Lost: Offense

[ColtsBlueFL]

My god, man. Do you have a point in all of this or do you just want to argue? You said my comments were opinions, not facts, and I even confirmed as much in my next post, yet you still want to bicker?...

I said you stated them as facts, not as opinions. Please get it right.  When opinion are word as if absolute truth, It is no longer an opinion,  Then it is up for scrutiny. Do you not get that?  Or can't you tell the difference the difference between saying something like, 'I really don't think Arians offensive scheme is going to be beneficial to Luck's long term development, and if so, that might tarnish the franchise as a whole'  To "The immediate success he's produced with this team so far is not worth the long term damage he will do to Luck's development, as well as the franchise as a whole."  first one I read, disagree on the inside (or agree on if something I feel too) and generally move on form. The second statement, where it is said  as if there is no other alternative, is open to challenge, and IMHO, possibly bordering on disinformation.  word your opinions correctly, you'll never see me.

 

It's common knowledge that Arians had no choice in the matter. This isn't up for debate. He was forced out because Art Rooney wanted to go in another direction with the offense and overruled Tomlin on the matter of Arians coming back. The Rooney's were classy about it and let him save face by calling it a retirement, but he was relieved of his play-calling duties whether he wanted to be or not.

 

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/34496197

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7489906/pittsburgh-steelers-chose-not-keep-bruce-arians-bucking-ben-roethlisberger-sources-say

 

 

I think it's sad that you have to resort to word pinching on something that is really a non-issue

 

If they let him go before his contract expired, that is firing.  They did not.  His contract ended and he had no obligation to them, nor did they to him at that point.  That is not Fired... which was your words.  I beginning to think you use your words to obfuscate the truth and influence people.  That's my point.

I addressed everything that was worthy of being addressed. What exactly did I miss that you're so hung up on right now?

 

 

 

Awesome....And I care about this much

 

Sounds like were on the same ground.

You're missing my point, in reference to the "backyard football" remark. What I'm saying is, playing sloppy, undisciplined football for 3 quarters and always expecting the QB to bail you out in the 2 minute drill at the end of games is not anything tangible that can be transferred over to next season. You can't build an offense around broken plays, scrambles and QB throws with 2 defenders draped on his back. You're essentially playing hero ball and rolling the dice every time you take the field. How is that making Luck a better QB, or any of our offense better in the long run? Seattle and Washington aren't playing backyard football. They're running effective plays that cater to the personnel on the roster. We're running a high demand offense that is feast or famine, and requires the QB to operate under constant duress.   

 

Then be more specific to your point, backyard football is open to interpretation by the reader.   Now Luck isn't a Cam Newton, Russel Wilson, or RG3.  I believe with his skills, we have to run more plays from the pocket.  Short plays because the O line stinks.  I'll have to re-add the numbers, but our last game we were approximately 8-12 short pass for 72 yards and 2 deep completions for 51.  Second half, we only went deep 4 times (early) by my count and short on 14.  Beginning of the second half we were 1-4 for 33 yards deep and 0-7 short passes for no yards if I added right.  Then on the last drive, Luck went 6-7 on all short passes for the winning TD.  Now, why did those 7 short passes work, while the prior 7 short passes all failed?  Decipher that kind of info and tell the folks what you think, and that's good stuff.

And the fact still remains that he was fired by the Browns because his offense wasn't producing anymore. Inconsistency is a trend in Arians led offenses, if you haven't noticed yet

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=1696154

 

That's a good link for folks to follow on.  Then upon further reading, people,may find head coach who may have been a loose cannon firing somebody after every season. The year prior to Arians it was D coordinator.  Next season O coordinator and 2 more O assistants.  And yes, that dreaded injury on the O line killed Arians system back then too.  ;)  But heas adjusted and gone short recently.  Still didn't help too much.

It's also well-documented that Ben wasn't pleased with the Arians firing, so he's been pouting about it ever since. He doesn't like Haley's offense, even though before the injury, he was on pace to have his best season statistically and was taking less hits, sacks and pressures. Sounds to me like Haley was trying to protect Ben, but Ben is too slow to realize it.   

