Convince me that I'm wrong about the current state of the Colts vs. the AFC elite

[Goatface Killah]

Just now, crazycolt1 said:

Big long paragraphs that just say you are unhappy with the way things have been going.  

And compare us to the best teams in football so you can make us look bad.

 

Like how many teams have skill players as good as the 49ers? The Bengals? Who else?

 

This honestly makes no logical sense. 

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, Goatface Killah said:

And compare us to the best teams in football so you can make us look bad.

 

Like how many teams have skill players as good as the 49ers? The Bengals? Who else?

 

This honestly makes no logical sense. 

Personally I don't need to read a novel to tell me we need a franchise QB and a new coach.  

[Goatface Killah]

5 minutes ago, Indeee said:

Really? Ha!! I think you know exactly what I'm saying and are always just going to be the antagonist where I'm concerned.

 

But in case your genuine in your lack of understanding, it means that until your theory of needing just a better QB after already having 2 future HOFers, 2 rookies, 1 Super Bowl winner, and a bunch of other knuckleheads behind center over the past 6 years, is proven otherwise to what it normally turns out to be, my theory is always going to be correct. That it's not just about the QB or coaching. Yes, QB and Coaching are important, but so is the surrounding talent and this team's surrounding talent is mediocre.

No its not. Thats called a false equivilency. 

 

If we dont find a QB, that doesnt mean the talent was automatically mediocre because they couldnt be on par with Jamarr Chase and Tee Higgins who get to play with the best QB in football. 

 

Thats just not true. 

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

Personally I don't need to read a novel to tell me we need a franchise QB and a new coach.  

But remember, until we do, Michael Pittman sucks.

[crazycolt1]

Two season ago we lead the league in pro bowl players. Those players just didn't all of a sudden lose their talent.  

[Goatface Killah]

5 minutes ago, Indeee said:

Really? Ha!! I think you know exactly what I'm saying and are always just going to be the antagonist where I'm concerned.

 

But in case your genuine in your lack of understanding, it means that until your theory of needing just a better QB after already having 2 future HOFers, 2 rookies, 1 Super Bowl winner, and a bunch of other knuckleheads behind center over the past 6 years, is proven otherwise to what it normally turns out to be, my theory is always going to be correct. That it's not just about the QB or coaching. Yes, QB and Coaching are important, but so is the surrounding talent and this team's surrounding talent is mediocre.

Read your first paragraph again and dumb it down for me then.

 

How does Brock Purdy having success with the 49ers, mean that our guys should be able to perform regardless of the poor QB play? 

 

The existence of Brock Purdy 2,300 miles away couldnt possibly be more irrelevant to our QB situation.

[Jackie Daytona]

2 hours ago, Indeee said:

Let's have an honest, open-minded discussion here:

 

My take.

 

While most are excited with anticipation of our new HC/Staff and pondering over which QB would best fit our team, I can't help but have a much wider lens. 

 

When I think of the next decade in the AFC, I'm not seeing where the Colts can actually make a splash at all with this current roster, especially offensively. Yes, this team needs a QB, at least a stable one in the worst way but this offense from the skill positions is putrid. It's nowhere close to being elite. In fact, I would say that this year's draft should be entirely offense for the first 4-5 rounds and I'm not talking about drafting O-line or RB. 

 

Outside of JT, who on this offense scares defenses? I mean look at our competition.

 

Bengals: Burrow, Chase, Higgins, Boyd, Mixon, and Hurst.

 

Chiefs: Mahomes, Kelce, Mckinnon, Pacheo, Toney, Schuster, and Scantling/Hardman.

 

Bills: Allen, Diggs, Davis, McKensie, Knox, and Singletary.

 

Jags: Lawrence, Ridley, Kirk, Ettiene, Jones, and Engram.

 

Chargers: Herbert, Allen, Williams, Eckler, Palmer, and Everette. 

 

Dolphins: Tua, Waddle, Hill, Mostert, and Geseki. 

 

That is a gauntlet, and the Dolphins, Bills, and Chiefs are the least stacked IMHO, albeit still highly dangerous. 

 

Is Pittman, Campbell, and Pierce anywhere near what our competition already has in place at WR? I mean these guys struggle to gain separation most days. There are some on here actually suggesting that Pittman be traded. Who knows? It might just happen. Ballard himself basically recently eluded that Pittman is not a number one, something all of us should have known when he was drafted, heck i for one said it, and Pierce is terrible. Pierce is a WR3, if. 

 

Does anyone on here think Jelani Woods is a "Move" tight end? Meaning, is Jelani in the mold from a route running/quickness standpoint as Engram or Kelce or Everette? If he is, he isn't/hasn't been used that way and wouldn't most agree that if a player shows that type of skill in a practice standpoint that the team would try to utilize that in game? 

 

I think sometimes we as fans get caught up in what I call "fool's gold football".  We are so hopeful and forgiving that we stop using our eyes and instead, see with our minds. We start playing the what if game that's always predicated on what our minds are seeing in terms of hoping what our team can be. We lose sight of what it actually is.  Unfortunately, this has happened to a lot of us on this forum for the past few years and here we are. Most times I get crucified on here but I'm a realist. 

 

When Peyton was here, other than the Chargers always having our number, it was just the Patriots we had to worry about normally. Not now. Now there is at least 6 teams, and the Steelers are close to entering that mix with Pickett, Harris, Pickens, Johnson, and Friermuth.

 

I'm sorry, but this Colts team is years away from entering that gauntlet with this current offensive roster. Can the Colts win a game here and there, sure, but this team is nowhere near competing for a SB anytime soon. Again, this about winning Super Bowls, and we can't even win the division. 

 

Yes, we need a stable QB, however without a formidable skill tree around that QB, we are just spinning wheels. Where is that Skill tree going to come from? 

 

This team is in trouble, and it will take at least 3-4 more years to get somewhat close without an awful lot of luck. Ballard built this team for the 80's style of play and unfortunately it might have set us back that long. 

 

Convince me I'm wrong. Seriously. I'm trying to make waves here; the waters are already extremely choppy. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's pretty easy to "convince you" you're wrong.  

 

The NFL is structured so that with good managerial decisions, and a small bit of luck, ANY team in the league has a completely viable path to the SB every five years or less.

 

There.

[Indeee]

1 minute ago, Goatface Killah said:

Read your first paragraph again and dumb it down for me then.

