Defjamz26

Your Surpise Starter(s) for 2018

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Old Colt said:

Jacoby Brissett   :stir:

If he was to start the first couple of games, i wouldn't call that surprising

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

I'm not sure why you think we are only going to keep 8, or in your case if we cut Simon, 7 DL? You're also forgetting Hunt, who I think might be a surprise at the UT role, and Grover Stewart. The Colts will likely carry 10 DL. Tomasi Laulile could open some eyes too.

So 15 spots max for LBs, CBs, Ss? Hooker injured, Geathers was badly injured... Only 46 active on game day... Should DL play ST or not... Of course, they can, but would they?

Hunt didn't surprise anyone at UT in Bengals 4-3, if I remember correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, K-148 said:

BTW, pretty much everyone of you in other threads agreed, that Colts don't have to sign free agents as of now, because there are to many holes in roster to fill and that free agents can't make Colts as a whole better. But now you refuse "to cut" undersized 4-3 DE in his last year with the Colts, when the Colts have other options to explore/to prove! More, that move will save the Colts 3,3M to roll over and spend next year. You are talking about Simon like he is outstanding pass rusher at his 6-1, and like he is the only missing part of Colts Super Bowl run...

 

I don't think the Colts are worried about 3.3M in savings when they are still 52M under the cap (according to OverTheCap - could be wrong, but I think they are pretty close). That's * in the wind to them. Lewis, Turray, and Basham aren't ready to start at DE opposite Sheard yet. Simon has already proved himself for the time being, and no, no one is calling him a savior, but you still need leadership and experience, especially with a young team like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, K-148 said:

So 15 spots max for LBs, CBs, Ss? Hooker injured, Geathers was badly injured... Only 46 active on game day... Should DL play ST or not... Of course, they can, but would they?

Hunt didn't surprise anyone at UT in Bengals 4-3, if I remember correctly.

 

Hunt wasn't an UT for the Bengals, they kept playing him at DE in their 4-3 behind Dunlap and Johnson. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

I'm not sure why you think we are only going to keep 8, or in your case if we cut Simon, 7 DL? You're also forgetting Hunt, who I think might be a surprise at the UT role, and Grover Stewart. The Colts will likely carry 10 DL. Tomasi Laulile could open some eyes too.

I'm projecting 9 DL on the final 53 and Hunt isn't one of them. I'm surprised he hasn't been cut yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

I don't think the Colts are worried about 3.3M in savings when they are still 52M under the cap (according to OverTheCap - could be wrong, but I think they are pretty close). That's * in the wind to them. Lewis, Turray, and Basham aren't ready to start at DE opposite Sheard yet. Simon has already proved himself for the time being, and no, no one is calling him a savior, but you still need leadership and experience, especially with a young team like this.

Autry ready. And Autry is 27, just like Simon. Maybe, let him show leadership and experience?

With questions around Luck, Hooker, Geathers health, I can't believe the Colts will keep even 9 DL. Woods, Ridgeway, Johnson at DT; Autry, Lewis at DE/DT; Sheard, Basham, Turay at DE. Maybe Tomasi as a twiner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

Hunt wasn't an UT for the Bengals, they kept playing him at DE in their 4-3 behind Dunlap and Johnson. 

First, not DE only. Second, don't you think they have some reasons to play him at DE? Maybe at full time UT he was even worse? Or they have better option at UT in Atkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think Simon is getting cut either but there is definitely going to be a surprising DL cut or two, Sheard, Simon, Turay, Lewis, Basham, Ridgeway, Stewart, Autry, Woods, Hunt, and not to mention Nunez-Rochez and McCain.

 

It’s very crowded there now, good thing is that it also means there’s a lot of competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, K-148 said:

First, not DE only. Second, don't you think they have some reasons to play him at DE? Maybe at full time UT he was even worse?

My wife is a Bengals fan so I get to see them more than I'd like. They didn't really even play him inside, I mean I don't think I can count on 1 hand how many times I saw him inside. Geno Atkins was their 3 down UT, and they had Peko and Pat Sims at DT. I guess they figured they would get more out of him on the outside than the inside and he was non-existent as a DE in their scheme. I fault Cincy(Marvin Lewis) more than Hunt for that debacle.

