Dont make the same mistake that we made with manning

[atapcl]

Yes, my eyes! Castonzo has great measurable's and was a great player at BC, but he hasn't shown anything in the NFL so far. A lot of ppl praise him for being our best lineman last year which i totally agree with, he's been our best O-lineman the last 2 years. But you shouldn't base how great a player is by comparing him to other bad linemen at other positions. All I know is I watch the tapes and the guy constantly gets beat off the snap, doesn't use his hands well against bull rushers, and can't change direction or catch up to quick finesse players. So far everyone has based their praise for him on measurable's and potential. His 3rd year is usually when OT's start to shine and so far he's shown 0 improvement in his technique from last year. People kept saying the only reason he struggled last year was because he was with a shaky O-line, but now he has Donald Thomas next to him who so far has been amazing this year so there should be no more excuses. I think this is the year people will admit they over hyped this guy

Thomas has been ok. He did not communicate very well on stunts Sunday which allowed Luck to be hit.

[Jason_]

Well he is not which must be a fact he was getting destroyed by one of the worst teams in the NFL what does that tell you.

I don't know what this drivel means

[Jason_]

Oh and for the record most of the college tape I saw from him the tape showed him at right tackle most of the time.

Then you must have been watching mostly tape of his freshman year because that's the only year he played RT

[CanuckColt]

We had a reasonable O-line around Manning...they were almost all good Pass-blockers but suspect run-blockers.

Andrew has nothing...not a good pass-blocking line and not a good run-blocking line.

Time to put ALL D draft picks on cancel...draft O-line and trade up if necessary.

[theanarchist]

Yes, my eyes! Castonzo has great measurable's and was a great player at BC, but he hasn't shown anything in the NFL so far. A lot of ppl praise him for being our best lineman last year which i totally agree with, he's been our best O-lineman the last 2 years. But you shouldn't base how great a player is by comparing him to other bad linemen at other positions. All I know is I watch the tapes and the guy constantly gets beat off the snap, doesn't use his hands well against bull rushers, and can't change direction or catch up to quick finesse players. So far everyone has based their praise for him on measurable's and potential. His 3rd year is usually when OT's start to shine and so far he's shown 0 improvement in his technique from last year. People kept saying the only reason he struggled last year was because he was with a shaky O-line, but now he has Donald Thomas next to him who so far has been amazing this year so there should be no more excuses. I think this is the year people will admit they over hyped this guy

Well I like Costonzo. He isn't all pro I'll give you that. He's had his share of ups and downs. As you say year 3 is usually a big year for Tackles and I think Costonzo has a good year this year.

[Sova!]

Thomas has been ok. He did not communicate very well on stunts Sunday which allowed Luck to be hit.

I agree Thomas had a couple of mishaps, but his were more mental errors from being in a new system which he should easily improve over the next few weeks. The problem I have with Castonzo is his actual technique, which sometimes can never be fixed.

[Sova!]

We had a reasonable O-line around Manning...they were almost all good Pass-blockers but suspect run-blockers.

Andrew has nothing...not a good pass-blocking line and not a good run-blocking line.

Time to put ALL D draft picks on cancel...draft O-line and trade up if necessary.

If Holmes and Thornton become starters this year I think we'll see a huge improvement. heck, if we just get McGlynn out of there you'll notice the pocket not collapsing so constantly. From a technique standpoint, Thomas, Thornton, and Cherilus have been pretty impressive so far. I like what we've got, maybe draft or sign a LT next year though

[funktacious2]

Our O-line certainly wasn't ideal, but it wasn't maybe as bad as some people think. Vick Ballard averaged 4.8 YPC on Sunday, which is better than Trent Richardson, Steven Ridley, Alfred Morris, DeMarco Murray, Reggie Bush, and the same as Jamaal Charles. For me, specifically in the running game, I just felt like there wasn't time to manage both the passing game and the running game. Time was going by so fast in that game, that it just seemed like time would be better spend passing than running, because we know we're better at passing, but I feel like our RBs got noticeably less "stuffed" this game. lol. Obviously one game isn't indicative of how we'll fare the entire season, but as Bradshaw gets healthier and Ballard gets more reps, things can still get better.

 

Also on a somewhat unrelated rant, I have to say it. I think we should have used Donald Brown in the  game more on Sunday. With some dropped passes aside, DB has been pretty darn good at taking dumped off passes or short passes on the outside. One of his best attributes is is ability in open space. Get him in on some very limited plays early on and then use him later in games if/when we need a change of pace and conservatively running up the middle isn't getting us much progress. Quite frankly I thought there was going to a lot more of this from this offense in the first place. When I think of generally less "deeper" passes, I think they're bound to be replaced by some more opportunities to get your backfield/TEs more involved in the short passing game. I'm not a coach, but when our coaches say "we're going to be good at everything" I do end up a little surprised when the amount of variety is lacking to my expectation.  

[oldunclemark]

We need to build a top flight offensive line around Luck. We need to give him a solid running game. What ended up happening with Manning was that we relied way too much on his talent and didn't make the offense multi dimensional enough to really make that team into a true dynasty.

 

Even the year we won the Super Bowl the running game only came on in the playoffs. That was really what won it for us. The case could be make that Dominic Rhodes was the SB MVP. We have to continue to build a good offensive line that can take over a game when you need them to. Then we need to find that true difference make on defense.

 

We didn't have that true championship defense until we drafted Freeney. We added Mathis who is a great talent to go with him and then we added a stud in the secondary(who unfortunately couldn't stay healthy). We're in the early stages of this build but when I look back what a great fortune we came across early in Mannings career.

