Finball
-
Posts
1,022 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Finball
-
-
36 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:
A variety of reasons? I have to disagree with that comment.
Free agents are looking to get paid and the teams that offers the most get the players.
That's usually the case but didn't we offer more money for Poe, Melvin and Jensen at least? Might have been someone else I'm forgetting, maybe Jeffery?
-
5 hours ago, Lawrence Owen said:
Nick was good enough for Indy to draft on '01..but not good enough to resign after the SB season in '06. played 3 more years with the Titans before flaring out.
(his ability to play with speed helped, but had issues with taller receivers)
Harper was UDFA.
-
13 hours ago, ThorstenDenmark said:
another stat that absolutely makes no sense.
take these examples.
The Bears are 2nd in explosive runs and 32nd in Team Run-stuff defence, but due to one player or their top run defender, they are first. overall they are the best ran ked run defence.
then the saints are 3rd in explosive runs and 5th in team run-stuff defence, but their top-run player is 2,1% worse than the bears top run defender, and they are then the 7th best run defence...
hmmm.... again this makes no sense as the saints in a normal world would be better overall.
what am I missing?
I don't think Bears are #1 bc of their top run defender/one player nor the Saints are lower just because their top run D isn't as good as the Bears. Bears explosive (5.1%) and run D stuff (13.1%) add up to 18.2%, leaving out over 80% of run D plays and the Bears probably do a pretty good job at limiting YPC on those runs. They seem to try to limit explosive runs, at the risk of not being able to stuff runs for a loss. I guess their D isn't allowed to gamble a lot and have strict assignments on every play.
I guess Saints do very good job on getting TFL's and not giving up big plays on the run game but then on other running plays they give up relatively more YPC than other top run D teams.
-
2 minutes ago, jskinnz said:
1) Can we get through year 1 to decide if they truly are terrible?
2) Is the roster really a whole lot better? How many WR's playing this year will be on the team in 2019? Hilton and maybe Fountain?
3) I think Ballard's build through the draft approach is about patience. I think his unwillingness to go deep into free agency is about patience. I think doing anything 2 years in with Reich is not about patience. It would take coaching malpractice for him to be in any trouble after the 2019 season.
1) I said If, IF, we are terrible on year 2 as the post I was responding to originally said Reich is safe even if we are still terrible next year. Even if we finish well this year, there's no excuse to be awful next year without a ton of injuries. Even less of a excuse.
2) Next years roster should be quite a bit better than what we had last year. If not, Ballard has failed pretty badly. I'm not expecting SB, or even playoffs but improvement. Roster we have this year is also better IMO. Better OL, worse at WR but deeper and better DL along with better QB and LB.
3) I agree somewhat but Ballard has in some cases dug pretty deep into FA, it's just players haven't want to come here for variety of reasons.
-
20 minutes ago, jskinnz said:
The whole organization has been preaching patience, that this is a 3 year rebuild. That does not jive with firing Reich in year 2. Reich is here for the foreseeable future and I think that is a good thing.
That doesn't mean that the it's acceptable if the team is terrible on year 2 (or 3 from the dat Ballard was hired). Clearly incompetent coaching staff went 4-12 with Jacoby Brissett as QB. Reich with Luck and better roster should be doing a lot better.
I'm very much willing to be patient but HC/GM better show that they are building something and know what they are doing. Being below 0.500 with a franchise QB and otherwise at least decent roster doesn't indicate that.
-
1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
No to answer your question, even we go 4-12 to 6-10 next season he won't be either. If he does bad in year 3, then yes.
This year obviously no but if we are that bad next year, without major, major injuries, he should be gone.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:
Hughes is overrated on this board by people who wanted to create this narrative that Hughes was good and it was all about coaching. He had 2 years of 10 sacks back to back but since his season high is 6, which even Jonathan Newsome put up his rookie year. Once he didn’t have Mario Williams and Dareus he got exposed. I’m not worried about that matchup. It won’t be easy by any measure because Hughes is still a vet, but it’s not like Smith is going up against Watt or Mack.
This season he's ranked #8 edge rusher by PFF and ranks pretty high in TFL and pressure rates. He hasn't been able to convert pressures to sacks like elite edge rushers but he's definitely a good edge rusher.
15 hours ago, chad72 said:Let us see if they line up Jerry Hughes against him, would be interesting to
watch.
Hughes rarely lines up on the RT side.
-
No one really knows how bad or good OC he's going to be. He doesn't have a lot of coaching experience though.
Hard to be worse than McCoy though..
