theanarchist
-
Posts
2,197 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by theanarchist
-
-
I believe it would absolutely have to be mandated to have this happen. There are still guys that want the lightest helmets and pads to maximize their performance. In fact, as we know some do not wear leg pads and a lot do not even wear a mouth-piece. It more than likely will not happen unless the immediate future of the game is in jeopardy.
That said, I never thought all major tracks in the NASCAR circuit would have SAFER barriers. I also never thought NASCAR would build a Car of Tomorrow (COT) just for safety reasons.(It now has moved into a new car stage for 2013)
I would really hate for our favorite game to become a political 'pawn.' That nauseates me.....
I have a few ideas about the "safety" problems in today's NFL. There needs to definitely be a real effort into new technology for pads and helmets. Obviously this will take time and I also believe that any new technology that shows promise will have to be mandated. As you say, players are always looking for comfort over protection.
On another note. I think it's interesting that with all the safety talk that there has not been or I guess I havent heard as much about the "causes" of the spike in brain related injuries in the modern game. I think that the relationship between the size of today's NFL players and those that played 40 years ago is no cooincidence. I read a story yesterday about that fact that it's been 2 years since the last labor agreement and still no testing for HGH has been instituted. I'm no scientist but I would think that safety, size, PED all go hand in hand. Today's NFL is so much different from the NFL I grew up watching. In many ways it makes me sick to watch it at times. Don't get me wrong, I love the Colts but many things in today's game are a real drag for me.
It's time for the NFL to get serious about equipment, PED's, and do some real research into why the brain injury situation has increased so dramatically. All I've seen the NFL do to this point is make rules and issue fines for players that collide with another playes head. Many times those collisions are unavoidable given the nature of the game. Is it time for the NFL to start limiting the size of certain players? That will never happen but I have to believe that the size of the modern football player is playing a big role in these brain injuries.
-
My head would explode if they picked a rb
Best player. If that's a RB, which I doubt, I'd be Ok with it. We have greater needs but take the best
-
We don't need to spend a first round pick on any particular position.
Best player available. We have plenty of needs and I would be happy with anything from OLB, OL, DE, S, CB heck even a RB.
-
The issue is at what point will he(hughes) actually ever play the Mathis role? He certainly won't be doing that while Mathis is around, and Mathis won't be moving into Freeneys' role I think because it seems to require a player with some bulk. Freeney is 23 pounds heavier than Mathis. For the Ravens they have a guy like Suggs there instead of having Kruger in that spot. I don't think the 2 spots are interchangeable like they were in the Cover 2. I'm doubtful of when he will get his chance in that role.
Personally I'd love to see us take a run at Kruger. We have the cap money. It would be great to have Kruger, Mathis and Hughes playing those 2 spots. I just think Kruger is coming into his own and COULD be a real asset for us.
-
you contradicted yourself by saying Hughes had not had the number of snaps Freeney has had and that he shouldn't and you also said he has not had the production that Freeney has had. Dont you think that Hughes lack of starts and consistent playing time has hurt his chances of producing?(not that he would produce Freeney like numbers but I think its possible, he nees to improve his playing strength id develop a spin move) think about it, the guy actually gets a few starts last year and came away with 4 sacks while only starting and playing every snap in 4 games also what if his assignment was not always to rush the passer, Hughes is not a strictly rush the passer guy, he can actually drop back in a short zone and cover to a degree, my opinion he is more suited for the Mathis role
I agree. I think Mathis and Hughes should switch roles. As Krunk says I think more bulk is better in that role but Mathis has never had an issue being undersized.
-
In my mind I blame Bill Polian for starters . The man did very good for our Colts but in my mind he dropped the ball on defense .
This has been a pet peeve of mine Defense wins games , Tom Moore & Peyton Manning were in place , Bringing in Tony Dungy was supposed to cure our defense with the tampa 2 , what a joke that was .
Our 06 defense 32'nd in the regular season then turned it on in the playoffs , It was an amazing turnaround & IMHO the defense were the MVP of the SB .
To this very day I have not heard 1 reasonable answer for that turn of events , But of course theres my opinion - IMO the coachs failed all year & the players themselves dug deep & started believing that they could get-R-done , They heard there critics & were embarassed , I'v never heard any stories to the contrary & I would love 2 know what others thought of our SB run .
My point being it was clear watching Dwight Freeney play this year it was his last as a Colt - 4-3 yes in the 3-4 absolutely not in the run game he has always looked outta place IMO -
Dwight Freeney & Robert Mathis have been great but how much credit do the coachs deserve ??- The Eraser Bob Sanders did really good when healthy , But these bright spots have been few & far in between . The Defensive Coaching has let the team down year after year . Including 2012 .
