Caldwell and his staff (nearly the identical staff that developed Freeney and Mathis) got nothing out of him in 2 years, he was still behind Freeney and Mathis during the one year Pagano had him, and Grigson traded him for a bad ILB before he had a chance the next year to compete for a starting spot. How you see this as a failure of player development on Pagano's part is beyond me. Further, even if that were the case, if you can only find one example of this in five years, your argument that he's bad at player development doesn't hold water.

Tom Zbikowski, who was a Pagano guy, he did real well for us. :rolleyes:

Do all you guys argue with Stop signs? :cool:

Anyone who thought he was a starter was fooling themselves, he was terrible from the moment he came into the league.

And yet your hero advocated for his acquisition in Indy. Go figure.

1) Pagano is not the GM, his job is not talent acquisition.

2) The 2012 Colts were rebuilding, they needed a body to take reps at safety. Zbikowski was essentially a warm body, nothing more.

3) No one in the Colts organization ever thought of Zbikowski as anything more than a placeholder.

You are really reaching for evidence to support your argument and still coming up short.

And yet, he advocated and got his guy. And the guy sucked. Badly. Worse than replacement level player would have.

That's the point. Pagano does nothing in particular well.

that isn't true


he gives dam boners very well.

This is a reach at best.

To sum up your argument: "A bad player, who everyone knew was bad going in, played badly and was released, so that means Pagano is bad at things."

I just don't follow the logic.

pagano wanted to bring in a known bad player.

how do you not get this?