Recommended Posts

Wondering if we might make a run at one of these guys now that the draft is over or if we're prepared to run with what we have.  Some good names still on this list and we have plenty of cash.  Of note, CJ Anderson is still out there and I know there are a lot of you that like him.  I'm intrigued by Bashaud Breeland at CB.  Thought he was decent at Washington and he's only 26.  Is he a fit in this scheme though?  What about Kayvon Webster?  What you DON'T see is a lot of tackles available.

 

http://nfltraderumors.co/top-2018-nfl-free-agents-list/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/6/2018 at 8:45 PM, AZColt11 said:

Wondering if we might make a run at one of these guys now that the draft is over or if we're prepared to run with what we have.  Some good names still on this list and we have plenty of cash.  Of note, CJ Anderson is still out there and I know there are a lot of you that like him.  I'm intrigued by Bashaud Breeland at CB.  Thought he was decent at Washington and he's only 26.  Is he a fit in this scheme though?  What about Kayvon Webster?  What you DON'T see is a lot of tackles available.

 

http://nfltraderumors.co/top-2018-nfl-free-agents-list/

 

Breeland is a zone corner so he is very much a scheme fit.   I hope he is healthy now and we sign him this week.

 

WR Darnelle Inman is also out there...   we  already showed interest and brought him to the facility...   I hope we sign him too.

 

And I'm in the camp for CJ Anderson...   but my instincts tell me that drafting two RBs probably means we won't sign Anderson.   But I hope we do as well.

 

These are three FAs who I'd love to sign and who would bring a young-veterans presence in the locker room and on the field..  

 

Big week for Ballard and the Colts...

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Breeland is a zone corner so he is very much a scheme fit.   I hope he is healthy now and we sign him this week.

 

WR Darrelle Inman is also out there...   we  already showed interest and brought him to the facility...   I hope we sign him too.

 

And I'm in the camp for CJ Anderson...   but my instincts tell me that drafting two RBs probably means we won't sign Anderson.   But I hope we do as well.

 

These are three FAs who I'd love to sign and who would bring a young-veterans presence in the locker room and on the field..  

 

Big week for Ballard and the Colts...

 

 

I'm all for Breeland, if healthy.

 

I can see Inman as a viable #2, but with having just drafted 2 WR's, one of which had a 2nd round grade by most, that may not happen.

 

I'm not in the CJ Anderson camp though. With the 2 RB's we drafted, Robert Turbin coming back from injury, and Christine Michael resigned, I don't see it doing anything but take carries away from our young players that need the reps.

 

We're not contending yet, so I don't think we necessarily need or would benefit from FA stop-gaps.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 Players that would assist

 

Navarro Bowman to MLB (Until the kids develop)

Breeland a true zone CB with talent (If healthy)

Eric Reid to SS (No more taking the knee ..........in writing, or game fine, and SIT him)

 

Eric Reid is a very good SS......... he needs to protest in other ways

 

These 3 make the roster better

 

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wouldn't surprise me to see him add a WR. Looking at the WR depth chart, if they keep 6 WRs, it's tough to imagine the Colts going into the season with two rookies and some PS player (like Listenbee).

 

CB is another spot I could see them adding. For someone that preaches depth and competition, there sure isn't a ton of it at the CB position. I think Breeland could definitely be a fit.

 

The other position I could see is OT. I wonder if Ballard would roll the dice on Greg Robinson. He's been a huge bust, but maybe the new coaches think they can get something out of him. Another option would be a vet like Austin Howard. There's also potential trade options...like the RT from MIA.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would bring in Bowman just so we have a veteran and a servicable player at the MLB position. It's looking pretty thin at the moment.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I saw where Anderson signed today with Carolina.  So he's out obviously.  Don't think anybody else on the list did, or else I missed it.  Really hoping they look hard at Breeland.

