Originally Posted by sherck (Post 97303)

Between Autry, Hunt, Sheard, Turay, Woods and Muhammud, we have some nice role players on the D-Line that, at times, can all dominate.

What we really need is an elite talent sitting above them to draw the double team consistently, still beat it at times and take pressure off of all of them in order for them to shine more.

Top priority in free agency needs to be an elite pass rusher if any make it to the market. If not, then our 1st round pick or top 2nd round pick (from NYJ) probably needs to be a DE or DT that can crush the pocket.

As a side note, other pick probably needs to be CB. Wilson is finally coming on, Moore has been a find and Desir is rocking it but another young talent is required.

Walk Worthy,

Originally Posted by Chromeburn (Post 97532)

I didn't think much of Autry when we signed him. I'm glad I was wrong about the pickup, he's been great especially lately.

Originally Posted by 1965southpaw (Post 97616)

Just saw these stats on Facebook. What a difference a year makes.

Last year the #Colts⁠ ⁠leader in sacks was Jabaal Sheard with 5.5. 13 games in and they have three players who have matched or exceeded those numbers (Denico Autry w/ 8, Darius Leonard with 7 and Jabaal Sheard with 5.5). Margus Hunt is close with 5 and Kemoko Turay needs 1.5 sacks.

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish (Post 97622)

Yeah, coaching doesn't matter.

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 97640)

1) How many of those are new players?

2) The continued use of this phrasing shows a profound and complete lack of understanding of what my argument was.

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 97640)

1) How many of those are new players?

2) The continued use of this phrasing shows a profound and complete lack of understanding of what my argument was.

Originally Posted by Butter (Post 97650)

You lacked a sensible argument that is why everyone turned on you.

Originally Posted by Racehorse (Post 97667)

True. As they say, you never go full Tom Simpson. He went full Tom Simpson.

Originally Posted by Racehorse (Post 97667)

True. As they say, you never go full Tom Simpson. He went full Tom Simpson.

Originally Posted by omahacolt (Post 97682)

Who was the dt that he said would be a pro bowler with 5 minutes of his coaching?

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish (Post 97689)

It was a DT. I think it was Daniel Nuir.

Originally Posted by Racehorse (Post 97709)

OK, so he was never a member on the new board, it seems.

Originally Posted by Butter (Post 97650)

You lacked a sensible argument that is why everyone turned on you.

Originally Posted by rcubed (Post 97563)

love the avatar

Originally Posted by Racehorse (Post 97709)

OK, so he was never a member on the new board, it seems.

Originally Posted by southside asshole (Post 97727)

I remember him from the old one. IIRC, he was always talking about being a coach or a former coach, and this experience gave him some sort of deep schematic insight. I think it later either turned out to be completely false or he coached like some minor position of his kid's midget league team..

We basically drove him out of this place with persistent insults and derision. You know, the Coltfreaks way.

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 97765)

My argument was, and stance on the issue still is, that coaching typically has a neutral or negative effect on team performance on gameday. For all the love around here for Frank Reich and the coaching staff (deservedly so, because they've done their job, player development, well), Reich has been proof positive of my argument. Going for the win against Houston the first time is costing the Colts a shot at the division right now, for example.

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 97765)

My argument was, and stance on the issue still is, that coaching typically has a neutral or negative effect on team performance on gameday. For all the love around here for Frank Reich and the coaching staff (deservedly so, because they've done their job, player development, well), Reich has been proof positive of my argument. Going for the win against Houston the first time is costing the Colts a shot at the division right now, for example.

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 97765)

My argument was, and stance on the issue still is, that coaching typically has a neutral or negative effect on team performance on gameday. For all the love around here for Frank Reich and the coaching staff (deservedly so, because they've done their job, player development, well), Reich has been proof positive of my argument. Going for the win against Houston the first time is costing the Colts a shot at the division right now, for example.

Originally Posted by Chromeburn (Post 97772)

Wouldn't scheme choice, effective gameplan development, and good play calling be considered positive effects towards gameday results?

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 97765)

Reich has been proof positive of my argument. Going for the win against Houston the first time is costing the Colts a shot at the division right now, for example.

Originally Posted by Chromeburn (Post 97772)

Wouldn't scheme choice, effective gameplan development, and good play calling be considered positive effects towards gameday results?

Originally Posted by rcubed (Post 97777)

in game adjustments dumbass.

Originally Posted by Pez (Post 97788)

At the end of the day dam, it they had converted you might be saying that "going for the win on 4th down is what gave us this division", vs "Going for the win against Houston the first time is costing the Colts a shot at the division right now, for example"

You can go for it on 4th down. If you miss it's a horrible idea. If you make it it's brilliant. These are the debts a coach must pay.

Originally Posted by omahacolt (Post 97792)

the dude is trump. he will never admit he is wrong.

just make fun of him and move along

Originally Posted by omahacolt (Post 97792)

the dude is trump. he will never admit he is wrong.

just make fun of him and move along

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 97799)

All of those things can be and are regularly erased both in the positive and negative direction by player performance, so no. Examples from last game: the Autry sack where he jailbroke up the middle, the playcall on either side was irrelevant because of player performance. On the opposite side of the spectrum, any drop.



Still require player performance, dumbass.



To me, in the situation, the smart play was the tie. Reich's aggressiveness on 4th downs also potentially cost the Colts the @ Jaguars game. Don't get me wrong, I prefer the aggressiveness in most situations on 4th down (I specifically didn't bring up the Jaguars game initially because I mostly agreed with the decisions, even though I thought the calls were underwhelming in a couple of cases), but I tend to like to play the percentages with 4th downs, and that 4th down against Houston was very low percentage. A punt virtually locked a tie, while a failure to convert was almost assuredly a loss, and a conversion was maybe win/more likely still tie. To me, you're less than 50/50 on that 4th and 4 for getting a more positive result by going for it than punting, probably more like 25/75.



I don't have anything to admit to being wrong about.

Also, I'd like to point out that several people here have compared you to Trump.

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish (Post 97809)

But when we making fun of him, we are derailing threads?

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 97799)

All of those things can be and are regularly erased both in the positive and negative direction by player performance, so no. Examples from last game: the Autry sack where he jailbroke up the middle, the playcall on either side was irrelevant because of player performance. On the opposite side of the spectrum, any drop.

Originally Posted by Chromeburn (Post 97826)

But, for example, what if the coach gameplans the strength out of the opposition. Belichick often effectively neutralizes a teams strength, especially on offense. That is coaching, it isn't happenstance the players do it. They still have to follow through and accomplish it, but the design is by the coach that they follow.

Originally Posted by Racehorse (Post 97807)

Coaches get paid to build player performance and execution. Confidence to perform at this level can be an acquired trait, which can be produced by a coach known as a "whisperer". Stop ignoring the psychological benefits of a competent coach who understands how to build confidence.

Originally Posted by omahacolt (Post 97848)

Guys,

Dam backed a shitty coach. It’s over. He will never concede to being wrong no matter what. We all know he is wrong. He knows he is wrong. There isn’t a single person on the planet that would agree with him.

But it is done. He went all in on one of the worst coaches in history and he doesn’t have the balls to admit he was wrong. Dam lacks integrity as a human. He is a coward. To his core, as a man, he is a weak and shitty person. That is simply who he is.

He is damold trump.