Keith Bulluck On Freeney: "he Ain't Standing Up"

[Coltswarriors]

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/post/_/id/33963/freeney-friend-he-wants-to-stay-an-end

A close friend of Dwight Freeney's doesn’t expect the Colts defensive end to go for the idea of standing up and working as a 3-4 outside linebacker in a new defensive scheme.

Former Titans and Giants linebacker Keith Bulluck, a long-time friend of Freeney’s, said his pal wants to continue to play as an end. The two recently vacationed together in Australia and New Zealand.

I asked Bulluck for Freeney's thinking about the posibility of standing up in a 3-4.

“Dwight’s thinking is, he ain’t standing up,” Bulluck told us on the Nashville radio show "The Midday 180." “Dwight’s had his hand in the dirt for 11 years, now all of a sudden in Year 12 you want to ask him to stand up. I don’t know if that’s his answer, but that’s probably not far from it. I’m sure he’d do whatever he could do to help the team.”

Freeney’s counterpart at defensive end, Robert Mathis, is heading for unrestricted free agency.

There has been some speculation that if the new regime of general manager Ryan Grigson and coach Chuck Pagano really wants to clean house and start fresh, they could even part ways with Freeney. Heading into the final year of his six-year contract, his cap number is slated to be more than $19 million. The team could save more than $14 million of it by cutting him.

Bulluck doesn’t think Freeney is expecting that.

“For any indication I get, he plans on being a Colt this football season,” Bulluck said. “But we haven’t really talked too much about that.”

[Larry Horseman]

Just saw this too. If I were DFree, I'd be watching it because he is set to lose $14 million if the Colts cut him. There is no way he stays for his current salary and I do wonder how he will fit whatever scheme changes come on D...

[Coltswarriors]

I really don't want to lose Freeney & the possibility of Manning too. Two of the most important football players in Indy the last 10 years.

Hopefully there is some way Freeney is willing to rework his contract.

[IndyTrav]

Maybe he thinks he'll be exposed as a non-tackler.

O wait............

[21isSuperman]

Just saw this too. If I were DFree, I'd be watching it because he is set to lose $14 million if the Colts cut him. There is no way he stays for his current salary and I do wonder how he will fit whatever scheme changes come on D...

Even if the Colts do cut him, there will be many teams willing to pay for him. I'm sure Manusky and Pagano will find ways to use Freeney. I said this in another thread, even if you're an offense than runs 5 WR sets and is pass first, if you get Adrian Peterson on your team, you will put him into the gameplan. Same thing goes for Freeney. He is such a talented player that I'm sure the coaches will find some way to use him and utilize his skills.

[Larry Horseman]

Even if the Colts do cut him, there will be many teams willing to pay for him. I'm sure Manusky and Pagano will find ways to use Freeney. I said this in another thread, even if you're an offense than runs 5 WR sets and is pass first, if you get Adrian Peterson on your team, you will put him into the gameplan. Same thing goes for Freeney. He is such a talented player that I'm sure the coaches will find some way to use him and utilize his skills.

Totally agree, but I do think he will have to rework his deal by signing an extension. There is no way the Colts pay him $19 million next year, with $14 of that in base salary. As has been said elsewhere, his contract was set-up to be renegotiated this year. I just wonder if they want to invest in him for another 4 or 5 years if they truly do want to change schemes.

[21isSuperman]

Totally agree, but I do think he will have to rework his deal by signing an extension. There is no way the Colts pay him $19 million next year, with $14 of that in base salary. As has been said elsewhere, his contract was set-up to be renegotiated this year. I just wonder if they want to invest in him for another 4 or 5 years if they truly do want to change schemes.

I agree. It would be nice to be able to change that cap hit. Polian had a tendency to make players the highest paid at their position; it's fun to brag about, but not fun to try to work around

[CollieFangirl]

Hurts to even suggest, but would teams be willing to do a trade for Freeney? I'd love to keep him if we're going to stay 4-3 or hybrid, but if we are, like some think, going to a full out 3-4 that he won't adapt to, a trade may be best for both.

[Superman]

Cutting him would be a big mistake. That's really worst case scenario. Would be better to keep him even as a 25 down a game player, then let him walk in 2013, rather than cutting him. Best case scenario is to restructure and extend him, and fit him into Pagano's defense. Middle of the road is to trade him for a solid pick to a team that's willing to extend him.

[JSDiamond]

With the league favoring the pass, an all 3-4 seems like a bad idea to me. Look at the current world champs. The mvp should have gone to their front four (IMO). A hybrid situation might work. If not, then I agree that Freeney may be headed down the home stretch. It would be a sad thing to see him go, though. Scheming for him and Mathis gives opposing o-lines nightmares.

[chad72]

Middle of the road is to trade him for a solid pick to a team that's willing to extend him.

That would definitely be a "Richard Seymour" like move. Bills and Dolphins both moving to a 4-3 back from a 3-4, and suddenly the market for 4-3 players has grown in the AFC with the Browns changing to a 4-3 last year. We might be able to get that late 1st rounder from the Browns if we ask about it??? Given how Pagano used the term "hybrid", Freeney very likely stays, IMO.

[presto123]

Well....it's funny he said the exact opposite on an ESPN interview show at SB time. They asked him about playing LB and he said no problem. He would do whatever to make D better.

[Superman]

That would definitely be a "Richard Seymour" like move. Bills and Dolphins both moving to a 4-3 back from a 3-4, and suddenly the market for 4-3 players has grown in the AFC with the Browns changing to a 4-3 last year. We might be able to get that late 1st rounder from the Browns if we ask about it??? Given how Pagano used the term "hybrid", Freeney very likely stays, IMO.

