Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

It’s all relative…


Hark

Recommended Posts

Watched Bills/Bengals in a sports bar in Mexico. Lots of Bills Mafia in attendance. As the clock wound down I said to a guy sitting nearby, “just not your day today.” To which he replied, “That’s what happens when you don’t have a QB.” Every Bills fan I talked to said Josh Allen was their problem. Please, oh please, give us Colts fans that problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hark said:

Watched Bills/Bengals in a sports bar in Mexico. Lots of Bills Mafia in attendance. As the clock wound down I said to a guy sitting nearby, “just not your day today.” To which he replied, “That’s what happens when you don’t have a QB.” Every Bills fan I talked to said Josh Allen was their problem. Please, oh please, give us Colts fans that problem.

To some degree they are correct

 Everything runs thru  Josh. If he is not elite, then they are screwed. He is one of the best but he does play off script. It is funny how everyone talks bout  these qbs like Josh but I would take Burrows above anyone and even Mahonnes. Hard to game plan against a qb  who is some what mobile and will pick a D apart from the pocket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem is everything runs through him.  They don’t really have a running game.  The OL is honestly overrated.  And today Allen seemed off.  Lot of missed targets, mostly underthrows.

 

but I would take Josh Allen over any of the qbs we’ve had here during the Reich era.  Bills organization needs to make sure they don’t get content with the success they’ve had and keep building AROUND Allen.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

To some degree they are correct

 Everything runs thru  Josh. If he is not elite, then they are screwed. He is one of the best but he does play off script. It is funny how everyone talks bout  these qbs like Josh but I would take Burrows above anyone and even Mahonnes. Hard to game plan against a qb  who is some what mobile and will pick a D apart from the pocket.

Over Mahomes?  That’s just crazy talk.  Saying such things hurts your credibility.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, smittywerb said:

Problem is everything runs through him.  They don’t really have a running game.  The OL is honestly overrated.  And today Allen seemed off.  Lot of missed targets, mostly underthrows.

 

but I would take Josh Allen over any of the qbs we’ve had here during the Reich era.  Bills organization needs to make sure they don’t get content with the success they’ve had and keep building AROUND Allen.  

They need to get him a run game. Honestly for all the  glory McDermott and the GM get, this year was a head scratcher in not getting a run game. Especially since  McDermot is a defensive coach and for God sakes they play in Buffalo. Rather bizarre  actually.

1 minute ago, rockywoj said:

Over Mahomes?  That’s just crazy talk.  Saying such things hurts your credibility.  ;)

Absolutely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Moosejawcolt said:

They need to get him a run game. Honestly for all the  glory McDermott and the GM get, this year was a head scratcher in not getting a run game. Especially since  McDermot is a defensive coach and for God sakes they play in Buffalo. Rather bizarre  actually.

But what about Hines?  lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

To some degree they are correct

 Everything runs thru  Josh. If he is not elite, then they are screwed. He is one of the best but he does play off script. It is funny how everyone talks bout  these qbs like Josh but I would take Burrows above anyone and even Mahonnes. Hard to game plan against a qb  who is some what mobile and will pick a D apart from the pocket.


News flash:   If ANY quarterback is not elite odds are the team is screwed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


News flash:   If ANY quarterback is not elite odds are the team is screwed. 

My point is that they have nothing to fall back on. Josh is everything to that team . They have no running  back  and a crap D like the Colts. Not all teams have to have their qb play at an elite level every game. They can still win, but Allan is the qb and rb and plays  so off script that you just have to sit back and see if it works out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

My point is that they have nothing to fall back on. Josh is everything to that team . They have no running  back  and a crap D like the Colts. Not all teams have to have their qb play at an elite level every game. They can still win, but Allan is the qb and rb and plays  so off script that you just have to sit back and see if it works out.


They do have decent running backs.  Just not today.   And their defense is considered quite good.  But they weren’t good today.   Props to Cincinnati who out played them all day long today.  
 

But there’s no reason to think Buffalo isn’t going to continue to try to get better.   A better running game, a better defense.  They’ve got a top-5 quarterback.  His window is likely the next 8-10 years.  The Bills will try to move Heaven and Earth to maximize the window they have.  
 

Being highly competitive is not just a thing for players.  Execs and coaches are also highly competitive.   They want to make the most of Allen’s window.   
 

