Bio not provided
Pro-sports play a huge role in your #3 - stable infrastructure. Infrastructure costs money - roads, airports, mass transit, parking, etc. It's only worth the money when it gets used, and if it's only getting used from 8-5 on weekdays, then it won't pay for itself. An abundance of evening and weekend attractions can make up the difference, and that's where pro-sports fits in. Every penny that a downtown parking garage takes in during a Colts or Pacers game is a penny that they don't have to charge commuters in order to break even. If mass transit is going to take off in this city, it must be active all day, not just during the morning and evening commute. Sporting events, museums, shopping malls, zoos, conventions, and concerts all play their part in making that happen.
6 months, 1 week ago on Revenge of the #CATweetbag
@bradicus18 FA isn't the time to significantly improve the team. FA is the time to plug your obvious holes with other teams' leftovers, so you can have the luxury of picking BPA in the draft. To that extent, I think Grigson did a very good job. I'd hate to go into the draft without a starting corner or pass rusher, and be forced to pass over good offensive talent for lesser defensive guys.
8 months, 1 week ago on #CATweetbag: Grading Grigson
@Nate Dunlevy You, and others, have proven time and again that the sack rate is owned by the QB, not the line. But, conversely, how much does line play affect Passing Yards per Attempt? Giving the QB more time in the pocket should lead to more time to find the open receiver, and fewer short-yardage dumps. I know in 2010, it felt like Manning was dumping the ball a lot due to poor coverage. Likewise, how much does the line play into interceptions, as the QB tries to force throws due to the rush?
1 year, 7 months ago on I Was Wrong | April
@heavywoody I don't think Jim Irsay was "tired" of the string of 12+ wins per season that Bill Polian put together. And I don't think he had a problem with the "no fire" coaching, which he got used to with Tony Dungy. No, I just think that Irsay didn't have faith that Chris Polian was an adequate replacement for his father, or that Jim Caldwell was an adequate replacement for Dungy.
Sure, we all would have loved another Lombardi or two, but overall, we have NOTHING to complain about from the Polian/Manning era.
As for the new era, I have complete confidence in Luck. It's Grigson and Pagano that I'm not so sure about. And ultimately, they're going to be the ones to define the era.
1 year, 7 months ago on Revisiting "Old Manning' | April
My concern is about how much talent the new system will require, and how much competition there is for that talent. The real advantage of the Tampa-2 is that it could be run on the cheap. Except for the pass rushers, most of the defensive roster could be filled with mid-to-late round picks, freeing up the early rounds to draft offense. Plus, with so many other teams adopting the 3-4, the players we needed were less valuable to other teams, which helped us draft more efficiently.
Long-term, will the Colts have to invest more (and better) draft picks on the defensive side to maintain the 3-4 than they did on the Tampa-2?
1 year, 7 months ago on Building the Monster: Defense 2012 | April
matt_has I prefer Durtis Porlovsky... or "Dirt Poor" for short.
1 year, 11 months ago on Eyes in the Backfield-Titans
keep_the_eraser There is a way that this can work, sort of. If Manning retires at the end of this season, he would be availabe to "unretire" and return to the team if Luck fails. But there's no way he's going to sit on the bench behind Luck. When he's done starting, he's done playing.
2 years ago on Two Quarterbacks, One Roster
I love the analysis... but I think it's missing the most probable scenario. All of your scenarios require a level of certainty ("If Manning is healthy", "If you are certain Luck is the next big thing"). What if we just don't know? What if, on draft day, Manning's health is still a question, AND we're not 100% certain about Luck? Do you cut Manning AND trade the pick, or do you keep both and roll the dice with each? If each one is a 50/50 prospect, keeping both gives you a 75% chance of coming out with a franchise QB, at the expense of a salary cap hit in the first year.
I'm not saying it's the right decision, but it does have it's merits. Going all-in on one option sounds awesome, until that option fails. Then we have to watch Curtis Painter for 16 games.
I've always been a fan of the BPA strategy. I also tend to think that when the Colts DO draft for need, they're not drafting for immediate need, but for need 2+ years out.
Where I think the Colts could use improvement is in trading up-and-down in the draft. With the right trade, you can draft by need *AND* get the BPA.
2 years ago on Analyzing the Colts Draft Strategy
"The Devil and Mr. Irsay"
2 years ago on 'Name that Chapter' Contest!