Baldy breaks down Julian Blackmon

[Dogg63 1,903]

 

I agree with Baldy that Blackmon keeps showing up. He's looking very good!

[KelownaColtsFan 131]

He does seem to have a knack for getting there just in time to separate the ball from the receiver. Great to see another mid round draft pick showing up. 

[csmopar 6,715]

Looking solid so far

[indyagent17 776]

A very pleasant surprise from the "Ballard reached too high for a kid that may not play in 2020"

[lollygagger8 3,291]

Blackmon is ballin' ......what a great move my Ballard to see the need and grab the guy he wanted (who most considered a reach) 

 

 

[Mitch Connors 301]

Just heard Kevin Bowen say Blackmon has 5 pass breakups in 2.5 games. Hooker had 3 in 16 games. 

[NannyMcafee 1,624]

Ballard drafts replacements for Mack and Hooker 2 guys who have proven fragile for NFL football. 

 

I did love Mack tho. Dude has elite vision.  

[Nickster 785]

2 hours ago, jskinnz said:

 

2 hours ago, Mitch Connors said:

Just heard Kevin Bowen say Blackmon has 5 pass breakups in 2.5 games. Hooker had 3 in 16 games. 

Well he keeps knifing in half guys over the middle he’s going to get less pass breakups becausse they will quit throwing in front of him.

[Scott Pennock 2,478]

He reminds me of a young Antoine Bethea mixed with a little Bob Sanders.....instinctive, always around the ball with fundamental, well timed hits!

[Coltsman1788 1,450]

Blackmon is a baller. Enough said. 

[compuls1v3 519]

7 hours ago, NannyMcafee said:

Ballard drafts replacements for Mack and Hooker 2 guys who have proven fragile for NFL football. 

 

I did love Mack tho. Dude has elite vision.  

he didn't start with it though!

[EastStreet 8,660]

9 hours ago, Mitch Connors said:

Just heard Kevin Bowen say Blackmon has 5 pass breakups in 2.5 games. Hooker had 3 in 16 games. 

Won't get too caught up in minutia, but we've been playing a lot of "match" which is C3 hybrid. Long story short, it's similar to C1 in that you have single high FS that ball hawks, and the SS if more like a LB. I bring this up because we played C2 mostly with Hooker, which divides the field and is 2 high. Hooker was seen as a single high FS when drafted, yet was not allowed to ball hawk like safeties do in a single high C1. Blackmon is getting the opportunity to ball hawk, instead of being confined to his half of the deep 3rd like Hooker was. 

[NannyMcafee 1,624]

7 hours ago, compuls1v3 said:

he didn't start with it though!

 

Yeah he wasn't used a ton his first 2 years. We had Gore at the time too who helped him grow a lot. My hope is that Taylor can develop that same great vision but im a little worried about it. 

 

Doesn't help how much he was hyped coming out of college. 

 

Mack is better than we all think i believe. It really is a shame he can't stay healthy. 

[WarGhost21 879]

Early this year, I will admit I was complaining about how many on this forum wanted Hooker out. I thought he was a decent player and that moving him would just be a major downgrade.

 

Blackmon has proven me wrong. I’d be happy to go into next season with him starting back there!

[hoosierhawk 707]

22 minutes ago, WarGhost21 said:

Early this year, I will admit I was complaining about how many on this forum wanted Hooker out. I thought he was a decent player and that moving him would just be a major downgrade.

 

Blackmon has proven me wrong. I’d be happy to go into next season with him starting back there!

He was drafted to play a different position than Hooker. He as drafted as a SS. I can't tell if he if he is playing FS or SS or more of a hybrid.

[Blueblood23 327]

7 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

He was drafted to play a different position than Hooker. He as drafted as a SS. I can't tell if he if he is playing FS or SS or more of a hybrid.

He’s the player that Hooker wasn’t.

[AZColt11 1,266]

Eh, I'd be fine with both.  Split hairs over whom you want to start but I'd rather have both guys on my team.  Build the best roster you can I always say.

[PRnum1 225]

Wow !!! This guy is a 3rd round rookie ??? What a great pick !!!

[coming on strong 980]

13 hours ago, PrNum1 said:

Wow !!! This guy is a 3rd round rookie ??? What a great pick !!!

To be fair if he did not have a bad injury his last year black man would of been a first round pick. Colts got lucky 

[Hoose 1,031]

5 minutes ago, coming on strong said:

To be fair if he did not have a bad injury his last year black man would of been a first round pick. Colts got lucky 

And to be fair, many draft “experts” called Blackmon a reach. Ballard had him on the radar during the draft, traded down in the 3rd round and still got his guy. I think our GM did pretty darn well. Once again. 

