Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

    Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
    Cause kneeling during the anthem has anything to do with winning football games...

    No, but it clearly annoys a large segment of people who want to just watch football games instead of having a bunch of smug millionaire athletes telling them what an awful country they live in. If a guy isn't producing, then it's not worth keeping him around if he might hurt the business.

    Comment


    • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

      Cromartie lost his platform, now his wife reacts to give him another.

      Comment


      • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

        If kneeling during the anthem loses people their jobs, what do we have to do in order to get Chuck and Grigson to take a knee?
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

          Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
          Cause kneeling during the anthem has anything to do with winning football games...
          Have you talked to anyone who is against the kneeling during the anthem. There is a very large segment of this country who finds what they are doing is anti US and will not even discuss this as a legitimate form of protest.

          Then you add another group like Sollozzo mention who just want to watch football to escpate the political madness and are annoyed that politics are intergected into their football.

          It probably became a headache for Irsay, but Cromartie did not help himself by sucking. He got cut because he was awful here for four games, but his actions made it that much easier to cut him. It is like Hope Solo being cut. You think if she was in her prime they would have cut her for her remarks? Of course not, but the headaches tend to not be overlooked when your play slips.

          Comment


          • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

            A major problem for this "movement" is that the figure head, Colin Kaepernick, is completely unlikable. He always came across as smug long before this. He has no charm or charisma. People generally don't like when a smug person who gets paid millions to suck at their job tells them that this is a crappy country (in so many words). Plus he just looks like a complete clown with that lettuce.

            People are far more apt to listen when guys like D-Wade and Melo talk about this stuff (like at the ESPY's). They have charisma and don't come across as smug bags.

            Comment


            • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

              Once again, I said kneeling during the anthem has nothing to do with winning football games. None of what any of you have said dispute that. And with that, it is clearly time for me to exit this thread.

              Comment


              • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                Once again, I said kneeling during the anthem has nothing to do with winning football games. None of what any of you have said dispute that. And with that, it is clearly time for me to exit this thread.
                The NFL is about two things: winning football games and making money. Any owner is going to put a supreme value on both.

                You're right, it has nothing to do with winning games.....and neither did AC's mediocre play. Then you look at the business angle. Those actions are bad for business, as is evidenced by the decline in ratings. It's particularly bad for business in a heartland state like Indiana.

                Comment


                • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                  I can't say I want to have this discussion again in here.

                  Colts are playing a lot of backups Sunday in Ten. Gonna be ugly.
                  Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                    One of these years I want to make the trip to Nashville to see a Colts-Titans game. Looks like it will be beautiful weather to see DeMarcco Murray rush for 160 yards and 3 touchdowns.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                      Originally posted by Foul on Smits View Post
                      I hope Irsay cut him for that very reason. You wanna know why? Because we are a losing football team. We are 2-4 now. If I were Irsay, I would be damned if i'm paying these players millions of dollars and the first thing they are thinking about on game day is pushing there political agenda before winning a ****ing football game. If you're winning, sure. Maybe i let it slide. If you're losing, you check that ******** at the door. This is a win/loss sports league. This is a results matter sports league. Your political or social views are last on the list of what i give a **** about. You want to voice your political and social views, get a ****ing blog. Nuff said. Prop Irsay. Keep cutting every last one of them.
                      Its probably best that I don't get too entrenched into this conversation.

                      However, it's not as if Cromartie went well out of his way to discuss his political stance. He didn't make some type of controversial statement. He took a freakin knee.

                      Taking that knee had nothing to do with his (poor) performance on the field.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!




                        It looked like things were about to turn Indianapolis's way again last Sunday night. The Colts have been, in many ways, the luckiest franchise in football the past two decades. After producing a terrible season the year Peyton Manning entered the draft, they went 141-67 before Manning suffered a serious neck injury, yielding a second dismal season at the exact time Andrew Luck -- arguably the best quarterback prospect since Manning -- became available.

                        The Colts have played in what has perennially been the NFL's worst division with Luck at the helm, finishing no better than 13th in DVOA and still managing to make it to the playoffs three times in four seasons. Indy has won a league-high 71.1 percent of its games decided by one touchdown or less over that time frame. Meanwhile, the other teams in their division have combined to go through seven permanent head coaches.

                        All of which brings us to last Sunday night. With 4:56 left to go against the Texans, the Colts had a win expectancy of 99 percent. From there, the defense fell apart. It allowed a third-and-10 conversion at midfield to DeAndre Hopkins. Then Lamar Miller danced through tackles for a touchdown. Then the Colts went three-and-out and Houston scored again to tie the score. And after Indianapolis got one more bit of luck by winning the overtime coin toss, Indy punted and the Texans kicked a game-winning field goal.

