HarassedOffTheSite
-
Posts
3,416 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by HarassedOffTheSite
-
-
I'm not knocking the guy.
I didn't say you were.
I think he has the potential to help this defense out.
He'll obviously help this defense out. We did not have adequate talent at either DE or DT. He can play both. OBVIOUS upgrade.
Was it really worth giving a contract that puts in the top 8 for biggest on the team? I don't think so.
Grigson, Pagano & Manusky do.
We're not even sure if he's starting.
Oh hush.
-
Didn't think the signing was a must.
Definitely didn't want to overpay for the guy and that's what the Colts did. Not exactly thrilled with this signing.
Oh relax. Got your drift the first time. Dline & Linebackers matter most in this defense. And we are lacking talent at DE & DT. This was a very good pickup.
-
-
5) A NEW ELITE RUSH LB: yes that's right. The signing of Walden(who is a strong side LB)actually allowed us to move Robert Mathis to his more natural position and turn him loose on the QB. So, I'm looking at the Walden signing as a big win because there was no one NO ONE on the market with Mathis' skills rushing the passer so all in all this was a good move.
Let's not forget about Jake Killeen.
-
I'd figure if he was doing equal or better than Avery, he'd get the nod.
Right. But he was a rookie. There was NO WAY he would've done equal to or better than Donnie. Avery is faster and if anything ran routes just as good. And remember, his speed is the only thing that mattered to B.A. he was the Wallace-clone speedwise that fit B.A.s scheme. Like I said, nobody was going to unseat him. And if B.A. was still our OCoordinator, Avery would more than likely still be here. But now that Pep has taken over and a new scheme come in, things have changed. Now, we're a run to set up the pass team. And when we do pass, most of the time it'll be short to intermediate routes. We've gone from apples to oranges vis-a-vis WRs.
I just hope he can take over this year. If they nab a DE in the 1st, that'd be great, or an OG as well. But I still think WR is a viable option both for now and the future in the 1st round of this draft, regardless of how Brazill turns out.
I hear you.
-
Delete - thought you were talking about Brazill.
-
I think you could be right, and they simply think that highly of Brazill and Hilton right now, and that'd be fine. I just figure if Brazill was a threat, they'd have used him more than the 10-15 times they did.
Ehhh I think his reps had more to do with the fact that we'd just signed Avery and weren't about to waste that money. The 2 was his from the day we signed him (as much as the Collie-trolls hate to admit that). And nobody was going to unseat him unless he got injured.
-
If we want to upgrade at WR, it'd be a good idea to get a young guy in to learn from Wayne. IE - Wayne does his thing as he always does, and the rookie picks up on his good habits and uses them to create the kind of success that Wayne has.
It's a logical thought, IMO.
You know, now that I give it more thought you're right. Another kid to come in and learn (assuming Brazill takes over the 2) and eventually move over to 2 when Reggie retires isn't a bad idea.
I think I took your orignal thoughts to mean we needed a rookie to come in and be the 2. My bad.
-
I wouldn't read too much into Stanford's WR corp. WR and CB are two positions traditionally tough for Stanford to recruit.
Really? I did not know that. To what do you attribute that to? Is it "Offensive philosophy" or just can't land the blue chip recruits?
We've thrown a lot to our tight ends in the last few years because we didn't have great WR's.
What we've had recently are Owusu (who was decent but injury prone) and the two Whalen's (who were also decent but walk-ons) and some of our 4-star WR's didn't pan out for reasons that are still not clear.
In other words, don't look to Stanford for clues as to what the Colts will do.
Gotcha.
-
Can you tell me how that makes no sense?
I mean I just did but okay, you might've missed it.
You said...
We still have a need at WR that can be filled by a rookie who can develop behind (or across from) Wayne. Drafting a rookie, at least to me, makes sense.
