my concern

[Nickster]

17 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Im 65 years old.   I’m confident that you’re the first person in my life to call me boring,   But, whatever….

 

And I’d respond saying you’re definitely NOT boring….    But I wish you were.    

Another thing that’s boring about you is you seem to be a narrow minded agenda driven nit picker.

 

looking back at the posts in this thread I have repeated ad nauseam that I think Ryan will be better for the team than Wentz and many other things about sack totals, tTT, and scheme and personnel yet you incessantly challenge simple verifiable facts.  Ryan is NOT ever been in his career a particularly quick release guy despite being almost exclusively a  pocket guy and usually takes a lot of sacks.

yet. you . Continue.  To.  Respond. As. If . All. I. Said. Is. That. He . Will. Suck.

 

 

then you had to your theory that my posting habits are agenda driven

 

since you are so obsessed with me (and I don’t blame you for that cause I’m really good looking and have a great personality), look at my posting history from thanksgiving to New Years in 2021 and you will see the same posting habits would be my guess.

 

[NewColtsFan]

39 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Another thing that’s boring about you is you seem to be a narrow minded agenda driven nit picker.

 

looking back at the posts in this thread I have repeated ad nauseam that I think Ryan will be better for the team than Wentz and many other things about sack totals, tTT, and scheme and personnel yet you incessantly challenge simple verifiable facts.  Ryan is NOT ever been in his career a particularly quick release guy despite being almost exclusively a  pocket guy and usually takes a lot of sacks.

yet. you . Continue.  To.  Respond. As. If . All. I. Said. Is. That. He . Will. Suck.

 

 

then you had to your theory that my posting habits are agenda driven

 

since you are so obsessed with me (and I don’t blame you for that cause I’m really good looking and have a great personality), look at my posting history from thanksgiving to New Years in 2021 and you will see the same posting habits would be my guess.

 

Huh?

Here's how screwed up you are….  My negative comments about you on this thread are mostly about Q and Leonard.   Off the top of my head, I don’t recall any negative comments about Ryan.   I haven’t gone back through the thread so maybe I’ve missed something? 
 

I’ve tried to answer your Ryan questions and somehow you think were in some raging angry debate over Matt Ryan?!?!?    WTH?!?

 

You live in your world, and I’ll try to live in mine.   I seriously doubt there will be much overlap.   
 

Good luck to you. 

[Nickster]

19 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

@NewColtsFanand I both are on here a lot so we see when some seem to post a lot when we lose but disappear when we win which is odd. It is almost like they some show up to say I told you so that we would suck. When we win 3 or 4 games in a row those same people don't post for 3 weeks or so  . I am not lumping you in with them, I never put you in that category but I know for a fact there are easily 5 posters I can name that do that a lot that post a lot in here. I won't name them because I don't want to talk behind their backs or cause problems. I show up regardless, win or lose.

I see it too, but that’s not me.  Matter of fact we if lose a lot you’ll see me less in all likelihood because it’s less fun talking ball.

 

like the Brisett year, I didn’t post much when the wheels fell off.  It just wasn’t any fun.  I didn’t think he was any good and he isn’t.

 

I get there are probably some Hamlet soliloquy posters on here and that is annoying sometimes, but I am no less annoyed at the Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Roster posters personally.

[Nickster]

7 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Huh?

Here's how screwed up you are….  My negative comments about you on this thread are mostly about Q and Leonard.   Off the top of my head, I don’t recall any negative comments about Ryan.   I haven’t gone back through the thread so maybe I’ve missed something? 
 

I’ve tried to answer your Ryan questions and somehow you think were in some raging angry debate over Matt Ryan?!?!?    WTH?!?

 

You live in your world, and I’ll try to live in mine.   I seriously doubt there will be much overlap.   
 

Good luck to you. 

And NCF you love ad hominem seemingly but seem to get all but hurt when someone responds in kind.

I think this is the 1st post I made about Ryan which poses questions based 100% on verifiable statistics 

 

“Well Ryan is one of the most sacked QBs in the game last several years so I hope it goes well.  He’s had one Of the slowest TTT of non scrambling QBs.

