Potential Cuts (in my opinion)

[Superman]

I don't think he's untouchable either but much like kickers if you have a good one you don't cut him. Again for him to be cut it would have to be either for money which at this point in the offseason doesn't make a lot of sense or performance. His past performance shows no reason for him to be released so the only way I see it happening is if the colts wanted one of the two younger guys because they have something Justin doesn't. Again if that was the case I also think he would have been released by now because that means snow doesn't fit what the new coaches want in a Long snapper.

I don't think he's untouchable I just think if he was going to be released it would have already happened unless he gets to camp and just doesn't have it anymore.

I don't think long snapper is anywhere near as crucial as kicker, so I don't really buy into that comparison. And really, I'm just commenting on the idea previously stated that you don't touch your long snapper by virtue of the fact that he's your long snapper. I don't believe most teams carry a long snapper who doesn't at times handle other responsibilities. And considering the fact that he's 35 and his coverage skills aren't that great, if you can replace him with a player who can give you little more in coverage and make it easier to manage your roster (maybe an 10th lineman or 4th tight end), maybe you do that if you're not losing anything with the snapping. And I don't think Justin Snow is such a good long snapper that he can't be beat out in camp by a player who can do a little more for the team. It has nothing to do with the money; he's due $890k, with no pro-rated bonus, so we can cut him September 4th and not have to worry about any dead hit. And you don't cut him before you know that you have someone else who can take his place. We brought in two younger players who have experience as long snappers. There's competition on the roster. Let's see what happens.

[GoColts8818]

I don't think long snapper is anywhere near as crucial as kicker, so I don't really buy into that comparison. And really, I'm just commenting on the idea previously stated that you don't touch your long snapper by virtue of the fact that he's your long snapper. I don't believe most teams carry a long snapper who doesn't at times handle other responsibilities. And considering the fact that he's 35 and his coverage skills aren't that great, if you can replace him with a player who can give you little more in coverage and make it easier to manage your roster (maybe an 10th lineman or 4th tight end), maybe you do that if you're not losing anything with the snapping. And I don't think Justin Snow is such a good long snapper that he can't be beat out in camp by a player who can do a little more for the team. It has nothing to do with the money; he's due $890k, with no pro-rated bonus, so we can cut him September 4th and not have to worry about any dead hit. And you don't cut him before you know that you have someone else who can take his place. We brought in two younger players who have experience as long snappers. There's competition on the roster. Let's see what happens.

Oh no go ask the guy who botched the playoff game for the Giants years ago against the 49ers. Again if you have a good long snapper you tend to over look them because they make their job look really easy. It's when you don't have a good one you understand how important they are. Now with that said clearly a good long snapper isn't nearly as important as having a good QB or something but they are more important than you seem to be giving them credit for. If the long snapper can't get the snap there I don't care how good of a kicker you have back there to kick it.

I didn't say you couldn't touch your long snapper because he's your long snapper. I said like a kicker, if you have good one you tend not to mess with him. There is no real point to it. Finding a good one can be hard to do and even then long snappers are fairly cheap and if you cut the one you have you have to replace him so you don't save all that much in the long run by cutting one. It's not like if we cut Dwight Freeney tomorrow and went with Hughes where we would be saving 14 million dollars and you would go man while the production is going to go down we are gong to have a lot of extra cash to spend to make it worth it.

Also like kickers long snappers tend to play into their 40's because they play limited plays and don't take a lot of hits. So while yes 35 is old for a football player it's not over the hill for a long snapper.

Despite what you say Snow coverage skills are very good. In fact he is normally one of the first down the field and is almost always one of the first guys to cover a punt and is normally the guy who will down the ball if the returner doesn't field it.

How many truly bad snaps have you seen in the time Snow has been here? Not many. So I would disagree with the idea that it would be easy for someone to beat him out in camp. If he was odds are he wouldn't have been here as long as he has and we wouldn't be paying him what we are.

Again, I don't see why the Colts would look into cutting Snow. It wouldn't be for the money because if it was they would have already done it and if the new coaches didn't like the way he played the LS poistion and wanted to go in different directions they would have released him by now to do that and brought in one of the new guys to take over the poistion and would just be starting from scratch. He would have to flat out get beat in camp to lose his job and normally you just use one long snapper in camp and during the pre-season so I don't see Snow losing his job unless he becomes a problem at his job.