 

Personally, I don't mind bringing in a few older guys for that "vet presence" like Howard or Bowman on short term deals but it just doesn't seem to fit with the direction Ballard is going.  I think he's bound and determined to run with the younger guys, get them some experience, and keep building with younger players and draft picks.  That's why, to me, guys like Breeland make sense.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Nesjan3 said:

I would bring in Bowman just so we have a veteran and a servicable player at the MLB position. It's looking pretty thin at the moment.

not a fit for mlb in a cover 2, might be ok at sam

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Breeland and Inman. The 2 areas of greatest need. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2018 at 2:28 PM, Hoose said:

Breeland and Inman. The 2 areas of greatest need. 

Exactly the same 2 guys I'd like to see signed. I believe we'll be ok at WR but we could really use a solid corner.  I'd also really like another MLB with experience but we will have to trade or wait until cuts are made in order to get one, market is real thin in that area. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2018 at 5:03 PM, shastamasta said:

It wouldn't surprise me to see him add a WR. Looking at the WR depth chart, if they keep 6 WRs, it's tough to imagine the Colts going into the season with two rookies and some PS player (like Listenbee).

 

CB is another spot I could see them adding. For someone that preaches depth and competition, there sure isn't a ton of it at the CB position. I think Breeland could definitely be a fit.

 

The other position I could see is OT. I wonder if Ballard would roll the dice on Greg Robinson. He's been a huge bust, but maybe the new coaches think they can get something out of him. Another option would be a vet like Austin Howard. There's also potential trade options...like the RT from MIA.

Great call on Austin Howard!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Breeland and Jeremy Lane. If we sign both of them, we could do more with our defensive schemes, IMO. I know, it is a bit greedy on my part expecting that. :) 

 

Let the young WR corps grow together with some of Reggie's tutelage. TY, Chester, Cain, Fountain all bring something to the table along with the pass catching RBs and TEs, let us see how well they do together and how well they are utilized. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, rock8591 said:

Coby Fleener. Another red zone target.

Fleener couldn't pass a physical for the Saints so what makes you think he could here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2018 at 6:35 AM, crazycolt1 said:

Fleener couldn't pass a physical for the Saints so what makes you think he could here?

 

Not advocating bringing in Fleener but teams have different standards for medicals. Otherwise Brees would be in Miami and Grant in Baltimore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Finball said:

 

Not advocating bringing in Fleener but teams have different standards for medicals. Otherwise Brees would be in Miami and Grant in Baltimore.

Concussions are in a class all by themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though we have made a signing at RT, I would like to see an additional person brought in that might have a higher updside.

 

A midlevel guy, from 3 teams almost never, just becomes excellent

 

He is an improvemnt over last year, and with the massive upgrades at other spots on the OL, he might be enough..... but..... who knows

 

I still think we need a CB and a LB.......... to make even more competition.....

 

.02  

 

Deano

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2018 at 11:35 PM, crazycolt1 said:

Fleener couldn't pass a physical for the Saints so what makes you think he could here?

 

It's all technicalities and office politics who passes or fails a physical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rock8591 said:

 

It's all technicalities and office politics who passes or fails a physical.

Like I said earlier. Concussions are in a class all be themselves.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude, the guy has had 5 concussions in his football career.  And he still has symptoms from last year. Each time you have one it becomes easier with less  forceful blows to have more. Is that not self explanatory enough for you?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fleener's problems were far greater than the concussions. He had terrible feet in the open field. Went down at the slightest hit. Dropped key passes with distressing regularity. Lousy blocker. Just a significant disappointment in multiple ways. I'm sorry about his concussions. But they don't mask years of mediocrity. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the most part, FA's are asking too much for what they promise to deliver, and/or teams are only currently interested at looking at their youngsters.  Once camp cuts kick in, and if/when roster guys go down in pre-season, then teams will feel pressure to dial up some $$ FA's...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/13/2018 at 1:11 AM, horseshoecrabs said:

Dude, the guy has had 5 concussions in his football career.  And he still has symptoms from last year. Each time you have one it becomes easier with less  forceful blows to have more. Is that not self explanatory enough for you?

