Fleener?

[FightLikeSin]

It sucks that the Colts are under-utilizing Fleener. Maybe if they had a better O-line, they'd let him go up the seam and catch a ball or two a game or at least give him some targets.

[throwing BBZ]

Can anyone tell me why we picked Fleener instead of O-line or D-line help in the 2nd round? I'm not hating on Fleener but we sure could have used the O-line or D-line help. Was Fleener the best available on the board when we picked?

He wasn`t the best available on their board, I heard he was like 6th or 7th.

[haseo15]

He wasn`t the best available on their board, I heard he was like 6th or 7th.

The general rule is you Draft a TE and QB together so he has a safety net he can go too.

[Mouthfire]

The general rule is you Draft a TE and QB together so he has a safety net he can go too.

Hmmm... really? I've never heard that one before.

We didn't draft a single TE when Peyton was drafted.

[WSO]

It'll take time. I think the Colts had Allen has the top TE right? I swear I read it on here.

[haseo15]

Hmmm... really? I've never heard that one before.

We didn't draft a single TE when Peyton was drafted.

It does not happen in every single case. But a young QB's best friend is usually a TE so he has a safety net to go too if he runs into trouble.

[hambone35]

Everyone who's ticked about trading next years 2nd round pick should realize that sometimes they just don't work out. Or maybe they take time to work out. I totally agree we definitely need more tight end sets in which does creates coverage problems and opens up the field to long balls to wr’s as well

I'm happy with the trade for Davis. I just wish they would somehow work Fleener into the game plan. He has to be a mismatch with any LB out there.

[deedub75]

It does not happen in every single case. But a young QB's best friend is usually a TE so he has a safety net to go too if he runs into trouble.

I would think a young QB's best friend would be a good offensive line or good running game with a good TE right after those.

[haseo15]

Probably those as well but as a receiving option a Solid TE can really help out.

[GoDeep]

This cat has played in THREE NFL games.

Are we ready to write him off? I'm not.

And to say we should have drafted OL - well - we can hindsight all we want. They obviously thought the OL was improving.

And don't forget, we had Tamme gone, Dallas gone. What were we going to do? Coach up Gijon Robinson? Did we still have him?

[Mouthfire]

This cat has played in THREE NFL games.

Are we ready to write him off? I'm not.

And to say we should have drafted OL - well - we can hindsight all we want. They obviously thought the OL was improving.

And don't forget, we had Tamme gone, Dallas gone. What were we going to do? Coach up Gijon Robinson? Did we still have him?

I hear you, but the alternative would've been to draft offensive linemen and rely on your WRs and RBs as the primary weapons.

In other words... we'd be exactly where we are right now, except we'd likely have better pass protection and run blocking.

[GoDeep]

I hear you, but the alternative would've been to draft offensive linemen and rely on your WRs and RBs as the primary weapons.

In other words... we'd be exactly where we are right now, except we'd likely have better pass protection and run blocking.

IF we draft a guy or two that work out immediately.

[Mouthfire]

IF we draft a guy or two that work out immediately.

Not to keep pointing it out, but Cordy Glenn was a potential mid 1st rounder that somehow dropped to the 2nd round. We passed on him for Fleener. He's currently starting for the Bills and looks really impressive, from what I hear.

[GoDeep]

Not to keep pointing it out, but Cordy Glenn was a potential mid 1st rounder that somehow dropped to the 2nd round. We passed on him for Fleener. He's currently starting for the Bills and looks really impressive, from what I hear.

I understand.

I just don't think it is fair to draft retroactively.

[Mouthfire]

I understand.

I just don't think it is fair to draft retroactively.

Yeah, but even prospectively, you knew this would be a problem. Justice and McGlynn were linemen that nobody wanted. I couldn't see how they would magically get better once we got them.

There is a tried and true mantra in football that you "build from the inside out". The Patriots offense thrived for years with a stellar offensive line and mediocre receiving options, so there must be some truth to it.

The point being, if you have the option of either upgrading your offensive line versus picking a TE (all things being equal), you upgrade your offensive line.

[GoDeep]

Yeah, but even prospectively, you knew this would be a problem. Justice and McGlynn were linemen that nobody wanted. I couldn't see how they would magically get better once we got them.

There is a tried and true mantra in football that you "build from the inside out". The Patriots offense thrived for years with a stellar offensive line and mediocre receiving options, so there must be some truth to it.

The point being, if you have the option of either upgrading your offensive line versus picking a TE (all things being equal), you upgrade your offensive line.

I agree - I think we WOULD be better with our receivers and lesser TEs (especially since Fleener hasn't flashed yet) and a better OL.

I think we got into the problem of thinking that OL could be plug and play. Saturday was a lineman nobody wated. So was Lilja. Diem was a 4th rounder - and Jake Scott was a 7th rounder. Glenn was a 1st rounder (but so was Castonzo.)

