TomDiggs

Colts extend RG Mark Glowinski [Merge]

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

In Ballard's presser and in his interview with Dan Dakich he said he will always work on getting trench players on both sides of the ball.  Up grading the talent level at most all positions.

 

Smart.

 

Agreed.

 

Ballard has been crystal clear in all of his dealings w the media and fans. He has not misled anyone. He has said things and then stuck by it. If anything, I have seen numerous Colts articles where writers basically say "Ballard said he was going to do this" or "Ballard basically said he was not going to do that" in reference to fans being upset that we did or did not do something in player acquisition.

 

This is why any fans upset that we don't chase Bell or A.Brown, etc are just not listening. Listen now and you would know we are not going after those guys.

 

Ballard has said repeatedly he will build through the lines on both sides of the ball. He has also said he thinks the OL needs to be 10 deep.

 

I think the one thing that would prevent us from taking a first round offensive lineman is the fact that this class is so good and so deep on the defensive line. There might be a DL at 26 that is usually a top-15 talent in other years. That will necessitate us taking that DL.

 

But if the DL talent is not there for whatever reason, I would 100% not put it beyond Ballard taking an OL there for now and the future.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

Not at all. If Glowinski loses a camp competition and gets relegated to the bench, oh well. But this signing clearly indicates that he's the projected starter.

 

The other poster said this contract is that of a backup guard, which isn't true, because no one is paying guards $6m and projecting them as backups. Glowinski is the starter, unless he gets outplayed in the offseason.

 

As for Smith, if he loses the RT competition, that doesn't automatically make him the starter at RG. Most likely, he'd be on the bench, unless Glowinski doesn't play well at RG.

 

True...but at this rate, I think you can definitely live with him as a backup at that rate if better talent comes around. 

 

Ballard has spoken at length about having a very deep OL. Glow could easily be one of those pieces. But for now, he's likely the starting RG. 

 

I do think we will see a RT brought in somehow. That gives them depth at both spots on the right side.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

If a top line prospect falls to our lap, Im not gonna be against it because its not a need. I would just prefer we don't go into the draft with the idea we need to address the oline again with one of our early picks.

Have you seen what happened to the oline once C Kelley got hurt, or when LT AC didn’t start the first 6 or so games? Or when RG GLow sat out a few games. Not the same engine/productivity as before.

 

I’m not saying let’s move up in the first to grab the best LT available, But some well calculated insurance for Luck/RB is not a bad thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rackeen305 said:

Have you seen what happened to the oline once C Kelley got hurt, or when LT AC didn’t start the first 6 or so games? Or when RG GLow sat out a few games. Not the same engine/productivity as before.

 

I’m not saying let’s move up in the first to grab the best LT available, But some well calculated insurance for Luck/RB is not a bad thing.

 

As I mentioned a number of times, yes we need depth, but you can find depth in the later rounds. You don't need to pick one in the early rounds.

Share this post


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

I'm not 100% sure Smith is our starting RT.  In his recent interviews Ballard still seemed unconvinced that he was a RT.  The money Glowinski received seemed like what you would pay a quality backup like Reitz.  I still have a feeling we might be looking for another RT maybe in FA.    

I think a top 10 RT in the draft or in FA would have to fall out of a tree for Ballard to upgrade what looks like a proper pick at #37 last year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

It's probably the smart/neccessary thing to do. I'd prefer him as good depth not a starter. I wpuld prefer a upgrade at RT and move Smithy at RG. Venturi also said that but he also said a T is more expensive than a G.

I think we can use a good C to backup often injured Kelley and also depth at G.

I think Ballard rides the idea that both Glow and Smith are fairly-young and young players who will improve each year.  I doubt that he makes any moves along the oline other than churning backups.  In order to get a T that is good enough to supplant Smith right away, he's going to have to devote a pick in the second round or above, IMO, which he won't do this year.

 

Maybe a 4th round OT for depth/development to beat out Clark and Haeg next season, and who might start in future years.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Also some interesting stats with regard to Glow. Obviously he does not get all this credit. But it is still worth noting.

 

Would be interesting to see a similar take on games without AC, Kelly and before Smith stepped in.

 

But still, tells a solid story of the success with Glow in the lineup.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great deal and solid value! Good that Ballard got this done soon and early before the FA starts. I think Glow has made the right decision for himself. He improved here in Indy and still needs to improve alot more esp in pass pro. But he is a solid starting G, which dont grow on trees.

 

That said, I dont think Ballard will or should stop constantly investing in our oline though. Depth and competition is key. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard is all about improving talent across every position when he can. What he has said is pretty self explanatory of what he wants.