[Rally5 495]

On 10/7/2020 at 12:08 AM, EastStreet said:

Won't get too caught up in minutia, but we've been playing a lot of "match" which is C3 hybrid. Long story short, it's similar to C1 in that you have single high FS that ball hawks, and the SS if more like a LB. I bring this up because we played C2 mostly with Hooker, which divides the field and is 2 high. Hooker was seen as a single high FS when drafted, yet was not allowed to ball hawk like safeties do in a single high C1. Blackmon is getting the opportunity to ball hawk, instead of being confined to his half of the deep 3rd like Hooker was. 

You really like Hooker, I don't.  It's not about the scheme, if you look at the Baldy highlights it C1, C2 and C3 calls.  His play is instinctive and aggressive which Hooker simply wasn't.  Blackmon is coming up and hitting guys, Hooker didn't like to get dirty.  Hooker is one of those guys with measurables and no instincts, no toughness.  He'll be somewhere else next year and have the opportunity to decide if he wants to stay in this league.  My guess is he gets a minimal deal based on his tape.  Blackmon is the story here, a rookie, coming off significant injury playing like a vet...really good pick so far, he needs to keep it up!  Go Colts!

[Coffeedrinker 3,537]

2 hours ago, Rally5 said:

You really like Hooker, I don't.  It's not about the scheme, if you look at the Baldy highlights it C1, C2 and C3 calls.  His play is instinctive and aggressive which Hooker simply wasn't.  Blackmon is coming up and hitting guys, Hooker didn't like to get dirty.  Hooker is one of those guys with measurables and no instincts, no toughness.  He'll be somewhere else next year and have the opportunity to decide if he wants to stay in this league.  My guess is he gets a minimal deal based on his tape.  Blackmon is the story here, a rookie, coming off significant injury playing like a vet...really good pick so far, he needs to keep it up!  Go Colts!

I was not a Hooker fan, even in his rookie season when a lot fans thought he was playing really well because he had 4 INTs before he got injured.

 

Blackmon has been playing really well so far.  He reads the ball well, breaks quickly but doesn't seem to break too soon and he can cover a lot of ground in a short period of time.

 

But I do wonder, does drafting Blackmon in the 3rd round mean Ballard is a genius drafter or does drafting Hooker in the first round mean Ballard is a poor drafter? 

[C0LT5 64]

1 hour ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I was not a Hooker fan, even in his rookie season when a lot fans thought he was playing really well because he had 4 INTs before he got injured.

 

Blackmon has been playing really well so far.  He reads the ball well, breaks quickly but doesn't seem to break too soon and he can cover a lot of ground in a short period of time.

 

But I do wonder, does drafting Blackmon in the 3rd round mean Ballard is a genius drafter or does drafting Hooker in the first round mean Ballard is a poor drafter? 

Hooker was drafted with the previous scouting department, Blackman with Ballard's. I'm not sure how much difference it makes but I'm sure it makes a difference. 

 

I think if you look at all drafts the answer is pretty clear. 

 

On kind of a side note, I was reading something the other day and it said we have one of the most stacked rosters in the league.

[Coffeedrinker 3,537]

6 minutes ago, C0LT5 said:

Hooker was drafted with the previous scouting department, Blackman with Ballard's. I'm not sure how much difference it makes but I'm sure it makes a difference. 

 

I think if you look at all drafts the answer is pretty clear. 

 

On kind of a side note, I was reading something the other day and it said we have one of the most stacked rosters in the league.

Ballard drafted Hooker in his first draft as the Colts GM.

 

That being said, it was a joke, thus the hiding emoji.  I like Ballard as a GM.

[chad72 6,530]

1 hour ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I was not a Hooker fan, even in his rookie season when a lot fans thought he was playing really well because he had 4 INTs before he got injured.

 

Blackmon has been playing really well so far.  He reads the ball well, breaks quickly but doesn't seem to break too soon and he can cover a lot of ground in a short period of time.

 

But I do wonder, does drafting Blackmon in the 3rd round mean Ballard is a genius drafter or does drafting Hooker in the first round mean Ballard is a poor drafter? 

 

Just means that safety is not as premium a position in the current NFL compared to a CB or pass rusher for pass defense. Hooker was unfortunately drafted during a lame duck year for Pagano. Hooker has never been the same truly after the Jags player took his knees out in his rookie year. If Ballard did a re-do, he probably wished he'd gone with a different position, probably Marlon Humphrey at the CB position and gone with Alvin Kamara at RB in Round 2 which were positions he did draft Quincy Wilson and Marlon Mack for. Yeah, hindsight is 20/20.  

