Richardson named starter for the season

[ponyboy]

2 hours ago, Indyfan4life said:

You do realize in the first half our receivers dropped at least eight passes. That KILLED his stat line and yards. 
 

Eight dropped passes will look bad on ANY QB. 

 

Dropped at least eight passes?  I didn't recall anything close to that.  So, I went back and rewatched every Richardson play.  I see one drop by Downs.

 

Don't get me wrong.  I think Richardson has looked very promising so far.  I was very impressed with his performance these first two pre-season games.  Having watched the other 3 top rookie QBs this pre-season, I think he's looked as promising as any of them so far (actually even better than all that I've seen in limited pre-season action).

 

Which drive/plays do you consider drops?  I see one; Drive-5/Play-3.  Here's a breakdown of what I saw in his drives this game.  I've seen several posts about drops wand would be curious to know which of plays any other posters consider drops.

 

Drive 1:

• Play 1: Overthrown deep ball (Pierce/defender collided, no call)
• Play 2: Overthrown ball over the middle to Pittman.

 

Drive 2:

• Play 1: Completion to Pittman over the middle. Very nice pass.
• Play 2: Scramble.  Run 7 yards.
• Play 3: Completion to Ogletree over the middle. Very nice pass.

 

Drive 3:

• Play 1: Designed run by Richardson for 15 yards.
• Play 2: Incompletion, but defensive illegal contact. Pierce makes adjustment and nearly makes nice catch of off target (or back shoulder?) throw.
• Play 3: Completion. Scrambles, throws low dart 9 yards downfield to Granson. Nice pocket presence by Richardson. Nice catch by Granson. 
• Play 6: Short pass over the middle to Pittman. Turnover worthy throw.  Dropped interception.
• Play 8: Short completion to Pittman over the middle.  Pittman makes a nice catch of pass thrown slightly behind him (stopping his YAC momentum and leaves game limping).
• Play 9: Incomplete over the middle to goal line. Overthrown into tight coverage.  Play nullified by defensive illegal contact.

 

Drive 4:

• Play 1: Quick pressure, steps up into more pressure. Jumps while being hit and throws ball away (or overthrows) the checkdown RB.
• Play 2: Scrambles left, short hard throw back against body to Downs.  Ball is well behind Downs but he manages to whirl and get a hand on it. Not a drop.
• Play 3: Drop back, pumps, scrambles left. gains 12 yards and picks up first down.  Nice run for a first down.
• Play 4: Looks off first couple downfield reads and make nice throw to RB in the flat for a completion.
• Play 5: Nice intermediate depth throw toward the sideline. Thrown over defenders.  Nice throw.  Very nice catch by Granson.
• Play 6: Designed run option.  Richardson keeper for no gain.
• Play 7: Shotgun, drop back, scramble, defenders hitting legs.. able to dump ball downfield while going down.  Granson coming back toward Richardson nearly pulls in a low ball behind him. Originally ruled 1st down but overruled.  Very nice attempt by Granson, but ball touched ground as he was reaching back and going to the ground to craddle the ball.
• Play 8: Shotgun, drop back, immediate pressure up the middle.  GREAT escape by Richardson, scrambles right for 5 yards.

 

Drive 5:

• Play 1: Richard fumbles without pressure while throwing.  Ball slips from his hand during the throw.  Very nice recovery by Pittman.
• Play 2: Shotgun, drop, no pressure, short middle throw to RB.  High throw. RB leaps, full extension, ball goes through hands as he's being hit. Throw off target and kills YAC momentum. Stretch to call this a drop. This incompletion mostly on Richardson. Should have been a completion for a first down with an on target throw of short pass.
• Play 3: Shotgun, drop, nice pocket, nice movement forward in the pocket. Richardson delivers a beautiful rope between defenders and hits Down in stride and in the hands (just slightly high but very catchable). Defender was pulling on Downs shirt as he was separating. Downs leaves his feet and extends slightly; fastball goes through his hands.  DROP. Should have been first down, but fourth down instead. A shame because this was a nice pass.

 

Drive 6:

• Play 1: Overthrows well covered Pittman deep down the right sideline.
• Play 2: Shotgun, drop, no pressure, intermediate throw down the right seam to Pierce. Defender draped on Pierce appears to deflect ball. Unclear if defender gets a hand on it.  Throw is slightly behind Pierce causing him to slow and turn back into defender causing contact and defender to have play on the ball.  No other angle shown on this so hard to tell the ball placement.
• Play 3: Shotgun, drop, time to throw, slight pressure, arm may have been slapped as Richardson throws.  Ball out of reach of Pierce running hook toward left sideline.

