Depth chart player ratings

[rock8591]

Colts rank #12 of all teams.

 

Here is the ESPN article (insider only) - http://espn.go.com/blog/indianapolis-colts/post/_/id/5935/how-the-colts-fare-in-roster-ranking

 

Here's a copy of the depth chart though - https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/05/29/2014-depth-chart-indianapolis-colts/

 

Overall ranking I would put us at #8-10 or so, but the individual player rankings are horrible.

 

 

Andrew Luck at only "good starter" and not "high quality"

Hugh Thornton should be upgraded from "poor starter" to "below average"

DQuell Jackson should be upgraded from "below average" to "average"

RJF should be downgraded from "good starter" to "average starter"

 

Matt Overton (LS) right now listed as "poor starter" ? ROTFlmao. He's a long snapper, what did they expect his performance to look like? Not to mention he made the pro-bowl the past year.

[JPFolks]

Colts rank #12 of all teams.

 

Here is the ESPN article (insider only) - http://espn.go.com/blog/indianapolis-colts/post/_/id/5935/how-the-colts-fare-in-roster-ranking

 

Here's a copy of the depth chart though - https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/05/29/2014-depth-chart-indianapolis-colts/

 

Overall ranking I would put us at #8-10 or so, but the individual player rankings are horrible.

 

 

Andrew Luck at only "good starter" and not "high quality"

Hugh Thornton should be upgraded from "poor starter" to "below average"

DQuell Jackson should be upgraded from "below average" to "average"

RJF should be downgraded from "good starter" to "average starter"

 

Matt Overton (LS) right now listed as "poor starter" ? . He's a long snapper, what did they expect his performance to look like? Not to mention he made the pro-bowl the past year.

 

Rock,. you nailed it.  For them to make a ridiculous ranking like Overton tosses their entire ranking in the garbage.  No attention to detail on their part.  Moving along....

[rock8591]

The person who wrote the article "fails at trolling", as commonly termed.

[Track Guy]

I consider Luck elite. I think it will show more this year and people will talk about how much he's improved, but I believe he's already elite and was held back by a poor supporting cast in 2013.

[OLD FAN MAN]

Colts rank #12 of all teams.

 

Here is the ESPN article (insider only) - http://espn.go.com/blog/indianapolis-colts/post/_/id/5935/how-the-colts-fare-in-roster-ranking

 

Here's a copy of the depth chart though - https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/05/29/2014-depth-chart-indianapolis-colts/

 

Overall ranking I would put us at #8-10 or so, but the individual player rankings are horrible.

 

 

Andrew Luck at only "good starter" and not "high quality"

Hugh Thornton should be upgraded from "poor starter" to "below average"

DQuell Jackson should be upgraded from "below average" to "average"

RJF should be downgraded from "good starter" to "average starter"

 

Matt Overton (LS) right now listed as "poor starter" ? . He's a long snapper, what did they expect his performance to look like? Not to mention he made the pro-bowl the past year.

if our team is this bad we should start thinking about who we will take with the first pick of the 2015 draft, wrong again pff

[NewColtsFan]

For the record,  this is not -- repeat, NOT -- an ESPN article....

 

It's an article from Pro Football Focus, a popular website here.    ESPN is simply reporting the story.   That's all.

 

Again -- NOT an ESPN story.

 

Pro Football Focus!

 

Carry on!

[BlueCollarColts]

T.Y. Hilton was high quality, but Luck is above average? I don't get that. Vontae Davis should be high quality too. 

[The Peytonator]

if our team is this bad we should start thinking about who we will take with the first pick of the 2015 draft, wrong again pff

 

 

How does 12th best equate to number one overall pick?

[The Peytonator]

I consider Luck elite. I think it will show more this year and people will talk about how much he's improved, but I believe he's already elite and was held back by a poor supporting cast in 2013.