Again I don't think he's untouchable but I don't think there are really any signs to suggest his job is in danger either.

[Gavin]

I don't think long snapper is anywhere near as crucial as kicker, so I don't really buy into that comparison. And really, I'm just commenting on the idea previously stated that you don't touch your long snapper by virtue of the fact that he's your long snapper. I don't believe most teams carry a long snapper who doesn't at times handle other responsibilities. And considering the fact that he's 35 and his coverage skills aren't that great, if you can replace him with a player who can give you little more in coverage and make it easier to manage your roster (maybe an 10th lineman or 4th tight end), maybe you do that if you're not losing anything with the snapping. And I don't think Justin Snow is such a good long snapper that he can't be beat out in camp by a player who can do a little more for the team. It has nothing to do with the money; he's due $890k, with no pro-rated bonus, so we can cut him September 4th and not have to worry about any dead hit. And you don't cut him before you know that you have someone else who can take his place. We brought in two younger players who have experience as long snappers. There's competition on the roster. Let's see what happens.

why do we need a 10th lineman for? we got plenty of competition their and we have 7 tight ends already

[Gavin]

Oh no go ask the guy who botched the playoff game for the Giants years ago against the 49ers. Again if you have a good long snapper you tend to over look them because they make their job look really easy. It's when you don't have a good one you understand how important they are. Now with that said clearly a good long snapper isn't nearly as important as having a good QB or something but they are more important than you seem to be giving them credit for. If the long snapper can't get the snap there I don't care how good of a kicker you have back there to kick it.

I didn't say you couldn't touch your long snapper because he's your long snapper. I said like a kicker, if you have good one you tend not to mess with him. There is no real point to it. Finding a good one can be hard to do and even then long snappers are fairly cheap and if you cut the one you have you have to replace him so you don't save all that much in the long run by cutting one. It's not like if we cut Dwight Freeney tomorrow and went with Hughes where we would be saving 14 million dollars and you would go man while the production is going to go down we are gong to have a lot of extra cash to spend to make it worth it.

Also like kickers long snappers tend to play into their 40's because they play limited plays and don't take a lot of hits. So while yes 35 is old for a football player it's not over the hill for a long snapper.

Despite what you say Snow coverage skills are very good. In fact he is normally one of the first down the field and is almost always one of the first guys to cover a punt and is normally the guy who will down the ball if the returner doesn't field it.

How many truly bad snaps have you seen in the time Snow has been here? Not many. So I would disagree with the idea that it would be easy for someone to beat him out in camp. If he was odds are he wouldn't have been here as long as he has and we wouldn't be paying him what we are.

Again, I don't see why the Colts would look into cutting Snow. It wouldn't be for the money because if it was they would have already done it and if the new coaches didn't like the way he played the LS poistion and wanted to go in different directions they would have released him by now to do that and brought in one of the new guys to take over the poistion and would just be starting from scratch. He would have to flat out get beat in camp to lose his job and normally you just use one long snapper in camp and during the pre-season so I don't see Snow losing his job unless he becomes a problem at his job.

Again I don't think he's untouchable but I don't think there are really any signs to suggest his job is in danger either.

hes a long snapper lol I mean seriously how many times do you hear his named announced during a game, being a long snapper is about chemistry and repetition, I dont know if he will get cut or not simply do to the fact other players on the team now have done what he does and are younger

[GoColts8818]

hes a long snapper lol I mean seriously how many times do you hear his named announced during a game, being a long snapper is about chemistry and repetition, I dont know if he will get cut or not simply do to the fact other players on the team now have done what he does and are younger

Which is why I said he's not nearly as important as say a QB or something...

With that said unless it's for a false start or holding how often do you hear o-lineman's names? Does that mean they aren't important too?

As for the Chemistry and Repetition part that makes cutting Snow even more unlikely.

There has to be a reason someone gets cut it's normally one of the following reasons:

1. You want to save Money by cutting that player

2. That player does not fit what you are looking for for a player at his poistion on your team

3. That player causes problems

4. That player is not good enough to be on your team

Right now Justin Snow really doesn't fit any of those. When it comes to kickers and long snappers you don't just cut them to get younger. If they are still good at their job you tend to hang on to them because they are cheap and finding a good replacement can be a hard thing to do because there is a limited market to pick from because they aren't really glamor positions.

