Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Conversations are moderated for civility. We ask that you please stay on topic. For more info, see our Community Guidelines ×
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Clayton Geathers Has "Exceeded" Colts Expectations

krunk

By krunk
in Colts Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

ColtsFanMikeC Walk On

ColtsFanMikeC

Posted
Posted

I think we are lucky to have Lowery this year.  I don't know that he (or Adams) is the long term answer at S, but they should both be suitable this season.  I really like the fact that Geathers is being used as a cover guy for now.  It seems like his big build and natural ability (from just the few youtube clips I've seen of him) make him a good tackler and probably a natural fit to be a good strong safety.  However, he seems to have speed and athleticism which could make him what Pagano desires from safeties, one who has the ability to be interchangeable.  While there are some nice coverage plays in his highlight reels, I have a feeling he is still a bit raw there, so by training him in coverage from the get-go, I think we'll see him be a very well rounded S by the end of this year or by next year.  We don't really need him to come in and light the world on fire right away, as Lowery and Adams are just fine.  If he can beat one of them out by season's end, great.... if not, that's fine, he should be much better next year.  Pagano said on draft day that one of the best things about Geathers was he hasn't even come close to reaching his ceiling yet, so having 2 vets to learn from should be great for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TKnight24 Walk On

TKnight24

Posted
Posted

we do not need a super star we need solid players or above average. Can't have superstars everywhere

Sure you can, Seattle has 3/4 superstar players in their secondary

Superstar RB & QB, now a superstar TE

Superstar LB and DL

Shoot, they got it all haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Indra Walk On

Indra

Posted
Posted

I think we are lucky to have Lowery this year. I don't know that he (or Adams) is the long term answer at S, but they should both be suitable this season. I really like the fact that Geathers is being used as a cover guy for now. It seems like his big build and natural ability (from just the few youtube clips I've seen of him) make him a good tackler and probably a natural fit to be a good strong safety. However, he seems to have speed and athleticism which could make him what Pagano desires from safeties, one who has the ability to be interchangeable. While there are some nice coverage plays in his highlight reels, I have a feeling he is still a bit raw there, so by training him in coverage from the get-go, I think we'll see him be a very well rounded S by the end of this year or by next year. We don't really need him to come in and light the world on fire right away, as Lowery and Adams are just fine. If he can beat one of them out by season's end, great.... if not, that's fine, he should be much better next year. Pagano said on draft day that one of the best things about Geathers was he hasn't even come close to reaching his ceiling yet, so having 2 vets to learn from should be great for him.

I really like this post. A very thoughtful perspective :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ColtsFanMikeC Walk On

ColtsFanMikeC

Posted
Posted

Sure you can, Seattle has 3/4 superstar players in their secondary

Superstar RB & QB, now a superstar TE

Superstar LB and DL

Shoot, they got it all haha

 

I wouldn't call Wilson a superstar.  He has been very good in this league.  He Is not asked to do nearly as much as the superstar QBs, though -- Manning, Brady, Rogers, and even Luck.  He is surrounded by a very good team and is in a good scheme -- I don't think Wilson can win games on his own the way the 4 I mentioned can.  He is more than a game manager, but I honestly don't think he is a superstar. 

 

They have had a superstar RB, a good line, and a group of speedy, efficient WRs and a very good coaching staff to make their offense operate at a very efficient level.  They have also had a very, very good D - with a group of studs in the secondary and an above-average front 7.  Many times, the defense keeps Seattle in games, and Wilson is not asked to put the team on his back (in part due to the D and in part due to their running game).  Luck has not had a running game since he has been here, and has not had a dominating D.  I don't think Wilson could win 11 games on the teams Luck has had.  We now have a proven RB, we have provided Luck with a group of very solid weapons in the receiving game (I'd argue this is the best he has had going into a season since he has been here -- year 1 he had a superstar in Wayne and a bunch of unproven rookies in Fleener, Allen, and Hilton -- year 2 he lost Allen right away, lost Wayne less than halfway through the season, Fleener and TY were still developing -- year 3 Hilton and Wayne were very good prior to Wayne getting hurt, and Allen and Fleener were hot & cold, and our run game was pretty terrible like it was in year 1 and 2).  Luck also has dealt with a subpar line -- in large part due to injury and constant changes.

