ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum   ColtFreaks.com Home Page

Go Back   ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum > Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum > Indianapolis Colts Discussion
Register FAQ Community Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 03-13-2017, 09:27 PM
FatDT's Avatar
FatDT FatDT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 4,252
Thanks: 314
Thanked 1,099 Times in 497 Posts
Default

Not a fan. It'll need to be cheap.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-13-2017, 09:41 PM
sherck's Avatar
sherck sherck is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 3,751
Thanks: 1,793
Thanked 1,195 Times in 527 Posts
Default

Interesting enough, he was PFFs top remaining 4-3 DE or 3-4 DE under 31 years old. They had him as a 77.3 run defender and a 68.3 overall. Called him a "solid rotational run defender."

NFL.com had him as the #101 free agent in their Top 101 Free Agents list.

Don't think that means anything but I found it interesting.

Cheers,

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
__________________
==============
Thad
The future is so bright; I gotta triple up!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-14-2017, 12:01 AM
CanuckColt CanuckColt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Sault Ste Marie, Canada
Posts: 283
Thanks: 128
Thanked 77 Times in 49 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dam8610 View Post
Hopefully someone can teach him how to play football. I'm not holding my breath, though.
Every GM needs a project...this has to be better than Grigson's Danny Dongo experiment.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-14-2017, 12:48 AM
Dam8610 Dam8610 is offline
Post whore
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 6,024
Thanks: 102
Thanked 1,613 Times in 938 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CanuckColt View Post
Every GM needs a project...this has to be better than Grigson's Danny Dongo experiment.
Mingo?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by omahacolt View Post
i was wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-14-2017, 07:27 AM
Maniac's Avatar
Maniac Maniac is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Home
Posts: 1,772
Thanks: 782
Thanked 1,304 Times in 712 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sherck View Post

NFL.com had him as the #101 free agent in their Top 101 Free Agents list.
Well that's great, the Mr. Irrelevant of free agency.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Maniac For This Useful Post:
natagu23 (03-14-2017), smitty46953 (03-14-2017)
  #16  
Old 03-14-2017, 09:13 AM
Wyatt's Avatar
Wyatt Wyatt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Goshen, IN
Posts: 591
Thanks: 85
Thanked 160 Times in 76 Posts
Default

Margus Hunt:

Margus Hunt, a project player who never met the expectations set for him when he was drafted in the second round of the 2013 NFL Draft. He’s set to become a free agent on Thursday and there’s been no buzz regarding him returning to Cincinnati.
Selected by the Bengals in the second round of the 2013 NFL Draft, the thought was that his 6’8”, 277-pound frame combined with outstanding athleticism was worth taking a risk on the fact that he was already 25 and had never played American football until his freshman year at SMU, 2009. Unfortunately, those qualities haven’t helped him produce at the NFL level. In three seasons, he has never started a game and has only recorded seven tackles, one and a half sacks, and a pass deflection.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-14-2017, 09:25 AM
Wyatt's Avatar
Wyatt Wyatt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Goshen, IN
Posts: 591
Thanks: 85
Thanked 160 Times in 76 Posts
Default

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...outing-combine

"There will be plenty of debate about which player improved his draft stock most at this week's NFL Scouting Combine. That comes down to what teams saw, not us, but put SMU defensive end Margus Hunt in the conversation.

NFL.com's Daniel Jeremiah wrote Tuesday that Hunt "was the talk of the town" after his impressive workout this week in Indianapolis. Hunt boasts size -- 6-foot-8 and 277 pounds -- and his bench-press showing (38 reps at 225 pounds) turned heads.


"He then proceeded to wow scouts by running a 4.60-second (40-yard dash) and posting a 38-inch vertical jump," Jeremiah wrote. "Hunt is very raw on tape, but his size and upside will likely force him into the bottom of the second round."

In a deep draft at defensive line, that would mark a steady rise for Hunt, who grew up in Estonia before coming to SMU in 2007. He figures as an anchor from both the 3-tech and 5-tech spots and his stock might rise due to that versatility. Hunt has drawn comparisons to Arizona Cardinals defensive end Calais Campbell, and if he lives up to it, a second-round grade in the 2013 NFL Draft isn't too high for this player."
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-14-2017, 09:36 AM
sherck's Avatar
sherck sherck is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 3,751
Thanks: 1,793
Thanked 1,195 Times in 527 Posts
Default

Alas, athletic ability never a football player made.