Jerry Hughes a bust no, work in progress Yes
Now with a healthy Chuck Pagano maybe DC Manusky can coach up some players so they may realize there potential if not for the coachs illness this years defense I gotta believe would have been much better . I'm more inclined to giving these new coachs another year to fix the defense & players like Hughes .
I do like the idea of going after Krueger & Barwin .
Here's my take on the failures of the defense and personnel over the years. I've said it over and over. Bill Polian could not draft Defensive Tackles and he struggled drafting Corners. Name 1 defesnive Tackle that Bill Polian drafted while he was here that you can say was a true difference maker? How about a corner? I'm not bashing Bill Polian. I think he did a great job in certain areas but everyone has a weakness and I think Bill didn't know how to evaluate those two positions.
Also, Kruger looks like to me he is really turning into a true difference maker. Maybe its just a flash in the pan. Or, maybe he's just reaching his potential and his next 5 years will be ultra productive?? I don't know but I do know that watching him late in this season he created all kinds of havoc time and time again. I havent seen that sort of play from Hughes.
-
Jerry Hughes 41 tackles 4 sacks
Lawrence Guy 18 tackles 1 sack
Dwig Freeney 12 tackles 5 sacks
Hughes>Guy>Freeney
Hughes couldn't carry Freeney's shorts man. Freeney has every pass rush move in the book. I have yet to see Hughes do anything other than a speed move and bull rush. Yes, Freeney doesn't play the run. he doesnt defend the pass. But as a pure pass rusher Freeney is WAY more talented than Hughes in my opinion. Freeney has over 100 career sacks. Hughes is just a different player than Freeney. Freeney is a true speed rush DE in a 4-3. Hughes up to this point in his career hasn't had the number of snaps that Freeney has nor should he. My opinion is still that he is an average player to this point. Hope he proves me wrong.
Freeney, in my opinion, when he came into the league he had the fastest burst off the ball that I had ever seen anyone in football have. Probably the best spin move of any pass rusher in history.
-
Hi Buddy..... TCU Guy right here.
I see you and a few others seem to have a misunderstanding of what TCU ran when Hughes was there.TCU DID NOT run a 3-4 or a 4-3. TCU ran a 4-2-5
That's 4 Defensive Lineman
2 Linebackers
5 Defensive Backs
Like I said. It was just a highlight reel from youtube. What I saw was 3 d linemen with their hand on the ground and typically 2 guys outside of them near the line of scrimmage. Hughes was mostly hand on the ground outside shade to the OT
-
There is a big difference in Hughes and the other players you have named, those were always "the guy" at there position on there teams, Freeney or Mathis has always been "the guy" here in Indy, Limited and inconsistent snaps means limited production
So does not having the skill required to be "the guy". That's what I believe Hughes is. He does not have the skills that these other guys possess. That's my opinion. As i say, can he be a starter and be OK? Ya probably. But my point, going back to an earlier post, is that the OLB positions in this 3-4 hybrid are where you need "playmakers". I just don't believe that Hughes is a true playmaker. He does not possess, nor will he in my opinion, the pass rush techiniques that Mathis, Freeney, Avril, Barwin, Kruger possess. The guy just does not have it. Now, if we want to settle for average play at this position, which I don't because like I say its a critical position, then Hughes will be OK. My opinion is that his skills don't translate to the types of numbers these other guys would procuce. JMO
-
I don't think Hughes is a complete bust. But he hasn't lived up to being a first round pick. Blame Polian I guess. I just see some things from Hughes that I just don't like and I can't really put my finger on it. Will he be ok if hes and every game starter? probably. But I don't see him as a double digit sack guy. I really don't. Hope I'm wrong. But I do like some of the other guys mentioned more than I like Hughes.... Avril, Barwin, Kruger I think all would be great to get and Hughes is a nice 3rd guy for the OLB rotatation. JMO
-
The only part of that I didn't like was where they say Hughes would be given an opportunity to run with the job. Hughes was better in the scheme but still doesn't quite give us what we need in terms of pass rush. I'd rather bring in a more proven pass rusher for the scheme in Anthony Spenser.
Paul Kruger...
-
No, he wasn't. He was a traditional 4-3 end. Perhaps he rushed from a two-point stance on occasion, but he was a traditional, hand in the dirt end at TCU.
He was projected to the NFL as a pass rushing linebacker.
