ty4atd

What the Colts have and still need on D

Recommended Posts

In part 1 of this post I wrote about the Colts offence and what players and positions do we have covered for next season and where do we need improvements. Now it's time to break down the D. Usually in my history as a Colts fan when I look at the roster it's the D that has made me mad and depressed, this year somehow they are the bright spot. That being said there is still much to improve on, but it hasn't been as brutal as I thought it might. Right now the Colts run a 3-4 but assuming Chuck is not brought back next year (please god) then they may change it up and that may complicate things as far as projections. I'm gonna assume that they stay in the 3-4 but also touch on which guys I think can be system flexible.
 
Int DL: It all starts in the trenches, where the big uglies do the dirty work so that everyone else can do their job. In the off-season Chris Ballard did a lot of retooling with the D and especially the line and it has paid off. Al Woods has been a coup at NT for Indy this season. Since switching over to the 3-4 the Colts have struggled to find a big man to command the middle. Woods is never going to put up pretty stats but he's done a great job of taking on double teams and not giving up ground in the run game. Woods and the man I'm about to mention next are big reasons why the Colts run D has been an above average and improving unit, he'll fit in next season as our nose in either the 3-4 or 4-3. The other new bigman Ballard was able to find during the off-season was Jonathan Hankins, he was our 1 kinda "big slash" in FA last year and he's been a beast. He signed a 3 year 27 million dollar contract and he's been worth every penny. Hankins is another guy who plays better than his stat line, especially working as a DE in our 3-4. But despite the little number, he's been putting in work stuffing the run, getting in pass lanes and pushing the pocket. He'll definitely be a big piece to our D and has even shown off he can excel in a 4-3, putting up 7 sacks with the Giants in in 2014. Henry Anderson is going to be a question mark heading into next season. When he's healthy he's a perfect 3-4 DE, he's long, athletic, gets off blocks well and can collapse the pocket. Unfortunately this will be his 3rd season and his 2nd where he landed on IR. His rookie year he was dominant for his first 9 games before tearing his ACL, last year he wasn't able to recover in time to start the season and you could see he was still getting his feet back under him. Then once again he was able to start off strong this season playing in 9 games before hurting his throat. 
giphy.gif?cid=dc79c3575a23b5bc4d2f38316f
Lucky for the Colts Anderson still has one year left on his rookie deal so they can see if he's able to bounce back before having to make a real commitment to him, but it's not something I would hang your hat on. If the Colts stay in the 3-4 I would look for the Colts to add a low end FA on a 1 year deal or a mid/late round rookie to compete with Anderson. But if they make the switch the a 4-3 the coaching staff may not see a great fit in camp for Anderson and make a move for a proven 4-3 DT. But for the most part I think the interior DL is looking very good for next year and may only need minor tweaks. 
 
Edge: Other than Hankins the other two major pickups Ballard made last off-season were Jabaal Sheard and John Simon. Both have been excellent additions that have helped to upgrade the Colts anemic pass rush. Getting "home" hasn't been a strength of Indy this year but they have definitely put more pressure on QBs this year than seasons before. Sheard so far is leading the Colts in sacks with 4.5 and Simon missed some time with a stinger but has 3 sacks in 8 games. As you can gather from those numbers they have been good at getting pressure but both Simon and Sheard are more complimentary pieces instead of dominant edge rushers that you build a D around. Sheard has already played and shown he can preform in a 4-3 as a DE and i believe Simon could as well and if not I believe he would make a good SLB that you can blitz and set the edge. Coming into the year I did have high hopes for Tarell Basham being able to show some potential as a 3rd rusher who could step up and be the guy in the future. He hasn't shown much so far this season to make the Colts think that is still the case, while it's still too early to give up on him you also can't count on him. I do think that if the Colts switched to a 4-3 that it would be a better fit for Basham as he does seem a little stiff rushing the passer and in space. hopefully next year he breaks out but I'm not holding my breath. Looking to the off-season FA pass rushers, especially top tier guys, make BANK!  And this year though I don't see many guys who I think will make it to FA who would be worth the price-tag. Someone to look at on a possibly cheaper deal though is if K.C doesn't resign Dee Ford, he could be someone the Colts look to add. So far this season he has been banged up and has only played in 6 games but last year rotating with Tamba Hali and Justin Houston he put up 10 sacks. With Ballard already knowing him and drafting him in K.C and his price-tag maybe being brought down by a injury riddled season Ford could be a perfect fit for what Indy is looking for. If Ford doesn't hit FA and the Colts come up empty in FA as far as edge rushers go then this is a draft class where they should definitely be able to find someone to step in and help. If they stay put and pick around #5 either Arden Key or Bradley Chubb would be my favorites to go in that spot. I've mentioned both in my previous draft blogs, Key I believe would fit the 3-4 better than Chubb but if the Colts make the switch Chubb has put himself in the convo for best D player in the draft with his play. If they miss out on Key and Chubb or go a different route in Rd.1 then someone like Sam Hubbard or Harold Landry in Rd 2. who might just get pushed down because of the depth in this year draft would be a real steal for Indy. My mid-round target as an edge rusher would be Sione Teuhema, he's 6-4 250lbs and has been a monster for Southeast Louisiana but if it weren't for off field concern that got him kicked out of LSU he might be a 1st round prospect, so if Ballard checked him out and felt comfortable with the man he could get a great player at a discount. I feel like with what Ballard was able to add last season the Colts have a good base for their edge rushers and just need a little boost and some depth and they will be set for the foreseeable future.
 
