Jump to content

2023 NFL Discussion


rico

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Billingsley99 said:

Just to be that guy. What has this great foundation done? Having watched all of the playoff games this year, I think the Colts are fools gold. I don't think they are built as well as any of the playoff teams outside of the Eagles. They have a lot of likeable guys and if the Defense does not create turnovers the Defense is bad. The highest paid O line is great in theory and paper but I want to see wins. We need some nasty on both sides of the ball an a legit #1 receiver. Pittman is a 2 or 3 on any other good team and a 3 or 4 on the really good teams. The Colts benefit greatly from playing in the worst division and I as like many others have bought what they have been selling but the playoffs this year opened my eyes that the Colts are far from being a legit contender. 

Pittman finished the season statistically as the 19th most productive receiver.  Put a top 15 receiver opposite of him and he probably becomes a top 15 guy as well because he's no longer the focus of the best defender or double team.  

He's really good.  Name those teams he'd be the 3rd or 4th option on.  Bengals, Chargers, TB.  Then you would have to start including TEs to include a few teams, Chiefs, Niners.  So yeah, I'd say you are undervaluing him by a huge amount.  

https://fantasyfootballers.org/wr-wide-receiver-nfl-stats/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NotIThatLives said:

Pittman finished the season statistically as the 19th most productive receiver.  Put a top 15 receiver opposite of him and he probably becomes a top 15 guy as well because he's no longer the focus of the best defender or double team.  

He's really good.  Name those teams he'd be the 3rd or 4th option on.  Bengals, Chargers, TB.  Then you would have to start including TEs to include a few teams, Chiefs, Niners.  So yeah, I'd say you are undervaluing him by a huge amount.  

https://fantasyfootballers.org/wr-wide-receiver-nfl-stats/

The two teams in the Super Bowl, Pittman would be 3rd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NotIThatLives said:

Pittman finished the season statistically as the 19th most productive receiver.  Put a top 15 receiver opposite of him and he probably becomes a top 15 guy as well because he's no longer the focus of the best defender or double team.  

He's really good.  Name those teams he'd be the 3rd or 4th option on.  Bengals, Chargers, TB.  Then you would have to start including TEs to include a few teams, Chiefs, Niners.  So yeah, I'd say you are undervaluing him by a huge amount.  

https://fantasyfootballers.org/wr-wide-receiver-nfl-stats/

3rd and 4th yes, all of the teams you mentioned. Which all were still playing late into the Playoffs minus Chargers. I would say he would be 3rd or 4th on the Rams for sure. 3rd on the Packers and maybe the Broncos. The bigger question is, on what teams would he be a number 1 and the answer is those same teams that are around the Colts or worse. He is a very good receiver but every team has to have 1 guy get some stats correct?  Someone has to catch the ball, just like every NBA team has a 20 pt scorer just does not make them an all star. I think he would be a great #2 but the Colts need a stud

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Billingsley99 said:

3rd and 4th yes, all of the teams you mentioned. Which all were still playing late into the Playoffs minus Chargers. I would say he would be 3rd or 4th on the Rams for sure. 3rd on the Packers and maybe the Broncos. The bigger question is, on what teams would he be a number 1 and the answer is those same teams that are around the Colts or worse. He is a very good receiver but every team has to have 1 guy get some stats correct?  Someone has to catch the ball, just like every NBA team has a 20 pt scorer just does not make them an all star. I think he would be a great #2 but the Colts need a stud

Rams? I would take him over all their guys except for Kupp. He basically mimicked Woods best season, this past year, as a 2nd year player. 

Packers? who is better than him other than the obvious? 

Broncos? He's the best WR on that team, from what we've seen. Maybe Bridgewater (who is absolutely not a QB1 in this league) was all of the problem, though. That's why I'm saying "from what we've seen". 

I think the Colts need exactly another Pittman production/talent wise. Tee Higgins is a great example of a guy we need, I think you are spot on there. I just wouldn't give up Nelson to do it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Billingsley99 said:

3rd and 4th yes, all of the teams you mentioned. Which all were still playing late into the Playoffs minus Chargers. I would say he would be 3rd or 4th on the Rams for sure. 3rd on the Packers and maybe the Broncos. The bigger question is, on what teams would he be a number 1 and the answer is those same teams that are around the Colts or worse. He is a very good receiver but every team has to have 1 guy get some stats correct?  Someone has to catch the ball, just like every NBA team has a 20 pt scorer just does not make them an all star. I think he would be a great #2 but the Colts need a stud

Definitely a 3 on bengals.  Debatable behind Kupp but Stafford has been known to throw that ball all over to many different targets.  He was nailing his 3rd string te last night.  

Im not calling him a 1.  He can be a very very good 2 with his size and hands with a stud next to him.  Ballard has to see that.  That is so key to address this off-season, maybe even more so than in the past.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

When Q was out and Reid played you couldn't tell a difference.  Also when Pinter played Center not much of a difference either.

You couldn't tell a difference in the AZ game compared to the NE game? We ran buck wild on a top 5 run D in NE, then go to AZ and break one long run and have a pedestrian game after that. 

Reid is in way comparable to Q and neither is our offensive output. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, NotIThatLives said:

In a rebuild.  Including a top 7ish qb retiring with 12 years left in his career.  

Oh by the way.  I saw Luck at Meijer the other night looking at dog toys.  

He had had 3 years to get the QB right and it time to stop blaming Luck on our situation now.  Ballard hasn't put enough priority on skill position players like WR, DB, LT,TE.  He has missed a lot on pass rushers and we are still not good as a team in rushing the passer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, btownqb said:

Rams? I would take him over all their guys except for Kupp. He basically mimicked Woods best season, this past year, as a 2nd year player. 

Packers? who is better than him other than the obvious? 

Broncos? He's the best WR on that team, from what we've seen. Maybe Bridgewater (who is absolutely not a QB1 in this league) was all of the problem, though. That's why I'm saying "from what we've seen". 

I think the Colts need exactly another Pittman production/talent wise. Tee Higgins is a great example of a guy we need, I think you are spot on there. I just wouldn't give up Nelson to do it. 

I would take Kupp, OBJ,  for sure Woods and Pittmann are pretty close to equal had both in my fantasy league and one was on the bench all year.

You are correct with the Packers for sure. I would love to have Higgins and I put him just ahead of Pittman. I am a huge Pittman fan and think he will be a star but need someone opposite him as good or better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Billingsley99 said:

I would take Kupp, OBJ,  for sure Woods and Pittmann are pretty close to equal had both in my fantasy league and one was on the bench all year.

You are correct with the Packers for sure. I would love to have Higgins and I put him just ahead of Pittman. I am a huge Pittman fan and think he will be a star but need someone opposite him as good or better. 

I agree completely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The narrative has changed so quickly and negatively with the way the season finished.  I remember going into Raiders after just beating Arizona on the road on Christmas day, everyone feeling pretty good.  Many even saying they were A-ok with the way the trade worked out and giving up that 1st round pick for Wentz.  

They aren't getting either of those guys without giving up a stud already on the team, in addition to probably 3 draft picks.  Look at what Stafford got.  3 picks and a former number 1 pick, who is at least serviceable.  Would a Packers or Seattle take Wentz and 3 number 1's?  Wow, that's a bunch to take on Rodgers who could up and retire at any time and Wilson, who is great but not elite top 5 qb.   

52 minutes ago, Billingsley99 said:

Unless the Colts get Rodgers or Wilson they better keep Wentz.  Save the money and get some playmaker. Pittman would be option 3 or 4 on either team last .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, btownqb said:

Yeah, Ballard's record is 42-42 because of where Grigson left this roster. Bottom 5 roster when Ballard got here. 

He's 30-19 when Jacoby is not the QB. 

I didn't like Grigson but if the roster was so bad how did he go 52-34 and win the division 2 or 3 times.  Don't just say it was because of Luck being the QB.  Just look at the Lions with Stafford and how bad there record was even with a very good QB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NotIThatLives said:

The narrative has changed so quickly and negatively with the way the season finished.  I remember going into Raiders after just beating Arizona on the road on Christmas day, everyone feeling pretty good.  Many even saying they were A-ok with the way the trade worked out and giving up that 1st round pick for Wentz.  

