Highest graded linemen after 5 weeks

[zibby43]

14 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

I think right now, Reich would like to rely less on the running game. Like @Chloe6124 mentioned earlier, FR said they are at 48/52 run-pass ration right now, and he'd like to be closer to 40/60 than 50/50.

 

The only difference IMO between the 2nd half of 2018 vs now, is that we simply are running it with a higher frequency. Mack's yards per carry is the exact same (4.7 yards) this year as it was last. Right now, Mack has the second most attempts per game in the league. That's a recipe for injury and/or wearing out your RB1.

 

I don't think Reich cares, at all.  Plus, they've got a healthy Wilkins now (and Hines) to ease the load, should they need to.

 

“I’m not even sure the most carries he has had in his career whether in college or pros. Like last year when Andrew (Luck) was on pace to throw it 700 times or whatever, it usually has a way of working itself out,” Reich told the media Monday. “But right now (with) the way Marlon (Mack) is taking care of himself and how strong – I mean it feels to me like he is getting stronger. It feels to me like Marlon is getting stronger as the year is going on. I don’t sense any wear and tear on his body. So we will just keep rolling.”

 

- Frank Reich

 

https://coltswire.usatoday.com/2019/10/14/indianapolis-colts-maron-mack-workload-carries/

 

 

[Creekside]

15 minutes ago, zibby43 said:

 

Wait, so you're comparing just the Dallas game last year, with the entirety of this year?

 

 

No.

 

The Dallas game was one example for the poster I was speaking to, who had said, that he didn't remember any game last year where the Colts running attack was as prolific and dominant as this year. So I gave him one example.

 

Mack's 4.7 ave was all of 2018 compared to so far in 2019 at the very same 4.7 ave.

 

 

[Rally5]

On 10/15/2019 at 8:16 AM, Coffeedrinker said:

I don't like PFF grades, especially for olineman.  of course I don't base my evaluation of the line on PFF either.

Nelson is making AC's job easier but on the flip side AC is making Nelson's job easier as well.

This makes no sense to me.  For one reason, the Colts have one of the best olines in the NFL, that does not mean there are no weaknesses or any place for improvement, it just means they are one of the best units in the NFL so why mess with it?  Second, this philosophy would weaken three positions; RG would be weakened by moving someone there who has not played that position in the pros.  Then you weaken the RT position by playing a guy there that is not as good as the RT you just moved to guard and then in the future you weaken the LT position by moving a RT who will have to undo all his RT muscle memory and relearn the LT muscle memory.

 

Olineman can typically have long careers in the NFL and barring a major injury I can see AC playing another 4 or 5 years (he's not like Glenn where weight is an issue).  So there is no reason to draft his replacement anytime soon.

We're playing with fire at Tackle.  We have one true tackle and another guy through pure athleticism is making it work.  Our one true tackle is aging, and I'm one of the few on this board who constantly stood up for AT when everyone bailed on him a couple years ago.  This team needs a young legit OT in the next draft.  We won't be this lucky forever...

[Four2itus]

2 minutes ago, Rally5 said:

I'm one of the few on this board who constantly stood up for AT when everyone bailed on him a couple years ago.

There is about a dozen of us who were chuckling when that talk was going on. He has been one the the top two Colt LT's since the Colts came to Indy. 

[EastStreet]

On 10/15/2019 at 8:16 AM, Coffeedrinker said:

This makes no sense to me.  For one reason, the Colts have one of the best olines in the NFL, that does not mean there are no weaknesses or any place for improvement, it just means they are one of the best units in the NFL so why mess with it?  Second, this philosophy would weaken three positions; RG would be weakened by moving someone there who has not played that position in the pros.  Then you weaken the RT position by playing a guy there that is not as good as the RT you just moved to guard and then in the future you weaken the LT position by moving a RT who will have to undo all his RT muscle memory and relearn the LT muscle memory.

 

Olineman can typically have long careers in the NFL and barring a major injury I can see AC playing another 4 or 5 years (he's not like Glenn where weight is an issue).  So there is no reason to draft his replacement anytime soon.

