Pagano Envisions Freeney as Suggs

[coltnorth]

I still think our linebacking core is going to be Freeney, Edds, Angerer, and Mathis. I mean who has more chemistry than that group? Freeney and Mathis have been playing together since 2003. Then Edds and Angerer go back to Iowa.

Add Hickman and Freeman to the mix. Doubt they will compete to be starters but should be serviceable as rotational guys

[oldunclemark]

Add Hickman and Freeman to the mix. Doubt they will compete to be starters but should be serviceable as rotational guys

What did you do with Kavel Connor, CN?

[The Peytonator]

I'd be willing to bet Conner starts over Edds. Edds might be a nickel down, coverage linebacker though....who knows.

[colts1993]

I hope freeny can produce sugg like numbers in the 3-4

[UND3RDOGG]

I very much like what Pagano brings to our team.... a great defensive mind who likes to innovate. I like it.

[braveheartcolt]

Hughes may still surprise everyone this year. Let's see how he does in a scheme he's built for.

Yep. He's as likely to surprise us as a kid sitting in the school yard on Halloween morning cutting two little round holes in a white sheet whilst moulding a cardboard Jason mask with a bottle of tomato ketchup by his side and holding a plastic knife and a set of Dracula teeth. Boo.

[BrentMc11]

And the thing is I swear Jerry Hughes was projected to be a OLB in a 3-4 scheme coming out. I hope he can spell Freeney or Mathis at times and really come into things.

He was projected by the ESPN 'guys' as an OLB (in a 3-4) even though he was a DE with hand down in college. You are correct.

[BrentMc11]

Not sure about that. We may go with more 4 man fronts against teams that go no huddle more like the Patriots and Packers to minimize those situations.

If we go 3-3-5 instead of a 3-4-4 D, then we can switch to a 4-2-5 nickel defense right away with the same personnel against pass oriented teams, just a thought.

As Pagano has said, we may go 4-3 on first down, 3-4 on 2nd...and "Only Lord knows" the rest of the time. Your point is well taken.

[BrentMc11]

I still think our linebacking core is going to be Freeney, Edds, Angerer, and Mathis. I mean who has more chemistry than that group? Freeney and Mathis have been playing together since 2003. Then Edds and Angerer go back to Iowa.

Gotta utilize Conner too....he was making Session-esque hits at times last year.....I thought he came on well. Eds needs to stay healthy. I do like him...always have....

[mvbighead]

Yeah I saw Mathis as that type of player too. I guess I prefered Mathis blitzing and having a rookie brought in or allowing Hughes to stand up more and using that huge salary to field a more complete team. Having that much salary wrapped up into Freeney doesn't leave me feeling all warm inside. Even when Freeney gets to the quarterback it is only like 10 times a year. I know he gets more pressures than that but that leaves a lot of work on the rest of the team with him eating up that salary and seeing we need upgrades in the secondary, DT, and probably the other ILB and not even mentioning the offensive side of the ball that money could go a long way. I guess I was hoping to see Mathis take on that role and we would invest that money in the youth movement.

You sure are hung up on this aren't you. Pagano says, over and over, that Freeney is here for this season, and you're looking at it like its a bad thing. First and foremost, on the salary side of things why don't we let the GM/FO that manages the books worry about the money they have. If they've given Pagano the green light on keeping Freeney, well then I think they know how to make his salary fit.

As for getting to the QB "only" 10 times, well, that's 5.5 more times than Suggs did in 2009. 2 more times than Suggs did in 2008, and 5 more times than Suggs did in 2007. And, Suggs had a mere 1 more sack than that awful 10 sacks you speak of in 2010.

10 sacks is a good mark. 15+ is generally in the great area, and 20+ is outstanding. Freeney has generally consistently been in the good to great category. If Pagano can get him some help with pressure on the defensive side, I would think Freeney would have no problem getting more than 10 this year.

And also, as I've said time and again, what FA acquisitions are out there that would give us a bigger benefit than Freeney? And a bigger benefit than a much cheaper UDFA? I'm not seeing NFL.com list a bunch of still available FAs that everyone is clamoring about. Dropping Freeney isn't going to buy this team anything, at least not this season. Had they done it before FA, we might've had someone to go after. As it is, they've made some good acquisitions and still have 10 picks in the draft to add talent to this roster.

