jdoggydogg
Footballguy
TY should do well week 2. He torched the Dolphins last year. Well, they all did 
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
How do you see the T.Y. Hilton/DHB Split working out? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Man of Zen
- Start date
Hoss Style
Footballguy
How are you confused? I said he was targeted long on more than a few plays. Per your stats, he was targeted on 2 long plays. I had heard it was 3, turns out it was 2, but I mentioned right before that that I hadn't watched the game yet, I'd just seen highlights and read about it. You seem to love to pick one sentence and quote it but leave out any context or related qualifiers. You did this before.Hilton had 3 catches for 20 yards on 5 targets. How could he have been targeted on long passes "more than a few times"?
Meanwhile, DHB had 3 catches for 33 yards on 4 targets. How could Hilton have been "a lot more involved" and what makes it seem that he had a "better game"?
Let's look at PFF data:
Hilton:
26 snaps: 21 pass plays and 5 runs
PFF graded his performance at -0.2 as a receiver and -0.1 overall
5 targets:
- 1 target 2 yards behind the LOS, caught for 5 yards
- 1 target 3 yards downfield, caught for 3 yards
- 1 target 11 yards downfield, caught for 12 yards
- 2 targets 20+ yards downfield, neither caught
DHB:
36 snaps: 23 pass plays and 13 runs
PFF graded his performance at +0.2 as a receiver and +0.7 overall
4 targets:
- 1 target 1 yard behind the LOS, caught for 8 yards
- 1 target 6 yards downfield, caught for 9 yards
- 1 target 14 yards downfield, caught for 16 yards
- 1 targets 20+ yards downfield, dropped
DHB played more, as expected. He was also in on more pass plays, as expected (by some of us). His YPR was better and he had more YAC (14 to 8).
It's obviously a small sample size. We'll see how things evolve going forward.
Now, having just finished watching the game, he didn't have a bad game. Luck did seem to look for Hilton any chance he got when Hilton was in - but there just weren't that many passing plays to go around. I didn't see any bad routes from Hilton or drops. DHB looked good, but for some reason he didn't look as quick as I thought he used to. Maybe he was gassed from blocking so much (or maybe my memory is shot). Not sure. I thought Wayne might be a step slower this year but damned if he doesn't still look great.
Overall, the Colts looked a bit rusty, as is to be expected Week 1. It's obvious that Luck wants to hit Hilton when he's in, but it's also obvious that the coaching staff had a plan to slow the game down and run the ball. It'll be interesting to see if this was a Week 1 deal or if it'll carry into next week.
Either way, they will probably throw more in the future, and when they do I think Hilton will get his big plays. Unless he gets in the starting lineup at some point, though, it's not going to be as many as people thought. I made it a point to watch DHB block and he did seem pretty physical. I don't think he's coming out anytime soon as long as he doesn't flop in the passing game.
Last edited by a moderator:
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
I'm interested to hear from Hilton owners this week.
He killed Miami last year, and I am wondering who you're benching to start Hilton.
He killed Miami last year, and I am wondering who you're benching to start Hilton.
We Tigers
Footballguy
I'll be starting Daryl Richardson over him in my flex, and Dez and Jordy at WR. .5 PPR. Good matchup, but I'm not thrilled about starting him yet.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tau837
Footballguy
Quoting everything so as not to be accused of taking things out of context.How are you confused? I said he was targeted long on more than a few plays. Per your stats, he was targeted on 2 long plays. I had heard it was 3, turns out it was 2, but I mentioned right before that that I hadn't watched the game yet, I'd just seen highlights and read about it. You seem to love to pick one sentence and quote it but leave out any context or related qualifiers. You did this before.Hilton had 3 catches for 20 yards on 5 targets. How could he have been targeted on long passes "more than a few times"?
Meanwhile, DHB had 3 catches for 33 yards on 4 targets. How could Hilton have been "a lot more involved" and what makes it seem that he had a "better game"?