 

How does Brock Purdy having success with the 49ers, mean that our guys should be able to perform regardless of the poor QB play? 

 

The existence of Brock Purdy 2,300 miles away couldnt possibly be more irrelevant to our QB situation.

The notion that our skill players have underperformed based on not being able to have constant chemistry with a stable QB, great QB play. How could they when all we do is change the QB every season, or in this year's case, every 4 to 5 games. 

 

Purdy walks into that situation with zero chemistry with the niners skill players, other than practice, and other than a couple hiccups here and there, the niners haven't skipped a beat because they have McCaffery, Ayuuk (WR1a, high 2), Samuel(WR1), and Kittle(TE1). All of whom were drafted except McCaffery(RB1). 

 

We drafted JT(RB1), Pittman(WR2), Woods(TE2b), Pierce(WR3). Verdict still out on Woods and Pierce, however I don't see anything that special in those guys, especially Pierce. 

 

Anyways, would you not agree that the niners have done a better job at drafting skill talent than the Colts? 

 

If the answer is yes, then it's not about the QB play primarily. meaning that whatever QB you throw in here is not going to have that much success if the talent around them is subpar. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[crazycolt1]

Over thinking this stuff is not mentally healthy. Fandom makes no sense.  

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, Indeee said:

The notion that our skill players have underperformed based on not being able to have constant chemistry with a stable QB, great QB play. How could they when all we do is change the QB every season, or in this year's case, every 4 to 5 games. 

 

Purdy walks into that situation with zero chemistry with the niners skill players, other than practice, and other than a couple hiccups here and there, the niners haven't skipped a beat because they have McCaffery, Ayuuk (WR1a, high 2), Samuel(WR1), and Kittle(TE1). All of whom were drafted except McCaffery(RB1). 

 

We drafted JT(RB1), Pittman(WR2), Woods(TE2b), Pierce(WR3). Verdict still out on Woods and Pierce, however I don't see anything that special in those guys, especially Pierce. 

 

Anyways, would you not agree that the niners have done a better job at drafting skill talent than the Colts? 

 

If the answer is yes, then it's not about the QB play primarily. meaning that whatever QB you throw in here is not going to have that much success if the talent around them is subpar. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sounds like you need to become a 49ers fan to me. 

[Indeee]

2 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Sounds like you need to become a 49ers fan to me. 

No, it seems like Ballard should be a niners fan. Maybe that way he'd understand how to draft talented football players from the SKILL position side 

[Goatface Killah]

7 minutes ago, Indeee said:

The notion that our skill players have underperformed based on not being able to have constant chemistry with a stable QB, great QB play. How could they when all we do is change the QB every season, or in this year's case, every 4 to 5 games. 

 

Purdy walks into that situation with zero chemistry with the niners skill players, other than practice, and other than a couple hiccups here and there, the niners haven't skipped a beat because they have McCaffery, Ayuuk (WR1a, high 2), Samuel(WR1), and Kittle(TE1). All of whom were drafted except McCaffery(RB1). 

 

We drafted JT(RB1), Pittman(WR2), Woods(TE2b), Pierce(WR3). Verdict still out on Woods and Pierce, however I don't see anything that special in those guys, especially Pierce. 

 

Anyways, would you not agree that the niners have done a better job at drafting skill talent than the Colts? 

 

If the answer is yes, then it's not about the QB play primarily. meaning that whatever QB you throw in here is not going to have that much success if the talent around them is subpar. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think the 49ers have been better than everyone else at drafting skill players. Not sure why thats an indictment of our entire group of skill players, but whatever.

 

And please stop telling me what my answers mean. 

 

Ok let me ask you this. Why didnt these skill players elevate Trey Lance, who was atrocious? Lance had over a year to build chemistry with them. They are so talented. So why did he still look like chicken poo?

 

 

[Indeee]

4 minutes ago, Goatface Killah said:

I think the 49ers have been better than everyone else at drafting skill players. Not sure why thats an indictment of our entire group of skill players, but whatever.

 

And please stop telling me what my answers mean. 

 

Ok let me ask you this. Why didnt these skill players elevate Trey Lance, who was atrocious? Lance had over a year to build chemistry with them. They are so talented. So why did he still look like chicken poo?

 

 

I'm not entirely sure but if my memory serves me correctly, Samuel and Kittle were hurt during a good amount of that time as well as Mitchell. I don't follow the niners that close enough to know all of why Lance wasn't that successful if I'm being honest.

 

 

[crazycolt1]

19 minutes ago, Indeee said:

No, it seems like Ballard should be a niners fan. Maybe that way he'd understand how to draft talented football players from the SKILL position side 

It's hard to convince you when your narrative is to rag on Ballard non stop.

[Goatface Killah]

15 minutes ago, Indeee said:

I'm not entirely sure but if my memory serves me correctly, Samuel and Kittle were hurt during a good amount of that time as well as Mitchell. I don't follow the niners that close enough to know all of why Lance wasn't that successful if I'm being honest.

 

 

So you dont follow them close enough to know about Lance?

 

So why do you act like you know so much about the rest of their team?

 

I watch the 49ers a lot. They are a very solid team top to bottom and are extremely well coached. I think their defense is way better than their offense personally. But they are good on both sides of the ball which is probably the real reason they are so successful.

 

I believe they were 6th in total offense this year, right behind the offensive juggernaut known as the mighty Detroit Lions with their deep and impressive collection of skill players.

 

Qb play and coaching is probably 75% of it.

 

 

[IinD]

Jim and company wanted to stay a top team without bottoming out.

 

Unfortunately in the NFL in order to get good you've got to bottom out a couple/few seasons to get those top players in. Literally all the good playoff teams were dumpster fires for years. Losing has finally paid off for them.

 

I'd say it's an easy 3 years until we're legit contenders. Need to hit on this draft and we're probably looking at another top 10 pick next year. If we hit on playmakers on the next 2 drafts we'll be a good team in year 3.

 

Fan base will be on suicide watch for the next 2 years though.

[shasta519]

2 hours ago, Indeee said:

Let's have an honest, open-minded discussion here:

 

My take.

 

While most are excited with anticipation of our new HC/Staff and pondering over which QB would best fit our team, I can't help but have a much wider lens. 

