mvbighead
-
Posts
955 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by mvbighead
-
-
Simply looking at the numbers, Hilton is not far off from Dez in terms of yardage and receptions. 12-14 is definitely reasonable.
The only question that should be asked is if it makes sense to invest that money in TY and not on the defensive side (or offensive line). I could see it both ways.
On one hand, you have TY who is a known quantity. On the other, our defense can always stand to improve. And with Dorsett and Moncrief also being in the plans for the future, we could definitely find a much cheaper option to stretch the field in addition to Dorsett/Moncrief.
I wouldn't be terribly disappointed either way, but I would think a good 10-12 million dollar/season deal would be hard to pass up.
-
The longer I look at it, the more I am ok with it. Not thrilled, but I can see the point. And my guess... Hilton is gone after this year (unless we can RFA him).
The one thing I considered though, is with the Jets taking Williams, and the idea that they're hanging Wilkerson out there... if we suspect that we cannot retain Hilton after this year, perhaps we trade Hilton and a pick for Wilkerson. I suspect Wilkerson has more value than Hilton, so I would guess we have to give up a 2 or 3 plus Hilton (but just guessing really). But if we brought in a guy like Wilkerson, that would totally change our defense unlike any player in the draft. I know this probably won't happen (and would probably be majorly expensive)... but a guy can dream.
-
How many of those guys are you comfortable with protecting Andrew Luck for a whole season? Polian drafted Hughes, how is this relevant? You would rather take a Safety in the 1st (who is not anything besides solid ITB and average in coverage -and I'm not a hater, I like him), than to ensure that your franchise is protected; and to do so because well, we are already paying him $7mil, he needs to be out there whether he is hurting us or not? This is also assuming he can return, this appears to be something more serious, a degenerating knee issue possibly. I'm not saying no to Collins if he is the best player on the board at 29, I think he can improve our safety position immediately, but to rule out drafting a RT in the first for the reasons you stated seems somewhat absurd.
Hughes was relevant because we drafted a guy we could seldom put on the field before. With the WR pick right now, it seems to be about the same. Had we drafted a RT and Cherilus returned healthy, we'd either put a 1st rounder on the bench or a 7/million dollar player. Neither of those is good idea. We need depth on the OL, and for our starters to return healthy. Unless we planned on offloading Cherilus outright, drafting an OT in the first IMO would have been very similar to the Hughes situation.
As for the safety, it appears GB took a guy I thought we'd be taking. Soooo...
All I can say is, they must be expecting something major from Dorsett. That, and I suspect we're going to let TY go in some way shape or form either as a trade soon or next off season so we have cap space to re-sign Luck. That's about all I can figure.
-
I do not like the idea of a RT in round 1. I can see that Cherilus is injured, but I think we have much bigger problems on the defensive side of the ball. Safety would be ideal in my opinion, but a good NT would be awesome. I think we need OL depth, but we've got so many guys on the roster now, I don't see the need to bring in one in round 1.
I suppose many will call it drafting the BPA vs need, but Polian drafted Hughes... he never had a shot here behind Freeney/Mathis. And now he's making 9mill/season in Buffalo and is arguably one of their best defensive players. We need to draft a player that is nearly a certainty to be on the field. A good safety would be that. A dominant DL would be that. But whenever Cherilus returns, what do we do with him then? Pay him 7+ mill to ride the pine? I just don't see it.
-
Boom looks good, im more concerned with our pass happy play caller Pep Hamilton, at one point in the game we passed the ball 25 times to 3 runs, no balance at all, and against the broncos we are going to need to run the ball!
Eh, the way I see that one, Pep merely acknowledged that we are having an EXTREMELY difficult time running the ball. 10 dump offs to Boom were merely an extension of the run game, IMO. Sure, they were pass plays, but essentially Boom had 20+ carries as most starting RBs do, just that some of them were passes instead of handoffs.
Balance? If you consider that a number of passes were dump offs and short throws, and a handful were down the field, I think that is the balance most teams look for. Keep the defense honest and make them defend the long ball, but cut them up underneath with runs and short throws.
However you want to look at it, it worked and kept Luck relatively clean for most of the game.
-
There's plenty of black assistant coaches in the NFL that would make good head coaches, I just don't believe Pep Hamilton is one of them
I don't believe any coordinator with a top 10 QB is usually worthy of such interviews, but when people go looking at Adam Gase, why exactly is that?
To me, guys like Peyton and Brady have helped so many coordinators get into coaching positions, but a good part of the success of those offenses is the guy throwing the ball. Suffice it say, when a black coordinator gets interviewed, it ain't a Rooney rule thing necessarily. It could be as simple as looking for the next up and comer, and who better than a guy calling the plays for a highly ranked offense.
