Colts sign G Chris Reed

[throwing BBZ]

5 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

Just a thought here and I'm really just spit balling.......Maybe if they can't get the caliber of LT that they feel can slide right into a starting position BUT they draft two edge rushers that they feel can slide into a starters position they feel like Reed could start at LG and Q can slide to LT?  Maybe it is just until a young LT is ready or they wait until 2022 draft to take one high now that they theoretically have the defensive line squared away.

 

Just a thought....

 

 There is No Reason to believe that any drafted DE will be better prepared to play than Turay Or Lewis will be. A guy would be lucky to beat out Muhammad in year one. Let alone drafting 2 of them. JMO.

[Valpo2004]

6 hours ago, shasta519 said:

Haha ravaged?
 

AC missed 4 games yes...but the other 4 starters missed a combined 3 games last season.

 

If your starting OL players only missed a combined 7 out of 80 starts...that’s pretty fortunate actually. 

 

Yeah thought that a little odd that he referred to our OL as injury ravaged.  

[Superman]

2 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

Q would be an all-pro at Tackle too

 

He would not.

 

Just wanted to post that so I'm on the record.
 

2 hours ago, richard pallo said:

Any one know the difference between a 1 yr veteran benefit deal, which he is signing ,versus a regular one year contract?  

 

Veteran benefit deal counts a little less against the cap, and does not count toward the compensatory formula.

[JediXMan]

Looking at some of his film he has many similarities to Glowinski. For that price Ballard got a great deal. He’s definitely tackling OL head on.

[Dogg63]

Interesting (and impressive) tidbit.

 

[CR91]

Reed isn't gonna scream talent, but dude is nasty

[danlhart87]

1 hour ago, Dogg63 said:

Interesting (and impressive) tidbit.

 

 

Everytime he pancakes somebody 

[hoosierhawk]

On 4/1/2021 at 4:52 PM, Superman said:

 

He would not.

 

Just wanted to post that so I'm on the record.
 

 

 

Think Scott P was talking future, not present. I think he has a 80% better chance of  being an All Pro left tackle as anyone we draft.

I think it makes a lot of since to try him at LT. 

#1 I think he is a great candidate

#2 He will be paid LT money

#3 It is much easier to find a good a LG than a LT  

Time will tell but I think it is better than 50-50 the Colts try it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[CurBeatElite]

On 4/1/2021 at 8:11 AM, holeymoley99 said:

Great signing, 14 starts last season and 23 in career.  If Q moves to LT Reed likely starts at LG until Pinter can surpass him. Our O line is in much better shape than last season.

 

I think we have better depth now than we did last year, but a big IF at LT.. AC was one of the top 10 LT's in the NFL (probably top 6), and we don't know what's going on there yet -- I don't think we have improved from him in the starter position with any of the signings. 

 

On 4/1/2021 at 4:52 PM, Superman said:

 

He would not.

 

Just wanted to post that so I'm on the record.
 

 

Veteran benefit deal counts a little less against the cap, and does not count toward the compensatory formula.

 

 

I tend to agree that Q is a better G than T, though if there is any player on our team who I would not rule out to make a position move and excel at it, it'd be Q.  

 

My gut says, if Q sticks at LG and stays healthy, he's a perennial first-team all pro for 10-15 years and a first-ballot HOFer.  If he moves to LT, I think he'd be very good, but also tend to doubt he'd be a first-team all pro off the bat.  Again, wouldn't count him out, as he (IMO) has very high FB intelligence and is a physical specimen with a great work ethic.... but I get your doubts.  

2 hours ago, hoosierhawk said:

Think Scott P was talking future, not present. I think he has a 80% better chance of  being an All Pro left tackle as anyone we draft.

I think it makes a lot of since to try him at LT. 

#1 I think he is a great candidate

#2 He will be paid LT money

#3 It is much easier to find a good a LG than a LT  

Time will tell but I think it is better than 50-50 the Colts try it.

 

Q is going to get paid one way or another regardless, and he's Q (one of the few OL in the NFL with a personality and name that can garner huge endorsements (wasn't he making pancakes with budlight batter on commercials this time last year?).  

