Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

CurBeatElite

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    1,072
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by CurBeatElite

  1. 2 minutes ago, chad72 said:

     

    No, I have seen aggressive Ds like the Steelers or Ravens back up their QB with blitzes and force punts right after their O commits a turnover. There is no sarcasm in this. It is a valid question.

     

    Yes, our O does not do enough on the turnovers the D presents it, that is your point, I got it. The flip side can also be posed as a fair question, right?

     

    OK, got it... and yea, I think it's fair.

     

    However, I think some of that is related to defensive rest.  For example, look at the play by play from IND-BAL: https://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay?gameId=401220189

     

    They opened the 2nd half with a 4 min drive, we forced a fumble.  We then threw an INT on the first play after getting the ball back.  After they turned the ball over (and it was deep in our territory, we gave it right back to them - 7 seconds ran off the clock).  Our D had to be exhausted after just having that drive, getting some momentum with a FF and then seeing it get washed down the drain the next play.  Then Balt had a 5 min 40 sec drive for a TD.  We got the ball back and punted on a 3 and out.  Again, the D had to be exhausted.  You'll notice if you look across our season, our D plays much better after our O eats up some clock and gives them rest.  

     

    Not like the Pack had long drives on us before we forced turnovers, but when we did yesterday we gave it back to them within about a minute.  Then they had a long drive (4 min 15 sec after our missed FG) and we threw an interception our first play after they kicked off.  https://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay?gameId=401220191  

    • Like 1
  2. 4 minutes ago, coltsfan_canada said:

     

    I am glad someone pointed this out. No one mentioned JB but I think the teammates love him I remember when he got the 4th down converted all the O players jumped on him, and I felt that was game changing energy and was positive vibe. 

     

    JB is very effective on QB sneaks.  Our 3rd/4th and short play calling has been predictable many times this season.  It definitely did seem like brining JB into the game in those situations kept GB at check a bit.  

     

    In the offseason, Frank said he'd have ~6 plays per game where JB would come in.  After the play against Jax, I was hoping that we'd not see JB at all.. but yesterday, he was used very effectively and I do think that QB sneak gave our team a big boost like you mentioned.

  3. 1 hour ago, chad72 said:

     

    No, they did. However, there is a burden that we place on the offense if we dig a hole that sometimes, like the Browns game, we cannot come back from. That is my true concern. Of course, Ws are all I care about, no style points like in college.

     

    The offense digs itself its own hole fairly often.  Our D recovered a fumble on the opening drive by GB which gave our offense the ball at our 40.  We fumbled it right back.  

     

    Then when our D got an INT, inside their territory, our O got 3 yards and missed a FG to give it back to GB.

     

    Then we threw an interception the first play of the next drive which gave them the ball inside of our 30.  

     

    It doesn't help our D at all when they get a turnover and we give it right back to GB.  One, it gives GB good field position, and 2 it gives our D no time to rest.  

     

    Sort of like @Superman said, I think a big part of the D turnaround in the second half was that our O ate up a ton of clock, keeping Rodgers off the field and letting our D rest, and when the Pack did have the ball they weren't starting in favorable field position.

     

    In the Browns game, Rivers threw a pick 6 the first drive of the 2nd half.  Later in the 2nd half, our D got a safety and Rivers threw an INT after getting the ball back.  In the first half, CLE did have 2 nice drives which resulted in TDs, but we also had a nice drive which resulted in a FG and then a 3 and out.  If the O played a little better in the first half, there's no reason why that game isn't tied or a 3 point game at half instead of a 10 point game.

     

    We came back from 21 down in Cincy.. but let's remember, we fumbled the ball inside our own territory on our opening drive which gave Cincy good field position that they converted a TD on.  Then we went 3 and out and went down 21-0.  The Bengals did have fairly nice drives on their 2nd and 3rd possessions, but it isn't like our O is helping the D out when they start with a turnover, 3 and out, 3 and out.

     

    Our loss to Ravens we were up 10-7 at half.  The only 7 the Ravens scored in that half were when their D returned a fumble for a TD.  The second half, our D forced a fumble on their first drive which was a fairly long, exhaustive drive.  Rivers threw a pick the next play - giving Balt good field position and giving our D no rest, they scored a TD.  Then we went 3 and out and punted, giving them decent field position and our D only 1 minute 12 seconds of rest.  They scored another TD on their following drive.  Then our O finally gave the D some rest with a 5 min 40 sec drive which we turned over on downs, followed by our D forcing a 3 and out.  We turned it over on downs 5 plays later and they scored a FG after starting in good field position.  So while Balt put up 24 points, it's easy to argue that our O was directly or indirectly responsible for all of them.

     

    Our loss vs. Jax... our D gave up 2 good drives all day to Jax (which resulted in 14 points).  The other 13 points came from a pick 6 (again our O's fault) and a pick which gave the Jags the ball inside our 30.  

     

    It is a team game, and there have been many instances where our O is putting our D into very bad situations which results in them giving up points.

     

    1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

    First...    we had an interception and a fumble that helped the Packers and put our defense in a bad situation. 
     

    Second...   this is yet another thread that doesn’t factor in the Covid year.   No off-season.  No Pre-season games.   If you think this doesn’t factor into on field performance, you’re kidding yourself.   (Not picking on you Chad, these threads are all over the website).

    There’s nothing normal about this year. 

     

    Third...  I read that defense is terrible this year all across the NFL.  Offense is way up.  In part due to Covid and in part due to the refs told to back off and let the offenses play.  The NFL trying to preserve fan interest.  (I know yesterday’s game was an exception to the rule).  So if we’re hot and cold, well,  that’s the world we’re living in.  I know it’s not a great answer, but it’s hard to be dominant all the time in the best of season’s, much less in this crazy season. 

     

    We also had a missed FG (4 plays after Ya-Sin's INT) which GB capitalized on.

     

    As I put in my recent thread on takeaways from the GB game and (less directly) in my response to @chad72 above, it's a bit concerning that other teams are capitalizing on our turn overs, whereas it seems as we like to give the ball right back to the opponent after our D forces a turnover.

    • Like 2
  4. Certainly not the prettiest win, but a heckuva win versus a team who came into the game 7-2 (best record in NFC) with the NFL's top QB this year.  Especially important with the Titans beating the Ravens in OT in the early game.  Makes this upcoming game vs. Titans very important, with the winner being in sole control of the AFC South.  It was nice to see the team stay poised, Rivers play smart football, and get a come from behind win, for sure... that said, self-inflicted wounds (an INT, a fumble, a missed FG, and penalties) came close to costing the Colts a win yesterday.  At the end of the day, it seems like one of those team-building wins - the team played together, showed heart and overcame multiple challenges to get a big win versus a very solid opponent.  The coaching staff did a solid job, we made adjustments in the 2nd half and dominated time of possession, stopped their offense, and got back on top after going into half down by 14.  

     

    Positives:

    The team stayed poised and didn't show any signs of panic in the 2nd half.  The offense played very well in the 2nd half (aside our final drive of the 4th quarter with all the penalties) and our D, aside from GB's last drive totally shut the Packers down.  We got a huge ST turnover and really (aside from the two aforementioned  drives) dominated GB in the 2nd half.  I was also encouraged that our D came out strong and forced a turnover in OT, fearing the momentum from the Packers' last drive of regulation may have gotten to our D's head.

     

    Jonathan Taylor, IMO, had his best game of the year.  He ran hard and seemed to run with more instinct than he has all year.  I noticed at least one very solid play in pass protection from him and he also did well catching all 4 targets thrown at him for 24 yards.  

     

    Rivers, IMO, had a very solid game.  The INT wasn't the best, but it wasn't just a terrible decision like some of his previous INTs have been - this one was tipped at the line and the D made a good play.  Rivers played very smart in the 2nd half, keeping the ball secured, making several critical throws and keeping Rodgers off the field.  In our other losses this year, Rivers has made at least one or more very poor decisions at critical moments- I got a little nervous in the 2nd half yesterday he'd do that again, but he didn't force anything unnecessary, he made a few very nice throws throughout the game and played well and distributed the ball to 11 receivers.

     

    Jacoby's use was very solid.  He had a great QB sneak on a 4th and <1.  Definitely seemed like it kept GB off balance a bit.  

     

    Pittman had another solid game (aside from his holding penalty late).  He made a few nice blocks, caught all 3 balls thrown his way and ran after the catch very well.  He's deceptively fast and athletic when he's got the ball in his hands.  Pascal also had a solid game with 3 catches on 3 targets for 54 yards.

     

    STs -- aside from Hot Rod's missed kick early, we dominated that phase of the game.  Rigo had a nice punt which pinned them inside the 10 late in the game (of course Rodgers hit the bomb down the middle, but I still think with our D that it helped them keep GB out of the endzone compared to if Rodgers had gotten to start on the 25).  Marsh made a very nice play to knock the ball loose and we got a solid recovery on a kickoff late in the game.  Hot Rod settled in and nailed everything after his miss.  Rigo does a very nice job on kickoffs and our kickoff coverage unit does well to keep the returner from crossing the 25.  

