Why are some teams always in playoff contention

[ColtStrong2013]

48 minutes ago, Superman said:

If you could guarantee a team a SB trophy in exchange for 3-4 years of mediocrity, I think everyone would take the guaranteed SB. Of course, there is no guarantee.

The Lions would trade just a try at a superbowl for more years of mediocrity. I couldn't believe the collapse last night and felt for the fans. 

 

[DavePSL]

49 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

while I did say Irsay may have to be more cautious with cash spent than other owners, I never compared Ballard’s way of saving money to another team. I just stated that he saved Irsay money. And going back to the beginning of his tenure, there is little to argue that he hasn’t. A great deal of the cash spent was to players he drafted, which was the plan from the beginning and one that Irsay was obviously fond of since he hired him with that plan. 

 

they were 1 game away from being as low as the colts on the only metric people pay attention to, and you mostly supported my point even when disagreeing. It is about having an established qb. They had the Goff/Mcvay connection and the Stafford/Mcvay connection throughout all of Ballard’s tenure with the colts. The difference between the wins and losses of the two teams has been exactly that + Aaron Donald. We will never have a player like Aaron Donald. I’m not sure there will be one again. He’s that good. My biggest argument to the Ballard hate on this forum (not accusing you, I know where you stand) is that what we have done versus the expectation is literally the quarterback position. Yes it’s his knock, it didn’t get solved, we can argue it all day long. But in my opinion, there has not been a significant difference in the colts and the rams- it’s two players. And it makes up the difference in a few games give or take each year. 

Some Perspective----Bad drafting has killed us more than anything.

21- 1st or 2nd day picks...2 probowlers

First 3 drafts, 12- 1st or day 2 day picks, 2 out of those 12 are still on the  team. 10 are gone.

52 players since Ballard has been here (not counting this year)...again, 2 probowlers. Thats not close to good

enough when their picked that high. JT and Q are the only elite players still on the roster out of those 52 players. That has nothing to do with who our QB is and why we are void of talent.

Ballard drafted 38 players from 2017 to 2020....5 are on the roster still under contract(hopefully we sign Pittman, Grove and JB). That's bad and its why we keep playing young players and redrafting the same positions over and over. What compounds it is Ballard doesn't sigh elite players through FA. Amazing he still has a job and even more amazing that I still think he can do the job (mostly because I think last year's draft was really good)

 

Shouldn't surprise us what our over record is since Ballad has been here.

 

[ArmchairQB]

26 minutes ago, DavePSL said:

Some Perspective----Bad drafting has killed us more than anything.

21- 1st or 2nd day picks...2 probowlers

First 3 drafts, 12- 1st or day 2 day picks, 2 out of those 12 are still on the  team. 10 are gone.

52 players since Ballard has been here (not counting this year)...again, 2 probowlers. Thats not close to good

enough when their picked that high. JT and Q are the only elite players still on the roster out of those 52 players. That has nothing to do with who our QB is and why we are void of talent.

Ballard drafted 38 players from 2017 to 2020....5 are on the roster still under contract(hopefully we sign Pittman, Grove and JB). That's bad and its why we keep playing young players and redrafting the same positions over and over. What compounds it is Ballard doesn't sigh elite players through FA. Amazing he still has a job and even more amazing that I still think he can do the job (mostly because I think last year's draft was really good)

 

Shouldn't surprise us what our over record is since Ballad has been here.

 

We have different perspectives on what makes a draft successful.  Pro Bowl nods are not the only measurement of success, not to mention there’s a lot of factors that play into getting selected for a pro bowl.  
 

I see the better metric as how many of your draft picks are starters or major contributors.  In this metric Ballards drafting has been much better.  He also has excelled in finding high value players later in the draft which is where a lot of teams miss.  Here are all of Ballards draft picks who are currently starters (off the top of my head).  I didn’t even put Richardson on there as he hasn’t contributed enough yet. 

 

Raimann

Nelson

Fries

Smith

Pittman

Downs

Pierce

Granson

JT

Mo (UDFA)

J Jones

Ju Brents

Blackmon

Paye

Stewart

Lewis

Cross

Thomas

Moore (UDFA signed after he was cut)

Franklin

Speed

Odeyingbo

 

not to mention players who left in free agency but were quality draft picks such as Okereke.  
 

you can look at the data multiple different ways to fit a narrative.  

 

[Nesjan3]

1 hour ago, ArmchairQB said:

We have different perspectives on what makes a draft successful.  Pro Bowl nods are not the only measurement of success, not to mention there’s a lot of factors that play into getting selected for a pro bowl.  
 

