Flash7
-
Posts
4,129 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Flash7
-
-
I like that late in the season, we saw improvement from Luck, finishing against the Texans with a 95.5 passer rating and then following that up with a 95.8 passer rating in the final matchup against the Texans. He also went the final 3 games in the regular season without throwing an INT.
-
With the potential of a far better O-line (hopefully), I think that our run game will be vastly improved. This will result in defenses having to focus on stopping the run and the pass, unlike last year where defenses mainly focused on stopping our pass game. The run game will allow for the play-action to be more effective.
At Stanford, we saw how well Luck operated when using play-action. Even last year, when Luck used play-action, he was quite effective.
I expect a jump in completion percentage, 60-65% and a decrease in interceptions, 11 INTs. Although Luck may take shots downfield, I think that for the most part Pep will be asking him to make qhicker reads and get the ball out to his playmakers. This will result in shorter to intermediate passes, and more YAC.
-
Last year we could not stop the run or defend against the pass. So at the very least, if we can stop the run, we're miles ahead of where we were last year. There's no need to worry about this.
Secondly, if we look at our division, we face MJD, CJ2K, and Foster. If we stop them then we're asking Schaub, Locker, and Gabbert to beat us. I like those odds.
-
Let me play devil's advocate and ask "What if we only win 7 games this year? We all understand that this past year was a "rebuild/reload and part of a longer process. Would you still think that we are building the monster, or would you think that it would already be time for some changes?
One thing that has me very worried is that in the history of the NFL, teams that have won many (8??) wins by less than a touchdown or come from behind wins usually have a down year the following year. This can be explained by many factors but nonetheless, it has me a little worried.
-
I for one will be interested to see how this plays out this year. Both the Titans and Colts did drastic measures to improve these areas, and it will be fun to watch which team wins the majority of this battle.
In case you have missed it, the Titans brought in new OGs in Levitre and Chance Warmack, and most likely a new center in Brian Schwenke along with a 2nd RB in Shonn Greene. We all know the many additions the Colts have made in the front 7.
That's a great point. I think that every team in the AFC has done a good job of strenghtening their weaknesses. I think that the Colts, after looking at the AFC, have decided that we do not face dominant QBs in our division, but we do face great runningbacks like MJD, Foster, and CJ2K. It's clear that they have put an emphasis on stopping the run and being more stout up front. Our new direction will translate into more wins in our division.
With Luck gaining experience and working in a more efficient offensive system, I hope that we will soon have the best offense in the division, and fight to have one of the best defenses in the division. We're a long ways away from the latter, or at least until further evaluation of our newly aquired talent.
-
Aside from Sproles, who else would he compare to? I ask (honest question) because I'm trying to see if there are other successful guys with similar stature in the NFL.
-
I went to the playoff game between the Forty Niners and the Packers last year. There were a few fans wearing Packer's gear and they got heckled, but nothing bad. But it all depends on the luck of the draw and who you're sitting next to. Niner fans and Raider fans can get rowdy.
I'll be goint to the Colts-Niners game. Can't wait.
-
Oh good Lord... Brown's only fault is shaky health. When he is in the game he produces.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/stats/_/name/ind/indianapolis-colts
Did you watch the GB game?
What stands out about Ballard's stats above Browns? I can tell you... Ballard is a "hit the hole" back and Brown is "let it develop" type. Oh, and Ballard "stayed healthy" ...
They both will excel this season.
Again, I like Brown and have always defended him. I can't any longer, but I'm hopeful that he has a GREAT season.
Collie's only fault is his health and I loved watching Collie play for the Colts. Bob Sanders too, but they're only valuable when they play.
-
So Ballard gets a pass due to the bad o-line, but Brown is cast aside like a liquored up kicker?
I'd rather draft a back-up for Blue, than a RB this year. As an earlier poster said, we should give our current RB group a chance with a (hopefully) better line.
I have been a supporter of Brown for many years and have always found myself coming up with ways to explain his lack of solid performance-- having to play behind Addai, injuries, and bad O-line. I've just realized that if he were a "special" back, I wouldn't have to make excuses for him.
I have no excuses for Ballard because none is needed. He played great and was reliable behind the same O-line.
I'm not advocating for drafting a RB and don't think it's a need, but if we do draft one, I don't want a short yardage guy. We have that with Ballard and Carter. I want a home run threat.
-
Ballard has shown that he can be a productive back, behind a bad O-line. I have no doubt that he can be better this season. He has shown that he can gain chunk yards, but does not have the ability to score everytime he touches the ball. If we do draft a runningback, I think that it should be someone with "homerun" capability. Donald Brown was supposed to be that guy, but he hasn't panned out. I'd like someone who is a threat to score everytime he gets the ball. Think of someone like CJ Spiller-- I'm just not sure that guy exists in this draft.
