Goatface Killah

So? Thats completely irrelevant to my point.

Thats all Im really getting at Supe I put that play squarely on Brents, who I like a lot, and I thought did really well under tough circumstances last year. I understand why he was beaten and think its correctable. I think he was flat out asleep on the first play of the game and he just got burned.

1. I dont feel like that play is an accurate represemtation of Bradleys scheme, properly executed. 2. We had an unusually inexperienced group of corners. 3. All schemes requires players to execute and make plays against the perfect playcalls.

Honestly I just think everytime a guy gets beat people act like the DC told him to stand 2 yards behind the sticks and let him get the first down. The player was just too slow to read the play and react.

Player development. I think you can play a conservative play call, with aggression.

No I think sacks are their own thing and more pressures dont always equal more sacks. Sacks are a clear win. Usually it means your first move was effective. I think we got more sacks this year because Dayo and Kwity developed and were just better with their initial move. I also think Ebukam was really good for us and when he win, he won early. Some guys just dont get off blocks very well. Thats what seperates great rushers from good rushers, they win early and late. And I think really good QBs are very hard to sack. So youre never gonna sack good QBs unless they have a horrible OL......and then thats just another thing to point to that diminishes your play. Im just not a fan of trying to knock an accomplishment with analytics. Thats not what they are for. They are for evaluating areas of performance. Pressure rate is designed to evaluate the frequency of your pressures. Thats it. And yes we could absolutely be better at that. I already said I also want more pressures. I also want a more stout run defense. I have plenty of criticisms of this defense. i just dont blame Gus and his scheme every time. he has been in the league a long time and knows how to stop this stuff. As long as the team feels like he is a good teacher, I think he is fine at DC. I like his scheme and happen to think its plenty adequate for this pass happy league. I want JuJu to get an entire offseason healthy so he can get ready for next year and I think he covers that play much, much better.

Because the kind of change youre speaking of requires bringing in a different coach with a different philosophy, which also requires bringing in different players. And that is basically hitting the reset button. You lose all the positive things youve built over time, and there are positive things I have pointed out here.....and effectively start from scratch. Some people believe that improving your playcalling, talent and execution is just a better way to address it. I personally think the scheme is fine. Our secondary was an issue this year, which I expected.

He plays zone because he doesnt want to take risks. Thats the entire point. If you want him to change that, he is gonna have to take more risks. And if the guys cant execute thats a completely different issue. Brents had no help on that play. Call it a "beater" if you want but its only called that because it ISOLATES him in what is effectively MAN COVERAGE. The answer to that isnt necessarily a different coverage, because they likely check out of the play if they dont get the look they want and come back to it later. The answer is to be better. Get a sack. Cover him 1 on 1. Make a play. But out of curiosity, what would you have done on that play Supe? What wouldve been your call? And would that have only been the call because you, in hindsight, KNOW THE TEXANS PLAYCALL? Its a lot easier than doing it for real.

No I think you seem to over value analytics and diminish clear and obvuous stats. Sacks are way better than pressures. We discussed this already. So a framchise record in sacks is gonna be a great accomplishment. You remember that incredible throw to Nico Collins on the final Texans drive? That was a pressure. So you cant just throw out the franchise sack record and call it mediocre because we didnt get enough of those meaningless pressures. I wish we wouldve sacked him. We wouldve likely won the game if we did that.

Isnt that exactly what you advocate for? Taking more risks? Playing more man coverage? Well........ He cant win. He puts the rookie on an island, he gets beat, its a bad call. He plays zone and rushes four to try and stop plays like that and protect our young corners, its a bad call. He rushes 4 on 5 and they cant get immediate pressure, the pass rush stinks. He blitzes and allows the RB to catch a screen pass and take it 70 yards, the LBs cant cover. I mean I just find all this over the top.

Hold up, the playcall on the first play was the exact oppositte of Bradleys typical play call. He left a rookie on their best receiver 1 on 1. If anything it highlights the risks of playing man coverage, which his detractors use as THEE SOLUTION. Cmon.

Its definitely not. You can take any defense in the league and diminish them by pointing out that they cant stop very good QBs like they stop back up QBs. I dont understand the point in doing that unless its to prop up your opinion which isnt necessarily supported by the results. The franchise sack record cant be a fluke. A turnover streak of 18 games, or whatever, cant be a fluke or a statistical anomoly because the achievements are the anomoly. And to achieve an anomoly takes tremendous skill. The Colts defense did fine against CJ Stroud on Sunday. They got burned on the first play of the game by an incredible throw and play call..........and did very well against him the rest of the game. The kid played great in crunchtime and made some plays that won them the game. So we suck?

