EastStreet
-
Posts
26,341 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
258
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by EastStreet
-
-
I love hearing Parris, and Deep in the same sentence as we all know what he can do short.
Hope to hear Cain, and Deep later.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:
I had the same losses as you did, plus I think they lose one against the Jags, be it at home or on the road. Adding Foles could really do wonders for them. They still have a ton of talent, especially on defense. If Fournette gets his head out of his as*, and stays healthy, he should be a beast.
Jax has a crazy good D. Adding Foles is a great step forward, but they really need to upgrade his WR unit (which they did not address). Don't think they'll be able to double TY like they did last year.
-
9 hours ago, Jdubu said:
Williams? I see only 4 RB’s making the team. Mack,Hines, Wilkins and Ware probably unless he isn’t the same player he was in KC and one of those kids beat him out.
that's what i said above.
point i was making was that signing Ware is worse for Williams, than Wilkins. I don't see us cutting our RB2 (Wilkins) after his rookie season, over a guy like Williams who has bounced around to several teams in the last couple years.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, LockeDown said:
Wilkins has a lot of room to improve imo.
he absolutely does. he dances too much.
but, he's a pretty decent RB2.
keep in mind, he was a rookie last year too.
-
11 hours ago, JPFolks said:
Yeah, I just can't get on board with 7 OL. I don't care how good the starters are or how flexible they can play. Injuries tend to happen in spurts. We have to play out the final 10 weeks of the season with no bye week and then right into the playoffs and with our schedule (compared to NE) a #1 seed seems unlikely and even a bye will be very tough. I can see the AFC South winner at 9-11 wins easily because we may be eating ourselves all season. Luck made the playoffs with a terrible line, sure, but he also did it every season with essentially a developing Hilton and an aging Reggie or less. I think if we'd had Doyle all season, that alone would have won us 1-2 more games. Having him to throw to at the end of the first Houston game I think he finds a way to make that catch and get a first down. Ebron had a great year, but he's not a blocker and he's not the guy you want on the route to get a game saving/winning first down. We already have significantly more talent at WR than Luck has EVER had. We'd have to lose 4 of them just to take us down to the level he usually has had to play with and that type of carnage would be an outlier. But we've seen losing our OL and TEs with enough frequency that it is devastating. Ware is our insurance if Mack goes down (which sadly he is prone to). If we have the four you expect we could lose Mack and get by, in my opinion, just about as well as with him (as long as the other three regress instead of progress this year).
It's an interesting debate though. Thanks for engaging. Anyone else have thoughts? Of those 4 groups, which 2 would you like to see the extra body designated in?
Not saying we only keep 7, I'm saying after the starting 5, it's key to have at least a couple guys that can flex. Personally I'd have the starting 5, one T that can flex, one G that can flex, and two more who are either developmental (latest draft picks) who may also flex as well or two guys that are good but can't flex. So I'm good with the 9 standard. Let's not forget we have 10 slots on the practice squad that can be called up at anytime. It fluctuates throughout the year, but to start the year in 2018, we had at least one OL on it. and one TE too.
as far as Ebron is concerned, I agree he's not the best blocker, but he did ok. i disagree about him not being a drive extenders. the guy was clutch enough in the RZ. the guy had the 2nd most TDs of any receiving position, and 5th in total TDs from scrimmage.
I'm optimistic about our WR future. but to say we have more talent than ever, is a stretch. I'd say we have more potential than ever, and it should pan out hopefully. on Mack, I don't see Ware as his backup. i see him as a power or short yardage back. i see wilkins as his backup.
-
At WR, I think it's more like
Cain vs Funchess vs Pascal vs Fountain at X
and
Campbell vs Rogers at Slot but I think both are very safe.
At LB, I think all new adds are projects, so I see competion for depth, and situational, not starters.
At S, same as LB.
I could see Rock challenging for starter reps early.
Ware vs Williams (and maybe Wilkins) is pretty interesting, but I think Williams is odd man out or sent to the practice squad.
DL - I think we'll see a ton of movement here with Houston coming in. I hope they don't make Banogu try to learn multiple positions and multiple situational spots early on. Give him a bunch of technique coaching, and pick a spot for him to concentrate on.
