A few things I think

[ChaosTheory]

Originally Posted by Colts And Orioles

o


I believe that this team would have gone 13-4 with a prime Peyton Manning at quarterback.

I believe that they would have gone 12-5 with Patrick Mahomes at quarterback.

I believe that they would have gone 11-6 with Josh Allen at quarterback.

I believe that they would have gone 10-7 with a very good (but not great) quarterback.



If a prime Peyton Manning were the quarterback, I believe that the Colts would have beaten the Vikings by at least 12 points with the way that the Colts' defense played in that game (it was one of their better ones.)

Then there were games when the offense played well, but the defense was terrible (the first Jaguars game, and the Giants game.)

I think that Manning would have found a way to beat the Texans twice, also.

o

Bit conservative on Manning, I think (as a homer). Prime Manning would have torched this version of the league. Old, broken Manning only got to play 3 seasons under the 2011 changes... 17 game averages: 5264yds, 46tds, 13int.

Mahomes/Allen sweep HOU, GB, MIN and probably DEN. Defense earned JAX and NYG, so keep them. That's 12-13 wins

Good QB would have at least split with HOU, scored 17 on GB, which is already a division championship. Good QB probably would've beaten MIN that night. Hell, probably DEN, too.

Mishew level QB would've had us at 9-8 again.

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory

Bit conservative on Manning, I think (as a homer). Prime Manning would have torched this version of the league. Old, broken Manning only got to play 3 seasons under the 2011 changes... 17 game averages: 5264yds, 46tds, 13int.

Mahomes/Allen sweep HOU, GB, MIN and probably DEN. Defense earned JAX and NYG, so keep them. That's 12-13 wins

Good QB would have at least split with HOU, scored 17 on GB, which is already a division championship. Good QB probably would've beaten MIN that night. Hell, probably DEN, too.

Mishew level QB would've had us at 9-8 again.

Remember also better QB play would have meant the defense was on the field less. Rested defense = better results. This is not an endorsement of the scheme, yes I think moving on from it is a good thing. But they were gassed a lot the past two years. We had the most games decided by a few points in the league I believe. That’s the QB play difference.

[Thorgrim]

To be fair, comparing AR to Manning is like comparing a Yugo to a Ferrari. This would be true of many of todays quarterbacks although in AR’s case the Yugo has a suspect engine and transmission. One thing I am certain of is AR’s lack of toughness or mental fortitude. A tap out? Seriously? If Bromell had broken AR’s jaw Richardson would be asking for a priest and last rites before he got to the sideline.

[ChaosTheory]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

To be fair, comparing AR to Manning is like comparing a Yugo to a Ferrari. This would be true of many of todays quarterbacks although in AR’s case the Yugo has a suspect engine and transmission. One thing I am certain of is AR’s lack of toughness or mental fortitude. A tap out? Seriously? If Bromell had broken AR’s jaw Richardson would be asking for a priest and last rites before he got to the sideline.

True. But I think the point (at least the one I was making), is that the perception that this roster, outside of QB, can't win is misguided.

This roster doesn't require PM, Mahomes, Allen, etc. to squeak into the playoffs. I think some guys who aren't bleeding out of the eyes can see that if we just don't have outright bad QB play, that's when we squeak into the playoffs. Remember, we're talking about historically low efficiency.

Any levels above that, increase the success. It's not a roster that has arguably the best QB in the NFL (Burrow) and missed the playoffs. The ChoppedWood of that fanbase has more of a case.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory

True. But I think the point (at least the one I was making), is that the perception that this roster, outside of QB, can't win is misguided.

This roster doesn't require PM, Mahomes, Allen, etc. to squeak into the playoffs. I think some guys who aren't bleeding out of the eyes can see that if we just don't have outright bad QB play, that's when we squeak into the playoffs. Remember, we're talking about historically low efficiency.

Any levels above that, increase the success. It's not a roster that has arguably the best QB in the NFL (Burrow) and missed the playoffs. The ChoppedWood of that fanbase has more of a case.

