Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Conversations are moderated for civility. We ask that you please stay on topic. For more info, see our Community Guidelines ×
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

We Know You're A Long Time Colts Fan Tonight ... If..

Smonroe

By Smonroe
in Colts Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Smonroe Ring of Honor

Smonroe

Posted
Posted

* You understand the O-Line won't be in mid season form.

* You're watching players instead of plays.

* You don't get too excited by a rookie's performance, good or bad.

and most importantly:

* You couldn't care less about the final score.

(Please add more - and feel free to refer this thread to those that post "our O-line sux"... or things of that nature...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smonroe Ring of Honor

Smonroe

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well, that third one depends on what position the player plays and what your definition of "performance" is, but by and large I agree.

I'm always reminded of the time we played in the HoF game a few years ago. My buddy is a Skins fan and he was all excited about Colt Brennan being their QB of the future after that preseason. Last I heard, he's trying out for the UFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Warhawk Walk On

Warhawk

Posted
Posted

I'm always reminded of the time we played in the HoF game a few years ago. My buddy is a Skins fan and he was all excited about Colt Brennan being their QB of the future after that preseason. Last I heard, he's trying out for the UFL.

Well, sure. My point is you can look at certain aspects of some rookies' games and draw some conclusions from them. But not everything, and not every position, and NOT stats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smonroe Ring of Honor

Smonroe

Posted
  • Author
Posted

We Know You're A Long Time Colts Fan Tonight ... If..

You watch the game. haha

Everyone knows our favorite players won't be playing.

But wanting to see what the rookies can add to the depth of the team makes you a Colts Fan! :coltshorse:

Yeah. Like tonight, I'm happy they're resting Freeney and giving Hughes a chances to go against the Rams #1s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
everybodysgotone Walk On

everybodysgotone

Posted
Posted

* You understand the O-Line won't be in mid season form.

* You're watching players instead of plays.

* You don't get too excited by a rookie's performance, good or bad.

and most importantly:

* You couldn't care less about the final score.

(Please add more - and feel free to refer this thread to those that post "our O-line sux"... or things of that nature...)

At the half.

Nevis has had some good moments and I'm more stoked about that than anything else. Wheeler is around the ball a lot which is encouraging. Love the brief moments for D. Brown and PG.

Spann has had trouble handling the ball a couple of times and not looked good when he has brought it out.

I like the scoring reviews - a good change. Not sure I'm big on the 35yd line kickoffs but whatever that's part of the 2011 game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smonroe Ring of Honor

Smonroe

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I felt kind of bad after reading some of the posts in this thread.

It was not meant to be a 'guideline' or to make fun of anyone. It was not meant to say you're not a Colts fan if you don't agree with me.

It was an observation, not instructions. In other words, I think most of us were prepared for the worst.

Anyone who's been a Colts fan for at least the last 10 years understands the Colts do NOT gameplan in the preseason. While we can complain about individual play, who looks good or bad, the outcome of the game means nothing. And it certainly doesn't mean we aren't deep since our 2's get beat by theirs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
everybodysgotone Walk On

everybodysgotone

Posted
Posted

I felt kind of bad after reading some of the posts in this thread.

It was not meant to be a 'guideline' or to make fun of anyone. It was not meant to say you're not a Colts fan if you don't agree with me.

It was an observation, not instructions. In other words, I think most of us were prepared for the worst.

Anyone who's been a Colts fan for at least the last 10 years understands the Colts do NOT gameplan in the preseason. While we can complain about individual play, who looks good or bad, the outcome of the game means nothing. And it certainly doesn't mean we aren't deep since our 2's get beat by theirs.

Two kinds of people - those that get it and those that don't. In this landscape of the oft offended you're not simply a yell at the TV kinda fan, Smonroe, which is always welcomed as far as I'm concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NM_Colts Walk On

NM_Colts

Posted
Posted

I felt kind of bad after reading some of the posts in this thread.

It was not meant to be a 'guideline' or to make fun of anyone. It was not meant to say you're not a Colts fan if you don't agree with me.

It was an observation, not instructions. In other words, I think most of us were prepared for the worst.

Anyone who's been a Colts fan for at least the last 10 years understands the Colts do NOT gameplan in the preseason. While we can complain about individual play, who looks good or bad, the outcome of the game means nothing. And it certainly doesn't mean we aren't deep since our 2's get beat by theirs.

Don't feel bad; some people just like to urinate on threads. The rest of us enjoyed it. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The HOB Walk On

The HOB

Posted
Posted

Yeah Smonroe... don't worry about it. I think its a good post. Some people just don't feel inteligent unless they are putting someone else's contributions down.

