Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Combine Testing and On-Field Drills Thread - Day 1 - WR/TE/QB


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Burrow will go to Bengals 

Tua will go to Dolphins

Herbert will go to Chargers 

Love will go to Colts 

Eason or Fromm will go to Saints

Idk heard Redskins  were looking at qbs, panthers, Detroit as well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 309
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You’re being too picky at that point. I can not stress enough that this is a new era for the Colts. Daniel Jeremiah mentioned this on his podcast but this is the first time in 20+ years we don’t have

I want the QB. A few reasons why.   1) Yes, the QB could bust. So could any other player at any other position. No one is bust proof. And eventually you have to draft a guy that you can buil

Posted Images

Just now, Defjamz26 said:

Yeah I’ll take Mims in the 2nd. 4.40 flat. Ridiculous. He’s a dominant X at the next level. His tape is insane too. He’s Tee Higgins but fast.


I just wish he caught those couple of balls at the Senior Bowl. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Defjamz26 said:

Yeah I’ll take Mims in the 2nd. 4.40 flat. Ridiculous. He’s a dominant X at the next level. His tape is insane too. He’s Tee Higgins but fast.

Depends on  our qb. Also where will claypool  go

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

Nice backpedal try.  Its not working. 

 

If you're talking about QBs at a combine, empirical data would be height, weight, hand size....and the actual throwing data would be velocity and rotation.  

 

The other stuff is just garbage the opinionated types have already seen on tape.  

LOL... I probably provide more data/facts than 99% of those on the board. But hey, keep touting your "data" and "analytics" expertise.

 

here's the definition of "empirical" evidence.

 

Quote

Empirical evidence is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation.

 

Throwing patterns can be observed, documented, and reported. 

 

But hey, defy definition if you want.. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Reagor ran a lot slower than I thought he would. His numbers in other drills are good, but I thought he would be a 4.3 guy, not 4.5. His play speed is still good, but that time is definitely going to push him down a bit. If he's there in round 3, he's an interesting look

Link to post
Share on other sites

WR group 2 unofficial 40 times

Jauan Jennings  4.73    4.73

Jerry Jeudy  4.46     4.52

Juwan Johnson  4.59     4.62

CeeDee Lamb  4.51    4.51 

Kalija Lipscomb  4.58     4.58

Austin Mack  4.62     4.60

Denzel Mims  4.40     4.39

Darnell Mooney  4.38     4.43

K.J. Osborn  4.48     4.49

Aaron Parker  4.57     4.62

Dezmon Patmon  4.51     4.49

Donovan Peoples-Jones  4.56     4.48

Malcolm Perry  4.63     4.65

Michael Pittman Jr  4.52     4.54

Jalen Raegor  4.47     4.50

Joe Reed  4.51     4.47

Kendrick Rogers  4.52     4.57

Henry Ruggs III  4.28     4.31

Laviska Shenault Jr  4.59     (no second run?)

Freddie Swain  4.46     4.50

Jeff Thomas  4.46     4.51

Binjimen Victor  4.63     4.61

Quez Watkins  4.36     4.38

Cody White  4.70     4.67

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Stephen said:

Idk heard Redskins  were looking at qbs, panthers, Detroit as well. 

Redskins will go Chase Young and play average QBs again

Panthers will stick with Cam 1 more year 

Lions need D help will draft Brown or Okudah 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

LOL... I probably provide more data/facts than 99% of those on the board. But hey, keep touting your "data" and "analytics" expertise.

 

here's the definition of "empirical" evidence.

 

 

Throwing patterns can be observed, documented, and reported. 

 

But hey, defy definition if you want.. 

 

 

LOL.  Its only useful evidence if its objective.  "Empirical" evidence gathered by twitter reporters with their own eyes, and dispensed sporatically, is opinionated evidence, not empirical evidence.

 

But, please keep trying to sound smart.

 

We were here to see height, weight, hand size, velocity, and rotation.  The other "empirical" evidence we've already seen on game tape.  And everybody has interpreted that "empirical" evidence their own way, at least those who choose to have an opinion about it.

 

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

LOL.  Its only useful evidence if its objective.  "Empirical" evidence gathered by twitter reporters with their own eyes, and dispensed sporatically, is opinionated evidence, not empirical evidence.

 

But, please keep trying to sound smart.

 

We were here to see height, weight, hand size, velocity, and rotation.  The other "empirical" evidence we've already seen on game tape.  And everybody has interpreted that "empirical" evidence their own way, at least those who choose to have an opinion about it.

Not trying to sound smart. I just provided a simple and accepted definition that clearly countered your description of empirical evidence. Perhaps you should simply be more accurate. 

 

You're well known for deflecting, moving the goal posts, etc., same here. You said something isn't empirical, which by definition, you're incorrect. Now you're moving to another tangent. You've criticized use of stats, favoring "your eye test", but now criticize other's eye test that are likely more suited and experienced than your own. You certainly can disagree with others, and that's fine. 

 

And game tape itself is not empirical. It's the data that is gathered and document from the tape that's empirical. A simple eye test is not empirical. If anything is subjective and opinionated, it's you. Twitter bots using RAS or other grading sources to make their point is far more objective than your typical opinion or eye test.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

I think very few are saying that lol. Sure there's a few founding members of the Fromm fan club on here, but the polls have been pretty clear. 

 

But yes, he's exactly who I thought he was. I'd bet I've watched more UGA games than just about anyone here (unless they also live in the South and are UGA fans). There's a large portion of UGA fans that wished they'd stayed with either Eason or Fields. The coaches loved him, but the fans not so much. Probably cost them a shot at a natty. 

Too far over your skis once again.

 

That large fan group over in Athens (hmmm guess where I live..about 100 miles from the stadium) are plain wrong, and probably biased about other things.

 

I'm not a UGA fan, too old to change my allegiances, but Kirby Smart (who isn't, but is a Legacy Bulldog) cost UGA the natty, in part by holding back Fromm due to his conservative philosophy.

 

UGA is the last major SEC team that is still old school.  Smash mouth defense and running game.  Even Saban has moved on to more speed and athleticism on offense.  Even the offensive players that UGA sends to the NFL under Isntsmart, not many compared to their defense, are smash mouth OLs and RBs...Gurley, Chubb (Gore clones).  Michel was underutilized and D'Andre Smith was used a runner first and not a multi threat like he can be in the NFL. 

 

UGAs shortcomings have #Isn'tsmart's footprint all over them.

 

Nice thread here.  Didn't mean to strike a nerve with the fake twitter bot opinion/evidence call out.

 

 

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

Too far over your skis once again.

 

That large fan group over in Athens (hmmm guess where I live..about 100 miles from the stadium) are plain wrong, and probably biased about other things.

 

I'm not a UGA fan, too old to change my allegiances, but Kirby Smart (who isn't, but is a Legacy Bulldog) cost UGA the natty, in part by holding back Fromm due to his conservative philosophy.

 

UGA is the last major SEC team that is still old school.  Smash mouth defense and running game.  Even Saban has moved on to more speed and athleticism on offense.  Even the offensive players that UGA sends to the NFL under Isntsmart, not many compared to their defense, are smash mouth OLs and RBs...Gurley, Chubb (Gore clones).  Michel was underutilized and D'Andre Smith was used a runner first and not a multi threat like he can be in the NFL. 

 

UGAs shortcomings have #Isn'tsmart's footprint all over them.

 

Nice thread here.  Didn't mean to strike a nerve with the fake twitter bot opinion/evidence call out.

I live less than 60 miles from Sanford, so what's your point? I'm not a UGA fan, but most of my friends here are, and I've seen several of Fromm's games in person, and a lot more on TV. Doesn't really matter though... But hey, go ahead and discount the majority of UGA fans. Your opinion is clearly better than fans that watch every game... And by the way, if you know a lot of UGA fans, you'd know they don't like Kirby's O either. They can dislike his O and Fromm's limitations at the same time. 

 

This is a great example though of you looking silly in one debate, and then trying to jump off to another topic... keep doing you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, boo2202 said:

4.52 is a good time for Michael Pittman. If we don’t go WR in the first or second rounds, I’d love to take him in the third. 

It's great a great time for a 6-4 guy. Not freakish like 4.42 (Claypool), but still great. 

  • Like 1
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.


×
×
  • Create New...