grigs quiet?

[GoColts8818]

He also stated "We knew Shipley was a very good center."

yep he seems really high on Shipley as a whole. I think going forward Shipley, Holmes, Mewhort, and Thornton are fighting for three starting spots. Competition is a good thing as it generally brings out the best in people. The middle of the line is without question young and unproven but at some point you have to see if they can play or not and give them a chance to develop.

[BrentMc11]

yep he seems really high on Shipley as a whole. I think going forward Shipley, Holmes, Mewhort, and Thornton are fighting for three starting spots. Competition is a good thing as it generally brings out the best in people. The middle of the line is without question young and unproven but at some point you have to see if they can play or not and give them a chance to develop.

Some people are slamming Shipley.  All I can say is he fit in very well the last time (see GB Packer game) and to play guard if Holmes gets healthy is a plus.  Or...keep him at center.  I agree with you 8818!!

[Jason_]

Some people are slamming Shipley.  All I can say is he fit in very well the last time (see GB Packer game) and to play guard if Holmes gets healthy is a plus.  Or...keep him at center.  I agree with you 8818!!

 

and people slammed Grigson when he traded Shipley away.  Now people are slamming him for bringing Shipley back.  Proof once again that Grigson simply cannot win. lol

[BrentMc11]

and people slammed Grigson when he traded Shipley away.  Now people are slamming him for bringing Shipley back.  Proof once again that Grigson simply cannot win. lol

Well put, Jason!  Well put!  

[Jay Kirk]

Some people are slamming Shipley.  All I can say is he fit in very well the last time (see GB Packer game) and to play guard if Holmes gets healthy is a plus.  Or...keep him at center.  I agree with you 8818!!

We have always been Shipley supporters ,He brings his best no matter where hes playing ,and is adequate where ever hes playing. We were ones who were not happy he left.Wether as a starter or backup glad to have him back.

[Superman]

This.

Doesn't matter how much we improve the run if Luck is in a cast on the sidelines.

 

If you bring it back from the extreme, perhaps there's room to acknowledge how important it is to be able to run the ball.

[Superman]

Donald Thomas is on IR.

Mewort is banged up.

Louis has looked like crap and we don't know what we have in Thornton.

I'd say we need another guard.

 

Shipley played guard all last season for the Ravens. I don't think he played particularly well, but he can be considered a C/G player. If Harrison and/or Holmes are able to play, Shipley is guard depth. If not, they still belong on the active roster, and there's no room for another lineman.

[Superman]

And you can see, Lucks hits are about even each year, even with less passes in 2013. So you can't blame Arians' O without blaming Pep's equally.  That means Luck is cause for a lot of those, yes?  But he can't be accountable for all.  And scheme is already proven equal, so that is out.  

 

The scheme is not proven equal. Just because Luck is still getting hit doesn't mean he's getting hit for the same reasons. There's no question that Arians' offense encourages QBs to hold on to the ball, without emphasizing quick, high percentage passes, without dumpoffs to backs, etc. 

 

Pep's offense is still a work in progress, and not without blame itself. Especially since they spent all last preseason dubbing it a "No Coast Offense." There are still major remnants of Arians' offense left behind. 

[Gavin]

Improving the running game will go a long way with protecting Luck, The talent is there to protect Luck now but until we start throwing over the middle of the field more and force Linebackers to peel back they will just keep loading the box , Playcalling and Lucks decision making is key, Also the team should be using more Angle Blocking and Zone...Giving Trent some choices in what hole he takes...Actually ANY angle blocking would be nice to...The talent is there to run the ball.....Though Cherilus is much better against the pass then run.......Luck don't get hit if the ball is not in his hands

[Gavin]

As to why Luck gets hit so much....Much of it is on him..Not taking the open receiver,...double pumping on a player who is open......All of it? No....A lot of it? Absolutely

[The_Warlord]

You're excused... enjoy

 

Almost made me LOL....almost.

[ColtsBlueFL]

The scheme is not proven equal. Just because Luck is still getting hit doesn't mean he's getting hit for the same reasons. There's no question that Arians' offense encourages QBs to hold on to the ball, without emphasizing quick, high percentage passes, without dumpoffs to backs, etc. 