You know your a longtime Colts fan tonight if, after watching our backup QBs give it everything they got, you would be willing to chip in to purchase daily neck massage therapy (if such a thing exists) for Peyton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • NewColtsFan
      How to Beat the Texans (and every other team)

      By NewColtsFan · Posted

      We’ll see if it remains average this year.  I think it’s possible, but unlikely.   Put another way,  if the Colts defense is average in 2024 I will be very, Very, VERY disappointed. 
    • Moosejawcolt
      How to Beat the Texans (and every other team)

      By Moosejawcolt · Posted

      I agree with you that he is not trying to build an average defense. It is just a plain fact that after 8 yeas of drafting and free agency, he has managed to do it.
    • Superman
      *Update: AD Mitchell signed

      By Superman · Posted

      Kind of an extreme example, but Jim Irsay specifically praising Bryce Young last year could qualify. In general though, if a team is trying to throw off the scent by floating positive information about other players, that seems harmless. It's different if a team is trashing a player to try to get him to drop into their range, and I don't think that's something that actually happens. If it did, I think that would be highly inappropriate, and I think a good reporter would look back and recognize that their source was using them, and think twice about trusting that source again.     So I think this is way more common than what McGinn did. And I don't think people ignore it, unless it's something they don't want to hear. Most sports reports include some version of 'I've been told...' without naming or directly quoting a source. A lot of those are just fact-based, black/white reports, but that often happens with more opinion-based or viewpoint-based reporting as well.     I don't know if anyone necessarily likes those reports, but I do think we consume them, and are generally influenced by them. Yeah, the substantiated/analytical stuff is way more valuable than a report discussion a potential character issue, but if it has a legitimate foundation -- AD Mitchell does have diabetes, it can be difficult for someone with that condition to control their mood and energy levels -- then I think it should be considered. Ultimately, I know the quality of information I have access to is nowhere near what the teams are getting, so I don't worry too much about it.      Yeah, I fully agree. Ballard faced the media when the Okereke story came out, and it was obvious the team had done their homework. He was firm when asked about Ogletree coming back. The Colts are thorough. Doesn't mean nothing can go wrong once they draft the guy, but I'm confident they've checked all their boxes.    And definitely, I think Ballard 100% meant everything he said, and I have no problem with him saying it. But, I think there's a difference between McGinn's report, and the narrative that came later. I think the report was based on anonymous insights, and the narrative was based on sensational headlines. And I'd say Ballard's comments apply more to the narrative than to the report.
    • stitches
      *Update: AD Mitchell signed

      By stitches · Posted

      Yes. Just like you might want to try to make a player drop to you, you might want to bump up the stock of another player so he gets taken ahead of you and this drops another player you actually like to your team.  This to me looks even worse. This provides even further layers of anonymity and even more questions about the veracity of the report. With what McGinn is doing at least we know where(generally) this is coming from and what the potential pitfalls might be(conflict of interest). If he generalizes it to "People are saying"... this could be anyone... it could be a scout... it could be an exec... it could be an actual coach of the player(this might actually be valuable)... or it could be a water boy the player didn't give an autograph to... In a certain way it makes it easier to ignore, but it feels worse to me because of lack of specificity about the reliability of the source.  There is a lot of appetite for more and more information about the players. I'm not so sure there is a ton of appetite for anonymous reports about character failings specifically. In fact, I think those are some of my least favorite pieces of content around the draft. I think there is TONS of good(and some bad) substantiated, analytical, narrative content for fans to consume without going into the gutter of dirt that a lot of those anonymous reports are dealing with. Unless it is factually substantiated(example, player X is being charged with Y crime, i.e. there's actual case... it's all fair game to explore that...)    Someone pointed out that it was Ballard that went to Marcus Peters' house and spent a couple of days with him and his family to give the OK to the Chiefs to draft him. Ballard is not a stranger to having to clear a prospect's character for his team so they'd be able to draft him. IMO he seems very confident in his read on Mitchell. I don't think he'd go to that length to defend his player the day he drafts him if he didn't really think the things he said. And I really think he feels strongly about this. I guess we will see in due time if he was right. 
    • Superman
      *Update: AD Mitchell signed

      By Superman · Posted

      Does the same dynamic and conflict exist when it's a positive report, based on unnamed sources?    What if a reporter just generalizes this information, without offering quotes? 'People I've talked to have concerns about this player's maturity...' Is the standard the same in that case?   I think if media didn't share these anonymous insights, the stuff we love to consume during draft season would dry up, and we'd be in the dark. There's a voracious appetite for this kind of information. That doesn't mean the media has no responsibility and shouldn't be held to some kind of standard, but I think your standard is more strict than it needs to be. JMO.   To the bolded, I think that's the job of the scouts, and it's one of the reasons there's a HUGE difference between watching video, and actually scouting. That's why teams who have access to film and independent scouting reports still pay their own scouts to go into the schools, talk to the coaches, talk to family and friends, etc., and write up in-depth reports on players that they'll likely never draft. I'm confident the Colts got sufficient answers to those questions, which is why I'm not concerned about it. If the Colts didn't have a reputation for being so thorough with stuff like this, I might feel differently.

  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...