Jerry Hughes

[Mouthfire]

For what it's worth:

http://www.stampedeblue.com/2011/8/3/2341637/2011-colts-training-camp-notes-from-the-the-second-day

Notes from yesterday's practices:

I personally take this with a HUGE grain of salt, but it seems Jerry Hughes has looked good in camp. He's in shape and looks quick. He's working with the second team defense, and he was, by several accounts, blowing by Jeff Linkenbach.

[John Waylon]

Notes from yesterday's practices:

I personally take this with a HUGE grain of salt, but it seems Jerry Hughes has looked good in camp. He's in shape and looks quick. He's working with the second team defense, and he was, by several accounts, blowing by Jeff Linkenbach.

Eh, I'm not impressed. I was blowing by linkenbach.

And I wasn't even there.

[Jonathan24]

Eh, I'm not impressed. I was blowing by linkenbach.

And I wasn't even there.

lol john is hilarious

[Mouthfire]

Eh, I'm not impressed. I was blowing by linkenbach.

And I wasn't even there.

Bwuahahah....

[19colt]

Were they in pads?

If not /THREAD OVER

[Coffeedrinker]

Eh, I'm not impressed. I was blowing by linkenbach.

And I wasn't even there.

That is pretty funny.

Back on topic.

I don't know why anyone would be surprised. In his limited playing time last year Hughes showed the skills you'd expect from a first round draft pick. This year, feeling more comfortable with the D he should look really good.

[Coffeedrinker]

Eh, I'm not impressed. I was blowing by linkenbach.

And I wasn't even there.

That is pretty funny.

Back on topic.

I don't know why anyone would be surprised. In his limited playing time last year Hughes showed the skills you'd expect from a first round draft pick. This year, feeling more comfortable with the D he should look really good.

[Mouthfire]

That is pretty funny.

Back on topic.

I don't know why anyone would be surprised. In his limited playing time last year Hughes showed the skills you'd expect from a first round draft pick. This year, feeling more comfortable with the D he should look really good.

For some reason, all the fans seem down on him cause he's a first round pick. It always take D-linemen at least a year to really make an impact.

[coltsrule41]

unless your talking about ndamakoung suh

[unitaswestand]

unless your talking about ndamakoung suh

Agreed. Suh is the exception. I remember the beatingg Moali took last off season. He was 4x better last season then as a rookie and was consistently in the backfield. Now, he has to do a better job of tackling when he gets there!! hahaha. But he got better. I expect Hughes to have 6 sacks this year in spot duty and do well.

[Coffeedrinker]

For some reason, all the fans seem down on him cause he's a first round pick. It always take D-linemen at least a year to really make an impact.

I think if Freeney or Mathis had missed a significant amount of time last years Hughes would have made an impact as a rookie. But most fans seem to forget that he was backing up two Pro-Bowl DEs who did not take many plays off.

[Jason_]

Don't know if they were playing in pads but there's no way there was any contact...at least not on Kick return practice. Otherwise Gonzo would be on IR already. lol (just a light-hearted joke folks...if he can stay healthy I'm sure he will have a breakout year and there's nothing I would like to see more than just that )

[Wyld1]

That is pretty funny.

Back on topic.

I don't know why anyone would be surprised. In his limited playing time last year Hughes showed the skills you'd expect from a first round draft pick. This year, feeling more comfortable with the D he should look really good.

That is pretty much my take on it as well...I look forward to watching him get some playing time this year and showing us all what he is capable of.

[John Waylon]

What little was saw of Hughes last season he seemed to do pretty well for himself. I seen him get planted on his butt once, but most of the time he was quick and active, and he nearly got a sack against the Titans, as I remember.

I think a lot of people have issues with him because he's a first round pick who never saw the field last year, and in their minds they equate that with "He didn't play because he sucks" and I don't think that's the case. While I don't agree with the way we handled Hughes last year, by no means do I think that it indicates he is a bust...

I think he'll do really well on the downs he's in on this year.

[Hawkeyecolt]

Hughes just got blown up against the run in preseason and he looked lost. His lack of effort in attempting to tackle Cromartie on the kickoff was awful. Hopefully, the kid can turn it around, because there is a definite burst around the corner, but he looked completely over matched the little we got to see him last year.

