Blueblazes
-
Posts
421 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Blueblazes
-
-
I'm usually an optimist, but as Bill Parcells said, you are what your record is. 1-3 for us right now. The NFL is full of close games. 1-3 is 1-3. Did anyone expect different this season though, with like $53M left on the table under the salary cap, so that we can build for the future? It's hard to build for the future and win now as well. $53M brings in 3 game changers, but choosing to build for the future may pay off. Who knows.
-
The CBA installed a limit on rollover and invokes a penalty at some point for unused cap space. When does that kick in?
-
The median cap space for the 32 NFL teams is about $9M. The Colts have about $59M in cap space. Knowing the Colts have so many holes to plug on defense and a few on offense, does anyone know the advantage of this amazing cap space the Colts are maintaining? Surely the is a good reason that is not apparent.
-
2 hours ago, Doug Wilson said:
Eric Ebron, age 25 - 186 career receptions, 2070 yards, 11 TDs
Eric Swoope, age 26 - 15 career receptions, 297 yards, 1 TD
And you're saying Swoope should replace Ebron because Ebron lacks production?
Please read closer. I said "if he can stay injury free". Yes, I think he can be more productive than 11.8 ypc and 2.8 TDs per season despite having a prolific QB like Stafford. "if he can stay injury free" is a big if for Swoope, but yes, 500 yds per season is not very productive for a TE in a pass happy system for Ebron, but hey, just my opinion.
-
50 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:
19.8woope made like two "big" plays since he's been here, was on the IR all last year and so far this offseason and you think he needs to be on the field instead of Ebron....
Look, we all like Swoope's potential, but Ebron has actually produced.
Swoope is in danger of being cut in favor of Daniels or Travis because he lacks availability.
My friend, I'm just going by fact. Ebron averaged a whopping 2.8 TDs per season and he played regularly, and a very unimpressive 11.8 yards per catch despite having a QB like Stafford. On the other hand, Swoope averaged 19.8 ypc in 2016. And yes, I did qualify my statement that if he can stay healthy. I saw Ebron play here in NC and watched him in Detroit (knowing one of their coaches pretty well). Great potential/little production. But still holding out hope for him.
-
If Swoope can stay injury free, I would rather have him on the field than Ebron. He gets open and can actually make the big play. He just needs the opportunity and the health.
-
i hate to be a realist but there's a lot of mediocrity in this area with no pass rushers. I don't mean 6-8 sacks per year guy, I mean a real difference maker. We may stop the run, hopefully continuing to improve in that area, but the name of the game in today's NFL is putting pressure on the QB. Still hopeful someone steps up though.
-
1 hour ago, Scott Pennock said:
You can't take grades on players, especially on the defensive side of the ball because they are bland.....the teams don't release thier grades due to scheme.
Come on, let go of ego and realize that scouts, coaches, player personnel, asst GMs and the GM all watch extensive tape to find the right fit for what they are looking for!
Jeezush it's not that difficult of a concept to grasp.
My friend, if this were true, there would have been no Ryan Leafs, Jamarcus Russells or Tim Couch. This is a forum and thrives on differing opinions.
History shows that about 50% of the top 10 picks are successful and only about 40% of the first round in total is successful. So yes, there will be cases where informed fans hit on just as many picks as GMs and scouts.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Seriously, this is not an offensive line to build on. Honestly, it's 8th from the bottom in yards per carry in rushing and the league's laughing stock at keeping the qb upright. Sure, some passes have been designed to go deep but no more than most other teams. We have to face it, that we have 2 decent O linemen, one marginal and 2 not good at all. Keep AC, but he's not good at LT, maybe RT, keep Kelly of course, Mewhort is solid. But we need at least 2 more O linemen and a real LT. A real LT.
-
7 hours ago, Justin Zima said:
I was thinking the same thing. We have decent pieces on our line but they get shuffled around so often and miss so much time. Ryan Kelly for example plays a damn good center but when you miss 6 weeks it’s hard to get your feet underneath yourself. Castonzo has played a decent LT (he’s been beat a few games) Kalis has played well... As for the others, they get shuffled around too often for them to get any continuity at a spot, if we can keep the line healthy and maybe get a good/great guard this line could be just fine! I’d like to see us find a big mauler in the draft.
also want to just give props to the injuried Bond. I thought for an undrafted free agent he preformed very admirably (too many penalties) but preformed way better than to be expected from a guy asked to contribute on such short notice
Wow, with the several good O linemen you mentioned, we don't need much help there after all.
-
9 hours ago, #12. said:
Ballard did say, after viewing film, he was pleasantly surprised by the O-line.
Hell, 99% of this forum believed the O-line was set for the future. Based on what, I have no idea. It started during the 2016 Vikings game when CBS ran the statistic showing the Colts had only given up 7 sacks in 8 games, or whatever. After that, conventional wisdom throughout Colts land was the O-line was fixed. It was overnight. Before CBS ran that statistic, everyday people were screaming O-line. After, everything was fine. The line was set.
Throughout the offseason only a handful of us were challenging this notion.
I thought the same thing my friend. Why in the world would anyone have thought other than Mewhort and maybe Kelly that we were going to have even a decent O line. If someone says that the O line was attempted to be addressed by Ballard, that even says less of Ballard and his ability to evaluate talent. If he thought he was addressing the O line issues, then I have even less respect for his evaluation abilities. And yes, it is possible to have good talent players as well as a good O line. Several teams have accomplished this. Oh yea, we have to spend our money on defense; and how did that turn out? Sorry, I digress. Just saying you are correct.
-
34 minutes ago, rockywoj said:
There were a good 4-7 high ceiling young prospects out there to be had, reasonably cheaply. I was disappointed there appeared to be no effort to upgrade the OL via free agency, this past offseason.
