Football talk

[ColtStronger]

Hakeem Nicks: 38 catches, 405 yards, 4 TDs (nine of those catches, and 72 of those yards, came in one meaningless game at the end of the season)

 

You want to give him a multi-year deal for more than $4m/year. I don't get it. And understand, my problem isn't with the contract. I know it's not a cap busting deal. The problem is the player. He had plenty of opportunities to produce, and was virtually non-existent the majority of the year. It's time to move on.

 

And I haven't said anything about another one year guy who we hope can step in and produce a little bit. I think there's a lot of free agents who can play right away -- again, I'd give Cecil Shorts that $4m+, not Nicks, because Shorts is better, and can also return kicks and punts -- but the real answer is drafting someone who will be around for a long time. And there are a dozen guys I could name right now who will probably be picked between 50-120 in the draft, all of whom would be a better and more economical option than Hakeem Nicks. You say keeping Nicks would end the search, but really it wouldn't, because he isn't the answer.

 

Also, this has nothing to do with the other issues that need to be addressed. Yes, we need to improve the line and the backers and the back end of the defense, and add a pass rusher, and we need a running back, and so on. We also need to be better at WR.

Andrew Luck didn't even get chemistry with him until the final 3-4 games of the season, because he had no trust or confidence in him.  I do agree that he didn't produce early on and Luck had reason not to throw his way, but he wouldn't even look at him.  Never giving him a chance, and not working on the chemistry.  Hasselbeck and Nicks never had that problem.  Why?  Nicks played with the 2nd team most of the time, so they were working on their timing the whole season.  That 9 catch game, came when Colts were blowing a team out and Hasselbeck came in.  I think that game Nicks did better than Moncrief, and Wayne was injured and Hilton was benched.  It was a half to showcase who was better, IMO.  Moncrief is our future, I get that, but don't shut the door on Nicks because Donte is younger and was drafted. 

 

Now Luck has a better feel for Nicks, I think you would see him target Hakeem more, especially if Reggie wasn't in the picture.  TY obviously being our #1 WR, and make Moncrief and Nicks fight to see who's better.  I think most people on here think Moncrief is already a great WR, and he's not.  He will be in 2-3 years or so, but he isn't ready for the #2 role, without any help, IMO. 

 

You keep talking about Cecil Shorts, and he is better than Nicks.  He played for a team where there was no good WR.  You put him with the colts, he might as well be Griff Whalen.  You talked about the draft picks 50-120.  We will pick about 30th this year.  In no way can we afford a 2nd or 3rd on a WR, when we have major issues on the OL and LB.  4th maybe, but still we could use a Safety more.  Unless you want to see the same crap as we've seen in the past, and get frusterated a power run game eats us up.  Or if you like to see Luck on his back.  We are extremely lucky he hasn't been injured yet, with the pathetic play out of the line. 

 

You also mentioned you want a guy that will be around for a while.  I believe Nicks just turned 27 last week, he isn't old, and has great experience in big games.  Maybe I'm wrong about the figures of his contract, but I think it would be a heck of a lot better to resign him rather than take another risk on a FA, or use a much needed draft pick on a WR that will take several years to catch up.

[ColtStronger]

I think it was. That's my point. It's not like he was just so slow that he couldn't get into the end zone. 

Ok, I gotcha.  I was thinking he was injured on the tackle though.  The way he was brought down looked pretty bad. 

[ColtStronger]

My point is that there's no reason for us to have to make that limited choice. It's the offseason. I don't think a capable and dependable returner is rare at all. I'm not asking for a Devin Hester style returner (he was a FA last offseason, by the way). Just someone who can actually return when the opportunity is there, but can be relied on to secure possession first. 

 

Also, I don't support the idea of replacing the ST coach. I agree that our blocking is awful, but we have the best kicking and coverage units in the league, by the numbers. Guys like Josh Gordy need to come off of the blocking unit; he gets beat downfield way too often. 

Guys like Josh Gordy need to come off the roster, not just special teams lol

[Superman]

Andrew Luck didn't even get chemistry with him until the final 3-4 games of the season, because he had no trust or confidence in him.  I do agree that he didn't produce early on and Luck had reason not to throw his way, but he wouldn't even look at him.  Never giving him a chance, and not working on the chemistry.  Hasselbeck and Nicks never had that problem.  Why?  Nicks played with the 2nd team most of the time, so they were working on their timing the whole season.  That 9 catch game, came when Colts were blowing a team out and Hasselbeck came in.  I think that game Nicks did better than Moncrief, and Wayne was injured and Hilton was benched.  It was a half to showcase who was better, IMO.  Moncrief is our future, I get that, but don't shut the door on Nicks because Donte is younger and was drafted. 

