Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Did Seattle lay the blueprint on how to beat teams like the Broncos and Patriots?

Iron Colt

By Iron Colt
in NFL General

 Share

Recommended Posts

Iron Colt Practice Squad

Iron Colt

Posted
Posted

Curious if teams get way more aggressive and attack more upfront with 4 man fronts and zone up in the back and hit hard and secure rather than trying to cover all these spread formations man to man.

Kind of tired of this video game football that's been going on the last few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tonychen Walk On

tonychen

Posted
Posted

It is no longer a mystery about how to beat Broncos and a degenerating Pats. The biggest mystery now is for the rest of NFL how to beat Seahawks and 49ers which are loaded with talents on both sides of the football without any major weaknesses. But for beating all these teams but the Pats, ironically as it is the weakest among all these top teams, Colts may have an answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John Dee Walk On

John Dee

Posted
Posted

There are 2 main reasons Seattle is SO good...

 

They can rush the QB with only 4, nearly every down.    That is HUGE.

 

and ..    They tackle...  better than ANY team in the NFL in recent history.

 

If that D could not generate the rush is does...   we are not talking about the Seattle DB's. at all.     Just go back to the Colt game...  Luck extended plays and the "great" R Sherman got toasted by TY Hilton..

 

The BEST PASS D IS A GREAT PASS RUSH.     That has been true for EVERY great D this league has ever seen.

 

The good thing is...     Ya start winning, ya gotta start paying these players.   

Curious if teams get way more aggressive and attack more upfront with 4 man fronts and zone up in the back and hit hard and secure rather than trying to cover all these spread formations man to man.

Kind of tired of this video game football that's been going on the last few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldunclemark Walk On

oldunclemark

Posted
Posted

Curious if teams get way more aggressive and attack more upfront with 4 man fronts and zone up in the back and hit hard and secure rather than trying to cover all these spread formations man to man.

Kind of tired of this video game football that's been going on the last few years.

There is no such thing as a blueprint..

Teams evolve..........Denver will adjust to what Seattle does

 

..2014 will be different

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sweetsurrender Walk On

sweetsurrender

Posted
Posted

There is no formula for beating teams least of all ones led by Brady and Manning who routinely win 12-13 games every year. Football is more about match-ups and Seattle is a tough match up for any team because every level of their defense is formidable and they have a very poised, smart young QB who does not turn over and is also clutch. It is really the recipe for winning championships which is what Seattle did this year. But all teams evolve a lot year to year. I expect the Broncos to make changes so their offense is not so predictable and to address their defense which was not very good all year. The Pats biggest issue last year was health so if they can stay relatively healthy next season and add a couple more weapons for Brady then they can easily beat the likes of Seattle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BleedBlu8792 Walk On

BleedBlu8792

Posted
Posted

There are 2 main reasons Seattle is SO good...

They can rush the QB with only 4, nearly every down. That is HUGE.

and .. They tackle... better than ANY team in the NFL in recent history.

If that D could not generate the rush is does... we are not talking about the Seattle DB's. at all. Just go back to the Colt game... Luck extended plays and the "great" R Sherman got toasted by TY Hilton..

The BEST PASS D IS A GREAT PASS RUSH. That has been true for EVERY great D this league has ever seen.

The good thing is... Ya start winning, ya gotta start paying these players.

That was Browner, not the "great" Sherman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldunclemark Walk On

oldunclemark

Posted
Posted

     Understand what happens to Seattle now.. Every team in the NFL now spends half the spring and summer game planning how to beat Seattle...

 

....Offensive and defensive coordinators are nuts.......

 

Everyone offensive coordinator on the SeaHawks 2014  schedule is probably, as you are reading this, spending time they should be spending with their families looking at tape of Seattle's defense plotting how to beat that defense.......

 

....including an old guy in a dark room in Denver...who, like coaches in SF, Arizona and St. Louis,  is probably scanning every single play from last season

 

That's one of the reasons its so hard to win back-to-back NFL titles....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chad72 Ring of Honor

chad72

Posted
Posted

There's really nothing new about what they did.  The only difference is that Seattle had the personnel to execute the game plan.

 

Yep. Any QB can be made pedestrian with a great pass rush. Giants did that to Brady with 14 and 17 pts in 2 SBs. Then, Pats have done that to Peyton in the past, so have the Chargers and Steelers. Then, Ravens did that to Brady a few times too. Seattle did that to the Saints and 49ers the first time they played them, shellacking. The second time around, the 49ers and Saints were a little more ready for the physicality.

 

Yes, the Broncos played the Seahawks in pre-season but we all know pre-season is not the best gauge. Most importantly, the 49ers stayed patient when they beat the Seahawks and they had the D to keep the game close. Same with Colts in the regular season game. Seattle got a safety and were up 12-0 in the first quarter.

