Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to TexasPat's comment:
    [QUOTE]

         Indianapolis Colts GM Ryan Grigson has stated yet again that he would make the Trent Richardson trade again in a heartbeat. In case y'all have forgotten, Grigson traded the Colts #1 draft choice this year for the second coming of Ron Dayne, Richardson. Grigson is clearly delusional: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/02/23/colts-insist-trent-richardson-was-worth-a-first-round-pick/ 

         LOL!!!  

    [/QUOTE]


    Once again I played the fun board game - "who started this thread".  I guessed TP and voila.  I win the prize. 

    Lets please give the guy one full season with the colts before kill him.  Was he worth a #1?  After this season, the answer is currently absolutely not.  Will he ever be worth it?  That remains to be seen. 

    But beyond that, why would any GM publicly knock a current team player?  Belichick wouldn't.  You would accept that from him.  Why do you have different standards for other teams?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Reiss was hammering the Colts today over on ESPN Boston, but in a polite way. lol

    The Colts only have 5 picks in this deep draft and no 1st rd pick.  Ouch.

    Whenever I read about one of the all time great heists, I think of Mt Hurl approving of this trade when it happened. Cannot be made up.

    The Colts couldn't get Caserio and settled on Grigson. bawhahah

    [/QUOTE]

    Who said the colts wanted Caserio?  Do you have some information on that or is this another common fantasy from you russ? 

    The colts "settling" on Grigson amounted to an Exec of the year award in his first year.  Bawahaha. 

    He's turned over about 80% of the roster which helped the colts reach the playoffs in each of his first 2 years.  Pretty great if you ask me.  We're on our way.  But you keep focusing on Grigson's questionable moves while the rest of world still wonders why BB got rid of Welker, resigned Hernandez, played Gronkowski on a PAT, whined like a baby when glass Talib couldn't finish a game after running into smurf Welker. 

    Bawahaha

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Reiss was hammering the Colts today over on ESPN Boston, but in a polite way. lol

    The Colts only have 5 picks in this deep draft and no 1st rd pick.  Ouch.

    Whenever I read about one of the all time great heists, I think of Mt Hurl approving of this trade when it happened. Cannot be made up.

    The Colts couldn't get Caserio and settled on Grigson. bawhahah

    [/QUOTE]

    One further note - having 5 picks in a draft is not that bad given where the colts came from.  They were 2-14 and went 11-5 in both of the following years while turning over 80% of the roster.  Some of that comes with making moves with picks.  Rational fans find that as a worthwhile tradeoff. 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to ma6dragon9's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Lombardi pulls this caper and gets canned for it? Pfft.

    [/QUOTE]

    Lombardi didn't get canned. He left. As did the team's CEO, Joe Banner.

    The GM, CEO and Owner make up the triumvirate that runs every team. 2/3rds of that chose to leave, what's that say about the owner?

    [/QUOTE]


    They were canned.  There's no other way to spin it.  When they couldn't get someone to coach the team, the owner, I am sure, wondered, "what the hell am I paying you for"?

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to mellymel3's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The Colts GM paniced and showed his inexperience and lack of knowledge of the NFL and it's players...taken to the cleaners...he's set them back a few years...with this, the deepest draft in years?...WHAT A FOOL!

    [/QUOTE]

    Wow Melly - you should be inside a war room, then.  An exec of the year in 2012 set the colts back?  His roster moves (80% turnover) took the team from 2-14 to 11-5, twice.  Quite a set back.

    Better yet, that couch in your mom's basement is a much better place for you. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from DanishPastry. Show DanishPastry's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Reiss was hammering the Colts today over on ESPN Boston, but in a polite way. lol

    The Colts only have 5 picks in this deep draft and no 1st rd pick.  Ouch.

    Whenever I read about one of the all time great heists, I think of Mt Hurl approving of this trade when it happened. Cannot be made up.

    The Colts couldn't get Caserio and settled on Grigson. bawhahah

    [/QUOTE]

    Who said the colts wanted Caserio?  Do you have some information on that or is this another common fantasy from you russ? 

    The colts "settling" on Grigson amounted to an Exec of the year award in his first year.  Bawahaha. 

    He's turned over about 80% of the roster which helped the colts reach the playoffs in each of his first 2 years.  Pretty great if you ask me.  We're on our way.  But you keep focusing on Grigson's questionable moves while the rest of world still wonders why BB got rid of Welker, resigned Hernandez, played Gronkowski on a PAT, whined like a baby when glass Talib couldn't finish a game after running into smurf Welker. 

    Bawahaha

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You are deflecting the issue, Trent Richardson. And you better. That one is going to set the Colts back significantly. Especially playing in a powerhouse division like the AFC South. Those Texans and Jaguars look scary. (Those last two sentences were sarcasm, by the way)

    If the Colts fail to reach the playoffs in 2014 it would be a choke job second only to Gomer and Denver in the SB. That is even if they play Trent Richardson the entire year.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to DanishPastry's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Reiss was hammering the Colts today over on ESPN Boston, but in a polite way. lol

    The Colts only have 5 picks in this deep draft and no 1st rd pick.  Ouch.

    Whenever I read about one of the all time great heists, I think of Mt Hurl approving of this trade when it happened. Cannot be made up.

    The Colts couldn't get Caserio and settled on Grigson. bawhahah

    [/QUOTE]

    Who said the colts wanted Caserio?  Do you have some information on that or is this another common fantasy from you russ? 

