Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

vinsanity

Bruce Arians' offense

127 posts in this topic

I have to say, I am really not a fan of BA. I give the guy all the credit in the world for leading this team this far but I really don't see our offense being sustainable. Heres why:

1. There is no cohesion between run & pass. Run plays look exactly like run plays in this offense, and pass plays look like pass plays. There is no "running to set up play action" or "spreading them out to run". It is an extremely predictable offense, but not in a good way like the old Manning/Colts system.

2. The system takes precedence over the talent, instead of vice versa. Frequently, this team is in 3 or 4 WR sets, when the talent would indicate 2 TE sets are more appropriate. The plays often require alot of time to develop and have 5 players in routes, when this offensive line would be better off on quick plays or blocking help. Even just some designed roll outs would make more sense with this QB than what we are doing.

3. Arians is willing to let Luck fail when it comes to passes, yet he isn't letting the team learn other lessons. He mentioned on the radio that he doesn't trust them to run no huddle more because of the other rookies and that he would never allow Luck the amount of freedom that Manning developed. There are college teams that require their freshmen to run no huddle offenses the entire game, professionals aren't capable of that? He has one of the most intelligent QBs to come out of college, if you don't trust him, who would you trust.

4. This offense doesn't seem to have any of the cutting edge features of modern offenses. It isn't fast, it doesn't have multiple play packages in 1 play, it doesn't use no huddle except when it has to. It doesn't take advantage of athletic mismatches with TE. In sum, in the middle of an offensive revolution, Arians is a bastion of the old way.

Contrast that to what is going on in Was. There the coaches have a system they have developed over decades, and are famous for. Yet when they looked at their team, and the expanding landscape of offenses they modified their system to fit their teams talent, not tried to make the talent fit in their system.

New England is another example. Every year, they change and tweak their offensive system to match the talent they have. Seems to be working out for them. I bet if you grabbed an offensive player from the Steelers of the last few years, they could tell you what Arians plays are named.

Long story short:

The Colts were 1-7 in 1 possession games last year, this year they've flipped that. These 2 teams are only marginally different in actual ability, and at least from an offensive play calling perspective, I've seen nothing to say the new system is better than the old.

9 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IND_The Catch_728x90

Every system is garbage if you don't have a great qb , your qb is the system if we ran the ball 50 times a game that wouldn't change the fact that we not a great running team what you want is run 2 yd gain, run 1 yrd gain incomplete pass punt were playing to win games not pad stats, all the best team Pass the ball ba is doing fine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we'll be great once:

A. They build a much better OL

B. The defense gets better

C. The rest of the team grows

I think it can be a very good system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say, I am really not a fan of BA. I give the guy all the credit in the world for leading this team this far but I really don't see our offense being sustainable. Heres why:

1. There is no cohesion between run & pass. Run plays look exactly like run plays in this offense, and pass plays look like pass plays. There is no "running to set up play action" or "spreading them out to run". It is an extremely predictable offense, but not in a good way like the old Manning/Colts system.

2. The system takes precedence over the talent, instead of vice versa. Frequently, this team is in 3 or 4 WR sets, when the talent would indicate 2 TE sets are more appropriate. The plays often require alot of time to develop and have 5 players in routes, when this offensive line would be better off on quick plays or blocking help. Even just some designed roll outs would make more sense with this QB than what we are doing.

3. Arians is willing to let Luck fail when it comes to passes, yet he isn't letting the team learn other lessons. He mentioned on the radio that he doesn't trust them to run no huddle more because of the other rookies and that he would never allow Luck the amount of freedom that Manning developed. There are college teams that require their freshmen to run no huddle offenses the entire game, professionals aren't capable of that? He has one of the most intelligent QBs to come out of college, if you don't trust him, who would you trust.

4. This offense doesn't seem to have any of the cutting edge features of modern offenses. It isn't fast, it doesn't have multiple play packages in 1 play, it doesn't use no huddle except when it has to. It doesn't take advantage of athletic mismatches with TE. In sum, in the middle of an offensive revolution, Arians is a bastion of the old way.

Contrast that to what is going on in Was. There the coaches have a system they have developed over decades, and are famous for. Yet when they looked at their team, and the expanding landscape of offenses they modified their system to fit their teams talent, not tried to make the talent fit in their system.

New England is another example. Every year, they change and tweak their offensive system to match the talent they have. Seems to be working out for them. I bet if you grabbed an offensive player from the Steelers of the last few years, they could tell you what Arians plays are named.

Long story short:

The Colts were 1-7 in 1 possession games last year, this year they've flipped that. These 2 teams are only marginally different in actual ability, and at least from an offensive play calling perspective, I've seen nothing to say the new system is better than the old.

well said
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Running Arians offense you'd have to have the best of the best at the 5 OL positions and he's still going to take more contact than most quarterbacks.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love Arians offense and aggressiveness. and you can always find a way to criticize any offensive coordinator's offensive playbook and style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Running Arians offense you'd have to have the best of the best at the 5 OL positions and he's still going to take more contact than most quarterbacks.

