hes getting better

[CR91]

http://www.stampedeblue.com/2012/6/22/3110145/colts-stuff-im-not-worrying-about-the-quarterbacks

its a good article. brad makes an interest point about peyton and i wanna know what you guys think.

[oldunclemark]

wow..not a fan of Manning..or his past teamates...

or of the Indy media....

..and being a fan of Luck is easy since he's never lost an NFL game....

Just some guy with time on his hands.

[FireJimCaldwell]

I don't have a BBS translator.

[gspdx]

I guess Tom Brady and Big Ben were more than happy to share reps and mentor their backups. Kind of stupid. Why would any starting QB want to share reps? And he took all the receiver's time just to make him happy? No - it was to make the team better.

[Balzer40]

I don't really see where the guy was wrong about most of the things he said. I know fans don't ever want to hear anything negative about Manning but he was a control freak and didn't let the other QB's ever get any reps. Im a huge Manning fan myself, but im a bigger Colts fan and am glad to see the franchise finally concentrating on building a complete team and not one dominated by 1 guy. I think the team will be better than most think they will be this yr. and do not have to depend on 1 player to carry the entire franchise. Looking forward to many yrs. of balanced football and having the soft label removed once and for all.

[mark5362]

I'm not a fan of writers who leave the o out of about.

[MAC]

We go round and round with this argument. Franchise QBs are few and far between. The only way that you can have a team that does NOT slip dramatically when the QB leaves, is to NOT have all that good a QB in the first place, and/or a system that doesn't take advantage of his skill set. Wells acts as if having one of the greatest QBs ever to play the game was actually to our detriment, and that the Colts doing everything possible to maximize his potential was foolish. I beg to differ.

I doubt that I agree with 25% of anything that Wells has ever written.

[HungarianColtsFan]

I'm not giving too much credit to Wells' articles, but there is an interesting thing. A month ago or two I've read an article about how Manning "had to leave" Indy, and writer recalled the moment when Redskins were trading up for RGIII, Manning was rather surprised and disappointed, writer said Redskins must have been on Peyton's list. Seems like Peyton really didn't want to be bothered by a good prospect rookie. However I suppose other QBs would decide the same way if they were in Peyton's shoe's.

Fact, that Colts were short on QBs last season, and the situation was handled in a humble and short sighted way for years. We may never know the truth, but I think it was rather Polian's fault.

Things are handled completely in a different way in the new era.

[NewColtsFan]

The lack of a decent quarterback is a glaring mark on Polian's resume'.

Peyton's unwillingness to give up reps and/or groom a replacement is a demerit on him, but it's not uncommon. Montana and Young were not close. Favre and Rodgers were not close.

But the demerit for Peyton taking all/vast majority of snaps is -- to me -- more to the head coach, which means Caldwell, and yes, a guy who I love as a coach, Tony Dungy. It's important that whoever is the back-up have enough reps to be competent. I don't know what that magic number/percentage is, but it's apparently more than what was allowed in Indy. To me, it's also on the coach.

Remember, Elway, the player, was furious that Denver/Reeves went out and drafted Tommy Maddox with a 1stR pick to be the heir apparent at QB. Favre hated that GB used a #1 on Rodgers.

But the Colts -- to my knowledge -- didn't invest at all in a decent back-up. Red mark to Polian.

There's no conventional answer. I think Elway, the GM made a terrible mistake in taking Osweiler in the 2ndR. I think that pick should have been used to help Manning for the limited years he has left. An OL. A defensive player. But not a guy, who by all accounts, is being groomed for 3-4 years out. Invest a lesser round pick and sign a decent back-up. And I like Stanton as our back-up by the way.

I'm not beating up Peyton too much on this. He is who he is. And thank God for 98% of that. You forgive the 2% flaw. The rest is on Polian/Dungy/Caldwell. That's my view....

[Smonroe]

http://www.stampedeb...he-quarterbacks

its a good article. brad makes an interest point about peyton and i wanna know what you guys think.

[Superman]

I don't understand why this is even up for debate. Manning had an almost telekenetic bond with his receivers, and that's a notable part of why the passing game was so good. The price we paid was reps to backup quarterbacks, most of whom weren't any good in the first place. I'm glad we paid that price.

[John Dee]

We go round and round with this argument. Franchise QBs are few and far between. The only way that you can have a team that does NOT slip dramatically when the QB leaves, is to NOT have all that good a QB in the first place, and/or a system that doesn't take advantage of his skill set. Wells acts as if having one of the greatest QBs ever to play the game was actually to our detriment, and that the Colts doing everything possible to maximize his potential was foolish. I beg to differ.