                        Houston's 26-23 win sent the Colts reeling. ESPN's Football Power Index now gives Indy just a 9.3 percent chance of winning its division, courtesy of a defensive collapse authored by general manager Ryan Grigson. It was Grigson who said earlier this month that the Colts are struggling to put together a defense because of the five-year, $122-million contract extension he handed Luck this past offseason. (The exact quote, in case you're curious: "When you pay Andrew what we did, it's going to take some time to build on the other side of the ball.")

                        It's a quote that reveals a lot of what has gone wrong in Indianapolis. Blessed with the one thing every bad team desperately chases -- a superstar quarterback on a rookie contract -- Grigson squandered his opportunity and failed to build even a functional team around Luck. Now, having failed to do so, Grigson somehow blames Luck. When you look at the decisions Grigson has made over the past few years, you see a pattern of an executive with too much faith in his ability to evaluate personnel. The one thing that has kept Grigson afloat, ironically, is the quarterback who fell into his lap with the first overall pick.


                        General manager Ryan Grigson and QB Andrew Luck are staring at a 2-4 overall record heading into Week 7 at Tennessee. USA Today Sports
                        Grigson's identity

                        Grigson's decision-making process is laid relatively bare in a lengthy profile written by Michael Silver during the 2015 offseason, one that reveals both positives and negatives. Seahawks general manager John Schneider credits Grigson for "[not being the type] that thinks he has all the answers," which is naturally a valuable skill for a general manager to possess. At the same time, though, Grigson vacillates from plan to plan without much conviction. In Silver's story, Grigson recalls telling Mike Adams, an excellent low-cost signing of Grigson's at safety, that he went from not wanting to sign anybody over 28 to avoiding anybody under 33 before giving a speech about how the old-school players he was acquiring wouldn't "put up with much B.S. from young guys who don't quite get it." There's some hyperbole in there, of course, but it says a lot about the organizational culture in Indianapolis at the time that the Colts felt the need to import talent to somehow keep younger players in line.

                        We'll talk about those veterans Grigson did add -- almost all of whom failed miserably in hindsight -- in a moment. Let's focus on Trent Cole, though. In the piece, Grigson recalls how he refused to let Cole leave the building after his 2015 free-agent visit, while noting how lucky he is to sign a player he evaluated as a member of the Eagles organization nearly a decade earlier. "What are the chances I'm going to get a pass rusher as good as Trent at No. 29, a guy who's still a killer coming off the edge," Grigson asked, comparing Cole's likely production to that of the 29th overall pick.

                        It's that exact problem that seems to permeate Grigson's decision-making. In a vacuum, that does make some sense: Cole had been good for a long time, and when Grigson had gone for a pass-rusher at the end of the first round years earlier, he had gone bust with Bjoern Werner. In reality, though, Cole was a 32-year-old who hadn't been as effective as an outside linebacker. Grigson's evaluation was a decade old, and for whatever value it held at the time, it should have been a small part of the evaluation in 2015.

                        Grigson saw the specific player (Cole) and not the general value likely to come with an asset like the 29th overall pick. He took wide receiver Phillip Dorsett with the pick, who has struggled to gain relevance as a pro. The 29th pick might not have delivered a great pass-rusher, but one was lurking later in the second round in Arizona's Markus Golden, who has six sacks in six games this year and is signed for the next three seasons at a total of $3.2 million. Cole, who renegotiated his contract after an anonymous 2015, had just three sacks last year and did not record one before going on injured reserve with a back injury this season. The Colts will have paid $12 million or so to Cole by the time 2016 is up.

                        It would be wrong to say that Grigson only wants to target big names; if anything, he focuses too much on the bottom of the roster, as the scouts' meeting chronicled recently by Peter King attests. As with many organizations, there's an emphasis on hard work over all else, but unless they were shielding a broader philosophy from King, there are no meaningful details on what the Colts are actually looking for in their players, or how they value different positional groups, or how they plan on approaching things differently given the missteps they've made in the past. There's a note that Luck's contract forces the draft to be a "do or die" situation for the Colts, who can't go after players in free agency. If you look at Grigson's history there, you'll see that as a blessing in disguise.


                        Trent Cole has just 3.0 sacks in 16 games since joining the Colts in 2015. Joe Robbins/Getty Images
                        Grigson as free-agent evaluator

                        It's fair to note that Grigson inherited a very limited roster from the Bill/Chris Polian regime that preceded his arrival in 2012. And while he didn't go shopping much during his first season at the helm, Grigson's moves generally worked out well. He made short-term additions to shore up the weakest spots on the roster with the likes of Donnie Avery and Cory Redding. He signed Jerrell Freeman, a very capable middle linebacker, and claimed Darius Butler on waivers, eventually turning him into a useful slot corner. Grigson also re-signed Reggie Wayne, which proved to be an inspired move before Wayne tore his ACL in 2013.

