Is defense the biggest need or offense?

[throwing BBZ]

1 hour ago, krunk said:

I think Ballard sounded like he was pretty good with the 4 backs we have when I read the Colts.com interview.  He spoke more than once about Jonathan Williams in that commentary.  He also sounded like he wanted to continue to add players on D. Specifically the D line and more specifically at pass rusher. I think with everything we've got between all the FA money and the 9 draft picks I think we are in position to load up on Offense and Defense.  Especially since we've got some good young talent coming back between guys like Cain, Fountain, Ishmael, Marcus Johnson.  Plus you got an Old Head that you could consider bringing back in Dontrelle Inman.   It shouldn't take a whole lot to get the Offense looking really, really good.  Definitely should be a defensive draft now that I'm looking at it.

 

Anyone that doesn't like Mack a lot is >>>>!
Wilkins sure attacks the line fast and looks very interesting as a #2 type back.
Hines seems best suited as a gadget guy and hopefully won't be used to run it much.
Maybe Williams is/becomes a guy you can use as a lower carry #1 if needed?
 I have no doubt there will be quality competition in camp for the bottom 3.

[throwing BBZ]

18 hours ago, Myles said:

With the cap space available, it is possible. 

 

It's odd being in a spot where we can hope to sign a player that maybe in years past we would have excuses not to.

Like with Clowny.   I think in past years, some of us would say things like:

He isn't worth the money he'll be asking for

I'd rather use the money on an edge rusher

 

 

Thankfully our Owner got out of the Mentoring business, and let the Man execute the plan.
 I feel confident at least one of the best FA defensive lineman will soon be a Colt. 

[shasta519]

7 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

So I take it you are not familiar with history?

 

I am familiar with recent history...and it would suggest that you are incorrect. Which has been pointed out by a couple of people now.

 

I am not sure why you are doubling down on this. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

20 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

Mahommes is Rogers like with a higher ceiling. 
Andrew is rather Robo and sure looked good when he had lots of time.
 One thing is certain, CB will remain All-In to have a really good OL.
And Andrew is awfully far into his career to become things he just isn't natural at.
 He will get better though, i am confident.

I know often you are tough on Andrew but that is how most fanbases are on their QB's so I see your point when they play lack luster. Packer fans even bash Rodgers at times  . To me next season will show me if Andrew is Peyton/Elway like. It is just time to put up or shut up now. I think the Colts made huge strides this year but now the expectations are huge. Ballard needs to nail this Draft and Andrew needs to turn into a top 10 QB of all-time. Not much else to be said. 

[richard pallo]

FWI Bleacher Report had an article today on FA's and what bold FA move each team should make.  They have the Colts signing Trey Flowers and they think he would be a perfect fit for our defense. 

[#12.]

He seems like an obvious choice, but signing a New England player in free agency is often similar to hiring a New England coach.  

 

 

[#12.]

I'm fine with the RB stable.  Yes, you might have durability issues with Mack, but Wilkins would be fine, if given the chance.  

[richard pallo]

8 minutes ago, #12. said:

He seems like an obvious choice, but signing a New England player in free agency is often similar to hiring a New England coach.  

 

 

Vinny worked out okay.

[richard pallo]

1 hour ago, krunk said:

I ain't tripping at all if he goes after Hunt of course.  I'm just not sure what his thoughts are on the subject .

No one knows his thoughts but I would bet he hasn't ruled out the possibility.  It would be one heck of value signing.  He loves value. 

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, shastamasta said:

 

I am familiar with recent history...and it would suggest that you are incorrect. Which has been pointed out by a couple of people now.

 

I am not sure why you are doubling down on this. 

Because history is on my side.

I said rookie and 2 nd year receivers make occasional plays but not on a consistent bases.

Sorry if you have a problem with it.

[krunk]

2 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

Thankfully our Owner got out of the Mentoring business, and let the Man execute the plan.
 I feel confident at least one of the best FA defensive lineman will soon be a Colt. 

I actually wouldn't mind Clowney.  Probably going to cost some coin and there are some question marks there but I've been waiting to see him in a pure 4-3 scheme for some time now.  That's what he was in coming out of South Carolina when he was terrorizing college football.

[Myles]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

Because history is on my side.

I said rookie and 2 nd year receivers make occasional plays but not on a consistent bases.

Sorry if you have a problem with it.

I think you two are just getting confused on wording.

You posted this:

"List the WRs taken in the earlier rounds over the last 5 years and tell me the ones who made more than an occasional play in their first couple of years".

 

He replied with this:

"The 2014 draft alone had several guys who were impactful as rookies...and especially as 2nd year players (Evans, OBJ, Robinson, Cooks, Landry, Kelvin Benjamin, etc.)

This season had 2nd year guys like Corey Davis, Kupp, JuJu and Golladay".

 

Seems like he answered you question accurately.  

[pgt_rob]

This team needs pass rush badly. If we can somehow find a great one, we're going to look so much better. Could you imagine another great pick like Darius Leonard on the defense out of this coming up draft? I hope we find one. Corner and safety are another position of need too. Kenny Moore played out of his mind this season. But I think we need another DB. Safety was really thin this year too. 

 

As far as offense. I like what Mack and Hines have brought to this team. Not totally sure about Wilkins at the moment. I'd like to see another top player in the WR position. I think Inman came on great this year. He could possibly step up some more. Chester Rogers stepped up a lot this year as well but I don't necessarily feel as if he's another W1 material, more like W3. If we somehow can find another person who can play at TY Hilton's level, I think we will be golden.

[horseshoecrabs]

Still would like to see a big pounding Running back, that can get the tough yardage in goal line and short yardage situations, for depth at our running back group. 

[Smonroe]

1 hour ago, horseshoecrabs said:

Still would like to see a big pounding Running back, that can get the tough yardage in goal line and short yardage situations, for depth at our running back group. 

 

If you listened to Ballard, we may already have him on the team.  They really wanted Williams.

 

Probably won’t know until the preseason if he’s the answer. 

[horseshoecrabs]

2 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

If you listened to Ballard, we may already have him on the team.  They really wanted Williams.

 

Probably won’t know until the preseason if he’s the answer. 

No matter where he comes from, the Draft, FA, walk on, practice squad, or if he is already on the team, someone needs to fill this void on a regular basis. 

[crazycolt1]

3 hours ago, Myles said:

I think you two are just getting confused on wording.

You posted this:

"List the WRs taken in the earlier rounds over the last 5 years and tell me the ones who made more than an occasional play in their first couple of years".

 

He replied with this:

"The 2014 draft alone had several guys who were impactful as rookies...and especially as 2nd year players (Evans, OBJ, Robinson, Cooks, Landry, Kelvin Benjamin, etc.)

This season had 2nd year guys like Corey Davis, Kupp, JuJu and Golladay".

 

Seems like he answered you question accurately.  

He corrected me with exactly what I said.

It's no big deal, not worth an argument.

[Smonroe]

4 hours ago, horseshoecrabs said:

No matter where he comes from, the Draft, FA, walk on, practice squad, or if he is already on the team, someone needs to fill this void on a regular basis. 

 

Youre preaching to the saved brother.  I’ve been saying that all year.    

[ManningGM]

On 1/28/2019 at 12:53 PM, krunk said:

I actually wouldn't mind Clowney.  Probably going to cost some coin and there are some question marks there but I've been waiting to see him in a pure 4-3 scheme for some time now.  That's what he was in coming out of South Carolina when he was terrorizing college football.

Would make our games against the Texans a whole lot more interesting. 

[Dark Superman]

100% defense.

[Stephen]

On 1/28/2019 at 10:47 AM, #12. said:

I'm fine with the RB stable.  Yes, you might have durability issues with Mack, but Wilkins would be fine, if given the chance.  

RBS can stand to be upgraded 

[aaron11]

they lost because of offense.  we need to score to beat the chiefs and patriots

[lollygagger8]

On 1/28/2019 at 10:57 AM, richard pallo said:

No one knows his thoughts but I would bet he hasn't ruled out the possibility.  It would be one heck of value signing.  He loves value. 

 

Everyone does 

[krunk]

57 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

they lost because of offense.  we need to score to beat the chiefs and patriots

I thought we didn't execute well on offense, but also the game plan was bad.  We should have and could have done exactly what the Pats did against them.  Run the ball a lot and open things up with play action passing and the short passes.  The Patriots played more to possess the football and put pressure on the Chiefs to score.  They knew their defense would get more stops than the Chiefs would.  We should have played it the same way.  Instead we had more of a pass heavy attack working against the wind, the bad elements and also the number 1 pass rushing defense in football..  The Patriots chose to work more against the Chiefs weakness which was the run defense versus trying to work against their strength which was the pass defense.  It didn't turn out well for us obviously.

