If we wind up with the first pick.

[Stephen]

Losses on deck for Carson Beck lol

[coming on strong]

as long as we stay away from deon sanders son .  I rather not have that circus here ....

[ImissPeyton18]

Ballard will trade back instead of getting a blue chip player. This will only be fixed if the right people get fired before the draft but I would not hold my breath. This feels like the Jeff George or mike Pagel days. By the way, Kansas City sure has had lots of success without Ballard?

[bsteves]

The first pick will never be ours. As bad as we have been, the panthers have been a 1000x worse. Our struggles should smooth out barring any injuries. 

[Indyfan4life]

2 minutes ago, bsteves said:

The first pick will never be ours. As bad as we have been, the panthers have been a 1000x worse. Our struggles should smooth out barring any injuries. 

A top 5 pick isn’t out of the question. 

[Two_pound]

Heck, the Rams might have the first pick.

[New Zealands #1 Colts Fan]

https://www.tankathon.com/nfl

 

Well we currently have the #1 pick......

[bsteves]

8 minutes ago, Two_pound said:

Heck, the Rams might have the first pick.

 

Are ppl just forgetting about the panthers or do you guys truly think we are worse than them? Lmao

[JediXMan]

We're not going to get the first. There's the Panthers -> Bad teams -> average teams ->  Good teams lol.

[jvan1973]

If we have the first pick,  Ballard is fired would be my expectation.   The new gm should trade back and get a bunch of picks.  I don't see that happening though.  I see 8-9 middle of the pack.  

[IndyEV]

2 hours ago, coming on strong said:

as long as we stay away from deon sanders son .  I rather not have that circus here ....

That will never happen because Leon Dion hates Indy! 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Even if that happened we would never take another QB lol. But it isn’t happening.

[John Waylon]

It’s gonna be hard to beat the Panthers in the race to the bottom IMO. 
 

The race for second, however…

 

[chad72]

I’m trading it for a bounty of future firsts because we need playmaking TE, quality depth at DT, Safety at least for starters. 

I still think we’re in the 10-15 range at worst when it is all said and done 
 

 

[RealColtsFan17112]

4 hours ago, ImissPeyton18 said:

Ballard will trade back instead of getting a blue chip player. This will only be fixed if the right people get fired before the draft but I would not hold my breath. This feels like the Jeff George or mike Pagel days. By the way, Kansas City sure has had lots of success without Ballard?

Ballard is done.  He won’t be here after this year.  

[Jz0204945]

5 hours ago, Stephen said:

Losses on deck for Carson Beck lol

We have lots of problems, but none include QB we need a legit TE and lots of defensive players we gave Pittman 72 million over 3 years where has he been besides nonexistent plus i dont think Carson Beck is better than what AR will be if he is given 1 the proper chance and two time to develope.

[Patrick Miller]

6 hours ago, RealColtsFan17112 said:

Ballard is done.  He won’t be here after this year.  

Yeah Ballard might as well start packing. His philosophy has not worked and continues not to work.

[Two_pound]

Hilarious, all these Ballard is done comments. What struck me yesterday was how it looked like we weren't prepared. How many times did people make those comments when Reich was the coach? Pagano? Caldwell? Even Dungy-we had PLAYOFF games under Dungy where we looked liked we hadn't practiced all year. The more things change, the more they stay the same. How competitive were the chiefs before mahomes? And I'll also ask, how competitive were we before Manning? 1972-1997 we had FOUR playoff appearances and lost all four. Some of you on here need to smash your computers and get a hobby, you would probably feel better. This team is loaded, give Richardson time, if he looks like Justin Fields 2 years from now(I think he will look more like Mahomes), then we have a problem. 

[IndySouthsider]

11 hours ago, bsteves said:

 

Are ppl just forgetting about the panthers or do you guys truly think we are worse than them? Lmao

Not much better. Colts may have an easier division

[BeanDiasucci]

53 minutes ago, Two_pound said:

Hilarious, all these Ballard is done comments. What struck me yesterday was how it looked like we weren't prepared. How many times did people make those comments when Reich was the coach? Pagano? Caldwell? Even Dungy-we had PLAYOFF games under Dungy where we looked liked we hadn't practiced all year. The more things change, the more they stay the same. How competitive were the chiefs before mahomes? And I'll also ask, how competitive were we before Manning? 1972-1997 we had FOUR playoff appearances and lost all four. Some of you on here need to smash your computers and get a hobby, you would probably feel better. This team is loaded, give Richardson time, if he looks like Justin Fields 2 years from now(I think he will look more like Mahomes), then we have a problem. 