I'm not sure I agree with that. Luck can be like Ben, holding the ball too long. A lot of the times he's not waiting for the play to develop, he's waiting for the receiver to get open or is on his fifth read.

I'm not a fan of the empty backfield. I think we get INTs on that about 50% of the time.

I'm not defending Arians, but I think he knows what he can do with what he has. You can't argue with the success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say, I am really not a fan of BA. I give the guy all the credit in the world for leading this team this far but I really don't see our offense being sustainable. Heres why:

I'm not a fan of a lot of the elements of Arians' offense, but I'm going to pick a couple of bones here.

3. Arians is willing to let Luck fail when it comes to passes, yet he isn't letting the team learn other lessons. He mentioned on the radio that he doesn't trust them to run no huddle more because of the other rookies and that he would never allow Luck the amount of freedom that Manning developed. There are college teams that require their freshmen to run no huddle offenses the entire game, professionals aren't capable of that? He has one of the most intelligent QBs to come out of college, if you don't trust him, who would you trust.

It's not necessary to run a no-huddle offense in order to run an effective offense. I don't know why so many fans are harping on this, other than the fact that we ran a no-huddle for so many years. Going no-huddle doesn't necessarily make the offense any more effective or efficient.

The other thing is that Arians HAS let the offense go no-huddle in various situations, not all end of game, hurry-up situations, either.

The Colts were 1-7 in 1 possession games last year, this year they've flipped that. These 2 teams are only marginally different in actual ability, and at least from an offensive play calling perspective, I've seen nothing to say the new system is better than the old.

I can't understand how someone who watched this team last season can suggest that our offense isn't better than it was. And I feel like your preceding sentence counters that assertion. The offense can move the ball (4th in total yards, compared to 30th last year) we're one of the best in the league on third down (6th vs. 23rd), we score more points (22.1 vs 15.2; not enough, but significantly more), we have already scored four more touchdowns than we did all of last season (26 vs. 22). And the biggest difference is that we come up with big plays when we MUST have them, as indicated by the 7-1 record in one score games.

If it's not the ability, and it's not the system, then what's left?

I personally think the talent is superior, particularly at quarterback. But I also think the offense we were running last season with our 2nd, 3rd and 4th string quarterbacks was designed around a much better player, so the system wound up being the source of a lot of the ineptitude as well. Curtis Painter and Kerry Collins simply can't run the offense we were asking them to.

As I've said several times before, I don't think Arians' system is fundamentally flawed. I actually think it has a lot of potential. But a lot of the routes need to be shortened up, it needs more checkdown options, it should use the backs in the passing game more, etc. And the most effective adjustment I think he could make would be to use fewer personnel packages and formations, which would help mask some of the run/pass tendencies a little bit.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love Arians offense and aggressiveness. and you can always find a way to criticize any offensive coordinator's offensive playbook and style.

I dont think its only about criticizing the playcalling, I think it also is about Arians refusal to take advantage of Lucks strengths and that is his mobility as well as accuracy on short to intermediate passes which would also in turn also open up the game for shots downfield, (Thats when Manning was at his best especially off playaction,I dont see why anyone would not want that style of play calling after it worked so well with one of the greatest of all time) and once you factor in that Luck has mobility and we have all kinds of speed on offense then we would be a force to be dealt with no matter our O Line. That sure beats Luck taking mean shot after shot because of an inept O Line
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I agree with that. Luck can be like Ben, holding the ball too long. A lot of the times he's not waiting for the play to develop, he's waiting for the receiver to get open or is on his fifth read.

I'm not a fan of the empty backfield. I think we get INTs on that about 50% of the time.

I'm not defending Arians, but I think he knows what he can do with what he has. You can't argue with the success.

I'm not a fan of the system. Isn't waiting for the receiver to get open basically the same thing as waiting for the play to develop depending on the route?

I believe its more of a design to hold the ball longer because the routes are longer than a lot of other systems. if you have 3 routes that break at 15-20+ yards, then the OL has to be expected to block longer and the QB has to buy time more often.

The results are what they are. In my opinion they could have been better, they could have been worse. I don't think Arians puts Luck in the best scenarios to succeed thus the Colts aren't going to be in the best scenarios to succeed.

Luck isn't at the level to run a empty set as much as he is at this point. 5 years from now, then sure. Even then with the longer routes, it makes the empty set more complicated to block, due to having 5 guys to take on whatever comes, with the longer routes that makes Luck force a throw quicker if he can't side step and roll.