 

And while we're bringing up credible opinions, Hines Ward even went as far to say that part of the reason Arians wasn't retained is because he coddled Ben too much and let him do whatever he wanted.

 

http://plus.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php/pro-sports/steelers/118613-ed-hines-ward-explains-arians-firing

 

But you earlier said " ... wised up and realized that it wasn't the talent, but the scheme that was flawed."   But Ward says it's that Arians was to close to Ben? Oh, side note: wasn't retained was used... not 'fired'.

What you're not realizing is i didn't make that post with the intent to convince anyone of anything. Just voicing my opinions on the state of the offense. If you don't agree with it, so be it. Nobody has time to write mini research papers just to appease you. Anyone who's watched the games can see that play-calling is an issue with this offense. I've already spent way too much time in this thread than I originally intended. Thanks.....

Because your writing didn't sound like opinion to me. It was like you telling me the way it is, and the way it is going to be.  That's not opinion.  And if if turns out not true, it's disinformation.  So if you would please write your views in such a way so everyone knows it is opinion and not the Absolute Truth, you won't make me waste time pointing out your carelessness, and you wasting time in response. Or, provide supporting evidence for your statement of fact you say is opinion, and it's a done deal. Right?

 

You keep adding up the sum of those poor play calls, and eventually the odds will catch up. It WILL cost us a game. It WILL get Luck hurt. (in my opinion.... Better?)

 

That's a little better, only because of the disclaimer at the end. OTOH would have probably stated it like:

 

"I feel that with those type of poor play calls, eventually we likely lose a game or games we should not have and maybe the suffer the possibility of Luck getting injured."

 

See the difference?  And what if Luck never gets hurt?  Then your statement is not correct, opinion or not. Not until it does happen, if it happens.  I do think you are trying to 'convince anyone of anything', more so now than even before.

I'd rather have a great coach who can make marginal players look great,  and great one's look like HOFers

 

Then name him/them, and what the chances or circumstances you believe (not know) will bring him/them on board.

I think Pagano went with familiarity. He and Arians coached together (and against each other.) That's neither a testament or indictment to Arians abilities as a play-caller. Bruce has handled the interim HC job much better than I expected....And I hope it gets him a one way ticket out of here

 

You get to hope that hope.  And I get to say I'm so glad Pagano picked up the phone and called BA first.  It brought my team out of the depths on being worst NFL team to playoff status again.

 

I said my piece on this, you can have last the word.

[FanFromtheWasteland]

back on topic a little

 

can somebody answer a couple of quetions for me? (this was question one  )

 

What is the reason that it seem to me anyway that almost all are run plays are to the left?

[The Fish]

back on topic a little

 

can somebody answer a couple of quetions for me? (this was question one  )

 

What is the reason that it seem to me anyway that almost all are run plays are to the left?

Because Costanzo is the only guy who can push back.

[superrep1967]

Are we allowed to criticise Luck yet? Or is it still 50% O line 50% Arians 0% Luck fault that the offence is struggling?

It's a combination of all of the above. But you can criticize Luck all you want anytime but it may not always be accurate. Because it truly is a combination of things at different times.   

[Jules]

I have a feeling this offense is due for another explosive game. I said the same before our Packers game. Maybe the combination of being home and the Pagano factor could make it happen.

 

We'll see.

 

But, I just think they can pick it up again.....

[weslo1812]

There was an Article I read a while ago where Ariens was talking about the play calling and that he has those plays in the playbook but he gonna rely on taking shots and throwing it down field. He said hed really not gonna use the short plaus alot unless he sees really neccasary basically. So as far as play calling is concerned I dont think its gonna change. This is how Ariens is and what he does. Jopefully ee really improve that O line in the offseason because were gonna need it.

[Gavin]

There was an Article I read a while ago where Ariens was talking about the play calling and that he has those plays in the playbook but he gonna rely on taking shots and throwing it down field. He said hed really not gonna use the short plaus alot unless he sees really neccasary basically. So as far as play calling is concerned I dont think its gonna change. This is how Ariens is and what he does. Jopefully ee really improve that O line in the offseason because were gonna need it.

have that article?

