To all the people blaming the defense

[Archangel]

Defense absolutely needed to play better.  Giving up 160 yards to Blount is inexcusable.  But lets not act like 4 interceptions doesn't hurt hte defense when 2 of the 4 resulted in possessions with the Patriots starting inside the redzone and which they turned into 14 points.

 

 

Could of held them to six points

[OffensivelyPC]

Could of held them to six points

Or we could have just not thrown teh picks at all.

[Superman]

The lack of accountability he shows on the field. Players have done something in the game that most coaches would sit them down at the very least. And our staff (mainly the HC puts them right back out. Just an observation.

For instance?

[lollygagger8]

I thought the defense was doing a pretty good job. The tackling was sloppy, and that was a problem because it was allowing the Pats to extend drives. But the run fits were good, we weren't allowing big gains, and we even got some stops. Then we got punched in the mouth for 73 yards.

 

Ummm what?? 

 

The Pats had already scored 4 TD's and a 2 pt conversion on our Defense up to that point. The defense was doing a lot of things, but playing well wasn't one of them. 

[Jay Kirk]

 

Ummm what?? 

 

The Pats had already scored 4 TD's and a 2 pt conversion on our Defense up to that point. The defense was doing a lot of things, but playing well wasn't one of them. 

Agreed with all our injuries they would've taken our secondary apart,if they chose,But why bother when they ran all over us.

[Superman]

Ummm what??

The Pats had already scored 4 TD's and a 2 pt conversion on our Defense up to that point. The defense was doing a lot of things, but playing well wasn't one of them.

I was talking specifically about the run defense, but overall, the Pats were gifted one TD after the pick, then the 4th TD was on a drive extended by a bad PI call. The defense had forced punts on 4 of 8 possessions.

And again, in the run game, while there was some poor tackling, it wasn't leading to big gains. I can live with that, because at least you're containing the ball carrier and in position to make a play.

Lastly, I didn't say they were playing well. I said they weren't playing poorly. Had we scored points on the Havili drop/pick drive, then done something after the stop to open up the second half, we'd have had a stew going. The defense was put in bad situations from the start, and stil gave the team several chances to tie the game or take the lead.

And then they got punched in the mouth, and it was over after that.

Edit: +1 for New Edition. "Ronnie, Bobby, Ricky and Mike, if I love a girl who cares who you like?!"

[lollygagger8]

I thought the defense was doing a pretty good job. The tackling was sloppy, and that was a problem because it was allowing the Pats to extend drives. But the run fits were good, we weren't allowing big gains, and we even got some stops. Then we got punched in the mouth for 73 yards.

 

 

I was talking specifically about the run defense, but overall, the Pats were gifted one TD after the pick, then the 4th TD was on a drive extended by a bad PI call. The defense had forced punts on 4 of 8 possessions.

And again, in the run game, while there was some poor tackling, it wasn't leading to big gains. I can live with that, because at least you're containing the ball carrier and in position to make a play.

Lastly, I didn't say they were playing well. I said they weren't playing poorly. Had we scored points on the Havili drop/pick drive, then done something after the stop to open up the second half, we'd have had a stew going. The defense was put in bad situations from the start, and stil gave the team several chances to tie the game or take the lead.

And then they got punched in the mouth, and it was over after that.

Edit: +1 for New Edition. "Ronnie, Bobby, Ricky and Mike, if I love a girl who cares who you like?!"

 

Yes, you actually did say they were doing a pretty good job. 

 

419 total yards (234 on the ground) after our coach was preaching run the ball/stop the run all year....not a good job. 

 

Also, the game was over when our brilliant coach made the asinine/absurd decision to punt on 4th and 1 when were down by 21 points. 

 

Unfortunately for me, I don't think I'll be over that gem of a decision for a long time. 

[Superman]

Yes, you actually did say they were doing a pretty good job. 

 

Also, the game was over when our brilliant coach made the asinine/absurd decision to punt on 4th and 1 when were down by 21 points. 