I reviewed a youtube highlight clip of him at TCU. He was a hand on the ground guy but it appears to me that TCU ran a 3-4 and Hughes was like a 5 tech in that system. That being said I would still like to see better production from him at this level.
-
While it may not be a "blockbuster" contract ... Some 4/3 team will give him a VERY lucrative contract hoping to get 2-3 years of pre-2011 Freeney.
I agree
-
I expected Freeney to not come back but I did not expect Hughes to take the position full-time. I know he had some bright spots last year but I don't think he's good enough. I hope we can find someone to fill that spot but if Chuck believes he can take over full-time then I trust his judgement more than mines.
Wasn't Hughes a stand up DE at TCU?
Yes I think he was. I hope the staff is looking at FA to bring in a player that Manusky, Pagano, Grigson knows can play that Rush end very well. It's critical to the defense and I hope that this position is top priority along with the OL.
-
Per Rotoworld.
Impending free agent DE/OLB Dwight Freeney is not expected to re-sign with the Colts.
Freeney proved to be an extremely poor fit in Chuck Pagano's 3-4 scheme, compiling just five sacks and 24 tackles in 14 games. 2010 first-round pick Jerry Hughes will have a chance to run with the position full time next season. After 11 years with the Colts, Freeney is wearing down but still can help a team out of the 4-3 end spot as a situational rusher.
Thoughts?
The article supposes that Jerry Hughes will have a chance to run with this position. I'm not impressed very much with Jerry. He did nothing in the old 4-3. He didn't do much this year in the hybrid which I thought would be good for him. Im expecting Grigson understand that the OLB/DE in this defense are what makes it go. I expect that we are going to sign a FA to come in who has experience in this role.
-
I don't know why. Maybe its that fact that we may have lost a winnable game to the eventual super bow champs? But I feel the need to post about this game and give credit where credit is due. I think there is a feeling around us Colts fans of satisfaction that we just made it that far and were happy to be in the playoffs. But as I look back on that game now I have a different perspective:
1) We had a number of chances to put ourselve in position to win that game. We drove into the redzone a number of times and came up empty. Credit the Ravens for stiffening when they had to.
2) Andrew Luck played one heck of a game in my opinion. I said it that day also. He was under constant pressure on almost every drop back. Yet he threaded the needle into a lot of tight spaces and made throws that only the true top qb's in the NFL were going to make.
3) The defense played well enough to win the game. Yes, I said it. They did have some breakdowns at a couple of critical times but they played solid against what now looks like the hottest team in football. There's no denying that in today's NFL the team with the hot hand at this time of year ususally wins the Super Bowl regardless of their regular season record. How many times have we seen the #1 and #2 seeds falter in recent history in the NFL. Plenty. So, to do the job they did against the Ravens I think was a solid effort.
The point I want to make I guess is that yes it was great to make into the playoffs. But we were closer than a lot of people give us credit for, including us fans.
Also, I'd like to make an observation about the defense this year. I read a lot of posts about the defense not being improved from the old regime. The thing I thought was better about our defense this year was that we appeared to be making more stops on 3rd down. In years past our defense was really bad at making stops on 3rd down. I may be wrong but it sure appeared to me that our defense was much better in that regard this year.
Cant wait for next season!
-
Just saw this posted on NFL Trade Rumors. Looks good for the Colts!!
I don't read too much into the strength of schedule at this time of year. Its tough to predict how good a team will be 9 months from now. They may have been 2-14 this year but just like us they could be 11-5 next year.
-
As we all think about about the names we wish we could have, hope we can acquire,I think there is one thought we need to keep in mind, and I would imagine Grigs is considering it along with other GM's. We have a lot of cap space this year, no doubt about it, and it seems like most people would like to spread it around for many very good players, due to the holes we have instead of just a few big name players. I agree with the sentiment, but there is going to be something at play I have not heard discussed yet! The effect of the 2014 cap on this year's FA market!
After FA this year the salary cap is going to go up in the 2014 cap year due to the new television rights deals which will be signed. I have seen only a few numbers, but many have said the move will be substantial. I don't know what substantial is, but it does not really matter in the case of this argument. Since the cap will move up in 2014, and teams due to the CBA have to use 89% of cap space under the CBA (I do not know what loopholes there are if any), then I think a very good argument can be made to sign as many quality players this year as possible and when negotiating price really consider what is going to happen the following year. Once the cap is lifted next year, the contract signed this year may sound like a bargain next year.