I see the better metric as how many of your draft picks are starters or major contributors.  In this metric Ballards drafting has been much better.  He also has excelled in finding high value players later in the draft which is where a lot of teams miss.  Here are all of Ballards draft picks who are currently starters (off the top of my head).  I didn’t even put Richardson on there as he hasn’t contributed enough yet. 

 

Raimann

Nelson

Fries

Smith

Pittman

Downs

Pierce

Granson

JT

Mo (UDFA)

J Jones

Ju Brents

Blackmon

Paye

Stewart

Lewis

Cross

Thomas

Moore (UDFA signed after he was cut)

Franklin

Speed

Odeyingbo

 

not to mention players who left in free agency but were quality draft picks such as Okereke.  
 

you can look at the data multiple different ways to fit a narrative.  

 

Just because those players are starting doesn't mean they are great or even good picks. Facts are those players are starters on a team that has averaged 7.5 wins per season under Ballard since the start of 2017. Minimal playoff opportunity, even less playoff success and 0 division titles. All those things need to improve, and a huge reason its so low is his drafting, FA strategy and unwillingness to prioritize premium positions. 

[DavePSL]

1 hour ago, ArmchairQB said:

We have different perspectives on what makes a draft successful.  Pro Bowl nods are not the only measurement of success, not to mention there’s a lot of factors that play into getting selected for a pro bowl.  
 

I see the better metric as how many of your draft picks are starters or major contributors.  In this metric Ballards drafting has been much better.  He also has excelled in finding high value players later in the draft which is where a lot of teams miss.  Here are all of Ballards draft picks who are currently starters (off the top of my head).  I didn’t even put Richardson on there as he hasn’t contributed enough yet. 

 

Raimann

Nelson

Fries

Smith

Pittman

Downs

Pierce

Granson

JT

Mo (UDFA)

J Jones

Ju Brents

Blackmon

Paye

Stewart

Lewis

Cross

Thomas

Moore (UDFA signed after he was cut)

Franklin

Speed

Odeyingbo

 

not to mention players who left in free agency but were quality draft picks such as Okereke.  
 

you can look at the data multiple different ways to fit a narrative.  

 

Of course their Ballard's starters, he's been here for 7 years. That's part of the issue. Just because they start doesn't mean they are good players. As a matter of fact, except Jones, Brents and Downs, the rest are a part of a bad team last year which got us the 4th pick in the draft. Dayo and Lewis are not starters and Thomas never should have been. Ask yourself this. The Texans won our division and were in the same position as we were last year, maybe worse. How many of those Colt players could start for them because that's probably the standard now in our division and a better barometer on how good our so-called starters are.. The biggest misconception some Colts fan have is that you're a good player if you start for the Colts. Roc ya sin started for us 3 years, he's on the bench in Baltimore and let go from the Raiders. Parris Cambell started for us, he was inactive for the Giants toward the end. Pryor is a backup in SF but started for us. A lot of Ballard's picks aren't even in the NFL anymore..............Ballard has been solid to great in drafting OL, RB and LBer and that's about it.....JMO

[Superman]

3 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

while I did say Irsay may have to be more cautious with cash spent than other owners, I never compared Ballard’s way of saving money to another team. I just stated that he saved Irsay money. And going back to the beginning of his tenure, there is little to argue that he hasn’t. A great deal of the cash spent was to players he drafted, which was the plan from the beginning and one that Irsay was obviously fond of since he hired him with that plan. 

 

I guess I don't understand how Irsay has saved money, in light of the way cash/cap spending works in the NFL. The Colts have not been aggressive in signing free agents, but they've spent money just the same, on their own players.

 

With the Rams, we might disagree on some specifics. But fundamentally, the question is about the pros and cons of a more aggressive team management strategy, vs a more disciplined approach. The aggressive method might spike your odds in any given season, but there are no guarantees, and then you have to let players walk and probably have some mediocre seasons in between. The more disciplined approach relies heavily on your ability to draft well consistently, and you can usually keep your best players on second contracts, but you have a more steady range of outcomes every year. And again, no guarantees.

 

I'm not trying to be critical of Ballard, because I think Irsay and Reich are the main reasons we didn't get QB right for three years. But it's also true that Ballard's more disciplined approach hasn't resulted in a strong overall roster, mainly because our drafts haven't yielded enough playmakers, IMO. (And I wonder if there have been some player development issues along the way.) So whatever benefit we'd expect to gain from the more disciplined method hasn't been realized. Instead, we've been pretty mediocre since 2019, and it's starting to get old for a lot of people.

