masnerj
-
Posts
253 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by masnerj
-
-
I might get flak for this but I don't think Landry is a good fit for our 4-3 defense. He is too small and would need to bulk up in order to play as effective 4 down DE in our scheme. Otherwise he would only be a pass-rushing specialist (think Tim Williams from last year). There is no question the guy has some pass-rush abilities but he is probably a better 3-4 OLB then a 4-3 DE. And we all know how much our team loves "scheme-fit" with releasing Hankins and all.
-
Green was actually not terrible at CB last year when we had a bunch of injuries and tried him out at that position (when the whole Vontae Davis and Q Wilson situation was happening). He certainly looked a lot better than at safety....
The issue with him at safety is that he still can't recognize and react to plays at an NFL level while being back there. All the speed and size in the world won't help you if you don't have the instincts at safety. At least at corner, he put his size and speed directly to use (though I will admit he did get crossed over a few times). I was actually surprised by how decent he looked at corner. Especially because during draft time, most teams (if not all except for us) were looking into him as a potential cover corner type player.
I suggest that (if we keep Desir and Q Wilson at the top of the depth chart and don't make any crazy new additions) that we try him out at cornerback again. I think a full offseason and a year's worth of practice playing corner could make him a serviceable cornerback in the NFL. If he learns to not bit hard on double moves, he could even pass as a starter.
His size and speed will help and he is currently stuck behind a crowded defensive backfield in Farley, Geathers, and Hooker (with a strong possibility of another piece through the draft). Just an idea...
-
We have a very exciting upcoming draft. BDB just pulled off a wonderful trade, getting 3 second rounders from the Jets in return for moving down 3 spots from #3 to #6 overall. For now, the top 5 is set and will likely remain the same till draft night. This post is about dissecting each pick and team and looking at the possibilities that exist for the Colts at #6. Alright, let's get to it.
#1 Overall - Browns: QB#1
It is widely expected that the Browns will draft a QB here. They signed Carlos Hyde to a big deal (for a running back) and are trying to extend Duke Johnson. Hyde + Johnson would be a very solid RB committee and drafting Barkley here would be a waste. They finally made the move to hire a competent GM in Dorsey and you can bet that his most important job in revitalizing the Browns franchise is to get a franchise quarterback. For the purposes of this activity, it doesn't really matter who it is actually. Let's just call him QB #1. (I personally think it is going to be Darnold 90% chance, 10% chance Josh Allen).
#2 Overall - QB#2
This is where it starts to get interesting. The Giants clearly have a few issues that need addressing: their QB situation, their need to rebuild their OLine, to name a few. In my opinion, there are really only three practical options for the Giants. The first is them falling in love with Barkley and trusting Manning's next few years. The second is a team like Denver or the Bills offering a lot of money to move up for a QB. The last is them drafting a QB like Rosen, stealing an option away from the Jets and setting up a nice little succession plan. The latter two are the more likely options. Thus, in my opinion there is a >80% chance the pick here will be a QB, whether it is the Giants or Denver (Bills would probably have to give up way too much to move to #2 after the Jets deal). My personal opinion is that the Giants fall in love with Rosen and give him a chance to sit behind Manning for a year or two in a Rodgers type situation. That could help him get acclimated to the NY market and media and maybe even with Manning's mentoring tone down the public nature of some of his extreme views.
#3 Overall - Jets: QB#3
The Jets are probably hoping that the Giants stay put and draft a non QB like Nelson or Barkley. That would give them the 2nd choice of the top QBs. Realistically that probably isn't going to happen. But regardless, they didn't give up 3 second round picks to pick up Barkley or a non-QB. The 3rd QB of the draft is probably going to be picked up by the Jets.