 

When I think of the next decade in the AFC, I'm not seeing where the Colts can actually make a splash at all with this current roster, especially offensively. Yes, this team needs a QB, at least a stable one in the worst way but this offense from the skill positions is putrid. It's nowhere close to being elite. In fact, I would say that this year's draft should be entirely offense for the first 4-5 rounds and I'm not talking about drafting O-line or RB. 

 

Outside of JT, who on this offense scares defenses? I mean look at our competition.

 

Bengals: Burrow, Chase, Higgins, Boyd, Mixon, and Hurst.

 

Chiefs: Mahomes, Kelce, Mckinnon, Pacheo, Toney, Schuster, and Scantling/Hardman.

 

Bills: Allen, Diggs, Davis, McKensie, Knox, and Singletary.

 

Jags: Lawrence, Ridley, Kirk, Ettiene, Jones, and Engram.

 

Chargers: Herbert, Allen, Williams, Eckler, Palmer, and Everette. 

 

Dolphins: Tua, Waddle, Hill, Mostert, and Geseki. 

 

That is a gauntlet, and the Dolphins, Bills, and Chiefs are the least stacked IMHO, albeit still highly dangerous. 

 

Is Pittman, Campbell, and Pierce anywhere near what our competition already has in place at WR? I mean these guys struggle to gain separation most days. There are some on here actually suggesting that Pittman be traded. Who knows? It might just happen. Ballard himself basically recently eluded that Pittman is not a number one, something all of us should have known when he was drafted, heck i for one said it, and Pierce is terrible. Pierce is a WR3, if. 

 

Does anyone on here think Jelani Woods is a "Move" tight end? Meaning, is Jelani in the mold from a route running/quickness standpoint as Engram or Kelce or Everette? If he is, he isn't/hasn't been used that way and wouldn't most agree that if a player shows that type of skill in a practice standpoint that the team would try to utilize that in game? 

 

I think sometimes we as fans get caught up in what I call "fool's gold football".  We are so hopeful and forgiving that we stop using our eyes and instead, see with our minds. We start playing the what if game that's always predicated on what our minds are seeing in terms of hoping what our team can be. We lose sight of what it actually is.  Unfortunately, this has happened to a lot of us on this forum for the past few years and here we are. Most times I get crucified on here but I'm a realist. 

 

When Peyton was here, other than the Chargers always having our number, it was just the Patriots we had to worry about normally. Not now. Now there is at least 6 teams, and the Steelers are close to entering that mix with Pickett, Harris, Pickens, Johnson, and Friermuth.

 

I'm sorry, but this Colts team is years away from entering that gauntlet with this current offensive roster. Can the Colts win a game here and there, sure, but this team is nowhere near competing for a SB anytime soon. Again, this about winning Super Bowls, and we can't even win the division. 

 

Yes, we need a stable QB, however without a formidable skill tree around that QB, we are just spinning wheels. Where is that Skill tree going to come from? 

 

This team is in trouble, and it will take at least 3-4 more years to get somewhat close without an awful lot of luck. Ballard built this team for the 80's style of play and unfortunately it might have set us back that long. 

 

Convince me I'm wrong. Seriously. I'm trying to make waves here; the waters are already extremely choppy. 

 

I don't think anything should take 3-4 years in the NFL, especially if you get a good young QB. But I do think the Colts are probably two years away from being able to compete in the AFC. That's why I am actually in favor of potentially reshaping the roster, shedding some contracts and getting future draft capital this offseason...if they did choose to go that route.

 

As for where this offense stands, I think this team will need to add to the WR room in a big way. The trio of Pittman, Pierce and PC is not the worst in the NFL, but it's also not on the level of teams that were playing this past weekend. Perhaps Woods emerges as one of those top-tier weapons though. But that's a lofty expectation.

 

I see the Colts as a team that has a lot of solid players, but not a lot of game-changers. How that happened is something that has been debated a lot here. But it doesn't mean it won't change in the future.

 

[smittywerb]

To be honest, we’re a good qb, OC, and HC away from being a perennial playoff team.  We’re a DE (maybe 2), LT, maybe a pass catching TE (if woods doesn’t pan out) and alpha WR from being considered good or elite.  Like I said in the other thread, this is probably the best top 5 draft pick team in the history of the draft as far as talent on the roster.  I wholeheartedly believe if we had better qb play last year, we’d be in the playoffs.

[shasta519]

34 minutes ago, Goatface Killah said:

I think the 49ers have been better than everyone else at drafting skill players. Not sure why thats an indictment of our entire group of skill players, but whatever.

 

And please stop telling me what my answers mean. 

 

Ok let me ask you this. Why didnt these skill players elevate Trey Lance, who was atrocious? Lance had over a year to build chemistry with them. They are so talented. So why did he still look like chicken poo?

 

 

 

Lance played sparingly as a rookie at age 21 and put up solid stats.

 

Then he started Week 1 this year in a swirling storm and then got hurt early in Week 2 and went on IR.

 

I think it's a bit harsh to say he was atrocious. We really have no idea how this season would have played out if he didn't get hurt. Maybe he would have been Zach Wilson or maybe he would have made a leap like Lawrence did (and Hurts did the year before).

 

I would gladly take Lance off their hands on the cheap. He's only going to be 23. And if he can stay healthy, I like his chances as much as any rookie in this draft. But injuries are unpredictable. Still, I doubt SF would have any problem trading him for more than Indy would give up (obviously they aren't going to give up the #4 pick).

[Goatface Killah]

3 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Lance played sparingly as a rookie at age 21 and put up solid stats.

 

Then he started Week 1 this year in a swirling storm and then got hurt early in Week 2 and went on IR.

 

I think it's a bit harsh to say he was atrocious. We really have no idea how this season would have played out if he didn't get hurt. Maybe he would have been Zach Wilson or maybe he would have made a leap like Lawrence did (and Hurts did the year before).

 

I would gladly take Lance off their hands on the cheap. He's only going to be 23. And if he can stay healthy, I like his chances as much as any rookie in this draft. But injuries are unpredictable. Still, I doubt SF would have any problem trading him for more than Indy would give up (obviously they aren't going to give up the #4 pick).

He has completed 54% of his passes.

 

I think thats atrocious.

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, Jackie Daytona said:

It's pretty easy to "convince you" you're wrong.  

 

The NFL is structured so that with good managerial decisions, and a small bit of luck, ANY team in the league has a completely viable path to the SB every five years or less.