LBs: This is where is gets ugly, the Colts might have the worst off ball linebackers in the NFL. Antonio Morrison and Jon Bostic on a scale of 1-5 would get a -4, that picture sums up why......
b09c43_5f847bff5f254a3791e4b4dafaea857e~
Neither Morrison or Bostic can cover a TE or RB to save their lives,:edit:And for "2 down thumper LBs they don't even stop the run that well. This is a spot that the Colts NEED to improve before next season. In FA there are a couple of guys who I think could make it to the market and would be worth looking into for the Colts. My two favorite targets for the Colts are Avery Williamson and/or Demario Davis, but I don't think it's super likely that either hit the market. Stealing Williamson from the Titheads would be amazing for the D, it would give the Colts a man in the middle to get everyone set up and make the calls while hurting a division rival. Davis would also be a great target for the Colts as he has experience playing in a 3-4 and and is only 29 so he should still be able to play at a high level through the contract. Those two would be the guys I'd want the Colts to splurge on if that doesn't happen and they still want to add a FA LB Tahir Whitehead or Zach Brown are two more options who I think are a bit more likely to be had. Both would offer major improvements in pass coverage over any LB currently on the Colts while still being at least as good in run support. If the Colts look to the draft for an upgrade at LB there are a few guys I have my eye on. ILBs are becoming a position that teams are putting less and less emphasis on as the NFL keeps becoming more and more of a passing league, so teams aren't investing high picks like they used to, but guys like Luke Kuechly, Ryan Shazier and Sean Lee have been well worth the investment and would certainly go higher in a redraft. The only off ball LB I would consider in the 1st round in this upcoming draft is Roquan Smith. Smith has been awesome all season, but played like a man possessed in the SEC championship and was just given the Butkus award for best LB in college. Ideally if the Colts were to draft him it would involve a trade down 5-10 spots and adding some extra mid round picks. But if the Colts aren't able to find a trade partner and Smith is the player they want please Ballard don't worry about "positional value" and take him, I'm sick of watching trash linebacker play.
 
