Warhorse Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Yeah Langford's great, but we want better. We want a couple monsters up front. Langford should be a really good backup on a great team. I mean he wouldn't start for the Jets would he? No, he'd be a good backup. We could have signed Knighton and Fairley for a total of 10 million dollars. I don't think anything less than the best is acceptable personally. But I'm a big UK basketball fan, and use to Cal getting only the best year after year and totally dominating opponents.Feel free to say, "I want better". Be proud of YOUR position. Please don't include others. By saying WE, you assume that others agree with you. I don't. Just a respectful request. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
needanoline63 Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 He was good on the dolphins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark_Indy Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 I didn't want Suh or any of those top Dl men, But what did turn me against Langford signing was the whole 17 tackles 1 sack no tackles for loss in 16 games last season He was moved down the depth chart by Aaron Donald's fantastic rookie year. It's not his fault they drafted a superstar that took his place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BleedBlu8792 Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Yeah Langford's great, but we want better. We want a couple monsters up front. Langford should be a really good backup on a great team. I mean he wouldn't start for the Jets would he? No, he'd be a good backup. We could have signed Knighton and Fairley for a total of 10 million dollars. I don't think anything less than the best is acceptable personally. But I'm a big UK basketball fan, and use to Cal getting only the best year after year and totally dominating opponents.You keep saying you want something that resembles the Jets but you keep failing to realize the Jets got a few of those guys by drafting in the top-10/15. So unless you are wanting to see the Colts with a couple 3-7 win seasons, the Colts are NOT going to get access to those types of Dlineman. The Jets inept offense will eventually wear that defense down through games,as it happened to them this year quite a few games. Hell, it even happened to us in both NE games and the Dallas game. Our offense couldn't get anything going or right in either of those games and it took its toll on our defense. I believe our D is good enough with the offense we have to compliment it. The offense has to do a better job of not turning over the ball and sustaining drives. Again, as I've pointed out on here a couple of times, if the Colts offense limits turnovers, since 2012, the defense has only given up an average of ~18.5ppg. The defense has had its low points but the offense has to be equally blamed as well. Both NE games and the Dallas game was horrific on both sides of the ball, not just the defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gacker65 Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 I am not saying any thing about Langford, as I don't know much about him. I can wait till I see his play in pre and regular season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockThatBlue Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 From everything I've read about him he's supposed to be a decent run stuffer. If that's true I like the signing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coltsman1788 Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 My expectations are tempered. I expect him to be a complimentary type backup, rotational player who will probably be a starter on our line. He is solid but not a signing that will put our line over the top. We still need more help. Based on those videos of the Rams D line. 94 and 90 were the studs and 98 was there to help clean up some of the scraps. We have no Quins or Chris Jones on Indy's line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockThatBlue Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Double post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougDew Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Just to clear some things up: Salary equals expectation of talent. Length of contract equals expected longevity at that level. Redding signed for less money because he's an inferior player, not because he's 35. He signed for only 2 years because he's 35. AJ and Cole signed for more money, because they are expected to have more of an impact, but like Redding, short contracts because they are older. Fairley and Knighton signed for about 5m per year because they are good, but for only 1 year because they are unreliable. Langford will be the new Walden on this board. Simply because they were both relative no names that people were caught not knowing anything about when signed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 I heard and remember Langford from when we played the Rams. He gave us fits and was in on tons of plays. If you watch 98 in the top video you can see for yourself. He is really good and shedding blocks and stopping the run. And looks like he pushes the pocket on every play he's in there. Guys like that help the Quins of the world look better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougDew Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Last year the Dline was: Jones, Chap, Redding, RJF, Hughes, Kerr Currently, its Jones, Chap, Langford, Hughes, and Kerr. Seems like a draft pick in rounds 1-3 addressing the DL would be appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Langford was not let go from lack of play. He was caught up in a numbers game. He looked better than their 1st round pick Brockers. With the emergence of Donald I think they wanted to get him more playing time. Much smaller but he is really quick and explosive. So really they took the gamble for swapping