Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Drafting a RB to help our Defense?


Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, KB said:

I agree with a running game being helpful to the defence but there is one problem with it in regards to our team, and Dallas and Seattle have proven this point. You need a solid secondary to make it work and we don't have one. With Elliot Dallas was able to do as stated above but when it came to the playoffs they were not able to hold good passing attacks at bay well enough. Allowing the other team to be able to win. Now Seattle a couple years ago was able to maximize Marshawn lynch's value because he could run over them and then they were not able to pass easily due to the legion of boom.

 

This means for this to work, this year, we will have to hit on a fist round CB, mid round RG,  a mid-late round RB, and sprinkle in a slot corner/ groomball FS in there. Not just draft but hit the nail on the head. That's unlikely that four draft picks work out like that year one. We can build towards this but that's a couple years down the road. 

If we did draft one of the big 3 RB's in the 1st. rd. the liklihood of drafting a starting CB in rd. 2 is pretty high considering how deep the class is.  A mid round RG is probably doable as well.  We did sign a couple of young ER's in FA who I think are better than what we had.  And Hankins is going to be a big add to the NT position which will also help our LB's.  If we do take one of the top RB's in the first I think CB can still add some starting talent with the subsequent picks.  I don't think it's all gloom and doom just because we might take a RB 1st.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

One thing you didn't bring up. Dallas spent high picks on their O-line while Grigson couldn't hit on the talent level that even came close as to what Dallas has. Any decent RB on the Dallas roster will look real good.

 

 

All that you've written here is true....     completely true....    but it doesn't fully explain the Dallas success.

 

All you have to do is look at their last 3 years....

 

2014:    The RB was DeMarco Murray and the Cowboys went 12-4.   Their defense was off the field for something like 12 fewer plays a game than in 2013.     I think Murray ran for nearly 1700 yards.

 

2015:    The RB was Darren McFadden and the Cowboys went 4-12.    McFadden rushed for roughly 1100 yards,  so he did pretty well,   but it just wasn't the same and the poor Dallas defense was exposed.

 

2016:     The Cowboys draft Zeke and about 1650 yards later,  the Cowboys, still with a poor defense,  go 12-4 again.      And their defense is protected again.

 

So,  the Cowboys have now done this twice in the last 3 years and with different running backs.     Yes,  their OL can make anyone look good.      But it's not just a matter of running,  you have to run extremely well.    Dominate Time of Possession.     Keep the other team's offense off the field.     It's easier said than done.

 

But noting the Dallas O-line success is the reason that some posters here want the Colts to draft Forrest Lamp.   With a great OL,   the Colts could do most anything they wanted....

 

Sorry this post went so long....     I wanted to address all the points....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

If we did draft one of the big 3 RB's in the 1st. rd. the liklihood of drafting a starting CB in rd. 2 is pretty high considering how deep the class is.  A mid round RG is probably doable as well.  We did sign a couple of young ER's in FA who I think are better than what we had.  And Hankins is going to be a big add to the NT position which will also help our LB's.  If we do take one of the top RB's in the first I think CB can still add some starting talent with the subsequent picks.  I don't think it's all gloom and doom just because we might take a RB 1st.  

Honestly it is what it is with a RB in the first or any player they choose throughout the draft. I could live with a first round RB if he is BPA.  There are multiple guards to be had in the mid rounds that could solidify the o line if they work out and yes a starting cb can be found in the second round. All those picks would have to work out greatly though. If most our picks  work out then all praise be to Ballard but realistically 3 starters is a good draft let alone good ones.

 

The FAs we picked up could defiantly help this defense out but I don't know how good out secondary is gonna be with the look of multiple rookies, and as BOTT mentioned the pass rush is still an important need as well. We don't need a first year starter there but at least someone with good pass rush ability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Oldschoolcolt19 said:

A great RB can have a tremendous effect on a defense. By allowing them to sit while time of possession becomes real game changer.Opposing offenses will be forced to become one dimensional as the game progress's, and as Don Shula used to say" three things can happen when you throw the ball and two of them are bad"

We didn't really have a time of possession problem though did we?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

 

All that you've written here is true....     completely true....    but it doesn't fully explain the Dallas success.

 

All you have to do is look at their last 3 years....

 

2014:    The RB was DeMarco Murray and the Cowboys went 12-4.   Their defense was off the field for something like 12 fewer plays a game than in 2013.     I think Murray ran for nearly 1700 yards.

 

2015:    The RB was Darren McFadden and the Cowboys went 4-12.    McFadden rushed for roughly 1100 yards,  so he did pretty well,   but it just wasn't the same and the poor Dallas defense was exposed.

 

2016:     The Cowboys draft Zeke and about 1650 yards later,  the Cowboys, still with a poor defense,  go 12-4 again.      And their defense is protected again.

 

So,  the Cowboys have now done this twice in the last 3 years and with different running backs.     Yes,  their OL can make anyone look good.      But it's not just a matter of running,  you have to run extremely well.    Dominate Time of Possession.     Keep the other team's offense off the field.     It's easier said than done.

 

But noting the Dallas O-line success is the reason that some posters here want the Colts to draft Forrest Lamp.   With a great OL,   the Colts could do most anything they wanted....

 

Sorry this post went so long....     I wanted to address all the points....

 

 

2014 Cowboys had healthy Romo as QB.

 

2015 it was mostly Matt Cassel/Brandon Weeden.