[Peytonparker]

Dwayne Allen can block and so can Fleener although Allen is better at it besides we have 5 tight ends, its likely someone isnt cuttin it at Tight End, I mean we brought in 2 other tight ends after we already drafted Fleener and Allen

Dwayne Allen absolutely cannot block

[PrincetonTiger]

To my knowledge he's still the only long snapper on the team though. Maybe we picked someone up but if we didn't he's not going to lose his job till we do pick one up.

With that said I think this is the last year of his deal. I think it's more likely we will let him play out his contract. The big benefit to cutting a guy like that is saving the money and again if we were going to do that I think he would have been cut when we made the other money saving cuts.

Overton was the over LS

[Luck2Fleener]

whats with some people wanting Snow, we can get our third string Center to snap the ball

Not as our long snapper, we want someone who will get the ball into the hands of the punter or holder 99.99% of the time. A bad snap can be devastating to a team. Keep Snow.

[Superman]

why do we need a 10th lineman for? we got plenty of competition their and we have 7 tight ends already

Teams usually carry nine or ten offensive linemen, and three or four tight ends. We have seven on the roster now, but we're not going to have seven after final cuts. And it would help roster management if our long snapper could actually play tight end in a pinch. It's not a major consideration, of course. Just a small variable.

[WSnotch]

Chism will be cut, he's a Heat fan. BOOO

[Superman]

Oh no go ask the guy who botched the playoff game for the Giants years ago against the 49ers. Again if you have a good long snapper you tend to over look them because they make their job look really easy. It's when you don't have a good one you understand how important they are. Now with that said clearly a good long snapper isn't nearly as important as having a good QB or something but they are more important than you seem to be giving them credit for. If the long snapper can't get the snap there I don't care how good of a kicker you have back there to kick it.

He's not as important as the kicker, which is what you were inferring. Yes, the ball has to get back there, but seriously, you don't worry about your long snapper. He's usually more than capable. I'm not saying we should get rid of Snow. I just don't think he's the only guy who can be a long snapper. We signed two players who will likely compete for that position this year.

I didn't say you couldn't touch your long snapper because he's your long snapper. I said like a kicker, if you have good one you tend not to mess with him. There is no real point to it. Finding a good one can be hard to do and even then long snappers are fairly cheap and if you cut the one you have you have to replace him so you don't save all that much in the long run by cutting one. It's not like if we cut Dwight Freeney tomorrow and went with Hughes where we would be saving 14 million dollars and you would go man while the production is going to go down we are gong to have a lot of extra cash to spend to make it worth it.

Also like kickers long snappers tend to play into their 40's because they play limited plays and don't take a lot of hits. So while yes 35 is old for a football player it's not over the hill for a long snapper.

All of that is true. But we brought in competition this year, for the first time in a long time. He will have to show that he's the best guy for the job in camp. And I think that might be about more than just long snapping.

Despite what you say Snow coverage skills are very good. In fact he is normally one of the first down the field and is almost always one of the first guys to cover a punt and is normally the guy who will down the ball if the returner doesn't field it.

He gets down the field just fine, but he often gets blocked out of the play or overruns the returner. I don't expect him to get a trifecta every play, but our punt coverage has been subpar for a long time. Can't remove Snow from that picture entirely, and if there's someone who can long snap just fine and is more effective at taking on blockers or influencing the returner, that might be a factor in who gets the job.

How many truly bad snaps have you seen in the time Snow has been here? Not many. So I would disagree with the idea that it would be easy for someone to beat him out in camp. If he was odds are he wouldn't have been here as long as he has and we wouldn't be paying him what we are.

He had one last season against the Bucs that cost us a field goal. It happens. He's very good, and I don't take him for granted, but he's not perfect. And I don't think the dropoff for a specialist like a long snapper is something that would be too troublesome. You don't give the job to someone who isn't consistently good, but you're also not looking for perfection.

Again, I don't see why the Colts would look into cutting Snow. It wouldn't be for the money because if it was they would have already done it and if the new coaches didn't like the way he played the LS poistion and wanted to go in different directions they would have released him by now to do that and brought in one of the new guys to take over the poistion and would just be starting from scratch. He would have to flat out get beat in camp to lose his job and normally you just use one long snapper in camp and during the pre-season so I don't see Snow losing his job unless he becomes a problem at his job.

