Legend of Luck

Let's talk 2019 offseason

Recommended Posts

I had a couple thoughts going into the offseason that I wanted to share and discuss with everybody.

1. At WR- Ideally, I'd love to keep TY, Inman, and Cain, and upgrade the remaining 2 or 3 spots. Whether that's taking a WR early in the draft and signing someone like Tyrell Williams, or drafting 2 new guys, I think we have to get Luck some better weapons. The Chiefs beat us with tight man coverage. If we tried that on the Chiefs, Tyreek and Kelce would have 150 yards each. We needs weapons at that level as well. It'll open the run game up more too, when defenses are scared of playing man.

2. At TE- I know we are loaded at TE, and will likely not make any moves here, but...man, I kinda wish we had a major, well rounded TE like Kelce or Gronk. I think that could take this offense to another level. Jack is an excellent blocker, but he's not an explosive playmaker in the passing game, although he's solid. Ebron is a really good playmaker, but an inconsistent blocker. Cox is still somewhat unknown, but more in the mold of Jack. Again, not a major priority by any means, just something that is in the back of my mind.

3. At OL- I'm honestly really unsure of how to handle this. I think we keep Boehm and Haeg for depth, but we need a developmental tackle in the draft, because I just dont see a ton of upside with Clark. That also begs the question, do we keep Braden at RT? Move him back to Guard and have Glow as his backup, while drafting a new RT? This is one decision by the staff that I'll be really interested in. My guess is he stays at RT, but we'll see.

4. At RB- Man...I was 100% off of the LeVeon train...until the Chiefs game. Not that I don't believe in Mack, because I do, I just see LeVeon as a game changing playmaker that is both an elite RB and an elite WR. And to win against the elite teams in this league, you need elite talent. I know the price is steep...but I can't help but pine over the idea of Luck, LeVeon + Mack, Hilton + another top WR, Doyle + Ebron, and our beast offensive line. We would immediately be the best offensive roster in the league imo.

5. At Safety- if we could just keep our guys healthy, I love our current group of Hooker, Farley, Geathers, and Mitchell.

6. At CB- I would like one upgrade. Moore and Desir have been great, but if we could get another big time, playmaking corner, that'd be ideal. Although I am intrigued by Collins, maybe he's the answer?

7. At LB- Just need depth here, and maybe a SAM. In case Walker or Leonard get dinged up, we need guys that are fast and well rounded to play those spots. For Walker's backup, I think its important that that player be a "coach on the field" like Walker is so that our communication continues to run smoothly.

8. At DL- This is where things get tricky. I think we all know we need upgrades. But we have a ton of solid talent already. Do we move on from any of the aging vets? If so, who? On defense, becoming elite at this spot is my sole priority this offseason as far as the defense goes. I'll trust the staff to determine who will be part of the future, but I think its crucial that our d-line begins to resemble the Rams, Chiefs, Texans etc.

So, if I had to prioritize these spots in order, I believe it'd look like this:

1a. Elite Offensive Playmakers- WR, RB, TE
1b. Defensive Line/Pass Rush
2. Corner
3. Linebacker depth
4. Offensive Line Depth and Development
5. Safety (health will be the key factor)

Would love to hear your thoughts.
 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree.  You hit everything on the head.  I'm really hoping a FA pass rusher makes it to FA.  A long shot but maybe a chance this year.  That could change everything.  How well we do in FA will undoubtably effect who we draft and at what round.  Need an offensive playmaker for sure.  Ballard will need to get aggressive here.  There are not many available that could step in immediately and be a difference maker right away.  He's going to have to go out and get one.  I am with you on Bell.  I like Mack a lot and he has improved but he is not a playmaker or a player you have to game plan for IMO.  Overall we think alike.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Legend of Luck said:

1a. Elite Offensive Playmakers- WR, RB, TE
1b. Defensive Line/Pass Rush
2. Corner
3. Linebacker depth
4. Offensive Line Depth and Development
5. Safety (health will be the key factor)

Would love to hear your thoughts.
 

I won't quote the entire things.  But I disagree with your priority.

 

#1 - DE - The Colts do not have a DE that can consistently pressure the QB.  Turray may develop into that but I'm not as high on him as others are.

 

#2 - 3 Tech DT.  They was a big drop off from Autry to everyone else.  They need another to pair with Autry on passing downs and to rotate with Autry throughout the game.

 

#3 - Safeties - Since the Colts like to play a lot of 3 safety sets, I think they need 2 more safeties.

 

#4  - A big, bruising back.  I like Mack a lot and I think he is the Colts primary RB going forward.  I was one, that in the first few weeks of the season I was on the sign Bell bandwagon, but seeing what Mack was able to do, there is no reason.  They have Hines for the quick change of pace back, that they need is a change of pace back the other way.  They need that type of back that will punish the LBer and dline when they try to tackle him.

 

#5 - WR  (I am assuming the will sign Inman to a 2 or 3 year contract.)  But they will need someone to fill that #3 role if Cain does not recover well from injury.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I won't quote the entire things.  But I disagree with your priority.

 

#1 - DE - The Colts do not have a DE that can consistently pressure the QB.  Turray may develop into that but I'm not as high on him as others are.

 

#2 - 3 Tech DT.  They was a big drop off from Autry to everyone else.  They need another to pair with Autry on passing downs and to rotate with Autry throughout the game.

 

#3 - Safeties - Since the Colts like to play a lot of 3 safety sets, I think they need 2 more safeties.