 

Didn't you know that the Chiefs were good before Mahomes? Certainly, better than the Colts are now. The Chiefs went 11-5, 9-7, 11-5, 12-4, and 10-6 in the five seasons before Mahomes became their starting QB, making the playoffs 4 of the 5 years. They won the AFC West two years in a row before Mahomes took over. 

 

[Two_pound]

I knew they didn't have any post-season success, which I guess in some peoples minds is all that matters. Incredible how successful Andy Reid has been but he never beat the pats or Brady in the post-season, kind of weird, I think so anyways.

[BeanDiasucci]

11 minutes ago, Two_pound said:

I knew they didn't have any post-season success, which I guess in some peoples minds is all that matters. Incredible how successful Andy Reid has been but he never beat the pats or Brady in the post-season, kind of weird, I think so anyways.

 

If the Colts looked nearly as competent in the non-QB components of their team as the Chiefs did pre-Mahomes, you wouldn't see nearly so much criticism of Ballard. We'll see how that unfolds the rest of the season. 

[luv_pony_express]

12 hours ago, ImissPeyton18 said:

Kansas City sure has had lots of success without Ballard?

Teams tend to be successful for a good while after they hit paydirt on a franchise QB.

 

Not that this is the only ingredient to lasting success in the NFL.  It’s not.  But it’s both the most elusive one and the most critical one.

[chad72]

25 minutes ago, Two_pound said:

I knew they didn't have any post-season success, which I guess in some peoples minds is all that matters. Incredible how successful Andy Reid has been but he never beat the pats or Brady in the post-season, kind of weird, I think so anyways.

Pats and Brady were what Chiefs and Mahomes are, now. Play great complementary football and know how to win close games.

 

Once Brady saw Mahomes go down the field to tie the game 31-31 in the 2018 AFCCG, had a chance to beat them without Mahomes touching the ball, and realized he didn’t have the team to compete with in 2019, he bolted to the loaded Bucs. Peyton and Brady played each other just 5 times in the postseason their storied 18+ year careers. They were in the same AFC.

 

Mahomes vs Brady was 1-2 in the AFC and his losses were a FG game and an OT game (both his rookie year) where he didn’t touch the ball. He won in 2019 at Foxboro.

 

In the NFC, 2-1 vs Bucs with the Mahomes loss coming with both starting tackles lost for SB in Covid season SB.

 

To me, it’s not about postseason success exclusively but getting there enough times, knocking the door as a SB contender enough times, hard to happen without winning the division, which we are yet to since Ballard took over. 
 

Take yesterday’s game. If we were at least as good as the Seahawks going into Foxboro and playing clean enough football to beat the Patriots in Foxboro, even if it was a close gritty win, I’d be happier about the coaching and talent on the team.

Either the talent on the team isn’t what we thought it was or the coaching is sub par or both.

[DougDew]

Cowherd and his Podcast Co-Pilot were reminding his listeners that QBs generally never improve their accuracy...they struggle with it their entire career.  And that using Josh Allen as an example might just simply create a lot of false hope.  Just sayin'

[BeanDiasucci]

27 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Cowherd and his Podcast Co-Pilot were reminding his listeners that QBs generally never improve their accuracy...they struggle with it their entire career.  And that using Josh Allen as an example might just simply create a lot of false hope.  Just sayin'

 

Richardson reminds me a bit of watching some really big, muscular basketball players shooting free throws. They lack the touch to do it well - and look like they may not ever develop that soft touch.

 

But I don't know whether that analogy really fits or not. And there are no doubt some really big, muscular basketball players who shoot well and have a soft touch. 

 

You could also think about the powerful home run hitter who can hit the ball a mile, but struggles at making consistent contact. He might practice forever at improving this, but will always be a low batting average, high strikeout player. 

 

Just because you keep practicing something - particularly something you've already been practicing a long time - doesn't mean you'll become particularly good at it. But there are also examples of athletes who become much more skilled as their careers progress.

 

I think I disagree with people who say Richardson will definitely become a star and those who say he definitely won't. There's just no way of knowing if he'll improve enough on things like the ability to consistently throw a soft short-medium pass in the spot where the receiver needs to have it. 

[DougDew]

9 minutes ago, BeanDiasucci said:

 

Richardson reminds me a bit of watching some really big, muscular basketball players shooting free throws. They lack the touch to do it well - and look like they may not ever develop that soft touch.

