Bio not provided
@Nate Dunlevy That's why I think we would have a better opinion of the draft if, say, you add a second round DB or even pass rusher to the mix. Even though you can't exactly discount that completely , i think it skews our impression of this draft. A third and fourth rounder spent on Oline is hardly putting a "priority" on the position-- unless, of course, they didn't choose BPA or they deferred to lineman over equivalent DB/ Pass Rusher/RB types.
1 year, 4 months ago on What to Expect 2013: Hough Thornton and Khaled Holmes
@Nate Dunlevy I agree somewhat. I think I would have liked the Thornton pick better if we would have had a 2nd rounder. Not overly logical, but true. I think Thornton becomes a solid-to-good starting RG for 3.5 seasons, Holmes provides a good depth option and takes 10-15 starts over the life of this contract.
This draft will look GREAT if Hughes turns into a top 5 NT (his absolute ceiling) and/or if Boyett is a good successor to Bethea. Since its more likely that they are good rotational/depth options, the biggest problem with this draft is that the most likely path to its being a great draft is through Werner, and the odds right now point to a solid career for him, it appears as though the best this draft could do is "Solid". Which is ok, but not ideal.
Dollars to donuts this draft produces 2 starters and a couple rotational/depth/part-time starter players. That is a good draft.
I don't agree with that ranking... Vontae is probably a top thirty-two Cornerback if he's focused and doesn't have a giant douche for a head coach. Last year, I'll admit that he was pretty bad, but he's young and was good (again, not great) the year before that.
Having said that, a 2nd rounder? A 3rd rounder seems more reasonable, and a fourth rounder would have been more fair. I like the deal (in terms of the player) but not the cost (what will probably be a high second rounder)?
2 years ago on Vontae Davis to the Colts | Articles
@Thecolthardtruth Well, it's circular. On one hand, yes, he should produce tons more content. on the other hand, why would you want to read it if he doesn't have a unique perspective? The solution: FIRE HIM. I really wish they would just hire John Osher. That dude can generate readable content in high volume, and now he's pretty familiar with two separate franchises (albiet on that is much different than when he covered it).
2 years, 3 months ago on The Silliness of Mainstream Media Perspectives Regarding Colts Offensive Questions | June
@Atti46 I don't think he's dumb. I just think that he's a writer of average competence without a unique perspective and distinctive disdain for his readers. The latter quality wore well on Howard Cosell, but not on him.
@coltsauth_todd I would think that Avery would make the roster well before Johnson. Also, I think Fenelus doesn't make it. Other than that, this seems like a reasonable list.
2 years, 3 months ago on First crack at 53 man roster and Practice Squad | Articles
@Kyle Rodriguez I know we have Justice (whom I am more than happy to have starting since his name isn't "Jeff Linkenbach", but I think Reitz would make a good RT. Of course, maybe I am giving him too much credit re: foot speed, but I still would love to see him at least tried there. Of course, just plugging him into LG is probably a better option.
@Nate Dunlevy @Ubeor There are only two ways an O-lineman can affect the game: A really terrible player can be a negative and a really good pulling guard is a major positive. Again, though, if a pulling guard is worth a high end pick for you, you probably need to rebuild because you waisted a first round pick on Tim Tebow.
2 years, 4 months ago on I Was Wrong | April
Wow.... I just spent some time watching Anderson.... A certifiable Tackle... really good feet, explodes off the snap... can slide and mirror even against much smaller and athletic players.... watched him against LSU and South Carolina (and some other tape) and he never seemed to get beat off the outside.... good punch and once he locks on, the player is done... both patient and constantly active... awareness not excellent but good enough... run blocking a weakness, and spends a lot of time on the ground because his hips are a little too stiff which keeps his pad level high... when he is beat, he is beat to the inside; largely because his momentum off the snap (with his size) made his recovery time back toward the middle a step slow.... Looked much more like a mid round pic to my eyes and fired off the line much faster than Glenn ever did.
2 years, 4 months ago on Post Draft Thoughts | Articles
Yes, though certainly not a top-flight corner. He's young and pretty solid when healthy. I would compare him to a younger Sheldon Brown in terms of quality.
2 years, 4 months ago on The secondary needs help | Articles
Just a question for you guys: would anyone be upset if we swung a deal for Mike Jenkins (assuming he is actually available)?