I just don't see him drafting players out of positional need. The first three rounds he will be working on the core of players he has been talking about.

I have a strong feeling his draft board will not come close matching the big amount of mock drafts we are going to be looking at.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, TomDiggs said:

Smart.

 

Agreed.

 

Ballard has been crystal clear in all of his dealings w the media and fans. He has not misled anyone. He has said things and then stuck by it. If anything, I have seen numerous Colts articles where writers basically say "Ballard said he was going to do this" or "Ballard basically said he was not going to do that" in reference to fans being upset that we did or did not do something in player acquisition.

 

This is why any fans upset that we don't chase Bell or A.Brown, etc are just not listening. Listen now and you would know we are not going after those guys.

 

Ballard has said repeatedly he will build through the lines on both sides of the ball. He has also said he thinks the OL needs to be 10 deep.

 

I think the one thing that would prevent us from taking a first round offensive lineman is the fact that this class is so good and so deep on the defensive line. There might be a DL at 26 that is usually a top-15 talent in other years. That will necessitate us taking that DL.

 

But if the DL talent is not there for whatever reason, I would 100% not put it beyond Ballard taking an OL there for now and the future.

Those DL that are so good are the ones going top 15, only because there is nothing else good coming out in this draft. There are maybe 2 QBs that will be drafted in the first round, but neither are first round quality, let alone the top 10 in which they will be drafted. Our first pick will not be DL, based solely on the fact that 8 DL will go top 15, leaving good quality players at other positions available. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Antonio Garcia may work his way into the backup rotation next season. Highly regarded coming out of college #85 pick in 2017 draft, major health issues (Blood clot in lungs) have derailed him but he seems to be moving past those and regaining strength and size (lost 40 lbs at one point). He is way off everyone radar at this point but so was Glowinski this time last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

Those DL that are so good are the ones going top 15, only because there is nothing else good coming out in this draft. There are maybe 2 QBs that will be drafted in the first round, but neither are first round quality, let alone the top 10 in which they will be drafted. Our first pick will not be DL, based solely on the fact that 8 DL will go top 15, leaving good quality players at other positions available. 

He will be looking for pass rushers. That can from any position on the D-line or linebacker. He feels that is our biggest need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

Those DL that are so good are the ones going top 15, only because there is nothing else good coming out in this draft. There are maybe 2 QBs that will be drafted in the first round, but neither are first round quality, let alone the top 10 in which they will be drafted. Our first pick will not be DL, based solely on the fact that 8 DL will go top 15, leaving good quality players at other positions available. 

 

I am not disagreeing with your assessment that these good DL will go in the top 15. Heck, most mock drafts so far have shown 8-10 DL/Edge guys going in the top 15.

 

What I was getting at is that the DL left on the board when we pick at pick 26 will be rated as highly as other DL that were picked in the top-15 in previous years.

 

That was all i was getting at.

 

And if Ballard and the scouting department have DL rated that favorably (as some of these other scouting sites do) then I could see he going DL at 26.

 

I personally think if there was not a DL that he valued highly at 26 and there was a highly rated OL there, the Colts could easily take the OL before taking a WR (as an example).

 

Either way, this is a good draft to need DL help in when you consider how deep this draft is there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Ballard is all about improving talent across every position when he can. What he has said is pretty self explanatory of what he wants.

I just don't see him drafting players out of positional need. The first three rounds he will be working on the core of players he has been talking about.

I have a strong feeling his draft board will not come close matching the big amount of mock drafts we are going to be looking at.

 

He drafted out of need last year...even said so.

 

But going forward, I think you are right...with the exception of the DL. It's the 2nd highest positio group AND it is missing a handful of pieces. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

He will be looking for pass rushers. That can from any position on the D-line or linebacker. He feels that is our biggest need.

 

Players that most likely will be there for us at 26 and 34.

 

Byron Murphy cb,
Deionte Thompson safety, 
Johnathan Abram, safety
A.j Brown, WR
N'keal Harry, WR
D.K. Metcalf, WR
Jerry Tillery, DT

Brian Burns DE
Dre'mont Jones DE/DT
Mack Wilson, LB

Share this post


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

 

He drafted out of need last year...even said so.

 

 

 

hes gone bpa in the first round both times imo.  nelson obviously filled a big need too, while neither of them had the greatest positional value.  

 

the second round and beyond did seem to be geared towards need though 

Share this post


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

 

Players that most likely will be there for us at 26 and 34.

 

Byron murphy cb,
Deionte Thompson safety, 
Johnathan abrafm, safety
A.j brown, WR
N'keal harry, WR
D.K. metcalf, WR
Jerry tillery, DT
Brian burns DE
Dre'mont jones DE/DT
Mack Wilson, LB

 

Yeah...I think people need to accept that WR might just be the play, considering where they are drafting.

