Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Cleveland fans probably have not had this much excitement in years. They will be fun to watch. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours 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.

That argument concerning Geathers is kind of funny to me because it's not like it's a whole bunch of playmakers just running around the league at SS. Guys who are good in coverage, can stop the run and make plays on the football.  I can only name a few guys.  Most teams don't have superstar at SS, it's usually a guy like Geathers that is the norm at that spot. .

Share this post


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

That argument concerning Geathers is kind of funny to me because it's not like it's a whole bunch of playmakers just running around the league at SS.  I can only name a few guys.  Most teams don't have superstar at SS.

Nobody is asking him to be a superstar or an elite player. The argument for me is that he's an average player that provides nothing outside of tackles, when he is on the field. Someone that I hope we move on from

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mr.Debonair said:

Nobody is asking him to be a superstar or an elite player. The argument for me is that he's an average player that provides nothing outside of tackles, when he is on the field. Someone that I hope we move on from

 

what is a SS supposed to do? hes suppose to make tackles and help in run support. 

Share this post


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

 

what is a SS supposed to do? hes suppose to make tackles and help in run support. 

Sure. So if that’s all he does and nothing more and I can find some who also provides help in other areas besides tackles then give me that other player. All Im saying. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mr.Debonair said:

Sure. So if that’s all he does and nothing more and I can find some who also provides help in other areas besides tackles then give me that other player. All Im saying. 

 

help in what? you think kam chancellor was in coverage more then playing in the box?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

help in what? you think kam chancellor was in coverage more then playing in the box?

Don’t know which he did more, but I know he impacted the game far more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mr.Debonair said:

Don’t know which he did more, but I know he impacted the game far more. 

 

by knocking someone out. thats a flag now 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CR91 said:

 

by knocking someone out. thats a flag now 

No, with PD, INT,FF'S etc......but It's obvious that you're going to continue to ignore the point I am making so we can end the convo

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mr.Debonair said:

No, with PD, INT,FF'S etc......but It's obvious that you're going to continue to ignore the point I am making so we can end the convo

 

all im saying is you can have an impact by doing your job.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are very few play makers in this league. That’s why when you get one on your team you better keep them.

 

I agree there is something to be said about when you do your job well. To me your making a impact. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Championships aren't won in March, I would love to see us get 1 or 2 big names but if it doesn't happen, oh well. I look for results = we went 10-6 and won a playoff game, made the final 8 this past season. I expect us to win 10 again, perhaps 11 but get to the final 4 come this upcoming season. If we don't then complaining should definitely happen. We can't go backwards now like we did the Grigson era. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

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

 

 

 

I think we need to wait to make that judgment. Hines did quite well for his rookie year. If you look at his stats compared to Duke's rookie year they are very similar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Virtuoso80 said:

 

 

This is around the time we will begin to get involved.

 

When the market is starting to result in people signing 1 year "prove it" deals and "at" or "below" market values as the spending cools.

 

Would have liked Clinton-Dix but there are still a handful of good Safeties out there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Virtuoso80 said:

 

I thought Ballard would be all over this. Makes me think he must have Geathers contract in the works

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nesjan3 said:

I thought Ballard would be all over this. Makes me think he must have Geathers contract in the works

Yeah that looks like it might be the case

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr.Debonair said:

Nobody is asking him to be a superstar or an elite player. The argument for me is that he's an average player that provides nothing outside of tackles, when he is on the field. Someone that I hope we move on from

That's exactly why you would want to keep him. Having a sure tackler on the back end is a must and bonus points if he is a bruiser. How often have our defense been plagued by poor tackling. The best weve been is when Bob Sanders was out there laying the wood.

 

Now he is no more than a role player (dime linebacker), shouldnt command anywhere near top money, and the position should have another body there that is better in coverage. Sure tacklers are always needed though. He should be retained to continue his role though. Not a starter but a quality role player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

I don't hate Geathers, in fact I think he's pretty decent, but if we're calling him an impact player then I think we're using that term pretty loosely.