-
I think it may be a good idea but you have to consider the law of diminishing returns- The more we add to a position of strength, the less value added. The TE position is currently a position of strength for us and adding to it, only adds a little more value to the team overall, whereas if we added a stud pass rusher of OG, we would add much more value to our team.
I am not concerned about our offensive firepower. It's the pass rush or lack thereof that has me worried.
-
It's just one GM's opinion, that's all. It would be good to know who that GM is so that we can evaluate his previous drafts to see if this claim has any validity. If the GM has a weak background in making draft picks, then it would be a poor opinion of this year's draft.
-
If I had to assign movies for quotes, I'd assign:
1. Dumb and Dumber- "So you're telling me there's a chance?!! (so many good lines here.)
2. The Sandlot- "You're Killin' me Smalls"
3. Groundhog Day- "What if there is no tomorrow? There wasn't one today."
4. Happy Gilmore- "Just tap it in. Tap, tap, tap it in. " "Are you too good for your home?!!"
5. Billy Madison- "Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely *ic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
-
I don't think it will be. Not as much as the rematch between Denver and Baltimore (that has been moved to Denver thanks to the Orioles having a home game the same night on sept.5th and both teams share the parking lot) although Baltimore's defense has down graded from its super bowl defense, i still expect this game to have a lot of emotion. I mean lets face it, if it was not for the super bowl champs, manning could have very well went on to win the super bowl, but i guess we will never know lol.
Denver Vs Baltimore is too one-sided. Denver wants revenge while Baltimore just wants to find out what they have in their new team. It's not much of a rivalry/rematch if one side holds a grudge for losing and the other side won the Superbowl while you happened to be just one of the talented teams they beat along the way.
-
Simple - last year the Texans started off the year playing 3 bad teams in the AFC South and everyone said their schedule was one of the weakest. Once the Colts went 11-5 from 2-14, the Texans finished with the STRONGEST strength of schedule as of the end of the season.
So, the strength of schedule at the end of the year is the one that matters most. Plus the competition you have faced going into the playoffs.
The "strength of schedule" argument is so overrated and unreliable that I don't even know why it's even considered. Here is an example of why it's dumb:
Last year we played the Dolphins in week 9. Both teams had a record of 5-4 goin into the game. The Colts won that game and gained even more confidence, while the Dolphins nose dived to end their season; clearly losing confidence after that game. It put them on the outside looking in at the playoff picture.
So if we had lost that game and the Dolphins continued to play better, we would have had a better strength of schedule. I don't care what the strength of schedule of a team is before we play them, or after we play them. I only care about the team we face that week and what they present as a challenge that week.
-
Castonzo was the only bright spot on our line last year. I think he's the last of our worries on O-line right now and I wouldn't want to move him inside just because we drafted an unproven rookie. Let's see how Castonzo plays alongside a quality gaurd first, before we think he's underperformed.
-
I do not think that the offense that the Colts will be running will be all that similar to the Stanford offense. It's been repated too many times by Luck, Pep, and others that we will incorporate the best of different offenses into the system.
The terminology may be similar to Stanford's but all that means is that they will use the terminology to address formations, routes, and protections.
-
mo-offense?
Can we further shorten it to: Moffense?
-
Fleener provides an added dimension to our TEs. We have Saunders who is a very good blocker, then Allen who is a good blocker and a good receiver, and then Fleener, who is a decent blocker and a very good receiver. Fleener, if used properly, can cause matchup problems all over the field, more so than Ertz.
-
Man, I'm not liking the Pep hire. I don't wanna run the stanford Offense or anything that looks like it.
I don't think that we will run Stanford's offense, more of a hybrid as mentioned in this thread. But even if we did run Stanford's offense, I'm not sure why you would be against it.
Luck had a 72% completion percentage and threw for 37 TDs in that offense, (yes I am aware it was in collge against other college teams) even with a power running approach. It was one of college football's hardest offenses to stop. Harbaugh's had success with it in the NFL, right?
-
No, I wouldn't even care about making the playoffs. If he improved those things and showed that he could get rid of the ball quicker an cut down on the turnovers, I would say good things about him. But I don't think that will happen... He is what he is.... :dancing:
So by that logic, Manning is exaclty what he was as a rookie? He never got better?
-
That is why Manning would have won 10 games or more with the 2011 team and just as many or more with the 2012 team. Getting rid of the ball that quickly is one of Luck's biggest weaknesses along with underthrowing long routes..... :dancing:
You're saying that Manning would've won 10 games or more with the Colts this year, yet do not give credit to Luck for doing just that. Secondly, with Manning on the team, we could not afford some of the players that we were able to sign. Therefore, he would not be playing for a team that resembles the 2012 Colts, and therefore, you do not know that he would've won 10+games.
