Trade value in Coby Fleener

[Superman]

instead of trying to tell me stuff I already know, everyone could just say "good point, you are right"

When healthy, fleener on the field is not the most talented or best formation. Period

 

 

The bolded isn't relevant. No team uses their "best" package exclusively.

[dudeski]

The bolded isn't relevant. No team uses their "best" package exclusively.

again, I know. That was never the issue

[NewColtsFan]

again, I know. That was never the issue

 

Instead of posting the same response over and over and over again,  how about you telling all of us how much you think Fleener should play?

 

You've stated he shouldn't start.    Fine.

 

In percentage terms,  how often do you think he should be on the field, whether in 2 TE formations,  or 1 TE formation where's he's in and Allen is out.

 

This might help the discussion to move along........

[Jason_]

instead of trying to tell me stuff I already know, everyone could just say "good point, you are right"

They would have to agree with you to do that

[dudeski]

Instead of posting the same response over and over and over again, how about you telling all of us how much you think Fleener should play?

You've stated he shouldn't start. Fine.

In percentage terms, how often do you think he should be on the field, whether in 2 TE formations, or 1 TE formation where's he's in and Allen is out.

This might help the discussion to move along........

I would never take Allen off the field for fleener.

Percentage wise who knows. Too many factors play into that.

If we are putting our best 5 out there, fleener is not one of them

[dudeski]

They would have to agree with you to do that

they do agree.

[Jason_]

they do agree.

Clearly they don't

[NewColtsFan]

I would never take Allen off the field for fleener.

Percentage wise who knows. Too many factors play into that.

If we are putting our best 5 out there, fleener is not one of them

 

 

I think you're going to be very disappointed.....

[GoColts8818]

I agree that we had zero TEs, but every one forgets that the Bucs and the Giants had just signed their only TE just days before the draft.  IMO, that put their need for TEs as great as ours.

 

I agree that after the Combine and the Pro days, Fleener was the #1 ranked TE due to slow 40 by Dwayne.  Every one forgot that Dwayne plays faster.

 

Now draft day.  Fleener has been projected to be taken any where from 20th pick in the 1rst round to about 15th pick in 2nd round. In that latter part of the 1st, is the Bucs and the Giants, both needing a young TE.  Both are run first Offenses and both passed on Fleener.

 

It is our pick in at the top of the 2nd round.  Grigson now has a dilemma.  A 3-4 OLB/DE in Upshaw has dropped to us.  A multi-positional O-lineman in Glenn has dropped to us.  We have zero 3-4 OLB/DEs on the roster.  We have questionable pick ups at RG and RT.

 

Our pick, a 1 dimensional TE from Stanford.  That also happens to be the college our #1 over-all QB comes from.  Fact is they played 2 years together.  Hope is they will have a good chemistry together in the NFL.

 

Real easy to see where my opinion about Flenner's pick comes from.

Okay since Dungy left and Gruden won a Super Bowl with his team what exactly have the Bucs done to show people they know what they are doing down there when it comes to judging talent?  Also they took a flyer on Dallas Clark that year and thought he might be their answer.  Clearly he wasn't.  Giants are a different story but I have a feeling tightend wasn't their only need but not only did they pass on Fleener they passed on Allen twice so while it might have been a need they might have had other needs they felt like they needed to address with those picks. 

 

Going into that season we had Mathis and Freeney at OLB plus Hughes.  They had to give Freeney a legit shot since they kept him for his contract.  They also gave Hughes one last chance to prove if he could play here.  So at the time it was not as big of a need for the Colts.  As for the o-line I am guessing Fleener just graded out higher on their board.  Had we not drafted Fleener when Allen was out for the season last year we would have been screaming we needed another TE, also we would have been in real trouble after Reggie went down because Fleener became our second leading receiver after that.  Just because other players were in the draft that we could have taken doesn't help back up your point that Fleener doesn't fit the offense.  It just means the Colts had options at the pick.  They did, and Fleener was one of those options and was a fine option who has worked out just fine for the Colts which means Fleener fits the offense.

 

As for why we drafted Fleener he was a realistic option at that pick.  They didn't reach for him, if anything he feel to them.  He filled a very clear need.  It was a very logical pick for the Colts before you even get to the fact that Fleener and Luck played together in college.  That was just an added bonus.  You wanting to make it about that is ignoring the other facts. 