I agree, but I wonder in what capacity. If he's only going to be used as a three-point rusher, then we'll have to use the four man front pretty extensively to get our money's worth out of him, especially if he's really adamant about not playing from a two-point stance. And honestly, I wouldn't blame him for not wanting to make that kind of adjustment. He's good at what he does, one of the best. Having him play in space would seem to me like a bad idea. I've always said I think Mathis is more suited to playing OLB than Freeney is. He's a great player and a great athlete, but that's one heck of a transition to make.

[Smitto]

Money talks, freeney may not be happy to stand up but he will if he's still on the team

[betheafan41]

Didnt pagano say he was going to look at what he has on defense and the guys he has hes going to find the best way to use them, to where they can use their ability best and not try to change their style of play? i could be wrong. so if anyone knows for sure i would deff. like to know lol .

[BProland85]

Hurts to even suggest, but would teams be willing to do a trade for Freeney? I'd love to keep him if we're going to stay 4-3 or hybrid, but if we are, like some think, going to a full out 3-4 that he won't adapt to, a trade may be best for both.

I think there is a good chance we trade Freeney since he is easily tradeable due to the fact that his contract can be extended by his future team. We could probably get a late 1st or a couple of 2nds for him. Id be in favor of losing his cap hit and gaining more young talent.

[21isSuperman]

With the league favoring the pass, an all 3-4 seems like a bad idea to me. Look at the current world champs. The mvp should have gone to their front four (IMO). A hybrid situation might work.

And the year before, a 3-4 team won it all, with their defense making key plays and getting turnovers. A 3-4 is actually better at defending the pass because you have an extra pass rusher that the offense can't identify and you have an extra LB on the field, who can drop back into coverage way better than a DE can

[ColtJ82]

And the year before, a 3-4 team won it all, with their defense making key plays and getting turnovers. A 3-4 is actually better at defending the pass because you have an extra pass rusher that the offense can't identify and you have an extra LB on the field, who can drop back into coverage way better than a DE can

With our personnel I would have to imagine that we will be zone blitzing in our 3-4 lineups, which will require one of our OLBs to cover the flats. This would be a wildly different concept for Freeney/Mathis. I can't see either of them backpedaling into coverage, so zone blitzing would make more sense.

Main reason I responded...IMO, the 3-4 is only a better pass defense if your DBs are good enough to hold coverage long enough for the rush to reach the QB.

[ColtJ82]

I am excited to see some of the variations the 3-4 allows for (1-5-5, 2-4-5, etc).

[Coltsagent]

A 3-4 does mean you automically go to 0 and 3 techniques. Many times can still use a 5 technique within a 3-4. Just because you go to a 3-4 it does not mean you dont need pass rushers.

I would actually like to see the D to get as creative as the O has been the past 10 years.

[jwilli69]

I think there is a good chance we trade Freeney since he is easily tradeable due to the fact that his contract can be extended by his future team. We could probably get a late 1st or a couple of 2nds for him. Id be in favor of losing his cap hit and gaining more young talent.

If you trade Freeney, doesn't the Colts absorb the 19 million cap hit? Another late first or high second would be very nice to have but a 19 mil hit would be offsetting. I may be wrong about the cap hit though so someone can correct that if it is.

[Andy]

A close friend of Dwight Freeney...... he isn't Dwight Freeney. I wanna hear what Dwight says, not Bullock.

[21isSuperman]

With our personnel I would have to imagine that we will be zone blitzing in our 3-4 lineups, which will require one of our OLBs to cover the flats. This would be a wildly different concept for Freeney/Mathis. I can't see either of them backpedaling into coverage, so zone blitzing would make more sense.

Main reason I responded...IMO, the 3-4 is only a better pass defense if your DBs are good enough to hold coverage long enough for the rush to reach the QB.

If you have an unidentified pass rusher or a guy like Suggs or Clay Matthews who doesn't have much trouble getting to the QB, you'll be fine. If you can execute the zone blitz well, you will be fine as well. It's all about scheming

[Wyld1]

And the year before, a 3-4 team won it all, with their defense making key plays and getting turnovers. A 3-4 is actually better at defending the pass because you have an extra pass rusher that the offense can't identify and you have an extra LB on the field, who can drop back into coverage way better than a DE can

Yep. The 3/4 came into vouge(sp?) back in the 80's to defend against the West Coast offense and Spread Offenses of the time...

[oldunclemark]

A 3-4 does mean you automically go to 0 and 3 techniques. Many times can still use a 5 technique within a 3-4. Just because you go to a 3-4 it does not mean you dont need pass rushers.

I would actually like to see the D to get as creative as the O has been the past 10 years.

You'r e getting deep here CA...

I'm thinking that 3-4 doesnt mean everydown.....'3-4' is the base....

On passing downs..you might have a 4-1-6 set

..on second down...you might have 3 linemen and 5 backs...

am I right?

[BlueShoe]

Keith Bulluck On Freeney: "he Ain't Standing Up"

http://espn.go.com/b...-to-stay-an-end

That's what I have been saying. I hope that if we use him as a Jack or RUSH LB that I am wrong.

[GoColts8818]

Hurts to even suggest, but would teams be willing to do a trade for Freeney? I'd love to keep him if we're going to stay 4-3 or hybrid, but if we are, like some think, going to a full out 3-4 that he won't adapt to, a trade may be best for both.

props to you for seeing this way back in February!