CB/S: So far this season the conerback and saftey play for the Colts has been up and down. Injuries have really hurt the secondary for the Colts this season, but they have been able to find some players to step up in others absence. Last year's first two picks in the draft for Indy were devoted to the secondary, Malik Hooker, the Colts 1st pick, started week 1 at FS and in 8 games before tearing his ACL & MCL snagged 3 INTs showing great range and play making ability. Quincy Wilson the 2nd rounder for Indy has had more of a up and down season. Wilson was able to start the season as the Colts #2 CB and seemed to be playing decent through 3 games, then he missed some time with an injury and has been in the coaching staff's dog house since. Wilson has been a healthy scratch the last 5 games and Pagano when asked about it said that Wilson needed to show more ST ability to dress on Sundays. I'm sorry but Chuck, this season is lost and your butt is probably fired once it's over so get the young guys out there and see what you have. Coming into the year I had high hopes that Hooker and Wilson would combine with Geathers and Davis to form one of the leagues best secondaries. Unfortunately Geathers has been hurt most of the year and only just returned and Davis was released so i'll have to wait for next season to hopefully get that great secondary I imagined. But it hasn't been all bad luck for in the secondary for the Colts, 5th rounder Nate Hairston has been an excellent find to play the slot, Rashaan Melvin in his 5th year in the league exploded and has played at a pro bowl level this year and out of nowhere Mathis Farley has played great as a replacement safety. Looking to the off-season Rashaan Melvin is a FA at the end of this year and Chris Ballard will need to decide if he thinks this season was a fluke or if he will pay him. I would be hesitant to give him a huge contract as this has been his only season of really high level play but if he would accept a 3-4 year deal with a team option after year 2 for around 7-8 mill a year sign him up Chris. If Ballard is able to keep Melvin and Hooker is able to recover in time to start next season I really think the secondary will be the strength of the Colts next year. If I'm right and Luck is able to bounce back and give the Colts a real offence, in today's passing NFL we've seen teams ride a hot secondary like "The Legion of Boom" and "No Fly Zone" to a SuperBowl. If the Colts aren't able to retain Melvin another CB will be needed in either FA or the draft. In the last few years we've seen CBs getting huge contract in FA so unless it's someone you are very confident in I think the draft is the way to go. The only FA CBs I would possibly look for the Colts to add would be Prince Amukamara or Malcolm Butler. I don't think either would break the bank and if there's no Melvin they could be the veteran in the secondary who shows the young guys how it's done. So looking to next season if they lock Melvin up or are able to add either of the FA I mentioned then the secondary looks good next year with Wilson and Hairtston holding down the other CB spots and Hooker, Geathers and Fairley at saftey. If they can't keep Melvin or add another veteran in FA then Minkah Fitzpatrick would be the only 1st round target I'd look into, on day two someone like LSU's Donte Jackson or FSU's Tavarus Jackson look like good outside CBs for the next level.
 
In conclusion weirdly enough I think the D going into next season is in better shape than the offence, I have never thought that as a Colts fan, it's strange. There are still some spots that need work, Indy needs not 1 but 2 ILBs and need depth on the edge to improve the passrush. But I think the DL and secondary are mostly set and may only need some minor tweaks, especially if Melvin is retained and Wilson is able to show off in the last 4 weeks.
 
Thank you for reading my post any comments are very much appreciated.
      
 
   
Edited by Nadine
offensive/inappropriate
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I havent had a chance to look at prospects but for both your posts I liked most of what you had to say as far as positions and what we need. Can you imagine Holton with Landry and a healthy luck back....ooo baby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, a06cc said:

We need a sideline to sideline ILB. A guy with speed to run the defense. 

I agree with that too, unless there is a real blue chip edge guy or OL at our spot I want a trade down a handful of spots and draft Roquan Smith. Since there are 3 QBs that could go top 10 I think we can find a trade partner and get a good haul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they keep Melvin and Wilson can develop a little he just needs to get better at playing the ball he's usually had tight coverage I think he can be really good, then corner is less of a need, if either of those things don't happen another CB would be great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the goal, though?  The needs on defense for what?  

 

It can't get much worse, so it might be better to break it down into:  What do they need to be top 20?  Top 15?  Top 10?  Championship level?  

 

If the goal is top 10 or championship level, what don't we need?  We need about 3-4 game changers and better quality and depth across the board.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, #12. said:

What is the goal, though?  The needs on defense for what?  

 

It can't get much worse, so it might be better to break it down into:  What do they need to be top 20?  Top 15?  Top 10?  Championship level?  

 

If the goal is top 10 or championship level, what don't we need?  We need about 3-4 game changers and better quality and depth across the board.

