Vontae Davis wants the colts to sign Dwight Freeney

[krunk]

29 minutes ago, Myles said:

I don't think that Freeney would make them a playoff team, but if the coaches and GM feel this team is a playoff team, Freeney would be worth a look because he could upgrade a position, even if that position is a situational one.

This is a team forum.   Why would you think people should express their opinions?

 

 

I've been posting on this forum for a while now and I never tell anyone not to post what they feel. However I do hold the right to disagree and state my side of things.  I didn't say you couldn't voice your opinion.  Problem is you didn't really understand my post before you wrote me.  That's why I had to clarify why I responded in the way that I did about adding Freeney.  I don't think it's necessary until we see what we have in our young guys.  If it still looks dry from there, then maybe around October(like the Cardinals did) we can look at adding Freeney to the mix with our other 2 grandpa pass rushers.   I believe he would contribute, but this is a young mans game for the most part so we'll hang our bets on our young guys and Monachinos ability to scheme pressures and see what we got first.  The thing that is bigger than the pass rush to me is getting our offense back to where it needs to be so that the offense aids the defense.  It did not last year so it amplified the deficiencies we had with the pass rush. 

[Myles]

17 minutes ago, krunk said:

 

I've been posting on this forum for a while now and I never tell anyone not to post what they feel. However I do hold the right to disagree and state my side of things.  I didn't say you couldn't voice your opinion.  Problem is you didn't really understand my post before you wrote me.  That's why I had to clarify why I responded in the way that I did about adding Freeney.  I don't think it's necessary until we see what we have in our young guys.  If it still looks dry from there, then maybe around October(like the Cardinals did) we can look at adding Freeney to the mix with our other 2 grandpa pass rushers.   I believe he would contribute, but this is a young mans game for the most part so we'll hang our bets on our young guys and Monachinos ability to scheme pressures and see what we got first.  The thing that is bigger than the pass rush to me is getting our offense back to where it needs to be so that the offense aids the defense.  It did not last year so it amplified the deficiencies we had with the pass rush. 

That's where we disagree.  I'm not much of a fan of seeing what happens and then fixing it.   Especially when we have a pretty good idea of how it will be.    Seeing what happens didn't work well for the O-line last year.   

 

If the coaches feel Freeney will be a positive addition, they should go for it.    

[krunk]

44 minutes ago, Myles said:

That's where we disagree.  I'm not much of a fan of seeing what happens and then fixing it.   Especially when we have a pretty good idea of how it will be.    Seeing what happens didn't work well for the O-line last year.   

 

If the coaches feel Freeney will be a positive addition, they should go for it.    

 

How exactly do you know what level of fixing that needs to be done?  You haven't even seen the team or any of these young guys play?  Secondly nobody is rushing to sign a 36 year old pass rusher or else somebody would jump on Freeney right now.  He's going to be available all through out the preseason so what's with the rush?  It's no more than a 1 year fix at best and who knows if the numbers will even be the same.

 

When he was here with us he only got 4-5 sacks in this system and I don't believe his numbers got anywhere close to 7 or 8 sacks with San Diego either but I have to go back and check.  Now that I have checked his numbers with San Diego were 0.5 sacks and 3.5 sacks respectively which are closer to the figures he had in Indy playing as a 3-4 OLB. It's no guarantee overall.

 

I think the more realistic thing that is likely to happen and will help the team the most overall is for our offense to perform like we know it should.  That's more likely to happen before the addition of  Freeney saves the day and turns us into a Super Bowl team.

 

I'm not against signing Freeney if it's clear that none of the young guys can play, but we don't know that yet.  Newsome helped give us some good push in his first year and some of these young guys we have on the team now I think are better than Newsome.  If we find that to be the case then they need to play.  Not sit on the bench behind Freeney. 

[krunk]

51 minutes ago, Myles said:

That's where we disagree.  I'm not much of a fan of seeing what happens and then fixing it.   Especially when we have a pretty good idea of how it will be.    Seeing what happens didn't work well for the O-line last year.   

 

If the coaches feel Freeney will be a positive addition, they should go for it.    

 

If this was a young pass rusher we were talking about then I'd say sign the guy immediately.  However this is not a young guy we're talking about.  This is  a guy that most teams are going to take their time with before they sign. Very strong chance he'll be available. There are other options to be explored at this stage of the game as well.  No need to be in a panic at this point to me.  You're entitled to your side of things though.

[krunk]

Arizona had the #2 ranked offense in the league last year with 489 points so that aids in giving the defense more pass rushing opportunities.  I'm sure that also was a big factor in Freeneys sack numbers increasing.  If we can get our offense back to where it needs to be I bet our sack numbers will increase too.  With or without Freeney.

[CR91]

http://www.stampedeblue.com/2016/5/21/11729234/report-colts-have-had-no-discussions-with-dwight-freeney

[oldunclemark]

  You can sign Freeney and develop young pass rushers.

  But if they dont want to, they dont want to.

Sounds like there's other issues

Obviously  If we make the playoffs THIS season, who would be better on 3rd down?

Freeney or an undrafted free agent we're trying to develop

 

[akcolt]

On May 19, 2016 at 5:25 AM, Myles said:

That's where we disagree.  I'm not much of a fan of seeing what happens and then fixing it.   Especially when we have a pretty good idea of how it will be.    Seeing what happens didn't work well for the O-line last year.   

 

If the coaches feel Freeney will be a positive addition, they should go for it.    

I think we are seeing how the Colts feel about Freeney. We aren't interested right now. I believe Freeney will be handled just as Krunk suggested.

 

We will see what we can get out of Maggitt Bates and/or Thompson in the preseason. We will look at Okine and I wouldn't be suprised to see McNary get a look. He is Army's all team leader in sacks. Sio and Slyvestre both have experience off the edge. They could get a look too. 

 

The thing with Freeney is he will cost us a young guy somewhere on the roster. A young guy that could contribute on ST's and be gaining valuable experience. A young guy with a future on the team.

 

If Freeney was the difference maker some believe him to be him to be he'd have a job. There are 31 other teams taking the wait and see approach too.

 

I hope it doesn't come to that myself. I hope Mathis comes back and consistently get pressure this year. I'd love to see at least one of the youngsters step it up. Hopefully the young guys play so well we cut Cole. That's overly optimistic I know but I don't think Freeney's coming barring injury. 

 

[JPFolks]

On 5/16/2016 at 10:14 PM, RockThatBlue said:

http://www.stampedeblue.com/2016/5/15/11679598/vontae-davis-wants-colts-to-sign-dwight-freeney

 

 

I am sure if he's willing to give back some of his cash they'd consider spending it on Freeney.