Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Bad Offensive Gameplan


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 130
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Whether it is on Luck or Arians play calling, I think passes under 15 yards would be a good option as well.  Luck never dumps the ball off.  Houston knows they have 5-6 seconds to nail him in the pocket.  Notice that Tom Brady was getting the ball out in a hurry.  But, of course, Arians will do what he is doing regardless of who we play.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well I do like when we run the ball were picking up yardage but our passing game has got to improve. Arians I'm looking at you

cant have a passing game when your o-line is not blocking. also does not help that the texans are getting alot of the calls the colts are not getting. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
cant have a passing game when your o-line is not blocking. also does not help that the texans are getting alot of the calls the colts are not getting. 

Believe me I know this. And it is quite frustrating to see these questionable calls go against us

Link to post
Share on other sites

We could, if only those stingy Pats would lend us their line.

We don't need to go deep all the time. Just fill their secondary with bodies and make them make mistakes. Brady and the Pats threw a lot of quick passes against them.

We did it on the Hilton TD, and it worked to perfection. Need more of that sort of play.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Whether it is on Luck or Arians play calling, I think passes under 15 yards would be a good option as well.  Luck never dumps the ball off.  Houston knows they have 5-6 seconds to nail him in the pocket.  Notice that Tom Brady was getting the ball out in a hurry.  But, of course, Arians will do what he is doing regardless of who we play.

google arians and you will find the same exact complaints about arians in pittsburgh. i'm done fighting it..i hope arians gets a head coaching job.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not think that Offensive Coordinator Bruce Arians serves Head Coach Bruce Arians very well.

 

Been feeling this way for practically the entire season.    Suspect this will be a Hot Topic to explore come our off-season, whenever that time comes......

Link to post
Share on other sites
The texans were blown out last week. Blown out.

Why are we not trying any of what got them blown out last week?

We're totally capable of it.

Because we couldn't get 3 seconds for Luck to throw the stinking football! I can't wait until we get a O-line plus another year for these rookies!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not think that Offensive Coordinator Bruce Arians serves Head Coach Bruce Arians very well.

 

Been feeling this way for practically the entire season.    Suspect this will be a Hot Topic to explore come our off-season, whenever that time comes......

Does anyone really think that Arians won't be our O coordinator next season? Unless he chooses to leave, it's his job.

As far as the complaints in Pittsburgh, they also had a very weak O line and he made the best of it. Again, be real.

I'm not an Arians apologist but we have to be realistic about what we have out there and what's possible. BTW, we scored two TDs against a very good D. They scored one against an average (at best) D. So who had the better O coordinator today?

Link to post
Share on other sites
We gave up 4 or 5 sacks but most of them were Luck holding on to the ball. Overall the OL did ok. I agree offensive gameplan was not good at all

LOL, you have got to be kidding or smoking something.  The o-line is not good and they did not do ok today.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not think that Offensive Coordinator Bruce Arians serves Head Coach Bruce Arians very well.

 

Been feeling this way for practically the entire season.    Suspect this will be a Hot Topic to explore come our off-season, whenever that time comes......

he might be an excellent head coach somewhere if gives up play calling duties.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not an Arians apologist but we have to be realistic about what we have out there and what's possible. BTW, we scored two TDs against a very good D. They scored one against an average (at best) D. So who had the better O coordinator today?

They did.

 

They moved the ball better, they had more first downs, they converted on third down (we didn't convert a third down until halfway through the fourth quarter), they completed more passes, they had more yards, they had more points, they gave up fewer sacks, they ran the ball better... There really is no way to argue that our offensive coordinator did a better job than theirs did.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They did.

 

They moved the ball better, they had more first downs, they converted on third down (we didn't convert a third down until halfway through the fourth quarter), they completed more passes, they had more yards, they had more points, they gave up fewer sacks, they ran the ball better... There really is no way to argue that our offensive coordinator did a better job than theirs did.

.....They have more talent on both sides of the ball

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll stand by my opinion that the scheme makes the OL look extremely bad. They aren't a great OL by any measure, but the scheme makes them look worse than other schemes would. That falls on the shoulders of Arians and his stubbornness.

