Bye Week Grades: Reflecting on our offseason

[Superman]

Lots of change this season. I'm thinking this week about what we might have done differently, for better or for worse. And of course, with the benefit of hindsight, which is inherently unfair to the people who actually had to make all these decisions. But I'm curious what other fans think, so here goes. And share your thoughts also.

First of all, we got rid of Polian, Caldwell, and Manning. I'm not undoing any of that. The reasons why aren't important for this exercise; let's just assume that those decisions were made way back in January, and Irsay wasn't changing his mind. Moving forward...

Step 1: The first big decision that was made was hiring a GM. I love Ryan Grigson's approach to building the team. He's been super active; not paralyzed by fear of making a mistake or being judged if something doesn't work out; he stubbornly stuck to his draft board, which I might not agree with 100%, but I appreciate his conviction, and his explanation for why he did so was impressive to me. To modify a line from The Dark Knight: I believe in Ryan Grigson. Good hire.

However, at the time, I had two guys ahead of Grigson on my personal wish list. Eric DeCosta of the Ravens removed his name from consideration, not just for the Colts job, but for any job, and apparently the reason is because he's on the way up in Baltimore. I might have put on the full court press (and I say that not knowing that Irsay didn't) to try to get him. But assuming he just wasn't going anywhere, my other guy was Marc Ross from the Giants. The Giants have been plucking gems for several seasons now, not just at the top of the draft, but throughout, including undrafted rookies and backroom deals for unknown players. A lot of that has to do with Ross, who is in charge of college scouting, and given how his boss Jerry Reese uses every possible angle to acquire talent, I figured Ross would have brought the same approach with him. He'll get a gig somewhere soon.

But given how Grigson has done what I would have expected Ross to do, I really can't expect that Ross could possibly have been any more active. Time will tell whether Grigson has an eye for talent, and maybe in five years when both he and Ross have been running their own show for a while, we'll be able to judge the two side by side. For now, I'm happy with Grigson, and glad we got him. I also like that we were able to retain Tom Telesco. His experience will likely benefit Grigson.

Grade: A-

Step 2: We went with Chuck Pagano for the top job, which made a lot of us nervous and excited at the same time. Nervous because Pagano has never been a head coach before, and only has one year of experience as an NFL coordinator. I firmly believe that experience as a coordinator helps a rookie head coach to handle game management decisions, and Pagano is short on that. But he has a fire for the game, his players all speak highly of him, and he was a rising star in the league.

I'm eternally grateful we didn't choose a popular "name coach," a retread like Cowher, Gruden, or Fisher. I'm also glad that Irsay's flirtation with both Marc Trestman of the CFL's Argonauts and Jim Tressel, formerly of Ohio State, didn't gain any traction. I like the fresh face approach.

Other candidates I was excited about include Rob Chudzinski from the Panthers, and Pete Carmichael from the Saints, both offensive coordinators. Both of them have more experience than Pagano at making management decisions, and I can appreciate the benefit of having an offensive minded coach, given the foregone conclusion that we'd have a rookie quarterback. I also liked the idea of a college level coach like Boise State's Chris Petersen, but there's no indication we considered him. I also briefly got excited about the prospects of hiring Mike Zimmer, the fiery defensive coordinator from the Bengals. I like what Pagano brought to the table, and his personality seems to be a perfect fit for a team that needed to be jolted awake after a terrible season. Either of the others would have made me glad, but I'm sufficiently enthusiastic about Pagano, and have been since he was announced.

I'm far less enthused, however, with Pagano's choices for offensive and defensive coordinator. Greg Manusky is a retread who hasn't exactly left a glowing impression anywhere else he's been. But he wasn't Pagano's first choice. Word is we came ::thisclose:: to hiring Keith Butler, linebackers coach for the Steelers, and while I don't know that Butler would have done any better, I do wish we had been able to close the deal. Our defense so far has Pagano's pawprints all over it, and that's a good thing, but it's also showing some Manusky DNA, namely giving up big plays and having trouble getting off the field on 3rd down. It's unfair for me to give Pagano the credit for all the good, and Manusky the blame for all the bad, and we're only three games in, and hopefully we maximize our successes and minimize our failures moving forward. However, at this point, I regret that we couldn't do better than Manusky, and wish we had hired Butler. The grass is always greener...