[IndyTrav]

I think some need to calm down. Never said he was Suggs. Said he will play a Suggs type role. Also, to a diff poster. Freeney doesn't have an injury history. He's been injured once in the last friggin ten years for cryin out loud.guess he's the next bob sanders.

The guys had 2 very serious ankle injuries since 2007. Hes getting older, has a history of leg problems, and his game is based on speed. It's a concern. How could it not be.

[coltsfanej]

The guys had 2 very serious ankle injuries since 2007. Hes getting older, has a history of leg problems, and his game is based on speed. It's a concern. How could it not be.

The concern comes if they extend him before we see him play his new role. If we leave his contract as is then he will be gone next year and his OLB experiment will be over with the only loss being cap space this year, which is not a big problem because there are really no more FA to sign that we need.

If after a few weeks he plays well and he likes his new role then I can see them coming together for an extension. But i would say that the FO wants to see if he can excel at the new position and he wants to see if he likes playing it. At least I would want to know those things if I was on either side.

[BrentMc11]

One thing I think we are all not thinking about unless I have missed something. Freeney AND Suggs will be in their 11th year. If Freeney is ready and willing, I feel he is ABLE to work in in the Suggs capacity with his HAND down.

We can leave it to Pagano to do the rotating as needed. Suggs is 6'3'' and 260. Freeney is 6'1'' 268. We all know he will be giving 100% however he is used. That is what a leader does. The motivation of one Chuck Pagano makes the transition much easier. We need Havoc (Freeney) and Mayhem (Mathis) to be at their best with some of the new 'meat' up front with Redding, McKinney, and even Nevis since his injury knocked him out.

[mvbighead]

One thing I think we are all not thinking about unless I have missed something. Freeney AND Suggs will be in their 11th year. If Freeney is ready and willing, I feel he is ABLE to work in in the Suggs capacity with his HAND down.

We can leave it to Pagano to do the rotating as needed. Suggs is 6'3'' and 260. Freeney is 6'1'' 268. We all know he will be giving 100% however he is used. That is what a leader does. The motivation of one Chuck Pagano makes the transition much easier. We need Havoc (Freeney) and Mayhem (Mathis) to be at their best with some of the new 'meat' up front with Redding, McKinney, and even Nevis since his injury knocked him out.

Also, Freeney is very religious about his weight. When playing passing teams, he drops weight. When playing running teams, he ups his weight. It is quite likely that he will adjust his weight to fit his new role as he sees fit. That could be 260, or 255, or 250. Whatever he determines (or coaches perhaps) to be the right number to be. That said, I have little doubt Freeney can dominate the pass rush in the 3-4.

[BrentMc11]

Also, Freeney is very religious about his weight. When playing passing teams, he drops weight. When playing running teams, he ups his weight. It is quite likely that he will adjust his weight to fit his new role as he sees fit. That could be 260, or 255, or 250. Whatever he determines (or coaches perhaps) to be the right number to be. That said, I have little doubt Freeney can dominate the pass rush in the 3-4.

I like his 255-260....then we can compare directly with Suggs....same years....same weight...same desire to succeed! Good comment.

[DG1]

IMO we will not know what Freeney can do in this type of defense until he actually gets a chance to.

[oldunclemark]

The guys had 2 very serious ankle injuries since 2007. Hes getting older, has a history of leg problems, and his game is based on speed. It's a concern. How could it not be.

This is a big concern..I thought the reason we drafted Hughes was because we saw how Freeney's injury crippled us in th Super bowl.....we cant ask him to be more mobile...I thoughtb he played hurt at the enf of last season..

but Pagano certainly knows our personell...He may have to model a role just for Freeney.

He seems like a very creative coach. I see freeeny as a very expensive part time player

[vitoaf27]

Certainly can tell Pagano is a defensive mind. He's apparently green-lighted the release of many of our offensive stars while retaining our defensive stars. Which is why I feel our draft is going to be heavily oriented toward the offense. Which gives me some hope that Fleener may be a Colts next year.