 

Something tells me that they probably won't be drafting at #26. I sense either an agressive move up if someone slips or a trade back to try to have get some more draft assets.

Share this post


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

 

True...but at this rate, I think you can definitely live with him as a backup at that rate if better talent comes around. 

 

Ballard has spoken at length about having a very deep OL. Glow could easily be one of those pieces. But for now, he's likely the starting RG. 

 

I do think we will see a RT brought in somehow. That gives them depth at both spots on the right side.

 

Yeah if the circumstances push Glowinski to the bench, so be it. But they didn't sign him at $6m/year to be a backup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

hes gone bpa in the first round both times imo.  nelson obviously filled a big need too, while neither of them had the greatest positional value.  

 

the second round and beyond did seem to be geared towards need though 

 

Yeah...I mean when he says "we wanted to build out the trenches" and then he drafts two interior OL and two DL...I don't think it leaves much to interpretation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

Yeah...I think people need to accept that WR might just be the play, considering where they are drafting.

 

 

Agreed.  When Ballard said that he is "constantly looking to upgrade the trenches", he can do that by improving the quality of the bench too, not just the starters.  It doesn't mean he's going to allow himself to perpetually use first and second round picks on olinemen simply because an olineman might be clear BPA.

 

He'll make moves to try to get out of that pick if that BPA olineman is sitting there at 26 or 34 or 58.   It wouldn't be very smart to sit there and pick a G just because a G is BPA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CR91 said:

 

 

I have nothing against looking for more line depth, but we have a golden opportunity to add more young talent while Luck is still in the prime of his career. This is our open window to make a run if we can get the right players to contribute now, instead of drafting players to groom for a few years to replace a aging vet that still has a few good years left.  

 

The problem with drafting weapons for Luck is that they also take time to develop, so the theory that you're putting someone on the shelf until 2020 or beyond is kind of a universal theme for the most part. Most players take a couple of years to fully hit their stride. FA is the way to address issues where you'd like more immediate production, like Glowinski and Inman. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Yeah...I mean when he says "we wanted to build out the trenches" and then he drafts two interior OL and two DL...I don't think it leaves much to interpretation.

i dont think safety was the biggest need when we took hooker.  the trenches were a bigger need then, and the team went on to give up the most sacks while not getting many them selves

 

hooker was what they thought was a bpa pick 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Opinions, and speculation, are grand, but I appreciate real news SOOOO much more.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Agreed.  When Ballard said that he is "constantly looking to upgrade the trenches", he can do that by improving the quality of the bench.  It doesn't mean he's going to allow himself to perpetually use first and second round picks on olinmen simply because an olineman might be clear BPA.

 

He'll make moves to try to get out of that pick if that olineman is sitting there at 26 or 34 or 58.

 

In that recent interview he talks about having 2 WRs and a TE. He wants a WR that can take over if Hilton is being double-teamed. Specifically mentions KC as an example...because they have Hill, Kelce and Watkins (who they just signed to a big contract). 

 

Then he was asked about Cain..and all but says we aren't going to be relying on him to be that guy next season.

 

So I think we need to put the bed the idea that WR isn't a need and that Cain is all we need...because it sounds like Ballard has different ideas and is looking to invest in the position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

i dont think safety was the biggest need when we took hooker.  the trenches were a bigger need then, and the team went on to give up the most sacks while not getting many them selves

 

hooker was what they thought was a bpa pick 

 

No...I was just talking about the first three rounds of last year's draft. 

Share this post


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

 

The problem with drafting weapons for Luck is that they also take time to develop, so the theory that you're putting someone on the shelf until 2020 or beyond is kind of a universal theme for the most part. Most players take a couple of years to fully hit their stride. FA is the way to address issues where you'd like more immediate production, like Glowinski and Inman. 

 

I think WR could have a decent chance of immediate production...depending on where and who they draft. Guys like Fountain and Cain were raw players. But there are some very refined WRs in this draft...like the Browns, Isabella, Samuel, etc.

 

I know he is going to draft a WR...but I am also interested in how else he addresses it. There will certainly be WRs available in both FA and trade.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

In that recent interview he talks about having 2 WRs and a TE. He wants a WR that can take over if Hilton is being double-teamed. Specifically mentions KC as an example...because they have Hill, Kelce and Watkins (who they just signed to a big contract). 

 

Then he was asked about Cain..and all but says we aren't going to be relying on him to be that guy next season.

