Goatface Killah
-
Posts
2,147 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Goatface Killah
-
-
18 minutes ago, Superman said:
It's not normal to convert 21% of pressures to sacks. I think that's pretty much fact. Everything else I said is open to debate, which is why I said 'most likely.' I also never said the team got 51 sacks on pure luck, right?
But again, unless we can come up with some kind of explanation for why our pass rushers should be expected to convert pressures at a higher than normal rate, then we should acknowledge that 21% is not sustainable.
I'm not sure where the comparison with the Chiefs is coming from.
Because you are comparing our pressure rate to the rest of the league, which isnt an apples to apples comparison, and then using that metric as a statement as to our talent level. The Chiefs example is just to show that these stats are far more complex than just talent = production. Scheme is a factor. A big one. Situational football is another factor. A big one.
This is why people dont understand how GMs think. They tend to see it as a talent issue every time. GMs just dont think that way.
Ballard signed Raekwon Davis because he thinks we need to perform better on early downs, which should lead to better performance on 3rd down, at least in theory. 3rd and long is optimal for creating pressure in our scheme. Our run defense needs to be stout.
Its entirely possible that we just performed really well when we put ourselves into ideal situations for our scheme, but we just didnt put ourselves into those positions often enough to accumulate a high amount of pressures.
Does that make sense?
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Superman said:
Because it's not normal to convert 21% of your pressures to sacks. That conversion rate was most likely dependent on factors other than how good our pass rushers are, unless you can point to something that indicates that our guys are just abnormally better at converting pressures to sacks. And that would be ironic, because our guys are below average at getting pressures in the first place.
Why do you say this like its a fact?
The Kansas City Chiefs generated 73 unblocked pressures last year. Thats scheme, not talent. Scheme and situational football are a big part of this. Its hard to scheme up pressure when you are protecting a young secondary and its very hard to apply pressure on 3rd and short. We were very poor vs the run and just did not put ourselves in position to pressure with 4 guys. We need 3rd and 6 ir more to be effective there.
So comparing them to a team like KC whose stats are heavily inflated by a masterful DC scheming up blitzes is absolutely not fair to our guys. We have some very good football players on that DL. Is Gus on Spags level? No but not many are.
I think it is pretty wild to suggest the team set a franchise record in sacks on pure luck.
The truth is somewhere in the middle.
-
12 minutes ago, tfunky14 said:
I think top 8 is fair.
Absolutely.
These people are just hating and nitpicking, as usual.
Yes the pressure rate needs to get better, but no it isnt "way more important" than sacks. Sacks are huge plays for the defense and you absolutely dont "luck into" sacks. They also have 2 very young ascending edge players who look very promising and should take another step this year.
There are other ways to improve the pressure rate other than just throwing money at free agents. The biggest way is to force more 3rd and longs. Forcing 3rd and long is the biggest factor in increasing things like pressure rate, schematically. Its very hard to get pressure on 3rd and 3. Its much easier on 3rd and 8. Especially in this system. i would guarantee you that the teams with higher pressure rates forced more 3rd and longs than the Colts.
You have to win the early downs. And I think the fact they produced so many sacks while not being very good against the run is a testamemt to how good they are.
This DL is very good and definitely one of the better units, top to bottom, in the league. Are they a top 5 unit? Not quite. But they are knocking on the door. Adding Davis should help by making us more stout when Grover is off the field. He should bolster our short yardage package as well. I wouldnt be surprised to see them both on the field against strong running teams.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:
Maybe using Buckner at DE more.
Dayo outside more maybe.
I could see some big fronts on early downs like Bradley used to have in Seattle.
-
1
-
-
Ballard obviously didnt give this guy 7 million a year to just backup Grover Stewart. Its pretty clear he thinks he can play him at both spots inside.
I personally like it. I think the run defense was a bigger problem last year than people realize. We need to force more 3rd and longs and to do that you have to be good on first down.
-
3
-
-
11 minutes ago, csmopar said:
Sanchez has one of the bottom 6 punt averages in the league.
I believe he was 12th.