You prefer Burrow?   Fine.   But Allen is a top-5 QB franchise level player and there are about 25 other teams who would kill to have him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, rockywoj said:

Over Mahomes?  That’s just crazy talk.  Saying such things hurts your credibility.  ;)

Burrow is the best qb to come out since Luck and manning. He is better than Allen and trevor lawrence and Id take him over mahomes as well as I believe he is the better passer. Not to mention he has beat mahomes three times straight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allen is constant chaos.  When it works, it can be exciting, but if you want championships, give me someone like Burrow instead.  

 

The Bengals have a big play offense, but in between the big plays Burrow plays smart, Manning/Brady type consistent football. 

 

Sometimes you just gotta move the chains, Josh.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Stephen said:

Burrow is the best qb to come out since Luck and manning. He is better than Allen and trevor lawrence and Id take him over mahomes as well as I believe he is the better passer. Not to mention he has beat mahomes three times straight.

The Bengals beat the Chiefs three straight. Quarterbacks are not on the field at the same time. 

Just saying. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

To some degree they are correct

 Everything runs thru  Josh. If he is not elite, then they are screwed. He is one of the best but he does play off script. It is funny how everyone talks bout  these qbs like Josh but I would take Burrows above anyone and even Mahonnes. Hard to game plan against a qb  who is some what mobile and will pick a D apart from the pocket.

Totally agree on Burrow. They both do everything well. Burrow is absolutely surgical though. The road to the Super Bowl will run through Cincy for a while if they can keep the core of that team together. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, FuedinHatfield said:

Totally agree on Burrow. They both do everything well. Burrow is absolutely surgical though. The road to the Super Bowl will run through Cincy for a while if they can keep the core of that team together. 

 

 

 

 

This is two straight with Burrow. Looks like the Bengals are the team we will need to beat to get back to superbowl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Goatface Killah said:

Its hard to win in the playoffs. The Bills are still a very good team, they just ran into a better team.

 

Yep. Burrow is like Brady, plays like Brady with a little extra mobility that makes him dangerous, doesn't do many things off script. The unsung hero is their DC Lou Anarumo, he needs to seriously get HC consideration. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mitch Connors said:

If the BIlls have a problem it's a heck of a lot easier to fix than the 20+ teams that don't have an elite QB and are trying to fix their squads. What do the Cowboys do with Dak, for example? The Vikings with Cousins? The Colts with....nobody?

The Cowboys are interesting with Dak.  They seem to be really talented on both sides of the ball, and they just don't get it done.  They are married to Dak most likely for at least the next 2 seasons contract wise, but he definitely was a liability yesterday.  They are good.  Dak is good.  The team will have other chances to get it done in the post season, and I don't really think that there is much chance they will go in a new direction, but he hasn't gotten it done so who knows?

 

Cousins is interesting.  They could probably move him after next season if they wanted.  He always seems unwanted but always puts up big numbers.  That D is not good.  Looking at them, they don't seem to have an offense problem  Cousins seems to be unappreciated for some reason by fans.  I don't quite understand why. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Stephen said:

This is two straight with Burrow. Looks like the Bengals are the team we will need to beat to get back to superbowl

 

Bengals and Chiefs are at the top, followed by the Bills. First, we need to win the division and then have a puncher's chance after that. Right now, we are not better than the Jaguars or Titans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Nickster said:

The Cowboys are interesting with Dak.  They seem to be really talented on both sides of the ball, and they just don't get it done.  They are married to Dak most likely for at least the next 2 seasons contract wise, but he definitely was a liability yesterday.  They are good.  Dak is good.  The team will have other chances to get it done in the post season, and I don't really think that there is much chance they will go in a new direction, but he hasn't gotten it done so who knows?

 

Cousins is interesting.  They could probably move him after next season if they wanted.  He always seems unwanted but always puts up big numbers.  That D is not good.  Looking at them, they don't seem to have an offense problem  Cousins seems to be unappreciated for some reason by fans.  I don't quite understand why. 

 

He makes his mistakes early on and then either gets his numbers in garbage time in the past years or in comebacks like this year. That has been a theme. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, chad72 said:

 

He makes his mistakes early on and then either gets his numbers in garbage time in the past years or in comebacks like this year. That has been a theme. 

 

Maybe, but this year his team was +2 in TO ratio.  And the defense was truly dreadful surrendering 388 ypg.  I thought he played pretty well last week in the playoff game. 

 

but with that dude it's always kinda like a bowl of ice cream that is just OK.  It's ice cream.  It's good.  But it just isn't quite the thing you were looking for.  Should they move on?  They might be able to after next season, but it's quite a risk.  

