Welcome to the Commanders Brandon Coleman OT ~ TCU

[sinews]

21 hours ago, skinny21 said:

I’d be curious to either watch, or see some grades from any games he played against NFL talent over the last two years.  

It's not exactly what you're looking for, and I'm not familiar with this youtuber, but here's a recent look that includes Coleman at both LT and guard:

 

 

 

[The Consigliere]

On 4/27/2024 at 6:06 PM, NickyJ said:

Brandon Scherff was originally picked as a tackle too iirc. I won't be reading too deep into what position he's playing at until training camp.

 

But the decision to roll with Wylie and the backup OT has me floored.

Kinda depends, if you listened to analysts at the time, especially former OL's evaluating prospects, they all uniformally said Scherff was a league average OT in terms of potential and a pro bowl caliber guard prospect and they basically nailed it. 

 

I think w/this guy, he is closer to an OT than Scherff was by a good bit, but I also think its highly likely one of the reasons we had him high on the board was his versatility. I've been blabbing that a lot, but when you consider the issues we have on OL outside of Center and one guard position, and no depth really at all, I think he'll be someone who sees time in his rookie contract at both positions. We need help everywhere and we could start him RT, or Guard. We'll probably punch him in wherever the first cluster injuries hit. 

[illone]

It’s a long shot but could get snaps at Left Tackle this year. Dude was lights out in ‘22 helping tcu go undefeated until Georgia game. 

[The Consigliere]

On 4/29/2024 at 7:12 AM, Always A Commander Never A Captain said:

 

I wasn't as enamored about Suamataia as most here, but for reference here's the RAS compare.

 

 

That vertical leap is pretty wild for an OT/G. Wonder what percentile that is. Looks like its 95th. 

[The Consigliere]

13 minutes ago, illone said:

It’s a long shot but could get snaps at Left Tackle this year. Dude was lights out in ‘22 helping tcu go undefeated until Georgia game. 

Curious what was the issue this year, someone mentioned injury and OL is definitely a cascade issue position where injuries can cause unformal play to fall off, and not just that of the injured player themself. Kinda wonder if Coleman getting dinged, and maybe other line problems influenced it. Who knows. Does seem like amongst the guys we could have taken, he is a higher ceiling type, definitely potential, for me, as mentioned before, I like that we could play him in multiple positions along the line. We basically have a stop gap LT, a plug and play LG who wasn't a starter last year, stud C and RG, and a guy who played mostly like crap last year but people seem to believe it wasn't really his fault at RT, and then the depth chart couldn't beat out Lucas playing his worst season, horror show LG play, injuries at C, and yuck at RT, so for me anyway, I figure that guy could probably be plugged into LG, LT, and RT in an emergency.

[sinews]

Some questions answered here. He definitely can be a swing tackle. 

 

 

 

More past experience/personal:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 2 by sinews

[RandyHolt]

I wish teams would embrace subbing out OL versus... never ever doing it.  Like putting in a few blocking TEs, Basically like subbing in OL, right? 

 

OCs are telling the defense we are going to run the ball without fear of the TE not used to the QBs cadence. Getting Coleman out there as a project allowed to do things he does best - using his athleticism lets say run blocking on zone runs or pulling... only to use that to help sell play action - seems a card an OC never dares play. Or hell let him plow the road a few times if we can run that day, or get a lead. To me it seems worth the risk of breaking the cardinal rule of no subs allowed on the OL. Ever. And using that 3rd rounder vs making it a development year only. Let him get his feet wet and maybe sub out a guy getting schooled for a spell. Develop him faster while throwing curves at the DC. Its always telling how when there is an injury to an OL, the backup OL often seem to never skip a beat. Continuity schmoooity.

 

Many are old enough here to remember when defensive players never subbed out and still dominated. Aren't players in better shape now, maybe even far better? We talk about how Allen and Payne need a rest that DL need to be subbed out. They were gassed last year!!!1!. The horror cry me a ****ing river. I call bunk they are world class athletes on the field for 30 minutes of game time and asked to actually play full bore for maybe 15 actual minutes? If that. All spread out over 3 hours with tons of breaks. Hey if I am wrong and they desperately need rest, an OL must at times as well, right?

 

Annual rant aside, I am Frist calling him the next Trent Williams -we are all gushing over our shiny new prospects so why the **** not. I wanted us to take the mauler over Trent Okung?? and Trent proved me wrong that athleticism can work. Dare I think AP saw a little bit of a Trent lottery play when taking him.