We released two offensive and two defensive guys, excluding Manning. And Manning wasn't his decision at all.

[mvbighead]

This is a big concern..I thought the reason we drafted Hughes was because we saw how Freeney's injury crippled us in th Super bowl.....we cant ask him to be more mobile...I thoughtb he played hurt at the enf of last season..

but Pagano certainly knows our personell...He may have to model a role just for Freeney.

He seems like a very creative coach. I see freeeny as a very expensive part time player

We can't ask him to be more mobile because he was injured at some point in his career?

Does that mean the Vikings are going to move Adrian Peterson to fullback?

Freeney has not been a part time player in his career. Why would you expect him to be now?

Pagano envision Freeney as a Suggs type of player. I don't recall Suggs being part time. He also said something to the effect of keeping Freeney's hand in the dirt and using him 90% of the time in rushing and 10% dropping back. To me, this is not much different than what Freeney has been doing. Sure, he drops back 3-5 plays a game... not a big deal at all, IMO.

[mvbighead]

We released two offensive and two defensive guys, excluding Manning. And Manning wasn't his decision at all.

Precisely this. He's trimming the fat to open up space. Brackett, Clark, Addai, Bullitt. All guys that signed deals at some point that gave them pay above vet minimum. Actually, Clark was one of the highest paid TEs, and Brackett had a pretty sizable deal himself. Those cuts freed up space for the new staff to find durable players that fit the scheme.

He's brought in Satele, Justice, Avery on the offensive side. He's brought in McKinney, Redding, and Zbikowski on the defensive side. All of these signing are simply good fits at lower spending to try and put talent on this roster to start winning games. And none of them signed monster deals by any stretch of the imagination. Hopefully they pan out, but I'd say this team is simply rounding out the roster to get us closer to a fit for what they intend to do on both sides of the ball.

[JoKeR]

I've never seen Freeney drop in coverage, the only time I see him running in that direction is when he's in pursuit of the ball carrier.

[dgambill]

You sure are hung up on this aren't you. Pagano says, over and over, that Freeney is here for this season, and you're looking at it like its a bad thing. First and foremost, on the salary side of things why don't we let the GM/FO that manages the books worry about the money they have. If they've given Pagano the green light on keeping Freeney, well then I think they know how to make his salary fit. As for getting to the QB "only" 10 times, well, that's 5.5 more times than Suggs did in 2009. 2 more times than Suggs did in 2008, and 5 more times than Suggs did in 2007. And, Suggs had a mere 1 more sack than that awful 10 sacks you speak of in 2010. 10 sacks is a good mark. 15+ is generally in the great area, and 20+ is outstanding. Freeney has generally consistently been in the good to great category. If Pagano can get him some help with pressure on the defensive side, I would think Freeney would have no problem getting more than 10 this year. And also, as I've said time and again, what FA acquisitions are out there that would give us a bigger benefit than Freeney? And a bigger benefit than a much cheaper UDFA? I'm not seeing NFL.com list a bunch of still available FAs that everyone is clamoring about. Dropping Freeney isn't going to buy this team anything, at least not this season. Had they done it before FA, we might've had someone to go after. As it is, they've made some good acquisitions and still have 10 picks in the draft to add talent to this roster.

Why didn't you give Suggs 2011 stats?? It would seem more relevent. Suggs had 70 tackles, 7 forced fumbles, 14 sacks, and 2 ints. What did Freeney do? Oh wait he had 19 tackles and 8.5 sacks and 2 forced fumbles. Why are you cherry picking stats? Especially a year when Suggs was hurt most of the year? I don't expect us to get a Suggs in FA but I will tell you one thing. Suggs didn't just have his hand in the dirt all the time. He played back in coverage A LOT and had more ints than any of our secondary. The fact is I don't think Freeney has the skills to play in coverage..much less be disciplined in run coverage as he has never ever shown any ability to do that. He is one dimensional...and been great at pass rushing (one of the best) but he is perhaps one of the worst run defenders in the league. The whole dropping and adding weight thing is absolute crap. It hasn't helped him in run defense at all and hasn't helped him drop in coverage. His use of outside speed rush, spin move, and once in a while using a bull rush is all that has ever helped him do the ONE and ONLY thing he knows how to do and that is get after the qb.

