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
  #11  
Old 05-10-2017, 06:29 PM
Mr. Session's Avatar
Mr. Session Mr. Session is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 712
Thanks: 285
Thanked 492 Times in 224 Posts
Default

You gotta change your attitude if your a fan of this team.

It has become blatantly obvious that the media at this point has little to say about Indianapolis that isn't negative or at times flat out disrespectful. Somehow Indianapolis went from being the "big brother" of the division to the red headed step child in the nation's eyes, despite maintaining a relatively successful record in relation to the rest of the league.

After Deflate Gate things really went downhill for this franchise. I gotta hope Ballard can change that. I rarely hear anything positive about Indianapolis, despite the fact I really don't believe Houston, Tennessee, or Jacksonville are really that much better than the Colts.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-10-2017, 06:49 PM
omahacolt's Avatar
omahacolt omahacolt is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,219
Thanks: 1,441
Thanked 4,275 Times in 1,745 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brylok View Post
I record PTI every day but other than that I only watch live games.
why would you do that?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-10-2017, 10:13 PM
apballin apballin is offline
Doom -N- Gloom
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,852
Thanks: 1,805
Thanked 1,124 Times in 638 Posts
Default

I just came here to say FUCK THE PATS
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to apballin For This Useful Post:
Discflinger (05-10-2017), dwilli57 (05-11-2017), Racehorse (05-11-2017), Wyatt (05-11-2017)
  #14  
Old 05-10-2017, 11:53 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 omahacolt View Post
why would you do that?
I like Kornheiser and Wilbon together. ESPN also shows live games sometimes.
__________________
Soda's Picks Champion: 2014, 2016
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-11-2017, 06:16 AM
Wyatt's Avatar
Wyatt Wyatt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Goshen, IN
Posts: 591
Thanks: 85
Thanked 160 Times in 76 Posts
Default

I never watch ESPN, don't even have cable....I do however follow several of their people (that are still remaining) on twitter, for league news
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-11-2017, 11:25 AM
HoosierinFL's Avatar
HoosierinFL HoosierinFL is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 2,565
Thanks: 218
Thanked 1,647 Times in 790 Posts
Default

The criticism of Luck is pretty unfair. I saw something on ESPN yesterday where they were criticizing him for throwing too many INTs. Thing is, he doesn't really throw a lot of them!
Luck's first 5 years: 18, 9, 16, 12,13
Years 1, 3 and 4 (12 ints in limited play) were problematic, but year 1 is forgivable, and year 4 was a fucked up season.
But consider some of the numbers from those considered all time greats:

P. Manning: 28, 15, 15, 23, 19 (I mean wow, that's terrible!)
D. Marino: 6*, 17, 21, 23, 13, 23 (*first year was not a full season, so I included a 6th year)
J. Elway: 14, 15, 23, 13, 12 (overall comparable to Luck's numbers)
J. Montana: 9, 12, 11, 12, 10 (now those are some good numbers, but that west coast scheme was revolutionary back then)
T. Brady: 12, 14, 12, 14, 14 (and this is from a guy generally reputed to be safe with the ball, and was playing in a more conservative system in his first few years)
B. Favre: 13, 24, 14, 13, 13 (and who went on to have several more 20+ INT seasons later in his career)

So there's literally nothing unusually high about Luck's INT numbers. I didn't even bother factoring in things like TDs and attempts, so that the numbers could be seen more as an INT rate instead of raw numbers, but given how much we throw the ball, Luck's INT rate is surely low compared to these others QBs.
Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to HoosierinFL For This Useful Post:
apballin (05-11-2017), Butter (05-11-2017), omahacolt (05-11-2017), Racehorse (05-12-2017), Spike (05-11-2017), Wyatt (05-11-2017)
  #17  
Old 05-11-2017, 07:03 PM
omahacolt's Avatar
omahacolt omahacolt is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,219
Thanks: 1,441
Thanked 4,275 Times in 1,745 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HoosierinFL View Post
The criticism of Luck is pretty unfair. I saw something on ESPN yesterday where they were criticizing him for throwing too many INTs. Thing is, he doesn't really throw a lot of them!
Luck's first 5 years: 18, 9, 16, 12,13
Years 1, 3 and 4 (12 ints in limited play) were problematic, but year 1 is forgivable, and year 4 was a fucked up season.
But consider some of the numbers from those considered all time greats:

P. Manning: 28, 15, 15, 23, 19 (I mean wow, that's terrible!)
D. Marino: 6*, 17, 21, 23, 13, 23 (*first year was not a full season, so I included a 6th year)
J. Elway: 14, 15, 23, 13, 12 (overall comparable to Luck's numbers)
J. Montana: 9, 12, 11, 12, 10 (now those are some good numbers, but that west coast scheme was revolutionary back then)
T. Brady: 12, 14, 12, 14, 14 (and this is from a guy generally reputed to be safe with the ball, and was playing in a more conservative system in his first few years)
B. Favre: 13, 24, 14, 13, 13 (and who went on to have several more 20+ INT seasons later in his career)

So there's literally nothing unusually high about Luck's INT numbers. I didn't even bother factoring in things like TDs and attempts, so that the numbers could be seen more as an INT rate instead of raw numbers, but given how much we throw the ball, Luck's INT rate is surely low compared to these others QBs.
which is exactly why i stopped watching espn.


they say stuff that isn't really true and run with it. and then it gets just stuck to that player.

it isn't actual analysis. it is bullshit.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to omahacolt For This Useful Post:
Racehorse (05-12-2017)
  #18  
Old 05-12-2017, 09:42 AM
apballin apballin is offline
Doom -N- Gloom
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,852
Thanks: 1,805
Thanked 1,124 Times in 638 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by omahacolt View Post
which is exactly why i stopped watching espn.


they say stuff that isn't really true and run with it. and then it gets just stuck to that player.

it isn't actual analysis. it is bullshit.
Fuck it let em keep bashing Luck, players use that shit as motivation
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-12-2017, 11:28 AM
sherck's Avatar
sherck sherck is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 3,746
Thanks: 1,780
Thanked 1,189 Times in 523 Posts
Default

Two articles on NFL.com today:

First one ranks the top 15 offenses in the league....Colts are not even in the list other than at the end as an "honorable mention."

Second article listed the 2016 division winners in reverse order of whom is most "safe" to repeat and who is most vulnerable to getting beat out in 2017. HOU was listed as most vulnerable but TEN was identified as the team to do so with no mention of the Colts.

Keep swimming under the radar. Just keep swimming, swimming.....

Cheers,
__________________
==============
Thad
The future is so bright; I gotta triple up!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to sherck For This Useful Post:
Wyatt (05-12-2017)
  #20  
Old 05-12-2017, 12:33 PM
Pez Pez is offline
Accidental Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,576
Thanks: 1,019
Thanked 684 Times in 374 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sherck View Post
Two articles on NFL.com today:

First one ranks the top 15 offenses in the league....Colts are not even in the list other than at the end as an "honorable mention."

Second article listed the 2016 division winners in reverse order of whom is most "safe" to repeat and who is most vulnerable to getting beat out in 2017. HOU was listed as most vulnerable but TEN was identified as the team to do so with no mention of the Colts.

Keep swimming under the radar. Just keep swimming, swimming.....

Cheers,
I love the idea that we are under the radar and I have a large sense of optimism that we will win our division and a playoff game this year.

What I don't have is any sense whatsoever of persecution... What evidence does the press have to put the colts into the top half of the league, or that we will win our division? I see none... I see a team with massive holes, poor coaching and an culture that things saying "we have to get better" is ok.

As soon as they can PROVE otherwise by example, then I will feel like my team is being persecuted / underrated.
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 11:26 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.