[GoColts8818]

I agree, that Fleener is decent down field blocking.  Problem is at the LOS.  Fleener's blocking there leaves a lot to be desired.  I agree, Fleener' blocking has improved, but IMO, he has not reached average yet.  If he had, our RBs could have bounced outside last season rather than  get swallowed up in the middle.

I don't think it leaves as much as you think it does.  I think he's serviceable which for a tightend is fine, especially one who is a complimentary player to another tightend who does it extremely well.  Fleener and Allen are a great combo because they are almost picture perfect compliments to each other.  Honestly if Allen comes back from his injury it's not unrealistic to think the Colts are going to have the best combo at tightend in the NFL this season and as we saw with New England a couple of years ago a great combo at tightend and an elite QB (which Luck is becoming) can take you a long way in the NFL. 

 

The Colts want to be able to run the ball between the tackles they haven't been shy about that.  So the running back getting swallowed up in the middle is a product of playing calling and design of the Colts running game combined with a poor middle part of the line.  Where the Colts had success running the ball last year was getting Brown to the outside where they had better blockers at the tackle position along with Fleener.  So even if Fleener's blocking is suspect running outside was the strength of the ground game.  Not being able to run the ball up the middle is a completely different issue that has nothing to do with the tightends.  I think we are all smart enough to realize that has everything to do with the guards, center and fullback not making the blocks they need too. 

[dudeski]

Clearly they don't

clearly you aren't reading the posts

[dudeski]

I think you're going to be very disappointed.....

doubt it

[dudeski]

I think you're going to be very disappointed.....

who is fleener better than?

Wayne? No

Hilton? No

Nicks? No

Allen? No

I am right. There is no debating that

[NewColtsFan]

who is fleener better than?

Wayne? No

Hilton? No

Nicks? No

Allen? No

I am right. There is no debating that

 

I am not even certain you know what you're arguing about?!

 

My comment about you being disappointed is simply to say that Coby Fleener is going to play much, much more than you want him to.

 

That's all.  

[BrentMc11]

Sorry, missed highlighted part.  Ask yourself, why would we pass up a DE/OLB in Upshaw when we are changing to a 3-4 hybrid, then pass on a good O-lineman in Glenn when we needed O-line help, to draft a 1 dimensional TE in Fleener.  Grigson is always looking the good players every where, but let 2 slip by that fell into his lap.

 

In my mind, that was the only reason that made sense.  Let us not forget, that Fleener was passed on by 2 other run first Offenses in the 1st round (Tampa and NY Giants). 

This may have been answered, but as I said earlier in the thread....we had no serviceable TEs on the roster with Arians coming in loving the TEs...thus 2 in a row in the draft!

[throwing BBZ]

Okay since Dungy left and Gruden won a Super Bowl with his team what exactly have the Bucs done to show people they know what they are doing down there when it comes to judging talent?  Also they took a flyer on Dallas Clark that year and thought he might be their answer.  Clearly he wasn't.  Giants are a different story but I have a feeling tightend wasn't their only need but not only did they pass on Fleener they passed on Allen twice so while it might have been a need they might have had other needs they felt like they needed to address with those picks. 

 

Going into that season we had Mathis and Freeney at OLB plus Hughes.  They had to give Freeney a legit shot since they kept him for his contract.  They also gave Hughes one last chance to prove if he could play here.  So at the time it was not as big of a need for the Colts.  As for the o-line I am guessing Fleener just graded out higher on their board.  Had we not drafted Fleener when Allen was out for the season last year we would have been screaming we needed another TE, also we would have been in real trouble after Reggie went down because Fleener became our second leading receiver after that.  Just because other players were in the draft that we could have taken doesn't help back up your point that Fleener doesn't fit the offense.  It just means the Colts had options at the pick.  They did, and Fleener was one of those options and was a fine option who has worked out just fine for the Colts which means Fleener fits the offense.

 

As for why we drafted Fleener he was a realistic option at that pick.  They didn't reach for him, if anything he feel to them.  He filled a very clear need.  It was a very logical pick for the Colts before you even get to the fact that Fleener and Luck played together in college.  That was just an added bonus.  You wanting to make it about that is ignoring the other facts. 

 

 VN post. Even a cave man should be able to 'get it'.

 

 A 6'6" 250lb TE that runs faster than many WR`s and this ____ thinks he is to blame for our running issues outside.

 Sorry but the mistake is not in having another Blocking TE on the roster.