 

Smith would be a better G than T. If you disagree, that's fine, but you would disagreeing with anyone who watched him in college, or just about all of the experts that evaluated him. Long term he would be an upgrade to RG. 

 

I'd wager that most on this board think an OT needs to be drafted in the next two drafts. It's not uncommon for Ts to move sides, and it's not uncommon for a T to start at R and move to L, or vice versa as they age. You'd only be impacting 2 spots (RG and RT) initially, and it could easily be upgrades for both. 

[EastStreet]

On 10/15/2019 at 10:45 AM, BigQungus said:

 

Nelson at LT 

exactly. 

[EastStreet]

On 10/15/2019 at 3:07 PM, zibby43 said:

 

I don't think Reich cares, at all.  Plus, they've got a healthy Wilkins now (and Hines) to ease the load, should they need to.

 

“I’m not even sure the most carries he has had in his career whether in college or pros. Like last year when Andrew (Luck) was on pace to throw it 700 times or whatever, it usually has a way of working itself out,” Reich told the media Monday. “But right now (with) the way Marlon (Mack) is taking care of himself and how strong – I mean it feels to me like he is getting stronger. It feels to me like Marlon is getting stronger as the year is going on. I don’t sense any wear and tear on his body. So we will just keep rolling.”

 

- Frank Reich

 

https://coltswire.usatoday.com/2019/10/14/indianapolis-colts-maron-mack-workload-carries/

 

If he doesn't care at all, he shouldn't have made the comment chloe referenced. 

His comment about Mack being stronger right not, sure, but he's only played 5 games. And you simply don't want to run down your best RB.

 

The Rams have almost ruined Gurley and he's only 25. Elliot is afraid he's going to be ruined, which is why he sat out. We all know that teams have devalued the positioned, but it's more because a lot of teams love to run the hell out of the RBs during their rookie contract, and then move on after. 

 

We can be a top 5-10 rushing team without running Mack into the ground. I'm also not in denial that we're running a lot more simply because they're easing JB into thing. 

[Coffeedrinker]

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

 

Smith would be a better G than T. If you disagree, that's fine, but you would disagreeing with anyone who watched him in college, or just about all of the experts that evaluated him. Long term he would be an upgrade to RG. 

I didn't watch him much in college, I typically watch Big 10 football but I have watched him closely in the NFL and if the "experts" think he would make a better guard then yes I disagree with them.  While he would be a good guard in a zone blocking scheme like the Colts use, his lack of lower body strength and quick hand punch off the snap would hamper him going against NFL DTs.  Additionally, Smith does better when he has a bit of space to work with before engaging and that would not happen often at RG.

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

 

I'd wager that most on this board think an OT needs to be drafted in the next two drafts. It's not uncommon for Ts to move sides, and it's not uncommon for a T to start at R and move to L, or vice versa as they age. You'd only be impacting 2 spots (RG and RT) initially, and it could easily be upgrades for both. 

Again what "most" people on this board or in general think has no relevance on anything.  It's not unheard of for a tackle to move spots but it is uncommon, it's happening a bit more in the past few years as the skillsets for RT and LT are becoming closer because it's not just the LT that is dealing with the speed rushers, but it's still not preferred among oline coaches and teams.  that is why guys like Haeg are considered valuable assets to a team, he's not a great lineman but he is good and he can switch sides seamlessly and that is rare.

[Coffeedrinker]

10 hours ago, Rally5 said:

We're playing with fire at Tackle.  We have one true tackle and another guy through pure athleticism is making it work.  Our one true tackle is aging, and I'm one of the few on this board who constantly stood up for AT when everyone bailed on him a couple years ago.  This team needs a young legit OT in the next draft.  We won't be this lucky forever...

Making it work through athleticism is an incorrect statement and does a huge disservice to Smith.  Smith is making it work at tackle by working hard and becoming a tackle.  I'm not sure what makes a "true tackle" but to me a guy that plays tackle and plays it very well is as much of a true tackle as anyone else.

As far as AC (or AT if you prefer  ) aging... yup, every player on the team is aging so that is not a shock.  But he is still just 30 and tackles often play into their mid to late 30s so that is not much of a concern.  Not to say they won't draft a tackle in the next couple of drafts, but I doubt they will try to find a starting tackle in the next couple of drafts.