Again I don't think he's untouchable but I don't think there are really any signs to suggest his job is in danger either.

He would have be decisively outplayed in camp and preseason at this point. I don't expect that to happen. I'm just saying that it's strange to adamantly defend a long snapper as if he's the key to the team's success. The position is crucial to field goals and punts, absolutely, but he's not the only person who can long snap. And he has competition this year.

[Gavin]

Teams usually carry nine or ten offensive linemen, and three or four tight ends. We have seven on the roster now, but we're not going to have seven after final cuts. And it would help roster management if our long snapper could actually play tight end in a pinch. It's not a major consideration, of course. Just a small variable.

Im counting 14 linemen from looking at the Colts roster

[Gavin]

Chism will be cut, he's a Heat fan. BOOO

hey may be better then any Corner we got lol

[Fx Stryker]

Snow is going to get the long snapping record as a Colt. So in a way we are going to have the best long snapper to ever play in the NFL. Although dumping greats isn't a problem these days. :heh:

[GoColts8818]

He's not as important as the kicker, which is what you were inferring. Yes, the ball has to get back there, but seriously, you don't worry about your long snapper. He's usually more than capable. I'm not saying we should get rid of Snow. I just don't think he's the only guy who can be a long snapper. We signed two players who will likely compete for that position this year.

I am not saying he's as important as a Kicker. I am saying he's treated like a kicker that if you have a good one you don't get ride of him. That doesn't mean he's as important as the kicker it just means if you have a good one you don't replace them and the main reason you don't replace them is because they are cheap by NFL standards and hard to find. With that said if you don't have a good long snapper to get the ball back there it doesn't matter how good of a kicker you have.

All of that is true. But we brought in competition this year, for the first time in a long time. He will have to show that he's the best guy for the job in camp. And I think that might be about more than just long snapping.

It remains to be seen if that's true competition. For years we signed a second kicker just to rest Adam or a third QB just for camp with no real shot of him replacing our current QBs.

He gets down the field just fine, but he often gets blocked out of the play or overruns the returner. I don't expect him to get a trifecta every play, but our punt coverage has been subpar for a long time. Can't remove Snow from that picture entirely, and if there's someone who can long snap just fine and is more effective at taking on blockers or influencing the returner, that might be a factor in who gets the job.

I am not disagreeing with that our put coverage being subpar but it's not all Snow's fault. Frankly if you are counting on him to be a big play maker on your special teams that says more about the rest of the guys on the unit.

He had one last season against the Bucs that cost us a field goal. It happens. He's very good, and I don't take him for granted, but he's not perfect. And I don't think the dropoff for a specialist like a long snapper is something that would be too troublesome. You don't give the job to someone who isn't consistently good, but you're also not looking for perfection.

He had one last season...that's one. He's not perfect. Over his career he has been very good at snapping. Yes he's going to have a miss here or there. Adam misses a kick now and then too. Like you said you aren't looking for perfection.

He would have be decisively outplayed in camp and preseason at this point. I don't expect that to happen. I'm just saying that it's strange to adamantly defend a long snapper as if he's the key to the team's success. The position is crucial to field goals and punts, absolutely, but he's not the only person who can long snap. And he has competition this year.

I never said he was the only one who could do it. With that said, it remains to be seen if those guys are true competition or not. Just because a guy once did something doesn't mean they are going to do it at the NFL. For example, Painter held in college yet was never asked to do it here.

[MAC]

Dwayne Allen can block and so can Fleener although Allen is better at it besides we have 5 tight ends, its likely someone isnt cuttin it at Tight End, I mean we brought in 2 other tight ends after we already drafted Fleener and Allen

I hope you are right, but their draft profiles say otherwise. A lot of Colts fans seem to be just assuming by virtue of the high draft position that we have successfully replicated what the Patriots have, but a lot of experts (including the GM of the Giants) thought Fleener in particular was a reach. I have no idea what we're getting, but I'm not expecting Gronkowski or Graham.

Eldridge, on the other hand, substantially improved the Colts running game from his first snap, and he can catch the ball occasionally as well. His problem was injuries. I have no idea why the FO appears to dismiss him. If healthy, I would have been FAR happier if the Colts had just paired him with Allen and used that #2 pick on CB or WR.