 

Nicks time didn't start getting cut until Week 6. He had 15 catches for 123 yards. His numbers went down further for the rest of the year, and aside from the Cowboys game, he never had more than 3 catches in a game. It's not chemistry, and it's not Luck refusing to look his way. It was a simple inability to get open. He didn't produce all year, and it's because he wasn't able to get open. All the other stuff is flimsy excuses.

 

Now Luck has a better feel for Nicks, I think you would see him target Hakeem more, especially if Reggie wasn't in the picture.  TY obviously being our #1 WR, and make Moncrief and Nicks fight to see who's better.  I think most people on here think Moncrief is already a great WR, and he's not.  He will be in 2-3 years or so, but he isn't ready for the #2 role, without any help, IMO. 

 

 

Luck has a better feel for Nicks, yet he averaged 2 catches and 33 yards in the playoffs. No production. And you want to give him $4m/year.

 

You keep talking about Cecil Shorts, and he is better than Nicks.  He played for a team where there was no good WR.  You put him with the colts, he might as well be Griff Whalen.  You talked about the draft picks 50-120.  We will pick about 30th this year.  In no way can we afford a 2nd or 3rd on a WR, when we have major issues on the OL and LB.  4th maybe, but still we could use a Safety more.  Unless you want to see the same crap as we've seen in the past, and get frusterated a power run game eats us up.  Or if you like to see Luck on his back.  We are extremely lucky he hasn't been injured yet, with the pathetic play out of the line. 

 

That's silly, especially the bolded. He played on a team with terrible QBing, and still outproduced Nicks. He's faster, he gets better separation.

 

And we don't need to talk about what we can afford in the draft. You don't approach the draft by saying "we need this in the first, this in the second, this in the third." That's not how it works. You draft the best players you can, and you develop them so that they can help your team long term, hoping that they can provide an immediate boost as well. There are tons of receivers in that range who can step in and produce in that 2nd/3rd WR role right away, and be a long term part of the team. And they'd likely be better than Nicks was this season.

 

This is exactly why I said what I said in the OP. We need to get better at WR. Even if it's a late rounder... Kenny Stills was a 5th rounder in 2013; he doubled Nicks' production this season. Martavis Bryant was a 4th rounder this year; he didn't even get on the field until Week 7, and he had 8 TDs. 

 

You also mentioned you want a guy that will be around for a while.  I believe Nicks just turned 27 last week, he isn't old, and has great experience in big games.  Maybe I'm wrong about the figures of his contract, but I think it would be a heck of a lot better to resign him rather than take another risk on a FA, or use a much needed draft pick on a WR that will take several years to catch up.

 

 

Thing is, I don't want Nicks around at all. There's no risk on another FA, either he produces or he doesn't. Same as Nicks. And it would be better to grab a guy who has shown more ability to get open and make plays. And again, there's no reason to assume that a drafted WR would take years to catch up. We can get Nicks production, at least, out of a draft pick. And we need to add young guys that will grow with the team, not hold on to Nicks who didn't have any production anyways, hoping that he's going to do better at 27 than he did at 26.

 

Like I said, I'm fine with Nicks on another 1 year deal, with zero assumptions about playing time. But in the name of getting better, we ought to draft another receiver. Doesn't have to be in the first or second round.

[Coffeedrinker]

I would not mind the Colts signing Nicks to a new contract but I do agree that 4 mil a year is too much for his production.

[ColtStronger]

Nicks time didn't start getting cut until Week 6. He had 15 catches for 123 yards. His numbers went down further for the rest of the year, and aside from the Cowboys game, he never had more than 3 catches in a game. It's not chemistry, and it's not Luck refusing to look his way. It was a simple inability to get open. He didn't produce all year, and it's because he wasn't able to get open. All the other stuff is flimsy excuses.

 

 

Luck has a better feel for Nicks, yet he averaged 2 catches and 33 yards in the playoffs. No production. And you want to give him $4m/year.

 

 

That's silly, especially the bolded. He played on a team with terrible QBing, and still outproduced Nicks. He's faster, he gets better separation.

 

And we don't need to talk about what we can afford in the draft. You don't approach the draft by saying "we need this in the first, this in the second, this in the third." That's not how it works. You draft the best players you can, and you develop them so that they can help your team long term, hoping that they can provide an immediate boost as well. There are tons of receivers in that range who can step in and produce in that 2nd/3rd WR role right away, and be a long term part of the team. And they'd likely be better than Nicks was this season.

 

This is exactly why I said what I said in the OP. We need to get better at WR. Even if it's a late rounder... Kenny Stills was a 5th rounder in 2013; he doubled Nicks' production this season. Martavis Bryant was a 4th rounder this year; he didn't even get on the field until Week 7, and he had 8 TDs. 

