Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts


Senior Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by SLILLINGTON10

  1. 13 hours ago, IinD said:

    Not directed at you so don't take it directly, but I had a few conversations yesterday with football friends who were saying the same thing about them missing guys. I can't buy that because if your guys get injured what's the other team supposed to do, not play? Screw that, teams were pounding on us when we didn't have Peyton that one season and doing the same when Luck was hurt.


    That excuse don't fly with me. Don't like it?? Stay healthy then.

    I totally get your point. And I am not using injuries as an excuse for winning it losing. Our guys balled out against who was on the field and that is the game of football. I was stating a specific point that the DC was able to put us in more man coverages because hill and Watkins weren't available. It was a smart adjustment on our part and helped us win the game. I like when coaches are adapting to personnel and circumstances other than just continuingly doing only things they are comfortable with.

    • Like 1

  2. 6 hours ago, zibby43 said:


    Except that man is hard for young players.  It's not because of the "scheme" of it - that's relatively simple.  It's the technique/skill component.  It's the reason why "lockdown" corners are so coveted.   


    And personnel is 100% part of the equation.  Scouts specifically evaluate players to determine whether they're better in man or zone schemes.  Ideally you want to draft a player that is capable of man (Ya-Sin), but can understand the responsibilities and communication required by zone.


    Don't let outcome bias cloud your judgment.


    The greater utilization of man coverage (against tendency) worked against a KC team whose best receiver on Sunday night was a guy named Pringle (no Watkins). 


    The fact that the Colts merely used more man is not the sole reason for the positive outcome on Sunday night.  You have to also execute the man coverage.  When you don't, you're going to get torched for big plays. 


    All that said, I absolutely agree that the Colts should continue to mix it up more than they have (i.e., more than 25% man coverage in any given game), depending on the opponent and personnel availability (i.e., do we have the healthy bodies required).  It makes life much harder for QBs when you execute it properly.  It also potentiates the pass rush. 


    I kind of feel the opposite that with all the injuries in the secondary it was easier to go man coverages. Zone requires trust and feel for each other that comes with time and chemistry. Man coverages is just don't get embarrassed on national TV. 

    • Like 1
  • Create New...