 

Harrison was already here as was Glenn. Glenn was true top flight left tackle. Then we drafted a real difference maker at RB in Edgerrin James. What a great time to be a colts fan. Edge would pound it, Manning would hit huge plays off the play action and build a lead then Edge would just wear the defense out in the 4th Q. Freeney n Mathis would turn loose with a lead and it was all over. It took a good 4 year before the pieces were totally in place. unfortunately after we lost Edgerrin James our line got weaker and the running game became a weak part of the team.

Dont continue to try to figure out why we 'ONLY WON ONE SUPER BOWL'

 

Had we won two, we'd be wallowing in 'WE ONLY WON TWO' And I suggest it isnt possible to rely to much on a players talent...especially one you drafted to lead you

 

That's a strage statement

 

The running game did not win us the Super Bowl,...That's a revisionist myth...and watching the game again,.its doesnt hold up

 

Above that...Every town feels  that its one-time Super Bowl champion should have won multiple titles...its just fan ego

 

They say it in NOLA...they have said it for years in Chicago..

 

In NY, they say the NYGs should have won more than 2...In Boston, they say the Pats should have won more than 3 

 

...and they all blame the way the team was structured.,.and how it was coached...and management. Every body did everything wrong and if they'd just have let the fans run the team...they'd have had a dynasty

 

(Yes..in Boston, they say that Tom Brady throws the ball to much and the Pats rely on him too much.)

 

Indy got beat by better NE teams..in one-game playoffs.  SD and Pitt beat them in one game upsets. It doenst mean that the team which reached the playoffs 12 times wasn't built correctly...Not making the playoffs at all means you aren't built corractly.

 

Finally...There is no such thing as true championship defense or offense.(see New Orleans 4 year ago)

You rely on great players and hope for luck, (which Indy now has)

[theanarchist]

Dont continue to try to figure out why we 'ONLY WON ONE SUPER BOWL'

 

Had we won two, we'd be wallowing in 'WE ONLY WON TWO' And I suggest it isnt possible to rely to much on a players talent...especially one you drafted to lead you

 

That's a strage statement

 

The running game did not win us the Super Bowl,...That's a revisionist myth...and watching the game again,.its doesnt hold up

 

Above that...Every town feels  that its one-time Super Bowl champion should have won multiple titles...its just fan ego

 

They say it in NOLA...they have said it for years in Chicago..

 

In NY, they say the NYGs should have won more than 2...In Boston, they say the Pats should have won more than 3 

 

...and they all blame the way the team was structured.,.and how it was coached...and management. Every body did everything wrong and if they'd just have let the fans run the team...they'd have had a dynasty

 

(Yes..in Boston, they say that Tom Brady throws the ball to much and the Pats rely on him too much.)

 

Indy got beat by better NE teams..in one-game playoffs.  SD and Pitt beat them in one game upsets. It doenst mean that the team which reached the playoffs 12 times wasn't built correctly...Not making the playoffs at all means you aren't built corractly.

 

Finally...There is no such thing as true championship defense or offense.(see New Orleans 4 year ago)

You rely on great players and hope for luck, (which Indy now has)

You make good points. I still say that early in Manning's career the weakness of the team was a very bad defense. We had arguably the best and most complete offense in the NFL. After Edge departed for the most part we relied very heavily on Manning to carry the team despite attempting to protect the franchise QB with sub par offensive linemen. I like some of the additions to the offensive line in the off season. Cherilus looked like he had a good game Sunday. I didn't watch Don Thomas too much so I don't know what he did on Sunday. I think Grigson, being a former offensive linemen himself, understands the importance of a good offensive line.

[jameszeigler834]

Miami really isn't that good Clevelands o-line is worst than the colts.

[Indy005]

Miami really isn't that good Clevelands o-line is worst than the colts.

Please tell me how Joe Thomas and Alex Mack are worse than anything we got??!!

 

Those two are all pro's at their respective positions.

[Blackclouds]

Miami definetly can beat the Colts, good thing Luck is lucky. Anyways, for me it comes own to a capable organization, and I am still not convinced the Colts have a good one to manage this team.

[corgi]

Miami definetly can beat the Colts, good thing Luck is lucky. Anyways, for me it comes own to a capable organization, and I am still not convinced the Colts have a good one to manage this team.

And the Dolphins have this?

[jameszeigler834]

Those two are their best but the rest of the line is terrible they gave just 5 less sacks then the colts did 36 of them to be exact. and that stinks about Ballard too hope he can return next year at full strength.

[Warhorse]

Our O-line certainly wasn't ideal, but it wasn't maybe as bad as some people think. Vick Ballard averaged 4.8 YPC on Sunday, which is better than Trent Richardson, Steven Ridley, Alfred Morris, DeMarco Murray, Reggie Bush, and the same as Jamaal Charles. For me, specifically in the running game, I just felt like there wasn't time to manage both the passing game and the running game. Time was going by so fast in that game, that it just seemed like time would be better spend passing than running, because we know we're better at passing, but I feel like our RBs got noticeably less "stuffed" this game. lol. Obviously one game isn't indicative of how we'll fare the entire season, but as Bradshaw gets healthier and Ballard gets more reps, things can still get better.

 

Also on a somewhat unrelated rant, I have to say it. I think we should have used Donald Brown in the  game more on Sunday. With some dropped passes aside, DB has been pretty darn good at taking dumped off passes or short passes on the outside. One of his best attributes is is ability in open space. Get him in on some very limited plays early on and then use him later in games if/when we need a change of pace and conservatively running up the middle isn't getting us much progress. Quite frankly I thought there was going to a lot more of this from this offense in the first place. When I think of generally less "deeper" passes, I think they're bound to be replaced by some more opportunities to get your backfield/TEs more involved in the short passing game. I'm not a coach, but when our coaches say "we're going to be good at everything" I do end up a little surprised when the amount of variety is lacking to my expectation.  

Superb.