Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:


Every decent player has an impact on their team. I just think the term impact player means more, as confusing as that sounds. I think of an impact player like Luck, Leonard, TY Hilton, and Nelson. A guy who can change a game with one play or a guy who stands out well above the rest.

 

That's what it means. It's a difference maker...someone that commands attention and can change the game with one play.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Some cool stuff here.    

Brad wells is a child with rocks for brains. How does re-signing Geathers effect hooker? They play different positions. I swear I have no clue how he has a job. Half the people on this forum are more

Posted Images

1 minute ago, shastamasta said:

 

That's what it means. It's a difference maker...someone that commands attention and can change the game with one play.

 

so is hooker not a difference maker? All he had last year was 40 tackles and two picks. wow he sucks atleast by your definition 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Defjamz26 said:

Sure he played a part. But not as big a part as the D-Line and our all pro LB did.

 

So without geathers, we'd be what in run defense top 15-20? thats not making an impact?

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

 

Sure there is. About 2.5 yard/catch and 1 yard/carry.

 

Johnson is better at making people miss and picking up chunk yardage in the passing game. And he's actually a threat to run the ball (well...out of light fronts and shotgun). I really don't care to see Hines running the ball anymore.

 

What the.............????

 

You do know that Hines has only been a RB for basically two years.    Last season and his senior year in college.    He'll get better.

 

You do know that our offense will be improved and with it,  hopefully Hines has a chance to grow and improve with it.

 

Just because he's not great today,   doesn't mean he won't be much better tomorrow.

 

Hines should get better.     There's no apparent reason why he won't.

 

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

 

So getting us in the top 10 in run defense, that had nothing to do with Geathers?

 

You wanna give up on hines after one season? He had 800 total yards and 4 tds

 

Who is giving up on Hines? He is still here.

 

Hines' production was more volume-based than anything. When Johnson was getting that type of volume...he had more than 1k all-purpose yards and 7 TDs...and that was on a bad offense. He is just a better and more productive player.

 

You can have more than one of a similar type of players in a RBC. Just look at PHI when Reich was there.  

 

Mack/Duke/Hines/Wilkins would be a pretty good group.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Mitchell was more impactful in the 1st game he started. He ended up winning AFC defensive player of the week for 7 tackles, a PD, a INT, and a FF. It terms of impact it was more impactful than any game Geathers had this season. Check the game logs and you’ll see Geathers just racks up tackles. He doesn’t create turnovers or create negative plays in general.

 

And yet Mitchell has announced he won't be back next year, despite your rave reviews.

 

And, apparently,  we are still trying to re-sign Geathers,  despite your lukewarm reviews.

 

Imagine that......

 

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

 

Who is giving up on Hines? He is still here.

 

Hines' production was more volume-based than anything. When Johnson was getting that type of volume...he had more than 1k all-purpose yards and 7 TDs...and that was on a bad offense. He is just a better and more productive player.

 

You can have more than one of a similar type of players in a RBC. Just look at PHI when Reich was there.  

 

Mack/Duke/Hines/Wilkins would be a pretty good group.

 

Who else on the eagles played the sproles role? 

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

 

What the.............????

 

You do know that Hines has only been a RB for basically two years.    Last season and his senior year in college.    He'll get better.

 

You do know that our offense will be improved and with it,  hopefully Hines has a chance to grow and improve with it.

 

Just because he's not great today,   doesn't mean he won't be much better tomorrow.

 

Hines should get better.     There's no apparent reason why he won't.

 

 

No thanks...I want no part of that "Hines is a RB/Hines is not a RB" discussion that is going on.

 

All I will say is that his strength was clearly in the passing game. And on this team...a guy still figuring out how to play RB is not the deal candidate to be getting many carries each game. He wasn't making people miss much and he wasn't creating yards after contact. He could get better...but there are guys out there (and on this team) that are ahead of him.

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

 

Who is giving up on Hines? He is still here.

 

Hines' production was more volume-based than anything. When Johnson was getting that type of volume...he had more than 1k all-purpose yards and 7 TDs...and that was on a bad offense. He is just a better and more productive player.

 

You can have more than one of a similar type of players in a RBC. Just look at PHI when Reich was there.  