-
And the board's IQ level drops
What exactly is your point with this comment?
-
This reeks of a Rooney rule interview
Why is it every time a black coordinator gets interviewed, someone has to suggest this crap? The Colts had the leading offense in the league for quite some time into the season. Why not consider that coordinator for a head coach position, black or white or brown or yellow?
-
Can you please let me know how this front office has gotten more level headed? Didn't they just fire their coach mid-way through the season? The only possible cornerstone I see is Mack, Carr while decent for a rookie needs alot of work to become a cornerstone of the franchise. I don't mean to blast you but I live in SoCal and hear all about it from Raiders fans/radio, etc.... and they aren't as optimistic as you lol
I agree, getting any of the 32 head coaching jobs is a dream come true to some, but stop polishing a turd. If Pep or Bowles or whoever get the job, they will be cutting their teeth with a angry looking Reggie McKenzie and a befuddled looking Mark Davis standing over them questioning every move.
Firing a coach midway through the season means one is not level headed? Allen wasn't doing anything to show improvement. If that's the case, move on and try something else. And when you have a former head coach as a coordinator, why not give him the keys for a short while just to see what you have.
As for Carr, plenty are optimistic about him. Any rookie usually needs lots of work. Manning wasn't great for his first season or two. The thing is, Carr seems to have something that many of their previous QBs didn't. That 'it' factor that drives them to be better. He may not pan out over the next few years, but he has the physical tools and seemingly the drive to improve. That's a heckuvalot more than the Browns have in Manziel.
As for a staff questioning their every move, that's hogwash. Nearly every coach gets his first season as a near pass so long as some level of improvement is seen. Only truly horrible coaches get canned immediately for not being able to show a modicum of improvement. People joke about that franchise all the time, but having watched many of their games, they're often close in division games, which means they're a few steps away from putting up enough W's to make the playoffs. It just takes steady improvement for that to happen, and a good coach CAN make that difference.
-
I have to ask - how on earth do you know if the Raiders consider him a serious candidate or not?
I have to say, anyone is a serious candidate if you are asking permission to talk to them. Some teams simply know exactly who they want based on past experiences. Others may be combing the fields and talking to guys to see who has the right personality to fit what they want their organization to do.
But to me, if you are asking for permission to interview a guy, he's a serious candidate, not matter how many guys they interview. All one need do is say the right things and present the right attitude and they can be the guy they hire.
-
What stands out to me most is his body control.
However although it's hard to tell from a video, I'm concerned if he has the speed to be any kind of a deep threat in the NFL. He can outrun those guys in Canada, but can he do it in the big leagues? Looks can be deceiving but he honestly doesn't look that fast.
He appears to be a 4.6 guy, so definitely not the fastest. But Reggie is currently one of our best receivers and he was never considered a burner. I'd imagine this guy runs as fast or faster than Reggie, so what really matters is his ability to catch/run routes/etc. TY and Moncrief are both quite able to take the top off a defense.
-
I am not a Pep fan but really you'd want your first HC job in Oakland that seems to me like career suicide. I would wait for a better gig
I love how people say stupid stuff like this. Oakland has been bad, that goes without saying. But with Al Davis gone, the franchise has gotten a bit more level headed in the front office. They have multiple cornerstones on both sides of the ball in Mack and Carr. They have some veteran presence, and are often a tough team for some to compete with.
That said, their previous head coach was simply not getting it done. They had some good games with Sparano leading the pack, but I suspect the GM wants to hand select his guy if he's going to be on a short leash himself. And if they were to hire Pep, who better to develop Carr than the guy who had Luck. If offered the job, I bet Pep takes it in a heart beat.
-
I take that back I hope we learned our lesson with Rodgers this kid sounds like another knucklehead he couldn't make grades at any school has a poor attitude blah blah blah. Sign a real NFL WR and move on.
Real NFL receivers cost money. When we've invested relatively high picks in Hilton, Moncrief, Allen, and Fleener, it makes sense to round out some of the roster with up and comers behind them. That could be more draft selections, or UDFA, or players from Canada.
As for poor attitude, no two players are identical. Rodgers problem was marijuana. From what I am reading here, Carter's problem was academics. Academics are hardly a problem in the NFL. If the kid is a team player and has the talent to make it, it would he'd be a good prospect to develop as depth behind Hilton and Moncrief. And as I mentioned before, it would cost nearly nothing to bring him in, which is a good thing with some major contracts looming in the near future.