[YOUR GM]

I said you stated them as facts, not as opinions. Please get it right.  When opinion are word as if absolute truth, It is no longer an opinion,  Then it is up for scrutiny. Do you not get that?  Or can't you tell the difference the difference between saying something like, 'I really don't think Arians offensive scheme is going to be beneficial to Luck's long term development, and if so, that might tarnish the franchise as a whole'  To "The immediate success he's produced with this team so far is not worth the long term damage he will do to Luck's development, as well as the franchise as a whole."  first one I read, disagree on the inside (or agree on if something I feel too) and generally move on form. The second statement, where it is said  as if there is no other alternative, is open to challenge, and IMHO, possibly bordering on disinformation.  word your opinions correctly, you'll never see me.

 

Ok, I've had about enough of you. It's obvious you're just wanting to argue. To insinuate that I'm deliberately putting out false information to sway people on this forum is actually bad form on your part. I did not misquote anyone, skew any numbers or omit any bit of information in any of my statements. They were clearly MY opinions and I did not try to present them as anything but such. Your hang up with the way I word my opinions is just that.... YOUR hang up. Not my problem. Stop being an argumentative, [insert whatever expletive you like]     

 

 

If they let him go before his contract expired, that is firing.  They did not.  His contract ended and he had no obligation to them, nor did they to him at that point.  That is not Fired... which was your words.  I beginning to think you use your words to obfuscate the truth and influence people.  That's my point.

 

The bottom line is this... Bruce Arians was retired (by the Steelers.) He did not retire. There is a difference. He was forced out because he was no longer wanted by the Steelers orgnaization. Were it truly his choice to retire, my guess would be that he probably wouldn't have jumped so quick at Pagano's offer to be our coordinator. It was not a mutual agreement for Bruce Arians and the Steelers organization to part ways with each other. It is, in fact, more feasible for me to say that YOU are the one guilty of spreading disinformation right now, with the amount of spinning you're doing. Was the separation amicable? If you agree that it was not, you're supporting my original talking point.

 

Word pinching is what you're argument in this regard is reduced to. You can continue to clinch to your strawmen all you want, however.  

 

Then be more specific to your point, backyard football is open to interpretation by the reader.

 

Only those looking for something to argue about. Once again, your issue with my wording is your hang up, not mine.

 

Now Luck isn't a Cam Newton, Russel Wilson, or RG3.  I believe with his skills, we have to run more plays from the pocket.  Short plays because the O line stinks.  I'll have to re-add the numbers, but our last game we were approximately 8-12 short pass for 72 yards and 2 deep completions for 51.  Second half, we only went deep 4 times (early) by my count and short on 14.  Beginning of the second half we were 1-4 for 33 yards deep and 0-7 short passes for no yards if I added right.  Then on the last drive, Luck went 6-7 on all short passes for the winning TD.  Now, why did those 7 short passes work, while the prior 7 short passes all failed?  Decipher that kind of info and tell the folks what you think, and that's good stuff.

 

Beyond the fact that your numbers don't add up (unless you intentionally left out a few of his attempts), your numbers also don't take into account his 6 scrambles where he was flushed from the pocket (holding the ball too long) or his 3 sacks. How many of those were intended to be deeper passes, I wonder? That's 9 extra plays you're not accounting for.

 

 

That's a good link for folks to follow on.  Then upon further reading, people,may find head coach who may have been a loose cannon firing somebody after every season. The year prior to Arians it was D coordinator.  Next season O coordinator and 2 more O assistants.  And yes, that dreaded injury on the O line killed Arians system back then too.   ;)  But heas adjusted and gone short recently.  Still didn't help too much.

 

 

It sounds like you're trying to discredit the head coach by adding your own opinions to the circumstances.The facts are this... The Browns offense was nothing more than average even in Arians best season, and dropped off, significantly, the following season. Whatever stigmas you want to attach to Butch Davis' tenure as head coach of the Browns does not negate the fact that Arians was fired because his offenses didn't produce consistently. A trend that has followed him everywhere he's landed.

