Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

DougDew

Senior Member
  • Posts

    11,750
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by DougDew

  1. Multiple thought post alert: I liked Dayo as a potential draft pick long before he hurt his achilles late in the year. Afterwards, I totally forgot about him as I thought he would be off the draft board, but I was happy that Ballard liked him and thought that he was a first round player. I wanted Ballard to get one of the LTs at 54 or trade down to take Spencer Brown, but taking Dayo sort of muted the miss on a OT because I liked him as a replacement tweener for Lewis before his injury. Dayo is a tweener. Plays DE on "running downs" and DT (in place of Grover) on "passing downs". His job as DE is not to get sacks, per se, so any statistical analysis or rankings that compare him to other NFL LDEs might be a poor measure of evaluating Dayo. In modern NFL where there are more mobile QBs than pocket QBs, Dayos job will be to hold the edge and keep the QB contained in the pocket so that Paye and Defo can collect the sacks. Dayo will get his sacks when the QB is chased or is trying to escape. Compare this approach to the typical Robert mathis type of LDE that loops around the RT. In the days of pocket passers like Marino and Brady, Mathis's would approach the QB from nearly directly behind them. In today's NFL, that type of LDE will leave a gaping hole for the Mahomes, Allens. and Lamars to run through. Dayo will have the QB come to him, whereby his length can disrupt the escape, redirect it, or even get a sack. Dayos sacks will not come from him running to the QB, but from the QB running to him. That's going to make comparing his stats to other LDEs stats almost moot if the other LDEs have a more "get to the QB" approach. Also, since Dayo will be holding the mobile QB in the pocket, Paye's rankings and sack stats will be inflated when compared to RDE that have a LDE that allows the QB to escape. Separate thought: At 6'6 285, Dayo runs the risk of filling out more as young humans tend to do when they hit their mid 20s. Since our 43 does not employ a traditional fatty NT, if Dayo would gain 10 to 15 pounds he could displace Grover as the NT...perhaps even become a 3 down NT to pair with 3 down 3T Defo.....so, Dayo puts the risk on Grovers future contract rather Defos, IMO. But who knows, injuries to Defo or Grover, or Dayos ability or inability to maintain weight, or gain it, is going to influence his future way more than we can predict today. As of today, he is a tweener who is not really expected to collect the sack stats as some others in the NFL might, JMO.
  2. Its simple, IMO. We can't play C2, C1, and C3. The players that have the variety of high level talents and skills needed to play multiple coverages are simply not available at a reasonable price. A D can't go switching up personnel to play the different coverages. Most players need to stay on the field and be versatile. Pick a scheme and play it 80% of the time. Learn to coach it well to lessen the scheme's warts and have a persistent pass rush that helps the secondary. I don't know who in the FO isn't seeing this. If its Flus at the core of this, well, its been an issue for about 3 years so Ballard must be blind then. I'm not in a position to know the priorities of such decision making so I can't say they don't know what they're looking at, but it sure is hard to see how the players fit into any type of consistent defensive scheme. That goes for the DEs too. Lewis is looking better, but Ben and Turay never seemed like good fits like Paye and Dayo do.
  3. Agreed. I would say, though, that Ballard's comments upon drafting Ehlinger was that "we like him", so they probably saw that he had more of the QB traits they value, right from the college tape and the beginning of TC. Sam ascended and closed the gap pretty quickly to where he and Eason were splitting reps with the 1s. It may have simply been a matter of time and health.
  4. I was asking if we released a player who was playing Safety reasonably well...before he was grabbed by the Eagles.
  5. They drafted Davis in the 5th. I read that he had coverage skills but lacked tackling consistency, sort of Hooker-ish traits. He apparently showed nothing. I'm assuming they were projecting Davis to FS and Blackmon to SS with Willis signing elsewhere for a comp pick. A nice plan for the future, but did not do enough to secure for the present, at this point. What about that Chechere guy they waived, was he playing safety at all or strictly corner?
