Will the Colts have 4 new starting LB next season?

[Creekside]

2 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

They didn't have a high caliber RB so what makes you think he didn't think that?

He probably DID think that BECAUSE THE COLTS WERE A WINNING TEAM AND NOT A LOSING TEAM

[crazycolt1]

45 minutes ago, egg said:

He probably DID think that BECAUSE THE COLTS WERE A WINNING TEAM AND NOT A LOSING TEAM

Using capital letters is not making your point any stronger.

You can think what you want but our record will not effect us signing free agents.

I am sure if they got an offer from a playoff team like the Patriots, Broncos or a similar team they would more than likely go there. But keep in mind those teams already have quite a few players under big contract that is why they are who they are. If those team are already that good they are not in the market for as many free agents like this team might be. (I said might be)

IMO I highly doubt that Grigson will be looking at too many free agents. He has already made the statement he is building through the draft. It is this forum who is suggesting free agents, not the Colts front office.

[Jason_]

1 hour ago, egg said:

I want the Colts to sign proven good players. Not ho-hum -whatever-hope they work out -..players. Good players will have multiple offers, and where there are similar offers, the free agents will have a choice, and if their choice is between a winning team or a losing team, where would you go?

 

 losing teams, even teams that have had losing records for several years in a row, sign free agents every single off-season. 

 

[NewColtsFan]

11 hours ago, MacDee1975 said:

I can't ever remember seeing a worse starting unit in my life than this year's Colts lb corps.  Walden and Mathis are FA and will be gone.  I can see Jackson getting cut;  McNary wouldn't start on any other team in the NFL and will likely be out.  Nobody behind them even remotely looks like a legit NFL starter.

 

So, do they go LB in the first 2 rounds of the draft, and sign 2 starting LB as well?

 

The chances of acquiring four new LB's are almost zero.

 

First, with all our needs, I doubt we go LB, LB in the first two rounds.     2nd, even if we did,  it's hard to also expect that we sign two starting caliber LB's as well.

 

Walden will likely return on a 1 or 2 year contract and be a strong-side starter.

 

We'll likely be looking for 3 starters.....     Morrison could be one.   Edwin Jackson could be one.    Our 1st round pick could be one.      A free agent draft pick could be one.

 

But four new guys ALL who come from off the roster right now is just not very likely at all.....

 

[Chucklez]

19 hours ago, SteelCityColt said:

If Walden doesn't demand silly money I'd keep him around. He's not a blue chip player but he does a solid enough job, If his pass rushing was a little bit better he'd be a great fit. 

He has 5 sacks through 7 games.... Considering no one else is bringing any pressure at all, I'd say his pass rush is not too damned shabby...

[Gyworks]

19 hours ago, SteelCityColt said:

If Walden doesn't demand silly money I'd keep him around. He's not a blue chip player but he does a solid enough job, If his pass rushing was a little bit better he'd be a great fit. 

I don't think he'll agree to a reasonable price tag though. If he keeps up this sack rate in his contract year he would be crazy to not demand top LB salary.

[SteelCityColt]

1 hour ago, Chucklez said:

He has 5 sacks through 7 games.... Considering no one else is bringing any pressure at all, I'd say his pass rush is not too damned shabby...

 

43 minutes ago, Gyworks said:

I don't think he'll agree to a reasonable price tag though. If he keeps up this sack rate in his contract year he would be crazy to not demand top LB salary.

 

I think you both make a good point, I suppose the question we need to ask then is how much would you be willing to pay him? I must admit I was lax in not checking how many sacks he's made so far this season, I may have been too harsh judging his pass rush ability. He's always had a bit a of a hard time winning over the fans (on here anyway) as a lot of people had that game against the 49ers fresh in their minds when came over. But since being a Colt, a couple of knucklehead moments aside, I think he's been an above average SAM backer for us. Remember when people were crying out for us to sign Barwin? Although I don't think Walden is the better player I think he's offered us better value for money. 

 

So back to the question. He's currently making $4 Million APY, what do we think he asks for and what do we think we'd be willing to give him? 2 Years for maybe $11-12 Million wouldn't be the worst to give us some continuity, especially if you factor in Mathis/Jackson maybe being off the roster. 

 

I also feel slightly sad that one of my most liked posts is about Erik Walden!

[ztboiler]

It's a concern that we drafted Morrison in the first wave of the youth movement on defense....it's a much bigger concern if this staff leaves us in position for him to be the starter going into 2017.