 

 

But you earlier said " ... wised up and realized that it wasn't the talent, but the scheme that was flawed."   But Ward says it's that Arians was to close to Ben? Oh, side note: wasn't retained was used... not 'fired'.

I fail to see how one contradicts the other. Care to explain?

 

Because your writing didn't sound like opinion to me. It was like you telling me the way it is, and the way it is going to be.  That's not opinion.  And if if turns out not true, it's disinformation. So if you would please write your views in such a way so everyone knows it is opinion and not the Absolute Truth, you won't make me waste time pointing out your carelessness, and you wasting time in response. Or, provide supporting evidence for your statement of fact you say is opinion, and it's a done deal. Right?

 

Once again, the only one who seemed to confuse my original post as anything other than my own opinion is you. That is your problem to deal with. 

 

 

Then name him/them, and what the chances or circumstances you believe (not know) will bring him/them on board.

 

There are a number of coordinators that will be available who I feel could do a better job than Arians is doing right now. I could go into a big list of those names, but that's besides the point, and another topic entirely. We've already derailed this thread enough as it is, don't you think?

 

You get to hope that hope.  And I get to say I'm so glad Pagano picked up the phone and called BA first.  It brought my team out of the depths on being worst NFL team to playoff status again.

 

Thank you for telling me what I can and can't hope.lol A bit full of yourself, aye?

 

 

I said my piece on this, you can have last the word.

 

I seriously doubt that. Prove me wrong ;)  

[Old Colt]

This Colts o-Line needs retooled big friggin time

Colt's simply need to keep an Oline that can stay healthy....  injuries have killed them this year ...need to build a solid starting oline and some quality depth.  Only then we will see the true capabilities of Luck, when he has consistent time, he will lead this team to heights we all desire.  He has been amazing this season given the oline issues. 

[Nostrils]

It's not only that, Wilson is also playing on a team with a top-notch running game and the #2 defense, which forces a large number of turnovers, giving him short fields. 

 

In the previous two games, the Seahawks scored 108 points.  In one game, Wilson completed 7 passes.  In the next, 14.  With a mediocre defense and running game, you wouldn't be looking at the same thing. 

 EXACTLY!!!!... 

[GoColts8818]

back on topic a little

 

can somebody answer a couple of quetions for me? (this was question one  )

 

What is the reason that it seem to me anyway that almost all are run plays are to the left?

Have you watched the right side of the line attempt to block?  It's not very good.  At least behind Castonzo and Reitz they get a push at times.  Also one thing I really like about Castonzo is that he can get out there and run with the back like Glenn used to do for Edge.  It's clear he's our best lineman so the Colts are trying to maximize things behind him. 

[FanFromtheWasteland]

Because Costanzo is the only guy who can push back.

 

 

Have you watched the right side of the line attempt to block?  It's not very good.  At least behind Castonzo and Reitz they get a push at times.  Also one thing I really like about Castonzo is that he can get out there and run with the back like Glenn used to do for Edge.  It's clear he's our best lineman so the Colts are trying to maximize things behind him. 

Yeah I knew it was most likely a dumb question and I figured that maybe that was the answer but just wanted to make sure I wasn’t missing something else.  Thanks

[PrincetonTiger]

How can the Chiefs have a record like they do with a defense like they had?

[JoKeR]

Luck is 1-7 in the second half right now, with a sack and a scramble (nine pass plays called). We've run the ball twice. We have one first down. We started the half with a ten point lead.

Can I criticize Arians' play calling?

I remember his 1st half completion % being great,mathematically 1-7 in the second mostly because of drops, like everyone had hands of stone.

[Superman]

I remember his 1st half completion % being great,mathematically 1-7 in the second mostly because of drops, like everyone had hands of stone.

 

The drops were part of it. But several of those throws were highly contested. No one was getting open. Luck overthrew some balls, put the ball behind his receiver a couple of times, and got flushed from the pocket, sacked and even hit after the throw multiple times. The passing game was essentially dead for the first four possessions of the second half. The reasons for that are whatever they are.

