The Fan's 53 Man Roster Projection

[EastStreet]

Not a lot of shockers, but a few interesting predictions. 

 

The biggest area where I disagree is WR (# and those chosen), but he hedges his bets a bit in the write up. Most of the other areas I agree with.

 

https://www.1075thefan.com/kevins-sports-news/final-colts-53-man-roster-projection-heading-into-roster-cuts/

[csmopar]

15 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Not a lot of shockers, but a few interesting predictions. 

 

The biggest area where I disagree is WR (# and those chosen), but he hedges his bets a bit in the write up. Most of the other areas I agree with.

 

https://www.1075thefan.com/kevins-sports-news/final-colts-53-man-roster-projection-heading-into-roster-cuts/

I think it’ll end up close to this. But I’m still expecting a surprise cut, who or where, not sure. We shall find out tomorrow 

[EastStreet]

3 minutes ago, csmopar said:

I think it’ll end up close to this. But I’m still expecting a surprise cut, who or where, not sure. We shall find out tomorrow 

Close, but I also think they'll be a bit more strategic. With the new rules making it easier to elevate and demote, there are several guys that they picked that could be easily stashed on the PS. Like Grimble for instance. And several guys they didn't pick, that would be at high risk of being poached. 

 

If we have a truly surprising cut, it would be the DL for me. Not sure we keep 10 there again like we did last year.

[PrincetonTiger]

Have an issue with the OL picks

[w87r]

14 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Have an issue with the OL picks

What would you do different? Keep more?

 

I like Hunt and O'Donnel, maybe 1 of them over Eldrenkamp?

 

 

Pinter is our new versatile guy.

[CurBeatElite]

26 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Have an issue with the OL picks

 

I tend to think O'Donnell over Eldrenkamp and I think Patterson makes it... I think Sheldon Day gets axed or PUPed on the DL and we keep 9 OL and 9 DL.  Have a hard time believing they'd go into the season with only 8 OL on the 53, especially b/c it sounds like Pinter is also going to be used as a hybrid TE on certain short yard situations.

[PrincetonTiger]

11 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

I tend to think O'Donnell over Eldrenkamp and I think Patterson makes it... I think Sheldon Day gets axed or PUPed on the DL and we keep 9 OL and 9 DL.  Have a hard time believing they'd go into the season with only 8 OL on the 53, especially b/c it sounds like Pinter is also going to be used as a hybrid TE on certain short yard situations.

No real backup C either

 

i would keep 9(replace Elderkamp with Patterson and keep CO or add a Waiver pickup T

[CurBeatElite]

1 minute ago, PrincetonTiger said:

No real backup C either

 

i would keep 9(replace Elderkamp with Patterson and keep CO or add a Waiver pickup T

 

Yea, the roster on colts.com has Big Q listed as G/C and it sounds like Pinter is getting work at both Gs and C.  Though I don't doubt he could pull it off, I'd rather not see Q at C.  I was pretty high on Patterson last year prior to him getting hurt and from the few blurbs I've read since then it sounded as though he was working his tail off and recovering all right.

 

[PrincetonTiger]

2 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

Yea, the roster on colts.com has Big Q listed as G/C and it sounds like Pinter is getting work at both Gs and C.  Though I don't doubt he could pull it off, I'd rather not see Q at C.  I was pretty high on Patterson last year prior to him getting hurt and from the few blurbs I've read since then it sounded as though he was working his tail off and recovering all right.

 

It is not easy, Interior OL was my coaching focus

[EastStreet]

We simply don't know anything about the OL depth talent. We never saw them play last year, and we didn't see them in preseason this year. All we have is feedback from the coaches and reports from talking heads.

 

I was high on Patterson coming in, but also know he tore his ACL last year. Center to me is interior, but shares as much T skill set as G. Anyway, I like Pinter long term as either a G/C or depth swing man, so wouldn't be shocked if he sticks and Patterson is waived. I could see Patterson and/or Hunt on the PS.

59 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

I tend to think O'Donnell over Eldrenkamp and I think Patterson makes it... I think Sheldon Day gets axed or PUPed on the DL and we keep 9 OL and 9 DL.  Have a hard time believing they'd go into the season with only 8 OL on the 53, especially b/c it sounds like Pinter is also going to be used as a hybrid TE on certain short yard situations.

We only kept 8 OL last year to start IIRC. And especially with the new PS rules, it's easier than ever to move folks up and down. Clark (6) is the T swing man, and you need two (7 and 8) to cover G/C. 