#4 Overall - Browns: Chubb or Trade Down with the Bills and the Bills select QB#4
Unfortunately the Browns are going to be the X-Factor in whether or not Chubb falls all the way down to us. In my opinion, there is no way they should give up the opportunity to have a Chubb-Garrett tandem for the next decade. That would give them a potential Freeney - Mathis duo where both guys could reasonably be 10+ sack guys. The other option is that the Bills are desperate for a QB and don't want to miss out on the remaining 4th option (aka Mayfield) and give up the farm to move up and draft him. This is the scenario that we want and should hope to God for.
#5 Overall - Denver: If #4 is Chubb, remaining QB. If#4 is QB, Nelson or Fitzpatrick
Denver is in an interesting spot. They don't necessarily NEED a QB but if the 4th QB is still on the board (especially if its Josh Allen), then it could make sense to draft him and have him sit behind Keenum for a year or two at the very least. If the top 4 QBs are gone, then they probably draft Nelson or Fitzpatrick.
#6 Overall - Colts: If Chubb and Barkley are still on the board, see how much the Bucs would give up to be able to choose who they want. If they don't give up a lot, draft Chubb. Otherwise, draft Barkley if he is there (the dude is a generational talent and is worth more than another trade down or Nelson). Dangle the pick to everybody else and see if you can get more value then Nelson. Otherwise, draft Nelson and be extremely happy that your last option was a generational player at the guard position and a player that can be an All-Pro fixture for many years.
-
People don't realize, his moves are about bringing up the talent of our team, tier by tier. With the terrible roster of a team that we have had recently, it is going to take a lot more than just a couple 13+ million/yr players to get us back on track. On the other hand, you target guys like Simon, Sheard, Autry, Hankins, Woods who are mid-to-upper tier players (but NOT superstar status) but who you can get reasonably for 4-8 million a year. You grab many of these players, who are high upside and often have personal drive to excel in a full-time role. Then you slowly raise the talent level of the entire team.
That is how you build a dynasty. You need to have a solid, relatively cheap base that performs a base-level and then you supplement with superstars (whether through free-agency or high draft picks) to get to the championship level for a few seasons. We will be fine. As long as he comes out of the draft with atleast some Simon Sheard type players, we are good.
-
People are freaking out that we haven't signed any major player in the NFL free agency. We have missed out on Hitchens, Norwell, Robinson, and others. However, people don't realize this but Ballard prefers a certain type in free agency: Mid-Tier players (average-to-above-average players in the NFL) that are young and/or have upside. Just take a look at the previous year with players like Sheard, Simon, Woods, Hankins. These guys are majority under 7 million a year and are at the very least average starters but at their best flash pro-bowl potential. They do the most important thing in a rebuilding roster: plug holes with something more than a band-aid. They shore up our depth and overall talent. And the best part is that you can get many of them by having cap space and NOT chasing the above-averages starters that are getting All Pro money.
Just take a look at this article: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2763444-doug-farrars-top-50-players-on-the-2018-nfl-free-agent-market
And you'll quickly see just how much talent there is left out there at positions of concern/need of an upgrade prior to the draft. I can easily see a situation where after the initial "glow" or crazy of free agency, Ballard goes in and easily swipes up multiple impact players for less than 8 million a year. You better bet your money Ballard has a list more detailed and refined than this. He knows what he wants, and I think we'll see how he can "stack" up good free agencies as well as drafts.
-
This would be a dream scenario to be completely honest. Well Done!
Man, if somehow we can trade down a few spots AND still get Chubb, we would easily pick up some nice extra picks!
-
I think we need to realize that even if Norwell isn't a "done deal" to the Giants, the chances are still more that he signs elsewhere than he signs here.
There are quite a few teams that do have the cap space that would LOVE to sign an All-Pro guard. Not to mention, Indy isn't exactly the most attractive FA destination for most. People should realize that just because you have the money and desire for a certain player, it isn't even close to a done deal.