 

There.

 

I don't know about ANY team having a "completely viable" path. In the past 5 years, there have only been 10 different teams in the AFCCG and NFCCG, out of a possible 20 teams that could have been there.

 

But there is a theme...and that has been passing offense and QB. If you can get that right (with a little bit of luck), that path opens up significantly. Although now the AFC is loaded with teams just like that. 

 

 

 

[shasta519]

9 minutes ago, Goatface Killah said:

He has completed 54% of his passes.

 

I think thats atrocious.

 

It's bad. But so did Luck in his rookie season. Except Luck did it over 627 PAs.

 

Lance has only attempted 102 passes in his career, which is a very small sample size. And 1/3 of that sample size was a really bad weather game in CHI this year.

 

Not saying he's Luck or anything, but I think there is tremendous upside there. And to your point about SF being better at evaluating offensive talent...I just find it hard to believe they just missed that bad. I think it's more likely we just don't know yet. 

[chad72]

We have heard this story before. The OP wants to strongly vent and in the process, floats a theory they strongly believe in, hoping others would bite or believe, even if a lot of it can sound unreasonable. The others push back, some in subtle ways and some strongly. OP can't handle it, or agree to disagree, has to retort to every retort, so the topic goes to pages with every third or fourth post from the OP, and eventually getting personal. DEJA VU!!! 

 

[Goatface Killah]

11 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

It's bad. But so did Luck in his rookie season. Except Luck did it over 627 PAs.

 

Lance has only attempted 102 passes in his career, which is a very small sample size. And 1/3 of that sample size was a really bad weather game in CHI this year.

 

Not saying he's Luck or anything, but I think there is tremendous upside there. And to your point about SF being better at evaluating offensive talent...I just find it hard to believe they just missed that bad. I think it's more likely we just don't know yet. 

I dont even think thats comparable. Luck was a great player from day 1 and ran a full offense.

 

They have training wheels on Lance, he is on a stacked team, and he still cant be a productive QB.

 

 

[Stephen]

2 hours ago, Indeee said:

The notion that our skill players have underperformed based on not being able to have constant chemistry with a stable QB, great QB play. How could they when all we do is change the QB every season, or in this year's case, every 4 to 5 games. 

 

Purdy walks into that situation with zero chemistry with the niners skill players, other than practice, and other than a couple hiccups here and there, the niners haven't skipped a beat because they have McCaffery, Ayuuk (WR1a, high 2), Samuel(WR1), and Kittle(TE1). All of whom were drafted except McCaffery(RB1). 

 

We drafted JT(RB1), Pittman(WR2), Woods(TE2b), Pierce(WR3). Verdict still out on Woods and Pierce, however I don't see anything that special in those guys, especially Pierce. 

 

Anyways, would you not agree that the niners have done a better job at drafting skill talent than the Colts? 

 

If the answer is yes, then it's not about the QB play primarily. meaning that whatever QB you throw in here is not going to have that much success if the talent around them is subpar. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pierce will be elite with the right qb and woods was barely used along with cox. The coaching staff failed to get the ball in our best playmakers hands time and time again

[OLD FAN MAN]

4 hours ago, Indeee said:

Let's have an honest, open-minded discussion here:

 

My take.

 

While most are excited with anticipation of our new HC/Staff and pondering over which QB would best fit our team, I can't help but have a much wider lens. 

 

When I think of the next decade in the AFC, I'm not seeing where the Colts can actually make a splash at all with this current roster, especially offensively. Yes, this team needs a QB, at least a stable one in the worst way but this offense from the skill positions is putrid. It's nowhere close to being elite. In fact, I would say that this year's draft should be entirely offense for the first 4-5 rounds and I'm not talking about drafting O-line or RB. 

 

Outside of JT, who on this offense scares defenses? I mean look at our competition.

 

Bengals: Burrow, Chase, Higgins, Boyd, Mixon, and Hurst.

 

Chiefs: Mahomes, Kelce, Mckinnon, Pacheo, Toney, Schuster, and Scantling/Hardman.

 

Bills: Allen, Diggs, Davis, McKensie, Knox, and Singletary.

 

Jags: Lawrence, Ridley, Kirk, Ettiene, Jones, and Engram.

 

Chargers: Herbert, Allen, Williams, Eckler, Palmer, and Everette. 

 

Dolphins: Tua, Waddle, Hill, Mostert, and Geseki. 

 

That is a gauntlet, and the Dolphins, Bills, and Chiefs are the least stacked IMHO, albeit still highly dangerous. 

 

Is Pittman, Campbell, and Pierce anywhere near what our competition already has in place at WR? I mean these guys struggle to gain separation most days. There are some on here actually suggesting that Pittman be traded. Who knows? It might just happen. Ballard himself basically recently eluded that Pittman is not a number one, something all of us should have known when he was drafted, heck i for one said it, and Pierce is terrible. Pierce is a WR3, if. 

 

Does anyone on here think Jelani Woods is a "Move" tight end? Meaning, is Jelani in the mold from a route running/quickness standpoint as Engram or Kelce or Everette? If he is, he isn't/hasn't been used that way and wouldn't most agree that if a player shows that type of skill in a practice standpoint that the team would try to utilize that in game? 

 

I think sometimes we as fans get caught up in what I call "fool's gold football".  We are so hopeful and forgiving that we stop using our eyes and instead, see with our minds. We start playing the what if game that's always predicated on what our minds are seeing in terms of hoping what our team can be. We lose sight of what it actually is.  Unfortunately, this has happened to a lot of us on this forum for the past few years and here we are. Most times I get crucified on here but I'm a realist. 

 

When Peyton was here, other than the Chargers always having our number, it was just the Patriots we had to worry about normally. Not now. Now there is at least 6 teams, and the Steelers are close to entering that mix with Pickett, Harris, Pickens, Johnson, and Friermuth.

 

I'm sorry, but this Colts team is years away from entering that gauntlet with this current offensive roster. Can the Colts win a game here and there, sure, but this team is nowhere near competing for a SB anytime soon. Again, this about winning Super Bowls, and we can't even win the division. 

 

Yes, we need a stable QB, however without a formidable skill tree around that QB, we are just spinning wheels. Where is that Skill tree going to come from? 