    The colts "settling" on Grigson amounted to an Exec of the year award in his first year.  Bawahaha. 

    He's turned over about 80% of the roster which helped the colts reach the playoffs in each of his first 2 years.  Pretty great if you ask me.  We're on our way.  But you keep focusing on Grigson's questionable moves while the rest of world still wonders why BB got rid of Welker, resigned Hernandez, played Gronkowski on a PAT, whined like a baby when glass Talib couldn't finish a game after running into smurf Welker. 

    Bawahaha

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You are deflecting the issue, Trent Richardson. And you better. That one is going to set the Colts back significantly. Especially playing in a powerhouse division like the AFC South. Those Texans and Jaguars look scary. (Those last two sentences were sarcasm, by the way)

    If the Colts fail to reach the playoffs in 2014 it would be a choke job second only to Gomer and Denver in the SB. That is even if they play Trent Richardson the entire year.

    [/QUOTE]

    Oh so wrong Breakfast Roll. 

    If you look you will see a direct response about Richardson.  Its on this thread.  You've just got to quit focusing on the doughnuts.  The colts will be fine.  There are plenty of examples of late first round and early 2nd round picks that did not work out but that did not set back teams significantly. 

    Oh - and nothing can be more choke than Brady's example in 2007 playing a defense ranked in the bottom half of the league.  Remember his mocking of Burress - "We're only going to score 17 points? ha.  OK.  Is plax going to play defense?"

    Brady will never live that remark down.  That remark shuts down every conversation. 

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from DanishPastry. Show DanishPastry's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DanishPastry's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Reiss was hammering the Colts today over on ESPN Boston, but in a polite way. lol

    The Colts only have 5 picks in this deep draft and no 1st rd pick.  Ouch.

    Whenever I read about one of the all time great heists, I think of Mt Hurl approving of this trade when it happened. Cannot be made up.

    The Colts couldn't get Caserio and settled on Grigson. bawhahah

    [/QUOTE]

    Who said the colts wanted Caserio?  Do you have some information on that or is this another common fantasy from you russ? 

    The colts "settling" on Grigson amounted to an Exec of the year award in his first year.  Bawahaha. 

    He's turned over about 80% of the roster which helped the colts reach the playoffs in each of his first 2 years.  Pretty great if you ask me.  We're on our way.  But you keep focusing on Grigson's questionable moves while the rest of world still wonders why BB got rid of Welker, resigned Hernandez, played Gronkowski on a PAT, whined like a baby when glass Talib couldn't finish a game after running into smurf Welker. 

    Bawahaha

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You are deflecting the issue, Trent Richardson. And you better. That one is going to set the Colts back significantly. Especially playing in a powerhouse division like the AFC South. Those Texans and Jaguars look scary. (Those last two sentences were sarcasm, by the way)

    If the Colts fail to reach the playoffs in 2014 it would be a choke job second only to Gomer and Denver in the SB. That is even if they play Trent Richardson the entire year.

    [/QUOTE]

    Oh so wrong Breakfast Roll. 

    If you look you will see a direct response about Richardson.  Its on this thread.  You've just got to quit focusing on the doughnuts.  The colts will be fine.  There are plenty of examples of late first round and early 2nd round picks that did not work out but that did not set back teams significantly. 

    Oh - and nothing can be more choke than Brady's example in 2007 playing a defense ranked in the bottom half of the league.  Remember his mocking of Burress - "We're only going to score 17 points? ha.  OK.  Is plax going to play defense?"

    Brady will never live that remark down.  That remark shuts down every conversation. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Ha-ha. Got me on the name. What can I say, in my mind it was funny at the time, and now I'm to stubborn to change it.

    We'll have to disagree on the chokiest part - I think Gomer sets the standard in choking, and a hypothetical scenario where the Colts don't win their division in 2014 would also be an underwhelming performance. Whereas Brady committed hubris, but IMO didn't choke.

    So what you're saying is that it isn't painfully obvious that the Richardson trade was a really bad move? That trading your first round pick for a bad RB that didn't get any better once traded to the Colts wasn't dumb? Of course not having that pick will set you back. It remains to be seen how badly, seing as the status quo is decent enough, but that pick could have provided some real help for years to come, whereas Richardson will be gone soon enough.

      

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TexasPat's comment:
    [QUOTE]

         Indianapolis Colts GM Ryan Grigson has stated yet again that he would make the Trent Richardson trade again in a heartbeat. In case y'all have forgotten, Grigson traded the Colts #1 draft choice this year for the second coming of Ron Dayne, Richardson. Grigson is clearly delusional: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/02/23/colts-insist-trent-richardson-was-worth-a-first-round-pick/ 

         LOL!!!  

    [/QUOTE]


    Once again I played the fun board game - "who started this thread".  I guessed TP and voila.  I win the prize. 

    RESPONSE: My...you're so clever, Gomez...LOL!!!

    Lets please give the guy one full season with the colts before kill him.  Was he worth a #1?  After this season, the answer is currently absolutely not.  Will he ever be worth it?  That remains to be seen.

    RESPONSE: One question for you, Gomez. Grigson claims that he would do the same trade again today. If you were the Colts GM, and you could have a "do-over",would you make that Richardson trade, or ship Richardson back to Cleveland, and regain the Colts' #1 in 2014?  

    But beyond that, why would any GM publicly knock a current team player?  Belichick wouldn't.  You would accept that from him.  Why do you have different standards for other teams?