[EastStreet]

9 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I didn't watch him much in college, I typically watch Big 10 football but I have watched him closely in the NFL and if the "experts" think he would make a better guard then yes I disagree with them.  While he would be a good guard in a zone blocking scheme like the Colts use, his lack of lower body strength and quick hand punch off the snap would hamper him going against NFL DTs.  Additionally, Smith does better when he has a bit of space to work with before engaging and that would not happen often at RG.

Again what "most" people on this board or in general think has no relevance on anything.  It's not unheard of for a tackle to move spots but it is uncommon, it's happening a bit more in the past few years as the skillsets for RT and LT are becoming closer because it's not just the LT that is dealing with the speed rushers, but it's still not preferred among oline coaches and teams.  that is why guys like Haeg are considered valuable assets to a team, he's not a great lineman but he is good and he can switch sides seamlessly and that is rare.

 

I'd recommend watching some of his college highlights. I watch a lot of both Big10 and SEC football, and any team that routinely plays ND. Unfortunately or fortunately lol I have several buds that huge Auburn fans, so I've both watch a lot of games, and heard a lot.

 

Not sure how you can say he wouldn't make a better OG, if you've never seen him play OG.

 

Here's NFL.com's combine rating on him.

 

Quote

 

Overview

Braden Smith has an NFL-ready frame and will impress evaluators with the eyeball test. When the eyeballs are focused on the tape, they will see a player who is more than capable of matching power with power, but can be too regimented in his movement and overall play. Smith is a grinder whose play could vary greatly based upon the matchup across from him. He has size and power, but the holes in his game are unlikely to be patched up with coaching. He can become an average to solid starter.

 

Strengths

Built like a bank safe with broad chest, hulking arms and thick legs

Weight room strong and field strong

Good body control into initial contact

Absorbs contact and starts grinding

Mauler with power at the point of attack

Able to fist fight in trenches and hold his own against power players

Has strong hands and can lock on for the long haul when he gets a strong initial grab

Good drive blocker

Guard with some emergency tackle value

Has upper body power to cave-in defensive tackles on recovery blocks

Has enough pure power to slow bull-rushers

Punch is adequate

 

Weaknesses

Plays at a slower pace than you would like

Eyes need to be quicker

Delayed in seeing and picking up twists

Lacks responsive feet to slide and catch blitzers and counter rush moves

Allows rushers to get into his frame

Power zone is narrow affecting balance

Doesn't have reactive athleticism to mirror opponents movements and keep blocks centered

Has a major hitch coming out of his stance when asked to pull

Needs to play faster with hands

Tardy second level climber

Plays robotic and top-heavy at times

 

Sources Tell Us
"He's really strong but he's not a consistent block finisher because defenders can pull him off-balance. I thought he was much better in the early and middle parts of the season than he was at the end when his team really needed him." -- AFC team area scout

 

 

[Coffeedrinker]

16 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

I'd recommend watching some of his college highlights. I watch a lot of both Big10 and SEC football, and any team that routinely plays ND. Unfortunately or fortunately lol I have several buds that huge Auburn fans, so I've both watch a lot of games, and heard a lot.

 

Not sure how you can say he wouldn't make a better OG, if you've never seen him play OG.

Easy, because I know the skills needed to play guard in the NFL, especially with the Colts current blocking scheme and I listed the skills that I think he is lacking in order to become a great NFL guard. 

16 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

Here's NFL.com's combine rating on him.

 

 

I like NFL.com's draft prospects page and I read it quite a bit leading up to the draft.  Funny that you would post that, since it goes along with what I've been saying, he would be a good guard but his weaknesses would stop him from becoming great.  He is quickly becoming a great tackle.  I would say he is already a top 15 RT and he is still showing improvement every week.

 

If you want to base your opinions on what most people think, that's fine.  

[EastStreet]

5 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Easy, because I know the skills needed to play guard in the NFL, especially with the Colts current blocking scheme and I listed the skills that I think he is lacking in order to become a great NFL guard. 