 

I think there's a lot of nuance that gets left out when the Ballard debates start, and I find it frustrating at times. Especially since Irsay decided to keep Ballard and fire Reich, and then we drafted a QB, it seems obvious that there was a reset after 2022. And now it makes sense to wait and see how it goes for the next couple seasons. But I do think Ballard needs to find another gear moving forward, and this offseason seems like the right time to get going.

 

[ColtStrong2013]

41 minutes ago, Superman said:

But I do think Ballard needs to find another gear moving forward, and this offseason seems like the right time to get going.

 

I can't imagine anyone on this forum does not feel this way and would not be happy with a big offseason. 

[ArmchairQB]

4 hours ago, DavePSL said:

Of course their Ballard's starters, he's been here for 7 years. That's part of the issue. Just because they start doesn't mean they are good players. As a matter of fact, except Jones, Brents and Downs, the rest are a part of a bad team last year which got us the 4th pick in the draft. Dayo and Lewis are not starters and Thomas never should have been. Ask yourself this. The Texans won our division and were in the same position as we were last year, maybe worse. How many of those Colt players could start for them because that's probably the standard now in our division and a better barometer on how good our so-called starters are.. The biggest misconception some Colts fan have is that you're a good player if you start for the Colts. Roc ya sin started for us 3 years, he's on the bench in Baltimore and let go from the Raiders. Parris Cambell started for us, he was inactive for the Giants toward the end. Pryor is a backup in SF but started for us. A lot of Ballard's picks aren't even in the NFL anymore..............Ballard has been solid to great in drafting OL, RB and LBer and that's about it.....JMO

Yea,  we will just have to agree to disagree.  On multiple fronts.  I think we saw this year that our primary issues over the past few years were QB and coach related because the roster wasn’t significantly different between 22 and 23.  
 

I don’t believe that Houston is some kind of standard either.  They have their QB,  hopefully we have ours now and I think we have our coach now.  I have gone on record multiple times saying Ballard has tied his ultimate legacy to AR.  If AR fails Ballard is done.  But we competed with Houston and beat them with Gardner Minshew so I can’t say that they are somehow light years better.  We all saw what happened when they met a real playoff team.  They were playing the same cupcake schedule we were this year.  Next year will tell a lot.  Also hold the hot take on Caserio.  It took him 3 years of playing tank bowl to get to this year.  He drafted a consensus QB at 2 and suddenly they started winning games.  The QB matters.
 

@Nesjan3 I also think it’s a fiction that we don’t have multiple starters that could start on a lot of other teams.  Maybe not everyone I listed but more than a few of them 

[ArmchairQB]

2 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

I can't imagine anyone on this forum does not feel this way and would not be happy with a big offseason. 

I think it’s safe to say having our presumed QB and coach in place we should see a bit more aggression now.  Ballard said as much 

[DavePSL]

7 hours ago, ArmchairQB said:

Yea,  we will just have to agree to disagree.  On multiple fronts.  I think we saw this year that our primary issues over the past few years were QB and coach related because the roster wasn’t significantly different between 22 and 23.  
 

I don’t believe that Houston is some kind of standard either.  They have their QB,  hopefully we have ours now and I think we have our coach now.  I have gone on record multiple times saying Ballard has tied his ultimate legacy to AR.  If AR fails Ballard is done.  But we competed with Houston and beat them with Gardner Minshew so I can’t say that they are somehow light years better.  We all saw what happened when they met a real playoff team.  They were playing the same cupcake schedule we were this year.  Next year will tell a lot.  Also hold the hot take on Caserio.  It took him 3 years of playing tank bowl to get to this year.  He drafted a consensus QB at 2 and suddenly they started winning games.  The QB matters.
 

@Nesjan3 I also think it’s a fiction that we don’t have multiple starters that could start on a lot of other teams.  Maybe not everyone I listed but more than a few of them 

Whether we like it or not, the Texans are the standard because they won the division. Doesn't mean they're some great team just means they are who we are chasing. As for our starters......... You tried to imply because we have starters from Ballard's drafts that they are good players. So, I ask, could any of our players that started, particularly at premier positions, start on Houston. WR's? TE? LT? DE? CB? Safety? QB? It's more than the Texans just got a QB and FTR, I love AR and think he is the least of our worries. Ballard is now tied to more than AR. We all heard him a month ago say this team should compete for the division and be a playoff team. Regardless of how AR plays, that's the new standard right out of Ballard's mouth. I think with the help of Steichen identifying areas of need and upgrades, Ballard can do it. The question is, will he take the leap and input from his coach and get it done.......Anything less, IMO, he's gone.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Drafting your future QB is already the best way to have stability got years.

[2006Coltsbestever]

19 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Drafting your future QB is already the best way to have stability got years.

