Dudley Smith
-
Posts
584 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Dudley Smith
-
-
The only guy I was truly sad to see go was Freeman. The guy gave 110% and I liked how he carried a chip on his shoulder. He was somewhat limited but brought grit to the D. However, I think Sio Moore has more raw talent and could actually be better.
Fleener was a nice player who had all the physical tools to be a dominant TE. He improved each year, and I think there may be a bit of an adjustment period for Luck without him on the field. That said, Allen is actually the all-around better TE if he can stay healthy. If Allen stays healthy, I don't think you see too much of a drop off.
-
I really like Gore and think he will have a solid season this upcoming year. I do, however, remember some incredibly untimely fumbles by him last year that contributed mightily to the Colts losing. Jets and another game -- maybe Pats? For the most part he had a good year though despite the awful OL.
-
I really like Wilson, but it is hard for me to definitively say he is better than Luck when he typically has thrown on average only 15-20 times per game over the course of the last few years due to the Seahawks being ahead due to their ground game and defense. In a number of games I remember watching where he has had to drop back and throw a lot due to them being down (Carolina in the playoffs last year, etc.), he has been a turnover machine with INTs and fumbles -- the same insult non-Colts fans love to hurl at Luck. However, he is very shifty as others have mentioned, and has great accuracy on the run much like Luck. He is a great QB though and I think he and Luck are definitely 1A and 1B in the current generation of QBs -- just about neck and neck. I give the edge to Luck overall because I am bias as a Colts fan.
I realize he is coming off a great year, but I am still not sold on Newton. There is no denying he is a tank at QB, hard to bring down, and throws incredibly hard. However, he is about as immature as it gets and his accuracy isn't phenomenal by any means. I think you will see teams begin to use the blueprint the Broncos used to snuff out Carolina's "ground and pound" offense that was so successful last year which will force Newton into more conventional passing plays which are not his strength. That offense last year was in 3rd and 1 and 3rd and 2 A LOT, and it was perfect for that offense with Newton and the bowling ball RBs they had. I predict Newton will still be solid next year but will not have the same level success as 2015, and I don't think you see Carolina anywhere near the Super Bowl. I may be wrong but I think last year was more of a outlier based on a dominant defense and strong rush attack that worked to perfection with the personnel and schemes in place on both sides of the ball.
At the end of the day, I will still take Luck over the other two, with Wilson in a close second. His mobility coupled with size give him an edge on Wilson, and his passing ability is better than Newton. Obviously if Super Bowls are the main barometer we are using, Wilson and Newton have each gotten further than Luck, but Luck has had by far the least talented teams of the three thus far. Last year concerns me, but I will chalk it up as a fluke with the lacerated kidney. Hopefully with the OL getting fixed, Luck will be in a comfort zone this year that he hasn't had the first few years of his career.
-
16 minutes ago, chad72 said:
The true question is - what would exceed our fans' expectations this year?
Winning the division and winning a playoff game, we have been there before. But coming off a year where we didn't make the playoffs, would winning the division and winning a playoff game exceed expectations? Objectively looking at it, I would have to say "yes".
However, I cannot speak for the others
Is this team really that much different from the team that went to the AFC title game two years ago? Obviously a big part of that depends on Luck's health -- but it is still principally the same team. However, I would be happy making the playoffs and winning a game just based on the fact that this is somewhat of a transition year despite having the same coaching staff. It still seems like there has been a change in philosophy (which I like).
-
About time. I think I remember him being RIGHT about a call maybe about once or twice in the last couple of years he was with CBS. He was awful.
-
It is a little surprising given that we were only one game out of going to the playoffs last year with the injury to Luck and all of the drama surrounding the Colts coaching staff and front office. We did lose a couple of players, but by no means major impact guys (Fleener kind of hurts mostly due to his potential). We also added what should be a lot of help to what was our biggest weakness -- the Oline.
The Jags in particular got a lot better on paper, but if Luck continues to improve off of his seasons previous to last (or merely returns to 2014 form), I believe the Colts are still the best team in the AFC South.
-
1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:
The flip side to that coin is the way Luck plays is what makes him so fun to watch. It's like he is a QB with a linebackers mentality. He is a gun slinger and his type of play is what you are going to get good or bad. When he is on it don't get any better but when his is off it can be ugly as with just about any QB who plays like he does. Now we will just have to wait and see if he changes the way he plays. All I hope for is him just protecting the ball more while protecting himself. Hopefully we can get a better running game going where he don't have to handle the ball as much as in the past.
Only thing I would change about him would be to learn to throw it away more instead of trying to force a throw downfield. I think a schematic change with Chud should help with his holding the ball too long the past few years. But Luck definitely plays with a high risk/high reward mentality -- which is sometimes maddening....most of the time awesome.
