Anyone else worried?

[crazycolt1]

3 hours ago, Aluckiswolverine said:

I get what OP is saying. Would love the “Starwars” numbers on offense but not a fan of the dreadful cover 2 bend don’t break defense. 

 

Also so can do without Luck tearing it up regular season and then turning into playoff Peyton. Dominik Rhodes should have been Super Bowl MVP not Peyton.

 

Nah, the Colts defense should have been the MVP of the super bowl.

Besides, if you think Rhodes should have been the MVP then it should have been shared with Addai.

[Trueman]

4 hours ago, The Peytonator said:

There’s nothing inherently wrong with a 4-3 Cover 2, Dungy just didn’t have very good defenders to run it. He also showed waaaay too much of a preference for absolutely minuscule defensive tackles. He was rolling out 250 pound DTs on the reg. There’s a place for those types of guys, and it’s on third and long. He’d also employ a borderline prevent coverage all game long that just led to easy completions and long drives. 

 

A Cover 2 is fine, but I believe Eberflus has plans of mixing up his coverage schemes. There are whispers of a Seattle press Cover 3 being implemented as well. Truly the only thing that matters, and I’m not saying anything earth shattering, is having good players. The right players can make any scheme work. Chris Ballard is getting us good players. 

 

The problem with it is it's completely player reliant. You need great players in certain positions for it to function. There's no opportunity to equalize a disparity in talent with tactics/schemes. 

 

This is is why we won the SB when we got Booger. 

[Trueman]

2 hours ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

It's 2018, not 2004. What you call (well, not just you) tampa 2 is more influenced by Seattle's cover 3 than Dungy's original tampa 2. Way more. Actually, it is barely cover 2 (only mostly in RZ). It is mostly cover 3, with a single high safety, and a strong safety up close to the box. Not to mention the unbalanced front 4, which loooks more like a "shifted" 3-4 front, plus a tweener, than a traditional 4-3 front line.

 

We will talk a lot about it during the offseason I guess, because what's coming is not retro, but the opposite. New wave at it's finest.

 

Thanks , good post!

[Trueman]

17 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

Finishing 31st in the league was not scheme related 

 

Bingo. I honestly don't care if it's 3-4 or 4-3 , I just want it to be better than it was. 

 

I prefer more man coverage because I think it's better against Brady and elite Qb's, but if we go zone , fine. Just don't prioritize and build it like under Peyton.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

10 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Where did you come up with that? I haven't heard or seen anyone post that.

No one posted it But 90% of posts are DEFENSE, DEFENSE, DEFENSE. The rest are OL. Both need to be upgraded of course but so does every other part of the team. 

 

I love Mack, but he's still a question of how good and what kind of back he'll be. Even with him our group of backs is weak.

 

Besides TY, we have no one at WR. A major weakness in a passing league.

 

We all like Doyle, but he's not a vertical threat and who are our backups?

 

There are lots of needs on this team, not just Defense and they all need to be addressed. And I doubt we getting a Great Defense anytime soon. 

[crazycolt1]

15 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

No one posted it But 90% of posts are DEFENSE, DEFENSE, DEFENSE. The rest are OL. Both need to be upgraded of course but so does every other part of the team. 

 

I love Mack, but he's still a question of how good and what kind of back he'll be. Even with him our group of backs is weak.

 

Besides TY, we have no one at WR. A major weakness in a passing league.

 

We all like Doyle, but he's not a vertical threat and who are our backups?

 

There are lots of needs on this team, not just Defense and they all need to be addressed. And I doubt we getting a Great Defense anytime soon. 

Till the defense does get addressed this team is not going to win on a regular bases.

If we have learned anything from the past that goes all the way back since Peyton was drafted it takes a defense to win playoff and championship games. If that is what we want this team to do there is where we should start.

[Trueman]

Just now, crazycolt1 said:

Till the defense does get addressed this team is not going to win on a regular bases.

If we have learned anything from the past that goes all the way back since Peyton was drafted it takes a defense to win playoff and championship games. If that is what we want this team to do there is where we should start.

Exactly. 

 

Investing almost all your money in skilled positions is all well and good, but the Patriots showed the blueprint to building around a star QB who can make players better than they actually are. 

[HectorRoberts]

20 hours ago, Trueman said:

Is anyone worried or concerned that we look like we're mimicking the Polian/Dungy era a little too much?

 

I for one wasn't excited to hear that we're going back to the 4-3 cover 2 and the Reich hire couldn't be more Polian style. I'd rather mimic Denver's 4-3 , than ours of old.

 

I dunno, maybe Ballard is the key difference in building a different Colts era. I love that guy , and I believe in him. I just don't want it to be predictable and soft. I want some nasty and some complexity to our defence. 

 

Just curious to hear your guys thoughts. 

God yes! I’m petrified that we actually might become a good and respected team that actually wins games!!!! God forbid!

