Colts Worked Out 4 Safeties

[holeymoley99]

https://www.stampedeblue.com/2021/9/13/22672903/colts-reportedly-worked-out-four-safeties-on-monday

 

Some interesting names with experience, Josh Jones would be a real nice add 48 starts over the last 4 years. Would guess Sean Davis most likely gets pink slip despite having snaps yesterday. Not sure they are ready to pull plug on rookie Shawn Davis just yet.

[Happy2BeHere]

In other news: the Seahawks worked out our safeties yesterday, they will decline making a trade for them 

[Shive]

1 hour ago, holeymoley99 said:

https://www.stampedeblue.com/2021/9/13/22672903/colts-reportedly-worked-out-four-safeties-on-monday

 

Some interesting names with experience, Josh Jones would be a real nice add 48 starts over the last 4 years. Would guess Sean Davis most likely gets pink slip despite having snaps yesterday. Not sure they are ready to pull plug on rookie Shawn Davis just yet.

Jones and Sendejo are heat seeking missle types of guys. Just from the number of times Sendejo has injured his own teammates, I'll pass on him.

 

Josh Jones is a really aggressive, height/weight/speed, bring the boom type of safety, but that aggressiveness is also a weakness too. I believe he's also a bit of a liability in coverage as well. I know he was in college, but I haven't seen much of his NFL career. He's also a guy that you would see flashes here and there, but he was never able to consistently put things together.

 

I could see cutting Davis for a guy like Jones that was a high ceiling, low floor prospect that hasn't seemed to realize his potential just yet.

[CanuckColt]

14 hours ago, Happy2BeHere said:

In other news: the Seahawks worked out our safeties yesterday, they will decline making a trade for them 

More like "worked over" our safeties.

[MPStack]

Should’ve resigned M. Hooker. 

[The Fish]

4 minutes ago, MPStack said:

Should’ve resigned M. Hooker. 

 

A first round pick that walked. And he's not bad. I dunno what the story was, but I gathered things soured behind the scenes. Too bad. I thought he was good at keeping deep stuff under control, when he played.

[MPStack]

Just now, The Fish said:

 

A first round pick that walked. And he's not bad. I dunno what the story was, but I gathered things soured behind the scenes. Too bad. I thought he was good at keeping deep stuff under control, when he played.

He was inactive with the Cowboys last week. Biggest thing I took away, with M. Hooker, is never invest a top 15 pick on a Safety. 

[EastStreet]

5 minutes ago, MPStack said:

Should’ve resigned M. Hooker. 

 

Honestly, given the S performance last week, it's pretty obvious we are lacking in the coverage department. We need coverage Ss more than the big hit, strong, or box safety type. Neither starter had a good game as far as grades went. And if we're going to play more C2, we need guys that can handle the deep zones. 

 

Not saying Hooker is that guy. But if he was healthy, he's a coverage option guy that knows our system. And he could have been kept for cheap. Think he signed for the vet min.

[EastStreet]

1 hour ago, MPStack said:

He was inactive with the Cowboys last week. Biggest thing I took away, with M. Hooker, is never invest a top 15 pick on a Safety. 

And if you do, don't draft a C1 guy, and proceed to force fit him into C2.

[B~Town]

Read it was 5 safeties and 2 centers . 

[B~Town]

C Cohl Cabral

C Drake Jackson

S Delano Hill

S Josh Jones

S Lucas Jordan

S Will Parks

S Andrew Sendejo

[MPStack]

25 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

And if you do, don't draft a C1 guy, and proceed to force fit him into C2.

Minus the injuries, I think in the correct scheme, M. Hooker would’ve been a very good Safety. 
 

 

[EastStreet]

6 minutes ago, MPStack said:

Minus the injuries, I think in the correct scheme, M. Hooker would’ve been a very good Safety. 

 

Agreed. Just spit balling, but either the injury broke him, or we ruined him (instincts, etc) trying to make him what he wasn't. 

Bad fit overall. 

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, MPStack said:

Should’ve resigned M. Hooker. 

Thing is, Hooker got beat o' plenty deep when he lined up in C2 also.  Its when he stayed back there in C3 is when he stopped the deep pass.

 

You know, when a safety plays deep, he can defend the deep pass better.  Go figure.

 

If we were playing C2 last week, I don't know how much it would have mattered.

 

Neither Willis or Hooker are suited for C2, for different reasons, IMO.

[shasta519]

It was very curious that they went into the season with only 2 starting Ss and Odum. You would think a team that plays C2 would carry 5 or so. Looks like that might change pretty soon.

