Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

stitches

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    9,203
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    62

Posts posted by stitches

  1. 17 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

    Ballard can't trade a 1st or a 2nd in the 2022 draft.    So,  he doesn't have much of a chance

    Not 100% certain but I think he can. They can make it conditional on whatever happens with the pick for Wentz. For example, they can make it so the Hawks get the pick that the Eagles don't get. This might be more intriguing for the Hawks than a regular 2nd rounder because it has upside to become a 1st. 

     

    For example, in 2016 the Jamie Collins trade was condiitional on whether the Browns got a compensatory pick in the 3d. They can word the deal in a way that allows them to trade both those picks - one to the Hawks, one to the Eagles... depending on what happens with Wentz' snap count this year. 

    • Thanks 1
  2. What players and coaches talk about is largely dependant on what they are asked about in interviews and media availability. Right now the media is obsessed with Wentz and they don't ask tons of questions about Eason, which is to some degree normal. Unless some of the beat reporters is writing a story about Eason they are not likely to ask many questions about him from other players and coaches.

     

    As it stands right now it seems like Eason has been getting all the QB1 reps while Wentz was feeling ill. We also know that the team has not made a move for another QB to be our backup, so it seems like at the very least they like him enough to let him enter camp as the backup and prove whether he's ready for that or not. 

    • Like 2
  3. 34 minutes ago, Four2itus said:

     

    I'm playing checkers. Superman and Stitches are playing 3D chess. Lol

    Nah, not really, this is legitimately tedious and unclear contract description to read and it has at least 1 error. The question is which one... It's probably more likely the @Superman interpretation is right. 

    • Like 2
  4. 1 hour ago, Superman said:

     

    This is where I am also. To paraphrase Michael Scott: Do you want the pass rush to get better, get worse, or stay the same? If we want the defense to take the next step, the pass rush must get better, and it wasn't likely to do that with 31 year old Denico Autry and 32 year old Justin Houston. I think both of those guys were overvalued by Colts fans.

     

    Set aside the rookies, the real hope for 2021 is that Turay, Lewis, Rochelle, Muhammed and Banogu can complement Buckner well enough to replicate or out perform the disruption from the DL in 2020 (2 sacks/game, and a mediocre pressure rate). That's not a high bar to clear. 

     

    In the future, the hope is that Paye, Dayo, and one or two of the guys we already have start to form a really good edge group.

     

    But we weren't going to have the kind of pass rush we need by holding to Autry and Houston. I'd have taken either of them back on a modest contract, but I wouldn't have paid Autry $7m/year. Rochelle is basically an attempt to replicate what they did with Autry three years ago -- a rotational edge with length, mid 20s, with potential to be an 8-10 sack for a couple seasons. 

    It's amazing how Ballard has gone the path of high ceiling, low floor options on multiple positions of the team - EDGE is one of them - we had a certain floor with Houston and Autry, but he chose to go with the more risky path and let them go to let the young guys prove they can or cannot play. Wentz is IMO another high ceiling low floor option. When knowing all the available healthy LTs, FIsher sticks out as another one that has low floor and higher ceiling than the Charles Leno's of the world.

     

    I'm usually a fan of this type of decision-making. I think at the highest levels, you need to hit on ceiling guys in order to be competitive against the top teams. But it's striking how many of those Ballard made and all of them at very important positions. If he's right on most of those there is a chance this team can be really good... but if he strikes out on majority... we might be in trouble. 

  5. 3 minutes ago, Superman said:

     

    He typed this: "2022 voids automatically if on roster 23rd day prior to 1st year 2022 league year"

     

    I'm pretty sure he meant this: 2022 voids automatically if on roster 23rd day prior to 1st day 2022 league year. (That's how Spotrac interprets it also. Their breakdown should help. https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/indianapolis-colts/eric-fisher-12281/)  

     

    So if the 2022 league year starts on March 8, Fisher's contract voids on February 14, if he's still on the roster at that point. If he's released before then, his contract does not void because it's already terminated. 