[Smonroe]

No one on that list would surprise me except Snow. Brody is still in his rookie contract and we'll need blocking TEs, but that's not exactly a hard to find either.

[Gavin]

I hope you are right, but their draft profiles say otherwise. A lot of Colts fans seem to be just assuming by virtue of the high draft position that we have successfully replicated what the Patriots have, but a lot of experts (including the GM of the Giants) thought Fleener in particular was a reach. I have no idea what we're getting, but I'm not expecting Gronkowski or Graham.

Eldridge, on the other hand, substantially improved the Colts running game from his first snap, and he can catch the ball occasionally as well. His problem was injuries. I have no idea why the FO appears to dismiss him. If healthy, I would have been FAR happier if the Colts had just paired him with Allen and used that #2 pick on CB or WR.

Me to actually but I guess the temptation to pair Fleener with Luck was to much, I would have drafted Jenkins, Upshaw or Konz

[mvbighead]

To me, it makes more sense to predict which players stick than which don't. IE - Who justifies keeping a roster spot, not who doesn't.

And I have to disagree with the releases of Johnson, Mathews, Link, and Snow (maybe even Eldridge). If Eldridge makes it out of camp healthy, great, but there is no sense keep a blocking TE on the roster if he can't stay healthy. I'd rather see them trot out a 6th linemen than keep a spot player who is primarily wearing street clothes.

All that said, our past players are likely better than many of the UDFAs we picked up. They may not be great, but they've got more experience, and hopefully have improved since last season.

[Gavin]

To me, it makes more sense to predict which players stick than which don't. IE - Who justifies keeping a roster spot, not who doesn't.

And I have to disagree with the releases of Johnson, Mathews, Link, and Snow (maybe even Eldridge). If Eldridge makes it out of camp healthy, great, but there is no sense keep a blocking TE on the roster if he can't stay healthy. I'd rather see them trot out a 6th linemen than keep a spot player who is primarily wearing street clothes.

All that said, our past players are likely better than many of the UDFAs we picked up. They may not be great, but they've got more experience, and hopefully have improved since last season.

thats alot of hope right their, as many undrafted free agents as we picked up that tells me those players veteran experience that we have had (Johnson,Linkenbach) dont mean squat, why? because they never got the job done from day one and in Johnsons case hes been on the roster 5 years and clearly is a back up at best and Linkenbach hasnt established himself of even worth a roster spot either, Eldridge just might be on his way out to because of the recent signings of of a couple tight ends we have 7 on the roster, now Matthews I think would make a better defensive end

[chad72]

To me, it makes more sense to predict which players stick than which don't. IE - Who justifies keeping a roster spot, not who doesn't.

And I have to disagree with the releases of Johnson, Mathews, Link, and Snow (maybe even Eldridge). If Eldridge makes it out of camp healthy, great, but there is no sense keep a blocking TE on the roster if he can't stay healthy. I'd rather see them trot out a 6th linemen than keep a spot player who is primarily wearing street clothes.

All that said, our past players are likely better than many of the UDFAs we picked up. They may not be great, but they've got more experience, and hopefully have improved since last season.

Rico Mathews, I can see let go but not AJ considering how much we are likely to play the 4-3 in the hybrid as well. With our roster make up, it could end up being a 2-to-1 in favor of the 4-3 on D in terms of fronts till more pieces are figured out and/or assembled during the season and/or offseason.

Linkenbach - his value would depend on the health of Ijalana who can play swing tackle, IMO. Very much like Ugoh's roster spot was cemented when Charlie Johnson started the 2010 season banged up. That was when we went with 10 OLs because of injury, and Blair White, who would have made the squad then was cut. Then Blair White made the roster due to an injury anyway . I do think 9 OLs is the most we should expect to make the roster unless a sure fire starter like Castanzo or possibly Satele are injured.

[Gavin]

Rico Mathews, I can see let go but not AJ considering how much we are likely to play the 4-3 in the hybrid as well. With our roster make up, it could end up being a 2-to-1 in favor of the 4-3 on D in terms of fronts till more pieces are figured out and/or assembled during the season and/or offseason.

Linkenbach - his value would depend on the health of Ijalana who can play swing tackle, IMO. Very much like Ugoh's roster spot was cemented when Charlie Johnson started the 2010 season banged up. That was when we went with 10 OLs because of injury, and Blair White, who would have made the squad then was cut. Then Blair White made the roster due to an injury anyway . I do think 9 OLs is the most we should expect to make the roster unless a sure fire starter like Castanzo or possibly Satele are injured.

Antonio Johnson probably wont be let go but he should be, he didnt make any impact in the 4-3 we have been running, hes been in the league now 5 years and we havent been able to stop the run with him in their , hes slow doesnt have a quick first step and cant shed blocks well

[shakedownstreet]

maybe this guy can take snow's place. looks like a natural

[mvbighead]

thats alot of hope right their, as many undrafted free agents as we picked up that tells me those players veteran experience that we have had (Johnson,Linkenbach) dont mean squat, why? because they never got the job done from day one and in Johnsons case hes been on the roster 5 years and clearly is a back up at best and Linkenbach hasnt established himself of even worth a roster spot either, Eldridge just might be on his way out to because of the recent signings of of a couple tight ends we have 7 on the roster, now Matthews I think would make a better defensive end

This tells me you have the same expectation as every other fan out there when it comes to signings, particularly this bit:

as many undrafted free agents as we picked up that tells me those players veteran experience that...

You want to know why we signed X number of UDFAs? Hmm, I think I got a solid answer for you... we had X positions open with very little money to bring in any remaining veteran free agents. IT IS THAT SIMPLE.

Us signing UDFAs gives us NO insight whatsoever as to what the current group of guys are considered. Now, if we had signed 10 NTs post draft, that might suggest that we were still looking for a NT. And such is the case with us signing numerous CBs and TEs post draft. Our depth is limited in those areas, and the coaches are looking to find quality depth and maybe even a starter.

In any case, the only thing that general would indicate whether a player needs to worry about losing their job would be early draft picks. #1 overall QB, that says to me that Stanton clearly isn't considered our starter (Obvious, I know). A 2nd round pick at TE? That says to me that Brody Eldridge won't be expected to be our primary TE. A 3rd round pick at TE? That says to me that, based on the prior pick, we are valuing the TE position, and intend to use more 2 TE sets. A late 3rd on WR, that says to me that they are looking to add quality depth at WR, and hopefully get a guy that can contribute this season, perhaps later in the year.

But UDFAs? You gotta be kidding me. They pick up guys that they hope can compete for a roster spot, that they hope fit the system, that they hope... These players are not indicative of any problem other than depth on the roster. We've acquired TEs, CBs, safeties, etc. All of those positions we are lacking quality depth. None of them are expected better than what we have, but some could be. Some have a better chance of sticking due to lack of quality players in their positions. But to me, some of the guys we have are quality depth that simply are being forced to start before they're ready. They are developmental projects that get pulled in too soon due to health issues with other players. It is akin to taking your car in for an oil change, and driving off after the oil has been drained, but not replaced.

Eh, now I am just ranting.

[funktacious2]

I'd keep Brody Eldridge because he's a great blocker. I think he'd work well as a way to trick defenses. Defenses will have a hard time knowing if we're running or passing with Brody in.

[mvbighead]

I'd keep Brody Eldridge because he's a great blocker. I think he'd work well as a way to trick defenses. Defenses will have a hard time knowing if we're running or passing with Brody in.

Honestly, that's the "trick" with nearly any 2 TE set. TEs are almost always better run blockers than WRs. Most TEs are lesser receivers than wideouts, but that is not to say they are not capable. In any case, Brody very well can stick if he is healthy. But given investments in 2nd and 3rd selections, and the plethora of FAs also brought in at the position, Brody's odds of sticking around are not as good as a Fleener or Allen who have oodles of potential with little shown on an NFL field, vs. Brody who has shown little in his time in the league. Not to say he is bad, but he hasn't stood out, which isn't necessarily a good thing. A lot of that is due to injury, but he could change that this year. I just don't see him as anything more than the #3 given the attention they put at the TE position in the draft.

[Gavin]

This tells me you have the same expectation as every other fan out there when it comes to signings, particularly this bit:

as many undrafted free agents as we picked up that tells me those players veteran experience that...

You want to know why we signed X number of UDFAs? Hmm, I think I got a solid answer for you... we had X positions open with very little money to bring in any remaining veteran free agents. IT IS THAT SIMPLE.