Langford for Fairley. If he can stay healthy Fairley is an upgrade in their system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustin Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Just to clear some things up:Salary equals expectation of talent. Length of contract equals expected longevity at that level.Nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougDew Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Nope.Dustin. Its pretty obvious that clubs believe that Knighton and Fairley are good players, but they were only given one year commitments because of perceived risk that they will not be able to play at that level over a long time. League minimum players earn the league minimum because they are not as good as the competition. Age has nothing to do with that. However, sometimes, an old but good vet earns league minimum because they are cut late and have to hook up with a team when there is no cap left. Randy Starks and Barry Cofield may be two of those players this offseason. Redding and RJF got full benefit of a full offseason to negotiate the highest contract possible. Their "per year" compensation reflects their perceived level of talent....by the people who matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustin Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 .... Salaries do not equal expectations of talent. That's a massive oversimplification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougDew Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Salaries do not equal expectations of talent. That's a massive oversimplification.Most of the time they do. What is a greater oversimplification is saying that someone receives less compensation than someone else because they are older, not because their level of play has diminished. Other teams could've signed Redding for $8m per year for 2 years, if he was worth it. If you're talking total contract sure, because adding up the per year salaries over 4 years will be higher than a 2 year contract...and that deals with age. But the per year level of compensation reflects talent, which is why Revis gets paid a lot as does Suh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewColtsFan Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 I didn't want Suh or any of those top Dl men, But what did turn me against Langford signing was the whole 17 tackles 1 sack no tackles for loss in 16 games last season He didn't start last season. He was 2nd string. The Rams stumbled into Aaron Donald who went on to become the Rookie Defensive Player of the Year. Langford's stats should be viewed in that context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewColtsFan Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Salaries do not equal expectations of talent. That's a massive oversimplification. It may be a massive oversimplification, but it has a lot of truth in it. And if you want to disagree with someone -- fine. But feel free to write an explanation. "Nope." is not an answer or explanation. 2015 has to be the year you stop writing "Nope." as an answer. Feel free to write more than a word. Feel free to write more than a sentence. Feel free to string a few sentences together and turn them into a whole paragraph. Words can be your friend! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvan1973 Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 He didn't start last season. He was 2nd string. The Rams stumbled into Aaron Donald who went on to become the Rookie Defensive Player of the Year.Langford's stats should be viewed in that context.Donald was the 13th pick in the draft. I don't think they stumbled onto him. He was drafted to start Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Donald was the 13th pick in the draft. I don't think they stumbled onto him. He was drafted to startBrockers was a 1st rounder also. Langford didn't get cut cause lack of play. It's more cause they are loaded on the line. Now they took a big gamble on Fairley. It's only a 1 year deal so it's a win win if it pans out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewColtsFan Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Donald was the 13th pick in the draft. I don't think they stumbled onto him. He was drafted to start I used stumbled because from the stories I read they didn't anticipate him falling to them. They thought he'd go much higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgambill Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Donald was the 13th pick in the draft. I don't think they stumbled onto him. He was drafted to startand replace Langford who was due like 8 million against their cap....Stl has picks but no money...so they replaced him in the draft. In a division you have to get after wilson and kaepernick and stop lynch and gore you have to be stout against the run. Stl needed these guys in that division. Langford has been good but I'm not going to say he was as good in Stl as he was in Miami. I think he fits our system better....he will be solid against the run at de....and a much better pass rusher against the pass as he slides inside on those downs. I wanted him at the start of free agency and very glad we stole him away from denver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 and replace Langford who was due like 8 million against their cap....Stl has picks but no money...so they replaced him in the draft. In a division you have to get after wilson and kaepernick and stop lynch and gore you have to be stout against the run. Stl needed these guys in that division. Langford has been good but I'm not going to say he was as good in Stl as he was in Miami. I think he fits our system better....he will be solid against the run at de....and a much better pass rusher against the pass as he slides inside on those downs. I wanted him at the start of free agency and very glad we stole him away from denver.Just watching film on him