Quick thoughts on Colts-Raiders

[omahacolt]

Originally Posted by Chaka

I’ll only agree with you to a limited extent on this statement. There’s no denying that Ballard selected Smith and signed Glowinski, so there’s no accident there. Someone posted a quote a few days ago, however, that he feels he got “lucky” with regard to Smith because he didn’t really view him as RT. So you’re right to this extent.

On this last point, did anything during the Raiders game change your view at all that Good or Clark would be a better fit at RT?

Smith struggled early but bounced back. Glowinski has been fantastic. The way Clark played at LT makes me wonder but it doesn’t matter now. We have no way of knowing what a right side of smith and Clark or Good would look like. The results are just fine.

And yes accidental because nobody thought glowinski would play this well and smith didn’t really look comfortable to me at rt in preseason. Nothing wrong with lucking into players.

[omahacolt]

Originally Posted by FatDT

What does Autry offer that Anderson didn't do better?

Absolutely nothing

[omahacolt]

Originally Posted by VeveJones007

I see people are still debating moves strictly in the context of "would it have made the 2018 team better?"

Every year is important with an elite qb. I will never believe otherwise

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by Puck

HE DIDNT WANT TO PLAY IN A 4-3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And I hope all the other teams "abuse" us for 200 + rushing yards the rest of the way!

Puck, this may have been asked and answered before, but where are you getting that from? Is it insider info? I’m not necessarily disputing it, but I’ve never found it anyway else.

He played in a 4-3 in NY and he’s playing in a 4-3 now in Oakland. So it seems strange.

[Puck]

Originally Posted by rm1369

Puck, this may have been asked and answered before, but where are you getting that from? Is it insider info? I’m not necessarily disputing it, but I’ve never found it anyway else.

He played in a 4-3 in NY and he’s playing in a 4-3 now in Oakland. So it seems strange.

I dont have the article but he wanted out of NY because of the switch to 4-3

I assume he changed his mind after no one was coming after him in FA and maybe Chuckie promised him something. It is strange that he ended up there.

My initial thought on why he left was that he had a clause in his contract with us that he could leave if we didn't stay in a 3-4. If you think about it it was kind of strange that he chose to come here to begin with.

[YDFL Commish]

Originally Posted by Chaka

To clarify for everyone, Ballard is not my dad. Seriously, though, if my comments come off as though I have been offended by yours or anyone else’s comments, then I’m not expressing myself well at all. I am genuinely interested in your responses to my questions because I genuinely want to understand your position. I agree that I’ve ended up defending Ballard quite a bit, but that’s because you’ll have to admit that until recently the prevailing opinion seemed to be that he was throwing away multiple seasons, and was making poor draft and personnel decisions. I happen to strongly disagree with that line of thinking, and the strict businesslike approach he’s taking to running the team really appeals to me. I think it literally gives us a competitive advantage, and that advantage will become more and more apparent as time goes on.

As a result, I’ll usually challenge opinions to the contrary if they’re not explained in a way that makes sense to me. There’s a lot of smart people on this board, and lots who know WAY more than me about the X’s and O’s, so I’m interested in what all of you have to say – particularly when it sounds way out of line to me. But I’m certainly open to the idea that the guy makes mistakes, and the concept (however remote) that I might not be correct either.

In your comment, you simply said that we’d be better with Hankins, Simon and Anderson. Since there was no explanation for this statement, I asked for more detail, and in the process laid out my thinking on the issue so you could respond. You provided more info for me to consider in your response. Based upon that response, I can now decide whether I think your original comments have any merit or not (FYI the verdict is in - they do not as to Hankins and Simon, but maybe some as to Anderson/Autry).

Look, it wouldn’t be very fun if everyone just posted their gripes and complaints here, and then everyone else just agreed. If that’s all everyone hears then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Everyone needs the perspective that comes from genuine, respectful disagreement (or even disrespectful agreement that has actual substance). As I think you mentioned in a prior post, responses consisting only of insults are not useful. I’ve tried to provide meaningful detail when I post - much to your dismay given the length of some of my admittedly long posts – but that’s only so that people will provide equally detailed responses and the discussion will have some useful substance.

Thanks FatDT, you've got him going on 1000 word diatribe again.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by Puck

I dont have the article but he wanted out of NY because of the switch to 4-3

I assume he changed his mind after no one was coming after him in FA and maybe Chuckie promised him something. It is strange that he ended up there.

My initial thought on why he left was that he had a clause in his contract with us that he could leave if we didn't stay in a 3-4. If you think about it it was kind of strange that he chose to come here to begin with.

Giants played a 4-3 when he was drafted. To my knowledge that’s all he played in on the Giants. My understanding was he was pissed when he was moved from 1-tech to 3-tech for Damon Harrison. And Harrison, JPP, and Tucker (?) all got paid leaving little money for Hankins and him not playing his more natural position. I’ve never seen anything to indicate he was against playing in a 4-3. His best years as a pro came in a 4-3. And I believe last year in Indy was his only year in a 3-4. Now he’s back in a 4-3 again. I don’t believe Hanskins was the driver for being released. For a guy driven by money to ask for his release AFTER the opening of free agency makes absolutely no sense. Especially considering he was a late signer with the Colts when everyone balked at his asking price. He had to know his market would be somewhat limited.

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish

Thanks FatDT, you've got him going on 1000 word diatribe again.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by FatDT

What does Autry offer that Anderson didn't do better?

Regardless of signing Autry I never understood why they saw Anderson as primarily a DE in a cover 2 4-3. I would have thought he would have played 3-tech/DE or something at least.

[JAFF]

Originally Posted by omahacolt

Smith struggled early but bounced back. Glowinski has been fantastic. The way Clark played at LT makes me wonder but it doesn’t matter now. We have no way of knowing what a right side of smith and Clark or Good would look like. The results are just fine.

And yes accidental because nobody thought glowinski would play this well and smith didn’t really look comfortable to me at rt in preseason. Nothing wrong with lucking into players.

Good line coaching