Keep D'Qwell Jackson, or no?

[Superman]

Forget about the contract, forget about the draft, etc. Just based on how he's playing, do you think they should keep him for next year, or part ways?

 

Feel free to support your thinking however you'd like, but be sure to offer a clear opinion, independent of auxiliary factors.

[Buck Showalter]

Meh...

I said just keep him, while i think ILB is definitely an area the Colts could improve in, i guess a group of Freeman, DQ, Irving, & Moore, may suffice for another season, let the D concentrate on bolstering the the pass rush & backend first...

[JPFolks]

He's having a better season than last, so in a void, where money doesn't count and no one is getting drafted, I don't see how you don't keep him as there are not better options on the roster. 

[Superman]

I'm saying let him go.

 

He's playing really well right now against the run, but he can't cover anyone. He'll be 33 early next season, and is more likely to experience decline than he is to keep playing at the same level, which is already less than adequate overall. Even in a limited role, he can still be exploited.

 

Our biggest defensive weakness is rushing the passer, and the second biggest weakness is covering the middle of the field. Those are not complementary weaknesses if we want to be a top ten defense. As a matter of fact, they work in concert to weaken the effectiveness of the defense overall.

 

It's asking for a lot, but our ILBs need to be good against the run and against the pass. As difficult as that is to find, it's probably harder and more expensive to find disruptive pass rushers. We have to be able to cover the middle of the field with 6 or 7 men, instead of the customary 8 that we commit to the box. As long as we have one-dimensional ILBs, that will continue to be a problem.

[MTC]

He's replaceable.

 

Coverage skills is pretty awful and he is on a big contract.

[jvan1973]

He's replaceable.

Coverage skills is pretty awful and he is on a big contract.

He isn't on a big contract

[MTC]

He isn't on a big contract

 

4 years $22

[weslo1812]

I'm saying let him go.

He's playing really well right now against the run, but he can't cover anyone. He'll be 33 early next season, and is more likely to experience decline than he is to keep playing at the same level, which is already less than adequate overall. Even in a limited role, he can still be exploited.

Our biggest defensive weakness is rushing the passer, and the second biggest weakness is covering the middle of the field. Those are not complementary weaknesses if we want to be a top ten defense. As a matter of fact, they work in concert to weaken the effectiveness of the defense overall.

It's asking for a lot, but our ILBs need to be good against the run and against the pass. As difficult as that is to find, it's probably harder and more expensive to find disruptive pass rushers. We have to be able to cover the middle of the field with 6 or 7 men, instead of the customary 8 that we commit to the box. As long as we have one-dimensional ILBs, that will continue to be a problem.

LBers that are legitimately good at both stopping the run and covering are hard to get now days. Would sure be nice to get at least one though. You see any that could be on the free agent market this off season?

[jvan1973]

4 years $22

That isn't a big contract

[Solon]

I say keep him. He's a liability in coverage, but name linebackers who can play both the pass and run. They're either pro bowlers or locked up long-term with their respective teams. I'd prefer to let Freeman walk.

[TKnight24]

NFL leading Tackler

Enough Said

[MTC]

That isn't a big contract

 

Yes it is. He's one of our highest paid players on defense (which says a lot).

[Gavin]

Let him go, Let Moore and Irving compete for his spot. Maybe Herrera. I think Freeman will not be brought back either

[jvan1973]

Yes it is. He's one of our highest paid players on defense (which says a lot).

22 million for 4 years puts him at 5.5 a year. That's 17th among all inside lbers.

[jseg18]

Tough decision. If only we can hit on a mid to late round ILB like the Eagles did. That Jordan Hicks guy they lost is good at both. A poor mans Luck Keuchly.

[IndyD4U]

Adios. He's getting older and can be replaced with some young blood with some coverage skills. I really hope Moore gets a shot

[Larry Horseman]

I didn't vote because I say yes D'Qwell, no D'Qwell about equal in a game. I'm really not sure. I'd rather have the perfect ILB but that's a dubious request. If the staff reduces his role by having a real rotation I say keep. I really think Moore and Irving have a ton of upside but depth is critical at ILB and D'QWell does provide leadership.

[Coltswarriors]

He's much improved from last year.

 

He's actually having a pretty good year, IMO.

[NewEra]

How would we upgrade the position? Draft, FA or someone currently on roster?

[ColtRider]

I'm saying let him go.

 

He's playing really well right now against the run, but he can't cover anyone. He'll be 33 early next season, and is more likely to experience decline than he is to keep playing at the same level, which is already less than adequate overall. Even in a limited role, he can still be exploited.

 

Our biggest defensive weakness is rushing the passer, and the second biggest weakness is covering the middle of the field. Those are not complementary weaknesses if we want to be a top ten defense. As a matter of fact, they work in concert to weaken the effectiveness of the defense overall.

 

It's asking for a lot, but our ILBs need to be good against the run and against the pass. As difficult as that is to find, it's probably harder and more expensive to find disruptive pass rushers. We have to be able to cover the middle of the field with 6 or 7 men, instead of the customary 8 that we commit to the box. As long as we have one-dimensional ILBs, that will continue to be a problem.