We have a 2nd year WR (drafted WITH Andrew Luck), LaVon Brazill who is 23 years old, 5'11" 195 lbs and runs a 4.4. He is a great route runner (who just sat at the feet of Reggie Wayne last year). He's quick & explosive off the line. He can sink his hips at the top of routes and change up his speed to keep defenders off-balance. He's got strong hands and he's not a fumbling threat. He extends the field and is a threat to blow the top off of a defense not because of his speed, but his ability to stick a foot in the ground and jump off one leg at full speed and extend.
So....WHY....would I need a rookie to develop into the 1 or 2 when I already have a guy doing that right now? That is why what you proposed doesn't really make sense. Now, if we want to grab a FA. Cool. Or even some depth. Fine. But IMO Grigson isn't trying to throw away a draft pick in Brazill in order to waste another pick trying to do what is already being accomplished by Brazill.
Sorry. IMO we already have our starting WRs on the roster.
-
Should know something around or after 12:00 local time.
-
To me, Luck is young. Wayne is going to start, we know that. Hilton is a sure up and comer. We still have a need at WR that can be filled by a rookie who can develop behind (or across from) Wayne. Drafting a rookie, at least to me, makes sense.
Ehhh THAT kinda makes no sense. We have LaVon Brazill waiting in the wings. Can he not get the opportunity to develop behind (or across from) Wayne?
-
If there is a WR with first round talent available I hope they grab him. We're gonna need a #1 and you arn't likely to get a #1 in the 3rd round. (Maybe a #2 but not a #1). Get someone Luck can build some chemistry with for a long time. And we could use a play-maker.
An indicator would be to look and see how Hamilton and Stanford staffed their WR corps. I have not done so. They may be very important and maybe not so much. A west coast offense tends to be dink & dunk, so a typical WR "playmaker" may not be in the cards for us. Not satying it isn't, just saying.
-
Next year might be the year to draft wr in the 1st.
Yeah. I haven't looked to see how 2014 projects out talent-wise. But from our perspective, I don't think WR is a big enough need to warrant a 1 in 2013.
-
People, get this through your heads. If the Colts thought WR was a need even half as much as some of the fans do. They would have already brought one in...it's obvious they highly disagree with the assertion from fans that it's an immediate need.
Yeah, it would appear so.
Just because they havn't brought one in yet doesn't mean that they don't think of it as a need.
Some people just argue in order to argue.I think we'll draft a WR, but I'm not sure it will be in the 1st rd..
I wouldn't be surprised if we grabbed one. I'll be disappointed if they grab one in the 1st.
1. Trade our 1st for C. Cruz (I would think hard about doing it, its not proven we get a slam dunk at our 1st pick)
I would not trade our 1 for Cruz. I like him but the market right now is telling the RFA that he is not worth what he would think he is worth. The Welker deal should squash his dreams of a pay day with the Giants. I'm not so sure that has sunk in and he'd probably still try to cash in with us.
2. Pick up WR thru Free Agency (Who is left that you would pick up)
At the right price. Greg Jennings intrigues me. But apparently not too many NFL GMs.
3. Just pick our WR with first pick of draft.
THAT would be IMO a mistake. Unless some guy just falls very far on some baseless rumor, I'd rather go O&Dline, LBs more than Offensive weapons this go'round. ;)
-
I'd still like some more Oline but I would not be shocked (assuming we sign RJF) if we go get an ILBs or two. I'd like another NT & DT.
-
He didn't type out the message in Swahli. What was so difficult to understand? Having an elite pass rush does not necessarily equate to good pass defense. The Colts were a prime example in 2011. We still had Freeny and Mathis, 2 of the best pass rushers of the decade, but due to inept coverage, our defense still gave up the worst QB rating through the course of the year than any other team in history. Our defense made Colt McCoy look like Tom Brady. If there's no coverage, then the QB can get the ball out on a quick 3 step drop, thus negating any attempt at a pass rush.