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Jdubu said:
I wonder if extending Luck and front loading that contract would be an option while we can absorb a large hit? Then build your team as though you have an average paid QB. Not sure how that could get squeezed in but it’s something we would have the cap space for now.
It's cash spending that counts, not cap. And QBs usually get huge signing bonus so cash gets spend right there. Assuming the carryover rule is in Place for the next CBA, there is no need to absorb big cap hit which is usually trickier with QBs bc of big signing bonus though it can be done if QB is ok with smaller signing bonus and taking the money in roster bonuses. Like Garoppolo who has cap hit of almost 40M this year.
-
38 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:
Won't fly. He wants guaranteed money. Todd Gurley get a 5 year deal with 45 million in guarantees. Bell wants even more…
It was 4 yr deal and it effectively guarantees just under 50M based on how the contract was structured. But it's bit different since Gurley had 1 year left on his rookie deal and an option year at just under 10M.
Shorter contracts are generally smart for a player but incentive based deals are not, especially for a RB. So I think he could take 3yr deal but not incentive based.
-
56 minutes ago, chad72 said:
Maybe we extend Braden Smith and Darius Leonard in Year 3 (2020) if they continue to improve and play the way they do now, that would also count towards the floor, extending our own guys we want to keep.
Plus, the 2020 free agent class looks better to me on the surface. Tyler Boyd and Sterling Shepard are free agents then.
Smith and Leonard can't be extended until the 2020 season is over.
2020 FA class looks great now bc only some UDFAs have been available for an extension. It will look weaker year from now and even weaker on March 2020. How much weaker, that remains to be seen.
-
9 minutes ago, TheMarine said:
Cant wait to see him play, tbh.
Jets got Darnold - Starter
Colts got
Nelson - Starter
Smith - StarterLewis - Incomplete
2019 2nd round - IncompleteIn terms of pure draft capital, I believe the Colts got better value over even what Washington gave up to select RG3. Its paid dividends even at this point though the record may not reflect that we have two apparently very solid starters on the line.
Not quite, Redskins gave up 2012, 2013, 2014 first rounder and 2012 2nd rounder. They moved up one more spot but got two 1st rounders (of which one ended up being 2nd overall) instead of 2nd rounders.
Rams blew those picks pretty badly so I think/hope we can come out ahead there.
-
6 hours ago, Luck 4 president said:
That’s exactly what I wanted. I wanted to trade with the Bills for their 12, both their 2nds and next years 1st. Next years 1st could easily be a top 3 pick. They 100% would have taken that because they would have been able to keep their 2nd 1st round pick this year. And idk why Ballard didn’t trade up for Hernandez. Him and Nelson could have been special together.
Their GM said he wasn't willing to give up more than 1st rounder and no future picks. The latter for the exact reason many here wished we would get their 1st. They could be really bad. Bad OL, bad receivers and rookie QB.
-
19 hours ago, DougDew said:
That's what I was thinking. The types of targets matters. He was a 1st round choice, so i assume he has good/great speed. And I think he was used as OAKs deep threat, much like TY.
I think he has value as a WR.
The issue is that I don't know if WRs are valued that highly in this O. Ball control targets and YAC seems the desired profile, not another TY.
He has good but not great speed. And is not an ideal deep threat and hasn't been used as such by the Raiders. That's why they acquired Martavis Bryant. Amari Coopers depth of target (in yards) is actually sandwiched between Pascal, Grant and Ebron this year. 10.1 Yards per target on avg. when true deep threats have almost twice as much. We'll see if it changes as the OL gets healthy but right now, all Colts receivers are so close to each other on depth of target that it's clearly planned by Reich.
Cooper has had his best production when used in the slot. He can use his route running ability there better and not deal with the physicality of press corners and/o make contested catches.
-
51 minutes ago, DougDew said:
I'm not sure Howard, Bakhtari, and Diehl is ideally what we want. I think those guys became starters out of circumstance of what the others teams' needs were, and they were good enough to hold down the fort, but I may be wrong.
I think Peters and Penn are definitely longer term guys.
Howard was never ideal starter but Diehl was good player for a long time and at 3 different positions. Bakhtiari is a top 5 LT.
-
52 minutes ago, DougDew said:
OTOH, I can't think of any LT, and maybe only a few RTs, that had any decent success in the NFL NOT being a high draft choice. No low round or UDFA OTs become good enough to earn a big FA contract. I know Ryan Diem was our RT for years and he was drafted in the 4th. But he had difficulties with speed rushers, and I don't think he would survive today's NFL.
It is rare but it has happened. Jason Peters and Donald Penn were undrafted as was Ryan Schraeder and Austin Howard. David Bakhtiari was a 4th rounder, David Diehl was a 5th rounder.