 

A good LG is easier to find than a good LT, I agree.. but Q is a legendary, once in a lifetime LG -- I'm not sure replacing possibly the best LG ever (if he stays healthy for another 10 years, he'll likely go down as the best LG in history) with a 'good LG' and turning Q into a 'good LT' is going to make this OL better.  As I said above, I agree with @Superman that Q will have a hard time being a pro-bowl LT, but I would never count that guy out.  

 

I think our best bet is keep him at LG and get a LT at or near the caliber of AC - wishful thinking, I know.  

[Superman]

5 hours ago, hoosierhawk said:

Think Scott P was talking future, not present. I think he has a 80% better chance of  being an All Pro left tackle as anyone we draft.

I think it makes a lot of since to try him at LT. 

#1 I think he is a great candidate

#2 He will be paid LT money

#3 It is much easier to find a good a LG than a LT  

Time will tell but I think it is better than 50-50 the Colts try it.

 

Don't want to belabor the point. I've said plenty on this already, but I do not believe in Nelson as a LT. He's too talented and athletic to be bad, but he doesn't have high level tackle traits. I don't think he would ever be an All Pro LT. Pro Bowl, sure, anyone popular can be a Pro Bowler. All Pro is different. 

 

I don't think his salary should dictate his position, either. 

[life long]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Don't want to belabor the point. I've said plenty on this already, but I do not believe in Nelson as a LT. He's too talented and athletic to be bad, but he doesn't have high level tackle traits. I don't think he would ever be an All Pro LT. Pro Bowl, sure, anyone popular can be a Pro Bowler. All Pro is different. 

 

I don't think his salary should dictate his position, either. 

I disagree. I think Nelson could be an All Pro LT in a scheme that suits his strengths.  Might have to switch less power with more trap and zone run plays but I don't think its that far fetched he could get at least 1 All Pro in his career if he made the switch now. 

[ColtStrong2013]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Don't want to belabor the point. I've said plenty on this already, but I do not believe in Nelson as a LT. He's too talented and athletic to be bad, but he doesn't have high level tackle traits. I don't think he would ever be an All Pro LT. Pro Bowl, sure, anyone popular can be a Pro Bowler. All Pro is different. 

 

I don't think his salary should dictate his position, either. 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/04/02/kevin-mawae-on-colts-lt-cant-just-plug-players-in-anywhere-on-line/
 

agreed. As Kevin Mawae just said the other day, you want the best talent out there but you also want the best 5 combination... 

 

I think we all know Q could make Left tackle work, but at guard he is a game wrecker. Let’s find a good left tackle and put the best offensive line in the league out there each week. 

 

[ColtStrong2013]

2 hours ago, life long said:

I disagree. I think Nelson could be an All Pro LT in a scheme that suits his strengths.  Might have to switch less power with more trap and zone run plays but I don't think its that far fetched he could get at least 1 All Pro in his career if he made the switch now. 

could get at least 1? He can get all pro at guard every single year for the rest of his career if we keep him there.

 

find a left tackle. Keep your game wrecker at guard. It shouldn’t even be a conversation anymore, honestly. 

[holeymoley99]

What many seem to be missing is if you move Q to LT and he doesn't dominate like he does at LG we simply move him back, he doesnt have to stay at LT and just remain top 10 you put him back (Can be as early a half a season if no improvement being seen) BUT if he does dominate at LT like he does LG you have him at a more important spot. No one will argue LG is as valuable as LT, its not a comparison.   

 

What Ballard has done by bringing in a LG who started in Carolina in Reed and 2 LT who started for Chargers and Dolphins in Tevi and Davenport  respectively is cover all his bases in the draft.  If a LT he feels comfortable in is on the board still he drafts them starts them and Tevi and Davenport provide depth (Holden perhaps as well, O'Donnell may need another year of grooming coming from Canada). Reed than simply backs up Q and Glow,,,,,,,,IF that player isnt there he drafts an Edge rusher and stars Q at LT and Reed than starts at LG........if Q flops at LT he goes back and Reed backs him up and either Tevi or Davenport starts.

 

Ballard is covering his bases for all scenarios.

