ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum   ColtFreaks.com Home Page

Go Back   ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum > Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum > Indianapolis Colts Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 01-07-2020, 07:07 PM
Colts And Orioles's Avatar
Colts And Orioles Colts And Orioles is offline
Historian
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Brewster, NY
Posts: 6,763
Thanks: 3,950
Thanked 3,247 Times in 1,998 Posts
Default

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
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 01-07-2020, 07:10 PM
Brylok's Avatar
Brylok Brylok is offline
"Still at Work"
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 7,668
Thanks: 2,311
Thanked 3,036 Times in 1,865 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldcolt View Post
Does anybody have any interest in free agent qbs? Can Reich do some magic with like Winston?
Nah. It's gonna be JB again. Batten down the hatches...
__________________
Soda's Picks Champion: 2014, 2016
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 01-07-2020, 07:50 PM
Chromeburn's Avatar
Chromeburn Chromeburn is offline
Post whore
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,253
Thanks: 1,407
Thanked 3,582 Times in 2,004 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brylok View Post
Nah. It's gonna be JB again. Batten down the hatches...
ooohhh Boy. Trevor Lawrence 2021? Says about every bad team's fanbase next season.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 01-07-2020, 07:52 PM
Spike's Avatar
Spike Spike is offline
Post whore
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 7,710
Thanks: 8,123
Thanked 4,793 Times in 2,672 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldcolt View Post
Does anybody have any interest in free agent qbs? Can Reich do some magic with like Winston?
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.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 01-07-2020, 09:34 PM
Colt Classic Colt Classic is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,681
Thanks: 200
Thanked 448 Times in 282 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcubed View Post
On the flip side, in the last few years the rams have gone all in to win now. Resigning their own guys to big contracts (goff, gurly, donald) and being very aggressive in signing FAs and trades (fowler, weddle, mathews, suh, ramsey, etc).

They got embarrassed in the SB and didnt make the playoffs this year. They dont have a ton of cap space and need to resign guys, specifically fowler and ramsey who will bring a big contracts.

Not necessarily the best way to go about it either.
The Rams are an extreme example since they had to make a splash for their debut in LA. Do you think they could sell Ballard's plan as they arrive in LA?

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.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 01-08-2020, 12:37 PM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 859
Thanks: 337
Thanked 667 Times in 286 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369 View Post
Chaka, I get it - I’m not going to sway you at all. I can’t prove that anything would have been better and I can’t prove that anything good that has happened would have still happened. It’s a game that I can’t win. Pretty much the exact concern I had (the unpredictable nature of the NFL) rocked the franchise (Lucks retirement) and they may be facing a similar situation (AC retiring) this offseason. I complained about a 3-4 year rebuild and we are now entering year 4 and the dynasty is no where in sight. I complained about a 1 yr deal for Funchess because I didn’t believe it solved anything at WR. He played one game, WR is still a mess and whether or not he comes back next year is up in the air. It doesn’t matter what is said or what happens your opinion isn’t going to change. And considering where the team is mine sure as hell isn’t either. So the discussion is pointless.
I’m sorry to hear that. My opinion can and has changed in response to opinions expressed on this board, but I agree not in this instance. I understand your position, and it’s perfectly fair and reasonable, but I just happen to disagree. Your argument would be more convincing to me if the Colts were mired in a series of losing seasons, with little evidence of progress and we were being asked to simply trust Ballard on his word and vision. Then I would understand all the teeth-gnashing and frustration.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 01-08-2020, 01:01 PM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 859
Thanks: 337
Thanked 667 Times in 286 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt Classic View Post
The Rams are an extreme example since they had to make a splash for their debut in LA. Do you think they could sell Ballard's plan as they arrive in LA?

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.
The Bears aren't really comparable in my view. To begin with, we didn't have a screwed up QB situation in the time frame we've been discussing. We're talking about the window that opened in 2018 when Luck returned. The Bears don't have a Luck.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 01-08-2020, 01:54 PM
rcubed's Avatar
rcubed rcubed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 4,132
Thanks: 933
Thanked 1,476 Times in 814 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369 View Post
Fair enough, although:

1) I wouldn’t consider Goff at the franchise QB level. To me he doesn’t carry the team the way those guys do. He’s a decent QB on a good team. If a new GM took over KC and decided he was rebuilding the roster over 3-4 years it would be comparable. Seattle turned over their roster with Wilson. They didn’t wait to replace nearly every need in the draft. That’s more comparable.

2) Any discussion of spending money or bringing in vets and guys on here go to the most extreme examples they can find as the only comparisons. I’ve not once went off because we didn’t trade for the newest “star” that’s being moved or sign the highest price free agent. But if you think Ballard adequately addressed the WR position before the 2018 season then we simply won’t agree on anything. And I’ll point out - guess what one of the top needs going into 2020 is? Yeah, WR. It’s hard af to address every need through the draft or with a bargain.

3) After the 2018 season Ballard essentially said the team came together quicker than he thought. If he realized they would have been that good do you think he’d have done more? I do. And after this season he admitted erring by getting rid of some of the vets. That sounds pretty similar to what I’ve complained about - forcing youth for the long term gain over what vets bring this year.
similarly you dont seem to take into account that ballard has been in on many FAs that eventually went to another team. ballard has a value for a player and once the price goes beyond that he is out. that shows diligence in sticking to his process. I guess you could say that maybe his threshold is too low, but its not like he does nothing, and in the mean time he hasn't strapped the team with bad players with bad contracts.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 01-08-2020, 02:02 PM
rm1369 rm1369 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,074
Thanks: 287
Thanked 730 Times in 404 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaka View Post
.... I would understand all the teeth-gnashing and frustration.
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:
Originally Posted by Chaka View Post
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.
You are correct that our debates always come down to philosophical differences, however I want to point out that I’m not a always a “win now” guy. I’m only that when there is a true franchise QB in place. To me a true franchise QB just means that much. He puts you around .500 with a shitty roster. He gives you a chance to win any game you play. And he’s one hot streak from putting you in the SB or at least the AFCCG with minimal help. That is the importance of the position. IMO Polian gave away SBs trying to maintain greatness. Ted Thompson did similar in GB. Both teams would have done better to have had higher peaks and lower valleys because the QB would always allow for a very quick bounce back. That allows you to take more risks IMO.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 01-08-2020, 02:02 PM
rcubed's Avatar
rcubed rcubed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 4,132
Thanks: 933
Thanked 1,476 Times in 814 Posts
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
ColtFreaks.com is in no way affiliated with the Indianapolis Colts, the NFL, or any of their subsidiaries.