 

 

Thing is, I don't want Nicks around at all. There's no risk on another FA, either he produces or he doesn't. Same as Nicks. And it would be better to grab a guy who has shown more ability to get open and make plays. And again, there's no reason to assume that a drafted WR would take years to catch up. We can get Nicks production, at least, out of a draft pick. And we need to add young guys that will grow with the team, not hold on to Nicks who didn't have any production anyways, hoping that he's going to do better at 27 than he did at 26.

 

Like I said, I'm fine with Nicks on another 1 year deal, with zero assumptions about playing time. But in the name of getting better, we ought to draft another receiver. Doesn't have to be in the first or second round.

Nicks was never a #2 option.  Sure he got less snaps in favor of Moncrief, who made a play every now and then, but Luck had so many terrible passes to him as well.  I've seen a handful of plays where Nicks was (wide) open and Luck was starring down TY or Coby.  One TD pass Trent had a whole side of the field to himself and Luck didn't turn his head, as if nobody was over there.  It's stuff like that, that proves Luck didn't make him an option.  Sure sometimes he couldn't get separation, but I've saw plenty of times where there wasn't separation and a defender all over Nicks, but he still catches it. 

 

Shorts is a short speedier WR I would expect him to be able to get better separation.  I don't think Luck necessarilly needs a bunch of speedy guys to get open, he is good enough to place the ball only where the WR can catch it.  He needs a big target in the redzone, who can go up and catch a ball.  A physical receiver that can catch even when well covered.

 

With the draft, I can somewhat agree with drafting the BPA, but if you always do that when there are glaring needs then is that helping our future?  Would you draft Mariota if he was still available when the Colts pick?  No need, we have Luck.  Sure there is a small need at WR, but I don't think if we resigned Nicks he is going to screw us and hinder us from making a SB run.  Especially if Moncrief emerges like everybody is already calling for!  He would simply be our 3 WR or share time with Donte.  Not a big deal.  If the Colts draft a WR with the 2nd or 3rd pick and expect Thornton to be a sure thing (like last year) or neglect Cherilus' injury and think were going to be fine with the OL, you would see us in the same position, getting beat up by smash mouth teams, yet again!  Same thing with the defense.  If we get a WR in the 5th, I don't give 2 hoots, but we NEED a RG perhaps RT, ILB, OLB, and S more than we NEED another WR. 

 

The draft class for the WR's last year was pretty exceptionally great, can't say the same thing for this year, but I'm no expert on that stuff either.  Donte Moncrief stats this season 32 Reception 444 Yards 3 Td's.  He went in the 3rd round.  Hakeem Nicks stats 38 Rec 405 yards 4 TD's.  Very similar?  Yet people act like Moncrief is already far superior!  I'm sure with Nicks cut in snaps Moncrief edged him in that category as well.  It's the product of the depth chart, not the talent in this instance.  That's what I was trying to explain with Shorts.  Sure his QB sucked, but if he is always on the field, and is a go2 guy you would still expect a heck of a lot more than 53 Rec 557 Yards and 1TD?   Those are Cecil Short's stats for this year.  Not too much better, and I guarantee you as a starter he gets way more snaps, and targets. 

 

Im not saying any rookie can't produce what Nicks did this season, but is it Nicks learning the playbook, or is it Nicks with his expanded role during the end of the season.  Moncrief (as good as he was) surely didn't step in and WOW me.  People have unfair expectations when it comes to Nicks, and praise Moncrief like he fulfilled the role of Reggie Wayne (when healthy).  If we get a 5th round guy, than cool, he will sit the bench alot, same with this Duron Carter, guy everybody is talking about. 

 

I guess we both have different viewpoints on the subject, but I just don't see dropping Nicks and either drafting or signing somebody, being a more beneficial move.  Im my world Reggie retires.  TY is on the field 100% and Moncrief split 50/50 until regular season starts.  Who comes out the best should clearly get the #2 role, but have a 60/40 split in snaps.  I don't see any young WR (unless we draft a WR in the 1st 3 rounds, which would be a mistake), stepping in and doing better than Nicks.  Nor do I see any FA WR, coming in on less money, doing more than Nicks as a #3 or #4 WR that Nicks was this year.

[ColtStronger]

Nicks time didn't start getting cut until Week 6. He had 15 catches for 123 yards. His numbers went down further for the rest of the year, and aside from the Cowboys game, he never had more than 3 catches in a game. It's not chemistry, and it's not Luck refusing to look his way. It was a simple inability to get open. He didn't produce all year, and it's because he wasn't able to get open. All the other stuff is flimsy excuses.

 

 

Luck has a better feel for Nicks, yet he averaged 2 catches and 33 yards in the playoffs. No production. And you want to give him $4m/year.

 

 

That's silly, especially the bolded. He played on a team with terrible QBing, and still outproduced Nicks. He's faster, he gets better separation.

