Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

DougDew

Senior Member
  • Posts

    11,734
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

DougDew last won the day on February 20

DougDew had the most liked content!

Uncategorized

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

12,177 profile views

DougDew's Achievements

Hall of Famer

Hall of Famer (5/6)

3.3k

Reputation

  1. I'm feeling better about our WR group. It looks like Campbell can play and stay healthy. It looks like Pittman can play X or the slot. And there is always another year for Strachan to take the next step. I think TY and Pascal are probably going to be replaced by signing a vet FA. Sign a vet with their money. You want to sprinkle the corps with a mix of youth and experience, and adding a rookie to the PC, PItt, and Strach grouping is too much youth, IMO. Add Patmon too. And it looks like Wentz can find the receiver well enough. I think we really need to draft a TE, and they can be gotten in rounds 2 and 3, maybe even round 4. Zone corners can be had in rounds 2 and 3. Zone safeties can be had in rounds 2 or 3. LT is a problem if Fisher doesn't work out.
  2. Well, you're not going to change to a 34. And you're not going to play press man in the back 4 when the corners are UDFA rookies. And we don't have the FS to play Cover 3. Soft zone to run clock is about all you can do, and flood the middle with defenders. Flus tried to cover the middle, and the LBers, Ss, and DEs who were assigned that responsibility failed. Its clearly on the limitations of the personnel.
  3. On the TD, Oke tried but failed. On the 2 pt,(I think it was that play), Leonard looked like he didn't know what he was doing. Overall, I would think a dropping DE or an LB would have been keying on Andrews at some point. I mean, if you are playing back there, wouldn't you be looking at Andrews and watching him? Sure, if BAL overloaded your zone you're screwed, but at least stop Andrews first. To me, that failure doesn't seem like a lack of coaching. It seems like a lack of common sense.
  4. Sounds like they read this forum...LOL. We all know this. For me, for about 2 years now.
  5. The defense was keeping Lamar in check and Brown a non factor for most of the game. It was a great game plan for 3 quarters. When Rhodes and number 34 left the game, the coverage got worse. The "vanilla" narrative gets old. Having the DEs drop into coverage is not a vanilla 43. It didn't work because of the players who were dropping. The defense ended up rushing 3 and the middle was still wide open. Poor talent.
  6. Simms mentions that there is no defender on the TV screen when BAL throws the dump offs. Well, we have seven players not rushing, and the Ravens only had three receivers. The LBers are supposed to be close to the dump offs. They are not playing the deep ball. The LBers should be there, and I doubt that Flus told them to drop back deep so far they are out of the picture.
  7. With whom? Who can blitz besides Leonard? And I'm not sure that he blitzes very well.
  8. The defense was conservative because it had third string secondary that got beat deep the one time they went to man coverage. Completing that thought, the defense is conservative in general because it has no talent, in general.
  9. I think the play calling was a bit conservative there too. Should have tried to get one more first down which would have made the FG easier and taken more clock. Having said that, it looks like the FG was on line before being blocked, so it was Glow's fault really.
  10. The same thoughts get reinforced: The offense doesn't need to spend a combined $35 million on a LG and RT. The point of Frank's offense is to spread the ball around to different receivers quickly. Once Wentz and Ehlinger get comfortable, it shows in the offensive production. Since its the NFL and the pass sets up the run, once the passing game is secured then JT can break off nice runs. The defense doesn't need to spend $20 million on a WILL. Its tough to win when a team has to play its third string UDFA Corners. Missed Xtra point, blocked FG, missed FG cost us the game. Oh yeah, Frank is a good play caller. Wentz has weird throwing mechanics.
  11. There is a term in economics to explain the concept. I think its called "The point of diminishing returns." The beneficial impact of adding dollars sort of peaks, and the amount of dollars you add after the peak has little impact relative to the same level of dollars added before the peak.
  12. I could see Ballard trading down in the second to pick up another 3rd (which is doable depending upon how high the 2nd is). Along with the comp picks we get for Autry and Walker (4th an 5th?...or just a 4th for both?) we could then have a low 2nd, two 3rds and two 4ths (or 2 fifths depending upon comp pick). We need zone corner. zone safety, ILB, and TE, which are positions where good talent can be found in those rounds. We won't be in position to get a #1WR or LT (if needed), but the other positions needing upgrade can be gotten even though we may be giving up a fairly high 1 for Wentz.
  13. I don't disagree with this as a concept. Yes, When we added Nelson, we added two other good players too. So for people to attribute our highly ranked oline on the appearance of an elite LG is cherry picking the facts, IMO. Yes, the oline plays much better depending upon the quality of the LT. That position and RT seems to impact our o line more...duh, to some of us. But, I don't think that you can say that because the oline performed well vs MIA, that Nelson's presence is replaceable. Is a healthy Reed just as good or better than a naggingly injured Nelson? Probably. But that's not a fair comparison, IMO, to say that we could replace Nelson and not have a drop off in oline play. You said not a HUGE dropoff in the play of the entire oline. I tend to agree, but seeing what we saw in MIA is not a good sample with which to use as evidence of that, IMO. And how HUGE is huge? I assume that Reed is destined to take over for Glow or be the first backup, depending upon his contract demands this spring.
  14. Well, under the Polian years, the Colts defense of took a big step when they drafted Marlin Jackson in the first round and Kelvin Hayden in the 2nd round, (very good play on their cheap rookie contracts) moving away from the Nick Harpers and Jason Davids of the world. We played zone but I think each had some decent man coverage skills. But then later, Vontae, a man corner, did not play that well in zone coverage. Its kind of hard to say, but generally the better talent we'd get the better coverage we'd get despite what scheme we would play. But if we're going to pay Smith, Leonard, Nelson, and Wentz, we probably need to get good play from cheap rookie contracts rather than buy a Corner like Gilmore.
  15. It's hard to predict a hypothetical based upon the final score of a game. During the Ballard era, the defense has never been able to stop a good offense from needing a FG when they needed it. So if Frank settles for a FG, that simply requires the opponent to press the gas peddle more than they would if they had the lead, and the Colts D really can't stop good offenses from doing that. If Frank went for FGs, the Colts would likely lose the game just the same.
×
×
  • Create New...