Look that is great. That is worth a lot. There are few that can do what he has but for me I've watched the last three years his stats and affect on the game steadily decline. Maybe I'm wrong but the stats don't say so. So I apologize if I don't get excited to see if our aging lineman that is on the decline, that has never been able to run defend, never covered a TE or RB switch positions and expect him to perform at a continued high level...oh all the while eating up 19 million dollars. Sorry if I would like to invest that money in our youth and future FAs because even if we don't use it this year we can roll it over into next. Heck as of right now we will be over the salary cap by almost 3 million after we sign our draft picks.

I love the Colts. I want us to get back to being great. I want our defense to be awesome. I think it will have some excitement for the first time in years. As of now I will trust Pagano and staff to find a way to use Freeney and use him at what he is great at. I just don't see him having the production of Suggs or any elite OLB. Guess we just disagree but I'm not going to change my mind until he proves he can do things he hasn't shown he can do his whole career so forgive me if I have doubts.

[lollygagger8]

Man I hope Hughes plays well this year, and Freeney/Mathis don't get hurt in their new roles.

[Fx Stryker]

Gotta utilize Conner too....he was making Session-esque hits at times last year.....I thought he came on well. Eds needs to stay healthy. I do like him...always have....

I think Connor is going to be the rotation man. Who ever needs to sit out you plug him in. Edds though I only remember him missing two games, and that was after the monster hit he took from his blindside. I've seen people sit out longer for lesser hits.

Edds is a good coverage linebacker. Which is why I think Edds and Angerer work well. Pat is the pursuit and tackle guy, Edds was the drop back and cover.

[BrentMc11]

I think Connor is going to be the rotation man. Who ever needs to sit out you plug him in. Edds though I only remember him missing two games, and that was after the monster hit he took from his blindside. I've seen people sit out longer for lesser hits.

Edds is a good coverage linebacker. Which is why I think Edds and Angerer work well. Pat is the pursuit and tackle guy, Edds was the drop back and cover.

I give hits and have taken more....love Edds......not in the equation..

[BrentMc11]

Man I hope Hughes plays well this year, and Freeney/Mathis don't get hurt in their new roles.

Come on...kick it up a notch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You are Lolly!!!!

[Superman]

I love the Colts. I want us to get back to being great. I want our defense to be awesome. I think it will have some excitement for the first time in years. As of now I will trust Pagano and staff to find a way to use Freeney and use him at what he is great at. I just don't see him having the production of Suggs or any elite OLB. Guess we just disagree but I'm not going to change my mind until he proves he can do things he hasn't shown he can do his whole career so forgive me if I have doubts.

Why not?

He's never played the role. In his ten years in the league, he's always been used in a singular role: rushing the passer. People talk about him not being good or being undisciplined against the run, but his coaches have never used him in a way that would require him to stay in on the run. People see a team run a draw to Freeney's side, and think he messed up, but when you line your ends up on the outside, you're susceptible to draw plays. That's the game: you give, they take, they give, you take.

I don't know what kind of performance Freeney would turn in as a hybrid type player. I've always thought Mathis would be more suited to this role than Freeney. But in comparing him with Suggs, I see two players of similar size, with similar athleticism. The primary difference is that Suggs is used in a different capacity than Freeney, and has been most of his career. It's kind of pointless to compare the stats of the two, considering the fact that they essentially play different positions. What you're doing is tantamount to comparing Nnamdi Asomugha to Eric Weddle, and suggesting that because Weddle has more tackles and interceptions that he's a better player. It's not that simple.

Also, if Freeney (or Mathis) is used in coverage against good receiving tight ends or running backs, and loses, I fault the scheme and the playcall, not the player. Suggs isn't used in coverage against those kinds of players with any regularity, and close to 100% of the time he drops into coverage, it's a zone assignment, not a man assignment. I would assume that using our guys in coverage, which should rarely happen, would be zone assignments. If you're imagining Freeney trying to cover Rob Gronkowski up the seam, stop. And if you're imagining Terrell Suggs picking off a pass to Matt Forte in man coverage, stop. We're talking about zone blitzes with disguised pressures and coverages, not your typical Man-2 coverage with your linebackers trying to cover receivers. I don't think there's any issue with either of our guys dropping back into an occasional zone assignment.

