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, PuntersArePeopleToo said:

    I know that CFB has targeting in which the booth can initiate a look. And for them is when I player launches himself into a player using his head. 

    Doesn't the NFL have a targeting penalty? The fact that the Ravens player straight up launched himself with his helmet in to Doyle, even with Doyle straight (not falling down accidentally someone hitting him cuz the target got lower) up, and no flag, no ejection. I know for a fact in college that gets you ejected and missing 2 halves. It was completely unnecessary hit. The guy will be fined, but i think should get a game as even the Chiefs fan I was with agreed it was a dirty hit since he launched himself at a standing target.

     

     

    If the NFL doesn't have the CFB rule, and they want to keep people safe they need to add the ability of the booth to call down on a player like that, cuz that is not even ticky-tac that is straightforward one. 

     

    That was one of a few questionable calls against us today.  I still really don't think that INT should have been an INT, it looked like the ball was coming out before Peters made his 'athletic move'.  

     

    I don't think that hit on Doyle would have been classified as targeting, which is usually leading with your head/crown of helmet and making helmet to helmet contact, which I don't think happened.  However, I do think it should have been called unnecessary roughness for hitting a defenseless receiver (especially b/c he was in the head/neck area).  The replay commentator said the same.

    • Like 1
  2. 4 minutes ago, AZColt11 said:

    Despite the loss this team still has a chance to make amends on Thursday night.  They win that, get back to 1st in the division, things will look a little brighter.  Teh ball is still in their court.

     

    Yes, a win over TN would be huge for this team.  I am encouraged with the way our D played the run, especially in the first half.  Derrick Henry is the Titans' biggest weapon and they don't have a mobile QB.  I think if we can contain their rushing attack, we have a very good shot at beating TN.... especially if we don't shoot ourselves in the foot with turnovers at key times like we've done in our other losses this year.

    • Like 1
  3. Not too thrilled with this loss.  Again, I think we beat ourselves more than anything (like we did our previous losses).  We seemed to be pretty well in control of this game in the first half prior to Taylor's fumble.  We had a huge momentum swing by forcing a Baltimore fumble on their first drive of the second half, and then we gave it right back to them a couple plays later by throwing an INT (not a good throw, or good choice of where to throw it, I still don't really agree that it should have been ruled an interception on the challenge as I thought the ball was on the way out prior to Peters taking his 3rd step).  Our D looked fantastic in the first half and Baltimore really dominated the second half -- to Baltimore's credit, they're a top notch team, so I wasn't expecting our D to keep up the way they were playing in first half the entire game, but Balt really put it to us in the 2nd half.   Same with the O, they looked very efficient (minus the fumble) in the first half and couldn't really do anything in the second half.  Worrisome to me is that Baltimore was without their top CB and lost Calais Campbell early in the game - even without TY, I thought we'd be able to move the ball much better on them.  All that said, our season can really change for the positive with a win Thursday night versus Tennessee.

     

    Positives:

    Other than Doyle going into concussion protocol, there didn't seem to be any other serious injuries (when I saw Leonard holding his knee, that was pretty scary but he was back in just a couple plays later and looked fine).

     

    DeMichael Harris looked very dynamic.  I hope they continue to get the ball into his hands.

     

    Pittman was much more involved in the passing game, and for the most part he looked good.  It looked like he and Rivers weren't on the same page a few times, but overall I think Pittman showed he belongs in this league and will be a solid player if he stays healthy moving forward.

     

    I thought aside from the fumble, Taylor looked pretty solid (especially in the first half).

     

    The D was absolutely fantastic in the first half.  Leonard is a freak of nature and very glad his injury wasn't serious.  Grover Stewart looked good all game.  Buckner made a big play forcing the fumble on Baltimore's first drive in the second half when they were deep in our territory.  Unfortunately, Rivers threw a pick to give the ball right back.

     

    Negatives:

    The O and D both stalled out in the 2nd half.  Again, Baltimore is a very good team so I wasn't expecting to shut them down completely all game, but they seemed to be able to move the ball at will against us in the 2nd half and kept our O off the field.

     

    Although I was OK with the O play calling most of the first half, I was baffled a bit in the 2nd half.  We moved the ball effectively on two drives (one being the last drive, the other which we turned it over on 4th and 1).  Down 2 scores late in the game, and after watching Baltimore do such an effective job controlling the ball/time of possession in the 2nd half, I was kind of shocked on the drive where we turned it over on downs (failed 4th and 1) that Reich opted to run so much time off the clock - we moved it effectively but ate almost 6 minutes off the clock.  I was in favor of going for it on that 4th and 1, but really did not like that play call.  

     

    While I thought Rivers had some zip to his throws (aside from the INT which was underthrown), he and Johnson were not on the same page all game it seemed like (connecting on 2 out of 7 attempts).  Two passes (the INT and the very near INT) Rivers simply threw it behind Johnson.  Another pass, where Johnson had a couple steps on the defense Rivers threw it to his left while Johnson was breaking to his right - Rivers kinda gave him a look like 'what were you doing?'   Not sure if this is due to Colts missing full practice earlier in the week, if teams no longer are unprepared for Johnson, if TY's absence allowed Pitt to focus more on Johnson or what but we missed on way too many deep balls and didn't pick up any pass interference penalties on them.  Rivers admitted after the game he shouldn't have thrown the ball that got picked off, so that was on him.  I just couldn't tell if a few other missed connections with Johnson and Pittman (4 of 7) and Burton (1 for 4) were on the WR or Rivers as Rivers' body language seemed to suggest he didn't think the WRs were in the right spot.