 

Colts stayed patient and then Luck could roll out and take shots deep unlike Peyton. Broncos' D could not limit the Seattle O to FGs like we did with Hauschka, who kicked about 4 FGs, I think. 49ers had the D to limit Seattle O to 17 points in their 19-17 win in the 2nd regular season game.

 

Broncos did not stay patient, and they were already down 0-15 by the first quarter. They had a statue for a QB who could not roll out and take shots deep down. Broncos' D had not generated a turnover the ENTIRE PLAYOFFS, including the SB, they even had me fooled that they were playing well. So, the formula was easy, neutralize Peyton and the Broncos' team comes crumbling because the D did not have the character nor firepower to win by itself without point support in the mid 20s at least.

 

You can stay patient if you are running the ball well enough, which the Broncos were not doing either. There will always be a game where you barely hit 20 points that you might need the D to hold the fort for you but then, you would need to stay patient by running well, that is what happened in the 15-6 playoff win over the Ravens for the Colts in 2006.

 

If Russell Wilson or Kapernick plays pedestrian, Seahawks and 49ers can still stay in ballgames with their running game, D, and win it. If Peyton, Brady, Rivers or Luck play pedestrian, game, set, match to the opponents, IMO. That is the fundamental difference in the team makeups, IMO, as of right now. It will change over the next 2 years, the question is which team will implement those changes the best and quickest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Harden Walk On

James Harden

Posted
Posted

Sure Seattle have the blueprints but they are beatable. The NFC championship game could have turn out differently if Kaepernick throw the ball perfectly to Crabtree in the final seconds of the game. Then the 49ers would have went to the Superbowl. The Colts already can play ball against Seahawks and Broncos. We just need a blueprint for the Patriots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Synthetic Walk On

Synthetic

Posted
Posted

No, the Colts laid the blueprint.

 

 

Or better yet, the Saints in the Super Bowl showed you how to force Manning into mistakes.

 

He was only sacked once against Seattle. They didn't even blitz him like the Saints did in Super Bowl 44, his main weakness is taking hits. He gets quick feet and will lead his receivers into big hits once you lay a cold one on him a few times and the Colts did an excellent job of playing rough with Manning early in the game when they were blowing them out. Sure he came back and got to pad his stats and make the scoreboard look closer, but that game was over early on.

 

Denver had not played one top defense all year long. Any of the three NFC's best teams (Seattle, SF, NO) would have stomped them in that game, as you seen from Seattle.

 

There is no way that team would have broke all those records if they had the Saints or 49ers schedule. Seattle was beating the best teams in the league and squaring off against the most stellar defenses while the Broncos got cupcake after cupcake of teams that weren't going to do nothing to stop them from running up the stats to pat their egos.

 

 

New England struggled all year since Brady had no one to throw to, and he still put up impressive numbers with a banged up team. Losing Hernandez (not Welker) hurt them in the long run. Welker was expendable, cause the Pats depended on their TE's more than anything

 

 

And most of all, no one wants to ever admit this but the Pats defense has been very bad since they lost the Super Bowl in 2007. When they did win their Super Bowls, they had defenses that scared you. Look at how many times they picked Manning off in those AFC Championship games when they won the Super Bowls.

 

 

I don't believe Seattle really laid the blueprint. Teams have showed you how to beat them for years. The Saints manhandled the Pats in 2009 too, but no one ever wants to admit that obvious beat down. Even before that, great defensive teams have showed the "blueprint" to beating them.

 

 

Neither Brady or Manning have won a Super Bowl since Dubya was president. They are not invincible. You guys should have known that 5 years ago. Stop acting like New England and Denver are the powerhouses, neither one of these quarterbacks have won a ring in a while, and the times are changing and moving forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dustin Walk On

Dustin

Posted
Posted

No, the Colts laid the blueprint.

 

 

Or better yet, the Saints in the Super Bowl showed you how to force Manning into mistakes.

 

He was only sacked once against Seattle. They didn't even blitz him like the Saints did in Super Bowl 44, his main weakness is taking hits. He gets quick feet and will lead his receivers into big hits once you lay a cold one on him a few times and the Colts did an excellent job of playing rough with Manning early in the game when they were blowing them out. Sure he came back and got to pad his stats and make the scoreboard look closer, but that game was over early on.

 

Denver had not played one top defense all year long. Any of the three NFC's best teams (Seattle, SF, NO) would have stomped them in that game, as you seen from Seattle.

 

There is no way that team would have broke all those records if they had the Saints or 49ers schedule. Seattle was beating the best teams in the league and squaring off against the most stellar defenses while the Broncos got cupcake after cupcake of teams that weren't going to do nothing to stop them from running up the stats to pat their egos.