Let's look at PFF data:
Hilton:
26 snaps: 21 pass plays and 5 runs
PFF graded his performance at -0.2 as a receiver and -0.1 overall
5 targets:
- 1 target 2 yards behind the LOS, caught for 5 yards
- 1 target 3 yards downfield, caught for 3 yards
- 1 target 11 yards downfield, caught for 12 yards
- 2 targets 20+ yards downfield, neither caught
DHB:
36 snaps: 23 pass plays and 13 runs
PFF graded his performance at +0.2 as a receiver and +0.7 overall
4 targets:
- 1 target 1 yard behind the LOS, caught for 8 yards
- 1 target 6 yards downfield, caught for 9 yards
- 1 target 14 yards downfield, caught for 16 yards
- 1 targets 20+ yards downfield, dropped
DHB played more, as expected. He was also in on more pass plays, as expected (by some of us). His YPR was better and he had more YAC (14 to 8).
It's obviously a small sample size. We'll see how things evolve going forward.
Now, having just finished watching the game, he didn't have a bad game. Luck did seem to look for Hilton any chance he got when Hilton was in - but there just weren't that many passing plays to go around. I didn't see any bad routes from Hilton or drops. DHB looked good, but for some reason he didn't look as quick as I thought he used to. Maybe he was gassed from blocking so much (or maybe my memory is shot). Not sure. I thought Wayne might be a step slower this year but damned if he doesn't still look great.
Overall, the Colts looked a bit rusty, as is to be expected Week 1. It's obvious that Luck wants to hit Hilton when he's in, but it's also obvious that the coaching staff had a plan to slow the game down and run the ball. It'll be interesting to see if this was a Week 1 deal or if it'll carry into next week.
Either way, they will probably throw more in the future, and when they do I think Hilton will get his big plays. Unless he gets in the starting lineup at some point, though, it's not going to be as many as people thought. I made it a point to watch DHB block and he did seem pretty physical. I don't think he's coming out anytime soon as long as he doesn't flop in the passing game.
To me, a few = 3-4, so more than a few = 4+. It was self-evident from him having 3 catches for 20 yards and only 2 other targets that he could not have been targeted deep more than twice. That's what I found confusing about your comment.
In this post, you say Luck seemed to look for Hilton every chance he got, but Hilton had 5 targets in 21 passing plays. Maybe it's just semantics, but it seems like hyperbole to me. Unless Luck looked to him on a number of other plays but went away from him because he wasn't open...?
I'm deciding between him and Thompkins as my WR3. I love the 14 targets for Thompkins last week. And the red zone looks. Plus, there are reports that Amendola may not play. May flip a coin.
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
Do yourself a favor, don't start Hilton. Start White, you're about to tank your season bro.
Yeah, it's not that complicated. Worst case scenario:Quoting everything so as not to be accused of taking things out of context.How are you confused? I said he was targeted long on more than a few plays. Per your stats, he was targeted on 2 long plays. I had heard it was 3, turns out it was 2, but I mentioned right before that that I hadn't watched the game yet, I'd just seen highlights and read about it. You seem to love to pick one sentence and quote it but leave out any context or related qualifiers. You did this before.Hilton had 3 catches for 20 yards on 5 targets. How could he have been targeted on long passes "more than a few times"?
Meanwhile, DHB had 3 catches for 33 yards on 4 targets. How could Hilton have been "a lot more involved" and what makes it seem that he had a "better game"?
Let's look at PFF data:
Hilton:
26 snaps: 21 pass plays and 5 runs
PFF graded his performance at -0.2 as a receiver and -0.1 overall
5 targets:
- 1 target 2 yards behind the LOS, caught for 5 yards
- 1 target 3 yards downfield, caught for 3 yards
- 1 target 11 yards downfield, caught for 12 yards
- 2 targets 20+ yards downfield, neither caught
DHB:
36 snaps: 23 pass plays and 13 runs
PFF graded his performance at +0.2 as a receiver and +0.7 overall
4 targets:
- 1 target 1 yard behind the LOS, caught for 8 yards
- 1 target 6 yards downfield, caught for 9 yards
- 1 target 14 yards downfield, caught for 16 yards
- 1 targets 20+ yards downfield, dropped
DHB played more, as expected. He was also in on more pass plays, as expected (by some of us). His YPR was better and he had more YAC (14 to 8).