 

8 minutes ago, Matthew Gilbert said:

I'm projecting 9 DL on the final 53 and Hunt isn't one of them. I'm surprised he hasn't been cut yet.

 

ST's, give's depth to the DL, and is cheap. It wouldn't surprise me if he's cut after camp though if one of the new guys really show out. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

I don’t see Simon getting cut either but there is definitely going to be a surprising DL cut or two, Sheard, Simon, Turay, Lewis, Basham, Ridgeway, Stewart, Autry, Woods, Hunt, and not to mention Nunez-Rochez and McCain.

 

It’s very crowded there now, good thing is that it also means there’s a lot of competition.

 If there is a rookie with about equal talent with a higher ceiling, I am taking the Rookie and his 4 year contract.  Simon won't be resigned next year anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My surprise starter is Simon at SAM because he's better than Morrison and he can still be used as a situational pass rusher. 

 

Thus cutting ties with Morrison and keeping Adams and Franklin on the roster for depth and special teams. 

 

Kills multiple birds with one stone!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

Who do you guys think is a surprise starter for the Colts this season?

 

Maybe it’s premature given that it’s just rookie minicamp but I’m going with Kemoko Turray. I don’t think Simon will make it in a 4-3 and the opening spot is up for grabs. I’ll say Turray beats out everyone else including Basham and Lewis because of his incredible first step. Mathis will coach him up throughout the season.

 

Matthew Adams - he may be the meanest LB on the team 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, all! Long time reader, first time poster here:

 

I'd like to take a stab at this "surprise starter" thing, but I'm at a loss for some key bits of info. Specifically, can anyone break down for me, in a "typical" 53-man roster, how many spots are allocated to each position? I've looked at our depth chart, and have some ideas, but trying to project cuts/starters is a lot harder if I don't have a clue about how many spots are set aside for a given position. I know it probably varies, but some basic guidelines would be helpful.

 

BTW, am VERY optimistic about our chances to improve this year, and about the influx of so much new talent to the Colts. Should make for a LOT more enjoyable season than what we endured last year! Let's hope the CB/FR "magic" translates into a winning record this year! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

My surprise starter is Simon at SAM because he's better than Morrison and he can still be used as a situational pass rusher. 

 

Thus cutting ties with Morrison and keeping Adams and Franklin on the roster for depth and special teams. 

 

Kills multiple birds with one stone!

Agreed. Simon fits SAM as good, as downed 4-3 DE. If the Colts decide Simon's better play at SAM worth 3,3M, they will keep him there for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Old Colt said:

Jacoby Brissett   :stir:

thats not crazy, i put the odds at 50%+ that he starts at least one game this year 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

My surprise starter is Simon at SAM because he's better than Morrison and he can still be used as a situational pass rusher. 

 

Thus cutting ties with Morrison and keeping Adams and Franklin on the roster for depth and special teams. 

 

Kills multiple birds with one stone!

 

Adams was lining up at SAM in the rookie mini camps according to George Bremer. This was something i predicted when we drafted him given his skillset.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

We ran the nickle on defense almost 2/3s of our snaps last yr. Dont know about you but to me this formations OLB looks pretty close to what hed be playing as a DE in a 4-3. If he did well in the nickle last yr doing essentially the same thing, there is zero reason to believe he all of a sudden couldnt do it because you call him a DE instead of OLB. 

SvzStDa.png

 

 On 1st down he would be more of a target in the run game. But as you shared he played plenty in a 4 man front as a edge rusher, and was very effective.
 I would think Ballard paid Autry with the hopes he would win the starting edge position.
Next comes Basham improving and getting a lot of snaps in the rotation.
Next comes developing Turay and Lewis.
 Simon would be a very good veteran presence to go along with this group for sure.
Considering winning next season is more of a bad thing than good, barring injuries (likely), Simon would surely be on the bubble.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, K-148 said:

To see him fits in September. :) Not sure he can play 4-3 DE. 6-1 means shorter arms and lighter frame. Not good for 4-3 DE engaging with OT.