Unless he is a bust. We tried that with Jeff George and it backfired. A lot of teams have went that route and failed. Chargers/Leaf, Jets/Wilson, Raiders/Russell, Browns/Couch, Titans/Mariota, even Watson ultimately didn't work out in Houston nor did Mayfield with the Browns. Busts happen a lot or the pick by a team doesn't work out. It isn't looking good for Bryce Young either.

[chad72]

3 hours ago, DavePSL said:

Whether we like it or not, the Texans are the standard because they won the division. Doesn't mean they're some great team just means they are who we are chasing. As for our starters......... You tried to imply because we have starters from Ballard's drafts that they are good players. So, I ask, could any of our players that started, particularly at premier positions, start on Houston. WR's? TE? LT? DE? CB? Safety? QB? It's more than the Texans just got a QB and FTR, I love AR and think he is the least of our worries. Ballard is now tied to more than AR. We all heard him a month ago say this team should compete for the division and be a playoff team. Regardless of how AR plays, that's the new standard right out of Ballard's mouth. I think with the help of Steichen identifying areas of need and upgrades, Ballard can do it. The question is, will he take the leap and input from his coach and get it done.......Anything less, IMO, he's gone.

 

We have the LT and the CBs will improve. Pittman would start instantly on the Texans' WR corp.

 

QB is the equalizer, can make an average TE and WR look better, and a very good TE and WR look elite. AR is the key to the Colts' kingdom of success.  

[DavePSL]

16 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

We have the LT and the CBs will improve. Pittman would start instantly on the Texans' WR corp.

 

QB is the equalizer, can make an average TE and WR look better, and a very good TE and WR look elite. AR is the key to the Colts' kingdom of success.  

AR will only be able to do so much, and we can't expect him to turn average players into players that win us a SB or even a division. We all saw the difference when Tua, Hurts, Allen, Lamar, Goff got better weapons and we watched Mahomes struggle more when he didn't have those same weapons.

 

BTW, i asked what players could start over the team(Texans) we have to beat moving forward?

Raimann over Tunsil? NO

I like our CBs and they will improve but as of now, they're not starting over Stingley and Nelson

Pittman is not starting over Collins and probably not over Tank. So, are we ok saying that Pittman can start over their WR3 and he's supposed to be AR's WR1? I hope not and that's why I keep saying we have to be better at acquiring talent and get AR better weapons NOW because if we don't, we failed AR bigtime. We have the OL and RB and that's huge so were not that far away, but Ballard has to take the next step, which to this point, he hasn't, probably because of his old school mentality (run the ball and stop the run). I think with Steichen, he will.

Remember, the Texans, Jags, Titans will add talent and get better too.

[chad72]

15 minutes ago, DavePSL said:

AR will only be able to do so much, and we can't expect him to turn average players into players that win us a SB or even a division. We all saw the difference when Tua, Hurts, Allen, Lamar, Goff got better weapons and we watched Mahomes struggle more when he didn't have those same weapons.

 

BTW, i asked what players could start over the team(Texans) we have to beat moving forward?

Raimann over Tunsil? NO

I like our CBs and they will improve but as of now, they're not starting over Stingley and Nelson

Pittman is not starting over Collins and probably not over Tank. So, are we ok saying that Pittman can start over their WR3 and he's supposed to be AR's WR1? I hope not and that's why I keep saying we have to be better at acquiring talent and get AR better weapons NOW because if we don't, we failed AR bigtime. We have the OL and RB and that's huge so were not that far away, but Ballard has to take the next step, which to this point, he hasn't, probably because of his old school mentality (run the ball and stop the run). I think with Steichen, he will.

Remember, the Texans, Jags, Titans will add talent and get better too.

 

You are selling both Raimann and Pittman short. You are not even in the ballpark by saying Pittman is a WR3. That shows your disdain and you should read all the information in the Pittman thread and look at the consistency Raimann put up over the course of the year.

 

You should be a Texans fan then if you think so little of our players, since you are clearly uninformed. You can do your own research, don't expect me to provide it for you.

[DavePSL]

I never said Pittman was a WR3....I said he would not start over Collins and probably not Tank...Somebody Give me a reason why you would bench Collins or Tank to play Pittman? Doesn't mean Pittman is a WR3, doesn't even mean he's not a WR1. What it does mean is we need more talent with Pittman and more weapons for AR. Would you start Pittman over Chase and Higgins? AJ and Adams? Aiyuk and Deebo? Hill or Waddle? I'm not under valuing Pittman, it's some Colts fans over valuing Pittman and thinking he along with Downs and Pierce are all great weapons  for AR  to compete with other top AFC teams .

