Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Conversations are moderated for civility. We ask that you please stay on topic. For more info, see our Community Guidelines ×
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

How did Henry Anderson not fit our Defensive scheme

boo2202

By boo2202
in Colts Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

ColtsLegacy
ColtsLegacy

Whoops, you beat me to it.   He just forced an interception (making the guard look like a turnstile), hit Blount on the play he got hurt, and then hit Stafford on the play he got hurt. That

reidaj1812
reidaj1812

Anderson, Simon, Melvin and Hankins should all still be on this team. I think this is either CB making huge mistakes or we are in rebuild and have no intention of winning now and even next year

Boiler_Colt
Boiler_Colt

Umm, what? Patricia was never coming here, that was McDaniels.

IinD Ring of Honor

IinD

Posted
Posted
57 minutes ago, PeterBowman said:

Henry's a very good player when healthy....but this is only game one....let's see how many games he plays this year. 

C'mon, you know how it goes, one game can tell an entire season. Henry will come back to haunt us.

Sarcasm..

 

I'll be annoyed when he's an all pro/ pro bowler, not after one decent game. He wasn't a world beater here anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ztboiler Practice Squad

ztboiler

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Hes a 3-4 DE...   he’s not very fast or twitchy...    he’s not much of a pass rusher....   he can make tackles around the line of scrimmage,  but he’s not known for penetration or pressure in the backfield.

 

Im a Stanford fan...   love Henry...   but he was clearly not a scheme fit.

 

You’re right but you’re wrong.  Interior Penetration and pressure was what made us all excited about him when we played more 1 gap upon his arrival as a rookie.  

 

He wasn’t a scheme fit because he didn’t fit Ballard’s prototype as a 3 Tech and he wanted the roster space for players that did. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PrincetonTiger Ring of Honor

PrincetonTiger

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, ztboiler said:

You’re right but you’re wrong.  Interior Penetration and pressure was what made us all excited about him when we played more 1 gap upon his arrival as a rookie.  

 

He wasn’t a scheme fit because he didn’t fit Ballard’s prototype as a 3 Tech and he wanted the roster space for players that did. 

He didn’t fit Eberflus’ system 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jameszeigler834 Walk On

jameszeigler834

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, legend300 said:

Over 3 years he had 65 tackles and 3 sack and he was injured a lot.  That’s why he isn’t with us anymore. 

Everybody gets hurt its part of the game and I get he had a lot but when he was out there he was good you don't let good talent walk out the door and the colts have been doing that left right and sideways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewColtsFan Ring of Honor

NewColtsFan

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, ztboiler said:

You’re right but you’re wrong.  Interior Penetration and pressure was what made us all excited about him when we played more 1 gap upon his arrival as a rookie.  

 

He wasn’t a scheme fit because he didn’t fit Ballard’s prototype as a 3 Tech and he wanted the roster space for players that did. 

 

Well.....   let's see....    he wasn't a scheme fit at the nose.     He wasn't a scheme fit at the 3-tech.    And Henry wasn't a scheme fit at either DE position.    That's oh for four.    Seems to me pretty much not a scheme fit.

 

Also....

 

Henry Anderson is a giant over-sized version of John Simon.     Meaning,  when he's penatrating, he's winning with effort,  with desire,   with want to,   with hustle.     He's not winning with explosiveness or speed or quickness or bend around a player.    He's not Kemoko Turay.

 

He's made for a 3-4.    He's not made for a 4-3.    As a Stanford fan I loved having him when we were a 3-4 team.    When we moved to the 4-3,  I predicted he'd be traded.    I have no complaints about moving him.    The 7th round pick is a reflection of his injuries and the number of games missed.     I hope he has a long successful career with the Jets.    He just wasn't a fit with the Colts,  just like Simon.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chad72 Ring of Honor

chad72

Posted
Posted

 

Here is the deal though. There was a guy that played for Belichick, his name was Ninkovich. He was very much like Simon and Anderson. He was not lights out athletically to win 1-on-1s many times but won with hustle and motor. Every team needs a Ninkovich, IMO.  Belichick played mixed fronts, most teams do nowadays. I was in the camp of not being too thrilled about letting Anderson go.

 

Having said that, it is just 1 game, and based on the progress I am seeing, there is no reason to doubt Frank and Ballard. We just have to let it play out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ztboiler Practice Squad

ztboiler

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Well.....   let's see....    he wasn't a scheme fit at the nose.     He wasn't a scheme fit at the 3-tech.    And Henry wasn't a scheme fit at either DE position.    That's oh for four.    Seems to me pretty much not a scheme fit.

 

Also....

 

Henry Anderson is a giant over-sized version of John Simon.     Meaning,  when he's penatrating, he's winning with effort,  with desire,   with want to,   with hustle.     He's not winning with explosiveness or speed or quickness or bend around a player.    He's not Kemoko Turay.