 

Frank likes to get it out quick, so hopefully Matt’s issue was scheme and personnel.”

 

So NCF you are just plain wrong about what I’ve said.  Ryan was sacked 37 times his MVP year, I assume his line was pretty good that year.  Taking sacks ain’t always bad either.  It’s a heck of a lot better than a TO.

 

we agreed on some stuff on this thread before you got your britches in a bunge  from what I see.  Then you do the ole NCF self righteous thing.

But the dude takes a lot of sacks.  It’s not seriously debatable.  Why is. But not in fact.

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 hours ago, Nickster said:

I see it too, but that’s not me.  Matter of fact we if lose a lot you’ll see me less in all likelihood because it’s less fun talking ball.

 

like the Brisett year, I didn’t post much when the wheels fell off.  It just wasn’t any fun.  I didn’t think he was any good and he isn’t.

 

I get there are probably some Hamlet soliloquy posters on here and that is annoying sometimes, but I am no less annoyed at the Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Roster posters personally.

Both sides can go over board, the negative Nancy's and Sunshine guys. I am just optimistic about a team I love until I can't be anymore if we do indeed stink. I like our roster this year and Matt Ryan gives us hope at least. I think someone saying we will go 9-8 or 8-9 and miss the playoffs is pretty negative, then again if someone in here is guaranteeing we win the SB that is going a bit over board as well. I think we have it in us to make the AFC Finals but the AFC is so deep, so anything more than that is hopeful thinking. Cincy made it last year so who knows.

[chad72]

6 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Both sides can go over board, the negative Nancy's and Sunshine guys. I am just optimistic about a team I love until I can't be anymore if we do indeed stink. I like our roster this year and Matt Ryan gives us hope at least. I think someone saying we will go 9-8 or 8-9 and miss the playoffs is pretty negative, then again if someone in here is guaranteeing we win the SB that is going a bit over board as well. I think we have it in us to make the AFC Finals but the AFC is so deep, so anything more than that is hopeful thinking. Cincy made it last year so who knows.

 

If you think we are good enough to get to the AFCCG, you have a puncher's chance to make it to the SB, no doubt. When Peyton went to his 2 SBs, we never had to play the Chargers who were the Colts' nemesis then, as much as the Patriots. They were knocked out by the Patriots and then the Jets respectively in the 2006 and 2009 season playoffs. Sometimes, with the right breaks, you get better matchups and things work out. Plus, if you have enough veterans, playing on the road is not nearly as daunting as with too many young guys. I think we have a good mix. A playoff win would make me happy regardless. Long way to go.

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

If you think we are good enough to get to the AFCCG, you have a puncher's chance to make it to the SB, no doubt. When Peyton went to his 2 SBs, we never had to play the Chargers who were the Colts' nemesis then, as much as the Patriots. They were knocked out by the Patriots and then the Jets respectively in the 2006 and 2009 season playoffs. Sometimes, with the right breaks, you get better matchups and things work out. Plus, if you have enough veterans, playing on the road is not nearly as daunting as with too many young guys. I think we have a good mix. A playoff win would make me happy regardless. Long way to go.

I don't think we are better than the Bills or Chiefs but the Chiefs did lose Hill and we may end up with a better record than them. That would give us HFA against them. We smoked the BIlls last year but playoff games are so much different.

[ruf]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Both sides can go over board, the negative Nancy's and Sunshine guys. I am just optimistic about a team I love until I can't be anymore if we do indeed stink. I like our roster this year and Matt Ryan gives us hope at least. I think someone saying we will go 9-8 or 8-9 and miss the playoffs is pretty negative, then again if someone in here is guaranteeing we win the SB that is going a bit over board as well. I think we have it in us to make the AFC Finals but the AFC is so deep, so anything more than that is hopeful thinking. Cincy made it last year so who knows.

i like our roster too and if we can advoid injuries and start the season with the Lenorad back a 100% and help our OL and by help i mean making the necessary changes, for examble:

this week we need to look at how Fries plays at RG if that may be better to play him there when kelly gets back

[Nickster]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Both sides can go over board, the negative Nancy's and Sunshine guys. I am just optimistic about a team I love until I can't be anymore if we do indeed stink. I like our roster this year and Matt Ryan gives us hope at least. I think someone saying we will go 9-8 or 8-9 and miss the playoffs is pretty negative, then again if someone in here is guaranteeing we win the SB that is going a bit over board as well. I think we have it in us to make the AFC Finals but the AFC is so deep, so anything more than that is hopeful thinking. Cincy made it last year so who knows.

