Senior Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,251 Pro Bowler

1 Follower


  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

9,872 profile views
  1. ztboiler

    Interesting draft analysis from Rob Rang

    Despite my negativity on the scheme, I’m bullish that Ballard will make his plan work at a very high competitive level. He believes in it, wants a more player driven scheme and the strategic roster resource management advantages you referred to. I’m not bullish that it ever becomes a championship caliber defense unless they diversify the scheme more than I fear....and they very well may. The scheme isn’t limited to the way Dungy ran it...and I’m hopeful we can take it up a notch.
  2. ztboiler

    Interesting draft analysis from Rob Rang

    Some of it is just personal preference. I don't like to watch it. We'll let teams march up and down the field between the 20's before stiffening in the red zone. We all know and lived the story. I got my fill of it in the Manning years, and always thought it contributed to our inability to win multiple championships. Ballard seems determined to recreate what he had in Chicago, and that's great if you find the pieces you need...but its a scheme that is too dependent on finding a superstar at 3Tech...exactly as Polian admitted in so many words. One might say that we don't know yet what this version will look like....and that may turn out to be true, but all public commentary by coaches and Ballard has even included the Tampa 2 term along with "simplify" and "play fast" etc. I much prefer what Zimmer runs in Minnesota. Rant off.
  3. ztboiler

    Interesting draft analysis from Rob Rang

    Admittedly....I was really just using it as a passive aggressive opportunity to gripe about a scheme that I don't like much.
  4. ztboiler

    Interesting draft analysis from Rob Rang

    Right - he's overselling the importance of the undersized interior pass rusher to make this defense work. Every nickel package plays about the same around the league, and looks for specialists who can make their rush package work. To that end his fit isn't very unique in the league or even unique to how the Colts populated their roster in the heyday of the Tampa 2. Rushing the passer on passing downs has never been the trouble spot for this defense. You can be competent in this scheme with specialists, but you can't be elite without the right 3Tech. Polian told us as much when he admitted he never found it. It's the chess piece that influences the offensive play calling the most. Little disruption from the 3Tech on first down and you take 5-8 yards for 2nd and short...and we all know the rest of the story with this scheme. My exception with what Rang said is, I suppose, the posturing of insightful analysis about how it might help the Colts solve the puzzle with an under the radar chess piece. It doesn't...but it might help us win if we can build a big lead in the second half.
  5. ztboiler

    Interesting draft analysis from Rob Rang

    I’d be a bit more impressed if Rang included that Lewis is great fit to kick inside as a sub package rusher but he doesn’t project as the type of 3 tech that makes this defense go unless the Colts plan to repeat history. We’ve had that player here before and it’s an important fit today as it was then, but finding a good undersized interior pass rusher is not the dilemma of running his defense.
  6. ztboiler

    Tidbits from OTA reports

    Article on the front page suggests Tyquan Smith and Denico Autry are being used heavily on the inside. This would foreshadow being even lighter and quicker than many of us hoped...and maybe not just on obvious passing downs. I'd rather not swing the pendulum all the way back to Raheem Brock on base downs.
  7. I'd challenge the logic in your assessment of his coaching, not your ability to separate his coaching from his person, which you have done a reasonable job of. I called, politely, for a coaching change as early as late 2015 - so yes, I believe he took us as far as he could in 4 years and shouldn't have gotten 6....however, you are completely ignoring how hard it is to win a game in the NFL, let alone engineer one of the greatest turnarounds in NFL history leading to 3 consecutive playoff appearances and 3 playoff wins. Its hard to do and it takes very good coaching. Its OK with me if you don't think Chuck achieved anything in his tenure here - everybody gets to set the bar as they wish for themselves - but the numbers don't support that Pagano was a failure, nor did the eye test. 2012-2014 was a big success and a special time where it seemed like anything was possible and we came to expect the improbable again. Maybe the standard is no longer winning, but if it is then Pagano had a lot to do with it by definition....and anybody that says Andrew Luck did that by himself is revising history.
  8. You don’t go from 2-14 to 11-5 three straight years without having something to offer as a coach. It was Pagano’s blueprint and leadership that directed a very special and unexpected Colts resurgence. Can’t forget or discount that. Loved every minute of it. Thank you coach Pagano!
  9. You are defending the indefensible...there is no quantitative defense of Ballard. Nor should there be. He was brought here to do his own thing, and he is doing it. It will either work or it won't. I love what Ballard is doing. All of it. But only because I think it will work. It may not. I say all that having admitted elsewhere that I dislike the defense he is is installing. I still think it will work. But, Ballard is still indefensible. There is nothing to defend. People only have the opportunity to choose a positive or negative opinion based on what they like or don't like and what they think will or won't work. You can't even defend Ballard by the winning of 4 games without Luck. His predecessor won 5 games without Luck in 2015. Such quantitative logic excludes too many variables. None of it matters. Yet.
  10. I figured someone might over-read that and make this leap...so I should have written a disclaimer: No direct comparison is stated nor implied by the writer of this post. My fault. Another disclaimer I make every year around here: I don't do player evaluations. Evidently you do... Donald was drafted 13th Rankin was drafted 12th The suggestion here is that some teams will see Hurst as teams saw Donald or Rankins on draft day when they projected them as worthy of a high pick.
  11. We don't know enough about this new scheme to know how Corners will play, but we know enough to suspect that we won't be drafting premium 1st Round press corners anymore. Additionally, Hurst is a premium, disruptive player as he projects to the next level. His fit really isn't ambiguous at this stage of the league's evolution. Some team will think he is Aaron Donald or at least Sheldon Rankin and pick him between 10 and 20.
  12. When your new coach is using the bend but don’t break phrase in his stock discussions about defensive approach, we all know what we’re going to get. However, the scheme does work perfectly if you get the right players.... Which leads to this...it’s Ballard’s choice. He wants to scout and select for this scheme. It’s all on him, rather than scheme and coaching. He wants it that way. I, for one, believe he can pull it off...but I still hate the scheme
  13. Probably just degrees of emphasis. It’s this simple for me.... I’m not a fan of the new scheme because I’ve never seen it work without a player like John Randle, Warren Sapp or Tommie Harris in his prime. So much rides on finding a player like them that I’d rather build differently. Only thing I really need to be excited is more press coverage than I think we’re about to see....I hate receivers running around with nobody close to them!
  14. Here's why you've gotten resistance from me, despite the fact that we agree fundamentally....it's this reality built from our recent Colt's history: You can't have a solid D without great edge pressure, nor can you have an elite D without great interior pass rush. I simply have zero interest in repeating the defensive performance of '02 to '11. That scheme without a difference-maker at 3Tech was the number 1 reason why Peyton only won 1 Superbowl here. As great as those Colts teams were, and as much as we should all be grateful for what we had, they under delivered on their potential...and I see no reason to repeat that history unless you deal with the elements that prevented the scheme from working.
  15. Don't get me wrong. It's not either/or. It's both. And the Edges are most important. I've said nothing to the contrary of that. However, Warren Sapp was the irreplaceable part in Dungy's scheme. Lots of guys could have played the role of Simeon Rice, but fewer Warren Sapps ever come along. You don't have to have DFree on the Edge to make the scheme into a top 5 D, but you do have to have a guy like Sapp or you'll hover around top 15 and only occasionally break into the top 10.