 

Meanwhile, we called two run plays. Going through the first four possessions, we called fourteen pass plays and two run plays. We earned one first down (and got another via penalty). Luck was 1/10 in that stretch, with two scrambles, a sack, and a freebie due to the roughing call. He missed nine passes in a row. These four possessions were the epitome of bad play calling. Down after down, pass play after pass play, with no success. Why not call a run? It's no coincidence that the one scoring drive we had in the second half used the run to move the ball.

 

We had a game against the Bucs last season, where Painter had a terrible stretch like this. After his second touchdown pass, he went 5/14 and was sacked three times, while we called three run plays. One of those completions was an 11 yard throw on 3rd and 22. That's 17 pass plays for Curtis Painter, compared to three run plays. With no success. And it's not like we were down. The score was tied at 17 at the beginning of that stretch. It was basically the same silly play calling as what Arians did on Sunday, except that Andrew Luck >>>>>> Curtis Painter.

[JoKeR]

The drops were part of it. But several of those throws were highly contested. No one was getting open. Luck overthrew some balls, put the ball behind his receiver a couple of times, and got flushed from the pocket, sacked and even hit after the throw multiple times. The passing game was essentially dead for the first four possessions of the second half. The reasons for that are whatever they are.

Meanwhile, we called two run plays. Going through the first four possessions, we called fourteen pass plays and two run plays. We earned one first down (and got another via penalty). Luck was 1/10 in that stretch, with two scrambles, a sack, and a freebie due to the roughing call. He missed nine passes in a row. These four possessions were the epitome of bad play calling. Down after down, pass play after pass play, with no success. Why not call a run? It's no coincidence that the one scoring drive we had in the second half used the run to move the ball.

We had a game against the Bucs last season, where Painter had a terrible stretch like this. After his second touchdown pass, he went 5/14 and was sacked three times, while we called three run plays. One of those completions was an 11 yard throw on 3rd and 22. That's 17 pass plays for Curtis Painter, compared to three run plays. With no success. And it's not like we were down. The score was tied at 17 at the beginning of that stretch. It was basically the same silly play calling as what Arians did on Sunday, except that Andrew Luck >>>>>> Curtis Painter.

Well I can't argue against that, Arians play calling confuses "everyone" at times. Like the WR pass option play when the offense wasn't playing well. Wouldn't you try to get some rhythm 1st before trying some trickery?

[John Waylon]

Well I can't argue against that, Arians play calling confuses "everyone" at times. Like the WR pass option play when the offense wasn't playing well. Wouldn't you try to get some rhythm 1st before trying some trickery?

Well, I dunno about that... it was a head scratcher for sure, but plays like that sometimes work, and create a spark. Remember Joe Addai's TD pass against the 49ers? Our offense was off bad all day, and it was the play that won us the game.

I question whether Hilton was the one to pull it off... That was an awful throw. Should maybe someone else have tossed it?

I'd love to see Reggie get a passing TD.

[House]

Well, I dunno about that... it was a head scratcher for sure, but plays like that sometimes work, and create a spark. Remember Joe Addai's TD pass against the 49ers? Our offense was off bad all day, and it was the play that won us the game.I question whether Hilton was the one to pull it off... That was an awful throw. Should maybe someone else have tossed it?I'd love to see Reggie get a passing TD.

In T.Ys defense the ball was tipped lol. But it would have had no chance even if it wasn't.

[ColtsBlueFL]

In T.Ys defense the ball was tipped lol. But it would have had no chance even if it wasn't.

 

It was tipped, but he pulled a Luck and plain held on to it too long.  Then the D player was close enough to get his fingers on it as it sailed over.

[Superman]

Well, I dunno about that... it was a head scratcher for sure, but plays like that sometimes work, and create a spark. Remember Joe Addai's TD pass against the 49ers? Our offense was off bad all day, and it was the play that won us the game. I question whether Hilton was the one to pull it off... That was an awful throw. Should maybe someone else have tossed it? I'd love to see Reggie get a passing TD.