I doubt that I agree with 25% of anything that Wells has ever written.

[MAC]

A month ago or two I've read an article about how Manning "had to leave" Indy, and writer recalled the moment when Redskins were trading up for RGIII, Manning was rather surprised and disappointed, writer said Redskins must have been on Peyton's list. Seems like Peyton really didn't want to be bothered by a good prospect rookie.

[MAC]

The Colts should have seen a LONG time ago that Manning would have made it happen with most any "intelligent" player. Hindsight is perfect. And I guarantee if Polian had the luxury of it he would have built this team from inside out. Instead of outside in.

I'm scratching my head a bit on this one - I think that you are saying that the Colts didn't need to invest high draft picks on skill players because Peyton would have succeeded with any of them, so he should have built up other parts of the team? The Peyton of recent years certainly showed that capability, but not the younger Peyton. And would Peyton have even progressed the point that he did if his history had been written differently. Sometimes even 20-20 hindsite isn't clear.

In the meantime, high draft picks were spent on several non-skill positions that didn't work out mostly because of injury and bad luck. If they had, Peyton would still be here.

[John Dee]

I'm scratching my head a bit on this one - I think that you are saying that the Colts didn't need to invest high draft picks on skill players because Peyton would have succeeded with any of them, so he should have built up other parts of the team? The Peyton of recent years certainly showed that capability, but not the younger Peyton. And would Peyton have even progressed the point that he did if his history had been written differently. Sometimes even 20-20 hindsite isn't clear.

In the meantime, high draft picks were spent on several non-skill positions that didn't work out mostly because of injury and bad luck. If they had, Peyton would still be here.

[Fx Stryker]

Is this guy serious? We accepted a mediocre team if Peyton went down? I don't think any of us we're okay with the last season, but screaming at the TV said otherwise this last season?

Also Jim Sorgi wasn't a terrible player like Curtis Painter. I guess he ignored the Colts were 13-3 when Sorgi was in the game. He had a 3.6 TD% to a .6 Int% and a 63.5 CMP%. This is a huge step up from a 2.2 TD% and a 4.5 INT% and a 51.7 CMP%.

The whole problem last year was Painter was terrible. Had we kept Sorgi we are probably better than 2-14.

[CR91]

It's a good article if it's written by a 9th grader. He's an adult who just writes like a 9th grader. I know, I know, I'm being generous.

He states his opinion as facts, and writes a lot of nonsense just to say Luck's backups are better than Peyton's. Doesn't that remain to be seen?

Also, that crack about Loser Mentality??? Yeah, probably the best win record in the league during that loser mentality period.

not saying the article should be on the new york times, but its better then the crap he usually writes

[dacoats]

http://www.stampedeb...he-quarterbacks

its a good article. brad makes an interest point about peyton and i wanna know what you guys think.

what a piece of crap of an article

you want an article about Manning? Let me have a column or two on that guy.......

the guy had no talent around him, yeah right! What a joke!

[Malakai432]

It was way to long of a rant off for me to read it. I was done reading it within the first few paragraphs. He seems to just ramble a lot .

[Smonroe]

not saying the article should be on the new york times, but its better then the crap he usually writes

Lol! You should send that to Wells. It's probably the best review he ever had.

[The Peytonator]

I'm no expert on things, but I've always been under the impression that any starting QB would take all the reps with the 1st team. The only time reps get split, are when there's a QB controversy......like Tennessee right now. Alright, maybe on some teams, the coach lets the backup come in and run a few plays with the 1's, but it would probably be at the end of practice and only for grins and giggles more or less.

What's Peyton supposed to do, say 'Aww come over here Curt, I'm gonna let you run practice today, just in case I ever have some sort of nerve issue in my neck that requires 4 surgeries and you have to take the helm. Wouldn't want us to start out a year 0-14 now would we?'

Article was a bunch of crap to me. Curtis Painter got plenty of reps with the 1's last offseason did he not? The guy just wasn't good. It's as simple as that. Sorgi, when given the chance or two he was given, showed a LOT more in terms of QB ability.

[FireJimCaldwell]

BBS is to writers as Painter is to Quarterbacks as Caldwell is to coaches.

Among the worst.