-
I think Moncrief is pretty happy to be where he is. A winning team with a good young QB. It is typically year 3 that WR's break out. He could still be in Mississippi or worse. His rookie year and he is preparing to play in a home playoff game. Doesn't get much better than that.
I don't get the hype over Carter other than who his daddy is I think he has had 124 receptions in 2 years some cat had 112 this year alone up north. He tried the big leagues in 2013 and couldn't make it with the Vikes or NO.
Don't get me wrong I hope he is great and he comes to Indy but I would not be beating on it. What is the contract situation is it a bidding war or does he fall under a rookie max contract. I wouldn't invest a lot of money in someone who has done nothing in the NFL or at OSU or Alabama or Florida Atlantic.
A bidding war over a prospect from Canada? At most you're talking about which team is going to shell out 200k in a signing bonus, plus close to vet minimum on a per year basis.
Signings like this make plenty of sense as they cost nearly nothing in terms of compensation, and you get highly motivated players who may or may not have the talent to make it.
-
I must've been out of this too long, but as much as I hated to see the showing playing the Cowboys, I hardly think that defined the season. It was just an early risk on the punt pass play that failed and pretty much set a poor tone for the rest of the game.
As for the current staff, I dunno that I have major issues with the coaches. We just seem to lack the talent. Grigson seems to be missing more than he is hitting, but the beauty of it is most of the guys can be cut and open up space for next year. To me, none of the FA signings have been home runs, most have simply been adequate. Jackson/Landry/Jones/etc are all guys that contribute, but they're by no means Patrick Willis/Polamolu/Ngata. Granted, they're not being paid as such, but nonetheless we simply don't have any true stars on defense. And the loss of Mathis truly hurt what could have been a truly great D this year.
As for the O, they're making up for some of the defensive shortcomings, but you simply can't anticipate the loss of a player like Mathis.
As much as I try to look at things with a positive eye, it would seem the worst in our FO/coaching staff is Grigson. Aside from drafting Luck and Hilton, he hasn't really struck gold on his other selections. The thing working to his benefit is that most of the poor signings can easily be dropped next offseason and provide cap gains to sign quality replacements. We'll see if he sticks with the guys he's signed, but my guess is that Landry is one that is surely gone unless he shows up big time in the playoffs.
That may just be me, but aside from the Cowboy game, I just don't see how firing coach and coordinators is going to provide much benefit.
-
Wont matter whatever he does vs the Giants...Literally I think he could have a 150 yard game or so against them and he will still be gone if he don't show up in games after that....Im actually predicting that to happen....I don't think he gets 150 but I think he will get 90-100 and continues to flop the rest of the year
Gone? As in cut?
At this point, any move like that wouldn't make much sense. If nothing else, proceed with the next man up and if an injury occurs, he'll perhaps either have extra motivation or the experience within our system to start producing. This is not much different than the Heyward-Bey deal, and I certainly doubt he gets re-upped given his current production. We've struck good on some of those types of deals, such as Bradshaw. It is what it is really. I for one appreciate that Grigs uses trial deals to see what a player has. If it pans out, perhaps we invest for a longer duration. If it doesn't, having Hakeem Nicks on our roster is likely better than any UDFA who could've taken that spot, and it won't hurt the cap next year when we look to replace him or someone else.
-
If Fleener doesn't get off his butt and start making some plays I'm going to start calling for Erik Swoope. Maybe we can get something out of him. Why not? Fleeners playing like a practice squad player anyway! If I'm wrong I'll admit it, but I had to get that one off my chest bro. Just how I feel right now......
Fleener the Weener
I dunno that I'd replace Fleener with Swoope at this point, but I certainly don't expect them to try and re-sign Fleener when the time comes. I really wanted to think he'd blossom into a Jimmy Graham type of TE, but he just doesn't make the average catches enough, and seldom makes the tough catches in traffic. Next offseason I could see a trade, but if Pep can't make Fleener work in our offense, his value has to be extremely low to other squads so we just as well use him on the rookie contract and move on if he doesn't improve drastically. There's always going to be athletic talents in the draft at the TE position, so we just as well look to find one during the offseason and consider moving on from Fleener if we're able to secure a good one then, but now isn't the time.
-
Why are people so blind? I counted 4 passes to Nicks that neither Megatron or Dez Bryant could've even made the catch. Just because he is targeted doesn't mean he should catch it. The O line couldn't provide protection and Luck was inaccurate due to the pressure. Go ahead and be ignorant, but please don't share the stupidity!! Nicks could be a little better but what about the sideline catch about 30+ yards downfield? Nobody wanna give him credit for it?