 

He's made for a 3-4.    He's not made for a 4-3.    As a Stanford fan I loved having him when we were a 3-4 team.    When we moved to the 4-3,  I predicted he'd be traded.    I have no complaints about moving him.    The 7th round pick is a reflection of his injuries and the number of games missed.     I hope he has a long successful career with the Jets.    He just wasn't a fit with the Colts,  just like Simon.

 

Things aren’t this complicated.  

 

Anderson was a disruptive interior player in any scheme but Ballard was never going to play him inside as evidenced by the interview where Anderson was down 25 pounds to play outside...and that was clearly never going to work.

 

Ballard wanted to maximize his roster space for greatest probability to discover long term value in this scheme this year for players that fit his specs.  To that degree Anderson wasn’t a scheme fit.

 

If Ballard’s priority was maximizing wins in 2018 Anderson would be on the roster. That makes people uncomfortable so let’s just throw a blanket over it with scheme fit.

 

You have to make trade offs to build what you want in a league that is dominated by group think.  Ballard is different than that...in a good way.  I don’t like the scheme but I do like a GM that will commit to a path he believes in without regard to popular opinion.  

 

Trading Anderson was a definitive commitment to what Ballard believes in boldly...and it will absolutely work in the end.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jason_ Hall of Famer

Jason_

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, reidaj1812 said:

Anderson, Simon, Melvin and Hankins should all still be on this team. I think this is either CB making huge mistakes or we are in rebuild and have no intention of winning now and even next year

 

For all we know, Hankins could have asked for a release.  Either way, he'd have been battling Woods for the Nose spot in this defense and Woods has played well and was much cheaper.  BTW, Hankins is still a FA...hasn't been signed by another team.  Probably a reason for that.

 

It's been widely reported that Melvin took less money with the Raiders than he was offered by the Colts.  

 

I was as big a fan of Simon as anyone but he simply doesn't have the strength nor the speed to make up for his small stature (for this type of defense).  He's also only played 16 games in a season once in his career.

 

I would have rather kept Anderson...I don't buy that he wouldn't work as a 3-tech.  But he too had significant injury concerns.

 

12 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Add Mingo too. At very least good depth.

 

Why would Mingo want to be "good depth" here rather than be a starter in Seattle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shasta519 Ring of Honor

shasta519

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

100 percent false.    3-4 DE better against the run than the pass.    I’m a longtime Stanford fan.   Glad when we drafted him when we were running a 3-4 defense.

 

I preficted we’d trade him.   It was not hard to see this coming.   Ballard knows what he’s doing.

 

 

Not all 3-4 DEs are better against the run. I would argue that Watt, Jurrell Casey, Cameron Heyward, Chris Jones and Wilkerson were/are better pass rushers than run stoppers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shasta519 Ring of Honor

shasta519

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, DougDew said:

He "didn't fit" because he wasn't a star and last guy drafted him.  All GMs think that way.  Its SOP.

 

Yep...people always seem to be surprised when a new GM overturns a roster he inherited. They all do it (Grigs did the same thing)...and sometimes they even get rid of star players they didn't bring in. It's part hubris (of course), but it's mainly about having the roster built in their vision. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fisticuffs111 Hall of Famer

Fisticuffs111

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

but it's mainly about having the roster built in their vision. 


Yup. I'm starting to think Ridgeway could end up being a casualty of that/not being brought back next year. Thought it was weird that he was a healthy scratch, or at least there's been no word of an injury. I'm hoping he gets a chance to prove his worth, which will probably happen if and when a fellow interior DL goes down, but we'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shasta519 Ring of Honor

shasta519

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:


Yup. I'm starting to think Ridgeway could end up being a casualty of that/not being brought back next year. Thought it was weird that he was a healthy scratch, or at least there's been no word of an injury. I'm hoping he gets a chance to prove his worth, which will probably happen if and when a fellow interior DL goes down, but we'll see.

 

He flashed in preseaseon as well. I would think he's good enough to be part of the DL rotation at this point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steamboat_Shaun Walk On

Steamboat_Shaun

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, Luck 4 president said:

He’s killing it. Questionable moves by CB 

 

Since when has it been "questionable" to cut your losses with a player who can only stay on the field for an average of a half season at a time, especially considering it would've been a contract year? As a fan, I like Henry Anderson a lot, liked him from day 1, but from a GMs perspective, he was dead weight.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matabix Active Roster

Matabix

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Hes a 3-4 DE...   he’s not very fast or twitchy...    he’s not much of a pass rusher....   he can make tackles around the line of scrimmage,  but he’s not known for penetration or pressure in the backfield.

 

Im a Stanford fan...   love Henry...   but he was clearly not a scheme fit.