 

So I think we need to put the bed the idea that WR isn't a need and that Cain is all we need...because it sounds like Ballard has different ideas and is looking to invest in the position.

 

Minor difference, but I thought Ballard said that they think Cain can be the WR that can beat one on one match-ups when TY is being doubled.  However, Cain has not played and is coming off a knee injury.

12 minutes ago, buccolts said:

Opinions, and speculation, are grand, but I appreciate real news SOOOO much more.

 

Where do you get "real" news?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

In that recent interview he talks about having 2 WRs and a TE. He wants a WR that can take over if Hilton is being double-teamed. Specifically mentions KC as an example...because they have Hill, Kelce and Watkins (who they just signed to a big contract). 

 

Then he was asked about Cain..and all but says we aren't going to be relying on him to be that guy next season.

 

So I think we need to bed the idea that WR isn't a need and that Cain is all we need...because it sounds like Ballard has different ideas and is looking to invest in the position.

I don't think any fan that has been paying attention thinks we don't need a receiver.

Everyone knows Cain is still a rookie and is coming off surgery.

Ballard's first priority will be getting a pass rusher, preferably a couple before the receiver position is addressed. That is basically what he said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind it. He's the one piece I kind of thought was more iffy than the other to be honest, but the unit as a whole can maintain some continuity and improve their collective play, that's cool too.

Share this post


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

 

Minor difference, but I thought Ballard said that they think Cain can be the WR that can beat one on one match-ups when TY is being doubled.  However, Cain has not played and is coming off a knee injury.

 

Where do you get "real" news?

 

They do think he can...I was just speaking to next season...and being able to fill that need. Ballard was actually getting ready to say that they didn't think so...and then Dakich cut him off (at least that's how it reads on the transcript).

Share this post


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

 

In that recent interview he talks about having 2 WRs and a TE. He wants a WR that can take over if Hilton is being double-teamed. Specifically mentions KC as an example...because they have Hill, Kelce and Watkins (who they just signed to a big contract). 

 

Then he was asked about Cain..and all but says we aren't going to be relying on him to be that guy next season.

 

So I think we need to put the bed the idea that WR isn't a need and that Cain is all we need...because it sounds like Ballard has different ideas and is looking to invest in the position.

If BPA at 34 is WR, that will be the pick, IMO.   While I agree that a BPA WR could be taken over dline at 26 in other years, I suspect there will be enough pass rushers left on the board this year that one will be BPA at 26.

 

Ballard will already have a dlineman secured by the time 34 approaches, so that pick will be more wide open in terms of players of value at numerous positions.

Share this post


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

Where do you get "real" news?

 

Typically, only from the horses mouth......

 

 

 

Great screen name for Irsay, or Ballard, BTW.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure this one will pan out - why... we lost our o-line coach, and who's gonna replace him?

 

Luck will be sacked 25plus times next season, unless we get a quality o-line coach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ThorstenDenmark said:

I'm not sure this one will pan out - why... we lost our o-line coach, and who's gonna replace him?

 

Luck will be sacked 25plus times next season, unless we get a quality o-line coach.

 

I mean, you know they're gonna hire a line coach, right?

Share this post


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

If BPA at 34 is WR, that will be the pick, IMO.   While I agree that a BPA WR could be taken over dline at 26 in other years, I suspect there will be enough pass rushers left on the board this year that one will be BPA at 26.

 

Ballard will already have a dlineman secured by the time 34 approaches, so that pick will be more wide open in terms of players of value at numerous positions.

If I remember correctly the reason Ballard explained for taking Smith last year was he was the only remaining OL on their board with a 1st. rd grade that could start.  I expect he will follow that same approach this year and that might take DL off the board with the 1st. pick if they don't have him graded as a starter.  Especially with the expected run on DL.  I think he will be looking for starters in positions of need with the 1st couple of picks.  JMO.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

Thank you skinnz. You beat me to it.
AC, Clark, and Haeg are HIS potential starting LT's next season.
Ballard and his staff can't sleep very well with that possibility.
They have till final cuts to deal with it so...

Ballard said it's put up or shut up time for Clark so I'm expecting we will be making changes there.  Either in the draft or through FA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ThorstenDenmark said:

I'm not sure this one will pan out - why... we lost our o-line coach, and who's gonna replace him?

 

Luck will be sacked 25plus times next season, unless we get a quality o-line coach.

 

So, the line is gonna go from best to miserable in terms of sacks because we're replacing the Oline coach? There's a reason they were fired, these guys know what they're doing. I'd imagine the replacement will be fully capable, and may have them playing at an even higher level. Not to mention, the longer they play together, the more cohesiveness they form. Better. Not worse.

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.