They aren't getting either of those guys without giving up a stud already on the team, in addition to probably 3 draft picks.  Look at what Stafford got.  3 picks and a former number 1 pick, who is at least serviceable.  Would a Packers or Seattle take Wentz and 3 number 1's?  Wow, that's a bunch to take on Rodgers who could up and retire at any time and Wilson, who is great but not elite top 5 qb.   

It changed really quick for sure. I thought the Colts could make a deep run. After watching all of the playoff games I think there is a big gap between their offense and those that made the playoffs. I think the Defense is not good enough to rely on a team that cannot get close to 30 on a regular basis. 

Wilson may or may not be a top 5 QB but he has more wins than anyone that has ever played the game in his first 10 years. He is a winner and that is important. I think Wentz can get it done if he can get a weapon or 2. I thought he played well. Not great but better than any other legit option. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Billingsley99 said:

It changed really quick for sure. I thought the Colts could make a deep run. After watching all of the playoff games I think there is a big gap between their offense and those that made the playoffs. I think the Defense is not good enough to rely on a team that cannot get close to 30 on a regular basis. 

Wilson may or may not be a top 5 QB but he has more wins than anyone that has ever played the game in his first 10 years. He is a winner and that is important. I think Wentz can get it done if he can get a weapon or 2. I thought he played well. Not great but better than any other legit option. 

If you can't get one of those two, which I don't think you can or will, then you are looking at Kirk Cousins.  Just keep Wentz.  

The guys this morning likened it to renting a car for $160 only to find out your buddy has a free company car.  You can cancel your rental but only recoup 30%.  Might as well keep your rental and have your own car too.  Your on the hook for 15 mil no matter what, only to save 7 million.  Geez, they paid Rivers 30 million.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

For some reason I think the next QB for the Colts will be Jimmy G.  Probably not much of improvement but he has won games when healthy.

I'm not sure he fits the culture.  Colts organization is so stuck on the clean cut guys.  That porn star stunt as soon as he got to Cali may limit his chances.  

And here we go again.  Is he that much better than Wentz?  No

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NotIThatLives said:

If you can't get one of those two, which I don't think you can or will, then you are looking at Kirk Cousins.  Just keep Wentz.  

The guys this morning likened it to renting a car for $160 only to find out your buddy has a free company car.  You can cancel your rental but only recoup 30%.  Might as well keep your rental and have your own car too.  Your on the hook for 15 mil no matter what, only to save 7 million.  Geez, they paid Rivers 30 million.  

I truly do not think Wentz is the issue. I expect him to play better if he has some weapons. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NotIThatLives said:

I'm not sure he fits the culture.  Colts organization is so stuck on the clean cut guys.  That porn star stunt as soon as he got to Cali may limit his chances.  

And here we go again.  Is he that much better than Wentz?  No

I agree but how this off season has gone and what had been said, there is no way you can bring Wentz back.  He is so mentally weak and if he knows the owner wants to move on there is no way he can play here.

What upsets me is that Irsay had to be talked into the Wentz trade.  You should always go with your gut instinct and should have vetoed the trade.  Now we have given up 1st and 3rd for a QB who will be here one year.

Edited by IU Scott
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I didn't like Grigson but if the roster was so bad how did he go 52-34 and win the division 2 or 3 times.  Don't just say it was because of Luck being the QB.  Just look at the Lions with Stafford and how bad there record was even with a very good QB

The roster had gotten worse by the time Grigson was done, somehow. (we were 4-12 the first year with Ballard) w/absolutely Grigson's guys and no Luck. 

We are 38-30 outside of that year. 30-19 when Brissett is not the QB under Ballard. He went 12-23 (Hoyer included). 

Scott, we also had the most All Pros last year and the most Pro Bowl this year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, btownqb said:

The roster had gotten worse by the time Grigson was done, somehow. (we were 4-12 the first year with Ballard) w/absolutely Grigson's guys and no Luck. 

We are 38-30 outside of that year. 30-19 when Brissett is not the QB under Ballard. He went 12-23 (Hoyer included). 

Scott, we also had the most All Pros last year and the most Pro Bowl this year. 

I want Ballard as our GM but he isn't as great as some make out to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...