I don’t think it’s the worst roster in the league by any means. It’s certainly not devoid of talent. But saying the roster needs good QB play to squeak into the playoffs also isn’t exactly a flex or an indication it is a particularly strong roster either. It’s certainly not the Brad Johnson led Bucs, Dilfer led Ravens, or even Foles Eagles roster. It’s a mediocre roster put together by a GM who claimed he was building a complete roster that wasn’t dependent on a QB. And Ballard has misstepped multiple times trying to find a QB. Yes, I know - it’s hard. But if he’s mediocre at building the rest of the roster, bad at finding a QB, and even he seems to now acknowledge a culture issue, WTF is it that he brings?

[ChaosTheory]

Originally Posted by rm1369

I don’t think it’s the worst roster in the league by any means. It’s certainly not devoid of talent. But saying the roster needs good QB play to squeak into the playoffs also isn’t exactly a flex or an indication it is a particularly strong roster either. It’s certainly not the Brad Johnson led Bucs, Dilfer led Ravens, or even Foles Eagles roster. It’s a mediocre roster put together by a GM who claimed he was building a complete roster that wasn’t dependent on a QB. And Ballard has misstepped multiple times trying to find a QB. Yes, I know - it’s hard. But if he’s mediocre at building the rest of the roster, bad at finding a QB, and even he seems to now acknowledge a culture issue, WTF is it that he brings?

But that wasn't the claim and it changes the premise. My previous post argued against that claim...

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory

Bit conservative on Manning, I think (as a homer). Prime Manning would have torched this version of the league. Old, broken Manning only got to play 3 seasons under the 2011 changes... 17 game averages: 5264yds, 46tds, 13int.

Mahomes/Allen sweep HOU, GB, MIN and probably DEN. Defense earned JAX and NYG, so keep them. That's 12-13 wins

Good QB would have at least split with HOU, scored 17 on GB, which is already a division championship. Good QB probably would've beaten MIN that night. Hell, probably DEN, too.

Mishew level QB would've had us at 9-8 again.

I don't think it's unreasonable to believe the bolded scenario if we had "good" QB play. I would argue 3, maybe 4 wins, but it's at least 2 wins. And just like that, it's a division title. NFL margins.

Minshew, who I assume we don't consider a good QB, is the level of QB that squeaks us into the playoffs. Speaking of him... Colts and Raiders were 9-8 and 8-9 respectively last year. Minshew went 7-6 with us, and 2-7 with them. His surroundings were not the same.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory

But that wasn't the claim and it changes the premise. My previous post argued against that claim...



I don't think it's unreasonable to believe the bolded scenario if we had "good" QB play. I would argue 3, maybe 4 wins, but it's at least 2 wins. And just like that, it's a division title. NFL margins.

Minshew, who I assume we don't consider a good QB, is the level of QB that squeaks us into the playoffs. Speaking of him... Colts and Raiders were 9-8 and 8-9 respectively last year. Minshew went 7-6 with us, and 2-7 with them. His surroundings were not the same.

And Joe Flacco was 4-1 with Cleveland and 3-5 with the Colts. His surroundings were not the same. So clearly the Colts roster is a step down from Cleveland’s.

You can believe this is a good roster and that Ballard has done a good job. Buckner seems to believe there are issues and if we are to believe Ballard’s end of season presser, he sees there are major issues - not just QB. Sadly I think it’s most likely he’s full of shit and believes like you that’s he’s done a good job and it’s just AR holding back a good roster. The colts had a very easy strength of schedule and a shit division again. Ballard can’t win it. Even adding good QB play doesn’t make this a good team. MAYBE the best in the worst division. MAYBE. That’s with gifting Ballard the hardest thing to find in the league. To me that’s hardly a testament to the quality of the roster.

[ChaosTheory]

Originally Posted by rm1369

And Joe Flacco was 4-1 with Cleveland and 3-5 with the Colts. His surroundings were not the same. So clearly the Colts roster is a step down from Cleveland’s.