-
1
-
-
57 minutes ago, Indeee said:
Dude come on? I mean, keep some of our guys sure but actually go and get some real difference makers. PAY THEM
How many people on here been complaining about needing a safety. OK, why isn't McKinney a Colt? I mean I'm not saying that should've been done but go get some REAL talent at positions we need upgrades at. Signing our own guys is not going to cut it because these players are not good enough to get this team over the top and that's not an opinion that's based on the results we have witnessed for a long time now.
I'm not complaining, I'm just saying...
McKinney didnt make much of a difference for the Giants last year. The 1 good year theyve had, he was actually hurt and missed half the season. He aint moving the needle.
People over rate these free agents every year.
-
We were never gonna sign a guy who played in a 3-4 to replace Zaire Franklin.
-
1 hour ago, shasta519 said:
I misread that...that's my bad.
"You have a clear agenda" says the Ballard white knight who probably posts 100x more than me and always shows up on every thread that is critical of Ballard. Talk about pot meet kettle.
And it's very easy for me to have a conversation. I have my opinions and I support them. It's just difficult for you and your ilk because you don't like hearing those opinions (often times facts) and prefer to stick to excuses.
I actually dont post very often at all.
Do you have anything to say about any of the points I made regarding Ballard being active in free agency?
-
41 minutes ago, shasta519 said:
Much better? Where is the evidence that he has been much better beyond feelings? It's certainly not in the results. His predecessor won more playoffs games in half the time. The guy before that is a HOFer.
The conversation is about free agency.
I understand its very hard for you to follow any kind of actual conversation considering you have a clear agenda, but at least give it a good effort.
If you gave me the number 1 overall pick in the draft with a generational QB sitting there for me, I could win a playoff game also. Absolutely nothing impressive about that, at all.
-
13 minutes ago, ArmchairQB said:
You forgot Denico Autry. Both his greatest success and failure in FA management
Also Justin Houston, Yannick Ngakoue amd Samson Ebukam. Glowinski?
-
Just now, Indeee said:
"My Narrative"
This is the last moment I'm going to entertain your fizzle. Since reading my post you have made this all about "My Narrative".
You are right. It has been "My Narrative" for many years now, as you are quick to point out. But here's the thing. My post was from an Indy Writer, Reporter, whatever. Not from me. A person paid to write stuff about the team, not just some guy with a "Narrative" as you claim I am.
So, explain how "My Narrative" was so eloquently explained from some Indy writer I have zero ties to. A writer who has never had the privilege of seeing or knowing "My Narrative". Maybe I should attempt to sue her as she has clearly copied "My Narrative" without my permission, nor has she given me credit as "My Narrative" or could it be that "My Narrative" is starting to become a realized reality more and more each day, each year, as this GM continues down his never changing path.
Maybe, just maybe, "MY Narrative" has been spot on from the jump. As "My Narrative" to me, has always been nothing more than obvious assertions.
I'm out. You are no longer a part of "My Narrative".
You see eloquent and I see a bunch of mumbo jumbo from a writer with zero meaningful credentials in a world full of internet experts with zero meaningful credentials.
Im not impressed.
Why are you so impressed? Only because she agrees with you. Thats it. You like it because it tickles your ego. And you just admitted it.
-
8 minutes ago, #12. said:
Here's the thing about the Colts cycling through QBs that rarely gets mentioned. I'm sure no one will admit it, but internally for several years, I would bet there were people in the organization hoping and thinking that Luck might still return. It sure seemed like Irsay was holding out hope. That might have been a factor in deciding on what to do at QB.
At the beginning of 2022, while Wentz was still on the team, Ballard was asked what he would say if Luck wanted to return.
Ballard: Welcome back.
That must have made Wentz feel good.
I think most people expected him to miss the game and return at some point. Im shocked he never came back. That dude loved to play football, I dont care what anyone says.
-
11 minutes ago, Bravo said:
Grigson brought on Frank Gore, Andre Johnson, Laron Landry, Donnie Avery in FA and traded for Richardson.
Those were bigger names at the time of the signings.
I’m not saying he was a great GM, I thought the argument was that Ballard was the most active GM we have ever had.