It's obviously a small sample size. We'll see how things evolve going forward.
Now, having just finished watching the game, he didn't have a bad game. Luck did seem to look for Hilton any chance he got when Hilton was in - but there just weren't that many passing plays to go around. I didn't see any bad routes from Hilton or drops. DHB looked good, but for some reason he didn't look as quick as I thought he used to. Maybe he was gassed from blocking so much (or maybe my memory is shot). Not sure. I thought Wayne might be a step slower this year but damned if he doesn't still look great.
Overall, the Colts looked a bit rusty, as is to be expected Week 1. It's obvious that Luck wants to hit Hilton when he's in, but it's also obvious that the coaching staff had a plan to slow the game down and run the ball. It'll be interesting to see if this was a Week 1 deal or if it'll carry into next week.
Either way, they will probably throw more in the future, and when they do I think Hilton will get his big plays. Unless he gets in the starting lineup at some point, though, it's not going to be as many as people thought. I made it a point to watch DHB block and he did seem pretty physical. I don't think he's coming out anytime soon as long as he doesn't flop in the passing game.
To me, a few = 3-4, so more than a few = 4+. It was self-evident from him having 3 catches for 20 yards and only 2 other targets that he could not have been targeted deep more than twice. That's what I found confusing about your comment.
In this post, you say Luck seemed to look for Hilton every chance he got, but Hilton had 5 targets in 21 passing plays. Maybe it's just semantics, but it seems like hyperbole to me. Unless Luck looked to him on a number of other plays but went away from him because he wasn't open...?
1 = one
2 = a couple
3 = a few
4 = more than a few?
audiolover
Footballguy
Allen hurt his hip, but should be good to go in the base 22 formation for the next game.
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
I agree with this completely. Just going to be miffed if White has another mediocre outing.Eminence said:
Man of Zen
Footballguy
There are some circumstances where the NFL won't count a "target" in the same way it gets discussed on a FF board. Sometimes penalties wipe them out, or a deep pass a QB intends to go to a WR is so badly off target that it doesn't turn up in the official stats, etc.
But those things are still good to know for FF valuation purposes.
But those things are still good to know for FF valuation purposes.
Man of Zen
Footballguy
Sorry. That was in response to the discussion above about it being impossible for there to have been so many plays downfield to so and so when the box score only shows so many targets. Lots of balls thrown deep with the intention of hitting specific players don't end up showing up in the box score as targets.
Hoss Style
Footballguy
I clearly stated that I hadn't watched the game yet - another way of saying "I might be missing something", so arguing that I missed something is kinda pointless. I'm still not sure how that'sQuoting everything so as not to be accused of taking things out of context.How are you confused? I said he was targeted long on more than a few plays. Per your stats, he was targeted on 2 long plays. I had heard it was 3, turns out it was 2, but I mentioned right before that that I hadn't watched the game yet, I'd just seen highlights and read about it. You seem to love to pick one sentence and quote it but leave out any context or related qualifiers. You did this before.Hilton had 3 catches for 20 yards on 5 targets. How could he have been targeted on long passes "more than a few times"?
Meanwhile, DHB had 3 catches for 33 yards on 4 targets. How could Hilton have been "a lot more involved" and what makes it seem that he had a "better game"?
