#101
|
||||
|
||||
o
ESPN's "NFL Nation" has a blurb for all 32 teams ........ Mike Wells specifically has one for the Colts. Indianapolis Colts Revamp its group of pass-catchers. T.Y. Hilton, the team's No. 1 option, will be 31 next season. Devin Funchess, who didn't even play a full game this season, is a free agent. Parris Campbell, a 2019 second-round pick, played only seven games because of injuries. Tight end Eric Ebron is a free agent, and the Colts have very little interest in re-signing him. You get the picture. Zach Pascal was leading receiver (607 yards) for the Colts, who finished 30th in the NFL with just 196 passing yards per game. There's a chance that quarterback Jacoby Brissett remains the starter, despite his struggles late in the season, but Indianapolis needs to help him out ........ GM Chris Ballard has admitted as much. --- Mike Wells Biggest 2020 Off-Season Needs for all 32 NFL Teams (By NFL Nation) https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...l-32-nfl-teams o
__________________
BALTIMORE COLTS ))))))))))))))))))) INDIANAPOLIS COLTS Bert Jones, Johnny Unitas, Earl Morrall ))))))))).lll) Jim Harbaugh, Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck |
#102
|
||||
|
||||
Nah. It's gonna be JB again. Batten down the hatches...
__________________
Soda's Picks Champion: 2014, 2016 |
#103
|
||||
|
||||
ooohhh Boy. Trevor Lawrence 2021? Says about every bad team's fanbase next season.
|
#104
|
||||
|
||||
I don't care at all for Winston. He's a punk ass, interception throwing machine. Doubt even Reich can fix him.
__________________
Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid. |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
A closer parallel is the Bears. They went for it with the Mack trade, their QB situation is similarly screwed up, Mack and the defense led them to a nice season last year, but a sub-par season this year, mainly due to the lack of play-makers on offense. If I was a fan of the Bears, I wouldn't regret the team going for it with the Mack trade. Sure, he's making a lot of money, but he's exactly the kind of rare game-changer who the Colts are forever chasing through the draft, as opposed to parting with a few draft picks and having that issue solved for the next 4-5 years AND using the remaining picks to find complementary players who would be that much better since they step in day one next to a difference-maker. It's easy to say, "well the Bears didn't win a Super Bowl, so such a risky move wasn't wise and now they're up against the cap". You gotta spend the money on someone, might as well be an impactful someone. Last edited by Colt Classic; 01-07-2020 at 09:36 PM. |
#106
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
But that’s not what has happened here. There are plenty of signs that Ballard’s plan was working. Yes, the plan has been seriously damaged by major unexpected – and in some ways unheard of – events such as the Luck retirement. And yes, I agree things are always changing and unpredictable in the NFL. But the Luck retirement goes a little beyond that and its kind of uncharted territory – a marquee player in the prime of his career at the sport’s most important position who is abruptly eliminated from the equation permanently. That’s not within the realm of normal NFL “not for long” events. Sorry, it just isn’t. Maybe I'm forgetting something, but I really can’t think of a comparable event off the top of my head – maybe the Theismann injury, but he was pretty late into his career at the time if I’m not mistaken. Anyway, ultimately our debates always seem to come back a core philosophical difference regarding the proper time horizon the Colts should focus upon. It seems to me you are more of a “win now” guy because you believe competitive windows are usually brief, and I am more in the camp of believing that it's realistic to build a team that can maintain a high level of sustained success that spans several years. That’s our primary disagreement at the end of the day. |
#107
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Second, we aren't talking about the Colts failing to trade for a specific player at the cost of future draft picks - that's an entirely different analysis than the decision to sign free agents. Usually, guys like Mack aren't available through free agency. Third, your timeline is off with the Rams. They moved to L.A. in 2016, and ended up 4-12 after picking Goff with the first pick in the draft. they didn't really start their free agent splurge until around 2018 (Suh), when they made a Super Bowl run. So I think they are a much better comparable to the Colts and the philosophy that some here have advocated. For the record, I don't think trading future draft picks for a star player in his prime is necessarily a bad idea. Mack has been a good addition, no question. My problem with those type of trades is that often people look only at the quality of the star player and ignore the business implications - usually you have to sign the player to a market-value contract as part of such a trade, so there are implications for the team beyond the on the field performance. That said, unique players are often worth more than market rates, so I'm not against that idea. I haven't seen any indication that Ballard thinks this way yet though. |
#108
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#109
|
|||
|
|||
I want to make sure it’s clear that I like Ballard and I didn’t start this conversation complaining about him. It’s started because of a comment I made to dam about not seeing Ballard signing Bridgewater for big money or spending enough draft capital to move up significantly in the draft. Just doesn’t match his previous comments or actions, but either way I didn’t jump in bashing Ballard and really haven’t intended to.
Quote:
Without that guy in place then I’m not a “win now” guy. I’m a find a “true franchise QB” guy. And I’m down for patience. In a previous thread I said Ballard didn’t absolutely have to fix the QB situation this offseason, because it’s more important to get it right than it is to get someone quickly. However that also means that I don’t think the Colts will be true contenders for a few more years. That’s why I look at that 2018 season as a major missed opportunity - it’s going to be a few years before they have that opportunity again with a franchise QB (not just make the playoffs with an ok QB). You’ve mentioned several times that no one expected anything from that 2018 team, but that’s not accurate. They were in a great position with a returning franchise QB, very high draft pick that would net a difference make or two or three, tons of cap space, and ditching Pagano. I wasn’t pessimistic until I saw the direction Ballard was going. Last edited by rm1369; 01-08-2020 at 02:15 PM. |
#110
|
||||
|
||||
So the rumor-mill/what-if generators have been spewing a lot of tom brady to the colts. I highly doubt that would come to fruition, but I was wondering what if it actually did. How would that be accepted in colts land? If tom-terrific signed a two year deal and we draft someone to sit behind him. Would there be full riots in the streets? Would fans eventually calm and then root unconditionally?
I dont think I would want him, even taking the history out of the equation. |
|
|