[MikeCurtis]

2 hours ago, holeymoley99 said:

 

 

Ballard is covering his bases for all scenarios.

Yep.......

[dw49]

This was a great signing IMO. Tevi was fair to good and Davenport will not beat Holder out and be cut. 

[ztboiler]

3 hours ago, holeymoley99 said:

What many seem to be missing is if you move Q to LT and he doesn't dominate like he does at LG we simply move him back, he doesnt have to stay at LT and just remain top 10 you put him back (Can be as early a half a season if no improvement being seen) BUT if he does dominate at LT like he does LG you have him at a more important spot. No one will argue LG is as valuable as LT, its not a comparison.   

 

What Ballard has done by bringing in a LG who started in Carolina in Reed and 2 LT who started for Chargers and Dolphins in Tevi and Davenport  respectively is cover all his bases in the draft.  If a LT he feels comfortable in is on the board still he drafts them starts them and Tevi and Davenport provide depth (Holden perhaps as well, O'Donnell may need another year of grooming coming from Canada). Reed than simply backs up Q and Glow,,,,,,,,IF that player isnt there he drafts an Edge rusher and stars Q at LT and Reed than starts at LG........if Q flops at LT he goes back and Reed backs him up and either Tevi or Davenport starts.

 

Ballard is covering his bases for all scenarios.

Completely agree.  It absolutely frees Ballard up to add talent through the draft as his board breaks, including the freedom to take some risk and trade down when a LT prospect is grouped with other prospects of comparable draft value

[AwesomeAustin]

On 4/1/2021 at 3:57 PM, GoColts8818 said:

Take this with a giant grain of salt but the latest mock drafts I saw this morning didn’t have the Colts going tackle in round one or two.  This guy could be a starter at guard if they kick Nelson out to tackle.  It gives them another option.  Not sure that’s the option I want them to go but it’s an option so they don’t have to “force” a tackle pick.

Most of these mocks are need based.  I think Ballard is doing a great job filling holes on our roster with FAs so we can go BPA in the draft.  Like you said, having options is critical so nothing is forced.  Ballard can draft players that provide value for that slot.  This team is very deep but there isn’t a positional group that couldn’t be upgraded.  Add talented players via the draft and everything works itself out long term.  

[GoColts8818]

25 minutes ago, AwesomeAustin said:

Most of these mocks are need based.  I think Ballard is doing a great job filling holes on our roster with FAs so we can go BPA in the draft.  Like you said, having options is critical so nothing is forced.  Ballard can draft players that provide value for that slot.  This team is very deep but there isn’t a positional group that couldn’t be upgraded.  Add talented players via the draft and everything works itself out long term.  

Running back is pretty solid but that would be the only group I would say is going to be hard to improve.  So we pretty much agree.  For better or worse I think QB is pretty set right now with Wentz and Eason at least this season.  I expect some camp bodies to come in but baring an injury or a major find I think the Colts are set with Wentz and Eason.  

[AwesomeAustin]

12 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Running back is pretty solid but that would be the only group I would say is going to be hard to improve.  So we pretty much agree.  For better or worse I think QB is pretty set right now with Wentz and Eason at least this season.  I expect some camp bodies to come in but baring an injury or a major find I think the Colts are set with Wentz and Eason.  

Those groups are solid but Hines is due for an extension and Mack is an unknown coming off an Achilles. If it was an ACL I would feel better but that type of injury can be career ending for some.  If there is a play making RB that falls to us I wouldn’t feel bad.  For QB, Eason is a total unknown but the fact they haven’t signed a backup should mean they are confident in his skills.  I think the kid is a baller and has the skills to be a franchise QB so I would like to keep him. Doesn’t mean they won’t take a late round flier on a guy but I agree they are probably set at QB for the next two years at least. 

[GoColts8818]

2 minutes ago, AwesomeAustin said:

Those groups are solid but Hines is due for an extension and Mack is an unknown coming off an Achilles. If it was an ACL I would feel better but that type of injury can be career ending for some.  If there is a play making RB that falls to us I wouldn’t feel bad.  For QB, Eason is a total unknown but the fact they haven’t signed a backup should mean they are confident in his skills.  I think the kid is a baller and has the skills to be a franchise QB so I would like to keep him. Doesn’t mean they won’t take a late round flier on a guy but I agree they are probably set at QB for the next two years at least. 