 

Mack/Duke/Hines/Wilkins would be a pretty good group.

I think having Duke and Hines would be redundant because it's practically the same skill set.  Duke is like a more refined Hines to me.

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

 

No thanks...I want no part of that "Hines is a RB/Hines is not a RB" discussion that is going on.

 

All I will say is that his strength was clearly in the passing game. And on this team...a guy still figuring out how to play RB is not the deal candidate to be getting many carries each game. He wasn't making people miss much and he wasn't creating yards after contact. He could get better...but there are guys out there (and on this team) that are ahead of him.

 

If you make him one dimensional, and all he does is receive....    he will be much, MUCH easier to defend.

 

But if he's running the ball 4-6 times a game,  then he's likely to be far more effective.    Because the defense is not going to be as sure of what Hines will be doing.

 

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

 

If you make him one dimensional, and all he does is receive....    he will be much, MUCH easier to defend.

 

But if he's running the ball 4-6 times a game,  then he's likely to be far more effective.    Because the defense is not going to be as sure of what Hines will be doing.

 

 

He already does that. He had a few rushing TDs also, didn't he? 

 

He is our James White, screen passes, slants, making people miss in space, and the occasional runs but James White does do it a little better on the running front which will come with time for Hines. 

 

I think Reich and our OC take care of the predictability part but the true question here is, how much do we think Hines can improve as a runner to make teams honor that unpredictability more?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

He already does that. He had a few rushing TDs also, didn't he? 

 

He is our James White, screen passes, slants, making people miss in space, and the occasional runs but James White does do it a little better on the running front which will come with time for Hines. 

 

I think Reich and our OC take care of the predictability part but the true question here is, how much do we think Hines can improve as a runner to make teams honor that unpredictability more?

I was responding to Shasta who wrote that he didn't want to see Hines run the ball anymore.

 

That struck me as.....    unwise.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Who else on the eagles played the sproles role? 

 

Smallwood and Barner were back up change of pace guys. Barner took over returning punts when Sproles got hurt in 2017. 

 

Obviously...neither of those guys are Darren Sproles...he's one-of-a-kind. But they did some of the same things. It never hurts to have depth and redundancy built in. 

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

 

Smallwood and Barner were back up change of pace guys. Barner took over returning punts when Sproles got hurt in 2017. 

 

Obviously...neither of those guys are Darren Sproles...he's one-of-a-kind. But they did some of the same things. It never hurts to have depth and redundancy built in. 

 

I get the depth part, but its not worth giving up a pick for a player that we would ask Hines to basically do the same thing even if he might be better

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

 

If you make him one dimensional, and all he does is receive....    he will be much, MUCH easier to defend.

 

But if he's running the ball 4-6 times a game,  then he's likely to be far more effective.    Because the defense is not going to be as sure of what Hines will be doing.

 

 

I agree...which I why I think people view Hines in more of a specialized role...like 2-1 personnel or out in the slot (which is how they used him at times last year). Having him to run out of the backfield (especially against a base defense) to keep the defense honest is sort of a waste of touches...when he's getting less than 4 YPC. He was very easy to stop in the run game. It would be one thing if he was ripping off chunk plays...but he hasn't so far.

 

But you bring up a larger point that I like...and this is a reason why I have wanted to add a RB than can run and catch for a while now. With the current depth chart, you have two guys that run well but don't offer much in the passing game (Mack and Wilkins) and a guy who can make some plays in the passing game but doesn't run well (Hines). To your point, the offense becomes predictable in those scenarios. 

 

Obviously these guys can improve other aspects of their game as they develop...but in the meantime being able to add a guy that can do both well (Coleman) or one that is a playmaker in the passing game but also productive in the run game (Johnson)...would be a boon to the offense I think. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

I agree...which I why I think people view Hines in more of a specialized role...like 2-1 personnel or out in the slot (which is how they used him at times last year). Having him to run out of the backfield (especially against a base defense) to keep the defense honest is sort of a waste of touches...when he's getting less than 4 YPC. He was very easy to stop in the run game. It would be one thing if he was ripping off chunk plays...but he hasn't so far.