 

Don't get too caught up with Pinter's time at TE. It's likely more to do with having a flexible extra blocker that CAN catch if needed, then it is because we have TE depth issues.

 

Depending on Day's injury, I don't see him getting cut if it's not too serious. We need to rotate heavy at NT by scheme design, and Windsor is more than likely not that guy yet. Just not a lot of options at NT.

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, PrincetonTiger said:

No real backup C either

 

i would keep 9(replace Elderkamp with Patterson and keep CO or add a Waiver pickup T

The back up center is either Pinter, Hunt, who we recently claimed from Seattle, or Eldrenkamp.   I think I’ve read Patterson hasn’t had a great camp.  Maybe PS for him? 

[CurBeatElite]

49 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

It is not easy, Interior OL was my coaching focus

 

I understand that and wasn't trying to say it was easy to switch from G to C.  Just saying if anyone could do it and be elite at both spots, I wouldn't put it past Q - he's a once in a generation athletic talent with freakish size and a strong football/overall IQ.  That said, I think he's more valuable at G and would rather him there.  Pinter, while I like the fact they think he can be versatile was a TE just about 2 years ago at a fairly small football school and switched to T.  It sounds like he's coming along well, but I'd have a lot more faith if they kept a true C as a backup, let Clark be the main backup T (potential to move Smith to G if something happens to Glow or Q), Pinter as the 'Haeg' and one more just in case.  

 

9 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

We simply don't know anything about the OL depth talent. We never saw them play last year, and we didn't see them in preseason this year. All we have is feedback from the coaches and reports from talking heads.

 

I was high on Patterson coming in, but also know he tore his ACL last year. Center to me is interior, but shares as much T skill set as G. Anyway, I like Pinter long term as either a G/C or depth swing man, so wouldn't be shocked if he sticks and Patterson is waived. I could see Patterson and/or Hunt on the PS.

We only kept 8 OL last year to start IIRC. And especially with the new PS rules, it's easier than ever to move folks up and down. Clark (6) is the T swing man, and you need two (7 and 8) to cover G/C. 

 

Don't get too caught up with Pinter's time at TE. It's likely more to do with having a flexible extra blocker that CAN catch if needed, then it is because we have TE depth issues.

 

Depending on Day's injury, I don't see him getting cut if it's not too serious. We need to rotate heavy at NT by scheme design, and Windsor is more than likely not that guy yet. Just not a lot of options at NT.

 

Not sure what we started with last year, but we ended with 8 OL.  So yea, you could be right that we just keep 8... though, like you said we don't really know what we have in our backups (other than maybe Clark).  Last year we knew what we had in Haeg because he'd had ample experience in prior years.  While they seem high on Pinter moving along the OL, I'm a bit skeptical as a rookie that he's ready for serious playing time if need be (again, as I pointed out above, I could see if an injury occured at G to move Smith to a G and put Clark at RT).  And I don't think we'll use Pinter much as a receiving TE or a blocking TE, but they've eluded to packages which will bring him on the field.  What worries me there, is let's say he plays just a handful of snaps per game, that means we have 6 OL on the field at a time... having just 2 backups across that board, especially if he's the 'swiss army knife' could be dangerous (maybe not, but my point was more that if we're going to actual utilize him several times a game, he's not really a back up in terms of sitting on the  bench not putting himself at risk of injury on Sundays).

 

I wouldn't be shocked to see Day start on the PUP or that 3 week IR... he hasn't really practiced at all, so I doubt he's ready to go come the first couple of weeks anyway.  

 

[EastStreet]

4 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

Not sure what we started with last year, but we ended with 8 OL.  So yea, you could be right that we just keep 8... though, like you said we don't really know what we have in our backups (other than maybe Clark).  Last year we knew what we had in Haeg because he'd had ample experience in prior years.  While they seem high on Pinter moving along the OL, I'm a bit skeptical as a rookie that he's ready for serious playing time if need be (again, as I pointed out above, I could see if an injury occured at G to move Smith to a G and put Clark at RT).  And I don't think we'll use Pinter much as a receiving TE or a blocking TE, but they've eluded to packages which will bring him on the field.  What worries me there, is let's say he plays just a handful of snaps per game, that means we have 6 OL on the field at a time... having just 2 backups across that board, especially if he's the 'swiss army knife' could be dangerous (maybe not, but my point was more that if we're going to actual utilize him several times a game, he's not really a back up in terms of sitting on the  bench not putting himself at risk of injury on Sundays).