I believe we are going to have to be relatively agressive in FA and sign some upper echelon names this year for what may seem like more money than they are worth right now due to this dynamic which will be playing out. For the sake of argument, when I say overpay, I know it still has to be a consideration. But when you go to the store to buy something and you know the price is going to rise, what are your actions?
As I said, I don't know how much it will be lifted, but any increase will affect salaries. Simple demand and supply under the CBA rules since money has to be spent. So I would make the case that we keep this in mind when going out and pursuing talent for the Offensive line and other spots. Would love to hear if you agree or disagree with my logic!
Does anyone know what our cap sitiation is currently? With our current FA not counting against the cap(once free agency starts)where do we sit when that occurs? Well I dug it up and answered it myself. according to one source nfltraderumors, we will be 46 million under the cap. Wow, thats unreal.
-
Thats true, but if you're going to bring in a guy and pay him the money that Levitre will command, you better be 100% certain that he will be able to play within the scheme. This is why I highly doubt that Levitre will be signed, because he has only played in a zone scheme and we do not know if he can handle a man scheme. You don't sign a pricey FA without being sure if he even fits your scheme.
I agree with ya. It is possible he could be good at both though but as you say Grigson needs to know for sure than he can accel in our scheme. Makes sense.
-
I think we had Zone Linemen last year playing a Man (primarily) scheme, and as of today,before FA and the draft, obviously we still do
I don't know how much we ran zone vs man this last year. I will say this. I believe that our run blocking was better this year than it was the previous 3 or 4 years. Was that due to scheme? Personnel? I don't know. But I do know this, we have a couple of guys that look like they can play. We have a few that look like they struggle quite a bit. We need to upgrade a couple of positions there in my opinion. I don't want to see us fall into the trap we did when Manning was here. We spend all of our high draft picks on "skill" players and rely on late round picks an UDFA to be everyday starters on the line. I'm not saying you can't find a good player at that point in the draft but we all know the higher you pick the better the chance you have of landing a real anchor to your line. Jeff Saturday was the exception to this rule.
-
Here is an article about the Dolphins(that switched from a man scheme to a zone scheme this season) that explains the difference in the schemes and why bigger, stronger o-lineman are required for a man scheme. Lineman that play in a zone scheme are normally smaller, quicker, and more athletic than man to man blockers. Thats because they can use their athleticism to beat the defenders instead of shear strength. A smaller O-lineman(like Levitre) may have trouble in a man scheme because he don't have the mass or the strength to take on a defender one on one. He excels in the zone scheme because is is quicker and athletic enough to do so.
I think the key there is "may have trouble". I understand there is a prototype for each scheme. I'm a believer in exceptions to the rule though. Just because a guy may be 20 pounds lighter than your prototype doesn't mean he can't be good in your scheme. I also think some players play better in situations that fit better with their particular "Skills" not necessarily their weight or body type. JMO
-
To the Falcons/49ers game the former head of Officials Mike Pereira said you had to leave that as called on the field and went on to explain how the ball can hit the ground in a catch if it's controlled. I think the problem is that it's too hard to tell what is a catch and what isn't a catch in the NFL.
Here's another little observation on my part. When you need the former head of officiating to be in the studio and be asked to come on the air to explain how these rules are interpreted I think it's time to change something. Just my opinion. The NFL has clouded the rules to the point that a supreme court judge would have a hard time ruling on it. Absurd
-
To the Falcons/49ers game the former head of Officials Mike Pereira said you had to leave that as called on the field and went on to explain how the ball can hit the ground in a catch if it's controlled. I think the problem is that it's too hard to tell what is a catch and what isn't a catch in the NFL.
I completely agree. Please, NFL fix it. Make it common sense. I know that the opinion on the play is split somewhat. I would think that most fans believe that if the ball hits the ground while in the process of going to the ground it shouldnt be and hasnt been in the past, ruled a catch. When you look at that play vs the Avery play I think its just absolutely ridiculous that the Atlanta play IS a catch and the Avery play was not.
-
(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.).
Note 2: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of
possession.
Im just going to have to disagree with you. The ball was moving around between his hand and the stomach as he going to the ground. As his knees hit the ground it jars it even further to the point it starts to completely come out of his hand. It hits the ground and stays in partial contact with his hand and then he rolls onto it
I see you and a few others seem to have a misunderstanding of what TCU ran when Hughes was there.
TOBIN ON HAND
in Colts.com News
Posted
The thing I remember most about Bill Tobin was his "Who the h... is Mel Kiper anyway?" remark after Kiper went off about Tobin Selecting Trev Alberts with Trent Dilfer being the pick that Kiper thought he should have made. Funny stuff