 

What's so wrong with admitting Tunsil is better than Raimann right now ? BTW, I said our OL is solid!

Or that Collins is better than Pittman? It's not based on my opinion. It's based on PRODUCTION and stats (facts)

There is nothing wrong with giving my honest evaluation of Colts players against other team's players. Doesn't mean I hate any Colts players ............Jesus, I love my wife, but I'll be honest, she's not as pretty as Jessica Alba

[chad72]

2 hours ago, DavePSL said:

I never said Pittman was a WR3....I said he would not start over Collins and probably not Tank...Somebody Give me a reason why you would bench Collins or Tank to play Pittman? Doesn't mean Pittman is a WR3, doesn't even mean he's not a WR1. What it does mean is we need more talent with Pittman and more weapons for AR. Would you start Pittman over Chase and Higgins? AJ and Adams? Aiyuk and Deebo? Hill or Waddle? I'm not under valuing Pittman, it's some Colts fans over valuing Pittman and thinking he along with Downs and Pierce are all great weapons  for AR  to compete with other top AFC teams .

 

What's so wrong with admitting Tunsil is better than Raimann right now ? BTW, I said our OL is solid!

Or that Collins is better than Pittman? It's not based on my opinion. It's based on PRODUCTION and stats (facts)

There is nothing wrong with giving my honest evaluation of Colts players against other team's players. Doesn't mean I hate any Colts players ............Jesus, I love my wife, but I'll be honest, she's not as pretty as Jessica Alba

 

 

Collins has had 1 year with Stroud and hasn't had 2 or more good years like Pittman, so I wouldn't get carried away until he has another good year like this. Look at the consistency of Pittman with QBs like Wentz, Ryan, Minshew, so it is not apples to apples whatsoever to make a comparison, that is my point.

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PittMi01.htm

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CollNi00.htm

 

 

Tunsil, yeah he has been very good, no doubt but it doesn't mean Raimann has been outstanding for the Colts too. In fact, Raimann has been better this year based on PFF scores, so do we call Raimann better than Tunsil based on your "Nico is better than MPJ, Johnny come lately" logic? Raimann has been outstanding for us. 

 

https://www.pff.com/nfl/players/bernhard-raimann/77948

 

https://www.pff.com/nfl/players/laremy-tunsil/10647

 

There, I did your research for you. Yes, the Colts need a little explosiveness on offense but you need to understand the whole body of work and the potential before just categorizing ours as not as good as the others. We have several good players, need a few tweaks and infusion of no more than tops, a handful of players via draft and FA, IMO, to win the division. But the fact remains, if the QB AR isn't as explosive as what we have drafted him for, it comes down like a house of cards. AR is still the key. Stroud put the Texans over the edge, we expect AR to do it similarly for us.

[ArmchairQB]

2 hours ago, DavePSL said:

I never said Pittman was a WR3....I said he would not start over Collins and probably not Tank...Somebody Give me a reason why you would bench Collins or Tank to play Pittman? Doesn't mean Pittman is a WR3, doesn't even mean he's not a WR1. What it does mean is we need more talent with Pittman and more weapons for AR. Would you start Pittman over Chase and Higgins? AJ and Adams? Aiyuk and Deebo? Hill or Waddle? I'm not under valuing Pittman, it's some Colts fans over valuing Pittman and thinking he along with Downs and Pierce are all great weapons  for AR  to compete with other top AFC teams .

 

What's so wrong with admitting Tunsil is better than Raimann right now ? BTW, I said our OL is solid!

Or that Collins is better than Pittman? It's not based on my opinion. It's based on PRODUCTION and stats (facts)

There is nothing wrong with giving my honest evaluation of Colts players against other team's players. Doesn't mean I hate any Colts players ............Jesus, I love my wife, but I'll be honest, she's not as pretty as Jessica Alba

But you did cherry pick particular positions that you believe the Texans are better than us in.  You conveniently didn’t say RB or LB or OG because they didn’t fit the narrative.   Even though all these positions are Ballard picks.  Without a doubt EJ Speed and Franklin would start on Houston and Taylor goes without saying.
 

As far as Pittman goes the Texans don’t have any receivers like Pittman who is a big physical receiver.  So yes I think he starts on Houston.  I also think Blackmon or Kenny Moore starts on the Texans.  Their secondary isn’t so hot.  

[DavePSL]

3 hours ago, ArmchairQB said:

But you did cherry pick particular positions that you believe the Texans are better than us in.  You conveniently didn’t say RB or LB or OG because they didn’t fit the narrative.   Even though all these positions are Ballard picks.  Without a doubt EJ Speed and Franklin would start on Houston and Taylor goes without saying.
 