     

    The overall run game and OL.  Hines had a couple decent runs, Taylor had a couple decent runs, and so did Wilkins (though he got the most carries and averaged only 3.5 ypc).  Our most successful runs were the two reverses to D. Harris.  Again, it was Baltimore so maybe not entirely fair to judge but last year the motto was 'run the damn ball' and in many instances we seemed like we could run at will.  Some of this may be due to missing Mack, but I just don't see the OL dominating at the same level they did last year.  While the OL didn't allow any sacks, they were allowing pressure and it cost us, especially on that 4th and 1 attempt.

     

    Meh:

    Special teams.  I am still excited about I. Rodgers, the kid is very quick and fast, I will not be at all surprised if he breaks another KR TD this year.  Hines had a couple of decent returns, but a couple where I really thought he should have fair caught the ball (I am surprised he was able to stay up and hold onto the ball on at least one occasion).  Also, I like Rigo but he didn't do a very good job of pinning Balt down today with several touch backs.  We got spoiled with McAfee, but it makes a huge difference when we can pin the other team deep (inside their 5 or 10 vs. getting touch backs).

     

     

     

     

    • Like 9
  4. 5 minutes ago, coming on strong said:

    because patmon has more talent then them but is raw skill wise .  If patmon was better in practice frank would be crazy to sit him . there has to be a reason , we just do not know because we dont see him every day.  its the same reason eason is the number 3 QB and always inactive but wont put him as the back up . They are developing patmon hopefully when they feel he is ready he plays .  this week would be perfect with all the injuries .

     

    I disagree..  we have a solid QB in Rivers and Eason is/was expected to sit and learn from him and Jacoby.  We have no injury issues (knock wood) at QB now.  Our WR corps seems to get a new (or multiple) injury(ies) every week.  It is one of, if not THE, weakest position groups on the team.  

  5. 7 hours ago, coming on strong said:

    patmon could be struggling to get open in practice , it seems like who ever has the best week in practice gets to play that week.  It would seem better to just pick a line up and let them get reps with rivers to work on timing and trust .

    Why would they keep Patmon on the active roster and keep bouncing Johnson, Fountain, Harris back and forth from the practice squad but making the latter 3 active on game day and Patmon a healthy scratch  if it was a practice issue?  I think they see big potential in Patmon and are afraid to lose him to another team, but afraid to show some of his traits until he's fully ready.  

  6. 7 hours ago, aaron11 said:

    hooker was drafted high so that makes it easier for him to be a miss imo.  i was excited about his rookie season but hes been near invisible since then.  wilson was a lot worse and taken a round later, i actually forgot all about him when i posted this

    Yes, for sure that fact that he's a former 1st round pick makes him stick out more.. but I also think part of the reason he has been invisible since his rookie year is because teams really weren't challenging him very much.  

  7. 51 minutes ago, w87r said:

    Back on topic though.

     

    Excited to see Harris get some more action.

     

    We shall see if Fountain or Patmon get some run

     

     

    Yes, will be interesting to see if Patmon is a healthy inactive again tomorrow.  I understand not wanting to force him into the line-up, but it is starting to get confusing about when they may give him an actual chance instead of bouncing guys back and forth from the PS.

    • Like 2
  8. 6 hours ago, DougDew said:

    Of course, any player from the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th rounds that plays well but we didn't draft, a person could always criticize a GM for letting that player pass.  But realistically, you have to answer this question based upon the players you had on your radar that he passed on in favor of another.  By year:

     

    2017. Marlon Humphrey (Hooker was selected)

     

    2018.  I wanted Leonard and a G early in the second, so those picks were spot on.  With as much flak as Ballard has gotten over the Turay and Lewis second round picks, I can't think of anybody I wanted that he passed on.  I liked Ronnie Harrison, S Alabama that was picked way down at 93 though.

     

    2019.  Deebo Samuel, AJ Brown.  Taking Rock seems like an expensive choice given those WRs were on the board, whom I wanted.  Probably could have gotten a CB with the same NFL production later in the second round, where Banogu or Campbell were picked.

     

    2020.  Can't think of any body that was a questionable pass-on at the time.

     

     

    2017 -- I'm reluctant to give Ballard a full pass here, but this was kind of a bogus year as Ballard was working with a head coach most everyone knew he didn't select and/or want (Pagano wanted to run a 3-4 D, Ballard basically had his idea of what kind of team he wanted from Day 1 and on D that was the 4-3 D we have now).  To his credit, Hooker was on pace to be DROY (or right up there) and I believe he was leading or tied for the lead in the NFL for interceptions at the point he got hurt (week 7) for the year as a rookie.  Hooker hasn't been great when healthy, but he's been pretty solid for us throughout the rest of his career.  Pagano kept comparing Hooker to Ed Reed after we drafted him.  I have to think that pick was heavily influence by Chuck and think Hooker is better off in a system like Chuck's than he is in a system Ballard wants.