     

    This is one way to interpret it. What if instead he meant: "Eric Fisher (Colts) two years, 2022 voids automatically if on roster 23rd day prior to 1st year" (then he meant to hit enter and start new line with the following containing details for the 2022 year:

     

    "2022 league year: $12.38M total; $4M signing bonus, $6M gtd; salaries $2M 2021 (gtd), $4M 2022; up to $2.38M per game active total roster bonus '21, salary-cap figure 2021: $6.49M"

     

    Does that make any sense? So if he's on the roster to start this year, year 2 gets voided. But if he's on PUP, we get to have him on the second year for 12.38M that second year? 

     

     

    3 minutes ago, Superman said:

    He gets a $4m signing bonus. Because it's a two year deal, that signing bonus is split evenly between the two seasons, but the second year of the contract is basically a * year, just meant to allow the team to push $2m of his cap hit into 2022. This is what lots of teams did to restructure contracts this offseason, but it's not something the Colts have shown any inclination toward doing. Until now.

    Yah, that makes sense, but usually the teams do it because they need to spread money out... do we need to? We have 12M of capspace for this year remaining if we do it like this... or 10M without doing it like this... does it matter? We are not desperate to get under... Are we trying to make more acquisitions... like... any specific acquisition with 12M cap hit? What's the hit on Julio for example? This seems weird, first because we haven't done anything like this before... and second because we don't seem to need it right now... and if we needed something like that it seems like it's about as easy to just restructure one contract and spread current money over future years?

     

    3 minutes ago, Superman said:

    Fisher's base salary for 2021 is $2m, and it's fully guaranteed. So if he does not play a single game in 2021, he gets the $4m signing bonus, plus the $2m base salary = $6m. 

     

    3 minutes ago, Superman said:

    He has a per game roster bonus of $140k/game ($2.38m if he plays 17 games; he played all regular season games in 2020, so this roster bonus is considered likely to be earned, and will count against the cap proactively. There will be a cap reconciliation after the season, and if he plays fewer than 17 games the Colts will receive a prorated credit to the 2022 cap.) He also has a $750k incentive bonus, but I don't know what that incentive is. Aaron Wilson calls it not likely to be earned, so this is another area for cap reconciliation after the season, depending on whether he reaches that incentive threshold or not.

    "Not likely" bonus usually means it's a condition he didn't meet last year. He played 15 of 16 games of his team so I doubt it's a "games/snaps played" bonus. There aren't many individual performance stats that are kept for OL - he made the pro-bowl so this would be deemed likely, he didn't make all-pro, so it's possible it's all-pro bonus. Team-based bonus could be winning the super bowl or something of the sort. 

    3 minutes ago, Superman said:

    So right now, his 2021 cap hit is $6.38m (assuming 17 games played), with the potential for another $750k in incentives = $7.13m max 2021 cap hit. Then there's an additional $2m in dead money in 2022 (prorated signing bonus), which takes the total value of the contract to $9.13m. There may be an additional detail missing that would get us to $9.4m, as initially reported.

     

    TL;DR -- Prorated signing bonus of $4m is split evenly between 2021 and 2022, but 2022 is just a voidable/* year, meant to reduce his 2021 cap hit. He will be a free agent in 2022.

    I wonder what that means for the comp pick possibility? 

  6. 39 minutes ago, Superman said:

     

    That's a solid structure, given the circumstances. I wasn't expecting that much in per game bonuses, and I definitely wasn't expecting a voidable year. So his 2021 compensation is $6m, plus $140k for each game he plays, and the team will have a $2m cap penalty in 2022. I wonder how this early void day affects the comp pick formula.

     

    If he plays 8 games, his 2021 cap hit will be $7.12m. I can live with that, it's about 25% less than I thought it would be when this deal was first announced. And if he doesn't play at all, it's $6m total. 

    To me this structure is very confusing. What does it mean voids automatically if he's on the roster? So if we don't release him, he collects 4M for '22 and his contract is voided? What? Is this a forced termination with penalty for the team? What do we gain from this?