[BrentMc11]

Why not?

He's never played the role. In his ten years in the league, he's always been used in a singular role: rushing the passer. People talk about him not being good or being undisciplined against the run, but his coaches have never used him in a way that would require him to stay in on the run. People see a team run a draw to Freeney's side, and think he messed up, but when you line your ends up on the outside, you're susceptible to draw plays. That's the game: you give, they take, they give, you take.

I don't know what kind of performance Freeney would turn in as a hybrid type player. I've always thought Mathis would be more suited to this role than Freeney. But in comparing him with Suggs, I see two players of similar size, with similar athleticism. The primary difference is that Suggs is used in a different capacity than Freeney, and has been most of his career. It's kind of pointless to compare the stats of the two, considering the fact that they essentially play different positions. What you're doing is tantamount to comparing Nnamdi Asomugha to Eric Weddle, and suggesting that because Weddle has more tackles and interceptions that he's a better player. It's not that simple.

Also, if Freeney (or Mathis) is used in coverage against good receiving tight ends or running backs, and loses, I fault the scheme and the playcall, not the player. Suggs isn't used in coverage against those kinds of players with any regularity, and close to 100% of the time he drops into coverage, it's a zone assignment, not a man assignment. I would assume that using our guys in coverage, which should rarely happen, would be zone assignments. If you're imagining Freeney trying to cover Rob Gronkowski up the seam, stop. And if you're imagining Terrell Suggs picking off a pass to Matt Forte in man coverage, stop. We're talking about zone blitzes with disguised pressures and coverages, not your typical Man-2 coverage with your linebackers trying to cover receivers. I don't think there's any issue with either of our guys dropping back into an occasional zone assignment.

Superman....write a blog....good stuff but write a novel somewhere else. Like your stuff...blog it!

[Superman]

Superman....write a blog....good stuff but write a novel somewhere else. Like your stuff...blog it!

[BrentMc11]

Thanks...thought you had something to say! So intelligent! Write a novel....amazing!

[dgambill]

Why not?

He's never played the role. In his ten years in the league, he's always been used in a singular role: rushing the passer. People talk about him not being good or being undisciplined against the run, but his coaches have never used him in a way that would require him to stay in on the run. People see a team run a draw to Freeney's side, and think he messed up, but when you line your ends up on the outside, you're susceptible to draw plays. That's the game: you give, they take, they give, you take.

I don't know what kind of performance Freeney would turn in as a hybrid type player. I've always thought Mathis would be more suited to this role than Freeney. But in comparing him with Suggs, I see two players of similar size, with similar athleticism. The primary difference is that Suggs is used in a different capacity than Freeney, and has been most of his career. It's kind of pointless to compare the stats of the two, considering the fact that they essentially play different positions. What you're doing is tantamount to comparing Nnamdi Asomugha to Eric Weddle, and suggesting that because Weddle has more tackles and interceptions that he's a better player. It's not that simple.

Also, if Freeney (or Mathis) is used in coverage against good receiving tight ends or running backs, and loses, I fault the scheme and the playcall, not the player. Suggs isn't used in coverage against those kinds of players with any regularity, and close to 100% of the time he drops into coverage, it's a zone assignment, not a man assignment. I would assume that using our guys in coverage, which should rarely happen, would be zone assignments. If you're imagining Freeney trying to cover Rob Gronkowski up the seam, stop. And if you're imagining Terrell Suggs picking off a pass to Matt Forte in man coverage, stop. We're talking about zone blitzes with disguised pressures and coverages, not your typical Man-2 coverage with your linebackers trying to cover receivers. I don't think there's any issue with either of our guys dropping back into an occasional zone assignment.

I simply think paying Freeney 19 million is way to much..and thats playing in a 4-3..I think using him in the 3-4 is waste of his talent and if I am an opposing offense I see him as a liability and attack it. All I am saying is Suggs has proven himself one of the best 3-4 OLB in the league and Freeney for the last 3 years has seen his numbers and production go down. Compound asking a guy to do more who has shown he is doing less each year is a recipe for disaster.