     

    2018 -- Turay was really coming on last year before he got hurt.  Lewis has battled nagging injuries his first two years, this year he's been healthy and he's really looked pretty good the past couple of weeks.  

     

    2019 -- Ya-Sin is still very young.  He made the pro-football focus all-rookie team and has improved throughout his time in the league..  the only CB drafted after him that has (arguably) a more productive career is Sean Murphy-Bunting and he was taken 10 picks before we took Banogu.  Having signed Funchess in the off-season, CB was a more pressing need than WR and to Ballard's credit, everyone in the world was expecting Luck to be our QB for the foreseeable future.  Luck had the uncanny ability of being able to play at a high level without elite talent around him and the ability to make his WRs look good even if they weren't the best (e.g., Inman, Rogers).  Not that having high level WRs is unimportant, but CB was definitely a bigger need at that point in time.  Additionally, if you watch the pre-draft video series which the Colts organization put on the colts.com website, they mention a WR who they really, really liked.  Reich really liked Campbell, and in one of those videos they mention something about a coach saying "If I have a son, I hope he grows up to be like this kid" -- after the draft, Ballard and Reich pretty much confirmed that player was Campbell.  No way to predict injuries, but I have a feeling they had Campbell as their targeted guy and felt like they'd have a reasonable shot at getting him later in round 2.

     

    6 hours ago, Hoose said:

    Time will tell if Banogu was a swing and a miss. He's still a work in progress; I'll reserve judgment for now. 

    Campbell..... he's talented. But his disturbing series of injuries as a pro ( with none as a college player as far as I can tell ) leaves everyone pining for the other top WRs who've stayed healthy and shone. Its a "next year" scenario for him as well. 

     

    What I'm saying is these two guys are still unknown commodities, and its still too soon to say Ballard blew these picks. 

     

    The whiff that hasn't been mentioned is Malik Hooker. A first rounder who never panned out as hoped. He wasn't a total waste of a pick, but in no way did he prove to be a first round talent. 

    And while we're discussing the 2017 draft, how about second round miss Quincy Wilson; third round miss Tarell Basham; and fourth round dump Zach Banner?

    ( yes, I know Mack, Stewart, and Walker were chosen in the fourth and fifth rounds, but we're talking whiffs )

    All said, though, I think Ballard is a rock star GM and I am in no way suggesting he's anything less. But even the best miss in the draft. Its just the way it is. 

     

    Agree whole-heartedly that Campbell and Banogu are still works in progress (I'd lump Lewis, Turay, Ya-Sin, Speed, Okereke, Taylor, Pittman, and many others into that category as well).  Ballard has said multiple times that he and his staff judge players on talent as well as character and coachability (i.e., he has said from day 1 that having coaches being able to work with guys to make them better and selecting guys with the traits he likes knowing they may need a couple years of NFL coaching to reach their potential is part of building a successful long term team).

     

    I would not call Hooker a whiff.  He was drafted in the Pagano era and before his injury in week 7 of his rookie year, he was right in the race for Defensive Rookie of the Year, was up there for being a pro-bowler and was at the top of the league in interceptions.  Injuries have derailed him some, but he has been a solid player for us when he's been able to play since he returned from injury.  I think the verdict is still out on him.  I do think he'd thrive more in the manner Pagano sought to use him than he would in the defense Eberflus is running, but if he can regain health, I think he's quite capable of having a solid NFL career.  

     

    In terms of the others... Banner went on to become a starting OL (got hurt) and was playing very well prior to his injury.  He didn't work out here, and he admitted that he needed an attitude adjustment after Ballard cut him.  Basham is doing pretty well with the NYJ, not great but playing like you'd expect a 3rd rounder to play.  Q. Wilson seemed to start doing pretty well for us when Mike Mitchell took him under his wing.  Wilson definitely had some sort of work ethic type issues.  He played in 3 games (1 start) for NYJ this year after we traded him and in return we got Isaiah Rodgers, who IMO is doing quite well for us.

     

    Again, I agree with you that Ballard has been a rockstar GM.  He's done way better hitting than whiffing with his draft picks and most of them are still too early to decide on.  Very few, if any, GMs in the league have a draft record as good as Ballard since he's been here.

     

     

  9. 3 hours ago, Myles said:

    Metcalf was also coming off a neck injury which forced him to miss his final 5 college games.  

    Threads like this are nuts.  Do we get to bash every GM because another player taken later turned out good.   I think that line of thought only is relevant if it's fairly early in the first round.   Obviously if Leaf was chosen over Manning.  

     

    I agree -- this is a very difficult thing to argue.  There's a reason why Metcalf lasted until the 64th pick and 31 other GMs didn't take him.  Aside from his neck injury he really wasn't productive at Ole Miss.  Based on Campbell's productivity and his combine results, there was no real indicators that he would be hurt the majority of his first two seasons and/or that he would be significantly less productive than Metcalf in the NFL.