  6. Trading for Hooker, LOL Heck, trade Mack for Hooker and save money.
  7. We're not sitting Wentz at all if he can play, no matter what the W-L record. The only thing that could POSSIBLY be justified was if/when we are mathematically eliminated, do the Sam/Jacob competition thingy to see what you have in both young QBs, But even that would have been a stretch to justify if Jacob were still here. I can't imagine veterans playing hard and risking career injuries when the FO decides to use games as a training exercise for QBs, basically saying that we don't care much if we win, we just want 21 other guys to play hard so we give the 1 backup guy a chance to improve.
  8. I agree about Tell. I'm neither a Ballard worshipper (obvious), but I'm not a Ballard second guesser as much as some have evolved into being. But there is some lack of vision if the FO thought that Willis could be anything but an in-the-box SS. Given that limitation, he's really not a C2 half-field deep safety. Relying upon him and Blackmon to man the deep halves was doomed to problems, IMO. Maybe they feel comfortable with Odum in a pinch, or maybe they thought (hoped) Tell would show more.....or that 5th round draft pick Davis would stick. A lot of wannabe hope-it-works-out type of thinking, IMO.
  9. I thought the goal of having the "F" safety was for him to take away the deep ball on both sides of the field (when in C1 or C3). So speed is very much needed. But, when we play C2, coming up to tackle is an issue. It would seem that if we intend to play each C1, C2, and C3 (Dungy only played 1), then we need safeties who have the speed to cover sideline to sideline, instincts to read the patterns and QB to know what direction to take his first step (aka the fear Hooker put into opposing QBs so they never even attempted a long pass, LOL), but then have the play recognition and tackling ability (and willingness) to succeed there.. Sounds like a guy with so much talent and skill that he won't be around after round 1. But wait, we also need a zone corner who can tackle, but can run with the WR on the deep routes when we play man coverage. And LBers who can cover the middle but can blitz (because how dare we run a vanilla defense), but also have to be big enough to not get trucked by the RB. And we need a LT, .......and we need a deep threat WR, and...... Either we have to pick a defense and an offense and stick with it, with all of its warts in situations, or draft the do-it-all's we need at every position with the first round picks that it would take. If we build through the draft, the first guy we drafted would be retiring by the time we were able to get the last guy we needed, LOL. Nah, Blackmon is fine at FS. A smart coach would play him there and limit the things we try to do as a defense. (unless he has a career threatening injury of course). If he can't learn to cover deep, then choose between him and Willis and let the other find a new team. JMO.
  10. A couple of years ago I read an article that said there was a correlation between players that get knee reconstructive surgery and then later having Achilles issues. Not that its directly causal, and not that a player won't get an Achilles issue independent of having a knee issue, but that when a player has the knee, the risk of Achilles problems increase. Wasn't Hooker's latest injury with us the Achilles? Maybe a stat junkie will massage their own collected data to claim I have confirmation bias or something. I'm just reporting what I read and filing it under objective-pattern-recognition habits. But surgeries and rehabs might have advanced since the time the article was written, so any correlation might be outdated and moot.
  11. The talk about Eason being the QB#2 fails to recognize how tenuous that was. IIRC, Eason was #2 at the beginning of TC. Sam was just drafted with no time in the NFL, and Hundley was not even signed. But throughout TC and the preseason Ehlinger was slowly gaining on Eason to the point that they were splitting time with the 1s both in TC and preseason. Ehlinger simply understood how to play the QB position better than Eason did, by all accounts. When Sam returns from IR, he's the one chosen to keep. I'm not sure why this is a great mystery. Of course Frank is going to say supportive things in pressers. A successful 50 year old man should not throw a 23 year old kid under the bus just because fans want complete transparency. Frank, good job for not telling us everything. You'd be a bad HC if you did.