 

Finally, it seems like we have very good depth at WR, Allen and Fleener are healthy, we've got a proven RB in Gore plus some more experience with Boom and some promise at RB between Robinson/Tipton/Ballard as 3rd options.  It also looks like we have the deepest line since Luck has been here -- both Harrison and Holmes showed promise last year, Mewhort looked like he is going to be the real deal, Costanzo is back, we've got Reitz, Herremans and maybe a healthy Thomas, and we're not sure about Cherilus -- regardless, it looks like we should have more consistency on that front.  

 

Additionally, our secondary started coming into its own last year and looks to be improved with the loss of Landry and promising additions of Lowery, D'Joun, and Geathers.  With the additions of Cole, Langford, and the return of Mathis, a healthy Art Jones, another year under Werner, Newsome, Kerr, Chapman, Hughes, and the rookies from Stanford -- I think our front 7 should be improved and have more depth than we've had.  I don't know that our defense will be dominant, but it should be improved.  That, coupled with an improved offense, should allow for Luck to shine, but also should allow for him to have some relief in that he'll have more options and hopefully a more reliable D. 

 

Luck has struggled with INTs, and some have been, undoubtedly, due to poor decision making.  Some may also have been due to pressure of feeling like he has to do it all.  Manning threw a lot of picks when we had a bad D, and I always thought a lot of them were because he felt like he needed to squeeze the ball into pockets that didn't exist because he knew if he didn't score, the other team would probably score on us. 

 

In the salary cap age, no team can have superstars at every position.  The Seahawks are a very good team, and have been very well coached (much like the Pats), but they both have weaknesses throughout their rosters that have been masked by strengths and good coaching.  This is a big year for our team, and our coaching staff, and it seems like we finally have the roster, while not fulled with superstars everywhere, that should have enough strengths in all areas to mask some deficiencies in other areas and be a very hard team to prepare for.  While it is ultimately up to the players to perform on the field, a lot will be up to our coaches to develop game plans to put us in the best chance for success.  We have not had the luxury of being able to run the ball since Luck has been here -- if Gore, the other RBs, and the line are improved, it should allow for our offense to make defenses stack the box, in turn allowing Luck to torch defenses through the air -- or if teams choose to drop into coverage, should allow for Gore and others to help us win by pounding the ball against a spread out defense.  I don't think this is a super bowl or bust year for Pagano and staff, but if we stay healthy, there is no reason any team in the league should blow us out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chucklez Team Captain

Chucklez

Posted
Posted

I wouldn't be surprised if Geathers gets the start week 1, considering we're going against a qb-less team

Might as well give him reps early on when the schedule is weaker, as opposed to down the stretch

 

Matt Casell / EJ Manuel may not be premier QB's, but if you give any QB in this league a wide open field they can hurt you. Im not saying with Geathers in we would be wide open, but if he isnt ready, why throw him in and risk a big plays over the top / through the middle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SteelCityColt Hall of Famer

SteelCityColt

Posted
Posted

Matt Casell / EJ Manuel may not be premier QB's, but if you give any QB in this league a wide open field they can hurt you. Im not saying with Geathers in we would be wide open, but if he isnt ready, why throw him in and risk a big plays over the top / through the middle?

 

I can think of a few who could miss the proverbial barn door :P 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SteelCityColt Hall of Famer

SteelCityColt

Posted
Posted

Lol yep, case and point right there :)

 

I'm sure that was more on Thomas than Tebow but on a more serious note, you don't get to the NFL as a QB without at least a smidgen of talent. If you leave receivers open the QB is going to be able to hit them all day long. Correct me if I'm wrong but the biggest step up for QBs into the NFL, outside of grasping the mentals side of the game, is that receivers aren't wide open and the window to fit the ball into is oh so much tighter. 