 

#4  - A big, bruising back.  I like Mack a lot and I think he is the Colts primary RB going forward.  I was one, that in the first few weeks of the season I was on the sign Bell bandwagon, but seeing what Mack was able to do, there is no reason.  They have Hines for the quick change of pace back, that they need is a change of pace back the other way.  They need that type of back that will punish the LBer and dline when they try to tackle him.

 

#5 - WR  (I am assuming the will sign Inman to a 2 or 3 year contract.)  But they will need someone to fill that #3 role if Cain does not recover well from injury.

Again, totally agree 2 with Dline being a priority, I just personally want a bigger focus on offensive weapons as well. We have the capital to address both.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Legend of Luck said:

Again, totally agree 2 with Dline being a priority, I just personally want a bigger focus on offensive weapons as well. We have the capital to address both.

I understand and I know a lot of people feel the same way you do.  And, if I can make the distinction, I am not saying you are wrong, just that I disagree, if that makes sense.  I just think when you have one of the top offenses in the NFL, a QB who was #2 in passing TDs and top 5 in a lot of other catagories, lack of weapons on offense is not the issue.

 

Plus I'm not going to overreact (not that you are but a lot of people on this forum are over reacting) to the playoff loss.  Colts had a bad game.  I have thought all during the win streak that the Colts needed to improve a long the dline and safety position.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Legend of Luck said:

3. At OL- I'm honestly really unsure of how to handle this. I think we keep Boehm and Haeg for depth, but we need a developmental tackle in the draft, because I just dont see a ton of upside with Clark. That also begs the question, do we keep Braden at RT? Move him back to Guard and have Glow as his backup, while drafting a new RT? This is one decision by the staff that I'll be really interested in. My guess is he stays at RT, but we'll see.

4. At RB- Man...I was 100% off of the LeVeon train...until the Chiefs game. Not that I don't believe in Mack, because I do, I just see LeVeon as a game changing playmaker that is both an elite RB and an elite WR. And to win against the elite teams in this league, you need elite talent. I know the price is steep...but I can't help but pine over the idea of Luck, LeVeon + Mack, Hilton + another top WR, Doyle + Ebron, and our beast offensive line. We would immediately be the best offensive roster in the league imo.

 

I think the last few games have shown clearly that Braden isn't great at RT, and I'd move him to guard next season and acquire a better RT. The last few games have shown Glowinski's limitations as well. The right side needs to get better.

 

I think Bell would have been worse in the KC game than Mack was. Bell will dance around in the backfield for days, and the Chiefs were dominating with frontside containment and backside defenders. 

 

The game was an example of three problems for us on offense: 1) Reich is a very good playcaller, but he'll get stuck in a rut every once in a while, especially against a well-coordinated defense; 2) our receiving corps is B-level at best, much worse if Hilton isn't 100%; and 3) the OL isn't as dominant as they've been getting credit for, especially on the right side.

 

That being the case, we need another receiving weapon, or to make better use of the weapons we have (could have better weaponized Hines in this game, in multiple ways); I say both. We also need to improve the right side of the OL. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

lack of weapons on offense is not the issue.

 

I think it's definitely part of the issue. The weapons we have didn't play well Saturday, and part of that is Hilton being out, but we've seen this movie before. We need to complement Hilton in the receiving corps, and I'd make it a priority. Not my #1 priority, but I'm not sure that distinction is important.

 

I'm okay with Inman at #3, but we either need a #2 who can beat #2 corners, or we need a slot guy who can get separation and pick up YAC. I don't think Inman fits either description, and I don't want to rely on Cain to be a big part of the offense in 2019.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I understand and I know a lot of people feel the same way you do.  And, if I can make the distinction, I am not saying you are wrong, just that I disagree, if that makes sense.  I just think when you have one of the top offenses in the NFL, a QB who was #2 in passing TDs and top 5 in a lot of other catagories, lack of weapons on offense is not the issue.

 

Plus I'm not going to overreact (not that you are but a lot of people on this forum are over reacting) to the playoff loss.  Colts had a bad game.  I have thought all during the win streak that the Colts needed to improve a long the dline and safety position.

 

i think WR is a big need.   we cannot afford any type of injury or off day from ty, or else that group is really sub par.

 

he will be 30 next year too, hes not much younger than brown and thats been used as a reason to not go after him

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think it's definitely part of the issue. The weapons we have didn't play well Saturday, and part of that is Hilton being out, but we've seen this movie before. We need to complement Hilton in the receiving corps, and I'd make it a priority. Not my #1 priority, but I'm not sure that distinction is important.

Maybe, I just don't see it that way, this past game was more an issue of Luck not having time and therefore the receivers not having time to fully get into their routes.  But even when the receivers were open there were a lot of passes knocked down at the LOS and I think that was part of the gameplan, The Colts oline is good so rather than fighting to get to Luck they fought to get a yard or 2 deep and then got their hands up (on the interior) know that the outside rush of Ford and Houston would force Luck to get rid of the ball before he wanted to.

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm okay with Inman at #3, but we either need a #2 who can beat #2 corners, or we need a slot guy who can get separation and pick up YAC. I don't think Inman fits either description, and I don't want to rely on Cain to be a big part of the offense in 2019.

I've used this example in other threads.  But I will equate the WR position to the CB position last year.  Many fans were convinced the Colts needed to draft/sign 2 or 3 CBs especially after letting their best CB, Melvin, walk as a FA.  But the Colts stayed with what they had and got better play from those guys.  I see the same thing happening with the WR position.  Now, like I said earlier, I could be wrong (that is why I don't think opposing views are wrong just that I disagree), perhaps when CB and the staff evaluate the Colts roster they will look at Rogers, Fountain, ishmael and Cain and not see the capacity for the improvement needed and decide to go in a different direction.  And I'm also not saying improvement is not a priority, I just don't think it is a top 4 priority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we dont need great corners for cover two.  offensive scheme isnt enough to get great production out of guys like rogers though.  it didnt work this year 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Maybe, I just don't see it that way, this past game was more an issue of Luck not having time and therefore the receivers not having time to fully get into their routes.  But even when the receivers were open there were a lot of passes knocked down at the LOS and I think that was part of the gameplan, The Colts oline is good so rather than fighting to get to Luck they fought to get a yard or 2 deep and then got their hands up (on the interior) know that the outside rush of Ford and Houston would force Luck to get rid of the ball before he wanted to.

 

There were plenty of plays where Luck had plenty of time, and no one was open. And I think a big part of that was Hilton being hurt, but outside of Hilton, the Colts have no matchup problems at receiver. And this is a repeat; it's not the first time our receivers have been shut down, not even this season. 

 

Quote

I've used this example in other threads.  But I will equate the WR position to the CB position last year.  Many fans were convinced the Colts needed to draft/sign 2 or 3 CBs especially after letting their best CB, Melvin, walk as a FA.  But the Colts stayed with what they had and got better play from those guys.  I see the same thing happening with the WR position.  Now, like I said earlier, I could be wrong (that is why I don't think opposing views are wrong just that I disagree), perhaps when CB and the staff evaluate the Colts roster they will look at Rogers, Fountain, ishmael and Cain and not see the capacity for the improvement needed and decide to go in a different direction.  And I'm also not saying improvement is not a priority, I just don't think it is a top 4 priority.

 

I disagree there, also. Separate issue, but the Colts CBs weren't impressive this season. Better than expected, maybe; still in need of improvement, for sure. And I hope that Ballard addresses CB in the offseason, also. The scheme doesn't call for shutdown corners, but we could definitely do better than the "good enough" guys we have right now.

 

(In addition, Desir just had the best two months of his career, going into free agency. The expectation should be that he's not going to play this well again; and I personally don't think he was good enough that we shouldn't be looking to improve.)

 

Same at WR. There's room for improvement from the guys we have, but Rogers, Fountain and Ishmael shouldn't be expected to become a #2 who can beat a #2 corner. And Cain should be treated as medical recovery in 2019, not someone we depend on to make the roster better.

 

I don't know about order of priority at this point, but if I was forced to identify five areas at which the roster needs to be better in 2019, WR would be on the list, without a doubt.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just dont see the point in overreacting to one loss? Like we cant jusy disregard the past 10 games. We have pieces in piece but to say we need to upgrade on corner or runningback is kinda going haywire.

 

1)PASS RUSHER. We need a dominant rusher. A JJ WATT, Miller, mack type rusher

2)Wide Receiver- Keep Hilton, Inman, Cain, Rogers and Pascal. Add a top end talent. We’ll be fine.

3) a dominant DT. Run stopper and Pass rusher

4) Safety. A solid strong safety. Keep hooker and farley. Bring back geathers ona. Cheap contract. Maybe eve mitchell for depth. Thats a solid rotation.

 

after these 4 positions i dont see any major holes. We just need depth at linebacker and Oline. And corner.

 

honestly speaking, the defense played well. Holding kansas city to 7 second half points, 31 points in total considering the fact our offense went 3 and out 4 straight drives and couldnt do anytjing. They

did their job. This was supposed to be a shootout. Our offense had plenty of

opportunities to score. Idk what happened

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know how anyone could have watched us this season and not come away knowing that we need better WRs.  I think a lot are counting on Cain coming in and being the guy...but he is a rookie with a torn up knee, i wouldnt hold my breath (but hope i'm wrong).   We need a couple of WRs that can be put with TY who can get separation from the D and preferably at least one bigger guy who can win the 1 on 1 balls.  Part of why the offense and Luck looked bad vs the Chiefs is because none of our WRs could get any space from the D.

 

I also think we desperately need some pass rush.  The main thing that makes a tampa 2 D work, is having your book end rushers/push up the middle, to get to the QB or rush him into making the mistakes that this kind of D has to rely on.

 

I would also like to get at least one better safety and corner.  Other than that, we have a great group of YOUNG guys, now we need some good VETERANS to put with them, to help them get over the hump.

 

I may be in the minority, but i would definitely give up a 2nd round pick for AB, as we would not likely get someone that good who can contribute so quickly, in the 2nd round. His squabble is with Big Ben (who is a turd, anyhow).  I would also sign Bell at RB...we have the money to spend, for sure, and by the time our own guys are up for contracts, this one and AB would both be off the books anyhow, most likely.

 

Other than that, lets just hope some good players slip into FA and Ballard is able to bring them in.  Add these things with what we have, and having a year of experience with our coaches and Andrew being back and finally going to have a full off season where he will not be rehabbing anything, and we should be set to make some noise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welp, we invested some nice second round picks on a DE and a 3 Tech DT (Lewis) last year instead of starting zone CBs, so I don't see where it would be useful to pick a DE or 3 Tech before round 3 this year.  Can't cannibalize the playing time of players you just picked last year by picking players who would play most of the downs ahead of your second rounders.  We have Autry, Lewis, and I think Hunt (resigned) can play some 3.

 

That leaves picking a disruptive NT to replace Woods and have Grover back him up.