 

Unfortunately for me, I don't think I'll be over that gem of a decision for a long time. 

 

The entire post was talking about the run defense. And I stand by that: I think the run defense was doing a pretty good job (which is a relative term; doesn't mean I was thrilled with the way they were playing).

 

Punting on 4th and 1 was the wrong call. I believe Pagano even admitted that. But the long TD run is when the wheels came off for the defense.

[jameszeigler834]

Could of held them to six points

Like I said 2 of the four were not Lucks fault but I have seen this many times good defenses are able to only give up three when they have a turnover put the other team inside their territory so I don't want to here it the Defense was horrible mark my words 87 points given up in two games sucks ok this defense better be better next year or I better see the DC losing his job.

[amfootball]

The entire post was talking about the run defense. And I stand by that: I think the run defense was doing a pretty good job (which is a relative term; doesn't mean I was thrilled with the way they were playing).

 

Punting on 4th and 1 was the wrong call. I believe Pagano even admitted that. But the long TD run is when the wheels came off for the defense.

You did? You do know that was a historic rushing night for the Pats? And Brady completed 13 passes and still won by 21...

[The Fish]

You did? You do know that was a historic rushing night for the Pats? And Brady completed 13 passes and still won by 21...

Aside from 2 short and goal situations, and two long runs for TD's, it was a par for the course performance for the D. 

[coltfaninnewyork]

if we can get this defense in the top 12,we will be a tough team to beat in the playoffs.

[Superman]

You did? You do know that was a historic rushing night for the Pats? And Brady completed 13 passes and still won by 21...

 

What's wrong with putting my comment into context? I'm talking about prior to the 73 yard TD run. Yes, I think the run defense had done a good job to that point. 

[amfootball]

Aside from 2 short and goal situations, and two long runs for TD's, it was a par for the course performance for the D. 

46 rushes for 234 (5.1 YAC) and six TDs is normal for the Colts rush D?

[amfootball]

What's wrong with putting my comment into context? I'm talking about prior to the 73 yard TD run. Yes, I think the run defense had done a good job to that point. 

gotcha.

[No 1 Manning Fan]

The first pick last night was on the opening drive

Exactly. Thank you. Let's be honest here. There is more than enough blame to go around. Luck and offense put us behind the 8-ball early and we never recovered. The defense played pretty well and the offense almost caught up. But more mistakes on offense was followed by mistakes on defense and the team practically imploded.

The Chiefs game was different. The defense couldn't stop the Chiefs for the first half. They played a little better the second half. Luck tried to do too much out of desperation and got picked. Still shouldn't happen unless he's being hit, but it does, and happens often when fighting and clawing to get out of a hole.

The team didn't perform well enough as a whole (players and coaches alike) to overcome the Pats. End of story.

[Dark Superman]

The whole team is to blame.. Mainly the offense.

[colts8718]

What DEFENSE you mean Pagano's monster D yeah right what a joke

[Dudley Smith]

The defense was pathetic on Saturday night and it was pretty bad for the majority of the entire season. Mathis was the lone bright spot on an otherwise woeful D. Yes, they were put in a bad spot on the opening drive, but outside of the two three and outs they had in the 3rd quarter they looked awful. Despite some excellent drives by the offense to put up TDs, the defense would always let the Pats run another TD down the Colts' throats right afterwards, negating any momentum.

 

However, putting so much emphasis on Saturday night is missing the big picture. This defense was pretty bad for the majority of the season, and the fact the Colts won 12 games was a small miracle in light of how uninspired the defense played. Players like Freeman and Davis, who had outstanding seasons last year, actually seemed to take a step back. This is especially concerning considering that defense is our head coach's calling card. I think the Colts would be well-served showing Manusky the door, but I doubt it happens. Something needs to change on that side of the ball though.