On offense, I was equally hesitant about Bruce Arians' hiring. We've seen plenty of good so far from the offense, but also a troubling amount of bad. I think Arians' offense can be too cute for its own good, with all the motion and shifts, and I also think it's been far too predictable so far (if we're heavy tight end on the right side, we're running right, etc.) I'm very glad we didn't do the Mike Martz thing here, or Brad Childress, or Todd Haley, names that were floated briefly. It sounds like Arians was Pagano's guy right away, but as much as I don't think Marc Trestman would have been a good head coaching candidate, he'd have been a good fit at offensive coordinator. We also retained Clyde Christensen as a position coach, and I think that's a good idea. I'm just not thrilled with Arians.

Grade: C+ (B+ for Pagano, C- for Manusky, C for Arians)

Step 3: The roster needed to be trimmed of some dead weight, and restocked with young, promising players. We got rid of fan favorites who were overpaid and unperforming, like Gary Brackett, Dallas Clark, and Joseph Addai, and I think those were no-brainer decisions. The cap penalties hurt now, but the benefits moving forward will be tremendous. Two of those three aren't even on NFL rosters right now, and the one that is hasn't made any significant contribution to his new team. Grigson absolutely got this right. But he showed balance and restraint in not getting rid of Freeney and his massive contract, and I think he got that right as well. (More on this later.) Grigson also managed to hold on to two of the best players on the roster, Mathis and Wayne. Mathis is 4th in the league in sacks, and Wayne is 4th in receptions and 6th in yardage. We let Garcon walk, and for the money he got, this was the right move (that's before you acknowledge that he's missed two games and is being out-produced by Wayne, whom we kept for a third of the money).

Then we added players in free agency, the most notable so far being Cory Redding, who has emerged as a leader on defense. Donnie Avery has also been productive on offense on a vet minimum contract. Good moves there. There were other lower level moves that have been made along the way that are helping us now, one of the most impressive being NT Martin Tevaseu, who has played very well in a reserve role so far. And Grigson has consistently churned the roster, adding players from every angle he can find, in order to improve the talent. The Davis trade helps make a position of weakness a position of strength, and while the early returns have been mixed, there's no question about Davis' talent.

What I would have done differently starts with the Freeney contract. Once we were unable to trade him for a decent draft pick, I would have found a way to get him signed to an extension in order to spread out the pain of his $19 million cap hit. He's missed two games due to injury, and his changed role in the defense makes his future here uncertain, but extending him doesn't necessarily make us married to him beyond this season. I think it would have made more sense to lower his cap hit for this season, make a play for a good offensive lineman at RG or RT, and then kept myself ready to release or trade Freeney after this season if he doesn't work out. There are a good number of free agent linemen still available (Jake Scott???), and adding them to the fold would be a lot easier if we weren't choking away 16% of our cap on one player.

In the draft, we took Luck and gave him plenty of weapons on offense (two tight ends, two receivers and a back). I like the players we drafted, but I wish we had drafted a corner, a safety, and a promising offensive lineman. However, in drafting 10 players, and keeping 9 of them past camp (the one release had more to do with an injury than talent, I think), we did a pretty good job of adding talented players. Just not enough areas of need addressed.

We still have needs at offensive line, safety, and nickel/dimeback. Some of those needs could have been better addressed; perhaps we'll get more out of Lefeged and/or Zbikowski as time goes on. We're suddenly deep at both inside and outside linebacker, receiver, and quarterback, of all spots. With a limited amount of cap space and holes all over the roster, I think Grigson did a good job fielding an NFL caliber team. Still lots of room to go, of course, and I wish we had done more with the offensive line in particular.

Grade: B-

So, in a very unfair way, I think grading the results of our offseason moves after three weeks shows that we had a really good offseason, given where we were coming from. Maybe I'll feel differently after the season; maybe I'll sour on our coaching, or some of the acquisitions Grigson has made. But maybe I'll feel better. Given the roster overhaul and how horrible we played last season, I get the feeling that an overall passing grade is a given, regardless of how many games we win.

Overall offseason grade, through three weeks: A very solid B.

Go Colts!

[TKnight24]

C for Arians? sheesh that's kinda Harsh lol.