 To expect Fleener to EVER become a mauler at the line is ridiculous.  And he has already been a better blocker than the "great" Clark ever was. Fleener is a huge mis-match in the passing game. As Andrew improves so will the value of his mis-matches.

 And this poor guy is no comprende about draft boards. Geesh!

[Manning1887]

Interesting thought, but I feel that Fleener is in line for a breakout season. My biggest hangup with Fleener is that I really felt he would benefit from adding 10 lbs + this offseason. From all the pics and video I have seen, he looks slimmer.

 

As far as having trade value, after a strong pre-season, Da'Rick Rogers may have some value in the 5th to 6th round pick variety.

[Warhorse]

I am not even certain you know what you're arguing about?!

 

My comment about you being disappointed is simply to say that Coby Fleener is going to play much, much more than you want him to.

 

That's all.  

To quote Captain Hook...."I want my war!"

 

And an imaginary quote, "I'll throw my dislike of Fleener at the feet of your children's.............children's..........children!

[gacker65]

so you are saying blame the tightend for the bad running game? While Fleener plays a role in run blocking he does not play a big enough role and our oline is not nearly good enough to pass the buck to Fleener. Also when in this offense in college Stanford ran all over people with Fleener. I don't think he's the problem with the lack of production in the running game. Even with Allen in there the year before the Colts struggled to run the ball. So I don't think it's the tightends fault.

Again Fleener has produced in this offense and you are way over valuing tightend blocking to try to win an argument. When you look at the whole picture Fleener fits this offense just fine and is a nice complimentary player to Allen.

You are correct.  I value a blocking TE over a pass receiving TE for the balance to the Offense. 

 

Fleener was not that important to Stanford's running game.  I believe, that Fleener was taken out or they ran away from him. 

 

You are correct about our running game struggling even with Dwayne the 1st year, but the RB had and sometimes did bounce the play outside and the block was there.

[OffensivelyPC]

who is fleener better than?

Wayne? No

Hilton? No

Nicks? No

Allen? No

I am right. There is no debating that

TE≠ WR so I'm not sure why it matters in terms of offensive sets whether Wayne/Hilton/Nicks is better htan Fleener.  You put any three of those guys on Cherilus' right shoulder and they've getting bulldozed before they can even get off the LOS.

[dudeski]

TE≠ WR so I'm not sure why it matters in terms of offensive sets whether Wayne/Hilton/Nicks is better htan Fleener. You put any three of those guys on Cherilus' right shoulder and they've getting bulldozed before they can even get off the LOS.

that's irrelevant

[OffensivelyPC]

that's irrelevant

No it's not times infinity.

[Jason_]

who is fleener better than?

Wayne? No

Hilton? No

Nicks? No

Allen? No

I am right. There is no debating that

 

Wayne? No....depends on how he returns from injury

Hilton? No....in terms of raw physical talent, an argument could be made that Fleener and Hilton aren't far apart if not Fleener even coming out on top.  I like Hilton a lot, but I'm not as enamored with him as a lot of people on here seem to be.

Nicks? No....see Wayne

Allen? No...as a blocker, no Fleener is not better than Allen. As a receiving threat though, yes I would put Fleener ahead of Allen.

[dudeski]

Wayne? No....depends on how he returns from injury

Hilton? No....in terms of raw physical talent, an argument could be made that Fleener and Hilton aren't far apart if not Fleener even coming out on top. I like Hilton a lot, but I'm not as enamored with him as a lot of people on here seem to be.

Nicks? No....see Wayne

Allen? No...as a blocker, no Fleener is not better than Allen. As a receiving threat though, yes I would put Fleener ahead of Allen.

thats pretty funny

[Jason_]

thats pretty funny

As usual, a well thought out, beautifully articulated point by point counter argument that well serves to further the discussion. Bravo sir

[OffensivelyPC]

As usual, a well thought out, beautifully articulated point by point counter argument that well serves to further the discussion. Bravo sir

When all else fails, bust out the 8 year old response to an 8 year old comment.  Ends the conversation pretty quick.

[dudeski]

As usual, a well thought out, beautifully articulated point by point counter argument that well serves to further the discussion. Bravo sir

aside from your response being wrong, I take it you missed the original post saying to assume everyone is healthy.

[Jason_]

aside from your response being wrong, I take it you missed the original post saying to assume everyone is healthy.

 

aside from you having no idea what the terms "right" and "wrong" mean, a player can be healthy after an injury, but that is in no way a guarantee that he will return to pre-injury form.