     

    Or is this ... '22 voids if he's on the roster 23 days before the start of year 1? And if he's not, his 2nd year comes in effect? So in essence - if he's not on PUP he gets to play year 1 for 6m+bonuses and incentives and voids year 2, but if he's on PUP then his year 2 is in effect for 12.38m?

     

    I don't get it. That year 2 thing is super confusing.

  7. I've been pretty vocal in my worry about this defense... especially the pass-defense, in light of us losing both our starting EDGE rushers from last year, but the one thing that has given me a bit of optimism is precisely that - even though we lost both Autry and Houston, it's not like they were some pass-rushing machines that couldn't be stopped. The hope is that the new guys will be able to at least replicate that type of disruption. We were bottom 10 pass-rush unit last year so there is room for improvement especially when one of the pieces is Buckner. But there is still a chance we get even worse, especially year 1 of Paye(rookie with work to do on his technique and pass-rush plan) and Dayo(likely to miss most if not all of the season). I guess we will have to wait and see....

     

    This team is sneaky intriguing to watch on so many levels

    - Wentz' rebirth - how does it go?

    - WR group - many young pieces with lots to prove but nobody proven, except for TY(and Pascal?).

    - CB group - some promise from Tell, Rodgers... maybe Rock... will one or two of the rise to the top and will we find our next outside corner this year or will we have to go draft another one high?

    - EDGE - NOONE proven in that position group... tons of players with tons to prove - Banogu, Lewis, Turay, Paye, Dayo(if he plays), Rochell... our most proven commodity there is a back up from the last several years in Al-Quadin Muhammad

    - LT ??? How will Fisher look and when will he get back to play? Tevi a starter? 

     

    Along with the intrigue, there comes a level of uncertainty and risk. This is the reason I'm not sure how good this team will be... there are sooooooo many question marks on this roster and we need most of them to find their solution this year if we want to be legitimate contenders. That's not to say it won't happen, but there is a serious risk on multiple levels of this team that Ballard has taken and chances are they won't all pan out. 

    • Like 5
  8. 4 hours ago, DougDew said:

    Look at @SteelCityColt comment.  Its well said. I'm not disagreeing with Ballard.  What I'm saying is that Ballard's destiny of building the team from the inside out was pretty much set when he picked an all pro G at 6.  And his top rangy ILB panned out.

     

    He's built a ball control running offense...not a splashy QB centric offense...around his G because that's the cards he was dealt, both with the players available at 6 and his splashy QB retiring.  

     

    (what his defense is supposed to look like is a guess since he's stumbled a bit at building it, IMO)

     

    That type of offense is a different offense than what the perennially Championship Game or SB bound teams have had.  Green Bay was and still is splashy.  KC/Mahomes.  Colts/PM.  NO/Brees, even ATL Ryan.  NE/Brady, with BB/McDaniel probably having the most ball control offense of theses teams.  And I mean perennial contenders.  Not a few one-offs like a SEA or a BALT that happen to have a big defense and put it together on offense a couple of years.  Or a well rounded TB team that happened to find an elite QB that won't die.  Which is what happened in Denver with PM...built a great D for a few years before it fell apart.

     

    None of these successful teams were built from the inside out, at least in the way that Ballard is sort of being forced to do.

     

    Which is also why Ballard trading up for a splashy franchise QB was never going to happen.  The building blocks of the team have been set, and will be strengthened with these forthcoming contracts.  The Colts aren't getting that QB.  One might rise from the ashes of Wentz or Eason, but that is hardly a plan to be counted on.

     

    That's not a disagreement with Ballard.  What it is, is a simple observation that this approach is going to look different.  It may work out.  No team has really done it before, so it would seem to carry risks. But anybody pounding their fists saying that these high investments in a G and a ILB is definitely the key to winning a SB and should be embraced enthusiastically (not saying that anybody is) I think is looking at the situation with too much homerism, blind-Ballard-love, or love for pancakes.  The evidence is pretty skimpy that its a perennial contender formula. JMO.