 

That's a lot of concussions for someone who has missed 5 games in the past 5 years combined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Colts do have two second-round picks in next years draft.

Trade both 2nd rounders and our 3rd for OBJ.

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, lollygagger8 said:

I'LL NEVER FORGET

fleener-0.gif?w=500&h=304

Makes me want to vomit. Wasn't that the game Moncrief had his coming out party?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hankins cut still bothers me. I'm afraid we'll be looking for his type. For a longtime. Says it was cause of scheme fit. He came from the Giants, and this is first year since they had LT that there going back to 3-4. Hankins last year with Giants had a top 5 run defense. Wasn't until Booger till Freeney had someone beside him to take a Guard/Center double.

Share this post


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

Makes me want to vomit. Wasn't that the game Moncrief had his coming out party?

 

I literally only remember that specific play unfortunately. Weird how the mind works lol 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Matabix said:

Hankins cut still bothers me. I'm afraid we'll be looking for his type. For a longtime. Says it was cause of scheme fit. He came from the Giants, and this is first year since they had LT that there going back to 3-4. Hankins last year with Giants had a top 5 run defense. Wasn't until Booger till Freeney had someone beside him to take a Guard/Center double.

 

We are no longer playing a two gap 3 - 4 Defense that needs a hulk Zero technique to command a double team and eat up space in the middle.  All our D linemen will essentially line up in the gaps off the shoulders of the Offensive line (single gap, penetrating alignment).  Team speed and excellent tackling is needed. Even on the D line. A big space eater is less important in this scheme.

 

I am more concerned about who can play MLB at the high level required? (think Brian Urlacher, Sean Lee, etc...) and an excellent penetrating 3 technique (Think Donald, McCoy type).  Also, we may use a 'joker' at the other DT, a one gap guy that can line up anywhere from 0 two gap (if needed, run teams and situations) to 3 tech. Does that guy exist on the team?  One who was previously was a 3-4 zero tech that is speedy, athletic, can penetrate and can play situational 0 - 3 Tech as needed?  Our DE's will be 5 tech or higher, WILL and SAM fill other gaps in run.  Eberflus was highly influenced by Monte Kiffin, Tony Dungy, and Rod Marinelli. 

 

So I expect something creative, but along these lines.

 

Because of the way the league is, (so many 11 and 12 personnel) I doubt we are in 4 - 3 base that often either.  I look for many Nickel, Big Nickel, and Dime, Big Dime packages to dominate as well.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

We are no longer playing a two gap 3 - 4 Defense that needs a hulk Zero technique to command a double team and eat up space in the middle.  All our D linemen will essentially line up in the gaps off the shoulders of the Offensive line (single gap, penetrating alignment).  Team speed and excellent tackling is needed. Even on the D line. A big space eater is less important in this scheme.

 

I am more concerned about who can play MLB at the high level required? (think Brian Urlacher, Sean Lee, etc...) and an excellent penetrating 3 technique (Think Donald, McCoy type).  Also, we may use a 'joker' at the other DT, a one gap guy that can line up anywhere from 0 two gap (if needed, run teams and situations) to 3 tech. Does that guy exist on the team?  One who was previously was a 3-4 zero tech that is speedy, athletic, can penetrate and can play situational 0 - 3 Tech as needed?  Our DE's will be 5 tech or higher, WILL and SAM fill other gaps in run.  Eberflus was highly influenced by Monte Kiffin, Tony Dungy, and Rod Marinelli. 

 

 

I would argue that Hankins could have played the DT spot as well as, or better than Al Woods or whoever the starter is.  You also have Ridgeway and Stewart who are big bodies like Hankins, and again I would still say Hankins has the better upside. Regardless I will say I trust in what Ballard does.  He has a solid plan and did not see the fit or did not want to pay him for this position. He would in my eyes though still be a "fit" based on the guys that are still factoring in to the roster for the d-line.