    RESPONSE: True...but to make the claim that he would make that trade again today is a ridiculous statement...and one that I doubt BB would make. A more reasonable comment would be, "Trent is a talented player who is working hard, and getting our offensive system down. We'll see how it goes in 2014".

    [/QUOTE]


     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to DanishPastry's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DanishPastry's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Reiss was hammering the Colts today over on ESPN Boston, but in a polite way. lol

    The Colts only have 5 picks in this deep draft and no 1st rd pick.  Ouch.

    Whenever I read about one of the all time great heists, I think of Mt Hurl approving of this trade when it happened. Cannot be made up.

    The Colts couldn't get Caserio and settled on Grigson. bawhahah

    [/QUOTE]

    Who said the colts wanted Caserio?  Do you have some information on that or is this another common fantasy from you russ? 

    The colts "settling" on Grigson amounted to an Exec of the year award in his first year.  Bawahaha. 

    He's turned over about 80% of the roster which helped the colts reach the playoffs in each of his first 2 years.  Pretty great if you ask me.  We're on our way.  But you keep focusing on Grigson's questionable moves while the rest of world still wonders why BB got rid of Welker, resigned Hernandez, played Gronkowski on a PAT, whined like a baby when glass Talib couldn't finish a game after running into smurf Welker. 

    Bawahaha

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You are deflecting the issue, Trent Richardson. And you better. That one is going to set the Colts back significantly. Especially playing in a powerhouse division like the AFC South. Those Texans and Jaguars look scary. (Those last two sentences were sarcasm, by the way)

    If the Colts fail to reach the playoffs in 2014 it would be a choke job second only to Gomer and Denver in the SB. That is even if they play Trent Richardson the entire year.

    [/QUOTE]

    Oh so wrong Breakfast Roll. 

    If you look you will see a direct response about Richardson.  Its on this thread.  You've just got to quit focusing on the doughnuts.  The colts will be fine.  There are plenty of examples of late first round and early 2nd round picks that did not work out but that did not set back teams significantly. 

    Oh - and nothing can be more choke than Brady's example in 2007 playing a defense ranked in the bottom half of the league.  Remember his mocking of Burress - "We're only going to score 17 points? ha.  OK.  Is plax going to play defense?"

    Brady will never live that remark down.  That remark shuts down every conversation. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Ha-ha. Got me on the name. What can I say, in my mind it was funny at the time, and now I'm to stubborn to change it.

    We'll have to disagree on the chokiest part - I think Gomer sets the standard in choking, and a hypothetical scenario where the Colts don't win their division in 2014 would also be an underwhelming performance. Whereas Brady committed hubris, but IMO didn't choke.

    So what you're saying is that it isn't painfully obvious that the Richardson trade was a really bad move? That trading your first round pick for a bad RB that didn't get any better once traded to the Colts wasn't dumb? Of course not having that pick will set you back. It remains to be seen how badly, seing as the status quo is decent enough, but that pick could have provided some real help for years to come, whereas Richardson will be gone soon enough.

      

    [/QUOTE]

    What I said was that Richardson was bad this year and if the trade is based only on this year, then yes, the colts were on the wrong end of the deal, but I think Richardson deserves more time to prove himself.  Maybe he'll suck. 

    Even if he does suck, it doesn't mean the colts will have been set back for years.  Cleveland got the 26th pick and there are plenty of players drafted at the end of the first and start of the second round that haven't turned out but the pick didn't substantially hurt the team.  I suppose that is somewhat speculative given the question well what would have happened if the colts had the pick or if they didn't have richardson.  At the end of the day, the colts were 11-5 in 2013 and Richardson's presence didn't hurt them and they needed a running back. 

    For the richardson trade to really hurt, the colts would have needed to draft a player that would have started right away.  Looking at last year's draft, of the last 10 players taken in the first round (where the colts would have picked) half of them were not primary starters their rookie season. 

    That deep in the first, there's no guarantee that players pan out.  That pats took Dowling 33, chung 34, Merriweather 24, Maroney 21, Jackson 36.  they've also had some very productive picks, but the point is that there is no guarantee.  For what Richardson could be (and he may not be that now) - a future low first rounder was not a significant give.  If this trade had been made now, that value would be probably low 2nd round. 

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    It was a bad trade.  Who cares about the Colts anymore?

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to TexasPat's comment:

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TexasPat's comment:
    [QUOTE]

         Indianapolis Colts GM Ryan Grigson has stated yet again that he would make the Trent Richardson trade again in a heartbeat. In case y'all have forgotten, Grigson traded the Colts #1 draft choice this year for the second coming of Ron Dayne, Richardson. Grigson is clearly delusional: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/02/23/colts-insist-trent-richardson-was-worth-a-first-round-pick/ 

         LOL!!!  




    Once again I played the fun board game - "who started this thread".  I guessed TP and voila.  I win the prize. 

    RESPONSE: My...you're so clever, Gomez...LOL!!!

    I know. 

     

     Lets please give the guy one full season with the colts before kill him.  Was he worth a #1?  After this season, the answer is currently absolutely not.  Will he ever be worth it?  That remains to be seen.

    RESPONSE: One question for you, Gomez. Grigson claims that he would do the same trade again today. If you were the Colts GM, and you could have a "do-over",would you make that Richardson trade, or ship Richardson back to Cleveland, and regain the Colts' #1 in 2014? 

    today, I would like to have the pick, but again, I am not going to kill the guy for making the trade.  The colts have gone 11-5 over the past 2 years, and if this is his only mistake during that time, then he deserves more than a pass.   