@AJ_ I agree, but unless Anderson is better than most seem to think (not outside the realm of possibility), I do wish we had spent one more pick on an o-lineman at least. Right now, the depth chart is McGlynn, Shipley/Kirkpatrick, Linkenbach, and Anderson (Note: Seth Olsen is not that good.... uh, well, not as good as those above). One of those getting in at a time is OK. Multiples of these guys at the same time will be wretch worthy. I would love if the colts took a flyer on Eric Steinbach.
Also: I know you really want Ijalana to be the starting RT, but that spot is Justice's through next season at least.
@rogcohen I am not sure; all I know is that I always feel like one expecting him to say something intelligent.
@Kyle Rodriguez Well, I understand your concerns a bit. However, I have made it a rule to never care about 7th round picks because the returns are essentially random. Having said that, I liked the Fugger pick after talking to a friend of mine. The Lavon Brazill pick was a good one. One of the picks I questioned-- and still do-- was the Ballard pick, but I see him as a solid third down back in that he's OK in pass pro and has good open field speed and hands. The other pick was Anderson, but like I said: If he makes the roster and sticks for three years and doesn't embarrass himself, then it will be a positive. So I would agree, it wasn't great, but its hard to know anyway.
@AJ_ @UKColt I watched tape of Ta'amu, and while I agree that he was probably over-rated by being the best of a bad lot, he's a big strong guy with good stamina. I think he needs development, and he makes a whole lot more sense for a team that can take the time to develop him than it does for us. He's better than you give him credit for.
@NateWalton "Griff Whalen" sounds more like an inappropriate action than a real name. So yes, I am rooting for him. "Its time for some Griff Whalen.... if you know what I mean."
@Coltsheadben Nope. You ARE the only person in the world who doesn't have a close emotional and intellectual connection to T.Y. Hilton.
On second thought: I more than like Galippo and see some potential as an outside LB in this scheme....
Nate, I would like to disagree: this team is at least a 10 win team because all of the players will be break out players and not I won't listen to "rational" reasons why this roster is still pretty terrible.
On a serious note, that was a proper reaction and a well written article. More writers should be willing to write pieces like this. I hope that you will be issuing another "I was wrong" when the colts actually do win ten games and make the playoffs! (Hey, I can dream... literally, just had a dream in which Joe Lefeged won defensive player of the year).
@UKColt Also, saying that CB's and pass rushers are premium positions probably points to why the colts didn't draft them: they didn't have the premium picks to spend on them. Net year, when the colts will be able to maneuver themselves into a couple more first and second rounders, look for them to load up on those very same positions.
@UKColt I think Dwayne Allen is going to be the type of player that will be much better in a year than he is now. Essentially his upside is somewhere between Marcus Pollard and Brody Eldridge. As a #2, in-line TE, thats pretty good.
Also, an NT is not overblow in this defense. You need someone who can occupy a couple of blockers because while it is a passing league, having a giant in the middle frees up line backers and helps create mismatches on the outside. Also, Saying a player only matters on first and second downs isn't really a good point: Not only do they matter even more on third and short, but first and second downs make up a vast majority of plays.
@rogcohen Schein: "My voice has become a caricature of itself and I am only the second most idiotic sounding guy on this stage. The Colts got a prized QB and some weapons for him to use. Good Draft."
Peter Schrager: " WHY DIDN"T THE COLTS DRAFT FIVE HALL OF FAMERS ON EACH SIDE OF THE BALL Gaaaaa!"
@Nate Dunlevy @EdHay Just like I said: there is coach speak, and there is actual actions. If you remember (and I doubt you do, since, like, you are a productive member of society) I learned my lesson from the Michigan coaching staff last year-- I think its good if teams talk about run defense and running the ball (and even acquiring a few players to that end) as long as they do something quite different. And the connection to the Michigan coaching staff is notable, too, since Michigan's current D-Coordinator, Greg Mattison, was Pagano's predecessor in Baltimore.
2 years, 4 months ago on Truth Telling and The Eternal Optimist | April
I don't know, man: a gymnast? Lets just say that while direct hotness goes to Mrs. Tannehill, there is something to be said for a flexible brainy woman.
2 years, 4 months ago on Luck's girlfriend...in case you needed to know | Articles
If you count Pellerin, I nailed three picks! I might have nailed a fourth if I actually thought Fleener would make it there. Also Pleased with how close I came to nailing the value of Washington and Acho. This is no suprise, but I thought the FO did much better than my mock had them doing....