 

Of course if you're going to play your corners 10 yards off disregard the above, I'm not glad to see the back of those days :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chrisfarley Practice Squad

chrisfarley

Posted
Posted

I wouldn't call Wilson a superstar.  He has been very good in this league.  He Is not asked to do nearly as much as the superstar QBs, though -- Manning, Brady, Rogers, and even Luck.  He is surrounded by a very good team and is in a good scheme -- I don't think Wilson can win games on his own the way the 4 I mentioned can.  He is more than a game manager, but I honestly don't think he is a superstar. 

 

They have had a superstar RB, a good line, and a group of speedy, efficient WRs and a very good coaching staff to make their offense operate at a very efficient level.  They have also had a very, very good D - with a group of studs in the secondary and an above-average front 7.  Many times, the defense keeps Seattle in games, and Wilson is not asked to put the team on his back (in part due to the D and in part due to their running game).  Luck has not had a running game since he has been here, and has not had a dominating D.  I don't think Wilson could win 11 games on the teams Luck has had.  We now have a proven RB, we have provided Luck with a group of very solid weapons in the receiving game (I'd argue this is the best he has had going into a season since he has been here -- year 1 he had a superstar in Wayne and a bunch of unproven rookies in Fleener, Allen, and Hilton -- year 2 he lost Allen right away, lost Wayne less than halfway through the season, Fleener and TY were still developing -- year 3 Hilton and Wayne were very good prior to Wayne getting hurt, and Allen and Fleener were hot & cold, and our run game was pretty terrible like it was in year 1 and 2).  Luck also has dealt with a subpar line -- in large part due to injury and constant changes.

 

Finally, it seems like we have very good depth at WR, Allen and Fleener are healthy, we've got a proven RB in Gore plus some more experience with Boom and some promise at RB between Robinson/Tipton/Ballard as 3rd options.  It also looks like we have the deepest line since Luck has been here -- both Harrison and Holmes showed promise last year, Mewhort looked like he is going to be the real deal, Costanzo is back, we've got Reitz, Herremans and maybe a healthy Thomas, and we're not sure about Cherilus -- regardless, it looks like we should have more consistency on that front.  

 

Additionally, our secondary started coming into its own last year and looks to be improved with the loss of Landry and promising additions of Lowery, D'Joun, and Geathers.  With the additions of Cole, Langford, and the return of Mathis, a healthy Art Jones, another year under Werner, Newsome, Kerr, Chapman, Hughes, and the rookies from Stanford -- I think our front 7 should be improved and have more depth than we've had.  I don't know that our defense will be dominant, but it should be improved.  That, coupled with an improved offense, should allow for Luck to shine, but also should allow for him to have some relief in that he'll have more options and hopefully a more reliable D. 

 

Luck has struggled with INTs, and some have been, undoubtedly, due to poor decision making.  Some may also have been due to pressure of feeling like he has to do it all.  Manning threw a lot of picks when we had a bad D, and I always thought a lot of them were because he felt like he needed to squeeze the ball into pockets that didn't exist because he knew if he didn't score, the other team would probably score on us. 

 

In the salary cap age, no team can have superstars at every position.  The Seahawks are a very good team, and have been very well coached (much like the Pats), but they both have weaknesses throughout their rosters that have been masked by strengths and good coaching.  This is a big year for our team, and our coaching staff, and it seems like we finally have the roster, while not fulled with superstars everywhere, that should have enough strengths in all areas to mask some deficiencies in other areas and be a very hard team to prepare for.  While it is ultimately up to the players to perform on the field, a lot will be up to our coaches to develop game plans to put us in the best chance for success.  We have not had the luxury of being able to run the ball since Luck has been here -- if Gore, the other RBs, and the line are improved, it should allow for our offense to make defenses stack the box, in turn allowing Luck to torch defenses through the air -- or if teams choose to drop into coverage, should allow for Gore and others to help us win by pounding the ball against a spread out defense.  I don't think this is a super bowl or bust year for Pagano and staff, but if we stay healthy, there is no reason any team in the league should blow us out.