    Agree some of this... Just want to hammer the nail for you on the last point - perennial contender formula requires a top tier QB because of the value that top tier QBs provide(compared to any other position). And this is value that you can rely on consistently and with continuity. THIS is the biggest reason for perennial contenders. There is too much turnover and injuries in the game. Teams change, players graduate from rookie contracts and leave, others get injured, some suffer fall in form as they age. Strengths and weaknesses change, sometimes year to year. Even without changes on the team, coverage is extremely variable and wonky year to year. One of the few things that one can rely on in this game is the performance of a franchise QB. It's incredible how consistent top tier QBs are in the league. Year after year they put up amazing performances and give great value to their teams.

     

    Now... when you get your top-tier franchise QB, this does NOT absolve you from the responsibility to build a good team around that player, because in the playoffs you meet other teams with other great QBs and if the rest of your roster is not on par or better you will very likely lose. You still need solid protection for the QB, you still need playmakers. You still need a defense that won't absolutely get blown off the field... But yeah... this is the reason I was a proponent of trading up in the draft from one of the top tier QBs... and repeating that drill until you got your guy. 

     

    Now, IMO Wentz has the chance to be that type of player for us, but he's far from a sure thing. I am good with that trade, althugh I thought the price was too steep, but...if he is the guy it won't matter. 

    • Like 1
  9. Kevin Bowen for every day commentary on the Colts. Zach Hicks for more serious film study and Xs and Os(BTW he just got a gig covering the Colts for SI, well deserved). Joel Erickson for Colts news. And this might be a bit controversial but... I like Dan Dakich interviewing Ballard and players. I absolutely hate most of his commentary and opinions, but he probably does the best job interviewing the Colts executives and players. 

    • Like 2
  10. I just want to point out that those are skewed in favor of more rushing(compared to reality) for better teams and in favor of more passing for worse teams. What happens is - great teams get big advantages passing the ball and then run the ball to close the game and drain the clock, while bad teams fall behind a lot and try to come back by passing the ball a lot. Some outlets filter those situations out and provide stats for what they call "game-neutral situations". This is for situations that don't make your team skew the playcalling one way or the other, situations where the full playbook is available to the playcaller and he can actually choose what to play rather than be to a big degree forced to go pass or run. 

     

    Right now I would consider balanced playcalling about 60-40 in favor of passing in those game-neutral situations. But in reality I want a team to try a pass-heavy playcalling. I want some team to decide to test the limits. Similar to how in the NBA the 3p attempts have been going up and up every year. I want an NFL team to try 70-80... 85% passing. I want to see where the limit is and whether it will impact the offensive efficiency negatively. 

    • Like 1
  11. Favorite - Hooker, Q, Leonard, Pittman, Campbell. Agree with @Supermanthat Hooker had the chance to be special but his career got derailed by injuries. I still feel like if he gets in the right situation and scheme he can be very good and revive his career. Loved Q(my best player in that draft), loved Leonard(compared to others)... I had him as an early second and he was picked early second, but compared to other people not liking the pick I was pretty high on Leonard. Loved both Pittman and Campbell picks, lets see if they make me look foolish. Loved Hines... loved the Tell pick especially when I learned we were going to try to switch him to CB. 

     

    Least favorite - didn't love Braden Smith's pick(had him ranked as a 3d rounder, we picked him early second). Didn't love Tyquan Lewis pick... massive reach. Didn't love Khari Willis pick. Thought both Rock and Banogu were reaches, but not huge ones. Zach Banner was a horrible pick I thought. 

  12. Keep in mind that a lot of it is based on us having 4 games against 2 of the worst teams from last years - Texans and Jaguars. Even though Jaguars are supposed to take a step forward even projections for next year put them at about 6 wins and the Texans are projected to be even worse than last year. So this accounts for some part of it and skews the calculations a bit. The rest of the schedule is kind of tough though. 

    • Like 1
  13. 17 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

    Apologies...    I’m a little confused...