 

Anderson short cone drill and 10 yard shuttle was a better time than Mathis. He was very twitchy just didn't have the top end speed but by those numbers he got off the ball quicker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CanuckColt Practice Squad

CanuckColt

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, smittywerb said:

I think you guys are forgetting Henry was very injury prone with us.  No one doubted his talent.  He just couldn’t stay on the field.

 

good to see him healthy with the jets but if he gets hurt again, it wouldn’t surprise me.

Exactly!

His injury problems probably figured highly in the decision to release him.

Keep watching his play...he probably goes down injured again soon.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DougDew Ring of Honor

DougDew

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, shastamasta said:

 

Yep...people always seem to be surprised when a new GM overturns a roster he inherited. They all do it (Grigs did the same thing)...and sometimes they even get rid of star players they didn't bring in. It's part hubris (of course), but it's mainly about having the roster built in their vision. 

Absolutely.  Nothing evil or abnormal about it.  No matter who does it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewColtsFan Ring of Honor

NewColtsFan

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, shastamasta said:

 

Not all 3-4 DEs are better against the run. I would argue that Watt, Jurrell Casey, Cameron Heyward, Chris Jones and Wilkerson were/are better pass rushers than run stoppers.

 I didn’t say ALL 3-4 DEs are better against the run than the pass.

 

Just talking about Henry.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewColtsFan Ring of Honor

NewColtsFan

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, ztboiler said:

Things aren’t this complicated.  

 

Anderson was a disruptive interior player in any scheme but Ballard was never going to play him inside as evidenced by the interview where Anderson was down 25 pounds to play outside...and that was clearly never going to work.

 

Ballard wanted to maximize his roster space for greatest probability to discover long term value in this scheme this year for players that fit his specs.  To that degree Anderson wasn’t a scheme fit.

 

If Ballard’s priority was maximizing wins in 2018 Anderson would be on the roster. That makes people uncomfortable so let’s just throw a blanket over it with scheme fit.

 

You have to make trade offs to build what you want in a league that is dominated by group think.  Ballard is different than that...in a good way.  I don’t like the scheme but I do like a GM that will commit to a path he believes in without regard to popular opinion.  

 

Trading Anderson was a definitive commitment to what Ballard believes in boldly...and it will absolutely work in the end.

 

You have no idea if Anderson would be a disruptive scheme fit “in any scheme”.    You’ve never seen him in a 4-3.    He didn’t play one at Stanford nor with the Colts. 

 

I’ve said he wasn’t a scheme fit and I haven’t seen an argument yet that proves otherwise.     I don’t know why this has become so hard.......

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DougDew Ring of Honor

DougDew

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

You have no idea if Anderson would be a disruptive scheme fit “in any scheme”.    You’ve never seen him in a 4-3.    He didn’t play one at Stanford nor with the Colts. 

 

I’ve said he wasn’t a scheme fit and I haven’t seen an argument yet that proves otherwise.     I don’t know why this has become so hard.......

 

 

I think the argument is that "scheme fit" is akin to "on paper".  Simon falls under the same description.

 

On paper theory isn't the same as on the field performance.  In that sense, I agree with those that both Anderson and Simon would succeed in either the 3-4 or 4-3, based upon what they have done on the field and how they play.  BTW, somebody mentioned that the Jets were playing a 43 during the plays Anderson was being disruptive, so there may be evidence that he is disruptive in any scheme.

 

To give up two good players for essentially nothing, must have to do with saving the roster spots for players who can develop into something better than the two given up.  I'm not disagreeing with the decision, but it is more theoretical based than performance based at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ztboiler Practice Squad

ztboiler

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

You have no idea if Anderson would be a disruptive scheme fit “in any scheme”.    You’ve never seen him in a 4-3.    He didn’t play one at Stanford nor with the Colts. 

 

I’ve said he wasn’t a scheme fit and I haven’t seen an argument yet that proves otherwise.     I don’t know why this has become so hard.......

 

 

I hesitate...but here goes.  No wait.  Never mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jackie Daytona Ring of Honor

Jackie Daytona

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

This is my 7th year here....     and I confess I've never seen this response by anyone....

 

Well done, sir!      Well played!         Tip of the hat to you!     :hat:

A Purdue fan's probably so disenfranchised after almost a week of realizing Brohm was always fools gold, vs. the whole, next Urban Meyer line they all got sold, probably a crap weekend of football for them..Gotta see it their way, vs. IU, ND playing like crap but being 2-0, the PU fan's only saving grace was going to be the Colts game.......alas, it was not to be.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GusFring Walk On

GusFring

Posted
Posted
On 9/10/2018 at 6:34 PM, reidaj1812 said:

Anderson, Simon, Melvin and Hankins should all still be on this team. I think this is either CB making huge mistakes or we are in rebuild and have no intention of winning now and even next year

Ummmm, do u notice how much cap space this team has, of course they're rebuilding. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...