When you look at this secondary when he and Hooker were not back there you saw a huge difference in the effectiveness of this defense when both are back there and the front is getting a lot of pressure this defense was capable of beating any team that got put in front of them. Now this secondary got expose a bit when they couldn't get to the quarterback which at time made the defensive backfield look worst than what it actually is. I hate to break this to people while I agree Geathers isn't a superstar talent he is an important member of this secondary. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

 

Did you see the video of him visiting Carr at his house. They looked liked best buds. It was kind of odd with the bad reputation he has going around.

 

Who is the reputation coming from? This is the question and why? All of his other teammates not named Ben seems to enjoy him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Virtuoso80 said:

I think I read where Ballard said he was offering Gaethers a deal similar to the one he offered Mewhort last year.  Which was a one year prove it deal.  If true I would expect he will decide to sign pretty quickly now.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind if Geathers comes back at all.  However I do predict we will draft a safety who will do similar roles as Geathers did in his rookie year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would Geathers take a one year deal? I would think only if someone else was not offering a multiple year deal. With his injury history I would not blame him for taking a multi year deal. I guess though that one year deal could be pretty big money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, MightyLucks said:

Rumors are Houston to Steelers 

How are the Steelers going to sign him before they signed the three players they signed this morning they only had 6.5 million in cap space one of those players they paid almost 3 million I don't think they showed what they paid the other two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Virtuoso80 said:

 

Kind of surprising. I would have thought at this stage of his career he'd hold out for a contender, not a rebuild.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Specs on the Tate deal. Basically got what all the other slots got (ala Humphries, Beasley, Crowder, etc)

 

Got a bit more in guarantees. I would have happily paid that but I am biased and wanted Tate despite him being 30 going on 31 lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the Steelers are talking to Houston, but I haven't seen where they were close to signing.

Share this post


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

 

Specs on the Tate deal. Basically got what all the other slots got (ala Humphries, Beasley, etc)

 

Got a bit more in guarantees. I would have happily paid that but I am biased and wanted Tate despite him being 30 going on 31 lol

Baffling!   Do the Giants know what they are doing?  

Share this post


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

 

Specs on the Tate deal. Basically got what all the other slots got (ala Humphries, Beasley, Crowder, etc)

 

Got a bit more in guarantees. I would have happily paid that but I am biased and wanted Tate despite him being 30 going on 31 lol

 

I was interested in Tate at 2-years...  maybe 3, but that would be the Max.  At 4-years I’d be out of the discussion.   Especially at nearly 60 percent guaranteed!    Yikes!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr.Debonair said:

No, with PD, INT,FF'S etc......but It's obvious that you're going to continue to ignore the point I am making so we can end the convo

All you have to do is look at stats hell Kam has WAY more PDs and FF and INT. I've said it before he's useless in coverage. We need a SS that can cover TEs and underneath passes to WRs so we dont get destroyed again this year. But like some have said the forum has a huge man crush on Geathers. Prolly one of the most overrated Colts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr.Debonair said:

Yeah that looks like it might be the case

Hopefully he takes one of the studs in the draft. Geathers needs to be a back up 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

All you have to do is look at stats hell Kam has WAY more PDs and FF and INT. I've said it before he's useless in coverage. We need a SS that can cover TEs and underneath passes to WRs so we dont get destroyed again this year. But like some have said the forum has a huge man crush on Geathers. Prolly one of the most overrated Colts.

 

because we don't play him in coverage. jesus chirst you guys don't get it. You want us to put geathers in deep cover 2 zone instead of playing in the box to his strength?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

Who is the reputation coming from? This is the question and why? All of his other teammates not named Ben seems to enjoy him.

The Steelers traded a player they just signed to an enormous contract.    And Brown was still such an enormous jerk that (A) the Browns still traded him despite (B) a huge dead cap salary hit and (c) getting pennies on the dollar in draft pick return.