I like NFL.com's draft prospects page and I read it quite a bit leading up to the draft.  Funny that you would post that, since it goes along with what I've been saying, he would be a good guard but his weaknesses would stop him from becoming great.  He is quickly becoming a great tackle.  I would say he is already a top 15 RT and he is still showing improvement every week.

 

If you want to base your opinions on what most people think, that's fine.  

 

I'm basing my opinion on what I watched during his time at G, and what I've watched the last two years. I'm not sure how you translate NFL.com's evaluation as supporting your case, but OK lol. 

 

And PFF graded Smith 3rd nationally at guard when at Auburn, going up against some of the best DLs in the nation (many whom are playing on Sunday). IIRC, he's now grading out in the low 70s at T, similar to Glo's rating this year.

[Coffeedrinker]

14 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

I'm basing my opinion on what I watched during his time at G, and what I've watched the last two years. I'm not sure how you translate NFL.com's evaluation as supporting your case, but OK lol. 

Again easy, here is some quote from your NFL.com paste

 

"He has size and power, but the holes in his game are unlikely to be patched up with coaching. He can become an average to solid starter."

 

"Needs to play faster with hands"

 

"Plays robotic and top-heavy at times"

 

"Punch is adequate"

 

The main item is bolded

 

 

14 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

And PFF graded Smith 3rd nationally at guard when at Auburn, going up against some of the best DLs in the nation (many whom are playing on Sunday). IIRC, he's now grading out in the low 70s at T, similar to Glo's rating this year.

Again, I don't care about PFF grades for olineman.  I do not find them to be accurate. 

 

Again if you want to base your opinion on the words of others, I can't stop you... I will continue to base my opinions on my observations and knowledge. 

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Again easy, here is some quote from your NFL.com paste

 

"He has size and power, but the holes in his game are unlikely to be patched up with coaching. He can become an average to solid starter."

 

"Needs to play faster with hands"

 

"Plays robotic and top-heavy at times"

 

"Punch is adequate"

 

The main item is bolded

 

 

Again, I don't care about PFF grades for olineman.  I do not find them to be accurate. 

 

Again if you want to base your opinion on the words of others, I can't stop you... I will continue to base my opinions on my observations and knowledge. 

 

Seems clear you don't care about what the experts say, unless they agree with you. 

 

You also cherry picked some very bland comments, which honestly have zero to do with how he would fair at G vs T.

 

Here's some other comments... which don't support your comments.

Quote

 

Built like a bank safe with broad chest, hulking arms and thick legs

Weight room strong and field strong

Good body control into initial contact

Absorbs contact and starts grinding

Mauler with power at the point of attack

Able to fist fight in trenches and hold his own against power players

Has strong hands and can lock on for the long haul when he gets a strong initial grab

Good drive blocker

Guard with some emergency tackle value

 

 

[Four2itus]

2 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Making it work through athleticism is an incorrect statement and does a huge disservice to Smith.  Smith is making it work at tackle by working hard and becoming a tackle.  I'm not sure what makes a "true tackle" but to me a guy that plays tackle and plays it very well is as much of a true tackle as anyone else.

Spot on. I think people have a hard time when the square peg doesn't fit their square hole. I saw him as our starting right tackle before the preseason was over.

 

It was one of the defining moments for me with the new staff when they rolled him out at RT. They didn't follow others information, they went with their strength, which is their own pool of knowledge and experience. In the 80's, the Cowboys did this a LOT. 

 

[Coffeedrinker]

2 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

Seems clear you don't care about what the experts say, unless they agree with you. 

Actually, I don't care about what the "experts" say even when they do agree with me.

Quote

 

You also cherry picked some very bland comments, which honestly have zero to do with how he would fair at G vs T.

Of course, I picked comments, it would have been silly to just quote the entire thing again, you already did that.

Quote

 

Here's some other comments... which don't support your comments.

 

None of the additional comments you quoted go against anything I have said.  He has a strong upper body but he has a weaker lower body (that is one of the reasons when players, play "top heavy".

 

But since you like the experts so much, how about this.

