We Need Ndamukong

[Coltsman1788]

 I'll just leave this here...

 

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/columnists/gregg-doyel/2015/02/07/doyel-want-to-win-badly-enough-to-sign-ndamukong-suh/22974703/

 

 

 

 

 

[GoColts8818]

I don't see Grogson signing him given his history of steering clear of super high priced free agents.

[Colts_Fan12]

Hell yeah I wish we had nasty players on D that will stop us from getting run all over and bent over for 40 points a game

But we will not sign him

[Coltsman1788]

I don't see Grogson signing him given his history of steering clear of super high priced free agents.

Yeah he probably won't  but I think Suh is exactly what this team needs.  Some nastiness.  He would infuse some to this team in a big way.  Right now...no one fears our defense. 

 

I'm good with signing Big Dan Williams if we don't go after Suh.  But Suh makes us more of a threat to the Patriots in my opinion. Brady didn't even try to run the ball with his backs against Detroit this year. 

[Coltsman1788]

Well our window is kinda short in the sense that Luck's big pay day is coming.  Time to maximize the roster while we still can.  Colts could probably sign him if they wanted to.  Why not really go for it next year?  Sign Suh and see if they can bring home the Lombardi before they have to start making some difficult decisions. 

[Colts_Fan12]

Get Suh and Rolando McClain draft a OLB in the first round that would help the D a TON

I'd take Fairley instead of Suh for the DL not as good but cheaper and still solid IMO

[NewColtsFan]

Count me as one who does not want Suh.

 

You need a very good 53 man roster to win and Suh will suck-up too much money to allow a great roster.

 

I also don't think he's a good scheme fit and I don't think he's a good fit in the locker-room.

 

So,  I'm fine if we don't sign Suh.....

[Solon]

I don't say we need him, but I'd dam sure be happy if we signed him.

[crestmount]

He certainly would give our D-Line that much needed mongrel

[danlhart87]

SAY NO TO SUH

[Deano1818]

To me, he is intriguing

He is obviously a superstar DL

But......

When you invest in this type of player, you want to be sure...100% sure

The position change from 4-3 DT to 3-4 DE is a significant change

It adds some risk to the equation. Probably still do well...... But

Do you want to take the chance .... With that much money tied up?

(He will probably take up 20-25% of our total cap space)

When luck gets his payday ...... We could have over half of our cap tied up in 2 players

It could set us back 3-4 years if it doesn't

We ARENT going to be able to fill the needs of this team..... For this year...... In this draft

It just won't happen.

But..... I wouldn't start with Suh

[Dark Superman]

Bring in Suh. Mathis returns. Keep adding to the defensive front and other positions and this could be a defense that NOBODY wants to play against next season.

[Dark Superman]

I'll never say never with Grigson as our GM that's for sure.

[PeterBowman]

Would Suh be able to play in a 3-4 as effectively as he does in a 4-3?

[Dustin]

Would Suh be able to play in a 3-4 as effectively as he does in a 4-3?

Yes.

[PeterBowman]

Its a tough choice.

On one hand you know he s a potential ticking time bomb waiting to go off.

On the other...hes a proven game destroyer who produces at a high level even after making big money. And would also bring that nastiness the d line needs..

..combining him with Art Jones would be a huge boost. The secondary is there save for depth.

The question is...is the risk worh the potential rewar?

[Defjamz26]

I think it'd be a waste of money to bring in Suh or Fairley just to play DE. A 3-4 D is nothing without a true NT. That's what we need to be looking for. Doesn't matter who we have a DE if we don't have a solid NT.

[LightershadeofBlu]

You have to find a way to pay big time talent and Suh is the best outside of J.J. Watt. He would have an impact on this team that would be absolutely huge. He would change the whole way other teams would look at the Colts. I think Seattle will find a way to sign the big man.