I think the answer is to be complementary to the offense and special teams.  I think there is enough history now to show there are many ways to be a good to great team, but you can't have any of the parts absolutely stink.  I think they need play makers, difference makers, for sure, as you mention.  But does that mean a top ten ranking?  So much depends on what the offense provides too - is Luck Luck next year, or a shell of himself?  Then the answer is the D better be the identity of the team.  If Luck is Luck, I hope for pass rushers and ball hawks.  There is never enough money or talent to have it all.  And in a year with a high pick, and a lot of FA money, there happens to be a moderate at best FA market, and a draft lacking top tier OL and fewer edge rushers than in previous drafts...  Not a great combo for Ballard based on what I'd think they're shopping for.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One legit pass rusher and a healthy squad would do wonders for this D.

 

I think Ballard will get the job done even better in year two. If he can get that pass rusher we're in business. Go D in the draft and go out and sign 2 G's in FA and then we're cooking with fire.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, IinD said:

One legit pass rusher and a healthy squad would do wonders for this D.

 

I think Ballard will get the job done even better in year two. If he can get that pass rusher we're in business. Go D in the draft and go out and sign 2 G's in FA and then we're cooking with fire.

 

 

Need another WR or two. TY and Chester and zilch after that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Hoose said:

Need another WR or two. TY and Chester and zilch after that. 

You gotta bring that to the other conversation about the O :)..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't read the whole thing but if everyone comes back healthy we need 2 ILB's, a CB, and a edge rusher to make this a solid defense.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2017 at 12:35 PM, GoColts8818 said:

They need a pass rusher more than anything else.

 

after that middle linebacker.

I think we can get away again with Scheard and Simon as our starters depth would be nice for sure, no way can we get away with our current ILBs next year. For that I think ILB is our biggest need but other than Roquan Smith I don't see a 1st round LB and I think we would need to trade down for him to be the right value pick. So for the draft if we stay put I think Chubb or Key would be better picks and hopefully FA or day 2 of the draft gets us help at ILB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ty4atd said:

I think we can get away again with Scheard and Simon as our starters depth would be nice for sure, no way can we get away with our current ILBs next year. For that I think ILB is our biggest need but other than Roquan Smith I don't see a 1st round LB and I think we would need to trade down for him to be the right value pick. So for the draft if we stay put I think Chubb or Key would be better picks and hopefully FA or day 2 of the draft gets us help at ILB.

Look at the Colts on third down this year and how bad they have been at getting off the field on third and Long.  They need help big time at pass rush.  Chubb would be my choice there and he’d play OLBer here in a 3/4.  

 

I agree they need help at ILBer.  Probably two more starters but with the other holes they have to fill that might be hard to come by.  

 

This is all assuming they stick with the 3/4 defense if they make an expected coaching change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the Colts need on defense are a couple difference makers . They need a couple of guys who they can build the defense around...guys who opposing offensive coordinators fear. Once you have them, they will make everyone else on the defense better.

 

This was really the downfall of Grigson...he didn't bring in difference makers on defense. Not that you are going to have a roster full of them but you have to have a couple of them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Look at the Colts on third down this year and how bad they have been at getting off the field on third and Long.  They need help big time at pass rush.  Chubb would be my choice there and he’d play OLBer here in a 3/4.  

 

I agree they need help at ILBer.  Probably two more starters but with the other holes they have to fill that might be hard to come by.  

 

This is all assuming they stick with the 3/4 defense if they make an expected coaching change.

I'm assuming they stick with the 3-4 and I agree 100% the pass rush needs to improve, I just think we at least have serviceable players on the edge but terrible players at ILB. I think a big part of our 3rd down problems is also because it's so easy for QBs to make quick dump offs to their back and TEs and our backers can't hang with them so easy first down and no time to get a sack. If they stick where they are picking Chubb or Key would be my choice because those are "elite" prospects where Smith is just a 1st rounder. But I also think this draft has more depth on the edge than ILB if they trade down slightly to pick say 10 and still get Smith I think in rd 2 they could still get someone like Sam Hubbard, Harold Landry or one of the Clemson guys plus what ever picks they get in the trade and I think that would be better value than just Chubb and the next best ILB. All of this can change after FA but for now I think without better ILBs this D has no chance of being above average.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We absolutely must bring in at least 4 Linebackers: One of them has to have the ability to rush the passer and finish. 3 ILBs are needed with two having the ability to cover....