 

 

I love the guy and he will be elite one day, but it is not this day. He does not belong in the company of Manning, Rodgers, Brady, and Brees.....yet. He misses too many throws to be considered elite.

[Coffeedrinker]

It's funny so many people on this forum quote and reference PFF all the time, especially when it comes to free agents.  But when PFF rates the Colts players then they are wrong and make no sense.

[Coffeedrinker]

For the record,  this is not -- repeat, NOT -- an ESPN article....

 

It's an article from Pro Football Focus, a popular website here.    ESPN is simply reporting the story.   That's all.

 

Again -- NOT an ESPN story.

 

Pro Football Focus!

 

Carry on!

So, you're saying it's an ESPN article, right?

[NewColtsFan]

So, you're saying it's an ESPN article, right?

 

 

I figured since there's always so much ESPN hate around here, I might as well at least try to set the record straight....

 

For all the good it might do? 

 

As far as the masses here are concerned, ESPN is the Evil Empire and must be destroyed!

 

Oh well.........

 

Hey, did I mention that last article was NOT by ESPN but instead a story by Pro Football Focus?    Did I?!?

 

Oh, never mind......  

[lollygagger8]

Who cares......let the player's play do the talking. Fluff pieces belong on Bleacher Report. 

[Defjamz26]

For the record,  this is not -- repeat, NOT -- an ESPN article....

 

It's an article from Pro Football Focus, a popular website here.    ESPN is simply reporting the story.   That's all.

 

Again -- NOT an ESPN story.

 

Pro Football Focus!

 

Carry on!

 

Makes sense. PFF is a notorious stat based site that analyzes nothing else. I'm not surprised by the rankings because of that. They probably didn't watch any tape and just did a number crunch. Usually numbers don't lie, but they're misleading in Football.

[Dustin]

Makes sense. PFF is a notorious stat based site that analyzes nothing else. I'm not surprised by the rankings because of that. They probably didn't watch any tape and just did a number crunch. Usually numbers don't lie, but they're misleading in Football.

 

That's all they do. The entire site is based on grades from watching tape. 

[jskinnz]

It's funny so many people on this forum quote and reference PFF all the time, especially when it comes to free agents.  But when PFF rates the Colts players then they are wrong and make no sense.

 

Message Board Truths...

 

1) The media hates our team - categorical nonsense

2) Any positive article about our team is written by an all-knowing savant

3) Any negative article about our team is written by a half-wit with an obvious axe to grind against our team - see point # 1

4) The national media does not know our team as well we, the fans do. 

 

To point # 4, I would make a counter to this - maybe we as fans are too close and vastly overestimate our own players simply because they have a horseshoe on their helmet and that the national folks have a much more reasonable, non-emotional position.

And specific to this thread and article, anyone immediately dismissing the article and rankings as ridiculous simply because of where they ranked Overton is comical. 

[Dustin]

Very few of these I disagree with. And for anyone possible asking how Overton can be ranked low, you realize that long snapper have to cover on punts right? I believe he missed a tackle or 2 and was generally just not graded good based on that. 

[Dustin]

 He's a long snapper, what did they expect his performance to look like? Not to mention he made the pro-bowl the past year.

 

Jeff Saturday made a pro-bowl in the year he was benched. 

[That Guy]

I honestly believe (and this is not my bias speaking), that Andrew Luck's inconsistency is something that would downgrade him from "Elite" to "High Quality" instead of from "High Quality" to "Good Starter."  To think otherwise is to ignore the ever-growing list of his accomplishments.

[Ja'Crispy]

Colts rank #12 of all teams.

 

Here is the ESPN article (insider only) - http://espn.go.com/blog/indianapolis-colts/post/_/id/5935/how-the-colts-fare-in-roster-ranking

 

Here's a copy of the depth chart though - https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/05/29/2014-depth-chart-indianapolis-colts/

 

Overall ranking I would put us at #8-10 or so, but the individual player rankings are horrible.