 

This team is in trouble, and it will take at least 3-4 more years to get somewhat close without an awful lot of luck. Ballard built this team for the 80's style of play and unfortunately it might have set us back that long. 

 

Convince me I'm wrong. Seriously. I'm trying to make waves here; the waters are already extremely choppy. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

agree 100 percent, i have been saying for several years our talent level is way below average. jax will dominate our division for years to come and imo we will hold down last place and draft in the top 5 for several years. we are the new browns. thank you ballard.

[Superman]

3 hours ago, Goatface Killah said:

I think its very disingenuous the way you talk about the Colts vs other teams.

 

90% of the guys you listed are not feared by any team in the league.

 

And I really dont understand the point youre trying to make on Brock Purdy. He isnt in our team so how does him having success with the 49ers negate the fact we havent found a guy to come in and stabilize our Quarterback position? Its the most important position on the field and the lack of a stabilizing force there absolutely affects the performance of our skill players, who arent that bad at all.

 

I mean if youre seriously gonna sit here and list guys like Singletary, schuster, Scantling, Hardman, Toney, Jones, McKenzie, Hurst and Engram as "feared" offensive players then I would absolutely list Pittman, Pierce, Campbell, Woods and JT as players of that caliber.

 

I agree, people come up with arbitrary measurements for evaluating rosters, and then draw a line in the sand. And this happens with people who are more optimistic just as much as with people who are more pessimistic. This "feared skill players" designation is completely made up and totally subjective. 

 

But yes, the Colts are behind the class of the AFC at WR and TE. Seems obvious. It's also obvious that we have a handful of young players at those positions who have the opportunity to be really good. We're very young at these positions, and I think player development has been a shortcoming of our team for the last 2-3 years, on top of the QB changes. 

[Dingus McGirt]

4 hours ago, Indeee said:

Let's have an honest, open-minded discussion here:

 

My take.

 

While most are excited with anticipation of our new HC/Staff and pondering over which QB would best fit our team, I can't help but have a much wider lens. 

 

When I think of the next decade in the AFC, I'm not seeing where the Colts can actually make a splash at all with this current roster, especially offensively. Yes, this team needs a QB, at least a stable one in the worst way but this offense from the skill positions is putrid. It's nowhere close to being elite. In fact, I would say that this year's draft should be entirely offense for the first 4-5 rounds and I'm not talking about drafting O-line or RB. 

 

Outside of JT, who on this offense scares defenses? I mean look at our competition.

 

Bengals: Burrow, Chase, Higgins, Boyd, Mixon, and Hurst.

 

Chiefs: Mahomes, Kelce, Mckinnon, Pacheo, Toney, Schuster, and Scantling/Hardman.

 

Bills: Allen, Diggs, Davis, McKensie, Knox, and Singletary.

 

Jags: Lawrence, Ridley, Kirk, Ettiene, Jones, and Engram.

 

Chargers: Herbert, Allen, Williams, Eckler, Palmer, and Everette. 

 

Dolphins: Tua, Waddle, Hill, Mostert, and Geseki. 

 

That is a gauntlet, and the Dolphins, Bills, and Chiefs are the least stacked IMHO, albeit still highly dangerous. 

 

Is Pittman, Campbell, and Pierce anywhere near what our competition already has in place at WR? I mean these guys struggle to gain separation most days. There are some on here actually suggesting that Pittman be traded. Who knows? It might just happen. Ballard himself basically recently eluded that Pittman is not a number one, something all of us should have known when he was drafted, heck i for one said it, and Pierce is terrible. Pierce is a WR3, if. 

 

Does anyone on here think Jelani Woods is a "Move" tight end? Meaning, is Jelani in the mold from a route running/quickness standpoint as Engram or Kelce or Everette? If he is, he isn't/hasn't been used that way and wouldn't most agree that if a player shows that type of skill in a practice standpoint that the team would try to utilize that in game? 

 

I think sometimes we as fans get caught up in what I call "fool's gold football".  We are so hopeful and forgiving that we stop using our eyes and instead, see with our minds. We start playing the what if game that's always predicated on what our minds are seeing in terms of hoping what our team can be. We lose sight of what it actually is.  Unfortunately, this has happened to a lot of us on this forum for the past few years and here we are. Most times I get crucified on here but I'm a realist. 

 

When Peyton was here, other than the Chargers always having our number, it was just the Patriots we had to worry about normally. Not now. Now there is at least 6 teams, and the Steelers are close to entering that mix with Pickett, Harris, Pickens, Johnson, and Friermuth.

 

I'm sorry, but this Colts team is years away from entering that gauntlet with this current offensive roster. Can the Colts win a game here and there, sure, but this team is nowhere near competing for a SB anytime soon. Again, this about winning Super Bowls, and we can't even win the division. 

 

Yes, we need a stable QB, however without a formidable skill tree around that QB, we are just spinning wheels. Where is that Skill tree going to come from? 

 

This team is in trouble, and it will take at least 3-4 more years to get somewhat close without an awful lot of luck. Ballard built this team for the 80's style of play and unfortunately it might have set us back that long. 

 

Convince me I'm wrong. Seriously. I'm trying to make waves here; the waters are already extremely choppy. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can’t convince you … just hope you feel better after

all that.

[Superman]

Can I just point out how pedestrian Deebo has been this season? No question he's one of the most dynamic players in the league when healthy, but the dude had half a season of production and is now making $25m/year. 

[Dingus McGirt]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

Can I just point out how pedestrian Deebo has been this season? No question he's one of the most dynamic players in the league when healthy, but the dude had half a season of production and is now making $25m/year. 

Seems that’s normal these days.  Get the cash…coast.

[Goatface Killah]

14 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I agree, people come up with arbitrary measurements for evaluating rosters, and then draw a line in the sand. And this happens with people who are more optimistic just as much as with people who are more pessimistic. This "feared skill players" designation is completely made up and totally subjective. 

 

But yes, the Colts are behind the class of the AFC at WR and TE. Seems obvious. It's also obvious that we have a handful of young players at those positions who have the opportunity to be really good. We're very young at these positions, and I think player development has been a shortcoming of our team for the last 2-3 years, on top of the QB changes. 

I think teams are typically built around 2-3 players on offense.

 

On the Colts, in particular,  I think they have an All Pro in Taylor, 2 potential Pro Bowlers in Pittman and Woods, and 2 pretty good role players in Parris and Pierce. I also think Moss and Granson could be contributors to a good offense.

