LB Korey Toomer visiting Colts today

[dgambill]

8 hours ago, DarkSuperman said:

Heard the Colts signed someone today and it's not a TOOOOOMAHH!!!!

Yep....no news on Korey. Wondering how the meeting went. Got a couple more today....most seem like lower level competition signings but some older guys to push these youngsters isn't bad at all. Show them how hard they have to work to be competitive in this league.

[Freenyfan102]

22 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

So the Colts don't need a veteran or two? Especially at LB?  

You chastise a lot considering you don't have a clue as to what a NFL team needs.

 who was the last Middle line backer that we signed what was his name D’Qwell Jackson oh yeah i remember him. He was 29 when we signed him. How did that work out for us. Oh yeah he sucked .

 

2 years he was on the practice squad on of the Raiders then the chargers picked him up and was sitting behind on 2017 worse linebackers and he could not even win that spot. What does that say to me as a person is that this person is so bad he can not even beat out one of the worst linebacker on the Chargers team and NFL.

[DougDew]

Its NOT a Toomah!

[crazycolt1]

3 hours ago, Freenyfan102 said:

 who was the last Middle line backer that we signed what was his name D’Qwell Jackson oh yeah i remember him. He was 29 when we signed him. How did that work out for us. Oh yeah he sucked .

 

2 years he was on the practice squad on of the Raiders then the chargers picked him up and was sitting behind on 2017 worse linebackers and he could not even win that spot. What does that say to me as a person is that this person is so bad he can not even beat out one of the worst linebacker on the Chargers team and NFL.

Jackson has zero to do with anyone signed now. Why you even bring that up?

He didn't make 135 tackles without playing did he.  That would be kind of hard to do IMO.

Like I said, you find a reason just to be negative.

We are working on filling 90 positions for camp and there is absolutely nothing wrong if he is signed.

[MTC]

Was hoping Colts would sign him, but maybe it’ll happen at a later date. LB core is quite weak. We need bodies.

[Happy2BeHere]

7 hours ago, DougDew said:

Its NOT a Toomah!

Anyone who doesn’t hit the like button on this post is either A) just dumb or B) not a fan of kindergarten cop, I mean that movie is still a classic in my book

 

Touché my friend well done here. Show the guy some love and go like this post it is the best one in here hands down and will be period!

[Boiler_Colt]

10 minutes ago, Happy2BeHere said:

Anyone who doesn’t hit the like button on this post is either A) just dumb or B) not a fan of kindergarten cop, I mean that movie is still a classic in my book

 

Touché my friend well done here. Show the guy some love and go like this post it is the best one in here hands down and will be period!

One of the best movies ever made. I was in Astoria, Oregon three years ago and randomly stumbled upon the school they filmed at. I geeked out so hard.

[buccolts]

22 minutes ago, Happy2BeHere said:

Anyone who doesn’t hit the like button on this post is either A) just dumb or B) not a fan of kindergarten cop, I mean that movie is still a classic in my book

 

Touché my friend well done here. Show the guy some love and go like this post it is the best one in here hands down and will be period!

C) Never saw it. 

[Happy2BeHere]

14 minutes ago, buccolts said:

C) Never saw it. 

Then you fall in A) still

 

 just playing with you

[buccolts]

10 minutes ago, Happy2BeHere said:

Then you fall in A) still

 

 just playing with you

That's okay. 

I knew I was walking into that one.  

[Mel Kiper's Hair]

On 3/20/2018 at 2:23 AM, DarkSuperman said:

Heard the Colts signed someone today and it's not a TOOOOOMAHH!!!!

 

 

[bluephantom87]

On ‎3‎/‎19‎/‎2018 at 8:26 PM, crazycolt1 said:

Hell, if he can tackle that is better than we have seen over the last couple of years out of our LBs.

His stats seem to say he can tackle.

 

This ^ I agree with you 100%  on this.

[TdungyW/12]

What happened with him?

[HectorRoberts]

On 3/20/2018 at 12:47 PM, Freenyfan102 said:

 who was the last Middle line backer that we signed what was his name D’Qwell Jackson oh yeah i remember him. He was 29 when we signed him. How did that work out for us. Oh yeah he sucked .

 

2 years he was on the practice squad on of the Raiders then the chargers picked him up and was sitting behind on 2017 worse linebackers and he could not even win that spot. What does that say to me as a person is that this person is so bad he can not even beat out one of the worst linebacker on the Chargers team and NFL.

Good lord your a negative Nancy!

[Coffeedrinker]

On 3/20/2018 at 1:47 PM, Freenyfan102 said:

 who was the last Middle line backer that we signed what was his name D’Qwell Jackson oh yeah i remember him. He was 29 when we signed him. How did that work out for us. Oh yeah he sucked .

 

Actually he was 31 when the Colts signed him and he lead the team in tackles his first two years with the club, went the pro bowl his first year and was an alternate his 2nd year.  So I guess if the Colts sign Toomer and he sucks like that, it would probably be a good thing.

[DougDew]

22 hours ago, Happy2BeHere said:

Anyone who doesn’t hit the like button on this post is either A) just dumb or B) not a fan of kindergarten cop, I mean that movie is still a classic in my book

 

Touché my friend well done here. Show the guy some love and go like this post it is the best one in here hands down and will be period!

I think most likely, A)

[dgambill]

22 hours ago, Boiler_Colt said:

One of the best movies ever made. I was in Astoria, Oregon three years ago and randomly stumbled upon the school they filmed at. I geeked out so hard.

I don’t think I ever imagined that movie would be a cult classic when I was watching it back in the day. Next thing your going to tell me Roadhouse is an all time classic..I can’t take this lol.

[ColtJ82]

All news on Toomer went radio silent....nothing, zilch, nada.....not even about other visits. He did post on Twitter about 16 hours ago that someone will be getting a diamond in the rough. 

 

I wonder if we made him an offer.

[SteelCityColt]

On 22/03/2018 at 12:27 AM, Coffeedrinker said:

Actually he was 31 when the Colts signed him and he lead the team in tackles his first two years with the club, went the pro bowl his first year and was an alternate his 2nd year.  So I guess if the Colts sign Toomer and he sucks like that, it would probably be a good thing.

 

While I appreciate your point, can we stop acting like raw tackle numbers of pro bowl selections are good metrics to measure a player. Talk to me about TFLs/missed tackles and then we might have something more worthwhile..

[jimmy g]

On 3/20/2018 at 10:18 PM, Happy2BeHere said:

Anyone who doesn’t hit the like button on this post is either A) just dumb or B) not a fan of kindergarten cop, I mean that movie is still a classic in my book

 

Touché my friend well done here. Show the guy some love and go like this post it is the best one in here hands down and will be period!

I'm glad you guys responded with what it was about.  Guess I'm just too old to have gotten it...

[chrisfarley]

On 3/19/2018 at 10:50 AM, TKnight24 said:

This seems to be the plan folks, get used to it, accept it, embrace it, love it. 

 

2nd wave FA, not the big fish. May get a splash signing like Suh, but we’ll see. Definitely looks like this is the mold Ballard is going with. Build through the draft, get middle tier FA to come in and compete with the rest 

had to chuckle a little bit at your "Suh" reference.  This is Chris Ballard, he is likely driving a 1999 Subaru or something similar.

[ReMeDy]

44 minutes ago, chrisfarley said:

had to chuckle a little bit at your "Suh" reference.  This is Chris Ballard, he is likely driving a 1999 Subaru or something similar.

 

That would be a used 1999 Subaru.

[lollygagger8]

Is he still unsigned then? 

 

[coltsfeva]

Found a good article from Seattle ( who drafted him). Compares him a little to Bobby Wagner

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fieldgulls.com/platform/amp/2012/7/10/3148996/seahawks-draft-thoughts-a-z-k-is-for-korey-toomer

[Coffeedrinker]

15 hours ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

While I appreciate your point, can we stop acting like raw tackle numbers of pro bowl selections are good metrics to measure a player. Talk to me about TFLs/missed tackles and then we might have something more worthwhile..