    But beyond that, why would any GM publicly knock a current team player?  Belichick wouldn't.  You would accept that from him.  Why do you have different standards for other teams?

    RESPONSE: True...but to make the claim that he would make that trade again today is a ridiculous statement...and one that I doubt BB would make. A more reasonable comment would be, "Trent is a talented player who is working hard, and getting our offensive system down. We'll see how it goes in 2014".

    If true - then lets not qualify it.  We can mince words all we want.  By making the statement he made, he is demonstrating to Richardson that he is in his corner.  that he still has expectations of him.  If he tacitly defends the trade with your words then it sends a different (less committed) message.  Grigson has been very good in his short time.  He took over a 2-14 team, turned over nearly the entire roster in 2 years.  that's an extraoridinary amount of activity well beyond other teams.  While I don't yet consider the team that good, they've done some remarkable things over these 2 years and made the playoffs.  continue the criticism if it makes you feel better, but objectively, its sounds like sour grapes given his success and the team's success otherwise. 

     


     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to UD6's comment:



    Ha-ha. Got me on the name. What can I say, in my mind it was funny at the time, and now I'm to stubborn to change it.

    We'll have to disagree on the chokiest part - I think Gomer sets the standard in choking, and a hypothetical scenario where the Colts don't win their division in 2014 would also be an underwhelming performance. Whereas Brady committed hubris, but IMO didn't choke.

    So what you're saying is that it isn't painfully obvious that the Richardson trade was a really bad move? That trading your first round pick for a bad RB that didn't get any better once traded to the Colts wasn't dumb? Of course not having that pick will set you back. It remains to be seen how badly, seing as the status quo is decent enough, but that pick could have provided some real help for years to come, whereas Richardson will be gone soon enough.

      



    What I said was that Richardson was bad this year and if the trade is based only on this year, then yes, the colts were on the wrong end of the deal, but I think Richardson deserves more time to prove himself.  Maybe he'll suck. 

    RESPONSE: Why does Richardson "deserve" more time to prove himself? What has he done in Indy to deserve anything...except a pink slip?

    Even if he does suck, it doesn't mean the colts will have been set back for years. 

    RESPONSE: What do you think it means, Gomez? To me it means that the Colts still have a need at RB, with Brown an UFA, and Ballard coming off a pretty severe injury. It also means that the Colts missed an opportunity to improve the marshmellowy soft middle of their DL, and/or add a top rated body guard for Luck.

    Cleveland got the 26th pick and there are plenty of players drafted at the end of the first and start of the second round that haven't turned out but the pick didn't substantially hurt the team.  I suppose that is somewhat speculative given the question well what would have happened if the colts had the pick or if they didn't have richardson.  At the end of the day, the colts were 11-5 in 2013 and Richardson's presence didn't hurt them and they needed a running back. 

    RESPONSE: Didn't hurt them? It killed them! Luck had no viable rushing threat, which made the Indy offense one dimensional. Richardson's fumble in the playoff game against the Chiefs certainly wasn't helpful, either.

    For the richardson trade to really hurt, the colts would have needed to draft a player that would have started right away.  Looking at last year's draft, of the last 10 players taken in the first round (where the colts would have picked) half of them were not primary starters their rookie season. 

    RESPONSE: What a ridiculous argument! So now, according to you, a top 30 prospect is worthless! The Colts won 11 games and made he playoffs largely because of the fact that they play in the weakest division in football. They gave up 40 plus points to the Chiefs at home, in a game that they were very lucky to win. They were embarrassed by a depleted Patriots squad because they couldn't stop the run. They badly need a top prospect at DT, ILB, on the OL, and at RB, as previously mentioned above.   

    That deep in the first, there's no guarantee that players pan out.  That pats took Dowling 33, chung 34, Merriweather 24, Maroney 21, Jackson 36.

    RESPONSE: How juvenile. Try these names on for size: Joe Addai, Reggie Wayne, Bob Sanders, Gronk, Devin McCourty.  

    they've also had some very productive picks, but the point is that there is no guarantee.

    RESPONSE:The point is that they've already ave busted out with Richardson. In so doing, they've lost a prime opportunity to add a significant player at a position of need.

    For what Richardson could be (and he may not be that now) - a future low first rounder was not a significant give.  If this trade had been made now, that value would be probably low 2nd round. 

    RESPONSE: Ridiculous! Any time a team trades away a #1 draft choice is a "significant move". The bloom is off the rose on Richardson. If the trade would be made now, Richardson would fetch a 4th rounder at best.

    [/QUOTE]


     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to UD6's comment:

    In response to TexasPat's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TexasPat's comment:
    [QUOTE]

         Indianapolis Colts GM Ryan Grigson has stated yet again that he would make the Trent Richardson trade again in a heartbeat. In case y'all have forgotten, Grigson traded the Colts #1 draft choice this year for the second coming of Ron Dayne, Richardson. Grigson is clearly delusional: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/02/23/colts-insist-trent-richardson-was-worth-a-first-round-pick/ 

         LOL!!!  

     




    Once again I played the fun board game - "who started this thread".  I guessed TP and voila.  I win the prize. 

     

    RESPONSE: My...you're so clever, Gomez...LOL!!!

    I know. 

     

     Lets please give the guy one full season with the colts before kill him.  Was he worth a #1?  After this season, the answer is currently absolutely not.  Will he ever be worth it?  That remains to be seen.