 

Gimmick plays work sometimes. I didn't like that one, at that spot on the field. Not enough space. I did like the play-action screen to Reggie earlier in that drive. I know Arians has an imagination, and has a bunch of wrinkles in his play book. He worked for Bill Cowher, and the Steelers were always known for calling a trick play between the 40s. He has a deep play book. But it's like he got caught in the matrix in the second half.

 

I said earlier in the thread that there are plenty of reasons why he might have lost sight of what he was doing. He's wearing a lot of hats right now. I'm glad that he snapped out of it when he did, but if the Chiefs had been able to score or convert that 4th and short, we might have coughed up the lead.

[JoKeR]

It was tipped, but he pulled a Luck and plain held on to it too long. Then the D player was close enough to get his fingers on it as it sailed over.

Is it still " holding on the ball too long " if the play is still developing?

[ColtsBlueFL]

Is it still " holding on the ball too long " if the play is still developing?

If you run far enough to very soon almost be out of bounds and a defender out in coverage comes up almost close enough to make a tackle on you, yes. It is a poor play that takes too long to develop.  When you roll out like that (QB, RB, or WR) looking to pass, you've narrowed the field and limited your targets.  Any extra time accumulated before passing just allows more defenders to have changed direction to defend the area.  I generally like it when passes are attempted by the time the WR clears the hash marks, but before reaching the numbers, like these-

 

or

[John Waylon]

Looking MUCH better today.

But dear god our line is beyond awful. It has got to be the worst group we've fielded.

[YOUR GM]

Looking MUCH better today. But dear god our line is beyond awful. It has got to be the worst group we've fielded.

 

 

I'll give credit where due. The few issues on offense today have been all on Luck and the O-line. Arians is calling a good game right now.

 

 

Sidenote: I like the no-challenge by Pagano on that TY touchdown. It WAS a touchdown but we had the ball on the 1 with 3 downs to work with. Good situational management right there. Glad to have coach back! 

[John Waylon]

Luck was using Paintervision on that last drive before the half, staring Reggie down.

Reggie is being mugged quite a bit today and I think he was fishing for PI there.

[GoColts8818]

Found!  After further review we left them in Indianapolis last week to get ready for today!

[colts_mp]

Found!  After further review we left them in Indianapolis last week to get ready for today!

not so fast.  we only had 265 yards total offense and Luck went 14/28 for 184.  Outside of the 70yd TD catch by Hilton our offense was pretty weak, especially the 3rd quarter.  We opened the game with a good drive and closed the game with a good drive.  

 

We're gonna need alot more next week against the Ravens.

[GoColts8818]

not so fast.  we only had 265 yards total offense and Luck went 14/28 for 184.  Outside of the 70yd TD catch by Hilton our offense was pretty weak, especially the 3rd quarter.  We opened the game with a good drive and closed the game with a good drive.  

 

We're gonna need alot more next week against the Ravens.

21 points (and that's taking the kick return out of things) against one of the best defenses in the NFL in a game they HAVE to win and you don't is a very good day for any offense.  Also we got the ball back with just under 10 minutes to play and the Texans never saw it again.  If that's weak offense I'll take that every week. 

[colts_mp]

  If that's weak offense I'll take that every week. 

then you'll be taking a loss come playoff time because that's not enough to get the job done.  Don't forget we were at home where we (especially Luck) play much better than on the road.

 

I don't think it would be enough to beat Baltimore but against NE or Denver it won't even be close to enough.  

[GoColts8818]

then you'll be taking a loss come playoff time because that's not enough to get the job done.  Don't forget we were at home where we (especially Luck) play much better than on the road.

 

I don't think it would be enough to beat Baltimore but against NE or Denver it won't even be close to enough.  

Horse hockey if we can hold the ball for nearly 10 minutes a drive we'll be just fine in the playoffs.  We beat the Ravens once in the playoffs doing exactly that.  Yards isn't the only measure to if an offense is working or not.