[BProland85]

3 hours ago, Blueblazes said:

Hoping Richardson pans out, but unfortunately he appears to be what he showed in college. Decent runner but not much of a passer. Obviously preseason doesn't mean much, and it's too early to tell, but he wasn't a passer in college so not sure he'll pan out more than just a back up change of pace QB for someone. Still, being a major Colts fan, I hoping I am dead wrong and he turns out to be at least a 4 year spark and turns out to be at least a decent QB. Really hoping I'm wrong.

You can easily see the improvement and comfortability he showed from his 1st game to his 2nd. The guy needs reps and live game experience and he should only get better. Don’t let him not see the field the way the 49ers did with Lance. 

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, BProland85 said:

You can easily see the improvement and comfortability he showed from his 1st game to his 2nd. The guy needs reps and live game experience and he should only get better. Don’t let him not see the field the way the 49ers did with Lance. 

Im sorry, but the 49ers with Lance is not even close to the Colts with Richardson.   Completely different.   
 

The 49ers have been competing for the NFC West division every year with the hopes of a deep playoff run.  When Lance hasn’t been playing in the regular season it’s been because of one of two reasons.  Either Lance has been hurt or Lance has been playing badly.   They didn’t have the luxury of catering to him.   
 

Kyle Shannahan knows how to handle QBs.    He got the best years from Jimmy G.  An incredible year from Purdy.   He’s gotten a very good off-season from Sam Darnold.  The Trey Lance situation is unfortunate, but it’s NOT an example of Shannahan screwing things up.   Far from it.   
 

This is not close to an Apples to Apples situation.  The Colts have made a multi-year commitment to Richardson and ride things out thru good times and bad, thick and thin.  Our situation is the opposite of the Rams.   It’s just not the same. 
 

Hope this clarifies….  

[shakedownstreet]

I can here the chants in LOS now... Minshew! MinShoe! Minshew! MinShoe!

[stitches]

 

[shakedownstreet]

23 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

 

Did you know Notre Dame was originally named Motor Dame after the northern Indiana automotive industry. They changed it to Notre Dame to make it sound more Euro-sophisticated ...

[Stoney]

On 8/25/2023 at 4:49 PM, Blueblazes said:

Hoping Richardson pans out, but unfortunately he appears to be what he showed in college. Decent runner but not much of a passer. Obviously preseason doesn't mean much, and it's too early to tell, but he wasn't a passer in college so not sure he'll pan out more than just a back up change of pace QB for someone. Still, being a major Colts fan, I hoping I am dead wrong and he turns out to be at least a 4 year spark and turns out to be at least a decent QB. Really hoping I'm wrong.

What are you watching???? He's displaying elite arm talent out there. Decent runner? He looks as quick as Lamar. You seem like a hater to me, either that or you just don't know what you're watching because these are some pretty backhanded comments.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I was just thinking I am grateful colts drafted a QB this year after seeing how good Jordon Love has looked this preseason. We wouldn’t here the end of how Ballard passed on Love lol.

[2006Coltsbestever]

38 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

I was just thinking I am grateful colts drafted a QB this year after seeing how good Jordon Love has looked this preseason. We wouldn’t here the end of how Ballard passed on Love lol.

I am glad we finally went young and got a QB as well. It was time and we got someone that has a high ceiling. AR gets the ball out quick and his athletic ability is off the charts. With all do respect to the Packers, I have nothing against Love but I don't see them winning more than 7 games. They have a lot of holes, we could easily win as many as them. I see them at around 7-10. Many are just blowing off Rodgers not being there but that is an impact in itself.

[stitches]

44 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

I was just thinking I am grateful colts drafted a QB this year after seeing how good Jordon Love has looked this preseason. We wouldn’t here the end of how Ballard passed on Love lol.

 

 

Oh, how the turntables! 

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

 

Oh, how the turntables! 

Yeah at least Matt Ryan did something great for this franchise. He was the straw that broke the camels back as far as staying with old Vet QB's. 

[GoColts8818]

2 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

I was just thinking I am grateful colts drafted a QB this year after seeing how good Jordon Love has looked this preseason. We wouldn’t here the end of how Ballard passed on Love lol.

If I recall the Packers traded in front of the Colts for that very reason.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

5 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

If I recall the Packers traded in front of the Colts for that very reason.

Colts weren’t taking love. They would of traded up if they wanted him that bad. But he was right there to trade back into the first round. Would of been extremely cheap. Then Taylor would probably not of been drafted. Would  of just been Pittman.

[w87r]

1 minute ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Colts weren’t taking love. They would of traded up if they wanted him that bad. But he was right there to trade back into the first round. Would of been extremely cheap. Then Taylor would probably not of been drafted. Would  of just been Pittman.

Yeah I don't think they were either, but I think the Packers were definitely under that assumption.

[GoColts8818]

27 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Colts weren’t taking love. They would have traded up if they wanted him that bad. But he was right there to trade back into the first round. Would have been extremely cheap. Then Taylor would probably not of been drafted. Would  of just been Pittman.