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

 

Honestly, given the S performance last week, it's pretty obvious we are lacking in the coverage department. We need coverage Ss more than the big hit, strong, or box safety type. Neither starter had a good game as far as grades went. And if we're going to play more C2, we need guys that can handle the deep zones. 

 

Not saying Hooker is that guy. But if he was healthy, he's a coverage option guy that knows our system. And he could have been kept for cheap. Think he signed for the vet min.

 

Willis is a solid SS, but deep coverage is really not his strong suit. I think last season will prove to be an outlier or over-achieving season.

 

People bit really hard on those first few games from Blackmon last year. He has a long ways to go. That game looked like the second half of last season...poor deep coverage and missed tackles.

 

It's disappointing, given the hype this offseason. Ballard brought in several Ss this offseason and waived all of them. I wonder if we might see some other guys getting snaps back there.

[EastStreet]

18 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Thing is, Hooker got beat o' plenty deep when he lined up in C2 also.  Its when he stayed back there in C3 is when he stopped the deep pass.

 

You know, when a safety plays deep, he can defend the deep pass better.  Go figure.

 

If we were playing C2 last week, I don't know how much it would have mattered.

 

Neither Willis or Hooker are suited for C2, for different reasons, IMO.

 

As far as coverage goes, Hooker is a better option regardless of scheme than Willis or Blackmon. 

Now downhill / physicality, or playing the box, that's another question.

 

Heck, this last week, both Willis and Blackmon gave up / allowed 150ish passer rating.... And Blackmon even whiffed on a tackle. 200 yards allowed between them on 6 passes. Not sure Hooker was ever that bad lol.

 

Kenny had an atrocious game in both phases too.

 

Rock looks to have the lowest passer rating allowed (not all grades/stats are in) of all DBs.

[DougDew]

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

 

As far as coverage goes, Hooker is a better option regardless of scheme than Willis or Blackmon. 

Now downhill / physicality, or playing the box, that's another question.

 

Heck, this last week, both Willis and Blackmon gave up / allowed 150ish passer rating.... And Blackmon even whiffed on a tackle. 200 yards allowed between them on 6 passes. Not sure Hooker was ever that bad lol.

 

Kenny had an atrocious game in both phases too.

 

Rock looks to have the lowest passer rating allowed (not all grades/stats are in) of all DBs.

I think Blackmon has upside.  I think the rest of the Ss who are here or not here have pretty much reached their ceilings.

 

Rock's problem is that he gets beat deep in man coverage.  Looks like Eber took us out of man coverage...so it wasn't Rock that got beat deep, it was Willis. lol.

 

But I have said that Rock seems like a good #2 C2 corner, so he is fine in that capacity.  Now attention should go to the S.

[EastStreet]

7 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Willis is a solid SS, but deep coverage is really not his strong suit. I think last season will prove to be an outlier or over-achieving season.

 

People bit really hard on those first few games from Blackmon last year. He has a long ways to go. That game looked like the second half of last season...poor deep coverage and missed tackles.

 

It's disappointing, given the hype this offseason. Ballard brought in several Ss this offseason and waived all of them. I wonder if we might see some other guys getting snaps back there.

Yup, yup, and yup... 

 

I'll be more specific on Willis. He's a great, even fantastic, box safety in C3. Or decent in a deep quarters when he's asked to be more horizontal than vertical. He totally lacks the speed/agility to be a C2 vertical coverage guy. Not sure if I'd call his good grades outliers. I'd just say they are a product of correct personnel usage (keeping him mostly in the box, and horizontal).

 

Blackmom has always struggled in coverage. I'm very familiar with his college days. He was moved from CB for that reason. Burnt toast type of games. Great down hill guy though, IMO elite in that area. Just has never been good in vertical coverage.  He's OK in C3 at times with the smaller zone, but C2 gives him too much vertical real estate. He wasn't tested vertically a lot early last year, and made some highlight downhill hits. Now teams have film on him and he'll get tested a lot more.

 

I have been very consistent on both these guys since drafted, and said basically the same thing when drafted as I just did above (and got a lot of flack from people who don't understand coverages). Blackmon has the raw traits to develop into a better coverage guy, but Willis probably doesn't. Not saying Willis can't improve, but he simply lacks vertical speed. Blackmon's speed is OK, he just doesn't have awareness and bites forward to often.

 

Overall, but off topic a bit, our constant shuffling of coverages is part of the problem IMO. We don't have the athletes to be as flexible as Flus wants to be.

 

 

 

 

[EastStreet]

39 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I think Blackmon has upside.  I think the rest of the Ss who are here or not here have pretty much reached their ceilings.