The good QBs take everyone apart. If thats your gauge, everyone is mediocre. Supe, the Colts had the longest turnovers forced streak in the entire league at one point this year, and it was 3 times longer than anyone elses. And they set a franchise record in sacks. What youre saying is not true. At all.

I used the Browns solely because they are the only team Ive heard anybody suggest has a great defense this year. And we scored on them fairly easily, as did other teams. Truth is, there are no great defenses anymore, because its illegal to play what I consider great defense. I dont disagree that we need to be more creative. But that doesnt mean its gonna create better results than simply improving what we already do. The Colts defense already does the 2 of the 3 things I think are most important in the modern NFL, very well. They get sacks and force turnovers. If they can create more consistent pressure, they will check that third box and all of the other stats will improve significantly. JMO

Right. Sometimes a guy just gets outplayed. And sometimes that has to be acceptable because of how hard it is to do what the player is being asked to do. For example, if you dont ever ask Jaylon Jones or JuJu to cover a very good receiver with no help, then schematically a team is gonna see that and tear you apart in other ways. And if you do ask them to do it, they are gonna get beat sometimes because the other team has every rule advantage plus the knowledge of the play. But Rick would point out the flaw in the coverage and say nothing about the fact that we cant cover the TE and thats why the corner was put on that island in the first place. To a fan, every time another team does something positive against your team, its a failure by your team or a bad play call. And Rick talks like a fan a lot of times which is why other fans like him so much. And honestly I like Rick as a commentator, in small doses. I think he does a pretty nice job.

By me? Maybe. But I dont see much of that. I look at the merits of the person with the opinion and gauge how much stock I put into it. I never thought Rick was a good coach when he was here. And the fact he never coached in the modern NFL, suggests to me, that he hasnt a clue how hard it is to stop teams from scoring points now. The number 1 defense allowed 44 TDs this year. But when you hear Rick speak, it all sounds like he thinks its so easy. I think he would be embarrassingly bad if he attempted to coach a modern NFL defense. So why do I care what he has to say? Now as far as Gus, there are times I am also maddened by the problems with playing zone defense and just rushing 4. But I also understand that its even harder to build a defense that can thrive on man coverage and blitzing. Good quarterbacks destroy blitzes and man coverage and almost nobody is actually good at it.

I think that if a guy can catch the 5th most passes in the league without any elite traits, that would be pretty incredible. Moose is basically saying he isnt as fast as Tyreek Hill.

Its hyperbole, but the essence of what I posted is absolutely true.

Not great? Its actually very bad Hes never coached in the modern NFL. How would he know what works and doesnt work?

The funny thing about this is if Rick Venturi was the coach right now instead of Gus, and his track record was anywhere near as poor as it was when he was here back in the 80s and early 90s, these same fans would certainly be calling him a * and demanding he be fired. And defense was nowhere near as hard to play back in those days. I think people just call the guy who agrees with them a genius and everyone who doesnt is an *. The teams Rick coached for had like a 30% winning percentage when he was on the staff. And I believe he was like 1-15 as a head coach. But he agrees with me so hes brilliant!

I would be interested in a guy like Ryan Tannehill if he is available. I think he would be a good fit with Steichen and is certainly good enough to win games.

Again. I completely disagree. He would see a lot of single coverage and destroy it.

You seriously have no clue what youre talking about. If fans could read defenses that easily they would have jobs in the NFL. So on 3rd and 1 they are expecting run and play closer to the LOS. On first and 10 they are not playing close to the LOS. And youre take away from this is they only wanted to stop him on the plays when they crowded the line of scrimmage?

Heres the thing, I think Josh Downs is a star in the making and might wind up being our best receiver. On defense, I dont disagree that LB is a weakness for us. But I also think safety is a major weak spot and might be a little more important in this defense. I wouldnt be surprised if they make free safety a top priority.

People dont want to let a guy develop anymore. I think Pierce has a lot of talent and its way too soon to give up on him. He has things he needs to work on. Thats for sure. But he can be a weapon, I have no doubt about that.