Us signing UDFAs gives us NO insight whatsoever as to what the current group of guys are considered. Now, if we had signed 10 NTs post draft, that might suggest that we were still looking for a NT. And such is the case with us signing numerous CBs and TEs post draft. Our depth is limited in those areas, and the coaches are looking to find quality depth and maybe even a starter.

In any case, the only thing that general would indicate whether a player needs to worry about losing their job would be early draft picks. #1 overall QB, that says to me that Stanton clearly isn't considered our starter (Obvious, I know). A 2nd round pick at TE? That says to me that Brody Eldridge won't be expected to be our primary TE. A 3rd round pick at TE? That says to me that, based on the prior pick, we are valuing the TE position, and intend to use more 2 TE sets. A late 3rd on WR, that says to me that they are looking to add quality depth at WR, and hopefully get a guy that can contribute this season, perhaps later in the year.

But UDFAs? You gotta be kidding me. They pick up guys that they hope can compete for a roster spot, that they hope fit the system, that they hope... These players are not indicative of any problem other than depth on the roster. We've acquired TEs, CBs, safeties, etc. All of those positions we are lacking quality depth. None of them are expected better than what we have, but some could be. Some have a better chance of sticking due to lack of quality players in their positions. But to me, some of the guys we have are quality depth that simply are being forced to start before they're ready. They are developmental projects that get pulled in too soon due to health issues with other players. It is akin to taking your car in for an oil change, and driving off after the oil has been drained, but not replaced.

Eh, now I am just ranting.

I made a post yesterday about why perhaps we are loading up on one or two certain positions (positions that have depth such as Tight End and Tackle already) perhaps we are loading up their so when we have cut down to the final 53 men we wont have to cut down at other positions that we are less sure about such as Corner and Linebacker

[funktacious2]

Honestly, that's the "trick" with nearly any 2 TE set. TEs are almost always better run blockers than WRs. Most TEs are lesser receivers than wideouts, but that is not to say they are not capable. In any case, Brody very well can stick if he is healthy. But given investments in 2nd and 3rd selections, and the plethora of FAs also brought in at the position, Brody's odds of sticking around are not as good as a Fleener or Allen who have oodles of potential with little shown on an NFL field, vs. Brody who has shown little in his time in the league. Not to say he is bad, but he hasn't stood out, which isn't necessarily a good thing. A lot of that is due to injury, but he could change that this year. I just don't see him as anything more than the #3 given the attention they put at the TE position in the draft.

Well that's what I mean. I don't see him as anything better than a number 3 either because that's where he fits. He's a guy to bring in to mix things up and to throw good blocks. Given the new tight ends sets, our number 3 guy will likely be getting more reps. Maybe one of these FAs rise to the occasion, but for right now I feel Eldridge has the edge.

[JoKeR]

Eldridge, Johnson, Snow? No. Brody is our blocking TE, he has good potential. Johnson will be needed for depth. Snow is a experienced long snapper.

[FightLikeSin]

78 players currently on the Colts roster

this in no way reflects any facts of what will happen just my opinion of the Cuts that will be made

1-Ollie Ogbu-Defensive Tackle

2-Justin Snow-Tight End/Long Snapper

3-Brandon Pegeuse-Defensive End

4-Brandon King-Corner

5-James Aiono-Defensive End

6-Lutrus Scott-Linebacker

7-Matt Overten-Linebacker

8-Brody Eldridge-Tight End

9-Quan Cosby.Wide Receiver

10-Brian Stahovich-Punter

11-Jeff Linkenbach-Tackle

12-Jake Kirkpatrick-Center

13-Terrance Johnson-Corner

14-Gronkowski-Fullback

15-Jason Foster-Tackle

16-Chris Galippo-Linebacker

17-Deji Karim-Running Back

18-Mike Tepper-Tackle

19-Antonio Johnson-Defensive Tackle

20-Ricardo Matthews-Defensive Tackle

21-Kevin Eagan-Linebacker

22-Jeremy Ross-Wide Receiver

23-Steven Baker-Tackle

24-Trevor Vittatoe-Quarterback

25-Mario Addison

Thoughts?

I don't think Mario Addison, Mookie Johnson or Deji Karim get cut. The rest are def possible

[Gavin]

I don't think Mario Addison, Mookie Johnson or Deji Karim get cut. The rest are def possible

why not?

[FightLikeSin]

why not?

Well I guess it's certainly possible. Manning got cut...

