ColtStrong2013
-
Posts
4,760 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by ColtStrong2013
-
-
I look at this as much more positive on the offensive end than negative on the defensive.
Frank Reich is a great offensive mind that likes to exploit mismatches. This is great for this training camp... It's boosting the offense, but also teaching the young defense some things. Hooker and Geathers will help with any mismatches that sre really being exploited right now. And these young defensive backs are having to figure it out. I hope we can play fast on defense and learn to disrupt the game a bit. If we can over the course of the season, this team will get a lot of offensive possessions which can really wreck some teams. This offense can be more explosive than we have seen thus far with Luck and company.
-
2 minutes ago, J@son said:
just gonna leave this right here for you then:
This forum is really poor at sarcasm.
I think Supermans post stating that I was obtuse is a touch more condescending than me saying he must be fun to talk with at home, but i digress.
Enough qb sneak talk for my lifetime.
-
8 minutes ago, Superman said:
What does Peyton Manning have to do with Andrew Luck? When has Luck (or anyone else, for that matter) ever operated with the level of autonomy that Manning had? Manning didn't suggest or demand plays, he called plays. Andrew Luck doesn't operate the way Manning did.
And when did Manning miss a season with a surgically repaired throwing shoulder?
And at the end of the day, if the head coach and architect of the offense says 'we're not putting QB sneak in the playbook for now,' that's the end of the discussion. Doesn't matter how much green light the QB has, the buck stops with the head coach. I'm willing to bet that Andrew Luck isn't nearly as devoted to The Church of the QB Sneak as you seem to be.
The problem with this discussion is that you're either purposely misrepresenting my stance, or you're just being obtuse.
Franchise quarterback that caused the organization to send Peyton his walking papers has a lot to do with the two. There has never been a college qb coming out that is so similar. Perhaps you are misrepresenting my stance? I'm not obtuse in regard to your stance. I fully understand. You disagree with mine, and have proceeded to disagree with everything I have posted on this forum since stating that the qb sneak is efficient and that we shouldn't shy away from it this season in the proper situation. I maintain my stance.
-
6 minutes ago, J@son said:
are you this condescending in discussions at home?
Always.
-
34 minutes ago, Superman said:
I love posts like this. You're ignoring the need to balance priorities, and now you've dreamed up a scenario where Andrew Luck is going to demand that a specific play is called?
I also love the strawman fallacy. Everyone knows there's a huge difference between a timeshare running back and a franchise QB.
"Dreamed up a scenario where Andrew Luck demand a specific play" OH MY GOD. How dare I for even thinking of such a thing...
Do you watch professional sports? Do you remember Peyton Manning by chance? The man who didn't have to demand a playcall, but only suggest one... These franchise players have the green light a hell of a lot more than you think they do, which is apparently not at all...
My post about Mack was simply sarcasm. Congrats to you for taking it another level and indicating a fallacy where one doesn't exist. Are you this much fun in discussions at home?
-
54 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:
OK
Or get him re-injured.
There will still be broken plays. Luck was injured (shoulder) being pursued and pushed from behind on a rollout throw by Luck vs. Titans. That has been a big problem ever since. His scramble /run vs. the Broncos was cause of Kidney laceration.
True, but not without risk. Coaches don’t want any player on the ground. There is good reason, injury wise, whether they hav the ball or not.
That’s key, he must be smarter. Sometimes it means giving up on a play to live to play another down, or going to the ground before he reaches the goal/first down line to prevent getting leveled by a defender. But I don’t want his playmaking stifled either, just less reckless (unless in playoff, championship, or SB games)
I dont think Frank Reich will be reckless in his playcalling... He's a quarterback, and understands the spots he wants Andrew in. I think there could be several key playoff implication games this season, and I hope we would treat them as such in this regard.
-
I'm really intrigued by this team this season. I havent been excited like this for a while. Expectations are so low from the media, and I think most of us agree that this team should win 7 or 8 games with a healthy Andrew Luck.
What intrigues me most is this could be the year to spark the next ____ consecutive seasons of success. A lot of youth that will hit the field this year. Rookie's and Sophomore's alike. That is scary for a lot of times... but perfect for this season's Colts.
To stay on point, my grade for the scouting from a draft perspective is an A this early on. I have no doubt this years draft was very solid and will produce great football players. Last years draft is what I will be paying attention to most this season. That's where the difference is going to be going into next season. Hooker, Wilson, Basham, Mack, Hairston, Stewart, Walker... that crew is as important as any going forward.
-
1
-
-
39 minutes ago, aaron11 said:
you cant tell a qb like luck not to scramble, even peyton manning made a big run for a a first down in his last game against the patriots. i dont think they called many qb sneaks that last year while he was nursing injuries though
Andrew luck is going to make plays, whatever it takes... he will also be a smarter quarterback and not take the shots that he has in the past.