Consistently, year over year he absolutely is.
And he is much better than Grigson or Polian for that matter, ever was.
10 minutes ago, Bravo said:
Also Laron Landry, Donnie Avery, and the trade for Richardson.I thought the argument was activity and singing known players, not how good they were as a GM.
One year does not mean he was more active.
You didnt even name as many people as I did and I left out quite a few.
Phillip Rivers
Stephon Gilmore
Tre Burton
Eric Ebron
Jabaal Sheard
Xavier Rhodes
Johnathan Hankins
TJ Carrie
-
3 minutes ago, Indeee said:
The only colossal disappointment in this list is Jax. The rest you mentioned are hands down miles better than this team where it currently stands. That Philly team is one year removed from a super bowl which they came minutes away from winning and they are a disappointment? Miami? Cincy? Dude, for real?
This team arguably was improved sure but to what degree? as we were playing a third place schedule of teams I believe. The only real good win was against Baltimore, and that really doesn't count because the Colts seem to ALWAYS beat the ravens in Baltimore.
I'm glad you are a fan but where you say I'm one-sided in my viewpoints of this team, the same can be said for you, only opposite.
This team is NOT close to really competing the way it should be. Yes, they can compete in a league that had more backup QB's playing this year, including us, than any other year in the history of the league I think, but that does not mean that we drastically improved as much as you think we did. If we did drastically improve, we still would not be sitting here needing to fill gaping holes at premium spots like WR, CB, and Edge Rusher. These positions, along with QB, have been void of this team with Ballard at the helm and it is why as the writer says, we have zero division titles and only 1 playoff win in 8 years now. In NFL terms, that's a long time without a sniff. Even the hapless commanders won a division title a couple years back, and they just cleaned their entire house. < Seriously, think about that a moment.
I think it's time to take the glasses off or in your case, put them on, because clearly you can't see what's right in front of your face...
I think every single one of those fanbases are very dissapointed in their teams this season. So yes, they are all under achieving dissappintments just like us. The only people hyping up their failures is you, and its only for the sake of trying to make the Colts look bad.
As far as the rest of your post, its just more of the same. Our wins dont count because we played a backup QB, with OUR BACKUP QB......yada yada yada.......blah blah blah. Whatever. It doesnt even count when we beat the league MVP with our backup QB on the road. Nothing good ever counts. Because youre that insecure in your narrative.
The line between success and failure is razor thin and all the teams I listed are proof of that.
-
On 12/18/2023 at 3:53 PM, ArmchairQB said:
Extremely late to this party and admittedly haven’t read every single post.
I have seen the fact that this team is constantly young and inexperienced mentioned as a deficiency but I disagree. When you watch any Colts game you see 90% of the players producing on the field are homegrown Ballard draft picks. Are we dominate? No, but we are competitive and winning this year in spite of losing our QB early on.
We are consistently near the top of the NFL in salary cap space and have yet to have to do a salary dump fire sale under Ballard. Do you know how many teams would kill to hit in the draft the way Ballard constantly does? He pays intelligently and has had success replacing free agent losses. He has also shown he will sign big free agents if it makes sense and has mostly hit on those.
We could be doing much worse than Ballard. If the AR pick hits I think most agree he has overall been a very solid GM.
Its all about QB. Qb is the straw the stirs the drink.
We have needed one and its very hard to find. He has tried a bunch of different things, because its hard. A few have worked fairly well. Rivers, Minshew, and maybe Richardson. A few havent worked as well like Wentz and Ryan.
Sounds to me like a guy doing a descent job of plugging a gaping hole more than pure incompetence.
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:
With who? Not big time game changers. Grigson took over a roster in need of big time help. I give him some credit for those first 2 seasons. Obviously, I give Luck more
He is thinking of Gosder Cherilus, Andre Johnson and Frank Gore.
That year was clearly an outlier. And it didnt work either.
Most years the Colts have done exactly what Ballard has done. Even the most successful years we have had. A bargain bin signing or two and thats it. And its not gonna change.