TE will be fierce this year, as I don't see both Ebron and Doyle extended (unless Doyle is a bargain) at the end of the season.
-
12 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:
No one is down on Walker. It’s more that people are high on Okereke. But I’d also add to that that once upon a time, Morrison had 109 tackles in a season.
IDK, you have to be pretty down on Walker IMO to think someone will come in and start over him. It was only Walker's second season, and he went from like 10% of snaps to 60% of snaps, while being second in tackles and 2nd in TFLs by snap count %.
-
2 minutes ago, shastamasta said:
Regarding KC...Losing Hill will hurt...but they also added a 2nd round speedster at WR (just glad they didn't take Campbelll). But why does Mahomes play "not near as well" as last season? He's heading into his 2nd season as a starter...he should get better if anything.
They lost Hunt for the last five games...and Damien Williams stepped in and looked like a Pro Bowler. They added Carlos Hyde in FA. That system is basically plug and play for RBs.
They did lose an older Houston...but many would say they upgraded Dee Ford by trading for Frank Clark. They signed Breeland at CB, Mathieu at S and drafted one of the top Ss in Thornhill. They also drafted Khalen Saunders. They overhauled much of their defense...which was a weakness last year.
Not saying the Colts can't/won't beat them...just that I don't really see them as being any easier this year...aside from Hill (likely) not being there.
Hardman has a great ceiling, but is the definition of raw.
On running the ball, they could not run when it mattered in the playoffs.
Mahomes, IMO, he'll have a sophmore slump. He's not going to surprise teams like he did last year. Teams will adjust especially without Hill or Hunt.
On their D as a whole, they stunk last year except for sacks/QBH. I think they'll take a decent but not huge step back in sacks/QBH. The rest of the D has a long way to go. I think they did good upgrading S though, but still a lot of holes. If teams aren't playing from behind, they're in trouble.
-
35 minutes ago, krunk said:
As if Wikins is fast. He doesnt play fast even if hes got a decent time. Spencer Ware is probably the slowest of the bunch at 4.7ish. In Williams case 4.5 is a decent time for a 220lb back. Williams is good at goaline but he certainly isnt limited to that. He can carry on all 3 downs.
Wilkins pro day 40 - 4.5
Williams pro day 40 - 4.59
NFL Stats
Wilkins ypc - 5.6
Williams ypc - 3.1
Wilkins was RB1 and an every down back for Ole Miss. Had 1000+ yards and 6.5 ypc vs the toughest division in college football. Williams, also in the SEC West had 1100+ yards, but only 5.6 ypc, and had arguably one of the best OLs in CFB during his last two years in college.
Williams is a good back, and like I said, I like him. But he was over hyped as an every down back due to the OL he was running behind. His NFL production supports that. And, there's a reason why he's moved around to 4 teams in 3 years. I'd love for him to find a spot, but I don't see it over Wilkins and Ware.
Since you doubt Wilkins credentials, below is NFL.com's review.
QuoteWilkins - NFL.com's Overview
Finesse runner with good size and great agility with the lateral agility to elude tacklers in the open field and the speed to make them feel it. Wilkins lacks the aggressive running demeanor to take it to tacklers, but he does have moments of effectiveness along the interior thanks to his footwork and vision. Wilkins 12 carries against Alabama could be hard for teams to ignore as they look to project his NFL potential. He should find work as a solid backup with a shot at finding starters carries at some point.
Strengths
Checks the height, weight, and speed boxes
Hips swivel freely and is very agile
Able to access any side door he needs to for quick escapes
Plays with slasher qualities
Saw over 10 percent of his runs in 2017 go for 15-plus yards
Has sudden, one-cut ability with the juice to launch himself through line of scrimmage and into the open field
Feet are light and nimble
Runs with knee bend and good pad level
Excellent footwork in tight quarters
Has balance and vision to navigate fluid run lanes
Glides behind lead blockers allowing them to do their work
Wiggle makes him dangerous in space
Not much tread off his tires as a runner
Averaged 7.1 yards per carry against SEC competition including 101 against Alabama
-
10 minutes ago, JPFolks said:
See this is where I think OL/TE is more important than RB/WR because injury at those positions puts Luck in jeopardy and affects all the other positions MORE than being short on RB or WR which Luck and his talent with great protection and TE safety valves/added protection can make up for more easily than if Luck is getting crushed due to 3 OL injuries (which happens to teams all the time) or like we found last year when we were down mostly to Ebron at points due to injuries. Would you rather see it at WR or RB?