from the Rams he looks very disruptive. If he is actually better in a 3-4 he's going to be very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOTT Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Brockers was a 1st rounder also. Langford didn't get cut cause lack of play. It's more cause they are loaded on the line. Now they took a big gamble on Fairley. It's only a 1 year deal so it's a win win if it pans out.Rams have a nice rotation of 5 1st rounders lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Rams have a nice rotation of 5 1st rounders lolLol exactly. Just like Cowboys oline. They have 3 first rounders on the line they better be good. Only team I can think of to really stink it up with their first rounders is Texans. They scored on Watt but a bunch were busts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgambill Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Rams have a nice rotation of 5 1st rounders lolyep....but can't even win 5 games....they chose to spend pick after pick on the dl and don't get me wrong they need a strong DL but they have so many holes on that OL and secondary sometimes you have to wonder about the thoughts behind continuing to draft a position of strength instead of suring up weaknesses...when your adding guys like fairley etc that will struggle to get on the field or push promising players like brockers to the bench I got to wonder what their plan is. Maybe it's the fact that they struggle to find quality at receiver or other areas so they choose what they know...idk....a lot invested there and they continue to double down....just wonder if it will pay off in w's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOTT Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 yep....but can't even win 5 games....they chose to spend pick after pick on the dl and don't get me wrong they need a strong DL but they have so many holes on that OL and secondary sometimes you have to wonder about the thoughts behind continuing to draft a position of strength instead of suring up weaknesses...when your adding guys like fairley etc that will struggle to get on the field or push promising players like brockers to the bench I got to wonder what their plan is. Maybe it's the fact that they struggle to find quality at receiver or other areas so they choose what they know...idk....a lot invested there and they continue to double down....just wonder if it will pay off in w's.The main reason they struggle is, as usual, the QB position. They have addressed the Oline last couple yrs but hasn't yet worked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColtRider Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 My expectations are tempered. I expect him to be a complimentary type backup, rotational player who will probably be a starter on our line. He is solid but not a signing that will put our line over the top. We still need more help. Based on those videos of the Rams D line. 94 and 90 were the studs and 98 was there to help clean up some of the scraps. We have no Quins or Chris Jones on Indy's line.Help is on the way, brother! Help is on the way! ;) Just as stated earlier in this thread, Langford "fits" into the Colts system a lot more than people know. He will prove to be a great addition to the line. Count on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lollygagger8 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 I believe he's an upgrade over RJF. His sack dances are much better too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backshoulderfade Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Donald was the 13th pick in the draft. I don't think they stumbled onto him. He was drafted to startIMO, he was drafted by the Rams because he was BPA for Rams rather than filling an obvious need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chucklez Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 IMO I am still baffled on the D-Line we loose 2 solid players and sign 1 do not know much about Langford but we still have ota and preseason. I hope grigs has something up his sleeve for the draft for the D-line or he could be in the hot seat , Still have FA yet so we will see.The D Line is pretty strong in this years draft, I think we'll pick up one or even two additional players in the early rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvan1973 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 IMO, he was drafted by the Rams because he was BPA for Rams rather than filling an obvious need.yes, I agree. That's what smart GMs do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProblChld32 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 No threads about him cause most of this forum doesn't know him. Moment he signed a lot of folks labeled it a bad signing cause they rather Grigson dish out the money he could sign 6 guys to and hand it to guys like SuhBut to each their own I supposeI like the signing, Langford is a solid player Agree with you 100% i feel like he played out of scheme with the Rams but still effectively produced. i was excited about the pickup. He's gonna do well in Indy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horse Shoe Heaven Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 I believe he's an upgrade over RJF. His sack dances are much better too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horse Shoe Heaven Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 I think he will be solid, I honestly like we need another veteran, daft a guy to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archangel Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 The D Line is pretty strong in this years draft, I think we'll pick up one or even two additional players in the early rounds. [ Thanks for the info was not sure what grigs was planning hope this is the right direction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now