 

Rock's problem is that he gets beat deep in man coverage.  Looks like Eber took us out of man coverage...so it wasn't Rock that got beat deep, it was Willis. lol.

 

But I have said that Rock seems like a good #2 C2 corner, so he is fine in that capacity.  Now attention should go to the S.

Like I've said a lot. Rock was good, top 10 CB graded the last half of 2019. He was injured off and on all year in 2020. 

Not saying he doesn't have deficiencies, but he has traits to be fine in different coverages.

 

He'll struggle in soft-man vs speed guys. He was very good in press-man in college. He doesn't have the vertical speed to keep up with speed guys if he's giving a ton of cushion. He can jam well if his college tape is any indication, and knock guys off their routes. His speed is fine for X-type guys who aren't burners, or really anyone who isn't a burner. If you're going to match him up vs a speed guy, and not let him jam, he's going to be toast. That's flus's fault for putting him in that position. Don't ask him play cover 3 vs Tyreek Hill on the outside if you're going to play him 10 yards off. Let him knock Hill on his butt at the LOS.

 

See my response to @stitches on Blackmon and Willis. 

 

 

[DougDew]

17 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Like I've said a lot. Rock was good, top 10 CB graded the last half of 2019. He was injured off and on all year in 2020. 

Not saying he doesn't have deficiencies, but he has traits to be fine in different coverages.

 

He'll struggle in soft-man vs speed guys. He was very good in press-man in college. He doesn't have the vertical speed to keep up with speed guys if he's giving a ton of cushion. He can jam well if his college tape is any indication, and knock guys off their routes. His speed is fine for X-type guys who aren't burners, or really anyone who isn't a burner. If you're going to match him up vs a speed guy, and not let him jam, he's going to be toast. That's flus's fault for putting him in that position. Don't ask him play cover 3 vs Tyreek Hill on the outside if you're going to play him 10 yards off. Let him knock Hill on his butt at the LOS.

 

See my response to @stitches on Blackmon and Willis. 

 

 

IIRC, Willis was drafted when we were expecting to play Hooker more.  He is the classic SS to Hooker's classic FS.  If we're going to more C2, then Willis is almost as bad of a fit as Hooker was, IMO.  Blackmon is the only S that fits the C2 D.  And this idea of us switching wholesale coverages, to play anything at any point, and be equally good at all of them, is pie in the sky thinking, IMO.

 

When the Colts were negotiating with Philly for Wentz and were "competing" with the Bears, I said to offer Willis and Oke to reduce our draft pick give. 

 

Just carryover thoughts from last season.  Hopefully this season proves it all wrong.

[EastStreet]

4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

IIRC, Willis was drafted when we were expecting to play Hooker more.  He is the classic SS to Hooker's classic FS.  If we're going to more C2, then Willis is almost as bad of a fit as Hooker was, IMO.  Blackmon is the only S that fits the C2 D.  And this idea of us switching wholesale coverages, to play anything at any point, and be equally good at all of them, is pie in the sky thinking, IMO.

 

When the Colts were negotiating with Philly for Wentz and were "competing" with the Bears, I said to offer Willis and Oke to reduce our draft pick give. 

 

Just carryover thoughts from last season.  Hopefully this season proves it all wrong.

FWIW, we vary our coverages in-game, and in-season, more than most, or perhaps any other team. We play C3 most, but we are not in the top 15 usage in any specific coverage (except QQH). This means we are constantly moving from coverage to coverage. And our highest ranking is in QQH, which means we're sitting back more than most.

 

Blackmon IMO would be at his best as a SS. He'd be a better C2 SS than Willis, but we'd still have coverage issues. While he's faster than Willis, he's still not good vertically. He has the traits to improve though, where Willis is really limited. If we could find a FS, and put Blackmon at C3 SS, I think he's be a pro-bowl level guy almost immediately.

 

Here's PFF's take on Indy's scheme...

2020 Base Coverage: Cover 3
2020 Third-Down Mentality: Sit back in quarters

 

Though they do base out of Cover 3, with 28% of their snaps coming in that coverage, defensive coordinator Matt Eberflus mixes his coverages a lot. He doesn’t rank in the top 15 in usage rate for any coverage except for quarter-quarter-half; he likes to sit in a one-gap four-down front style without blitzing, hoping to use those four linemen to get pressure.

 

That hasn’t worked well even with the addition of DeForest Buckner. The Colts' defensive linemen ranked just 23rd in pressure rate, and they finished 12th league-wide last season in EPA allowed per play.