    RESPONSE: One question for you, Gomez. Grigson claims that he would do the same trade again today. If you were the Colts GM, and you could have a "do-over",would you make that Richardson trade, or ship Richardson back to Cleveland, and regain the Colts' #1 in 2014? 

    today, I would like to have the pick, but again, I am not going to kill the guy for making the trade.  The colts have gone 11-5 over the past 2 years, and if this is his only mistake during that time, then he deserves more than a pass.   

    But beyond that, why would any GM publicly knock a current team player?  Belichick wouldn't.  You would accept that from him.  Why do you have different standards for other teams?

    RESPONSE: True...but to make the claim that he would make that trade again today is a ridiculous statement...and one that I doubt BB would make. A more reasonable comment would be, "Trent is a talented player who is working hard, and getting our offensive system down. We'll see how it goes in 2014".

    If true - then lets not qualify it.  We can mince words all we want.  By making the statement he made, he is demonstrating to Richardson that he is in his corner.  that he still has expectations of him.  If he tacitly defends the trade with your words then it sends a different (less committed) message.  Grigson has been very good in his short time.  He took over a 2-14 team, turned over nearly the entire roster in 2 years.  that's an extraoridinary amount of activity well beyond other teams.  While I don't yet consider the team that good, they've done some remarkable things over these 2 years and made the playoffs.  continue the criticism if it makes you feel better, but objectively, its sounds like sour grapes given his success and the team's success otherwise.  
     

    [/QUOTE]

    RESPONSE: Nonsense! What made Grison was his luck in getting Luck. How hard is it to turn over an aging team that just finished 2-14?What choice did he have but to turn that team over? Not hard to upgrade from a bunch of players that absolutely suck.

    At least you are willing to acknowledge that trading for Richardson was a mistake...and that I was dead on in my criticisms of the deal, when it was first made. Hate to say, "I told you so, Gomez...but..."

    LOL!!! 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonTrollSpanker. Show BostonTrollSpanker's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    Was a pleasure watching UD6 blow a gasket all over this thread. Reminded me of playing whack-a-mole at Chuck E Cheese.

    I can understand why UD6 is frustrated and defending this trade. You would be too if you were stuck with a Trent Richardson Colts jersey.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Was a pleasure watching UD6 blow a gasket all over this thread. Reminded me of playing whack-a-mole at Chuck E Cheese.

    I can understand why UD6 is frustrated and defending this trade. You would be too if you were stuck with a Trent Richardson Colts jersey.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yep, and equally as funny was seeing another classic Texas pat Under Dog slam fest. These guys are OG's. I respect UD more then babe though. At least UD stands by his team....unless UD is Babe???

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to TexasPat's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to TexasPat's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TexasPat's comment:
    [QUOTE]

         Indianapolis Colts GM Ryan Grigson has stated yet again that he would make the Trent Richardson trade again in a heartbeat. In case y'all have forgotten, Grigson traded the Colts #1 draft choice this year for the second coming of Ron Dayne, Richardson. Grigson is clearly delusional: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/02/23/colts-insist-trent-richardson-was-worth-a-first-round-pick/ 

         LOL!!!  

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Once again I played the fun board game - "who started this thread".  I guessed TP and voila.  I win the prize. 

     

     

    RESPONSE: My...you're so clever, Gomez...LOL!!!

    I know. 

     

     Lets please give the guy one full season with the colts before kill him.  Was he worth a #1?  After this season, the answer is currently absolutely not.  Will he ever be worth it?  That remains to be seen.

    RESPONSE: One question for you, Gomez. Grigson claims that he would do the same trade again today. If you were the Colts GM, and you could have a "do-over",would you make that Richardson trade, or ship Richardson back to Cleveland, and regain the Colts' #1 in 2014? 

    today, I would like to have the pick, but again, I am not going to kill the guy for making the trade.  The colts have gone 11-5 over the past 2 years, and if this is his only mistake during that time, then he deserves more than a pass.   

    But beyond that, why would any GM publicly knock a current team player?  Belichick wouldn't.  You would accept that from him.  Why do you have different standards for other teams?

    RESPONSE: True...but to make the claim that he would make that trade again today is a ridiculous statement...and one that I doubt BB would make. A more reasonable comment would be, "Trent is a talented player who is working hard, and getting our offensive system down. We'll see how it goes in 2014".

    If true - then lets not qualify it.  We can mince words all we want.  By making the statement he made, he is demonstrating to Richardson that he is in his corner.  that he still has expectations of him.  If he tacitly defends the trade with your words then it sends a different (less committed) message.  Grigson has been very good in his short time.  He took over a 2-14 team, turned over nearly the entire roster in 2 years.  that's an extraoridinary amount of activity well beyond other teams.  While I don't yet consider the team that good, they've done some remarkable things over these 2 years and made the playoffs.  continue the criticism if it makes you feel better, but objectively, its sounds like sour grapes given his success and the team's success otherwise.  
     

    [/QUOTE]

    RESPONSE: Nonsense! What made Grison was his luck in getting Luck. How hard is it to turn over an aging team that just finished 2-14?What choice did he have but to turn that team over? Not hard to upgrade from a bunch of players that absolutely suck.

    At least you are willing to acknowledge that trading for Richardson was a mistake...and that I was dead on in my criticisms of the deal, when it was first made. Hate to say, "I told you so, Gomez...but..."

    LOL!!! 

