Freeney??

by modern_day_warrior on Feb 10, 2012 8:01 AM EST

Where does he fit in?? Yesterday Keith Bullock was on radio telling people that Dwight doesn't want to be a "stand up" guy. I don't know how good of friends Bullock is with Freeney but it sure sounded like they had spoke. Maybe Freeney was going on assumptions when he spoke to Bullock....maybe. I'll tell you this though, if I were a new coach coming to the Colts and my specialty was defensive coordinator, one of the first people I would talk to would be Freeney!

So, where does this leave Freeney in this whole "new era"? Freeney is a true 4-3 DE. He's never, to my knowledge, played LB. He is not big enough to play the DE position in a 3-4 and if you did play him at DE in a 3-4 you lose everything Freeney is about, speed and finesse off the edge.

I remember the defense before Freeney came along. It wasn't pretty. Probably worse than what we saw last year. We had no one that could rush the passer. Chad Bratzke was the closest thing we had to anyone who could put heat on the passer and he will never be compared to Freeney or Mathis in terms of production.

The new guys will have to get creative with Freeney. I think he still has a few years of production left and he's someone that you just have to keep.

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.

Tweet Comment 18 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I guess I'm in the minority...

But I think it makes sense to deal Freeney if you can get good value in a trade. If we really are in full-on rebuild mode, it doesn’t make sense to pay Freeney that mega-salary to do things that in all probability he’s not really cut out to do. We can free up quite a bit of cap-space and hopefully get a couple of solid pieces for the new D. In fact, I think it makes more sense than losing Peyton (assuming Peyton is healthy). Give Freeney a chance to go somewhere else and cement his legacy as one of the greatest (if not the greatest) pass-rushing DEs to ever play.

Mathis, however, we need to keep. He is younger, probably less expensive, and is very well built to play in a hybrid system ala Scruggs at Baltimore.

by Wippersnapper on Feb 10, 2012 9:48 AM EST reply actions

Trade

I would trade him for draft picks and use the money saved to resign Mathis. He’s the guy to keep for this style of defense. Freeney doesn’t want to be a part of a rebuilding project in the last three or four years of his career, more so than playing the 3-4. I don’t think his body type fits the system well, he’s to stiff to play in coverage if needed. Just my opinion.

by andmpete2 on Feb 10, 2012 9:49 AM EST reply actions

agreed.

trade freeney for picks, he is older. He is spectacular against the pass but a liability against the run, how many times have we seen him spin past a running back. Too much money for one player.

by coltsgolfbeer on Feb 10, 2012 10:06 AM EST up reply actions

Do you think a team is willing?

I don’t know what Freeney’s contract looks like. I’m sure he’s in the top 10% of DE’s for pay so I wonder if there is a market for him? I realize there are lots of teams that want his talent but are there teams out there who are willing to take on his salary?

by modern_day_warrior on Feb 10, 2012 10:27 AM EST reply actions

You want

Freeney chasing your quarterback? The Titans will pick him up and he’ll dedicate the rest of his career to destroying Luck.

I can’t see Freeney being traded. He’s only 1/2-way through his career, probably. They’ll build the D around him, I think. That’s what good coaches do—build a plan around your strengths.

by wcwills on Feb 10, 2012 11:27 AM EST reply actions

No he won't.

He’s well past halfway, he has one year left at an insane salary, and we don’t know if he can be built around or will be a good fit in the new scheme. He has a history of foot and ankle injuries and is starting to slow down gradually. So you have no reason to retain him if it’s only for one year, but no evidence that he’s worth paying for more than that one year. The only reasonable option is to trade him for whatever you can get. Perhaps that one year of him and the right to exclusive negotiations for an extension is worth a 2nd to a team that runs a 4-3 with a wide 9 rusher like the Eagles. But that’s asking a lot since obviously the Colts’ intentions will be transparent. More than likely he just ends up cut.

by willyduer on Feb 10, 2012 5:13 PM EST up reply actions

Scheme is overblown

DEs, who can not drop in coverage, simply do not drop in coverage in a 3-4 as OLBs

If Freeney can’t do anything else, but rush the passer, he will do that regardless of the scheme. What the stance is should not be an issue for Freeney, after all, he gets paid plenty. For this money, he should do anything asked of him. And BTW, this awful Tampa-2 limited his sack numbers, if he is onboard with the future, he can be a 15-20 sack guy for a couple years.

by Ty46 on Feb 10, 2012 11:29 AM EST reply actions

Mathis, Hughes and Freeney...

seem to be no different in size than James Harrison of the Steelers…

by derrickhatchet on Feb 10, 2012 12:15 PM EST reply actions

Except

Freeney is 28# heavier than Harrison at the same height, and I don’t think that 28# is beer and junkfood.