This line was good then.

I do realize that coaching and leadership has changed since then. Cough, cough, Howard Mudd, cough, cough

Not sure if ownership thinks this (or did) or what.

[Superman]

I agree - I think we WOULD be better with our receivers and lesser TEs (especially since Fleener hasn't flashed yet) and a better OL.

I think we got into the problem of thinking that OL could be plug and play. Saturday was a lineman nobody wated. So was Lilja. Diem was a 4th rounder - and Jake Scott was a 7th rounder. Glenn was a 1st rounder (but so was Castonzo.)

This line was good then.

I do realize that coaching and leadership has changed since then. Cough, cough, Howard Mudd, cough, cough

Not sure if ownership thinks this (or did) or what.

The line play deteriorated under Howard Mudd's watch. And the Eagles have a terrible offensive line under his watch as well. I liked him when he was here, and I think he deserves a lot of credit for our line play in our best years, but from 2008 on, his prowess on the offensive line has been ineffective. Just goes to show that it starts with the players.

[GoDeep]

The line play deteriorated under Howard Mudd's watch. And the Eagles have a terrible offensive line under his watch as well. I liked him when he was here, and I think he deserves a lot of credit for our line play in our best years, but from 2008 on, his prowess on the offensive line has been ineffective. Just goes to show that it starts with the players.

True - but it still stands that these guys had a very good line with minimal investment.

I just wonder how much the new leadership considered this.

[Superman]

True - but it still stands that these guys had a very good line with minimal investment.

I just wonder how much the new leadership considered this.

So your argument is more that we should have done more in the offseason to address the offensive line, than it is that we should still have Howard Mudd as our line coach?

I guess I can get behind that. I definitely expected us to spend some picks on the line and the secondary, and we really didn't. I don't know how much impact that kind of investment would be making right now; the Steelers did a lot in the draft for their offensive line, and it's still not very good. At this point, I'm okay with deciding to go with a makeshift line right now, and then trying to improve in free agency. I'm sure that if we get a free agent offensive lineman, we'll have to overpay, but that's the nature of the beast.

Meantime, we'll get a better idea of what we do and don't have along the line. I'm pretty certain AC is a lock for left tackle moving forward; he's looked like an old vet so far this season, with little exception. We're still troubled at both guard spots, and we're not in good shape at right tackle. We also might not be so good at center, but assuming Satele is reasonably healthy at the end of the season, I'm pretty sure he'll be the starter next season. It would help if we flank him with better players. Hopefully Joe Reitz gets back and plays well, and then we'll get even more info on how our interior line looks.

[GoDeep]

So your argument is more that we should have done more in the offseason to address the offensive line, than it is that we should still have Howard Mudd as our line coach?

I guess I can get behind that. I definitely expected us to spend some picks on the line and the secondary, and we really didn't. I don't know how much impact that kind of investment would be making right now; the Steelers did a lot in the draft for their offensive line, and it's still not very good. At this point, I'm okay with deciding to go with a makeshift line right now, and then trying to improve in free agency. I'm sure that if we get a free agent offensive lineman, we'll have to overpay, but that's the nature of the beast.

Meantime, we'll get a better idea of what we do and don't have along the line. I'm pretty certain AC is a lock for left tackle moving forward; he's looked like an old vet so far this season, with little exception. We're still troubled at both guard spots, and we're not in good shape at right tackle. We also might not be so good at center, but assuming Satele is reasonably healthy at the end of the season, I'm pretty sure he'll be the starter next season. It would help if we flank him with better players. Hopefully Joe Reitz gets back and plays well, and then we'll get even more info on how our interior line looks.

Actually, I was discussing our draft - I think Mouthfire's point was that we should have drafted OL instead of Fleener.

I was saying that possibly they thought they could do more with what they had than they have been able to so far.

They did do it in the past, good line, minimal investment.

[throwing BBZ]

Oh Ok. That's actually called blind faith then.

Hmmm, wouldn`t that be the OPPOSITE of blind faith?

[throwing BBZ]

Actually, I was discussing our draft - I think Mouthfire's point was that we should have drafted OL instead of Fleener.

I was saying that possibly they thought they could do more with what they had than they have been able to so far.

They did do it in the past, good line, minimal investment.

No, actually you spend a few thousand hours and tons of $$$ to develope a draft board and stick with it.

I think they wanted Janoris Jenkins at CB and missed him by one spot.

Fleenors Value is as a deep threat as he has already successfully shown us, it takes time to get there, as he is much FASTER than Clark, his day will come.

[GoDeep]

No, actually you spend a few thousand hours and tons of $$$ to develope a draft board and stick with it.