    [/QUOTE]

    Luck was a great deal of help, but Luck doesn't play defense or special teams or offensive line or etc. 

    Since 2000, 10 QB's were taken #1.  No team did what the colts did with their rookie QB.  There are other factors involved. 

    Grigson has turned over 80% of the roster because like you said, everyone else sucked.  He had to find players that were available that did not suck, and he did.  That's why he won exec of the year.  

    And what I said about the trade is if I am only allowed to look at his 2013 production then it was a bad trade, but he's got more time to prove his worth.  What I said is lets wait.  I am sure that you'll take my comments out of context in the future.  That's your MO. 

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Was a pleasure watching UD6 blow a gasket all over this thread. Reminded me of playing whack-a-mole at Chuck E Cheese.

    I can understand why UD6 is frustrated and defending this trade. You would be too if you were stuck with a Trent Richardson Colts jersey.

    [/QUOTE]

    LOL - you've got a poor ability to analyze my comments (probably clouded by your misguided fandom), but that's ok.  I don't expect much.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]...If you were the Colts GM, and you could have a "do-over",would you make that Richardson trade, or ship Richardson back to Cleveland, and regain the Colts' #1 in 2014? 

    today, I would like to have the pick, but again, I am not going to kill the guy for making the trade.  The colts have gone 11-5 over the past 2 years, and if this is his only mistake during that time, then he deserves more than a pass.   

    But beyond that, why would any GM publicly knock a current team player?  Belichick wouldn't.  You would accept that from him.  Why do you have different standards for other teams?

    RESPONSE: True...but to make the claim that he would make that trade again today is a ridiculous statement...and one that I doubt BB would make. A more reasonable comment would be, "Trent is a talented player who is working hard, and getting our offensive system down. We'll see how it goes in 2014".

    If true - then lets not qualify it.  We can mince words all we want.  By making the statement he made, he is demonstrating to Richardson that he is in his corner.  that he still has expectations of him.  If he tacitly defends the trade with your words then it sends a different (less committed) message.  Grigson has been very good in his short time.  He took over a 2-14 team, turned over nearly the entire roster in 2 years.  that's an extraoridinary amount of activity well beyond other teams.  While I don't yet consider the team that good, they've done some remarkable things over these 2 years and made the playoffs.  continue the criticism if it makes you feel better, but objectively, its sounds like sour grapes given his success and the team's success otherwise.  
     

    [/QUOTE]

    RESPONSE: Nonsense! What made Grison was his luck in getting Luck. How hard is it to turn over an aging team that just finished 2-14?What choice did he have but to turn that team over? Not hard to upgrade from a bunch of players that absolutely suck.

    At least you are willing to acknowledge that trading for Richardson was a mistake...and that I was dead on in my criticisms of the deal, when it was first made. Hate to say, "I told you so, Gomez...but..."

    LOL!!! 

    [/QUOTE]

    Luck was a great deal of help, but Luck doesn't play defense or special teams or offensive line or etc. 

    RESPONSE: Special teams have never been an Indy strength...and the Indy defense was a disaster, especially in the play-offs. Luck carried that team.

    Since 2000, 10 QB's were taken #1.  No team did what the colts did with their rookie QB.  There are other factors involved. 

    RESPONSE: Just goes to show how stats can be manipulated to butress a bogus point. Of the 10 previous QBs taken since 2000 in the first round, none was as highly touted (and for good reason) as Luck. Luck was the best QB prospect since that Horsefaced choke artist, who now plays in Denver, was selected. 

    Grigson has turned over 80% of the roster because like you said, everyone else sucked.  He had to find players that were available that did not suck, and he did.  That's why he won exec of the year.  

    RESPONSE: Grigson did a decent job. But the main reason for the Colts resurgence came about due to the team tanking the 2011 season. Grigson should get no credit for taking Luck. He was the consensus #1 overall pick in 2012. I do credit him for finding better players than the Colts had in 2011. But, that shouldn't have resulted in him being named "Executive of the Year". today, I would like to have the pick, but again, I am not going to kill the guy for making the trade.  The colts have gone 11-5 over the past 2 years, and if this is his only mistake during that time, then he deserves more than a pass. 

    And what I said about the trade is if I am only allowed to look at his 2013 production then it was a bad trade, but he's got more time to prove his worth.  What I said is lets wait.  I am sure that you'll take my comments out of context in the future.  That's your MO. 

    RESPONSE: Oh really? Re-read your own words, Gomez: "today, I would like to have the pick, but again, I am not going to kill the guy for making the trade."  The colts have gone 11-5 over the past 2 years, and if this is his only mistake during that time, then he deserves more than a pass.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    RESPONSE: Grigson deserves "more than a pass" for trading away his #1 pick in 2014 for a bust, who is he second coming of Ron Dayne?? Uh...okay.

    LOL!!!  

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from mellymel3. Show mellymel3's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mellymel3's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The Colts GM paniced and showed his inexperience and lack of knowledge of the NFL and it's players...taken to the cleaners...he's set them back a few years...with this, the deepest draft in years?...WHAT A FOOL!

    [/QUOTE]

    Wow Melly - you should be inside a war room, then.  An exec of the year in 2012 set the colts back?  His roster moves (80% turnover) took the team from 2-14 to 11-5, twice.  Quite a set back.

    Better yet, that couch in your mom's basement is a much better place for you. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Unfortunately, it's a couch in my living room in a 10th floor condo in Brookline MA, overlooking Coolidge Corner...if you know the area it's VERY nice...

