Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

RB Matt Jones


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Blueblood23 said:

I just don't see it the way you see it. The Colts haven't run the ball well so far and last year the had one game of over a hundred yards.

Not really true. Macks run well, Gore ran well against Pitt. Turbins had some nice gains. You speak as if the starting Oline has played an entire game. We got a 1000 yards last year with an 35 year old back. And the stats show there were a lot more yards on the table if we had given those carries to a younger back. The holes Mack had against Dallas were very nice. Especially one of them that Deyshaun Bond opened up for him. We are going to run a lot more this year from what Ballard has acquired so far.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

26 minutes ago, krunk said:

I'm just glad we have 3 different backs we can use if we want to get tough and pound the rock. This will also help us get our receivers open and be less predictable.

“pound the rock”  coltsforged? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I gotta say I really like the RB stable for this year. First two are the same as last year but Mack and Jones seem to be good upgrades over Toddman and Furgeson. I wonder how they are going to fair on special teams though. Gotta play there as third and fourth string.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stats and numbers look nice......but I'm from the DC area and Matt Jones is a fumbling machine and it became such a problem the skins was paying him to stay home......so I'm thinking best case they keep him at short yardage situation when giving Gore and break to lessen the time he has with the ball in his hands 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KB said:

I gotta say I really like the RB stable for this year. First two are the same as last year but Mack and Jones seem to be good upgrades over Toddman and Furgeson. I wonder how they are going to fair on special teams though. Gotta play there as third and fourth string.

I think Mack will be #2 and Turbin slides down to #3.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Blueblood23 said:

I just don't see it the way you see it. The Colts haven't run the ball well so far and last year the had one game of over a hundred yards.

 

I'm assuming you're talking about having only one time with an individual RB having over 100 yards and not the team as a whole?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DonnieDarko1023 said:

Stats and numbers look nice......but I'm from the DC area and Matt Jones is a fumbling machine and it became such a problem the skins was paying him to stay home......so I'm thinking best case they keep him at short yardage situation when giving Gore and break to lessen the time he has with the ball in his hands 

We have a pretty good RB coach in Jemal Singleton. They feel he can get Jones issues fixed. Also dont think he will carry the ball a whole bunch here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, J@son said:

 

I'm assuming you're talking about having only one time with an individual RB having over 100 yards and not the team as a whole?

You are right about the individual player. I do believe that rushing the football has been extremely difficult during the Pagano years here. They are nearly at the bottom of the league yearly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to be a debbie downer here, but there is a reason he was cut.  243 for 950 yards over the first two years of his career  is not quite the calling card of a dynamic back, particularly when you factor in the fumbling.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A8bil said:

Not to be a debbie downer here, but there is a reason he was cut.  243 for 950 yards over the first two years of his career  is not quite the calling card of a dynamic back, particularly when you factor in the fumbling.  

I think it's more to do with the fumbling than his stats... Those stats are pretty good. As for the fumbling it can be rectified ex: Tiki Barber 

Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW my buddy is a die hard skins fan and this was his take "matt jones was like equivalent to Joseph addai  he had a badass rookie year and then fell off. horrible ever since. power back that use to bulldoze linebackers. to a guy that dances in the backfield and doesn't cut up field well.  poor vision. but he might get better. not not crazy about him."

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, twfish said:

FWIW my buddy is a die hard skins fan and this was his take "matt jones was like equivalent to Joseph addai  he had a badass rookie year and then fell off. horrible ever since. power back that use to bulldoze linebackers. to a guy that dances in the backfield and doesn't cut up field well.  poor vision. but he might get better. not not crazy about him."

Joe Addai didn't fall off at all. He done exactly what was ask of him. He blocked for Manning and caught passes out of the backfield. Both of those he was very good at. Made a whole bunch of first downs. He should have been co MVP of the super bowl.

So IMO Joe was a bad example to use.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Yes he may play but if he drops the ball he will be sitting.

Yeah if he fumbles it wont be good. I do think we have a pretty good RB coach who can help to tighten him up in that area. Jones is the type of runner this offense has always lacked. Great size and speed, plus physical. And he can pass block.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Joe Addai didn't fall off at all. He done exactly what was ask of him. He blocked for Manning and caught passes out of the backfield. Both of those he was very good at. Made a whole bunch of first downs. He should have been co MVP of the super bowl.

So IMO Joe was a bad example to use.

The comparison didn't come out of my mouth. However Joe had a good rookie year and a good second year but he did decline heavily. I agree we likely wouldnt have acheived a superbowl with out him. But he nearly had as many yards in his first two season then he did the last 4 years and only had the 2 1k seasons. It may not have been as extreme of a drop off but a drop off none the less.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, twfish said:

The comparison didn't come out of my mouth. However Joe had a good rookie year and a good second year but he did decline heavily. I agree we likely wouldnt have acheived a superbowl with out him. But he nearly had as many yards in his first two season then he did the last 4 years and only had the 2 1k seasons. It may not have been as extreme of a drop off but a drop off none the less.

Joe's roll with the team changed. He became the RB that protected Manning's back. He blocked as well as any RB in history. He then became fantastic at catching the ball off of those blocks. Add his running yards with his receiving yards and you will notice the yardage was there. He caught 191 passes for 1,448 yds with 9 TDs and 71 first downs.

His last two years put his numbers way down due to injury and is what lead to his being released and on to retirement.

One stat that was amazing was his rookie year he went over a 1,000 yards without starting a game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually happy to see this.  There are plenty of decent RB's that come across the waiver wire every year because they where just the odd man out that managed respectable YPC averages in the league.  Not a bad thing to churn through some of them to see if one of them can do the job for you.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TheOptimist88 said:

No? He's 6'2 230+ you'll be stupid not to use him as a blocker in certain sets. I'm not saying he'd be a full time fullback. 

I've watched him play every game of his college career.  He is a large back but he is not overtly physical and he's not a great blocker.  He will totally disappoint you as a lead blocking back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, tikyle said:

I've watched him play every game of his college career.  He is a large back but he is not overtly physical and he's not a great blocker.  He will totally disappoint you as a lead blocking back.

Well dang!  Throw some water on my fire why don't you?  I still have visions of Gore and Jones wearing the D down and then Mack blazing through them.  If Jones really has a chip on his shoulder hopefully he will plow some guys under.  That's what I'm looking for him to provide for us.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheOptimist88 said:

No? He's 6'2 230+ you'll be stupid not to use him as a blocker in certain sets. I'm not saying he'd be a full time fullback. 

There is no reason to do that because we would use Turbin or one of the tight ends/H backs. Turbin is a big dude as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, MB-ColtsFan said:

Well dang!  Throw some water on my fire why don't you?  I still have visions of Gore and Jones wearing the D down and then Mack blazing through them.  If Jones really has a chip on his shoulder hopefully he will plow some guys under.  That's what I'm looking for him to provide for us.

Dont buy what hes selling. Look at the film. Jones while not just running and plowing over everything in his path, he still breaks a decent amt of tackles. The size alone makes people hesitant about making the tackle. That's basically what you want right there. People get tired of having to come up and hit that big frame. Hes not Jamal Lewis but what he does have we've never had in this offense. And he's about a 4.4 to 4.5 guy so he can also break one on you.

Link to post
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...