[Chucklez]

2 hours ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

 

I think you both make a good point, I suppose the question we need to ask then is how much would you be willing to pay him? I must admit I was lax in not checking how many sacks he's made so far this season, I may have been too harsh judging his pass rush ability. He's always had a bit a of a hard time winning over the fans (on here anyway) as a lot of people had that game against the 49ers fresh in their minds when came over. But since being a Colt, a couple of knucklehead moments aside, I think he's been an above average SAM backer for us. Remember when people were crying out for us to sign Barwin? Although I don't think Walden is the better player I think he's offered us better value for money. 

 

So back to the question. He's currently making $4 Million APY, what do we think he asks for and what do we think we'd be willing to give him? 2 Years for maybe $11-12 Million wouldn't be the worst to give us some continuity, especially if you factor in Mathis/Jackson maybe being off the roster. 

 

I also feel slightly sad that one of my most liked posts is about Erik Walden!

If he keeps the sack rate through to the end of the season, I'd be comfortable giving him $6m a year to keep him around.... I mean, Mathis is done, he's gotta retire after this year, Cole has been a big ol' swing and a miss, Irving and Moore are gone, DQ might stay another year but his time could be up as well.... Without Walden, our LB corp is literally barren. We might not have a choice but to pay him really...

[Gavin]

-I'd probably move on from Walden. He is not as good as some people make him out to be against the run and has been all or nothing as a pass rusher, He is either getting the sack or has a non existent pass rush. Not much at all in the form of other pressure

-Ayers can give you as good or better as a pass rusher. Plus I'd like to see what Maggit does in year 2. Put 1 of them in at Sam

-Draft a pass rusher.

-Let Cole walk.

-Re-sign Mathis to a 1 year 5 mill deal at most

-Start the rookie pass rusher and have Mathis in on 3rd downs only

[KB]

15 minutes ago, Gavin said:

-I'd probably move on from Walden. He is not as good as some people make him out to be against the run and has been all or nothing as a pass rusher, He is either getting the sack or has a non existent pass rush. Not much at all in the form of other pressure

-Ayers can give you as good or better as a pass rusher. Plus I'd like to see what Maggit does in year 2. Put 1 of them in at Sam

-Draft a pass rusher.

-Let Cole walk.

-Re-sign Mathis to a 1 year 5 mill deal at most

-Start the rookie pass rusher and have Mathis in on 3rd downs only

Waldens been the most consistent linebacker this year. He has earned another contract and should stay. If he dosnt I would consider it another Jarrell Freeman type situation.

 

I kind of agree with the resigning of Mathis for one year. Someone is going to need to be the veteran of pass down all the information to the young bucks, but he has been giving this same info for years and nobody has proven themselves.

 

I would resign Walden and let Mathis walk though. Maybe Ayers shows enough to get the stating rush spot for the beginning for next year as we groom 2 rookies up to eventually take their place. hoping for Harris from mizzou at rush and Anderson from Bama on the strong side. That's kind of a pipe dream though.

[Malakai432]

On 10/27/2016 at 10:26 AM, SteelCityColt said:

If Walden doesn't demand silly money I'd keep him around. He's not a blue chip player but he does a solid enough job, If his pass rushing was a little bit better he'd be a great fit. 

 

Yeah I'd have to agree.  He's one of the very few bright spots on the D this year.

[Defjamz26]

On 10/27/2016 at 5:22 PM, crazycolt1 said:

I agree. I think Grigson will either pull a trade of some kind to get a veteran LB or a free agent if a decent one becomes available.

And this time around "veteran" has to be a guy coming off a rookie contract or a maximum of 5 years experience. Maybe a Melvin Ingram or a Chandler Jones.

[Creekside]

10 hours ago, Gavin said:

 

-Re-sign Mathis to a 1 year 5 mill deal at most

 

 

The Colts should send me the 5 mil. and not re-sign Mathis. The Colts could then upgrade the position, and I would be rich (of course I would give most of it to charity)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JPFolks]

On 10/27/2016 at 8:12 PM, jvan1973 said:

If Walden is re signed,  it won't be for depth.   He will be starting

What I would hope is he'd initially be pegged to start, but our Rookie draft pick would quickly overtake him moving him to depth.  He's the smartest kid in a very dumb class of OLB's right now.  You have to resign him because there aren't enough guys floating around in the offseason to fill the void.  He's not good enough to be a long term starter,but he may well be better than the 3rd, 4th or 5th guy they could possibly assemble by next year.  If we sign a solid FA to start for Mathis and draft a solid OLB, we better hope he quickly overcomes Walden.  