    You’ve addressed two issues, the 5th year option, which the Colts exercised on Nelson.  
     

    And the possibility of a big extension, which I think you’re saying we also can do?   So now that we have Nelson secured for two more years, this year and next, we could TODAY sign him to an extension as well beyond 2022?    
     

    Is that what you’re saying?   

    I don't know what Superman meant, but yes, Q and our other 2018 draftees are eligible for extensions and can be signed right now if the two sides agree to contract extensions. For example, Frank Ragnow already signed his extension with the Lions through 2026 last week:

    https://detroit.cbslocal.com/2021/05/10/lions-lock-up-frank-ragnow-through-2026/

     

    Ragnow was 1st rounder in the same class as Q, Braden and Leonard. 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  14. I was having similar thoughts a while ago - how can we have so much money tied in the OL and isn't this detrimental to the team? The more I've been thinking about it the more I feel like... it's all about allocation of resources. Every team has limited resources and if you allocate too much resources to one area you might be hitting the point of diminishing returns. For example... would you rather pay 40% of your cap on the no. 1 OL in the league or 30% on the no. 5 OL in the league? And where is the cut off where it all becomes excessive spending that can be used better elsewhere on the roster? But also... we have to account for draft picks in our considerations, too.

     

    This is really the main couple of resources for acquiring talent - cap space and draft picks . It's interesting that they are almost completely decoupled, too ... meaning - for huge majority of draft picks, the cap spent is minuscule and doesn't impact the cap space much and at the same time for the biggest of our cap spendings we don't spend draft resources(Buckner and Q being the exceptions here). It's also important to not count it twice once the draft picks enter their second contract. At least I don't ... so... in essence it becomes - cap space + RECENT draft picks(still on rookie contracts)....

     

    In essence my position has been ammended to something along the lines of - I don't care what % of the money we spend on specific position group as long as there is enough resources (this might include draft picks) spent on most other important positions. Example -

     

    - QB - we spent 1st, 3d and 25M a year for QB. This is plenty IMO. People seem to consider it cheap but it is NOT cheap when you account for BOTH the picks and the money. If Wentz gets back to his previous form with us, I am good with it. I think it's worth it having that type of QB.

    - EDGE group - no big money spent, but pretty big draft resources - currently 1st round pick, 3 second round picks..

    - Interior pass-rush - big money, big resources (22M a year for Buckner, 10M a year for Grover, 1st for Buckner).

    - OL - good mix of money and draft resources (Fisher 10M, Kelly 12M, Glowinski 6M + 1st + 2nd on Q and Braden)... now if you have to replace the 1st and 2nd from Braden with big money you will need to spend some picks rather than money on other positions and this is exactly what we did with EDGE - shuffled around the resources spent from money(Autry, Houston) to draft picks - Paye, Odeyingbo

    - CB - this IMO is the group that is in a holding pattern... I don't know where we will go with it, because we have some pick investments, but they are to a huge degree question marks and Kenny is our only CB with somewhat big(still not huge though) contract past this year. IMO Ballard is waiting on them(Rock, Tell, Rodgers) to show him something either way and we are very likely to address it next year. BTW I have not watched next year's CBs, but the PFF guys seem to think next year's CB class is very good... probably too ealry to tell at this point but worth keeping in mind. I wonder if Ballard looks ahead to future drafts... 

    - WR - good, not great resources spent - 2 2nd round pick + short term deal for TY... another position in holding pattern. 

     

    So I guess my general position is - As long as the roster overall has good talent at other positions be it through bargain FA contracts that hit or through draft picks, I'm good with us splurging a bit on a specific area of the team that we consider important. In general I feel like our resources have been spent relatively well, with some minor gripes here and there, but even for them there IMO is a good reason. 

     

    • Like 3
  15. On 5/13/2021 at 3:38 AM, EastStreet said:

    From CBS

    Many our old OC should be happy!

     

    "Based on records from last year, here are the teams with 10 most difficult schedules heading into 2020.