[Superman]

What little was saw of Hughes last season he seemed to do pretty well for himself. I seen him get planted on his butt once, but most of the time he was quick and active, and he nearly got a sack against the Titans, as I remember.

I think a lot of people have issues with him because he's a first round pick who never saw the field last year, and in their minds they equate that with "He didn't play because he sucks" and I don't think that's the case. While I don't agree with the way we handled Hughes last year, by no means do I think that it indicates he is a bust...

I think he'll do really well on the downs he's in on this year.

Agreed.

[Camio]

I think a lot of people have issues with him because he's a first round pick who never saw the field last year, and in their minds they equate that with "He didn't play because he sucks" and I don't think that's the case. While I don't agree with the way we handled Hughes last year, by no means do I think that it indicates he is a bust...

The issue people can/could have on Hughes isnt Hughes himself. He's irrelevant, just like Brown. The issue is, why waste a #1 on a backup?

Regardless of whether Brown was gonna be better than Addai or not, that was irrelevant. The facts are/were:

-Colts are a pass offense first

-Addai isnt a bad runner at all

-Chances of Brown being better than Addai at PBK were of about 0% considering Addai's 1 of the top 3 better PBK backs in the league, something the Colts offense has been relying on for the last decade

Moving on to Hughes, drafting him in the first round didnt made any sense when you consider the following:

-2 pro-bowlers at DE already on the team, both in their prime, neither having shown injuries issues in the past(aka, missing a year or so and requiring knees surgeries or something)

-NCAA caliber DTs on the roster

-weak tackles (LT and RT)

The drafting of Hughes would've made sense if:

-Either Mathis or Freeney were just average DEs and Hughes was exactly what the Colts needed, which in the current situation, isnt the case

-Had the Colts not have other glaring holes on the roster (DT, LT, RT), getting a 1st rounder at DE to backup 2 pro-bowlers would've made some sense

-Either Freeney or Mathis would've shown, thru the years, to have been very prone to injuries (having required surgeries and stuff, aka, The Eraser)

-Either Freeney or Mathis would've been 33-34 and the drafting of Hughes would've been to replace either aging DE in a year or 2

What happened is nothing mentionned above. The only way this pick makes sense is because they have been thinking of letting Mathis walf after the upcoming season which would be foolish.

In the past, when I've wrote this on the old Colts board (as Brown and Hughes were drafted), all people would say is "in BP we trust" and the old references of "PM over Leaf" and "Edge over Ricky".

Really, thats the only argument?

[Camio]

Notes from yesterday's practices:

I personally take this with a HUGE grain of salt, but it seems Jerry Hughes has looked good in camp. He's in shape and looks quick. He's working with the second team defense, and he was, by several accounts, blowing by Jeff Linkenbach.

So were players from nearly all the teams the Colts played last year

[Jason_]

You know what you said in your first post lol

All very good points, but perhaps they drafted Hughes expecting to not re-sign Mathis when his contract comes up. If Hughes comes into form and Mathis doesn't get re-signed then it was a smart move. It's very clear that DE is probably the most important position on defense to the Colt's front office so bringing in Mathis' replacement a couple years early to let him learn and adjust to the pro game. If this is not the scenario then I agree with you completely. Oh and I'm not at all saying I want to see Mathis leave. I'm just speculating that this might have been the rationale in drafting Hughes with a 1st round pick when there were other needs to address.

Similar to when they moved up in the draft to bring in Ugoh. Some people questioned the move since we already had a solid starter at LT in Tarik Glenn, but the FO wanted to bring in Glenn's replacement ahead of time instead of waiting until Glenn actually moved on. I think probably the biggest reason Ugoh wound up being a bust for us was the fact that Glenn retired before the next season so Ugoh never had a chance to learn behind Glenn as the FO had planned. Instead he was forced into the role before he was ready and he crumbled.

As for Donald Brown...I agree with you completely.