Let's look at PFF data:
Hilton:
26 snaps: 21 pass plays and 5 runs
PFF graded his performance at -0.2 as a receiver and -0.1 overall
5 targets:
- 1 target 2 yards behind the LOS, caught for 5 yards
- 1 target 3 yards downfield, caught for 3 yards
- 1 target 11 yards downfield, caught for 12 yards
- 2 targets 20+ yards downfield, neither caught
DHB:
36 snaps: 23 pass plays and 13 runs
PFF graded his performance at +0.2 as a receiver and +0.7 overall
4 targets:
- 1 target 1 yard behind the LOS, caught for 8 yards
- 1 target 6 yards downfield, caught for 9 yards
- 1 target 14 yards downfield, caught for 16 yards
- 1 targets 20+ yards downfield, dropped
DHB played more, as expected. He was also in on more pass plays, as expected (by some of us). His YPR was better and he had more YAC (14 to 8).
It's obviously a small sample size. We'll see how things evolve going forward.
Now, having just finished watching the game, he didn't have a bad game. Luck did seem to look for Hilton any chance he got when Hilton was in - but there just weren't that many passing plays to go around. I didn't see any bad routes from Hilton or drops. DHB looked good, but for some reason he didn't look as quick as I thought he used to. Maybe he was gassed from blocking so much (or maybe my memory is shot). Not sure. I thought Wayne might be a step slower this year but damned if he doesn't still look great.
Overall, the Colts looked a bit rusty, as is to be expected Week 1. It's obvious that Luck wants to hit Hilton when he's in, but it's also obvious that the coaching staff had a plan to slow the game down and run the ball. It'll be interesting to see if this was a Week 1 deal or if it'll carry into next week.
Either way, they will probably throw more in the future, and when they do I think Hilton will get his big plays. Unless he gets in the starting lineup at some point, though, it's not going to be as many as people thought. I made it a point to watch DHB block and he did seem pretty physical. I don't think he's coming out anytime soon as long as he doesn't flop in the passing game.
To me, a few = 3-4, so more than a few = 4+. It was self-evident from him having 3 catches for 20 yards and only 2 other targets that he could not have been targeted deep more than twice. That's what I found confusing about your comment.
In this post, you say Luck seemed to look for Hilton every chance he got, but Hilton had 5 targets in 21 passing plays. Maybe it's just semantics, but it seems like hyperbole to me. Unless Luck looked to him on a number of other plays but went away from him because he wasn't open...?
, but anyway...You are exactly right when you say Luck went away from Hilton when he wasn't open. I targeted Hilton when watching and Luck didn't throw to him when he was covered well, in addition to there not being many passses thrown. This is the way it usually works. Did you watch the game? Just curious. Or are you getting everything you know about the game from the stats? Stats are great, I agree, but watching is infinitely better.
Listen, I'm not here to argue or explain how the game works. I finished watching it and thought I'd add what I saw. Just trying to help with the Hilton owners out there. Luck looked to Hilton when he was in ("looked" doesn't mean "threw the ball"). Hilton wasn't in a lot because there weren't a lot of passing plays. I expect this to go up in future weeks. With DHB looking pretty good in his blocking I'm not sure Hilton takes his spot unless DHB falls flat in the passing game.
This is what I saw. When I watched the game, I mean. I'd hold Hilton and hope the Colts pass more in the future. If they do, Hilton will perform, I believe, but not as much as many of us thought because it seems DHB will hold that starting WR spot for the near future.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hoss Style
Footballguy
Hey, there you are! I think Otis is looking for you.1 = one
2 = a couple
3 = a few
4 = more than a few?
Touchdown There
Footballguy
Otis is ticked you jinxed his chance at a royal flush 2013.Hey, there you are! I think Otis is looking for you.1 = one
2 = a couple
3 = a few
4 = more than a few?
Last edited by a moderator:
Johnny Blood
Footballguy
maybe this is a derail but i think it is relevant at least for clarifying what football jargon means.
I don't really know Pep Hamilton. I kept hearing this would be "west coast offense" and maybe drafted hilton on a misconception.