[Dtman513]

To me, this guy is the only guy who has decent trade value and can also be replaced. I think he could net us an early 3rd from a TE needy team, and I would be ok with that because of our depth at WR. Allen has shown to me to be Luck's favorite TE in the pros, and if young players like Moncrief and Da'rick Rogers pan out we are loaded at WR since I expect us to resign either Wayne or Nicks next offseason.

 

We could easily use that extra 3rd to get us some defensive help which we need especially in the secondary. I would wait until we know Allen will be fully healthy for the regular season, and then see if a team bites on Fleener.

[gacker65]

Okay since Dungy left and Gruden won a Super Bowl with his team what exactly have the Bucs done to show people they know what they are doing down there when it comes to judging talent?  Also they took a flyer on Dallas Clark that year and thought he might be their answer.  Clearly he wasn't.  Giants are a different story but I have a feeling tightend wasn't their only need but not only did they pass on Fleener they passed on Allen twice so while it might have been a need they might have had other needs they felt like they needed to address with those picks. 

 

Going into that season we had Mathis and Freeney at OLB plus Hughes.  They had to give Freeney a legit shot since they kept him for his contract.  They also gave Hughes one last chance to prove if he could play here.  So at the time it was not as big of a need for the Colts.  As for the o-line I am guessing Fleener just graded out higher on their board.  Had we not drafted Fleener when Allen was out for the season last year we would have been screaming we needed another TE, also we would have been in real trouble after Reggie went down because Fleener became our second leading receiver after that.  Just because other players were in the draft that we could have taken doesn't help back up your point that Fleener doesn't fit the offense.  It just means the Colts had options at the pick.  They did, and Fleener was one of those options and was a fine option who has worked out just fine for the Colts which means Fleener fits the offense.

 

As for why we drafted Fleener he was a realistic option at that pick.  They didn't reach for him, if anything he feel to them.  He filled a very clear need.  It was a very logical pick for the Colts before you even get to the fact that Fleener and Luck played together in college.  That was just an added bonus.  You wanting to make it about that is ignoring the other facts. 

First, I appreciate the thought and logic you put into your comments. 

 

I agree that we had Mathias, Freeney and Hughes on the roster and we hoped they would be able to transition to OLB.  That should have been enough of a reason to draft Upshaw, as none of them had played OLB in college.  In hindsight, Mathias and Hughes played decent.  It could have went the other way.  That is called being lucky.

 

Like you, I can only guess how a 1 dimensional TE graded out over a multi-positional O-lineman.  I do watch college football, I saw how Coach Harbough and Coach Hamilton covered for the lack of blocking by Fleener.  That is the main reason for my comment about Fleener not fitting in our Offense.  The only reason I could come up with was, because he had played with our newly drafted QB.

 

 

I agree, that at that time, Fleener was not a reach and was a realistic option.  He filled a need as would have Upshaw and Glenn at that point in time. 

 

In hindsight, Mathias and to some extent, Hughes took to the change to OLB and did well.  Glenn would have helped our interior O-line woes.  Fleener has improved his blocking some and as you pointed out the 2nd leading receiver last year after Reggie and Dwayne went down, but IMO, last year was due to familiarity with the QB, not because he stepped up.

[Jason_]

I am not even certain you know what you're arguing about?!

 

My comment about you being disappointed is simply to say that Coby Fleener is going to play much, much more than you want him to.

 

That's all.  

 

some people like to argue out of both sides of their mouth just to keep arguing and stirring up trouble

[dudeski]

some people like to argue out of both sides of their mouth just to keep arguing and stirring up trouble

not the case here

[Jason_]

not the case here

 

so it is the case in all of your other posts but just not this time?

[Cobb78]

Lots of players on the Colts have trade value.  That doesn't mean it's smart to trade them.

[dudeski]

so it is the case in all of your other posts but just not this time?

never the case with me

[Jason_]

never the case with me

Excellent use of sarcasm. Well played sir. Very well played indeed ;) lol

[dudeski]

Excellent use of sarcasm. Well played sir. Very well played indeed ;) lol

not at all. Aren't you the dude I had to reluctantly teach how our defense plays

[Jason_]

not at all. Aren't you the dude I had to reluctantly teach how our defense plays

Once again, no that was not me.

[dudeski]

Once again, no that was not me.

i don't know. I keep thinking it was you

[AntonMcG]

Football is situational... Fleener is a better goalline player than Hilton every day of the week.

 

This simplified argument is completely redundant.