[crazycolt1]

51 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

What I would hope is he'd initially be pegged to start, but our Rookie draft pick would quickly overtake him moving him to depth.  He's the smartest kid in a very dumb class of OLB's right now.  You have to resign him because there aren't enough guys floating around in the offseason to fill the void.  He's not good enough to be a long term starter,but he may well be better than the 3rd, 4th or 5th guy they could possibly assemble by next year.  If we sign a solid FA to start for Mathis and draft a solid OLB, we better hope he quickly overcomes Walden.  

Dumb??  Nonsense.  They may be lacking talent but calling someone dumb is dumb of you to even go there.

[SkyBane]

38 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Dumb??  Nonsense.  They may be lacking talent but calling someone dumb is dumb of you to even go there.

It was a metaphor. Just saying he's the best of a despicably bad unit.

[crazycolt1]

4 minutes ago, SkyBane said:

It was a metaphor. Just saying he's the best of a despicably bad unit.

I am glad you can speak for someone else. Makes things interesting.

[MacDee1975]

18 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Dumb??  Nonsense.  They may be lacking talent but calling someone dumb is dumb of you to even go there.

 

You can't seriously be this dim, can you?

[crazycolt1]

5 minutes ago, MacDee1975 said:

 

You can't seriously be this dim, can you?

If I called you and what you do dumb I guess you would like it? Ok.

[MacDee1975]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

If I called you and what you do dumb I guess you would like it? Ok.

 

So I guess the answer is a resounding "yes"

[NewColtsFan]

22 hours ago, JPFolks said:

What I would hope is he'd initially be pegged to start, but our Rookie draft pick would quickly overtake him moving him to depth.  He's the smartest kid in a very dumb class of OLB's right now.  You have to resign him because there aren't enough guys floating around in the offseason to fill the void.  He's not good enough to be a long term starter,but he may well be better than the 3rd, 4th or 5th guy they could possibly assemble by next year.  If we sign a solid FA to start for Mathis and draft a solid OLB, we better hope he quickly overcomes Walden.  

 

The odds of signing a "solid FA for Mathis" are small, because Mathis is the rush OLB,  and those guys command HUGE money in Free Agency.        The odds are more likely that we re-sign Walden to be the strong side guy for a year or two.

 

Draft a rush OLB in the first and hope he can start.    Sign a veteran FA guy for a modest contract and have him be the insurance guy behind the rookie.     Unless we think that Ayers can be that guy and I don't think we've seen enough yet,  but it doesn't seem likely.

 

I suspect we'll also draft another OLB with the goal that a year or two later he replaces Walden on the strong side.

 

 

[NewColtsFan]

On 10/28/2016 at 6:44 AM, ztboiler said:

It's a concern that we drafted Morrison in the first wave of the youth movement on defense....it's a much bigger concern if this staff leaves us in position for him to be the starter going into 2017.

 

Young players get better.     The game slows down for them.     They figure it out.    They get more reps in practice.   

 

Morrison will be better next year and even better in 2018.      At least,  that's the plan.

 

[NewColtsFan]

On 10/27/2016 at 6:13 PM, crazycolt1 said:

They didn't have a high caliber RB so what makes you think he didn't think that?

 

 

I don't know why,  but Gore's initial move was to sign with Philly.

 

We talked him out of it and he came to sign with Indy.

 

 

[COLTS449]

20 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

The odds of signing a "solid FA for Mathis" are small, because Mathis is the rush OLB,  and those guys command HUGE money in Free Agency.        The odds are more likely that we re-sign Walden to be the strong side guy for a year or two.

 

Draft a rush OLB in the first and hope he can start.    Sign a veteran FA guy for a modest contract and have him be the insurance guy behind the rookie.     Unless we think that Ayers can be that guy and I don't think we've seen enough yet,  but it doesn't seem likely.

 

I suspect we'll also draft another OLB with the goal that a year or two later he replaces Walden on the strong side.

 

 

 

We have to have a double digit sack EDGE rusher or 2 if we want a good defense and a good team. No matter how we get one we're gonna have to pay him one day. So with our need and with free agents like Nick Perry, Chandler Jones, and Melvin Ingram available why the heck wouldn't we throw buckets of money at one of them so we could fix our pass rush. Then still use our 1st rounder on an EDGE rusher. IMO It would be stupid for us not to do whatever it takes to sign one of those 3 guys.

 

As for the 2nd part of your post. (Sign a vet for a modest deal, etc) No offense NCF, but that's the kind of stupid stuff we've been doing that's got us in this mess. If somebody with some sense is running things this coming offseason there wont be anymore Trent Coles and Erik Walden's unless its as a cheap backup.