[HitStick21]

At the time, we can safely assume Polian drafted Hughes because he was the BPA. We all know how we draft. That being said, he could have been the replacement for Mathis. However, as of training camp TWO days ago, Polian was quoted as follows:

"Next year our priorities go like this: We need to pay Mathis, Reggie, Pierre..."

That sounds like a man who is going to use Jerry has a heckuva replacement when our duo take breathers or trade-bait. Also, the reason for drafting him can be simple as this: After the Super Bowl, Polian was angry not only with the line play but the lack of pass rush after Freeney went down. He could've simply drafted off of emotion.

Many ways to look at it, but barring injury, Mathis is back next year.

[Coffeedrinker]

Hughes was drafted because the Colts need(ed) an effective 3rd rusher because they had just learned a couple of months before what happens when you lose one of the Frathis brothers.

[Razgriz18]

I agree with the emotion comment... I think this may have been a combination of BPA and knee-jerk. Didn't pan out well at first, but having a good DE to spell Freeney/Mathis can't be that bad-emphasis on "good"...

[Jason_]

I highly doubt it was a drafting on emotion. I think Hughes replacing Mathis was much more likely and even remember hearing reports to that effect during and shortly after that draft. I would say more likely is the recent reports of re-signing Mathis being top priority may have more to do with the coaching staff and FO determining that Hughes isn't going to work out to be the replacement for Mathis that they had originally hoped he would be.

[indy_nick]

Wasn't Raheem Brock a free agent the year we drafted Hughes? I think his number one priority was to solidify his role as a backup. later on down the road, if he matured enough, he could replace Mathis. I still think his initial need for the team was a solid backup and if you look at it from that perspective he has been doing pretty well. I expect a lot more playing time from him this year as we are deep on the D line now. I expect a good rotation of fresh bodies. My only question is will he ever be worth the first round pick we spent on him? Only time will tell until his rookie contract has expired.

[John Waylon]

Hughes replacing Mathis is a terrible idea, IMO. Freeney is getting older, and we have a better future with Mathis than we do with Freeney, IMO.

Everyone seems to think that Freeney's presence has given Mathis his production.

What a load of crap.

Mathis is one of the 5 best DE's in the league, IMO, and in the past 3 seasons he's outproduced Freeney, IMO.

[BlueCrew]

John, I completely agree with you. It seems like the media always says "two pro bowler ends" but when they break it down it's always "freeney, freeney, freeney"... It's like how a few years after Marvin retired and we've had the emergence of Pierre, Gonzo, Collie and White, that now Peyton may of "made Marvin" and some people have even questioned Reggie! Total B.S.

Just cause a peanut butter and jelly sandwich tastes great doesn't mean that the jelly by itself is worse off.... Okay, so that was an awful example, but that's all I got.

[John Dee]

I have listened to several interviews on Hughes over the last 6 months and most feel he was just not strong enough to play big minutes right away. Lets hope he hit the weights hard in the off season.

[John Dee]

Hughes replacing Mathis is a terrible idea, IMO. Freeney is getting older, and we have a better future with Mathis than we do with Freeney, IMO.

Everyone seems to think that Freeney's presence has given Mathis his production.

What a load of crap.

Mathis is one of the 5 best DE's in the league, IMO, and in the past 3 seasons he's outproduced Freeney, IMO.

This is what I think we will see..

Anderson and one of Dwight or Rob M starting at DE on first and second down. And with Dwight and Robert both on the field every third down. Rotating in Hughes and Foster also.

Dwight and Mathis cannot keep playing all these downs. But hopefully the D will be so good this season that we will see plenty of 3n Outs....

That would make everything very simple.

[Camio]

All very good points, but perhaps they drafted Hughes expecting to not re-sign Mathis when his contract comes up. If Hughes comes into form and Mathis doesn't get re-signed then it was a smart move. It's very clear that DE is probably the most important position on defense to the Colt's front office so bringing in Mathis' replacement a couple years early to let him learn and adjust to the pro game. If this is not the scenario then I agree with you completely. Oh and I'm not at all saying I want to see Mathis leave. I'm just speculating that this might have been the rationale in drafting Hughes with a 1st round pick when there were other needs to address.