 

But I don't know whether that analogy really fits or not. And there are no doubt some really big, muscular basketball players who shoot well and have a soft touch. 

 

You could also think about the powerful home run hitter who can hit the ball a mile, but struggles at making consistent contact. He might practice forever at improving this, but will always be a low batting average, high strikeout player. 

 

Just because you keep practicing something - particularly something you've already been practicing a long time - doesn't mean you'll become particularly good at it. But there are also examples of athletes who become much more skilled as their careers progress.

 

I think I disagree with people who say Richardson will definitely become a star and those who say he definitely won't. There's just no way of knowing if he'll improve enough on things like the ability to consistently throw a soft short-medium pass in the spot where the receiver needs to have it. 

Here's the deal, an NFL QB can't be inaccurate more than 2 or 3 passes per game.  If he's inaccurate with 5 or more passes, even if its placed on a wrong shoulder, he's a first down/drive killer (can't sustain drives).  Not to mention drops or picks.  

 

Dazzling accuracy with 85% of the throws isn't good enough for the NFL.  About 90% to 95% of a QBs passes need to be accurate, IMO.

[chad72]

6 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Here's the deal, an NFL QB can't be inaccurate more than 2 or 3 passes per game.  If he's inaccurate with 5 or more passes, even if its placed on a wrong shoulder, he's a first down/drive killer (can't sustain drives).  Not to mention drops or picks.  

 

Dazzling accuracy with 85% of the throws isn't good enough for the NFL.  About 90% to 95% of a QBs passes need to be accurate, IMO.

If 90 to 95% are accurate, why do the best QBs barely clip 65% completion rates? It can’t be that all 32 teams have WRs that drop the balls or have pass break ups at a high rate. If they do, then the QB isn’t accurate at the rate you say they are. Putting the ball in the zip code of 2-3 feet isn’t considered accurate, that’s the only way the ridiculous percentages you’re quoting can even be believed.
 

You’re just pulling numbers out of your behind and I’m sure you’re bound to double down on it.

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, BeanDiasucci said:

 

Didn't you know that the Chiefs were good before Mahomes? Certainly, better than the Colts are now. The Chiefs went 11-5, 9-7, 11-5, 12-4, and 10-6 in the five seasons before Mahomes became their starting QB, making the playoffs 4 of the 5 years. They won the AFC West two years in a row before Mahomes took over. 

 

 

Mahomes waltzed into the perfect set up. Similar to Tom Brady... They were the key component that took a strong team to an elite, or even legendary tier. 

 

Mahomes would be good in just about any city, but I don't think he's anything close to where he's at success wise without the Chiefs organization, roster core, and Andy Reid working with him. It's a dream for him. 

[DougDew]

4 minutes ago, chad72 said:

If 90 to 95% are accurate, why do the best QBs barely clip 65% completion rates? It can’t be that all 32 teams have WRs that drop the balls or have pass break ups at a high rate. If they do, then the QB isn’t accurate at the rate you say they are. Putting the ball in the zip code of 2-3 feet isn’t considered accurate, that’s the only way the ridiculous percentages you’re quoting can even be believed.
 

You’re just pulling numbers out of your behind and I’m sure you’re bound to double down on it.

I don't have the numbers, no.  They were offered to make a point.  The point being that there is not much difference between an accurate and inaccurate passer for the NFL.  Only few passes per game can be the difference between the extra pick, the extra drop, or the drive killing wrong shoulder placement.

 

Completion percentage isn't a good measure because, as we all know, a coach can call plays that are easy pitch and catches but don't lead to points or TDs.  And there are plenty of completions that happen with wrong shoulder placement that limits FD or TD getting YAC.  

[ColtStrong2013]

21 minutes ago, BeanDiasucci said:

You could also think about the powerful home run hitter who can hit the ball a mile, but struggles at making consistent contact. He might practice forever at improving this, but will always be a low batting average, high strikeout

 

Aaron Judge has struck out 1200 times in his career and is .287 in average. Yet, the 300 homeruns he's hit make him one of the most dangerous batters in the world. 

I get what you are saying, I don't think there is an analogy for the responsibility of a quarterback. With the baseball analogy, I can easily make an argument and case for Richardson as a home run threat... I don't think it fits, and it's because I largely agree with you that he may never develop the touch and accuracy that he needs to elevate himself to the top, and thus this team as well. 