 

And we don't need to talk about what we can afford in the draft. You don't approach the draft by saying "we need this in the first, this in the second, this in the third." That's not how it works. You draft the best players you can, and you develop them so that they can help your team long term, hoping that they can provide an immediate boost as well. There are tons of receivers in that range who can step in and produce in that 2nd/3rd WR role right away, and be a long term part of the team. And they'd likely be better than Nicks was this season.

 

This is exactly why I said what I said in the OP. We need to get better at WR. Even if it's a late rounder... Kenny Stills was a 5th rounder in 2013; he doubled Nicks' production this season. Martavis Bryant was a 4th rounder this year; he didn't even get on the field until Week 7, and he had 8 TDs. 

 

 

Thing is, I don't want Nicks around at all. There's no risk on another FA, either he produces or he doesn't. Same as Nicks. And it would be better to grab a guy who has shown more ability to get open and make plays. And again, there's no reason to assume that a drafted WR would take years to catch up. We can get Nicks production, at least, out of a draft pick. And we need to add young guys that will grow with the team, not hold on to Nicks who didn't have any production anyways, hoping that he's going to do better at 27 than he did at 26.

 

Like I said, I'm fine with Nicks on another 1 year deal, with zero assumptions about playing time. But in the name of getting better, we ought to draft another receiver. Doesn't have to be in the first or second round.

You contradicted yourself in the same post.  Also your making it sound like Nicks has done nothing!  I just replied and showed you he had very similar product as Moncrief, with similar snaps, but you're acting like he was a go2 guy all season.  What is your idea of a good #3 or #4 WR on a team?  That may help me figure out your expectations...

[OffensivelyPC]

So? That's the job.

 

Lots of good thoughts in that post, by the way. But good teams have 8-10 really good/great players, and 40+ role players. The Pats are Brady, Gronk, Solder, Vollmer, Edelman, Collins, Wilfork, Revis, McCourty, and maybe Chandler Jones. Mayo has been hurt for two years. Everyone else is highly replaceable. Special note for glue guys like Ninkovich, or specialists like Vereen and Hightower. But those guys are all replaceable.

 

We have Luck, Hilton, Castonzo and Davis. Up-and-comers that are arguable, but definitely make plays for us, would include Allen, Fleener, hopefully Moncrief, Newsome, Redding (who is probably gone), and I think that's it. Glue guys and specialists, but no one that is really a consistent playmaker and adds a lot of value. Missing on back to back first rounders really hurts, because that should be two more guys on this list.

 

What I disagree with is how everyone takes issue with the FA class of 2013. Free agency isn't for adding stars or core players. If you get lucky, you'll get someone like that, but that's still probably only going to be a 2 year boost. This is speaking historically, by the way. Free agency is to fill glaring holes with hopefully average to above average players. Without guys like Walden, Toler, RJF, Cherilus and even Landry (at times), going 11-5 these past two years probably doesn't happen. So no, those signings haven't magically made us the best team in the league, but I really don't think they were expected to. 

 

And yes, it sucks that some of them are going completely sour. But historically, that's what happens. That's why Grigson went with mid-level guys and team friendly contracts. We should churn some of them out, and bring in new blood. It would have been nice if we had more overall draft success, then we wouldn't be talking about FA guards or safeties. 

 

I'm thinking 20 guys who were on the playoff roster won't be on the opening day roster, and that's a referendum Grigson's work the past two years. His misses have been HUGE misses, and have cost us a few playmakers, but the rest of the roster is fine. To make up for some of those misses, we have to dip back into free agency for some stopgaps, and this might be the year to trade up in the draft for a really special guy.

Yeah, the misses have really hurt us.  I remember an article back aroudn the Trent trade where he said something about how guys always over value draft picks.  Hopefully he's changed his perspective a bit on that one, because that trade is one of those deasl that can set a franchise back a bit.  I mean, he went into that trade with all the right intentions and had it worked out - i.e. Trent Richardson = Marshawn Lynch - then perhaps that would be another one of those franchise cornerstone playmakers.  It unfortunately just went in the opposite direction.

 

I agree that free agency isn't for adding stars.  You'd hope that the guys you pay a little more than the mid-tier guys - specifically Landry and Cherilus - would play better.  I know that in Cherilus' case, health has been a major concern (as well as Toler and I think Donald Thomas), but health was a concern before we signed them, so when we give them a bigger portion of the cap hit, we shouldn't be surprised when they don't finsih the season.  When healthy, these guys are worth the signings.  But by and large, they have not stayed healthy except Landry, who got himself suspended and has at most other times has been a liability.  So when I say that we "missed" on them, i mean that in a pretty broad sense, not that we missed adding super star power.  But like yo usaid, thankfully they all signed team friendly deals (perhaps with the exception of Cherilus). 

[chad72]

To me, that's too much money. Far too much money.