IMO, we carried more OL last year because we were inserting 2 brand new early round picks. if everyone is healthy, we don't need to do that this year. starting positions are likely set, and it's just a matter of back ups battling it out.
TE had injury concerns. Only way I see us carrying 4 is if there are still injury concerns, or were assuming we're letting Doyle go after the season, and trying to get a good look at the other TEs.
Keep in mind that the OLs we have are versatile. Braden could literally play 4 out of the 5 spots. Q too. A lot of NFL guards have played T or C in their career. You just don't need a 1 for 1 replacement all the time. You need 2 good versatile back ups, preferably one at T, and one at G, and one of those that can play C.
As for TE, we only ran 2 TE slots around a quarter of the time, while we ran 3 WR sets more than 50% of the time. RBs block as much as TEs do, actually probably more in our O.
To answer you're Q, I'd rather Ebron go down than Mack. I'd rather Mack go down than TY.
-
14 minutes ago, krunk said:
No
so you don't agree to disagree lol.
would you like articles/reviews?
-
15 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
Bears have a tough schedule this season too the way it is lined up. I do not trust their QB either but they look like a 10 win team to me with that defense.
Agree on the Bears. I see a lot of close games in their future this year.
-
1
-
-
32 minutes ago, cbear said:
You bring up a good point about banogu. In every tape I've watched on him, I kept scratching my head as to why he played as poorly as he did pass rushing. You can see the potential and athletic ability, but he played DE so tentatively. He loves to stunt inside (and right into double teams). Even when using a speed rush, if he doesn't get passed the tackle immediately, he just sort of sticks to him and is neutralized.
It looks so coachable and it was puzzling why they didn't coach him up with some pass rush skills. Hopefully our coaches can do that job. His physical abilities got him his college numbers, but he won't be getting much in the NFL without major coaching. But Ballard/Reich must be confident they can do it.
TCU's scheme just doesn't rely on the same things we want in our scheme, so they only coached per their scheme. I can see him really improving as the year goes along. If there's a most improved winner at the end of the season pre-season candidate, I'd bet on Bonagu.
If he's smart and willing to be coached, he'll do well over the next 2 years (assuming we put the time in coaching). If he's anything like the Nigerian kids who went to ND, he'll be hard working and very coachable. ND takes a lot of chances on international kids, so I've seen guys like Banogu completely morph in a few years.
I don't know how he is personality or brain wise, but I do trust Ballard in those areas so I'm gonna say he'll stick, and in year 2 or 3 he's a nice player. Not saying he'll be Leonard type stud, but much more complete than he is today.
-
3
-
-
25 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
Yeah I have Rodgers making the playoffs, can't see him missing 2 years in a row. He will be on a mission this season. After the Pack fired their coach he knows it would look bad if he misses the playoffs.
Packers just seem to be imploding to me. Wasn't impressed with their draft either besides their 2 first round picks. My bold take on the Falcons getting a WC could easily go to GB. I'm not really all that high on the Bears either (primarily not impressed with their QB).
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, krunk said:
Williams isnt a short yardage back. Hes more of a 3 down back. I look at him as competition for Wilkins. In some ways i think hes better than Wilkins. Wouldnt be surprised if it turned into a Robert Turbin situation in that you have a guy travel around the league a little bit then find a home.
agree to disagree. Williams lacks speed (he's around 4.6).
everything i've ever read on him describes him as a short yardage guy.
-
1 minute ago, JPFolks said:
Okay, I wasn't very clear on my question. I know often it comes down, at the end, to extra depth at certain positions. So, using your example, we'd have 4/6 WRs, (Depending on 3 WR dominant or 2 TE dominant lineups) 2/4 TEs, 10OLs, 2RBs, 2QBs. That gives us 3 more guys (if we give 3 to the D and 3 to the O and our base WR is 5 and base TE is 3) on the O to add as depth. Where do you spend those extras? Is is ALWAYS a certain way, or is it open to strategy or is it based on the best talent available (or for that matter, the weakest starting talent needing more back up)?