    Not like living in KKK infested Indiana, rooting for a team owned by a drunken sot who can't control himself...

    Now...back to the issue at hand....The trade was and IS a disaster for the Colts...with an aging and injured wr, a key to their performance, the loss of such draft capital in a year when the draft is extremely deep (as I can attest to watching the combine these past few days)., your boys will hurt this year ...they now have competition in their division...they won't finish first, they may not make the playoffs...LMFAO...

    Go colties...LMFAO!

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from mellymel3. Show mellymel3's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to TexasPat's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]...If you were the Colts GM, and you could have a "do-over",would you make that Richardson trade, or ship Richardson back to Cleveland, and regain the Colts' #1 in 2014? 

    today, I would like to have the pick, but again, I am not going to kill the guy for making the trade.  The colts have gone 11-5 over the past 2 years, and if this is his only mistake during that time, then he deserves more than a pass.   

    But beyond that, why would any GM publicly knock a current team player?  Belichick wouldn't.  You would accept that from him.  Why do you have different standards for other teams?

    RESPONSE: True...but to make the claim that he would make that trade again today is a ridiculous statement...and one that I doubt BB would make. A more reasonable comment would be, "Trent is a talented player who is working hard, and getting our offensive system down. We'll see how it goes in 2014".

    If true - then lets not qualify it.  We can mince words all we want.  By making the statement he made, he is demonstrating to Richardson that he is in his corner.  that he still has expectations of him.  If he tacitly defends the trade with your words then it sends a different (less committed) message.  Grigson has been very good in his short time.  He took over a 2-14 team, turned over nearly the entire roster in 2 years.  that's an extraoridinary amount of activity well beyond other teams.  While I don't yet consider the team that good, they've done some remarkable things over these 2 years and made the playoffs.  continue the criticism if it makes you feel better, but objectively, its sounds like sour grapes given his success and the team's success otherwise.  
     

    [/QUOTE]

    RESPONSE: Nonsense! What made Grison was his luck in getting Luck. How hard is it to turn over an aging team that just finished 2-14?What choice did he have but to turn that team over? Not hard to upgrade from a bunch of players that absolutely suck.

    At least you are willing to acknowledge that trading for Richardson was a mistake...and that I was dead on in my criticisms of the deal, when it was first made. Hate to say, "I told you so, Gomez...but..."

    LOL!!! 

    [/QUOTE]

    Luck was a great deal of help, but Luck doesn't play defense or special teams or offensive line or etc. 

    RESPONSE: Special teams have never been an Indy strength...and the Indy defense was a disaster, especially in the play-offs. Luck carried that team.

    Since 2000, 10 QB's were taken #1.  No team did what the colts did with their rookie QB.  There are other factors involved. 

    RESPONSE: Just goes to show how stats can be manipulated to butress a bogus point. Of the 10 previous QBs taken since 2000 in the first round, none was as highly touted (and for good reason) as Luck. Luck was the best QB prospect since that Horsefaced choke artist, who now plays in Denver, was selected. 

    Grigson has turned over 80% of the roster because like you said, everyone else sucked.  He had to find players that were available that did not suck, and he did.  That's why he won exec of the year.  

    RESPONSE: Grigson did a decent job. But the main reason for the Colts resurgence came about due to the team tanking the 2011 season. Grigson should get no credit for taking Luck. He was the consensus #1 overall pick in 2012. I do credit him for finding better players than the Colts had in 2011. But, that shouldn't have resulted in him being named "Executive of the Year". today, I would like to have the pick, but again, I am not going to kill the guy for making the trade.  The colts have gone 11-5 over the past 2 years, and if this is his only mistake during that time, then he deserves more than a pass. 

    And what I said about the trade is if I am only allowed to look at his 2013 production then it was a bad trade, but he's got more time to prove his worth.  What I said is lets wait.  I am sure that you'll take my comments out of context in the future.  That's your MO. 

    RESPONSE: Oh really? Re-read your own words, Gomez: "today, I would like to have the pick, but again, I am not going to kill the guy for making the trade."  The colts have gone 11-5 over the past 2 years, and if this is his only mistake during that time, then he deserves more than a pass.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    RESPONSE: Grigson deserves "more than a pass" for trading away his #1 pick in 2014 for a bust, who is he second coming of Ron Dayne?? Uh...okay.

    LOL!!!  

    [/QUOTE]

    Methinks Coltboy is hitting the grappa hard today!

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    Trading for a RB in general seems a dumb move.  Might make an exception for Adrian Peterson, but most RBs are good for two or three years at most and then fade away. 

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to TexasPat's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]...If you were the Colts GM, and you could have a "do-over",would you make that Richardson trade, or ship Richardson back to Cleveland, and regain the Colts' #1 in 2014? 

    today, I would like to have the pick, but again, I am not going to kill the guy for making the trade.  The colts have gone 11-5 over the past 2 years, and if this is his only mistake during that time, then he deserves more than a pass.   

    But beyond that, why would any GM publicly knock a current team player?  Belichick wouldn't.  You would accept that from him.  Why do you have different standards for other teams?

    RESPONSE: True...but to make the claim that he would make that trade again today is a ridiculous statement...and one that I doubt BB would make. A more reasonable comment would be, "Trent is a talented player who is working hard, and getting our offensive system down. We'll see how it goes in 2014".