But through a WILD 3 Weeks, a B sounds about Right

[jimirsaysdog]

people are always mentioning right guard and right tackle as problem areas. i think mcglynn has been solid and versatile and justice when healthy has done fine. no one mentions left guard at all. olsen has struggled and what has reitz ever shown to be considered a fixture ? i do like reitz but he has a lot to prove yet. hopefully he and satele are ready to go next week. i'd love to see the first five together. those five could be solid for some time as none of them are even 30 yet. watching other liners around the league i don't see the colts as one of the worst at all. heck baltimore looked awful up front. cowboys, eagles, saints, green bay. none of those o-lines have looked better than the colts. given the injuries i think they've done pretty well. it's not like there is a first rate running back lined up behind luck either.

[Smonroe]

C for Arians? sheesh that's kinda Harsh lol.

But through a WILD 3 Weeks, a B sounds about Right

I agree. You can't drive a Pinto and expect it to perform like a Porsche. I think he's doing what he can with what he has. We already look better than last year, and that's with a lot of guys who never played together.

[Superman]

I agree. You can't drive a Pinto and expect it to perform like a Porsche. I think he's doing what he can with what he has. We already look better than last year, and that's with a lot of guys who never played together.

I'm not grading him based on the results to this point. My reason for holding Arians' grade down is because his play calling is very predictable.

[SteelCityColt]

I'm not grading him based on the results to this point. My reason for holding Arians' grade down is because his play calling is very predictable.

The breakdown FJC posted of plays type vs formation highlighted his predictability, but with a BYE week to work on things I'd hope to see more of the playbook come out.

[Superman]

people are always mentioning right guard and right tackle as problem areas. i think mcglynn has been solid and versatile and justice when healthy has done fine. no one mentions left guard at all. olsen has struggled and what has reitz ever shown to be considered a fixture ? i do like reitz but he has a lot to prove yet. hopefully he and satele are ready to go next week. i'd love to see the first five together. those five could be solid for some time as none of them are even 30 yet. watching other liners around the league i don't see the colts as one of the worst at all. heck baltimore looked awful up front. cowboys, eagles, saints, green bay. none of those o-lines have looked better than the colts. given the injuries i think they've done pretty well. it's not like there is a first rate running back lined up behind luck either.

I see McGlynn and Justice as stop gap players, guys who can fill the need for a year, but still not adequately enough for us not to be looking for upgrades. Olsen is a backup, and the general consensus is that Reitz played well last season at left guard. Maybe not a fixture, but not a glaring weakness, either.

I hope to see the line get better as the year goes on, and hopefully we'll be healthy at some point. That would improve things quite a bit. But I wish we had done more to address the needs along the line.

As for other teams' lines, I don't see what that has to do with our line. Yes, some teams have poor offensive lines, and yes, some of them can win games and will go to the playoffs. We went three years in a row with a substandard line. But it would be nice to have consistent line play, and to me, the first step toward getting there is to add better players on the right side.

And Donald Brown has been as effective as could be hoped for, running behind a line that allows him to be hit behind the line of scrimmage more than 30% of the time. He's not first rate, but it's not him making the line look bad.

Edit: Another thing, according to the FO stats, the left side of our line is much better on runs off guard and off tackle than the right side, so for as questionable as Seth Olsen is in pass protection, he's performing better in the run game than his counterpart at right guard.

Edited September 28, 2012 by Superman
addendum

[SteelCityColt]

Oh and a nice balanced review Superman, liking Grigson's willingness to make moves. It will be interesting to see how he uses the cap space next season.

[BleedingBlue]

Beware of trolling mods! Thank god I agree with most of your statements.

I particularly agree with Arians. Arians is calling plays for the players I would have drafted, not for the players Grigs drafted.

I'm not sure whats up with that.

Not getting Butler reminds me of us drafing GQ Fleener over Courtney Upshaw. The biggest mistake in our draft was not getting Upshaw or Cordy Glenn. I'm still fuming about this.

Redding is a beast.

[Superman]

The breakdown FJC posted of plays type vs formation highlighted his predictability, but with a BYE week to work on things I'd hope to see more of the playbook come out.

We had all offseason. The thing is that this is pretty much how Arians' offense looks. It's what the offense looked like when he was in Pittsburgh. It's not specific to the first three weeks of our season, and I don't expect much to change after the bye. Also, just to point out, I really liked the play calling in the second half of the Jags game. Very balanced, and should have been more productive, if not for mistakes in execution (turnover, penalties, missed kick, etc.)