I'm not making a direct comparison here... but you know who else was 6'1 and a DE for the Colts... some guy named Dwight Freeney.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

With Autry, and supposedly Lewis, having the ability to move inside on passing situations, there still has to be EDGE guys. Simon is more athletic than both and can hold up on both sides as well (pass/run). Honestly I think Basham is the one who's on the bottom of the totem pole. I believe all of the other guys are just better than him right now, including Turray and Lewis. Also, the coaching staff has reiterated that they want to have a stable of guys, on the ends, who can get up field. They don't want to depend on just 2 guys all of the time. They want a constant, healthy rotation, so that even deep into games, and the season, they aren't all wore out when they are depended on the most. 

 

I don't see this as a "these are the DE's and these are the DT's", I see this more as "this is the DL as a whole", especially with the guys they are looking at flexing inside (Autry/Lewis).

 

I agree on Basham, as he could be the one to get the boot. Would he be considered a draft bust or just a miss? Cant remember what round CBall chose him.

Share this post


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

Considering winning next season is more of a bad thing than good, barring injuries (likely), Simon would surely be on the bubble.

this isnt the nba

 

the nfl is not about super bowl or tank, winning games would be great next year

Share this post


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

 

 On 1st down he would be more of a target in the run game. But as you shared he played plenty in a 4 man front as a edge rusher, and was very effective.
 I would think Ballard paid Autry with the hopes he would win the starting edge position.
Next comes Basham improving and getting a lot of snaps in the rotation.
Next comes developing Turay and Lewis.
 Simon would be a very good veteran presence to go along with this group for sure.
Considering winning next season is more of a bad thing than good, barring injuries (likely), Simon would surely be on the bubble.

I think he very well could be on the bubble if they pigeonhole him into one role. I wouldnt be against seeing him get a shot as an early down SAM (as he has shown he can do well setting the edge and also he can react to run plays a little better back there and avoid getting eaten up by blocks a little easier) and maybe having him come down as a DE in pass situations (With Autry moving inside). Versatility will be valuable when players inevitably start dropping with injuries. 

 

I was taking issue more with people saying he is no longer a scheme fit for us. He could easily play DE for us, but we may just have too many mouthes to feed at that position to keep him. Its not his skillset that makes him expendable, it is more his short contract and lack of guaranteed money.

Even then I think Ballard will try his best to keep him, as cutting players going into a contract year doesnt mesh well with his plan to accumulate comp picks and get extra ammo to build through the draft. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mr.NotSoCreative said:

I agree on Basham, as he could be the one to get the boot. Would he be considered a draft bust or just a miss? Cant remember what round CBall chose him.

I think he was a 3rd rounder. I doubt he gets cut.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Chucklez said:

I'm not making a direct comparison here... but you know who else was 6'1 and a DE for the Colts... some guy named Dwight Freeney.... 

With a once in a lifetime first step and spin move.....who also happened to play around 265/270 versus 250.

 

Not saying Simon can't, but, there is probably a reason he was drafted and converted to OLB by the Ravens, then the Texans and then the Colts....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Chucklez said:

I think he was a 3rd rounder. I doubt he gets cut.

 

Yeah that'd be extremely early to give up on a higher draft pick. 

Share this post


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

With a once in a lifetime first step and spin move.....who also happened to play around 265/270 versus 250.

 

Not saying Simon can't, but, there is probably a reason he was drafted and converted to OLB by the Ravens, then the Texans and then the Colts....

I was merely pointing out that being 6'1 is not a limitation to being a productive DE. He was predicating his argument on that. I even prefaced my statement saying I wasnt making the direct comparison between the two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

My surprise starter is Simon at SAM because he's better than Morrison and he can still be used as a situational pass rusher. 

 

Thus cutting ties with Morrison and keeping Adams and Franklin on the roster for depth and special teams. 

 

Kills multiple birds with one stone!

Indeed it does....my thoughts exactly...Indy isn't going to cut Sheard, Autry, Basham, Turay, and Lewis unless they stink up the place....It would best if Simon could adapt as SSLB or at least a SSLB/DE hybrid depending on down....the position is in need and I believe he would excel. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Chucklez said:

I was merely pointing out that being 6'1 is not a limitation to being a productive DE. He was predicating his argument on that. I even prefaced my statement saying I wasnt making the direct comparison between the two.

It's cool, I still think him at SAM will be what's "best" for the defense. He knows how to set the edge, cover a flat and blitz plus he's a sure tackler. Which makes him far superior to Morrison!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

It's cool, I still think him at SAM will be what's "best" for the defense. He knows how to set the edge, cover a flat and blitz plus he's a sure tackler. Which makes him far superior to Morrison!