Cool man.  See I just don't think it's negative to discuss perceived strengths and weaknesses. Like not to me.  I may be to others, but that is fine.  

 

It's just the self righteous ad hominem and accusatory snark that goes around is just so sewing circle that I think it deserves ridicule. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

8 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Cool man.  See I just don't think it's negative to discuss perceived strengths and weaknesses. Like not to me.  I may be to others, but that is fine.  

 

It's just the self righteous ad hominem and accusatory snark that goes around is just so sewing circle that I think it deserves ridicule. 

Nothing wrong with discussing our weaknesses. I think with me it just how some do it - meaning like we have no hope or saying a certain player sucks because of a pre-season game. It is when some do it over and over too. I am on record saying our WR room needs improvement as I am one of biggest advocates for bringing back TY for 1 year. Many don't want TY back.

[Nickster]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Nothing wrong with discussing our weaknesses. I think with me it just how some do it - meaning like we have no hope or saying a certain player sucks because of a pre-season game. It is when some do it over and over too. I am on record saying our WR room needs improvement as I am one of biggest advocates for bringing back TY for 1 year. Many don't want TY back.

I don't feel I do that.  But for instance Pryor I'm dubious on.  I'm dubious because he's a journeyman interior lineman who has never been the preferred starter anywhere and is now handed the LT position.  When I was at camp he was getting toasted.  He has other reports of getting beat often in camp.  In the limited preseason game he looked poor IMO, and I watched the LT on almost every play of the game until the 4th Q.  Personally grading them in the chat so to speak.

 

So I think LT is probably going to be  weakness, but it's not for a singular reason.

Now occasionally guys come into their own later a career, but boy thats seem unlikely at LT from what I think has been shown so far. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, Nickster said:

I don't feel I do that.  But for instance Pryor I'm dubious on.  I'm dubious because he's a journeyman interior lineman who has never been the preferred starter anywhere and is now handed the LT position.  When I was at camp he was getting toasted.  He has other reports of getting beat often in camp.  In the limited preseason game he looked poor IMO, and I watched the LT on almost every play of the game until the 4th Q.  Personally grading them in the chat so to speak.

 

So I think LT is probably going to be  weakness, but it's not for a singular reason.

Now occasionally guys come into their own later a career, but boy thats seem unlikely at LT from what I think has been shown so far. 

LT has me concerned as well, I would like to think Pryor will at least be average. I miss AC.

[Nickster]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

LT has me concerned as well, I would like to think Pryor will at least be average. I miss AC.

I'll just say I hope he looks average.  Right now it doesn't appear that way to me. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, Nickster said:

I'll just say I hope he looks average.  Right now it doesn't appear that way to me. 

I like RainMan but he is a rookie. I call him the RainMan  

[Nickster]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I like RainMan but he is a rookie. I call him the RainMan  

I'm leaning something to emphasize the ethnicity.  The Teutonic Titan would have worked except for obvious reasons. 

 

The Germanic Giant?

 

The Burgandland (His home state) Behometh?  

 

The Austrian . . .  (can't think of anything)

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, Nickster said:

I'm leaning something to emphasize the ethnicity.  The Teutonic Titan would have worked except for obvious reasons. 

 

The Germanic Giant?

 

The Burgandland (His home state) Behometh?  

 

The Austrian . . .  (can't think of anything)

 

I got RainMan out of Raimann because 1 night at work someone kept calling RainMan  . He was like that Bernhard Rainman may be a steal  . I actually just went along with it because the name sounds cool.

[chad72]

2 hours ago, Nickster said:

Cool man.  See I just don't think it's negative to discuss perceived strengths and weaknesses. Like not to me.  I may be to others, but that is fine.  

