than happy to dismiss facts or ignore simple stats that are counter to your narrative. 

 

In terms of the FO, nobody really knows who is responsible for certain things or championed certain ideas. Ballard has done pretty good in things we know he likely championed. His trade backs for instance. The Wentz deal was likely a strong push by Reich, so I give Ballard a little slack. The dumb contract raise and extension for JB, who knows. Letting Luck keep a bunch of unearned cash, likely Irsay, but we don't know. 

 

Overall, we're on our 5th QB in 5 years, with no QB of the future. Our D has been average or below average aside from take aways, and that's with us have a super soft SoS. The only thing this team has really been good consistently at is the OL and rushing. 

 

But overall, near the same FO has been in place for 5 years. And we've been average over that time period. So hard to say the FO is top 10. We're all now grasping onto Ryan to save us on O, and Bradley's new scheme to save us on D, with likely a two year window to make noise. 

 

And sorry, your logic fails easily on Stafford vs Ryan. LAR made a strong push for Stafford. Very aggressive. Ryan fell into our laps. Even the suggestion they are similar situations is intellectual dishonesty lol. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

What you are attempting to do is simply find any crack in which you can whine about my post lol.

 

The original discussion was if Cinci and LAC should be ahead of Indy. And it's easy to see they should by the simple ranks and fact that they have a very good QB of the future. But like you and a few others, you're more than happy to dismiss facts or ignore simple stats that are counter to your narrative. 

 

In terms of the FO, nobody really knows who is responsible for certain things or championed certain ideas. Ballard has done pretty good in things we know he likely championed. His trade backs for instance. The Wentz deal was likely a strong push by Reich, so I give Ballard a little slack. The dumb contract raise and extension for JB, who knows. Letting Luck keep a bunch of unearned cash, likely Irsay, but we don't know. 

 

Overall, we're on our 5th QB in 5 years, with no QB of the future. Our D has been average or below average aside from take aways, and that's with us have a super soft SoS. The only thing this team has really been good consistently at is the OL and rushing. 

 

But overall, near the same FO has been in place for 5 years. And we've been average over that time period. So hard to say the FO is top 10. We're all now grasping onto Ryan to save us on O, and Bradley's new scheme to save us on D, with likely a two year window to make noise. 

 

And sorry, your logic fails easily on Stafford vs Ryan. LAR made a strong push for Stafford. Very aggressive. Ryan fell into our laps. Even the suggestion they are similar situations is intellectual dishonesty lol. 

 

 

okay but what stats do you have to prove your point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, AustinnKaine said:

okay but what stats do you have to prove your point?

 

lol. what stats do you have to disprove.

I shared an opinion. Sorry if it makes you butthurt or triggers you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, EastStreet said:

GB and LAR are bottom 10 in cap health (have been regularly), but still seem to always be in the SB conversation.

In GB's case, that's despite themselves management wise. They have made some seriously dumb draft moves in recent years, and while I'm no Rodgers fan, IMO he and GB fans have every right to be livid about it. Drafting Love, for example, and totally bungling their WR situation this year. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

lol. what stats do you have to disprove.

I shared an opinion. Sorry if it makes you butthurt or triggers you.

 

do you have stats that prove im butthurt? what percentage of triggered you think im at? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, AustinnKaine said:

 

do you have stats that prove im butthurt? what percentage of triggered you think im at? 

5 of 5 of your last posts are all about butthurt. Your Reich and FO trigger rate is 99%. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, jonjon said:

In GB's case, that's despite themselves management wise. They have made some seriously dumb draft moves in recent years, and while I'm no Rodgers fan, IMO he and GB fans have every right to be livid about it. Drafting Love, for example, and totally bungling their WR situation this year. 

I think it was super dumb too (drafting Love). That is, if they were confident in Rodgers being there for a long time.

But I'm also realistic about Rodgers. I think he's a great QB, but he's a little out there. And it seems like coinflip every year as to if he's going to play another year. 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have an elite QB who you still feel is still playing at a top level, you surround him with as much talent as you can to go for a SB, not draft his replacement prematurely by "wasting" a #1 draft pick. That's basic. In fairness, they clearly had doubts and based on what I saw, I don't blame them, but fish or cut bait. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/8/2022 at 5:30 PM, EastStreet said:

 

lol. Dude you fail both intellectual and factual arguments daily. 

You're bent because I disagree on a few spots. You get triggered every single time someone criticizes Ballard and Reich. 

 

If we're going to cruise down memory lane....

Remember what I've told you several times.... you don't have to reply or comment on my posts. You don't have to passive aggressively be the emoji poker lol.... I believe I actually asked you a few times to simply ignore all my posts and stop emoji'ing them..... , and I would reciprocate. You weren't able to do that. Offer is still on the table. 


Uhhhh….   No.    I know what’s in it for you,  no criticism from me.   But what’s in it for me?    Not a thing. 
 

Beside, you have all the control and power you need.    If you don’t like my comments, do what a few others have done.    They’ve simply blocked me.   You can do that too. 
 

Believe it or not, I’ve already cut way, way back in my comments and emoji’s for you.   You have no idea how many times you’ve left yourself wide open for comment.   And yet you still meltdown.  

 

So block me.   That’s your choice.   But that’s the best offer you’ll get from me.  You don’t show others any respect, I don’t see why you think you’ve earned any in return.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...