Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Recommended Posts

Not surprised. I called this in a few threads.

 

Doesn't catch the ball, doesn't run the ball. And we've never run a lot of two back sets. We already have good blocking TEs, Taylor did well in WI, and Mack and Hines improved last year. 

 

He was a pure luxury, and the overall value is just not there.

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, krunk said:

Not surprised. We have almost never kept a fullback no matter who our staff has been

FBs are simply a declining breed. RB value in general has already diminished, and FBs, especially ones that don't really run the ball or catch, just don't bring a lot of value. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Keefer mentioned Nix had "too many fumbles" and didn't have a good camp, and Bowen mentioned him not getting very many starting reps during camp and that special teams value was about all he added.

 

I was excited to see a FB on the roster and wanted to see it translate into even better running, but we already have excellent run blocking going on - from all 5 guys on the line as well as from MAC and Doyle. It didn't seem to me we really need yet another run blocker.

 

In the end, I bet coming up with ways to use Nix effectively (aside from special teams) was similar to Reich trying to put together a special gadget play for JB...probably more effort than it's worth. 

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

FBs are simply a declining breed. RB value in general has already diminished, and FBs, especially ones that don't really run the ball or catch, just don't bring a lot of value. 

Better to be an H back. Somebody who can lineup in the backfield as a blocker. Or lineup inline as pass catching TE or an inline blocker. Got to be able to do all that. Weve used Jack Doyle in that way under Pagano. Or recently Reich used that other guy i believe we picked up from the Bengals. Think his name was Ryan Hewitt.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, krunk said:

Better to be an H back. Somebody who can lineup in the backfield as a blocker. Or lineup inline as pass catching TE or an inline blocker. Got to be able to do all that.

Yup. That's kind of what Burton started out as when he came into the league. 

Or be a king size RB like AJ Dillon who has FB size, but RB speed and skills.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I was wrong, but it looks like he didn’t have the best camp. With some high expectations this season, coupled with it already being unusual, he just wasn’t in the cards to be a part of the game plan. Best of luck to him. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CR91 said:

I think this had more to do with our injuries to TE

I agree partially. IMO the TE depth problems just hastened the inevitable. A FB who can’t run and catch is one dimentional and not worth keeping over a TE/Hback. The Colts are better off carrying 4 TE’s. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Hoose said:

I agree partially. IMO the TE depth problems just hastened the inevitable. A FB who can’t run and catch is one dimentional and not worth keeping over a TE/Hback. The Colts are better off carrying 4 TE’s. 

Yep. Agree, agree, agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're all looking at the wrong area of the depth chart.....

This will make it easier to keep 6 wide receivers.....

Or keep all 7 linebackers - Franklin, Adams and Glasgow mostly for special teams.....

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:

I think you're all looking at the wrong area of the depth chart.....

This will make it easier to keep 6 wide receivers.....

Or keep all 7 linebackers - Franklin, Adams and Glasgow mostly for special teams.....

It's all impacted. But from a functionality perspective, most connection to RB and TE.

We have a lot of folks hanging around the cut lines in different positions groups. WR and LB are a bit more obvious, but OL, DL, and DB also have some tough decisions as well.  To be honest, Nix just doesn't have a lot of functional value, and was the easiest of those decisions. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like this move for Wilkins, who I like allot.   

 

I will say that I was looking forward to seeing what it would look like with Nix and Taylor plowing through this O-line.   

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, CR91 said:

I think this had more to do with our injuries to TE

Ball security is what I read sounds like they were trying to use him as more than just a blocker . 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am hoping they resign him to our practice squad. I don't think anybody is going to pick him up right away.

We need Rosie Nix as we have a depleted TE squad and who are injury prone. The only downside is if Rathman does not think Nix has good enough hands for their scheme.

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

FBs are simply a declining breed. RB value in general has already diminished, and FBs, especially ones that don't really run the ball or catch, just don't bring a lot of value. 

 

When he was first signed, it seemed like Reich and Ballard both had a heavy emphasis on his ability to play STs in their interviews.  TBH, we probably have enough guys who can play well on STs (Glasgow, Franklin, Adams, Speed, maybe some of the young TEs, Dulin, etc.), so yea if Nix wasn't adding value outside of STs as anything more than a blocker, probably an easy decision to get rid of him.

 

15 hours ago, Dogg63 said:

Keefer mentioned Nix had "too many fumbles" and didn't have a good camp, and Bowen mentioned him not getting very many starting reps during camp and that special teams value was about all he added.

 

I was excited to see a FB on the roster and wanted to see it translate into even better running, but we already have excellent run blocking going on - from all 5 guys on the line as well as from MAC and Doyle. It didn't seem to me we really need yet another run blocker.

 

In the end, I bet coming up with ways to use Nix effectively (aside from special teams) was similar to Reich trying to put together a special gadget play for JB...probably more effort than it's worth. 

 

 

It sounded like, at least early in camp, they were running packages with a true FB on the field.  I doubt we see a lot of that, but will be shocked if we don't see it at all.  Maybe one of the TEs, Pinter or someone on D (Windsor or a LB) has shown enough that they can line up as a FB if needed.  I imagine several of the younger guys are more athletic than Nix and can match his contributions on STs as well.

 

42 minutes ago, AustexColt said:

I am hoping they resign him to our practice squad. I don't think anybody is going to pick him up right away.

We need Rosie Nix as we have a depleted TE squad and who are injury prone. The only downside is if Rathman does not think Nix has good enough hands for their scheme.

 

I don't know that we 'need' Nix.  He's a true FB, not a TE.  I can't imagine he'd be any better than Green, Vollert, etc. as a TE.  What we need is for Doyle and MAC to stay healthy and for Burton to heal sooner than later.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, John Hammonds said:

Yup.  Not surprised.

What are the odds we bring in a free agent TE in the next 7 days?

 

If Washington cuts Hentges - which is likely from the articles I've been reading on them - I can absolutely see the Colts claiming him now that we have a need that wasn't there a year ago. They loved him in camp last year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, EastStreet said:

To be honest, Nix just doesn't have a lot of functional value, and was the easiest of those decisions. 

True statement. That is why I focused on the WR group and LB group.  All of Speed, Adams, Franklin and Glasgow offer special teams ability.

 

Dulin (last year as a gunner) and supposedly Patmon (who played some in college) also offer special teams ability from the bottom of the WR Group - along with Pascal.

 

Nix was a one trick pony on offense and with an oline that already run blocks extremely well he wasn't needed in my own humble opinion.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

True statement. That is why I focused on the WR group and LB group.  All of Speed, Adams, Franklin and Glasgow offer special teams ability.

 

Dulin (last year as a gunner) and supposedly Patmon (who played some in college) also offer special teams ability from the bottom of the WR Group - along with Pascal.

 

Nix was a one trick pony on offense and with an oline that already run blocks extremely well he wasn't needed in my own humble opinion.

 

We also have some competition at DB and I imagine between Rodgers (also a returner), Rutledge, Tremon Smith, etc.. we have several guys who can play STs and we may want a little more depth at DB.  Granted, they'd be in a different role than Nix (probably would be a LBer or TE who plays his type of role), but with the availability of Blackmon still up in the air (sounds like they're going to take it pretty slow bringing him up to speed) and the loss of Tell, Hooker's injury history and Moore II just coming off a groin strain, they may want to carry an extra DB.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

When he was first signed, it seemed like Reich and Ballard both had a heavy emphasis on his ability to play STs in their interviews.  TBH, we probably have enough guys who can play well on STs (Glasgow, Franklin, Adams, Speed, maybe some of the young TEs, Dulin, etc.), so yea if Nix wasn't adding value outside of STs as anything more than a blocker, probably an easy decision to get rid of him.

You're spot on with that list. I'd add Wilkins and Odum who really only will get time due to injury. Both of them had a ton of ST's snaps.

 

At the end of the days, we're already a great run blocking team. Adding a FB who really doesn't catch or run the ball, just never made sense to me. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

True statement. That is why I focused on the WR group and LB group.  All of Speed, Adams, Franklin and Glasgow offer special teams ability.

 

Dulin (last year as a gunner) and supposedly Patmon (who played some in college) also offer special teams ability from the bottom of the WR Group - along with Pascal.

 

Nix was a one trick pony on offense and with an oline that already run blocks extremely well he wasn't needed in my own humble opinion.

We're overloaded with STs talent this year lol. Good problem to have though. 

 

I also think we cut one of Adams/Franklin/Glasgow. Just no need to keep 7 LBs given the position group is one of our most solid on the team. There's an argument to be had for just about every other position group to keep extra though.

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

You're spot on with that list. I'd add Wilkins and Odum who really only will get time due to injury. Both of them had a ton of ST's snaps.

 

At the end of the days, we're already a great run blocking team. Adding a FB who really doesn't catch or run the ball, just never made sense to me. 