Ever think that Nicks may not be where Luck expected him to be? There's definitely a chemistry element to accurate passes. Nicks did make a very good catch, but by and large he doesn't separate well and doesn't see the ball often as a result. This offense has never been much for a jump ball type receiver, which, IMO, is more along the lines of what Nicks seems to be.
For me, if the throws are accurate elsewhere, one certainly has to consider that Nicks may not be in the spot Luck anticipated. That may improve, but for me, he doesn't seem to have those issues with Hilton, Wayne, Moncrief, or even Whalen so it may just be that Nicks is not a good fit here.
And the pressure he was under, that element certainly plays into a lot of it as well.
-
Our defense is what caused the turnovers to bring us back in the game. You can't throw a pick
Sorry, but our defense is what brought us back into the game with the turnovers. Offense was off early. You can stare down a receiver and not expect a pick 6. You can't hold onto the ball when you know your offensive line can't slow down the blitz. And you have to be smart situationally especially near the opponents goal line.
Like I said i think Andrew tries to do too much. Its the gift and the curse. You just have to learn balance and live to play another down.
The defense had their moments, for sure. But by and large, Ben was untouched. I doubt the dude needed an ice bath after that game (or whatever they do after getting pummeled all game long); whereas Andrew is probably still in there.
Luck certainly had some issues, but holy cow man, we were down 10-20 points for most of the game... your game plan at that point is to try to score EVERY drive. And seemingly, the Steelers WERE scoring every drive.
However you want to look at it, the majority of our trouble yesterday was the lack of a pass rush. No matter how many we sent, Pitt had an answer. At that point, we ought do drop 8 in to coverage and look for picks.
-
Our defense didn't look soft. They looked stupid for continuously blitzing when Pittsburgh obviously had a counter for it. We stuffed their run game. Bell broke off a couple of runs with 1:13 left in the game to pad the stats.
I definitely started feeling that way later in the game. We weren't getting pressure with 4, 5, or 6 guys. We seldom got close to Ben. If that's the case, just start sticking guys back. Look to bat the ball, look to do something other than a half hearted attempt at rushing the QB. Two things we need in the next draft are a solid corner to backup / play across from Vontae and another pass rusher with speed.
-
Nicks can't create any separation. And he's slow out of his breaks. But that pick 6 was on Luck. Luck could've thrown 4 picks today if the defense had hands.
Luck just tries to do too much. Its the gift and the curse. He needs to learn how to tone it down man. He's a talent and brought us back. But he also lost us the game with the key turn overs.
Sorry,but a QB doesn't lose you a game when you give up 51 points and allow Big Ben to be the 1st person in NFL history with two 500+ yard games.
We lost this game because our coverage was weak and our QB pressure was equally weak. There's no two ways about it, we lost because our defense didn't even begin to slow down Ben.
-
Can't help but be reminded of Albert Haynesworth. No thanks.
Don't normally disagree with you, but this is one where I'd differ.
Suh is a phenomenal talent. his attitude needs to get in check, but he is definitely a high motor guy with the talent behind it. Haynesworth put up one solid year and cashed in big, and then just took the pay checks.
Only problem i see with the NYJ thing is they already seem to be loaded up front on their 3-4. And it doesn't seem like either of their current guys would play the nose. That said, if one of them slid inside and Suh was paired with those two... holy cow would that be a nasty defense.
-
Why do people moan about this being too early? They're not suggesting these are the best guys of the draft class. They're rating them as of week 3. Sure, there isn't a lot to go on, but it's not meant to be a final list for 2014.
-
He fumbled TWICE
Fumble: Singular
Fumbles: Plural
TWO FUMBLES
He's a bust...... Just accept it
Fumbles don't make one a bust just as INTs don't make Luck a bust.
This game had two factors in the end... the refs, and Pep's idea of only letting Luck throw the ball in an obvious passing situation when the game is on the line.
T.Y. Hilton seeking a whopping 14m per year. Per B/R
in Colts Football
Posted
Definitely interesting. I will say that it doesn't exactly feel balanced at the moment, and I do suspect some of those names will be removed in the future. Walden, Jackson, and Toler all being possibilities in the next year or two. They're all adequate players, but none are world beaters.
That said, I am not saying we don't keep Hilton. It's simply that our options behind him are much better than in other positions. Granted, I do suspect we see a year or two of Andre and then he's gone too. Hilton would be one that we keep for quite some time. And he is a bonafide star, so based on the Polian logic of re-signing your good players, he certainly is one that we should keep.