Maybe maybe not.  I firmly agree they didn’t want him bad enough to trade up for him but had he fallen to him that could have been a different story.  Also agree it would have cost them Taylor or Pittman.  However, you can’t pass on a guy who was drafted before you pick.  That was my main point in my initial response to you.

[richard pallo]

15 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Maybe maybe not.  I firmly agree they didn’t want him bad enough to trade up for him but had he fallen to him that could have been a different story.  Also agree it would have cost them Taylor or Pittman.  However, you can’t pass on a guy who was drafted before you pick.  That was my main point in my initial response to you.

Yeah I remember I wanted Jacobs when he was drafted.  The Raiders took him right before our pick.  Really ticked me off.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, richard pallo said:

Yeah I remember I wanted Jacobs when he was drafted.  The Raiders took him right before our pick.  Really ticked me off.

Taylor is better. I am not sure I would take anyone over Taylor, even McCaffrey has been injury prone and Henry is 29 years old. Barkley, Chubb? They are in that discussion as well. 

[NewColtsFan]

10 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Yeah I remember I wanted Jacobs when he was drafted.  The Raiders took him right before our pick.  Really ticked me off.

I think you’re confusing Jacobs with someone else?   Taylor was taken 41st.   Jacobs went in the first, pick 24.    

 

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

35 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Maybe maybe not.  I firmly agree they didn’t want him bad enough to trade up for him but had he fallen to him that could have been a different story.  Also agree it would have cost them Taylor or Pittman.  However, you can’t pass on a guy who was drafted before you pick.  That was my main point in my initial response to you.

In this case yes you can say colts passed on him.  They didn’t want him and it would only have cost A late round pick. I don’t think they would have taken him early in the second either. 

[GoColts8818]

Just now, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

In this case yes you can say colts passed on him.  They didn’t want him and it would only have cost A late round pick. I don’t think they would have taken him early in the second either. 

That’s not passing on someone.  In order to pass on someone you have to not take them.  The Colts never had the chance to do that.  You can say and be correct they didn’t want to trade up and get him but that’s not the same thing as passing on someone.

[2006Coltsbestever]

11 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I think you’re confusing Jacobs with someone else?   Taylor was taken 41st.   Jacobs went in the first, pick 24.    

 

 

Different draft, Jacobs went 24th in the 2019 draft, Taylor 41st in the 2020 Draft. So not sure what he was thinking?

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

30 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

That’s not passing on someone.  In order to pass on someone you have to not take them.  The Colts never had the chance to do that.  You can say and be correct they didn’t want to trade up and get him but that’s not the same thing as passing on someone.

Semantics 

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Colts weren’t taking love. They would have traded up if they wanted him that bad. But he was right there to trade back into the first round. Would have been extremely cheap. Then Taylor would probably not of been drafted. Would  of just been Pittman.

How do you know trading back into the first would’ve been extremely cheap?   Especially for a quarterback?    You’re totally guessing.   
 

Ballard is long on record that trading back into the first in any draft is very expensive.  And his is the only vote that counts. 

[richard pallo]

26 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Different draft, Jacobs went 24th in the 2019 draft, Taylor 41st in the 2020 Draft. So not sure what he was thinking?

 

40 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I think you’re confusing Jacobs with someone else?   Taylor was taken 41st.   Jacobs went in the first, pick 24.    

 

 

I was talking the 2019 draft.  We had pick 26 and traded back with Washington after Jacobs was drafted with pick 24.  I know we were very high on Jacobs that year.  That’s how I remember it.  We missed on Jacobs that year but got Taylor the following year.  Frank wanted the big running back.  Finally got him in Taylor.

[NewColtsFan]

6 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

 

I was talking the 2019 draft.  We had pick 26 and traded back with Washington after Jacobs was drafted with pick 24.  I know we were very high on Jacobs that year.  That’s how I remember it.  We missed on Jacobs that year but got Taylor the following year.  Frank wanted the big running back.  Finally got him in Taylor.

You know the Colts were high on Jacobs?   Really?   How?   
 

And maybe the Colts weren’t as high as you thought? 

[w87r]

1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:

You know the Colts were high on Jacobs?   Really?   How?   
 

And maybe the Colts weren’t as high as you thought? 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2832532-2019-nfl-draft-rumors-raiders-eagles-colts-interested-in-rb-josh-jacobs.amp.html

 

https://coltswire.usatoday.com/2019/04/22/2019-nfl-draft-indianapolis-colts-josh-jacobs-quite-interested/

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si.com/.amp/nfl/2019/04/15/nfl-draft-2019-josh-jacobs-alabama-landing-spots

 

 

For the record, don't know if they truly were, but they did trade down after he was selected in front of them.

[richard pallo]

3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

You know the Colts were high on Jacobs?   Really?   How?   
 

And maybe the Colts weren’t as high as you thought? 