[Blackhawk4]

What I think? Don't really care to be honest

[GoColts8818]

Is the off-season over yet so people (not the posters in this thread I mean the writer) can stop trying to make stories out of nothing?

[Gavin]

I think quite a bit of what he said was accurate, not all by a long shot but alot

[NewColtsFan]

The OL and DL have just simply never been a high priority to Polian. And I get the whole BEST available player thing but GLARING NEEDS that are ignored year after year become...... GLARING.

And then when you blow them off for so long and finally fire at the position that is lacking and MISS????

We get Indy 2011

I don't know what happened but i know a strong OL and a strong DL usually stay in games. Add a QB to the mix.... $$$

For whatever it's worth (not much, I know) I'm not sure it's true that the lines weren't very important to Polian as you say.

I'm linking the Colts all-time list of draft picks. All you have to do is scroll down to 1998 and then keep scrolling up to today. You'll see the Polian used a fair number of picks on both sides of the line. I think the bigger problem is that so many of his picks just did not pan out -- for whatever reason. But a large number of picks just didn't give Indy much production.

Your Colts draft link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indianapolis_Colts_draft_history

Hey, while trying to defend Polian in one area (the willingness to try and draft lineman) I may have darned him in another.... the inability to draft productive players. And not just lineman. You'll see a fair number of players at other positions that didn't pan out either. That said, you can win as many games as the Colts did over a decade without a number of good players. So, either through free agency or some way, Polian got enough good players to win consistently.

[Gavin]

For whatever it's worth (not much, I know) I'm not sure it's true that the lines weren't very important to Polian as you say.

I'm linking the Colts all-time list of draft picks. All you have to do is scroll down to 1998 and then keep scrolling up to today. You'll see the Polian used a fair number of picks on both sides of the line. I think the bigger problem is that so many of his picks just did not pan out -- for whatever reason. But a large number of picks just didn't give Indy much production.

Your Colts draft link:

https://en.wikipedia...s_draft_history

Hey, while trying to defend Polian in one area (the willingness to try and draft lineman) I may have darned him in another.... the inability to draft productive players. And not just lineman. You'll see a fair number of players at other positions that didn't pan out either. That said, you can win as many games as the Colts did over a decade without a number of good players. So, either through free agency or some way, Polian got enough good players to win consistently.

1. Peyton Manning

2.Edgerrin James

3.Reggie Wayne

4.Hunter Smith

5.Mike Peterson

6.Ryan Diem

7.Dwight Freeney

8.David Thornton

9.Dallas Clark

10.Robert Mathis

11.Cato June

12.Bob Sanders (2 great years, the rest injury riddled)

13.Jake Scott

14.Joseph Addai

15.Antoine Bethea

16.Clint Session (two very good years with us)

17.Pierre Garcon

18.Pat Mcafee

19.Pat Angerer

20.Kavell Conner

I counted 20 out of 109 draft picks that have worked out so far to this point with all of the 2011 class a wait and see at this point still

but I didnt count undrafted free agents such as Jeff Saturday

[John Dee]

For whatever it's worth (not much, I know) I'm not sure it's true that the lines weren't very important to Polian as you say.

I'm linking the Colts all-time list of draft picks. All you have to do is scroll down to 1998 and then keep scrolling up to today. You'll see the Polian used a fair number of picks on both sides of the line. I think the bigger problem is that so many of his picks just did not pan out -- for whatever reason. But a large number of picks just didn't give Indy much production.

Your Colts draft link:

https://en.wikipedia...s_draft_history

Hey, while trying to defend Polian in one area (the willingness to try and draft lineman) I may have darned him in another.... the inability to draft productive players. And not just lineman. You'll see a fair number of players at other positions that didn't pan out either. That said, you can win as many games as the Colts did over a decade without a number of good players. So, either through free agency or some way, Polian got enough good players to win consistently.

PEYTON MANNING.

OK, so Bill used 6 total draft picks in the first 3 rounds from 2000-2009 on OL or DL?????? 6 out of a possible 30? For units that occupy ONE HALF of the starting lineup?

Like I said in 10, and 11 the team started to FINALLY ADDRESS THE ISSUE. too little too late.....\

But that is the past... onward and forward....

Go Colts.

Ok, it's not rocket science..... Manning masked MANY NEEDS for MANY YEARS.

[dacoats]

a lot of you guys need to go look at the history of the draft

you are lucky if you get three guys that have an impact on any given year.