-
Guys, I think the issue here is how we classify Bradley Chubb. I am hearing phrases like "rock-solid pash-rusher" or "complete 4-3 DE with no overall weaknesses" and then I am hearing things like "elite pass-rusher" and "top overall defensive player in the draft." The problem is whether or not we consider Bradley Chubb to be an ELITE, All-Pro potential PASS-RUSHER. Nobody will deny that in all likelihood, Bradley Chubb's floor is that of an above-average 4-3 DE who gets around 6-7 sacks a year and is a good run-defender as well and never comes off the field. HOWEVER, that is not what the #3 pick overall is for (atleast in today's NFL).
Just go back to Ballard's words about what the #3 pick should ideally be. He used words and phrases like "transformational talent", "game-changer," etc. At this point, throwing needs out of the window to an extent (which any self-respecting NFL draft strategy should have," there is no question that those phrases belong to Saquon Barkley more so than they do to Bradley Chubb. And looking back at history, those phrases belonged easily to Clowney and Garrett.
Unfortunately, Chubb probably isn't at the same level as Bosa, Garrett, Clowney, etc in terms of pass-rush talent. Sure he might be a better run-defender coming out or have an overall better solid body of work but that isn't what a top 5 pick is about. You need a game-breaker type player if you want to pick at #3 (unless your team is desperate for a QB in which case you probably reach for a Josh Allen or settle with Rosen type player).
As much as I love Bradley Chubb and his extremely high floor, I don't think his ceiling is high enough to warrant the use of the #3 pick. If we somehow trade back to like 6-8 and grab him than I will go crazy because we would have picked up extra premium picks AND gotten him at a pick that he is suited for. I hate to agree with @BlueShoe because I personally would rather have a defensive player than an offensive player but I have been convinced over the last few weeks that Barkley fits exactly with that game-breaker type talent way more so than Chubb or anybody else in the draft. And to be honest, that might be why Ballard wasn't jumping out of his seat when describing SB in an interview (or was it his press conference?). He used "good player" lol.
If Barkley is there at 3, you grab him no questions asked (unless a team gives up the farm to trade up for him). If Barkley is gone, I don't think you can grab Chubb at #3 and be "happy." At a pick like #3 you gotta be able to grab a player and start jumping up and down in the war-room and be excited for a game-changing talent. If Barkley is gone, that means you probably will have several teams looking to trade up for the 2nd QB pick in which case you move down and comfortably select out of Chubb, Nelson, etc in a BPA mode AND enjoy additional 1st/2nd round talent this year or next also in a BPA mode.
-
I want Schwartz. I think with Ballard as GM, he could be kept in check so he doesn't get too out of control but we need a fiery guy that can spark this franchise after all that has happened. As long as Luck comes back healthy I am not too worried about the state of the franchise moving forward considering we will win (assuming he is healthy) regardless of who is head coach.
-
29 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:
You have an opinion based on no data. As a linebacker coach, he isn't drawing up the schemes
Although technically true considering he wasn't the DC, he was also the "passing game coordinator" so you better believe he was in the same meetings as the DC regarding game-plans and schemes that are being employed to defend against the pass. Also, he was also considered by Dallas to be the heir to their current DC. We just got lucky that their DC didn't retire this past year and that he wanted to jump out of that shadow and make his own with the Colts.
Just wait, he will be good. Linebackers is our last weak spot in the defense (apart from a star pass-rusher which we can grab in Chubb). What better to fix that then one of the most well regarded LB coaches in the game and provide him with a chance to transform the linebacker corp with players that he loves and wants? Bring in Hitchens, grab a 2nd or 3rd round MLB and add him to Simon and you got yourself a high-upside LB corp and the complete overhaul of the weakest part of our defense.
-
Is it 11am EST or CST?
-
6 minutes ago, John Waylon said:
Boy the punches keep on rolling in. He didn’t even stay for a carrot dangled in front of him. He just stayed to stay.
I really want to think this whole thing wasn’t just some elaborate setup designed as deflategate retaliation.