 

Yep, I'd go for Jeremy Maclin if I am paying $5 mil. a year. Nicks is not versatile enough to play outside, he is strictly a possession wideout at this point. Maclin is more versatile.

 

Eric Decker, the best wideout on the market last year, kind of re-set the WR salaries. No one is going to be stupid like the Dolphins to pay Mike Wallace money for Mike Wallace type one dimensional wideouts. The best ones, unless they are Megatron will go for around $9-10 mil., which is probably what Demaryius Thomas will get, IMO.

[Superman]

Yep, I'd go for Jeremy Maclin if I am paying $5 mil. a year. Nicks is not versatile enough to play outside, he is strictly a possession wideout at this point. Maclin is more versatile.

 

Eric Decker, the best wideout on the market last year, kind of re-set the WR salaries. No one is going to be stupid like the Dolphins to pay Mike Wallace money for Mike Wallace type one dimensional wideouts. The best ones, unless they are Megatron will go for around $9-10 mil., which is probably what Demaryius Thomas will get, IMO.

 

I think DT and Dez might both get $12m/year or more. But unless you're a top tier playmaker, you're going to get a more reasonable deal. I'd love to have Maclin, but I think he's an $8m/year kinda guy, and I doubt he leaves Philly.

[Superman]

Nicks was never a #2 option.  Sure he got less snaps in favor of Moncrief, who made a play every now and then, but Luck had so many terrible passes to him as well.  I've seen a handful of plays where Nicks was (wide) open and Luck was starring down TY or Coby.  One TD pass Trent had a whole side of the field to himself and Luck didn't turn his head, as if nobody was over there.  It's stuff like that, that proves Luck didn't make him an option.  Sure sometimes he couldn't get separation, but I've saw plenty of times where there wasn't separation and a defender all over Nicks, but he still catches it. 

 

I'm not knocking Nicks because he didn't have #2 production. But 38 catches and 404 yards is JAG production. That's Griff Whalen in 2013 production, if Griff had played 16 games. 

 

And yes, I'm sure Luck may have missed Nicks being open on the back side a few times. But he did that to everyone, yet Coby and TY and Allen and everyone else was able to produce.

 

Shorts is a short speedier WR I would expect him to be able to get better separation.  I don't think Luck necessarilly needs a bunch of speedy guys to get open, he is good enough to place the ball only where the WR can catch it.  He needs a big target in the redzone, who can go up and catch a ball.  A physical receiver that can catch even when well covered.

 

Shorts and Nicks are the same height. He gets better separation because he's faster and more explosive coming out of his breaks. And I'm not in love with Shorts, I'm just saying I think he'd be better than Nicks, and if we're going to give someone $4.5m/year, I'd choose Shorts over Nicks. Easily. (By the way, Nicks wasn't any kind of red zone target this year.)

 

With the draft, I can somewhat agree with drafting the BPA, but if you always do that when there are glaring needs then is that helping our future?  Would you draft Mariota if he was still available when the Colts pick?  No need, we have Luck.  Sure there is a small need at WR, but I don't think if we resigned Nicks he is going to screw us and hinder us from making a SB run.  Especially if Moncrief emerges like everybody is already calling for!  He would simply be our 3 WR or share time with Donte.  Not a big deal.  If the Colts draft a WR with the 2nd or 3rd pick and expect Thornton to be a sure thing (like last year) or neglect Cherilus' injury and think were going to be fine with the OL, you would see us in the same position, getting beat up by smash mouth teams, yet again!  Same thing with the defense.  If we get a WR in the 5th, I don't give 2 hoots, but we NEED a RG perhaps RT, ILB, OLB, and S more than we NEED another WR. 

 

Let's not dumb this down to the absolute basics. I think we all know what BPA means, and I think we all know that you don't reach for need in the draft. 

 

I'm not arguing that Nicks would hurt the team. I'm saying we don't need him.

 

The draft class for the WR's last year was pretty exceptionally great, can't say the same thing for this year, but I'm no expert on that stuff either.  Donte Moncrief stats this season 32 Reception 444 Yards 3 Td's.  He went in the 3rd round.  Hakeem Nicks stats 38 Rec 405 yards 4 TD's.  Very similar?  Yet people act like Moncrief is already far superior!  I'm sure with Nicks cut in snaps Moncrief edged him in that category as well.  It's the product of the depth chart, not the talent in this instance.  That's what I was trying to explain with Shorts.  Sure his QB sucked, but if he is always on the field, and is a go2 guy you would still expect a heck of a lot more than 53 Rec 557 Yards and 1TD?   Those are Cecil Short's stats for this year.  Not too much better, and I guarantee you as a starter he gets way more snaps, and targets. 

 

 

 

Moncrief is a part of the long term future of this team. He doesn't have to be better than Nicks as a rookie, but if he only puts up 38 catches for 400 yards next year, that will be a disappointment.