                        After a stunning 11-5 season in Luck's rookie season and with more than $34 million in dead money from the 2012 cap off the books, Grigson had money to spend in 2013 and did not spend wisely. There was logic in his decisions, and Indy's contracts were structured in ways to basically turn the signings into two-year deals, but Grigson showed little ability to value players within the market. He gave young rotation players on other teams such as Ricky Jean-Francois, Erik Walden and Greg Toler contracts like they were starters. He rightfully wanted to protect Luck, but his moves for Donald Thomas and Gosder Cherilus went after injury-prone linemen who continued to get hurt. Many of these deals were panned at the time, and the best thing you can say is that the likes of Toler and Walden managed to stick around, even if they weren't above-average contributors.

                        Grigson's decision-making continued to be hit-and-miss at best. For every player like Adams, who emerged as a Pro Bowler, there was a LaRon Landry or a Hakeem Nicks. For all the luck he enjoyed, Grigson probably deserved better when the Colts signed Arthur Jones as a sorely needed 5-technique end from the Ravens, only for Jones to miss most of 2014 and all of 2015 with injuries before his 2016 PED suspension.

                        The real disaster, though, was the class of veterans Grigson was so proud to sign in March 2015. Not one lived up to expectations. Cole was a total nonfactor as a pass-rusher. Andre Johnson collected $10 million to make 41 catches for 503 yards. Guard Todd Herremans, part of the best offensive line in football two years earlier, was benched and cut before the season ended. Dwight Lowery and Nate Irving lasted one season each. Frank Gore averaged fewer than 4 yards per carry for the first time in his career. He and Kendall Langford are the only players from that free-agent class currently on the Colts' active roster.

                        Grigson (and to be fair, many members of the media) saw that free-agent class as the final pieces of a puzzle the Colts were close to solving. If they had drafted better, maybe it would have been.


                        Andre Johnson had a career-low 503 receiving yards last season in Indy. Brett Carlsen/Getty Images
                        Grigson as drafter

                        Again, Grigson did his best work in the 2012 draft. After being delivered Luck on a silver platter, he went after badly needed weapons to play alongside Wayne. Grigson's next two picks were Coby Fleener and Dwayne Allen, forming the core of Indy's two-tight end offense. Next, Grigson traded up to acquire Florida International wide receiver T.Y. Hilton, sending a fourth-round pick and a future fifth-rounder to the 49ers, who would trade the former pick to the Dolphins for the selection they used on Lamar Miller. It was one of the rare situations where teams traded up twice and neither regretted their decision. Grigson also would make his most successful trade during that 2012 season, sending a 2013 second-round pick to the Dolphins in exchange for benched cornerback Vontae Davis, who struggled with injuries before emerging as an upper-echelon cover corner.

                        If anything, Grigson's early success reinforced bad habits going forward. He has traded up for the anonymous Montori Hughes and the overmatched David Parry, although Parry's usage pattern isn't really his fault. He sent a sixth-round pick to the Raiders for Sio Moore, who didn't even last a full year with the team. Winston Justice, Drew Stanton, Cam Johnson and Josh Gordy all came in deals for sixth- and seventh-round picks without leaving much of an impression. Grigson does deserve credit for trading down twice, once with the Buccaneers in a deal for Ali Marpet and then in a second trade with the Packers for Jason Spriggs. At the same time, the idea of trading down with teams who want to grab offensive linemen must infuriate Colts fans sick of Luck being slaughtered.

                        Of course, the most infamous trade of all was sending the team's 2014 first-round pick to the Browns for Trent Richardson, a deal that looked bad at the time and only got worse. It was more defensible at the time than it might seem now, given how many people around the league believed Richardson was the second coming of Adrian Peterson. At least it wasn't Grigson's lone opinion, which might very well have been the case with some of his other moves. The pick also ended up being the No. 26 selection in the first round, which is still bad, but obviously not as bad as it would have been if the Colts were worse.


                        Trent Richardson averaged 3.09 yards per carry in his two seasons with the Colts. Michael Hickey/Getty Images
                        Things weren't much better when Grigson held on to his picks, sadly. The 2013 draft did indirectly deliver Davis, but the rookies -- Werner, Hughes, Hugh Thornton, Khaled Holmes and others -- are a total washout. There's not a single player from that draft left on the active roster. Meanwhile, the players chosen just before some of the Colts' selections in that year's draft include Sharrif Floyd, Jordan Reed and Tharold Simon.

                        The 2014 draft was a disaster before it even got underway with the team's first- and fourth-round picks missing. The second round delivered Jack Mewhort, who has oscillated between guard and tackle. Donte Moncrief showed some promise during his sophomore season, but is out with a fractured scapula. Nobody else from this draft is on the roster. The players chosen just after the Colts' picks in the 2014 draft include Deone Bucannon, Kony Ealy, John Brown and Tre Boston.