 

For Pagano's system, a DE/OLB would have been Tyus Bowser but for the 4-3 Ballard wanted, Kpassagnon who has done well with the Chiefs would have been a good fit. So, Pagano sticking around did mess a few things up for his drafting philosophy for 1 year.

[Rally5 495]

4 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I was not a Hooker fan, even in his rookie season when a lot fans thought he was playing really well because he had 4 INTs before he got injured.

 

Blackmon has been playing really well so far.  He reads the ball well, breaks quickly but doesn't seem to break too soon and he can cover a lot of ground in a short period of time.

 

But I do wonder, does drafting Blackmon in the 3rd round mean Ballard is a genius drafter or does drafting Hooker in the first round mean Ballard is a poor drafter? 

Drafting, even for the best, is a 50/50 proposition.  Hooker seemed like a great pick but wasn't, it happens.  Overall, I really like Ballard's drafts, my only real gripe is not getting depth at OT but at least AC never gets hurt.  So I guess we don't need to worry about that...

[Coffeedrinker 3,537]

1 hour ago, Rally5 said:

Drafting, even for the best, is a 50/50 proposition.  Hooker seemed like a great pick but wasn't, it happens.  Overall, I really like Ballard's drafts, my only real gripe is not getting depth at OT but at least AC never gets hurt.  So I guess we don't need to worry about that...

Two things, one I would refer you to my response to C0LT5.

 

Two, as far as depth at OT, the Colts have two guys with 5 years experience each and 65 games and 19 starts between them.  Can't get much more experience at depth than that.  And Clark gets knocked a lot on this forum but he looked good in 2018 during the preseason and in 2019 in the preseason before his injury and he has looked good in mop up time this year.

[Four2itus 4,708]

1 hour ago, Coffeedrinker said:

And Clark gets knocked a lot on this forum but he looked good in 2018 during the preseason and in 2019 in the preseason before his injury and he has looked good in mop up time this year.

Every year there are at least 3 players that are in most Colt fans doghouse. Clark has a pretty good amount of experience. I am really looking forward to see how he holds up. Wouldn't it be a blessing if he eventually filled role?

[funktacious2 375]

If Taylor can come along big and Blackmon can continue to play well then awesome job by Ballard an co to get those replacements Mack and Hooker's contract year. I still hope we re-sign Mack though. Might be cheaper to do so now.

[Rally5 495]

4 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Two things, one I would refer you to my response to C0LT5.

 

Two, as far as depth at OT, the Colts have two guys with 5 years experience each and 65 games and 19 starts between them.  Can't get much more experience at depth than that.  And Clark gets knocked a lot on this forum but he looked good in 2018 during the preseason and in 2019 in the preseason before his injury and he has looked good in mop up time this year.

Clark is terrible, having him start at LT is terrifying.  Thrilled to be wrong.

[EastStreet 8,660]

15 hours ago, Rally5 said:

You really like Hooker, I don't.  It's not about the scheme, if you look at the Baldy highlights it C1, C2 and C3 calls.  His play is instinctive and aggressive which Hooker simply wasn't.  Blackmon is coming up and hitting guys, Hooker didn't like to get dirty.  Hooker is one of those guys with measurables and no instincts, no toughness.  He'll be somewhere else next year and have the opportunity to decide if he wants to stay in this league.  My guess is he gets a minimal deal based on his tape.  Blackmon is the story here, a rookie, coming off significant injury playing like a vet...really good pick so far, he needs to keep it up!  Go Colts!

I actually don't like Hooker all that much. I don't think I'd ever use a first round pick on a S. That said, I think it was absolutely dumb to use a first round safety known as a single high lurker, in a 2 high system. It's just a total waste. No reason at all to go that high if you're going to play 2 high. Do I think Hooker would have looked better in a 1 high, yes, but that really doesn't mean I like him. 

 

As far a B's highlights, I think you're putting way too much stock into a few highlights. On the INT, the ball comes right to him off the hands of the WR. He's just sitting there. On the help play where Carrie gets the INT, he's helping out (doubling) on the only WR going intermediate to deep. On the hits, he's doing exactly what he did in Utah, which is a huge man single high scheme. Long story short, Blackmon is known for playing well vs what's in front of him (big hitter), but the questions about him, and areas he's struggled in, is when he's single high and asked to cover the back end. We really haven't seen him do anything but go forward or side to side helping. Hooker, conversely, was not known for being a hitter, and was simply called "the ultimate lurker" in the draft. Very different styles and player types.