As far as Pittman goes the Texans don’t have any receivers like Pittman who is a big physical receiver.  So yes I think he starts on Houston.  I also think Blackmon or Kenny Moore starts on the Texans.  Their secondary isn’t so hot.  

I didn't cherry pick anything. I said "PREMEIR" positions and RB, LBer and OG are not considered premier positions. QB, LT, WR, Edge, CB are considered premier positions. I also have said many times, Ballard is great at picking OL, RB and Lbers.

 

So if Pittman starts, who gets benched?

2 games against Texans this year

Pittman 13 catches 100 yards

Collins 16 catches 341 YARDS!!!!!!!!

Of course Pittman can start for their wr3 Woods but I damn sure aint benching Collins for Pittman.

 

I find it funny that Pittman gets a pass on his numbers because of Qb play and then people will turn right around and talk about how Collins hasn't produced before this year. Think about what's wrong with that logic?

 

[VikingsFanInChennai]

2 hours ago, DavePSL said:

I didn't cherry pick anything. I said "PREMEIR" positions and RB, LBer and OG are not considered premier positions. QB, LT, WR, Edge, CB are considered premier positions. I also have said many times, Ballard is great at picking OL, RB and Lbers.

 

So if Pittman starts, who gets benched?

2 games against Texans this year

Pittman 13 catches 100 yards

Collins 16 catches 341 YARDS!!!!!!!!

Of course Pittman can start for their wr3 Woods but I damn sure aint benching Collins for Pittman.

 

I find it funny that Pittman gets a pass on his numbers because of Qb play and then people will turn right around and talk about how Collins hasn't produced before this year. Think about what's wrong with that logic?

 

Texans draft started in 3rd round only in 2021, two of their picks - Collins and TE Jordan - look like great picks. Collins is very physical too, and explosive. Pittman is consistent WR2 for most teams, and Colts need an explosive receiver, in addition. 

[ArmchairQB]

On 1/30/2024 at 6:59 PM, DavePSL said:

I didn't cherry pick anything. I said "PREMEIR" positions and RB, LBer and OG are not considered premier positions. QB, LT, WR, Edge, CB are considered premier positions. I also have said many times, Ballard is great at picking OL, RB and Lbers.

 

So if Pittman starts, who gets benched?

2 games against Texans this year

Pittman 13 catches 100 yards

Collins 16 catches 341 YARDS!!!!!!!!

Of course Pittman can start for their wr3 Woods but I damn sure aint benching Collins for Pittman.

 

I find it funny that Pittman gets a pass on his numbers because of Qb play and then people will turn right around and talk about how Collins hasn't produced before this year. Think about what's wrong with that logic?

 

I don’t think it’s unfair.  It’s exactly the same thing.  Collins did not produce without a good QB.  Pittman has produced without anyone equal to CJ at QB.  But you’re arguing one is better than the other based solely off one year of production with a capable QB.  While others are arguing Pittman has at least been consistent throughout his career.  Not sure why you think this is being hypocritical or giving one a pass. 

[ColtStrong2013]

On 1/16/2024 at 1:00 AM, VikingsFanInChennai said:

There will be zero major question mark on 49ers if they fail to win Super Bowl this year.

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/39505917/49ers-lose-chiefs-third-straight-super-bowl-defeat-championship-window-closing

 

"Is the 49ers' title window closed? Why this latest loss should have them questioning everything."

 

I take nothing away from the 49ers. My original post was regarding if they didn't even make the superbowl, which they not only did, but were literally a play away from winning it... and at several points of the game. However, I still stand by my comment of having question marks. I don't think Purdy is the big question anymore, although he is not Patrick Mahomes (no one is.) I think it's simply if they can get over the hump with Kyle Shannahan, who everyone will point fingers at. I don't see their roster getting better than it was this season. We can argue on that until we are red in the face, but it's an opinion that I can point to data on the ages of the backbone of the roster and simply ask "do you expect them to not decline? and how are they going to replace these guys with better talent?" 

People jumped down my throat on this forum for making a simple statement, as if it hasn't been posed by plenty. I also stated it would be a major disappointment if they didn't "make the superbowl." Guess what? They made it, and they are even more disappointed by not winning.  "We've been so close so many times that it's only so many more opportunities that we have," Bosa said on Sunday.

[chad72]

5 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/39505917/49ers-lose-chiefs-third-straight-super-bowl-defeat-championship-window-closing

 

"Is the 49ers' title window closed? Why this latest loss should have them questioning everything."

