Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum


Senior Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


DougDew last won the day on June 6 2018

DougDew had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,270 All-Pro


  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

11,650 profile views
  1. I'll be rooting for the Colts. Like most, I wouldn't expect it and would consider any SB achievement an overachievement. But proper credit is usually given to the HC and the QB for that overachievement.
  2. IDK, its tough to play what ifs. IIRC, the Colts made the playoffs every year of Luck's career when he was healthy. It kind of transcends GMs. Its tough to compare us with Luck to KC. KC would still have much more of a potent offense with Hill, and Kelce. TY isn't the same and JT really isn't the threat KCs players are. We have Buck, they have Chris Jones. Has no bearing on whether or not to extend Ballard though. We don't have Luck, and its still the right move. And he may never find a Luck like QB, and it would still be the right move.
  3. But any group with Luck was a SB caliber group. I mean, there is having to beat Mahomes now and Brady then, but other than that, its about the same without Luck. Good with a good Rivers QB, bad with a bad JB QB.
  4. I'm not questioning the signing. I don't like firing GMs every 4 years. The timing of the announcement was pretty good.
  5. So this whole Philly/NY injustice complaint is that Pederson pulled his starting QB in the 4th quarter of a game where he was not playing great anyway? That's an injustice to whom exactly? People have gone nuts.
  6. Right after we qualify for the playoffs...but before we lose. Good timing.
  7. IMO, the thinking behind the cover 2 is to force the O to "matriculate the ball down the field" with short passes. In the larger volume of plays the O will have to run to move the ball down field (as opposed to big chunk plays), the more likely there will be a drop, a bad throw, a holding call, etc. More chances for the O to mess up its own drive than to need a great defensive stand all of the time. But yeah, if the Qb is good and the O doesn't mess up, a zone D can allow the ball to get down the field over time. Hopefully though, the field shrinks and those zones get smaller as the O move
  8. Also with the other things he can do, it would be a waste to have Blackmon solely worry about the deep ball.
  9. Hooker had value when he was back there protecting the deep ball. Remember seeing many short/ intermediate completions and tackles where Hooker wasn't even in the screen he was so far back. Then when he would line up closer to the LOS, he'd get beat deep. I guess I'm saying it has less to do with the talent of the S than where he lines up, JMO. My beef about the secondary is that I think we are playing coverages that we don't have the talent to play. Play cover 2, contest catches as much as you can but keep everything underneath and make the tackle quickly. Switchin
  10. I know, but he's not athletic enough to recover after pressing. All but the top 5 NFL corners get beat over the top if they don't have over the top S help. When RYS gets beat, it seems like the QB sees the S coverage not being there, so he gets picked on. In cover 2, the S is supposed to be there and they are not when he is getting beat. Either the S is messing up consistently or we are playing some sort of coverage that we don't have the talent to play. I suspect the latter. What you're asking for is enough talent to be physical in the LOS jam, support the run, then cover for
  11. A few thoughts. I'd prefer to spread out the talent along the dline and not concentrate it in the middle. So I'd prefer the other stud to be more of a three down DE. And in a 4-3, that guy should be about 6.4 270. 250 to 260 pound DEs are purely pass rushers, IMO. A DE like that will not get the sack numbers... a decent amount but not stud PR stats..but the situational nature of the other rotational players, plus Buckner, should keep the team ranked high in terms of pressures and sacks. Rock is not quick enough to tangle at the LOS then turn and run with the receiver for a long
  12. I agree. I think the in the past, Freeney and Mathis would get gassed at the end of games. It looks like Ballard is taking a more rotational approach to the edge position, and using the 3T Buckner as our primary disruptive single-named player. But if our edges cant set the edges, QBs will just audible to run plays. While I like the rotational approach in general, at least one of our edges needs to be the primary guy that gets a lot of plays and he has to be good enough in both the passing game and running game. The other side can have a pure rotation, IMO, as well as Grover giv
  13. This is what Turay did last season. He feasted on bad OTs, but didn't do much against the playoff caliber type. You recall Freeney did well against them all. Tough comparison I know, but a team needs to be able to have pass rushers in the playoffs, that's how important an EDGE is and why they are hard to find.
  14. IMO, this entire perception of bad play calling is a bit off. If you look at Frank's game management, I think ball control...possessing the ball a lot more than the other team....is a big part of his planning and even philosophy. Especially if a defense is young, limiting the number of possessions the opposing offense has leads to better odds of winning. That's why he's generally conservative when we're winning and have momentum, yet aggressive on 4th down. Its about holding the ball, playing keep away, maybe even more important than scoring as many points as possibl
  15. I'm sorry, let me rephrase that into something more acceptable around here. Its an A grade. It would have been an A+, if it wasn't for our near-superbowl quality roster being held back by Frank's bad play calling and Rivers' immobility. Is that better?
  • Create New...