                        Grigson curiously chose to go after Dorsett in the first round of the 2015 draft, a pick that has yet to pay dividends. After trading down, the player they chose with the first pick of the third round -- corner D'Joun Smith -- has already been waived. Fellow third-rounder Henry Anderson was impressive as a rookie before tearing his ACL, and Parry will end up as a useful rotation lineman, but there don't yet appear to be any stars lurking elsewhere in this Grigson draft, either.

                        And this is where Grigson's complaint about Luck's contract impeding his ability to build a defense falls apart. Forget that Luck was making a fraction of his market value between 2012 and 2015 and that Grigson could have signed veterans to big-money deals then -- although that would have been one option. Forget that Grigson has known Luck's contract was coming due for years now. And forget that every single team in the league who has the cap space to absorb Luck's contract would happily do so.

                        Just consider this: Through all the traded picks and selections used on offensive players, there simply isn't a core of cost-controlled defensive players on this roster because Grigson hasn't devoted the resources toward acquiring one. Using Chase Stuart's draft value chart, the Colts have committed just 64 points of draft capital toward defensive players since 2012, the lowest figure in football. The average team has committed 113.3 points over that same time frame. (The Colts are ninth in terms of capital used on offensive players since Grigson arrived.)

                        Those players also have been ineffective, generating just 37 points of approximate value since 2012. Again, that's the lowest rate in football. The typical team is at 90.6 points of defense over that same time span. You can factor in Davis' value here given that he cost a second-round pick, but Davis is also making close to market value on his deal, with an $8.4 million cap hold this year as he enters the third season of his four-year contract. Most rookies are going to make a fraction of that amount.

                        The Vikings -- in many ways the antithesis of the Colts -- have eight homegrown players starting on defense, with a few more in reserve. Indy will start four, and one of them is Robert Mathis, who was scouted and developed back in 2005. The time has come and gone for Grigson to easily build an effective defense alongside Luck, regardless of his contract. Grigson already survived a contract battle this offseason in getting himself and Chuck Pagano extensions from owner Jim Irsay. That may not be enough to hold on to his job if things don't get better in Indianapolis soon.
                        Good read if you want to get pissed off today.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                          Originally posted by cdash View Post
                          How Colts GM Ryan Grigson wasted away all his Luck (via @billbarnwell) https://t.co/1SLk0ijt3G
                          — Mike Wells (@MikeWellsNFL) October 21, 2016




                          Good read if you want to get pissed off today.

                          What the f#%k was was Irsay thinking? We could all see this by the time of the pow-wow between Huey, Dewey, and Louie that brought these clowns back. Must not have started real discussion until they had ole Jimmy boy liquored up and higher than a kite.
                          I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                          -Emiliano Zapata

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                            I just find it really hard to root for the Colts these days.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                              That was a long article but, informative too. I just fear we will still be complaining about grigson & pagano a year from now.
                              I worry another year of luck is wasted and another year where he gets pummeled. Luck is tough but, he isn't invincible. These years of getting sacked sometimes 5-6 times and hit many more per game are gonna have him broken down much sooner than otherwise.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                                Reading that just made me even more infuriated at Grigson's excuse about Luck's contract.

                                We had 20 picks combined in the 2013, 2014 and 2015 drafts and only SEVEN of those players are still on the roster now. When you whiff on 65% of your picks in three season it is not the contract Luck signed that is the problem. It is the GMs inability of to build a team through the draft. You do not get to blame anything else if you whiff on 65% of your picks in three drafts. He is the one who has left the cubbard bare and forced Luck to carry this crap team.

                                It frustrates me so much to hear people get on Luck about his bonehead plays. Yes, he has made some bad decisions, but jesus look what he has to work with. He is in a worse spot than Manning had because he is forced to drag an offense and defense. At least Polian nailed those first round offensive weapons for Luck.

                                Luck has to play a near perfect game to give us a chance to win and I just think that forces his hand to do whatever it takes and that includes throwing balls he probably should not because he knows he has to score.

                                EDIT

                                I wanted to add on top of the whiffing on 65% of this draft picks over a three year span look how many blown free agents. We blow our draft picks and we blow free agents. Outside of Gore, Walden, Butler, Freeman (let go for some reason), Adams, and Langford I cannot think of much of anyone who has made an impact for us as a free agent.

                                Landry
                                Trent Cole
                                Arthur Jones
                                Andre Johnson
                                Hakeem Nicks
                                Gosder Cherilus
                                Greg Toler
                                Todd Herremans
                                Dwight Lowery
                                Nate Iring
                                Ricky Jean Francios
                                Donald Thomas
                                Todd Herremans
                                Last edited by thewholefnshow31; 10-21-2016, 03:54 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X