 

Im not saying any rookie can't produce what Nicks did this season, but is it Nicks learning the playbook, or is it Nicks with his expanded role during the end of the season.  Moncrief (as good as he was) surely didn't step in and WOW me.  People have unfair expectations when it comes to Nicks, and praise Moncrief like he fulfilled the role of Reggie Wayne (when healthy).  If we get a 5th round guy, than cool, he will sit the bench alot, same with this Duron Carter, guy everybody is talking about. 

 

You're arguing against a strawman and conflating separate issues. I'm not praising Moncrief. I'm saying we don't need Nicks, and that his production didn't warrant another contract, certainly not a multi-year contract at $4.5m per.

 

Also, to the bolded, I don't know what expanded role for Nicks you're talking about. If his role was expanded at the end of the year, and he still barely put up 2 catches and less than 40 yards/game, then why do we think he's going to be better in 2015?

 

I guess we both have different viewpoints on the subject, but I just don't see dropping Nicks and either drafting or signing somebody, being a more beneficial move.  Im my world Reggie retires.  TY is on the field 100% and Moncrief split 50/50 until regular season starts.  Who comes out the best should clearly get the #2 role, but have a 60/40 split in snaps.  I don't see any young WR (unless we draft a WR in the 1st 3 rounds, which would be a mistake), stepping in and doing better than Nicks.  Nor do I see any FA WR, coming in on less money, doing more than Nicks as a #3 or #4 WR that Nicks was this year.

 

 

We don't have to drop Nicks. He's a free agent. He can do what he wants.

 

You contradicted yourself in the same post.  Also your making it sound like Nicks has done nothing!  I just replied and showed you he had very similar product as Moncrief, with similar snaps, but you're acting like he was a go2 guy all season.  What is your idea of a good #3 or #4 WR on a team?  That may help me figure out your expectations...

 

Eh, I see why it seems like a contradiction. But it's really not. I don't care if we keep Nicks on a low level deal, but he's not on my list. The contention I had with your viewpoint to begin with was the $18m for four years. If you said you'd like to bring Nicks back for another year, I'd have just kept moving. 

[Gavin]

I watched the run plays by the Patriots on the coaches film just about an hour ago or so and came away with a few thoughts......

 

 

1.I think a couple of our D Linemen just wore down by the end of that 3rd Quarter....I think a couple of them could stand to drop to around the 315-320lb range in hopes that helps there stamina.

 

2.The Patriots did not appear to me to use real complicated blocking schemes when run blocking, A lot of it was an occasional chip on a D Linemen followed by a Guard getting up on a ILB...which we don't do enough of.........Much of it was just an uncovered O Lineman getting up on a Linebacker creating an easy and natural running lane to follow simply dictated by the O Lineman that was not covered...Nothing complicated from what I saw for the most part (there was a few what I would call fancy blocking plays) they just executed......Creating easy holes for the rb to run right through

 

3.Linebackers just missed on to many tackles (Phillips crashing down to hard from LOLB and missing on a tackle leaving an easy cutback lane for Blount that went for 10 yards at 13:19 of the 2nd Quarter just as 1 example)

[Superman]

Yeah, the misses have really hurt us.  I remember an article back aroudn the Trent trade where he said something about how guys always over value draft picks.  Hopefully he's changed his perspective a bit on that one, because that trade is one of those deasl that can set a franchise back a bit.  I mean, he went into that trade with all the right intentions and had it worked out - i.e. Trent Richardson = Marshawn Lynch - then perhaps that would be another one of those franchise cornerstone playmakers.  It unfortunately just went in the opposite direction.

 

I agree that free agency isn't for adding stars.  You'd hope that the guys you pay a little more than the mid-tier guys - specifically Landry and Cherilus - would play better.  I know that in Cherilus' case, health has been a major concern (as well as Toler and I think Donald Thomas), but health was a concern before we signed them, so when we give them a bigger portion of the cap hit, we shouldn't be surprised when they don't finsih the season.  When healthy, these guys are worth the signings.  But by and large, they have not stayed healthy except Landry, who got himself suspended and has at most other times has been a liability.  So when I say that we "missed" on them, i mean that in a pretty broad sense, not that we missed adding super star power.  But like yo usaid, thankfully they all signed team friendly deals (perhaps with the exception of Cherilus). 

 

I think Grigson's comments about over-valuing draft picks was in the context of "oh no, we traded our first, now we can't take a player next year!" And Grigson's point was that we're getting a good player this year. Tomorrow's draft pick doesn't help you today. Obviously the trade didn't work, but sometimes it's okay to part with a draft pick for a special player. This move was obviously ill-fated, like you said. My beef from the beginning was that RBs aren't worth first round picks. It's insult to injury that Richardson has been terrible.