Freeney is a defensive end. He’s not small—just 3" shorter than average at the position. I think they’ll keep him there, no question. Mathis is the guy they will use to rush standing up, I’d guess. Rushing with a hand down is totally different than rushing standing up. You use your hands to keep the tackles hands off of you, keep him off balance, use your body to leverage him, work on him a few plays to set him up for a spin or bullrush. With 14 years college/pro playing DE, why would you try to move a guy into a position he doesn’t play? If you can get a pass rush with 3 guys, that frees up a linebacker. You put a bad-ass DT in the middle, spread the ends out and you either have to blatantly double the end, which frees up a linebacker to rush, or you get your QB sacked by Freeney. With 4 linebackers, I don’t see ball carriers running past a spin move. No center can handle a DT by himself so a guard from one side is going to have to stay in. A wide-set 3 man line could be perfect for Freeney. He’s the only elite player on the Defense.

Was Bullock speaking for Freeney or was Bullock guessing? I don’t think Freeney said anything about it at all.

by wcwills on Feb 10, 2012 1:40 PM EST up reply actions

Don't get me wrong...

For many years, Freeney was my favorite Colt on the other side of the ball. But at $19 million and reports of his disinterest in standing up as an OLB in a 3-4 scheme, I can’t argue with trading him for draft picks/players that fit this scheme or outright cutting him and using the $$$ saved to sign Mathis, Garcon and possibly Wayne (albeit for a lesser amount/shorter term). Regardless of who’s under center next year, the Colts NEED to get better on defense… whether it be to get Peyton another ring or two, or to give Luck more oppotunities to score via 3-and-outs or turnovers.

by James Busch on Feb 10, 2012 12:32 PM EST reply actions

sounds like he and Dwight have talked

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/playerbreakingnews.asp?sport=NFL&id=1517&line=227666&spln=1

There’s the link

by modern_day_warrior on Feb 10, 2012 3:04 PM EST reply actions

I don't think so

Bullock is probably right, but he doesn’t say he talked to Freeney and I wouldn’t assume it.

Still, I think it’s true, and I think it’s insane to think of cutting Freeney.

by wcwills on Feb 10, 2012 8:39 PM EST up reply actions

he is friends with freeney

by omahacolt on Feb 10, 2012 8:48 PM EST up reply actions

If that's true

it’s still not Freeney himself declaring he would not play standing up.

You want your own friends and acquaintances walking around telling people what you will and will not do? If you drive Freightliners and your company is switching to Volvos with automatics and you say to a friend, “Man, I don’t want to drive a friggin Volvo with an auto,” you would appreciate your friend posting that on the cork board? You know he’s not a friend because he didn’t keep his mouth shut. Plus, nobody but the player actually speaks for the player. Of course he doesn’t want to learn a new position, but did he say he wouldn’t? He’s a team player and will probably do whatever he’s asked to do. I don’t think they will ask it, though.

by wcwills on Feb 10, 2012 11:43 PM EST up reply actions

i was just clarifying that these guys are friends

not saying you are wrong or right

by omahacolt on Feb 11, 2012 11:35 AM EST up reply actions

doesnt matter

we arent going to a 3-4 this year. it will take time. freeney will be just fine no matter what we do.

by omahacolt on Feb 10, 2012 8:09 PM EST reply actions

Hey, an omahacolt post I agree totally with.

Must be steak night.

by tim55 on Feb 11, 2012 12:32 PM EST up reply actions

I personally think Freeney will play even better next season. For the following reasons:

1) Pagano has many of the players excited, just based on his track record… especially defensively. Our defense will play harder just due to his leadership (I hope).

2) Freeney has long been an afterthought to Manning the last decade… and in many of his interviews, he does express discomfort in the fact that the Colts are taken to be a one man team… what better way to show everyone up by taking command in the new era?

3) He’s still in his prime. He’s smarter than most guards and tackles he faces.

4) We need him. He’ll do it for us ha

by DoItAlone on Feb 13, 2012 9:31 AM EST reply actions