He likes to use a lot of different formations and a lot of motion, and there's nothing wrong with any of that. But the problem is that you only have 60 or 70 plays in each game. If you use 15 different formations, your average number of plays per formation is lower. It's easier to recognize trends. Then add your motions and shifts, and the film begins to show even more trends: when they go heavy left and then motion to heavy right, they run right, etc. You're only running 7% of your offense from each formation, and now defense know that when you use this formation, it's because you want to do this; when you use this personnel grouping, it's because you want to do that, etc. And opposing coordinators can call plays accordingly. That's why I say his offense is a little too cute for its own good. The diversity actually acts as a hindrance.

Compare this to the Moore/Manning offense. Begrudgingly, by the way, but hear me out. The old offense would use the same four or five formations all game long, setting aside situational calls. Out of 60-70 plays, you have a much higher average number of plays per formation, and the trends don't really come into play. The fact that there wasn't very much motion has the same affect. You're running 20% of your offense from each formation, and you're running, throwing and calling play action out of that formation. You don't have formations specifically weighted toward the run, or the pass, or play action.

That was a different animal altogether. I'm not suggesting our offense should be the Moore/Manning offense. I'm just saying that a more simplistic offense has its virtues.

[SteelCityColt]

We had all offseason. The thing is that this is pretty much how Arians' offense looks. It's what the offense looked like when he was in Pittsburgh. It's not specific to the first three weeks of our season, and I don't expect much to change after the bye. Also, just to point out, I really liked the play calling in the second half of the Jags game. Very balanced, and should have been more productive, if not for mistakes in execution (turnover, penalties, missed kick, etc.)

He likes to use a lot of different formations and a lot of motion, and there's nothing wrong with any of that. But the problem is that you only have 60 or 70 plays in each game. If you use 15 different formations, your average number of plays per formation is lower. It's easier to recognize trends. Then add your motions and shifts, and the film begins to show even more trends: when they go heavy left and then motion to heavy right, they run right, etc. You're only running 7% of your offense from each formation, and now defense know that when you use this formation, it's because you want to do this; when you use this personnel grouping, it's because you want to do that, etc. And opposing coordinators can call plays accordingly. That's why I say his offense is a little too cute for its own good. The diversity actually acts as a hindrance.

Compare this to the Moore/Manning offense. Begrudgingly, by the way, but hear me out. The old offense would use the same four or five formations all game long, setting aside situational calls. Out of 60-70 plays, you have a much higher average number of plays per formation, and the trends don't really come into play. The fact that there wasn't very much motion has the same affect. You're running 20% of your offense from each formation, and you're running, throwing and calling play action out of that formation. You don't have formations specifically weighted toward the run, or the pass, or play action.

That was a different animal altogether. I'm not suggesting our offense should be the Moore/Manning offense. I'm just saying that a more simplistic offense has its virtues.

I bow to your superior knowledge of the game, my thought was that they might have been limiting the number of plays per formation to bed people in before becoming more versatile. But as you correctly say you will only be able to get so many plays out each formation, I'd agree also that limiting your formation changes can serve to confuse the defense if you keep mixing it up.

Do you think Luck will be given more leeway to call things at the line off his own back as we go on?

[BleedingBlue]

I agree. You can't drive a Pinto and expect it to perform like a Porsche. I think he's doing what he can with what he has. We already look better than last year, and that's with a lot of guys who never played together.

No actually his play calling is pedestrian. As someone else just mentioned FJC posted a chart of our formations and the predictability of the plays out of that formation. Heck even I could tell what we were going to do based on our formations.

But its not just that, its going against the grain of the draft and the rebuilding season. I understand we need to manage clock with a lead and we should run the ball. But when you can't run against a team that puts 4 in teh box and dares you to run, then you're not going to run. So you air it out and let Luck and his receivers get plenty of practice in game situations. Let them gell.

[Smonroe]

No actually his play calling is pedestrian. As someone else just mentioned FJC posted a chart of our formations and the predictability of the plays out of that formation. Heck even I could tell what we were going to do based on our formations.

