Indy vs Seattle Defensive Stats

[DaColts85]

26 minutes ago, tikyle said:

Can we have a little perspective here.

 

We have played the Rams, Browns and Arizona.

 

Seattle has played Green Bay, Titans and 49ers.

 

Let's just say they've played much better competition than we have.  And also to have played those teams and still be 30th in passing D is quite alarming, even if it is only yards allowed.  A 2nd year QB who looked terrible his rookie year, a rookie QB who has no weapons on the outside and an over the hill QB who was missing wide open receivers.  And we're still 30th in pass D?  We need more pass rush.  It can't just be Simon and a prayer.

There are a lot of things wrong with this attempted argument.  We had an obvious bad opening game...and that one game is producing the stat line of 30th in passing.  We have been minus our #1 CB which hurts as well.  We had a completely new defense with two rookies in the secondary you are trying to tear apart for this game as well.  Also, Goff has been pretty solid so far and guess what QB's do magically get better with time and a better system now.

 

The Rams also beat the 49ers since you are trying to say one is tuff but the other is not...so that hurts your argument.

 

Kizer had a bad game and we had pressure, and you like others get fixated on the Sack stat and over look the pressure and hits we had on him, so you claim we had no pressure on him...wrong.

 

The Cards game we shot ourselves in the foot and looked bad in the second half.  We did though show a lot of growth form week one so again the stat you are fixated on is with an extremely small sample size.

 

So, a Seattle team that is 1-2 plays a Colts team that is 1-2.  Home field advantage is my only concern for this game!

[krunk]

49 minutes ago, tikyle said:

Can we have a little perspective here.

 

We have played the Rams, Browns and Arizona.

 

Seattle has played Green Bay, Titans and 49ers.

 

Let's just say they've played much better competition than we have.  And also to have played those teams and still be 30th in passing D is quite alarming, even if it is only yards allowed.  A 2nd year QB who looked terrible his rookie year, a rookie QB who has no weapons on the outside and an over the hill QB who was missing wide open receivers.  And we're still 30th in pass D?  We need more pass rush.  It can't just be Simon and a prayer.

Bad perspective from you.  

[krunk]

1 hour ago, tikyle said:

Can we have a little perspective here.

 

We have played the Rams, Browns and Arizona.

 

Seattle has played Green Bay, Titans and 49ers.

 

Let's just say they've played much better competition than we have.  And also to have played those teams and still be 30th in passing D is quite alarming, even if it is only yards allowed.  A 2nd year QB who looked terrible his rookie year, a rookie QB who has no weapons on the outside and an over the hill QB who was missing wide open receivers.  And we're still 30th in pass D?  We need more pass rush.  It can't just be Simon and a prayer.

Why come you're not telling us more about that bad performance Seattle put up against San Francisco and holding them to that?  When they faced poor competition they played just like them.   Sounds like a superior team right?

[krunk]

We've got former Seahawks in our front office and on both sides of the football to go along with the film.  No way we shouldn't  have a pretty good game plan to counter what we'll be facing.  I'm sure we've got some good intel on how they do things.

[Superman]

4 hours ago, DaColts85 said:

We had an obvious bad opening game...and that one game is producing the stat line of 30th in passing. 

 

That first game isn't an outlier at this point, not for passing yardage. We gave up 310 passing yards to the Rams, 332 to the Cardinals, and 242 to the Browns, for an average of 294. The Rams game is basically what we are against the pass right now.

 

Hopefully we'll get better as time goes on. The Seahawks haven't been lighting it on fire so far, averaging less than 230 passing yards/game, and Wilson is at 57% completions. He's still a dangerous weapon, and will break contain if we aren't disciplined up front (which we weren't last week). 

[tikyle]

On 9/29/2017 at 3:22 PM, krunk said:

Bad perspective from you.  

 

With hindsight, do you think it was bad now?

[tikyle]

On 9/29/2017 at 3:06 PM, DaColts85 said:

There are a lot of things wrong with this attempted argument.  We had an obvious bad opening game...and that one game is producing the stat line of 30th in passing.  We have been minus our #1 CB which hurts as well.  We had a completely new defense with two rookies in the secondary you are trying to tear apart for this game as well.  Also, Goff has been pretty solid so far and guess what QB's do magically get better with time and a better system now.

 

The Rams also beat the 49ers since you are trying to say one is tuff but the other is not...so that hurts your argument.

 

Kizer had a bad game and we had pressure, and you like others get fixated on the Sack stat and over look the pressure and hits we had on him, so you claim we had no pressure on him...wrong.

 

The Cards game we shot ourselves in the foot and looked bad in the second half.  We did though show a lot of growth form week one so again the stat you are fixated on is with an extremely small sample size.

 

So, a Seattle team that is 1-2 plays a Colts team that is 1-2.  Home field advantage is my only concern for this game!

 

....................please listen to me next time when I pose a rational argument.  I don't like to bust the bubble of people in here so I tone down my takes but this Colts team is not very good and that was obvious before this game.