[Trueman]

2 minutes ago, HectorRoberts said:

God yes! I’m petrified that we actually might become a good and respected team that actually wins games!!!! God forbid!

 

Here we go....

 

thanks man.

[Aaron86]

I think you kinda need a strong running game to support a strong defence. Without a running game to control the the clock any of those defences are going to break.

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, Trueman said:

Exactly. 

 

Investing almost all your money in skilled positions is all well and good, but the Patriots showed the blueprint to building around a star QB who can make players better than they actually are. 

I agree. Investing the bulk of your cap space on any position other than the QB does not buy rings.

The thing about the Patriots and Brady Is he has never been a top paid QB. Therefore it gives them more cap space to work with.

It's too late for that to happen for the Colts.

Other than the QB the only positions on the field that requires stud players is on the defense with the pass rushers as being the most important. That is why the great ones don't hit the free market.

All we need in other positions are good players who do the job they are paid to do.  

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, Aaron86 said:

I think you kinda need a strong running game to support a strong defence. Without a running game to control the the clock any of those defences are going to break.

There is truth to that but it don't take a bell cow RB to make that work.

[jshipp23]

37 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

No one posted it But 90% of posts are DEFENSE, DEFENSE, DEFENSE. The rest are OL. Both need to be upgraded of course but so does every other part of the team. 

 

I love Mack, but he's still a question of how good and what kind of back he'll be. Even with him our group of backs is weak.

 

Besides TY, we have no one at WR. A major weakness in a passing league.

 

We all like Doyle, but he's not a vertical threat and who are our backups?

 

There are lots of needs on this team, not just Defense and they all need to be addressed. And I doubt we getting a Great Defense anytime soon. 

It's like speaking to a brick wall in this forum and always has been....They don't understand having a good offense helps the defense..smh..Or having a great running back could help protect the QB..

[LJpalmbeacher2]

Well thats too bad because our GM & HC look like they are Offense orientated.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

2 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

It's like speaking to a brick wall in this forum and always has been....They don't understand having a good offense helps the defense..smh..Or having a great running back could help protect the QB..

Exactly. I don't think they will like my post above. Lol

[jshipp23]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

There is truth to that but it don't take a bell cow RB to make that work.

It doesn't take a franchise QB to win a Super Bowl either, but it's nice to have 1..Just because you can win 1 with Trent Dilfer or Brad Johnson doesn't mean you don't try and get one..BUILD THE TRENCHES, BUILD THE TRENCHES..LOL..Been hearing it for 5 years on here..The last time we were elite was because we had a great offense...We have 1 legit playmaker weapon on offense in Hilton..Mack is a change of pace guy who had a few nice plays to go along with a few fumbles..

[King Colt]

I don't hear a single word from anyone on the OL fix. Odd, since everyone knows that is there biggest problem.

[Aaron86]

5 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

There is truth to that but it don't take a bell cow RB to make that work.

That also is true. I just have this feeling that Chubb is the pick or position we need just not the player. He feels like a bust in the making. But if we pick him I will be on board.

[BOTT]

 

Just now, King Colt said:

I don't hear a single word from anyone on the OL fix. Odd, since everyone knows that is there biggest problem.

Seriously?

[Trueman]

8 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

There is truth to that but it don't take a bell cow RB to make that work.

 

Agreed. I think running back by committee is how I'd go. Get 3 guys that offer different skills/qualities for defences to account for.

 

Ultimately if you have a good OL they can make anyone serviceable. 

[BOTT]

1 minute ago, Aaron86 said:

That also is true. I just have this feeling that Chubb is the pick or position we need just not the player. He feels like a bust in the making. But if we pick him I will be on board.

Lots of peope have cruddy butt hunches, vibes and feelings on this forum.  I swear half of you get up in the morning expecting to get hit by a car on the way to work.

[Aaron86]

3 minutes ago, King Colt said:

I don't hear a single word from anyone on the OL fix. Odd, since everyone knows that is there biggest problem.

This is where I'm different. I don't think we are that bad on the OL. O think the majority of it was due to putting alot of stress on the OL. I think we do need help just not as much as most seem to think.

[Trueman]

6 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

It doesn't take a franchise QB to win a Super Bowl either, but it's nice to have 1..Just because you can win 1 with Trent Dilfer or Brad Johnson doesn't mean you don't try and get one..BUILD THE TRENCHES, BUILD THE TRENCHES..LOL..Been hearing it for 5 years on here..The last time we were elite was because we had a great offense...We have 1 legit playmaker weapon on offense in Hilton..Mack is a change of pace guy who had a few nice plays to go along with a few fumbles..

You know , to be "elite" we don't have to do everything the same way...