 

But you bring up a larger point that I like...and this is a reason why I have wanted to add a RB than can run and catch for a while now. With the current depth chart, you have two guys that run well but don't offer much in the passing game (Mack and Wilkins) and a guy who can make some plays in the passing game but doesn't run well (Hines). To your point, the offense becomes predictable in those scenarios. 

 

Obviously these guys can improve other aspects of their game as they develop...but in the meantime being able to add a guy that can do both well (Coleman) or one that is a playmaker in the passing game but also productive in the run game (Johnson)...would be a boon to the offense I think. 

 

I do like Duke Johnson.....    I'm not sure Ballard wants to acquire him as a duplicate to Hines?

 

But if he does,  I'd be good with it.

 

The back I was hoping we'd show interest in,  but so far have not,  is TJ Yelson.    In his 4 years as mostly the primary back-up,  and 3rd down specialist,  he has nearly 3200 total yards,  nearly 800 yards per season.

 

So, he could back up Mack,  and still be an effective receiver and blocker in pass pro.    But at this point,  it appears doubtful unless something unexpected pops up....

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

He already does that. He had a few rushing TDs also, didn't he? 

 

He is our James White, screen passes, slants, making people miss in space, and the occasional runs but James White does do it a little better on the running front which will come with time for Hines. 

 

I think Reich and our OC take care of the predictability part but the true question here is, how much do we think Hines can improve as a runner to make teams honor that unpredictability more?

 

White is a good comp. He wasn't very much of a RB early on either. And he has improved...but he's not a guy that gets many carries each game. It's usually matchup-dependent. BB gave him like 8 total carries in the playoffs across three games. (Reich did the same thing with Hines as well).

 

The real difference for me is that in White's 2nd season (he missed nearly all of his rookie season)...he immediately proved to be much more dynamic in the passing game. Hines isn't there yet...whereas a guy like Duke Johnson is. 

 

And Duke's a better RB than both White and Hines.

 

 

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

 

I do like Duke Johnson.....    I'm not sure Ballard wants to acquire him as a duplicate to Hines?

 

But if he does,  I'd be good with it.

 

The back I was hoping we'd show interest in,  but so far have not,  is TJ Yelson.    In his 4 years as mostly the primary back-up,  and 3rd down specialist,  he has nearly 3200 total yards,  nearly 800 yards per season.

 

So, he could back up Mack,  and still be an effective receiver and blocker in pass pro.    But at this point,  it appears doubtful unless something unexpected pops up....

 

 

Yeldon gets a lot of flack for some reason...but I like that he is versatile. And it never hurts to have RBs like that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, krunk said:

I think having Duke and Hines would be redundant because it's practically the same skill set.  Duke is like a more refined Hines to me.

 

Yeah...there is some redundancy. But redundancy isn't a bad thing when we are talking about a physical position like RB. And we are talking offensive weapons...there is no real limit to how they can be deployed.

 

In this case... I would say refined = better and more versatile...which is something the RB group could use.

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

 

so is hooker not a difference maker? All he had last year was 40 tackles and two picks. wow he sucks atleast by your definition 

I know it's not popular on this forum, but Hooker has not been a difference maker. He may never be the player most think he is or maybe this year he becomes that guy. Really hope he does as I have many doubts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Blueblood23 said:

I know it's not popular on this forum, but Hooker has not been a difference maker. He may never be the player most think he is or maybe this year he becomes that guy. Really hope he does as I have many doubts.

 

So all the 30+ yard tds that we've been famous for giving up before Hooker got here hasn't been reduced?

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I do like Duke Johnson.....    I'm not sure Ballard wants to acquire him as a duplicate to Hines?

 

But if he does,  I'd be good with it.

 

The back I was hoping we'd show interest in,  but so far have not,  is TJ Yelson.    In his 4 years as mostly the primary back-up,  and 3rd down specialist,  he has nearly 3200 total yards,  nearly 800 yards per season.

 

So, he could back up Mack,  and still be an effective receiver and blocker in pass pro.    But at this point,  it appears doubtful unless something unexpected pops up....

 

I'm hoping we look at Yeldon also

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Blueblood23 said:

Sure it has since he plays 20+ yards off the line of scrimmage. Come on man you're better than that.

 

Its not that simple. Why do you think teams don't try to go deep on us anymore? You think thats convenience? If you thinks its just because of the scheme, you're wrong 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Blueblood23 said:

OK then I'm wrong.