Similar to when they moved up in the draft to bring in Ugoh. Some people questioned the move since we already had a solid starter at LT in Tarik Glenn, but the FO wanted to bring in Glenn's replacement ahead of time instead of waiting until Glenn actually moved on. I think probably the biggest reason Ugoh wound up being a bust for us was the fact that Glenn retired before the next season so Ugoh never had a chance to learn behind Glenn as the FO had planned. Instead he was forced into the role before he was ready and he crumbled.

As for Donald Brown...I agree with you completely.

I hope they dont sign Wayne and let Mathis walk. Mathis is far more important than Wayne is. Thats, based on the position each plays and also the skill of each players. I can live with Wayne receiving a new contract after this year of say 2 or 3 years, but based on his play in the last 2 years, it looks like he'll be good for another 3 years max (counting this year) and thats reaching a bit, seeing how he's slowed down in the last 2 years. I'm not referring here to stats but anyone who's been watching the Colts games last few years can easily see Wayne has lost a step, something that cant be said about Mathis.

The Ugoh example is an accurate one and I personnally never questionned that pick because of Glenn's age at the time and the position he played. He had been talking about retirement for about 2 years already, always saying he didnt envisioned himself playing 'till his middle 30s.

Mathis was 29 (or so?) when Hughes was drafted. Considering how pathetic the DT spot has been for the last 5 years or so, I still dont get, to this day, why they didnt either drafted a DT at the spot they were, traded up to get one of the top DT in the draft, traded down to get multiples picks and therefore, pick a DT or 2, along with a speedy DE (I'm prety sure Hughes would've fallen to the 2nd round anyway) or simply trade that #1 (or a 2nd or 3rd) for an established/proven DT in the league.

As for Brown, well... As the ad say: what can Brown do for you?

Apparently, he cant run the ball for you

[Camio]

Hughes was drafted because the Colts need(ed) an effective 3rd rusher because they had just learned a couple of months before what happens when you lose one of the Frathis brothers.

That part has often been what some people have awnsered me (basically the only thing) when I kept questionning the drafting of Hughes in the 1st round 1.5 year ago.

Where this stops making sense tho is: Is either Freeney or Mathis injury prone? The awnser is no. They could get injured this year but thats irrelevant. The question is, 'till now, has either players been having health issues.

If the reasonning is "but we saw what happen when 1 is missing", then why dont BP draft a QB? After all, what happens if PM goes down? The offense lost a step when they lost their best offensive player (besides PM) last season (Clark). Why didnt BP drafted a TE in the first round in the last draft? Of course it wouldnt have made any sense. Now, apply that same logic to the DE. Why did it made any sense to draft a DE in the first round to backup 2 pro bowlers in their prime just because, Freeney got injured late in a season in which the Colts got to the SB?

It makes no sense, period.

What makes some sense however is, considering how bad the DT position has been for the Colts for the past decade (baring 1.5 year: Simon/Booger), why doesnt it make sense to fix the issue once and for all?

The issue years after years have been the same on D: no push up the middle from the DTs giving the option for opposing QBs to simply step up in the pocket once Frathis get around the edges (Pats began donig this vs Colts years ago and its been copied by alot of teams since then) and pathetic DT play vs the run, which means LBs and safeties often serve as 1st line of defense (instead of 2nd and 3rd line of defense). This means more injuries to those undersized players and also, since the Colts organization dont believe in paying OLBs (I have np with that philosophy btw as long as its done properly), we get a revolving door there and the issue is the same yearly: OLBs constantly in the wrong gaps.

Get NFL caliber DTs in the middle and you'll see this:

-that Frathis will suddenly become even more effective

-that even if 1 of the Frathis duet gets injured, the D will still be somewhat effective because, there will still be push up the middle due to competent DTs

After all, how many Ds in the NFL have 2 pro bowlers DEs in their prime? The awnser is, only 1. That goes to show you there's more to a D than DEs.

Conversely, each good D in the league has a great DT (for 3-4) or a great DT and another above average DT (for 4-3) in their lineup.

This shows you can have a good/great D without having dominant DEs. I dont know of a good/great D with crappy DT play however.