[Patrick Miller]

Say we do get the number one pick. Is there a quarterback coming out that would be worth taking at that spot? I know a lot of you think Richardson is going to pan out but just say he has a terrible season. I know that’s a stretch, but humor me…..

[cdgacoltsfan]

54 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Cowherd and his Podcast Co-Pilot were reminding his listeners that QBs generally never improve their accuracy...they struggle with it their entire career.  And that using Josh Allen as an example might just simply create a lot of false hope.  Just sayin'

Cowherd is an *. He trashed Jordan Love this time last year saying he was nothing more than a backup because he couldn't hit the " layups" . This went on for weeks until Love started playing well then Cowherd jumped on the Love bandwagon. 

[shasta519]

37 minutes ago, BeanDiasucci said:

 

Richardson reminds me a bit of watching some really big, muscular basketball players shooting free throws. They lack the touch to do it well - and look like they may not ever develop that soft touch.

 

But I don't know whether that analogy really fits or not. And there are no doubt some really big, muscular basketball players who shoot well and have a soft touch. 

 

You could also think about the powerful home run hitter who can hit the ball a mile, but struggles at making consistent contact. He might practice forever at improving this, but will always be a low batting average, high strikeout player. 

 

Just because you keep practicing something - particularly something you've already been practicing a long time - doesn't mean you'll become particularly good at it. But there are also examples of athletes who become much more skilled as their careers progress.

 

I think I disagree with people who say Richardson will definitely become a star and those who say he definitely won't. There's just no way of knowing if he'll improve enough on things like the ability to consistently throw a soft short-medium pass in the spot where the receiver needs to have it. 

 

He was arguably the most inaccurate R1 QB of all time (depending on which metric you use). And for me, it's always been about the lack of touch. Occasionally, he will dip his shoulder and throw these little side-arm passes that have no accuracy, but most of the time it looks like one type: a fastball.

 

And he can be accurate on these passes, but it's also inconsistent. JT O'Sullivan mentioned this in the breakdown Week 1 (curious to see his and Baldy's breakdowns this week). When AR throws it with a lack of touch, it can do a few things: create too much anticipation and it becomes an overthrow, cause the ball to sail high and it can limit the angles he can drop in passes.

 

It's a big issue that has overall limitations on AR's passing. This offseason, (I believe) his personal QB coach talked about improvements from year 1 to year 2 with this ability to change speeds and throw with touch, so they have been working on it.. But so far we haven't seen these improvements. 

 

Until that happens, he's going to be a highlight reel player who struggles overall, like he was at UF.

[shasta519]

13 minutes ago, Patrick Miller said:

Say we do get the number one pick. Is there a quarterback coming out that would be worth taking at that spot? I know a lot of you think Richardson is going to pan out but just say he has a terrible season. I know that’s a stretch, but humor me…..

 

Hard to say at this point. But there will be a handful of QBs in R1 (Ward, Moss, Beck, Nussmeier).

I can't see them only winning 2-3 games to have that pick, but if they did, there will be a new GM. If he believes in AR, then he will try to fix him for a year and parlay that pick into multiple picks to rebuild essentially the whole defense.

[DougDew]

10 minutes ago, cdgacoltsfan said:

Cowherd is an *. He trashed Jordan Love this time last year saying he was nothing more than a backup because he couldn't hit the " layups" . This went on for weeks until Love started playing well then Cowherd jumped on the Love bandwagon. 

Yeah, I think Cowherd was probably stating a demonstrable fact about QBs not improving their accuracy much, rather than stating his opinion.  So its the message more than the messenger for me on this.

[KB]

Unless there's a true generational QB I wouldn't pick another just yet. I'd say keep putting those picks into the O and D line. 

[jbaron04]

We gonna end up in top 10 for sure but , it’s needed to get the change we all know we need the problem is our expectation is 1 year to early because of the injury 

[1959Colts]

 

Pretty sad that we are at this point, just two weeks into the season

[Solid84]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Cowherd and his Podcast Co-Pilot were reminding his listeners that QBs generally never improve their accuracy...they struggle with it their entire career.  And that using Josh Allen as an example might just simply create a lot of false hope.  Just sayin'

So, Luck? Manning?

 

Look, AR is never going to be a 70% completion rate QB. What we get is his running ability instead, which should add a lot of “short passes” effectively adding to his “completions”.

 

There’s little evidence really that’s he’s inaccurate. Most QB are inaccurate their first few years in college as well and so was AR. 
 

Again, not saying he’ll ever have Brees-level accuracy, but can we give him a chance?