 

I take nothing away from the 49ers. My original post was regarding if they didn't even make the superbowl, which they not only did, but were literally a play away from winning it... and at several points of the game. However, I still stand by my comment of having question marks. I don't think Purdy is the big question anymore, although he is not Patrick Mahomes (no one is.) I think it's simply if they can get over the hump with Kyle Shannahan, who everyone will point fingers at. I don't see their roster getting better than it was this season. We can argue on that until we are red in the face, but it's an opinion that I can point to data on the ages of the backbone of the roster and simply ask "do you expect them to not decline? and how are they going to replace these guys with better talent?" 

People jumped down my throat on this forum for making a simple statement, as if it hasn't been posed by plenty. I also stated it would be a major disappointment if they didn't "make the superbowl." Guess what? They made it, and they are even more disappointed by not winning.  "We've been so close so many times that it's only so many more opportunities that we have," Bosa said on Sunday.

 

Kyle Shanahan has just had the misfortune of running into Brady once and Mahomes twice.

[ColtStrong2013]

44 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Kyle Shanahan has just had the misfortune of running into Brady once and Mahomes twice.

Peyton Manning had the misfortune of running into Brady and the Pittsburgh Steelers in the playoffs too. 
 

Didn’t stop people from questioning if he could ever get it done. I’m not dogging him by any means. I believe he’s one of the best offensive minds in the history of the game. He had some questionable decisions last night, as does everyone. But my stance is that he will only get more reliant on Brock Purdy to win a championship. That’s the “window” that I see. It’s not saying they have a window to win one, they very well might next year or down the road. It’s that they have missed the opportunity when it was in front of them and nothing is guaranteed in this league. Tom Brady sat for a decade without a championship. Pat Mahomes could do the same. I like Brock. I think he showed a lot this year. As I watched last night though, to me he’s a product of a system. That doesn’t mean he’s not on his way to being great. It just means that he has a great offensive mind at head coach and a ton of talent surrounding him, so there is currently an unknown of what it will look for him when the surrounding talent isn’t as strong (and it inevitably will be.) 

[chad72]

37 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Peyton Manning had the misfortune of running into Brady and the Pittsburgh Steelers in the playoffs too. 
 

Didn’t stop people from questioning if he could ever get it done. I’m not dogging him by any means. I believe he’s one of the best offensive minds in the history of the game. He had some questionable decisions last night, as does everyone. But my stance is that he will only get more reliant on Brock Purdy to win a championship. That’s the “window” that I see. It’s not saying they have a window to win one, they very well might next year or down the road. It’s that they have missed the opportunity when it was in front of them and nothing is guaranteed in this league. Tom Brady sat for a decade without a championship. Pat Mahomes could do the same. I like Brock. I think he showed a lot this year. As I watched last night though, to me he’s a product of a system. That doesn’t mean he’s not on his way to being great. It just means that he has a great offensive mind at head coach and a ton of talent surrounding him, so there is currently an unknown of what it will look for him when the surrounding talent isn’t as strong (and it inevitably will be.) 

 

The thing is Kyle Shanahan doesn't control the defensive aspect of the 49ers. It is hard to always outscore in the playoffs. Belichick is the ONLY head coach with a defensive background to shut down Patrick Mahomes for an entire half, happened in Mahomes' 1st year of starting in the 2018 AFCCG.

 

San Fran has so much offensive talent, they are not going away.

[Myles]

Purdy has gained experience in this run.  I think he will be good for many years so San Fran is still a threat.

[ColtStrong2013]

20 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

The thing is Kyle Shanahan doesn't control the defensive aspect of the 49ers. It is hard to always outscore in the playoffs. Belichick is the ONLY head coach with a defensive background to shut down Patrick Mahomes for an entire half, happened in Mahomes' 1st year of starting in the 2018 AFCCG.

 

San Fran has so much offensive talent, they are not going away.

 

I agree for the most part, except for it was obvious that he was screaming in the mic to Wilkes to stop dropping five back and change it up. He even called a timeout to put a stop to it. So, in essence, he does have control of the game in that regard. To assume Shannahan doesn't have control of the defense is like saying that Bill Bellichick didn't control the offense... even though there is plenty of footage of he and Brady sitting in his office running through film and gameplanning on the offensive side of the ball. 

 

I don't believe San Fran is going away, at all. I just know that they aren't getting younger. They are set to lose some key pieces. McCaffery is only going to have so many years to play at this level. Kittle will be 31 this year. Their all-world Left Tackle is 36 this summer. Things are going to change. Again, they are going to get more reliant on Brock Purdy elevating his game. It's not saying he won't. But it's not guaranteed that he does. He couldn't beat Pat Mahomes with a disparity of $37 million in cap hit. He has two more seasons before he's making the big bucks.