     

    I don't totally agree that this should only be applicable to the early first round.  For example, selecting Bjoern Werner when Xavier Rhodes, DeAndre Hopkins, Alex Ogletree, Zach Ertz, Codarrelle Patterson, Darius Slay, Jamie Collins, Kawann Short, etc. were all on the board was a bit ridiculous if you ask me.

     

    3 hours ago, coming on strong said:

    Ballard has been great , but it’s not bashing him by saying he missed on a great player . Drafting is hard even the best gm is gonna miss a lot .    Also Blackmon was hurt to and Ballard drafted him and it turned out very well. Dk was a big miss so far , unless Paris comes back next year and turns into a pro bowler .  It’s still to early to judge Paris Campbell but as of right now dk is working out better due to injury .

     

    So far Blackmon has been playing well, but he's started in what, 6 games?  Hooker was also coming off injury/recovering from surgery when he was drafted.  He played in 7 games with 6 starts and many were considering him to be a top candidate for Def. Rookie of the Year, potentially probowl.  Just judging him on 6 weeks, we probably would have said he turned out very well, too -- I don't think he's been bad for us, but there is a reason Ballard didn't offer him his 5th year rookie option and if I had to guess, I wouldn't be shocked if his days as a Colt are over after this season.

     

    2 hours ago, aaron11 said:

    i would put Metcalf up there too hes been one of the best receivers in the league.  

     

    might get some push back on this but Hooker comes to mind.

     

     

    i think he was taken ahead of us, i would not be mad if we had him over nelson though.  Big q is great too neither team missed there imo 

     

    Hooker was playing very well as a rookie before he got hurt.  Also a weird scenario, as Ballard came in and was forced to keep Pagano around -- we all knew Ballard and Pagano had different philosophies (a main one being Pagano likes a 3-4 and Ballard wanted a 4-3 D).  Pagano was comparing Hooker to Ed Reed (who Pagano coached in Baltimore).  Safety was also a major need for us that year.. sure, Hooker hasn't turned out exactly like everyone wanted him to, but I'd in no way consider him a bust and the only S taken after him that year who has been more successful is Budda Baker who was taken in the 2nd round.

     

     

     

    7 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:

    I'll agree with what everyone else is saying.

    2019 Draft

    2nd round pick 34 CB Rock Ya-Sin with WR Deebo Samuel still on the board (picked 36 by 49'ers)

    2nd round pick 49 DE Ben Banogu with WR A.J. Brown still on the board (picked 51 by Titans)

    2nd round pick 59 WR Parris Campbell with WR D.K. Metcalf still on the board (picked 64 by Seahawks)

     

    Of the three, at least Rock Ya-Sin became an instant starter, even though he's had some growing pains.

     

    The worst of them was the Banogu pick.  His obvious best talent was pass rush, yet the team talked about making him a Sam linebacker.  He's not the Sam linebacker.  Okereke does that, whenever we line up with one.  And Banogu has yet to excel with his strongest talent, either.

     

    I still have hope for all three of our picks.  But I'm also aware of the Rookie Contract rule.  If you haven't shown you deserve a 5th year option, or a new contract by year four, you will most likely be playing somewhere else.

     

    They said pretty much right after Banogu was drafted that he'd take a few years to develop.  He hasn't been great for us, but he is improving and I think that was expected.  Ya-Sin has been solid for us and CB was a severe need at that point in time.  

     

    Ya-Sin has been solid.  Campbell has shown flashes when he is healthy - though he hasn't been very often.  That said, Campbell never had any serious injury trouble in college, whereas Metcalf was coming off a season-ending neck injury (i.e., if one were to predict who'd be hurt in the NFL, most would say due to past injury history Metcalf was a riskier pick than Campbell).  

     

    Also, in all instances you mention WRs behind the guys we took.  To Ballard's credit, he was expecting a healthy Luck that season.  He signed Devin Funchess who both he and Reich were high on and Ebron was coming off a probowl season.  The club was pretty excited about Deon Cain coming back healthy, etc... while Ballard did take Campbell with our 3rd second round pick, I get a feeling with TY, Funchess, Cain, Fountain, Inman, Pascal plus Ebron and Doyle and a healthy Luck (known to make those around him better) that WR wasn't a huge priority for Ballard as we had major needs elsewhere on the roster.

    • Like 2
  10. More likely than not, Ballard will have to address the WR position again this off-season.  Too much uncertainty about Campbell's ability to stay healthy (I think he's got all the skills to be a quality starter if he could stay healthy, but he hasn't proven he can).  Too much uncertainty about TY - he's hurt again (this year it's a groin instead of a calf) and he hasn't looked like himself all season.  I know he's very valued as a team leader, locker room guy, etc.. but he hasn't really done anything this year that screams the Colts should bring him back next year (or at least not give him a big contract).  Pascal's not bad, but I think in a perfect world he'd be a 4th or 5th WR (no higher than a #3, IMO).  Pittman was coming along before he got hurt, so it'll be interesting to see how he progresses this second half of the season (he didn't impress me as a WR last week, though he did show he's a willing blocker).  Haven't seen anything from Patmon in a game - heard some good things about him in camp, and obviously by not putting him to the PS, the front office/coaching staff thinks highly enough of him that they're unwilling to risk another team snagging him away (though it's still odd that they'll bring up WRs - e.g., Fountain, Johnson, Harris off the practice squad and activate them while keeping Patmon deactivated). 

     

    Right now, this team lacks a true #1.  I think Pittman can develop into being a very solid #2 or even #1b, but don't see it in him being a true #1.  I know the knock on Patmon has been he plays smaller than his size.  I also don't see him ever becoming a #1 (maybe a #2b to Pittman or a #3 or #4).  Campbell I think is best used as more of a slot WR, so don't think he's really a true #1 either, same goes for D. Harris.  I like Johnson as a #3.  We don't exactly have the deepest WR group in the league so seeing Fountain on the practice squad says something about him, maybe he'll get better another year after recovering from ankle injury, but I don't see him being a long term starter for us (maybe a #5).  Dulin, actually, I think has a lot of potential and can see him developing into a solid #3.  

     

    Personally, I think we'll see Pittman and Patmon be in the line-up for us regularly for several years.  I do, however, think Ballard really needs to bring in a true #1 in the very near future (though, this may be difficult as unless Eason is our long term QB answer, we'll need to address that position and we'll need to start throwing big $ at guys like Leonard, Q, B. Smith, etc.).  

     

    If I had to predict, 2 years from today the WRs on the current roster I'd still expect to be Colts are Pittman, Patmon, Campbell, Dulin.

    • Like 1
  11. The list of players this week who have been limited in practice (or not practicing) is quite long.  A couple questions - Julian Blackmon was listed as DNP due to groin/achilles issues - anything to be concerned about there or is resting him just a precaution?  Also, TY and Dulin both got banged up versus Detroit?  I'm assuming neither will play this week.  Any chance we'll see the team bring up DeMichael Harris or Daurice Fountain from the practice squad to the active roster, or actually use Dezmon Patmon this week?

  12. 2 hours ago, stitches said:

    From what I'm seeing it's 48% pass, 52% run on 1st down. 

    https://www.sharpfootballstats.com/situational-run-pass-ratios--off-.html

     

    Then we go 50-50 on second down. And then when we are in trouble on 3d (and often long) we pass 76% of the time. 

     

     

    Doh.. you are right.  Thank you.  I was looking at this: https://www.espn.com/nfl/team/stats/_/type/team/name/ind

     

    We have 93 first downs from passing and 45 from rushing... we did not pass 93 times on first down.

    • Like 1
  13. 3 hours ago, stitches said:

    Yeah, no doubt game script influences the playcalling to some degree and you can see some trends about passing more when trailing by a lot and running more when trying to hold on to a lead and drain the clock, but over the long run the tendency of the playcaller become obvious with bigger sample. Right now we are passing on 55% of the time which is 9th lowest in the league(btw this has jumped over the last two games, it used to be under 50%). I cannot find the stat right now but a week or two ago I saw the game-neutral situation pass% and we were bottom 5 in the league too. We just run way too much on 1st and 2nd and long in game neutral situations(not leading or trailing by a lot). 

     

    We have passed 93 times on first down this year.  We have ran 45 times on first down this year.  We pass over 67% of the time on first down.

  14. 8 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

    Yeah those 2nd round picks of his r just lighting it up

     

    Q. Wilson in 2017 didn't work out for us.  From 2018, Leonard is a 2x all-pro and based on his play last week is still getting better.  Braden Smith is playing very well.  Tyquan Lewis has really come around this season.  Turay was doing very well last year and hopefully we see him back in action in a couple weeks.  His 2018 2nd rounders are over-achieving, IMO.  From 2019, Ya-Sin is playing just fine, Campbell has showed promise but has been hurt, Banogu was a project pick and everyone knew that - he's not playing great but he's not been awful either as he's still continuing to develop.  From 2020, Taylor is doing just fine and Pittman has been injured but looks like he'll be fine, too.  

     

    3 minutes ago, Superman said:

     

    Sure, I would have taken the right WR at the right price. Claiming the GM isn't balanced enough in a shouty post is another story.

     

    Ballard said it since day 1 and he recently said it again -- "Our lines are always in the water.... but it takes 2 teams to tango."  We just got Pittman back, we don't know the extent of TYs injury and we don't know if we'll get Campbell back later this year.  Fountain is back on our PS, DeMichael Harris looked good in his few attempts when he was brought up.  Ballard might be just fine with who our WRs are and how they are progressing.  For all we know, he may have placed a few trade offers and not gotten back what he thought was fair.  In Ballard, I trust. 

  15. 12 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

    The Maniac plays with just as much intensity as did Lewis. 

    Leonard is at a HOF pace. 

     

    The intensity and leadership Leonard plays with are the two main things that remind me of Lewis.  Those two traits and both of them have (in Lewis' case had) the knack to make big time plays at critical moments.  Otherwise, I think they're pretty different players.  

     

    Lewis was a littler faster straight ahead, but I don't remember him being able to cover the field side-to-side like Leonard could.  Lewis also had an elite D most of the time he was in Balt (he was the leader, but for many years he had a HOF free safety in Ed Reed, a great pass rusher in Terrell Suggs, Peter Boulware, Chris McAlister, Bart Scott, Adalius Thomas (in 2006 they had 4 LBs make the pro bowl, which is ridiculous), Haloti Ngata, etc.  

     

    Leonard now has Buckner, and Houston has been very good (on the tail end of his career) but otherwise, I don't think the level of talent surround Leonard has really been comparable to what Lewis had throughout his career.  


    Also hard to compare them since we play a 4-3 and Lewis was in a 3-4 the vast majority (if not all) of his career and Lewis was an ILB, whereas Leonard is mainly outside.  Therefore, I agree with the other posters that Leonard is more comparable to Derrick Brooks.  That said, they are two very different players as well (IMO).  Leonard gets far more sacks than Brooks ever did (he'll surpass Brooks' career sack numbers with just 1 more sack) and also more interceptions and FFs.  Early in his career, Leonard is putting up more tackles per season as well (Brooks was a good, but not elite LB as a rookie).  

     

    Leonard was a first team all-pro as a rookie, neither Lewis or Brooks can say that.  I don't really think it's fair to compare Leonard to anyone right now, he's really playing his own style of football.  He's definitely got Lewis' leadership and fire, but he's longer and plays longer/lankier than Lewis.  He's got similar (maybe not quite as good) coverage ability to Brooks.  Leonard is the first player in NFL history (at least since 1982 when sacks and interceptions were both official stats) to record >10 sacks and >5 interceptions in his first 25 games (https://coltswire.usatoday.com/2019/12/09/indianapolis-colts-darius-leonard-making-history-impact-plays/).  

     

    Leonard is a very unique player.  Very glad he's a Colt.  Very funny that people bashed Ballard for reaching on him and watching Leonard help prove Ballard right.  My main concern with Leonard is him staying healthy.  He missed a game as a rookie.  Missed 3 in year 2 (some retirement talk there, as his concussion symptoms lasted longer than normal and were pretty severe) and has missed a few games this year....  One of Brooks' best attributes was he played in 16 games all 14 seasons in the NFL (the only 2 seasons he didn't have >100 tackles were his rookie year and his last year -- a 12 year stretch of >100 tackles is a remarkable stat).... Lewis had 8 seasons with 16 games played in his 17 year career... Leonard in 3 seasons has yet been able to say he has (or can) play 16 games.

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

    @Nickster @chad72

     

    I'm kind of shocked at this. From PFF:

     

    In 2020, Rivers play action percentage is 24.3%. He has 58 play action plays, 56 attempts, 62.5, 6.5 yards/attempt, passer rating 84.2. He has 181 non play action pass plays, 175 attempts, 72%, 8.6 yards/attempt, 101.5 rating. 

     

    In 2019, Rivers play action percentage was 20.7%. He had 131 play action plays, 121 attempts, 72.7%, 9.7 yards/attempt, passer rating 112.8. He had 502 non play action pass plays, 470 attempts, 64.3%, 7.3 yards/attempt, passer rating 82.2.

     

    I don't know how they account for RPOs, probably count them as play action if there's a fake handoff... 

     

    JB had 30.6% play action in 2019, and his differential on play action was +8.4 completion percentage, +1.4 yards/attempt. 

     

    I'm not sure what's going on here. The Colts passing game is an enigma to me right now.

     

    We were about 50/50 on first downs last year between shotgun and under center.  This year, we are using shotgun at a way higher ratio.  http://www.nflsavant.com/game.php?team_code=IND&team_id=2200&stype=REG&year=2020 (just change 2020 to 2019 to see last year).  Overall we were in shotgun 2/3 (66%) of the time and under center 1/3 (33%) of the time last year.. this year we're 3/4 (75%) shotgun and 1/4 (25%) under center.   

     

    That may not explain everything, but I believe play action is much more typical when lined up under center (I can't find stats to back that up, maybe @EastStreet knows where to get them).  

     

     

     

     

    • Like 1
  17. 1 hour ago, stitches said:

    Sure, I don't mind that. You won't make the play on every single instance, whether run or pass is chosen/switched to. 

     

    I was very encouraged in 2018 about the offense too, and I credited both Luck and Reich with it(it was hard to separate the influece of each of them on the offensive game the Colts played). They seemed like a great pairing, though. But then in the off-season(before Luck retired) Reich started saying stuff that 1. go against what we were seeing in the games, 2. are not supported by evidence(like the playaction needing good run game or the passing game opening up with better run game). Then Luck retired and he switched to run heavy play calling with Brissett and I was willing to credit it to him not trusting Jacoby to throw(deservedly so) and still had some hopes that we will see a more pass-happy offense this year with Rivers (especially on 1st and second down and in neutral situations), but we have been among the most run-heavy teams again... even though our pass-game has been very efficient and our run game has been horrible. 

     

    First, I don't think our run game has been 'horrible'.  It certainly hasn't been great and it has seemingly regressed from last year, but it has been effective at times.  My main issue has been the predictability with the playcalling, most specifically with Hines.  While Taylor didn't have a very good week against Detroit, he has been steadily progressing as the year has gone on.

     

    In terms of our pass game, last week we passed 34 times and ran 39 times (pretty balanced and to be expected  that we ran more since we were up 20).  Against the Bengals we passed 44 times, ran 15 times (pass heavy, and to be expected that we passed more given we were coming from behind).  Against the Browns we passed 33 times, ran 18 times (we were pass heavy, expected as we were down most of the game).  Against Chicago, we passed 29 times, ran 38 times (pretty run heavy, but we had a lead basically the whole game and our D was smothering Chicago -  there really wasn't much need to pass).  Against NYJ, we passed 25 times, ran 31 times (pretty balanced, with more running and we were up big so of course we were going to run).  Against Minn., we passed 25 times and ran 40 times (run heavy, and expected since we were up big for the last 3 quarters of the game and our D smothered Minn).  Against JAX, we passed 46 times, ran 22 times (pass heavy, and we were very efficient passing aside from the 2 INTs, plus Mack going down early, IMO, changed the game plan).  

     

    Out of 7 games, we have passed more than ran 3 times (the games when we were run heavy made sense).  As a whole, we've passed 236 times and ran 203 times, so overall we're passing more than running.  On first downs, the only game we ran more than passed was week 2 against Minn (ran 11 times, passed 10 times).  Every other week we have passed significantly more than ran on first downs and on the season, we've over double the amount of passes (93) compared to runs (45) on first downs.  

     

    Our passing game has been efficient.  It has also cost us numerous times (essentially, the 2 INTs cost us the JAX game and did not help us at all versus CLE - the first drive in the second half when it was a 10 point game they had a pick 6, creating a 17 point game and making it harder on us... then we they got a safety on Rivers when we tried to pass out of our own endzone, which turned a 7 point game into a 9 point game and gave them the ball back... we forced them to punt and then threw another INT which allowed them to kill >4 minutes off the clock late in the game).  Rivers made better decisions last week (i.e., took a few sacks instead of throwing stupid passes, which aside from the ball that bounced off MAC's chest against MINN, basically all the INTs Rivers has thrown have been terrible throws or terrible decisions or a combination of the two).  Also, take into account that we've played most of the season without WR # 2 (Campbell) and a good chunk without WR #3 (Pittman), TY hasn't been himself (and now he's got a groin issue), and all three of our top TEs have missed games.  Rivers is making the most of what he's got, but he hasn't really had a lot to work with due to lack of talent at the WR position after two of our top 3 guys went down.

     

      

     

     

  18. 11 hours ago, Caffrey said:

    I reviewed it once during the game and a few times today, I did not see the false start and anything worthy of calling a false start penalty.  After watching the replay of the game tonight, my initial reaction was the related the to the play prior, a run by Hines in which towards then end of the run, Pittman made an aggressive block on the DB on the defensive side of the pile-up and it even looked like Ryan Kelley was looking who is that.  I was thinking the referee did not call a penalty on the block but called him for a false start on the next play.  Maybe I'm thinking too deep into this?

     

    I like that he is an aggressive blocker, Reich did say he is a good blocker.  Keep it up and passes will be coming his way, in due time, at least he did play, coming back from his injury, getting some initial rust off and did not have an injury set-back.  We still got over half a season left.

     

    I haven't had a chance to rewatch the game... it's not uncommon for officials to get the number of the player wrong on false start calls though.  Any chance another player (maybe Pascal #14) moved and they accidentally said #11?

  19. 1 hour ago, landrus13 said:

    Colts 28, Ravens 17

     

    Lamar Jackson is a bad passer. Make him throw the ball 25+ times and he's gonna turn it over a few times. He can't throw to the flat. He loves to throw over the middle. Keep him in the pocket and make him beat you with his arm. Colts are pretty good against the run so I'm not too worried about that. Lamar getting out in the open and running all over us is my biggest concern.

     

    I don't think Lamar is a 'bad passer', he actually has a very strong arm and can make a lot of throws that few other QBs in the league can make.  That said, he is a much stronger running QB (best in the league) than he is a passing QB (middle of the pack).  

     

    Having a healthy Leonard really helps in this game.  We got pressure on Mayfield a couple weeks ago without blitzing, but when he could step up in the pocket or get out of the pocket and avoid being sacked, he gave our D a lot of trouble.  We blitzed more than normal today, but that huge play Stafford hit in the second half was made when he was able to step up in the pocket and avoid a sack from our front 4.  Mayfield, while a mobile QB, is nowhere near as explosive as Jackson.  Stafford isn't a mobile QB... on that play where he hit the deep bomb, I feel like Jackson would have taken off and ran (and probably had a good shot at a first down).  

     

    I think Leonard can shadow Jackson and keep him in check running... we just need to make him get the ball out of his hand throwing it fairly quickly.  We'll be in trouble if he has time to run around and let the WRs get deep (personally, I think Willis is who they'd attack this game).  

    • Like 1
  20. 21 minutes ago, krunk said:

    I thought we made some real improvements today. Third down conversion still needs work but i saw some good things at different points

    Yes, in the RZ we were much better today (less predictable).  We also had our first TD of >20 yards today (the pass to Hines) - I'd love to start seeing that become a regular thing.

     

    As @EastStreetsaid, we were 50% (7/14) on 3rd down conversions.  At one point (I think when were were 6/13) I saw a stat saying our average to-go on 3rd down was 9.7 yards.  We need that number to go down if we want to see our 3rd down conversion percentage go up.. there were a few cases when we had a lead where we were passing on first down (which I'm fine with, though I don't think we should have the majority of our first downs be pass plays, especially with a lead).  A couple drops or poor throws cost us in some instances (the one that sticks out to me is the drop by Hines on a 2nd and 10 after 1st and 10 went incomplete to M. Johnson - where Hines started to look up field before he secured the catch -- that could've probably moved the chains - if not picked up at least 7-9 yards, instead, it put us in a 2nd and 10 position).  

     

     

     

     

    • Like 2
  21. On 10/28/2020 at 1:42 PM, EastStreet said:

    I'd like to see the WR rotation firm up a bit once Pittman gets back. TY/Pittman/Pascal/Johnson might end up being a nice rotation. Burton seems to be eating up slot type snaps, so there's that too. As far as being a threat in the passing game, I think a lot of the issue has simply been game plan / play calling. Not really sure why we chose to throw it a bunch in the first game with zero preseason vs a team who is horrible vs the run. I do understand why we tossed it a lot vs the Bengals after getting down. The rest of the games were just heavy run / conservative game plans though.

     

    I'd just like to see some balance.

     

    Personally, I think Mack going down early in week 1 changed the game plan.   Also, aside from the 2 bad interceptions, Rivers was very efficient passing vs. Jax.  Before he got hurt (I think it was the 4th offensive drive - TD drive 1, Hines got stopped on 4th and 1 at Jax 3 drive 2, Rivers threw pick drive 3) Mack was very effective as a runner and receiver out of the backfield.  The missed FG, getting stuffed on 4th and 1 deep in Jax territory on our 2nd drive and costly interceptions certainly didn't help, as it allowed Jax to stay in the game and then take a lead.  Had we gotten that 4th and 1 we could have easily been looking at 14-0 after our 2nd drive (or if we kicked the FG, 10-0).  The 3rd drive, Rivers threw a pick which gave Jax a 27 yard field to work with and they scored to tie it 7-7 -- all the sudden, we're looking at a tied ball game instead of a 14-0 game.  I'm  not sure how much trust the coaching staff had in Taylor week 1 into his rookie season without having a preseason, but my guess is that if we got up 14-0 or 21-0 we would've ran a lot more (if Mack didn't get hurt, I also think we would've stayed with the run a bit more).  We were pretty balanced the first two drives.  Also, it was week 1 -- now everyone knows the Jags don't really have a good run D, but that wasn't such an easy assessment with no tape from this year available on them that first week.

     

    I'm with you though, other than the NYJ game, we haven't really been balanced on O.  It'd be nice to get more of a balance during the final stretch.

     

     

    • Like 1
  22. On 10/26/2020 at 9:05 AM, Nickster said:

    Pro reference has a cool list of HOF predictions.  He rates just under average for HOFers. The only current HOF guy I’d rate him above is NA math.  There are a few players like Big Ben that rate above him on that list.

     

    i personally think the lack of a championship appearance makes him marginal but I think he will and should get in.
     

    he is essentially a dead heat on this page with Ryan.  Do you rate Ryan as N HOF?  I personally put him in the hall of very good and see him and Rivers at like the cutoff line. I would rate Ryan over Rivers if ATl wouldn’t have blown it against ne.

     

    Ben is 4 below him on that list... 

     

    Look at the AFC since 2004 -- Brady, Peyton and Pittsburgh have been dominant since Rivers entered the league (Flacco and Mahommes each had 1 SB appearance since Rivers entered the league, otherwise it has been/was dominated by Brady and his HOF coach Belichick, Peyton and his HOF coach Dungy, and Ben and his future HOF coach Tomlin).  Yea, Rivers lack of championships may hurt him in some eyes, but we'll probably never see another era of dominance in the NFL like Brady-Belichick put together in NE.

     

    IF is a big word -- I'd put myself in the HOF, too, IF I was 6'5" 240 pounds had a cannon arm and won 6 superbowls... Ryan will need to play at least 4 more seasons at a high level to touch Rivers' statistical numbers.  Ryan was Rookie of Year in 2008 (Rivers was basically ineligible for ROY since he sat behind Brees).  Ryan was MVP in 2016 and had a very amazing year (led the league in passer rating -- which Rivers did in 2008 and also led the league in TDs but somehow wasn't even elected to probowl).  Other than that, his SB appearance, and his cool nickname "Matty Ice" Ryan has a ways to go to be at Rivers' level.

     

    19 hours ago, Thebrashandthebold said:

    Kelly went to four straight Super Bowls. Aikman won a Super Bowl. That would put them both way ahead of Rivers and they were.

     

     

    No, Aikman is nowhere near ahead of Rivers (other than his SB ring).  Kelly, at least, was among the best QBs in the league when he played, just like Rivers.  Aikman was on an amazing team and he helped guide them to the SB.  Kelly was on an amazing team and helped guide them.  Kelly was a better QB than Aikman, by far.  Rivers has never been on a team nearly as stacked as either of those guys.  

×
×
  • Create New...