Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Conversations are moderated for civility. We ask that you please stay on topic. For more info, see our Community Guidelines ×
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Did we set the edge like we were supposed to on D?

chad72

By chad72
in Colts Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Coltscek Walk On

Coltscek

Posted
Posted

Walden did pretty well,but they kept running to the other side

. You have to be kidding me. No one contained including Walden. You must have been tuned into the wrong game. I continually saw olb's crashing down the LOS and ball carriers scooting untouched around the end.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TKnight24 Walk On

TKnight24

Posted
Posted

Put it like this........ :ranton:

Contain Read Option: No

Contain traditional running: Yes

That's why Run DMC was held under 100. We stopped the run, but not the read option. Which I'm not too upset about cause all other 31 teams struggle to stop it too so it's not like we're the worst team just cause it got us. And plus it was our first time ever seeing it if I'm not mistaking. I think the run defense will be better this week since I don't believe the Dolphins run the read option.

:rantoff:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JoKeR Walk On

JoKeR

Posted
Posted

"Setting the edge", "setting the edge" seems like the current regime's mantra for D.

 

 

Based on yesterday's game, did we set the edge well enough? I don't think we did.

 

 

Thoughts???

When the Raiders were running the ball with the RBs? Yes

But when Pryor was running no but that's a different story. Gimmicky garbage can make good defenses look silly. And yes I called it garbage, look at the final score, substance > gimmicks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chad72 Ring of Honor

chad72

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Tannehill and the fish will give us a better idea how well our guys set that edge.

 

 

To me, Tannehill and the Fish will also test our OL's pass protection considerably, especially Wake, IMO. Their running game was almost shut down by the Browns' D that looked good. Their O-line is physical but our interior DL did real well, it was our LBs' containment that was not up to snuff, IMO. It is a copycat league and I am sure that they will have runs to the outside that might hurt us too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mameluc Walk On

Mameluc

Posted
Posted

To me, Tannehill and the Fish will also test our OL's pass protection considerably, especially Wake, IMO. Their running game was almost shut down by the Browns' D that looked good. Their O-line is physical but our interior DL did real well, it was our LBs' containment that was not up to snuff, IMO.

yea im not really confident on wake vs castonzo to be honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chad72 Ring of Honor

chad72

Posted
  • Author
Posted

When the Raiders were running the ball with the RBs? Yes

But when Pryor was running no but that's a different story. Gimmicky garbage can make good defenses look silly. And yes I called it garbage, look at the final score, substance > gimmicks.

 

Dolphins' OL will be a better test for running with RBs, IMO. They are a better OL than that of the Raiders, IMO. I fancy more off tackle runs being put in the playbook as well. I feel we are more stout between the tackles, just not outside the tackles.

 

I don't think the Raiders' tackles were that good due to injuries and misfits, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JoKeR Walk On

JoKeR

Posted
Posted

. You have to be kidding me. No one contained including Walden. You must have been tuned into the wrong game. I continually saw olb's crashing down the LOS and ball carriers scooting untouched around the end.

By ball carriers you mean Pryor running the option?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jay Kirk Walk On

Jay Kirk

Posted
Posted

. You have to be kidding me. No one contained including Walden. You must have been tuned into the wrong game. I continually saw olb's crashing down the LOS and ball carriers scooting untouched around the end.

They kept running towards Mathis side ,we switched Walden and Mathis and then they ran mostly to Mathis again.Go back and check it out,and pay attention to detail before you try to correct me please. :thmup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Superman Ring of Honor

Superman

Posted
Posted

When the Raiders were running the ball with the RBs? Yes

But when Pryor was running no but that's a different story. Gimmicky garbage can make good defenses look silly. And yes I called it garbage, look at the final score, substance > gimmicks.

By that logic, the Chiefs running game is a gimmick. They gave us 352 yards, but they didn't win, so it's garbage.

Not to mention our game winning score was a QB run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewEra Walk On

NewEra

Posted
Posted

They didn't run the read option but only a handful of times. Most of Pryor's yardage came from bailing on the pass.

Yes most runs came off if Pryor just scrambling and making plays with his legs. Or giving himself extra time to make a pass. I didn't realize he was that big and fast. He looked good for his second start in the nfl

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bavanlan Walk On

bavanlan

Posted
Posted

yea im not really confident on wake vs castonzo to be honest.

 

I'm not so much either, but after re-watching the game on TV instead of in person, he looked poorly conditioned.  Hopefully it's fixable with some time back instead of being injured on the sidelines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BrentMc11 Walk On

BrentMc11

Posted
Posted

They kept running towards Mathis side ,we switched Walden and Mathis and then they ran mostly to Mathis again.Go back and check it out,and pay attention to detail before you try to correct me please. :thmup:

I just saw the grades someone put up nationally that gave Mathis a B- and Walden a D+....Werner a D....Sheppard a C- and I believe Freeman a B+.