 

The thing is we can turn a weakness into a strength overnight, so why not do it. 60 million in cap room. Screwing around, signing nobodies, and being content waiting 3-4 years to contend is a really dumb strategy when you have a franchise QB capable of leading a team to a SB and 60 million in cap space. We have to do something different. Something that makes some sense if we want to go into next season as a top tier team, and contrary to what some may think.....We can go into next season as a top tier team if we hit big in the draft and bring in 2-3 impact free agents on D. No sense in wasting away another year of Lucks career when we could win now.

[COLTS449]

4 new starting LB's, a new CB, a new RB, and a GM and HC!!!!!

 

 

Notice I didn't say a new GM and HC. That's because we don't currently have either.

[crazycolt1]

2 hours ago, MacDee1975 said:

 

So I guess the answer is a resounding "yes"

You can try and start an argument all you care to. No thanks. I have to care about something enough to argue about it and what you say means absolutely zero to me.

[Colts_Fan12]

4 hours ago, MacDee1975 said:

 

You can't seriously be this dim, can you?

Actually he can....

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, COLTS449 said:

 

We have to have a double digit sack EDGE rusher or 2 if we want a good defense and a good team. No matter how we get one we're gonna have to pay him one day. So with our need and with free agents like Nick Perry, Chandler Jones, and Melvin Ingram available why the heck wouldn't we throw buckets of money at one of them so we could fix our pass rush. Then still use our 1st rounder on an EDGE rusher. IMO It would be stupid for us not to do whatever it takes to sign one of those 3 guys.

 

As for the 2nd part of your post. (Sign a vet for a modest deal, etc) No offense NCF, but that's the kind of stupid stuff we've been doing that's got us in this mess. If somebody with some sense is running things this coming offseason there wont be anymore Trent Coles and Erik Walden's unless its as a cheap backup.

 

The thing is we can turn a weakness into a strength overnight, so why not do it. 60 million in cap room. Screwing around, signing nobodies, and being content waiting 3-4 years to contend is a really dumb strategy when you have a franchise QB capable of leading a team to a SB and 60 million in cap space. We have to do something different. Something that makes some sense if we want to go into next season as a top tier team, and contrary to what some may think.....We can go into next season as a top tier team if we hit big in the draft and bring in 2-3 impact free agents on D. No sense in wasting away another year of Lucks career when we could win now.

 

In case you haven't noticed,  but most big name free agent signings do NOT pan out and pay off.    That's why most teams don't do it.

 

And most Colts expensive free agent signings have not panned out.   And a good number of our modest to middle class FA signings HAVE worked out.

 

Trent Cole was a bad signing.     Erik Walden has been a decent signing.    Which is why I expect to re-sign him for another year or two.

 

Look.....    I've been wrong plenty....   but I'm only telling you recent history...   both the colts and the NFL.

 

And Grigson has talked about going away from big free agent signings and building through the draft.

 

We're not going to wake up in a year and have a great defense.     It's going to take time.    It's not going to get built in one off-season.

 

 

 

[crazycolt1]

8 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

In case you haven't noticed,  but most big name free agent signings do NOT pan out and pay off.    That's why most teams don't do it.

 

And most Colts expensive free agent signings have not panned out.   And a good number of our modest to middle class FA signings HAVE worked out.

 

Trent Cole was a bad signing.     Erik Walden has been a decent signing.    Which is why I expect to re-sign him for another year or two.

 

Look.....    I've been wrong plenty....   but I'm only telling you recent history...   both the colts and the NFL.

 

And Grigson has talked about going away from big free agent signings and building through the draft.

 

We're not going to wake up in a year and have a great defense.     It's going to take time.    It's not going to get built in one off-season.

 

 

 

Exactly. Signing one high dollar free agent on the defense is not all of a sudden make this defense even average. Very few free agents are worth what they want. Most free agents become free agents for a reason. Underperforming, not worth the money they want or age pretty much covers it.

[braveheartcolt]

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

In case you haven't noticed,  but most big name free agent signings do NOT pan out and pay off.    That's why most teams don't do it.

 

And most Colts expensive free agent signings have not panned out.   And a good number of our modest to middle class FA signings HAVE worked out.

 

Trent Cole was a bad signing.     Erik Walden has been a decent signing.    Which is why I expect to re-sign him for another year or two.

 

Look.....    I've been wrong plenty....   but I'm only telling you recent history...   both the colts and the NFL.

 

And Grigson has talked about going away from big free agent signings and building through the draft.

 

We're not going to wake up in a year and have a great defense.     It's going to take time.    It's not going to get built in one off-season.

 

 

 

What you talking about......Albert Haynesworth.....

[SteelCityColt]

1 hour ago, braveheartcolt said:

What you talking about......Albert Haynesworth.....

 

I miss the days of the Redskins paying stupid money in Free Agency. 

[ztboiler]

9 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Young players get better.     The game slows down for them.     They figure it out.    They get more reps in practice.   

 

Morrison will be better next year and even better in 2018.      At least,  that's the plan.

 

Of course they do....and you know that's not the point.  

 

Morrison doesn't fit what the Colts say they want to become....and he certainly doesn't fit the modern game.  He can't tackle in space outside the tackles....and that isn't something he can do anything about physically to improve on.  He will always chase and dive at their ankles.  His ceiling is late career DQ Jax...that is not what this staff aspires to.  

 

He can improve and be serviceable depth, but the design for 2017 should not include him as a starter or it's a red flag.

[JPFolks]

11 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

The odds of signing a "solid FA for Mathis" are small, because Mathis is the rush OLB,  and those guys command HUGE money in Free Agency.        The odds are more likely that we re-sign Walden to be the strong side guy for a year or two.

 

Draft a rush OLB in the first and hope he can start.    Sign a veteran FA guy for a modest contract and have him be the insurance guy behind the rookie.     Unless we think that Ayers can be that guy and I don't think we've seen enough yet,  but it doesn't seem likely.

 

I suspect we'll also draft another OLB with the goal that a year or two later he replaces Walden on the strong side.

 

 

This is our last chance for the foreseeable future to sign one or two meaningful FA's.  The draft is risky at best especially with Grigson picking.  We need to find a FA Inside and Outside LB and draft an inside and outside LB.   If Ayers proves value the rest of this season, he and Walden would join those 4 new players and whoever else they can scrape up.  Unless they can find another Mathis in a late round (Grigson doesn't instill much confidence there) they may have to use this one chance to sign a rush LB in FA.  And that assumes one will even be on the market which is unknown but unlikely.  

[ColtsUrUs]

Let's be real my guy is just wasted space out there on the field. He's getting no pressure what so ever. And it's sad to watch. Colts should be looking for a lb asap or we'll be wasting a spot on in the playoffs. That's if we make it. 

[dgambill]

On 10/27/2016 at 10:12 PM, NewColtsFan said:

 

The chances of acquiring four new LB's are almost zero.

 

First, with all our needs, I doubt we go LB, LB in the first two rounds.     2nd, even if we did,  it's hard to also expect that we sign two starting caliber LB's as well.

 

Walden will likely return on a 1 or 2 year contract and be a strong-side starter.

 

We'll likely be looking for 3 starters.....     Morrison could be one.   Edwin Jackson could be one.    Our 1st round pick could be one.      A free agent draft pick could be one.

 

But four new guys ALL who come from off the roster right now is just not very likely at all.....

 

I agree. I think they want Morrison to start but Walden is a toss up if he comes back. He may not even want to. But two starters from rd 1 and 2 couldn't start? We have a UdFA from last year starting guard and what a 5th rd starting at rg and rt....along side a rookie center. Heck we even started blythe and had 3 rookies starting once this year. Two rookie LBs if they are top two picks. I got no problem going that route. At this point I have no problem going very young the next couple years and hoping to establish some good young players and build our future. Some pain for the next few years would be worth it if we build a contender and not an avg team that's warts are covered up by qb play to only get exposed in playoffs....ala early and late 2000 Colts.

[NewColtsFan]

7 hours ago, ztboiler said:

Of course they do....and you know that's not the point.  

 

Morrison doesn't fit what the Colts say they want to become....and he certainly doesn't fit the modern game.  He can't tackle in space outside the tackles....and that isn't something he can do anything about physically to improve on.  He will always chase and dive at their ankles.  His ceiling is late career DQ Jax...that is not what this staff aspires to.  

 

He can improve and be serviceable depth, but the design for 2017 should not include him as a starter or it's a red flag.

 

Huh?

 

No,  that's exactly my point.

 

And I find it astounding that you -- a fan -- thinks you can say that Morrison doesn't fit what the Colts say they want to become.     Who do you think drafted Morrison?     And the Colts think they stole him!      Now, they may be wrong, and you may be right,   but I think it's silly to make these kind of judgements based on a half a season.

 

I don't understand.....    you say you understand my point that Morrison will be better next year and the year after and yet you've already decided his ceiling is low,   and that the staff can't figure out that Morrison is the opposite of what they want.

 

I'm sorry,  but I don't understand this viewpoint at all....