A team needs great coverage and an above average pass rush or a great pass rush and above average coverage. If a team is great at one but bad at the other then it won't matter that they're great at one. It's not that difficult. Surely someone of your staggering intellect can grasp these concepts. Or is the air too thin way up there on your pedestal that it makes it difficult to concentrate?
Hahaha and here comes another one.
None of that addresses or refutes the reality that in order of importance, CBs are the lowest position in all 3/4 and 4/3 defenses. Y'all are arguing against a myriad of imaginary statements that I have not made.
CBs are the lowest position (directly relative to priority and impact on the gameplan) in all 3/4 and 4/3 defenses.
It just is what it is and it is that statement that has received a blizzard of hissy-fits
. For no reason. Hahaha why fight reality? And in none of those responses has there been anything that can overcome that reality.I understand that between the clique of cornerbackites
and the everpresent coterie of those who are desperate to be offended 
, some have lashed out against it...but all of that drama doesn't change fact. It's not my opinion. It is just fact. And both Polian and Parcells said so this week on their espn free agency show.CBs are the lowest position (directly relative to priority and impact on the gameplan) in all 3/4 and 4/3 defenses.
Stop arguing with...
"Having an elite pass rush does not necessarily equate to good pass defense"
"QB rating"
"A team needs both"
"Pass completion rate"
"Sacks"
...because none of that addresses my comment nor can it overcome it.
CBs are the lowest position (directly relative to priority and impact on the gameplan) in all 3/4 and 4/3 defenses.
-
I will complete concede your good at getting under some peoples skin, well played. Your quite adapt at picking and choosing a little piece of a persons opinion and ignoring facts staring you in the face just to live in your Im right and everyone else is wrong world, unfortunately for you your opinions mean the same as everyone elses around here.....
LOL what is it with you and being such a crybaby? Someone takes 'your' incorrect assertions to task and 'your' eventual response is ad hominem? Really dude?
Hahaha anyway. Anyone who knows football knows that in order of importance (relative to impact in the gameplan), CBs are the lowest position in all 3/4 and 4/3 defenses. That statement doesn't magically morph into meaning CBs aren't important or somehow imply they're not needed.
Now, you run along and find something else in that to be offended with. ;)
-
Vikings led the league in sacks in 2011 with 50, they were 26th in passing yards allowed
2011-Patriots 40 sacks good for 14th in the league was 31st in yards allowed
2011-Giants were 29th in passing yards allowed they had 48 sacks good for 3rd best
2011 Cowboys-42 sacks good for 10th in the league was 23rd worst in yards allowed
LOL and? What is someone supposed to magically divine from those statistics?
-
If Laron Landry can bring that FIRE that Bob Sanders brought to the old Colts........ wooooo wheeee we're gonna be Dangerous!
That!
I just want him LAYING OUT some of these TEs.
-
That's one physical secondary!
This. One of the best and most physical in the league. WRs beware.
Fair enough. But I hope they can stay off of the Injury report too. I'm very pleased with the addition of Toller & Landry.
-
And the good news is the Colts have depth at each position. They have Zbi and Lefeged as backups, which is good.
As much as people hate Vaughn, he's a pretty good backup too.
Having good depth is very important and they have it in the secondary.
I agree.
-
this could be the best starting 4 in the backfield we have ever had.
It'll more than likely turn out to be the best defensive backfield that the "Indianapolis" Colts have ever had.
Now everything should center on the LBs & Dline.
-
Barring injury, the secondary looks GREAT.
Some people just argue in order to argue.
. For no reason. Hahaha why fight reality? And in none of those responses has there been anything that can overcome that reality.
and the everpresent coterie of those who are desperate to be offended 
, some have lashed out against it...but all of that drama doesn't change fact. It's not my opinion. It is just fact. And both Polian and Parcells said so this week on their espn free agency show.
its offical/Ricky Jean Francois Signs Big Deal with Colts (confirmed)(merge)
in Colts Football
Posted
Or a new addition via this or next draft, this or next FA?