Bio not provided
@hankster If Richardson is still getting the most carries of any RB by the end of the season, I will be very surprised.
2 days, 4 hours ago on
For what we have invested, I like the move. I just think that counting on him to do anything, even depth, is a stretch at this point.
5 days, 4 hours ago on
@DougEngland I was very surprised when it seemed like the colts didn't go after Daryl Smith. He was a very similar player in a system that is a copy of what he played in Baltimore. He's a bit older but much cheaper, and the front-loaded contract makes it seem like Grigson wanted Jackson as a stop-gap measure anyway.
The real question is why we didn't go after Dansby. Location, winning, and coach history have nothing to Dansby going to Cleveland. Indy is no worse than Cleveland, the Browns are not a winning team, and he's never played for any of the Browns' coaches. He just wanted a bit more money. Why not pony up a bit more for someone who is competent (or better) in both phases of defense and fits the system? His contract was structured almost identically, so his inevitable slide wont hurt when we need to resign all the skills players coming up in a few years.
2 weeks, 3 days ago on
@ECB Here's a dirty little secret: The 2009 SB team wasn't actually that good.
Robinson was a starter in name only. The Colts hardly ever used 2 TE sets, and Gijon was only on the field for 293 snaps. The Colts used Collie, Garcon, and Wayne as the majority formation. Tamme, Santi, and Robinson combined accounted for fewer snaps than any of those WRs.The offensive line was pretty average or worse. It has been every year since 2007. The DBs were injury racked and half of them were IRed or missed half of the games.
Don't confuse team success with not having tons of holes. Those Colts did better because the conference was relatively weak AND their offense was great. This offense is nowhere near that, and even the injuries they had last year were nothing that the 2009/2010 Colts didn't have to deal with. PFM and the playcalling were just that much better than what we are working with right now. They didn't get blown out of games they tried to win. The Colts have had more losses of 14+ points in the two years with Luck than they did in the last 4 years of healthy Manning. The offense last year could be outstanding at times. Other times they were awful. They were league average in PPG, and that precludes being "outstanding" by any rational definition.
As much as we've spent the last few years, I'm not really seeing much reason to expect more from the defense. They look like they might be better at run defense, but the pass defense doesn't seem to have any improvement. It's the same DBs minus Bethea, and we have no replacement for him. We need to get one somewhere, and FA is just as likely as the draft.
The Colts don't need a ton of big name replacements. Getting a competent FS and C will go a long way to smoothing over the rough spots. Barring horrible things, there is no reason why they shouldn't make the playoffs. By that narrow definition, they are definitely contenders. However until the offense can be more consistent and the defense can show up against good offenses, there is no way the Colts can be considered better than the 3rd in the AFC (Broncos, Pats) and probably no higher than 7th in the NFL (SF, SEA, GB, NOLA/CARO).
1 month ago on Colts Authority Fireside Chats: Grading Grigson's Shopping Spree