If we can find those guys (at a minimum), the defense will improve immensely in 2018. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Carlos Danger said:

We absolutely must bring in at least 4 Linebackers: One of them has to have the ability to rush the passer and finish. 3 ILBs are needed with two having the ability to cover....

If we can find those guys (at a minimum), the defense will improve immensely in 2018. 

 

 

 

That would be great but this isn't Madden you can't just build a team with great players at every spot. Our OLBs are decent just need depth so they can rotate and they aren't dead by then end of the game. 3 ILBs aren't needed Morrison Bostic or Walker can be decent backups, 1 is NEEDED and 2 would be very nice. With all the other needs a 2nd CB, pass rush depth, the OL, another WR and RB 4 linebackers just isn't happening. For 2018 I think the best we can hope for on D is a new rookie ILB to go with a vet in FA and either a depth OLB on day 2 of the draft or a new top dog at the top of round 1. Even with 2 new starters at LB either 2 ILB or 1 ILB and 1 OLB and actually staying semi healthy I think the D will improve big time.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 ILBs, 1 more pass rusher. 

 

After that assuming we dont don’t lose people and guys come back healthy, I’m good with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch some game film on Clelin Ferrell. Alittle raw, but has great hand usage and speed off the edge. Won’t mind Colts drafting him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, a06cc said:

Watch some game film on Clelin Ferrell. Alittle raw, but has great hand usage and speed off the edge. Won’t mind Colts drafting him. 

I do like him I forgot his name and was too lazy to look it up but he's one of the Clemson guys who I think could slide to rd 2 and I'd be all over him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ty4atd said:

I do like him I forgot his name and was too lazy to look it up but he's one of the Clemson guys who I think could slide to rd 2 and I'd be all over him.

I have a feeling he’ll be a sleeper pick. The way he uses his hands is unreal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Colts need ILBs and safeties that can cover on every down and are great tacklers. 

 

They need two more pass rushers for sub packages.  Pass rushers gassed anyway if they play every down.

 

The front DL seems capable of handling the run....for a change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, our_dbs_rock said:

How do you know what the Colts need, when you don't even know what type of defense the new coach will want to use next year?

Did you read the post? I know we may change alignments I based our needs assuming we are staying in a 3-4 but tried to touch on where guys might play if we change it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, our_dbs_rock said:

How do you know what the Colts need, when you don't even know what type of defense the new coach will want to use next year?

Ballard will insist and be a fool not to stay with the same base D, if he wanted to hire a coach that prefers a defensive scheme other than the 3-4 base that he has started to build. Going to a 4-3 base coach would be Ballard saying, the last 6 years of talent (if you can call it that ) has been a waste....were cutting everyone hiring a 4-3 coach and starting over. We would go from 3 or 4 guys needed to fill out this defense to needing 10 or 11 to fill it out. Now the next guy might utilize some of the 3-4 schemes differently, but the general talent set will be similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, crunked said:

Ballard will insist and be a fool not to stay with the same base D, if he wanted to hire a coach that prefers a defensive scheme other than the 3-4 base that he has started to build. Going to a 4-3 base coach would be Ballard saying, the last 6 years of talent (if you can call it that ) has been a waste....were cutting everyone hiring a 4-3 coach and starting over. We would go from 3 or 4 guys needed to fill out this defense to needing 10 or 11 to fill it out. Now the next guy might utilize some of the 3-4 schemes differently, but the general talent set will be similar.

That is very far from true. The secondary would stay the same in a 3-4 or 4-3 Hankins, Woods Anderson could at be DTs in a 4-3, Scheard has played DE and Simon could be a SLB in a 4-3 the needs would be similar.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ty4atd said:

That is very far from true. The secondary would stay the same in a 3-4 or 4-3 Hankins, Woods Anderson could at be DTs in a 4-3, Scheard has played DE and Simon could be a SLB in a 4-3 the needs would be similar.