I think they wanted Janoris Jenkins at CB and missed him by one spot.

Fleenors Value is as a deep threat as he has already successfully shown us, it takes time to get there, as he is much FASTER than Clark, his day will come.

Wondering if you read the whole thread.

I agree his day will come. My point is that the board would have targeted line with more priority if we knew at the time what crap this line was.

[YOUR GM]

The line play deteriorated under Howard Mudd's watch. And the Eagles have a terrible offensive line under his watch as well. I liked him when he was here, and I think he deserves a lot of credit for our line play in our best years, but from 2008 on, his prowess on the offensive line has been ineffective. Just goes to show that it starts with the players.

Didn't Lesean McCoy just come off a 1300 yard season and lead the league in rushing touchdowns? I'm not seeing how you can call Mudd's work on the eagles line 'ineffective'? They're struggling with protection right now, partly because Jason Peters (arguably the best left tackle in the league) isn't playing, but mainly because Vick is holding the ball too long. I've heard nothing but positive reviews of Mudd's work with the Eagles O-line since he's been there.

I, for one, think we should've kept him. He and Polian's relationship deteriorated when Polian threw him under the bus after the superbowl loss, however

[Tark The Shark]

Give Fleener some time. He doesn't get a free pass, but I just don't think Arians has enough confidence in the young offense to lay it on the rookies i.e Fleener, Allen, Hilton, Brazil, Luck.

He seems to still hold the notion that rookies can't contribute to NFL teams this quickly, even though I think that *.

Sooner or later, I think Fleener will be the right pick and be a great TE for us.

[Flash7]

I have gone back and watched all three regular season games this year (NFL game rewind). Fleener hasn't played bad, he just hasn't had any break out plays yet.

He's had a few drops, but after watching the games and keeping an eye out for Fleener, I noticed that the drops that he has had have been passes that were well over his head, and Fleener has reached out to get his hands on the ball. There was one drop where the ball was at his ankles and he reached for the ball but couldn't bring it in. We count those as drops, but they really weren't catchable balls to begin with.

When the ball was catchable, he's made the catches and has been tough to bring down. Also, his blocking has been much better than we've been giving him credit for.

[Superman]

Didn't Lesean McCoy just come off a 1300 yard season and lead the league in rushing touchdowns? I'm not seeing how you can call Mudd's work on the eagles line 'ineffective'? They're struggling with protection right now, partly because Jason Peters (arguably the best left tackle in the league) isn't playing, but mainly because Vick is holding the ball too long. I've heard nothing but positive reviews of Mudd's work with the Eagles O-line since he's been there.

I, for one, think we should've kept him. He and Polian's relationship deteriorated when Polian threw him under the bus after the superbowl loss, however

He's not the only line coach out there.

You're right, the Eagles did a good job running the ball last year, and Mudd deserves some credit for that. Having a quarterback like Vick has an impact as well, but either way, they were good running the ball. Top five in average per carry. But they're not very good in pass protection, and yes, part of that is Vick's fault, but they still aren't that good.

All I'm saying is that we can't spend the rest of eternity complaining about not having Howard Mudd anymore (same goes for Tom Moore). He was a good line coach; perhaps he still is. But he's in his 70s, and he officially retired a couple of years ago, only to be talked out of retirement by his friend. We don't know the ins and outs of his relationship with Polian; that's entirely speculative. But either way, we ought to be able to improve the quality of our line play without pining for Howard Mudd forever.

Like you said about the Eagles, they're suffering because they're without their best player. We're suffering because we don't have quality linemen in key spots. Three of the five line spots are makeshift right now. Hopefully it gets better as the season goes on, but we know -- and knew going into the offseason -- that we needed to improve the line. I think we actually did, and that says something about how bad the line was before. Still have a ways to go, but I think the answer is improving the players, not complaining about a line coach we lost three years ago.

[Superman]

Actually, I was discussing our draft - I think Mouthfire's point was that we should have drafted OL instead of Fleener.

I was saying that possibly they thought they could do more with what they had than they have been able to so far.

They did do it in the past, good line, minimal investment.

Now I get it.

[NewColtsFan]

3 games into the season.

A bad offensive line that's already been decimated by injuries.

A rookie QB. Rookies at skill positions.

A new coaching staff overseeing the youngest roster in all the NFL.

And did I mention it's only been 3 freaking games.

And fans here are debating why we took this player over that player. As if 3 games tells us anything.

Sorry, but this is the kind of thread that gives Internet message boards a bad reputation.....

<<sigh...>>

[Kleats]

It took a while for him to ascend the depth chart in college ( which is normal most freshmen / sophs don't play alot ). When he improved enough and they started going to him , what happened ? 17 TD's . I'm a Stanford fan I watched his progress , didn't miss a game .