[DallasClarkrules]

Agreed. Suh is the exception. I remember the beatingg Moali took last off season. He was 4x better last season then as a rookie and was consistently in the backfield. Now, he has to do a better job of tackling when he gets there!! hahaha. But he got better. I expect Hughes to have 6 sacks this year in spot duty and do well.

I'm sorry, am I hallucinating or something? Suh is the exception? anyone remember a certain Dwight Freeney's 2002 rookie season, with 13.0 sacks and a rookie record 9 Forced Fumbles?

I'm surprised no-one brought up that, considering it's more relevant to the discussion than Suh (though Suh is A exception, but not THE exception).

[Mouthfire]

The issue people can/could have on Hughes isnt Hughes himself. He's irrelevant, just like Brown. The issue is, why waste a #1 on a backup?

Regardless of whether Brown was gonna be better than Addai or not, that was irrelevant. The facts are/were:

-Colts are a pass offense first

-Addai isnt a bad runner at all

-Chances of Brown being better than Addai at PBK were of about 0% considering Addai's 1 of the top 3 better PBK backs in the league, something the Colts offense has been relying on for the last decade

Moving on to Hughes, drafting him in the first round didnt made any sense when you consider the following:

-2 pro-bowlers at DE already on the team, both in their prime, neither having shown injuries issues in the past(aka, missing a year or so and requiring knees surgeries or something)

-NCAA caliber DTs on the roster

-weak tackles (LT and RT)

The drafting of Hughes would've made sense if:

-Either Mathis or Freeney were just average DEs and Hughes was exactly what the Colts needed, which in the current situation, isnt the case

-Had the Colts not have other glaring holes on the roster (DT, LT, RT), getting a 1st rounder at DE to backup 2 pro-bowlers would've made some sense

-Either Freeney or Mathis would've shown, thru the years, to have been very prone to injuries (having required surgeries and stuff, aka, The Eraser)

-Either Freeney or Mathis would've been 33-34 and the drafting of Hughes would've been to replace either aging DE in a year or 2

What happened is nothing mentionned above. The only way this pick makes sense is because they have been thinking of letting Mathis walf after the upcoming season which would be foolish.

In the past, when I've wrote this on the old Colts board (as Brown and Hughes were drafted), all people would say is "in BP we trust" and the old references of "PM over Leaf" and "Edge over Ricky".

Really, thats the only argument?

Re: drafting Hughes, I pretty much agree with what was already said. With the draft boards at the time, Hughes was easily the BPA, projected to go in the early-mid 1st round. I don't remember exactly, but I don't think there were any 1st round caliber DT/OTs still available at the time.

[21isSuperman]

At the time, we can safely assume Polian drafted Hughes because he was the BPA. We all know how we draft. That being said, he could have been the replacement for Mathis. However, as of training camp TWO days ago, Polian was quoted as follows:

"Next year our priorities go like this: We need to pay Mathis, Reggie, Pierre..."

That sounds like a man who is going to use Jerry has a heckuva replacement when our duo take breathers or trade-bait. Also, the reason for drafting him can be simple as this: After the Super Bowl, Polian was angry not only with the line play but the lack of pass rush after Freeney went down. He could've simply drafted off of emotion.

Many ways to look at it, but barring injury, Mathis is back next year.

I can't think that's what happened. Very rarely is a guy successful when he does things out of emotion. For example, Dan Snyder is crazy so he spent $150 million on DeAngelo Hall and Haynesworth. On the other hand, teams like the Colts and Pats make sure to keep things in perspective and do what is best for the team rather than getting caught up in media hype or free agent frenzy. I still have faith in Hughes

[Camio]

Re: drafting Hughes, I pretty much agree with what was already said. With the draft boards at the time, Hughes was easily the BPA, projected to go in the early-mid 1st round. I don't remember exactly, but I don't think there were any 1st round caliber DT/OTs still available at the time.

Then, if that DE spot wasnt realy a position of need for the Colts, why not either trade up to get a DT, trade down to get multiple picks (and therefore, maybe a DE and DT?) or simply go get a DT via UFA or trade for it using a 1st, 2nd or 3rd.