Edited May 3 by RandyHolt

[ntotoro]

16 hours ago, illone said:

It’s a long shot but could get snaps at Left Tackle this year. Dude was lights out in ‘22 helping tcu go undefeated until Georgia game. 

 

I can allow that. That was when Georgia was right smack in the middle of that lossless period.

[goskins10]

17 hours ago, sinews said:

Some questions answered here. He definitely can be a swing tackle. 

 

 

 

More past experience/personal:

 

 

 

 

 

Everyone needs to watch the Inside Scoop video. He was a the anchor at Left tackle in 2022. He was only moved inside due to major upheaval along the line afterthe very successful 2022 sewason. Lot's of guys signed to the NFL leaving holes. He was NOT moved there due to poor performance and in the end he was moved back to Tackle. 

 

People still saying the team didn ot address the Oline are really sleeping on this pick. 

 

Also, I was listening to Jim Miller and Pat Kerwin - who I really respect so if others feel differently feel free to stop reading 🙂 - Pat Kerwin was making the point that with a rookie QB you do NOT want a bunch of rookies on the Oline. You want veterans who have been there and can help the rookie out, even if they may not be Probowl players. Then the following season you bring in young guys to make upgrades. But that first season you really want seasoned veterans. 

 

There are of course no gaurantees. And maybe they could have drafted more big guys. But I think they are not done yet, waitnig for some later CAP or and camp casualties. I also look at where they picked and at each spot you look and say where is the Olineman that is better than who they picked. And before people say Mike S, that guy could end up being the best player from this draft. He is an absolute beast of a player, smart, athletic. His only issue is being slightly undersized. But I remember a MLB for us that was undersized who should be in the HOF in London Fletcher. I know it's different positions, but same concept. 

 

Time will tell but I am less concerned than I was the day they drafted him. I think he is going to surprise people. 

 

 

[The Consigliere]

I think people are more upset that we didn't get a guy from tier 1 (the last of the first round types that went 5-29) and there are some that were really enamored with Paul, or the guy with red flags (Suamataia).... and then there are some that wanted us to trade up in round 1, and also grab another one before day 2 was over. We left the draft with only one OT, it wasn't a tier 1 guy, it was more of a project, and the team has no depth, and probably needs new starters either now, or by next year for 3 of 5 spots (predraft), so that's the upset. I agree w/you that getting Coleman in round 3 was no different than taking an OT at 36 or 40, he was in the same tier of the talent that went in the 50's. There were no OT's taken for basically what, 27 picks (29-54 or thereabouts) and Coleman was rated ahead of multiple guys who went in the 50's by Brugler and the ESPN dude.

 

He's a legit investment with a grade in that 40-75 zone, and upside and versatility (can play probably 2-4 spots on the line given time and development). I like him too. Not sure he gets a second contract, but he's definitely one of the better options we could have taken if we didn't get a guy with a 1st round grade, so I'm happy. Hopefully we learn enough in '24 to find out if we can focus on LT or RT, and also if Coleman is a long term Guard, or solves one of the long term OT issues. 

[redskinss]

I was watching a YouTube video of a couple guys debating the top tackles in college football and this colemans name came up with names like fashanu and fataunu, and I was thinking what are these guys nuts?

No way he's in their tier and then I noticed the video was a year old.

 

Certainly seems like he was held in much higher regard before last season which could be good or bad but let's you know at least at one point he had the ability to produce with the top guys.

At least in these guys eyes anyway. 

[goskins10]

 

4 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

I think people are more upset that we didn't get a guy from tier 1 (the last of the first round types that went 5-29) and there are some that were really enamored with Paul, or the guy with red flags (Suamataia).... and then there are some that wanted us to trade up in round 1, and also grab another one before day 2 was over. We left the draft with only one OT, it wasn't a tier 1 guy, it was more of a project, and the team has no depth, and probably needs new starters either now, or by next year for 3 of 5 spots (predraft), so that's the upset. I agree w/you that getting Coleman in round 3 was no different than taking an OT at 36 or 40, he was in the same tier of the talent that went in the 50's. There were no OT's taken for basically what, 27 picks (29-54 or thereabouts) and Coleman was rated ahead of multiple guys who went in the 50's by Brugler and the ESPN dude.