 

 

Andrew Luck at only "good starter" and not "high quality"

Hugh Thornton should be upgraded from "poor starter" to "below average"

DQuell Jackson should be upgraded from "below average" to "average"

RJF should be downgraded from "good starter" to "average starter"

 

Matt Overton (LS) right now listed as "poor starter" ? . He's a long snapper, what did they expect his performance to look like? Not to mention he made the pro-bowl the past year.

 

And it's not like Overton got in because of his name. Who outside of Indiana really knows who our long snapper is? I'd say he is a fine long snapper. 

[Gavin]

For the most part I agree with the assesments and article......With the exceptions the followings:

 

Ahmad Bradshaw-While he cant seem to stay healthy...when he is healthy he has proven to be a "High Quality"...If not "Elite" talent

 

Jerrell Freeman-This player simply don't get the recognition he has earned....He was 2nd in the league behind Karlos Dansby in sacks as an interior linebacker last year and 8th at his position in combined tackles at his position, I personally think he is a "High Quality" starter...Not elite yet but I think the best is yet to come from him if he stays healthy but he has been a play maker since he has come aboard

 

D'Qwell Jackson-While I don't think we are getting anything special I don't think "Below Average Starter" would be sufficient to describe Jackson, Solid in dropping back in short zone and has some range. I'd say "Average Starter" works in this case

 

 

Other then that I think this article is accurate

[ProblChld32]

Luck just a Good Starter? Reggie not Elite? This is Hog wash , take it with a grain of salt.

[BrentMc11]

The depth chart looks correct if everyone is healthy.

 

Other than that....flat out annoying I shall say

 

Not enough info for Harvey?  I guess the writer does not pay attn to special teams whatsoever.        

[That Guy]

They also have Brandon Marshall and Ndamukong Suh as "Elite," but not Luke Keuchly, AJ Green, or Tom Brady.

[Dustin]

They also have Brandon Marshall and Ndamukong Suh as "Elite," but not Luke Keuchly, AJ Green, or Tom Brady.

 

With the exception of Green, I don't see anything wrong with that. Based off last season. 

[Jason_]

Colts rank #12 of all teams.

 

Here is the ESPN article (insider only) - http://espn.go.com/blog/indianapolis-colts/post/_/id/5935/how-the-colts-fare-in-roster-ranking

 

Here's a copy of the depth chart though - https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/05/29/2014-depth-chart-indianapolis-colts/

 

Overall ranking I would put us at #8-10 or so, but the individual player rankings are horrible.

 

 

Andrew Luck at only "good starter" and not "high quality"  Agree, I think he could be considered High Quality, but not yet elite

Hugh Thornton should be upgraded from "poor starter" to "below average" agree

DQuell Jackson should be upgraded from "below average" to "average" agree

RJF should be downgraded from "good starter" to "average starter" DISAGREE..still don't get the hate or dislike for RJF

 

Matt Overton (LS) right now listed as "poor starter" ? . He's a long snapper, what did they expect his performance to look like? Not to mention he made the pro-bowl the past year.

[throwing BBZ]

I honestly believe (and this is not my bias speaking), that Andrew Luck's inconsistency is something that would downgrade him from "Elite" to "High Quality" instead of from "High Quality" to "Good Starter."  To think otherwise is to ignore the ever-growing list of his accomplishments.

 

The battle between Andrew being High Quality or Good Starter may lay between his Intangibles (he IS Elite at pocket awareness and Running) and his overall passing game which is a work in progress.

 For those that are not able to grasp he has a good ways to go as passer not to worry.

 The Offense will grow as a Unit. The O-Line will improve, the Run game will be better, Andrew will have more time to make better decisions and IMO without doubt, Andrew this season will become a Higher Quality PASSER with Elite coming before long.

 Remember, YOUR Fav QB Avgeraged 20 Int`s and played scared in the pocket his 1st 5 years (Andrew won`t, and sure as ___ doesn`t).