 

It's just the self righteous ad hominem and accusatory snark that goes around is just so sewing circle that I think it deserves ridicule. 

 

Preach it!!! The Pom-Pom shakers (akin to Fox News never saying anything negative about Trump), you can tell by the self righteous stance they hide behind, "Ballard and Reich know better". If that were the case, there is no need for forum discussion. 

 

Like you said, it does not forbid us from discussing strengths and weaknesses and disagreeing with Irsay or Ballard or Reich. "Reasonable" disagreement is still frowned upon sometimes. 

[NewColtsFan]

6 hours ago, Nickster said:

And NCF you love ad hominem seemingly but seem to get all but hurt when someone responds in kind.

I think this is the 1st post I made about Ryan which poses questions based 100% on verifiable statistics 

 

“Well Ryan is one of the most sacked QBs in the game last several years so I hope it goes well.  He’s had one Of the slowest TTT of non scrambling QBs.

 

Frank likes to get it out quick, so hopefully Matt’s issue was scheme and personnel.”

 

So NCF you are just plain wrong about what I’ve said.  Ryan was sacked 37 times his MVP year, I assume his line was pretty good that year.  Taking sacks ain’t always bad either.  It’s a heck of a lot better than a TO.

 

we agreed on some stuff on this thread before you got your britches in a bunge  from what I see.  Then you do the ole NCF self righteous thing.

But the dude takes a lot of sacks.  It’s not seriously debatable.  Why is. But not in fact.

 

Yeah….   No.   Because I didn’t attack you about Ryan.   At all.   I just mentioned what I said giving my point of view.   That’s it. 
 

Plrase don’t accuse me if things I clearly didn’t do.   Don’t use words like ad hominem attacks, because you clearly don’t know what it means or how to use it properly.   I was not attacking you — period, full stop.   
 

You quoted me and said that was an attack on you.    You had asked me questions, and I answered them.  That’s it.   And it’s exchanges like this that now have ME asking YOU to stop responding to me.   There’s no upside to be found.   Only downside. 
 

Are we clear now?   Go live your life here on the website.   Enjoy yourself.   Good bye. 

[Nickster]

38 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Yeah….   No.   Because I didn’t attack you about Ryan.   At all.   I just mentioned what I said giving my point of view.   That’s it. 
 

Plrase don’t accuse me if things I clearly didn’t do.   Don’t use words like ad hominem attacks, because you clearly don’t know what it means or how to use it properly.   I was not attacking you — period, full stop.   
 

You quoted me and said that was an attack on you.    You had asked me questions, and I answered them.  That’s it.   And it’s exchanges like this that now have ME asking YOU to stop responding to me.   There’s no upside to be found.   Only downside. 
 

Are we clear now?   Go live your life here on the website.   Enjoy yourself.   Good bye. 

 

You must be out of touch bro.  You do this "(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining" on practically a daily basis.  Ad hominem is not that complex of an idea young man. 

 

As a matter of strong opinion, you are doing it right now.  Now if you want to get all righteously legalistic about your words, you can prevaricate for a while, that's up to you, but you have been seen through.

 

 

 

[NewColtsFan]

8 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

You must be out of touch bro.  You do this "(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining" on practically a daily basis.  Ad hominem is not that complex of an idea young man. 

 

As a matter of strong opinion, you are doing it right now.  Now if you want to get all righteously legalistic about your words, you can prevaricate for a while, that's up to you, but you have been seen through.

 

 

 

If you have something to say to me, you’re free to message me privately.   I am 100 percent not able to respond here as I’d like.  
 

So it’s either private, or not at all.   Your call. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

- no please here, it is slow in here today.

[Nickster]

On 8/23/2022 at 12:21 PM, NewColtsFan said:

you always seem to avoid talking about the terrible OL he’s had in front of him.   I wonder why?    Hmmm?

 

Here are some of your ad hominem gems from the last two pages of this thread alone:

 

"You always seem to avoid talking about the terrible OL he’s had in front of him.   I wonder why?    Hmmm?"  

 

"I think you either DELIBERATELY make bogus arguments to make a point,  or with a lack of understanding how football is analyzed, you make uninformed posts. "

 

When asked you offered no such posts BTW.

