Jump to content
Activated10

Indianapolis Colts aren't SB Contenders

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, stl4life07 said:

A dome team traveling outdoors especially to KC is tough. Road playoff games in general are tough. The example you made has some merit but it doesnt end the discussion just because the Colts went to Arrowhead which is a tough place to especially and outside for a dome team and got beat pretty soundly. The Colts need HFA for sure in the playoffs because even when they had Peyton and all the great players on the Colts they still had trouble going outside to New England and winning. 

Do I consider them one of the teams I feasibly see winning the SB next year?

No.

Do I like their roster construction?

Yes.

Do I think Andrew Luck was (unjustly) excused by most for his horrific performance in that game?

Yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

They were absolutely annihilated by the Chiefs last year in the playoffs. It wasn't even a game.

Are they likely to make the playoffs? Sure.

Is there a gap they need to close though... absolutely.

And the Patriots, who won the Super Bowl, got annihilated by the Titans.  I guess pencil in the Titans for the Super Bowl.

I still don't really understand why you think they're not contenders.  They should own their conference with Luck healthy, as they've dominated in the past when he was healthy, they had a great draft, you seem to agree they have a great roster.  What is it you don't like, exactly?  Their secondary, which they addressed with three picks in the draft, isn't elite?  Is that it?

They were better in the last half of 2018 than the first half, they are elite at QB, OL, and above average at LB and WR, and added a ton of talent this offseason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
1
11 minutes ago, Daniel said:

And the Patriots, who won the Super Bowl, got annihilated by the Titans.  I guess pencil in the Titans for the Super Bowl.

I still don't really understand why you think they're not contenders.  They should own their conference with Luck healthy, as they've dominated in the past when he was healthy, they had a great draft, you seem to agree they have a great roster.  What is it you don't like, exactly?  Their secondary, which they addressed with three picks in the draft, isn't elite?  Is that it?

They were better in the last half of 2018 than the first half, they are elite at QB, OL, and above average at LB and WR, and added a ton of talent this offseason.

Elite is a word I don't throw around lightly. You don't get to 10,000 plus posts on this site (over the last 7 years) without having your fair share of disagreements. I tend to err on the side of veteran posters when I say that elite is a term reserved for the very best in the NFL and no more than that.

Luck by no means is an elite qb, nor has he ever been an elite qb.

I can make an exceedingly strong argument that he's padded his stats for years against a poor division. He has a postseason passer rating of 73, which is brutally bad. He laid down and died vs KC last year, a team that I may add can still be considered very talented.

As to your analogy to New England. New England is a powerhouse and they lost 1 game to the Titans in the regular season. The postseason is a different animal and they dominate it consistently.  Never put the Colts in the same sentence as the Patriots (and this sickens me, as I'm a freakin Raiders fan). By your logic, the Raiders last year (with a laughably bad roster) played the Chiefs far closer in one of our regular season games than the Colts did in the playoffs and therefore the Raiders should be considered better than the Colts? See how this goes both ways?

As much as the colts "should" (your words, not mine) own the AFC south, it's actually poised to be a competitive division AGAIN and the Colts I may add haven't won it since 2014 by virtue of the competitiveness of these teams. I can make excellent arguments as to why all of those teams are poised to be better this year.

 

 

Looking at the AFC:

Teams I'd take over the Colts today:

Patriots, Chiefs, Chargers. All without blinking.

IMO, the colts are in that next tier with teams like the Browns, Steelers, Texans, and Titans.  All good teams with potential, but haven't proven enough, or have enough on the roster yet to be in that top tier.

 

As for their offseason, I actually wasn't a big fan of their draft this year. I didn't particularly like Ya Sin, Banogu, Okereke or Campbell (preferred McLaurin to him).

Regarding FA, I like Houston. That was a good signing. As for Funchess, not really. Ware is also a good signing. But again, not anything HUGE, unless you think Houston will be transformative to the defense.

So while it may be a clear answer to you,  it isn't to me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

Luck by no means is an elite qb, nor has he ever been an elite qb.

xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, bomont said:

 

xD

Easiest statement I"ll ever stand by on this site.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have a good coach and a great gm. 

I like there offense, they could have a great oline, solid backs and ty Hilton and a rejuvenated ebron. 

There defense could take a big step up with more talent injected. 

The issue is will locks shoulder stay intact? It has had a lot repair, it probably wont hold up forever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The hype the Colts are getting this offseason is similar to the one they got in 2015 and that ended in disaster. This time however they have a GM that knows what he’s doing, Above average coach, an Elite OL and a healthy Luck who’s not rehabbing for the first time in years.

Edited by Blackstar12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason they aren't is that they'll have to go through one or both of KC and NE in their place, probably. Luck may have to wait a few years before taking NE down, finally. 

I do think they have the pieces though - I think you may be being harsh. They're the favorites for the 'next Patriots' model, for a lot of people.

So, agreed, but for different reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Hunter2_1 said:

The only reason they aren't is that they'll have to go through one or both of KC and NE in their place, probably. Luck may have to wait a few years before taking NE down, finally. 

I do think they have the pieces though - I think you may be being harsh. They're the favorites for the 'next Patriots' model, for a lot of people.

So, agreed, but for different reasons.

I'm probably being harsh, but I see a lot of garbage hype on this site and I"ll call it out, unless someone has something of substance to contribute. This site lacks substantial posts these days...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blackstar12 said:

The hype the Colts are getting this offseason is similar to the one they got in 2015 and that ended in disaster. This time however they have a GM that knows what he’s doing, Above average coach, an Elite OL and a healthy Luck who’s not rehabbing for the first time in years.

So basically the opposite  of 2015 and possibly justified, Gotcha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Daniel said:

And the Patriots, who won the Super Bowl, got annihilated by the Titans.  I guess pencil in the Titans for the Super Bowl.

I still don't really understand why you think they're not contenders.  They should own their conference with Luck healthy, as they've dominated in the past when he was healthy, they had a great draft, you seem to agree they have a great roster.  What is it you don't like, exactly?  Their secondary, which they addressed with three picks in the draft, isn't elite?  Is that it?

They were better in the last half of 2018 than the first half, they are elite at QB, OL, and above average at LB and WR, and added a ton of talent this offseason.

My memory may be failing me, but isn't a big part of that the fact that they didn't play anyone remotely noteworthy after like week 5?

I know they had one of the softest SoS in the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

I'm probably being harsh, but I see a lot of garbage hype on this site and I"ll call it out, unless someone has something of substance to contribute. This site lacks substantial posts these days...

Was that meant for me? My post was responding to OP.

Edited by Hunter2_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, DigInBoys said:

Can we get some actual analysis why instead of blanket statements without any support?

Ah, I see that this is your first time in NFL General. Welcome!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jakuvious said:

My memory may be failing me, but isn't a big part of that the fact that they didn't play anyone remotely noteworthy after like week 5?

I know they had one of the softest SoS in the league.

I'm more referring to Luck's arm.  I'm not saying "they won more games" as much as I'm saying "Luck looked much more like pre-injury Luck."

Beating Tennessee right when they were clicking (they stomped the Cowboys and Pats the two weeks before Indy thrashed them) and the Texans at home is something, so they didn't play no one, even though the schedule was much easier on the back end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their defensive turnaround was largely built on facing crappy qbs the last 2 months 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×