 

He's a legit investment with a grade in that 40-75 zone, and upside and versatility (can play probably 2-4 spots on the line given time and development). I like him too. Not sure he gets a second contract, but he's definitely one of the better options we could have taken if we didn't get a guy with a 1st round grade, so I'm happy. Hopefully we learn enough in '24 to find out if we can focus on LT or RT, and also if Coleman is a long term Guard, or solves one of the long term OT issues. 

 

 

They tried to tade up but no one was willnig to trade, at least without trading th farm. I am glad they were not desperate and jsut traded up giving up all kinds of other resources. By pick 29, below is what had been selected. Agian, Adam P made it very celar they tried to get back into the 1st to get one of these guys. ANd if we are being honest are Morgan (pick 25), Barton (pick 26) and Guyton (pick 29) really 12st rd OTs? For me the 1st rd Tackles stopped at Fautanu, but that's jsut me. ANd he may end up at Gaurd where he already played some. 

 

 

The next group down to Coleman at 67 was:

 

 

I didn ot like anyone in thre well enoguh to trade up for them. JPJ is pure C anyway. I don't see anyone I want to use draft resopurces for. I realloy like that thgey let the draft ocem to them and had a plan B for if they cod not get back into the 1st rd. And again I do not think they are done. 

 

 

Also, I think many are sleeping on Colemans abilities. As @redskinss said, for the 2023 draft Coleman was consided one of the top tackles. He was moved to Guard not due to performance due to need by TCU since the rest of thier line was in shamables. He ended up back as Tackle. I guess what I am saying - and it's not just me, listen to Logan Paulson and many others - Coleman IS a top tier tackle, at least in thier opinion. 

 

And we do have some depth. It may be the depth you or other fans want, but clearly they have a plan. If this was the last group in the FO, I would be more with you. But this group is a different breed. These are lifetime football people that have had success that and were wanted across the league. Adam Peters could have gone anywhere. Dan Quinn had more than one opportunity. Cliff K was all but signed by LV before spurning them for us. 

 

Just becasue we have had to watch significant incompetence for most of the last 20+ yrs does not mean this group is. Doesn't mean I am suggesting no one can be critical. Not what I am saying at all. I am saying that while at first glance it looks like they missed on improving the Oline like it needs, maybe that judgement is a bit premature, if not harsh. Just my observation after doing more looking around since the draft. I will admit, I did not know as much about his story before the draft as I should have. But after digging into him over the last week. I really like what I see and can understand why the team is so high on him. 

Edited May 3 by goskins10

[Riggo-toni]

Other than centers, it seems like most of the guys we've picked outside of the top 5 at OL have been busts. Only exceptions I can think of are Dockery, Moses, and Cosmi (who was a bust at OT, but looks like a solid guard). I know it's a new era with Peters, but it's just hard for me to be optimistic.

[illone]

On 5/2/2024 at 2:09 PM, The Consigliere said:

Curious what was the issue this year, someone mentioned injury and OL is definitely a cascade issue position where injuries can cause unformal play to fall off, and not just that of the injured player themself. Kinda wonder if Coleman getting dinged, and maybe other line problems influenced it. Who knows. Does seem like amongst the guys we could have taken, he is a higher ceiling type, definitely potential, for me, as mentioned before, I like that we could play him in multiple positions along the line. We basically have a stop gap LT, a plug and play LG who wasn't a starter last year, stud C and RG, and a guy who played mostly like crap last year but people seem to believe it wasn't really his fault at RT, and then the depth chart couldn't beat out Lucas playing his worst season, horror show LG play, injuries at C, and yuck at RT, so for me anyway, I figure that guy could probably be plugged into LG, LT, and RT in an emergency.

 

I think, assuming no more additions are made, they will have an open competition in camp and he very well could win the job this year. Im not even against it at this point. 
 

I dont follow TCU too closely, so not entirely sure why the dropoff and less snaps at LT in ‘23 but I’m hearing it was due to roster changes and need. One thing I can say thats universally true is that college coaches could care less about preparing a kids’ resume for the next level…
 

Its similar to the pros in that its one week at a time and those coaches just need to win at all cost next Saturday. 

[philibusters]

I think Brandon Coleman had a high ankle sprain last year and that probably was at least partly responsible for the drop off in his play.   That said, regardless of the injuries, I do think its a possibility based on the comments of people who have watched his tape, that he is stiff in the hips and that will cause him to lunge and get off balance in pass pro.   Not having the high ankle sprain should improve his footwork as he'll have more pushoff power and acceleration, but he is still will need to prove that he can overcome his stiff hips as a pass protector at the NFL level.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[CommanderInTheRye]

On 5/7/2024 at 8:09 PM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

 

Here's the full 8 minute interview with Coleman's college head coach...

 

 

 

[redskinss]

We don't need position versatile we need a starting left tackle.

I really hope that attribute doesn't avail itself.

[Skinsinparadise]

I knew he was a good athlete I missed or forgot he was on the freaks list

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

Just now, redskinss said:

We don't need position versatile we need a starting left tackle.

I really hope that attribute doesn't avail itself.

 

66% give or take of 3rd rounders are busts.

 

If he ends up a high end LG instead of tackle, that's a hit and big time so IMO.

 

I'd rather him be the solution at tackle don't get me wrong but if we get another Cosmi level guard in the third round, that's a killer pick if it unfolded like that.

 

[redskinss]

7 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

66% give or take of 3rd rounders are busts.

 

If he ends up a high end LG instead of tackle, that's a hit and big time so IMO.

 

I'd rather him be the solution at tackle don't get me wrong but if we get another Cosmi level guard in the third round, that's a killer pick if it unfolded like that.

 

 

I'd certainly rather he work out at guard than bust, just hope we never have to find out if he's any good inside.

[Skinsinparadise]

20 minutes ago, redskinss said:

 

I'd certainly rather he work out at guard than bust, just hope we never have to find out if he's any good inside.

 

It's not so much for me about busting.  But if he is a high end guard, not just a starter but a really good one, I'd take it and be happy,

 

It's not like Scheriff where you got a high top 10 pick and hope he's a tackle and a high end guard instead feels dissappointing considering the context.

 

Considering the context, a high end guard would be a hit as to that pick.  Hopefully though I agree that he ends up a good tackle everything being equal.

Edited May 9 by Skinsinparadise

[method man]

On 5/3/2024 at 11:38 AM, The Consigliere said:

I think people are more upset that we didn't get a guy from tier 1 (the last of the first round types that went 5-29) and there are some that were really enamored with Paul, or the guy with red flags (Suamataia).... and then there are some that wanted us to trade up in round 1, and also grab another one before day 2 was over. We left the draft with only one OT, it wasn't a tier 1 guy, it was more of a project, and the team has no depth, and probably needs new starters either now, or by next year for 3 of 5 spots (predraft), so that's the upset. I agree w/you that getting Coleman in round 3 was no different than taking an OT at 36 or 40, he was in the same tier of the talent that went in the 50's. There were no OT's taken for basically what, 27 picks (29-54 or thereabouts) and Coleman was rated ahead of multiple guys who went in the 50's by Brugler and the ESPN dude.

 

He's a legit investment with a grade in that 40-75 zone, and upside and versatility (can play probably 2-4 spots on the line given time and development). I like him too. Not sure he gets a second contract, but he's definitely one of the better options we could have taken if we didn't get a guy with a 1st round grade, so I'm happy. Hopefully we learn enough in '24 to find out if we can focus on LT or RT, and also if Coleman is a long term Guard, or solves one of the long term OT issues. 

A beef a many folks have is we didn’t walk away with two of these guys

[Going Commando]

1 hour ago, redskinss said:

We don't need position versatile we need a starting left tackle.

I really hope that attribute doesn't avail itself.

 

He's 100% a guard.  They're either going to play him at guard, or they're going to run him out of the NFL.

 

Unless they sign a cap cut with real starting experience, Lucas is going to end up winning the starting job at LT.  I think they'll probably start Coleman at LG, and it'll be sink or swim for him there.  I don't know what we're going to do if Lucas or Wylie go down.  Moving Coleman outside will be detrimental to his development.  They're going to have to move Cosmi outside and hope that Daniels or Stromberg can start.

[redskinss]

8 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

He's 100% a guard.  They're either going to play him at guard, or they're going to run him out of the NFL.

 

Unless they sign a cap cut with real starting experience, Lucas is going to end up winning the starting job at LT.  I think they'll probably start Coleman at LG, and it'll be sink or swim for him there.  I don't know what we're going to do if Lucas or Wylie go down.  Moving Coleman outside will be detrimental to his development.  They're going to have to move Cosmi outside and hope that Daniels or Stromberg can start.

 

I certainly hope you're wrong.

The team seems to think you are, all indication ls are that they believe he's a tackle.