Too shallow in their respective positions for me to let any of those guys go personally. Addison and Johnson will be good backups for the D-line. Karim brings too much value to the return game to let go. He was a great backup for MJD, though obviously not nearly as good, he was at least serviceable when he stepped in.

[wordofmouth]

Snow is going to get the long snapping record as a Colt. So in a way we are going to have the best long snapper to ever play in the NFL. Although dumping greats isn't a problem these days. :heh:

Peyton? I'm OK with losing him, but Snow?! That would be a travesty.

[Gavin]

Well I guess it's certainly possible. Manning got cut...

Too shallow in their respective positions for me to let any of those guys go personally. Addison and Johnson will be good backups for the D-line. Karim brings too much value to the return game to let go. He was a great backup for MJD, though obviously not nearly as good, he was at least serviceable when he stepped in.

we have 8 defensive tackles although I expect at least 2-3 of those to be defensive ends (Moala, Nevis, maybe Ricardo Matthews)

[FightLikeSin]

we have 8 defensive tackles although I expect at lest 2-3 of those to be defensive ends (Moala, Nevis, maybe Ricardo Matthews)

yeah, looking at the photos from the OTA's, they have Moala, Johnson, Matthews and Addison lining up at DE in various shots. I think they use Nevis in the 4-3 scheme next to Chapman or McKinney.

[mvbighead]

Well that's what I mean. I don't see him as anything better than a number 3 either because that's where he fits. He's a guy to bring in to mix things up and to throw good blocks. Given the new tight ends sets, our number 3 guy will likely be getting more reps. Maybe one of these FAs rise to the occasion, but for right now I feel Eldridge has the edge.

The only problem I have with this is durability and lack of showing anything special the past two years. To me, I'd much rather see the spot go to a young basketball player type of guy who hasn't had a chance on the field yet. We have Brody, and not only is he simply average, but he is not exactly durable given the limited reps he gets. You'd expect a guy who sees 5 snaps a game to last all season, but he simply doesn't.

To me, if we could find a physical guy who fits the mold of a TE, with limited experience, but above average physical skills, and mold him into what we want, we'd be better off. Especially if that guy remains healthy throughout the season.

I have nothing against Brody, just players with marginal talent who seem to lack durability. If you have Bob Sanders talent, thats one thing, but when you're marginal, the team would be far better off with someone who is consistently available.

[Gavin]

yeah, looking at the photos from the OTA's, they have Moala, Johnson, Matthews and Addison lining up at DE in various shots. I think they use Nevis in the 4-3 scheme next to Chapman or McKinney.

Id like to see what Chigbo can do in the 4-3 next to Chapman to

[chad72]

Id like to see what Chigbo can do in the 4-3 next to Chapman to

Both play the same kind of NT role, there would be no pass rush or disruption. Yes, you may have 2 big guys you cannot run past, but they will never get to you if you make them come to you. Chigbo and Chapman have to be accompanied with a Nevis at UT to provide pass rush ability, IMO. Maybe in a goal line formation for short yardage, I can definitely see that, in a 5 man front. Otherwise, Chigbo and Chapman should be rotated at the NT spot, IMO.

[HtownColt]

gotta think about your special teams groups as well when it comes to cuts

[mvbighead]

Both play the same kind of NT role, there would be no pass rush or disruption. Yes, you may have 2 big guys you cannot run past, but they will never get to you if you make them come to you. Chigbo and Chapman have to be accompanied with a Nevis at UT to provide pass rush ability, IMO. Maybe in a goal line formation for short yardage, I can definitely see that, in a 5 man front. Otherwise, Chigbo and Chapman should be rotated at the NT spot, IMO.

Honestly, this seems like more of a Cover 2 mentality than anything, IMO. To me, if you put Haloti Ngata next to Casey Hampton (in his prime), I don't care that either one can't penetrate the pocket, each one will aid in collapsing the pocket. If it takes the offense's middle front three to isolate the front two of that line, you leave gaping holes to the sides as your tackles kick out to stop the ends.

I've heard this mentality a lot in the past, but I just think you have different types of players. Honestly, if you had 4 Haloti Ngata's across the front four of your defense, you'd still have a really, really scary defense. Are they fast? Not necessarily, but they will do plenty to free up the other 7 to make plays. Just my opinion, but I honestly think the whole NT/UT concept gets beat to death from the Colts past.