 

The Colts' experts moved him to RT.  Even when they changed experts after 1 season, the new experts kept him at RT and signed the RG to a 3 year $18 million extension indicating they have no plans to replace neither the RT nor the RG in the immediate future.  But perhaps the Colts' experts should pay attention to an NFL.com draft profile and change up one of the best olines in the NFL.  

[EastStreet]

26 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

The Colts' experts moved him to RT.  Even when they changed experts after 1 season, the new experts kept him at RT and signed the RG to a 3 year $18 million extension indicating they have no plans to replace neither the RT nor the RG in the immediate future.  But perhaps the Colts' experts should pay attention to an NFL.com draft profile and change up one of the best olines in the NFL.  

Glow's contract was only 16Mish. And is only 4.2Mish guaranteed so it's not like a huge commitment on the team's part. It's a middle of the road / average salary for a starting RG, and would be very easy to part with. 

 

I just checked Glow's PFF rating. It's a pretty poor 57.6. So he's currently the lowest rated guy on the OL by a pretty decent margin. 

 

AC (85.1) / QN (90.9) / RK (66.9) / MG (57.6) / B.Smith (72.1)

 

Here's PFF's scale

100-90 Elite

89-85 Pro Bowler

84-70 Starter

69-60 Backup

59-0 Replaceable

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I think Braden has improved quite a bit with the new scheme. I also think glow is just fine. There may be times when he struggles with a elite rusher but that’s when you give him help. Some rushers are elite for a reason and are hard to stop.

[throwing BBZ]

3 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Easy, because I know the skills needed to play guard in the NFL, especially with the Colts current blocking scheme and I listed the skills that I think he is lacking in order to become a great NFL guard. 

I like NFL.com's draft prospects page and I read it quite a bit leading up to the draft.  Funny that you would post that, since it goes along with what I've been saying, he would be a good guard but his weaknesses would stop him from becoming great.  He is quickly becoming a great tackle.  I would say he is already a top 15 RT and he is still showing improvement every week.

 

If you want to base your opinions on what most people think, that's fine.  

 

  Actually, Smith is quite powerful with his hands and lower body so there is no reason he couldn't be extremely good inside as a run blocker.
 And i would think that if his footwork and quickness is good enough to play RT, he would be as good or better inside at pass protecting.
 And if you have been watching, he is being used on occassion to pull left to make some very good blocks. He shows some quickness to do that well.
 Therefore, he would have a good chance to be a better G than Tackle.
  Our first 3 games Smith clearly was having all kinds of problems pass blocking, his PFF grades also showed this. When we are run heavy with 2 TE's, he and AC will always look better than they probably are.

[Coffeedrinker]

4 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  Actually, Smith is quite powerful with his hands and lower body so there is no reason he couldn't be extremely good inside as a run blocker.

there is the crux, I agree 100% he is very strong in the upper body, but I disagree he's strong in the lower body... thus one of the main reasons why I think he would struggle inside.

 

Combine that with his punch being slow coming out of his stance.  Those are two items that are critical for a guard to be elite in the NFL.

4 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 And i would think that if his footwork and quickness is good enough to play RT, he would be as good or better inside at pass protecting.

He does have good footwork and quickness in a short area.  It's why I didn't list that as a possible weakness on the insde.

4 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 And if you have been watching, he is being used on occassion to pull left to make some very good blocks. He shows some quickness to do that well.

I've never said anything about his quickness

4 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 Therefore, he would have a good chance to be a better G than Tackle.

Your conclusion does not match the information you provided.

4 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

Our first 3 games Smith clearly was having all kinds of problems pass blocking, his PFF grades also showed this. When we are run heavy with 2 TE's, he and AC will always look better than they probably are.

He struggled against Bosa, I watched the Tenn game a few times on gamepass and Smith, regardless of the PFF grade, played a good game.  And I didn't see anything yet that would make me think... he would be a great guard.  To match him with a past colt, he reminds me a lot of Diem but a bit better athletically.

[braveheartcolt]

I would back any player being successful in the NFL against what they did in college. Two different beasts. Leave him where he is....

[throwing BBZ]

20 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

there is the crux, I agree 100% he is very strong in the upper body, but I disagree he's strong in the lower body... thus one of the main reasons why I think he would struggle inside.

 

Combine that with his punch being slow coming out of his stance.  Those are two items that are critical for a guard to be elite in the NFL.

He does have good footwork and quickness in a short area.  It's why I didn't list that as a possible weakness on the insde.

I've never said anything about his quickness

Your conclusion does not match the information you provided.

He struggled against Bosa, I watched the Tenn game a few times on gamepass and Smith, regardless of the PFF grade, played a good game.  And I didn't see anything yet that would make me think... he would be a great guard.  To match him with a past colt, he reminds me a lot of Diem but a bit better athletically.

 

 I don't see anything that makes me expect him to be a very good T.
 He should continue to improve as he plays against a wide variety of players and learns their tendencies. But the smaller, faster rushers are likely to always give him considerable problems. 
You are probably right, he is a lifer with that "slow punch". Just no improving that!
 After watching him do a good job handling JJWatt, and you think his lower body is insufficient. chuckle

[Rally5]

5 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Making it work through athleticism is an incorrect statement and does a huge disservice to Smith.  Smith is making it work at tackle by working hard and becoming a tackle.  I'm not sure what makes a "true tackle" but to me a guy that plays tackle and plays it very well is as much of a true tackle as anyone else.

As far as AC (or AT if you prefer  ) aging... yup, every player on the team is aging so that is not a shock.  But he is still just 30 and tackles often play into their mid to late 30s so that is not much of a concern.  Not to say they won't draft a tackle in the next couple of drafts, but I doubt they will try to find a starting tackle in the next couple of drafts.

Spare me the soap box nonsense, I know very well how good Smith is and how hard these guys work that's not at all the point. We need more talent at tackle, we have zero depth at the spot. This isn't controversial.

[Rally5]

2 hours ago, Four2itus said:

Spot on. I think people have a hard time when the square peg doesn't fit their square hole. I saw him as our starting right tackle before the preseason was over.

 

It was one of the defining moments for me with the new staff when they rolled him out at RT. They didn't follow others information, they went with their strength, which is their own pool of knowledge and experience. In the 80's, the Cowboys did this a LOT. 

 

Then we have two tackles, you comfortable with that while we have 6 safeties, 7 receivers etc? It's a gap...get over yourselves.  They didn't plan to play him at tackle, he had to because our FA's were terrible and he had played some T in college and it's worked great.  We need depth that's not debatable, why are we looking for a fight on this? 

[Coffeedrinker]

2 minutes ago, Rally5 said:

Spare me the soap box nonsense, I know very well how good Smith is and how hard these guys work that's not at all the point.

Fair enough

2 minutes ago, Rally5 said:

 

We need more talent at tackle, we have zero depth at the spot. This isn't controversial.

What do you consider depth?  The Colts have two guys that have 47 starts between them ( I don't know the exact break down) with greater than half those starts at right and left tackle.  I'm not a Clark nor Haeg fan but Clark played well last year when called upon... not great but didn't make any major mistakes and Haeg is a solid guy at all positions who has reached his ceiling on effectiveness.

 

But this post seems to be a far different concept (no depth at the position) than your original post where the Colts have only one true tackle.  Which both Clark and Haeg were tackles in college so I guess they are both "true tackles: as well.

[Coffeedrinker]

1 hour ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 I don't see anything that makes me expect him to be a very good T.

You mean other than his play where he has already proven to be a very good tackle?

1 hour ago, throwing BBZ said:

 He should continue to improve as he plays against a wide variety of players and learns their tendencies. But the smaller, faster rushers are likely to always give him considerable problems. 

Perhaps.  Of course, smaller, faster rushers always gave T. Glenn considerable problems until he spent a year going against Freeney in practice.

1 hour ago, throwing BBZ said:

You are probably right, he is a lifer with that "slow punch". Just no improving that!
 After watching him do a good job handling JJWatt, and you think his lower body is insufficient. chuckle

One, he got a lot of help with Watt last year and Watt is not a DT.  He is smaller than majority of DTs a guard faces.

[Coffeedrinker]

1 hour ago, braveheartcolt said:

I would back any player being successful in the NFL against what they did in college. Two different beasts. Leave him where he is....

yeah, but what about the position they played in college AND their PFF grade in college.  That is a better indicator of what they will do in the NFL than their actual play in the NFL.

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

You mean other than his play where he has already proven to be a very good tackle?

 

I love what he's done at T since he moved from guard, but I wouldn't say he's "very good" at this point. He's average right now. PFF actually grades him at the very low end of "starter". That's after grading out much higher at G in college (3rd highest G in the nation). 

[Four2itus]

21 minutes ago, Rally5 said:

Then we have two tackles, you comfortable with that while we have 6 safeties, 7 receivers etc?

Since we have darn near run out of WR and safties at times? Ya, I'm ok with our depth at this time. But, no matter what numbers a front office stocks at each position, one will bite you at some time. 

[braveheartcolt]

40 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

I love what he's done at T since he moved from guard, but I wouldn't say he's "very good" at this point. He's average right now. PFF actually grades him at the very low end of "starter". That's after grading out much higher at G in college (3rd highest G in the nation). 

Fair enough. If PFF says so.....

 

It's like 'a guy down the pub says so......'. 

 

Gospel.

[EastStreet]

15 minutes ago, braveheartcolt said:

Fair enough. If PFF says so.....

 

It's like 'a guy down the pub says so......'. 

 

Gospel.

 

Typically I'd say PFF > "a guy on a message board", especially one that says a guy will be a better T than G, when he's never seen the guy play G...... 

[Rally5]

5 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Fair enough

What do you consider depth?  The Colts have two guys that have 47 starts between them ( I don't know the exact break down) with greater than half those starts at right and left tackle.  I'm not a Clark nor Haeg fan but Clark played well last year when called upon... not great but didn't make any major mistakes and Haeg is a solid guy at all positions who has reached his ceiling on effectiveness.

 

But this post seems to be a far different concept (no depth at the position) than your original post where the Colts have only one true tackle.  Which both Clark and Haeg were tackles in college so I guess they are both "true tackles: as well.

You're going to sell us on Clark as depth, c'mon, stop trying to win an argument.  Again, I think Smith has developed beautifully and is a wonderful talent.  I'm not convinced he couldn't be even better at Guard, but that's again not even my point.  Our depth at tackle is easily the thinnest position on the team, Haeg is a guard as well who can morph into multiple roles which is his value and I like Joe.  The thing that concerns me is the quality of the next guy up.  Look no further than our record last year when AC was out for proof positive of that concern.  There's nothing more I can add.  Go Colts.

[Coffeedrinker]

12 hours ago, Rally5 said:

You're going to sell us on Clark as depth, c'mon, stop trying to win an argument.  Again, I think Smith has developed beautifully and is a wonderful talent.  I'm not convinced he couldn't be even better at Guard, but that's again not even my point.  Our depth at tackle is easily the thinnest position on the team, Haeg is a guard as well who can morph into multiple roles which is his value and I like Joe.  The thing that concerns me is the quality of the next guy up.  Look no further than our record last year when AC was out for proof positive of that concern.  There's nothing more I can add.  Go Colts.

I don't need to sell anything, Clark is solid depth and Haeg has played guard but he was a tackle in college and has played more games at tackle than guard in the NFL.

 

I'm not sure if, as fans, we can expect much better depth than 2 guys that have a combined 47 NFL starts.  of course they are not as good as the starters, that is not possible.  

 

Lastly, if Clark/AC was the only difference between the first few games and the rest of the season you would have more of a point.  AC is definitely better than Clark but what lead to the record was, it was also before, Glow became the RG, Smith became the RT, Mack was injured and Nelson, no matter how great he is, was a rookie and learning the NFL game.  Additionally, on the defensive side, Walker was being brought along slowly because of his preseason injury, Leonard was a rookie learning the NFL and Flus was still calling a pretty generic D.  So there were a lot more issues than just AC not playing that lead to the 1-5 start for the Colts.

[Myles]

Well, I think we can all agree that Smith was a great draft pick.   Now having him as a guard/tackle hybrid is pretty awesome.