[Dustin]

I think it'd be a waste of money to bring in Suh or Fairley just to play DE. A 3-4 D is nothing without a true NT. That's what we need to be looking for. Doesn't matter who we have a DE if we don't have a solid NT.

 

That was true in the 70's when teams were running the ball the majority of the time. Most true NTs don't even play 40% of their teams snaps. Josh Chapman only played 36%. 

[21isSuperman]

Yes.

What makes you think he can?

[Dustin]

What makes you think he can?

 

3-tech in our base front isn't any different than what he plays now. Plus, talent > scheme. 

[21isSuperman]

3-tech in our base front isn't any different than what he plays now. Plus, talent > scheme. 

A lot of people see similarities between him and Albert Haynesworth, and we saw how that ended.  He's talented, but how badly does he want it?  And talent isn't always more important than scheme.  We've seen talented guys like Freeney, Werner, and Jerry Hughes not be successful in Indy because of scheme and usage.

[Dustin]

A lot of people see similarities between him and Albert Haynesworth, and we saw how that ended.  He's talented, but how badly does he want it?  

 

I have never seen any reason to remotely question his work ethic. 

 

 

We've seen talented guys like Freeney, Werner, and Jerry Hughes not be successful in Indy because of scheme and usage.

 

Freeney "failed" because he was already past him prime. He was still a good pass rusher, and had good years in San Diego as an OLB. Hughes just put up double-digit sacks as both a 34 OLB and 43 DE in Buffalo, and Werner just isn't talented enough to succeed in any scheme. 

[BProland85]

I would like the colts to do what the pats did with Revis. Sign Suh to a big 1 or 2 year deal basically, with options to extend him if he translates well to this defense.

[Colts_Fan12]

I would like the colts to do what the pats did with Revis. Sign Suh to a big 1 or 2 year deal basically, with options to extend him if he translates well to this defense.

why would he do that?

[21isSuperman]

I have never seen any reason to remotely question his work ethic. 

 

 

 

Freeney "failed" because he was already past him prime. He was still a good pass rusher, and had good years in San Diego as an OLB. Hughes just put up double-digit sacks as both a 34 OLB and 43 DE in Buffalo, and Werner just isn't talented enough to succeed in any scheme. 

I'm not questioning his work ethic, but rather his desire.  Is he willing to keep his cool and let his play shine?  Or is he content to let his emotions get the best of him and get himself kicked out of a game because he's more concerned with that than about helping his team win?

 

As you mentioned, Freeney did well in San Diego as an OLB, so our scheme wasn't a good fit for him.  Hughes was originally projected as a 3-4 OLB, but was drafted by Polian to play 4-3 DE.  He did poorly at that, so the new regime tried him at 3-4 OLB, and he wasn't a fit there either.  But then we goes to Buffalo and does well in both a 3-4, and a 4-3, as you said.  So again, our scheme did not fit his talent.  I personally think Werner could be a decent 4-3 DE.  My point is that our coaching staff hasn't shown a consistent ability to maximize player talents and adjust the scheme to fit the players.  So just because Suh has a ton of talent, that doesn't mean he will fit the scheme or the coaches will be able to utilize his talent

[danlhart87]

I would hate it if Colts got Suh!

[BOTT]

A lot of people see similarities between him and Albert Haynesworth, and we saw how that ended.  He's talented, but how badly does he want it?  And talent isn't always more important than scheme.  We've seen talented guys like Freeney, Werner, and Jerry Hughes not be successful in Indy because of scheme and usage.

A lot of people are wrong. I don't see any similarities between Suh and Haynesworth....other than being very talent and having a nasty disposition on the playing field.

[BProland85]

why would he do that?

Revis did that to play with a title contender. He could have made better money elsewhere but he wanted a ring with the pats. Suh might want that as well.

[21isSuperman]

A lot of people are wrong. I don't see any similarities between Suh and Haynesworth....other than being very talent and having a nasty disposition on the playing field.