2016 was Hunt's most active/best year. He played more plays and made more tackles in 2016 than his first three year combined.

Perhaps he is finally on an uphill swing having now gotten a few more years of football experience which he was sorely lacking coming out of college.

And, if not, I cannot imagine that he will make terribly much (south of $2m a year I would guess) so cutting him will not hurt at all.

Really, a low risk move for, perhaps, medium return. He will never be a world beater.

The question is "can he push T.Y. McGill down the depth charts" since I think our DE 5-tech depth chart is: Anderson, Jones, Langford and Ridgeway as starters and primary depth. McGill and Hunt are working towards DE #5.

Cheers,
__________________
==============
Thad
The future is so bright; I gotta triple up!
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-14-2017, 09:59 AM
omahacolt's Avatar
omahacolt omahacolt is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,231
Thanks: 1,452
Thanked 4,284 Times in 1,751 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sherck View Post
Alas, athletic ability never a football player made.

2016 was Hunt's most active/best year. He played more plays and made more tackles in 2016 than his first three year combined.

Perhaps he is finally on an uphill swing having now gotten a few more years of football experience which he was sorely lacking coming out of college.

And, if not, I cannot imagine that he will make terribly much (south of $2m a year I would guess) so cutting him will not hurt at all.

Really, a low risk move for, perhaps, medium return. He will never be a world beater.

The question is "can he push T.Y. McGill down the depth charts" since I think our DE 5-tech depth chart is: Anderson, Jones, Langford and Ridgeway as starters and primary depth. McGill and Hunt are working towards DE #5.

Cheers,
Not exactly. We don't use (2) 5 techs. Usually it is a de and a dt. So where will he fit. Probably de while McGill is usually a dt or nt
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-14-2017, 10:22 AM
sherck's Avatar
sherck sherck is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 3,751
Thanks: 1,793
Thanked 1,195 Times in 527 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by omahacolt View Post
Not exactly. We don't use (2) 5 techs. Usually it is a de and a dt. So where will he fit. Probably de while McGill is usually a dt or nt
Really?

Because while a lot of depth chart and football sites want to put DT or DE next to our players, the reality of what I see is that both sides of our defense (strong side and weak side) are doing a 5-tech DE job.

Our base alignment is that our NT is either in the 0-tech (head up on OC) or the 1-tech (on one of the OC shoulders, usually the strong side one). His job is to try and fill the A gap (between OC and OG) on either side depending on where he feels the run develop.

Our DEs typically almost always in the 5-tech which is shading the inside shoulder of the OT in order to control the B gap (between OG and OT) and the C gap (outside of OT). They invite a double team from the OT and OG if possible so that the ILB on that side is freed up to attack the runner.

On a strong side run, if the NT is occupying the OC and weak side OG and the DE is occupying the strong side OG and OT, and the OLB[EDGE] is contending with the TE, then the strong side ILB is free to attack the runner. The weak side DE is 1v1 with the weak side OT and is hopefully holding both gaps in order to prevent backside cuts.

On a weak side run, the NT is, again, hoping to occupy the OC and strong side OG, the weak side DE occupying the weak side OG and weak side OT and both the weak side ILB and OLB[RUSH] are free to make the tackle with the strong side DE 1v1 on the strong side OT or double teamed by the strong side OT and TE.

If we played a "DE" and "DT" structure, the DE would be the 5-tech and the DT would be more of a "3-tech" which is a term that is typically used on a one-gap 'shooting" type defensive linemen rather than a two gap "stuffer" (our Under Tackle concept from when we played under Dungy). Our backside DE is not really playing a shooting style because I see them still holding a two gap responsibility against cutback.

Please tell me where I am wrong but I see our DE playing 2 gap from the 5-tech almost all the time; strong side or weak side.

Cheers,
__________________
==============
Thad
The future is so bright; I gotta triple up!

Last edited by sherck; 03-14-2017 at 10:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
ColtFreaks.com is in no way affiliated with the Indianapolis Colts, the NFL, or any of their subsidiaries.