You are not going to land three to four guys every year and if you you are probably a dynasty

As far as the article I made it clear that Manning had tons of talent around him, Pro Bowlers on both sides of the ball.

He choked out a lot of big games, he is also the reason our team imploded, mostly because of his salary demands and the orchestration of him leaving was a soap opera to say the least. If you bought into that my neck hurt stuff, think again. That was for you fans that like stories. Manning wasn't hurt, he was a financial burden, plain and simple cut and dry.

Manning looks fine and healthy to me out there as soon as he put on the orange suit. Good for him, but his name needs to leave just like he did.

[SilentHill]

Interesting read for sure, it makes me wonder if maybe part of Manning's deal with the broncos is that they would trade Tim Tebow?

[Smonroe]

a lot of you guys need to go look at the history of the draft

you are lucky if you get three guys that have an impact on any given year.

You are not going to land three to four guys every year and if you you are probably a dynasty

As far as the article I made it clear that Manning had tons of talent around him, Pro Bowlers on both sides of the ball.

He choked out a lot of big games, he is also the reason our team imploded, mostly because of his salary demands and the orchestration of him leaving was a soap opera to say the least. If you bought into that my neck hurt stuff, think again. That was for you fans that like stories. Manning wasn't hurt, he was a financial burden, plain and simple cut and dry.

Manning looks fine and healthy to me out there as soon as he put on the orange suit. Good for him, but his name needs to leave just like he did.

Kind of early to start drinking, isn't it?

[Restored]

I haven't got to the part about Luck yet but the Manning portion is hilarious to say the least. Brad Wells never fails to give me a good laugh.

"For some reason, a healthy number of Colts fans were actually OK with this; that if the quarterback went down, it was perfectly acceptable to classify the Colts as "done." The season would then become meaningless, and there was always next year.

Loser mentality, in my humble opinion.

Ask the 2011 Texans if it was OK to give up and pack it in after they lost not one but TWO starting quarterbacks in the span of two weeks."

How is this a loser mentality? It worked for over 13 years. And if you want to talk about 2011, the Colts lost THREE starting QB's. Two to injury and one to just flat out sucking but nonetheless three.

"One position cannot define the season for an entire team, and the quarterback should not be the difference between the team winning twelve games and the team winning two. If he is, then A) That's one heckuva quarterback (and Peyton was that at one point), and B) the general manager must be an incompetent boob."

While I agree that it shouldn't be the difference between 2 and 12 wins, it can make a huge difference. 8 out of the past 10 Super Bowl winners have had a Good/Elite QB playing the position. We've seen years where teams lose their starting QB and they dip from 10 wins to about 6. The difference with the Colts this year was is that the roster itself was already depleted of talent and the dispairity between the starting QB (Manning) and everyone was else was huge. Another point is that our offense had primarily became a read-offense so it was pretty much predicated on Manning's ability to deciever the defense and go from there. While I agree that Painter wasn't as prepared as he probably should have, nothing great was ever achieved without risk, and for about 10 out of the 13 years Manning was here, this team was great The larger the gap, the larger seperation of wins and losses.

[GoColts8818]

PEYTON MANNING.

OK, so Bill used 6 total draft picks in the first 3 rounds from 2000-2009 on OL or DL?????? 6 out of a possible 30? For units that occupy ONE HALF of the starting lineup?

Like I said in 10, and 11 the team started to FINALLY ADDRESS THE ISSUE. too little too late.....\

But that is the past... onward and forward....

Go Colts.

Ok, it's not rocket science..... Manning masked MANY NEEDS for MANY YEARS.

Because from 2000-2006 the oline was one of the best units in football. He didn't need to draft new players for it after 2006 he drafted at least seven olineman to try to fix it and I am going beyond 2009 because I am looking at the whole run not just the part I want to to support an argument. People forget how good the oline was threw really 2007 it's not like it stunk the whole time he was here. That's blasting him for only drafting three qbs while he was here. He didn't have too he drafted Peyton manning.

As for the dline he had what some would say is the best end combo in football so that's half the dline. For the tackle spot you left out that he also signed several free agents to try to fix that spot in Johnson Muir Simon Regor and traded for booger and tried to trade for a guy from the bills that failed a physical. He also signed Ed Johnson who went undrafted but many said had the talent to be a fairly high draft pick. He just clearly had issues. So he tried to fix the dt spot he didn't just ignore as you make it seem.