 

I'm not saying he won't be good in single high coverage that goes vert, but that's where he struggled when at Utah. He was moved from CB to FS because he was consistently burnt in coverage. And what Baldy doesn't show, was a few plays where he was very late coming over to help (range), which is another dig on him in the draft. His PFF is decent (65ish), but likely reflects that lateness. If he was as clean as the highlights on every play, he'd be 80s. 

 

It's still very early, and there's a lot to like. How he looks when we play a decent O, with a decent QB who can test us deep, will be the test.

[EastStreet 8,660]

@NewColtsFan what about what I said is incorrect? How about you actually add something factual or non-anecdotal lol. I would expect a Stanford fan to actually know a little about Utah's D. Didn't play them last year after Blackmon converted to FS, but you did play them in 18 when he was still at CB. IIRC, it was a nice beatdown.

[Rally5 495]

5 hours ago, EastStreet said:

I actually don't like Hooker all that much. I don't think I'd ever use a first round pick on a S. That said, I think it was absolutely dumb to use a first round safety known as a single high lurker, in a 2 high system. It's just a total waste. No reason at all to go that high if you're going to play 2 high. Do I think Hooker would have looked better in a 1 high, yes, but that really doesn't mean I like him. 

 

As far a B's highlights, I think you're putting way too much stock into a few highlights. On the INT, the ball comes right to him off the hands of the WR. He's just sitting there. On the help play where Carrie gets the INT, he's helping out (doubling) on the only WR going intermediate to deep. On the hits, he's doing exactly what he did in Utah, which is a huge man single high scheme. Long story short, Blackmon is known for playing well vs what's in front of him (big hitter), but the questions about him, and areas he's struggled in, is when he's single high and asked to cover the back end. We really haven't seen him do anything but go forward or side to side helping. Hooker, conversely, was not known for being a hitter, and was simply called "the ultimate lurker" in the draft. Very different styles and player types.

 

I'm not saying he won't be good in single high coverage that goes vert, but that's where he struggled when at Utah. He was moved from CB to FS because he was consistently burnt in coverage. And what Baldy doesn't show, was a few plays where he was very late coming over to help (range), which is another dig on him in the draft. His PFF is decent (65ish), but likely reflects that lateness. If he was as clean as the highlights on every play, he'd be 80s. 

 

It's still very early, and there's a lot to like. How he looks when we play a decent O, with a decent QB who can test us deep, will be the test.

I'm not putting way too much stock in a few highlights, that's what the OP was about.  I appreciate your in depth knowledge of Blackmon's college career, I'm just not sure I care about what he did at Utah.  I don't mean that to sound as snarky as it does, how he's coached and plays here is what matters to me.  The second highlight, shows his vertical ability, so we know he can get vertical and I do expect him to make mistakes at safety as a rookie.  It's a so far so good story for me. It seems like you always had a scheme defense for Hooker and that's fine, I'm willing to concede the point if you're willing to admit hitting people and effort aren't scheme based.  Otherwise, I do thank you for your insights, they are well thought out and valuable.

[Rally5 495]

8 hours ago, Rally5 said:

Clark is terrible, having him start at LT is terrifying.  Thrilled to be wrong.

Meh, I regret posting this...mods feel free to delete.

[EastStreet 8,660]

46 minutes ago, Rally5 said:

I'm not putting way too much stock in a few highlights, that's what the OP was about.  I appreciate your in depth knowledge of Blackmon's college career, I'm just not sure I care about what he did at Utah.  I don't mean that to sound as snarky as it does, how he's coached and plays here is what matters to me. 

I honestly I don't care either, so long as he doesn't have those same issues in Indy. 

No offense taken :-)

46 minutes ago, Rally5 said:

 

The second highlight, shows his vertical ability, so we know he can get vertical and I do expect him to make mistakes at safety as a rookie.

If you look at that play, poorly underthrown ball by Cousins. The WR had to start slowing 10 yardsish before it got there. Blackmon did do a good job getting over to help, but at the same time, it's help on a bad throw.

46 minutes ago, Rally5 said:

 

  It's a so far so good story for me. It seems like you always had a scheme defense for Hooker and that's fine, I'm willing to concede the point if you're willing to admit hitting people and effort aren't scheme based.  Otherwise, I do thank you for your insights, they are well thought out and valuable.

I'm really not trying to defend Hooker, as much as hoping people understand the context around Hooker's career. He wasn't made to play in a 2 high box. I'm more unhappy that we used a 1st on S, than anything else. And he's injury prone to boot, so a huge waste to me all things considered. The first half of the 2017 draft was just silly bad to me. We needed DE, LB, CB, OL, and RB, and there was probably 10 guys I would have taken before Hooker.

 

But I agree, Blackmon so far, Blackmon is good. I've just set my expectations appropriately like I have with some other guys we've taken in the last 2-3 years.