 

I agree about the MLB spot though.  Not sure if we have one on the roster right now, but I hope someone shows up. Hearing Skai Moore playing Mike in rookie camp was interesting but I am not sure he would be able to hold up.  He can easily gain about 5 or 10 pounds though and that would be huge. What about Leonard at Mike and Moore at Will? Then you have a Walker/various others that can come in at Sam.  I don't know it will be interesting come TC time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DaColts85 said:

I would argue that Hankins could have played the DT spot as well as, or better than Al Woods or whoever the starter is.  You also have Ridgeway and Stewart who are big bodies like Hankins, and again I would still say Hankins has the better upside. Regardless I will say I trust in what Ballard does.  He has a solid plan and did not see the fit or did not want to pay him for this position. He would in my eyes though still be a "fit" based on the guys that are still factoring in to the roster for the d-line.

 

Why do you think he would be better than all of the others?  Penetration, explosiveness, speed, and tackling are the qualities that get you out in front in this scheme. Now I'm interested in finding out the 10 yard split (in the 40), bench reps, vertical leap, broad jumps, and lastly, the 40 time of the D linemen.  Then I can tell who might have the 'leg up' on the others.  If the bench, vertical, and broad jump add up = > 70, they are explosive (Pat Kirwan #).

 

1 minute ago, DaColts85 said:

I agree about the MLB spot though.  Not sure if we have one on the roster right now, but I hope someone shows up. Hearing Skai Moore playing Mike in rookie camp was interesting but I am not sure he would be able to hold up.  He can easily gain about 5 or 10 pounds though and that would be huge. What about Leonard at Mike and Moore at Will? Then you have a Walker/various others that can come in at Sam.  I don't know it will be interesting come TC time.

 

I see the MIKE covering zone over the middle (7 yard drop or so) if he reads pass, and even a deep drop to middle safety area at times.   The Tampa 2 D is made to funnel everything underneath the MIKE (no crossing patterns behind the MLB).  He does have to take at least 1 step toward the LOS in case of a run, I understand. But I would like a more stout player, too.  If we have a 6-2" - 6'4" lb weighing between 245 - 255 lbs., runs 40 around 4.6, has a 1.60-1.65 10yd split, a 4.15 - 4 short shuttle and 6.9 ish 3 cone, hopefully with great instincts... lets plug that guy in @ MLB and see what happens. If we don't have that guy, we need to fixate on finding and getting him in some way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Matabix said:

Hankins cut still bothers me. I'm afraid we'll be looking for his type. For a longtime. Says it was cause of scheme fit. He came from the Giants, and this is first year since they had LT that there going back to 3-4. Hankins last year with Giants had a top 5 run defense. Wasn't until Booger till Freeney had someone beside him to take a Guard/Center double.

 

Gee whizz. We will never be looking for his type. You clearly don't get this D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

Why do you think he would be better than all of the others?  Penetration, explosiveness, speed, and tackling are the qualities that get you out in front in this scheme. Now I'm interested in finding out the 10 yard split (in the 40), bench reps, vertical leap, broad jumps, and lastly, the 40 time of the D linemen.  Then I can tell who might have the 'leg up' on the others.  If the bench, vertical, and broad jump add up = > 70, they are explosive (Pat Kirwan #).

 

I think that Hankins did a good job with penetration and giving the chance to "see ball, get ball" as everyone is saying I think he would do just fine.  He was not bad last year but yet lining him up on the shoulder would allow him a quicker step to get in and create havoc versus just trying to take the lineman into the gap and plug a hole. Again in my eyes I think he could have been fine, but I trust Ballard and his decision making abilities for sure.

 

20 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

I see the MIKE covering zone over the middle (7 yard drop or so) if he reads pass, and even a deep drop to middle safety area at times.   The Tampa 2 D is made to funnel everything underneath the MIKE (no crossing patterns behind the MLB).  He does have to take at least 1 step toward the LOS in case of a run, I understand. But I would like a more stout player, too.  If we have a 6-2" - 6'4" lb weighing between 245 - 255 lbs., runs 40 around 4.6, has a 1.60-1.65 10yd split, a 4.15 - 4 short shuttle and 6.9 ish 3 cone, hopefully with great instincts... lets plug that guy in @ MLB and see what happens. If we don't have that guy, we need to fixate on finding and getting him in some way.