So a tackles aren't a good way to judge a LB?  A position who's primary job it is to, you know, tackle the ball carrier?  And while the probowl is somewhat of a popularity contest it is also voted on by players and coaches vote on the players as well so it can't be dismissed either.

 

tackling is not the only metric to use but it is a very good metric for LBers.  But in 2014 he had 10 TFLs... 30th or so in the league, 10 in 2018 and 8 in 2016.

 

So for, TFL for a loss is a nice stat but to gauge effectiveness of a LB you have to look at tackles that resulted in a gain of 3 yards or less.  I went through every play by play of every game book after the 2014 season and while I don't remember the exact number, right around 45% of his tackles for were a gain of 3 yards or less which put him right up there with some of the top LBers that year.

 

So again, if the Colts sign Toomer and if he "sucks" like DQ did then the Colts will come out the winner in that deal.

[krunk]

11 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

So a tackles aren't a good way to judge a LB?  A position who's primary job it is to, you know, tackle the ball carrier?  And while the probowl is somewhat of a popularity contest it is also voted on by players and coaches vote on the players as well so it can't be dismissed either.

 

tackling is not the only metric to use but it is a very good metric for LBers.  But in 2014 he had 10 TFLs... 30th or so in the league, 10 in 2018 and 8 in 2016.

 

So for, TFL for a loss is a nice stat but to gauge effectiveness of a LB you have to look at tackles that resulted in a gain of 3 yards or less.  I went through every play by play of every game book after the 2014 season and while I don't remember the exact number, right around 45% of his tackles for were a gain of 3 yards or less which put him right up there with some of the top LBers that year.

 

So again, if the Colts sign Toomer and if he "sucks" like DQ did then the Colts will come out the winner in that deal.

I've always wondered when people would make that statement. "Don't judge linebackers by tackles"  I'd start scratching my head.

[crazycolt1]

6 minutes ago, krunk said:

I've always wondered when people would make that statement. "Don't judge linebackers by tackles"  I'd start scratching my head.

Yeah, it's not a good thing when your safeties and CBs lead in team tackles. That means 2-3 yards runs end up being 20 yard runs. Same with passes. We have seen the effects of our linebackers not making tackles way too much. Making average RBs and QBs look like pro bowl players when they play us.

[SteelCityColt]

17 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

So a tackles aren't a good way to judge a LB?  A position who's primary job it is to, you know, tackle the ball carrier?  And while the probowl is somewhat of a popularity contest it is also voted on by players and coaches vote on the players as well so it can't be dismissed either.

 

tackling is not the only metric to use but it is a very good metric for LBers.  But in 2014 he had 10 TFLs... 30th or so in the league, 10 in 2018 and 8 in 2016.

 

So for, TFL for a loss is a nice stat but to gauge effectiveness of a LB you have to look at tackles that resulted in a gain of 3 yards or less.  I went through every play by play of every game book after the 2014 season and while I don't remember the exact number, right around 45% of his tackles for were a gain of 3 yards or less which put him right up there with some of the top LBers that year.

 

So again, if the Colts sign Toomer and if he "sucks" like DQ did then the Colts will come out the winner in that deal.

 

Well no any volume stat isn't really a good way to judge a player... we don't hold up number of pass attempts or even even the number of passes completed as a yard stick for how QBs are playing. We look, instead, at completion % because then we start to add some context to the number. Having a large number of tackles for LB could just means you D-line sucks. 

 

You somewhat contradict yourself because you then talk about tackles for gains of 3 of less yards and yes, I agree, that's a good metric because again it has context to it. 

 

Do you have any firm stats on the number of coaches and players who actually vote in the pro bowls? Who says players are actually that good at evaluating talent. I'm not being funny when I say that, a lot of skill position guys would put their hands up and say they have 0 idea about the trenches. Besides that's before we even get into the people making the pro bowls as 5th reserve type deals. It's a horrible, horrible thing to hold up for judging a player..

 

DQ didn't suck at doing what he was good at.. i.e. thumping, but coverage was another matter.