 

Are they stacked like SF OR Cincy? No. But nobody else is either. It doesnt mean you cant have a great offense.

 

If you placed Josh Allen or Joe Burrow on the Colts tomorrow I think you'd be surprised how good those guys look. Especially the 2nd tier guys like Woods. 

 

Like I said before, I think its 75% coaching and quarterback play. The talent gap is not that wide from team to team.

 

 

 

 

[Indeee]

15 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I agree, people come up with arbitrary measurements for evaluating rosters, and then draw a line in the sand. And this happens with people who are more optimistic just as much as with people who are more pessimistic. This "feared skill players" designation is completely made up and totally subjective. 

 

But yes, the Colts are behind the class of the AFC at WR and TE. Seems obvious. It's also obvious that we have a handful of young players at those positions who have the opportunity to be really good. We're very young at these positions, and I think player development has been a shortcoming of our team for the last 2-3 years, on top of the QB changes. 

thanks for saying this. It should seem obvious however to some over these past few years it isn't and that is what gets my goat personally. I do however fully agree that player development has been atrocious. I remember seeing where someone on twitter stated that Ballard made a mistake thinking that he could out draft and out develop all the other 31 teams and it hasn't turned out that way. That was a spot-on assessment Imo especially at positions that score points. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Solid84]

5 hours ago, Indeee said:

Let's have an honest, open-minded discussion here:

 

My take.

 

While most are excited with anticipation of our new HC/Staff and pondering over which QB would best fit our team, I can't help but have a much wider lens. 

 

When I think of the next decade in the AFC, I'm not seeing where the Colts can actually make a splash at all with this current roster, especially offensively. Yes, this team needs a QB, at least a stable one in the worst way but this offense from the skill positions is putrid. It's nowhere close to being elite. In fact, I would say that this year's draft should be entirely offense for the first 4-5 rounds and I'm not talking about drafting O-line or RB. 

 

Outside of JT, who on this offense scares defenses? I mean look at our competition.

 

Bengals: Burrow, Chase, Higgins, Boyd, Mixon, and Hurst.

 

Chiefs: Mahomes, Kelce, Mckinnon, Pacheo, Toney, Schuster, and Scantling/Hardman.

 

Bills: Allen, Diggs, Davis, McKensie, Knox, and Singletary.

 

Jags: Lawrence, Ridley, Kirk, Ettiene, Jones, and Engram.

 

Chargers: Herbert, Allen, Williams, Eckler, Palmer, and Everette. 

 

Dolphins: Tua, Waddle, Hill, Mostert, and Geseki. 

 

That is a gauntlet, and the Dolphins, Bills, and Chiefs are the least stacked IMHO, albeit still highly dangerous. 

 

Is Pittman, Campbell, and Pierce anywhere near what our competition already has in place at WR? I mean these guys struggle to gain separation most days. There are some on here actually suggesting that Pittman be traded. Who knows? It might just happen. Ballard himself basically recently eluded that Pittman is not a number one, something all of us should have known when he was drafted, heck i for one said it, and Pierce is terrible. Pierce is a WR3, if. 

 

Does anyone on here think Jelani Woods is a "Move" tight end? Meaning, is Jelani in the mold from a route running/quickness standpoint as Engram or Kelce or Everette? If he is, he isn't/hasn't been used that way and wouldn't most agree that if a player shows that type of skill in a practice standpoint that the team would try to utilize that in game? 

 

I think sometimes we as fans get caught up in what I call "fool's gold football".  We are so hopeful and forgiving that we stop using our eyes and instead, see with our minds. We start playing the what if game that's always predicated on what our minds are seeing in terms of hoping what our team can be. We lose sight of what it actually is.  Unfortunately, this has happened to a lot of us on this forum for the past few years and here we are. Most times I get crucified on here but I'm a realist. 

 

When Peyton was here, other than the Chargers always having our number, it was just the Patriots we had to worry about normally. Not now. Now there is at least 6 teams, and the Steelers are close to entering that mix with Pickett, Harris, Pickens, Johnson, and Friermuth.

 

I'm sorry, but this Colts team is years away from entering that gauntlet with this current offensive roster. Can the Colts win a game here and there, sure, but this team is nowhere near competing for a SB anytime soon. Again, this about winning Super Bowls, and we can't even win the division. 

 

Yes, we need a stable QB, however without a formidable skill tree around that QB, we are just spinning wheels. Where is that Skill tree going to come from? 

 

This team is in trouble, and it will take at least 3-4 more years to get somewhat close without an awful lot of luck. Ballard built this team for the 80's style of play and unfortunately it might have set us back that long. 

 

Convince me I'm wrong. Seriously. I'm trying to make waves here; the waters are already extremely choppy. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Most of the players on the roster won’t be here in a decade. Calm down. 

[Superman]

41 minutes ago, Indeee said:

thanks for saying this. It should seem obvious however to some over these past few years it isn't and that is what gets my goat personally. I do however fully agree that player development has been atrocious. I remember seeing where someone on twitter stated that Ballard made a mistake thinking that he could out draft and out develop all the other 31 teams and it hasn't turned out that way. That was a spot-on assessment Imo especially at positions that score points. 

 

I don't think anyone is arguing that the Colts are as good at WR and TE as the Chiefs, Bills, Bengals, etc. Everyone knows the Jags just spent a ton of money at those two positions. And we know that we haven't had an environment conducive to pass catchers reaching their potential. Is anyone making the case that the Colts are ready to hang with the big dogs in the conference?

 

I think everyone's focus is on the much more important HC and QB decisions, because until those are settled, it doesn't really matter what we have at WR and TE. 

[OLD FAN MAN]

imo a new head coach will make little difference in our results with the current roster. if ballard changes and signs elite free agents it will make a difference. a draft pick rookie qb will take 2 or 3 years to reach full potential

[tvturner]

The Bills are Josh Allen and Diggs

The Chiefs are Mahomes and Kelce

The Bengals and Chargers have the best big 4 out of the group

 

The majority of those teams have 2 players on offense that carry hard

 

The Colts just need the guy at QB

[coltsva]

6 hours ago, Indeee said:

Bengals: Burrow, Chase, Higgins, Boyd, Mixon, and Hurst.