Usually I agree with your posts. Not this one. IMHO the O line is playing above their talent level. It's pretty hard to scheme for that many weaknesses. Like I said in an earlier post, we scored 2 TDs and should have had a third.

Considering the way Watt played, the O was pretty good for the most part.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll stand by my opinion that the scheme makes the OL look extremely bad. They aren't a great OL by any measure, but the scheme makes them look worse than other schemes would. That falls on the shoulders of Arians and his stubbornness.

 

I'll stand by my opinion that the o-line completely wiffing on blocks is what makes them look extremely bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They did.

 

They moved the ball better, they had more first downs, they converted on third down (we didn't convert a third down until halfway through the fourth quarter), they completed more passes, they had more yards, they had more points, they gave up fewer sacks, they ran the ball better... There really is no way to argue that our offensive coordinator did a better job than theirs did.

I wouldn't argue that, but they also have significantly more talent and experience. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
They did.

 

They moved the ball better, they had more first downs, they converted on third down (we didn't convert a third down until halfway through the fourth quarter), they completed more passes, they had more yards, they had more points, they gave up fewer sacks, they ran the ball better... There really is no way to argue that our offensive coordinator did a better job than theirs did.

They finished one drive with a TD. We would have had 3 if not for a stupid fumble. Look at the big picture, not just the stats. We've been "out stated" in just about every game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They did.

 

They moved the ball better, they had more first downs, they converted on third down (we didn't convert a third down until halfway through the fourth quarter), they completed more passes, they had more yards, they had more points, they gave up fewer sacks, they ran the ball better... There really is no way to argue that our offensive coordinator did a better job than theirs did.

This post is a shining beacon of truth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, I don't see how that's relevant.

 

We're talking about their offensive gameplan and play calling, in comparison with ours.

You based your analysis on offensive success.  I'm sure you don't believe talent(on both sides of the ball) to be irrelevent to the success of your offense, or the opposition's. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Usually I agree with your posts. Not this one. IMHO the O line is playing above their talent level. It's pretty hard to scheme for that many weaknesses. Like I said in an earlier post, we scored 2 TDs and should have had a third.

Considering the way Watt played, the O was pretty good for the most part.

That's fair, but I believe if this team with this OL were running a WCO, then the offense would look more competent on a weekly basis. It would be more consistent, the sack totals would be lower, the # of QB hits would be lower, and the completion % would be higher.

Asking this OL to run this scheme is about on par with asking Painter to run Manning's offense. The OL has faired better than Painter, but they shouldn't be put in this position.

The end result is more QB hits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They moved the ball better, they had more first downs, they converted on third down (we didn't convert a third down until halfway through the fourth quarter), they completed more passes, they had more yards, they had more points, they gave up fewer sacks, they ran the ball better...

And most importantly, they generated scoring drives more consistently. Points per possession. I still believe it to be the most important stat (aside from the final score, of course) in the game. And it is not even a stat that anybody keeps.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Some short/quick routes would still give the QB a chance at more completions.

 

Luck gets pressured on the quick passes too.  The line is just bad, nothing of significance can be done until next year.  The Colts do some short/quick passes, but they can not do that all game long.  The Texans were pinning their collective ears back from the start.  That is what teams will do against this o-line until they prove that they can hold up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's fair, but I believe if this team with this OL were running a WCO, then the offense would look more competent on a weekly basis. It would be more consistent, the sack totals would be lower, the # of QB hits would be lower, and the completion % would be higher.Asking this OL to run this scheme is about on par with asking Painter to run Manning's offense. The OL has faired better than Painter, but they shouldn't be put in this position.The end result is more QB hits.

I'll agree with that conceptually. Our QB completion rate supports that. However, I kind of like that big risk big play style.

I know it's no excuse, but have we had the same O line two weeks in a row, ever this season? That's why I think the game plan is about the best we're going to get right now. Maybe next season, with some better talent it will change.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...