[SteelCityColt]

14 minutes ago, krunk said:

I've always wondered when people would make that statement. "Don't judge linebackers by tackles"  I'd start scratching my head.

 

Because it's a volume stat that has zero context, that's why. 

 

Ok let me ask you a question, what's the better metric for evaluating a QB. Total passing yards or Yards per Attempt. Or even better adjusted net yards per attempt. This isn't even really about football, it's statistics and understanding the metric is a quantity not quality measure. 

[PrincetonTiger]

3 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Because it's a volume stat that has zero context, that's why. 

Stats can be very misleading and often depend on the type of O or D the player is in

  

[Coffeedrinker]

6 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Well no any volume stat isn't really a good way to judge a player... we don't hold up number of pass attempts or even even the number of passes completed as a yard stick for how QBs are playing. We look, instead, at completion % because then we start to add some context to the number. Having a large number of tackles for LB could just means you D-line sucks. 

 

You somewhat contradict yourself because you then talk about tackles for gains of 3 of less yards and yes, I agree, that's a good metric because again it has context to it. 

 

Do you have any firm stats on the number of coaches and players who actually vote in the pro bowls? Who says players are actually that good at evaluating talent. I'm not being funny when I say that, a lot of skill position guys would put their hands up and say they have 0 idea about the trenches. Besides that's before we even get into the people making the pro bowls as 5th reserve type deals. It's a horrible, horrible thing to hold up for judging a player..

 

DQ didn't suck at doing what he was good at.. i.e. thumping, but coverage was another matter.

I didn't contradict myself at all.  I stated that tackles is a metric but it's not the only one, same as I stated (or tried to at least) that TFLs is a metric but not the only one (mainly because the defensive scheme can limit the TFLs of a LB).  Then I stated what I think is a good metric (better than tackles and TFL), tackles for 3 yards or less.

 

Oh well, DQ was a good player for the Colts his first two years, his last year he was showing his age.  And his coverage was not as bad as a lot of people claimed on this forum.  His ability to handle a TE or WR who did double moves was pretty bad because he lacked good change of direction ability, but his coverage between the seams was very good.  That is how he intercepted the deflated football... because he had good coverage.

[SteelCityColt]

1 minute ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Stats can be very misleading and often depend on the type of O or D the player is in

  

 

Bingo, you win the nuts. No stat should ever be used in isolation, and in the case of football no dataset should ever be used as the sole judge. I mean it's a cliché but there's a reason they watch film rather than just looking up their Madden rating. 

 

PFF has tried to address this of course by offering a service of watching the film for you, but then it's metric based on opinion. Besides we all know what people think of PFF around here...

[SteelCityColt]

1 minute ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I didn't contradict myself at all.  I stated that tackles is a metric but it's not the only one, same as I stated (or tried to at least) that TFLs is a metric but not the only one (mainly because the defensive scheme can limit the TFLs of a LB).  Then I stated what I think is a good metric (better than tackles and TFL), tackles for 3 yards or less.

 

Oh well, DQ was a good player for the Colts his first two years, his last year he was showing his age.  And his coverage was not as bad as a lot of people claimed on this forum.  His ability to handle a TE or WR who did double moves was pretty bad because he lacked good change of direction ability, but his coverage between the seams was very good.  That is how he intercepted the deflated football... because he had good coverage.

 

Ok my apologies for misunderstanding but can you understand why when your opening gambit was holding up his raw tackle number in isolation? 

 

We got abused that badly and consistently over the middle during that period it's hard to see past the scars 

[krunk]

14 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Because it's a volume stat that has zero context, that's why. 

 

Ok let me ask you a question, what's the better metric for evaluating a QB. Total passing yards or Yards per Attempt. Or even better adjusted net yards per attempt. This isn't even really about football, it's statistics and understanding the metric is a quantity not quality measure. 

My main issue was people spoke about it as if it didn't matter at all.   It does matter, but as you guys have said context needs to be provided and it's not the only point of judgement when assessing the value of the player.

[Coffeedrinker]

10 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Because it's a volume stat that has zero context, that's why. 