Yes he looks a little tentative but he looked the same way as he progressed thru college . He's adjusting and needs to learn how to get off the ball quicker - that's his biggest problem right now . That and the fact that the OC hasn't used him properly yet ( he's not a blocking TE per se but he has made strides w this every year I've watched him). But that isn't , and won't ever be the proper way to utilize his strengths , which is speed and dusting LB's .

Once he starts getting off the ball quicker, and thus getting 'open' , he'll flourish ( as long as the OL improves enough to give Luck enough time ). But he's got to do a better job getting open ..... cuz Andrew doesn't waste time w unopen guys. He'll get there ... after a while.

[throwing BBZ]

Looks like a rookie defense coordinator, a rookie head coach, and a castaway offensive coordinator playing fantasy football to me. Didn't make sense to go heavy offense this draft and go heavy defense in the next draft when you know the defense has stunk for years.

I'm also venting also because I'm tallying up my expenses for attending today's game.

But then again it is an Offense led League so it makes perfect sense to start with the Offense. Hmmm!

I believe they will stick to their draft board next year trying to get talent and value for the picks. We need a great O-Lineman, a Great RB, and all positions on D.

The owner said his goal is NOT mediocrity. Why he cleaned house.

[throwing BBZ]

Hmmm... really? I've never heard that one before.

We didn't draft a single TE when Peyton was drafted.

Probably thought Dilger & M Pollard would do OK for Mannings rookie season!

[throwing BBZ]

Give Fleener some time. He doesn't get a free pass, but I just don't think Arians has enough confidence in the young offense to lay it on the rookies i.e Fleener, Allen, Hilton, Brazil, Luck.

He seems to still hold the notion that rookies can't contribute to NFL teams this quickly, even though I think that *.

Sooner or later, I think Fleener will be the right pick and be a great TE for us.

Fleener, Hilton, and Allen have a had a good game IN the 1st 3 games of their career.

If there is a Problem it is LUCK who has gotten Reggie off to the fastest start in his CAREER, and who has been OFF Target on a LOT of throws.

Do we wanna get down on Andrew after 3 games? ;- 0 :dancing:

! He has hung in great of course with the O-Line he has had and our not so crafty running backs. Fleener was hired to outrun LB`s and Safeties and block some.

I think we are inching forward nicely for this DEEP into the season. PATIENCE, and pray we draft very early. Wins this year HURT us.

[GoColts8818]

Probably thought Dilger & M Pollard would do OK for Mannings rookie season!

Which is a key difference in manning's rookie year and Luck's. Most of Peyton's weapons were already nfl players and had experience in Harrison, dilger, pollard, and Faulk. Luck is working with mostly rookies they are going to take some time to develop too. Maybe even longer than luck. That's why I keep saying we just need to stay patient and watch for progress from game to game.

[YOUR GM]

He's not the only line coach out there.

You're right, the Eagles did a good job running the ball last year, and Mudd deserves some credit for that. Having a quarterback like Vick has an impact as well, but either way, they were good running the ball. Top five in average per carry. But they're not very good in pass protection, and yes, part of that is Vick's fault, but they still aren't that good.

All I'm saying is that we can't spend the rest of eternity complaining about not having Howard Mudd anymore (same goes for Tom Moore). He was a good line coach; perhaps he still is. But he's in his 70s, and he officially retired a couple of years ago, only to be talked out of retirement by his friend. We don't know the ins and outs of his relationship with Polian; that's entirely speculative. But either way, we ought to be able to improve the quality of our line play without pining for Howard Mudd forever.

Like you said about the Eagles, they're suffering because they're without their best player. We're suffering because we don't have quality linemen in key spots. Three of the five line spots are makeshift right now. Hopefully it gets better as the season goes on, but we know -- and knew going into the offseason -- that we needed to improve the line. I think we actually did, and that says something about how bad the line was before. Still have a ways to go, but I think the answer is improving the players, not complaining about a line coach we lost three years ago.

Oh, I'm not dwelling on the Mudd glory years or anything like that. I'm not even complaining about our current regime. I was just responding to the portion of your post saying Mudd hasn't been successful since leaving the Colts. That's simply not true. He turned the Eagles into one of the league's top rushing attacks last year while allowing 17 fewer sacks than they did the season before. Howard Mudd is still a more than effective line coach.

As I said, anyone who has watched an Eagles game this year can see that Vick is the problem right now; not the line. He holds the ball too long and isn't reading the defense. If the QB can't call the correct protection or understand that there are more blitzers coming than he has blockers (meaning, he's responsible for the extra defender), that's on the QB, not the line.

Also, the Mudd/Polian dispute is pretty well documented. It's not speculative to suggest that their relationship deteriorated in the latter part of Mudd's tenure here.