-
12 minutes ago, Superman said:
I'm not a fan of tanking, but the 76ers are doing something completely different. Their plan is to spend several years picking at the top of the draft, thereby increasing their odds of getting great players to build around. Not just a one season anomaly, but purposely allowing the team to suck for multiple seasons in a row. In theory, it's a plan that can work, and five years from now, they can have a contending team.
The problem is that it's entirely counter to the foundation of competitive sports, which is that everyone tries to do their best. It's also undermining league revenue.
Agree with everything you say. I guess what I was trying to convey is that I think doing something like the 76ers are doing, where you intentionally embrace a culture of losing, can have a negative impact on the whole franchise, which I think has definitely happened to them. And I am not suggesting that the OP was saying that the Colts should do that. I do think that putting 3rd and 4th string players out in starting positions is trending towards that same type of mentality, however, which I think the Colts should avoid. You're essentially telling the team you've mailed in the season as far as trying to win and just want to see what some of the guys deeper on the depth chart got. Not that Pagano, who is "coaching for his job," is going to do that anyway.
-
The Colts already have gotten flak (wrongfully so IMO) for the "suck for Luck" a few years ago. Doing something like this would essentially seal our fate as a franchise that tries to lose at times. I think the overall effect would be potentially disastrous to the franchise, despite me understanding to a certain extent why you would want to do it.
Installing a mentality that it is okay to lose, however, is never a good idea. That cloud can hang over a franchise. Look at the 76ers in the NBA. They're definitely on the extreme, but are proof that doing something like that never works.
-
He's arguably been the only bright spot on an otherwise disappointing season. We finally found a returner after five years. He could still take a knee once in awhile, but he definitely seems to have the instincts needed to run effectively on returns, and hasn't muffed any punts that I can remember. That is an improvement over everyone else we have had back there over the last few years.
-
7 minutes ago, Narcosys said:
I can agree with getting rid of Grigson because of how he operates as GM. I do not agree with getting rid of coaching staff. We went 11-5 3 years in a row and made it to the AFC Championship.
I do not want to turn into the browns and raiders and have a new coach just because they have a bad year.
It is hard to lay everything at Grigson's feet. He is partly responsible, but not completely. Pagano was brought in as a "defensive guru" 4 years ago. The defense is arguably worse now than it was 4 years ago. Part of that is Grigson's fault for not drafting worth a crap, but part of it is definitely falling on Pagano as well. Whether that is because he chose a lackluster DC or not, Pagano has to take some of the blame, and he will not be coaching here next year because of it.
-
This has been tough for Chud -- I don't think it falls squarely on him when he is running another guy's offense. What I do find perplexing is how multiple times it seems MH is not on the same page as his receivers. These are all veterans who should know the correct routes. I think it happened multiple times yesterday with MH to Moncrief and maybe once to Hilton. It makes sense that the delay of game penalties could partly be attributed by the Chud-Clyde-MH play-calling pipeline, but even then it seems strange that MH would not know where the play clock is.
-
28 minutes ago, Kyle said:
If Whitehurst is our QB vs Miami and Tennessee....we will be losing both those games. I actually hope we do
I don't disagree that I think we will lose the last two games -- I think we will lose both of them anyway (not that they are unwinnable -- neither Miami or Tenn. are world-beaters), but I actually think that Whitehurst actually gives us a better chance to win at this point than MH does. MH is so beat up and there is now plenty of game film on him that teams have caught up to him and understand he can't throw down the field.
When MH came back in yesterday in the 4th, I was actually wondering if we would have been better off had the Colts kept Charlie in since he was so much more mobile. That was before that awful INT to end the game.
-
John Harbaugh is a no brainer if he Ravens were crazy enough to let him go. He would easily be the top choice. Problem is the Ravens aren't that dumb.
Unless something crazy happens and John Harbaugh is available, I'd like Cowher. Proven track record and a no nonsense coach. Not sure what his interest level is. McDaniels is kind of intriguing, but his previous HC experience makes me nervous.
-
The problem with T.Y. is that I think the talent is there for him to be a #1 receiver, but he is so inconsistent game to game. I don't have any numbers in front of me, but it seems like one week he will have 100 receiving yards with a TD, and the next 1 catch for 12 yards. Your #1 needs to have a higher "floor" than that. He also definitely disappears at times which is not a trait you want in a #1. As far as whether he is worth the money, it is hard to say at this point when Luck has been out for so much of the season and is able to utilize TY much more effectively than MH.