8-4 is 8-4, but this offense isn't one to write home about in my opinion. I believe you could compare it to the defense/special teams of say the past 10 years. It's hard to argue against 10 win seasons, but obviously there were issues that were needing to be addressed.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think its only about criticizing the playcalling, I think it also is about Arians refusal to take advantage of Lucks strengths and that is his mobility as well as accuracy on short to intermediate passes which would also in turn also open up the game for shots downfield, Thats when Manning was at his best especially off playaction,I dont see why anyone would not want that style of play calling after it worked so well with one of the greatest of all time) and once you factor in that Luck has mobility and we have all kinds of speed on offense then we would be a force to be dealt with no matter our O Line. That sure beats Luck taking mean shot after shot because of an inept O Line

Meh; I think we can have a good offense without it being the Manning offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's honestly gotten to the point where I don't even care about this type of offense anymore. I personally think its stupid because Luck would excel much more in a west coast style offense. But it's obvious Irsay & Grigson are fine with the way things are. So I've learned to accept it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh; I think we can have a good offense without it being the Manning offense.

Of course we can, we are proving that this year but its not about being a good offense or being about a Manning offense per say, Its about getting the best out of your offense and to do that ya have to play to there strengths. Take Donald Brown for example (a healthy Brown), Brown runs between the Tackles and does a decent job at it, But call a play for him to the outside then its heck to stop him unless a defense is in position and thats because Arians has at times used Browns strenghths (Not nearly enough)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think its only about criticizing the playcalling, I think it also is about Arians refusal to take advantage of Lucks strengths and that is his mobility as well as accuracy on short to intermediate passes which would also in turn also open up the game for shots downfield, Thats when Manning was at his best especially off playaction,I dont see why anyone would not want that style of play calling after it worked so well with one of the greatest of all time) and once you factor in that Luck has mobility and we have all kinds of speed on offense then we would be a force to be dealt with no matter our O Line. That sure beats Luck taking mean shot after shot because of an inept O Line

but we are an offense to be wrecking with already. Im pretty sure Arians is going to expand the offense more next season because it would be everybody's second year in the system and add more wrinkles, and Arians does have a flat route, drag route, or rb coming out the backfield checkdown on most of his plays its just Luck doesn't go to them. Luck is just as aggressive as Arians is and Luck tries to force balls more often than not. and you here Arians on the sideline a couple times say " you gotta check that down son" and pats him on the helmet. and the only way to learn from that is trial by error, better to learn when you can force a ball and when to just take what the defense is giving you sooner rather than later. Arians is building Luck for the future so Luck can process all that information like clockwork in the next year or two

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say, I am really not a fan of BA. I give the guy all the credit in the world for leading this team this far but I really don't see our offense being sustainable. Heres why:

1. There is no cohesion between run & pass. Run plays look exactly like run plays in this offense, and pass plays look like pass plays. There is no "running to set up play action" or "spreading them out to run". It is an extremely predictable offense, but not in a good way like the old Manning/Colts system.

2. The system takes precedence over the talent, instead of vice versa. Frequently, this team is in 3 or 4 WR sets, when the talent would indicate 2 TE sets are more appropriate. The plays often require alot of time to develop and have 5 players in routes, when this offensive line would be better off on quick plays or blocking help. Even just some designed roll outs would make more sense with this QB than what we are doing.

3. Arians is willing to let Luck fail when it comes to passes, yet he isn't letting the team learn other lessons. He mentioned on the radio that he doesn't trust them to run no huddle more because of the other rookies and that he would never allow Luck the amount of freedom that Manning developed. There are college teams that require their freshmen to run no huddle offenses the entire game, professionals aren't capable of that? He has one of the most intelligent QBs to come out of college, if you don't trust him, who would you trust.

4. This offense doesn't seem to have any of the cutting edge features of modern offenses. It isn't fast, it doesn't have multiple play packages in 1 play, it doesn't use no huddle except when it has to. It doesn't take advantage of athletic mismatches with TE. In sum, in the middle of an offensive revolution, Arians is a bastion of the old way.

Contrast that to what is going on in Was. There the coaches have a system they have developed over decades, and are famous for. Yet when they looked at their team, and the expanding landscape of offenses they modified their system to fit their teams talent, not tried to make the talent fit in their system.

New England is another example. Every year, they change and tweak their offensive system to match the talent they have. Seems to be working out for them. I bet if you grabbed an offensive player from the Steelers of the last few years, they could tell you what Arians plays are named.

Long story short:

The Colts were 1-7 in 1 possession games last year, this year they've flipped that. These 2 teams are only marginally different in actual ability, and at least from an offensive play calling perspective, I've seen nothing to say the new system is better than the old.