I would very much tend to agree with you here. I think we can both agree he isn't cut material, especially as we are already so thin at LB.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, TheRustonRifle#7 said:

Indeed it does....my thoughts exactly...Indy isn't going to cut Sheard, Autry, Basham, Turay, and Lewis unless they stink up the place....It would best if Simon could adapt as SSLB or at least a SSLB/DE hybrid depending on down....the position is in need and I believe he would excel. 

This makes sense as well and I'm sure there will be times they use him in the capacity you speak of.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/14/2018 at 4:57 PM, krunk said:

What does the word Fit mean to you?  It means it's not a problem schematically.

It's wasn't me who said this,  it was Ballard.    Stop acting like this is the first 4-3 DE who's been 6'1".

You're acting like Simon has a guaranteed spot on the roster and he definitely does not.

 

I'm sure Ballard thinks everybody on the roster is a fit or they would not be here. Simon has to produce to keep his roster spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bluefire4 said:

You're acting like Simon has a guaranteed spot on the roster and he definitely does not.

 

I'm sure Ballard thinks everybody on the roster is a fit or they would not be here. Simon has to produce to keep his roster spot.

No that's you misquoting me for whatever reason you have.  I'm clearly aware anyone can be cut and that's pretty obvious.   The argument is based on "Scheme Fit" of which Ballard has already said scheme fit is not the issue.   The argument has zero to do with production.  Who is arguing about his production?

Share this post


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

No that's you misquoting me for whatever reason you have.  I'm clearly aware anyone can be cut and that's pretty obvious.   The argument is based on "Scheme Fit" of which Ballard has already said scheme fit is not the issue.   The argument has zero to do with production.  Who is arguing about his production?

You literally wrote "They ain't cutting John Simon. Get that out of your head" on the first page. 

 

I did not misquote you. You obviously believe that John Simon will easily make the team. I would not be surprised at all if he is cut. We already know that Jabaal Sheard, Kemoko Turay, Tyquan Lewis, and Denico Autry are locks for the roster. 

 

Simon's going to have to win his job and prove he is just as productive in this scheme on the NFL level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bluefire4 said:

You literally wrote "They ain't cutting John Simon. Get that out of your head" on the first page. 

 

I did not misquote you. You obviously believe that John Simon will easily make the team. I would not be surprised at all if he is cut. We already know that Jabaal Sheard, Kemoko Turay, Tyquan Lewis, and Denico Autry are locks for the roster. 

 

Simon's going to have to win his job and prove he is just as productive in this scheme on the NFL level.

Yeah because you ain't been following the argument.  Trying to jump in late with your 2 cents.    The issue was about Surprise Cuts and people were saying that about Simon based on scheme fit.    You're late to the table homie

Share this post


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

No that's you misquoting me for whatever reason you have.  I'm clearly aware anyone can be cut and that's pretty obvious.   The argument is based on "Scheme Fit" of which Ballard has already said scheme fit is not the issue.   The argument has zero to do with production.  Who is arguing about his production?

Simon fits in a 4-3 but not ideally. If you would have asked him about Henry Anderson or Hankins before they were traded/cut, I’d expect Ballard to say that they fit.

 

If you openly say that a player doesn’t fit your scheme, that can create controversy for obvious reasons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Simon fits in a 4-3 but not ideally. If you would have asked him about Henry Anderson or Hankins before they were traded/cut, I’d expect Ballard to say that they fit.

 

If you openly say that a player doesn’t fit your scheme, that can create controversy for obvious reasons. 

He pretty much got rid of them before anyone could get deep into those issues. It was kind of questionable what our plans were with Hankins and Anderson reading the tea leaves because neither one of them knew exactly what their roles were going to be.  That's was a bit shocking to me because you would think if we had plans for them to start they would know what their roles were and how they would be used.   

 

Ballard basically answered the stuff people brought up.  They didn't bring up issues with Anderson and Hankins before he got rid of them so he didn't have to answer it.  If they did bring it up I'm sure he'd say something like "Well the staff is still figuring out what they do best, but they are both good players" or something to that effect.

  • 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.