I am sure Pagano will find ways to disguise the defense and utilize Freeney and his pass rush while minimizing his time in coverage or being forced to play the run. That has to be certain I don't argue. Fact is though you don't have to do that with Suggs because he can cover and he is productive in run defense all the while getting to the qb just as much if not more. I don't see Freeney being able to play that kinda role. He may play Suggs position..but he won't play it like Suggs is what I am saying. To me you shouldn't have to cover up for a guy getting paid 19 million dollars weaknesses. You shouldn't have to try to be creative to "hide" him in coverage. That guy should have few weaknesses and should be the focus of your defense. To me Freeney no longer qualifies as that type of player.

4-3 or 3-4. He is on the back side of his career and he is on the decline. I think he was an incredible DE...a great pass rusher and we certainly would not have been a super bowl team without him but in the last 3 years his production has declined while his contract has ballooned. I hope for success this year and hope he can be reenergized by this change and for him to be successful and help us but he can't play the OLB the way Suggs does. He will have to play it differently, so to me...while Pagano envisions him playing Suggs position..I don't believe he can play it nearly as effectively in the same manner Suggs plays it. If Freeney tried to play it the way Suggs does...wow it would be a disaster. Can he play the OLB and be effective? I am sure we can get creative and use him effectively but to think he will line up and play the game similarly to Suggs and our defense will look similar to Baltimores isn't likely.

[BOTT]

is this really surprising? any rational thinking football fan probably thought freeney would be used in a similar manner as suggs. and i highly doubt this changes his position on restructuring at all. given freeney's age and the state of the colts roster i'm not sure i want him to restructure.

[Carlos Danger]

Freeney must have some doubts about his role... or he'd jump at a contarct extension here...

Dunno that he'd "jump" per se... There are a lot of 4-3 teams that would love to sign him for big $$. I think he will impress because he is just that awesome, but I wouldn't be surprised if our FO tries to low-ball him and he ends up testing the FA market in 2013.

[BrentMc11]

I am glad there are paragraphs.....stop the novels unless you blog....please!

[Superman]

I simply think paying Freeney 19 million is way to much..and thats playing in a 4-3..

I've been one of the chief advocates of either extending him or trading him because his cap hit is way too high, and it was really never anticipated that he would play his final year under that cap hit. We agree there, and can set that aside. The rest of the debate has nothing to do with money. It's about football.

I think using him in the 3-4 is waste of his talent and if I am an opposing offense I see him as a liability and attack it. All I am saying is Suggs has proven himself one of the best 3-4 OLB in the league and Freeney for the last 3 years has seen his numbers and production go down. Compound asking a guy to do more who has shown he is doing less each year is a recipe for disaster.

This is where I think we should be patient. Just wait and see. He's a highly motivated professional athlete with a great work ethic and outstanding athleticism. If anyone can handle playing a new position, it's Freeney.

And, as I mentioned before, he's not a liability if we're using him right. If you're asking him to play man coverage, that's your fault. If you're having him drop into a zone maybe once or twice a game, that's probably just a disguised coverage that's called situationally, and I doubt he's going to get picked on because of it.

I am sure Pagano will find ways to disguise the defense and utilize Freeney and his pass rush while minimizing his time in coverage or being forced to play the run. That has to be certain I don't argue. Fact is though you don't have to do that with Suggs because he can cover and he is productive in run defense all the while getting to the qb just as much if not more. I don't see Freeney being able to play that kinda role. He may play Suggs position..but he won't play it like Suggs is what I am saying. To me you shouldn't have to cover up for a guy getting paid 19 million dollars weaknesses. You shouldn't have to try to be creative to "hide" him in coverage. That guy should have few weaknesses and should be the focus of your defense. To me Freeney no longer qualifies as that type of player.

The Ravens defense is full of disguises, most of them featuring Suggs. He's a complete wildcard, because he lines up all over the field, in both a two-point and a three-point stance. And he'll rush or drop from either position, and either side of the field. But mostly, he's rushing.