 

I wouldn't be shocked to see Day start on the PUP or that 3 week IR... he hasn't really practiced at all, so I doubt he's ready to go come the first couple of weeks anyway.  

 

Purely my opinion, but 8 is enough.

 

With a T and 2 G/C guys, you'd have to have 2 Ts go down to be in doo doo. And the flexibility that Smith brings (and Nelson) go a long way in a pinch. Nelson could likely play any position on the OL.

 

Keep in mind Pinter has just as much experience as Patterson. Patterson was out last season, so it's not like he has a year under his belt. Patterson also is G/C, who converted from G to C at Ole Miss. But IMO, he'd be VERY weak at G, and the coaches likely don't see near the flex value in him as they do Pinter.

 

I could see the 3 week IR for Day, If he's due back this week or next, I think they keep him.

[CurBeatElite]

2 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Purely my opinion, but 8 is enough.

 

With a T and 2 G/C guys, you'd have to have 2 Ts go down to be in doo doo. And the flexibility that Smith brings (and Nelson) go a long way in a pinch. Nelson could likely play any position on the OL.

 

Keep in mind Pinter has just as much experience as Patterson. Patterson was out last season, so it's not like he has a year under his belt. Patterson also is G/C, who converted from G to C at Ole Miss. But IMO, he'd be VERY weak at G, and the coaches likely don't see near the flex value in him as they do Pinter.

 

I could see the 3 week IR for Day, If he's due back this week or next, I think they keep him.

 

Patterson at least got some camp in last year and was around the facilities getting shown the ropes and rehabbing with NFL strength and conditioning and he comes from a more highly competitive conference in college.  He also was an OL all along in college, whereas Pinter only has 2 years experience (it sounds like in his life) on the OL.  I agree, Pinter probably has more long-term value and flexibility... but at least at the C position, I think I'd prefer to see Patterson or Joey Hunt (didn't realize he had 8 starts in Seattle last year) this season anyway... but yea, we'll see 8 may be enough and with the expanded PS and changes in bringing guys up, we may be able to stash a Patterson and another player or 2 to provide quality depth on the PS.

[EastStreet]

9 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

Patterson at least got some camp in last year and was around the facilities getting shown the ropes and rehabbing with NFL strength and conditioning and he comes from a more highly competitive conference in college.  He also was an OL all along in college, whereas Pinter only has 2 years experience (it sounds like in his life) on the OL.  I agree, Pinter probably has more long-term value and flexibility... but at least at the C position, I think I'd prefer to see Patterson or Joey Hunt (didn't realize he had 8 starts in Seattle last year) this season anyway... but yea, we'll see 8 may be enough and with the expanded PS and changes in bringing guys up, we may be able to stash a Patterson and another player or 2 to provide quality depth on the PS.

I agree that being around was good for Patterson, just not to that big of an advantage. I'd rather be the guy coming in new and healthy, than a guy who was around but coming back from an ACL. While I might feel a little better about Patterson playing C than Pinter early on, I would feel much better about Pinter playing G than Patterson. I'd definitely prefer Hunt to Patterson at C.

 

Regardless, I think we'll be able to stash a few on the PS. 

 

Trying to think of different injury scenarios, with only 8 OL.

 

LT goes down - Smith to LT, Clark to RT

RT goes down - Clark to RT

RG goes down - Eldrenkamp or Pinter

LG goes down - Smith to LG, Clark to RT

C goes down - Pinter

2 Ts go down - Clark to LT, Pinter to RT

2 Gs go down - Smith to LG, Clark to RT, Pinter or Eldrenkamp to RG.

 

Think about your 8, and what you'd do if Patterson was included.

[Horsey]

No way Fountain makes the team. He's only known for dropping an easy TD. Not a good pick by Ballard, and he should give the roster spot to a WR that can actually catch a pass.

[PrincetonTiger]

With the COVID situation   

  It is not good to only keep 8 OL

[EastStreet]

1 hour ago, Horsey said:

No way Fountain makes the team. He's only known for dropping an easy TD. Not a good pick by Ballard, and he should give the roster spot to a WR that can actually catch a pass.

You should give Ballard and Reich a call and let them know.

59 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

With the COVID situation   

  It is not good to only keep 8 OL

Covid could effect any position. The PS rules make it incredibly easy to elevate and demote. On top of that, some of the OL we'd like to keep, would likely pass waivers with more ease compared to some others close to the line. 