 

If ALL THAT doesn’t tell you that the problems with Brown are far more than with just Ben Roethlisberger, then I don’t know what will?

Share this post


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

Baffling!   Do the Giants know what they are doing?  

 

I am not saying I agree with this at all, but I did see an article which said in so many words that the Giants went from:

 

"Hey we can compete now"

 

- Drafted Barkley to help an aging Eli

- Invested in OL to protect aging Eli and run ball better (signed Solder, drafted Hernandez)

- Paid OBJ to prevent distraction and lock him in and make him happy

 

to realizing

 

"Wow, we are not close to competing. We truly need to rebuild"

 

This article mentioned that the moment it became clear they really must rebuild it made all the sense in the world to trade OBJ. If they are going to draft their QB of the future (and use Eli as a bridge), their management did not want that young QB having to deal w OBJ in his ear demanding the ball and being ticked off about the rebuild and them not winning/competing.

 

 

Again, I'm not saying I agree with this. I'd rather have a weapon like OBJ for my young QB to develop with, but if that was the logic and thought process then I get it.

 

Giants turn around and get Zeitler to further beef up their OL and now with grabbing Tate they still have some weapons.

 

If they take a new QB in the draft he at least has Saquon, Engram, Shepherd and Tate to throw to.

 

The question really amount to:

 

Would you trade OBJ (@ $18M a year)

 

for

 

1st Rd pick

3rd Rd pick

J. Peppers

G. Tate (@$9M a year)

 

 