In what way is this guy West Coast Offense? I looked at his coaching pedigree on wikipedia and it doesn't scream WCO to me. I see Stanford for a couple years, one year in San Fran with TURNER, not McCarthy...
is this the Walsh/Holmgren/Reid WCO or just some college power running/te obsessed variant of WCO I don't know about because I don't watch college football? I watched part of the game and didn't see some core WCO concepts... but I was just watching redzone and clicking around. 23 passing attempts would be low for a wco in 1992! in my 49ers/packers/eagles influenced mind you aren't starting someone at wr2 for their run blocking in the WCO, or even if you are, you aren't skeptical that the wr3 will be productive. maybe the term "west coast offense" just includes totally different systems at this point but i don't get it. walsh and holmgren etc were not saying "yeah let's put the best run blocker in at wr2." they were replacing running plays with horizontal passing plays! Their wr 2-3 would help control the clock by catching high percentage passes not primarily by being stud run blockers.
i'm holding hilton with optimism but maybe didn't do enough research on hamilton given what happened in that game and what people here are saying. like, even if dhb is no threat to hilton because he's only in there for run blocking---that's still a shock to me! get the better pure receiver in there and throw the ball! let the rb live on screen passes and what the line provides. that's how i see the wco, anyway...
I don't really know Pep Hamilton. I kept hearing this would be "west coast offense" and maybe drafted hilton on a misconception.
In what way is this guy West Coast Offense? I looked at his coaching pedigree on wikipedia and it doesn't scream WCO to me. I see Stanford for a couple years, one year in San Fran with TURNER, not McCarthy...
is this the Walsh/Holmgren/Reid WCO or just some college power running/te obsessed variant of WCO I don't know about because I don't watch college football? I watched part of the game and didn't see some core WCO concepts... but I was just watching redzone and clicking around. 23 passing attempts would be low for a wco in 1992! in my 49ers/packers/eagles influenced mind you aren't starting someone at wr2 for their run blocking in the WCO, or even if you are, you aren't skeptical that the wr3 will be productive. maybe the term "west coast offense" just includes totally different systems at this point but i don't get it. walsh and holmgren etc were not saying "yeah let's put the best run blocker in at wr2." they were replacing running plays with horizontal passing plays! Their wr 2-3 would help control the clock by catching high percentage passes not primarily by being stud run blockers.
i'm holding hilton with optimism but maybe didn't do enough research on hamilton given what happened in that game and what people here are saying. like, even if dhb is no threat to hilton because he's only in there for run blocking---that's still a shock to me! get the better pure receiver in there and throw the ball! let the rb live on screen passes and what the line provides. that's how i see the wco, anyway...
Last edited by a moderator:
Tau837
Footballguy
I clearly stated I didn't see the game. AndI clearly stated that I hadn't watched the game yet - another way of saying "I might be missing something", so arguing that I missed something is kinda pointless. I'm still not sure how that'sQuoting everything so as not to be accused of taking things out of context.How are you confused? I said he was targeted long on more than a few plays. Per your stats, he was targeted on 2 long plays. I had heard it was 3, turns out it was 2, but I mentioned right before that that I hadn't watched the game yet, I'd just seen highlights and read about it. You seem to love to pick one sentence and quote it but leave out any context or related qualifiers. You did this before.Hilton had 3 catches for 20 yards on 5 targets. How could he have been targeted on long passes "more than a few times"?
Meanwhile, DHB had 3 catches for 33 yards on 4 targets. How could Hilton have been "a lot more involved" and what makes it seem that he had a "better game"?
Let's look at PFF data:
Hilton:
26 snaps: 21 pass plays and 5 runs
PFF graded his performance at -0.2 as a receiver and -0.1 overall
5 targets:
- 1 target 2 yards behind the LOS, caught for 5 yards
- 1 target 3 yards downfield, caught for 3 yards
- 1 target 11 yards downfield, caught for 12 yards
- 2 targets 20+ yards downfield, neither caught
DHB:
36 snaps: 23 pass plays and 13 runs
PFF graded his performance at +0.2 as a receiver and +0.7 overall
4 targets:
- 1 target 1 yard behind the LOS, caught for 8 yards
- 1 target 6 yards downfield, caught for 9 yards
- 1 target 14 yards downfield, caught for 16 yards
- 1 targets 20+ yards downfield, dropped
DHB played more, as expected. He was also in on more pass plays, as expected (by some of us). His YPR was better and he had more YAC (14 to 8).