Haynesworth had a history of dirty play, much like Suh.  Talented DL, going into free agency, will command a lot of money, has a history of dirty play.  We also don't know how Suh will do if he's placed in a 3-4 and asked more to occupy blockers to let the OLBs get the sacks than to pressure the QB himself.  Unless Suh comes cheap, which won't happen, I don't think we should go after him.

[Colts_Fan12]

Revis did that to play with a title contender. He could have made better money elsewhere but he wanted a ring with the pats. Suh might want that as well.

then he would go somewhere else no here we have too many holes

[BOTT]

Haynesworth had a history of dirty play, much like Suh. Talented DL, going into free agency, will command a lot of money, has a history of dirty play. We also don't know how Suh will do if he's placed in a 3-4 and asked more to occupy blockers to let the OLBs get the sacks than to pressure the QB himself. Unless Suh comes cheap, which won't happen, I don't think we should go after him.

That's all well and good, but you seemed to equate the two with their work ethic. Just because he is talented and pushes the boundaries doesn't make him albert Haynesworth....a player who always had his motor questioned.

[Superman]

We got off topic in another thread talking Suh. It was determined that we could afford him if we wanted.

I personally don't think it's practical. Super expensive, and he'll want a big guarantee, so you're married to him. At least a three year commitment.

And this is the kind of move that has the potential to seriously set a team back. If he gets hurt, if he gets lazy, if he isn't a good fit, you're stuck.

And I think we'd get more impact from signing multiple players on defense. So I'm against it.

However, I clearly see the upside. He could potentially transform the defensive front, making life easier for everyone on the field.

[Deano1818]

Yes.

How do you know this?

DT in a 4-3 is a different position than DE in a 3-4

What if he is merely mortal with a position change.... AND is drawing 20% of the total cap?

I understand the desire to get that ONE player.......

History has proven more often than not the big FA names signed to the big contracts, don't pan out

The problem with this one player is, he will take so much money if we are wrong...... It will be painful

The folks like Albert Haynesworth haunt many memories

[Deano1818]

I personally don't think it's practical. Super expensive, and he'll want a big guarantee, so you're married to him. At least a three year commitment.

.

It would be a messy divorce........... At least 3 years to pay off the attorneys ....... If it didn't work out.....

[Superman]

How do you know this?

DT in a 4-3 is a different position than DE in a 3-4

What if he is merely mortal with a position change.... AND is drawing 20% of the total cap?

I understand the desire to get that ONE player.......

History has proven more often than not the big FA names signed to the big contracts, don't pan out

The problem with this one player is, he will take so much money if we are wrong...... It will be painful

The folks like Albert Haynesworth haunt many memories

It would only be ten percent of the cap, assuming $15m/year.

And the thinking is that dynamic talent is productive no matter what. If he were receptive to the scheme change, I don't think there would be any problem with him fitting the defense and still being a playmaker.

I also don't think he's a Haynesworth kind of person.

But we agree that typically, free agents don't live up to expectations. You're more likely to have a bad experience than a good one, historically speaking. With Suh, the ceiling is pretty high, enough that it's worth considering. But I'm not for it. Too much risk.

[coltsfan1218]

our defense needs some swagger on the field like the seahawks it'll cause some penalties but at least we won't get pushed around. I think Suh would bring that but at too big of a price. We need to sign that type of player, build like Baltimore did

[chrisfarley]

There's no way we can afford him.

[scooter4910]

Indystar.com

 

"The choice belongs to the Colts. What do they want to be? Great, or decent? Same for Colts fans. What do you want your team to be – great, or decent?

 

We've seen decent.

 

Decent got outscored 45-7 by the best team in football."

 

http://indy.st/1DQgi0Q

[CanuckColt]

Suh would be a great signing...a genuine impact player...but very expensive.

But Grigs/Chuck will probably overpay for 3 or 4 mediocre under-performers because it fills more holes.

They SHOULD sign Suh and then backfill the other holes with some eager young draft picks or UDFAs.