I must say I was interested to hear what you had to say in this post, and after reading it I think you bring up some valid points. I do agree that BA is running a "old school" style offense, but then again I think this is what Irsay brought him in here for. It's almost like we are going back to the fundamentals of football. We are focusing on running the ball more, minimizing turnovers, and I have to admit we have been a more solid team because of it. I don't remember the last time a running back lost a fumble. It's the little things that I am noticing that have improved considerably. We are disciplined, and the players have bought in to the system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If superbowls are the ultimate yardstick; BA's 2 SB wins > 1 PM win. BA was a fomer college quarterback, you have to assume he knows there are lots of improvements that still can be made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If superbowls are the ultimate yardstick; BA's 2 SB wins > 1 PM win. BA was a fomer college quarterback, you have to assume he knows there are lots of improvements that still can be made.

Arians 2 SB appearances he won 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course we can, we are proving that this year but its not about being a good offense or being about a Manning offense per say, Its about getting the best out of your offense and to do that ya have to play to there strengths. Take Donald Brown for example (a healthy Brown), Brown runs between the Tackles and does a decent job at it, But call a play for him to the outside then its heck to stop him unless a defense is in position and thats because Arians has at times used Browns strenghths (Not nearly enough)

I agree with the bolded. I just think the Manning offense comes up a little too often, especially in comparison with what we're doing now. There's more than one way to skin a cat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It must be difficult to game plan with a weak OL. I think BA is coaching well with what he's been given up front

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It must be difficult to game plan with a weak OL. I think BA is coaching well with what he's been given up front

The only way this group would get confused with the Hogs is if they collectively dressed as the Hogettes on Halloween.

HogettesFull.jpg

The current group will not be confused with an elite pass blocking group either, but with that said, the scheme/system makes them look worse than they are. They wouldn't look nearly as bad, or the QB wouldn't take on as many hits if he were in a WCO or a quicker hitting system. Which is why I feel for Luck to enjoy a clean pocket and rarely get hit, then this system needs the best of the best at the OL, and that is hard to do from a cap perspective. So, he will continue to face pressure and take on hits. They will dwindle a bit as he becomes more accustomed to the speed, and becomes more decisive with his decision making process, but he will still face pressure and take hits in this scheme.

I agree with the bolded. I just think the Manning offense comes up a little too often, especially in comparison with what we're doing now. There's more than one way to skin a cat.

There are hundreds of ways. Some are just more complicated than others...
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the bolded. I just think the Manning offense comes up a little too often, especially in comparison with what we're doing now. There's more than one way to skin a cat.

The Manning offense comes up alot I know and alot of that is because of how good Manning runs it(if we had the defense during that era we would have possibly been near unstoppable by average to poor teams) but that same offense we should be running (in my opinion) would be even more 'lethal' with Lucks ability to move in the pocket and scramble, Right now Arians has turned Luck into a gun slinger in terms of number of throws and the type of throw and some games he will have to do that but right now we have neither the O Line or even the defense to support that play style the times it fails (as we found out vs the Pats). Long term it could be argued this helps him I suppose, But it seems the minute Arians gets down by 1-8 points he feels he has to throw it (148 of Lucks 295 come from behind throws that have been from the come from behind variety by only that 1-8 margin), Throwing it is not the real problem but the type of throw is and certainly could be again vs the Pats or Broncos in the Playoffs if we get there or even Ravens

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luck is being expexted to grow in BA's system. I really don't know if he's cut it back since Luck's a rookie. As long as Luck isn't lost in this present sytem and is being successful, I don't see anything that needs to be changed. Imagine how quick his reads will be once he gets 2 seconds more with an improved line.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Manning offense comes up alot I know and alot of that is because of how good Manning runs it(if we had the defense during that era we would have possibly been near unstoppable by average to poor teams)

Manning isn't the quarterback anymore, though. If anyone currently on the Colts has a relevant opinion about the Manning offense, sans Manning, it's Reggie Wayne. Just based on the numbers and the usage, I think Reggie would endorse the decision to move on from the Manning offense, specifically without Manning.

but that same offense we should be running (in my opinion) would be even more 'lethal' with Lucks ability to move in the pocket and scramble

What is it about the old offense that makes you think Luck's mobility would be featured significantly in it? Manning excelled at diagnosing defenses before and at the snap, and getting rid of the ball quickly. Why would Luck be asked to scramble?

Right now Arians has turned Luck into a gun slinger in terms of number of throws and the type of throw and some games he will have to do that but right now we have neither the O Line or even the defense to support that play style the times it fails (as we found out vs the Pats). Long term it could be argued this helps him I suppose

We have a negative point differential on the season, five comeback victories, and three blowout losses. We've been behind a lot. You're right, we don't have the offensive line nor the defense to support it, but that's probably part of the reason we've been behind so much, also. I haven't gotten the impression that we've thrown ourselves out of a game, except against New England (and again vs. the Lions, but that wound up being a win, so technically we didn't throw ourselves out of that game).