But its not just that, its going against the grain of the draft and the rebuilding season. I understand we need to manage clock with a lead and we should run the ball. But when you can't run against a team that puts 4 in teh box and dares you to run, then you're not going to run. So you air it out and let Luck and his receivers get plenty of practice in game situations. Let them gell.

That's my point. Maybe the reason his play calling is pedestrian is because he sees the team at practice and knows that those plays have the best chance for success. Maybe we just don't have the team to implement more challenging plays.

I say 'maybe' because we as fans don't really know what the coaches see in practice every day. We do know that our line consists of one first round pick who looks to be the real thing, and four guys who have never been more than adequate. That's not to say they won't gel into a respectable unit. But unless you believe in magic, we shouldn't have expected it to happen overnight.

And he is letting Luck throw it, way more than the Ravens let Flacco throw for more than two years. And they had a good line. Go back and re-watch the second half of the Jags game. It wasn't as much a conservative plan, as it was running plays that just didn't work. It wasn't three into the line and punt every series.

I'm not saying Arians is revolutionizing the game, I'm just saying he's doing pretty well considering what he has to work with.

[cmgww]

Arians is doing fine. He has very little to work with in terms of EXPERIENCED PLAYERS...emphasis on experienced. The Colts are too predictable right now, but it's out of necessity. The entire playbook isn't installed. We'll see more coming out of the bye week I imagine. But with a sub-par line, new skill players learning a new playbook, you can't expect the Colts to go out like the Manning days where everyone had been together (mostly) for years.

Get through the season, have fun watching the team grow, and then it's time to load up....we have a ton of $$ to spend in the offseason on talent. I don't think we'll go Redskins and blow it on high priced vets, but I do expect some solid moves. Then draft D and O line heavy, we'll probably have a top 10 pick (hate to say it) or top 15 at worst. Next season will be the Colts' breakout season. You can see flashes of it now, especially on offense. But I think we're right back to being AFC contenders as early as next year.

[Superman]

Arians is doing fine. He has very little to work with in terms of EXPERIENCED PLAYERS...emphasis on experienced. The Colts are too predictable right now, but it's out of necessity. The entire playbook isn't installed. We'll see more coming out of the bye week I imagine. But with a sub-par line, new skill players learning a new playbook, you can't expect the Colts to go out like the Manning days where everyone had been together (mostly) for years.

Get through the season, have fun watching the team grow, and then it's time to load up....we have a ton of $$ to spend in the offseason on talent. I don't think we'll go Redskins and blow it on high priced vets, but I do expect some solid moves. Then draft D and O line heavy, we'll probably have a top 10 pick (hate to say it) or top 15 at worst. Next season will be the Colts' breakout season. You can see flashes of it now, especially on offense. But I think we're right back to being AFC contenders as early as next year.

I think this comment, especially the bolded, suggests that fans who aren't impressed with Arians' play calling (such as myself) are hoping to see trickery and sleight of hand in order to produce big plays. Just speaking for myself, I'm not.

When I complain about a predictable offense, I'm concerned that defensive coordinators know what our play call is before the ball is snapped. And with film study and the headset for the defensive captain, they can share a lot of those trends with their players.

Just to expand on what I was saying earlier, if a trend develops that suggests that we run to the heavy side of our unbalanced tight end formations 85% of the time, then defenses can attack us there. It is troubling when we use an unbalanced tight end formation four times a game, because that suggests that we're going to run that way practically every time. Because we're using so many different formations, and then add in the motion to those formations, which gives the defense another data point to identify with, they can bet on what we're going to do.

I'm oversimplifying. It's not quite that straight forward. And like I said, we used play action and other weapons very effectively against the Jags, particularly in the second half. Ironically, what I'm suggesting is that we pare down the different looks we're showing offensively (formations, personnel groupings, and motions/shifts), in order to create less distinction between our run plays vs. pass plays vs. play action plays, to lessen the certainty the defense has regarding the play and direction of the play that's coming. I don't think that has anything to do with the newness of the offense or the inexperience of the players running the offense. As a matter of fact, it should make it easier to execute.

[Superman]

I bow to your superior knowledge of the game, my thought was that they might have been limiting the number of plays per formation to bed people in before becoming more versatile. But as you correctly say you will only be able to get so many plays out each formation, I'd agree also that limiting your formation changes can serve to confuse the defense if you keep mixing it up.