     

    Buckner -- only had 2 tackles recorded on the day, but his overall play definitely helped keep Rodgers in check for most of the second half and he made an outstanding play on the fumble recovery in OT.  For that matter, I thought Grover Stewart and Houston also had very solid  games.  

     

    Blackmon -- I thought he should have been able to knock that ball down on GB's last drive when Rodgers threw it deep in the middle of the field, he was close.  Otherwise, a solid game and a great play in OT to get that ball loose and get it back to our O.  He's really making a case for DROY (https://www.sportsbettingdime.com/nfl/defensive-rookie-year-odds/).

     

    Cassius Marsh -- nice forced fumble on the kick return and he is making solid contributions on D when he's in the game.  

     

    We won the turnover battle.  That'll be important to continue moving forward.

     

    Negatives:

     

    Some self-inflicted mistakes.  The fumble by MAC and the INT by Rivers were good plays by GB, so let's give them some credit, but we can't afford to give the ball away down the stretch here.  Hot Rod missed (short) on a 50 yard attempt.  He redeemed himself, was a bit alarming that he was short (hit the cross bar) from 50.  I would hope distance wouldn't be the problem from inside 55 yards for most NFL kickers, especially in a controlled environment.  Then the penalties this game were the most we've had - several throughout the game hurt us, but especially that last drive.  Some of them were a bit tacky, but there is no reason why after picking up a 1st down on a 4th down conversion that late into the game why we can't run the clock out.  We got lucky, and I don't think we can expect to stop QBs like Rodgers or guys in the AFC like Ben, Mahommes, etc. who we may have to face in the playoffs to be kept out of the end zone when we give them that kind of chance very often.

     

    Not capitalizing on their turnovers, but letting them capitalize on ours.  We got a fumble recovery on their first drive, leaving us with solid field position... and then we fumbled it back 3 plays later and allowed them to score a TD.  Then we got an INT which put us in very good field position and followed up with a missed FG, which they in turn scored a TD on.  Then we threw an INT which they scored a TD on.  Later in the game, we forced a fumble on their 28 yard line (the kickoff return) and only got a FG out of it.  Then in OT we forced a fumble deep in their terrority and got a FG (which is fine, that's what we needed to win there).  Anyway, on 3 TOs we forced in regular time which all gave us pretty solid field position we walked away with 3 points.  They got 14 off our INT and fumble and another 7 on our missed FG.  We did enough to win the game, but it is my opinion that we need to not only win the TO battle in tough games, but also if we're forcing 3 TOs to get more than 3 points out of it, especially when  they're turning our turnovers into TDs.

     

    Other than those two things, I don't think there was much very negative.

     

    Meh:

    Rock Ya-Sin -- had a very nice pick in the 1st half.  It did seem like Rodgers was kind of picking on him.  I thought he did OK, TBH for as long as the ball was in the air on his pass interference and the way Rodgers threw it, that was a tough play not to get the pass interference on. 

     

    As for the rest of the secondary, I thought Rhodes and Blackmon played well, Willis was his normal self (nothing great, but no major mistakes) and Moore was solid tackling and held nice coverage on Adams in the end zone late in the game, and I'd have to go back through the advanced stats but it seems like QBs have very high completion percentage rates when facing him.

     

    Windsor -- I noticed him out there a few times, I'm guessing he's done enough to impress coaches that they were OK cutting Sheldon Day.  I didn't notice anything good or bad from Windsor, just that he was out there.

     

    TY & Johnson-- TY had 3 nice catches, and reminded me of his former self on the 23 yard completion, but still only 50% of his targets were caught.  I thought there could have been pass interference on the play where Rivers missed him in back of end zone, though I think TY could've done more to cause the ref to throw a flag or make a better effort on the ball.  Johnson caught 1 of 3 targets.  Seems like he's moving down the depth chart with the emergence of Pittman and with other teams focusing on him a bit.  I don't think either of them were negative, but it'd be nice to see one/both of them (especially TY) really step up down the stretch - I have a feeling teams will start keying in on Pittman moving forward and hopefully TY can step up and take the pressure off.

     

    TE play -- Doyle had a TD on one of two targets (6 yards), Burton had a nice diving catch in the endzone for a TD (nice pass by Rivers, too) but overall only got 2 of 5 targets (I know one was picked off  due to being tipped) and Alie Cox caught both balls thrown his way, fumbling one of them away.   Again, they weren't horrible, but it'd be nice to have >50% completion rate to the TEs.

     

    Hines -- did nothing in the run game (again, used kind of predictably) and was OK in the pass game.  I guess we can believe Reich more when he says he's gonna play the hot hand or switch RBs from week to week - Taylor was certainly the star of the RB group yesterday while Wilkins did well with limited carries and his 1 catch.

     

    ________________

    Overall, a solid win.  A tough win which was probably good for the locker room and some of our young guys, but certainly not a perfect win (not that they really exist - but we've really got to reduce penalties, do a better job capitalizing on turnovers when we force them and limiting our turnovers.  

    • Like 1
  5. 15 hours ago, TheLegend87 said:

    I don't know how he can label Fred Warner the best linebacker in the league when he hasn't faced Darius Leonard and others. I hope someone asks Rodgers who he thinks is the best linebacker in the league following the game on Sunday. I would love to hear his answer.

    Rodgers called him 'possibly the best middle linebacker in the game.'  https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/49ers/aaron-rodgers-calls-fred-warner-possibly-best-nfl-middle-linebacker  Rodgers said this before the game and then after the game he was heard telling Warner he should be an all-pro during handshakes.  The 9ers crushed the Packers in the regular season and in the playoffs last year.  In a 37-8 victory in regular season, Warner had 11 tackles, 1 sack, 2 tackles for loss and a QB hit.  Warner is a very good LB, this year he is the best middle LB in pass coverage in the league and he has had tremendous games in 2 of the last 3 that he and Rodgers played against each other.  Rodgers is a vet and a smart one at that, he's not going to tell the press the day before a game against a team who destroyed GB last year 'Their middle linebacker is garbage and their defense is horrible.'  That said, Rodgers wasn't wrong, Warner is 'possibly' the best MLB in the NFL right now.  


    Leonard typically doesn't play middle linebacker anyway.  He was in an interview with Mike Wells and said that he heard Rodgers say that and he is motivated to prove Rodgers wrong.  It's almost as though every time Leonard is interviewed he finds someway to talk about how he has a chip on his shoulder and how he found something new to motivate him, this is nothing new.  He's said since he entered the league he wants to be the best LB in the game and constantly talks about how he feels disrespected (e.g,. not making the probowl as a rookie).  

     

    This kind of a waste of time to argue, as it is really a non-issue.  Leonard doesn't play the same role in Indy's D that Warner does in SF's D anyway.  If we're talking about this year, Leonard has missed time and Warner has put up better numbers by staying healthy and on the field.  

     

    I hope Leonard and the Colts' have a great game on Sunday and come out with a W.  All the debate/hype about who is the best in the league between two guys who play different positions/roles for their D means nothing to me.

    • Like 2
  6. On 11/18/2020 at 3:21 AM, stitches said:

    AC - 71.3(39th out of 77)

    Quenton - 80.0 (6th out of 83)

    Kelly - 73.1(6th out of 39)

    Glowinski - 74.6 (10th out of 83 )

    Braden - 75.6 (27th out of 77)

     

    Those are all good grades. None of them is obviously bad. The run blocking has taken a step back, but IMO the pass-protection has become better this year. 

     

     

     

     

     

    A week or so ago, @EastStreet posted PFF grades from 2019 vs. this year for our OL.  I believe everyone of them is down this year compared to last year with the exception of Glow.  Nelson, IIRC, was >91 last year.

     

    On 11/18/2020 at 11:44 AM, chad72 said:

     

    Rivers must be thinking "didn't I come here for that stellar OL they talked about?". :) 

     

    Rivers is the least sacked full-time starting QB in the NFL.  I think the only QB who has started the majority of the season who has been sacked <10 times.  He's liking this OL a lot better than what he had last year, I can almost guarantee you that.

     

    On 11/18/2020 at 12:15 PM, EastStreet said:

    Time to throw

    Rivers 2020 - 2.49 (#4 lowest) / OL Adjusted Sack % - 5.1% (Tie-7th) / 20th in deep ball attempts / 20th in completed air yards

    Rivers 2019 - 2.63 (#5 lowest) / 6.2% (9th) / 6th in DBA / 5th in CAY

    Brissett 2019 - 2.93 (#31) / 6% (7th) / 26th in DBA / 29th in CAY

     

    I don't think our OL is driving Rivers to get rid of the ball, I think it's simply Reich's play calling / scheme. As the stats suggests, he's throwing a whole lot less deep.

     

    It's pretty clear our OL has digressed a bit, but it's still an upgrade to what Rivers had last year. Not sure what our OL issue is, but they just don't look the same in terms of blocking scheme in the running game.

     

    I agree, Reich's definitely scheming for shorter routes.  I think part of this is because when we're effective, we eat up a lot of clock.  I could be wrong, but I have to think another part of this is our receiving personnel.  TY is definitely not his former self.  Campbell has been injured.  Pittman missed a good chunk of time.  

     

    I like Johnson, I know he's fast and everything... and he did a good job of getting long balls when he came up from the practice squad this year.  I think part of that is teams weren't really expecting it or fearing him his first couple of games.  There is a reason why he was a PS guy to start the season and why he was sent back to PS after having a decent game for us on the active roster.  If he doesn't have someone to really move coverage away from him, I personally don't think he's a good enough WR to be a consistent deep ball threat when other teams are taking him seriously.  Hines and Harris both have the speed to be deepball threats, but they also both happen to be undersized and I don't think either are terrific route runners as WRs.

     

    If Campbell was healthy, TY was playing at the level he was playing at several years ago, Pittman wasn't hurt, etc.. I tend to think Reich would take more shots down the field.  Maybe I'm wrong, but I just don't think we've had the personnel to really warrant a lot of deep shots downfield. 

     

    On 11/18/2020 at 2:54 PM, DougDew said:

    But last year, we were told that the lack of long DBAs were JBs fault.  Our awesome oline gave him plenty of time to throw, and receivers were open all over the field, he just never pulled the trigger. 

     

    So I'm confused as to why the lack of long pass attempts this year would be Franks fault, and last year they were JBs fault.  Other than somehow a midseason whipping boy is established, then that gets ridden until the horse is dead.

     

    Luck threw down the field more later in 2018.  Full year stats won't show it.  He dinked and dunked early.  Looked terrible.  Then resorted to old chud Luck and began throwing down the field again, and we went on a winning streak.  If you recall, that's when Inman emerged as a viable third option behind TY and Ebron.  Remember, wondering if he was going to be resigned or not because of how strong he came on in later 2018.  Instead, Ballard signs Funchess and drafts Campbell.

     

    So I don't know if first half 2018 Luck vs 2nd half 2018 Luck was the result of different playcalling by a different HC (LOL) or the QB choosing to look down the field more because that's basically who he is....and having the players to do it with.

     

    Personally, I think a big reason for not throwing the deep ball more is due to the injuries to WRs and TE groups along with a lack of talent at those positions when we have to stretch the depth chart.  Some of it could also be our run game not always getting going.  I could be wrong, but if we were averaging >4.5 ypc and more frequently getting big run gains, I think we may see a bit more play action used resulting in deep shots.

     

    22 hours ago, EastStreet said:

    IIRC, that's the play Rivers looked at Johnson and gave him the look like he ran the wrong read. Who knows, but I thought it might have been a comeback. With the FS coming over to help, makes sense. I do remember thinking regardless that Johnson did a bad job of tracking the ball. If it was a deep go, Johnson didn't get behind him, so makes me think even more it was supposed to be a comeback (Johnson has the speed). If you've noticed, Johnson has had less reps since then.

     

    As far as TY is concerned, I don't think him slowing should be the reason we don't go deep. We have had others that have speed and didn't try. Dulin had speed. So did Fountain. Heck, even TY got behind the secondary but dropped it earlier this year. Hines could burn some DBs out of the slot too. Harris definitely can. He ran a beautiful back shoulder which surprised the heck at of me. Wouldn't doubt if that was the same route Johnson was supposed to have run. And then you have big bodied guys like Moe and PIttman that can go deep for 50/50s.

     

    Not sure if that is the same play.  Earlier in the game, Rivers took a deep shot down the middle of the field and Johnson was behind the secondary (would have caught the ball inside Balt's 5 and walked into EZ).  Rivers looked like he was expecting Johnson to break the opposite way after the play.  You may be right that play should have been a comeback, but Rivers said after the game that he shouldn't have thrown the ball in the first place and if he was going to throw it he should certainly not have underthrown  it (again, could be him not throwing MJ under the bus, but I think that was just a bad throw by Rivers).

     

    To your second bolded point -- I have noticed Johnson has had less reps since... but think that is more a product of having a healthy Pittman back who had the most snaps of any WR last week and having TY back last week (without TY and Pittman in the lineup, Johnson was our #1 or #2 with Pascal -- with TY and Pittman, Pascal goes to #3 and Johnson goes to #4, perhaps #5 if Harris keeps it up). 

     

     

    22 hours ago, Four2itus said:

    It is pretty odd to lose your #1 RB, #1 TE(part time), and have your #1 WR decline/injured.....all in the same season...and have folks point fingers at the remaining folks. Could they do better, sure, but I think it's folly to just look around the room and stab at the problem. Honestly? This team at full strength would be a load for any team.

     

     

    We also lost our #2 WR (Campbell), have seen injuries to our #2 and #3 TEs who have missed games, and saw Pittman miss several games to injury before coming on strong last week.  Throw that into the mix of not having a full off-season, having no pre-season games, and a new QB and it has to do something to impact the play calling and game planning.

     

    21 hours ago, EastStreet said:

    Harris, Dulin, Hines, Taylor, Fountain, etc all should be able to do simple 9 routes. All 4.4s or better.

     

    Pittman is a good 50/50 guy, at least he was in college. Not as good as Claypool though. Pittman will eat it up outside and underneath. I was surprised to see him have the most snaps of all WRs last week. 10 more than Hilton and Pascal.

     

    I just don't think Reich likes 50/50s much. Can someone make a 50/50 card for him, like he has for 4th down calls?

     

    I think Pittman is by far our best blocking WR.  Also, his injury is something which you come back from at basically 100% -- TY's got something nagging going on again,  I think and imagine Reich is going to keep him on somewhat of a play count until he's fully healthy.  

    • Like 2
  7. 5 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

    I thought it was a pretty competitive game. Yeah I get that people just looked at the final score. I thought all and all we kept up with a pretty good team and probably should of won. We would have won if those two turnovers don’t happen. 

     

    We could easily be 9-0 if not for 2-3 very bad plays or decisions in our lost games.  That is a good sign, we can play with everybody, IMO.

     

    However, it's pretty common for games in the NFL to be decided by just a handful of plays.  Very few teams can have turnovers or turnovers on downs which result in the other team scoring multiple times in 1 game and expect to win.  So while I'm pleased that so far we have shown we can play with anyone, what I'm more concerned about it that several of our turnovers have just been boneheaded decisions (either by Rivers throwing a bad INT or by Reich by making a bad call/decision to go for  it on 4th down).  I'll give Taylor's fumble which the Ravens ran back for a TD a pass here because he did make a good run and it was a solid play call, Baltimore just made a good play (they're the best in the league at causing fumbles) and got the ball loose before JT could get down.  While no turnover is good, that was simply a good play made by the opponent -- as opposed to Rivers' interception on our first drive of the second half which was a boneheaded decision and shouldn't have been attempted, on top of that it was a lazily thrown ball.  Rivers' INTs versus the Jags week 1 were not just the Jags making a good play, they were combinations of him making a poor decision along with a poor throw.

     

    5 hours ago, Chucklez said:

    This is almost like saying we would have won if we scored more points than the opposing team.... I mean.... duh?

     

    Yea, I mean the TItans could say the same thing about last Thursday night -- if their kicker didn't shank a punt and then have a punt blocked for a TD the very next drive, they would've potentially been winning 17-13 well into the 3rd Q.  

     

    I think what the initial point was getting at is that we haven't been blown out by anyone this year.  We've had chances to win, and could very well have won all 3 games we've lost.  And, TBH, aside from the NO game and the Jax game late last season we were only a few plays away (in many instances missed FGs) from winning games....  anyway, yea we have 3 losses on our record and aside from Pitts, every team in the league has at least 1 loss (KC has 1, everyone else has 2 or >).  Every team that has lost can point at at least 1 game and say it came down to just a handful of plays (e.g., KC wasn't in a bad position against Raiders until Mahommes threw a pick which the Raiders brought back to the KC 2 yard line).  

     

    My main concern with our losses is that  all of them have involved very bad decisions and throws by Rivers at very bad/critical times in the game.  He's got a bit of a reputation for doing that throughout the course of his career.  I know they say 'you can't teach an old dog new tricks', but man if Reich could somehow just get it through Rivers' head to not have the 1-3 total mental lapses per game, I do believe this team can play with anyone in the league.

     

    5 hours ago, Mitch Connors said:

     

    I dont think there's a team in the league the Colts cant beat IF they showed up in all 4 quarters on both sides of the ball. 

    Problem is I dont think there's a team in the league that cant beat the Colts when they only show up for half of the game.

     

    I hope this is the week they put it all together.

     

    I think that can be said for just about every single team in the league.  There are some teams who may be able to get away with mistakes better than others (e.g., KC because they are so fast and can score so fast when they get going).  The Colts just have to make sure to avoid those few key plays where they shoot themselves in the foot, and I'm confident they can play with anyone.  The same can be said about most of the other teams in the league though (outside the Jets, who just stink).  

     

    4 hours ago, DougDew said:

    You could say that about a lot of teams.  Most NFL games are pretty close until the better team finds a way to win.  That pick BALT made was a great play by the defender and a great challenge by a smart coach.  That play was a big part of their win.

     

    It was a very smart challenge by Harbaugh.  That said, I think it was more of a poor decision to throw that ball, coupled with the fact that it was lazily thrown and underthrown by Rivers that caused the INT rather than a great play.  It was just a stupid idea to throw that ball, and if you're gonna throw that ball you better throw it long and to a spot where only the WR has a chance to make a spectacular play on it... Rivers underthrew it and the only chance Johnson had on that play was to try to break it up.  That play early in the 2nd half and the fumble by JT which they returned for a TD late in the first half (which allowed Ravens to be in a close game to start the 2nd half) really hurt our momentum.  

     

    2 hours ago, DontEverGiveUp said:

    I predict the Colts will continue to not get respect regardless of whether they win or lose Sunday.

     

    A large part of that is due to many in the sports media claiming that signing Rivers was a mistake this off-season.  They will continue to protect their opinions, even if proven wrong.  It's funny how other QBs have bad games that cost their teams a win, but nobody harps on it like they do with Rivers.  See Brady and Wilson as examples, both whose teams also have 3 losses.

     

    Just keep winning as much as we can and take this division.  It doesn't matter what the talking heads think.

     

    I agree to an extent here.  I will say, Brady's performance against the Saints is far worse than any of Rivers' performances this year.  However, Brady and Wilson both have SB rings and have played very clutch in many games on national TV.  Rivers will definitely be a HOFer at some point, no doubt about it, but the two things people try to argue against him are (1) He's never won the big game/has a history of making poor decisions late in big games (not that he hasn't made good decisions late in big games, people just don't remember them as much), and (2) it seems common for him to have some just total mental lapses and boneheaded plays (IMO aside from the INT which bounced off Mo Alie Cox's chest, almost all of his INTs this year are just poor decisions).  I'm pretty sure if Rivers' had a SB ring (or 6 of them like Brady) and Brady/Wilson had 0 and their major knocks were that they struggle in big games and have a history of throwing mindless interceptions, the media would have a different spin.

     

    1 hour ago, Smonroe said:

     

    Totally agree with the bolded.  However, I think if we lose this game (along with the Ravens game) tells us a heck of a lot.

     

    We had the Ravens when they were at their weakest with injuries and Covid.  Yes, we've had our own too.  But let's face it, they owned the second half of the game.  

     

    Only time (especially the next two games) will tell if we're a contender or just another middle of the road team.

     

    I am a bit reluctant to say 2 games really tell us who the Colts are.  I predict the Ravens beat the Titans this week.  No matter what happens this week, the outcome of the Titans-Colts game in 2 weeks will determine who is in the driver seat of AFC South with 4 games to play.  Ideally, we'll see some of our younger guys start performing better and getting them back (e.g., I expect Pittman to continue improving as the season goes on, Turay should be back soon which may be a huge boost to the DL, we may get Campbell and/or Dulin back).  We're a very young team with new key pieces at the two most important positions on O (QB-Rivers) and D (3Tech - Buckner).   If we get hot down the stretch and these guys continue to improve with more time together, I will not be at all shocked if we can make a splash in the playoffs.  

     

    Every team in the league has had a weird season, us included.  The Ravens definitely did control the clock in the 2nd half... but I think we outplayed them in the 1st half about as equally as they outplayed us in the 2nd half.  If not for Taylor's fumble which they returned for a TD, it would've been 13-0 or 17-0 at halftime and Rivers' dumb INT in the 2nd half really didn't help.  Our D came up with a huge play forcing a fumble the first drive in the 2nd half, if Rivers didn't make a stupid and bad throw the first play we got the ball back, the game would've been a lot different.  We moved the ball very well on them until getting stuffed on 4th and short on our 3rd possession of the 2nd half.  

     

    I think we showed enough in that Ravens game that we can play with them.  We also showed, like most teams in the league, we cannot afford to make multiple critical mistakes which result in giving the ball to the opponent and allowing them to score (e.g., we were on their 36 when we fumbled, at worst we likely get a FG out of that -- instead they take it to the house that is a 10 to 14 point turnaround on one play, then the INT early in the 2nd gave them very good field position which they turned into a TD and it happened on the first play we got the ball back after they had a pretty solid drive going for them, meaning our D had basically 0 time to recover and rest on the sideline).  

     

    1 hour ago, rockywoj said:

    IF the Colts upset GB then follow that up with another win over the Titans the following week, sitting at 8-3, they’ll start to get some talking heads recognition.  
     

    Imagine wins in the next two with the Titans losing to Baltimore this weekend, Colts at 8-3 and Titans at 6-5. Basically, the division can be the Colts’ with only 5 games to go. 

     

    We’re potentially on the cusp here.  Go Colts!

     

    I'm not sure this will be too big of an upset if we win.  According to betMGM.com, the Colts are 2 point favorites.  I think it started with GB being 2.5 pt favorites, but it is in Indy and GB recently lost to Vikings (who we beat) and last week were very close to losing to Jax.  I personally think this is a toss-up game.

     

    Ideally we win and TN loses. Regardless, we have to win against TN in 2 weeks when they come to Indy.  

     

    1 hour ago, chad72 said:

     

    Kind of like how people wanted to crown the Browns and someone said let them play the Colts and the Steelers and beat them both and come back and talk to me. Then everyone realized Browns are not there yet.

     

    This game vs an NFC contender in GB followed by playing a desperate TN team in all likelihood will clearly show us and the NFL where we stand.

     

    We will be equally desperate against TN when we play them in 2 weeks.  No matter what happens this week, whoever wins the IND-TN game is going to be in first place in the AFC South.  

     

    The Browns beat the Colts.  They lost to the Steelers (like every other team Pitt has faced).  They've also lost to the Raiders and the Ravens (who we also lost to).  The Raiders are better than the Jags.  The alarming thing about CLE is they got beat up bad by Balt and Pitt.  All of our loses were (IMO) due to self-inflicted wounds as much or more than getting 'beat up' by the other team.

     

    Regardless, there are 6 teams in the AFC at 6-3 and NE is at 4-5.  I don't doubt any of them could make a splash in the playoffs if they got hot at the right time and had good fortune in terms of health.

  8. On 11/17/2020 at 8:36 AM, twfish said:

    I've been a big fan of speed ever since seeing him in training camp. I think he has massive potential but he was incredibly raw coming out of Tarlton state. I look to see more from him next year, kinda Grover Stewart esque imho

     

    That is kind of my thought on Speed.  Small school guy, with great physical traits just like Grover.  

     

    We'll see what Walker asks for come FA, but I won't be shocked if we see him elsewhere next year and see Speed on the field a lot more often.  

     

    From this article: https://coltswire.usatoday.com/2020/07/02/indianapolis-colts-news-ej-speed-working-ground-up/

    "

    Linebackers coach Dave Borgonzi told Colts.com that the team is essentially building Speed from scratch.

    “Yeah, E.J. is an interesting guy because physically you’re not going to find a guy that’s better than E.J., just in terms of size, speed. E.J. loves football. He loves to play. E.J. just needs to continue to develop,” said Borgonzi. “He’s from a small college, played offense in high school, played offense early in college. So just being a linebacker is relatively new to E.J. So we’re working really from the ground up and E.J.’s working really hard. He’s committed to football. He wants to be a really good player in this league, so the sky’s the limit for E.J.”

    "

    • Thanks 1
  9. 16 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

     

    The issue people probably have for Taylor is the fact that he is SPECIFICALLY a running back. RBs develop a lot quicker than any other position as rookies in the NFL. So usually it's a "what you see is what you get" case with them. Taylor isn't horrible and he can catch, but he needs to do better. Ithink the last couple games may be due to an ankle injury, but he also needs to run with more determination and not be so hesitant. Hines and Wilkins are doing that and getting much better results. Taylor has been timid with his runs up to this point.

     

    In Mack's rookie year he had 93 carries for 358 yards, a 3.8 average per run with a long run of 35 and 3 TDs.  He also had 21 receptions for 225 yards, a 10.7 average per catch, a long of 34 yards and 1 TD.  He also had 1 fumble.  This was spread across 14 games.  Frank Gore was our bell cow and Mack was the change of pace back.

     

    Taylor's rookie year, through 9 games, he had 113 carries for 428 yards with a 3.8 ypc, 4 TDs and a long of 22 yards.  He has 22 receptions for 203 yards, for a 9.2 average per catch and a long of 35 yrads with 0 TDs yet.  He also has one fumble.  

     

    Taylor's rookie numbers in terms of average yards per catch and carry are very similar to Mack as a rookie.  He has shown  the same amount of explosiveness as a receiver (35 yard long reception compared to Mack's 34).  Mack was also used as a role player rather than a bell cow as a rookie, which is what the plan for Taylor was (i.e., let Mack be the bell cow and mix Taylor in here and there).  That changed 4 carries into the season.  Taylor had no pre-season games, a very odd training camp, and IMO is suffering some due to predictable play calling.  Not really fair to compare the OLs because they're definitely different, but IMO the OL this year has taken a pretty big step back from the OL they were last year.  @EastStreetrecently posted first half of the season OL grades and they are (aside from Glow) lower for every player along the OL - in some cases significantly lower.  I don't know if this is mainly due to coaching change, if it's due to the compromised offseason, if it's due to opposing teams having really studied tape on how good our OL was last year and figuring out how to exploit it, if it's due to some nagging injuries (seems like at least Castonzo and Q have been dealing with some nagging stuff), if it's due to predictable playcalling, if it's due to a drop-off in RB talent, or a combination of all of those factors.  Maybe Taylor's numbers are down from what Mack put up last year because last year was Mack's 2nd season playing behind the same exact OL, so he had familiarity with their tendencies and vice-versa.  

     

    I tend to think Taylor was drafted to be the replacement for Mack after this year with the assumption Mack would be asking for high $ over a long-term deal.  I'd like to see Mack come back, and TBH his injury may have been good for the Colts in that regard as he may need to sign a 1 year 'prove it' deal for cheaper than what he was hoping to in order to show the NFL he recovered from his injury.

     

    Long story short, I'm not at all worried about Taylor. He's performing almost at the same exact level Mack was as a rookie but doesn't have the benefit of being the change of pace back, had a compromised off-season/pre-season, and maybe I am wrong, but it seems to me that the playcalling this year has been a lot more predictable  than it was last year.

     

    8 hours ago, Smonroe said:

     

    Some of that is true.  But I was watching the Titans game again.  He was hit in the backfield on just about every short or negative run.  I do think he needs to improve his vision/decisions but it's not all on him.

     

    Yes.  As I stated above, the OL just doesn't seem to be as dominant as they were last year.  

    • Like 2
  10. 7 hours ago, coltsfan_canada said:

    Exactly I think Rivers always excel with shorter RB at SD he was successful with Sproles and Eckler and now Hines is feasting. 

     

    Not totally sure that height of the RB is the key here.  I think all these guys are very quick, good in open space, have good hands and run good routes for RBs.  Quickness and shortness may have some correlation, but Rivers is doing well getting the ball to Taylor out of the backfield as well and think he would have been just fine getting Mack involved in passing game.  

     

    6 hours ago, krunk said:

    Mack had issues running up the gut in his first year but the difference is you could see his talent very early on beginning with his preseason gave vs Dallas. And actually his first game vs the Rams he had some nice runs. Then there was the 49ers game and some other ones. You could see the speed and the talent even if he had some other things to work on.  It hadnt quite worked that way for Taylor but it will be great for us if he begins to find his stride very soon. We need it! Hes got to learn how to hit these holes and stop running into peoples backs.

     

    Taylor has had several nice plays (he didn't have a preseason like Mack did).  Some of them have been on screen passes, some have been runs.  I do think he's got to let things open up a bit and work on his vision (especially on inside runs), but also think the OL hasn't been playing at the same level as they were last year (as evidenced by declines in PFF grades to all except Glow), and I think some of the play calling has been very predictable.  I have full faith that Taylor will turn out to be just fine for the Colts if he stays healthy.

     

    _______________

    To the OP, I don't think there is any chance that Taylor goes to WR.  I think Hines will stay being used the way he has been (a hybrid RB-WR).  I could see Harris being used similarly to Hines, but think if anything he's going to be the guy who steps up to become the WR you describe and seem to desire.

    • Like 1
  11. 5 hours ago, compuls1v3 said:

    It's nice to see dividends paying whereas others have failed like Q Wilson, and T.? Green <safety>.  

    Yes.  What is bizarre to me is that Wilson seemed to really do much better with Mike Mitchell around to mentor him.  It seemed like he had some maturity/mental issues moreso than issues with his physical skills and needed a 'big brother' in the room to help guide him. 

     

    TJ Green was drafted by Grigson.  He's still in the league (on the Falcons practice squad).  He was definitely a project pick who only had minimal experience as a DB after mainly being a WR for most of his previous football life.  In his case, I think his athletic skills were definitely there but I don't know about the football IQ.

     

    Overall, Ballard has a very solid draft record.  The vast majority of the guys who Ballard drafted are still in the league somewhere, even if not on the Colts (Q. Wilson is on the NYG active roster).  He said it before last year's draft - you know you have a good team when you see 10+ guys who you had to cut to get to 53 get signed on other teams.  Obviously this offseason was weird with no teams being able to see guys in pre-season games, etc. (probably good for us as it allowed us to retain DeMichael Harris, Marcus Johnson, Fountain who we've utilized on the 53 man squad.  I also have some hope guys like Carter O'Donnell, Rob Windsor, Farrod Green, Ron'Dell Carter, etc. can contribute to the 53 in coming years.  Anyway, even though several guys Ballard has drafted didn't make the Colts, 100% of his draft picks from 2017-2020 are still around in the NFL on active rosters (Hairston, Q. Wilson, Basham, Banner, Jackson Barton, Cain-well he bounces back and forth in Pitt), or practice squads throughout the league (G. Green, J. Patterson) or on our practice squad (Windsor, Fountain).  I am not sure, but I highly doubt that any other GM in the league has a 100% NFL retainment on players drafted between 2017-2020 (that is remarkable to have 100% of players from the past 4 drafts in the NFL either on active rosters or practice squads).  Anyway, I think several guys who were drafted as projects are going to contribute for us more than they already are, eventually -- EJ Speed I can see taking over for A. Walker if Walker asks too much in FA this offseason,  I can see Pinter replacing Glowinski, still haven't entirely given up on Banogu, etc... 

     

    • Like 1
  12. On 11/12/2020 at 11:46 PM, compuls1v3 said:

    I remember when he didn't look good a few years back.    Man he's come along way and he's kicking butt this year.   Henry may have found his match :) !!

     

    On 11/13/2020 at 2:29 AM, smittywerb said:

    Say what you want, but Ballard has a done an excellent job building this defense.  
     

    a lot of the talent we have on defense is young and HOMEGROWN!  And Grover is another stud pick by Ballard.  
     

    we have a nice 1-2 punch with Grover and Buckner.  Pay that man please. 

     

    When Ballard drafted him, he was very upfront in saying it may take him a few years to develop and wanted to trust our coaches to develop him.

     

    https://www.colts.com/news/top-10-quotes-colts-wrap-up-2017-nfl-draft-18809884

     

    "Grover (Stewart) is a big man with strength, good initial quickness and he can run. He's got a unique trait.... something unique and now we turn it over to our coaches and let them bring their talent to light." — Ballard, on the risk/reward of taking chances on players in the final day of the draft.

     

    For sure Buckner is helping him.. but he isn't much different (IMO) and from Ballard's quote above from Tyquan Lewis or many of Ballard's other picks.  Most of them are learning and improving.  Keep in mind, Ballard had a whole entire team to revamp and was under the assumption he had a once-in-a-lifetime QB in Luck to work with.  We are in the driver's seat of the AFC South. 

     

     

    • Like 2
  13. 8 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

    I don't think our pass pro grades are the issue.

     

    I don't have a PFF account, so don't think I can get access to see if they break down grades on pass vs. run protection.  However, watching the tape from Baldy's Breakdown against the Ravens there were several plays there where the OL did not look very good in pass pro.  A few plays in that clip are plays in there where it seemed like Q was making last year that he was getting beat on.

    • Like 1
  14. 8 hours ago, EastStreet said:

    I've included PFF grades (vs 2019), team leaders, and top/bottom 25 NFL stats.

     

    Offensive Line
    -Getting harder to believe the coaching change doesn't have an impact
    Castonzo - PFF 69.1 (2019 PFF 81.3)
    Nelson - 76.4 (91.2)
    Kelly - 68.4 (73.0)
    Glowinski - 76.2 (60.5)
    Smith - 76.3 (79.8)

     

    Quarterback
    Rivers - 73.4 (74.3)
    -9th in NY/A
    -13th in completion %, 17th in YPG
    -19th in QBR

     

    Running backs
    Taylor - 65.5 (rook)
    -3rd in the NFL in catch % (all skill players)
    -Leads the team in yards from scrimmage
    -Leads RBs (team) in catch%, Y/T
    -Leads RBs (team) in rushing yards and Y/A
    -3.9 Y/A, ahead of Elliot, McCaffery, Jacobs, Gurley, Mixon, etx.
    -BTW, Mack was 3.7 his first 8 games, 3.8 his rook year, and that was with a spread out Chud O.
    Wilkins - 74.9 (69.8)
    -3.7 Y/A
    Hines - 70.8 (63.3)
    -3.2 Y/A
    -2nd on the team in yards from scrimmage
    -6th in the NFL in PR Y/R (qualifiers)
    Mack - 72.6 (69.5)

     

    Tight Ends
    Doyle - 53.7 (69.2)
    Alie-Cox - 90.5 (67.3)

    -25th in the NFL (all skill players) in catch %
    -10th in the NFL in Y/R
    -Leads TEs in yards and yards/target
    -Leads all WR/TEs (team/more than 10) in catch %, Y/T,  
    Burton - 69.8 (49.2)

     

    Wide Receivers
    Hilton - 66.0 (75.1)
    -sub 60 catch %
    Pascal - 61.2 (73.7)
    -Leads WRs in yards and targets
    Johnson - 65.4 (59.8)
    -sub 60 catch %
    Campbell - 72.8 (54.7)
    Pittman - 61.6 (rook)
    Dulin - 66.7 (59.3)
    Fountain - 61.1 (NA)
    Harris - 86.0 (rook)


    Corner Backs
    Moore - 60.3 (75.5)
    -Giving up a team high 93.9 passer rating
    -Giving up a team high YAC
    -Leads team in missed tackles
    Rhodes - 78.3 (46.4)
    -10th in the league in completion % (lowest)
    Ya Sin - 48.4 (65.3)
    Carrie - 74.0 (56.2)
    Rodgers - 61.4 (rook)

    - 2nd in the NFL in Y/KOR


    Safeties 

    Blackmon - 67.7 (rook)
    -Giving up the NFL 9th highest yards/completion
    Willis - 67.0 (69.5)
    -Has improved his completion % big time from last year 47.4% vs 83.8%. (ranked 9th)
    -Has 4 hurries on 18 blitzes vs 1 on 23 last year
    Wilson - 72.2 (71.9)
    Odum - 53.9 (67.3)

     

    Defensive Line
    Houston - 62.6 (87.1)
    -Only 3.5 sacks, about 30% down from his 2 year average (10)
    Buckner - 86.3 (78.8)
    -Tied for 9th most QB knock downs
    -Only 2.5 sacks, about 50% down from his 2 year average (9.75)
    Autry - 54.6 (71.0)
    -Tied for 14th most sacks in the NFL
    -5 sacks, on track for his best year ever, and above his two year average (6.25)
    -Leads team in sacks and TFLs
    Stewart - 76.0 (65.8)
    AQM - 62.0 (66.2)
    Lewis - 63.9 (46.1)
    Stallworth - 63.1 (65.5)
    Banogu - 40.7 (49.0)
    Day - 61.5 (60.6)

     

    Linebackers
    Leonard - 81.1 (78.7)
    -Leads team in Ts, and Ts/snap
    Okereke - 50.9 (78.4)
    -Giving up the NFL 12th highest completion %
    -Giving up 2nd most YAC (team)
    Walker - 44.6 (61.0)
    -2nd in Ts/Snap
    Franklin - 67.7 (61.3)

     

    Special Teams
    Blankenship
    -30th in the NFL in touchback %
    -15th in the NFL in FG %
    -19th in the NFL in KO AVG
    Sanchez
    -11th in punt average

     

    Thanks for digging this up and putting together, @EastStreet!

     

    Looks like Blankenship only has 1 KO this  year and Sanchez has 47.  Sanchez is barely above 50%, I'm thinking you meant to put the KO stats under his name.  I don't think that's a terrible thing though, as teams are only averaging 21.2 yards per return on his kickoffs.  I am not sure, but I tend to think the coaches trust the ST unit we have enough to have Sanchez kick to allow teams to attempt to return.  I don't recall many (any) of his kicks being caught more than 4 yards out of the end zone, so with a 21.2 y/return average that ought to mean teams are starting in worst field position against us (after a kickoff) than they are against teams who have kickers that are typically kicking touchbacks.

     

    I'm kind of shocked at how much Walker and Ya Sin have declined. I will have to watch Ya Sin more closely, but I thought he's been playing fairly well.   I think Leonard has been playing at an amazing level, though not shocked to see both Walker and Okereke dropping off... the level to which Walker has dropped off is somewhat shocking to me, though.  Walker is in a contract year, and frankly, I won't be shocked if he's somewhere else next year -- I don't see Ballard giving him a big contract and wouldn't be shocked if a guy like EJ Speed or a new rookie could come in and perform at a similar or better level.

     

    Along the DL, a few shockers -- first I though AQM has been playing as good or better than last year.   Also shocked at Autry dropping so much, as I thought he's been better than he was last year (maybe Buckner is just masking some of his miscues?).  Houston's sacks are down and I do think he's at the stage of his career where it's expected for him to start declining, but it seems to me like he's still getting pressure and I was not expecting to see he's dropped 25 points from last year.  Glad to see Stewart's rating has gone up significantly, he is starting to look like the DT I think the FO envisioned when he got drafted -- same with Lewis.  I actually don't think Banogu's been awufl, but his PFF rating doesn't reflect that.

     

    The OL doesn't shock me much at all.  I am not sure if that's coaching, scheme, predictable play calling, or simply a decline in the performance of the individuals along the line.  I really enjoyed last year when the OL put it on themselves to 'run the d^mn ball' and they seemed to have (at least publicly) a tougher/meaner mentality than they do this year.  

     

    Overall, aside from what I pointed out, I'm not too shocked with the ratings.  Glad to see Rhodes seems to have revitalized himself by coming here, he has been fun to watch.  Again, our schedule the 2nd half of the season is a bit tougher than the first half of the season - it'll be interesting to see how we stack up down the stretch.  

     

     

  15. 1 hour ago, BProland85 said:

    I’ve always believed in going with the hot hand. I also believe Wilkins is better used in start of games, due to reliability and ball security, with JT brought in to wear down the defense afterwords. 

     

    Wilkins was benched his rookie year due to his fumbling issues.  JT has fumbled 1x in 8 games and it was against the D in the NFL who is the best at forcing fumbles.  Really not too worried about JT's ball security.  It does seem at times that he's still learning how to hold onto the ball very tightly and it may effect him for a split second with his vision, etc.. but I'm still not worried about him.  I think our biggest problem in the run game has mainly been predictable play calling in many situations.

    • Thanks 1
  16. 1 hour ago, lennymoore24 said:

    I think it would be wise to promote Eason over Brissett.  Brissett is gone after this year and we will likely get nothing out of him this year.  It would make more sense to have Eason as the backup and get him a rep here or there.  I know many say Eason isn't ready, but it is hard for me to think any QB could be worse than Brissett.

     

     

    I do not agree here.  We know Brissett is capable of keeping us in games and potentially winning some games if he's called on.  None of us have really seen Eason in practice or have any idea how ready he'd be if thrown into a real game scenario.  

     

    Our D has shown they can keep us in games.  Our offense at times has looked very efficient and aside from a few key mistakes this team could very easily be 8-0, 7-1, or 6-2 (i.e., I think we have beaten ourselves every game we've lost - we have not been blown out or outmatched for an entire game so far this year).  Our O needs to stay healthy, Rivers needs to get in sync w/ his receiving targets and the play calling needs to improve some.  That said, a win Thursday night and we're right back in the driver's seat of the AFC South.  If we get hot, make it to the playoffs and stay healthy, I do believe this team can play with any team on any given Sunday - it'll really be a matter of avoiding self-inflicted wounds.  

     

    Until we are mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, we should continue to do what is best for us to win.  In the QB case, that's start a healthy Rivers and keep Brissett as the backup.  The day we get mathematically eliminated, or the day Rivers or Brissett gets hurt, is the day we should consider bringing Eason up to the active roster.  If mathematically eliminated, it'd be good to get him some live reps.

    • Like 3
  17. 24 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

    Your r missing the point. You show displeasure with Reich. I asked if u think another coach could do more with this offence

     

    There definitely has been some questionable play calling... but I highly doubt any other coach in the league would turn this into an 'elite' offense given the amount of injuries we've had.  Simply, we don't have many elite players in the skill positions on offense and those who are higher end players have been hurt or injured at some (or multiple) points this season.  We're young at at the skill positions after TY and Doyle and we're working with a new QB in a year with a highly reduced off-season and no preseason games.   While every team had to deal w/ a short offseason and no preseason games, I cannot think of how many other teams who have a new QB have had the amount of injuries around their skill positions as the Colts have had this year.

  18. 17 minutes ago, AustinnKaine said:

    We had one deep pass. And when he does throw deep its a commercial worth of time for him to wind it up. He ain't throwing the ball well at all. Accuracy and strength is gone. 

     

    We had several deep pass attempts.  It was very clear Rivers and his WRs were not on the same page yesterday.  Johnson had a step on 2 DBs in the middle of the field on one pass and Rivers put plenty of arm under it, Johnson broke to his right and the ball went to his left.  Rivers looked at Johnson after the play like he was expecting him to turn left.  There was nothing wrong with Rivers' arm strength on that play, it was miscommunication and the way Rivers' body language read was like Johnson didn't run to where he was supposed.  He had another fairly deep ball where he and Pittman weren't on the same page.

     

    His arm strength is fine.  Yes, he's better if he can set his feet and throw it, but there's really not much wrong with his arm.  Him being on the same page with the WRs is another issue.  Mind you, our top 2 WRs yesterday (in terms of targets) were Pittman (who had missed almost half the season prior to yesterday and is a rookie) and Johnson (who was on the PS to start the year and bounced back and forth from the PS a few times since - to me, it is pretty clear that without TY and when teams are not surprised by Johnson, he's easier to game plan for).  He went 2-7 to Johnson and 4-7 to Pittman.  One throw to Johnson was behind him on a crossing route, one was underthrown (the INT), one was overthrown or thrown to the wrong spot (where Rivers looked at Johnson like Johnson ran the wrong route), and I don't remember the rest but they weren't on Rivers' arm.  At least one incompletion to Pittman looked like a miscommunication.  Pascal was targeted 6 times and had 5 catches (Rivers and Pascal have been working together in games for longer than Rivers has with Pittman or Johnson).  

     

    Yesterday Rivers played far better than Tom Brady did last night.  People are questioning if Brady is done on the Bucs' boards.  The answer is, "No, he's not."  The Colts got outcoached in the 2nd half and Rivers certainly didn't have his best game, but he's still better than Brissett and if we win Thursday night we're in control of the AFC South.  Yes, his throwing motion is whacky, but it always has been and it really hasn't changed much since he's been in the league.

     

    He threw for under 300 yards and over 40 passes, sure.  He connected on <30 of those passes.  It was the highest incompletion percent rate of the season for Rivers.  Had he connected on the deep ball down the middle to Johnson when it looked like miscommunication, he's over 250, another 3-4 passes after that and he's over 300.

     

    6 minutes ago, John Waylon said:


    This is who he’s always been. A mediocre QB who has just enough good games to earn himself a lifetime of free passes. Sometimes you get good Rivers who brings you back from 21 down and wins the game. Sometimes you get bad Rivers who throws 40 times for less than 300 yards and loses the game with just a single score to show for it. There’s no rhyme or reason to when you get either one or why, it’s just a random draw week to week. He had plenty of SD teams he should have done better with than he did, and it all comes back to him just not being the kind of QB who can put you over the top. He’s just a guy who can make people think he can. 
     

    This is Phillip Rivers. This has always been Phillip Rivers. It will always be Phillip Rivers. 

     

    First off, Cody Jinks is a great artist - nice avatar.  

     

    Rivers has been more than a mediocre QB throughout his career.  The numbers don't lie about this.  Yesterday, he stunk and do did our receivers and some of the game calling.  It's not time to throw in the towel quite yet.

  19. 7 minutes ago, AustinnKaine said:

    Not joking, and with all due respect to Rivers... but I got non football people watching the Colts and they can even see he can't throw the ball anymore. At what point do we keep letting Rivers be a detriment? Also, this isn't even just about this last game. I'm not saying Rivers can't put together an average game, but let's be real here... Who really thinks he has the arm to go point for point with even the lower level of Elite QBs? 

     

    Also, an important thing to talk about: At what point do the colts players feel divided about Rivers coming in and really not doing much better than Brissett? I mean here we are again 5-3, and 25 million dollars less. What has the difference been between Rivers and Brissett? 

     

    Who remembers that play where the Broncos had Brissett in the grass for a safety, he rolls to the right and throws a dart to Ty on the sidelione. Now, I am not saying he was an MVP, but before Huge man 56 stomped on his knee, we were 5-2 with quality wins. "When you have two QBs, you have none". 

     

     

     

    Other than the INT which he underthrew to Johnson, I thought he had a lot of zip on many of his passes yesterday.  I don't think we'd be any better off with Jacoby at this point and highly doubt the fact that Rivers is starting over Jacoby is doing anything to divide the locker room.

    • Like 4
  20. 3 hours ago, Mr.Debonair said:

    If you're happy that your guy doesn't suck as much as the other guy, are you really happy to have him? I get Rivers is looking better than Foles or Newton but I honestly would have preferred not bringing him aboard.

     

    What was the other option?  Keep Jacoby as our starter and have people going crazier on here now than they are already because more likely than not we'd have the same or a worse record in that instance.  Not only would people be calling for Frank's head, Ballard's head, and Jacoby's head for not being 1st in the AFC South, but they'd probably be calling for Irsay's head for not forcing Ballard to try to make an improvement from Jacoby.  Rivers is definitely better than Jacoby, he's made a bad mistake or two in each of our 3 losses and he needs to correct that.  Otherwise, please keep in mind that we've played the vast majority of snaps this year without our #1RB, we've missed our 3 top TEs all for extended periods of time or in critical moments, we've seen injuries to our top 3 WRs and it seems like every week we have to shuffle bringing guys from the practice squad up to the after roster a day or two before each game.

     

    2 hours ago, Thebrashandthebold said:

    I think the Colts vastly overrated their talent. They added what some of you believe to be a HoF QB to get to a Super Bowl but it is apparent that he is surrounded by 8-8 talent. The wide receivers are and will be awful. The offensive line is great but even they won't charge a running game if the wide receivers are no threat. It is a combination of those things along with a QB who clearly is over the hill and doesn't have the HoF arm strength he had. That is why the Chargers moved on from him. You don't need a franchise QB if the rest of the team is very good. But, that is not the case in Indy. I doubt that trading up is an option and just trading for another fill in QB doesn't seem productive either and it eats a lot of money out of the salary cap.

     

     

    Rivers is a HOF QB, but he's at the end of his career.  

     

    The WRs have been hurt.  This is a different team with a healthy Campbell, Pittman and TY every game.  We've seen injuries which have caused all of them to miss >1 game.  The TEs have also been dealing with injuries, with Doyle, Burton and MAC all missing >1 game throughout the season.  Couple those two things with the loss of Mack so early in the season.  Add the fact that we had no preseason games, a very limited in person off-season, and it makes sense why we don't always seem to be totally clicking.  I get it, every team had a limited offseason and no preseason games... but we have (outside TY) a very young WR corps, a brand new QB, a rookie RB, and have been dealing with a rotating panel of TEs.  We've got more going on than a lot of teams who are returning their QBs and haven't had the amount of injuries at their skill positions around him.  

     

    The OL this year doesn't seem to be the same as last year, if you ask me.   Either that, or Taylor/Wilkins/Hines are a major drop off from Mack (which I truly don't think is the case).  We were less of a passing threat on offense last year than this year, yet our OL was able to maul other teams and they 'ran the damn ball'.  They're not playing awful, but I don't think they're as dominant as they were last year.

    • Like 1
  21. 7 hours ago, adubb84 said:

    I get things were frustratingly bad for our team yesterday but this is article is completely one-sided and doesn’t address 2 BIG things that sucked the life out of our team. A fumble by Taylor and a dubious interception call changed the whole dynamic of the game. Things that aren’t Phillips fault. 
     

    With that said the play calling was still suspect and predictable which ultimately did us in for the day. 
     

    Need to get creative and FAST with what we got as the next 2 games will decide the season. And for gods sake use Taylor more

     

    :rantoff:

     

    As others have said and as Rivers said himself, that INT was on Rivers.  While the INT itself was questionable, it was a stupid decision for Rivers to throw into tight coverage and on top of that it was a horrible, underthrown ball.  The one thing we have in common in all three losses this year is that Rivers makes at least one very bad decision coupled with a bad throw that results in an INT at a critical time in the game.  Versus Jax and CLE, he threw two INTs... yesterday his one was combined with Taylor's fumble.

     

    25 minutes ago, boo2202 said:

    Teddy bridgewater??

     

    The Panthers have lost their last 4 games, all by one score or less.  In 2 of those 4 games Bridgewater has thrown a costly pick on the Panthers last drive allowing the opponent to run out the clock.  While Bridgewater is younger and likely has more miles left on him, he's not doing any more to help the 3-6 Panthers win by making bad plays in key situations than Rivers is doing to help the 5-3 Colts win.