    Hardest schedules
    1. Steelers: 155-115-2 (.574) 
    2. Ravens: 152-118-2 (.563)
    3. Bears: 149-122-1 (.550)
    4. Packers: 147-124-1 (.542)
    5. Vikings: 144-127-1 (.531)
    T-6. Bengals: 144-128 (.529)
    T-6. Lions: 143-127-2 (.529)
    8. Raiders: 142-128-2 (.526)
    9. Browns: 140-130-2 (.518)
    10. Rams: 140-132 (.515)

     

    The Steelers and Packers both have 10 games against playoff teams from last year, which is the most in the NFL.

    As for the easiest schedules, the Eagles will be going into the season with the least difficult slate. The Eagles will be playing ZERO teams on the road that had a winning record in 2020. They also only have five games against playoff teams from last year. 

     

    Easiest schedules
    1. Eagles: 117-155 (.430) 
    2. Cowboys: 122-148-2 (.452)
    3. Falcons: 123-148-1 (.454)
    4. Buccaneers: 126-145-1 (.465)
    T-5. Dolphins: 128-144 (.471)
    T-5. Broncos: 127-143-2 (.471)
    7. Panthers: 128-143-1 (.472)
    8. Giants: 128-142-2 (.472)
    T-9. Colts: 130-142 (.478)
    T-9. Bills: 130-142 (.478)"

    Strength of schedule based on last year records is not great. Too much turnover and changes year to year. Vegas lines or some sort of advanced analytics projections are probably better for SoS.

     

    Here's one based on Vegas over unders:

    Quote

     

    Steelers (153)

    Raiders (152)

    Lions (151)

    Bengals (150.5)

    Texans (150)

    Bears (149)

    Ravens (148)

    Saints (148)

    Washington (148)

    Cardinals (147.5)

    Chiefs (146)

    Rams (146)

    Vikings (146)

    Packers (145.5)

    Giants (145.5)

    Jets (144.5)

    Chargers (144)

    Patriots (144)

    49ers (143.5)

    Falcons (143)

    Titans (143)

    Bills (142.5)

    Panthers (142.5)

    Browns (142.5)

    Dolphins (142)

    Cowboys (141.5)

    Broncos (141.5)

    Colts (141)

    Jaguars (141)

    Eagles (141)

    Buccaneers (141)

    Seahawks (137.5)

     

    https://theathletic.com/news/nfl-strength-of-schedule-steelers-raiders-seahawks-lions-bengals/wa372YuigYZB

     

    This one thinks we with the 5th easiest schedule.

    • Like 1
  16. 2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:


    I think I pay pretty close attention to the roster.  Closer than most here.  


    But I don’t mind freely admitting that I had no idea we had a player named Sam Jones — NO IDEA — on our roster?!?   Honestly,  I’m guessing he’s in the Federal Witness Protection Program and he was hiding in plain sight on our roster.  We’re releasing him today because it will naturally be lost with all the noise and excitement over the schedule release!  No one will notice.   No one will ever know....

     

    That’s my story and I’m sticking to it!   :peek:

    I didn't know who he was either. Colts do that the second half the regular season - sign young players they've seen something promising in to future contracts and try them out. Glowinski was one such player. We claimed him off waivers after he was released by the Seahawks in December. He trained in our building in the off-season, made the team and by game 6 of the next season he was starting. From then on it's all history, as they say... 

     

    Now if you follow how many of those we sign toward the end of the year(many... around 10+ players every year), you would be justified in not paying attention to any specific one. Some turn into Glowinski, but most turn into... *checks notes* ... Sam Jones.

    • Like 2
  17. 26 minutes ago, Superman said:

     

    It's all about Wentz.

     

    Edge is probably gonna be a step back in 2021, but it wasn't a strength last season IMO. And I think now we have the potential to be better in the future. Wild card is probably Turay, if he's healthy and can show something, and Paye, if he's ready to contribute in Year 1.

     

    Corner, LB, safety, kind of a push all told. We get some help at corner, losing Walker hurts but not that much IMO, safety is basically the same with room for growth from the young guys. 