except for New England

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chrisfarley Practice Squad

chrisfarley

Posted
Posted

still wondering why we took him so early as he was projected way down the line (like 7th or later).  could have gotten him for bargain basement dollars. he has a lot to learn but has an adequate upside.  still grinding my teeth about where we took him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ColtsLegacy Active Roster

ColtsLegacy

Posted
Posted

still wondering why we took him so early as he was projected way down the line (like 7th or later). could have gotten him for bargain basement dollars. he has a lot to learn but has an adequate upside. still grinding my teeth about where we took him.

Projected by who? NFL.com? They have a ton of guys who went undrafted rated in the 3rd to 5th round.

Nfldraftscout.com has Geathers' as a 4-5 rounder.

Either way those projections mean little. There could have been multiple other teams that had Geathers' rated as a 4-5 rounder and it only takes one team for him to be gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chrisfarley Practice Squad

chrisfarley

Posted
Posted

Projected by who? NFL.com? They have a ton of guys who went undrafted rated in the 3rd to 5th round.

Nfldraftscout.com has Geathers' as a 4-5 rounder.

Either way those projections mean little. There could have been multiple other teams that had Geathers' rated as a 4-5 rounder and it only takes one team for him to be gone.

Yes, NFL.com was at least one of a couple i saw that had him late rounds --- you're right, they do miss many as much as they guess right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewColtsFan Ring of Honor

NewColtsFan

Posted
Posted

Sure you can, Seattle has 3/4 superstar players in their secondary

Superstar RB & QB, now a superstar TE

Superstar LB and DL

Shoot, they got it all haha

 

They don't have superstar WR's,  this despite trading a #1+ for Percy Harvin.

 

And they don't have a superstar OL.    Just one very good LT,  but the rest are solid and play very well as a group.

 

They had to trade a #1 to get a superstar TE,  they've been struggling to get a good one for years.

 

They've been very, very fortunate in the defensive backfield.   Sherman was a 5.   Browner was a 5.   The big corner who just got the huge deal from philly was either drafted late or a free agent.   Chancellor was a 3, I think,  or later.

 

Very good scouting,  but I suspect even the Seahawks would tell you there's some luck involved.   They didn't expect all those guys to be great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ColtsFanMikeC Walk On

ColtsFanMikeC

Posted
Posted

except for New England

 

New England does not have superstars at every position.  Not even close.  They are very well coached, they have a superstar QB, a superstar TE, a superstar K, arguable superstars at 2 LB spots (Jamie Collins and Hightower, though I think they are just very good and not superstar level), and last year they had a superstar NT and CB.  Jonas Gray, Shane Vereen, LaGarrette Blount are not superstars.  Chandler Jones is good, but not a superstar.  Rob Ninkovich is good but not a superstar.  Amendola, Edeleman, LaFell, Boyce, Slater, Tyms are all not superstars at WR.  I don't see anyone on their OL that is a superstar (maybe Vollmer?).  Devin McCourty and Brandon Browner are good, but not superstars.  They have superstars in a few key positions and they are very well coached and very disciplined at other positions which is why they have been so successful.

 

Bullcrap we do need some stars on our D its full of average to crap players that are over the hill

 

Vontae is a young superstar.  Then we have a lot of young guys with a lot of potential. 

