Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Top FA's Still Available


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

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....

 

I understand it's not just size...   I was implying that when you referenced their size...

 

If they're not going to be too big, then they're going to be something else....   they're going to be fast and quick and more athletic...

 

And three of the four linebackers you referenced are within the size parameters I referenced...

 

This is a head scratching exchange...   the second in two days.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I understand it's not just size...   I was implying that when you referenced their size...

 

If they're not going to be too big, then they're going to be something else....   they're going to be fast and quick and more athletic...

 

And three of the four linebackers you referenced are within the size parameters I referenced...

 

This is a head scratching exchange...   the second in two days.

 

 

You 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."

 

Isn't Urlacher, Sean Lee, and Vander Esch all at the upper end or above that threshold? Speed an quickness isn't just about lower weight.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"This is a head scratching exchange...   the second in two days."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

OK, what was the other?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

You 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."

 

Isn't Urlacher, Sean Lee, and Vander Esch all at the upper end or above that threshold? Speed an quickness isn't just about lower weight.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"This is a head scratching exchange...   the second in two days."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

OK, what was the other?

 

Apologies...   this post will be long to address all the issues in play here.   No way around this...   so here we go...

 

Where did Urlacher mention come from?

 

You listed four backers and Urlacger wasn't one of them.    You listed Lee, Leonard, kueckly and Vander Esh.    The first three are between the 235-245 range I described.   Only Vander Esch is outside the weight range and he's an athletic freak.

 

Im sorry I didn't literally state the speed and other athletic requirements.   I thought that was implied by both the weight reference and the comment about "no more thumper."    I should have stated that  so as to be clear.

 

As to the other head scratcher...    you picked out a post of mine from November about Walter Football where I said I don't think they have a good reputation.   You noted they got the Connor Williams pick right.   As if that makes me wrong.   As if the one pick you noted gives them a good reputation.   What I objected to was back in November when I made my post WF said Williams could go between rounds 2-4.    That's 100 picks!   A spread of one hundred picks!  My dead mother can safely make that projection.   That was November.

 

Even on the day before the draft they had Pitt O-tackle Brian O'Neill going between rounds 1-3.   Again 100 picks!   You can pull a homeless person off the street, and give him 10 minutes on the internet and he can figure out ONeill could go in those 100 picks.  That's what I mean about not a good reputation.

 

I just don't understand the need to point out where posters were wrong and others were right?   No one is right or wrong all the time.   But making comments about players being projected too high or low is one of the most popular posts on this website.   Are we doing away with them?   If not, then I don't understand the need to point out where posters were right or wrong.   What's to be gained?

 

Again.....    sorry this post went so long..... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

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

You clearly where a Colts fan after 2006. Wasn't until Booger was here did teams stop pulling guard/tackle double off of Freeney. Plus Hankins came from 4-3. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Matabix said:

You clearly where a Colts fan after 2006. Wasn't until Booger was here did teams stop pulling guard/tackle double off of Freeney. Plus Hankins came from 4-3. 

Yes....   Hankins came from a 4-3...   but he didn't like it and it's one if the reasons he signed with the Colts in 2017,  we were running a 3-4 which is what he wanted to play in....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Booger Mcfarland and Hankins are the same type of athlete and play style.  Plus Mcfarland had years of experience in the exact systems we ran before he even came to be a Colt.  Mcfarland moved and shot gaps better than Hankins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Apologies...   this post will be long to address all the issues in play here.   No way around this...   so here we go...

 

Where did Urlacher mention come from?

 

Because he was mentioned by stats, not name(s) when I said this here-

 

"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."

 

These are Urlacher/Lee type numbers.

 

Quote

You listed four backers and Urlacger wasn't one of them.    You listed Lee, Leonard, kueckly and Vander Esh.    The first three are between the 235-245 range I described.   Only Vander Esch is outside the weight range and he's an athletic freak.

 

Sean Lee fits too.  He's listed as 6'2" and 245 lbs- the lower end of my scale (and one reason I chose it).

 

http://www.nfl.com/player/seanlee/496937/profile

 

Quote

Im sorry I didn't literally state the speed and other athletic requirements.   I thought that was implied by both the weight reference and the comment about "no more thumper."    I should have stated that  so as to be clear.

 

As to the other head scratcher...    you picked out a post of mine from November about Walter Football where I said I don't think they have a good reputation.   You noted they got the Connor Williams pick right.   As if that makes me wrong.   As if the one pick you noted gives them a good reputation.   What I objected to was back in November when I made my post WF said Williams could go between rounds 2-4.    That's 100 picks!   A spread of one hundred picks!  My dead mother can safely make that projection.   That was November.

 

Even on the day before the draft they had Pitt O-tackle Brian O'Neill going between rounds 1-3.   Again 100 picks!   You can pull a homeless person off the street, and give him 10 minutes on the internet and he can figure out ONeill could go in those 100 picks.  That's what I mean about not a good reputation.

 

I just don't understand the need to point out where posters were wrong and others were right?   No one is right or wrong all the time.  

 

 

That bolded part is exactly the point, everyone sometimes get things right, and sometimes wrong.  People, web sites, analysts, football teams.  A poster mentioned a player would drop, and was shot down. He cited a resource that supported why he felt Connor would fall out of round 1 to round two.  That was questioned as well. Both he and that resource turned out right.

 

To be fair, I even mentioned I wasn't trying to single anybody out in my post, but we all have hits, and we all have misses.  It makes the forum go.  And also proves nobody is an absolute authority.  As an aside, from what I've heard, Charlie Campbell (the insider at Walter Football) is legit, and often gets great info. Of course, teams/agents etc. can also use guys like that to 'leak' certain information; some maybe not always on the up and up either. Walt  on the otherhand... uhhh...