  12. As others have said, I think EJ was more elusive and had better balance, making him a bit tougher to tackle, IMO. He could gain yards with more defenders around him. He was sort of a poor man's Barry Sanders. Taylor definitely has home run speed, and seems to move the pile better, but more of a straight line runner. He is a bigger and better Donald Brown. I like RBs with EJs talents more than a RB with JT's talents. EJs rookie year highlights:
  13. He has earned the starting spot merely because every other option that has played has been worse. Many don't seem to see that.
  14. So lets see... The Colts throw deep when the WR group is playing with deep threat players. And it doesn't, when they don't (which is a lot of games over the past two years). Who still doesn't get this?
  15. Flus didn't stay the course. He dropped DEs into the middle coverage. The middle was open because the DEs sucked at it. Players sucking at it is synonymous with no talent. Flus did his job, the players failed to do theirs.
  16. Leonard, and the slot corner, (Moore), and the closer to the LOS of the two safeties, (Willis), are the only positions (players) that would frequently blitz in our scheme. All three players are pretty good at it. The defense is not set up to blitz a lot. And with Moore and Willis on the shelf, I wouldn't expect much blitzing.
  17. I'm feeling better about our WR group. It looks like Campbell can play and stay healthy. It looks like Pittman can play X or the slot. And there is always another year for Strachan to take the next step. I think TY and Pascal are probably going to be replaced by signing a vet FA. Sign a vet with their money. You want to sprinkle the corps with a mix of youth and experience, and adding a rookie to the PC, PItt, and Strach grouping is too much youth, IMO. Add Patmon too. And it looks like Wentz can find the receiver well enough. I think we really need to draft a TE, and they can be gotten in rounds 2 and 3, maybe even round 4. Zone corners can be had in rounds 2 and 3. Zone safeties can be had in rounds 2 or 3. LT is a problem if Fisher doesn't work out.
  18. Well, you're not going to change to a 34. And you're not going to play press man in the back 4 when the corners are UDFA rookies. And we don't have the FS to play Cover 3. Soft zone to run clock is about all you can do, and flood the middle with defenders. Flus tried to cover the middle, and the LBers, Ss, and DEs who were assigned that responsibility failed. Its clearly on the limitations of the personnel.
  19. On the TD, Oke tried but failed. On the 2 pt,(I think it was that play), Leonard looked like he didn't know what he was doing. Overall, I would think a dropping DE or an LB would have been keying on Andrews at some point. I mean, if you are playing back there, wouldn't you be looking at Andrews and watching him? Sure, if BAL overloaded your zone you're screwed, but at least stop Andrews first. To me, that failure doesn't seem like a lack of coaching. It seems like a lack of common sense.
  20. Sounds like they read this forum...LOL. We all know this. For me, for about 2 years now.
  21. The defense was keeping Lamar in check and Brown a non factor for most of the game. It was a great game plan for 3 quarters. When Rhodes and number 34 left the game, the coverage got worse. The "vanilla" narrative gets old. Having the DEs drop into coverage is not a vanilla 43. It didn't work because of the players who were dropping. The defense ended up rushing 3 and the middle was still wide open. Poor talent.
  22. Simms mentions that there is no defender on the TV screen when BAL throws the dump offs. Well, we have seven players not rushing, and the Ravens only had three receivers. The LBers are supposed to be close to the dump offs. They are not playing the deep ball. The LBers should be there, and I doubt that Flus told them to drop back deep so far they are out of the picture.
  23. With whom? Who can blitz besides Leonard? And I'm not sure that he blitzes very well.
  24. The defense was conservative because it had third string secondary that got beat deep the one time they went to man coverage. Completing that thought, the defense is conservative in general because it has no talent, in general.
  25. I think the play calling was a bit conservative there too. Should have tried to get one more first down which would have made the FG easier and taken more clock. Having said that, it looks like the FG was on line before being blocked, so it was Glow's fault really.
×
×
  • Create New...