 

 Gotta be a Blind Homer to Give Thornton an Automatic Bump from last seasons poorest of the poor performance.

 He couldn`t be more unproven. Let him earn it. Just maybe our GM missed. I don`t believe he missed but...

 RJF did enough in SF to expect him to be a good starter. I expect him to play at the top of that grade. Woot woot!

[throwing BBZ]

The depth chart looks correct if everyone is healthy.

 

Other than that....flat out annoying I shall say

 

Not enough info for Harvey?  I guess the writer does not pay attn to special teams whatsoever.        

 

Harvey was so fat and slow he could no longer be used as a LB`er, other than perhaps goal line and we still had better options.

[That Guy]

With the exception of Green, I don't see anything wrong with that. Based off last season. 

 

You don't see the reigning defensive player of the year (Luke Kuechly) as "Elite?"

[Dustin]

You don't see the reigning defensive player of the year (Luke Kuechly) as "Elite?"

Nope. He's not good in coverage. The only elite off LOS LBs in the league are Willis, Bowman, and Lavonte David.

[That Guy]

Nope. He's not good in coverage. The only elite off LOS LBs in the league are Willis, Bowman, and Lavonte David.

I disagree entirely.

 

He had seven passes defensed and four interceptions last year.  In coverage, he is AS good as Bowman, BETTER than Willis, but worse than David.

[Track Guy]

I love the guy and he will be elite one day, but it is not this day. He does not belong in the company of Manning, Rodgers, Brady, and Brees.....yet. He misses too many throws to be considered elite.

 

Personally I think he's as good as those guys already. I understand that's a bold statement. He does miss throws the most often out of those guys (he's also a better athlete than any of them) but I'm going by what I watched last year. Our O-line was bad last year. We didn't have much at receiver after the Allen/Wayne injuries. Our defense was inconsistent. What I saw was an elite QB carry a team that otherwise would have gone .500 at best, and likely worse. I think if we still had Manning at QB this season we still wouldn't have got past the Patriots. Obviously there's no way to know for sure.

 

But I also understand the numbers don't support Luck being quite "elite" and "high quality starter" would be conventional measures be the most appropriate label for him.

[Dustin]

I disagree entirely.

He had seven passes defensed and four interceptions last year. In coverage, he is AS good as Bowman, BETTER than Willis, but worse than David.

No he isn't. He's terrible in coverage. Using PDs and INTs alone to judge the coverage ability of a LB isn't a proper way to evaluate them. You use those in conjunction to things like YPA, completion%, targets, receptions allowed, , ect..... all of which Kuechly wasn't good in.

Also, I live in NC and catch a bunch of Panthers games. He gets beat pretty often.

[Coffeedrinker]

Message Board Truths...

 

1) The media hates our team - categorical nonsense

2) Any positive article about our team is written by an all-knowing savant

3) Any negative article about our team is written by a half-wit with an obvious axe to grind against our team - see point # 1

4) The national media does not know our team as well we, the fans do. 

 

To point # 4, I would make a counter to this - maybe we as fans are too close and vastly overestimate our own players simply because they have a horseshoe on their helmet and that the national folks have a much more reasonable, non-emotional position.

And specific to this thread and article, anyone immediately dismissing the article and rankings as ridiculous simply because of where they ranked Overton is comical. 

Excellent synopsis of the message board truths.  I would also add #5

 

5)  The same writer can fall under truth #2 and truth #3 during the year.

[ztboiler]

Message Board Truths...

 

1) The media hates our team - categorical nonsense

2) Any positive article about our team is written by an all-knowing savant

3) Any negative article about our team is written by a half-wit with an obvious axe to grind against our team - see point # 1

4) The national media does not know our team as well we, the fans do. 

 

To point # 4, I would make a counter to this - maybe we as fans are too close and vastly overestimate our own players simply because they have a horseshoe on their helmet and that the national folks have a much more reasonable, non-emotional position.