Do you think Luck will be given more leeway to call things at the line off his own back as we go on?

I hope so.

By the way, I make up most of this stuff as I go along. ;)

[jbaron04]

I'm not grading him based on the results to this point. My reason for holding Arians' grade down is because his play calling is very predictable.

Every teams play calling is predictable it comes down to execution

[DoomOf21]

Superman: Our defense so far has Pagano's pawprints all over it, and that's a good thing, but it's also showing some Manusky DNA, namely giving up big plays and having trouble getting off the field on 3rd down.

Jags 4-13,

Vikings 7-15,

Bears 4-12,

Overall: 15-40

16th in the NFL. To be honest, I actually expected this to be a little better ranking wise. I have been pleasantly surprised with the defense on third down. You may feel different though.

[Superman]

Superman: Our defense so far has Pagano's pawprints all over it, and that's a good thing, but it's also showing some Manusky DNA, namely giving up big plays and having trouble getting off the field on 3rd down.

Jags 4-13,

Vikings 7-15,

Bears 4-12,

Overall: 15-40

16th in the NFL. To be honest, I actually expected this to be a little better ranking wise. I have been pleasantly surprised with the defense on third down. You may feel different though.

Not a bad ranking, but the number overall isn't good. The best defenses are usually allowing 35% or less on 3rd down. This season's numbers and rankings will change quite a bit.

But the real problem are the 3rd and medium to longs that we've given up. We did a pretty good job against the Jags, and no wonder, since they have a pretty anemic passing game. Only one big conversion on 3rd down, and it was 3rd and 5, so not the end of the world.

But against the Vikings, we gave up 3rd and 6, 3rd and 11, 3rd and 6, 3rd and 9, and a touchdown on 4th and 4 (fluke play, but still). Against the Bears, 3rd and 10, 3rd and 10, (12 yards on 3rd and 13, just barely got that one).

I'm not asking for the world; I recognize that 38% on 3rd down isn't terrible; it's certainly a whole lot better than we've been in several years (usually in the high to mid 40s), and even better than Manusky's Chargers defense last season (49%). But the more troublesome instances are those 3rd down situations that good defenses win, and we're not winning them enough.

[SteelCityColt]

I'm not asking for the world; I recognize that 38% on 3rd down isn't terrible; it's certainly a whole lot better than we've been in several years (usually in the high to mid 40s), and even better than Manusky's Chargers defense last season (49%). But the more troublesome instances are those 3rd down situations that good defenses win, and we're not winning them enough.

With a defensive unit that is far from the finished article and with starters who are questionable in some positions I'm not expecting them to be world beaters but your right 3rd down stops are crucial. There has been flashes of some excellent defensive play IMO but we need to work at being more consistent and building a more confident mindset.Easy to say, hard to implement without the talent.

[hambone35]

I totally like pagano as coach he has some fireyness and defense minded had a great connection with players and a great demeanor I think heck be a great coach as time passes plus gives great speaches that seem to attract his player's

[Warhorse]

You know, Supe, I agree with most of what you said, but I think Pagano was the right hire at this time. A+. Now, I'm not saying he is the right coach for Alucks career, but a fresh start was needed that felt nothing like the old regime. Based on that, he was the top hire. We'll see down the road if he molds into the job.

[The Peytonator]

Excellent breakdown. Can't find a single thing to disagree with you on. I was very underwhelmed on the Arians and Manuskey hirings, but I really dug Pagano right from the start. Whether or not he pans out is yet to be seen, but I would've put my fist through my monitor if Irsay hired the sweater vest as our HC.

As far as Grigson......the franchise looks to be in pretty good hands with that guy. He's showing us that he will not stay stagnant with our roster, an area Polian could have used a refresher course in. Like you, my only disagreement with him came on the third day of the draft. I still reckon a couple of those late picks could have been spent on a Corner and D/Olineman. Also, I know it's premature, but it kinda looks like we may have gotten a raw deal out of the Vontae Davis trade. When it went down I was pumped, so I can't rip him at all for that one, but I sure hope Vontae gets it together.

[NewColtsFan]

Well, well, well, well, well..!! Holy Cow!!