 

A #2 WR has been needed for years.  Route running, hands, and YAC.  I don't care what size he is.

 

Our safties are not the best suited for zone defense, IMO.  I wouldn't look to upgrade necessarily, but if a high value player fell to us, I'd have to consider it.

 

Moore and Desir are backups, IMO.

 

We need a RB who can run tough without having to put 2 hands on the ball and duck his head upon contact.  Again, if value fell, I'd pick one high.

 

The team has needed a RT for years.  Not sure how to address this because we already need upgrades at the above positions and there aren't enough draft picks.  Late 2nd round is a good spot to find a RT, if the BPA is there.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dacoltsboi said:

honestly speaking, the defense played well.

 

Yikes. 

 

First, if you think the Chiefs offense felt any pressure at all in this game, I believe you're very mistaken. The one time we even remotely threatened, they came right back and scored a TD. I mean, Mahomes had 50 TDs this season; do you think our defense kept him from throwing a TD? I don't; he just didn't have to. Their best weapon wasn't even fully utilized, and they still won by three scores.

 

Second, even in a game where I don't think the Chiefs went more than 25% into their gameplan (because the game was over at halftime), they had 26 first downs (not including penalties), they converted three times on 4th down (and it wasn't close on any of the three), they had 433 yards, zero turnovers on offense, they averaged 5.5 yards/rush and totaled 180 yards, Kelce smoked us, the QB was 65% and had open receivers from start to finish...

 

Do you know how many times they went "first down, second down, first down" on us? You know they didn't even get to second down until the fourth play of the game? They earned first downs on first down or scored on first down nine times in the game. The few times they were behind the chains were due to penalties.

 

Their offense toyed with our defense from start to finish. We put up zero resistance, aside from a handful of plays, mostly helped by an offensive penalty on their part. The idea that our defense played well is crazy to me.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I don't see where it would be useful to pick a DE or 3 Tech before round 3 this year.  Can't cannibalize the playing time of players you just picked last year by picking players who would play most of the downs ahead of you second rounders. 

 

I don't get this thinking. There's plenty of playing time for young DL in 2019. They want to be two-deep at DL, and we're not close right now, especially at DE.

 

Woods will be gone, I'm not sure Hunt will be back, Stewart is nice but not preventing us from adding better players, and for some reason Ridgeway can't get in the rotation, so he doesn't factor, either. 

 

And if it does look crowded during the summer, I'd be okay with trading or cutting one of the vets if the young guys look good.

 

The DL is still lacking playmakers, and if drafting a potential playmaker pushes out another guy somewhere, oh well. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Yikes. 

 

First, if you think the Chiefs offense felt any pressure at all in this game, I believe you're very mistaken. The one time we even remotely threatened, they came right back and scored a TD. I mean, Mahomes had 50 TDs this season; do you think our defense kept him from throwing a TD? I don't; he just didn't have to. Their best weapon wasn't even fully utilized, and they still won by three scores.

 

Second, even in a game where I don't think the Chiefs went more than 25% into their gameplan (because the game was over at halftime), they had 26 first downs (not including penalties), they converted three times on 4th down (and it wasn't close on any of the three), they had 433 yards, zero turnovers on offense, they averaged 5.5 yards/rush and totaled 180 yards, Kelce smoked us, the QB was 65% and had open receivers from start to finish...

 

Do you know how many times they went "first down, second down, first down" on us? You know they didn't even get to second down until the fourth play of the game? They earned first downs on first down or scored on first down nine times in the game. The few times they were behind the chains were due to penalties.

 

Their offense toyed with our defense from start to finish. We put up zero resistance, aside from a handful of plays, mostly helped by an offensive penalty on their part. The idea that our defense played well is crazy to me.

 

While I agree that the defense looked out of sorts early and the Chiefs moved the ball pretty much at will, the defense certainly clamped down in the second half and made enough stops and plays to give the offense ample opportunities. I will however agree that the lack of pass rush with the front four hurt them a lot in the game and they had no answer for Kelce which was to be expected.

 

I also think its important to remember that Mahomes banged up his knee late in the first half and that offense did not look the same in the second half after it. The offense just didn't take advantage of the opportunities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need a few receivers, honestly.  One being a vet, preferably.  

 

I think they'll keep Smith at RT and probably sign Glowinski, but look to keep adding.  Even in one of their lesser games in KC, the O-line perhaps played well enough to win, but nothing else worked.  Glowinski wasn't great and Smith got beat a few times, but there are much bigger issues.

 

To compete with elite offenses, we need quite a few upgrades on D.  Regardless, when it gets to playoff time, you will probably have to match scores with elite offenses.  In this day, once you reach the playoffs, you have to be prepared to shoot it out.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I don't get this thinking. There's plenty of playing time for young DL in 2019. They want to be two-deep at DL, and we're not close right now, especially at DE.

 

Woods will be gone, I'm not sure Hunt will be back, Stewart is nice but not preventing us from adding better players, and for some reason Ridgeway can't get in the rotation, so he doesn't factor, either. 

 

And if it does look crowded during the summer, I'd be okay with trading or cutting one of the vets if the young guys look good.

 

The DL is still lacking playmakers, and if drafting a potential playmaker pushes out another guy somewhere, oh well. 

Here's my thinking.  My version of positional value says that the second round should be reserved for picking players you expect to start and play all 3 downs, depending on position.  Not rotational players.

 

The first round is where you get QBs, #1 WRs, LTs, EDGE, Disruptive DTs, and #1 CB (if press-man).  2nd round is where you can find Gs, RTs, Ss, ILBs, zone CBs and NTs.

 

Rotational players should be picked no higher than the third round.  

 

Its not a perfect world, so BPAs don't tend to fall into rounds exactly by position, and there are always exceptional players that blow up that formula, but the above bucketing maximizes value.  Your starting roster consists mainly of 1st and 2nd round talent, but at the proper positional value.

 

Turay is an EDGE, but Lewis is a rotational player.  Any 3 tech we pick this spring will have more talent than Lewis, and will play all three downs IMO.  And there is Autry.  So when does Lewis play?  and Where?

 

Maybe he plays LDE, but I don't think he's long enough.  If we got starting CBs last year with those second round picks, and there were some available IIRC, we could be going into the draft picking the pass rusher and 3 tech by pick 36 AND have our CB solved.  As it stands, we still need the 3 tech and 1 probably 2 starting corners.  We traded up to get a rotational player....a waste of capital when you're trying to upgrade multiple positions, IMO.

 

Despite drafting Turay and Lewis, we still need a starting RDE and a 3 tech.  Should have drafted starters at CB with their picks.  JMO.

 

Share this post


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

 

While I agree that the defense looked out of sorts early and the Chiefs moved the ball pretty much at will, the defense certainly clamped down in the second half and made enough stops and plays to give the offense ample opportunities. I will however agree that the lack of pass rush with the front four hurt them a lot in the game and they had no answer for Kelce which was to be expected.

 

I also think its important to remember that Mahomes banged up his knee late in the first half and that offense did not look the same in the second half after it. The offense just didn't take advantage of the opportunities.

 

No question the defense didn't get any help from the offense, and that was a major factor.

 

But I think it's lacking context to suggest that the defense "clamped down" in the second half. The defense was outmatched from jump, and the game didn't get closer than 17 points until late in the 4th quarter. Then they promptly scored again.

 

I'll give the defense credit for their 4th down stop, and they got another stop on that late TD drive, but it was ruined by a STs penalty. Still, their offense had another gear that they never showed in that game.

 

I don't get how anyone could say the defense played well.

Share this post


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

I understand and I know a lot of people feel the same way you do.  And, if I can make the distinction, I am not saying you are wrong, just that I disagree, if that makes sense.  I just think when you have one of the top offenses in the NFL, a QB who was #2 in passing TDs and top 5 in a lot of other catagories, lack of weapons on offense is not the issue.

 

Plus I'm not going to overreact (not that you are but a lot of people on this forum are over reacting) to the playoff loss.  Colts had a bad game.  I have thought all during the win streak that the Colts needed to improve a long the dline and safety position.

I just look around and see the other teams in the playoffs are night and day better than us from a talent standpoint at the skill positions.


Saints- Kamara, Ingram, Thomas, Ginn, Smith, even Hill has been a weapon for them (all they need is a young, stud TE.)

Chiefs- Hill, Kelce, Watkins, Williams, Ware, Conley

Patriots- Gronk, Eddleman, Hogan, Michel, White, Burkhead

Rams- Gurley, Anderson, Woods, Cupp, Cooks, Reynolds

Chargers- Allen, Tyrell Williams, Mike Williams, Travis Benjamin,  Melvin Gordon, Ekeler, Hunter Henry

Ravens- Crabtree, Snead, Brown, both their rookie TE's, Collins, Edwards, Montgomery

Eagles- Jeffery, Agholor, Tate, Etrz, Sproles, Smallwood

We entered the playoffs with a severely injured T.Y., Ebron, Mack, Inman and Hines.

I love Inman and Hines (Inman has been my late season MVP for us), but they dont put us on equal footing with ANY of the above teams.

You look at other successful non-playoff QBs around the league that have strong offensive talent.

Falcons- Julio, Ridley, Hooper, Freeman, Coleman

Bucs- Evans, Godwin, Humphreys, Jackson, Howard, Brate, Barber


My point is, Andrew+Our O-Line+ Reich, can get us to the playoffs. But to truly be dominant, we need high quality weapons for Luck and Reich to utilize.
 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

We traded up to get a rotational player....a waste of capital when you're trying to upgrade multiple positions, IMO.

 

 

I don't necessarily agree with your philosophy, for several reasons. One of the biggest is that it's overly concerned with roster management, which I don't think should be a primary focus in the draft. Pick good players that fit your scheme, and work the rest out over the summer and in camp. 

 

Also, I don't agree with the common thinking that players selected in the first or second round have to play a certain percentage of the time in Year 1. I still believe in developing players, and sometimes that takes time. Sometimes a first or second round guy will be a reserve in Year 1, and that's okay with me, as long as the expectation is that he'll be in the mix for a starting job by Year 2. Quincy Wilson is an example; he was a bust this time last year, if you ask posters on this board, but now he's a starter and had a solid second half of the season.

 

But I quoted the part above because it stands out to me pretty glaringly, and it's on the topic of the DL. First, I'm not sure why you've pegged Lewis as a rotational player. He's a DE/DT who, ideally, will play outside on early downs and inside on late downs. And the coaches want to be two-deep, so no DL is expected to play every down, making them all "rotational players," in the strictest sense of the word. I don't know how Lewis' expected role makes him any different.

 

Second, they traded up three spots, and it cost them a 6th rounder. Not a lot of relevant players that late in the draft, and we still had three picks after the traded pick. Hardly a waste of capital; seems like a nitpick, at best.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

No question the defense didn't get any help from the offense, and that was a major factor.

 

But I think it's lacking context to suggest that the defense "clamped down" in the second half. The defense was outmatched from jump, and the game didn't get closer than 17 points until late in the 4th quarter. Then they promptly scored again.

 

I'll give the defense credit for their 4th down stop, and they got another stop on that late TD drive, but it was ruined by a STs penalty. Still, their offense had another gear that they never showed in that game.

 

I don't get how anyone could say the defense played well.

 

We played one kf the best offenses in NFL HISTORY. No one expected the defense to % them down. No defense this eyar his completdlt shut down the Chiefs. the defense held their own against a very very good offense. It gave our offense more than enough opportunities to come back into the game. If vinateri makes the kicsk its a 24-17 game with our offense looking like crap the whole day. Imagine- we’d only be down one score with 4:30 to play. We wouldn’t have done a squib kick and whk knows our defense makes a stop?

 

point is- the defense did its part. Offense choked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

No question the defense didn't get any help from the offense, and that was a major factor.

 

But I think it's lacking context to suggest that the defense "clamped down" in the second half. The defense was outmatched from jump, and the game didn't get closer than 17 points until late in the 4th quarter. Then they promptly scored again.

 

I'll give the defense credit for their 4th down stop, and they got another stop on that late TD drive, but it was ruined by a STs penalty. Still, their offense had another gear that they never showed in that game.

 

I don't get how anyone could say the defense played well.

They still didn’t fully utilize  Tyreke Hill. I think if the game didn’t get so out of reach early the Chiefs could of put 40 up on the board

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a game where the offense scores 6 POINTS the whole game, its crazy to look at it and blame the defense. It was going to be a shootout. We had the ball back many times, a few times in great field position.  The offense didnt come to play at all

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

I think the last few games have shown clearly that Braden isn't great at RT, and I'd move him to guard next season and acquire a better RT. The last few games have shown Glowinski's limitations as well. The right side needs to get better.

 

I think Bell would have been worse in the KC game than Mack was. Bell will dance around in the backfield for days, and the Chiefs were dominating with frontside containment and backside defenders. 

 

The game was an example of three problems for us on offense: 1) Reich is a very good playcaller, but he'll get stuck in a rut every once in a while, especially against a well-coordinated defense; 2) our receiving corps is B-level at best, much worse if Hilton isn't 100%; and 3) the OL isn't as dominant as they've been getting credit for, especially on the right side.

 

That being the case, we need another receiving weapon, or to make better use of the weapons we have (could have better weaponized Hines in this game, in multiple ways); I say both. We also need to improve the right side of the OL. 

So, ideally, you think we should move Braden back to Guard, keep Boehm, Haeg, and Glow as backups, and then draft a new RT?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dacoltsboi said:

 

We played one kf the best offenses in NFL HISTORY. No one expected the defense to % them down. No defense this eyar his completdlt shut down the Chiefs. the defense held their own against a very very good offense. It gave our offense more than enough opportunities to come back into the game. If vinateri makes the kicsk its a 24-17 game with our offense looking like crap the whole day. Imagine- we’d only be down one score with 4:30 to play. We wouldn’t have done a squib kick and whk knows our defense makes a stop?

 

point is- the defense did its part. Offense choked.

 

Oh, you're playing a zero sum game. 

 

Offense played bad + defense didn't give up 50 = defense played well?

 

Or wait, now you're saying they "held their own"? 

 

The defense was awful, with the exception of a handful of plays. Our defense was no match for the Chiefs offense, from the first drive of the game. Just because they didn't run up the score on us doesn't mean the defense played well. We can't win consistently with this defense, and Saturday was the perfect example.

 

And then look across the conference at the other matchup. The Pats marched on a better defense just like they marched on our defense in October, and just like the Chiefs marched on us.

 

And look at the Rams vs the Cowboys, another 'statistically good' defense that played an easy schedule this year. The Cowboys were 31st I think in opponent ranking (we were 32nd), based on a study posted here last week. And as soon as the Rams clicked, it was like a hot knife through butter. 

 

The Saints played a defense that's actually good, not just statistically good, and had to fight for their lives for 20 points, at home, in a dome. 

 

These are the kind of teams the Colts will have to compete with to win a Super Bowl. "Good enough" isn't good enough. Our defense isn't good enough, and was downright bad on Saturday.

 

And that's true even though they got zero help from the offense. It's not either/or.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dacoltsboi said:

In a game where the offense scores 6 POINTS the whole game, its crazy to look at it and blame the defense. It was going to be a shootout. We had the ball back many times, a few times in great field position.  The offense didnt come to play at all

 

Again, it's not either/or. There's plenty of blame to go around. The offense didn't do their job, but the defense was bad also.

Share this post


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

 

I don't necessarily agree with your philosophy, for several reasons. One of the biggest is that it's overly concerned with roster management, which I don't think should be a primary focus in the draft. Pick good players that fit your scheme, and work the rest out over the summer and in camp. 

 

Also, I don't agree with the common thinking that players selected in the first or second round have to play a certain percentage of the time in Year 1. I still believe in developing players, and sometimes that takes time. Sometimes a first or second round guy will be a reserve in Year 1, and that's okay with me, as long as the expectation is that he'll be in the mix for a starting job by Year 2. Quincy Wilson is an example; he was a bust this time last year, if you ask posters on this board, but now he's a starter and had a solid second half of the season.

 

But I quoted the part above because it stands out to me pretty glaringly, and it's on the topic of the DL. First, I'm not sure why you've pegged Lewis as a rotational player. He's a DE/DT who, ideally, will play outside on early downs and inside on late downs. And the coaches want to be two-deep, so no DL is expected to play every down, making them all "rotational players," in the strictest sense of the word. I don't know how Lewis' expected role makes him any different.

 

Second, they traded up three spots, and it cost them a 6th rounder. Not a lot of relevant players that late in the draft, and we still had three picks after the traded pick. Hardly a waste of capital; seems like a nitpick, at best.

Did Lewis even play LDE this year?  I'm not concerned about giving the 6 as much as having to now find that corner.  Like G, Corner was deep last year.

 

I understand about development.  Neither Turay or Lewis saw much time this year.  If your Ballard, how does that figure into your thinking with picks 26 and 36.  Do you go edge and DT knowing that the guys you just picked last year might be good enough?  Certainly you can see that if we picked a RB in the second round last year, and he was nicked up, we're not taking a RB at 26 or 36 no matter how good he is.  We would look to fill other positions provided the value is there.

 

That's why I think NT early.  Woods and Grover are not the answer, and we have no other players to develop there.  Autry, Hunt, and Sheard are all good enough to retain and keep in the rotation at edge and 3.

 

I'm not so concerned about cannibalizing Turay's PT since we have no other speed edges on the roster.

 

I think we'd be treading water if we replaced Sheard, Autry, Hunt, with Lewsi, Turay, and another edge and 3 tech when all we have at NT is Woods and Grover.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Legend of Luck said:

So, ideally, you think we should move Braden back to Guard, keep Boehm, Haeg, and Glow as backups, and then draft a new RT?

 

Acquire a new RT, who can compete to start right away. Draft or FA, but I would look in free agency first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, runthepost said:

They still didn’t fully utilize  Tyreke Hill. I think if the game didn’t get so out of reach early the Chiefs could of put 40 up on the board

 

Right. The Chiefs have so much more in their arsenal than they showed Saturday.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I think the last few games have shown clearly that Braden isn't great at RT, and I'd move him to guard next season and acquire a better RT. The last few games have shown Glowinski's limitations as well. The right side needs to get better.

 

I think Bell would have been worse in the KC game than Mack was. Bell will dance around in the backfield for days, and the Chiefs were dominating with frontside containment and backside defenders. 

 

The game was an example of three problems for us on offense: 1) Reich is a very good playcaller, but he'll get stuck in a rut every once in a while, especially against a well-coordinated defense; 2) our receiving corps is B-level at best, much worse if Hilton isn't 100%; and 3) the OL isn't as dominant as they've been getting credit for, especially on the right side.

 

That being the case, we need another receiving weapon, or to make better use of the weapons we have (could have better weaponized Hines in this game, in multiple ways); I say both. We also need to improve the right side of the OL. 

 

 

I'd love to know what management thinks of Smith at RT and also how much they like Glowinski. I think we will find out really quickly when the FA period begins. The OP suggested keeping Glow as a backup but I think he no doubt will get starters money in FA. Thus , IMO, as flush as we are in cap money ,we won't pay a backup starter money.  My best guess is they resign Glow and plan on keeping Smith at RT.

 

Also that IMO wouldn't rule out them taking a OL high if one with a lot of value fell in the draft.

Share this post


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

 

 

I understand about development.  Neither Turay or Lewis saw much time this year.  If your Ballard, how does that figure into your thinking with picks 26 and 36. 

 

i didnt love those picks either, but they both battled injures this year.  the team was trying to get them experience and they both hit setbacks.

 

interesting question about the draft this year, neither of them are nose tackles so we really have no on the roster that would make us pass on that.  if there is a great edge rusher there, we probably take them.  if its a  just prospect with potential we might pass

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Legend of Luck said:

So, ideally, you think we should move Braden back to Guard, keep Boehm, Haeg, and Glow as backups, and then draft a new RT?

 

This might work if teams needed to rotate OL as they do DL. Glowinski will not sign on the cheap to back up Q and Smith. He will no doubt at least explore what he can get in free agency.

 

Thing with that , even if he is not able to get starters money , those that "explore" the market often take the same kind of offer as the original team offered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, aaron11 said:

 

i didnt love those picks either, but they both battled injures this year.  the team was trying to get them experience and they both hit setbacks.

 

interesting question about the draft this year, neither of them are nose tackles so we really have no on the roster that would make us pass on that.  if there is a great edge rusher there, we probably take them.  if its a  just prospect with potential we might pass

Yeah, those picks are bridge under the water. 

 

I brought it up because they do impact how we look at the draft this year, IMO. 

 

 I agree.  I think its NT and EDGE early before we go 3T.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Did Lewis even play LDE this year?  I'm not concerned about giving the 6 as much as having to now find that corner.  Like G, Corner was deep last year.

 

I understand about development.  Neither Turay or Lewis saw much time this year.  If your Ballard, how does that figure into your thinking with picks 26 and 36.  Do you go edge and DT knowing that the guys you just picked last year might be good enough?  Certainly you can see that if we picked a RB in the second round last year, and he was nicked up, we're not taking a RB at 26 or 36 no matter how good he is.  We would look to fill other positions provided the value is there.

 

That's why I think NT early.  Woods and Grover are not the answer, and we have no other players to develop there.  Autry, Hunt, and Sheard are all good enough to retain and keep in the rotation at edge and 3.

 

I'm not so concerned about cannibalizing Turay's PT since we have no other speed edges on the roster.

 

I think we'd be treading water if we replaced Sheard, Autry, Hunt, with Lewsi, Turay, and another edge and 3 tech when all we have at NT is Woods and Grover.