Please understand me: Freeney has never been asked to focus on playing the run. NEVER. We're assuming he's a liability, but in reality, the scheme he's been in since he came to the NFL has played him at the nine, well away from any run support responsibilities. Nor has he ever been asked to drop into any kind of coverage. The merits of that scheme are debateable, but that's not Freeney's job.

And you keep comparing him to Suggs, even though they play entirely different positions. Suggs is a hybrid linebacker/end, but that in itself requires Suggs to play more run support and to occasionally drop into zone coverage. Freeney has always had a singular focus, per the coaching staff: Get to the quarterback. I don't know how well Freeney will adapt to a Suggs-like role, but your argument essentially boils down to "he's never done this before, so he must not be able to." And I'm simply saying that he's never been asked to, so to assume that he necessarily can't is presumptuous. He definitely has all the tools.

4-3 or 3-4. He is on the back side of his career and he is on the decline. I think he was an incredible DE...a great pass rusher and we certainly would not have been a super bowl team without him but in the last 3 years his production has declined while his contract has ballooned.

I also have to nitpick here. I find it hard to judge any of our defensive players on anything that's happened since 2009 because of the way Coyer and Caldwell were using them. The schemes were often terrible, especially last year. I would like to see a breakdown of what percentage of plays Freeney and Mathis even had the opportunity to be involved in. Because what I saw was a coverage scheme that completely took our pass rush out of the game, starting with the Super Bowl. We really can't talk about anyone's production, if you ask me, because the coaching was so ridiculous.

Whether Freeney is on the decline or not is worthy of consideration. But I don't think that can be based on production. His production has always been judged on sacks, because that's all we've ever held him responsible for, and we didn't give him any chance to get sacks since 2009.

I hope for success this year and hope he can be reenergized by this change and for him to be successful and help us but he can't play the OLB the way Suggs does. He will have to play it differently, so to me...while Pagano envisions him playing Suggs position..I don't believe he can play it nearly as effectively in the same manner Suggs plays it. If Freeney tried to play it the way Suggs does...wow it would be a disaster. Can he play the OLB and be effective? I am sure we can get creative and use him effectively but to think he will line up and play the game similarly to Suggs and our defense will look similar to Baltimores isn't likely.

And this was my original question. Are you basing this supposition on your thoughts that Freeney is declining, or is it based on his physical abilities? Because I don't think there's evidence of decline to this point, and I think he has all the physical tools and capabilities of Terrell Suggs. He just plays a different position. If we allow Pagano and Manusky to tinker with Freeney and Mathis, figure out what they can and can't do, I think maybe we'll see just how good those two players (and coaches) are.

[Superman]

I am glad there are paragraphs.....stop the novels unless you blog....please!

If you don't want to read them, then don't.

???

[IndyTrav]

Dunno that he'd "jump" per se... There are a lot of 4-3 teams that would love to sign him for big $$. I think he will impress because he is just that awesome, but I wouldn't be surprised if our FO tries to low-ball him and he ends up testing the FA market in 2013.

There are ZERO 4-3 teams that will sign him for big $$$. If they were willing to do that, he'd have already been traded.....

His "awesomeness" won't get him paid. His production and age will. Ones going down. The other up.....

[IndyTrav]

And this was my original question. Are you basing this supposition on your thoughts that Freeney is declining, or is it based on his physical abilities? Because I don't think there's evidence of decline to this point, and I think he has all the physical tools and capabilities of Terrell Suggs. He just plays a different position. If we allow Pagano and Manusky to tinker with Freeney and Mathis, figure out what they can and can't do, I think maybe we'll see just how good those two players (and coaches) are.

Of course you don't think there is a decline because you have openly admitted to throwing out 2009 and forward, so all this is moot.....Although I'd like to know why Mathis has stayed in line with his career averages over that same span, in the same system.....

[BrentMc11]

If you don't want to read them, then don't.

???

Thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!Now I am mad! You need to stop it......NOW

[The Peytonator]

I don't remember Suggs trying to cover Gronkowski one-on-one in that playoff game. Pretty sure they won't be having Freeney attempt such a suicidal manuever. If he drops it will most likely be to cover a short zone and keep his eyes on the RB in case of a release to the flat. He will do just fine in this scheme.