[Johnny Bui]

Obviously the team is to blame. Offensively, yes we can do better, but turnovers are gonna happen and thats when defense needs to help us out.  Remember, Palmer threw 4 INT and their defense bailed them out big time and beat seattle at home.  Defensively, we just couldn't stop a nose bleed.  Pats Oline just raped our DLine.  The team didn't play well plain and simple.  I think the pats only punted 2x.  Defense needs big improvement and we need to run the ball better.  INT are gonna happen when you have to throw it 85% of the time.  

[rittdk01]

Get real.  After the Denver game the Colts were spotting the other team 2 tds almost every game.  Until the last three games of the regular season they were giving out over 30 points and starting games very poorly.   The defense  blew the game against the Chiefs which was won by Luck magic.

 

A team gets down in a game and they have to throw the ball so the defense knows whats coming and they get picks.

 

First int Rogers outmuscled for the ball but I will put it on Luck. Second one was on Havili.  Third on Luck and didn't see the fourth but it was garbage time int anyway. Luck still had them within a td but the defense parted and let Blount run clear down the field to go pack up by 14. 

 

Even if your QB throws a pick man up and have his back.  Hold them to a field goal or Bethea  catch the int thrown RIGHT TO YOU.

[Superman]

gotcha.

 

46 rushes for 234 (5.1 YAC) and six TDs is normal for the Colts rush D?

 

Just to further make my point...

 

The Colts pulled within 7 points, 29-22. Then the Pats went three-and-out twice in a row. The Pats ran four times for 16 yards in that stretch. The Colts offense couldn't do anything, running a total of 8 plays in their two possessions. Then Blount rips off for 73 yards (and coincidentally, runs through a poor tackling attempt, so even on that play, the run fits weren't terrible). Some of the first downs and TDs were well contested, with the Pats backs barely squeezing over the line. They won the physical battles, but not by much. The Colts won some battles as well, including a zero gain on third and 2, and another zero gain on third and 1. There was one drive where the Pats kind of dominated all the way down the field, rush after rush. Other than that, they scored a TD after the initial pick, then another after the big pass to Amendola, then another after a questionable PI call on third down.

 

To that point, the Pats were averaging 3.3 yards/carry on 33 carries (108 yards). They had scored four rushing TDs, on rushes of 2, 2, 2 and 3 yards. They had been stopped on the ground in short yardage multiple times. Their longest run to that point was 9 yards. 

 

Now I'm not here claiming that everything was great, that the run defense was dominating, that I was happy with the way things were going. Not at all. But up until Blount's long TD run, the run defense had been pretty good, overall. Lost some battles, won some battles, had missed too many tackles, but still hadn't given up any big plays. Then the knockout punch.

[amfootball]

Just to further make my point...

 

The Colts pulled within 7 points, 29-22. Then the Pats went three-and-out twice in a row. The Pats ran four times for 16 yards in that stretch. The Colts offense couldn't do anything, running a total of 8 plays in their two possessions. Then Blount rips off for 73 yards (and coincidentally, runs through a poor tackling attempt, so even on that play, the run fits weren't terrible). Some of the first downs and TDs were well contested, with the Pats backs barely squeezing over the line. They won the physical battles, but not by much. The Colts won some battles as well, including a zero gain on third and 2, and another zero gain on third and 1. There was one drive where the Pats kind of dominated all the way down the field, rush after rush. Other than that, they scored a TD after the initial pick, then another after the big pass to Amendola, then another after a questionable PI call on third down.

 

To that point, the Pats were averaging 3.3 yards/carry on 33 carries (108 yards). They had scored four rushing TDs, on rushes of 2, 2, 2 and 3 yards. They had been stopped on the ground in short yardage multiple times. Their longest run to that point was 9 yards. 

 

Now I'm not here claiming that everything was great, that the run defense was dominating, that I was happy with the way things were going. Not at all. But up until Blount's long TD run, the run defense had been pretty good, overall. Lost some battles, won some battles, had missed too many tackles, but still hadn't given up any big plays.