Looks like our friend Superman found himself a few minutes away from the wife, kids, dog, cat, job and any other hobbies legal or illegal to turn out the War and Peace of the Colts 2012 season thus far.

And a treat for the eyes for us Colts fans, new, or longstanding!!

Wow! Nice job.

One question.......

Can you do this every week? You know, update it and tell us how things change week to week?!?!

[Smonroe]

Every teams play calling is predictable it comes down to execution

Somewhat. But you're right, that was our M.O. during the glory years. Teams knew what we could do, they just couldn't stop it.

Like every team game, it comes down to execution, how each player handles their assignment, and beats their man.

[TKnight24]

Beware of trolling mods! Thank god I agree with most of your statements.

I particularly agree with Arians. Arians is calling plays for the players I would have drafted, not for the players Grigs drafted.

I'm not sure whats up with that.

Not getting Butler reminds me of us drafing GQ Fleener over Courtney Upshaw. The biggest mistake in our draft was not getting Upshaw or Cordy Glenn. I'm still fuming about this.

Redding is a beast.

Didn't Upshaw get taken right before Fleener?

[TKnight24]

Somewhat. But you're right, that was our M.O. during the glory years. Teams knew what we could do, they just couldn't stop it.

Like every team game, it comes down to execution, how each player handles their assignment, and beats their man.

Exactly. Like when we played the Titans. They knew we couldn't run the Ball. But for some reason Finnegan always allowed Wayne to get behind him on that Famous Bomb from Peyton to Wayne that made Finnegan realize it was time to move to another Division

[vtcoltsfan802]

Didn't Upshaw get taken right before Fleener?

No Upshaw was still on the board I believe. I think the problem was they didn't expect allen to be there when they picked in the 3rd. I personally think the Fleener pick will work out, but knowing now that Allen would be there in the third, I wish with the 2nd round pick we had gone Glenn or Upshaw. Hindsights always 20/20 though...

[stat2883]

Just to expand on what I was saying earlier, if a trend develops that suggests that we run to the heavy side of our unbalanced tight end formations 85% of the time, then defenses can attack us there. It is troubling when we use an unbalanced tight end formation four times a game, because that suggests that we're going to run that way practically every time. Because we're using so many different formations, and then add in the motion to those formations, which gives the defense another data point to identify with, they can bet on what we're going to do.

I'm oversimplifying. It's not quite that straight forward. And like I said, we used play action and other weapons very effectively against the Jags, particularly in the second half. Ironically, what I'm suggesting is that we pare down the different looks we're showing offensively (formations, personnel groupings, and motions/shifts), in order to create less distinction between our run plays vs. pass plays vs. play action plays, to lessen the certainty the defense has regarding the play and direction of the play that's coming. I don't think that has anything to do with the newness of the offense or the inexperience of the players running the offense. As a matter of fact, it should make it easier to execute.

lots of good points in your posts superman. I would like to add that I think the unbalanced formations we saw in the Vikings game in particular and the running to that side consistently were called knowing the defense would be stacking to that side. But....if you don't give the defense what they're looking for at all, they will quit playing that trend and the play-action won't open up as well when you add that in. You have to give the defense some of what its looking for to keep them honest, and as a result you saw how hard the Vikings were biting on play-action (I haven't seen the Jags game yet). Motioning to the strong side of the formation and tipping your hand towards run was even used in play-action as well and it opened up huge windows against the vikings.

The various shifts and motion also help Luck read coverages and can get the defense to tip their hand before the snap. The gameplan in any given week is not created in a vacuum. Sometimes teams will intentionally create trends in order to exploit them later in the season - I've seen this from several teams. They will spend a few games showcasing a given group of plays or formations, then several weeks later take advantage of the film study and prep that the defense did that week and go another direction. The motions and shifts give that much more material for the defenses to have to remember. If you pare it down to just a small handful of formations, the defense will find other keys instead. I think as the season progresses, you will start to see a growing variety of plays being run from a given formation. Right now its still just foundational work I think.

When you draw the comparison between the offense today and the offense that Manning/Harrison/Wayne had, that developed over years and the execution had become 2nd nature. I think Arians is still building and we haven't seen everything yet.

....if we're still having this conversation in week 10....then yeah there might be a problem Right now I think Arians is doing a good job (not talking about his end of game conservativeness in particular) and I would look for things to open up more as the season goes on.