 

As for the FAs, without doing a complete post-mortem on that class, I think we were racked with injuries (Cherilus, Thomas, RJF was hurt in 2013, Toler was hurt, Bradshaw was hurt), and then Landry just hasn't panned out. So yeah, two years later, those guys aren't building blocks, but free agents generally aren't. They were to bridge the gap between the previous decline of 2009-11, and the hopefully promising future. That goes for all of the FAs, going back to Redding and Satele in 2012.

 

The bigger issue, IMO, is the missed or uncertain draft picks, because now, we have to bridge the gap again with some mid tier guys, because Richardson is a bust, Werner isn't a playmaker, Thornton and Holmes aren't sure things, etc. And the young WRs, CBs and safeties we hoped would come through -- Brazill, Rogers, Purifoy, Howell, Boyett -- are off the team for various indiscretions or injuries. And half the previous stopgaps will probably be gone this offseason, at least if I had my way -- Cherilus, Landry, Thomas, Nicks... DHB and Satele are already gone... So we're still churning some parts of the roster that should probably be more firmed up than they are.

 

Anyways, it's like you said, it's a tall task. But this is now officially Ryan Grigson's job. No more dead money, no more transition years for the defense, etc. The problems this roster has aren't inherited, they are his own doing. So now, he has to fix them. And it will only get harder once the 2012 draft class is re-signed. This is a special, one year period of opportunity. This offseason is very crucial.

[Superman]

2.The Patriots did not appear to me to use real complicated blocking schemes when run blocking, A lot of it was an occasional chip on a D Linemen followed by a Guard getting up on a ILB...which we don't do enough of.........Much of it was just an uncovered O Lineman getting up on a Linebacker creating an easy and natural running lane to follow simply dictated by the O Lineman that was not covered...Nothing complicated from what I saw for the most part (there was a few what I would call fancy blocking plays) they just executed......Creating easy holes for the rb to run right through

 

 

Those plays weren't just uncovered OL, a lot of them saw the guards passing off DL to wham blockers and pull blockers, and the DL didn't shoot into the hole. When the DL did aggressively come upfield into the backfield, there was nowhere for the backs to run, and they had to bounce. That's when things got interesting.

[Gavin]

Those plays weren't just uncovered OL, a lot of them saw the guards passing off DL to wham blockers and pull blockers, and the DL didn't shoot into the hole. When the DL did aggressively come upfield into the backfield, there was nowhere for the backs to run, and they had to bounce. That's when things got interesting.

Good call, Im seeing that now

[esmort]

I definitely think you start in the draft with dominant OL, even if they haven't played a down in the NFL, they're big, atheletic, and just need to be conditioned, and taught.  That way their also cheap starting out.  Problem is IDK if we will be able to get what we need picking 29th or 30th.  We may need to trade up, which I wouldn't be upset with, but for my sanity, please fix this OL!

 

Too many holes need filled to trade up, too expensive especially in the first. 

[ColtStronger]

I'm not knocking Nicks because he didn't have #2 production. But 38 catches and 404 yards is JAG production. That's Griff Whalen in 2013 production, if Griff had played 16 games. 

 

And yes, I'm sure Luck may have missed Nicks being open on the back side a few times. But he did that to everyone, yet Coby and TY and Allen and everyone else was able to produce.

 

 

Shorts and Nicks are the same height. He gets better separation because he's faster and more explosive coming out of his breaks. And I'm not in love with Shorts, I'm just saying I think he'd be better than Nicks, and if we're going to give someone $4.5m/year, I'd choose Shorts over Nicks. Easily. (By the way, Nicks wasn't any kind of red zone target this year.)

 

 

Let's not dumb this down to the absolute basics. I think we all know what BPA means, and I think we all know that you don't reach for need in the draft. 

 

I'm not arguing that Nicks would hurt the team. I'm saying we don't need him.

 

 

Moncrief is a part of the long term future of this team. He doesn't have to be better than Nicks as a rookie, but if he only puts up 38 catches for 400 yards next year, that will be a disappointment.

 

 

You're arguing against a strawman and conflating separate issues. I'm not praising Moncrief. I'm saying we don't need Nicks, and that his production didn't warrant another contract, certainly not a multi-year contract at $4.5m per.

 

Also, to the bolded, I don't know what expanded role for Nicks you're talking about. If his role was expanded at the end of the year, and he still barely put up 2 catches and less than 40 yards/game, then why do we think he's going to be better in 2015?

 

 

We don't have to drop Nicks. He's a free agent. He can do what he wants.

 

 

Eh, I see why it seems like a contradiction. But it's really not. I don't care if we keep Nicks on a low level deal, but he's not on my list. The contention I had with your viewpoint to begin with was the $18m for four years. If you said you'd like to bring Nicks back for another year, I'd have just kept moving. 