Good summation. I did think the Colts D overall was keeping the game a game until the fourth. That and our long snapper. Ay,ay,ay. But I think the difference was the red zone. The Pats were perfect down there (6 for 6 including a two point conversion) while the Colts went 2 for 4 kicking two FGs. Those rushing TDs by the pats were critical as the red zone is where they have struggled without Gronk. They manned up and got it done. Had your D forced a couple of FGs there especially early then the Colts are not struggling to come from behind all game even with the picks.

[Jason_]

Get real.  After the Denver game the Colts were spotting the other team 2 tds almost every game.  Until the last three games of the regular season they were giving out over 30 points and starting games very poorly.   The defense  blew the game against the Chiefs which was won by Luck magic.

 

A team gets down in a game and they have to throw the ball so the defense knows whats coming and they get picks.

 

First int Rogers outmuscled for the ball but I will put it on Luck. Second one was on Havili.  Third on Luck and didn't see the fourth but it was garbage time int anyway. Luck still had them within a td but the defense parted and let Blount run clear down the field to go pack up by 14. 

 

Even if your QB throws a pick man up and have his back.  Hold them to a field goal or Bethea  catch the int thrown RIGHT TO YOU.

 

Even the 2nd pick to Havili was...not the greatest throw in the world.  It was certainly catchable but was still thrown somewhat behind Havili.  Had Luck put the ball in front of Havili he likely catches it without issue.   I've seen Luck do this since Stanford.  Not consistently mind you but he does have a tendency to throw behind receivers on short routes like that.  I have complete faith that this is something he can improve on with experience but at this point, his accuracy is inconsistent.  

[The Fish]

Good summation. I did think the Colts D overall was keeping the game a game until the fourth. That and our long snapper. Ay,ay,ay. But I think the difference was the red zone. The Pats were perfect down there (6 for 6 including a two point conversion) while the Colts went 2 for 4 kicking two FGs. Those rushing TDs by the pats were critical as the red zone is where they have struggled without Gronk. They manned up and got it done. Had your D forced a couple of FGs there especially early then the Colts are not struggling to come from behind all game even with the picks.

So now it makes sense to you? Jeesh.

[Superman]

Good summation. I did think the Colts D overall was keeping the game a game until the fourth. That and our long snapper. Ay,ay,ay. But I think the difference was the red zone. The Pats were perfect down there (6 for 6 including a two point conversion) while the Colts went 2 for 4 kicking two FGs. Those rushing TDs by the pats were critical as the red zone is where they have struggled without Gronk. They manned up and got it done. Had your D forced a couple of FGs there especially early then the Colts are not struggling to come from behind all game even with the picks.

 

Yeah, the PI call took away what would have been a stop, but led to another TD and a two point conversion. The score might have only been 24-22. The Pats definitely got it done, finishing off drives with the running game. Credit to them for sticking with it for so long; like I said, their first big gain on the ground came on their 34th carry, midway through the 3rd quarter, after two three-and-outs. 

[OffensivelyPC]

Good summation. I did think the Colts D overall was keeping the game a game until the fourth. That and our long snapper. Ay,ay,ay. But I think the difference was the red zone. The Pats were perfect down there (6 for 6 including a two point conversion) while the Colts went 2 for 4 kicking two FGs. Those rushing TDs by the pats were critical as the red zone is where they have struggled without Gronk. They manned up and got it done. Had your D forced a couple of FGs there especially early then the Colts are not struggling to come from behind all game even with the picks.

As long as it isn't us, easily one of my favorite bloopers to ever happen in a football game.  It's like a jail break, rugby style scrum or something...and that ball went for what seemed like miles.

[Superman]

Even the 2nd pick to Havili was...not the greatest throw in the world.  It was certainly catchable but was still thrown somewhat behind Havili.  Had Luck put the ball in front of Havili he likely catches it without issue.   I've seen Luck do this since Stanford.  Not consistently mind you but he does have a tendency to throw behind receivers on short routes like that.  I have complete faith that this is something he can improve on with experience but at this point, his accuracy is inconsistent.  

 

Your point stands, but Havili has to catch that ball. Every QB throws it behind his receiver from time to time. And it really wasn't that far behind Havili; he still could have grabbed it and run away from the defender. That one is 99% on Havili.

[Jason_]

Your point stands, but Havili has to catch that ball. Every QB throws it behind his receiver from time to time. And it really wasn't that far behind Havili; he still could have grabbed it and run away from the defender. That one is 99% on Havili.

 

The only part we disagree on is the %.  If it had been a WR or TE then yeah I put it as a much higher percentage on the receiver, but RB/FB aren't typically as prolific with their hand/eye coordination in bringing the ball in.  I agree that Havili should have caught it, I said as much in the previous post, but especially when throwing to a FB that doesn't get a lot of touches, it would be immensely helpful to make the catch as easy as possible, especially on that type of route.

 

Plus I fully admit that I get annoyed when people go absurdly out of the way to blame everyone on the team BUT Luck.

[Superman]

The only part we disagree on is the %. If it had been a WR or TE then yeah I put it as a much higher percentage on the receiver, but RB/FB aren't typically as prolific with their hand/eye coordination in bringing the ball in. I agree that Havili should have caught it, I said as much in the previous post, but especially when throwing to a FB that doesn't get a lot of touches, it would be immensely helpful to make the catch as easy as possible, especially on that type of route.

Havili wouldn't be a Colt if he couldn't catch. He's been a pass catching fullback since USC. Now in the rain, ball on your back shoulder, I get it. But when the pass bounces off of you and into the hands of the defender, that's your fault. I don't see much room to blame the QB when the pass was still very catchable.

Edit: I agree, Luck deserves plenty of blame. The first pick and the third pick are plainly on him, no question. And there was almost another one that two Pats fought over. Havili should have caught the second one, though.

[amfootball]

So now it makes sense to you? Jeesh.

I did not know his context. Overall it was a terrible performance by the rush D with six TDs and 234 in yards but they were managing it until the fourth in terms of yardage and yards per carry but the problem there is Brady was in third and short a ton which allowed for easy first downs and drives to be extended and TDs. I also don't give them on a pass on letting in the red zone TDs. Have to be better there and keep the Pats to a couple of FGs.

[amfootball]

Yeah, the PI call took away what would have been a stop, but led to another TD and a two point conversion. The score might have only been 24-22. The Pats definitely got it done, finishing off drives with the running game. Credit to them for sticking with it for so long; like I said, their first big gain on the ground came on their 34th carry, midway through the 3rd quarter, after two three-and-outs. 

Yes and no. While the Colts were "managing" the run instead of stopping it, they let Brady have third and short a ton which extended drives and led to TDs. While they did not let up the big bomb until late, they also did not ever really stop the run either. It was a slow death if you will but the red zone was the key of the game.

[Superman]

Yes and no. While the Colts were "managing" the run instead of stopping it, they let Brady have third and short a ton which extended drives and led to TDs. While they did not let up the big bomb until late, they also did not ever really stop the run either. It was a slow death if you will but the red zone was the key of the game.

What might have changed if the Colts had scored a TD instead of the pick on the Havili drop? And then some points on one of the two possessions prior to the big run? The game would have changed at some point.

I agree it was a slow death, but that's better than a fast death. It gave the team multiple chances to climb back into the game.

And two of the four red zone conversions were gifts, IMO. One on the opening pick, the other on what I thought was a bad PI call. The Pats did a good job, but the run defense got put in some tough spots. So yeah, 4 rushing TDs and all to that point, but there was more to the story.

[amfootball]

What might have changed if the Colts had scored a TD instead of the pick on the Havili drop? And then some points on one of the two possessions prior to the big run? The game would have changed at some point.