That's the general nature of my question. When you get to decide if you want 6WRs or (fill in the blank) # of guys, which do you prefer, or is it just a standard that nearly all teams use? Or, are 4 or 5 of those on Defense more often? You hopefully get where I am going. Where do you all put the luxury depth players?
it's open to strategy/scheme, competition, injury, but also draft/FA pick ups (guys you might not need but want to give time). If you have a position that's struggling and you're trying to upgrade, you might carry more. If you have a position with injury issues, you might carry more. If you draft players in a position where the comp is close, you might carry more.
Last year's initial 53 man roster vs the anatomy article standards (or NFL avg).
QB - 2 / 2
RB - 4 / 4
WR - 5 / 6 (-1)
TE - 4 / 3 (+1)
OL - 10 / 9 (+1)
DL - 9 / 9
LB - 6 / 7 (-1)
CB - 5 / 5
S - 5 / 5
ST - 3 / 3
Areas where we weren't average
WR - during the year we carried 5 to start and 6 some weeks. I'd bet we carry 6 this year to start given Cain is coming back from injury and we drafted PC.
TE - doubt we carry 4 this year if Doyle is healthy.
OL - we carried +1 last year because we drafted 2 guys who were in the mix quickly. may not carry 10 this year.
LB - We drafted a few, so I can see us going back to 7.
In short, it's all fluid and year to year based on the things I listed (and more).
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
How about a bold prediction of the Cowboys missing the playoffs. I think Eagles will win that division. I then have the Saints winning the NFC South, the Rams winning the NFC West, and the Bears winning the NFC North. That leaves 2 wildcards, I say Packers and Seahawks get those. These predictions could change though.
I pay a lot less attention to the NFC, but here's my stab.
NFC East - Redskins win, no WC. Is that bold :-) ?
NFC North - Bears win but not by much. no WC
NFC South - Saints win, Falcons get a WC (not too sure on this).
NFC West - LAR win, Seahawks get a WC
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:
I love what they did in the draft and FA, but that schedule is brutal. If we played some of those guys at home, it would make a major difference, but as it stands I said:
--11 wins
--Chargers
--Win that SB baby
KC doesn't look scary at all to me now. Who do you have as losses?
-
17 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
Yeah post draft I have:
Pats win AFC East
Colts win AFC South
-Then it gets tricky because we do not know yet if Hill will play for KC?
If Hill plays I think KC wins the AFC West and the Chargers get a Wildcard if not I think it will be the other way around. That is how much Hill means to that team. He is a huge weapon that opens up their whole offense.
Browns are going to win the AFC North, you know why? Because I want to make a bold prediction
. They actually can though.
Browns should win based on talent, but they're the Browns LOL. It's just hard for me to say Browns and Division Champions in the same sentence without laughing. Be bolder my friend :-).
My bold prediction for 2019 is that AZ goes from worst in the NFC, to top 6 and a playoff birth.
I'm assuming Hill is gone. I just can't see anyway he comes back after that audio. In today's political climate, he'll be lucky with a one year suspension. And I agree, he's a HUGE loss.
-
1
-
-
44 minutes ago, cbear said:
I think it's a pretty big if that either banogu or okereke turn out to be leonard or even walker. Banogu has no pass rush skills, though he does set a good edge and plays the run game well. Okereke looks very raw to me. Hopefully I'm wrong.
Banogu needs serious technique coaching and a little SandC improvement.
Okereke needs SandC if he wants to be an every down guy.
IMO, both will see their snap counts increase as the season goes along, but both need a lot of work if they want to be more than situational guys.
I wouldn't really compare these guys to Leonard. Leonard had good size, strength, and technique already. He was also a monster stat stuffer. His only sin was going to a small school.
Banogu and Okereke both went to P5 schools and weren't really stat stuffers. Banogu is a victim of TCU's D scheme (nobody was really trying to correct his deficiencies), which can be corrected with good coaching. Stanford has a great SandC program, so Okereke's need to get thicker and get better against the run is a bit harder IMO because I'm sure Stanford already made it a priority.