when you lay it all out like that, it makes a bit more sense. I still would not have done it, but man it sounds like their entire management was just done with him and realized it too late. They should have moved him before his extension last year when they could have made a killing on dealing him.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • IMO this is the wrong way to look at it. IMO the reason they drop 7-8 is not because they don't fear the run game - it's because they fear the pass game much more than they fear the run game. This is especially true when you have a combination of 1. Exceptional QB with great receivers and 2. bad running game. In general the level of fear that teams should show is:   1. Fear of great passing attack 2. Fear of bad passing attack 3. Fear of great running attack 4. Fear of bad running attack.    And the distance between 1 and 4 should be light years! And when you get on your team both great passing attack and horrible running attack this forces opponents to send more help to cover.    It is not a coincidence that teams with great running backs like KC(before Hunt got banished) and the Saints(Kamara) and the Rams(Gurley) faced the least amount of stacked boxes ... this goes directly against what you would assume teams would do in a situation where they face elite running backs. The reason is - they just feared those teams passing games MUCH MORE! The passing game dictates how many people you send to cover much more than the running game.    And at the same time teams like Dallas, TEN, JAX had most stacked boxes - it's because the opponents didn't fear their passing game. I'm using just anecdotes here but the data overall supports that. The passing game strength overall dictates coverage vs run support much more than the quality of the run game. The weaker your pass game is the more stacked boxes you will see almost regardless of how good your RB/running game is.    I said 'almost' above because I can see a situation where you need to have some base level of a threat from the run. You need to at least be a threat to run it.   The short answer is ... weak passing game. Notice that this is all relative. No team will 100% leave 8 in the box and not team will 100% leave 8 in coverage. We are talking about percentages. The weaker the passing game, the more attention your run game will get from the defense pre-snap. This is alignment based... now once the snap is made the defenders have to read run and pass keys in order to know whether they should choose optimal strategy for run defense or pass-defense. In general the reason play-action(and RPO) works is because of the THREAT of the run, not the success of the run(it doesn't matter if you run it for 4.2yards a run(where we were last year) or 4.7yard a run(where Reich wants us to be). So ... my point is not that you have to completely ignore the run. You don't ignore it. You still have to keep the threat that you will run it(by running it often enough) in order to make the defenders still read the keys and give you the extra second or so that running the play action gives you while the defenders are reading the run key you are giving(faking to) them. You just don't generally care much if you run for 4.7 or 4.2 when it comes to your passing game or your play-action game. Teams react the same way to 4.7y teams as they do to 4.2y teams when it comes to play action as long as you keep the threat that you will run high enough to make defenders still read their run keys. (now this is another thing I have not seen yet, but expect at some point in the future- some defensive coordinator will say - just screw it - play the pass 100% and don't read the run keys... play the run on your way to the passer and I don't know what will happen then)      Well, that quote is a bit of an exaggeration to bring the point across. You won't really wait for the old timers to die out. Just... the more young blood comes in(Shanahan, McVey, etc.) and tries the new stuff and succeeds with it against the old strategies the more the old timers that are unable to adjust will lose their jobs to the new kids and so on. This pretty much already happened in the NBA. It's a new league now compared to just 5-10 years ago. It didn't happen because the old timers died out, it happened because the new strategies proved better and more efficient and even some of the old timers borrowed from them and incorporated them into their game plans. IMO similar things are happening and will continue to happen in the NFL. It probably will take longer because in general the NFL seems more conservative of a league but IMO it will happen sooner or later.    In 20-30 years I think we will be laughing at things like "establish the run" or "first we need to stop the run", just like we would be laughing at statements like "what this team really needs is more post ups for their center" or "this guy should have just taken one dribble into the 2p range and taken the shorter 20 feet jumper instead of the 24 feet open 3" in the NBA-context right now. 
    • Thats a bummer.  She is talented and her and Matt Taylor worked well together. 
    • "But really what is going to set the tone for us is going to be how we run the football. That is not going to change. We have to run the football. Our goal is going to be a top-five rushing football team. That will set up our play-action pass. That will set up all the big chunk plays. To me that will get us where we want to go.” https://www.colts.com/news/top-takeaways-frank-reich-on-otas-day-1     Just as Reich has stated above I do believe a good ground game opens up more favorable passing opportunities because teams have to committ more personnel than they would like to run defense. That in itself sets up more opportunities for you to get one on one coverage down the field.  I think you get less of those opportunities if you can't run.   If I want more one on one coverage down field I'd like to know how I'm supposed to do that if I don't need to run? I guess maybe you'd say screens or something?  I'm sure he's saying this based off what he's experienced during games and what he's seen on film.
    • One of my issues and I belive Princeton Tiger brought it up also was when your running game is not very effective.  For example in Peytons last years in Indy our run game was abysmal and teams literally ignored all of our play action fakes. Or you can even look at some of our seasons under Pagano.  They dropped 8 and rushed three a large majority of the time because they had little fear that we could do anything on the ground.  Do you think that happens to us with a successful rushing attack? I personally don't believe so.   I think when you are able to run it forces the defense to leave less defenders in coverage.   I don't want to turn this into a long drawn out debate but I believe your contention was it isnt the amount of times you run but more of the effect of the play action itself.  So when the defense is ignoring the play action then what is it that would cause them to honor it again? I believe you would have get some kind of success from your running game which enhances those play action fakes.  It's not just the play action fakes themselves.  I don't really think you need any type of data during a game to tell you that if the defense is committing 8 men or more in the box you've got a better chance of completing passes on the defense.  What causes the defense to committ 8 to 9 men in the box?  A successful running game gets them to do that more often than not.  I think it creates more opportunities for you to face lighter numbers of defenders when you want to pass the ball.   I got to be honest here and say I can't go toe to toe with you on all that stat crunching, but there's just a few things I will just never buy about that data.   And if you're waiting for bodies(us old school thinkers) to die it's going to be a long, long, long time before that happens in the game of football.........
    • He could "beast", and still be a bad addition to the locker room in the long run. 
  • Members

    • Legend

      Legend 3,586

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Dingus McGirt

      Dingus McGirt 806

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 5,226

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CamMo

      CamMo 769

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • John Hammonds

      John Hammonds 365

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • newb767

      newb767 27

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NewEra

      NewEra 3,602

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • erock

      erock 25

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Buck Showalter

      Buck Showalter 3,770

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jskinnz

      jskinnz 5,163

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