I agree it was a slow death, but that's better than a fast death. It gave the team multiple chances to climb back into the game.

And two of the four red zone conversions were gifts, IMO. One on the opening pick, the other on what I thought was a bad PI call. The Pats did a good job, but the run defense got put in some tough spots. So yeah, 4 rushing TDs and all to that point, but there was more to the story.

I suppose the what if game is always fun. I wonder what the score might have looked like if our long snapper did not snap the ball 40 yards over our punters head ultimately getting him injured. Pats were in complete control there up 21-10 and that gaffe was a game changer for sure.

 

I agree about the slow death and that is probably all the Colts could manage defensively. Stop after stop would have been unrealistic so just try to keep it close which they did for three quarters.

[Dustin]

Playing from behind especially late increases turnovers without question. Luck did throw so really dumb ones though. Not all but some.

 

Im not disagreeing. But the defense was bad regardless of the turnovers.

[Jason_]

Havili wouldn't be a Colt if he couldn't catch. He's been a pass catching fullback since USC. Now in the rain, ball on your back shoulder, I get it. But when the pass bounces off of you and into the hands of the defender, that's your fault. I don't see much room to blame the QB when the pass was still very catchable.

Edit: I agree, Luck deserves plenty of blame. The first pick and the third pick are plainly on him, no question. And there was almost another one that two Pats fought over. Havili should have caught the second one, though.

 

That is true, Havili is one of the better receiving FB's and I do agree he should have caught that pass.  I just disagreed with the initial notion that it was all on Havili and 0% on Luck.  And I do agree that all QB's throw behind receivers from time to time but imo Luck has an above average tendency to do that at this stage in his career. 

 

The 3 negatives I personally saw with Luck at Stanford were the higher than normal tendency to throw behind receivers on crossing/flat routes, throwing high to WR's running comeback/out routes and not handling the blitz very well.  These are things that he still needs to work on but they are absolutely correctable, especially for someone with the work ethic that Luck has.  

[The Fish]

I did not know his context. Overall it was a terrible performance by the rush D with six TDs and 234 in yards but they were managing it until the fourth in terms of yardage and yards per carry but the problem there is Brady was in third and short a ton which allowed for easy first downs and drives to be extended and TDs. I also don't give them on a pass on letting in the red zone TDs. Have to be better there and keep the Pats to a couple of FGs.

See the thing is the Colts run D has given up large amount of rushing yards before, and often. The circumstances that lead to 2 or 4 of the short yard T.D runs were more telling than the actual D's performance through out the first 3 quarters. By the time the 73 yard happened the D had been exhausted, because Pep fired up the "Trent is a legit power back" scheme twice in a row, putting a gassed D back out there after two 3 and outs.

The thing few are going to remember about this game is that the Colts were in striking distance for 40 min. They squandered their chances as much as the Pats capitalized on theirs. It's the nature of the game, and the stat line and final score doesn't show it. 

[5toolplayer]

Landry was brought in to be the big hitter and run stopper.....EPIC FAIL

[amfootball]

See the thing is the Colts run D has given up large amount of rushing yards before, and often. The circumstances that lead to 2 or 4 of the short yard T.D runs were more telling than the actual D's performance through out the first 3 quarters. By the time the 73 yard happened the D had been exhausted, because Pep fired up the "Trent is a legit power back" scheme twice in a row, putting a gassed D back out there after two 3 and outs.

The thing few are going to remember about this game is that the Colts were in striking distance for 40 min. They squandered their chances as much as the Pats capitalized on theirs. It's the nature of the game, and the stat line and final score doesn't show it. 

So you put the game more on the coaching?

 

I agree about the situational football too.

[Slick_Rick]

I kind of feel like we are still the same old Colts. Our defense plays big in spots then hides in the worst possible moments. Idk if it's a talent or coaching issue at this point. I feel like we have fielded one of the better defenses personell wise that we have in years. That said, the 7 turnovers in two games didn't exactly help anything.