 

 

New England struggled all year since Brady had no one to throw to, and he still put up impressive numbers with a banged up team. Losing Hernandez (not Welker) hurt them in the long run. Welker was expendable, cause the Pats depended on their TE's more than anything

 

 

And most of all, no one wants to ever admit this but the Pats defense has been very bad since they lost the Super Bowl in 2007. When they did win their Super Bowls, they had defenses that scared you. Look at how many times they picked Manning off in those AFC Championship games when they won the Super Bowls.

 

 

I don't believe Seattle really laid the blueprint. Teams have showed you how to beat them for years. The Saints manhandled the Pats in 2009 too, but no one ever wants to admit that obvious beat down. Even before that, great defensive teams have showed the "blueprint" to beating them.

 

 

Neither Brady or Manning have won a Super Bowl since Dubya was president. They are not invincible. You guys should have known that 5 years ago. Stop acting like New England and Denver are the powerhouses, neither one of these quarterbacks have won a ring in a while, and the times are changing and moving forward.

 

New Orleans would have gotten crushed against Denver. They don't match-up with them well at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BOTT Walk On

BOTT

Posted
Posted

PFF can have that. We all seen Sherman hand off TY to Thomas. Sherman wasn't contesting that route fully as there was an obvious communication error between he and Thomas. Hilton had a nice conversion on Sherman late in the game though.

It was nice for Sherman to give up on the play though

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jules Walk On

Jules

Posted
Posted

Patriots vs. Colts of the early 2000's, Colts vs. Steelers playoffs 2005, Pats vs. Ravens/Giants. Broncos vs. Seahawks......

 

It's nothing new. The blueprint has been around for a while. A physical tough D with a "good enough" QB can trump the fancy passing frenzy led offenses at any time in big games.

 

In 2009 when we lost to the Saints in the SB that D thrived on turnovers and waited for it IMO......if you got too pass happy that turnover was often going to come for them. And I would argue their offense was better then the Colts that year too. We were 4 to 5 pt faves but really based on the regular season and post season runs I am not sure why looking back......

 

Same with this years Broncos, favored over the Seahawks by a few points and many here picked them to win and said "they liked" the matchups/thought the Hawks offense was not good enough to keep up with the 49ers let alone the Broncos, but we always get delusional by the QB.....fallen into the same trap many times myself.

 

Even a so called labeled physical defensive team like the Chiefs in 2013 was hardly worth their hype and record IMO. We showed as much in two meetings vs. them in like 4 weeks lol.

 

The AFC outside of the Colts beating the Seahaws/49ers was a giant fraud vs. the NFC in 2013 too. The NFC East was a joke, the NFC North was a joke, the NFC South's best team in Carolina beat the Patriots and so on and so on.......and the same Pats barely "scraped by" the dome team in New Orleans in Foxboro.

 

The NFC West is just brutal from top to bottom and we learned as much last year when the Colts played them. Even their bottom 2 teams can punch your lights out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldunclemark Walk On

oldunclemark

Posted
Posted

there is no blueprint....The NFL is too fluid for that.. That's just simplistic thinking...in hindsight..

 

Everybody who looked seriously at the Super Bowl said that Seattle matches up well with Denver

 

Who picks who and who the Vegas favorite is is not a factor in anything...but its over..

 

 

 

We all know that what worked last year will have to adjust in the future.......

 

Everybody works all summer to beat the team that won the title. That;s why few repeat...

 

Seattle wont always be able to sit in the same defense and stop people...no matter what they say...even they probably know that

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sweetsurrender Walk On

sweetsurrender

Posted
Posted

Patriots vs. Colts of the early 2000's, Colts vs. Steelers playoffs 2005, Pats vs. Ravens/Giants. Broncos vs. Seahawks......

 

It's nothing new. The blueprint has been around for a while. A physical tough D with a "good enough" QB can trump the fancy passing frenzy led offenses at any time in big games.

 

In 2009 when we lost to the Saints in the SB that D thrived on turnovers and waited for it IMO......if you got too pass happy that turnover was often going to come for them. And I would argue their offense was better then the Colts that year too. We were 4 to 5 pt faves but really based on the regular season and post season runs I am not sure why looking back......

 

Same with this years Broncos, favored over the Seahawks by a few points and many here picked them to win and said "they liked" the matchups/thought the Hawks offense was not good enough to keep up with the 49ers let alone the Broncos, but we always get delusional by the QB.....fallen into the same trap many times myself.

 

Even a so called labeled physical defensive team like the Chiefs in 2013 was hardly worth their hype and record IMO. We showed as much in two meetings vs. them in like 4 weeks lol.

 

The AFC outside of the Colts beating the Seahaws/49ers was a giant fraud vs. the NFC in 2013 too. The NFC East was a joke, the NFC North was a joke, the NFC South's best team in Carolina beat the Patriots and so on and so on.......and the same Pats barely "scraped by" the dome team in New Orleans in Foxboro.