-
30 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
What did you vote on how far we would go? I have us losing in the AFC Title Game but it's a crapshoot who we will play. Between the Pats, Chiefs, and Chargers who knows? If we have HFA throughout we could make the SB though. The Steelers are always a tough place to play and we rarely have won there in franchise history. I think we will have a better record than them in the end but winning at Pitt will be tough.
I voted the same (Conf Champ loss). I don't see the Cheifs overcoming the Chargers now with everything going on in KC. HFA is critical. I think we can beat anyone in Lucas this year IF things work out at WR and Ware becomes a legit short yardage back for us.
I think it's Pats, Chargers, and Colts fighting for HFA.
I see the conferences like this post draft
AFC East - Pats win the division, no other WC teams
AFC South - We win division easily, no other WC teams. Jax will be most improved though.
AFC West - Chargers win, Chiefs get WC. Raiders and Broncs could nip at KC's heels.
AFC North - Most interesting division by far. Browns and Steelers fight it out, loser with a WC
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, JPFolks said:
I can't recall, do we always keep 4 RB's or is it sometimes only 3? If it comes down to an extra lineman, an extra WR, an extra TE or an extra RB, which would (or anyone else) choose? It seems like one or more of these areas have to cut it deeper than the others. I think I would lean towards an extra TE and an extra OL. Those are Andrew Luck security blankets. In a catastrophic injury scenario, I'd rather he have time and protection to throw to lessor WR's or hand off to lessor RB's (and often there are veterans you can bring in ala Inman) over guys who need time to gel with blocking schemes/personnel and protection packages that a back up level guy is better filling than a guy off the streets.
What are your (or anyone's) thoughts on that?
Yup, 4 RBs are pretty standard. Depending on the scheme, they may even keep 5. RBs make great ST's players too. I'm guessing with our O, the design is:
2 similar standard down backs (RB1 Mack and Back up Wilkins)
1 short yardage back (guessing the Ware sign is bad for Williams)
1 all purpose back (Hines) who can flex to slot if needed.
RB is another position that's often kept on the 10 man practice roster.
If you think about it, there's 22 standard positions, plus K, P, and LS specialists. If every standard position gets a back up, that's 44. Then 47 when you count the 3 specialist. Now you have 6 slots to go deeper, and 10 practice team slots. So reallly you have 63. It's not that simple, as OLs and DLs can play multiple positions, and DBs, DLs, LBs, WRs, and other can be highly specialized based on down and distance, scheme, etc..
Here's a decent/simple article on roster anatomy if interested. There's better/deeper articles out there, but this is light and hits the basics.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1640782-the-anatomy-of-a-53-man-roster-in-the-nfl
-
2
-
-
12 minutes ago, krunk said:
Im not writing Jonathan Williams off like that. Wait till the pads get on. Hes a pretty good back..
I like Williams too, I just like Ware more. Both are short yardage backs, but Ware is faster, IMO, and more physical. I don't see us keeping two short yardage guys.
-
3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
Yeah that Chiefs game is 50/50, if it was here we would win for sure IMO. If Hill doesn't play we still may win there. That is like with the Chargers, I do not think they are better than us either but HFA makes a difference.
here's how i look at the games
Chiefs - I'd be really, really surprised if Hill plays this year. I know they picked up one nice piece for the front 4, but they lost 2. Taking Hill and Hunt away from the O are two big losses. Mahomes is going to do well, but not near as well as last year. We get revenge.
Saints - Hard place to play at. If we were at home, I'd pick us. If I thought our run D in the middle was improved, I'd might even pick us on the road. If we pick up a FA DT, I could even change my pick to a W.
Chargers - This game will be interesting. I think we can play well on D vs them, but they are very very solid on D, and just picked up to pretty good players that will see time early (perhap not when we play them). They also improved their LB core a bunch. This one I think will go down to the last drive.
Steelers - Like NO, hard place to play. I'm on the fence here as they didn't do much in FA. Their draft was decent (I like 3 of 4 of their first picks), but they are vulnerable. I could switch here too after pre season.
-
1
-
. They actually can though.
Eberflus and Leonard bad plays
in Colts Football
Posted
I wonder if anyone does this for bad coaching play calls on both the O and D.
"Frank, Matt, here's your worst play calls of 2018.... lol. Stay grounded guys and peace out."