But it seems the minute Arians gets down by 1-8 points he feels he has to throw it (148 of Lucks 295 come from behind throws that have been from the come from behind variety by only that 1-8 margin), Throwing it is not the real problem but the type of throw is and certainly could be again vs the Pats or Broncos in the Playoffs if we get there or even Ravens

That's half. What's the magic number? I'm not sure how I'm supposed to feel about that stat, especially without knowing how much time was on the clock, what the down and distance was, how the run was being defended, etc. For instance, we were only down five on the final possession on Sunday. We called nine pass plays; two wound up being scrambles, but we spiked it twice, so it's nine attempts. All nine of them with only a one score deficit. But we had no timeouts, so were we supposed to be running it? How many of those 148 attempts were in a similar circumstance?

I do think we're throwing it more than we should be, but that's not unique to Arians' offense, nor is it foreign to the Manning offense. Manning set the record for pass attempts in 2010, mostly because we couldn't run, but also because we fell behind a few times. Hopefully we improve the run blocking, which will allow us to have a more balanced attack moving forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not as concerned as much by the scheme as I am by some of the situational play calling at times and the ease with which we abandon the run game. I know we're not the best running team but Ballard and even Brown have shown they can legitimate if not spectacular RBs. Though I'd argue Ballard could prove to be a steal. It also diminishes the effectiveness of our P/A, which is where I think Luck really can excel.

I do think however that the scheme is a little ambitious with the current O line, considering we've invested so heavily in Luck as the future it's tempting fate to put him in the firing line so much. I accept though part of it is down to him being as equally aggressive/ambitious. For a quiet guy there is a lot of fire burning beneath the surface,must be a Texas thing huh?

This was never going to be a one season job so to be truely fair to the O scheme we need to see how it plays next season, hopefully with a improved O line. If Arians is still here of course.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say, I am really not a fan of BA. I give the guy all the credit in the world for leading this team this far but I really don't see our offense being sustainable. Heres why:

1. There is no cohesion between run & pass. Run plays look exactly like run plays in this offense, and pass plays look like pass plays. There is no "running to set up play action" or "spreading them out to run". It is an extremely predictable offense, but not in a good way like the old Manning/Colts system.

2. The system takes precedence over the talent, instead of vice versa. Frequently, this team is in 3 or 4 WR sets, when the talent would indicate 2 TE sets are more appropriate. The plays often require alot of time to develop and have 5 players in routes, when this offensive line would be better off on quick plays or blocking help. Even just some designed roll outs would make more sense with this QB than what we are doing.

3. Arians is willing to let Luck fail when it comes to passes, yet he isn't letting the team learn other lessons. He mentioned on the radio that he doesn't trust them to run no huddle more because of the other rookies and that he would never allow Luck the amount of freedom that Manning developed. There are college teams that require their freshmen to run no huddle offenses the entire game, professionals aren't capable of that? He has one of the most intelligent QBs to come out of college, if you don't trust him, who would you trust.

4. This offense doesn't seem to have any of the cutting edge features of modern offenses. It isn't fast, it doesn't have multiple play packages in 1 play, it doesn't use no huddle except when it has to. It doesn't take advantage of athletic mismatches with TE. In sum, in the middle of an offensive revolution, Arians is a bastion of the old way.

Contrast that to what is going on in Was. There the coaches have a system they have developed over decades, and are famous for. Yet when they looked at their team, and the expanding landscape of offenses they modified their system to fit their teams talent, not tried to make the talent fit in their system.

New England is another example. Every year, they change and tweak their offensive system to match the talent they have. Seems to be working out for them. I bet if you grabbed an offensive player from the Steelers of the last few years, they could tell you what Arians plays are named.

Long story short:

The Colts were 1-7 in 1 possession games last year, this year they've flipped that. These 2 teams are only marginally different in actual ability, and at least from an offensive play calling perspective, I've seen nothing to say the new system is better than the old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say, I am really not a fan of BA. I give the guy all the credit in the world for leading this team this far but I really don't see our offense being sustainable. Heres why:

1. There is no cohesion between run & pass. Run plays look exactly like run plays in this offense, and pass plays look like pass plays. There is no "running to set up play action" or "spreading them out to run". It is an extremely predictable offense, but not in a good way like the old Manning/Colts system.

2. The system takes precedence over the talent, instead of vice versa. Frequently, this team is in 3 or 4 WR sets, when the talent would indicate 2 TE sets are more appropriate. The plays often require alot of time to develop and have 5 players in routes, when this offensive line would be better off on quick plays or blocking help. Even just some designed roll outs would make more sense with this QB than what we are doing.