 

The NFC West is just brutal from top to bottom and we learned as much last year when the Colts played them. Even their bottom 2 teams can punch your lights out.

Good points all around. The only thing is the AFC vs the NFC was not a blow out by any means. The bare numbers—wins and losses—come out to a narrow win for the NFC with a .530 winning percentage, while the AFC managed a .460. Neither number shows a fair amount of dominance or futility. The Colts are actually a great example of any given Sunday as they beat the two powerhouses in Seattle and San Fran and were blown out by Arizona and St. Louis. The parity is still there but I think the Super Bowl is making us think there is this huge gap between the NFC and AFC. The Ravens beat the Niners last year because they were the better, more physical team. As you say, pass first teams like Manning-led teams will always look bad against the physical defenses. I think what the AFC is lacking is the physical defenses with the exception of the Bengals and the Patriots had they been healthy all year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ColtsBlueFL Team Captain

ColtsBlueFL

Posted
Posted

Two things about the Seahawks surprised me a little.  

 

1. that so many 4 and 5 rounders are playing pro-bowl caliber ball

2. that so late in the season, those middle round phenoms and D stars appeared to have not lost any speed

 

Teams get beat up and lose a step after a long season.  All teams fly around in the first few weeks.  That Seahawks team looked real fast, especially on defense compared to other teams O's.  Almost no YAC, ever. And they don't whiff on the tackle.  Each man knows his job and concentrates on it, not thinking of helping out a team mate. Just concentrate on his responsibility that play and carry it out.

 

They can be beat, but they will never let it be an easy task to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BrentMc11 Walk On

BrentMc11

Posted
Posted

Two things about the Seahawks surprised me a little.  

 

1. that so many 4 and 5 rounders are playing pro-bowl caliber ball

2. that so late in the season, those middle round phenoms and D stars appeared to have not lost any speed

 

Teams get beat up and lose a step after a long season.  All teams fly around in the first few weeks.  That Seahawks team looked real fast, especially on defense compared to other teams O's.  Almost no YAC, ever. And they don't whiff on the tackle.  Each man knows his job and concentrates on it, not thinking of helping out a team mate. Just concentrate on his responsibility that play and carry it out.

 

They can be beat, but they will never let it be an easy task to do so.

They hit...wrap....and tackle.  My kind of defense.  Nice post!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sweetsurrender Walk On

sweetsurrender

Posted
Posted

There's really nothing new about what they did.  The only difference is that Seattle had the personnel to execute the game plan.

True. But this is the part I am struggling with. San Fran did not look that against Seattle and almost won at the end if Kaep throws the ball in the end zone a foot further. And even New Orleans had it within one score late in the game. I get that Seattle matched up well with Denver but something was really wrong in that game for it to be as brutal as it was. There were no adjustments from Denver at all when it was clear from the get go that Seattle had a beat on their routes. I don't think it is some blue print for beating Denver by any means but it is by far the most dumbfounding SB I have ever watched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jules Walk On

Jules

Posted
Posted

True. But this is the part I am struggling with. San Fran did not look that against Seattle and almost won at the end if Kaep throws the ball in the end zone a foot further. And even New Orleans had it within one score late in the game. I get that Seattle matched up well with Denver but something was really wrong in that game for it to be as brutal as it was. There were no adjustments from Denver at all when it was clear from the get go that Seattle had a beat on their routes. I don't think it is some blue print for beating Denver by any means but it is by far the most dumbfounding SB I have ever watched.

 

The matchup thing is just a comforting excuse at times IMO. Even if you matchup poorly vs. another team that does not mean you necessarily have to get blown out of the stadium or can't make adjustments. And you know what......ALL offenses can struggle vs. top defensive teams lol, it's no secret now and it was no secret heading into the Super Bowl. The Broncos didn't really even beat any "great" defenses the entire season. KC was a fraud I feel and I am not sure who else they got by that I think was that special overall on D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OffensivelyPC Active Roster

OffensivelyPC

Posted
Posted

True. But this is the part I am struggling with. San Fran did not look that against Seattle and almost won at the end if Kaep throws the ball in the end zone a foot further. And even New Orleans had it within one score late in the game. I get that Seattle matched up well with Denver but something was really wrong in that game for it to be as brutal as it was. There were no adjustments from Denver at all when it was clear from the get go that Seattle had a beat on their routes. I don't think it is some blue print for beating Denver by any means but it is by far the most dumbfounding SB I have ever watched.

Well, it that.  Probably worse than the 1993 superbowl with Dallas and Buffalo.  At least that game was kinda close at half time.  But even if there was nothing incredibily special with the seahawks game plan, they played mistake free, and Denver couldn't help but make mistakes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...