-
Those are pretty good excuses but they are still excuses. He has a host of free agents around him now and a better line. I will be interested to see what excuses you make when his passer rating is still bad and he still gets rid of the ball much too slowly. We will see what the new season brings. My expectations are pretty low so any improvement will be a big deal with me.... :dancing:
Well, I would love to see what excuses you make when he increases his completion percentage, increases his "beloved end-all-be all" passer rating, and leads the Colts to yet another playoff appearance next season. Even if he does all of these things, you would still find fault with Luck.
-
Please take the time to read this very, very long response to your criticism of Luck.
The normal excuses for Luck. That doesn't do anything about his arm strength or his accuracy.... But you are right, he deserves a bit more time. I think this year will tell the tale..... :dancing:
The case for Luck
In a broad overview, we can all agree that Luck stepped into a situation that was daunting—being drafted first overall by a team that just finished 2-14 and released its previous QB, Peyton Manning, who may go down in history as one of the best to ever play the position. Luck was asked to step in and win, and win he did.
In contrast, Russell Wilson was drafted by a team with a good rushing attack and one of the best defenses. RGIII wasn’t drafted into a great situation, but was afforded a team with one of the league’s best rushing attacks (partially due to RGIII himself), and an average but opportunistic defense. Tannehill had the benefit of playing for his previous college coach in a similar offense. The Dolphins had a good O-line and a good defense, but an average receiving corps.
Offensive Personnel: Luck was a rookie along with Coby Fleener, Duane Allen, T.Y. Hilton, and Vick Ballard. Donnie Avery was new to the team and he and Hilton led the league in pass drop rate at 16.7%. This group was asked to play together from the very beginning and go through their growing pains together. This would help to explain the inconsistency on offense at times. Luck relied heavily on the brilliant play of Reggie Wayne, who drew double teams quite often.
Wilson played with veterans, both at WR and RB. Even with this veteran group the Seahawks had the 27th ranked passing offense in the league. RGIII had a solid group of receivers and a workhorse rookie running back who was in the discussion for rookie of the year. Tannheill had a very good slot receiver in Devon Bess, a fairly good receiver in Brian Hartline, and a good veteran play maker RB in Reggie Bush, who also caught the ball really well out of the backfield.
O-Line: The Colts could boast that they possibly had the worst O-line in the league last year. Only the left side of the O-line was serviceable in the run game; however, it made it very predictable where the ball was going. The Colts relied on the left side of the line in the run game perhaps on over 75% of their run plays. The pass blocking was horrendous, leading to 41 sacks and very little time for Luck to effectively set his feet, survey the field, and complete a pass. He was essentially hurried nearly every pass play.
Russell Wilson played behind one of the best O-lines in the league. This group was very good in pass protection and run blocking. However, the Seahawks were still nearly last in passing yards, despite being afforded the luxury of the league’s 3rd best rushing attack, which should help in the play-action passing game, and help to open passing lanes. RGIII had a good O-line only in the run game, but a line that struggled a little in pass blocking. Tannehill played behind a very solid O-line. They were not spectacular but good in both pass protection and run blocking.
Offesive Schemes: Of the four rookies, Luck, RGIII, Wilson, and Tannehill (not going to include Weeden in this discussion), Luck had the most “vertical” offense. He was asked to throw the ball more and deeper than any of the other rookies. This was problematic after taking into account the lack of pass protection as mentioned above, not to mention that it asked a lot of the rookie QB. Luck was consistently asked to drop back, scan the field and complete deep passes into the heart of the defense. Yes, Luck did have his share of interceptions, but some of it is understandable knowing what was asked of him. In addition, the passing scheme did not call for many check-downs and did not include many roll-outs for easier completions. By not having check-down options, Luck was asked to throw the ball to receivers downfield. The Colts had the 22nd ranked rushing attack. Their inability to gain the necessary yards on short yardage situations led the team to pass much more often, including in the red zone. Luck actually led the team in rushing TDs as further proof of this point. Luck passed 39 times per game on average. It’s clear that the Colts relied on Luck both in the passing game and running game to score points.