[DougDew]

Considering we just signed Glowinski, it seems the starting oline is set, so we only have one position on Offense that needs immediate upgrade, and that's WR.  You could also argue for RB, since I think Hines and Mack are really just traditional third round backs.  I'd like to have a RB the defense is concerned about.

 

I think just about any position on defense is in play for upgrade, except WILL and FS.

[Deadpool]

On ‎1‎/‎27‎/‎2019 at 7:49 AM, Stephen said:

We didn't score much versus chiefs but we also didn't do a good job of shutting  down their offense. So would going defense heavy or offense  in the draft be better.

I think we need to focus on the Defense in FA. If we get Flowers, and someone like Clowney (would be nice to pry him away from Houston and let him go after Watson) and improve the pass rush.....Then come draft day, draft a WR in the first round and then go after a Corner and Safety in the second round Safety Nasir Adderley from Delaware or Florida Safety Chauncey Gardner - Johnson and then Corner Julian Love from Notre Dame. Then mix it up in rounds 3 through 7 with offense and defense. We really only need one more WR, maybe draft a O-lineman later in the draft for depth reasons, but keep a focus on defense still.  But in terms of WR, I really like Keelan Doss  from Cal-Davis. I think he would do good in the Colts offense. 

[DerekDiggler]

On 1/28/2019 at 10:15 AM, throwing BBZ said:

 

Anyone that doesn't like Mack a lot is >>>>!
Wilkins sure attacks the line fast and looks very interesting as a #2 type back.
Hines seems best suited as a gadget guy and hopefully won't be used to run it much.
Maybe Williams is/becomes a guy you can use as a lower carry #1 if needed?
 I have no doubt there will be quality competition in camp for the bottom 3.

If you don’t think the RB position can be upgraded from Mack then you just don’t know football.   I am not on the sign Bell bandwagon at all.  But he would avereagen140+ behind this line.   Mack is not near as good as some of you “ball watchers” might think.  It is all because of the online.   And we could certainly upgrade easily

 

that said.    I’d still rather draft D and let the RBbC keep going for now.  But the RB position is not set 

[horseshoecrabs]

Let's face it we still need upgrades on both sides of the ball. We can't ignore one or the other. 

[ClaytonColt]

On 1/31/2019 at 1:03 PM, aaron11 said:

they lost because of offense.  we need to score to beat the chiefs and patriots

It wasn't because of one or the other.

 

Being down 24-7 down at half time with the score coming from a special teams play is clearly a failing from both sides of the ball.

 

With the resources we've sunk into Luck, TY, our O-Line, and TEs we should be able to score on any body. Some players have to be complementary, they can't all be stars. Our WR2 and probably running back could be upgraded of course but when there are so many glaring holes at crucial positions on the D then that should be the focus for our resources.

 

 

[aaron11]

37 minutes ago, ClaytonColt said:

With the resources we've sunk into Luck, TY, our O-Line, and TEs we should be able to score on any body. Some players have to be complementary, they can't all be stars. Our WR2 and probably running back could be upgraded of course but when there are so many glaring holes at crucial positions on the D then that should be the focus for our resources.

 

 

our offense still has a ways to go to be on par with the Rams, Chiefs or Saints, and i think thats more important than defense these days.  it takes 30+ points to beat them 

 

we could go dline but its not mandatory.  there might be a big run on them but we can have top pick or two of WRs.  i think we are too reliant on TY

[ClaytonColt]

19 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

our offense still has a ways to go to be on par with the Rams, Chiefs or Saints, and i think thats more important than defense these days.  it takes 30+ points to beat them 

 

we could go dline but its not mandatory.  there might be a big run on them but we can have top pick or two of WRs.  i think we are too reliant on TY

Our defense has an even further way to go! Maybe we are in terms of weapons but in terms of the offence as a whole we have either drafted or paid 7 players who are stars at their position. We have to figure out a way for lower end players to contribute. Players like Dwayne Allen, Dorsett and Austin Blythe are playing for rings tomorrow. 

 

Some good results against second and third tier quarterbacks have conned us into thinking the defense is close. In terms of pure talent it's not at all.

 

As an example. Who is our 5th best defensive player? Whoever it is probably wouldn't play for another Championship level team, I bet our 5th or even 6th best offensive players would though.

[horseshoecrabs]

No matter how many studs you get on defense, in this era, offense seems to be the priority to win in this league now. Keeping your defense fresh by ball control helps out tremendously, even with less than stellar defense. The Rams on paper have a hell of a defense but, they have not dominated. Same goes for the Texans, on defense, on paper looks good but, in the playoffs ? non factor. 