Amongst this arguement, I have said the numbers may be off, I'm not a contract guy.  All I know is we won't get him on another bargain deal.  I would say at least 2.5-3M a year, but he will want a multi year deal this time around.  It is what it is, I can't make the decision, neither can anybody else on this forum, the contract talks is between Nicks/Agent and Grigson/Colts Organization.  Bottom line he will be back if we need him, mostly in Grigs eyes, but I don't see him coming back because he probably will want more money then Colts are willing to shell out.  It will surely be sad to see if we waste a draft pick when there are plenty of other needs that desperately should be addressed first, or spend the same money on anybody else that puts up the same stats.  We are debating on practically a 3rd WR, I just don't know if that big of a deal.  Whoever gets that spot WILL NOT put up a significant amount more yards than what Hakeem did on the same snap count.  I just don't see it happening...

[ColtStronger]

Too many holes need filled to trade up, too expensive especially in the first. 

The way I look at it, we could get a semi good guard with a 30th overall pick, or we good trade up with our current pick, Thornton, and a future pick for a top 15 spot to get perhaps the 2nd best guard available.  I would much rather do that than get a project like Mewhort (although I very much like him) that will take a whole season to come to his own.

[Superman]

Amongst this arguement, I have said the numbers may be off, I'm not a contract guy.  All I know is we won't get him on another bargain deal.  I would say at least 2.5-3M a year, but he will want a multi year deal this time around.  It is what it is, I can't make the decision, neither can anybody else on this forum, the contract talks is between Nicks/Agent and Grigson/Colts Organization.  Bottom line he will be back if we need him, mostly in Grigs eyes, but I don't see him coming back because he probably will want more money then Colts are willing to shell out.  It will surely be sad to see if we waste a draft pick when there are plenty of other needs that desperately should be addressed first, or spend the same money on anybody else that puts up the same stats.  We are debating on practically a 3rd WR, I just don't know if that big of a deal.  Whoever gets that spot WILL NOT put up a significant amount more yards than what Hakeem did on the same snap count.  I just don't see it happening...

 

Yeah, it's a discussion about the third WR, absolutely, but that's an important position. And all I'm saying is that I think we can do better than Nicks, even in the amount of reps he got. 

[Detectacon]

This place can be a dumpster after a big loss like this. I'm as irritated as anyone else, but I come here to talk football, not put up with melodrama.

 

So this thread is for people who want to talk football. Not for "fire XYZ," not for "this player is trash and needs to go," not for "we're wasting Luck's career"... 

 

My thoughts:

 

1) We're too light in the pants to hold up to New England's power run game, especially when they go double strong. We do a poor job of anchoring the line, the backers get washed out and can't make tackles, and then the back end gets worn down. It starts up front. Until we can control the line and make stops at first contact, we won't be consistent against the run. 

 

2) Our pass defense is terrible in the middle of the field. The Pats played off of that with the crossing patterns, knowing we'd fall back to protect the middle. All that short stuff outside is a function of not being able to cover the middle. We have to get better in the middle. DJackson has his strengths, but pass coverage isn't one of them. Landry really doesn't have any strengths. These first two points add up to the conclusion that we have to get better up the middle of the field. Sadly, that was the problem last season. We were slightly better at times this year, but not really.

 

3) The offensive line is a mess, from center to right tackle. Until the line can bully defenses in the ground game and consistently protect Luck the offense will have its struggles. We have to do something at RG and RT. And I think if there's any coaching spot that requires close scrutiny and probably a change, it's the line coach. 

 

4) Throughout the offseason, we expected the receiving corps to be a strength. Nicks didn't pay off; Reggie got hurt; two of the most promising young guys blew their chances. It's just Hilton and Moncrief. Our receivers combined for two catches in the biggest game of the year. If this is it for Reggie, he sadly goes out with a pitiable whimper. We need to get better and deeper at receiver. I know people are going to raise a fuss when we draft a receiver this year. Please don't. It's a huge need.

 

5) I have been torn on whether to prioritize Fleener or Allen. We need both. Re-sign them. That position is a strength of this team.

 

6) Cribbs has to go. This game shows why we had Whalen returning earlier this year. He got pulled off the job after he started getting careless. We need a responsible weapon at returner.

 

7) We still have a great situation at QB. Luck took some serious steps forward this season, and is clearly the bedrock upon which this team will be built. 

 

8) The corners are another strength. With better safety/ILB play, and a better pass rush, they will be dominant in 2015.

 

9) This team is still on its way up. This result sucks, but again, perspective. If the team attacks hard and gets its weaknesses shored up -- we have cap space, we have a full complement of draft picks, and we have a destination for free agents -- we can climb another rung on the ladder. We had an ideal path to the AFCCG this year. Go hard, and we can be favorites for a spot in this game next season, and be just as strong a candidate as any other AFC team to go to the Super Bowl.

 

GO COLTS!!!

This....all of this!!!