Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colts sign CB X. Rhodes


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 392
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Sometimes all a player needs is a change of scenery. Hope it works out.

I was reading a lot of your guys post on Rhodes. I was hoping I could shed some light on his play the last 2 seasons. The Vikes run a very complicated Double A scheme. In 2017 it was super effective w

He should have been a Colt all along...   I don't know how well he fits the defense, or why he fell off last year. I'll have to dig into what the Vikings were doing with him. 

The good...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IC1R1YfMAkw

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBfGGaD4A1w

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfZ54yKgsmA

 

The bad...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IXSzqU1diQ

 

and the ugly...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUlafk8krnk

 

 

Hopefully, he can rebound in our system.  I think it's a decent gamble to take for one year.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m all for seeing if a change of scenery helps, but I’m seeing people essentially say “he’ll at least be as good as Desir.” And we just don’t know if that’ll be the case.

 

Again, not against signing him, but I’m not expecting too much.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

I’m all for seeing if a change of scenery helps, but I’m seeing people essentially say “he’ll at least be as good as Desir.” And we just don’t know if that’ll be the case.

 

Again, not against signing him, but I’m not expecting too much.

 

Same if not even more so true can be said about Rivers. And father time is not on Rivers side.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rackeen305 said:

Same if not even more so true can be said about Rivers. And father time is not on Rivers side.

 

The same can be flipped around and said "Rivers has a longer track record plus he has had 3 prior years with Reich and Siranni in a system that involves very similar concepts."

 

But I get your point. :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to wonder if perhaps some of the injuries have gotten to his head. There were a few times in the playoffs last year he was glued to his receiver, but he’d have just the slightest hesitation. And that would be just enough for his target to make a catch. 
 

It’s going to be interesting on what the coaches will plan to do with him. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

@chad72

 

Why cant you receive messages, you have them disabled?

 

No, I don't. I get the trade proposals from other members just fine for our mock draft. Let me check again.

 

I cleared a whole bunch in my Inbox now and sent you a test message.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember how well the so called washed up Charles Woodson was for the Packers from age 30-36, making the ProBowl 4 times?

 

Perhaps with Rhodes his career will entail a similar rebirth!  I am an advocate of this low risk signing.   Really nothing to lose in giving Rhodes the opportunity to recapture his stellar play.

 

Somewhat unrelated, I wonder if S Eric Berry is still in play. Hmmmm.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Like most people...I really wanted Rhodes in that draft.

 

The concern is that injuries have possibly taken away a step...and that his style of play gets flagged a lot (he and Rock both had 8 last year)...and only 1 INT in the past two years. 

 

But it’s a cheap one year deal...sometimes these work out really well and sometimes they don’t...and become a footnote. 
 

I will say...I doubt they draft a CB early. If they are planning on keeping Wilson...then they have a 5-man depth chart. Maybe a developmental prospect later in the draft.

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

Remember how well the so called washed up Charles Woodson was for the Packers from age 30-36, making the ProBowl 4 times?

 

Perhaps with Rhodes his career will entail a similar rebirth!  I am an advocate of this low risk signing.   Really nothing to lose in giving Rhodes the opportunity to recapture his stellar play.


Woodson played some S as well.

 

Now that would be an interesting wrinkle in this. Rhodes certainly has the size to play S...and would allow them to run more of a big nickel with 3 Ss on the field. 
 

You might be onto something here.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, krunk said:

He did suck when he was a Colt.  Many of those comments were made before we acquired him.  Gavin was one of the main ones who hated him.


Patrick Robinson was good at football.  So was Tim Jennings.  So is Xavier Rhodes.

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


Woodson played some S as well.

 

Now that would be an interesting wrinkle in this. Rhodes certainly has the size to play S...and would allow them to run more of a big nickel with 3 Ss on the field. 
 

You might be onto something here.

 

Correct. For all that we know, Xavier Rhodes might be transitioning to a "face to the QB" Kam Chancellor like role?? Just thinking out loud. That is why I also mentioned "Richard Sherman like role in the 49ers" where his face is mostly facing the QB and he is rarely on an island at this point in his career.

 

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

FWIW Peter King just said on PFT that he hopes Ballard knows what he is doing.  He doesn't see the signing.  Florio agrees.  They said he was in the bottom of the league the last two years.  Oh well. 

I think it really falls to how they use him.  He is not a guy who can chase a quick WR all over the field.  If you let him press and we get actual pass rush he will do very well

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

FWIW Peter King just said on PFT that he hopes Ballard knows what he is doing.  He doesn't see the signing.  Florio agrees.  They said he was in the bottom of the league the last two years.  Oh well. 

They act like Ballard gave him a 6 year deal with a huge cap hit.  It's a 1 year deal.  If it works out, great.  If it doesn't, both sides move on.  In my opinion, it's low risk, high reward

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

In the KC game we played a lot of MAN, not sure why we didn't do it more. People were even posting about it the next day how good our D looked playing that way.

I remember that game. I don’t get why teams run zone based schemes anyways. Good QBs destroy any type of zone. It’s best used as a prevent defense IMO.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, jameszeigler834 said:

I don't know how Desir was horrendous I also never did put much stock in that PFF crap either never did think it meant anything.

He gave up far more receptions, plain and simple. 

He was good at tackling, horrible at coverage.

 

On PFF... It's not perfect, but it certainly is an indicator of performance. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

Houston is in a contract year with Banogu and Turay as up and coming pass rushers. Signing Clowney to a 4-5 year deal would not be the worst idea since he would essentially replace Houston as our everydown end while Banogu and Turay can still rotate to stay fresh.

 

Perhaps seeing the additions of Rhodes, Day and Buckner plus Leonard and Hooker lurking behind him might sway his opinion on taking Ballards offer?

 

Is it that hard to see that he really just wants to be paid?

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

Houston is in a contract year with Banogu and Turay as up and coming pass rushers. Signing Clowney to a 4-5 year deal would not be the worst idea since he would essentially replace Houston as our everydown end while Banogu and Turay can still rotate to stay fresh.

 

Perhaps seeing the additions of Rhodes, Day and Buckner plus Leonard and Hooker lurking behind him might sway his opinion on taking Ballards offer?

I'd be OK with that strategy if he indeed was set to replace Houston. I doubt though that they are willing to move off Houston. I can see them re-upping so long as he doesn't drop off this year. Also, we're #3 in DL spending currently, and only a few M off being #1. I just don't see them blowing away the #1 spot by that much.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, #12. said:

 

 

Cruzship1234 at Colts Reddit posted a photo of Rhodes' introductory press conference.

 

lc8bacdry4p41.jpg

Unfortunately, this may or may not be the true identity of Cruzship1234...

 

298068661a6eb2b988e5dbb67c9a6737.jpg

  • Haha 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked a few friends who are fans of MN.

FWIW ----- Both said:

 

-Awesome 2-3 years ago

-Horrible the last 2 years

-Is a drama queen / "me" guy

 

@NFLfan can you address #3? lol

2 minutes ago, Dogg63 said:

Who or what is Cob 2?

guessing he meant to type cov2 (cover 2)

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

exactly!! the dude would absolutely kill it here with our line!!! I can only dream :Cry:

Sorry to bring Cousins into discussion here. 

 

IMO, Cousins is like an expensive Quality Inspector, sorta like what companies in good times spend money on shiny new concepts would spend for no particular use or gain. 

 

Cousins had a stellar OL in Redskins behind Trent Williams, Brendon Schreff, Morgan Moses, and others, but that was not enough because defense was poor. Vikings had a stellar defense which is what Cousins wanted his whole career, but you find out how bad your OL is. (OL is bad compared to Colts' standard, but they were 15th best in league (average) in giving up QB pressures. Let's say Cousins comes to Colts for few years, he would expose where the team needs to improve, which as a fan you'd probably know already. But, a Quality Inspector confirms it officially.

 

The problem is you'd have to pay 30 million, sometimes in fully guaranteed deal for his liking, to test and find out where your team's weakness lies, which you probably knew by eye test for free as a fan. Cousins will not improve the team or compensate the problem by elevating his game, but he can wow fans by some of the elite passing skills, which come and go so often that he wouldn't play consistently even through a single game. He would look top 3 QB in the league in highlights package, so he would have lot of football fans understandably saying why the team has done well with him. 

 

Even in game plan and play execution, Cousins comes on to the field like a Quality Inspector. He would try to execute a play, if everything doesn't go well as planned, for example someone in OL didn't pass protect for few more seconds until the play develops or if the wide receiver was late running a route, Cousins would expose how other players are doing it wrong. He wouldn't make adjustments and find a way to keep the drive alive, he'd just expose average flaws in the team as worst and worse flaws in the team as irreparable. I firmly believe that was the point of contention for Adam Thielen and Stefon Diggs with Kirk Cousins, as they love their QB to buy time and throw it to them whether they're covered or a bit late in route transition because the CB coverage was good. Cousins is just too nerdy and plays by book that he cannot ever excel making plays when situations aren't in "ideal conditions" on the field, which most often is the case. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Coltsman1788 said:

The good...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IC1R1YfMAkw

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBfGGaD4A1w

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfZ54yKgsmA

 

The bad...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IXSzqU1diQ

 

and the ugly...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUlafk8krnk

 

 

Hopefully, he can rebound in our system.  I think it's a decent gamble to take for one year.  

Maybe CB is betting that he'll play better in a zone than getting beat in man coverage???

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Coltsman1788 said:

You ain’t right for that.  Lol 

 

Just passing it along.  Based on recent times, it's pretty accurate, though.  Rhodes was horrible in 2019.  I do however think it's a good idea to take a low risk chance on a reclamation project now and then.  

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

I asked a few friends who are fans of MN.

FWIW ----- Both said:

 

-Awesome 2-3 years ago

-Horrible the last 2 years

-Is a drama queen / "me" guy

 

@NFLfan can you address #3? lol

guessing he meant to type cov2 (cover 2)

 

I don't think he is a "me" guy. I'm not sure why your friends say this. As for drama queen, some fans felt that he seemed to complain of injury whenever he got beat on a play. He did seem to do this at times.

 

I like Rhodes. I'm not among the ones who complained about him.

 

What do your friends think of Cousins?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a big thing to remember is that OTAs and offseason will be extremely shortened if not almost non-existent. Bringing in guys familiar with the system like Rivers and Rhodes and an immediate impact player like Buckner instead of taking a draft pick that will be behind the 8 ball getting up to speed with the NFL sends a signal to me that Ballard is trying to field a team that can hit the ground running and make a real run at the playoffs and our division. He probably sees that rookies who can’t come into facilities and practice are not going to make a huge contribution this year and he would rather bring in vets that can help more right away...at least this year. 

  • Like 2
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

    • All this off season there were those who were talking about how bad Glow was. That he was the weakest link and needed to be replaced. And when Pinter was drafted how he could step in and take Glows spot.     Y'all are looking kind of uninformed at this point.   
    • FWIW I thought this from last weeks mail bag was funny because it seems to support what both you and I are saying.  If what I understand your point being is the dline including Buckner played similarly well both games and my belief that 3techs don’t need to record sacks and tfls to be dominant. : “I can understand why fans who watched last Sunday's opener against the Jaguars, and then checked out the box score afterwards, might come away with the conclusion that DeForest Buckner didn't have much of an impact on the game. After all, the Colts traded away their 13th-overall pick in this year's NFL Draft to acquire Buckner, and then immediately handed him a huge contract extension, so expectations are high. I get that. But looking back at the film, I think what's evident is Buckner deserves a little bit more credit beyond his stat-sheet line of six tackles (one for a loss). As the defensive line started to gel in the second half — that's when it limited Jacksonville to six combined rushing yards and had three of its four sacks — you began to feel Buckner much more consistently, and the attention placed on him allowed for others (I thought linebacker Bobby Okereke was fantastic in the second half) to make plays. Buckner also had the eighth-best week among all NFL interior defensive linemen in run stop win rate in Week 1, according to ESPN. Now, moving forward, of course you want to see more of those impact-type plays out of Buckner — sacks, big run stuffs, forced fumbles, defensive touchdowns, etc. But I think it's also important to to remember there are other ways for the three-tech to impact the game, and Buckner did a pretty good job of that last Sunday.”  
    • I’m a little surprised you don’t see a difference in dline play between  the two games.  I don’t have access to any of the services but I would suspect that The grades are significantly higher for the dline in Sunday compared to the Jax game.   but Sunday was even more dominant than i thought, and I thought it was dominant.  Between the opening drive during which MN gained 75 and scored a FG and their last meaningless drive for 75 yds and a TD, the Colts gave up a total of 25 other yds.    against Jax, we gave up around 60 yds rushing in the 1st half and the dline looked less than dominant then imo.  Jax had 5 of 8 drives during which they scored if you throw out the kneel downs at the end of each half.   Percentage of  tackles and sacks for linemen were very similar in both games.  You said that colts had more pressures during the mn game and I said probably a function of Jax short passing attack.   buckner had 6 tackles v Jax and 3 v mn.  He had no sacks v Jax but 1.5 tfl.  He had 1.5 sacks v mn but no other tfl.  Statistically counting sacks, tackles, and tfl he was “better” V Jax.  But you probably don’t think He was better Iwould suspect.   i would be shocked if the dline didn’t grade out higher v. Mn than Jax even though the tackles, tfl, and sacks were very similar over all.   im sure teams keep advanced stats that show a clearer pic of when a d lineman wins or loses on each Play that doesn’t necessarily match easier to see stats like tackles, etc.   do you have access to the grades?  I’d really be interested in the units grades in the two games.   i agree there can be other factors like obviously opponent strength and the play of LBs and dbs.  And mn looks like they might suck pretty bad surprisingly to me.  I think the main problem with lasts weeks game imo is the LBs are weak in coverage and Indy is as a result susceptible to short passing attacks.     that being said, rarely do dlines dominate the LOs like the colts did.   i maintain that a guy like Buckner and dts in general could have nit recorded a sack, had only a couple of tackles and be more dominant than In a game where he recorded a few tackles and a couple of sacks.    
    • Let's hire an exorcist!  
    • Didn't Nick Bosa get hurt this week too?
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...