Curious

by Scooty4422 on Oct 20, 2008 2:06 AM EDT Comment 9 comments

Now I know this has nothing to do with this week, since the whole team played bad, but I am curious though, how much money we pay our offense vs. what we pay our defense. I know Peyton, Marvin, and Reggie probably get hefty sums, but we're not including other playmakers like Dallas, Joseph, or even Gonzalez. Where is on D that I know of only Freeney and Sanders has big money numbers. Kinda weird how we expect the best quality of both, but are not paying for it. I don't know, might be wrong, but was curious, if anyone knows the details please comment.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Stampede Blue's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Stampede Blue's writers or editors.

0 recs | Comment 9 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

There are Big Players and contracts, people just underrate them

For example, players like Gary Brackett, Marlin Jackson, Kelvin Hayden, Robert Mathis, Antione Bethea all big time players for our defense. They only work if the right parts are in place. Bethea is only good if Sanders is helping him out in coverage or run support. Jackson is only good if Hayden is covering the other corner otherwise they attack Tim Jennings all day long. Mathis and Brackett speak for themselves, They both play out standing dispite losing key players. Tony Dungy uses a theory called the “Next Man Up” theory. For any starter that goes down, The replacement is expected to fill their shoes and contribute as much to the team as possible.

by colts9318rock on Oct 20, 2008 8:30 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

re. next man up!

I think Tim Jennings blew the next man up theory out of the water on Sunday! God, I miss Hayden, damn shitty Houston surface!!!

by scottishcoltsfan on Oct 20, 2008 9:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Tim Jennings is the Colts Defensive whipping boy like the offenses Charlie Johnson

I’M NOT DEFENDING JENNINGS, HE SUCKS AND DESERVES TO BE RAGGED ON!

by colts9318rock on Oct 20, 2008 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mathis and Brock combined account for 11.5 mil this season year and Brackett is around 2.75. Next season those 3 will cost more and dwight’s cap hit goes up to 11 mil.

The defense is clearly less than the offense but it doesn’t excuse their shit play this year because they did well last year.

It is time that fans quit (and I’m not really saying you are) trying to make excuses for these guys. They aren’t 5 yr old children who don’t know any better. They are professional football players who are grown men and are being paid high 6 figures or 7 figures to play the game and again, they did well last year (and overall as a team from 03 on) so it isn’t like they don’t have the ability.

by loregnum on Oct 20, 2008 9:35 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

All I meant

What I meant to point out is expectations really. If I pay a shit load of money for something I instantly expect more out of it than I do for things I pay less for. The play makers we have on offense would be successful on any team, and would be heavily compensated to play there. However I feel that Freeney, Mathis, and Sanders are the only players that would be wanted by other teams. That’s twice as many on offense, that are proven play makers, and only 3 on D. Even our players that did play well for us and went on to other Defenses, how good, or what have they done since? For instance, Gary Brackett is no Derrick Brooks, and Sanders has a few years before he reaches John Lynch status. Now Mathis and Freeney are awesome, but where is our equal to Warren Sapp? As well as there are no names at the position of CB for the Colts, meaning no equal to Ronde Barber. Yet we’re expecting the same results just on Dungy’s name alone. As well this team being Defense heavy only won one championship too, just like our Offense heavy Colts. Only when we had our best mix of the both have we won, why not have an equal amount of talent on both sides of the ball. I’m not saying this defense isn’t good, I watched last season, I’m saying the offense is better, like greatly, and was built to be better. I just want to advocate the best talented team overall, not one sided on either side of the ball.

by Scooty4422 on Oct 20, 2008 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Which teams do you know of that are extremely good on both sides of the ball? Most are lopsided. The teams that are even between offense and defense have mediocre offenses and defenses that are always in the middle of the pack during the season.

by TouchdownMonkey on Oct 20, 2008 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well

N.E. when they won there championships for one. I think the Steelers are good on both sides of the ball right now. The Giants when they won they’re championship last year, and when they’ve done well this year. I’m not saying anything about being even, I’m saying we need equal amounts of playmakers on both sides of the ball, and I rate playmakers by players that could play anywhere on any team, and we’re really lopsided. What I’m saying is use the logic we already use for the Defense for the whole team, and no I’m not saying be finesse. We need good talent and role players around them, but everywhere, to make the best team. Or we could be satisfied with having a loaded offense, all the time, and win a super bowl during the years or streaks that our Defense gets on a roll.

by Scooty4422 on Oct 20, 2008 4:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Colts do have playmakers on defense. But they look like crap when you can’t rush the passer. Night now without having a nose tackle that requires blocking we saw both Freeney and Mathis double teamed. You give the quarterback an easy time and he’s going to get people open. The key of the defense is the pass rush. With a tackle right now that required two linemen to keep him out of the backfield Freeney or Mathis would be forcing the quarter back to throw two seconds sooner—which makes the DBs look a lot better. It’s pure bad luck that the three good tackles the Colts have had in the last 2 years are gone. Linebacker sized defensive tackles don’t stand a chance against the hogs.

Also, not having a punisher at safety is hurting things to. Running backs that are looking for the blowup hit don’t do as well. Melvin Bullet isn’t Bob Sanders. And I think the leadership in the DB group is poor without Bob Sanders as well. Bob has a great nose for the ball. He’s going to get his guys in the right spot and he’s going to be in on every play.

The Colts need a good DT most of all. They stocked up on them even.

by wcwills on Oct 20, 2008 7:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

This is what I’m trying to say in comparison of Dungy’s two teams, he had playmakers at DT, I wish we could just have one DT that came in and played that position to the level Mathis and Freeney, play DE and the way Sanders plays safety, and we would be able to see how good the D is, but as for now, the only true players we have on D is Sanders, Freeney, and Mathis. Brackett is good, but I don’t think he’s on they’re level atleast yet. All of these positions need a DT, to hold things together, everyone even the best on our D would benefit. Which means soon in the future our next big contract should be going to a quality DT, and anchor him in for awhile.

by Scooty4422 on Oct 21, 2008 2:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs