Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colin Kaepernick


NCost12

Recommended Posts

Defending the read option is all about discipline and good tackling, two things we didn't show much of today. With film study and better positioning, those two things can get better. I'm glad we faced this challenge before we go play the Niners.

 

I just don't think we have enough overall D talent or time for necessary improvement.  If we are to suffer a blowout (like we did a few times last season), this one is potentially it. I hope I'm wrong. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI....even if he does rip us to pieces, it only counts as one loss? Right?

IF the Colts get blown out by the 49ers this will be the type reaction you will be able to expect around here....

 

"OMG!!!! Colin Kaepernick threw 87 touchdowns, for 4,000 yards, and had an additional 18 td's on the ground for 900 yards. Then volcanoes came out of the ground and spewed blood into the sky, and then it formed into Avril Lavigne’s face and she recited the Good Will Hunting screenplay and then the words turned into sentient razors and just bored into your flesh.Then the townspeople stormed Lucas Oil Stadium with pitchforks and torches in hand, and offered Chuck Pagano and Ryan Grigson as sacrifice to the Elder Gods.Then in a fit of hysteria the forum fans demanded the reinstatement of Jim Caldwell, and the release of Andrew Luck and mediocrity held sway!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't think we have enough overall D talent or time for necessary improvement.  If we are to suffer a blowout (like we did a few times last season), this one is potentially it. I hope I'm wrong. :(

 

We're not suddenly going to be better tacklers, but we might potentially get better at getting into position, and you miss fewer tackles when you are where you're supposed to be.

 

I don't think the issue is talent at all. It's entirely about execution. Our secondary was pretty good yesterday, and the defensive front was good at stopping their running backs and even pressuring Pryor. We just over pursued on designed QB runs and then didn't tackle well. All fixable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're not suddenly going to be better tacklers, but we might potentially get better at getting into position, and you miss fewer tackles when you are where you're supposed to be.

 

I don't think the issue is talent at all. It's entirely about execution. Our secondary was pretty good yesterday, and the defensive front was good at stopping their running backs and even pressuring Pryor. We just over pursued on designed QB runs and then didn't tackle well. All fixable. 

 

It is still early, but I am wondering if our guys are fast enough or have good enough instincts to be able to make plays in space. That's talent, They will have to be coached to read the right keys, maintain discipline, and clog the lanes before someone gets out in space. Then maybe they can execute a proper tackle (jury still out there too). But if they don't, we may look less than average at containing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. They outweigh him and both are 6'6".

 

http://www.nfl.com/player/camnewton/2495455/profile

http://www.nfl.com/player/terrellepryor/2531332/profile

http://www.nfl.com/player/andrewluck/2533031/profile

 

Cam Newton is listed as 6'5", 245 pounds. Terrelle Pryor is listed as 6'4", 233 pounds. Andrew Luck is listed as 6'4", 239 pounds. 

 

So he's actually bigger than Pryor, and very insignificantly smaller than Newton. But quite honestly, all three are about the same size. To say that they're not is nitpicking at its absolute finest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.nfl.com/player/camnewton/2495455/profile

http://www.nfl.com/player/terrellepryor/2531332/profile

http://www.nfl.com/player/andrewluck/2533031/profile

Cam Newton is listed as 6'5", 245 pounds. Terrelle Pryor is listed as 6'4", 233 pounds. Andrew Luck is listed as 6'4", 239 pounds.

So he's actually bigger than Pryor, and very insignificantly smaller than Newton. But quite honestly, all three are about the same size. To say that they're not is nitpicking at its absolute finest.

that's what i was getting at. very similar in size

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.nfl.com/player/camnewton/2495455/profile

http://www.nfl.com/player/terrellepryor/2531332/profile

http://www.nfl.com/player/andrewluck/2533031/profile

 

Cam Newton is listed as 6'5", 245 pounds. Terrelle Pryor is listed as 6'4", 233 pounds. Andrew Luck is listed as 6'4", 239 pounds. 

 

So he's actually bigger than Pryor, and very insignificantly smaller than Newton. But quite honestly, all three are about the same size. To say that they're not is nitpicking at its absolute finest.

 

I have seen both Newton and Pryor listed at 6'6". Who knows what the truth really is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.nfl.com/player/camnewton/2495455/profile

http://www.nfl.com/player/terrellepryor/2531332/profile

http://www.nfl.com/player/andrewluck/2533031/profile

 

Cam Newton is listed as 6'5", 245 pounds. Terrelle Pryor is listed as 6'4", 233 pounds. Andrew Luck is listed as 6'4", 239 pounds. 

 

So he's actually bigger than Pryor, and very insignificantly smaller than Newton. But quite honestly, all three are about the same size. To say that they're not is nitpicking at its absolute finest.

 

I'm not really sure I would rely on their information as being completely true. Marvin was listed at 6' and having stood by him, and I'm 6'3, Marvin wasn't 6' with cleats on. Cato June is another example in that they had him listed at 220 and even he admitted in an interview that his listed weight was "generous" and that he played closer to 210 than 220. Not to say that their profiles are "way off", but I wouldn't call them competely accurate either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not really sure I would rely on their information as being completely true. Marvin was listed at 6' and having stood by him, and I'm 6'3, Marvin wasn't 6' with cleats on. Cato June is another example in that they had him listed at 220 and even he admitted in an interview that his listed weight was "generous" and that he played closer to 210 than 220. Not to say that their profiles are "way off", but I wouldn't call them competely accurate either.

 

Yeah, the guy on the Internet is much more reliable.

 

I get what you're saying, but I'm much more prone to believe the team's measurements than some guy who is eyeballing how tall someone is from in front of their TV.

Link to comment
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...