I remember reading reports about him and the Colts.  Our visits, scouting reports, etc.  Of course I don’t know if we would have drafted him.  But I remember I was ticked when the Raiders drafted him.  Then we traded back with Washington shortly after he was picked.  Coincidence I don’t know.  But Frank made no secret of how much he wanted and valued having a big running threat.

[NewColtsFan]

12 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I remember reading reports about him and the Colts.  Our visits, scouting reports, etc.  Of course I don’t know if we would have drafted him.  But I remember I was ticked when the Raiders drafted him.  Then we traded back with Washington shortly after he was picked.  Coincidence I don’t know.  But Frank made no secret of how much he wanted and valued having a big running threat.

We’re talking about 2019, right?    The Colts traded down and ended up with 3 second round picks and a third.   And didn’t use one of them in a running back.   
 

That was the year where the Colts revealed their draft video and Frank is taking laps around the draft room shouting 4 for 4!   4 for 4!    And none were a running back. 
 

The Colts didn’t use any of their day three picks on a running back.   So the Colts took zero RBs in the draft.   
 

It was the 2020 draft where the video has Frank saying the Colts wanted to get more explosive and make more big plays.  They targeted Pittman and Taylor and were both shocked and thrilled to be able to draft both. 

For the record,  I like Jacobs.  Always have.  Think I mocked him going in the late first.  He was a very unique player.   I’m just not sure everyone saw him as a first round talent?   He had a very unusual career at Bama. 

[richard pallo]

1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:

We’re talking about 2019, right?    The Colts traded down and ended up with 3 second round picks and a third.   And didn’t use one of them in a running back.   
 

That was the year where the Colts revealed their draft video and Frank is taking laps around the draft room shouting 4 for 4!   4 for 4!    And none were a running back. 
 

The Colts didn’t use any of their day three picks on a running back.   So the Colts took zero RBs in the draft.   
 

It was the 2020 draft where the video has Frank saying the Colts wanted to get more explosive and make more big plays.  They targeted Pittman and Taylor and we’re both shocked and thrilled to be able to draft both. 

For the record,  I like Jacobs.  Always have.  Think I mocked him going in the late first.  He was a very unique player.   I’m just not sure everyone saw him as a first round talent?   He had a very unusual career at Bama. 

Of course I’m talking about 2019.  I remember people were telling me you don’t draft a running back in the 1st rd.  I wanted Jacobs for the Colts but the Raiders took him before we had a chance.  The Colts apparently felt there were better players available at other positions once Jacobs was gone.  Thats pretty obvious.  That’s what happens in drafts.  You don’t force a pick if you don’t think a player will meet your expectations.  Good news.  We got Taylor the following year.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

53 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

How do you know trading back into the first would’ve been extremely cheap?   Especially for a quarterback?    You’re totally guessing.   
 

Ballard is long on record that trading back into the first in any draft is very expensive.  And his is the only vote that counts. 

Did you see what it cost packers to move up. It was cheap. It would of only been a few spots.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

45 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

You know the Colts were high on Jacobs?   Really?   How?   
 

And maybe the Colts weren’t as high as you thought? 

Colts did have Jacobs in on a top 30 visit.

[NewColtsFan]

9 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Of course I’m talking about 2019.  I remember people were telling me you don’t draft a running back in the 1st rd.  I wanted Jacobs for the Colts but the Raiders took him before we had a chance.  The Colts apparently felt there were better players available at other positions once Jacobs was gone.  Thats pretty obvious.  That’s what happens in drafts.  You don’t force a pick if you don’t think a player will meet your expectations.  Good news.  We got Taylor the following year.

“Once Jacobs was gone…”

 

You're assuming the Colts would’ve taken him had he been there.   You believe it.  I don’t based on the reasons I’ve stated. 

[NewColtsFan]

9 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Colts did have Jacobs in on a top 30 visit.

The Colts bring in all sorts of players on top-30 visits.   It’s not just for first round players.  

[w87r]

Alright, this is a Richardson thread, that's like the 14th post about Josh Jacobs. I'm even guilty of 1.

 

Can we move on?

 

 

 

[stitches]

Some thoughts from college football analysts and fans after they watched Florida's offense without Richardson:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are tons and tons more... 

 

 

 

[stitches]

Darius Slay on Colts joint practice, Anthony Richardson, and pre-season game(starts talking about it at about 3:17):

 

 

 

 

[Jason_]

On 8/27/2023 at 1:24 PM, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Semantics 

 

No, not really

[stitches]

 

 

[CR91]

 

Love seeing that 

[stitches]

9 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Love seeing that 

I just came here to post this. At this point it qualifies as too good to be true, I think. AR has been exemplary when it comes to attitude and work ethic in this pre-season. I really really hope he becomes really good. I don't think I've ever wanted a player to be great more than I do with Richardson now.