3. Arians is willing to let Luck fail when it comes to passes, yet he isn't letting the team learn other lessons. He mentioned on the radio that he doesn't trust them to run no huddle more because of the other rookies and that he would never allow Luck the amount of freedom that Manning developed. There are college teams that require their freshmen to run no huddle offenses the entire game, professionals aren't capable of that? He has one of the most intelligent QBs to come out of college, if you don't trust him, who would you trust.

4. This offense doesn't seem to have any of the cutting edge features of modern offenses. It isn't fast, it doesn't have multiple play packages in 1 play, it doesn't use no huddle except when it has to. It doesn't take advantage of athletic mismatches with TE. In sum, in the middle of an offensive revolution, Arians is a bastion of the old way.

Contrast that to what is going on in Was. There the coaches have a system they have developed over decades, and are famous for. Yet when they looked at their team, and the expanding landscape of offenses they modified their system to fit their teams talent, not tried to make the talent fit in their system.

New England is another example. Every year, they change and tweak their offensive system to match the talent they have. Seems to be working out for them. I bet if you grabbed an offensive player from the Steelers of the last few years, they could tell you what Arians plays are named.

Long story short:

The Colts were 1-7 in 1 possession games last year, this year they've flipped that. These 2 teams are only marginally different in actual ability, and at least from an offensive play calling perspective, I've seen nothing to say the new system is better than the old.

I think BA must have told Luck to stay in the pocket and it doesn't play into Lucks strength. I think Luck is better moving around and making plays instead of just staying in the pocket. I think our offense was at it's best against the Lions when BA let Luck move around and make plays it won us the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Manning isn't the quarterback anymore, though. If anyone currently on the Colts has a relevant opinion about the Manning offense, sans Manning, it's Reggie Wayne. Just based on the numbers and the usage, I think Reggie would endorse the decision to move on from the Manning offense, specifically without Manning.

What is it about the old offense that makes you think Luck's mobility would be featured significantly in it? Manning excelled at diagnosing defenses before and at the snap, and getting rid of the ball quickly. Why would Luck be asked to scramble?

We have a negative point differential on the season, five comeback victories, and three blowout losses. We've been behind a lot. You're right, we don't have the offensive line nor the defense to support it, but that's probably part of the reason we've been behind so much, also. I haven't gotten the impression that we've thrown ourselves out of a game, except against New England (and again vs. the Lions, but that wound up being a win, so technically we didn't throw ourselves out of that game).

That's half. What's the magic number? I'm not sure how I'm supposed to feel about that stat, especially without knowing how much time was on the clock, what the down and distance was, how the run was being defended, etc. For instance, we were only down five on the final possession on Sunday. We called nine pass plays; two wound up being scrambles, but we spiked it twice, so it's nine attempts. All nine of them with only a one score deficit. But we had no timeouts, so were we supposed to be running it? How many of those 148 attempts were in a similar circumstance?

I do think we're throwing it more than we should be, but that's not unique to Arians' offense, nor is it foreign to the Manning offense. Manning set the record for pass attempts in 2010, mostly because we couldn't run, but also because we fell behind a few times. Hopefully we improve the run blocking, which will allow us to have a more balanced attack moving forward.

Manning isn't the quarterback anymore, though. If anyone currently on the Colts has a relevant opinion about the Manning offense, sans Manning, it's Reggie Wayne. Just based on the numbers and the usage, I think Reggie would endorse the decision to move on from the Manning offense, specifically without Manning. Fair enough but its not all that far fetched to think last years debacle of another QB using Peytons system has something to do with that, maybe not all because he seems to enjoy being moved around but I think some.

What is it about the old offense that makes you think Luck's mobility would be featured significantly in it? Manning excelled at diagnosing defenses before and at the snap, and getting rid of the ball quickly. Why would Luck be asked to scramble?

A. Nothing in particular but its a fair assesment that a mobile QB asked to roll out off a playaction which in turn would get other teams Linebackers to bite (Im assuming that I know but is a fairly safe assumption it would happen some)would also have to be considered a scrambling threat

I haven't gotten the impression that we've thrown ourselves out of a game, except against New England (and again vs. the Lions, but that wound up being a win, so technically we didn't throw ourselves out of that game).

A. Perhaps not, I guess thats more of perception deal, But Luck does have the most attempts passing the 2nd quarter of games out of any quarter (163 pass attempts, Luck is only completing 53.4 of those passes to). I just feel thats far to early to be giving up on the run, between the 2nd and 3rd quarters combined passes out of his 503. The pass attempts in those quarters are a little high to me but not something that can really be debated given our O Line lack of ability right now to open up for a consistent run game, But Arians seems to like to air it out in that quarter most of all instead of using the pass game like the run game (although recently he has done better with that)I just think it should be a bigger part of our offense

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say, I am really not a fan of BA. I give the guy all the credit in the world for leading this team this far but I really don't see our offense being sustainable. Heres why:

1. There is no cohesion between run & pass. Run plays look exactly like run plays in this offense, and pass plays look like pass plays. There is no "running to set up play action" or "spreading them out to run". It is an extremely predictable offense, but not in a good way like the old Manning/Colts system.