Look they are all athletes and professional ones at that.....so yes they could....but you would have to convince me that guys who are performing at avg. or slightly above in the current scheme would perform better in an alternate scheme. Although I would agree that this coaching staff is far from brilliant at developing talent, I would argue that they "should" know better than you and I what their strengths are, and Ballard would not sign/Pagano would not put a player in a position that diminishes his talent just for sake of defensive scheme 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ty4atd said:

That is very far from true. The secondary would stay the same in a 3-4 or 4-3 Hankins, Woods Anderson could at be DTs in a 4-3, Scheard has played DE and Simon could be a SLB in a 4-3 the needs would be similar.

Agreed.

 

Hankins Woods Anderson Ridgeway DTs.  Hunt/Sheard (or maybe Anderson/Ridgeway) at LDE.  Draft Chubb at #3 for RDE and sign a FA backup.  Draft Roquan Smith at #35 ( if he lasts that long) to play WILL.  Simon at SAM. Maybe get by with Bostic/Morrison at MIKE.   Draft or sign a new SS and keep Farley/Hooker for FS.  CBs are fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said the secondary needs would be the same 4-3 or 3-4 so that's 4 out of 11 starters really 5 since the nickle plays so much. Hankins had his best season in a 4-3 and Woods would be a fine NT Scheard has had similar success in both schemes so that's 6/7 out of 11 I already said we could use a pair of ILBs but in a 4-3 it would just be a MLB and WLB. Upgrading on Simon as a 3-4 old would be nice but as a SLB/DE in a 4-3 I believe he would be just as good as he is now so 7/8 of 11. The only new need that might spring from changing to a 4-3 is a UT if they want Hankins on the nose and don't think Anderson could make the transition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Ballard knew he might get a 4-3 guy so he got scheme versatile players last year. Hankins, Scheard, Hooker and Wilson can all play in a 4-3 or 3-4 and he hasn't played in a 4-3 yet but I'm sure Simon could find a role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crunked said:

Ballard will insist and be a fool not to stay with the same base D, if he wanted to hire a coach that prefers a defensive scheme other than the 3-4 base that he has started to build. Going to a 4-3 base coach would be Ballard saying, the last 6 years of talent (if you can call it that ) has been a waste....were cutting everyone hiring a 4-3 coach and starting over. We would go from 3 or 4 guys needed to fill out this defense to needing 10 or 11 to fill it out. Now the next guy might utilize some of the 3-4 schemes differently, but the general talent set will be similar.

We’re in a 4-3 alignment 60% of the time anyways. Our 3-4 has always been a myth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Defjamz26 said:

We’re in a 4-3 alignment 60% of the time anyways. Our 3-4 has always been a myth. 

 I am just not convinced you get "Better" play out of Hankins, Woods, Simon, Anderson, and Sheard by switching schemes. Or maybe more correctly stating going from Hybrid to strictly a 4-3......in a simple way to say it.......Someone will have to convince me that we get better play out of those guys with the switch. I don't see it, I see same but different performance and stat totals and results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, crunked said:

 I am just not convinced you get "Better" play out of Hankins, Woods, Simon, Anderson, and Sheard by switching schemes. Or maybe more correctly stating going from Hybrid to strictly a 4-3......in a simple way to say it.......Someone will have to convince me that we get better play out of those guys with the switch. I don't see it, I see same but different performance and stat totals and results.

That wouldn’t be why you make the switch. Most of the guys you listed are stop gap guys anyways. You’d make the switch for the future. Plus the next coach shouldn’t be hand cuffed to the 3-4 since it’s not like our personnel is specifically suited for it.

 

Most guys will tell you that there isn’t a benefit to either scheme but there is when it comes to team building through the draft. Most defensive prospects comeing out come from a 4-3 and are more suited for it in the pros. Think about it. When is the last time the top edge rusher coming out was ideally suited for a 3-4? Most of these guys are coming into the draft at 6’4” 275+ pounds, which is ideal 4-3 DE weight. That’s also why the combine has LB conversion drills (Which Myles Garrett participated in and didn’t look good).

 

If the Colts switch to a 4-3, they make drafting and finding scheme fits a lot easier for the next coach. If we switch to a 4-3, you could draft Chubb without a 2nd thought and Basham came from a 4-3 as well. You’d already have 2 young 4-3 DEs for the future right there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, crunked said:

 Someone will have to convince me that we get better play out of those guys with the switch. I don't see it, I see same but different performance and stat totals and results.