It's obviously a small sample size. We'll see how things evolve going forward.
Now, having just finished watching the game, he didn't have a bad game. Luck did seem to look for Hilton any chance he got when Hilton was in - but there just weren't that many passing plays to go around. I didn't see any bad routes from Hilton or drops. DHB looked good, but for some reason he didn't look as quick as I thought he used to. Maybe he was gassed from blocking so much (or maybe my memory is shot). Not sure. I thought Wayne might be a step slower this year but damned if he doesn't still look great.
Overall, the Colts looked a bit rusty, as is to be expected Week 1. It's obvious that Luck wants to hit Hilton when he's in, but it's also obvious that the coaching staff had a plan to slow the game down and run the ball. It'll be interesting to see if this was a Week 1 deal or if it'll carry into next week.
Either way, they will probably throw more in the future, and when they do I think Hilton will get his big plays. Unless he gets in the starting lineup at some point, though, it's not going to be as many as people thought. I made it a point to watch DHB block and he did seem pretty physical. I don't think he's coming out anytime soon as long as he doesn't flop in the passing game.
To me, a few = 3-4, so more than a few = 4+. It was self-evident from him having 3 catches for 20 yards and only 2 other targets that he could not have been targeted deep more than twice. That's what I found confusing about your comment.
In this post, you say Luck seemed to look for Hilton every chance he got, but Hilton had 5 targets in 21 passing plays. Maybe it's just semantics, but it seems like hyperbole to me. Unless Luck looked to him on a number of other plays but went away from him because he wasn't open...?
You are exactly right when you say Luck went away from Hilton when he wasn't open. I targeted Hilton when watching and Luck didn't throw to him when he was covered well, in addition to there not being many passses thrown. This is the way it usually works. Did you watch the game? Just curious. Or are you getting everything you know about the game from the stats? Stats are great, I agree, but watching is infinitely better.
Listen, I'm not here to argue or explain how the game works. I finished watching it and thought I'd add what I saw. Just trying to help with the Hilton owners out there. Luck looked to Hilton when he was in ("looked" doesn't mean "threw the ball"). Hilton wasn't in a lot because there weren't a lot of passing plays. I expect this to go up in future weeks. With DHB looking pretty good in his blocking I'm not sure Hilton takes his spot unless DHB falls flat in the passing game.
This is what I saw. When I watched the game, I mean. I'd hold Hilton and hope the Colts pass more in the future. If they do, Hilton will perform, I believe, but not as much as many of us thought because it seems DHB will hold that starting WR spot for the near future.
at the bolded.
Hoss Style
Footballguy
Glad you're entertained, JWB. If you'd like me to explain anything about the game, like a QB looking at a WR without throwing the ball, PM me. It's quite easy to see with video these days. I'll even try to send you links (if it'll let me, might need a password). I'll gladly respond. Let's keep this thread on track. No need for the "rofl" icons, man. I'm no expert, but I've been around the game a little and just tried to share what I saw from the Colts game. I'd welcome your thoughts on the game as well after seeing it.
It's just an opinion, man. As is yours.
It's just an opinion, man. As is yours.
Tau837
Footballguy
You're right, no need to further derail the thread. Stand by for a PM asking you to explain the game to me.
cstu
Footballguy
ponchsox
Footballguy
Coach Chuck Pagano said the "first thing" coaches talked about after Sunday's game was getting T.Y. Hilton more snaps and touches.
