"The Plan"

What was that shit all about? I remember that term being thrown around here alot a few years back. Looking back it seems it was an optimistic way to legitimize decisions that didn't make sense on the surface. Everything was part of "the plan". It's funny how perception has changed.

 

"The Plan" was to have some early success, get a big extension, a new house in Quail Hollow, and then spend every future offseason on vacation.

 

I'll throw out a serious answer for fun. I think they actually have a plan, and have stuck to it. I think they've been at it so long we forgot what it was like before they got here.

I think it was about doing things differently than they were done previous to Fox Hurney - and I think they have, and I think they've had more success than previous regimes had.

When Fox Hurney showed up, the only first round pick ( that we made ) on the roster was Morgan. They've made drafting a huge priority, and while they have room for criticism, they've done much better at finding and keeping their own players than previous regimes.

Fox has been consistent in the type of players he wants on the team. Smart, tough, and high character.

Fox has been consistent in the style of football he wants to play - stop the run, run the ball, keep it close and hope something good happens in the 4th quarter. I think this philosophy compliments the smart, tough, high character players whom he seeks.

Fox has been consistent in his idea that free agency should be used to find role players. Stephen Davis was a huge signing - but he was cheap. So was Delhomme. Since Fox/Hurney came on, there have been very few big money deals like we handed out to the likes of Chuck Smith, Doug Evans, William Floyd, and Sean Gilbert. I'd say the craziest Free Agent year was 2006 - when we grabbed Kemo, Hartwig, and Keyshawn. The Wahle and Lucas years were big, too, but NONE of these offseasons resulted in huge outlays for free agents hoping they would revamp an entire section of the team. See 2000 and Chuck Smith, Reggie White, Eric Swann and Giblet.

So - that's what I think the plan was/is and I'd say they've stuck to it. Doesn't mean it's always worked out. I would criticize some of the moves to KEEP our players more than the free agent moves, which is a huge departure from previous regimes. Morgan and Foster come to mind, letting Spoon go, not paying more for Moose, those all seem to stick out as bad moves that were questioned at the time. I'm now pretty concerned about Peppers and Gross being given stupid contracts ( this would be part of the plan ), hanging on to Morgan and Carr might happen, too.

 

Our best players were drafted by the previous regime.

It was wishful thinking, IMHO

 

Good post.

We need to get away from the big contracts. I love what Fox represents, but his loyalty can be a big downfall for us.

 

They still spend big to fill holes they opened up. They spend big and don't get much out of their $$.

They havn't drafted well, signed well or managed the cap very well. If that's the plan I don't want them sticking to it.

 

Amen to the last part of that. "Oh my God it's a 7-9 season again, this is the worst." Remember how excited we were to be 8-8 in 1999, or 7-9 in 2002?

They've drafted up and down, but they've tried to keep the "core guys".

Which is part of the crappy part of the "plan", is that who you keep regardless of why or who, is "core" and better players gone just aren't in the "plan". Doesn't leave room for the team having made an error.


Fox has been consistent in the style of football he wants to play - stop the run, run the ball, keep it close and hope something good happens in the 4th quarter. I think this philosophy compliments the smart, tough, high character players whom he seeks.

2003 we spent - struck out some, but we did spend. Davis, Dyson, Brzezinski, Proehl, just on offense; I'm sure there were others. We also spent the first 3 picks on O - crazy. And long term, by 2006, who was left? Gross.


At any rate, we do pretty well with this philosophy. I think we would need to rededicate to toughness and the run on both sides of the ball, and then worry about the rest, to stay with the plan. FWIW, we were good at stopping the run overall, but gave up a lot of yards because of TOP.

 

I can't argue that. The success of their plan is arguable, but I think they've been pretty consistent at the plan.

And I think they've drafted some good players.

2002:
Peppers and Foster have been good up until this year. Not Smitty good - but not many players are. Spoon was great - we made the wrong choice on who to keep there.

2003:

Gross has started every damn game. Manning was spectacular as a rookie until they changed rules.

2004:

Gamble and Wharton have been solid starters. Colbert has somehow kept a spot, as has Carter. That's 4 from a 6 person draft in 2004. They may not be stars, but from managing a roster, they're WAY more efficient than free agency.

2005:

Worst draft of the regime. Sad that Haye has become a solid starter. Thomas Davis is all that's left. Hang still here, and Seward. 10 picks that year, 1 starter, 2 throwaways.

2006 and 2007 show promise.

These drafts aren't spectacular, but other than 2001 they're better than 1995-2000. Which is insane.

I read somewhere that every Colts starter on offense and defense ( 22 starters ) have never played for anyone but Indy. That's awesome.