So if you see the same performance and results then why would it be going backwards, like you implied, to move from a 3-4 to a 4-3 if the new coaches preferred that system?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, crunked said:

 Going to a 4-3 base coach would be Ballard saying, the last 6 years of talent (if you can call it that ) has been a waste....were cutting everyone hiring a 4-3 coach and starting over. 

we wouldnt have to cut every body

 

the dline would be fine except for maybe anderson.  simon could play one of the line backer spots in a 4-3

 

i dont know about sheard as an every down defensive end, but he could do it on passing downs.  he would be the biggest hang up in my opinion, but he has also played well in a 4-3 before, just not all of the time 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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

    • Yep...all I was saying was that it was a little concerning how they decided to pay everyone but him. I'm sure they have their reasons....obviously he has played great this year to make all-pro. I just had some concerns about him and what he may be asking for...along with the fact that Carolina (minus Cam) was absolutely awful running the ball this year.
    • First, we should acknowledge that the Jaguars might actually be good this year.  Not to say that they don't have flaws, but there team matches up well with Pittsburgh.  As far as the Steelers losing to inferior teams that me be the case but I don't think a team that averages 11-12 wins a year in the last 5 that is really a problem.  I can say the same thing for the Patriots.  They obviously lose to lesser teams because they've only had one undefeated season and are almost always the favorite.  They seem to lose to the Dolphins and Chiefs every year or so but it's no big deal.   Now the perception of the team being out of control because of outspoken players and guys making Facebook videos is way overblown.  Those same guys put in MVP performances week in and week out.  Tomlin has also went through an entire team, staff and scheme overhaul and has NO LOSING SEASONS in 11 years as coach.  They lost Dick LeBeau, Troy Polamalu, Jerome Bettis, Bruce Arians, Hines Ward, Joey Porter, and the list goes on and on.  They went from 3-4 "Blitzburgh" to a 4-3 "Dungyburgh" zone.  They went from bombs away Arians to dink and dunk Haley.  They move on from WR after WR from Superbowl MVP WRs to MVP candidate WRs.  And through all of that the team wins and is in contention.  He also develops talent quite well.  The Steelers don't have many "wasted" high picks and they've developed low picks like Antonio Brown or Villenueva.   I think his in game decision making is questionable at times but I'm not blaming the HC for the calls that the OC and DC make on 4th down or on critical 3rd downs.  I blame the HC for going for it on 4th or calling onside kicks or the big decisions.  Once they make the call the coordinators pick the play.  This perception of control or ruling with an iron fist is totally overrated and archaic.  These guys (especially the millennials) are going to more and more push back against that.  You don't always get the most out of people by keeping your thumb on them.  Sometimes working with them and letting them be themselves yields the best results.  Everyone is different.
    • And Monachino was an instant upgrade over Maunsky And Manusky was an instant upgrade over Coyer And Coyer was an instant upgrade over Meeks  And Meeks was an instant upgrade over Fangio.   He seems like he could be good but the last good DC the Colts had was Meeks.
    • http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/9919/andrew-norwell   thought I'd pass this along.    
    • I like the fact that he appears to be bringing in coordinators who are not retreads.  Coaches on the rise who are hungry and ready to prove themselves.  Brings a new mindset and enthusiasm to the organization.  A lot of the OC's and DC's that are making lateral moves, or moves back into a position they held previously are just trying to stay employed.  I always wondered why an OC or DC from a sub-.500 team would draw any interest from other organizations.  Why hore someone from a losing team if you're trying to build a winner?  I know the losing wasn't all their fault, but success breeds success...go out and hire coaches who come from winning organizations.  They must have been at least a part of that success.
  • Members

    • Swan Ronson

      Swan Ronson 169

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • newb767

      newb767 27

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NewColtsFan

      NewColtsFan 13,983

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Clem-Dog

      Clem-Dog 239

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • BlueShoe

      BlueShoe 3,123

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • deedub75

      deedub75 965

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • MFT5

      MFT5 202

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • IinD

      IinD 1,273

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Mr. Irrelevant

      Mr. Irrelevant 799

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NewEra

      NewEra 2,401

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active: