Jump to content
Click here to get your free tickets for Colts Training Camp today!

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

MTC

Colts have fired OL coach Dave DeGuglielmo

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

I disagree here.  Ballard came in to build a system which he has seen run successfully in the past (or some modification of that).  Out of respect to Pagano, Irsay gave him a year to work with Ballard after Grigs was fired.  It was pretty clear then, at least defensively, that Ballard was mostly bringing guys in that could transition to a 4-3/cover2 defense if Pags didn't work out.  

 

I do think you are correct that Ballard needs to address the coaches and be very tightly on the same page with them, but I think Ballard had the vision for what kind of coaches and schemes he wanted to see brought into Indy to build this franchise back to legitimacy.  However, Ballard had a vision when he was brought to Indy and he's hired guys who can help him achieve getting there to be coaches.  He definitely has experience as a scout and a good track record in the NFL prior to Indy.  Sure it's important he communicate with the coaches, but he's also got to have a keen eye for the kind of talent and the kind of personalities that he wants to see in Indy.

 

To Coffee's point, though, it's unique to see a GM with a strong preference for a specific scheme, on either side of the ball. And in Ballard's case, there was also a desire to move away from a specific scheme; he didn't want to continue with the 3-4, based on his comments.

 

It's one thing to say 'we need a fast defense,' it's another to say 'we need a 4-3, zone based defense,' and evidently Ballard did the latter (edit: I didn't mean former). And evidently, he already had in mind a defensive coordinator. Maybe I'm putting more on his preference for Eberflus, but it sounded to me like Ballard knew he wanted him from the beginning.

 

And it's also interesting to me because Ballard played offense. I've always wondered why he eventually gravitated toward the defensive side of the ball. 

 

End of the day, it's not really a problem. The way I see it, Ballard wanted an offensive minded head coach, which is a good strategy, IMO. And it shouldn't be hard for an offensive head coach to buy in to Ballard's vision for the defense. And since that's Ballard's forte, he can spend a lot of time with the DC figuring out what kind of players to target. And it sounds like he and Eberflus have done just that, and he's learned even better what he can do to support Eberflus' system, personnel-wise. That's exciting.

 

And if I were a GM, I'd have preferences on both sides of the ball, and it would likely influence my hiring decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

 

 

I completely disagree about an eye for talent because there is no set definition of "talent".  Talent is the combination of attributes and the attributes and priority of those attributes is determined by conversations with the coaches, coordinators and position coaches.  Glowinski is a perfect example.  Glow was not talented enough for Seattle, that is why they let him but he comes to the Colts and does very well.  Did he all of a sudden become more talented?  No, he just came to a team that wanted and was able to teach him how to use his attributes.

 

Anyway, welcome to the board and I hope you keep posting, especially posts like these, they were enjoyable to read.

I totally disagree that a person cannot have an eye for talent. Leonard was a good example. The so called expects on the draft had him going much later as did the experts on the sight, me included. We pay people to be talent scouts because they recognize talent. We have very few on the roster left from the Grigson era. Why? I say because he and his staff were not good at talent evaluation.

As for Glow, I give our staff credit for recognizing the talent he has and putting him in a situation to succeed based on that talent. That happens often where players are set up for failure but are then put in a position to succeed because someone recognize their talent to play in a different system where their talent was more suited. Moore is a case in point. Ebron also. Ebron is not a blocker and was used in Indy as more of a situational player and put in a position to succeed.

Share this post


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

I totally disagree that a person cannot have an eye for talent. Leonard was a good example. The so called expects on the draft had him going much later as did the experts on the sight, me included. We pay people to be talent scouts because they recognize talent. We have very few on the roster left from the Grigson era. Why? I say because he and his staff were not good at talent evaluation.

Fair enough, but I think we are using different definitions of talent.  I can guarantee CB and scouts did not watch film of Leonard and say we need to draft him he's talented.  What they did is break down the attributes a LB needs for Flus.  Some of those attributes are

Team leader

Form Tackler

Agility

Speed

Acceleration

Field Awareness/Football Intelligence

Arm length

Hand size

ETC.

 

Then they assigned a number grade to each of those attributes then they meld that information with the self scouting and give that player an overall grade.

 

And I think the explanation you gave is a great example of people (fans and internet/tv show experts) vs GMs/scouts.  The former group looks at college stats watch some film, focus on the highlights and decide whether someone is talented.  The latter group quantifies everything they want in a football player at each position and assign a number value to that player.  The former group (for the most part, there were some fans on here that could not stop raving about leonard) did not think Leonard was very talented, the latter group had him graded as one of the Top OLBs.

8 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

As for Glow, I give our staff credit for recognizing the talent he has and putting him in a situation to succeed based on that talent. That happens often where players are set up for failure but are then put in a position to succeed because someone recognize their talent to play in a different system where their talent was more suited. Moore is a case in point. Ebron also. Ebron is not a blocker and was used in Indy as more of a situational player and put in a position to succeed.

That is what good GMs do, and that is why they quantify what they are looking for, find the players that meet that criteria, and then let them play and develop.  That is why there are multiple teams that run multiple schemes that are still successful.  And it's why players like Glow can be released from one team and go to another team and succeed.

 

Ebron is another good example.  Ebron is not more talented than he was in Detroit, he just was put in position the better utilize his abilities.

 

We are saying the same thing, I just think the difference is the definition of talent or an "eye for talent"  And based on your posts then I would agree Ballard has an eye for talent, in that he knows how to break down the attributes needed for each player at each position, accurately grade the players on those attributes and then give them a chance to succeed.  So if that is what you mean by an eye for talent then I 100% agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not surprised this guy was hand picked by McDaniels. Arrogance needs to stick together. I'm more than happy to allow Frank Reich to bring in one of his guys.

Share this post


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

Fair enough, but I think we are using different definitions of talent.  I can guarantee CB and scouts did not watch film of Leonard and say we need to draft him he's talented.  What they did is break down the attributes a LB needs for Flus.  Some of those attributes are

Team leader

Form Tackler

Agility

Speed

Acceleration

Field Awareness/Football Intelligence

Arm length

Hand size

ETC.

 

Then they assigned a number grade to each of those attributes then they meld that information with the self scouting and give that player an overall grade.

 

And I think the explanation you gave is a great example of people (fans and internet/tv show experts) vs GMs/scouts.  The former group looks at college stats watch some film, focus on the highlights and decide whether someone is talented.  The latter group quantifies everything they want in a football player at each position and assign a number value to that player.  The former group (for the most part, there were some fans on here that could not stop raving about leonard) did not think Leonard was very talented, the latter group had him graded as one of the Top OLBs.

That is what good GMs do, and that is why they quantify what they are looking for, find the players that meet that criteria, and then let them play and develop.  That is why there are multiple teams that run multiple schemes that are still successful.  And it's why players like Glow can be released from one team and go to another team and succeed.

 

Ebron is another good example.  Ebron is not more talented than he was in Detroit, he just was put in position the better utilize his abilities.

 

We are saying the same thing, I just think the difference is the definition of talent or an "eye for talent"  And based on your posts then I would agree Ballard has an eye for talent, in that he knows how to break down the attributes needed for each player at each position, accurately grade the players on those attributes and then give them a chance to succeed.  So if that is what you mean by an eye for talent then I 100% agree.

Fair enough!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Wow, you are busy with your quotes.   Good work.  I will give you the system somewhat, Chicago ran a cover 2 type D for a bit while he was there, but not always and KC did not run a cover 2 type at all. But the attributes, that is up to the coaches to decided, it's up to the GM to figure out how to grade players in those attributes.

 

I will say I don't think Pagano staying on for a year was "out of respect" for Pagano, I think @DarkSupermannailed it the other day in his "tanking a season" post.  I think Irsay/CB wanted to tank the season so they could start the rebuild.

 

 

I completely disagree about an eye for talent because there is no set definition of "talent".  Talent is the combination of attributes and the attributes and priority of those attributes is determined by conversations with the coaches, coordinators and position coaches.  Glowinski is a perfect example.  Glow was not talented enough for Seattle, that is why they let him but he comes to the Colts and does very well.  Did he all of a sudden become more talented?  No, he just came to a team that wanted and was able to teach him how to use his attributes.

 

Anyway, welcome to the board and I hope you keep posting, especially posts like these, they were enjoyable to read.

 

Or he could just be a better fit for Indy's scheme.  We got him in December 2017 off waivers.  He started out that season as a starting OL for Seattle and was later replaced by a younger guy (so I wouldn't say he was 'not talented enough for Seattle' -- maybe he was just irked that he lost his starting job and needed a change of scenery, plus Seattle had Luke Joeckel at one G spot and a couple of young studs at G as well).  Our OL was pretty horrendous in the 2017 season, so I think we would've signed basically anyone we could get to try to help out (we had 4 different starters at C, 5 different starters at RG, and had Vujo as a LG with Clark and Haeg splitting the season at RT).  

 

Glowinski was a 4th round pick in 2015 and obviously is talented enough to play in the NFL.  I am sure if we didn't claim him off waivers, someone else would have.  At the time it may not have seemed like it, but maybe we were lucky that our OL was so bad in 2017 that we needed to pick him up (and convince Ballard to put some major investment into it during last offseason).  That said, I appreciate what Glowinski did for us this past year, but I still think he was the weakest link on the OL by far and a lot of his troubles were masked by being surrounded by the rest of the OL which is very talented.  I don't think we should break the bank for him, as I think he is pretty easily replaced, but it'd be nice to see him back at the right price.

 

Anyway, to your point "talented" is a combination of things (IMO).  Raw talent is one thing, fitting a scheme and being in an environment to thrive given your raw talent (and willingness to work hard) is another.  This happens often... see Jerry Hughes, a first round draft pick for us that didn't produce at all and then went to Buffalo to become a very solid LBer or Vontae Davis who was nowhere near living up to potential in Miami and came here and gave us a few years of being a top 3 CB (IMO, definitely in the top 10) in the NFL.    

 

This article is pretty compelling about Ballard looking to switch to a 4-3 (even though a few arguments like his Hankins and John Simon signings are out the window):  https://www.stampedeblue.com/2018/1/4/16849394/theory-ballard-knows-the-new-head-coach-big-changes-coming-for-colts-defense

 

Another thing I love about Ballard is he is drafting/signing guys who are good locker room guys... heck he even hired a former Green Beret to help judge player character (http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/17255219/green-beret-brian-decker-thinks-improve-success-rate-nfl-first-round-draft-picks).  

 

It is funny, Ballard has said many times he is aiming to bring in guys who love football and who are of high character... now we're seeing players coming up with quotes very similar to what Ballard's philosophy has been since day 1 of being hired as Colts' GM... for example, TY in this article (https://www.colts.com/news/the-sky-s-the-limit-for-colts-t-y-hilton-in-2019 -- which came out today) says: "What Chris (Ballard) and Frank has put together, they're putting together some guys that love football,” Hilton continued. “And as long as you're around guys that love football, you're gonna be a tough team." .... very similar to Ballard here: https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/colts-gm-chris-ballard-says-hes-learning-from-theo-epsteins-example-cubs-model/ when he says "

"We want high-character guys that love football, that will hold each other accountable, that will be good teammates. It stuck out like a beacon light.

"Look at the teams that win in this league. It's culture. Culture wins. It absolutely wins. Football is the greatest team sport. It really is because guys want to have individual success, but they can't have individual success without their teammates. They can't do it. Not in this sport. It's too hard.""

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2019 at 3:35 PM, CurBeatElite said:

I agree with you, though I may put the healthiest and most consistent line we have had in years a little higher to #3.  However, we still didn't have a totally healthy or consistent OL.

 

I really just started spouting off things that were more important, could have kept going, but they were in no real order. I honestly would put health and depth number 1. Bringing Q and Braden through the draft and Glowinski through FA obviously helped tremendously... but it wouldnt have had they been injured. Our o-line failures over the past 6 years have been mainly because of busts due to injury (Donald Thomas, Cherilus, etc.- the list is long). Grigson tried through FA to put together a good o-line. They busted because of injury. When we got healthy and Castonzo came back, it was a noticeable difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any news on Degugliemo's replacement yet. I figured they 

would already have an eye on his replacement, and is the new O line coach

still in the playoffs possibly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2019 at 12:35 PM, CurBeatElite said:

 

see where I quoted @ColtStrong2013 below.   I think a lot of things went into our OL play this year, Guges being a small part of it.

 

 

 

If Chuck was good enough to not get fired, we probably never would have brought McDaniels in and in turn would probably never have seen Guges on our staff.

 

 

Exactly.  I won't go as far as saying Reich is as calm as Dungy, but he definitely seems to have more of that mold as a coach (i.e., little yelling or screaming or berating players).  While Good may be one example (and it recently came out, so it may also have something to do with public perception), it sounds as though Guges definitely was a screamer and a yeller.  He got the guys to play hard for him, as Frank acknowledged throughout the season, which was good.... but Frank probably has someone in mind (see link posted about hiring Sirianni below) who he would've selected if Guges wasn't already on board through McDaniels.  Also, I don't see us (barring injury) falling back to middle of the pack with this offense, especially if we get another WR or 2 who can create separation (this was a major problem in the KC game and forced Luck to hold the ball longer than normal).  This unit gave up very few coverage sacks throughout the season because Luck is in a rhythm in this offense which gets the ball out of his hand very quick compared to years past.

 

 

I agree with you, though I may put the healthiest and most consistent line we have had in years a little higher to #3.  However, we still didn't have a totally healthy or consistent OL... Slauson got hurt after starting 5 games, Haeg and Clark were starters early in the year (we didn't really see Braden Smith until week 5), Kelly had some injuries and there were a few games where our 3rd string C (Josh Andrews) had to come in to replace Boehm.  Big Q was the only OL to start all 16 games for us.  In my opinion, that'll be the biggest thing for us going forward.  I tend to think we can upgrade Glowinski/Slauson at RG (whether it be move Smith there and bring in a new RT or whether Haeg or Clark develop enough to win a starting spot on the right side of the line is TBD).  I definitely thought there was an obvious drop-off in the OL when Kelly was out, so hopefully they can figure out how to keep him on the field for the entire season.  Anyway, if we get some WRs that can separate from the defenders and lessen our drops next year, that'll only just help Luck get the ball out faster and have the offense running smoother than it did this year.  I also think Q became a leader of this team over the course of the season.  While I love that Slauson helped a lot of the young guys, I tend to think he's pretty expendable at his age coming off that injury and imagine Q can light a fire under this OL week-in/week-out.  

 

 

The O coordinator was hand-picked by Reich.  Reich is still responsible for play calling, but Sirianni has a lot to do with planning their offensive attack and is in constant communication with Reich from the booth during Sunday.  Read here: https://www.1070thefan.com/blogs/kevins-corner/colts-coverage/frank-reich-always-knew-nick-sirianni-would-be-his-colts

 

 

Reich coached in Indy 2006-2011 (Saturday's last year in Indy was 2011).  Reich started as an intern for 2 years than an offensive assistant and then QB coach.  I am sure he and Saturday have some sort of chemistry from spending 5 years together.

 

Where I see Saturday being a good fit is: (1) he's a former Indy player and still very well respected in the organization as a member of 'The Ring of Honor', (2) he was one of the most cerebral centers in NFL history, running the O with Peyton Manning (it sounds like Kelly is responsible for a lot of the O's success by helping Luck orchestrate the line on the field, much like Saturday did with Peyton).

 

Where I may not see Saturday fitting is: (1) He doesn't have prior NFL coaching experience, and we all know that good/great players don't always translate into good/great coaches, and (2) It seems like we're trying to build a more power group in Indy than what Saturday played with in his time.  We were primarily a pass-protection unit during most of Saturday's tenure in Indy (especially after the Edge years) and we very rarely had a 'run it down their throat' mentality.  I get the impression that we want some sort of mix with our line, but are leading toward a dominant physical unit, which we never really had during the the Saturday/Manning era Colts.

 

I would be more in favor of seeing Saturday come in kind of like a Robert Mathis and start more as an assistant positions coach/mentor to see how good of a coach he can be (or is) before flat out offering him the OL coach position... but why would Saturday give up his TV personality gig to do that?

 

 

 

Very rarely when a team went 4-12 and had as many holes as our team had is a first year HC let go after leading a team to the playoffs and picking up a dominating win in the first round.

 

 

 

I disagree here.  Ballard came in to build a system which he has seen run successfully in the past (or some modification of that).  Out of respect to Pagano, Irsay gave him a year to work with Ballard after Grigs was fired.  It was pretty clear then, at least defensively, that Ballard was mostly bringing guys in that could transition to a 4-3/cover2 defense if Pags didn't work out.  

 

I do think you are correct that Ballard needs to address the coaches and be very tightly on the same page with them, but I think Ballard had the vision for what kind of coaches and schemes he wanted to see brought into Indy to build this franchise back to legitimacy.  However, Ballard had a vision when he was brought to Indy and he's hired guys who can help him achieve getting there to be coaches.  He definitely has experience as a scout and a good track record in the NFL prior to Indy.  Sure it's important he communicate with the coaches, but he's also got to have a keen eye for the kind of talent and the kind of personalities that he wants to see in Indy.

 

My comment about Pagano was sarcastic.     I was kidding.     I was joking.

 

I'm actually a Pagano supporter....    but many here want to blame Pagano for many of our problems,  so I thought I'd add one more.     Again,  complete sarcasm.     Sorry it wasn't more obvious.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

My comment about Pagano was sarcastic.     I was kidding.     I was joking.

 

I'm actually a Pagano supporter....    but many here want to blame Pagano for many of our problems,  so I thought I'd add one more.     Again,  complete sarcasm.     Sorry it wasn't more obvious.

 

I was also kind of kidding in my response... but found a way to blame Pagano for Guges' firing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When training camp starts the goal is to preform and make the team. Right?

OL coach is to get his OL and make them perform to there best. Right?  

 

We had one of the best OL in the league and coach still gets fired. Go figure that one even though its not my guy per Reich 

 

That would be like Ballard firing Reich because that was not my guy Josh was. even though he led them to the playoffs

 

Colts fans would have went crazy if that happened.

 

Been a Colts fan for over 50 years 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don’t know the whole story, probably never will.  I used to love listening to interviews with the OL coach and he sounded like a good guy.  

 

But all we really know is what we saw, a really good Oline.  Apparently not enough to keep the job. 

 

Personality, the Good issue, Reich’s guy?  Anyone’s guess.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard wanted his guys and eventually got them and Reich wants his guys.  You get one good shot at being a HC in this league and you need to go all in with your people and your strategy.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reich has a philosophy how he wants this oline and offense to scheme. GUGs did not have the same philosophy. There is not much more to it then that. Reich wants to run more out of a zone scheme. GUGs wants a power run scheme. We will be much better with someone on the same page as Reich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The positive to come out of the this firing is that Ballard should be able to get any available candidate he wants to come here for the OL job. Who wouldn't want to take over this O-Line, with more help on the way in FA and the draft, is beyond me. Lets just hope we don't take a step backward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mirobi48 said:

When training camp starts the goal is to preform and make the team. Right?

OL coach is to get his OL and make them perform to there best. Right?  

 

We had one of the best OL in the league and coach still gets fired. Go figure that one even though its not my guy per Reich 

 

That would be like Ballard firing Reich because that was not my guy Josh was. even though he led them to the playoffs

 

Colts fans would have went crazy if that happened.

 

Been a Colts fan for over 50 years 

 

 

 

 

My question is why have so many teams gotten rid of him after only a year or two?

 

It just seems odd to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mirobi48 said:

When training camp starts the goal is to preform and make the team. Right?

OL coach is to get his OL and make them perform to there best. Right?  

 

We had one of the best OL in the league and coach still gets fired. Go figure that one even though its not my guy per Reich 

 

That would be like Ballard firing Reich because that was not my guy Josh was. even though he led them to the playoffs

 

Colts fans would have went crazy if that happened.

 

Been a Colts fan for over 50 years 

 

 

 

 

It is like you don't realize THAT GUY is only Part of the reason our line played better. He gets lots of help making it all work, and please tell us what it is like working with him? Funny that Belichek fired him after one season isn't it?
Remain calm, our professionals seem very competent.

Share this post


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

Ballard wanted his guys and eventually got them and Reich wants his guys.  You get one good shot at being a HC in this league and you need to go all in with your people and your strategy.  

Yep, I don't have a problem with Reich succeeding or failing on his own terms. He will be judged on his decisions both in the off-season and in-season and both on his staff and on the roster. Lets see how his decisions pan out on the field over the next several seasons. There will be plenty of opportunity to judge and evaluate Reich's decisions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mirobi48 said:

When training camp starts the goal is to preform and make the team. Right?

OL coach is to get his OL and make them perform to there best. Right?  