In todays NFL and with what they are trying to move to I do not know if you will see to many of those types of MLB's on this roster.  You will probably see more guys around 6'0" - 6'3" and closer to 230 or 240 moving quick and covering a lot of field.  I also understand the basics of Tampa 2 and I see us running a variation of this but not the exacts.  Just my thoughts and opinions on that anyways.  I am still very curious on who the starting LB's will be though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speed is now seen as much more important given the multiple sophisticated passing attacks out there. A LB has to be able to cover. You cannot have a "pure thumper" type who can't stay with the TE or RB in pass coverage. Hence the move to lighter LBs who resemble large SS's. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Why do you think he would be better than all of the others?  Penetration, explosiveness, speed, and tackling are the qualities that get you out in front in this scheme. Now I'm interested in finding out the 10 yard split (in the 40), bench reps, vertical leap, broad jumps, and lastly, the 40 time of the D linemen.  Then I can tell who might have the 'leg up' on the others.  If the bench, vertical, and broad jump add up = > 70, they are explosive (Pat Kirwan #).

 

 

I see the MIKE covering zone over the middle (7 yard drop or so) if he reads pass, and even a deep drop to middle safety area at times.   The Tampa 2 D is made to funnel everything underneath the MIKE (no crossing patterns behind the MLB).  He does have to take at least 1 step toward the LOS in case of a run, I understand. But I would like a more stout player, too.  If we have a 6-2" - 6'4" lb weighing between 245 - 255 lbs., runs 40 around 4.6, has a 1.60-1.65 10yd split, a 4.15 - 4 short shuttle and 6.9 ish 3 cone, hopefully with great instincts... lets plug that guy in @ MLB and see what happens. If we don't have that guy, we need to fixate on finding and getting him in some way.

 

I could be wrong, but it's my sense of things that we want all our linebackers in the 235-245 range.    I don't see us signing or drafting someone heavier than that.  

 

While you want toughness, I think our  days of having a "thumper" are over.   Not sure what that means for someone like Morrison...   Ballard has given him some public praise after the draft.   He may be on our roster one more year either playing MIKE or SAM and then get phased out next year...   worth watching...

 

Share this post


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

 

I could be wrong, but it's my sense of things that we want all our linebackers in the 235-245 range.    I don't see us signing or drafting someone heavier than that.  

 

While you want toughness, I think our  days of having a "thumper" are over.   Not sure what that means for someone like Morrison...   Ballard has given him some public praise after the draft.   He may be on our roster one more year either playing MIKE or SAM and then get phased out next year...   worth watching...

 

 

So, what is your impression of Sean Lee?  What happened to the Cowboys when he went down with injury in 2017? How did their D fare when he played vs. being out?  What is his size/bio stats?

 

(Hint: Lee is not a Morrison 'thumper' type MIKE)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

So, what is your impression of Sean Lee?  What happened to the Cowboys when he went down with injury in 2017? How did their D fare when he played vs. being out?  What is his size/bio stats?

 

(Hint: Lee is not a Morrison 'thumper' type MIKE)

 

I understand the hint...

 

And doesn't that support my post?

 

Lee is around 240 and can move (when he's not hurt).

 

I see us using the high 2nd from the Jets next year (around 38-42) to take another LB for our unit.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I understand the hint...

 

And doesn't that support my post?

 

Lee is around 240 and can move (when he's not hurt).

 

I see us using the high 2nd from the Jets next year (around 38-42) to take another LB for our unit.

 

 

I have Lee at 6'2" 245 lbs....

 

Luke Kuechly is 6'3" and 238 lbs

 

D. Leonard is  6'3" 235 lbs...

 

Vander Esch is 6'4" 255 lbs... and solkid MIKE material.

 

It's not just size....

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.