Hines extension isn’t an issue if you are talking about needs for this year which I believed your point to be.  It’s a major issue for the future no doubt but not going into this coming season.  Mack’s injury is a question mark for sure but again the Colts made their feelings known about that by re-signing him.  So I don’t think the Colts are looking at the running back spot thinking it needs to be upgraded at least for this season.  I think they are happy with the four they have.  
 

As for QB.  There are questions about both for the future no doubt.  However, again for this year, the Colts appear to be moving forward with these two guys.  Also remember Eason is an unknown to us.  He is not an unknown to the Colts.  If the Colts were concerned about him Ballard would have more than likely brought a vet QB in to compete with him for the backup job.  The fact he hasn’t seems to suggest they are comfortable with him in that role.  So again, I don’t think the Colts are going into the draft looking to upgrade either the QB or RB slot for this upcoming season.  I think they are happy with the guys they have.  Will that be the case after the season?  Time will tell.

[AwesomeAustin]

28 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Hines extension isn’t an issue if you are talking about needs for this year which I believed your point to be.  It’s a major issue for the future no doubt but not going into this coming season.  Mack’s injury is a question mark for sure but again the Colts made their feelings known about that by re-signing him.  So I don’t think the Colts are looking at the running back spot thinking it needs to be upgraded at least for this season.  I think they are happy with the four they have.  
 

As for QB.  There are questions about both for the future no doubt.  However, again for this year, the Colts appear to be moving forward with these two guys.  Also remember Eason is an unknown to us.  He is not an unknown to the Colts.  If the Colts were concerned about him Ballard would have more than likely brought a vet QB in to compete with him for the backup job.  The fact he hasn’t seems to suggest they are comfortable with him in that role.  So again, I don’t think the Colts are going into the draft looking to upgrade either the QB or RB slot for this upcoming season.  I think they are happy with the guys they have.  Will that be the case after the season?  Time will tell.

I guess that’s kinda what we are both saying lol.  Ballard is signing people so we don’t need anyone and we may be happy with who we have.  Draft the best player regardless of position but of course always exceptions. But with running back, what if Etienne from Clemson is sitting there at 54? I still think the Colts go a different direction but I wouldnt be upset at all of they took him. Yeah it may be a logjam but it would be an excellent problem to have.  Hines wouldn’t need extended, would be a formidable 1-2 punch for the next 3yrs on rookie contracts.  If they draft good players it will all work itself out. There is always room for another good player regardless of position except for maybe QB. 

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

On 4/1/2021 at 9:34 AM, Wentzszn said:

Someone isn’t going to make it. I like Holden He showed he was capable in the one game he played. I like that Ballard is loading up with guys with experience.

yes his rookies seem to move on to other teams and start except for a few

 

[holeymoley99]

3 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

Hines extension isn’t an issue if you are talking about needs for this year which I believed your point to be.  It’s a major issue for the future no doubt but not going into this coming season.  Mack’s injury is a question mark for sure but again the Colts made their feelings known about that by re-signing him.  So I don’t think the Colts are looking at the running back spot thinking it needs to be upgraded at least for this season.  I think they are happy with the four they have.  
 

As for QB.  There are questions about both for the future no doubt.  However, again for this year, the Colts appear to be moving forward with these two guys.  Also remember Eason is an unknown to us.  He is not an unknown to the Colts.  If the Colts were concerned about him Ballard would have more than likely brought a vet QB in to compete with him for the backup job.  The fact he hasn’t seems to suggest they are comfortable with him in that role.  So again, I don’t think the Colts are going into the draft looking to upgrade either the QB or RB slot for this upcoming season.  I think they are happy with the guys they have.  Will that be the case after the season?  Time will tell.

Colts will definitely bring in a vet QB no question on that. At last count 16 who have started in NFL unsigned and after draft we may have a few others.

