Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyNorm
No, you can't at this point b/c that statement assumes that Stroud will stay healthy and continue to at least be as good as he was his rookie year and that AR will continue to be injury plagued or he won't improve on what we did see on the field this year (which was pretty damn promising).
Totally get your sentiment that a bird in the hand is better than 2 in the bush, but Ballard drafted AR w/ the long game in mind rather than just his rookie year. If 2-3 years down the road Stroud is an all pro and AR can't stay on the field or doesn't develop then I will completely agree w/ you that Ballard fucked up by not trading up to draft Stroud. But the fact is that it's WAY too early to say that Ballard definitely fucked up. Especially when you consider that despite the injury concerns AR still has the higher ceiling.
|
You clearly understand what I'm saying. Stroud is already showing it, and the Colts could've had him if they wanted to make the investment. Yes, Richardson could have a better career, I hope he does, but right now the Texans have a franchise QB barring injury and the Colts
might have a franchise QB
if he can stay healthy. I can't put it better than what you did, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyNorm
I absolutely care for and think nuance is important, but what you do isn't adding nuance. You make definitive statements based on hypotheticals to try to prove that you're not wrong.
Adding nuance is stating something like: Yeah, I was wrong about Wilson. Dudes a total bust. But I don't think the Jets did him any favors by throwing him to the wolves, and if they had let him sit for part or all of his rookie year it might have worked out better. Certainly couldn't have hurt anything.
What you say (paraphrasing): I wasn't wrong on Wilson. The Jets fucked up. If they had listened to me and sat him his rookie year he'd be a really good QB.
Also, BTW: I disagree w/ that sentiment on Wilson. The dude's basically the Gen Z version of Ryan Leaf, only with pill popping swapped out for milf hunting.
|
That paraphrase is pretty out there and not really what I say at all. Of course a franchise is going to implement what they believe is the best course for each player's development, and they would never listen to anyone outside their organization unless they specifically sought out that person as a consultant. Clearly, the Jets picked the wrong developmental path for Wilson. Maybe there wasn't a right one. That said, I don't know how much clearer I can be than:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dam8610
The entire 2021 QB class appears to be a bust.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dam8610
I already said everyone was wrong about the 2021 QB class. In some cases, those QBs came in with fatal flaws, in some cases the team destroyed the development of the QB, all 5 of them appear to be busts now.
|
I pretty much said exactly what you said was the "right way" to do it in the post you responded to, actually. So I truly don't get the point here. I guess I'll say it like this and then be done with it: If the Jets planned to do what they did to Zach Wilson, and the Cheats planned ro do what they did with Mac Jones, all parties would've been better off had those selections not been made. I think I said that part before, but I can't find it now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyNorm
I'm not disagreeing with you that Lawrence hasn't and in all likelihood won't live up to expectations. I do think the book isn't near as closed on him as you think it is, but I digress. The point I've been making is that you bring him up ALL THE TIME. Even when the discussion has absolutely nothing to do with him whatsoever (like how you did on this thread).
|
He's the starting QB of a division rival, so always somewhat relevant here. He's also relevant to a discussion of the 2021 QB class. You brought up Mac Jones and Zach Wilson as points to discredit my opinion, why wouldn't I bring up one of the biggest points in the favor of the credibility of my opinion? Yes, I'm loudly going to proclaim the W on Trevor Lawrence, because I loudly and proudly got it right in the pre-draft process. Same reason I won't claim any sort of W on Purdy, I didn't say anything back then even though I saw him back then watching Breece Hall and Charlie Kolar and thought he stood out on film more than you would expect from a college QB who nobody had ranked highly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyNorm
Calling BS again. As Chaos backed me up on, there were quite a few of us here who specifically said that we did not want the Colts to draft Young. I don't see how anyone who made that statement would have Young ranked higher than Stroud. It has been almost a year and a ton of beers since then, so maybe there were more people on here who liked Young than I remember. But I definitely remember that there was a good portion of us on here who did not want Young at all.
|
Please show me the posted rankings or the posts where anyone but me is saying that Stroud is clearly better than Young and should be taken before him. The only posted rankings I saw or remembered were someone in that poll who put Young at 1 ahead of Stroud and I think Chromeburn did like a full scouting report on each of the top 4 QBs, dedicating a post to each, had Young at the top, and said he did them in the order of his ranking. By the way, props to Chromeburn on that, it's a lot of time and effort to make something like that.
I get not wanting to draft Young, his height was a clear risk, but that doesn't mean you thought Stroud was better or wanted to draft him. Clearly you, specifically, did, based on the vote in the poll, but I think you and I were more the exception than the rule.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyNorm
I don't disagree w/ this, but in your effort to be always right you state these circumstances as the definite root cause as to why a given player you liked hasn't or didn't work out. It could very well be that the said player just isn't a good, NFL quality player.
|
Absolutely that possibility exists, I already acknowledged it earlier in this post. I state circumstances because they're relevant factors in why a player might not have worked out. Mac Jones and Zach Wilson don't look like they'll be starting NFL QBs at this point, but I'd bet if the Cheats and Jets each cut those QBs, they'd find another team. That's because most NFL teams saw both players as having significant talent coming out of college, and there's probably some team out there that believes they can still unlock that potential.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyNorm
I honestly forget what this was a response to. I think it was that I was again trying to get through your thick head that it's too early to definitely say that staying put and drafting AR instead of trading up for Stroud is the franchise killing disaster that you claim it is.
|
Never claimed it was a franchise killing disaster, just frustrating to be holding a lottery ticket when it's clear the annoying next door neighbor cashed theirs in for the jackpot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyNorm
If AR doesn't pan out then Ballard is probably gone. With that said as much shit as I give Ballard on here, I fully admit he's good at his job. Certainly better than his predecessor and better than any of us armchair GMs on here would be. Also, he's shown that he won't hesitate to cut bait like he did w/ Wentz. I think we need to give him leeway for the next season or 2 before we start calling for him to replace AR.
|
This, as much as anything, is what frustrates me about this situation. Ballard is a great GM, I'd argue top 5 in the league at the very least. His job now rides on the right arm of Anthony Richardson. It could've rode on the right arm of C.J. Stroud and been much more secure. Maybe Richardson will work our better in the end, or maybe Irsay fires Ballard and replaces him with we won't know who until it happens, but the likelihood of it being an upgrade is slim to none.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyNorm
Basically you thought he could be a top 15 QB. I balked at this. Then you came back w/ saying that you watched film on him, that he showed well in said film, and that you predicted that he would improve upon his '22 season and have a good year in '23. This obviously didn't happen, and not just b/c he got hurt ~1/3 of the way through the season. He was GOD AWFUL prior to that.
|
You're going to need to quote me on that. I believe the discussion was on QBs who could have a better year than Jalen Hurts, and one that you scoffed just as hard at as Daniel Jones who I was FAR more confident in than Daniel Jones was Dak Prescott. I should've included C.J. Stroud in the group, clearly. As far as the film part, I've never watched film on Daniel Jones and never claimed to. You might be confusing me with Lawrence Owen on that part, he did a whole feature on his YouTube channel about the Colts pursuing Daniel Jones in the offseason. I was never interested in that, either, as I always believed his ceiling was mid-tier starter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyNorm
As with C&O, you're trying to speak for me. I answered the poll w/ how it read: Who do you want the Colts to draft at 4? and not Who do you want the Colts to draft at 4 that you think will likely be there? Fully understand why folks would think the 2nd part is implied, but I did not.
|
I wasn't speaking for anyone. Based on what you said here, a more interesting question would then be: Did you believe that Stroud would be on the board at 4? If not, did you want to trade up for him or do you think what happened was the best course of action given the circumstances? Do you think drafting Levis at 4, as Ballard suggested would've happened had a different team traded up to 3 and drafted Richardson, would've been preferable to trading up to 1 for Stroud?
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyNorm
I also find it interesting that I am actually agreeing w/ you on something, but yet you seem to still want to argue about it.
|
There are clear points of disagreement, and it seems also clear points of misunderstanding. Those are the things from which the continued discussion is borne.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyNorm
A few observations on this: omaha says a lot of things in jest (or at least that's how they come across), whereas you do not. On top of that he'll bring up something once or twice and then let it go whereas you bring it up again, and again, and.......(out to infinity) again. Also, his statements seem come from him just wanting the Colts to be better, whereas yours are more about trying to prove that you're right above anything else. Maybe that's not your intent, but it's definitely how you come across on here. And I'm obviously not the only one who thinks so.
|
Omaha acts like he's better than everyone else constantly and most of the things he says "in jest" are insults to people who dare to disagree with him. Honestly, if I acted the way Omaha does on this board, I'd expect to get treated the way I get treated. I do say some things in jest, one example earlier in this post would be the line about putting Stroud in the "could be better than Hurts this year" group at the beginning of the season, no one could've seen that coming from Stroud. As a Colts fan, ultimately what I want in every situation is for the Colts to get better. I'd love to see them put together a dynasty the likes of which makes the Cheats fans jealous, all the more because it was accomplished without cheating. That said, I do enjoy the game of football, and talking about the game of football, beyond just being a Colts fan. I enjoy learning about everything about the game, from the on field chess match of strategy that's constantly going on to the players whose drive and talent change and evolve those things even down to contract structure and how various clauses and contract language affect the salary cap. Point being the things I say may not be only about the Colts being better, because I enjoy all aspects of football as football beyond just the Colts.
Of course, not many conversations here break out about the subtle differences between Cover 3 and Cover 7 and in which situations you'd prefer to have the MEG (man everywhere he goes) half of the field vs. the situations where it would be preferable to have full zone or the implications of likely to be earned vs. not likely to be earned incentives in contracts for players and the impact it will have on the cap for teams, but when they do, I'll be all about them.
01-13-2024, 04:46 PM
Hybrid Mode