 

Please don't forget, in 3 years our team has been essentially rebuilt from scratch (Costanzo, Vinatieri, McAffee, Mathis, and Reitz are the only players remaining from when Grigs and Pags took over).  You can't rebuild overnight.  We've got some 'stop gaps' in there (e.g., Mike Adams, Trent Cole, etc.), but we needed to get some older average or above average players in the mix and I'm pretty sure replacing them is in the long-term plan of this franchise (see the release of RJF, or the non-aggressive going after Redding).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
C0lts088 Walk On

C0lts088

Posted
Posted

Matt Casell / EJ Manuel may not be premier QB's, but if you give any QB in this league a wide open field they can hurt you. Im not saying with Geathers in we would be wide open, but if he isnt ready, why throw him in and risk a big plays over the top / through the middle?

That is true in a sense, but if the other 10 guys are doing they're job it should be that much of a liability.

And just like any qb can hurt you; Geathers was drafted for a reason as well, I'm sure the kid can ball to some degree

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chrisfarley Practice Squad

chrisfarley

Posted
Posted

New England does not have superstars at every position.  Not even close.  They are very well coached, they have a superstar QB, a superstar TE, a superstar K, arguable superstars at 2 LB spots (Jamie Collins and Hightower, though I think they are just very good and not superstar level), and last year they had a superstar NT and CB.  Jonas Gray, Shane Vereen, LaGarrette Blount are not superstars.  Chandler Jones is good, but not a superstar.  Rob Ninkovich is good but not a superstar.  Amendola, Edeleman, LaFell, Boyce, Slater, Tyms are all not superstars at WR.  I don't see anyone on their OL that is a superstar (maybe Vollmer?).  Devin McCourty and Brandon Browner are good, but not superstars.  They have superstars in a few key positions and they are very well coached and very disciplined at other positions which is why they have been so successful.

 

 

Vontae is a young superstar.  Then we have a lot of young guys with a lot of potential. 

 

Please don't forget, in 3 years our team has been essentially rebuilt from scratch (Costanzo, Vinatieri, McAffee, Mathis, and Reitz are the only players remaining from when Grigs and Pags took over).  You can't rebuild overnight.  We've got some 'stop gaps' in there (e.g., Mike Adams, Trent Cole, etc.), but we needed to get some older average or above average players in the mix and I'm pretty sure replacing them is in the long-term plan of this franchise (see the release of RJF, or the non-aggressive going after Redding).

The issue is not whether or not New England has superstars but rather, did we get better than them in the off-season(thru the draft & FA).  I'm afraid the answer is no, we did not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hoose Hall of Famer

Hoose

Posted
Posted

Projected by who? NFL.com? They have a ton of guys who went undrafted rated in the 3rd to 5th round.

Nfldraftscout.com has Geathers' as a 4-5 rounder.

Either way those projections mean little. There could have been multiple other teams that had Geathers' rated as a 4-5 rounder and it only takes one team for him to be gone.

Precisely. You can grab any draft magazine post draft and find all kinds of players projected as 5th-6th round or later who end up in the second and third rounds. And vice versa. Projected early selections who go undrafted. Projections made in December and January do not take into account the later performances of these players in personal workouts, etc. Geathers was taken where he should have been; the Colts got an excellent player IMO, and you don't look back. Over half of every team's draft class craps out within the first two years, and often sooner. Get a perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hoose Hall of Famer

Hoose

Posted
Posted

The issue is not whether or not New England has superstars but rather, did we get better than them in the off-season(thru the draft & FA).  I'm afraid the answer is no, we did not.

I disagree. I think the Colts are much improved from the FA's and draft class. Combine that with the injured players from last year that are now healthy, and you have a serious contender for the throne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gavin Walk On

Gavin

Posted
Posted

is that why players get cut in camp and otas?

your not seriously trying to say what this kid does in shorts and no contact has any bearing on what he does when the pads start popping for real are you? Again...Its OTA's...you get to see how much players can digest information and put that info to use (In games), What there work ethic at the next level is really like and all that but at the end of the day what matters most is what happens when pads start hitting for real, Till then its don't get injured, Show that you can digest info(playbook), work out,, work on technique. Now if he makes plays in preseason games then its time to take real notice, Till then study and don't get injured. There are players who actually don't get many reps at all in camp and OTA's and its a numbers game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...