    If true - then lets not qualify it.  We can mince words all we want.  By making the statement he made, he is demonstrating to Richardson that he is in his corner.  that he still has expectations of him.  If he tacitly defends the trade with your words then it sends a different (less committed) message.  Grigson has been very good in his short time.  He took over a 2-14 team, turned over nearly the entire roster in 2 years.  that's an extraoridinary amount of activity well beyond other teams.  While I don't yet consider the team that good, they've done some remarkable things over these 2 years and made the playoffs.  continue the criticism if it makes you feel better, but objectively, its sounds like sour grapes given his success and the team's success otherwise.  
     

    [/QUOTE]

    RESPONSE: Nonsense! What made Grison was his luck in getting Luck. How hard is it to turn over an aging team that just finished 2-14?What choice did he have but to turn that team over? Not hard to upgrade from a bunch of players that absolutely suck.

    At least you are willing to acknowledge that trading for Richardson was a mistake...and that I was dead on in my criticisms of the deal, when it was first made. Hate to say, "I told you so, Gomez...but..."

    LOL!!! 

    [/QUOTE]

    Luck was a great deal of help, but Luck doesn't play defense or special teams or offensive line or etc. 

    RESPONSE: Special teams have never been an Indy strength...and the Indy defense was a disaster, especially in the play-offs. Luck carried that team.

    Since 2000, 10 QB's were taken #1.  No team did what the colts did with their rookie QB.  There are other factors involved. 

    RESPONSE: Just goes to show how stats can be manipulated to butress a bogus point. Of the 10 previous QBs taken since 2000 in the first round, none was as highly touted (and for good reason) as Luck. Luck was the best QB prospect since that Horsefaced choke artist, who now plays in Denver, was selected. 

    Grigson has turned over 80% of the roster because like you said, everyone else sucked.  He had to find players that were available that did not suck, and he did.  That's why he won exec of the year.  

    RESPONSE: Grigson did a decent job. But the main reason for the Colts resurgence came about due to the team tanking the 2011 season. Grigson should get no credit for taking Luck. He was the consensus #1 overall pick in 2012. I do credit him for finding better players than the Colts had in 2011. But, that shouldn't have resulted in him being named "Executive of the Year". today, I would like to have the pick, but again, I am not going to kill the guy for making the trade.  The colts have gone 11-5 over the past 2 years, and if this is his only mistake during that time, then he deserves more than a pass. 

    And what I said about the trade is if I am only allowed to look at his 2013 production then it was a bad trade, but he's got more time to prove his worth.  What I said is lets wait.  I am sure that you'll take my comments out of context in the future.  That's your MO. 

    RESPONSE: Oh really? Re-read your own words, Gomez: "today, I would like to have the pick, but again, I am not going to kill the guy for making the trade."  The colts have gone 11-5 over the past 2 years, and if this is his only mistake during that time, then he deserves more than a pass.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    RESPONSE: Grigson deserves "more than a pass" for trading away his #1 pick in 2014 for a bust, who is he second coming of Ron Dayne?? Uh...okay.

    LOL!!!  

    [/QUOTE]

    How's his team done since he arrived?  What was the team's record the year before he showed up?  Trading away #26

    From 2000-2008 only 50% of the players taken with the last 10 picks in the first round started more than 4 years in the league.  32% started less than 3 years.  Giving a future 1st rounder in the last 10 for the possibility of getting a great running back is not a bad thing.  Again - it was a future first.  That likely puts the pick value somewhere in the second round, and I'd imagine the success of second rounders is even lower than those taken in the bottom of the first round? 

    Look, I know you want to make this as horrible as you can, but it just isn't.   

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    Colts better get more players before they kill Luck

    They were thin last year and may well be in purgatory

    I am thrilled Lombardi is back. He will provide synergy in the front office

    Idzk did great getting rid of Revia and his $ , but he may have negated it with the cb and Qb picks, he will get some wr or te in this draft, nut the jets have a ways to go. Have a hard time believing Rex will survive. His D need cbs and he won't have any

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Colts Still in Denial Over Trent Richardson

    In response to mellymel3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mellymel3's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The Colts GM paniced and showed his inexperience and lack of knowledge of the NFL and it's players...taken to the cleaners...he's set them back a few years...with this, the deepest draft in years?...WHAT A FOOL!

    [/QUOTE]

    Wow Melly - you should be inside a war room, then.  An exec of the year in 2012 set the colts back?  His roster moves (80% turnover) took the team from 2-14 to 11-5, twice.  Quite a set back.

    Better yet, that couch in your mom's basement is a much better place for you. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Unfortunately, it's a couch in my living room in a 10th floor condo in Brookline MA, overlooking Coolidge Corner...if you know the area it's VERY nice...

    Not like living in KKK infested Indiana, rooting for a team owned by a drunken sot who can't control himself...

    Now...back to the issue at hand....The trade was and IS a disaster for the Colts...with an aging and injured wr, a key to their performance, the loss of such draft capital in a year when the draft is extremely deep (as I can attest to watching the combine these past few days)., your boys will hurt this year ...they now have competition in their division...they won't finish first, they may not make the playoffs...LMFAO...

    Go colties...LMFAO!

    [/QUOTE]
    LOL- Smelly.  The Klan is all over your state of residence.  For all I know, you may be a part of it given your frequent postings about it. 

    as for your prognostications - they have been so wrong so frequently, that your current ones about the colts give me comfort.  You'd think that with your parents taking care of you in their nice condo and having all of that time to watch the combine and NFL related media that you'd be better than you are.  Its a shame, really.

     

Share