 

2016 Dak Prescott who had one of the best rookie years for QB ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

So,  the Cowboys have now done this twice in the last 3 years and with different running backs.     Yes,  their OL can make anyone look good.      But it's not just a matter of running,  you have to run extremely well.    Dominate Time of Possession.     Keep the other team's offense off the field.     It's easier said than done.

 

 

 

That only works if a) your QB has the respect that they keep 2 safeties deep most of the time (that is why Addai and Rhodes were able to run well in our 2006 SB run, not to mention Peyton converted a lot of 3rd downs passing that year) or b) your D keeps the game close enough for the run to matter and not get away. Still, your QB and O-line need to be able to move the chains any which way they can.

 

The Packers playoff game got away from the Cowboys in a hurry, so Zeke and their running game became less of a factor. While LeVeon Bell became less of a factor after his injury, the Steelers would still have had to abandon their run game due to their deficit vs the Patriots in the AFCCG.

 

The only team that kept it interesting was the Falcons, who had 2 quality backs that had their own strengths plus the fact that Matt Ryan could spread it around in the passing game.

 

IMO, being balanced and being able to spread the ball around in the passing game to keep the O on the field is far more important than a dominant run game. So, being able to find the role players to mix and match on the field with the run and pass, is far more important than hedging bets on one department of the offense. Patriots, Packers both use the short pass for the run game just as effectively to move the chains, so it is definitely not a "must" to have that dominant O-line for that run game. If anything, when you run into a top notch run D like the Ravens etc., you need the ability to throw 50 times in order to change up your offensive game plan on any given week and thus balance is far more important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Finball said:

 

2014 Cowboys had healthy Romo as QB.

 

2015 it was mostly Matt Cassel/Brandon Weeden.

 

2016 Dak Prescott who had one of the best rookie years for QB ever.

 

All true.   Good points.

 

But to Prescott,  without saying any negative about him,  because he's clearly tremendous,  but had the benefit of the NFL's number one line.     He had a top-5 RB,  a top-5 WR,   a top-10 and future Hall of Fame tight end,  and a top-10 slot WR....

 

In other words, Prescott fell into the best situation any rookie QB in NFL history has ever been dropped into.   It couldn't have worked out more perfectly for him.       That helps a TON!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

 

That only works if a) your QB has the respect that they keep 2 safeties deep most of the time (that is why Addai and Rhodes were able to run well in our 2006 SB run, not to mention Peyton converted a lot of 3rd downs passing that year) or b) your D keeps the game close enough for the run to matter and not get away. Still, your QB and O-line need to be able to move the chains any which way they can.

 

The Packers playoff game got away from the Cowboys in a hurry, so Zeke and their running game became less of a factor. While LeVeon Bell became less of a factor after his injury, the Steelers would still have had to abandon their run game due to their deficit vs the Patriots in the AFCCG.

 

The only team that kept it interesting was the Falcons, who had 2 quality backs that had their own strengths plus the fact that Matt Ryan could spread it around in the passing game.

 

IMO, being balanced and being able to spread the ball around in the passing game to keep the O on the field is far more important than a dominant run game. So, being able to find the role players to mix and match on the field with the run and pass, is far more important than hedging bets on one department of the offense. Patriots, Packers both use the short pass for the run game just as effectively to move the chains, so it is definitely not a "must" to have that dominant O-line for that run game. If anything, when you run into a top notch run D like the Ravens etc., you need the ability to throw 50 times in order to change up your offensive game plan on any given week and thus balance is far more important.

 

Good post...

 

I think the ability to spread the O around on the field and having a dominant run game are equally as important.     I'm not sure I'd put one before the other.

 

But,  as I noted to another poster, but it's worth repeating.....    in the history of the NFL,  I'm not sure any rookie QB benefited from his surroundings any more than Prescott. 

 

The number one OLine.

A top 5 RB

A top 5 WR

A top-10 slot WR

A top-10 and future Hall of Fame TE.

 

Prescott was completely surrounded by great talent and it all feeds off each other.   All of that helps not just Prescott,  but Elliott too.     He also benefited from the talent around him.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Finball said:

 

2014 Cowboys had healthy Romo as QB.

 

2015 it was mostly Matt Cassel/Brandon Weeden.

 

2016 Dak Prescott who had one of the best rookie years for QB ever.

And McFadden was a has been prior to his arrival in Dallas.  And even with dreadful QB play he put nice numbers in Dallas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, we shouldn't go RB because we don"t have the O-line to make him look good, but then we don't want to go O-line either because, apparently, we're all set there... even though we can't run the ball and are poor in pass protection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, #12. said:

Okay, we shouldn't go RB because we don"t have the O-line to make him look good, but then we don't want to go O-line either because, apparently, we're all set there... even though we can't run the ball and are poor in pass protection.

No, we shouldn't take a running back in the first because they don't have positional value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stitches said:

By some metrics our O-line was among the best in the league on running downs. They were creating a lot of space and a lot of yards before contact, but our Rbs were unable to capitaliza and break off big gains.

 

This is true, and important to remember. 

 

Honestly our biggest weakness was in pass protection, not run blocking. If we were to take an O-Lineman in the first, I'm more concerned about getting a great pass blocker. Haeg, Clark, Good, Kelly, and Mewhort have statistically been excellent in the run blocking department.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...