Elite - Burrow & Chase are great, Boyd & Higgins are good. Mixon is solid, but not great, Hurst is average (Woods put up better rookie numbers than Hurst)

 

Chiefs: Mahomes, Kelce, Mckinnon, Pacheo, Toney, Schuster, and Scantling/Hardman.

Mahomes & Kelce are great. McKinnon & Pacheco are a nice combo but not great. The receivers are average. 

 

Bills: Allen, Diggs, Davis, McKensie, Knox, and Singletary.

Allen is very good. Diggs is great, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Bills decided explore trade options for him. Davis is solid. McKensie, Singletary, Knox are all average.

 

Jags: Lawrence, Ridley, Kirk, Ettiene, Jones, and Engram.

Lawrence looks like the real deal, but let's see him do better than 9-8. Ettiene is good, not great. Their receivers are average (okay, Kirk is very good). 

 

Chargers: Herbert, Allen, Williams, Eckler, Palmer, and Everette. 

Herbert is good. Allen is very good-great, but is already 30. Williams is good, not great. Ekeler is solid, not great. Everett is average (Woods had better rookie stats)

 

Dolphins: Tua, Waddle, Hill, Mostert, and Geseki. 

Sad to say, but Tua is not long for this league. Hill and Waddle are a great tandem. Mostert is good, not great. Gesecki is average.

 

That is a gauntlet, and the Dolphins, Bills, and Chiefs are the least stacked IMHO, albeit still highly dangerous. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Good topic Indee. I'll go counterpoint. I think the Colts are a good coach and a good QB away from being on par with the Bills, Fish, Chargers, Jags. 

 

AFC elite is Chiefs & Bengals. Bills are not elite, they are wanna be elite. Chargers, Dolphins, Jags are all average. 

 

This is not a gauntlet of great football teams.

This is:

One team with a great QB. a great TE, and HOF coach.

One team with a great QB and great weapons. 

One team with a very good to great QB and a great WR who may not be worth his yards. 

Three teams who for the most part have played average football with their current group of players (I'm not anointing the Jags anything until they go better that 9-8),

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Stephen]

4 hours ago, shasta519 said:

 

I don't think anything should take 3-4 years in the NFL, especially if you get a good young QB. But I do think the Colts are probably two years away from being able to compete in the AFC. That's why I am actually in favor of potentially reshaping the roster, shedding some contracts and getting future draft capital this offseason...if they did choose to go that route.

 

As for where this offense stands, I think this team will need to add to the WR room in a big way. The trio of Pittman, Pierce and PC is not the worst in the NFL, but it's also not on the level of teams that were playing this past weekend. Perhaps Woods emerges as one of those top-tier weapons though. But that's a lofty expectation.

 

I see the Colts as a team that has a lot of solid players, but not a lot of game-changers. How that happened is something that has been debated a lot here. But it doesn't mean it won't change in the future.

 

Just need a speed guy like jylin hyatt

[stitches]

8 hours ago, Indeee said:

Let's have an honest, open-minded discussion here:

 

My take.

 

While most are excited with anticipation of our new HC/Staff and pondering over which QB would best fit our team, I can't help but have a much wider lens. 

 

When I think of the next decade in the AFC, I'm not seeing where the Colts can actually make a splash at all with this current roster, especially offensively. Yes, this team needs a QB, at least a stable one in the worst way but this offense from the skill positions is putrid. It's nowhere close to being elite. In fact, I would say that this year's draft should be entirely offense for the first 4-5 rounds and I'm not talking about drafting O-line or RB. 

 

Outside of JT, who on this offense scares defenses? I mean look at our competition.

 

Bengals: Burrow, Chase, Higgins, Boyd, Mixon, and Hurst.

 

Chiefs: Mahomes, Kelce, Mckinnon, Pacheo, Toney, Schuster, and Scantling/Hardman.

 

Bills: Allen, Diggs, Davis, McKensie, Knox, and Singletary.

 

Jags: Lawrence, Ridley, Kirk, Ettiene, Jones, and Engram.

 

Chargers: Herbert, Allen, Williams, Eckler, Palmer, and Everette. 

 

Dolphins: Tua, Waddle, Hill, Mostert, and Geseki. 

 

That is a gauntlet, and the Dolphins, Bills, and Chiefs are the least stacked IMHO, albeit still highly dangerous. 

Yep. Agreed. Been having very similar sentiments for a while. My biggest worry is not that we don't have the weapons and QB right now. My biggest worry is that Ballard doesn't have the mentality and philosophy that will help get us closer to those teams when it comes to offensive weapons. IMO Ballard values the completely wrong things on both ends of the ball and there is very little indication he will change his mind about how he needs to build an NFL team in 2023. Now, the little indication we got in his exit interview gives a slight hope he might make some changes but I will believe it when I see it. 

8 hours ago, Indeee said:

Is Pittman, Campbell, and Pierce anywhere near what our competition already has in place at WR? I mean these guys struggle to gain separation most days. There are some on here actually suggesting that Pittman be traded. Who knows? It might just happen. Ballard himself basically recently eluded that Pittman is not a number one, something all of us should have known when he was drafted, heck i for one said it, and Pierce is terrible. Pierce is a WR3, if. 

I am not completely opposed to trading Pittman IF we use the assets we get to get offensive weapons. In general I am kind of of the opposite mind - you don't need to trade Pittman, you need to ADD more and better offensive players around him. Pittman is a very good piece to have, even if he's not no. 1. It's better to have a no 2 receiver and be searching for no 1 than to be missing both no. 1 AND no. 2. I disagree about Pierce, but he's a bit of a project so don't rely on him being what you dream he can be - go get more weapons and if he turns out to be great - awesome, now you have 3 great options. You can never have too many weapons. 

 

8 hours ago, Indeee said:

Does anyone on here think Jelani Woods is a "Move" tight end? Meaning, is Jelani in the mold from a route running/quickness standpoint as Engram or Kelce or Everette? If he is, he isn't/hasn't been used that way and wouldn't most agree that if a player shows that type of skill in a practice standpoint that the team would try to utilize that in game? 

I'm not sure he will be a move tight end and a true mismatch weapon.  Maybe? But again, don't just assume best case scenario even if you think he can do it. Continue adding weapons at TE as well. And if he ends up panning out - great. More options for the offense. 