-
1 hour ago, oldunclemark said:
I understand the concern...obviously..
..but we need to start thinking of Luck as the guy he was.
I wouldnt have him back returning punts but I'd let him do anything he did before last season.
He's going to take some hard hits.....but he's got to run and get down if its open. QB sneak. Sure. Bootleg at the goal line. I would
......I dont want him to be 'careful'
Andrew was best when he rolled out of a broken play and extended them. TY was also best. The problem with them was it happened all too often. I don't want to get away from those plays as they can still win us a lot of football games... but many Colts fans want to protect him at all costs. Those costs can pretty great with serious limitations of a once in a generation qb. The guy is chomping at the bit to play football because he's been forced to watch for so long... Unleash him and protect him by calling better/quicker plays, being more prepared, and utilizing a much improved offensive line.
That doesn't mean never calling quarterback sneaks when they make 100% sense, or not allowing him to scramble...
-
1
-
-
Guys I guess we should just sit Marlon Mack this season, you know, since he'll be taking shots to his surgically repaired shoulder and all...
-
17 minutes ago, Superman said:
QB sneak on the goal line, he goes over the top, and still gets crushed by multiple defenders. First contact looks like it's to right shoulder.
This is totally safe...
Like I said, I'm not against QB sneak, and I'm not saying the Colts should never run it. I just wouldn't put Luck in that position right now.
Luck demands a qb sneak to extend a drive in a game where the offense is clicking, and you are going to tell him no... ok
Thank God Frank Reich is head coach. Colts fans won't know what they are watching when some risks pay off this season.
-
1 hour ago, Superman said:
I believe we can do all of that without relying on QB sneak, especially to the extent you're suggesting it should be run.
I'm not disputing the effectiveness of QB sneak. I do think you're overstating its advantage over other high percentage short yardage plays.
I'm still looking for these QB sneaks anywhere on the field that don't result in multiple offensive and defensive players landing on top of the QB.
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/GrimySickBullfrog-max-1mb.gif
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FatDelightfulJabiru-max-1mb.gif
https://gyazo.com/b21572997a1a715e05139ec973673db1.gif
And my point is that you agree there's a point where the risk outweighs the advantage. We don't agree about where exactly that point is, but that point obviously exists and factors into anyone's decision making. So we don't have to reduce this to the absurd and act like I'm saying that if there's any risk to any play, I don't want it to be run at all.
I'd also like to point out that the Patriots run a ton of QB sneak on the goal line, so you even diverge from the decision making of the five time champs yourself.
On the goal line, Brady generally goes over the top (as do most runningbacks) as the defensive lineman submarine... I'm ok with Andrew doing this if it keeps him above the lineman.
My problem with goal line situations is that there are usually 6 or 7 defensive lineman and a few backers stacked with no gaps to exploit like there is in the middle of the field and especially on 3rd down... they are going to respect Luck and his receivers when they are spaced out with a lot of green in front of them, and that is when a sneak is in order.
-
29 minutes ago, Superman said:
When the risk outweighs the potential reward, you mitigate the risk. It's the defining principle behind throwing the ball away, sliding, dumpoffs, not forcing the ball into double coverage, etc.
It's not all of a sudden, the OP said 3rd and 4th and short.
I'm not sure but it sounds like you're advocating running a QB sneak on any down if it's short yardage? That's a terrible idea. Maybe you'd convert on 2nd and 1 more often, but the points added when you pop a big play on 2nd down are a big factor in efficient offensive output. A QB sneak, even successful, probably takes points off the board on second down.
And even if the Colts were less efficient on 3rd and short in recent years, you're still ignoring the other highly successful play calls that can be used in shortage, and how they compare to QB sneak. For instance, Robert Turbin has been basically automatic in short yardage situations.
Another thing, the Colts have had a big problem with offensive play calling for a while now, including in short yardage. Let's not try to reduce that to something as simple as 'they don't run QB sneak often enough.'
I agree with this, but you're stuck on one number and ignoring everything else because you think it's all-telling and conclusive, but that's not the case.
You can eliminate a high percentage play if you have other high percentage options to replace it, especially if those other options are less risky. The statistical advantage of QB sneak in short yardage is not so significant that the risk of QB sneak becomes unworthy of consideration.
Edit: By the way, you stated that you're against QB sneak on the goal line, because it's dangerous. You admit that at some point, the risk outweighs the reward.
I'm in favor of sustaining drives, something this team has sorely lacked. I'm in favor of high percentage plays, something this team has lacked. I'm in favor of catching defenses off guard, which we obviously have lacked.
I'm not in favor of running straight no-sneaks... but there is no doubt the Patriots and several organizations have had great success pulling it out when it makes sense in a game.
I did say goal line sneaks are dangerous. Because they are. That's the situation that 1200 and 1500 lbs WILL be on top of you, regardless of your position. I believe in spreading defenses out and creating mismatches/taking what defenses give you, something Reich will be very good at, and the qb sneak is a play that defenses give you repeatedly throughout a game in short yardage situations.
-
14 minutes ago, Superman said:
It's just risk mitigation. Do you run a play that likely ends with 1200-1500 pounds of linemen piled on top of your QB with a surgically repaired shoulder if there's only a marginal statistical advantage to that play? It's not that I don't think Luck can handle it, it's just "why risk it?"
This is somewhat absurd. All 4 defensive lineman are going to land on him? Do you have faith that Ryan Kelly and Quenton Nelson can hold their ground and perhaps push their guys back enough to where not a single pound lands on Andrew in a sneak at midfield?
I'm against goal line sneaks. I think they are dangerous. I think middle of the field, high percentage quarterback sneaks with defenses spread out, is safe, efficient and smart football.
-
5 minutes ago, Superman said:
It's just risk mitigation. Do you run a play that likely ends with 1200-1500 pounds of linemen piled on top of your QB with a surgically repaired shoulder if there's only a marginal statistical advantage to that play? It's not that I don't think Luck can handle it, it's just "why risk it?"
Why risk dropping him back more than 3 steps? Why risk putting him on the field if we are down more than 2 touchdowns late in the game? Risk... makes people do funny things.
8 minutes ago, Superman said:You using the Pats number is a fallacy. League average makes much more sense.
This study (posted earlier) found that there were about five 4th and short play calls per team per year between 2010 and 2012.
Let's say for the sake of argument the Colts did have five games that possibly could have been decided by one 4th and short play call (they didn't, no single team did). If league average for QB sneaks on 4th and short is 80%, then 4 of those 5 games could be won with QB sneak. If league average for other runs (pitches, spread runs, read options) on 4th and short is 70%, then 3.5 of those 5 games could be won with QB sneak.
As a matter of fact, based on the success rates from your FO piece, but with much smaller sample sizes, I could argue that pitches, spread runs, read options and bootlegs are under-utilized on 4th and short.
You're acting like this one play is the deciding factor between winning and losing games, and it's probably not. It's certainly not the deciding factor for a winning season. And it's arguable whether it's significantly more effective than other run plays, on average. It's certainly not 21% more effective, but even if it was, that represents 1 out of 5 plays.
Like I said, on a game-deciding play in a season-deciding game, I'm fine with QB sneak. In any other situation, the statistical advantage of QB sneak isn't as great as you're making it out to be, and even if it was, it's not worth the risk to Luck's health.
I'm also curious whether Manning ran any QB sneaks in 2012, fresh off his neck injury. Not to mention the very different nature of that injury and recovery.
Why are we talking 4th and short all of a sudden? I am talking 2nd, 3rd and 4th and short... which comes to a hell of a lot more than just a handful of times in a game. How many 3rd and shorts have stalled Colts drives over the last several seasons? I'd be scared to death to know, but what I do know without looking is that they were 90 plus percent predictable, without the success of a qb sneak, percentage-wise.
Football is a numbers game. This organization wouldn't hire analytical staffing if it were not important. I know for certain that Frank Reich is going to use statistics and variations 100% more than Chuck Pagano... and he will RISK a lot more than Pagano did offensively.
I understand that we want to protect Andrew. I think we are making great strides in order to do that. But I don't think this organization will eliminate a high percentage play because they are afraid of the risk it poses on him... It's not any different than he getting hit while throwing the football (which will happen this season) compared to any other team' quarterbacks. The risk is there... so is the reward.
-
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2016/2015-short-yardage-results
Absolutely worth the risk...
5 time NFL champs agree.
-
26 minutes ago, Superman said:
Tom Brady doesn't have a surgically repaired throwing shoulder.
If league average on QB sneaks on 4th and short is around 80%, but league average on other runs is around 70%, is that extra ten percent worth the risk, given Luck's status?
The further Luck gets from his surgery, and assuming he makes it through this season with no issues, the more comfortable everyone will get with him running such a physical play. For now, I don't think it's worth the risk, when there are other plays that are nearly as effective as QB sneak, but far less risky.
Peyton Manning had a surgically repaired neck times 4, and they still snuck the football on occasion. Patriots sneaks are 91%, so to answer your question, yes, the extra 21% could make or break close games... or in last season's case, the difference between 4 wins and 9, 10, 11?
-
31 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:
I could see it going both ways... if they're in scoring position, especially down near the goal line, & it makes sense to run a QB sneak, I don't see Reich shying away from it, but at the same time I can't see it happening very often.
I don't see it happening in goal line situations, or when defenses are stacked. 3rd and short, split the defense out wide, with 4 down lineman and one backer accounting for a tailback. Get them on a hard count or catch them off guard,and go where the defense is weak.
It's honestly the easiest concept in football. You put the ball in your playmaking franchise qb's hands, with the responsibility to get a yard... and he gets to decide where he goes.
Andrew Luck behind Ryan Kelly and leaning left behind Quenton Nelson is a money play... guaranteed.
-
43 minutes ago, aaron11 said:
maybe many times is an exaggeration but its definitely happened
I have watched a lot of Patriots games over the years... Because they play the game right and showcase how a team should be built. They have extended a lot of drives and put a lot of games away because of Tom Brady's sneaks on 3rd/4th & short. They know the risk of it, but have also proven that when done correctly, the risk is minimized... and with great reward.
-
Tom Brady has mastered it and never takes a hit... It's just smart football.
-
1
-
-
Easy talking the C word around here... I stated a while back that Ballard was changing it, and a few jumped down my throat.
-
No one is sure he is the best player in this year's draft, certainly don't know his status in the league... but one thing is for certain, he was the best player for the Colts this draft. Period.
He single handedly is changing how this team conducts themselves in practice. He single handedly makes this offensive line better and meaner.
With the change in offensive philosophy with quick release throws, and a better emphasis on the run game (better in the sense that we will take what the defense gives and not force Frank Gore up the middle with a stacked defense), drafting Nelson was the best complimentary move this offseason for any team, in my opinion. The fact that we got 3 second round picks AND Nelson is hard to argue that statement.
-
2
-
-
8 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:
I can't speak for Smonroe, but I'll tell you my concerns about Reich. 1.) He has 0 sample size as a head coach so far. I buy into his philosophy, and the Eagles won a SB with him, but I guess I'm one of those guys who needs to see it to believe it. 2.) There was little to no interest in him as a head coaching candidate before we showed it after the Josh McDaniels fiasco. In fact, I don't remember any other team showing interest in him besides us. That's sort of a red flag to me. I don't think he has character concerns, but I think there may be reasons we don't know about that he didn't get hardly any interest (if any) by 31 other teams before McDaniels didn't work out with us, and finally, only interest with us afterward. Something could happen where he had some baggage the other FO's knew about that the fans didn't, and it shows during our first season.
I'm just speculating, and it's all my opinion, but it's something to keep in mind.
Bills were interested... that's at least one team. But as @Clem-Dog said, most teams don't want to wait on a guy who refuses to speak with teams until after the first week of February. He wasn't expecting to be a hot commodity this season, the super bowl run with Foles made him one... he would be a front-runner if not the top guy going into this season had he stayed in Philly.
Today's NFL doesn't give two craps about head coaching sample sizes. One of the brightest minds in football is 32 years old and had a full 2 years of experience as an offensive coordinator. No one cares about recycling head coaches that had mediocre careers as HC.
-
5 hours ago, coltsfeva said:
The biggest difference I’ve noticed with Ballard vs Grigson is humility and the sense that he sees himself as part of the solution.
Even though Grigson did well, he seemed to be dripping with arrogance. At the time, I don’t know if was anything he said per se, just an observation.
Having said that, I’m sure there have been plenty of successful GMs that were pretty arrogant.
There have been some players let go ( Mingo, Melvin) that were a bit of a head scratcher but despite all we’ve been through as Colts’ fans, I’m glad we’ve got Ballard/ Reich.
You listen to Pac McAfee talk about Grigson... and then watch Ballard on his show. You see how fast Adam V signs with Ballard versus the difficulty that Grigson game him in his negotiations (how is that even a difficult signing?) You hear what former colleagues say about Grigson (surprised he got a GM job) versus seemingly everyone that Ballard ever work with praise him with the utmost respect. You see how approachable Ballard is to the media and respectful towards athletes. We all saw the difference in how each of them worked with Pagano. There is no question the difference in character and respect across the league in the two executives.
I'm a big believer in some things working out for the best. I believe the timing in letting go of Grigson was the greatest thing that happened to this organization. Whether Ballard's teams win a championship, or even match the W's that Grigson's career here brought, or not, he is a better and more respectable General Manager on so many different levels. Winning is the ultimate goal in the National Football League, but everything else is important as well. Ballard is top notch in how he conducts himself and how he handles business. Without a doubt.
-
1
-
1
-
Luck QB sneak ???
in Colts Football
Posted
I've always felt more acute...
I'm learning.