2 years, 4 months ago on My Fearless Colt's Mock W/ Commentary. | Articles
Yikes, this place is tough. He's a Rich guy giving away a car and you guys simply say "F HIM HE IS A MESS LOL".
2 years, 4 months ago on Colts giving away a car | Articles
I hate to start out the comments like this, especially since this is pretty good other than the problems I am going to mention, but the second pick I don't like a whole lot and there is no way Kendricks or Jenkins are there at those picks.
2 years, 4 months ago on Last Mock Draft: Potential Colts Picks vs. My Picks | Articles
@paulcareyjr @AJ_ The last good TE taken in the first? I think you might be forgetting a certain 24th overall pick out of Iowa... his point was that you shouldn't take one very high, not that you shouldn't take one in the first round AT ALL.
2 years, 4 months ago on 2012 Colts Authority Mock Draft Board 2.0 - FINAL with Player Visits | April
@blessedwhiteeyes @rogcohen And, yes: I murdered the goddess Grammer at her own alter. Thats what I get for correcting misconceptions about grammar after two healthy glasses of Balvenie.
@blessedwhiteeyes @rogcohen RE: grammar
It depends mostly on preference and specific use. The most common usage of "data" is to treat it as a mass noun, such as "furniture." Some really want it to exist ONLY as a plural because it is a neuter plural noun in latin, which isn't always the case; really, people should "datum" if they want to be consistant with this but usually say "data point". The reason is that trying to force latin plurals on english is usually pretty strange when it doesn't just add the final "e/es" sound. It is especially since "data" in latin just means "given" making this dedication to the grammar a bit weird anyway. I would argue that if people are making broad statements like "the data speaks for itself", they are probably using it correctly since they mean the total effect.
The issue is, of course, that this is really an unreal question. Grammarians can argue all they want about what it should be, but the fact is that usage determines what language is. Data is becoming the norm, so that is the more "acceptable" usage.* A pretty good analoge would be the word "bacteria", which really should be "bacterium" in the singular and is almost never used because it is not really the accepted usage any more.
* Speaking of "not understanding" how certain things work, calling a usage you disagree with "improper" grammer is better than calling it "poor", but it is probably better to think of it as "acceptable" or "unacceptable". A small semantic difference, to be sure, but since I have already ridden the hobby horse to long anyway, right?
@UKColt @kc6624 @Jake @TrueBlue87 YES! Obviously, we all hope that the best player available is at a position of need. But if its not, than oh well-- take them anyway (except QB after the first). Remember, Rietz and Justice are FA after the season-- its not like we couldn't use at least a depth guy.
2 years, 5 months ago on Analyzing the Colts Pre-Draft Offensive Line | April
@Goéland @pierrezombie @squirrel @gbearrin If this were the NBA, you would be right. But given the fact that revenue is shared, combined with the fact that ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX paid a whole lot of money for TV rights, they have to have games that include stars, quality teams, and have a high probability for quality games. So thinking that the league should act all high and mighty might be "good" but it would be irresponsible. Not to mention: wouldn't you be angry if the league tried to hide the saints in 1pm games? They are going to have every angle of that story discussed ad nauseum. I for one would rather have leagues not hide their warts-- and that goes for 'roids users in the Baseball HOF.
Also, this: if the Colts look like they could take on a quality team later in the season, they will get flexed to a better time. But slice it any way you want it, many people assume the colts will have the leagues worst roster, and until that opinion changes, they will stay out of the limelight.
2 years, 5 months ago on The fallout: one prime time game | Articles
@coltsauthority Lets be clear here: Glenn and Martin absolutely would start over Olsen, McGlynn, Tepper, and probably Justice (a pretty good battle) and maybe (probably not) Reitz. This roster isn't good enough to turn down the best player available, and if that happens to be O-Line, so be it. Right now, for players who expect to go in that range, I would put Fleener , Wright, Hightower, Brockers, Hill, Perry, Branch, Reyes, Worthy and Janoris Jenkins above Glenn and Martin (pretty similar in terms of value, which moves the hierarchy to "need") and Ruben Randall, Dwayne Allen right below that. I think there is all too good of a chance that that first group is gone.
@squirrel Ok, yes, that was to disagree.
@squirrel Not too dissagree, but come on: this team will probably be pretty awful, and if not then they will get flexed to a later time. This has nothing to do with "following the rules" and expecting it to be so makes YOU the ass clown. Good teams and teams with big names get good games, its as simple as that.