 

"I think you might be the first critic I’ve had to use that attack, but it doesn’t surprise me."  What doesn't surprise you NCF? and why doesn't it surprise you? 

 

"I think you’ve been making bogus arguments on Q and Leonard for several years now.   And I don’t think you’ve made an effective argument yet."  Note that you didn't give one SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR ahem attack. 

 

"But since you’re in the mood to ask….  It was certainly noticed and was a constant topic of conversation for roughly two months last season that you and Moose were hammering on the team when we started 1 and 4.   Ok, you had lots of company.   Lots of angry fans.  But when we turned it around and went 8 and 2 and were the hottest team in football the two of you were hard to find.   People here asked where were our two hardest critics?   Why did you disappear when times were good?    And then when things went south at the end, you guys came back.   That seemed odd to many.   Here when times were bad, gone when times were good.   Usually, it’s the opposite.   Do you have thoughts you’d like to share?'"  Note the snarky righteous tone, but embarassingly misinformed.  Once again you offer zero, zero actual examples but you are very good at being peronally accusatory.

 

This is one of my personal faves.  A real beaut Clark.

"You live in a world all your own."

 

Oh this is a good one too lol.

 

"Here's how screwed up you are…. "

 

GOOD GOD MAN GET A GRIP.

 

[NewColtsFan]

4 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

Here are some of your ad hominem gems from the last two pages of this thread alone:

 

"You always seem to avoid talking about the terrible OL he’s had in front of him.   I wonder why?    Hmmm?"  

 

"I think you either DELIBERATELY make bogus arguments to make a point,  or with a lack of understanding how football is analyzed, you make uninformed posts. "

 

When asked you offered no such posts BTW.

 

"I think you might be the first critic I’ve had to use that attack, but it doesn’t surprise me."  What doesn't surprise you NCF? and why doesn't it surprise you? 

 

"I think you’ve been making bogus arguments on Q and Leonard for several years now.   And I don’t think you’ve made an effective argument yet."  Note that you didn't give one SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR ahem attack. 

 

"But since you’re in the mood to ask….  It was certainly noticed and was a constant topic of conversation for roughly two months last season that you and Moose were hammering on the team when we started 1 and 4.   Ok, you had lots of company.   Lots of angry fans.  But when we turned it around and went 8 and 2 and were the hottest team in football the two of you were hard to find.   People here asked where were our two hardest critics?   Why did you disappear when times were good?    And then when things went south at the end, you guys came back.   That seemed odd to many.   Here when times were bad, gone when times were good.   Usually, it’s the opposite.   Do you have thoughts you’d like to share?'"  Note the snarky righteous tone, but embarassingly misinformed.  Once again you offer zero, zero actual examples but you are very good at being peronally accusatory.

 

This is one of my personal faves.  A real beaut Clark.

"You live in a world all your own."

 

Oh this is a good one too lol.

 

"Here's how screwed up you are…. "

 

GOOD GOD MAN GET A GRIP.

 

Like I said, private or not at all.   You said I attacked you over Matt Ryan.  I did no such thing.   My other responses were responses to attacks by you to me.   If I was free to speak my mind — which I’m not — we’d be having a completely different conversation.  
 

So AGAIN..     it’s either private or not at all. 

[ruf]

1 hour ago, chad72 said:

 

Preach it!!! The Pom-Pom shakers (akin to Fox News never saying anything negative about Trump), you can tell by the self righteous stance they hide behind, "Ballard and Reich know better". If that were the case, there is no need for forum discussion. 

 

Like you said, it does not forbid us from discussing strengths and weaknesses and disagreeing with Irsay or Ballard or Reich. "Reasonable" disagreement is still frowned upon sometimes. 

to get back on topic i think the weakness is at RG going into the season and they should play around with the idea of putting the rookie OT at RT and moving Smith to RG or trying Fries at RG over Printer and have him as backup for two OL positions

[Nickster]

Just now, NewColtsFan said:

Like I said, private or not at all.   You said I attacked you over Matt Ryan.  I did no such thing.   My other responses were responses to attacks by you to me.   If I was free to speak my mind — which I’m not — we’d be having a completely different conversation.  
 