Your last sentence couldn't be more true. With that said, bring in some youthful Von Miller tenacity.

[aaron11]

keep DQ for now and find better pass rushers.  there are just too many needs to create yet another roster spot that has to be filled right away

[#12.]

Need to first know who the next GM and coach will be and what their philosophy will be moving forward. That said, I expect quite a bit of turnover, and Jackson seems to be a good candidate.

[Superman]

He's much improved from last year.

 

He's actually having a pretty good year, IMO.

 

That's absolutely true. Yet and still, what's he going to look like next year?

[RockThatBlue]

That's absolutely true. Yet and still, what's he going to look like next year?

I get what you're saying, obviously he's due to fall off because of age. But assuming he keeps this up I think you almost have to bring him back at least for a one year deal IMO.

[ricker182]

Who's better for the same price or cheaper?

 

No one.

 

Keep.

 

And judging by his enjoyment of the Red Garter I think he like Indy. A Lot. And that place sucks.

[2006Coltsbestever]

I voted keep him.

[GoColts8818]

If we are basing this just off his play you keep him. Both him and Freeman have been good at stuffing the run this year. Amazing what happens when you get them a good line in front of them to slow the running game down.

[GoColts8818]

Need to first know who the next GM and coach will be and what their philosophy will be moving forward. That said, I expect quite a bit of turnover, and Jackson seems to be a good candidate.

or if there is a new GM or coach, if this team rallies without Luck and goes say 9-7 and gets into the playoffs and wins a game or two that will make it hard for Irsay to fire people.

[2006Coltsbestever]

That's pretty cool you can see who votes yes and no.

[SteelCityColt]

NFL leading Tackler

Enough Said

It's a terrible stat for assessing player performance.

[C0lts088]

If we can get someone better, I don't think so; but that will be hard to get someone better, I believe he leads the league in tackles.

[indyspeed13]

he very well could start to decline next year or this year even but he very well could have a couple solid more years in him and i dont know who we could replace him with. with freeman picking up the coverages the tandem are pretty effective but put in a spot where they both have to cover... plus jackson can blitz pretty well from the inside.if you cut jackson who do you replace him with? Irving is not the answer dont know why so many people are mentioning him. Moore possibly but i havent seen anything that shows me hes ready to be a starter over DQ. id keep him at the same price one more year if possible

[theanarchist]

He's a solid ILB but he's getting old and he can't cover. Its time to let him go and infuse some youth. Moore or Irving can compete for that spot and we should draft one.

[AntonMcG]

Forget about the contract, forget about the draft, etc. Just based on how he's playing, do you think they should keep him for next year, or part ways?

 

Feel free to support your thinking however you'd like, but be sure to offer a clear opinion, independent of auxiliary factors.

 

I voted keep him as you asked us not to take his contract into consideration. He is good linebacker close to the line of scrimmage but he is horrific in coverage and thus does not offer the versatility that is needed as a starter in a top defense.

 

If I could, I'd keep him as a rotational/backup player.

[chrisfarley]

i just love posts that suggest unloading our leading tackler.  

[lollygagger8]

I'd rather replace Freeman than DQ. <- If you would've asked me that a year or two ago, I would've said the opposite. At least DQ is constant, and Freeman seems to be dinged up all the time. 

 

DQ's having a really good year this year. He's old and can't cover, but he wrecks it in the run game. Personally I don't think he warrants the $5.7M/yr though.

 

Irving and Moore make less than that combined. 

[Valpo2004]

I say keep him. He's a liability in coverage, but name linebackers who can play both the pass and run. They're either pro bowlers or locked up long-term with their respective teams. I'd prefer to let Freeman walk.

 

This. . . LB's that can both cover and stop the run well don't grow on trees.  It's not like you can just reach into free agency and find a half dozen of them.  

 

Any decision to let someone go is predicated on how easy it is to replace them with what you want.  And if the cause for getting rid of D'Qwell is he's not very good against the pass, then you have to ask yourself how easy it would be to find and aquire a LB who's just as good against the run as D'Qwell is but better against the pass.  

 

And if you think that it would be easy to find that LB who's just as good against the run but better against the pass you are living in a fantasy land.  At that point you might as well cut Luck because he's not Aaron Rodgers.  

[Valpo2004]

I'd rather replace Freeman than DQ. <- If you would've asked me that a year or two ago, I would've said the opposite. At least DQ is constant, and Freeman seems to be dinged up all the time. 

 

DQ's having a really good year this year. He's old and can't cover, but he wrecks it in the run game. Personally I don't think he warrants the $5.7M/yr though.

 

Irving and Moore make less than that combined. 

 

Not a fair comparison.  Moore is still on a rookie deal.  Also his pro-rated salary isn't being counted in because the Raider's paid that when they traded him away. 

[pacolts56]

Keep him....but if the opportunity to draft or sign a top flight ILB presents itself I consider that a very high priority given DQs age.

[NagelHausForge]

He is having a good season and until we find a serviceable replacement I say keep him.  He is also a good leader in the locker room and rarely gets penalized.

 

Yes, he is getting older and is a liability against the pass but there's no doubt he is a good run stuffer.