 

I really do believe people do not understand what setting the edge is.  Walden was the ONLY LB that contained the way he was supposed to, and he DID get sucked in on one major run by Pryor.  On no less than 2 plays he had his body angled from out of bounds in to take 'containment to the the furthest extent.'  Was he great?  Heck no.  I want him more aggressive in tackling mode even though when we 'contain,' more often than not 'another' player makes the tackle.  I would have given Mathis a D for total lack of awareness.  Walden I will say a C because he did get beat. A TON to work on.  We KNEW Pryor would do that.

 

Jay you are spot on....they flip flopped them numerous times (Mathis/Walden) and don't think Pryor did not notice.  He ran to Mathis's side.  

 

Kaep and Wilson will hurt us badly if we do not improve....and some say Tannehill next week...not as afraid of him....continuous improvement!!! :lecture:  :colts:  :colts:  :colts: !!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jay Kirk Walk On

Jay Kirk

Posted
Posted

I just saw the grades someone put up nationally that gave Mathis a B- and Walden a D+....Werner a D....Sheppard a C- and I believe Freeman a B+.

 

I really do believe people do not understand what setting the edge is.  Walden was the ONLY LB that contained the way he was supposed to, and he DID get sucked in on one major run by Pryor.  On no less than 2 plays he had his body angled from out of bounds in to take 'containment to the the furthest extent.'  Was he great?  Heck no.  I want him more aggressive in tackling mode even though when we 'contain,' more often than not 'another' player makes the tackle.  I would have given Mathis a D for total lack of awareness.  Walden I will say a C because he did get beat. A TON to work on.  We KNEW Pryor would do that.

 

Jay you are spot on....they flip flopped them numerous times (Mathis/Walden) and don't think Pryor did not notice.  He ran to Mathis's side.  

 

Kaep and Wilson will hurt us badly if we do not improve....and some say Tannehill next week...not as afraid of him....continuous improvement!!! :lecture:  :colts:  :colts:  :colts: !!!!

Would agree with your grades,in another thread I gave LBs as a group a D mostly because of containment

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BrentMc11 Walk On

BrentMc11

Posted
Posted

Would agree with your grades,in another thread I gave LBs as a group a D mostly because of containment

Still need to find that thread....gonna go protect Pep from what may have been his final Colts game  :funny:  :lol:  :spit: !!!!!

 

:yeahright:  :yeahright: !!

 

Some here jumped the Brad Wells bandwagon instead of hopping on Pagano's shoulders and moving forward.  BTW loved his postgame speech...all positive.  You work on the bad stuff this week on W 56th!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BrentMc11 Walk On

BrentMc11

Posted
Posted

Absolutely not, Pryor got outside time and again - amazing that he was bigger and faster than the guys chasing him down for the most part.

 

Erik Walden is in serious need of another jersey number - the way he rushed the passer today was not 93 like.

Have to get Edge's 32 off of Cassius Vaughn first :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smonroe Ring of Honor

Smonroe

Posted
Posted

Absolutely not, Pryor got outside time and again - amazing that he was bigger and faster than the guys chasing him down for the most part.

 

Erik Walden is in serious need of another jersey number - the way he rushed the passer today was not 93 like.

 

As a Buckeye fan, I watched every game Pryor played when he was at OSU.  He did to the Colts exactly what he did to the college teams he faced.  Good and bad.

 

The Colts should have studied his college tapes.  I wish the guy luck in the future but I don't think he's ever going to be a quality NFL QB.  He is perfect for a team like Oakland right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chad72 Ring of Honor

chad72

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hard to watch so many players, so many times, diving down the line. That was messed up.

 

Might have replaced Sheppard with a DB shadow for Pryor. Some. ??

Freeman is a top quality player. A big fan.

 

But Freeman did not play stellar in this game to me. He was all over the place and mostly trailing. He has played better in the past, so I am sure it is correctable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BrentMc11 Walk On

BrentMc11

Posted
Posted

Hard to watch so many players, so many times, diving down the line. That was messed up.

 

Might have replaced Sheppard with a DB shadow for Pryor. Some. ??

Freeman is a top quality player. A big fan.

The way Harvey played on Special teams, he could have been your man....he wanted to hit someone everytime...Pryor would have been nice :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BrentMc11 Walk On

BrentMc11

Posted
Posted

But Freeman did not play stellar in this game to me. He was all over the place and mostly trailing. He has played better in the past, so I am sure it is correctable.

Still wondering who was at fault on the 'no coverage' on the Mastrud 41 yard reception...Freeman or Mathis?  I thought Freeman but I am not sure.  I defer to someone who saw it up close and personal.  The replay did not do us any good...nobody close :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jay Kirk Walk On

Jay Kirk

Posted
Posted

Still wondering who was at fault on the 'no coverage' on the Mastrud 41 yard reception...Freeman or Mathis?  I thought Freeman but I am not sure.  I defer to someone who saw it up close and personal.  The replay did not do us any good...nobody close :)

Don't  know but Bathea sure was trying to get the attention of someone on that play

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...