So AGAIN..     it’s either private or not at all. 

Message me bro.  Say whatever you want.  I'm a big boy. 

 

I'm not mad at you dude, but you are just absurd sometimes.  

 

No attacking the person not the argument from you huh. 

 

Well you've been served. 

[Nickster]

6 minutes ago, ruf said:

to get back on topic i think the weakness is at RG going into the season and they should play around with the idea of putting the rookie OT at RT and moving Smith to RG or trying Fries at RG over Printer and have him as backup for two OL positions

I disagree.  RTs are more valuable and harder to find than RGs and Smith is a really good RT.  I don't see how that would improve the team.  I mean is the RG completely incompetent?  He'd have to be awfully bad to justify moving Smith down to RG.  

 

I don't think the Behometh of Burgandland is ready yet man. 

[gspdx]

31 minutes ago, Nickster said:

I disagree.  RTs are more valuable and harder to find than RGs and Smith is a really good RT.  I don't see how that would improve the team.  I mean is the RG completely incompetent?  He'd have to be awfully bad to justify moving Smith down to RG.  

 

I don't think the Behometh of Burgandland is ready yet man. 

Would agree Raimann as a rookie is not ready to start on either side.  Would also agree Pryor is a question mark and wouldn't be my first choice at left tackle.  But at this point he is who we have on the team.  

 

I am still optimistic this line can gel into a good unit.  If there are injuries that cause lots of rotation on the line all bets are off.

[ruf]

51 minutes ago, gspdx said:

Would agree Raimann as a rookie is not ready to start on either side.  Would also agree Pryor is a question mark and wouldn't be my first choice at left tackle.  But at this point he is who we have on the team.  

 

I am still optimistic this line can gel into a good unit.  If there are injuries that cause lots of rotation on the line all bets are off.

i think the problem is at RG is Printer is not strong enough for some of those bull rushes and the problem at LT is that Pryer can be beat on the outside by speed rushers (we can fix that by helping with TE or rb chipping. but can't help the RG i think his best position is C

[EbenezerRouge]

On 8/25/2022 at 2:38 PM, Nickster said:

I disagree.  RTs are more valuable and harder to find than RGs and Smith is a really good RT.  I don't see how that would improve the team.  I mean is the RG completely incompetent?  He'd have to be awfully bad to justify moving Smith down to RG.  

 

I don't think the Behometh of Burgandland is ready yet man. 

Smith is a better guard than Printer, and maybe the rookie could play well enough at RT to improve the O line.

[ruf]

On 8/21/2022 at 5:47 PM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

We will see how it goes this year when Nelson and Kelly are 100% healthy and with Matt Ryan at QB.

i hope they both are healthy but it want do much good if the RG is not holding up

[IinD]

It's still preseason so I'm staying optimistic because we haven't seen real season action yet, but I think any realistic fan knows this team can be anywhere from good/bad/ugly from a combination of things this season.

 

There's changes at many positions every year, but this season seems to have a ton of new/young faces at a ton of positions. 

 

Without going full blown depression mode, I could see struggles at OL/WR/Ageing QB/Punter somehow losing us a game or two/Kicker who's had some ehh kicks in the past. And who's to know if the defensive gets better? I think that side should on paper hold up better though but since it's a negative paragraph I'll throw that in.

 

Definitely arguments for pro and con on how we'll look this season.

[Nickster]

7 hours ago, EbenezerRouge said:

Smith is a better guard than Printer, and maybe the rookie could play well enough at RT to improve the O line.

I don’t think Raimann is ready yet from what I’ve seen.  Maybe at RT.  He looked good to me run blocking, but to take Smith off the edge and put him inside, you’d have to be pretty locked in confident in Raimann.  
 

I think our line will struggle.

[ruf]

5 hours ago, IinD said:

It's still preseason so I'm staying optimistic because we haven't seen real season action yet, but I think any realistic fan knows this team can be anywhere from good/bad/ugly from a combination of things this season.

 

There's changes at many positions every year, but this season seems to have a ton of new/young faces at a ton of positions. 