 

if its so simple to stop deep passes by playing a cover two, more teams would do it, instead Hill continues to run through zones and burn teams deep

Just now, Chloe6124 said:

 

 

Will Steve Ishamel give up 17 is the question haha 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just heard on the radio here in Mass that the pats offered Humfries 10m a year.  The radio hosts called it outrageous and couldn't beleive it.  Oddly earlier when they mentioned the colts signing Funchess to 10m for the 1 year they didn't think that shocking.  

 

Maybe someone out there knows more than i do!  hahaha

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Fluke_33 said:

I just heard on the radio here in Mass that the pats offered Humfries 10m a year.  The radio hosts called it outrageous and couldn't beleive it.  Oddly earlier when they mentioned the colts signing Funchess to 10m for the 1 year they didn't think that shocking.  

 

Maybe someone out there knows more than i do!  hahaha

 

I think they were shocked he picked the titans over the pats is what they mean

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

 

I think they were shocked he picked the titans over the pats is what they mean

no, they were specifically talking about the amount offered.  (They were also surprised that he didn't take it but that was a separate discussion)

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

    • So sounds like it’s the Colts’ year to finally make it rain in FA and sign some big name players.
    • Another reason why I think the Steelers might be ideal second trade partners is that they have a 4th Round compensation pick 13 picks later but no pick in Round 5.   Do like the Walker Little pick and hope he does slide to say the 4th and we could nab him.
    • JB is not my favorite QB. But even I would never compare him to the likes of the guys on that list. He is much more in the Hasselback group.    But I also disagree with putting Grigs on that list as well. He wasn’t a disaster or an embarrassment...he was just a disappointment in the end. A guy who couldn’t evaluate talent nearly as well as he did early in his career. And he was an unlikeable guy (which has always made me wonder how he sold Irsay on giving him the job).    But plenty of GMs fail to get there with a star QB...especially early in that QB’s career. Only one team gets to win the SB each year.    I mean...just look at Polian. He got there eventually...but he was gifted PFM...and didn’t win a playoff game until the 6th season. Grigs had won 3 by his 3rd season...and had just as many playoff appearances (3) as Polian over their first 5 seasons. Polian is a HOFer...but my point is that it’s not easy even when you get a great QB.   And as I have said before...Luck was great and my favorite player of all time...but he wasn’t quite Mahomes or Rodgers good...they are true Ferraris. He made mistakes and also didn’t exactly light it it up in January either. I think his prime would have been something to behold and maybe he would have taken his game to a new level...but injuries unfortunately derailed that (which I think many parties are to blame for...not just Grigs).   The guys on that list brought nothing to this org...Grigs at least managed to oversee a winning roster for years. A 49-31 record (.612 winning %) with a 3-3 playoff record, in 5 years, is far from a disaster. If you want to see what a true disaster looks like...it’s what has happened in HOU...where their FO has wasted a QB who (IMO) might be even better than Luck.   So far, Ballard has been superior in just about every facet. But the results are still the results. We can discount 2017...but without it the Colts are still just 28-20 (a .583 winning %) and 1-2 in the playoffs so far. Yes, he has only had Luck for one of those seasons...but that’s just another way of saying he needed Luck to win more games (to win more playoff games). And that’s the argument I always hear to vilify Grigs...that he only won because of Luck. Seems like a double standard...and not the only one.   I think most Colts fans have become huge fans of the process...and that’s great. It’s might be my favorite part of sports. But there are those that are still results-oriented...and I can understand why some might be asking what does it all without the results? This season will be huge to answering that question. 
    • Relax....i was paraphrasing a Bill Tobin quote . Tobin went off on Kiper when the Colts drafted Trev Alberta instead of Trent Dilfer. 
  • Members

    • DaColts85

      DaColts85 403

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • OhioColt

      OhioColt 99

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • rayski

      rayski 197

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Kangaroo

      Kangaroo 98

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • IndyEric07

      IndyEric07 109

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Mr.NotSoCreative

      Mr.NotSoCreative 266

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DiogoSales

      DiogoSales 75

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Nadine

      Nadine 6,430

      Administrators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • cdgacoltsfan

      cdgacoltsfan 577

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