Thread: TPG NFL Pickem Week 8

Originally Posted by SuperBadAce

I really think that the Colts are going for Luck. After Sunday's night game (if you want to call what the Colts did was a game) it looks that way. Manning doesn't played on defense and the Colts defense never showed up. I can understand not scoring with Manning out but the defense, no excuse. Now Kraker hates me. lol

The excuse for the defense revolves around how the defense is built. The Colts have a defense that is built to protect a lead. They're not great against the run because they don't have to be. They have undersized linebackers and somewhat undersized DTs who aren't very good against the run but are good against the pass. Why? Because when Manning is playing the running game is usually taken away by the number of points the opposing offense has to score. When you're down by 21 or so the odds of running the ball go down drastically, since you need a lot of yardage in a shorter period of time. Without Manning putting up big points, the defense gets run on a lot more, and the LBs having to play the run as well means they're not playing the pass as well as they normally do. That being said, their secondary is just not playing very well, even accounting for Bethea being out.

Fajita,
Trying to run the no-huddle with Painter isn't that much of a stretch. The idea is to simplify the number of reads Painter has to make, since with an up-tempo offense the defense can't get as "cute" with their coverages. Also, since Painter has been in Indy several years now and should theoretically have a significant grasp of the offense (which normally is at or near 100% no-huddle), asking Painter to run the offense the way it is intended shouldn't be that much of a stretch. That being said, I agree that the Colts' coaching staff is incompetent. Caldwell never should have been promoted, because his job is basically to carry Manning's jock strap. Manning requires either a strong defensive coach that will let Manning handle the offense while the coach fixes the defense, or a strong-willed offensive coach that can stand up to Manning and mold him into the intended offense rather than just doing what he wants. Caldwell is neither of those, and doesn't appear likely to become one any time soon. Caldwell's first head coaching gig shouldn't have been in Indy where the personalities are strong because of the success they've had over the last decade. His first gig should have been in a franchise where he wasn't expected to try and keep the status quo. Who knows, he may have been a decent head coach in another situation, but he's just not the right fit for Indiana.

I think it's a toss up between Indiana and Miami for who is more likely to be 0-16. The Colts seem to have put up more of a fight, but sunday they just looked like a completely beaten team against the Saints. From what little I bothered to watch (blowouts don't interest me) the Colts seemed disinterested, disheartened, and appeared to have given up. Miami's definitly in the conversation though, because their running game has been abysmal and their passing game not much better (outside of that game against the Pats that became a shootout). Add that to their defense appearing to collapse and there's not a lot of hope left. You're definitly right about the Rams being screwed by a brutal schedule. I believe every team they've played is .500 or better (outside of Philly, who's still a tough team despite their record) and no less than 3 of their opponents so far will be in the playoff hunt at the end of the year, I'm sure (Giants, Packers and Boys....and maybe Philly. Redskins probably not, and Ravens are iffy). Luckily the Rams have a game against Cleveland and 4 games against their struggling division mates in that poor excuse for a division that really is just an example of parity....a very negative example that shows things can be very even without actually being good or exciting. Rams should manage to pull out a win SOMEwhere.

Oh and Kraker....the Colts probably should select Luck if they have that option. While Manning theoretically has 3-5 more years, he's had 3 surgeries on his neck in the last 2 years. That's an indicator of a chronic condition, and is very worrisome. The Colts can't afford to not have a backup plan in place in case Manning goes down again, and Luck appears to have the ability to lead the Colts to another 10+ years of being in the upper third of the league.

painter is still the 9th ranked quarterback in the league right now

According to what? (The new nfl QBR system maybe?)

Even still, he is most certainly NOT the 9th best QB, and that 9 ranking isn't translating into ANY wins.

Manning may have 3-5 years left at best, but even then it isn't a given that he will play at the level he has played at for the last sever years (especially with a neck injury). That being said, I understand the team has other needs on defense and such, however when you have someone deemed "The next Peyton Manning" for you to choose to sit behind the actual Peyton Manning, you take him and lock in winning seasons for your franchise for the next 10-15 years. Where would the Colts be if they had selected a defensive player in stead of Manning over a decade ago?

Nothing personal to Painter, but when you have a modern day John Elway, who is calling his own plays AT THE COLLEGE LEVEL, you take him.

Manning has proven he can win with this current team, so why not take Luck, and use the next 5 years drafting/signing players to help manning and/or build around the future for Luck?

As for the GM, there are issues there. Manning has carried not only this team, but the entire organization. And coach Caldwell needs to be fired. I don't think I saw his mouth move one time in that Sunday night crucifixion including after the game at the handshake (or during any game for that matter). He was merely living off of manning's success. Which brings up another point, it's become obvious that manning runs the show around Indy, but with Luck, you can bring in a new coach (and possibly other staff) that will put up with Manning for a few years, but be able to work with Luck, who I'm sure won't be as demanding with authoritative requests.

Not taking Luck would be a stupid move.

Originally Posted by rock_lobster

As for the GM, there are issues there. Manning has carried not only this team, but the entire organization. And coach Caldwell needs to be fired. I don't think I saw his mouth move one time in that Sunday night crucifixion including after the game at the handshake (or during any game for that matter). He was merely living off of manning's success. Which brings up another point, it's become obvious that manning runs the show around Indy, but with Luck, you can bring in a new coach (and possibly other staff) that will put up with Manning for a few years, but be able to work with Luck, who I'm sure won't be as demanding with authoritative requests.

Not taking Luck would be a stupid move.

That's the point I've been trying to make for awhile. Manning IS the Indianapolis Colts. He has far too much influence over it's decisions. Another benefit of taking Luck is that if Manning does not appear to be 100% when he comes back, you have another option. Also, in 2-3 years even if Manning IS 100%, you have the option of trading Manning for a rather large bounty from a QB-needy team and then plugging Luck into the team you've built over that period. For a Peyton Manning that's playing how he should be, you can probably take the Carson Palmer trade and probably more than double it's value. Call it a 1st/2nd year 1, 1st/3rd year 2, and a 2nd/4th in year 3. That's probably about rough value for an elite QB, even a few years past his prime. 2 first rounders, 2 second rounders, a third and a fourth should provide plenty of additional picks to continue building a quality team, and all the extra cap room you save by getting rid of Manning's contract is just icing on the cake.

I don't think the Colts GM is smart enough to do that.

You also have to take into consideration, that they may want Manning to retire a Colt, and will "do him a favor" by not trading....much to the detriment of their franchise in the long run.