But I can’t. I just * can’t. If I live for another 50 years I don’t think I’ll be able to ever say this wasn’t a setup to get back at us for deflategate.
And I’m sure he and Ballard discussed draft and free agency strategy at some point. I’m sure McDaniels has walked away from this with more information than he needs.
This is bad. This is real bad. Even if you didn’t want him as our coach this is bad.
The bolded is an excellent point that I actually didn't even think of. Disregarding everything about him as a HC and how we are seriously behind in the offseason process already, it should be pointed out that now McDaniels (and the Pats by extension) have some sort of idea and insight into Ballard's workings and plans for the offseason, draft, and free agency.
-
1 minute ago, RockThatBlue said:
I like the immediate statement by the Colts and the "agreeing to contract terms" included to let people know that ultimately Josh McDaniels DID back out and this will very well probably be a legal fight as well.
-
3 minutes ago, indy1888 said:
Schefter still reporting that Mcdaniels expected to be named head coach.
If this were to fall through though it would almost certainly be because he was offered the Patriots job as soon as BB retires. And who knows that may be sooner then later. Nobody else would hire the guy if he bailed on the Colts offer. But if he was guaranteed the Pats job he likely wouldn't care and Kraft would get enjoyment out of sticking one to the Colts.
This would be very foolish on McDaniel's part for several reasons.
1) You typically don't want to follow in the footsteps or take over from a LEGENDARY coach (arguably the GOAT in the coaching world). Especially in this case considering Brady is almost done, there is no back-up QB contingency plan (the Jimmy G fiasco), and knowing what Patriot fans have been used to for the last decade +, McDaniels leash would not be very long to be completely honest in NE unless he starts winning quickly which might be hard if Brady leaves soon.
2) If he bails on the Colts, he will arguably never get an interview for a serious HC position in the NFL every again. He would essentially be chaining himself to NE for the rest of his life. What happens if he doesn't have the same success following Belicheck and the fans start asking for his firing? If he has to leave NE, he would have nowhere else to go (especially considering he already messed up his first HC gig).
3) The Colts are arguably a better situation for Josh McDaniels than the Patriots in 1-2 years would be. Colts have 80+ million in cap space RN, have the #3 overall pick, an excellent young GM to "grow old with" lol, and a potentially healthy Luck who could easily be a top 5-10 QB the rest of his career if he doesn't encounter any career-ending injuries.
-
8 hours ago, Bubba_Rebel said:
Why would we want that? McDaniels is, arguably, the top OC in the game
Agreed. Offensively minded head coaches (especially ones that were known as excellent OCs) don't typically give up play-call duties considering its usually their "bread and butter." And to be honest, I don't know if I would want anyone other than Josh McDaniels calling plays. Man has showed that he can gameplan with the best of them and knows how to be a skilled play caller.
-
If you guys remember, one of Ballard's key points about the next head coach is that he must be able to hire and assemble an excellent skilled and experienced staff. Considering that, Peetz probably doesn't meet Ballard/Irsay's requirement for a OC considering he is so young and inexperienced. I definitely think he would get the approval as a QB coach but I don't think that that would be allowed considering you would have to get permission probably.
This guy, on the other hand, has experience and has played with another really good QB in Russell Wilson and for a respectable organization in the Seahawks.
-
9 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:
Or if Barkley and Chubb are gone at our pick we could trade down for extra picks. Take Quenton Nelson in the first and Will Hernandez in the 2nd. FA isn’t the only way to add quality OL.
I don't know how I feel about that. Asking two drafted OL to play above-average immediately no matter how high they were drafted is pretty unreasonable. Nelson will most likely easily start off as an above-average guard. But I don't know about Hernandez's ability to come in without any real struggles.
The best case scenario is a we draft a high-upside guy in the first couple of rounds AND sign a guy like Norwell. Another option is, if we lose out on the Norwell bidding, then we sign a couple of veteran SOLID O-lineman from the FA and then approach the draft with an intention to trade down and draft a guy like Nelson.