 

I personally haven't ever really believed in Dak or Kirk, but boy they'd both look good in Colts Blue right now compared to what we've had. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

Maybe, but this year his team was +2 in TO ratio.  And the defense was truly dreadful surrendering 388 ypg.  I thought he played pretty well last week in the playoff game. 

 

but with that dude it's always kinda like a bowl of ice cream that is just OK.  It's ice cream.  It's good.  But it just isn't quite the thing you were looking for.  Should they move on?  They might be able to after next season, but it's quite a risk.  

 

I personally haven't ever really believed in Dak or Kirk, but boy they'd both look good in Colts Blue right now compared to what we've had. 

 

Yeah, defense wins championships. Can't expect to score 30 points every playoff game to win games. You have to be able to win the low 20s and sub-20s games in the playoffs, whether at home or on the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all the people on here ripping Ballard all year about having a "running back" because it is not a "premium" position, I find it odd that now Buffaloes problem is they don't have a "running game". What??? You mean they don't have a running back, a "non premium position"? Really!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Two_pound said:

For all the people on here ripping Ballard all year about having a "running back" because it is not a "premium" position, I find it odd that now Buffaloes problem is they don't have a "running game". What??? You mean they don't have a running back, a "non premium position"? Really!

 

Balance is the name of the game. Brady's Patriots kept Mahomes on the bench in the 2018 AFCCG with their run game and timely 3rd down passing to move the chains. Now, Burrow is doing the same to other teams, that is why he is the closest to Brady, IMO, in playing style with extra mobility to get some yards with his feet. The name of the game is balance and keeping drives alive. It does wonders to how fresh your D is too. 

 

The Bills are a quick strike offense, with routes 20-30 yards down the field, they did not do a good job scheming the underneath as well. The short passing game is a good substitute for the run game, IF you execute it well, the Patriots have shown it so many years with deaths by a thousand paper cuts offense, that works in the playoffs and is the big reason Tom Brady won so many SBs. That is also the reason they did not win a SB with Randy Moss, because those routes take long striders like him and others time to form and against playoff DLs, it is hard to get that time like it showed vs the Giants. Frank Reich had the right idea, and only Rivers could execute it well after Luck, but the OL and QB regression took things south.

 

That is also why the Chiefs went away from Tyreek Hill and started spreading it around more, which is why they will play the Bengals better this time, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree you need balance, which is why you need a running back, he makes the job of the qb so much easier. Remember how much credit Marshal Faulk got for making Peyton's job a lot easier in '98, Taylor will do the same for our rookie next year(hopefully it will be Stroud).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Two_pound said:

For all the people on here ripping Ballard all year about having a "running back" because it is not a "premium" position, I find it odd that now Buffaloes problem is they don't have a "running game". What??? You mean they don't have a running back, a "non premium position"? Really!

 

 I don't believe you are well informed. I know they have at least one good RB.
It is said they have a weak OL. How good of an OL coach do they have?
 They can have our OL coach. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 I don't believe you are well informed. I know they have at least one good RB.
It is said they have a weak OL. How good of an OL coach do they have?
 They can have our OL coach. 

 

Yep. James Cook and Devin Singletary are their RBs, they had 5 and 6 carries each with Josh Allen rushing 8 times. They had been rushing well coming into the playoffs, they needed to keep the balance and they did not, IMO. Let Allen rip or run only goes so far. Ken Dorsey, their OC, is not Brian Daboll, and his stock just went waaaayyyyy down in HC interviews. That is why I want HC candidates that have done it across teams for a few years. Mike Kafka fits the bill. Shane Steichen and Brian Callahan both have better QBs, better OLs, better WRs with the Eagles and Bengals respectively, and Mike Kafka has Daniel Jones and Barkley, lol. :)  That is why I also like the fact that Ben Johnson went back to the Lions, we can see how well he does 2 years in a row.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comparing Singletary to Taylor. Singletary played 16 games and had 819 yards on 177 carries. Taylor had 11 games and 861 yards on 192 carries. Now the big difference is I seriously doubt Singletary faced many 8 man fronts let alone 9.  I will stick with Taylor and get a qb that defenses have to respect and an offense that will let receivers stretch the field. Buffaloes top three receivers, Diggs, Davis, and Shakir are ahead of the Colts top 3(Diggs makes a big difference) but we need a qb who can get the ball downfield so defenses stop stacking the box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Two_pound said:

Comparing Singletary to Taylor. Singletary played 16 games and had 819 yards on 177 carries. Taylor had 11 games and 861 yards on 192 carries. Now the big difference is I seriously doubt Singletary faced many 8 man fronts let alone 9.  I will stick with Taylor and get a qb that defenses have to respect and an offense that will let receivers stretch the field. Buffaloes top three receivers, Diggs, Davis, and Shakir are ahead of the Colts top 3(Diggs makes a big difference) but we need a qb who can get the ball downfield so defenses stop stacking the box.