In contrast, Wilson played in an offensive scheme that was QB friendly. The Seahawks relied on their running game and asked Wilson to throw the ball about 25 times per game. They took advantage of the play-action, sometimes in the pistol formation and read-option plays, allowing for easier reads and easier completions. Wilson, however, was asked to make reads in the passing scheme and to make difficult throws at times. The Redskin’s offensive scheme was brilliant. They ran a variation of the read-option offense, and Shanahan’s offense out of the Pistol formation. Of the 4 rookie QBs, RGIII used play-action the most. He was also asked to run with the ball more than the others to take advantage of his speed and to create hesitation and confusion for the opposing defenses. RGIII had a very good running back and helped the Redskins to lead the league in rushing, yet RGIII finished 22nd in the league in passing yards gained while Wilson finished 23rd. Both RGIII and Wilson finished with passer ratings over 100, which is incredible. Tannehill played in an offense that relied on WCO principles. This includes shorter routes, and the use of roll-outs and check-downs for easier completions. (The Colts look to use this approach this upcoming year). Overall, Tannehill performed well, but consider this: he was in an offense that he was familiar with, behind a good O-line, and in a QB friendly offense, yet he finished behind Luck in QB rating-- something that Luck often gets criticized for.
Run game: The Colts finished with the 22nd ranking rushing attack. Donald Brown started at the RB position during the beginning of the season but missed time later due to injury. Vick Ballard stepped in and played very well. The O-line did not generate many running opportunities and the Colts were not a major threat in the run game. This allowed defenses to focus greatly on the Colt’s passing attack.
The Seahawks, as mentioned earlier, have the league’s 3rd best rushing attack, in part due to the play of Russel Wilson, but mostly due to Marshawn Lynch running behind a very stout O-line. The use of the read-option and the pistol also aided in the success of the run game. The pistol and the read-option were staples in the Redskin’s rushing attack. With RGIII’s ability to run, defenses had to read and react to the Redskin’s offense, often placing the defense behind a step or two. The Redskins have a very good running back who rushed for over 1,600 yards and RGIII also ran very well. The Dolphins finished with the 17th ranked rushing attack, with a good RB and a solid O-line that can create running lanes.
Defense: The Colts defense ranked #26 in the league, 21st in passing and 29th against the run. So in essences, it didn’t excel in any aspect, especially at creating turnovers. The Seahawks defense ranked #4 overall, 6th against the pass and 10th against the run. They were a very good unit. The Redskins finished #28 in overall defense, 30th against the pass, (the loss of their edge rusher due to injury really hurt), and 5th against the run. At least the Redskins were able to make their opponents one-sided and did well in creating turnovers. Miami started the year off strong and had a good defense, but it greatly underachieved over the course of the season. The Dolphins ranked #21 overall, 27th against the pass and 13th against the run.
In defending Luck’s stats as compared to the other rookies (as this is how they are most often compared, regardless of the many other variables that factor into the equation). People point to Wilson’s and RGIII’s greater completion percentage and QB rating, and to the high amount of turnovers that Luck is responsible for. My overall thoughts are that I do agree that Luck at times had his struggles. He did rely on Wayne too often. He held onto the ball too long, and he wasn’t always very accurate. Did he have too many turnovers? Yes, perhaps. In fairness, of the four rookie QBs, who was behind the worst O-line; he had the lowest ranking rushing attack; and couldn’t rely on the run game which led defenses to focus more on the passing attack? Who had to rely heavily on other rookies in an offensive system that was the most vertical in comparison to the other three rookie QBs, one that rarely included check-downs? As you know, in the NFL, the greater the distance that a pass travels, the greater the odds are of an interception. If Luck is consistently throwing a deeper pass than his peers, his interception numbers will be higher. I would also like to note that he threw 18 interceptions and the record for most interceptions thrown by a rookie is 26, by Peyton Manning. Luck was not encroaching into that territory of all-time bad. Colts did not rely on the pistol or read option to confuse the defense and in-fact were very predictable. Despite all of these obstacles, he still found a way to lead the Colts to an 11 win season, a season that included an appearance in the playoffs. I would like to refute the notion that passer rating is the best way to judge a QBs performance. The current passer rating system heavily favors QBs that throw shorter passes and have a greater completion percentage for this reason. My case and point would be Alex Smith early in the season. He was among the highest in passer rating, with a rating of 104 before he left with concussion issue. No one would argue that Alex Smith, (Mr. Checkdown and don’t take any risk) is the model NFL QB. He’s been labeled a game manager for this reason. It’s been long argued that both RGIII and Wilson are asked to make safer and shorter throws and run if the pass is not available. You cannot knock them for being careful with the ball, but you can make a point that they are asked to do severely different things than Luck, leading to a higher passer rating.
You can take any 3 players in the league and add them to your team. Which 3 players do you take?
in NFL General
Posted
Although I am very tempted to include Watt, I think I'll go with
1. Calvin Johnson
2. AJ Green
3. Adrian Peterson
At least our offense will be unstopable.