 

Ok let me ask you a question, what's the better metric for evaluating a QB. Total passing yards or Yards per Attempt. Or even better adjusted net yards per attempt. This isn't even really about football, it's statistics and understanding the metric is a quantity not quality measure. 

It's not quite the same comparing QBs throws to LBer tackles.  A better example would be WR receptions.  Receptions for a WR is not the only or the best stat use for WR effectiveness but it can't be discounted or dismissed either.

 

Same with Lbers.  tackles is not the only or best stat to use for LB effectiveness but it is a part of the entire package and cannot be discounted or dismissed.

When your job is to make tackles to say that tackles is not a good metric to use is a bit silly. I do agree it's not the only metric to use.

[SteelCityColt]

1 minute ago, krunk said:

My main issue was people spoke about it as if it didn't matter at all.   It does matter, but as you guys have said context needs to be provided and it's not the only point of judgement when assessing the value of the player.

 

Just now, Coffeedrinker said:

It's not quite the same comparing QBs throws to LBer tackles.  A better example would be WR receptions.  Receptions for a WR is not the only or the best stat use for WR effectiveness but it can't be discounted or dismissed either.

 

Same with Lbers.  tackles is not the only or best stat to use for LB effectiveness but it is a part of the entire package and cannot be discounted or dismissed.

When your job is to make tackles to say that tackles is not a good metric to use is a bit silly. I do agree it's not the only metric to use.

 

I think we're all kinda saying the same thing here unless I'm wrong? To clarify, I think we disagree about how useful a metric it is, but I think you both agree it's not something to use in isolation. I think we can all agree on that we need a serious shot in the arm at LBer...

 

My beef is people who throw it out as the be all and end all of measuring how good a player is. 

[Coffeedrinker]

5 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Ok my apologies for misunderstanding but can you understand why when your opening gambit was holding up his raw tackle number in isolation? 

 

We got abused that badly and consistently over the middle during that period it's hard to see past the scars 

My word Steelcity, it's just a discussion no need to apologize for anything.

 

I used to write small papers on the forum but I'm too old and don't have the time to do that anymore, so i keep it short (but then spend time explaining myself so I should go back to writing longer posts).  

 

And to further confuse the issue... I believe that when a player leads the team in a category that is important for their position it's a good thing.  So when a LB leads the team in tackles it's a good thing.  When a WR leads the team in receptions it's a good thing.  when a CB leads the team in passes defensed it's a good thing.

[SteelCityColt]

1 minute ago, Coffeedrinker said:

My word Steelcity, it's just a discussion no need to apologize for anything.

 

I used to write small papers on the forum but I'm too old and don't have the time to do that anymore, so i keep it short (but then spend time explaining myself so I should go back to writing longer posts).  

 

And to further confuse the issue... I believe that when a player leads the team in a category that is important for their position it's a good thing.  So when a LB leads the team in tackles it's a good thing.  When a WR leads the team in receptions it's a good thing.  when a CB leads the team in passes defensed it's a good thing.

 

Have you seen how "discussions" often end on here 

 

As a rough rule.. yes I'd say it's a good indicator if you lead your team in certain areas, but as @PrincetonTiger pointed out you have to be aware of schematic and other factors too. I mean let's take a silly example, a WR has 80 receptions in a season. Nice right? But what if that's a product of the QB forcing the ball to him and he was targeted 300+ times (I did say I was being purposefully silly). That's before we get into what happened on the throws that didn't lead to a reception. Drop % would be a nice number to use but it's very subjective... when does a bad throw become a drop and vice versa?

 

 

[Pelt]

28 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Stats can be very misleading and often depend on the type of O or D the player is in

  

I kinda like what Mark Twain said about stats - "There's statistics, damn statistics, and lies." 

 

I mean, I think you'd at least want to take a gander at stats when evaluating a player that you may want to obtain. That seems somewhat prudent. I think film is more important myself. But on the flipside of stats, how many times have we seen games where one team dominates every statistical category, only to end up losing?

 

I guess the only stat I care about is from the wins and losses category.

[ColtJ82]

5 hours ago, lollygagger8 said:

Is he still unsigned then? 

 

Correct....still out there