 

Even if it is 20 yards down the field consistently on all sides with pinpoint accuracy and zip, that will force Ds to back off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • The Pacers by winning last night gives them their 11th appearance in the Final 8 as an NBA franchise since the league went to 16 teams in 1984 making the playoffs. 1994, 1995, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2024.   -Eastern Conference Finals appearances = 1994, 1995, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2004, 2013, 2014. (8)   -NBA Finals appearances = 2000. (1)   -No NBA Championships but still a very good franchise looking at those numbers. The year the Pacers won the East (2000), they had to face Shaq, Kobe, and Phil otherwise we win it all that season and Reggie has his ring.    -I will go by since 1984 but here is my all-time Pacers team since 1984: PG - TY Haliburton SG - Reggie Miller SF - Paul George PF - Myles Turner (I have Turner here/Rik is my Center. C - Rik Smits 6th Man - David West   My HeadCoach is Larry Bird. From 1998-2000 he made the Conference Finals in all 3 seasons he coached and the Finals in 2000.
    • I could see Slovis challenging Ehlinger for QB3. He's more athletic than Ehlinger and showed flashes of a potential 1st round QB prospect as a freshman at USC. Some stability and a chance to reset might be exactly what he needs. His upside is WAY higher than Ehlinger's and we've already seen him do it. It's just a matter of if he can get back to that level of play.
    • I don't understand this, so please explain.     This is how I see it based upon what we know.   By accounts, Purdy has played better than Jimmy G.  If you believe the training camp stories where the players were telling media and the coaches that Purdy was the real deal when he got a chance to play in TC, Purdy was good right away and need little actual development by NFL coaches.   If Lynch knew this would happen, why did he wait until the very last pick of the drat to select Purdy?  To say it wasn't luck, but rather skill and knowledge, you'd have to believe that...going into the draft... Lynch knew Purdy would be good (or else why pick him), and also knew that not one other team thought he would be good, so he knew he could just wait until pick 250..    He knew the other GMs thought Purdy would not even be even good right away, but not even a good enough prospect to take a flyer on him and snipe him at pick 249?  Sure, he benefits from Shanahan's system, but my goodness, his success is not THAT system dependent that some team would not have selected him in round 4, 5, 6, 7. with all of the comp picks added on as merely a prospect.  They all ignored Purdy.      How do folks hold the GM player evaluation process in such high regard when we all know that GMs miss.  Both with picking busts and missing good players.  Why is pointing that out a negative?  We all know it.  And why does Ballard deserve to be shielded from it?
    • Maybe he needs lessons in how to manage his image and draft stock as the more he does this type of stuff, he could drop out of the Top 5 that his Dad feels he would go at. With 6 teams taking QBs this year, and 3 last year, in Round 1, the demand won't be as high and the supply will still be good enough. If his OL doesn't protect him well like during their losing streak, is he going to throw his OL under the bus next? I rarely see Deion or Shedeur taking ownership of their on the field issues or have the humility to say "it was my fault". They talk like they are in denial that a team could shellack them or they always lost to a team that they could have beat, that is the impression that I get, and it gets old.
    • No, why would I notice something like that?     No.  He may have said that, but that isn't the video I'm talking about.  There is a video of him in the draft room exactly at pick 53, looking at his draft board (we see his face so the board is unseen behind the camera)  looks around the room talking to the staff, and finally says, "lets go with the wide out".  Nothing about that suggests that he had that specific debate between those two players AP and JW, ahead of time to where it was a clear decision to take AP over JW the day before the draft.  Maybe you never saw that video.   Yes, everybody has the same info on the players.  All players are ranked as the top 250 prospects on all 32 teams' prospect board within a variance of about 5% throughout the ranking.  The difference is in how teams use the info that forms their actual draft boards.  So when Ballard says...and he just did in this presser...".Nobody has any idea how this stuff will play out"....he's talking about how no one GM (meaning himself) knows how all 31 GM are going to use the information.  He has absolutely no working knowledge that tells him a player isn't going to be sniped ahead of him, (See ATL trying to trade up for Latu) That's why he. and other GMs, have a GROUP of players they are comfortable taking at a certain slot.  It may work out to  where the highest ranked player within that group is still available, but that's not the same thing as "targeting that player"    Trading UP is the proof that a GMs targets a specific player, like CAR just did with Brooks at 46, Ballard previously did with JT at 41, and Grigsy did with TY at the end of round 2, etc.  There are examples all over the NFL where teams trade up to get players they targeted, but standing pat or trading down is not how they "target" a specific player.  That's where they settle for one of a group of players that they think will be there when they pick.  In round 1, they can better predict if a player will come to them, but not so much in round 2, 3, 4, etc.  