Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Do you think the pass rush will be better this coming season?


RockThatBlue

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Vinatieri4 said:


I see what you are saying, but last season he got 0 sacks. Yes he was injured, but the NFL is a "what have you done for me now" type of league. For example: Peyton Manning went from 55 touchdowns, to 39 touchdowns to 9 touchdowns in 3 seasons. Arguably the greatest QB of all time, and has taken limited punishment. 

 

Langford is a defensive lineman, who literally has contact every single play he is on the field. Which makes you ask this question:  Is a player of his caliber (never GREAT but solid his career) worth keeping on the roster when you could clear up some cap, and also get young guys some more playing time. I think the smart thing to do is trade him for a 6th or 7th, or just cut him.

 

As for veteran talent, offensively we have: Luck, TY, Costanzo, Gore, and Doyle at each position group to help be a veteran presence. 

 

Defensively: Vonate Davis, Jabaal Sheared, and I would expect Henry Anderson to become more of a leader this season as well. 

So if you get hurt and they know you're hurt that equals cut after one season?  Henry Anderson didn't do squat last year either. What have you done for me lately?   If this was about what have you done for me lately with the staff then they would have gotten rid of him along with all the other aging vets they let go.  The Peyton Manning analogy doesn't fit because he had a serious neck injury. Langford had some stuff cleaned out of his knee.  It wasn't even a high level injury.    It's not wise to cut all of your veteran leadership. 

 

And what young guy will we be replacing him with.  Grover Stewart? Mcgill and Ridgeway are more 3 Technique than 5 Tech.   I don't see it.  If Kendall is healthy he'll be on the roster.  If you haven't noticed they've pretty much made sure they have 1 veteran on every level of the defense. Kendall on the D Line, Bostic in the LB corps, Vontae in the CB corps, and Butler in the S corps.  I don't think they want a complete group of newbies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, our_dbs_rock said:

I think will all depend on if the lbs can cover tight ends and running backs.

 

It seemed like they consistently gave up 10-15 yard plays in the middle of the field last year on short passes.

I think Hooker was a great pickup in that department 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, krunk said:

So if you get hurt and they know you're hurt that equals cut after one season?  Henry Anderson didn't do squat last year either. What have you done for me lately?   If this was about what have you done for me lately with the staff then they would have gotten rid of him along with all the other aging vets they let go.  The Peyton Manning analogy doesn't fit because he had a serious neck injury. Langford had some stuff cleaned out of his knee.  It wasn't even a high level injury.    It's not wise to cut all of your veteran leadership. 

 

And what young guy will we be replacing him with.  Grover Stewart? Mcgill and Ridgeway are more 3 Technique than 5 Tech.   I don't see it.  If Kendall is healthy he'll be on the roster.  If you haven't noticed they've pretty much made sure they have 1 veteran on every level of the defense. Kendall on the D Line, Bostic in the LB corps, Vontae in the CB corps, and Butler in the S corps.  I don't think they want a complete group of newbies.

 

Your comparison of cutting Anderson isn't valid.  Anderson is young and has potential and is still on the up rise. Langford is getting older, and did have an injury which only can expedite his "aging process as a player"

 

I would say Ridgeway, Anderson, and Hankins should be the starting defensive line.  I'm not opposed to Kendall being on the team by any means, but I just think we will see a significant drop in his play this season, so maybe it's best to rip the band-aid before that happens. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm optimistic.  But I'm knocking on wood because we need everyone to stay healthy and create a good rotation so everyone can stay fresh, and avoid injury.

 

One or two injuries, and our pass rush might be as bad, or worse than last year. :hide:

 

But even if we can't get to the QB before he throws it, hopefully the back-end of the D will be better than last year when the ball is in the air.  An extra interception or two can decide a game. :clover:

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.
  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Not really.   There's a theory that Ballard wants to draft an OL high because he said it's important to protect the QB, and Richardson was hurt last year. And the counter was that Richardson's injury/s probably aren't about the level of OL protection, and drafting an OL high wouldn't address that concern.
    • I'm thinking if we can trade to 8 or 9 and draft Odunze , we should do it if the price is reasonable. The value chart shows giving up P 15 and P 46 is the perfect number. Probably won't do it and I would think 2025 2nd for a 2024 4th added to the deal would make it work . That of coarse would depend on Atlanta or Chicago wanting to move to 15 . Obviously , as we all know , it takes 2 to make a trade.
    • I can too. And that will tell us everything we need to know about how the view him. It will tell us their feelings on the tight end room, and what direction they pick from there will tell us even more.    but if they take him at 15, we won’t know much about what might have happened, as they will be landing someone they had rated highly and fell to them. 
    • Glad that’s over…    if I wanted to argue about it, I would have responded far more in depth than pointing out how you were attempting to gaslight me. I did not. Meaning I was ending my part of whatever the argument was. You “putting a finality to it” and then listing bullet points tells me it was the argument you wanted all along, which makes sense why you brought Grigson up in the first place. Bait, hook, gaslight. Almost got me buddy. You are a funny guy, Doug 
    • Putting a finality on an argument you want to have.   There is a theory that Ballard won't draft a OL high because ARs injuries were not caused by a poor oline.  I felt it important to note that since Luck's major injuries were also not caused by his oline, Ballard could still want to improve it like he did in 2018 simply because AR is The Franchise. And its important to point that out because there has been a running (false) narrative for about 9 years that Luck's oline was the (main) reason for his injuries that kept him out of games.  The (false) narrative is based upon, IMO, a detest of Grigson, and not reality about the facts (or strong rumors) behind the kidney laceration and snowboarding shoulder. Therefore, mentioning Grigson and the (false) narrative was germain to the point about Ballard possibly drafting Oline high this draft to protect AR. Mentioning Grigson shouldn't trigger a CB vs RG discussion, unless people reading it are gaslighted by their own reading lens.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...