[chad72]

1 minute ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

I agree for the most part, except for it was obvious that he was screaming in the mic to Wilkes to stop dropping five back and change it up. He even called a timeout to put a stop to it. So, in essence, he does have control of the game in that regard. To assume Shannahan doesn't have control of the defense is saying the Bill Bellichick didn't control the offense... even though there is plenty of footage of he and Brady sitting in his offense running through film and gameplanning on the offensive side of the ball. 

 

I don't believe San Fran is going away, at all. I just know that they aren't getting younger. They are set to lose some key pieces. McCaffery is only going to have so many years to play at this level. Kittle will be 31 this year. Their all-world Left Tackle is 36 this summer. Things are going to change. Again, they are going to get more reliant on Brock Purdy elevating his game. It's not saying he won't. But it's not guaranteed that he does. He couldn't beat Pat Mahomes with a disparity of $37 million in cap hit. He has two more seasons before he's making the big bucks.

 

The Chiefs erased Kittle from the game. So it was Jennings that benefited from it. 

 

Remember, when the Patriots dynasty, after going back to back, losing Romeo Crennel as DC who went to become HC. Then Charlie Weis went to Notre Dame. That is when Peyton started doing better against that Belichick D, in 2005, when we exploded for a 40-21 win at Foxboro on SNF with Marvin spiking the ball after a TD in Samuel's face, one of my favorite memories.  

 

That is less likely to happen in this current environment in this league because a defensive guy like Steve Spagnuolos isn't going to be as sought after nowadays. I am shocked he didn't get any HC interviews, to be honest, probably because The Falcons would rather hire a young Raheem Morris than an older Spags or Belichick, I guess. So, that works out well for The Chiefs for the next year.

 

It is the best 1-2 punch where 2 head coaches are coaching the offense and defense along with an elite QB in his prime. 27 points is still the most any team scored against the Chiefs, all season long. Absolutely mind blowing consistency from that D!!! 

[ColtStrong2013]

1 minute ago, chad72 said:

The Chiefs erased Kittle from the game. So it was Jennings that benefited from it. 

 

Exactly. What happens when Kittle isn't in the game? Things get a lot easier for the defensive side of the ball, and a lot more difficult on Brock Purdy. 

 

2 minutes ago, chad72 said:

It is the best 1-2 punch where 2 head coaches are coaching the offense and defense along with an elite QB in his prime. 27 points is still the most any team scored against the Chiefs, all season long. Absolutely mind blowing consistency from that D!!! 

 

Yeah, Spags was great this year. The defense was a legit component of their season. They rode the defense at the beginning of the season, when they were clearly struggling. Aside from a weak AFC West, they could have easily been in trouble this season with the offenses woes. 

[ColtStrong2013]

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/39511676/49ers-players-say-know-super-bowl-rules

 

And then this comes out. 

How does a coaching staff not prepare professional players on overtime rules in the playoffs? Not just at the beginning of the playoffs, but in the two week preparation for the superbowl. Andy Reid did all year apparently. No doubt Bill Bellichick would. I would hope that Shane Steichen would be that detailed... But Kyle Shannahan? Not addressed with the team. Players reportedly didn't know the rules until they were put up on the big screen at Allegiant Stadium. WHAT? LOLLL.. this is unbelievable. 

[chad72]

25 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/39511676/49ers-players-say-know-super-bowl-rules

 

And then this comes out. 

How does a coaching staff not prepare professional players on overtime rules in the playoffs? Not just at the beginning of the playoffs, but in the two week preparation for the superbowl. Andy Reid did all year apparently. No doubt Bill Bellichick would. I would hope that Shane Steichen would be that detailed... But Kyle Shannahan? Not addressed with the team. Players reportedly didn't know the rules until they were put up on the big screen at Allegiant Stadium. WHAT? LOLLL.. this is unbelievable. 

 

It would have been downright embarrassing if the 49ers did score a TD in OT and started jumping like they won the SB. It could have exposed even more guys who didn't know the rules then. I guess in a way, a few other guys were spared from that.  

[ColtStrong2013]

6 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

It would have been downright embarrassing if the 49ers did score a TD in OT and started jumping like they won the SB. It could have exposed even more guys who didn't know the rules then. I guess in a way, a few other guys were spared from that.  

can you imagine? 
 

if half the sideline was running onto the field and Gatorade bathing Shanahan? HAHA. Wow- what a site that would have been. 
 

they showed Mahomes a couple times during that drive, right up to the fieldgoal, and he was as cool as a cucumber. 
 

when they showed the 49ers on the bench during the Chiefs drive, they all looked ready to vomit.