 

Without going full blown depression mode, I could see struggles at OL/WR/Ageing QB/Punter somehow losing us a game or two/Kicker who's had some ehh kicks in the past. And who's to know if the defensive gets better? I think that side should on paper hold up better though but since it's a negative paragraph I'll throw that in.

 

Definitely arguments for pro and con on how we'll look this season.

hoping for the best but the O will all depend on the Oline i think the wr will be good if the qb has enough time and the Oline can open up on the run game

[ruf]

55 minutes ago, Nickster said:

I don’t think Raimann is ready yet from what I’ve seen.  Maybe at RT.  He looked good to me run blocking, but to take Smith off the edge and put him inside, you’d have to be pretty locked in confident in Raimann.  
 

I think our line will struggle.

i agree with Ebnezer that Smith would be better at RG than Pinter but not sure on Raimann but should try him there to see and also try Fries at RG to see how that would work

[Nickster]

Has Pinter been that bad?  I don’t know much about how he’s been reported to look.  
 

That was the issue for Luck was terrible IOL.  You can usually find a guy to play RG well enough but the Colts struggled there and C and LG with Luck and it is hard with pressure right up the gut.

 

To me, it seems our C should be adequate (maybe not much better than that) and the LG should be great and the RT good to great, so you should be able to get by with an NFL competent RG.

 

its LT that I think is the major concern.  But if Pinter is just not even competent, you’d maybe have to do something drastic.

 

But if our  LT is what I think it is and then you move a probowl type of RT inside  and put a very inexperienced rookie on the other edge, Ryan might retire by game 6 lol.

[ruf]

1 hour ago, Nickster said:

Has Pinter been that bad?  I don’t know much about how he’s been reported to look.  
 

That was the issue for Luck was terrible IOL.  You can usually find a guy to play RG well enough but the Colts struggled there and C and LG with Luck and it is hard with pressure right up the gut.

 

To me, it seems our C should be adequate (maybe not much better than that) and the LG should be great and the RT good to great, so you should be able to get by with an NFL competent RG.

 

its LT that I think is the major concern.  But if Pinter is just not even competent, you’d maybe have to do something drastic.

 

But if our  LT is what I think it is and then you move a probowl type of RT inside  and put a very inexperienced rookie on the other edge, Ryan might retire by game 6 lol.

good points but if the inside is clear qb can step up in the pocket, i do hope Pinter will hold up at RG but i do think he is better at C and will be exposed we will see how the Texan game goes with him but my real concern is with the jags

another problem with the D may be giving up the run i hope Lenoard is ready for the first game

[Nickster]

7 minutes ago, ruf said:

good points but if the inside is clear qb can step up in the pocket, i do hope Pinter will hold up at RG but i do think he is better at C and will be exposed we will see how the Texan game goes with him but my real concern is with the jags

another problem with the D may be giving up the run i hope Lenoard is ready for the first game

I’d be pretty surprised if we struggle much with HOU.

[ruf]

2 hours ago, Nickster said:

I’d be pretty surprised if we struggle much with HOU.

well nothing surprises me anymore

i notice in the 53 topic that at #20 the colts did tinker with Smith at RG, looks like ebenezer was on to something

[Nickster]

36 minutes ago, ruf said:

well nothing surprises me anymore

i notice in the 53 topic that at #20 the colts did tinker with Smith at RG, looks like ebenezer was on to something

It might be but also guys have to be ready to play different positions in case someone goes down.  So that might be evidence that they are thinking about a different starting lineup to move Smith inside but to me it’s more likely that they were doing a few reps in the last day or so of camp at different positions in case injuries or illness.

[ruf]

6 hours ago, Nickster said:

It might be but also guys have to be ready to play different positions in case someone goes down.  So that might be evidence that they are thinking about a different starting lineup to move Smith inside but to me it’s more likely that they were doing a few reps in the last day or so of camp at different positions in case injuries or illness.

i will like to see what some of the people have to say now about my concerns about our starting OL.

I know Kelley is not playing but i think we should maybe try Kelley at C and the other Kelley (if healthy) at RG for the opener