[LiveAndLetAddai]

 I know this is an old thread, but as a new member I am on a pitch count, that said, I love this signing.

[Orioles22]

I noticed one site focusing on the Colts picked Reed to start instead of Glowinski. I wonder if Glowinski could be part of a trade, maybe to move up in the first round to get Darrisaw, or someone like that.

[Blueblood23]

On 4/1/2021 at 8:28 AM, Shepman said:

You are missing Holden

Believe me, the officials will call it when they see it.

[holeymoley99]

On 4/11/2021 at 10:14 PM, Orioles22 said:

I noticed one site focusing on the Colts picked Reed to start instead of Glowinski. I wonder if Glowinski could be part of a trade, maybe to move up in the first round to get Darrisaw, or someone like that.

I saw that as well, made me scratch my head a bit.......

[EastStreet]

Reed is solid depth, but can't see him being Plan A and Glow Plan B... 

If anything, it could mean Indy wants to experiment with Q to LT

[holeymoley99]

13 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Reed is solid depth, but can't see him being Plan A and Glow Plan B... 

If anything, it could mean Indy wants to experiment with Q to LT

Yep Reed starts if Q is moved to LT because we dont have a LT we like on the board during the draft and Q and Reed combo would be very very good. Reed can play 100% and is a starter for many teams Glow is just a different level talent right now.

[Orioles22]

I read earlier the plan was to let Glowinski go when he hits free agency. If we can get something back, it may make sense.

[NewColtsFan]

19 minutes ago, Orioles22 said:

I read earlier the plan was to let Glowinski go when he hits free agency. If we can get something back, it may make sense.

Not sure what you mean by...   the plan?    I’m sure there’s one, but there’s nothing public.   Neither Ballard or Reich have said anything.

 

Whatever you read, it’s likely the thoughts of a poster or writer who is just speculating. 

[Smonroe]

14 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Not sure what you mean by...   the plan?    I’m sure there’s one, but there’s nothing public.   Neither Ballard or Reich have said anything.

 

Whatever you read, it’s likely the thoughts of a poster or writer who is just speculating. 

Well, it’s someone’s plan!  The last thing anyone related to the team would say is that they’re planning on replacing someone who’s still on the roster.  
 

Glow was the weak link that every other team would love to call their weak link, right? (At least that used to be true.  We won’t know if it still is until September)

[LiveAndLetAddai]

  I don't see Reed's signing as a plan to trade Glow?  I mean what could you realistically get?  Plus even if Reed or Pinter beats him out, he is quality depth in the last year of his contract.

[NewColtsFan]

15 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

Well, it’s someone’s plan!  The last thing anyone related to the team would say is that they’re planning on replacing someone who’s still on the roster.  
 

Glow was the weak link that every other team would love to call their weak link, right? (At least that used to be true.  We won’t know if it still is until September)

This sentence confuse me.....

 

”The last thing anyone related to the team would say is they’re planning on replacing someone who’s still on the roster.”

 

So my questions would be:

 

** Who said that?

** When did they say that?

 

This doesn’t sound like anyone with the Colts?  This sounds speculation from a beat writer?    But that writer is guessing.  They’re not quoting someone inside the program.  Any of this is possible.   I just don’t view it as likely. 

[Smonroe]

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

This sentence confuse me.....

 

”The last thing anyone related to the team would say is they’re planning on replacing someone who’s still on the roster.”

 

So my questions would be:

 

** Who said that?

** When did they say that?

 

This doesn’t sound like anyone with the Colts?  This sounds speculation from a beat writer?    But that writer is guessing.  They’re not quoting someone inside the program.  Any of this is possible.   I just don’t view it as likely. 

Yeah, I wasn’t very clear, my bad.  I meant it jokingly, like maybe some guy at a bar said it.  Someone with no real insight into the inner workings.
 

But no one in the Colts organization would ever say something like that.  Obviously, it was pure speculation.

 

Most likely speculation from someone doing a podcast.  

[Orioles22]

I saw it a few months back. it was speculation at the time that Pinter would take over at guard when/if Glowinski left. I don't know if i like the idea, but it seems reasonable considering the money we've spent on the line.