[NYColt]

Linkenbach actually played well in limited time at LT and RT

I think what we all mentally associate him with is that Chargers game where he was EPIC FAIL

But playing the OT spots he was great - don't forget alot of us wanted him at RT over Diem

[Coffeedrinker]

That part has often been what some people have awnsered me (basically the only thing) when I kept questionning the drafting of Hughes in the 1st round 1.5 year ago.

Where this stops making sense tho is: Is either Freeney or Mathis injury prone? The awnser is no. They could get injured this year but thats irrelevant. The question is, 'till now, has either players been having health issues.

Injury prone? No but it wasn't the first time they had been missed in the playoffs and each time it had an effect on the Colts. Polian even stated after that they had tried to draft the 3rd DE for a few years it just had not worked out until Hughes.

If the reasonning is "but we saw what happen when 1 is missing", then why dont BP draft a QB? After all, what happens if PM goes down? The offense lost a step when they lost their best offensive player (besides PM) last season (Clark).

Different scenario. If Manning went down the entire offensive philosophy would change in addition to QB being the highest price position. So you need someone that can learn the playbook, be cheap and handle the change in offense. And we don't know, if Manning missed a significant amount of time one year the Colts may very well spend a high draft pick on a QB. So this scenario is bogus because it has not happened

Why didnt BP drafted a TE in the first round in the last draft? Of course it wouldnt have made any sense. Now, apply that same logic to the DE.

Because they already had Tamme on the roster. And that is why they drafted Tamme and kept him on the roster as Clark's back-up. If the Colts had a starting quality, pass rushing DE on the roster they probably would not have drafted Hughes. So this scenario is bogus because it's not similar at all.

Why did it made any sense to draft a DE in the first round to backup 2 pro bowlers in their prime just because, Freeney got injured late in a season in which the Colts got to the SB?

It makes no sense, period.

As I said above, because 2009 wasn't the first time it happened.

What makes some sense however is, considering how bad the DT position has been for the Colts for the past decade (baring 1.5 year: Simon/Booger), why doesnt it make sense to fix the issue once and for all?

I would guess it's because they didn't think any DT available would fix the issue once and for all.

The issue years after years have been the same on D: no push up the middle from the DTs giving the option for opposing QBs to simply step up in the pocket once Frathis get around the edges (Pats began donig this vs Colts years ago and its been copied by alot of teams since then) and pathetic DT play vs the run, which means LBs and safeties often serve as 1st line of defense (instead of 2nd and 3rd line of defense). This means more injuries to those undersized players and also, since the Colts organization dont believe in paying OLBs (I have np with that philosophy btw as long as its done properly), we get a revolving door there and the issue is the same yearly: OLBs constantly in the wrong gaps.

Umm, are you really saying that no QBs stepped up into the pocket against the Colts before Brady started doing it? And it's been discussed many times on the message boards... the Colts have done more things out of the ordinary to try and fix the DT position and it hasn't worked out. It's frustrating but it's not from lack of trying. They've signed a high profile free agent, spent high draft picks, signed guys of questionable character, made in season trades (completed one and not the other). Then it looks like they have the DT situation settled, Moala up and coming from the draft before. Muir had a very good 2009 campaign and Mookie for the rotation. Then Muir takes a step back, Moala improves, and Mookie doesn't get in any better shape and is only good for 4 or 5 plays but is forced to play more because Muir digress.

Get NFL caliber DTs in the middle and you'll see this:

-that Frathis will suddenly become even more effective

-that even if 1 of the Frathis duet gets injured, the D will still be somewhat effective because, there will still be push up the middle due to competent DTs

Perhaps. But teams would still take primarily three step drops to get rid of the ball before anyone on the line can get there (this is why I think they signed Anderson to get those long arms above his 6'6" height and disrupt some of those passes). Now, instead of being somewhat effective, the DEs can still be effective because they spent a first round pick on a DE.

After all, how many Ds in the NFL have 2 pro bowlers DEs in their prime? The awnser is, only 1. That goes to show you there's more to a D than DEs.