Ding, ding, ding. You are on the money. Exactly right.
-
Not bringing in top notch Oline talent and hoping against hope that the mediocre O linemen you do bring in are better than they've ever been. That's what Grigson did. Mewhort was good initially but has slipped considerably this season with injuries. The jury is still out on Kelly at C. Now Ballard has a chance and he didn't bring in anyone in the offseason that makes much difference either. We can say he brought in --- or he brought in --- but you can find that kind of talent on the waiver wire. When we bring in a good Olineman from free agency or trade, and actually hit on a good O lineman in the draft, we will have trouble protecting an outstanding QB, Luck. The Falcons brought in Levine at LG and Mack at C and drafting Matthews at LT and what do you know, they had an awesome offense last year. You don't need 5 All-Pros but you need 3 O lineman that are very good. Or at the very least 2 and hoping for a 3rd to develop. Ok , I'll get off my O line soapbox now.
-
We are 26th in the league in rush defense and 21st in ypc rush defense, so not a great improvement at all. He's average I would say. Hoping for more, but our rush defense as a whole is below average and I'll give him credit for being better than the others and being average. It's amazing that we have not been able to find a runstopping DLine since we had Booger McFarland. Amazing.
-
It's gotten to be fairly humorous what we have started to settle for with offensive linemen. Several saying we don't have to get many above average, or AC is not bad, etc. OL is the foundation of an offense after the QB position. The evidence of this is our OL over the past 8 years or so. We accept average at best and say its ok. It's not ok. You need 3 above average to excellent OL to really make an offense go. No, you don't need 5, but yes, you need 3. Mewhort and Kelly are a good start. Kelly's jury is still out, but Mewhort is above average. If you accept AC at LT, we will always see Luck, Bissett or whomever continue to run for their lives. If you don't think they have been for years, you haven't been watching Colts football very closely or you are a relative of one of the O linemen of the last 8 years. We need to get a good LT, sure AC would be average at RT and that would be ok. We could hopefully get an average RG. But the key is finding a very good to excellent LT. The talent positions are in place with the offense but the O line must be addressed in the offseason.
-
On 10/3/2017 at 9:01 AM, Coffeedrinker said:
The leverage comment is makes sense.
The rest of it, not so much. The offensive line does not need to be retooled again. Get a RT(may be Good but someone else)and another guard (possibly Bond) to pair with Mewhort and that is it. Two more OLBs, ILB, RT and 3WR are all much bigger needs than LT.The O line has not improved to any great degree at all. If they don't "retool" we will totally miss Andrew Luck's best years, wasting them with an O line that anyone not partial totally recognizes is terrible at best and dangerous at worst for the QB. Honestly?
-
17 minutes ago, drums1st said:
Dang, I thought CB was a bigger need. We got nothing beyond V. Davis at corner.
The 2nd starting corner could have been addressed.
D. Butler or T.J. Green could have competed for that FS type position.
I know they'll draft a corner or two in later rounds but the really good guys will be gone.
Hope this works out.
Peace
I would be in total agreement. Doesn't mean we are negative or doesn't mean we don't know what we are talking about.
-
Safeties still are easier to get than most any position. Hooker is a ballhawk for interceptions but not a great tackler at all. Too many other needs were still on the board, not to mention better players not matter what position they play. As much as I'm trying to like this pick, it's just not getting it.
-
9 hours ago, TKnight24 said:
Yes, I am prepared to go into next season with the offensive line of
Castonzo
Mewhort
Kelly
Haeg
Clark
I also said in the exact same breath that I'm not opposed to taking Lamp or Cam Robinson if they're there & to also add OL depth. Let the young guys gel together & maybe we get lucky & get a offensive line like Dallas
Yes I would like to believe that too, However, the right side of that would be a frequent issue and the LT is average at best. Sorry I just want for more, and I'm possibly wanting too much, but I feel protecting Luck is imperative. An average O line makes for an average team.
-
1) Lenny Moore
2) Eric Dickerson (just too good to disqualify based on longetivity)
3) Edgerrin James
4) Marshall Faulk
-
Any impartial semi-football educated observer would say this O line needs more than slight improvement. Castanzo is average at best at LT, possible a reliable RT (waited long enough for him to live up to his pre-draft status). Mewhort is solid, Kelly will be fine. But honestly that would leave LT and RG wide open for improvement. Just being a realist.
-
Just a decent group. Hate to be a realist, but just a decent group
-
On 10/31/2016 at 10:33 PM, The Old Crow said:
They had great defenses from 58-71, and won 3 NFL Championships and a Super Bowl. Three good years 75-77 where they won the division and had pretty good defenses. Irsay dismantled those teams.
The Indy era had some good defenses, but the better ones seemed to exist in the Baltimore era. One thing is for sure , you are dead right about the great string of quarterbacks. Should be more titles.
So true. The '68 defense was the best defense in NFL history up to that point. And still one of the best ever. The worst defenses were '81 and '82 in Baltimore. In Indy, I would say this is the worst. Gives up a lot of yards, a lot of points, but also doesn't get turnover or sacks. Just very, very sad.
-
What a shame. We have found a true franchise QB and pay him what all the other good QBs will be making in a year or two. What a shame. It's really hard on a GM when you have found a franchise QB, it just really makes it tough to build a good team if you have a great QB. I wonder how other teams win in this league since Grigson says it's hard to build a team if you have to pay a good QB.
Aikman Efficiency Ratings
in Colts Football
Posted
Been a Colts fan for a long time and try to be optimistic, but we're stretching here guys. We are 1-5, losing to some pretty bad teams. At some point, Bill Parecells was right, you are what your record is, but I guess trying to look at anything semi-promising is good at this point.