2. The system takes precedence over the talent, instead of vice versa. Frequently, this team is in 3 or 4 WR sets, when the talent would indicate 2 TE sets are more appropriate. The plays often require alot of time to develop and have 5 players in routes, when this offensive line would be better off on quick plays or blocking help. Even just some designed roll outs would make more sense with this QB than what we are doing.

3. Arians is willing to let Luck fail when it comes to passes, yet he isn't letting the team learn other lessons. He mentioned on the radio that he doesn't trust them to run no huddle more because of the other rookies and that he would never allow Luck the amount of freedom that Manning developed. There are college teams that require their freshmen to run no huddle offenses the entire game, professionals aren't capable of that? He has one of the most intelligent QBs to come out of college, if you don't trust him, who would you trust.

4. This offense doesn't seem to have any of the cutting edge features of modern offenses. It isn't fast, it doesn't have multiple play packages in 1 play, it doesn't use no huddle except when it has to. It doesn't take advantage of athletic mismatches with TE. In sum, in the middle of an offensive revolution, Arians is a bastion of the old way.

Contrast that to what is going on in Was. There the coaches have a system they have developed over decades, and are famous for. Yet when they looked at their team, and the expanding landscape of offenses they modified their system to fit their teams talent, not tried to make the talent fit in their system.

New England is another example. Every year, they change and tweak their offensive system to match the talent they have. Seems to be working out for them. I bet if you grabbed an offensive player from the Steelers of the last few years, they could tell you what Arians plays are named.

Long story short:

The Colts were 1-7 in 1 possession games last year, this year they've flipped that. These 2 teams are only marginally different in actual ability, and at least from an offensive play calling perspective, I've seen nothing to say the new system is better than the old.

This is spot on. I'm sure Arians has heard all of this before, and I'm sure he doesn't care and has no intention of changing his coaching philosophies.

Sad to say, but one of the main reasons why I think Arians won't be getting the offers he thinks he will after this season is because he's basically a stubborn, old man. That is his biggest weakness, and is likely why organizations haven't looked his direction once since he's been an assistant. I haven't seen anything he's done this season that suggests to me he's worked on that weakness. We're probably stuck with him, unless San Diego or Kansas City is dumb enough (and desperate enough) to give him a shot.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If superbowls are the ultimate yardstick; BA's 2 SB wins > 1 PM win. BA was a fomer college quarterback, you have to assume he knows there are lots of improvements that still can be made.

Lebeau is credited for the Superbowl wins far more than Arians. Like I said in another thread, there is a reason Lebeau is still in Pittsburgh while Arians was shown the door.

And 22 points per game is nothing to be scared of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think BA will eventually give Luck more options to choose from at the LOS, than he gave to Roethlisberger?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Every system is garbage if you don't have a...

...Offensive Line. Let's face it guys & gals; we have a bunch of cast offs. And Luck's talent coupled with BAs offense is making chicken salad out of _________. Once we get our Oline protection sorted out this offense will (imagine it) really be hitting on all cylinders.

Add in a NT, DE and another CB.

Presto Ipso....?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you think BA will eventually give Luck more options to choose from at the LOS, than he gave to Roethlisberger?

He'll have no choice. At some point Luck is going to take over this offense.

BA would be wise to stay put, give the kid the reigns, lay back and....cash his checks/bask in the sunlight/retire with that many more rings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lebeau is credited for the Superbowl wins far more than Arians. Like I said in another thread, there is a reason Lebeau is still in Pittsburgh while Arians was shown the door. And 22 points per game is nothing to be scared of.

I dont think anyone can pin all of that on BA. The fact of the matter is, remove the hype and Rapelisburgher is a dumb QB. The offense they ran was watered down for him and even when he was up to speed, his execution of it was less than impressive. Couple that with a delusional RB obsessed fanbase & lackluster Oline and BA was the scapegoat. The obvious proof: the Steelers are averaging 21.2 pts this season, their Oline still sucks and their 24th in the league in rushing. Bill Walsh couldn't raise their point totals. Arians was NOT their problem.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hopefully pagano will force arians to adjust when he returns...it's the job of the head coach to coach the coaches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Offensive Line. Let's face it guys & gals; we have a bunch of cast offs. And Luck's talent coupled with BAs offense is making chicken salad out of _________. Once we get our Oline protection sorted out this offense will (imagine it) really be hitting on all cylinders.

Add in a NT, DE and another CB.