Either way, we absolutely need to sign some veteran offensive lineman. One of Grigson's biggest mistakes are certainly that he realized too late that he needed to fix the O-Line. But an underrated mistake is his inability to fix it once he realized so. He tried to fix it by drafting a bunch of offensive lineman and hoping that they would come in and fix it right away without any developmental time, regardless of how high they were drafted.
-
People are seriously too in love with Chubb and Barkley. Don't get me too wrong...Chubb is an excellent player who will probably be an above-average DE at the next level and gets 10+ sacks a year. BUT he is NOT a generational talent who like Von Miller changes a franchise almost. He is simply a very well-rounded and strong candidate to go top 5 in most drafts.
That being said, who CARES if we miss out on Chubb and Barkley if both Cleveland and Giants pick non-QBs with their top 2 picks (a mistake in my opinion for them). We practically become almost #1 overall pick holders WITHOUT a need for a QB (presuming Luck is healthy and coming back). And with an above-average draft for QBs with three interesting candidates to go top among the QBs, we would have a very tremendous haul (think extra first round and second picks).
We could go down a couple of spots, still pick a guy like Quentin Nelson or Minkah Fitzpatrick (or if you are really desperate grab Davenport if we drop even more) who are almost sure to become above-average players in the NFL and have solid careers.
Extra first and second rounders this year and next year is how you accelerate the re-build we are currently in. Yes Luck is coming back. But we are going for a dynasty (Seahawks, Patriots, etc both teams that should sound familiar with our staff) and for that sustained success (multiple Lombardis) you need to develop a strong base through the draft and then pair that up with an excellent QB like Luck in his prime.
-
1 minute ago, csmopar said:
Well not only that but something nobody on here has mentioned... with several decent proven QBs hitting the market, such as Bradford, potentially Bridgewater, heck even Bortes may not be back with the Jags next year. Not to mention Kaepernick, it's possible they sign one or those. Then draft Barkey at one.
Not only is that possible, it is something that we as Colts fans should be strongly rooting for. The best thing that can happen for us in the draft is if the Browns (or Giants but this is pretty unlikely) draft Barkley #1 overall. That puts us in PRIME position to trade down (and get a HUGE haul) and still get the player(s) that we wanted originally or were super high on our board.
-
So here it is: I think I know exactly what is going to happen in this upcoming draft based on my own theories formed by connecting the dots with what has happened so far...
Setting the stage:
Irsay mentions Edgarrin James earlier in the year when talking about Andrew Luck and the need to pair him up with a guy similar to James who can set up a strong tandem. This made headlines everywhere and most people assumed that this meant heavy interest in a guy like Barkley, considered a generational talent at the RB position who can truly do it all and might perform similar/more than some stellar RBs drafted in recent years.
Ballard in a few conversations about the draft pick has talked about how high it is, it being extremely rare to be in a position like this, not trying to be in a position like this again, lots of talents players found in the top 5 that a franchise might never have a chance at, etc. All this points towards him talking about a guy or two that he feels is extremely worth the 3rd overall pick which is what we have.
Now moving on to the draft and the prospects, here are the teams at the top and their general needs:
Browns: 1st, 4th overall. Needs at QB, RB and reports suggest that they would ideally want to come out of those top two picks with a stellar tandem of RB and QB.
Giants: 2nd overall. Needs at QB cause of uncertainties with Manning and the future. A new coach, guy like Shurmer, knows that they won't have a chance to pick this high again so they probably will want a guy out of Rosen, Darnold, Allen.
Colts: 3rd overall. Assuming Luck is healthy and coming back (and at this moment all things point towards this). Needs at RB, Pass-Rush, OL, etc.
