Flash7

Senior Member
  • Content count

    2,312
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,230 Pro Bowler

About Flash7

Uncategorized

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

9,968 profile views
  1. Thanks for the info, much appreciated. I stand corrected.
  2. It depends on the players mindset: Do I take the guaranteed money since the average NFL career is very short, and only the top players earn large contracts, or do I believe in myself enough to play for a team with the best opportunity to start. If I start, I can showcase my talents and earn a big contract. The decision would come down to Cleveland or Indy.
  3. The Colts last year were a good "middle of the field" team, but not especially good in the red zone. Far too often, the Colts had to settle for a field goal. Adding another big bodied receiver, (similar height to Moncrief) adds another red zone weapon. I believe in competition. Let the best players earn their playing time. If that's Aiken, great. If that's Doresett, great. Let the best players play and use the best of their abilities -- use them wisely as the situation calls.
  4. The AFC South had 3 teams finish with an even record or winning record. The Colts finished 8-8 while the Texans and Titans both finished with winning records, 9-7. The NFC West had 3 teams finish with losing records.
  5. Hypothetically, if we signed POE, he would have been a starter for our defense this year. IF he produced at a Pro-Bowl level, that's a good thing. We would have a shot at re-signing him, before Free Agency began. If he decides to leave, we would get a compensatory pick. Again, that's a good thing and a return in value. I don't think that I am acting as though Free Agency is over and that no one else can be signed. Agree, there are still plenty of players available.
  6. 1. New England had the #1 scoring defense, and we already know about their prolific offense. They have plenty of play makers. They signed Talib, and then signed Revis (Super Bowl victory) and just signed Gilmore this Free Agency. Atlanta just signed POE, which is what many would have been satisfied with as a big free agent pickup. I agree that Green Bay and Pittsburgh do a good job building through the draft. If anything, those 4 teams illustrate that there is more than 1 way to get it done. 2. The Texans do not have a quality QB. The Giants are adding play makers, however, I wouldn't say that they have plenty of play makers. KC is a good team with an above average QB. What happens to KC in the playoffs is what you would expect. 3. I don't think that anyone is advocating that we "Break the Bank" for a few difference makers. I think it's reasonable to pay players what the market dictates their value is. If we wait to pay for play makers, (AKA- add depth now and next year or the year after go after high-end FA's) that's fine, just note that the market is only going up. 4. Jacksonville had the #6 defense, after being ranked at the bottom the past few years.
  7. Sure, understandable. Does adding quality FAs negate CB's ability to also add depth through FA with nearly 50M in cap space? For example, we could have signed POE and possibly even Zach Brown, and still signed all of the depth players that are currently signed. (I understand that just because we are interested in players, it does not mean that they will sign with us, as there are other options available). Does adding qualtiy FAs negate CB's ability draft quality players? Respectfully, I don't see why you cant do both?
  8. Let's try to understand what people are actually arguing on both sides. Some are arguing that CB is doing a good job building a younger defense with players that have potential to play better than they have shown. This will increase competition within the team and overall, increase the competitiveness of the team. CB will build the team through the draft and if you are looking for star players, wait for the draft. The other side is arguing that CB should have added difference makers to the defense rather than low-level starters with potential, or back ups. This is essentially spending the cap with minimal return. If you look around the league, the teams with the best defenses have the best players -- difference makers. The Colts do not have any, and haven't since Freeney, Mathis, Sanders, and Bethea in their prime. Some are tired of average players and would rather have 1 or 2 difference makers added, rather than 5-6 average players (which is what has been happening for too long). NO ONE (I don't think) is arguing that every signing has to be a HOF or pro-Bowler. That is a straw man argument. If you look at both arguments, they both have merit. Overall, it depends on your view on how to build the team.
  9. Good signing for the Jags. They had the #6 defense and and McNary will not be relied upon to play defense. McNary will be a special teams player, which was a need for them.
  10. Nope, not placing the blame on CB. I understand his approach, however, it doesn't change that this team will once again have to rely heavily on Luck this upcoming season, due to lack of defensive talent. IMO, adding Sheard, Simon, etc... adds depth or starters to our D, which is a good thing. I don't think they will be difference makers, and thus, we still have the same exact holes to fill. There were starter level FAs available that we could have targeted that would have filled some holes (CBs, ILB etc.) for the long term. As it stands, we still have so many holes to fill because signing low level players does not effectively address those needs. We will eventually have to find high-level players at these positions. This of course is my philosophy. There are more ways to reach the same end goal and I hope CB's approach is the right one. Besides, what do I know? I'm just a fan.
  11. So far, looking at the signings, CB has raised the 'floor' of the team. Our depth has improved and the team has gotten younger and more competitive, which is a good thing. However, as it currently stands, our secondary is still a major concern and has gotten worse, compared to last year (I know it's still early -- just comparing a snapshot of the team now vs. last year's squad). We cut Patrick Robinson and have not brought back Butler, both who were starters. So far we have added depth, but still no real substance in these signings....no difference makers. I see potential for an improved defense, from #31 (or whatever the ranking is) down to 25th in the league. Alright team, pile onto Luck's shoulders for yet another season, until we have a viable defense.
  12. 1. Broncos immediately improved and then went on to the SuperBowl, losing to Seattle, then won it in year 3. My point is, due to the signing of the top FA players, the Broncos were consistently Super Bowl contenders. If FA is used correctly, you can "win Free Agency" and can win Super Bowls -- they are not mutually exclusive. 2. The Patriots are known for taking away what the other team does best. They sign the best corners in the league, like Talib, Revis, or this year, Gilmore to take away the teams best receiver. Without a premier corner, their system doesn't work as well. Revis was a crucial clog in that system.
  13. Patriots with Revis. Broncos with Manning, Sanders, Ware, Talib, and TJ Ward.
  14. Earlier he tweeted "they rather have puppies than dogs." This can be interpreted as a negative tweet, but I think the intent was that they are letting the older players go for younger players. I don't think it's negative, or two faced.
  15. We got a 4th, they got D. Allen and a 6th.

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.