 

We had one of the best OL in the league and coach still gets fired. Go figure that one even though its not my guy per Reich 

 

That would be like Ballard firing Reich because that was not my guy Josh was. even though he led them to the playoffs

 

Colts fans would have went crazy if that happened.

 

Been a Colts fan for over 50 years 

 

 

 

Terrible analogies for 200 Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it kind of interesting that he got fired twice after the O line played poorly in 2 play off  games.  When the Pats were beaten by Denver and mostly recently in the Colts loss the KC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2019 at 10:02 AM, pgt_rob said:

 

We also have a brand new 1st rounder and a brand new 2nd rounder on the offensive line that happen to be very good. So I think that has a lot to do with how we've played. 

Coaching has a lot to do with young guys playing well 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I find it kind of interesting that he got fired twice after the O line played poorly in 2 play off  games.  When the Pats were beaten by Denver and mostly recently in the Colts loss the KC

I think it's because how hard we got beaten upfront. The Chiefs were sniffing out every single reach-block we attempted and got easy access to the backfield and in pass pro they were able to confuse especially our tackles. That we didn't find a way to adjust in the 2nd half is the biggest reason he was fired imo. The Pats went heavy with extra tight ends at FB and did power run with them and never had people try reach-blocks and you could see that chiefs players were not strong enough upfront to stop all that beef and we didn't manage to find something like that. Hearing that so many of our o-liners say that guge was not a bad fundamental guy makes me believe that the firing really was because of his inability to create a better blocking scheme for the big game against kansas city and the office just didn't want to throw him under the bus saying he can't gameplan 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/20/2019 at 12:27 PM, mirobi48 said:

I believe When training camp starts the goal is to preform and make the team. Right?

OL coach is to get his OL and make them perform to there best. Right?  

 

We had one of the best OL in the league and coach still gets fired. Go figure that one even though its not my guy per Reich 

 

That would be like Ballard firing Reich because that was not my guy Josh was. even though he led them to the playoffs

 

Colts fans would have went crazy if that happened.

 

Been a Colts fan for over 50 years 

 

 

 

Reich is just trying to put a spin on this by saying he wasn't his guy. Major personality clash which we will probably never know about was the real cause. may have clashed with other assistants. Who knows but it was definitely something that the Colts couldn't put up with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Posts

    • Honestly I don't really recognize any of their faces at this point.  Havn't really at what their faces look like.   I'm hoping a bunch of them play well enough that I come to know their face though.  
    • Honestly in terms of trade's I think I would rather just run with Turay than invest in Clowney.  I would maybe be interested in giving up a 4th rounder for Clowney, but not much higher.    He's on the franchise tag and if someone wants to get Clowney they are going to have to pay him.  And because of how he is being looked at, and being a former #1 overall pick he's probably expecting a market setting deal or at least something in line with what Khalil Mack is getting. (Mack is getting 23.5M per year)  But Mack's doing double digit sacks every year but his rookie year.  Clowney hasn't hit double digit sacks yet in his career.   He's not worth the pick or the money to me.     Also consider next year's draft is suppose to be really good.  I'd rather give Ballard the pick in a really good draft class then take the pick away and get a good but not great 26 year old player.     I am generally skeptical of trading first or 2nd round picks away.  I think the Trent Richardson trade left a bad taste in my mouth.  
    • That’s a personal opinion, just I think he’s a very rough person. Overall, I trust the judgement of the NFL, just based off of what everyone heard and saw, I would have suspended him. I’m not upset either way though, because I don’t have enough information to judge it all
    • Yeah, you'd definitely want better production out of a guy you used a #1 pick to get, but that's how the cookie crumbles sometimes.
    • Seems dumb.  Who is going to want to go to those games?   Who wants to watch 2 "B-teams" going at it?     Keep it at 16 games.  
  • Members

    • DoubleE Colt

      DoubleE Colt 41

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Valpo2004

      Valpo2004 3,419

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NannyMcafee

      NannyMcafee 1,069

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Defjamz26

      Defjamz26 3,934

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ThaCaliColt

      ThaCaliColt 170

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Beizy317

      Beizy317 19

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • coltskane

      coltskane 887

      Senior Members
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • MFT5

      MFT5 386

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • WarGhost21

      WarGhost21 934

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ClaytonColt

      ClaytonColt 332

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...