I know people are still mad at polian and that's fine but if we are going to review him look at his whole work don't cherry pick what supports an arguement. If you want to say towards the end they made some huge mistakes on the oline clearly that easy to support and that while trying to fix the dt spot he could just never get it done that would also be right. However more or less saying he ignored both is false. You don't just luck into winning like bill polian did here. Not with a team that was a laughing stalk in the sports world before he got here and in a tiny media market. He also has an impressive track record with the bills and panthers to fall back on as well to prove it wasn't just a fluke here.

Again if people want to say he was a jerk I think there is an arguement to support that or that for whatever reason his performance slipped towards the end again that can be backed up but lets not try to pretend that for a very long time he wasn't good at his job.

[Gramz]

Interesting read for sure, it makes me wonder if maybe part of Manning's deal with the broncos is that they would trade Tim Tebow?

It was never a "secret" that Elway wasn't a fan of Tebow. I doubt very seriously that Peyton made this request as part of his deal.

[Gramz]

If you bought into that my neck hurt stuff, think again. That was for you fans that like stories. Manning wasn't hurt, he was a financial burden, plain and simple cut and dry.

SERIOUSLY..?????

[NewColtsFan]

PEYTON MANNING.

OK, so Bill used 6 total draft picks in the first 3 rounds from 2000-2009 on OL or DL?????? 6 out of a possible 30? For units that occupy ONE HALF of the starting lineup?

Like I said in 10, and 11 the team started to FINALLY ADDRESS THE ISSUE. too little too late.....\

But that is the past... onward and forward....

Go Colts.

Ok, it's not rocket science..... Manning masked MANY NEEDS for MANY YEARS.

Couple of things.... Sorry, but I don't care how great PEYTON MANNING is/was, he was not the only reason why the Colts were in the playoffs 9 straight years and were the 1st or 2nd winningest franchise in the entire NFL. Sorry, that's not how it works.

Second, I don't know why you limited your scope to 2000-2009 and only the first 3 rounds. The man was the GM from '98 to 2011. And in that time, if you just go to 4 rounds, he's go 10 offensive lineman and 9 defensive lineman. And that still excludes some good lineman who were taken in lower rounds.... guys like Robert Mathis.

I think a more legitimate complaint is the large number of picks that flat out didn't work out. And it's not like they left the Colts and played better for another team. So, Polian's drafting was spotty. There may be some legitimate reasons why some picks didn't work out, but there are a surprising number (to me) of picks that didn't pay off for the franchise. Sooner or later that catches up to you.

That said, he found other players in lower rounds -- a fair number -- and used Free Agency to help the team.

Just offering another perspective.

[FireJimCaldwell]

It was never a "secret" that Elway wasn't a fan of Tebow. I doubt very seriously that Peyton made this request as part of his deal.

Tebow's days in Denver were numbered. I doubt he made that request either.

Signing Manning, just gave Elway and the Broncos a legitimate way to get rid of Tebow and his crazed fans.

[NewColtsFan]

Tebow's days in Denver were numbered. I doubt he made that request either.

Signing Manning, just gave Elway and the Broncos a legitimate way to get rid of Tebow and his crazed fans.

Yes, absolutely yes. Peyton certainly did not have to tell Elway to trade Tebow. I'd be beyond stunned if he did. No way.

By going after and signing Manning you've signaled the whole world of your intentions. The writing was on the wall. Once there was commitment to Manning, Tebow was good as gone.

And if Manning had gone elsewhere, John would have only stayed with Tebow long enough until he had found a replacement, either by the draft, or free agency, or trade. Tebow was leaving town -- period.

[Mameluc]

man brad wells sucks, he thinks he is so much smater and better than anyone. id like a journalist to actually act like a journalist and get some stories, not rumors, copy pastes and opinions. there is 0 investigation with that guy, i bet he never leaves the chair

[SilentHill]

Yes, absolutely yes. Peyton certainly did not have to tell Elway to trade Tebow. I'd be beyond stunned if he did. No way.

By going after and signing Manning you've signaled the whole world of your intentions. The writing was on the wall. Once there was commitment to Manning, Tebow was good as gone.

And if Manning had gone elsewhere, John would have only stayed with Tebow long enough until he had found a replacement, either by the draft, or free agency, or trade. Tebow was leaving town -- period.

Well, I am not too familiar with the situation, but I think Tebow said he would backup Manning and that he did not need to start, That could have been a conversation that was run by Manning and, judging by the past maybe Manning said, nah trade him because he didn't want a decent QB behind him.