Mailbag: Colts edition

<em>Posted by ESPN.com's Paul Kuharsky</em> <p><strong>Chris in Indy writes:</strong> Hey Paul, The Colts have a huge hole at DT and I'm not sure they go that way in round 1. But a guy like <a href="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=4462" target="_new">Dewayne Robertson</a> is available. I know he'd have to come cheap (possibly vet minimum with incentives) but could you see this as a possibility. His upside is still huge I think he could be a beast in what will remain a form of the tampa 2? What-da-ya think?</p> <p><strong>Paul Kuharsky:</strong> Why is his upside huge? He's pretty much busted in two places. I can't dismiss it completely, because they want size and don't have a lot of money, and he's got size and won't get a lot of money.<br /> <br /> But I'd hope they'd do better.</p> <hr /> <p><strong>Jon in Indy writes:</strong> Instead of referring to the Colts as a team that has "underachieved" in the playoffs, I want you to consider instead that the team has actually "overachieved" in being so consistently good in the regular season. The majority of the games the Colts are in, teams are controlling the tempo against them by consistently moving the ball against an undersized defense that is often overpowered. That is shown by the fact that the Colts ranked dead last in the NFL in 3rd down percentage defense in 2006 and 2008, and third worst in that category in 2007. Those are astounding stats for such a dominant winning team! But when they get to the playoffs, they play teams that are superior to them on both sides of the line of scrimmage (the Colts running game has never been above average, even when James was at his peak), and Manning is simply no longer able to make magic against teams like Pittsburgh, San Diego, and New England like he does in the regular season. Go back and look at how badly the Colts get outrushed in their playoff losses with Manning, and that should tell you what the Colts issues are. So I think we need to evaluate whether the Colts are actually "underachieving", and instead acknowlege the fact that what they have accomplished in the regular season during this salary cap era is a tremendous accomplishment.</p> <p><strong>Paul Kuharsky:</strong> The two are not mutually exclusive. But this amounts to you changing the topic.</p> <p>I don't think they've overachieved during the regular season. I think they are a very good team that's played very well, putting together an incredible string of success. To overachieve, you have to play beyond your talent. I believe they are so good because they've done very well assembling talent. But that string should have produced more success in the postseason.</p> <p>All a fan can ask is for its team to play well enough to get to the playoffs and have a chance. Then, when your team consistently does that, you ask for championships -- plural.</p> <hr /> <p><strong>Joe from parts unknown writes:</strong> I Think they colts defense shouldnt rely one four dl all the time...i think they would benefit if they incorporate some 3-4 element into it....i mean both freeney and mathis are great athletes with speed they can play Lb...this way opponents would have to worry about which one is rushing not just double teaming them all the timeon passing situations.</p> <p><strong>Paul Kuharsky:</strong> I respectfully disagree completely. The Colts do what they do and they try to do it very well. If they get ahead and make you throw it, Freeney and Mathis are terrors as rusher. Why put them in a scheme where you'd ask them to cover sometimes, when that's not what they've become Pro Bowlers doing?<br /> <br /> The Colts will be a less predictable team under new defensive coordinator Larry Coyer, it won't be all Tampa 2 and only a handful of rush schemes. But while some teams will occasionally throw a changeup, you are either 4-3 or 3-4. And the Colts are a 4-3.</p> <hr /> <p><strong>Kyle in Indianapolis writes:</strong> Paul, another question please. I've read the Colts are having Matt Sanchez work out. Peyton's successor (I've always liked Sorgi, but he just isn't a starter) could very well be in this draft. Would the Colts accept a QB if he fell into their laps? Is this just some kind of smokescreen? I'm personally very high on <a href="http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=185609" target="_new">Nate Davis</a> (and he's very well thought of locally). Is it possible these Sanchez rumors are to mask a Davis crush because I know they've already seen enough of him to know? Or even another position? Thanks again.<br /> <br /> <strong>Paul Kuharsky:</strong> You pose the two extremes -- they are looking for the heir or it's a smokescreen.<br /> <br /> Why can't they just be evaluating a guy in case he's there for them? I think it will be moot, and he will be long gone.</p>

More...