 

Very true.. Wilkins has shown, in limited opportunity, he can be a solid contributor as a RB.  I still tend to think he plays a little small for his size, but he has a very solid YPC when given the shot.  Seems to have improved his carrying technique to limit his fumbles, as well.  

 

I could be wrong, but from the Nix signing to the way Ballard spoke about Glasgow, it does seem like he wants a bell cow on the STs.  Ballard didn't really mention anything about Glasgow being a major contributor as an LBer, but did talk at length about him being a stud ST guy.  He is sort of a tweener, so I could see him being used in a role I think they imagined Geathers at on D (kind of a nickel LBer/in box safety type) at some point... but I still see his primary value as a ST guy (if he makes the team).

 

2 hours ago, EastStreet said:

We're overloaded with STs talent this year lol. Good problem to have though. 

 

I also think we cut one of Adams/Franklin/Glasgow. Just no need to keep 7 LBs given the position group is one of our most solid on the team. There's an argument to be had for just about every other position group to keep extra though.

 

I agree, it'd be weird to see 7 LBers on this team.. as with Leonard, Walker, Okereke that may be our best starting 'group' on the team (rivaled by OL though I think our weak link, whether you say Okereke or Walker at LB is stronger than Glow on the OL).  I think Speed, who was drafted as a project, has a ton of upside, too.  I also think Franklin and Adams (and before he opted out, Skai) have shown they are solid backups.  

 

Glasgow seems like he'd have a decent chance to be protected on the PS for a while, but he also seems like he has the pedigree of a football player (I think both his brothers were walk-ons prior to him being a D-I walk on and both are in the NFL, one a DL and one an OL).  I could see 7 LBs being kept if Glasgow is kind of our ST ace and also can fill a role of  just a hard-nosed football player who can play a blocking role on offense similar to what they may have had envisioned Nix as. One trait I noticed with Glasgow when I read his draft profile and watched his tape after we drafted him (admittedly, it's been a while), is he seems like a guy who is willing to do whatever he's asked to make the team and play whatever role they want him to.  He doesn't have the best test scores (i.e., 40 time, combine measurables), but he seems like seems like if they asked him to run through a brick wall on a short yardage situation as a fullback, he'd do it without questioning it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

Very true.. Wilkins has shown, in limited opportunity, he can be a solid contributor as a RB.  I still tend to think he plays a little small for his size, but he has a very solid YPC when given the shot.  Seems to have improved his carrying technique to limit his fumbles, as well.  

 

I could be wrong, but from the Nix signing to the way Ballard spoke about Glasgow, it does seem like he wants a bell cow on the STs.  Ballard didn't really mention anything about Glasgow being a major contributor as an LBer, but did talk at length about him being a stud ST guy.  He is sort of a tweener, so I could see him being used in a role I think they imagined Geathers at on D (kind of a nickel LBer/in box safety type) at some point... but I still see his primary value as a ST guy (if he makes the team).

 

 

I agree, it'd be weird to see 7 LBers on this team.. as with Leonard, Walker, Okereke that may be our best starting 'group' on the team (rivaled by OL though I think our weak link, whether you say Okereke or Walker at LB is stronger than Glow on the OL).  I think Speed, who was drafted as a project, has a ton of upside, too.  I also think Franklin and Adams (and before he opted out, Skai) have shown they are solid backups.  

 

Glasgow seems like he'd have a decent chance to be protected on the PS for a while, but he also seems like he has the pedigree of a football player (I think both his brothers were walk-ons prior to him being a D-I walk on and both are in the NFL, one a DL and one an OL).  I could see 7 LBs being kept if Glasgow is kind of our ST ace and also can fill a role of  just a hard-nosed football player who can play a blocking role on offense similar to what they may have had envisioned Nix as. One trait I noticed with Glasgow when I read his draft profile and watched his tape after we drafted him (admittedly, it's been a while), is he seems like a guy who is willing to do whatever he's asked to make the team and play whatever role they want him to.  He doesn't have the best test scores (i.e., 40 time, combine measurables), but he seems like seems like if they asked him to run through a brick wall on a short yardage situation as a fullback, he'd do it without questioning it.

I think Glasgow would easily stick on the PS squad. Much more than a lot of the other guys who will be tough decisions. I think Adams would to though to be honest. 

 

As far as Franklin and Adams are concerned, I agree they are good depth, but I'd never want to see either start at any position but SAM, which we sparsely use anyway. 

  • 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...