[ClaytonColt]

13 minutes ago, horseshoecrabs said:

No matter how many studs you get on defense, in this era, offense seems to be the priority to win in this league now. Keeping your defense fresh by ball control helps out tremendously, even with less than stellar defense. The Rams on paper have a hell of a defense but, they have not dominated. Same goes for the Texans, on defense, on paper looks good but, in the playoffs ? non factor. 

It's not that there a non-factor is it? Both sides of the ball have a factor is any result.

 

It's just that an A* defense will no longer keep teams to 14 points and allow a below average offense to succeed.  Thats why the Texans fail. The Rams haven't got themselves into a position where they have 7 players drafted in the first round on defense because it's pointless and not important.

 

If you only have a B defense how are you ever going to stop a top notch offense. They just march up and down on you and you can't beat them if their offense is also good.

 

[horseshoecrabs]

3 minutes ago, ClaytonColt said:

It's not that there a non-factor is it? Both sides of the ball have a factor is any result.

 

It's just that an A* defense will no longer keep teams to 14 points and allow a below average offense to succeed.  Thats why the Texans fail. The Rams haven't got themselves into a position where they have 7 players drafted in the first round on defense because it's pointless and not important.

 

If you only have a B defense how are you ever going to stop a top notch offense. They just march up and down on you and you can't beat them if their offense is also good.

 

It's called ball control on offense keep your defense fresh!

[horseshoecrabs]

If we were just basing the defense  on paper then the Patriots should have no chance at winning  this Super Bowl. But my point is that . without an consistent offensive ball control it doesn't matter a whole lot., how on paper, your defense stacks up in this era.  

[horseshoecrabs]

New England 's defense is ranked 22 second in the pass, 27th in the rush, yet, here they are in the Super Bowl, Explain that.

 

[ClaytonColt]

40 minutes ago, horseshoecrabs said:

It's called ball control on offense keep your defense fresh!

I don't think it is. The difference between a good time of possession team and an average one is only about a minute. You can't hide a lack of talent of defense no matter how much talent you have on offense.

 

31 minutes ago, horseshoecrabs said:

If we were just basing the defense  on paper then the Patriots should have no chance at winning  this Super Bowl. But my point is that . without an consistent offensive ball control it doesn't matter a whole lot., how on paper, your defense stacks up in this era.  

Why? They're one of the heaviest investors on defense through the draft in the current era.

 

Over the last ten years they've had 24 picks in the first two rounds.

 

16 on defense

8 on offense.

 

22 minutes ago, horseshoecrabs said:

New England 's defense is ranked 22 second in the pass, 27th in the rush, yet, here they are in the Super Bowl, Explain that.

 

Because you're looking at stats and I'm looking at talent. 

 

It's about big plays in the crucial moments not just yards. It's complimentary football.

 

Once again. If D didn't matter then Belichick wouldn't be pumping the draft resources into it.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Yeah I don’t think it matters to much where your ranked on defense. It’s more of are you able to stop the other team at critical parts of the game.  It’s not about having a dominate D anyone. But you do need to get stops when they are important.

[horseshoecrabs]

7 minutes ago, ClaytonColt said:

I don't think it is. The difference between a good time of possession team and an average one is only about a minute. You cant hide a lack of talent of defense no matter how much talent you have on offense.

 

 Why? They're one of the heaviest investors on defense through the draft in the current era.

 

Over the last ten years they've had 24 picks in the first two rounds.

 

16 on defense

8 on offense.

 

Because you're looking at stats and I'm looking at talent. 

 

It's about big plays in the crucial moments boy just yards. It's complimentary football.

 

Once again. If D didn't matter then Belichick wouldn't be pumping the draft resources into it.

Darn Clayton Colt! did you ever consider trying out for a Gm position ? Your perspicacity, definitely only relates to your perspective. Us only lonely, uninformed fans thank you for your knowledge. We will  wait patiently  for next words of wisdom. 

[ClaytonColt]

1 minute ago, horseshoecrabs said:

Darn Clayton Colt! did you ever consider trying out for a Gm position ? Your perspicacity, definitely only relates to your perspective. Us only lonely, uninformed fans thank you for your knowledge. We will  wait patiently  for next words of wisdom. 

I'm not saying that you're uninformed. Just that I disagree with you and giving real terms examples why. No need to take it personally.