At least the Colts can identify their mistakes. Hilton caught just three passes for 20 yards while playing a mere 45.6 percent of the snaps (26-of-57). It's simply not enough for a difference-maker like Hilton, especially when Darrius Heyward-Bey produced a 3/33/0 line on his 36 snaps. Look for Hilton to play more in two-wide sets and get some plays designed around his explosive skill set against the Dolphins this week. He remains a WR3 with upside.
At least the Colts can identify their mistakes. Hilton caught just three passes for 20 yards while playing a mere 45.6 percent of the snaps (26-of-57). It's simply not enough for a difference-maker like Hilton, especially when Darrius Heyward-Bey produced a 3/33/0 line on his 36 snaps. Look for Hilton to play more in two-wide sets and get some plays designed around his explosive skill set against the Dolphins this week. He remains a WR3 with upside.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
Luck destroyed the Dolphins last year. Look at what Indy receivers did in last year's Miami game:
D. Avery - 5 for 108
T.Y. Hilton - 6 for 102 1TD
R. Wayne - 7 for 78 1TD
D. Allen - 6 for 75
Yeah, I am starting Hilton.
Billy Bats
Footballguy
Man of Zen
Footballguy
I've been as skeptical about Hilton owing to his position as anybody. But I've got to say I'm a little more bullish after reading this. Too late to do me any good, but I'm rooting for you Hilton owners.ponchsox said:
cstu
Footballguy
I re-watched the game on Game Rewind and it was clear that the Colts went with a very conservative game plan. Very little deep and Luck just fed Wayne who appeared to be open on almost every play. DHB looked good and caught every catchable ball - there was a pass on the sideline that was too high.
Hilton got open on a long play that would have been TD had Luck hit him, just off by a couple feet. Only two deep ones to Hilton though and the other was thrown into double coverage. I expect him to get more shots down field against the Dolphins.
Hilton got open on a long play that would have been TD had Luck hit him, just off by a couple feet. Only two deep ones to Hilton though and the other was thrown into double coverage. I expect him to get more shots down field against the Dolphins.
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
Ketamine Dreams
Footballguy
From Rotoworld:
Colts downgrade TE Allen (hip) to doubtful
Colts TE Dwayne Allen (hip) has been downgraded from questionable to doubtful for Sunday's game against the Dolphins.
Allen didn't practice at all this week after suffering the hip injury in last Sunday's win over the Raiders. He's shaping up as a game-time decision who likely won't suit up. Coby Fleener will handle tight end duties, while Dominique Jones could see some time on offense. This could give OC Pep Hamilton a chance to get T.Y. Hilton additional playing time by using more three-wide sets.
I think this does make Hilton a more attractive option this week. Still mulling it over with my other flex options.
Colts downgrade TE Allen (hip) to doubtful
Colts TE Dwayne Allen (hip) has been downgraded from questionable to doubtful for Sunday's game against the Dolphins.
Allen didn't practice at all this week after suffering the hip injury in last Sunday's win over the Raiders. He's shaping up as a game-time decision who likely won't suit up. Coby Fleener will handle tight end duties, while Dominique Jones could see some time on offense. This could give OC Pep Hamilton a chance to get T.Y. Hilton additional playing time by using more three-wide sets.
I think this does make Hilton a more attractive option this week. Still mulling it over with my other flex options.
cstu
Footballguy
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
Was just a matter of time.
Billy Bats
Footballguy
cstu
Footballguy
I told you that he's a must-start every week if you're going to bother having him on your team.
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
Kinda hard to make a blanket statement like that if you don't know someone's roster. He's not Calvin.
need2know
Footballguy
We Tigers
Footballguy
I still think he'll be up and down, but he's a get-him-in-your-lineups-guy for sure whenever Allen is out. This game may also start to push him towards even more snaps.
cstu
Footballguy
True for a loaded team, but I think he's more trouble than he's worth if you can't get him into your lineup every week.
ponchsox
Footballguy
After this game he starts every week for sure, this is what I needed to see. Pagano realized they need to let Luck throw to his best weapon.
donkshow
Footballguy
Similar threads