-
1
-
-
On 12/15/2023 at 3:37 PM, Moosejawcolt said:
U cannot absolve Ballard for the Rivers Wentz and Ryan acquisitions. Thr buck is suppose to stop with him on personnel decisions. Now if we r to beleive that Irsay had a lot of influence on those decisions. Then one might ask themselves if Irsay has faith in Ballard.
So because the perfect solution wasnt there, he is penalized for having to try something?
Youre so delusional youre even mad about the Rivers decision and he took us to the playoffs.
-
2
-
-
34 minutes ago, Indeee said:
First of all, the FA aspect is only one part of it. So it is you my friend who are clearly looking to confirm your feelings. Regardless of whether we agree or disagree with what you call organizational philosophy, as the writer points out, it has not worked. See "results" as the key here.
As far as Ballard's decisions goes, again, can't really say they have been great when the results show otherwise.
And neither has your philosophy. You all have been hyping up colossal dissapointments like Miami, Philly, Cincinnatti, Jacksonville, Etc.....
I am critical of the organization when I feel they deserve it. The last play call of the year, Frank Reich, etc.
And I praise them when they deserve it. You know, because I think about what actually happened and not some fantasy world I created for myself, where all my personal opinions result in success. Its not hard to be objective and fair.
You on the other hand are pretty consistently posting the same thing 1000 different ways. There is zero nuance to your opinions. Its all Ballard hate, all the time.
His decisions last year absolutely worked. The team was drastically improved from the year before. But you would never acknowledge it. So why does your opinion matter if you cant be the least bit honest with yourself?
-
24 minutes ago, Bravo said:
That’s not true.Grigson was by far the most active (For better or worse)
Youre basing this off one single year. And every move was horrible.
Ballard is active every year bringing in guys who actually contribute. Autry, Houston, Ngakoue, Ebukam, Gay, etc.
-
Thats an organizational philosophy. All you complainers act like we were bringing in free agents before Ballard got here. We have never done that.
In reality, Ballard has been more active and made better decisions in free agency than any other GM we have ever had. Much better. Much more active.
Stop looking for things that confirm your feelings and try actually looking at evidence.
-
2
-
-
19 hours ago, Solid84 said:
Sacks are a product of pressure, pressure isn't a product of sacks. That's why the pressure rate matters so much because more pressure is more opportunities to impact the play (with sacks among other ways).
It's not two separate things. Sacks is a subcategory of pressure.
But it is 2 seperate things. They might be connected, but they arent the same.
-
20 minutes ago, Superman said:
There's a little note at the end of this article that illustrates why I'm harping on pressures and pressure rate.
Not only does pressure lead to sacks, but pressure can turn a really efficient and capable QB into a complete disaster. To be clear, sacks are more valuable, but pressure still matters. Even if you don't see our sack conversion rate as unsustainable, we still need to be better than 19.6% pressure rate.
I agreed we need more pressure. I never said we didnt.
This all started as a response to moose who claimed our pass rush was awful. It isnt. The sack production proves that. If our pressure rate matched pur sack output, we would be undeniably elite.
We are somewhere between those 2 extremes.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:
Apparently Martendale could be available. Make the call. I have a lot of faith in Steichen but his retention of Bradley is a real head scratcher for me unless there are things going on behind the scenes we don't know about. Does continuity refer to the scheme rather than keeping the coach? I don't know but heading into next season with the same old coach, talent and scheme on defense is just going to lead to the same results. 8 years watching this defence tells me it is broken from the coaching, talent, and scheme. It is time to make a change. Also not being talked about is this. Steichen reportedly is a very bright man. He had to see what is going on, he had to. In keeping Gus, if he does, is this his first shot stating he believes the problems with the D is more talent than coaching? If he retains Gus, that's what it's telling me. I still have to believe there is more going on behind the scenes
The Giants defense gave up more yards than the Colts this year.
Colts offseason discussion / Ballard Grievances (merge)
in Colts Football
Posted
If you are looking to add important positions, or guys who you hope will become cornerstones of your team, doesnt it make sense to draft and develop those players instead of throwing tons of money at veterans?
I think this makes perfect sense.