And specific to this thread and article, anyone immediately dismissing the article and rankings as ridiculous simply because of where they ranked Overton is comical. 

No comment on the OP article.  Haven't read it, not gonna read it.  Points 1-3, complete agreement.

Expanding on your point and counterpoint to #4....the national media does have an advantage in objectivity, but they are at a great disadvantage to offer insight beyond the obvious.  They simply fail to know the strategic moving parts and story lines like a true fanatic who also happens to understand the game....and the media (local and national) proves it on a regular basis in an effort to produce content void of any knowledge synthesis.

[jskinnz]

No comment on the OP article.  Haven't read it, not gonna read it.  Points 1-3, complete agreement.

Expanding on your point and counterpoint to #4....the national media does have an advantage in objectivity, but they are at a great disadvantage to offer insight beyond the obvious.  They simply fail to know the strategic moving parts and story lines like a true fanatic who also happens to understand the game....and the media (local and national) proves it on a regular basis in an effort to produce content void of any knowledge synthesis.

 

I guess what I don't care for the most are the broad strokes certain fans and the national media paint with.  From a fans perspective, there are far too many cases of black and white.  The world is grey.  Comments like "the media" hates us are just ridiculous when their complaint may just be with one guy who said something dumb (or spot on that may not jive with what our thoughts on the Colts may be.)

 

To your national media point - I have seen enough nonsense from them to agree with you.  Many talking heads take the path of least resistance.  But I have seen enough from national types who are spot on too.  The standard to me is what they are saying reasonable? 

 

Long winded way of saying I agree with you. 

[ztboiler]

I guess what I don't care for the most are the broad strokes certain fans and the national media paint with.  From a fans perspective, there are far too many cases of black and white.  The world is grey.  Comments like "the media" hates us are just ridiculous when their complaint may just be with one guy who said something dumb (or spot on that may not jive with what our thoughts on the Colts may be.)

 

To your national media point - I have seen enough nonsense from them to agree with you.  Many talking heads take the path of least resistance.  But I have seen enough from national types who are spot on too.  The standard to me is what they are saying reasonable? 

 

Long winded way of saying I agree with you. 

I have no problem with the media (national and local) reporting/regurgitation.  They do their basic reporting function about as well as can be done.  It is mostly reasonable and rarely inaccurate.  Insight, however, is hard to come by.  Attempts at getting below the surface with analysis are usually filler pieces that expose their lack of roster/scheme/leadership knowledge or that they just aren't really football guys/gals.

[rock8591]

Same website btw also listed Chad Greenway as a "poor starter", .

[Dustin]

Same website btw also listed Chad Greenway as a "poor starter", .

Spot on.

http://vikingsterritory.com/2014/analysis/minnesota-vikings-chad-greenway-has-been-bad-at-football-for-three-years

[NewColtsFan]

I have no problem with the media (national and local) reporting/regurgitation.  They do their basic reporting function about as well as can be done.  It is mostly reasonable and rarely inaccurate.  Insight, however, is hard to come by.  Attempts at getting below the surface with analysis are usually filler pieces that expose their lack of roster/scheme/leadership knowledge or that they just aren't really football guys/gals.

 

Good post....

 

Some thoughts to add, if I may, since this was my area once upon a time....

 

Remember,  lots of media have more to cover than just your favorite football team.    National media has to cover all 32 NFL teams, all 30 MLB teams,  all 30 NBA teams, and how many NHL teams are there?  30?  

 

Plus all the other sports....  golf, tennis,  auto racing,  horse racing,  soccer and on and on...

 

Locally,   if you work for one of the local stations in Indy,  there's the Colts,  the Pacers,  auto racing,  AAA-baseball and all the local college and high school sports.     Are the Colts #1?    You bet.    But as ZTB pointed out,  you're just not going to get deep insight.    That's not typically what local stations do.........