Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Baldy breaks down Julian Blackmon


Recommended Posts

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.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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!

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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? :hide:

Link to post
Share on other sites
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? :hide:

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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? :hide:

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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? :hide:

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...

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Thanks 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.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It's common knowledge that so far Luck has sucked? I know you can't link a podcast...but do you have any other links that talk about Love sucking? The last time I heard anything to that effect was during TC.   All I have found since that time (regarding Love's development) was an article from October...where Rodgers said Love was doing well...learning and opening up. And then another from a month ago that GB was pleased with his progress.    The narrative about adding GB hurting because they drafted Love should be dead...as they get ready to enter the NFCCG. And with Rodgers playing at an MVP level...it's impossible to know how Love will turn out because we won't see him in a Packer uniform for a couple of years at least.  
    • They are still in first round interview mode. I'd expect that to continue assuming they want to interview guys still in the playoffs. Keep in mind the Texans had to get special approval to interview Bieniemy when they did, because they failed to interview him on the off week. They can't interview him again till they are done (unless they seek a waiver from the NFL again).   Purely my opinion, but I think it's simple to me.   If Watson stays, Bieniemy will be the HC. Anyone other than Bieniemy is a signal that Watson is gone. That assumes though that there are teams willing to mortgage their future...   
    • TO's stats absolutely warranted first ballot... but he had antics on the field (e.g., the Dallas Star incident, spitting in DeAngelo Hall's face) and was also a cry-baby who was often in conflict with the media and front offices of teams he played on, and thought by many to be a subpar teammate (at least for portions of his career).  He also did other things (e.g., the Desparate Housewives skit before MNF, OD on pain meds) which made him unpopular with the media, who are ultimately who vote players into the HOF.   Marvin also deserved to be a 1st ballot HOFer.  Although he got in before TO, I firmly believe Marv's alleged shooting incidents and the allegations of him punching a younger fan at a pro-bowl game were held against him in voting.  I know it's said that the HOF is for what players did on the field, and off field stuff shouldn't come into play -- but it's voted on by people (i.e., sports writers) and there surely is some sort of human element that goes into the vote casting process.     You're right... Reggie will get in, just a matter of when.  While I do think some of Marv's off-field issues hindered him, there were also guys like Andre Reed (who had been eligible for almost a decade) and Tim Brown who were waiting to get into the HOF... both deserving HOFers who got overlooked previous years as guys like Jerry Rice and Cris Carter got in.   While I think the main knock on Reggie will be that he was WR#2 to Marvin for a decent part of his career, and the fact he wasn't all-decade team and only a 1x First-team All Pro (and 2x 2nd team).  That said, he's one of the most prolific WRs in NFL history and has some of the best post-season stats of any WR in NFL history.  Megatron definitely was a physical freak who changed the game, but his career was not long enough to put him in the record books like Reggie (who is top 10 in just about every category and top 5 in several post-season categories).  The only other WR on the ballot is Torry Holt who is a 2x finalist -- Reggie has more all-pro appearances, 1 less probowl than Holt, though Reggie has more yards, TDs and receptions.  They both have 1 SB ring, with Reggie having greater post-season success with individual stats, and Holt was 2nd team 2000s all-decade which Reggie wasn't.  Holt was also 2nd fiddle to Isaac Bruce for a decent part of his career.   Not making any guarantees, but compared to the WR classes when Marv and TO were finalists (including guys like Reed and Tim Brown who had been on the wait-list for a while) as well as studs across the board (e.g., Jerome Bettis, Derrick Brooks, Michael Strahan, Aeneas Williams, Junior Seau, WIll Shields, Favre, Orlando Pace, etc..).... I think this class is pretty weak.  After Peyton and Woodson, as I mentioned earlier in this thread, I don't see any guy in this class who clearly deserves to be a HOFer more than Reggie does.      He has to retired first and if he keeps taking his Benjamin Button diet, that may not happen.
    • Personally I think the future QB is already on the roster in Eason. To be honest we don't have a clue on his abilities in the NFL. He has all the physical tools. In this offense he wouldn't have to be superman to be successful.  I am pretty sure Ballard will pull some surprises out of his little black book. He seems to do that every season so far. 
    • Or your bling "Love" of him has altered yours... 
  • Members

    • Douzer

      Douzer 512

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Bert Johns

      Bert Johns 99

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Fourstar40

      Fourstar40 16

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Architects08

      Architects08 227

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • MikeCurtis

      MikeCurtis 2,140

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Sikma

      Sikma 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • PeacefulEasonFeeling

      PeacefulEasonFeeling 5

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • James

      James 347

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • chad72

      chad72 6,561

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • EastStreet

      EastStreet 8,681

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...