The margin of error in their assessment of what other teams with do is just too big.  No, there is no proof that Ballard targets a mid round player by waiting for him...or trading down for him.  Its more likely that he picks the best player out of the group of players he will settle for.     You probably should adjust your understanding of the concept of GMs "targeting players" to what it actually is.  Its not easy, because their are a lot of paid talking heads in the media using the term wrongly, IMO.   Do you think teams wanting a top 10 LT (and which team would not even shuffle their oline or cap to accommodate) would pass on him through pick 77 because he was 3 years older than the typical college graduate, when LTs have careers that typically span 10 years or more?  It makes no sense that they would be hung up on that three years.   Before your time, a truly great GM, Bill Polian, took LB Rob Morris at pick 26 because he was a player who was thought to be able to start immediately and because it was a position of need.  At the first round presser, BP call RM, "overaged", because he was 24 or 5 coming off his mission from BYU.  Overaged by three years, and still took him in the first round because he "strongly thought" he was a player who could step in and fill a position of need right away.  He didn't wait until the third round because of concern about how old he would be years down the road when he had to think about a second contract.  So, yes, when teams think a player won't be able to step in and play well right away, they slide to the mid rounds.  Those are called "developmental players".   That was the Luck/Griffin year...and yes, pundits all over the place had him ranked as a third rounder.  Seems SEA had him ranked no differently than others on their draft board.    Again, the prospects are ranked similarly.  Who teams want to draft out of a grouping is obviously different.    The point being made by me...and Ballard...is that no GM knows what the other 31 GMs will do at any given moment....they don't know the other teams' draft boards.   But they all know the traits of the players and have similar ideas about what kind of prospect they will be, and whether or not they can play right away or take a season or two to earn a starting job.  That part of the evaluation is all the same amongst 32 teams, IMO.   Because they don't know what other teams will do, and don't know other teams draft boards is why why Frank was high fiving.  There was excitement  in getting the players they wanted, in that no other team took them or sniped them.  If they knew what other GMs were going to do, they would have known they would have gotten those players and it would be non suspenseful.    But. its possible that Ballard was way off in how he ranked his prospects compared to other teams back then, and everybody was excited when they didn't have to be.     And I'm not going to believe for a moment, that Ballard lets himself be some dullard blank canvas between the ears that won't make a pick until his HC draws him a picture of who to pick.  Especially on the defense and in every round.  Especially when he deliberates with only himself and then he's the one telling the others in the room "lets go with the wide out".  Sorry, not buying it.   Yes, that difference is what dictates their draft boards.  But, they all have the same knowledge of what the different player traits are.  They know which ones are fast, slow, twitchy, good balance, arm length, etc.  As the Raimann example, they all evaluate him as being a successful NFL LT.  His experience at a small school, weight (like Freeland), years as an olineman when he was a former TE, all weigh into their conclusion about how long they think it would take him to be a starter.  They all saw his traits and experience as not being worthy of a pick higher than 77, and they misjudged how quickly he learned the NFL game.    Same with Mathis, Saturday, Brady, Purdy, etc... all the teams know what these players traits are, and they all feed them through the same evaluation process, and that process misses players from time to time.  Contrast that thought with what I've been reading, that Ballard knew Raimann was good and dropped him only because of age, which means that better GMs like Polian, NE, and Lynch must have known those players would be what they would be....and knew that no other team figured it out so they waited.  To me, that makes no sense.  IMO, they all got lucky relative to how well they thought each player would play when they drafted them.   That's great.  And I sincerely hope that you've enjoyed your career.     But, I'm the kind of person that doesn't care about credentials.  I judge the content for what it says.   Thanks for staying calm.  
  • Members

    • richard pallo

      richard pallo 9,080

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Reboot

      Reboot 46

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • 2006Coltsbestever

      2006Coltsbestever 41,576

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • IndyD4U

      IndyD4U 1,435

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Lifetime Colt

      Lifetime Colt 176

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Kc77

      Kc77 3

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Pelt

      Pelt 1,224

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • chad72

      chad72 18,315

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • w87r

      w87r 14,247

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ChuggaBeer

      ChuggaBeer 1,783

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...