     

    Receiver is about Pittman and Campbell, with a chance for TY to be more productive with a more dynamic QB. TE/RB all basically the same. I think OL should be fine, AC didn't have his finest year in 2020 anyway, and I think even average LT play can be mitigated with the other factors on the offense.

     

    So the question is whether Wentz can play at a high level. Just his 2019 level of play, which was not his former dynamic, franchise QB level of play, but was still top ten. If we get that from Wentz, I think the offense is better, good enough to convert well on third down, and hold a lead in the 4th quarter. And there's some potential for great QB play, based on what we've seen in the past. I think that's the only question in my mind, is how well can Wentz play for us. If he's bad, nothing else really matters.

    Agree on pretty much everything. I think several positions have potential to be better than last year: WR(better health, internal development), CB(return of Tell, internal development of the young guys - I really think both Tell and Rodgers had some intriguing moments in their respective rookie years, I want to see how they develop... hopefully Rock gets better too), EDGE(this is a controversial one because I can see it going both ways - Paye could come in ready to play and wreck the league and Kemoko might return to healthy play... the biggest reason that EDGE doesn't worry me is - they are not measuring against amazing pass-rush combo from last year... we were pretty bad pass rushing from the EDGE last year so... it's easier to improve from that point). 

     

    OL might take a slight step back, especially if Fisher is not ready early, but I feel like we can weather that storm, both because the rest of the line stays the same and they have good chemistry and because Frank has shown in the past that he would help his OL and QB with his playcalling if he feels they are mismatched. 

     

    RB is rock solid... it's one of the best RB stables in the league. We have power and game breaking speed with Taylor, we have shiftiness with Mack, we have a dynamic pass-catching option in Hines... 

     

    TE might be a wash... I guess it depends on Granson but either way I don't think it will be fundamentally different unit than the one last year. Same with LB... I don't feel like Walker is a huge loss... I don't think he was bad for us, but I think he's replaceable. 

     

    ST is interesting... I am not as confident in the kicking game as most people seem to be. But lets see how Blankenship does in his year 2. 

     

    So like with a lot of situations in the league the true decider will be the QB. I have a bit of an outlier of an opinion I think because I think the range of outcomes is relatively polarized because of the style Wentz plays, the playcalling of Frank and the strength of the roster. I think he either will take on to coaching and to a huge degree return to his form and because of the strength of this roster look great overall (better than 2019 and 2018) or he will continue his spiral down into the abyss, not listen to Frank and look about as bad as he did last year in which case we are screwed. 

    • Like 2
  18. 2 minutes ago, Superman said:

     

    They seem to think that if a guy fits the locker room, he has the best chance to hit his ceiling, even if he has injury concerns. And I get it. A guy with injuries isn't likely to wreck team chemistry, as long as he works hard and has the right attitude, even if he doesn't get healthy. A guy who might not respond well to coaching, or whatever other character issues you might have with him, that might cause issues. 

     

    But I did think that they were going to make injury history a super priority, especially after last offseason where basically everyone they added had a good history of not missing games due to injury. And I guess the thing is that football players get hurt, and if you have an obvious injury (rather than a series of weird injury issues), then it's easier to count on a recovery and return to play.

     

    And maybe the Blackmon return, combined with Pittman and Rivers getting hurt (when they had a history of not being hurt), sort of emboldened the team. 

     

    Either way, I hope Fisher works out and plays well in 2021. Just more risk than I expected them to be willing to take.

    So... what's your answer to the ultimate question now that the roster is to a huge degree complete? Did we get better? 

     

    My answer right now is - it's a wash... and the deciding factor will be Wentz. 

    • Like 1
  19. Just now, Scott Pennock said:

    Only two options being Deon Jackson at RB or Tyler Vaughns at WR and probably ONLY if there is an injury or a trade!

    IMO Deon Jackson is the one that has the best chance. It's possible we take him over Wilkins whose contract expires at the end of the year. Plus he got the biggest signing bonus if I'm not mistaken... 

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...