You can believe this is a good roster and that Ballard has done a good job. Buckner seems to believe there are issues and if we are to believe Ballard’s end of season presser, he sees there are major issues - not just QB. Sadly I think it’s most likely he’s full of shit and believes like you that’s he’s done a good job and it’s just AR holding back a good roster. The colts had a very easy strength of schedule and a shit division again. Ballard can’t win it. Even adding good QB play doesn’t make this a good team. MAYBE the best in the worst division. MAYBE. That’s with gifting Ballard the hardest thing to find in the league. To me that’s hardly a testament to the quality of the roster.

I didn't say the roster is golden and can't be improved. But it's a good roster. It's the margins and the perception. All things could be equal, but if the thin margin in a couple games goes our way, and we're not the "dumpster fire" some claim... we're division champs.

Those two designations are worlds apart, but when you break it down, the margin isn't that great. Same team.

Address the claim, for example. You don't think <insert "good" QB> would have made enough of a difference in the second Houston game? We lost by 3 after AR was 2/15 and gifted them a last second TD. Probably the first HOU game, too.

Even as weird as the GB and DEN games were... 17 measly points from AR and we win a game the DEF shit the bed in, and if we aren't throwing for 45%, we probably don't have 12 consecutive 4-play drives in DEN and blow a game where the DEF actually held them to under 200 yards of offense.

QB needs to be fixed. Unfortunately, everyone has to depend on AR developing this laser-focus and making a miraculous turnaround for that to happen. Let's hope he can and does.

[IndyNorm]

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory

But that wasn't the claim and it changes the premise. My previous post argued against that claim...



I don't think it's unreasonable to believe the bolded scenario if we had "good" QB play. I would argue 3, maybe 4 wins, but it's at least 2 wins. And just like that, it's a division title. NFL margins.

Minshew, who I assume we don't consider a good QB, is the level of QB that squeaks us into the playoffs. Speaking of him... Colts and Raiders were 9-8 and 8-9 respectively last year. Minshew went 7-6 with us, and 2-7 with them. His surroundings were not the same.

No doubt with good QB play we probably get into the playoffs this year, and let's face it to be a SB contender in today's NFL you need very good if not great QB play.

But I think it's fair to also point out that our D costs us a spot in the playoffs just as much as the QB play and we would have had 3-4 more wins w/ good/ or even decent defensive play. If our D doesn't shit the bed @ NYG and @ Jagoffs we win both of those games. Additionally, our run D was just as much at fault in the losses vs. HOU and @ GB, and if it's not a shit show we win at least 1 and possibly both of those games. Also, I need to point out that we had at least 3 games down the stretch where our O bailed out really bad defensive play against bad offenses: @ NYJ, @ Cheats, and vs. Tits.

So yes we need much better QB play, but we also need much better defensive play as well.

[ChaosTheory]

Originally Posted by IndyNorm

No doubt with good QB play we probably get into the playoffs this year, and let's face it to be a SB contender in today's NFL you need very good if not great QB play.

But I think it's fair to also point out that our D costs us a spot in the playoffs just as much as the QB play and we would have had 3-4 more wins w/ good/ or even decent defensive play. If our D doesn't shit the bed @ NYG and @ Jagoffs we win both of those games. Additionally, our run D was just as much at fault in the losses vs. HOU and @ GB, and if it's not a shit show we win at least 1 and possibly both of those games. Also, I need to point out that we had at least 3 games down the stretch where our O bailed out really bad defensive play against bad offenses: @ NYJ, @ Cheats, and vs. Tits.

So yes we need much better QB play, but we also need much better defensive play as well.

I hear you, for sure. I don't defend them for those dogshit performances. I do think our offensive unit, outside of QB, is the strong unit, but AR had a great game vs NYJ and a great moment in NE to bail out the D.

I have two separate tiers of concern, and QB has been the consistent weakness on this team for years. At least I've seen the D be a lot better with largely the same personnel, and there's reason to believe that the talent can produce if they keep their collective head out of their ass. Hope the Gus change and the heat they're seemingly under from inside and outside the building makes that happen.

AR just has more influence as the QB, and I'll be the broken record... 45% and 12 completions a game can't work.