 

Quote

But making comments about players being projected too high or low is one of the most popular posts on this website.  

 

Why not have people explain why they feel a poster is incorrect.  People just say "No way dude drops that far" and leaves it.  Poster responds with a supporting web site also feels that way as well, and the pushback is his web site is not reliable either.  No explanations why they would be wrong.  Or questions asking further details and why the feel that way.  Then they get it right, and the people that said had said they were wrong and relying on poor info scoot on by unscathed waiting for the next prey...

 

Quote

 

Are we doing away with them?   If not, then I don't understand the need to point out where posters were right or wrong.   What's to be gained?

 

Again.....    sorry this post went so long..... 

 

Do them.  But I'd like discussion to why from more people.  Can learn more than 'no way that ever happens, dude... and your site has a poor reputation', without examples to support it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/17/2018 at 10:21 AM, krunk said:

I don't think Booger Mcfarland and Hankins are the same type of athlete and play style.  Plus Mcfarland had years of experience in the exact systems we ran before he even came to be a Colt.  Mcfarland moved and shot gaps better than Hankins.

I'm talking size and other teams need to double team. Who do we have now that requires double team. Other teams are going to play us like the past. Double outside, single inside. Follow lead block and run up the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Matabix said:

I'm talking size and other teams need to double team. Who do we have now that requires double team. Other teams are going to play us like the past. Double outside, single inside. Follow lead block and run up the middle.

 

 

So I assume you're talking 21 personnel in your example.

There is a thing called run gap control.  If proper technique is used by ALL of the front 7 (or 8 if walking a safety down into the box) is executed to maintain and control Their_Assigned_Gap, the play is stuffed, or has to bounce to the outside, where zone corners see run keys in front of them and come down to help on the tackle. Here is a couple picture examples-

 

1f3630fb49f2e47dd3d62f01f6956940_crop_no

 

4dacb66d6955a754bf88f4ef3143ddf4_crop_ex

 

{SAM is just off picture to the right}

So the results we see is a coaching/execution thing. If any of the D lets the O linemen get right up straight into his numbers, he lost gap control and failed his assignment that play. He must be off shoulder and shaded and penetrate into his gap, and maintain it during the play.

 

As for Over and Under 4 - 3 fronts, I'll paste this-

 

"The key to knowing the difference between the “Over” and “Under” front in the 4-3 defense is the alignment of the “3-technique” defensive tackle and the Nose.

In the “Under” front, the Nose is aligned to the “closed” side of the formation with the “3-technique” defensive tackle aligned to the “open” side—opposite of what you see in the “Over” front."

 

The closed side refers to side where TE is.  If a team can run two TE's, the D game plan installed determines which TE side is determined closed, for D play call alignments in game.

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

    • Yeah... Richardson needs players who can separate and who can get open deep. IMO "give the inaccurate QB a contested catch receiver with large catch radius" is one of the tropes that hasn't proven to work well. Contested catches have about 50-55% success rate even with the best of contested catch receivers and with relatively accurate QBs... now if you think AR's accuracy is not good, drop that rate even more. The best way to give a relatively inaccurate QB better chance to complete passes is to give him a WR who separates and and who is open so the QB would have more of a margin for error to throw the ball a little behind or ahead or a little higher or lower than ideal. (we are not talking about uncatchable balls here... those will be uncatchable for anyone really). In that regard, one thing I would agree about is - we need WRs who have good hands and have good ball skills.   And this is ignoring that AR has indeed been pretty good with his accuracy on passes at intermediate and long range. His biggest problem coming into the league was the short stuff and he was already showing improvements in that deparment before he got injured.    And Worthy is the WR who created the most separation from anybody in this draft :   
    • Richardson  accuracy  on deep balls is his strength.  Hence why you pair an elite deep threat in worthy.
    • No.   You weren’t.   If you were the least bit sincere, we’d be having these conversations in private.  But you’ve repeatedly ignored my efforts to do that.  Your call.      Then you avoid me until I’m in an uncomfortable conversation with another poster.   You use that awkward moment as an excuse for you to come in with some sincere friendly advice.   The problem is, you’re neither sincere, nor friendly.  And you’ve been doing this for months now.  This is not new.   The pattern is clear and obvious.     And the shame of it all is that even with our different views on Ballard we have enough in common that we should be friendly.  Maybe not friends, but friendly.  You wouldn’t need to address me as “Sir.”    “Good deed going unpunished”.  You flatter yourself.     But your actions speak much louder than your words.   There’s no reason for me to trust you.  And here we are.  A real shame.      
    • In a year when the Colts were in serious need of a QB and in position to draft one, Ballard came up in front of the media 3 days before the draft and straight up said something to the effect of "That guy everybody in media is talking about(Levis), we are not taking him". I don't know why you think the Colts are trying to throw us off the scent this year specifically. They are not trying to give us away the pick(thus the vagueness), but I also don't really think they are trying to mislead anybody. This usually becomes specifically apparent in retrospect after the draft when you look back at a lot of those quotes in the videos they release pre-draft... and they were talking precisely about players we ended up drafting, which they reveal in the post-draft video by extending some of those quotes(they did that with AR last year for example).    And about why people are doing it(guessing who they are talking about) - because it is fun. Nobody has the illusion that we will be right in our guesses 100% of the time... or anywhere close really... but it's still fun. And it's part of why the Colts release those videos with those quotes - to create engagement with the fanbase... part of which, and the entirety of which that 70 pages thread and whole board is about in the offseason. is to guess who the Colts might take and how they might feel about specific prospects.
  • Members

    • Kirie89

      Kirie89 6

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • rob220

      rob220 1

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Dark Superman

      Dark Superman 1,778

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NewColtsFan

      NewColtsFan 21,150

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...