[LJpalmbeacher2]

3 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

It doesn't take a franchise QB to win a Super Bowl either, but it's nice to have 1..Just because you can win 1 with Trent Dilfer or Brad Johnson doesn't mean you don't try and get one..BUILD THE TRENCHES, BUILD THE TRENCHES..LOL..Been hearing it for 5 years on here..The last time we were elite was because we had a great offense...We have 1 legit playmaker weapon on offense in Hilton..Mack is a change of pace guy who had a few nice plays to go along with a few fumbles..

Speaking of TY being our only playmaker...some on hear wanted to trade him and get a draft pick for him. Our Best player! Maybe we could have gotten a 3rd round pick and drafted a backup linebacker for him

[Trueman]

7 minutes ago, Aaron86 said:

That also is true. I just have this feeling that Chubb is the pick or position we need just not the player. He feels like a bust in the making. But if we pick him I will be on board.

Why is Chubb "a bust in the making"  ,exactly?

[Aaron86]

2 minutes ago, BOTT said:

Lots of peope have cruddy butt hunches, vibes and feelings on this forum.  I swear half of you get up in the morning expecting to get hit by a car on the way to work.

Well aren't you mister grumpy gills.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

6 minutes ago, King Colt said:

I don't hear a single word from anyone on the OL fix. Odd, since everyone knows that is there biggest problem.

 

Well now that Philbin is gone, whoever is his replacement is a step in the Reich(sorry, couldn't help it) direction. I'm sure now the OL may ne able to handle simple stunts.

[BOTT]

1 minute ago, Aaron86 said:

Well aren't you mister grumpy gills.

It was a joke...kinda.

[Trueman]

14 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Well thats too bad because our GM & HC look like they are Offense orientated.

Does Ballard strike you as an offensively oriented guy?

 

He seems like he wants as balanced a roster as possible to me. Maybe I'm missing something...

[BOTT]

16 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Well thats too bad because our GM & HC look like they are Offense orientated.

What evidence is there that Ballard is offense oriented?  5 of his 7 draft picks were on defense including the first 3.  His free agent signs focused on defense...Hankins, Simon, Sheard...

[Aaron86]

1 minute ago, Trueman said:

Why is Chubb "a bust in the making"  ,exactly?

From what I have seen of him he looks like a one trick pony. But I'm no scout either. I hope if we pick him he becomes monster. 

[HectorRoberts]

2 minutes ago, Trueman said:

Why is Chubb "a bust in the making"  ,exactly?

I don’t see him being a bust, I think he will be fine but I don’t think he’s going to be anything special, he seems like another Sheard, He’s good just not great

[jshipp23]

55 minutes ago, Trueman said:

You know , to be "elite" we don't have to do everything the same way...

We have been trying to be something we're not for 6 years now..I want a good defense believe me..When you have a franchise QB it makes sense to build the team around him...Be great at something instead of mediocre at both..

[Trueman]

Just now, Aaron86 said:

From what I have seen of him he looks like a one trick pony. But I'm no scout either. I hope if we pick him he becomes monster. 

Wasn't he ranked top 10 in the nation against the pass and run? That's pretty rare , no?

[Aaron86]

7 minutes ago, BOTT said:

It was a joke...kinda.

Oh. I will try to take your comments less seriously. I guess.

[jshipp23]

12 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Speaking of TY being our only playmaker...some on hear wanted to trade him and get a draft pick for him. Our Best player! Maybe we could have gotten a 3rd round pick and drafted a backup linebacker for him

Lol..And the thing is,Hilton is basically the only guy Luck has ever had in 6 years..Never had a RB, big play TE, or good #2, 3 WRs..Hell, Peyton had James, Harrison, Wayne, Clark, Stokely, Garcon, Collie, Pollard, Rhodes, Addai..We have literally given him nothing to work with and a crappy offensive scheme and you wonder why he holds the ball too long and gets sacked..

[BOTT]

4 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

We have been trying to be something we're not for 6 years now..I want a good defense believe me..When you have a franchise QB it makes sense to build the team around him...Be great at something instead of medicre at both..

No, the colts had a cruddy coach for 6 yrs and a cruddy GM for 5.

[Trueman]

3 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

We have been trying to be something we're not for 6 years now..I want a good defense believe me..When you have a franchise QB it makes sense to build the team around him...Be great at something instead of medicre at both..

 

The last 6 years had nothing to do with failing at trying to be something else. 

 

It failed because of a disastrous GM and coach. (Sorry Chuck , I love ya)

[jshipp23]

1 minute ago, BOTT said:

No, the colts had a cruddy coach for 6 yrs and a cruddy GM for 5.

Agree 100%, but still ready for a new philosophy..

[LJpalmbeacher2]

2 minutes ago, BOTT said:

What evidence is there that Ballard is offense oriented?  5 of his 7 draft picks were on defense including the first 3.  His free agent signs focused on defense...Hankins, Simon, Sheard...

Both his HC hirings were creative, offensive minds and i think he will lean on Reich's wants. At least for the immediate future.

Of course he wont neglect the defense but i think they ecpect our offense to carry is out of the cellar.