  22. 2 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

     

    Tannehill isn't Lamar...but he's not a statue. If he can get outside the pocket and extend plays (like Baker and Burrow)...that's a problem.

     

    However...we agree on a lot of things...but Tannehill has been FAR better than an average to slightly above average starting QB since taking over the starting job last year. And since then, TEN has basically been a top 5 overall offense. Henry is a big part of that...but Tannehill has been pretty amazing.

     

    This season...you could make an argument that Tannehill is a top 5 QB.

     

    DYAR - 5th

    DVOA - 3rd

    QBR - 7th

    Passing TDs - 5th (tied)

    INT % - 5th

    AY/A - 5th

    Passer Rating - 6th

     

    Yes, Tannehill is much more mobile than Rivers and far less mobile than Jackson.  I'd say Baker and Burrow are a bit more mobile than Tannehill.

     

    Not sure where you're getting your stats from, but on ESPN.com they have him ranked 13th in average yards per attempt, 17th in total yards, 21st in average yards per game (should be higher as guys like Dak and Fitzpatrick have higher YPG but aren't playing anymore), 11th in QBR (10th if you remove Dak), 6th in RTG, 21st in completion percentage, and then yes 5th in passing TDs, and does a good job not turning the ball over.

     

    Still don't think he's a top 5 QB or 'FAR better than average'.  He's not bad, but that offense runs through Henry and because they're so effective running Tannehill can be more of a game manager type of player.  The Titans are 10th in total yards per game on offense, but only 20th in YPG passing while they're 6th YPG rushing (with Henry being 2nd in the league in rushing and their main bellcow - as opposed to BALT who is led by Lamar Jackson in rushing but also gets contributions from Ingram, Gus Edwards, and Dobbins) .  They are 7th in points per game, suggesting they do a good job moving the ball down the field running and are effective in the red zone and rarely turn the ball over.  

     

    Not saying we should sleep on the pass, but if we can limit their rushing attack (the fact that we handled the Baltimore rushing attack so well in the first half and overall kept them well below their league leading average rush yards per game leads me to believe we can), I think we have a good shot at really screwing up their offense.

    • Like 1
  23. 4 hours ago, MFT5 said:

     

    Do you knw who ryan tannehill is ??

     

    An average or slightly above average starting QB in the NFL (17th in the league in passing yards), who doesn't run much, throws for less yards per game than Rivers does and relies on Derrick Henry (the NFL's 2nd leading rusher) to carry the offensive load.  Baltimore's running offense is scary because the QB and the RBs can run, and the QB can pass.  Not saying Tannehill can't pass, but he's nowhere near the threat of a runner as Jackson is.  If we can shut down Henry, I think we'll be OK if we force Tannehill to beat us with the pass. 

     

    4 hours ago, Smonroe said:

    Nice write up @CurBeatElite   I think this game showed us exactly who we are.  A decent second tier team.  Not in the same category as Baltimore.  They came in with injuries and missing a key player because of COVID.  They still owned us.

     

    Play calling was suspect, sitting Taylor for most of the game after his fumble was stubborn and didn’t help.  The OLine is still not as good as last season IMO.  Rivers looked like he never played with our WRs (both to blame there).
     

    Like you said, the D played good enough to win an NFL game.  It’s a shame the O didn’t.  

     

    To our credit, we also went into that game with injuries and were missing our #1 WR and our #1 TE got knocked out of the game early.  Also, Johnson was banged up going into the game (mind you, he was a practice squad guy multiple times this season and now he's our #1 deep threat).  I agree, Rivers was out of sync with the WRs, and I'm not sure how much blame to place on him vs. the WRs.  I don't think missing practice earlier in the week due to staff members having covid helped at all, and TBH, I don't know how successful Johnson is going to be going forward now that teams aren't going to be surprised by him... especially if TY's out or banged up and can't take attention away from him.

     

    Agree, the play calling was suspect.  It was a weird scenario, though.  We dominated time of possession in the first half.  After that INT they really dominated time of possession with a 5 min 15 second TD drive, forcing us 4 and out and then a 8 min 23 sec TD drive.  We moved the ball well our next drive when we got stopped on 4th and 1 but it kind of shocked me that we ran 5 min 40 seconds off the clock when we were down two scores.  

     

    I think at this point, Reich and team have to focus controlling what they can - starting with a win on Thursday night to put us in the driver's seat of the AFC South.  First we have to make the playoffs, but if we do, I think we can make a run there.  I don't think Baltimore 'owned us'.  It wasn't too unlike the loss to the Jags, IMO.  We were the better team in the first half.  We had a very effective second drive (8 plays, 65 yards, TD, 4 min 41 seconds).  Then forced them to punt and had a nice drive going with a 13 yard pass to Pittman and then a 9 yard run by Taylor which would have put us on the BALT 36 yard line in a 2nd and 1 situation, except Taylor fumbled and the Jags ran it back.  Then we stuff their O for the rest of the half and had another effective 11 play 68 yard drive which lasted 4 min38 sec and resulted in a FG.  If Taylor holds onto that ball, we likely go into the locker room at half either 13-0 or 17-0.  

     

    Our D came up huge forcing that fumble on their first drive of the 2nd half, then Rivers threw a pick the next play and they drove down the field and scored.

     

    While I do agree that the play calling was suspect, I don't think we got owned.  Really, 2 plays took the wind out of our sails.  What worries me some with Rivers is that his INTs in the games we have lost have all been bad decisions and bad throws in key situations.  Against Jax, both his INTs left them with field position around our 30 yard line or inside of it.  Against CLE, we were down 10 coming out of halftime and Rivers threw a pick 6, totally screwing up the momentum of the game and giving them a 17 point lead.  Yesterday, we were up 3 just got a huge fumble recovery and had the opportunity to really turn that game around (had we driven down and scored that would have taken some wind out of the Ravens' sails), and Rivers underthrew a ball into double coverage.

     

    2 hours ago, DougDew said:

    BALT's dline controlled the LOS in the second half, IMO.  The run game went nowhere and Rivers had difficulty squaring up to throw, which is what he needs to do.

     

    I don't disagree that BALT's dline outplayed our OL in the second half... however, they didn't really control our run game.  The first drive we had in the 2nd half Rivers threw a pick on the first play.  The second drive it was a 1 yard screen pass to Wilkins, then 2 incompletions and punt.  The 3rd drive we looked very good with an 11 yard run, a 5 yard pass, 5 yard run, -2 yard run, 3 yard pass, 18 yard pass, 6 yard pass, 4 yard run, 2 yard run, 6 yard pass, 1 yard run and then a failed 4th down pass.  We averaged 5.3 yards per carry throughout the game and we were moving it pretty effectively that 3rd drive of the second half (suspect play calling on 3rd and 2 and 4th and 1).  Then our 4th drive was 4 plays and turnover on downs - all were passes.  Our final drive we had 1 run (Hines off the left guard for 14 yards on 2nd and 20 at BALT 34), otherwise it was all passing.

     

    2 hours ago, NorthernColt said:

    Agree with all of this except Rigo. I think that was probably his first bad game in over a year, so I'd cut him a break there as he's been fantastic otherwise.

     

    As for the playcalling, I agree first half I felt we had them on they're heels, keeping them off balance with a decent balance of run and pass. 2nd half, I don't even know how to describe what that was.

     

    Our 3rd drive in the 2nd half we did a pretty good job keeping them off balance.  We just ate a lot of clock to fail on a 4th and 1 attempt when we were down 2 scores.  Balt really controlled the clock in the 2nd half and the fact they got up 2 scores likely changed our game plan.  

     

    Again, if Taylor doesn't fumble, we would have blanked them in the first half and we would have been 2nd and 1 from their 36.  Worst case we get a FG and we enter halftime up 13-0.  Best case, we score a TD and enter half 17-0.  It would have likely been a very different game in either scenario.  Second half, D  comes up huge and Buckner forces fumble which Leonard recovers and fumbles to Okereke who makes a nice return on it.  Still up 3, we were in position to change momentum of the game while we were still ahead and Rivers throws short into double coverage for an INT.  

     

    As far as Rigo, yes he's had a good year otherwise... but IMO moving forward he's gotta avoid having touchbacks (especially multiple in 1 game) as pinning a team inside their 5 vs. letting them start on their 20 can make a world of difference.

  24. Colts 28 - Titans 17. 

     

    If we can stop their running game, which I think we can, we should be in good shape.  My biggest concern is our tendency in losses to have self-inflicted wounds at key moments (e.g., the pick 6 vs. jacksonville or today's fumble return for TD and the INT on first drive of second half).  If we can avoid them, I like our odds.

    • Like 3
×
×
  • Create New...