Presto Ipso....?

i think most people's problem isn't arians offense...it's his lack of adjustments considering the colts mediocre oline. at times he has a mike martz approach..."i'm going long everything else be darned"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i think most people's problem isn't arians offense...it's his lack of adjustments considering the colts mediocre oline. at times he has a mike martz approach..."i'm going long everything else be darned"

Yeah, I know. But IMO that is cheap seats nonsense uttered in a vacuum. At the end of the day the only thing that counts are Ws. BA has gotten them...more than every current griper believed possible (and full disclosure: I did not like the Arians addition). When we're losing more games than winning as a result of not adjusting, I'll entertain nitpicking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I know. But IMO that is cheap seats nonsense uttered in a vacuum. At the end of the day the only thing that counts are Ws. BA has gotten them...more than every current griper believed possible (and full disclosure: I did not like the Arians addition). When we're losing more games than winning as a result of not adjusting, I'll entertain nitpicking.

sorry, but that is not cheap seat nonsense....he was criticized for it in pittsburgh as well and not just by fans. and protecting your young franchise qb counts too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sorry, but that is not cheap seat nonsense....he was criticized for it in pittsburgh as well and not just by fans. and protecting your young franchise qb counts too

Yeah I dismiss the nonsense from Pittsburg. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. They're still no better. Arians wasn't the problem.

Arians cannot make the Oline execute. The protection problems are on them, Grigson and the reality of our situation. Not BA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Posts

    • Peyton vs reggie miller
      Football players only play half the game and spend half the time they are out there standing around resting. Manning has had a damn pot belly his entire career and couldn't break 5 seconds on a 40 yard dash. How is a sport harder to play when you don't even have to be a great athlete to play it? Yes there is more strategy but having time to develop a strategy is a plus. Basketball players are more responsible for what happens on the court because they are forced to improvise on the fly. Its a game of constant motion.    And I hate to break it to you but its always much harder to win 16 games than 4. Yes lose 1 and your done but you can go thru the entire playoffs and not even have to play a road game.    I've played both sports and basketball players are easily the greatest athletes on earth. If you don't believe me go sit front row at an NBA game. 
    • Peyton vs reggie miller
      Yes, but without that defense they lose the first game that year. Manning was atrocious. Without Bob Sanders they are 1 and done. Yes he was great against the Pats, for a single half. But he was Joe Flacco the rest of the playoffs.   Reggie never won but he got to the conference finals 7 times I believe and they lost to more talented teams every single time. If he had one other player his caliber his entire career he would have won a ring.   The greatest NBA team in history was the 95-96 Bulls who only lost 10 games all year. The Pacers split the season series with them that season and took them to 7 games in the playoffs and were winning in the 4th quarter of game 7 on the road. If Reggie had a player the caliber of Scottie Pippen to play with, he would've won multiple titles. I have no doubt about that.   Those Pacers teams just didn't have the talent to win a title in that era. But Reggie carried them further than they ever should've went. He was as fierce of a competitor as has ever stepped on a court.    And he was CLUTCH. Was Manning clutch? Or when we went into a big game did people question how he would play? No one ever questioned whether Reggie would bring it when we needed it, because he always did.   I don't expect Reggie to win on a Colts board but some of these comments about this are just plain *ic and disrespectful to a great, great athlete. 
    • Peyton vs reggie miller
      Common sense will tell you its easier to get 5 players to play as a unit over 22.  Basketball players are not getting pounded on every play either. Just learning the playbook in the NFL is much harder than anything you have to learn in the NBA. Yes the NFL has a week to prepare but you are not factoring in the healing process in that week. It may be your opinion that a NBA title is easier to win than a super bowl but it don't make it true. In basketball you have a chance to win a series. In the NFL it's win or go home. And you think the NBA is harder? Sorry but my reply to you is "nonsense".
    • Peyton vs reggie miller
      Yeah its much harder. In the NFL you just have to win 3-4 games lol. And you get a week to prepare for each one.   In baseball it is much tougher but the team with the best pitching always wins.   In basketball you have to have 3 great players out of 5 starters and beat another team with 3 great starters of their own.  And you don't get a bye either. You have to win 16 games, more than baseball or football.   "All you have to do is get 3 great players" .....YEAH THATS REAL EASY! There are only 8-10 guys who play. That's the equivalent of a football team fielding a roster with at least 15 great players. Its 60% of your starting unit.   In fact its not even close.
  • Topics

  • Members

    • GoDeep

      GoDeep 401

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • shakedownstreet

      shakedownstreet 4,314

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Gavin

      Gavin 5,828

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • GoatBeard

      GoatBeard 41

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Revala

      Revala 1

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • gregr507

      gregr507 13

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Superman

      Superman 19,324

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Andretoindy

      Andretoindy 66

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • SuperJoe33

      SuperJoe33 7

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Buddy Lee

      Buddy Lee 30

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Blog Entries

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.