-
I'm not picking on you at all but I alway find it funny how these NCAA programs fire these types of coaches or force them out! You used the word "underachieved", Miles' record the last 6 seasons: 2010- 11-2, 2011 13-1(National title), 2012 10-3, 2013 10-3, 2014 8-5 and this year 7-3 so far. Those are great records for any program. Ask Texas and Nebraska about how they feel about their most recent coaching hires. I just shake my head at these situations because a guy who has gone 110-32 at your school shouldn't be getting forced out. It's ridiculous.
It's easy to think the way you do if all you do is look at his overall record. But take a look at LSU's games, specifically the offense the last few years, and you'll see a team with a lot of talent that has no business struggling to score the way it does. Hence my "underachieving" label for Miles (which I believe to be true and which I think a lot of other college football fans would agree) and the reason for not wanting him to be the Colts coach.
I do agree with your overall point that he shouldn't be getting forced out with the record he has, but I don't believe he is an elite coach and therefore do not desire him to be on the Colts' sideline. Looks like LSU is keeping him anyway after today.
-
No, besides to my knowledge having zero NFL experience, the guy has underachieved for a number of seasons now with LSU. He did win one title at the NCAA level, but I don't think that is enough to think he is going to come in and take the Colts to the next level.
-
It is clear Luck is dealing with some confidence issues at this point. He looked very uncomfortable in the pocket yesterday especially against the blitz. I agree with the idea of going to a short passing game as the Colts with MH did against the Texans, but I have little faith that will happen. As someone else said, this offense doesn't seem to have an identity right now. Pep Hamilton seems to want the Colts offense to be a vertical passing attack, which is so far from his roots at Stanford it is borderline mind-boggling. It also is not a type of offense that functions very well in the NFL on a regular basis as we are seeing this season. When we have gone to a short passing game (Texans game and 1st half of Pats game), our offense has looked 100 times better than at other points this season.
A veteran offensive coach would work wonders in this situation to help get Luck back on track -- but I don't believe Pep is going to be doing that for Luck any time soon.
-
TY is definitely inconsistent, which is probably his biggest weakness at this point in his career. He will go from 150 receiving yards and 2 TDs one week to 1 reception for 7 yards the next. But this move has a greater chance of hurting our team than it does helping IMO. I would be against it at this point but an interesting idea nonetheless.
-
Pep has been mediocre to awful from day 1 on the job. The offense immediately took a couple of steps back in year 1 with him at the helm from where it was with Arians. He was brought it to install a west-coast style of offense to minimize the hits on Luck that still utilized some of Arians' own longer passing schemes (remember Pep's own words calling his offense the "No-Coast Offense" on an account of the blending of the two?). Instead, Luck has continued to get nailed at the highest rate in football, and we have also lost the ingenuity of Arians plays and play-calling in the process, being replaced by vanilla, college-style routes that take a long time to develop and just horrible play-calling from Pep (20+ passing plays in a row, zero slants, zero check down options, etc.). There is almost no short-passing game in this offense from what I can see watching these games on Sunday.
As mediocre as he was the past two years, Pep has just been awful this year. Getting rid of him I think would immediately improve this team. There are a lot of problems, but Pep Hamilton is the biggest one IMO.
-
I don't think Pagano is going anywhere before the end of the year. However, it would be nice to see Pep gone tomorrow and to see what Chud can do at OC. I think this move is actually fairly realistic except for the fact we keep hearing Pagano doesn't have control over his own staff personnel decisions and that Pep might be Grigson's pet. The entire team is a mess at this point...but I think Pep has been the biggest issue and is a logical starting place to make a change. See if it gives the offense a much needed spark.
Heck, I would even take Clyde Christensen being promoted to OC over having Pep remain at this point. Just do something to shake things up.
-
I don't believe in basing any season on past performance. I think last night game's showed how silly is to do that. Right now Cincy is the most balanced, most loaded team and Dalton has playing fantastic especially vs Seattle when he led the come back late. Of course he has something to prove in Jan but that does not mean he won't.
I disagree. The NFL is about what you do in the playoffs. Cincy hasn't done jack in the playoffs, and Dalton has been incredibly underwhelming in postseason play. Cincy has also had hot starts in the regular season the last couple of years. No reason right now to believe it will be different come this January.
-
griff whalens
This has made me "lol" a couple of times now. Thank you.
-
if those of you who saw moncrief's video were he did that high jump..maybe the colts should put him behind field goal attempts so he can jump the line and block them ..just saying
He certainly should have been in on the last play of the 1st half in the Texans-Colts game.
Kendall Langford Out
in Colts Football
Posted
Colts should still win the Lions game even without Langford and the other two. Granted a lot of this is banking on Luck coming back and looking like himself and not the guy who played hurt in seven (?) games last year.