@TrueBlue87 @UKColt @Jake I second that emotion.
@kc6624 I would say no. While I am not opposed to adding a center, there is just too great a need at other positions-- not even just TE and WR, but a G/T prospect, again if the right one falls-- that makes a second round center worth the trouble. I am not convinced that Konz is one or two rounds better than David Molk, for example.
I also wanted to add that you make a great point (even if you got it from Nate) that the O-line is usually only an issue if the QB is immobile and there is an absolute Sieve at one of the positons, especially Tackle. A couple of good players plus a couple of average players and some talented depth is plenty good enough and that's pretty much what we have-- and we will probably add, especially later in the draft.
I will say it over and over: if a bonafide first round o lineman, he almost has to be the pick especially if Wright and Fleener are off the board-- and that is if if Jon Martin or Cordy Glenn are there. Other than that, I like me some Reuben Randall or even a trade down (only about ten spots) to see if Randall is still there, go after one of the other TE's, or even to take Ta'amu if you think he's good enough.
One question: Does anyone think Reitz could be an option at RT?
@Goéland @kasey_junk @rogcohen One more point about DVOA, which is important, and reflects what is easily the most intelligent thing I think that I have heard Bill Polian say, which is no small feat: Statistical analysis in football might be a semi- usefull as a team metric ( I am not sure how much better it is than Pythagorean wins) but football games have so many different situations, formations, coverages, and techniques which don't ever have enough data points from a specific season, to the point that statistics are almost useless as an evaluative tool for players except in the vague, broad generalizations that people like KC Joyner use.
2 years, 5 months ago on Truth Telling and The Eternal Optimist | April
@Goéland @kasey_junk @rogcohen gaaa.... First of, DVOA isn't really as great of a stat as people like to think, though it is still pretty good-- it really doesn't offer as much "context" as people think it does. Secondly, I probably should have used a few other teams like the Steelers, Texans, Falcons, and Lions as examples.
@kasey_junk @rogcohen Here's the issue. There is favoring certain phases of the game, and there is completely ignoring significant needs. Take the Pats, who have let defense slide quite a bit: they still give themselves a chance by having a good player (Wilfork, Mayo, Chung, McCourty) at every level of the D and by making attempts to add free agents. The Colts didn't commit enough resources to the Middle of their defense until it was too late. When they did commit major draft picks to certain positions, they were largely failures or at least weren't much better than average (Ugoh, Moala are prime examples).
The reason why run defense was such an issue in the post season was because it rarely rose to the standard of average. its one thing to think run defense is less important, but to turn it into a major exploitable weakness-- and pass blocking was an issue here to, RE: 3-4 defenses with good OLB's-- is a failure.
@flores_salicis @AJ_ @WilliamTerryClogston Um... It takes about three years to fully turn a roster as bad as this one into a good one. In NFL years, thats a "while.P:
@rogcohen Boom. I don't go as far as you did, but you make a lot of points that are pretty good. I think the biggest thing is that he seems to make the logic misstep that being good at one thing precludes being good at another. Part of that, I think, is that the Colts chose to be good at a few things and were terrible at others-- Passing and rushing offense early, passing and passing defense later. Other teams are able to be good at multiple things.
@gizzardfanny @naptown_ninja Firstly, no, the current roster shape, even with the cuts, says other wise. Secondly, you want a contender in a season from now? Thats being unreasonable. There is a minimum of two more offseasons needed to rebuild this roster.
@gizzardfanny @naptown_ninja When the HOF GM stops acting HOF and leaves a hollow roster too long supported by a HOF QB and you have the opportunity to rebuild around a superstar prospect. You can think that the plan is flawed, but it isn't random.
@heavywoody I think more to your point is this: having a weakness isn't a good thing.
@gizzardfanny @naptown_ninja I guess thats a big part of what I have been trying to say. Just because a team has been a consistant contender doesn't mean they will stay so forever-- especially when since one of these years Manning will begin his decline. Why does hiring new leadership--which seems to have a good pedigree-- mean change for the sake of change?
@gizzardfanny @naptown_ninja Arians and the Steeler offense. The Eagles and their roster construction. Luck being better than anything the Ravens have ever had at QB.
@gizzardfanny @naptown_ninja The mass of evidence compiled by a solid hundred years of Coach speak?