What I think is happening here is that Ballard + Irsay are creating the notion that the Colts are extremely interested in a guy like Barkley and want to pair him up with Luck for the next 5-10 years. This scares the Browns because they pick just before us. The Browns, knowing that they can't draft Rosen cause he doesn't want to play for them, are stuck between Allen and Darnold. If they feel that there is not much difference between the two and that neither one is worth the #1 pick, they might just go ahead and select Barkley to make sure that they get him and that we don't mess up their plans with our 3rd overall pick. Then the giants select Rosen, and then all of a sudden there is a huge market for the the 3rd overall picks and we can drop down to 5 or 6 and still get Chubb who I would think would be a great fit in a 4-3 defense (Ballard has mentioned that the draft is a good place to draft players for schematic changes).
Ballard might be trying to force Cleveland into thinking that at the very least we are interested in Barkley and at the very max that we love the guy and thus making them strongly consider drafting Barkley #1 overall.
Bottom line is that Cleveland drafting Barkley #1 overall is the best thing that can happen to us and I believe that that is exactly what will happen. And knowing Ballard, he already has an idea of what the minimum trade offers would be for a team like Denver so they can jump past the Browns and get their pick of Darnold or Allen.
-
The bigger "issue" will be the other DT position. Hankins is basically perfectly set in one of the positions but he needs a good partner in crime. I don't think Al Woods is considered a real fit for a 4-3 defense at DT so he might be relegated to a depth/rotation role like earlier in his career. I hope he proves me wrong and outperforms expectations once again but until I see it, I'm not gonna believe it.
The X-Factor for the other DT position is going to be Henry Anderson. I think he is the best fit on our team to fill up the other DT position and with solid play from him, we can continue our rising success in the trenches. Though it is interesting considering some have slotted him at DE but I think he is too big to play end unless its an obvious run-play. Hassan Ridgeway should also be a good guy to rotate in at DT for pass-rush purposes.
-
7 minutes ago, csmopar said:
Last spring, the talk was that Hankins was a better fit for a 3-4 so I don't know
But the irony of that statement is that he was considered a better fit for the NT position at the 3-4 as he played DT in NY. He will be returning to his original position lol.
-
My best case scenario:
Ballard finds a way to trade down, ideally picks up atleast an extra 1 and a 2, and then we still get Chubb.
Heck, even if we trade down, grab an extra 1 and a 2, and pick up Quentin Nelson or Minkah Fitzpatrick or Raquon Smith, we are coming out ahead. My only requirement for my first round pick this year is that we MUST hit and grab atleast an above-average starter at an important position. If we grab a stable and good starter at the very least with our 1st round pick AND pick up extra picks, we are good to go.
-
5 hours ago, Hoose said:
So honestly, the top three picks are likely QBs. The Browns, the Giants, and the team the Colts trade with. So, why woiuld the Browns not figure that out and take the best QB out there? They will have the 4th pick and take Barkley if he's their guy. The Browns aren't worrying about trading with anyone. They control this draft. Take their QB; get Barlkley; and then get the BPA from thereon. They will have a field day.
Great, great point. Browns have TWELVE picks. They have multiple extra first and second round picks. If they come out the draft with a QB and a RB and miss all on the rest of their picks, they could still come out with the most improvement team-wise from a single draft.
Imagine that... Browns with a decent QB, all-pro RB, a rising defense (Garrett and company). That is easily a 8-8 team if not more. And whatever else they hit in this draft is just a cherry on the top.
A 1 AND a 4? That is just insane. That is the same value as two once-in-a-generation picks for a stable franchise like the Colts or Patriots or Steelers. In one draft. With a QB and RB that could change their team completely.
The Current State of The Colts Roster (March)
in Colts Football
Posted
Great write-up!
I just had a few things to point out:
- John Simon will most likely play a linebacker position as he isn't big enough to play 4-3 DE. Sheard is a perfect fit for the 4-3 DE
- I am not so sure about Hairston on the outside. In all likelihood we have Desir and Wilson on the outside and maybe a 2nd or 3rd round draft pick in the room to push for a starting position. Hairston has shown a nice niche playing slot corner.