 

 

The corners in the second round were gone before #64, though, so trading up didn't cost us a corner; not sure if that's what you're saying.

 

And it's not hard to find corners to fit this scheme. Just a quick look through the last three drafts shows plenty of Day 2 corners that can play in our defense, and that will continue to be the case. I don't think we missed on a generational corner, or a particularly deep corner class, in 2018.

 

Back to Lewis and the DL, first, Lewis didn't get used the way the staff apparently wants to use him, and that's mostly due to his injury. I think they want to use him like Seattle used Michael Bennett, and that makes sense to me. His snaps -- and Turay's -- don't factor into my draft strategy. Say you go three tech at #26 and edge at #36, and they don't explode onto the scene in Year 1 -- which is reasonable, given the fact that rookies don't always pop in Year 1 -- then you put them on the same trajectory that Lewis and Turay are on now.

 

And in 2020, Sheard is a FA, Autry and Stewart are in contract years, and there's still room to work in new players. This is how you develop a pipeline of young talent. It's not about Year 1.

 

If anything, NT is the position we don't need. I prefer the penetrating NT, and I'd rather keep Hunt and Stewart at that spot as my two-deep than draft an early NT. That's definitely a non-premium, rotational position that I wouldn't spend a first or a second on. 

 

To the bolded, this is what I don't think is part of the calculus. It wouldn't be, for me. Make the team better by drafting good players. Positional value is a major factor, but outside of QB, that's not heavily influenced by the players on the roster. I don't care that we have a recently drafted three tech, if we can draft a better three tech, we should (and that might be the most important position in this defense, so I'm more than okay with doubling up there). 

 

I'm all about giving the young guys time and snaps to develop, but if second year guys can't compete with rookies, then they probably aren't good enough in the first place. Especially at two-deep positions like DL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

 

I'd love to know what management thinks of Smith at RT and also how much they like Glowinski. I think we will find out really quickly when the FA period begins. The OP suggested keeping Glow as a backup but I think he no doubt will get starters money in FA. Thus , IMO, as flush as we are in cap money ,we won't pay a backup starter money.  My best guess is they resign Glow and plan on keeping Smith at RT.

 

Also that IMO wouldn't rule out them taking a OL high if one with a lot of value fell in the draft.

 

My big question is whether Smith is what you want at RT. I don't think he is. I'd rather acquire a better RT and have an embarrassment of riches at guard than be mediocre at RT because I'm playing a converted guard there. And if Glowinski gets a starter-level contract offer from someone else, I'm more than fine with him walking. 

 

But to your point, if we give him starter money before the market opens, then we'll know what the staff thinks at RG and RT. Right now, I think we need to get better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard just had a long press conference. It was very impressive and worth a listen.

 

He mentioned that he is not going to let Brissett go unless it’s a great deal for the team and for jacoby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does Smith really suck at RT?  I thought people were praising him against the Texans, and then he has a bad game against KC and he's bad?  Just curious what people think.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a little perturbed that the focus generally seems to be on the offense once again.

 

Wasn't part of the reason we invested so heavily in the offensive line so we could be productive without outstanding talent throughout the skill positions? You can't be amazing everywhere. I'm certainly not saying that we can't upgrade the WR position but it shouldn't need to be a top echelon player to do that alongside Luck, TY, the TEs and our O-line. 

 

The focus has to be on getting players who can cause issues on the other side of the ball for the top end quarterbacks. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • What you are describing is a loss of faith, not blind faith. Being positive does bring faith. Till it becomes negative then the faith dwindles till it's gone. For me I don't give a lot of attention to who is drafted till they are drafted. I don't have the resources and a whole scouting team (and coaches) to help me make the choice. The largest part of what most see is what the media shows. That means schools that draw the most attention. Good GMs pay little attention to what the media has to say. (or what the fans think to be honest).
    • I actually thought this thread would be about having the 32nd pick in the first round of the NFL draft. That would ensure that the player would have a 5th year option for us as opposed to the 34th pick or later picks, where we only have 4 year contracts.
    • This is a terrific question and a fascinating thread.  I don't have a full understanding of how compensatory picks work, but draft capital seems to be king now (especially in light of the rookie salary cap vs. out-of-control free agent contracts).  We didn't need the NFL to tell us the Colts had the best draft class of 2018.  I have reason to believe more good decisions will be made in FA and draft 2019, so this is indeed an exciting time.     Based on Ballard's 2 grand slams and other fine picks last year, you bet I'd buy a 3rd rounder with a viable backup QB.  You can't make Keenum's arm stronger and I don't know if even Luck can make Bortles more serious about football, but just having one of them aboard means you could warm up to Brissett offers and jockey for position in April.     I guess you'd have to take a look at your big board vs. team needs, run the numbers, and start wheeling and dealing accordingly.  This "game within the game" stuff is truly fascinating and probably one of the reasons I enjoy Fantasy Football so much.  Thanks for your post Superman.  Good stuff!
    • Maybe Jachai Polite will fall or even Devin White. There's some decent options at the #13 spot. Not sure if Montez Sweat is worth the #13 pick, but he might be with the combine and pro day coming up.
    • He brought in so many talent potential lads into the Shoe last year. These no-name guys are quickly becoming recognizable faces.    Gotta say that last years draft was amped with talent for many levels and positions. Some potentially playoff caliber quarterbacks too.   This year’s draft will be interesting as it could pose a challenge for most teams outside of the top 10. 
  • Members