But a lot of teams believe in stacking up on their strengths. Baltimore has been able to maintain a great D in large part because they always stack up at LB so if one goes down or they lose one to FA another can step in with very little, if any drop-off. Steelers has done the same thing with their LBers. Colts are doing it with their DE. They were in a position where there was no need to draft an immediate starter in the first round. They went with the BPA that filled a need and would be in position to take over if; one of the players got injured or one was not given a new contract. Now if the Colts don't sign Mathis after this season, rather than relying on a rookie draft pick to be a starter they will have a 3 year veteran. Makes perfect sense.

Conversely, each good D in the league has a great DT (for 3-4) or a great DT and another above average DT (for 4-3) in their lineup.

This shows you can have a good/great D without having dominant DEs. I dont know of a good/great D with crappy DT play however.

I agree a DT is important and there have been a few I would have liked the Colts to have drafted. But I only have about 1/10th the information that an organization has when making their decision. I'm not going to sit here and pretend that if they had done things my way the weaknesses would have been solved.

[cmgww]

Oh give it a rest already! He was a rook last year playing behind a Pro Bowler in Mathis and a future Hall of Famer in Freeney....Neither is getting any younger. He'll rotate in this year and probably be fine.

[Mouthfire]

Then, if that DE spot wasnt realy a position of need for the Colts, why not either trade up to get a DT, trade down to get multiple picks (and therefore, maybe a DE and DT?) or simply go get a DT via UFA or trade for it using a 1st, 2nd or 3rd.

DE was a need. If you pay attention to Polian's quotes over the years, he's unsuccessfully been looking for a 3rd pass-rushing DE for years. Drafting at the end of the 1st round every year will do that.

So when you're picking #31, and arguably the best pass-rushing DE of the draft falls in your lap... you pick him up. I can't blame BP for doing that.

[Camio]

Umm, are you really saying that no QBs stepped up into the pocket against the Colts before Brady started doing it?

In 05 and 06, that tactic didnt worked as well vs the Colts. Thats the 2 years where the Colts had the most production out of the DT position.

And it's been discussed many times on the message boards... the Colts have done more things out of the ordinary to try and fix the DT position and it hasn't worked out. It's frustrating but it's not from lack of trying. They've signed a high profile free agent, spent high draft picks, signed guys of questionable character, made in season trades (completed one and not the other).

Since 2000, only 2 DTs were drafted in the first 2 rounds by the Colts (Tripplett 02 and Moala 09). Besides that, Simon and Booger were acquired in 05-06 and both had injuries/weight issues and thats why they were dealt.

Thats the only things they did to really try and fix the situation besides what happened since 2 days or so. Tripplett never was a great DT but he had his best year and started playing good (or rather, looked good) the minute he was playing next to an overweight/out of shape Simon. Check that week 1 game vs the Ravens, Tripplett looked like a good DT in that game.

The opposing teams couldnt play Simon 1 on 1 that year so they had to double him pretty often and when they did, either Mathis or Freeney were 1 on 1. Thats a win-win situation for the Colts.

You dont have that with the DTs currently on the roster.

You're making it sound like BP tried to fix the siatuation with all kinds of moves and picks. It just never happened.

But a lot of teams believe in stacking up on their strengths. Baltimore has been able to maintain a great D in large part because they always stack up at LB so if one goes down or they lose one to FA another can step in with very little, if any drop-off. Steelers has done the same thing with their LBers. Colts are doing it with their DE. They were in a position where there was no need to draft an immediate starter in the first round. They went with the BPA that filled a need and would be in position to take over if; one of the players got injured or one was not given a new contract. Now if the Colts don't sign Mathis after this season, rather than relying on a rookie draft pick to be a starter they will have a 3 year veteran. Makes perfect sense.

Lewis himself was complaining about 6 years ago about being doubled/tripled on every single plays (obviously, he was exagerating) and what did the Ravens do? They drafted Ngata and that fixed the D. The Steelers have Hampton. The Buccs had Sapp. The Panthers in 03-04 has Jenkins. The Bears, in their best years, had a dominant Harris. All are DTs.

[John Waylon]

The Bears, in their best years, had a dominant Harris.

You're getting me all hot and bothered... Stop it.