-
I'd put RB a lot, lot lower.
Also, how on earth slot CB isn't mentioned at all when teams are in nickle defense almost 70% of the time these days?
-
4 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:
I think Reggie Mckenzie is a good GM, and I feel sorry for him. I think he drafted some great players and had the team going in the right direction. Gruden sure is putting his stamp on the team, and I guess we'll have to wait a few years to see if he's making the right moves.
As far as Melvin goes, Ballard doesn't seem like the type of guy to pursue someone again after they essentially told him no to his initial offer.
I think he's a good GM too and he rebuilt the Raiders pretty well considering the mess he inherited but he's had some big misses at the draft and things like not addressing the LB are black marks on his resume.
IIRC, some teams contacted Raiders about Reggie and his availability after the Gruden hire but he opted to stay. It's been clear since the Mack trade that he doesn't have anymore what he was promised when he was hired back in '12; complete control of tootball OPs. Gruden has that now.
12 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:Wow!
Not a good thing when the HC publicly talks about a player like that.
Didn't his brother do something similar in Washington? If so, was it about RG3?
IF I'm correct, guess it runs in the blood.
Btw, I never really liked Gruden. Especially his hyped up personality, regardless if it was
genuine or for show.
And yeah, I'd bring back Melvin.
He did throw some shade at Cousins on his way out. If he has thrown his own player on the bus, it probably was RG3 but can't remember anything. He handled the Norman benching thing pretty well last week, compared to how his bro does it.
6 hours ago, NorthernBlue said:That team was 12-4 two seasons ago and would have won a playoff game if Derek Carr didn’t break his leg.
Last season they took a step back, but that was mostly due to that Defense having no playmakers besides Khalil Mack, and I’m pretty sure that offensive line hit injuries.
I’m of the opinion that if Oakland kept things the same, and just addressed the issues they had, they could have been a competitive football team this year. Instead, Jon Gruden has come in, and in an attempt to turn it into ‘his team’, has made what should have been an elite team by now into a dumpster fire.
To be fair, there where plenty of red flags on that '16 Raiders team. They had lot of close score, comeback wins. They lacked playmakes on defense outside of Mack and had less than half dozen actually good defensive players on their roster, and they were almost all on their 2nd or 3rd contracts. Their OL was pretty healthy last year. Their starters missed 5 games combined.
-
16 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:
I know , you know, that isn't allowed. If you sign someone off another teams P.S., they must go on to the signing teams 53 man roster for at least 3 weeks, and that player also gets NFL pay for 3 weeks. Even if the signing team waives him the next day.
That and we'd need to release 2 more players just to have 7 WRs on the roster. Assuming no WR is cut.
-
2 minutes ago, Mr.Debonair said:
His demeanor has nothing to do with his play. Stop with the assumptions
It can be related to his lack of drive and disappearing acts and how he hasn't really shown much improvement since coming into this league.
-
Our receivers do suck but Luck still has a bad habit of staring down his target.. I think on the Lee INT he stared down the receiver and also didn't see Lee dropping back.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, MPStack said:
Polian made as many bone headed decisions as good ones IMO. He did nail a lot of his 1st RD picks until towards then end. Occasionally struck gold with some lower rd picks. However most of his 2nd and 3rd rd picks were not so good. I think he’s ego often got the better of him, but there’s no denying the work he did for the Colts and Bills. Personally, I think he’s a dinosaur now.
Pretty much in complete agreement here.
He was a great, great GM and over long period of time. Didn't personally agree with his philosphy on how to build a team. He started to miss more towards the ned before he gave his son the control. Recently he's said lot of things that make no sense so it's hard to put weigh on what he says.
-
1
-
-
Actually, because of his reserved demeanor, I'm not sure if the kid has enough drive, the 'it' factor or whatever you want to call it. He's talented for sure but has bad tendency to disappear way too often. And it seems like he doesn't really care that much. Personally, not interested giving up day 2 pick for him.. So.. not interested.
-
1 hour ago, gspdx said:
Yes - and if we had drafted him and didn't address the o-line then what? Remember watching Barry Sanders? He was exciting to watch running for his life while the team continued to lose. One great running back is not going to carry us to a superbowl.
I am not saying that our o-line is fixed now but I would rather work on that first. With a strong o-line a good RB or 2 will get the job done.
I should probably elaborate that my opinion hasn't changed, I don't want to spend high picks on RB. I wanted Chubb the most but Nelson was my #2 option.
-
1
-
Is Reich on the Hot Seat?
in Colts Football
Posted
It's mentioned by few posters in this thread