8 hours ago, Indeee said:

I think sometimes we as fans get caught up in what I call "fool's gold football".  We are so hopeful and forgiving that we stop using our eyes and instead, see with our minds. We start playing the what if game that's always predicated on what our minds are seeing in terms of hoping what our team can be. We lose sight of what it actually is.  Unfortunately, this has happened to a lot of us on this forum for the past few years and here we are. Most times I get crucified on here but I'm a realist. 

 

When Peyton was here, other than the Chargers always having our number, it was just the Patriots we had to worry about normally. Not now. Now there is at least 6 teams, and the Steelers are close to entering that mix with Pickett, Harris, Pickens, Johnson, and Friermuth.

 

I'm sorry, but this Colts team is years away from entering that gauntlet with this current offensive roster. Can the Colts win a game here and there, sure, but this team is nowhere near competing for a SB anytime soon. Again, this about winning Super Bowls, and we can't even win the division. 

Yep. Unfortunately we are not close to the top teams in the conference. This is part of the reason I don't shy away from the T-word. And this includes trading a lot of the top players we have now whose prime is wasted on a team that won't be ready for years. 

8 hours ago, Indeee said:

Yes, we need a stable QB, however without a formidable skill tree around that QB, we are just spinning wheels. Where is that Skill tree going to come from? 

 

This team is in trouble, and it will take at least 3-4 more years to get somewhat close without an awful lot of luck. Ballard built this team for the 80's style of play and unfortunately it might have set us back that long. 

 

Convince me I'm wrong. Seriously. I'm trying to make waves here; the waters are already extremely choppy. 

 

I don't think you are wrong. Maybe you are wrong on some of the specifics but IMO you are not far off in the big picture. We need QB... Even if we get a good one in this draft, QBs need a year or two before they hit their stride in the league. Then you need weapons. AND MORE WEAPONS! 

 

I want to see what Ballard will do this year and whether the self-scout will result in a visible change of philosophy and strategy. Maybe if it does and if he hits on a few picks we can be like 2 years away of contention? That's kind of optimistic view of the future.

 

The pessimistic one is we strike out on QB, we need new GM and HC after next year... We have to reset, just having lost another year..

 

[Defjamz26]

 

The Chiefs skill group is misleading though, because aside from Kelce they don’t have any alpha’s. But again, I think there is a blueprint for what consistently wins in today’s NFL. And if you extend it and look at the skill groups for some of the teams that were eliminated like the Bucs, Dolphins, and Bills you’ll see they also have top tier guys at those positions.

 

 

It should also be noted how much each team invested in FA and player trades. Ballard needs to get more than JAG at WR. We’re at least good at RB. Woods shows promise as a Giseckei type TE as well.

 

Again, Ballard will have to change his approach if he wants to catch up. His philosophy for team building that he’s been employing for 6 years has not and likely will not yield the type of players we need to be a real contender.

[Nickster]

9 hours ago, Indeee said:

Let's have an honest, open-minded discussion here:

 

My take.

 

While most are excited with anticipation of our new HC/Staff and pondering over which QB would best fit our team, I can't help but have a much wider lens. 

 

When I think of the next decade in the AFC, I'm not seeing where the Colts can actually make a splash at all with this current roster, especially offensively. Yes, this team needs a QB, at least a stable one in the worst way but this offense from the skill positions is putrid. It's nowhere close to being elite. In fact, I would say that this year's draft should be entirely offense for the first 4-5 rounds and I'm not talking about drafting O-line or RB. 

 

Outside of JT, who on this offense scares defenses? I mean look at our competition.

 

Bengals: Burrow, Chase, Higgins, Boyd, Mixon, and Hurst.

 

Chiefs: Mahomes, Kelce, Mckinnon, Pacheo, Toney, Schuster, and Scantling/Hardman.

 

Bills: Allen, Diggs, Davis, McKensie, Knox, and Singletary.

 

Jags: Lawrence, Ridley, Kirk, Ettiene, Jones, and Engram.

 

Chargers: Herbert, Allen, Williams, Eckler, Palmer, and Everette. 

 

Dolphins: Tua, Waddle, Hill, Mostert, and Geseki. 

 

That is a gauntlet, and the Dolphins, Bills, and Chiefs are the least stacked IMHO, albeit still highly dangerous. 

 

Is Pittman, Campbell, and Pierce anywhere near what our competition already has in place at WR? I mean these guys struggle to gain separation most days. There are some on here actually suggesting that Pittman be traded. Who knows? It might just happen. Ballard himself basically recently eluded that Pittman is not a number one, something all of us should have known when he was drafted, heck i for one said it, and Pierce is terrible. Pierce is a WR3, if. 

 

Does anyone on here think Jelani Woods is a "Move" tight end? Meaning, is Jelani in the mold from a route running/quickness standpoint as Engram or Kelce or Everette? If he is, he isn't/hasn't been used that way and wouldn't most agree that if a player shows that type of skill in a practice standpoint that the team would try to utilize that in game? 

 

I think sometimes we as fans get caught up in what I call "fool's gold football".  We are so hopeful and forgiving that we stop using our eyes and instead, see with our minds. We start playing the what if game that's always predicated on what our minds are seeing in terms of hoping what our team can be. We lose sight of what it actually is.  Unfortunately, this has happened to a lot of us on this forum for the past few years and here we are. Most times I get crucified on here but I'm a realist. 

 

When Peyton was here, other than the Chargers always having our number, it was just the Patriots we had to worry about normally. Not now. Now there is at least 6 teams, and the Steelers are close to entering that mix with Pickett, Harris, Pickens, Johnson, and Friermuth.

 

I'm sorry, but this Colts team is years away from entering that gauntlet with this current offensive roster. Can the Colts win a game here and there, sure, but this team is nowhere near competing for a SB anytime soon. Again, this about winning Super Bowls, and we can't even win the division. 

 

Yes, we need a stable QB, however without a formidable skill tree around that QB, we are just spinning wheels. Where is that Skill tree going to come from? 

 

This team is in trouble, and it will take at least 3-4 more years to get somewhat close without an awful lot of luck. Ballard built this team for the 80's style of play and unfortunately it might have set us back that long. 

 

Convince me I'm wrong. Seriously. I'm trying to make waves here; the waters are already extremely choppy. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

He’s not wrong.  Indee says we are probably 3-4 years away without a lot of luck.  Even if we hit at QB it would likely take 2 before dividends start returning on that.