Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It’s hard to say, I don’t think he has ever been in a system like the one we currently run. I’m not saying he couldn’t though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t think so. Might as well let the young guys develop if we’re not going to spend money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard came from Kansas City, he knows Houston very well. I assume, if we would be a good fit, he'd been already visited Indy....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. He is a 3-4 linebacker. Doesn’t fit our system. Why do you think KC got rid of him. They are switching to the same defense we are.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

No. He is a 3-4 linebacker. Doesn’t fit our system. Why do you think KC got rid of him. They are switching to the same defense we are.

 

Well...    yes the Chiefs are switching to a 4-3...    and yes, the Colts run a 4-3.

 

But not all 4-3 defenses are the same.  

 

Ballard and Eberflus stress speed, especially first step quicknes..   they also want long guys... taller guys with long arms...    and tremendous hustle...  relentless pursuit...   our coaches don’t want to see one guy tackling the ball carrier...   they want to see multiple players in on the tackle...   the more the better...  this is not necessarily the philosophy of every 4-3 team.

 

Other posters may want to elaborate more on this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our pass rush is just fine, as long as Leonard, Autry and Ward combine for nearly 20 sacks again, just like everyone predicted.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

No. He is a 3-4 linebacker. Doesn’t fit our system. Why do you think KC got rid of him. They are switching to the same defense we are.

 

There is an article on NFL.com explaining how he and Ford were cap casualties. Houston can absolutely fit and play in this defense.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

There is an article on NFL.com explaining how he and Ford were cap casualties. Houston can absolutely fit and play in this defense.

 

 Ballard won't pay him IMO, but maybe if the draft and the rest of the off season doesn't satisfy CB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Frank Clark is rumored to be on the trade block, I’d rather go after him as long as we get good value. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He and his agent are probably seeking a 3-4 year deal. Hence why Ballard hasn’t contacted him yet. The injury issues with him concern me. I would pass! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guy is 30 has not played 16 games or hit double digit sacks since 2014. He’s played OLB in a 3-4 his entire career. He isn’t going to be a Colt maybe the Jets sign him 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree on the age/injury issue. Houston hasn't been the same guy the past few years. He's very talented, but not worth the $ he'll likely want. And the odds are pretty good that he won't play a full season given his recent history. There isn't much left out there in FA land, but that isn't an excuse for making a bad deal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think so but Ballard knows him so if he signs him I will defer to his knowledge.  I would guess IF they did sign him it would be a fairly short deal due to his age. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read this, you may see why he is still a FA (especially regarding Ballard's methods thus far)

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2019 at 6:16 PM, #12. said:

Our pass rush is just fine, as long as Leonard, Autry and Ward combine for nearly 20 sacks again, just like everyone predicted.

 

 If we can get 14 from them we should have a better pass rush than last year.
 Whoosh, over your head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colts need pass rushers, but not sure a 3-4 player that got let go because they were switching to a 4-3 would be the player I'd go after. 

 

Reminds me of Freeney when they switched to 3-4, and wasn't good. Wasn't Bjorn Werner a 4-3 guy put into a 3-4 system? Mathis transitioned well, but doesn't seem to be the norm. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

Colts need pass rushers, but not sure a 3-4 player that got let go because they were switching to a 4-3 would be the player I'd go after. 

 

Reminds me of Freeney when they switched to 3-4, and wasn't good. Wasn't Bjorn Werner a 4-3 guy put into a 3-4 system? Mathis transitioned well, but doesn't seem to be the norm. 

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001022821/article/chiefs-gm-salary-cap-required-proactive-changes-on-d


It wasn't the scheme, it was cap space. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

It wasn't Just the scheme, it was cap space. 

 

Fixed it for you.  Cap savings is a great soundbite for a GM (and true), but it was perfect storm / combo.  The players on the team not named Houston or Ford were younger, cheaper, and a better schematic fit to the new defense. Ford was traded to 49'ers, which is also not a typical 4-3 like reported, especially the sub packages (70% of snaps).  Houston has yet to be signed.  Interesting to see where he ends up, and how each will do.

  • 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

    • that guy is too short, has no wheels, and has to take a time out after every 6 attempts. will never make it.. nice jugs though
    • The facts.. a hung jury (twice) mistrial with most voters having sided for the alleged accuser/victim... both times.     She (prosecution) didn't drop the charges, the school (judge/jury) did.  She wanted round 3.  She wanted a full yes or no vote (4-1 or 5-0) either way, not we're split 3-2 so we'll just call it against the majority vote and designate as "Not Responsible" because it isn't 4 or more votes either way. - 'Case closed'.     There were questions (and other items) from the accuser that were never allowed in or asked in follow up questioning.  I think one of the changes to the Stanford Title IX hearing rules is to also allow an attorney to be not only in attendance but to also perform all duties of representation.  And an outside group determines what is admissible as questions/evidence, follow questions, etc...     At some level, it did, and many things at Stanford were changed after. At the  minimum, it was a mistrial x2, with no conclusive verdict either way. Then school (not prosecution) drops the case.   So she really needed to report this to both the school, and also the Police.  But with what evidence does she have to convince the LEO?  Guess the gals need some hidden body cam w/audio these days, like many folks do with dash cams (like me and my wife's cars...) and be their own TMZ...   Video, apparently the only way things get rectified anymore...     No worries, at least we know each others positions.  All is good.     Except to have (at some level) differing story from a another high achieving Stanford student about another high achieving Stanford student-   https://www.collegesimply.com/colleges/california/stanford-university/admission/     We don't even know for certain they ever got the FULL story, but articles I've read suggest that the Stanford Panel repressed/disallowed many/most of her interrogating questions and supplemental follow up inquiries to be asked of the accused.  Unless someone directly asks her directly, how could you answer as to whether her whole story was even heard or not?   If you are not truly interested to fully know those answers, then you don't ask.  At least, that's my perspective.  
    • you and me both. the period between basketball and football sucks (base) balls. the only thing i'm enjoying now is the women's WC.   i'm still leaning towards thinking we'll keep 6 WRs this season given all the puts and takes. DF it TE-lite, Cain coming back from injury, PC a rook, TY coming off being banged up, Fountain improving, Roger's reliability and cross training..... and sheet might happen like Cain being pup'd and I think Fountain can spend another year on the PS.
    • and very hard to watch the D for all those games without him.... truly epic player with truly epic injury issues...   i know all teams go through injuries, but seems like we've been especially cursed with Sanders, Manning, and Luck. That's 3 of my five favorite Colts lol.
    • Ugh Hendricks sent to the IL, prospect Adbert Alzolay might be called up. Currently down 1-0 in the 7th. 
  • Members

    • Swan Ronson

      Swan Ronson 279

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • shastamasta

      shastamasta 1,674

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • tweezy32

      tweezy32 364

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • tate

      tate 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NewColtsFan

      NewColtsFan 18,994

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Irish YJ

      Irish YJ 693

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • KB

      KB 382

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • White shoes

      White shoes 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Shadow_Creek

      Shadow_Creek 414

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • coltskane

      coltskane 886

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