[krunk]

3 hours ago, Horsey said:

No way Fountain makes the team. He's only known for dropping an easy TD. Not a good pick by Ballard, and he should give the roster spot to a WR that can actually catch a pass.

Straight nonsense on your part!

[krunk]

Give me Fountain all day. I dont get the Dulin love. Ive seen or heard zero from Dulin as a WR and thats the main function of the job.

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, krunk said:

Give me Fountain all day. I dont get the Dulin love. Ive seen or heard zero from Dulin as a WR and thats the main function of the job.

I've seen a few good reports on Dulin at WR. I think most of the love for Dulin stems from his return and gunner roles on STs though. He had limited returns last year, but he looked fantastic when he did. IMO, You really can't go wrong with one or two of Fountain, Dulin, and Patmon. IMO, Fountain may be the easiest to stash on the PS though.

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

I've seen a few good reports on Dulin at WR. I think most of the love for Dulin stems from his return and gunner roles on STs though. He had limited returns last year, but he looked fantastic when he did. IMO, You really can't go wrong with one or two of Fountain, Dulin, and Patmon. IMO, Fountain may be the easiest to stash on the PS though.

STs is why I like AD

 

 

  i like DF but think AD offers more

[PrincetonTiger]

2 hours ago, EastStreet said:

You should give Ballard and Reich a call and let them know.

Covid could effect any position. The PS rules make it incredibly easy to elevate and demote. On top of that, some of the OL we'd like to keep, would likely pass waivers with more ease compared to some others close to the line. 

 I don’t disagree but would like to a true backup C on the final 53 over a Swiss Army knife that might force the team to move QN around if RK gets hurt

[EastStreet]

5 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

 I don’t disagree but would like to a true backup C on the final 53 over a Swiss Army knife that might force the team to move QN around if RK gets hurt

Just not sure a second year guy who's one year was ACL recovery is going to be that big of a difference (over Pinter). I'd take Hunt over Patterson if I had to keep one of the two. Outside of just the snapping skill, I'd think Pinter is likely stronger and moves better than both Hunt and Patterson.

[PrincetonTiger]

9 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Just not sure a second year guy who's one year was ACL recovery is going to be that big of a difference (over Pinter). I'd take Hunt over Patterson if I had to keep one of the two. Outside of just the snapping skill, I'd think Pinter is likely stronger and moves better than both Hunt and Patterson.

 I agree with keeping Pinter mine was with keeping JE over JP or JH

[EastStreet]

19 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

 I agree with keeping Pinter mine was with keeping JE over JP or JH

We just don't really know. If JE can simply snap the ball well, I'd take him over Patterson. JE was 1st team PAC. Patterson played G and C for OM, but never made any end of season lists and is coming off injury. I have no idea about JH (he's been to a bunch of teams), but he was first team B12 (TCU mind you).

[krunk]

45 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I've seen a few good reports on Dulin at WR. I think most of the love for Dulin stems from his return and gunner roles on STs though. He had limited returns last year, but he looked fantastic when he did. IMO, You really can't go wrong with one or two of Fountain, Dulin, and Patmon. IMO, Fountain may be the easiest to stash on the PS though.

Weve already got Hines and P. Campbell. At most those skills he possesses would be for reserve. I havent seen a whole lot of indicators to say Dulin is actually a good receiver. Not even in practice. And thats over a 2 year period plus a few games. Fountain is one of our draft picks who we also dont have a long track record on but theres been enough indicators from practice over 2 years to show he should make the team. Why waste the draft pick? I think Dulin is a real easy guy to put on the PS.

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, krunk said:

Weve already got Hines and P. Campbell. At most those skills he possesses would be for reserve. I havent seen a whole lot of indicators to say Dulin is actually a good receiver. Not even in practice. And thats over a 2 year period plus a few games. Fountain is one of our draft picks who we also dont have a long track record on but theres been enough indicators from practice over 2 years to show he should make the team. Why waste the draft pick? I think Dulin is a real easy guy to put on the PS.

 

Do you really want Campbell returning? Especially given his injuries last year? And typically, you don't want a starting WR returning. Returning is ideally a depth WR or DB job. Hines is great, but you have to have 2.

 

Not sure how it's wasting a draft pick if the other guy simply brings more value. And I'd say Dulin would get picked up before Fountain simply because of his flexibility. Neither has WR film. But Dulin does have return film, and folks know he was a good gunner.