 

Pep's offense is still a work in progress, and not without blame itself. Especially since they spent all last preseason dubbing it a "No Coast Offense." There are still major remnants of Arians' offense left behind. 

 

Well let me rephrase, the schemes results have proven to be nearly identical. Reasons of Arians scheme is moot, that season is past.  What is the reason for  Pep's schemes from failing to improve it? Luck was sacked and hit at the exact same rate. Now you claim that Pep has remnants of Arians scheme still in there.  Then his hybrid is a failure.  The results would seem to point to he kept a part of the worst of Arians Offensive plans (sacks +hits) while leavng out the better parts (we had 420 yards less total passing yards and 3rd down rate conversion went dramatically lower).

 

With an identical W-L record and a almost identical sack+hit rate, and equally ineffective running game, the results of each scheme proven to be equally less than optimal in the areas under discussion.  No clear winner of one over the other. The bad thing is, Pep's scheme was supposed to be an inherent improvement in some area and it doesn't show as a major difference at all.  Arians is gone. Peps is accountable for the lack of improvement in certain critical areas. Mainly the ones where people still trash Arians scheme but Pep's own scheme did not improve upon.

[Superman]

Well let me rephrase, the schemes results have proven to be nearly identical. Reasons of Arians scheme is moot, that season is past.  What is the reason for  Pep's schemes from failing to improve it? Luck was sacked and hit at the exact same rate. Now you claim that Pep has remnants of Arians scheme still in there.  Then his hybrid is a failure.  The results would seem to point to he kept a part of the worst of Arians Offensive plans (sacks +hits) while leavng out the better parts (we had 420 yards less total passing yards and 3rd down rate conversion went dramatically lower).

 

With an identical W-L record and a almost identical sack+hit rate, and equally ineffective running game, the results of each scheme proven to be equally less than optimal in the areas under discussion.  No clear winner of one over the other. The bad thing is, Pep's scheme was supposed to be an inherent improvement in some area and it doesn't show as a major difference at all.  Arians is gone. Peps is accountable for the lack of improvement in certain critical areas. Mainly the ones where people still trash Arians scheme but Pep's own scheme did not improve upon.

 

Being critical of Arians' scheme isn't a defense of Pep's gameplanning or play calling. I'm not sure anyone is absolving Pep of any responsibility for the issues with offense last season, least of all NCF (I hate to speak for anyone else, but I happen to know that NCF isn't a member of any Pep Hamilton fan club). I think those issues were many and varied, and like you said, some of them could be considered the opposite of improvements on what we had with Arians. Doesn't mean Arians' system should never be criticized.

 

To me, I am optimistic because Pep doesn't have a decade of calling NFL offenses the exact same way, like Arians does, so I can hold on to hope that he will make the adjustments that I personally think are critical for an efficient and effective offense. And given how we adjusted toward the end of last season, and how things looked in preseason, I think there's a chance for Pep to grow into what I think a good coordinator should be. (This is all based on my ideals, by the way. Yours might be very different. And that's fine; there's more than one way to skin a cat.) Based on what he did in preseason, my only real complaint is the lack of play action, which I started a thread about a couple weeks ago. We'll see how that shakes out.

 

But don't mistake comments about the "flaws" in Arians' system for praise of Pep's system, or absolution of any kind. Pep has a lot of work to do to earn significant praise from anyone, I think.

 

What I will say, however, is that Pep had more significant injuries, which affected the third down rate, IMO, even though we had a shorter third down average (so it might be a wash, depending on how you balance those two factors out). And before the Chargers game, the run game was decent. Top ten in yards per game, I think. So there were some improvements with Pep, but the offense still didn't bring it home as effectively as we all wanted. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

Being critical of Arians' scheme isn't a defense of Pep's gameplanning or play calling. I'm not sure anyone is absolving Pep of any responsibility for the issues with offense last season, least of all NCF (I hate to speak for anyone else, but I happen to know that NCF isn't a member of any Pep Hamilton fan club). I think those issues were many and varied, and like you said, some of them could be considered the opposite of improvements on what we had with Arians. Doesn't mean Arians' system should never be criticized.

 

To me, I am optimistic because Pep doesn't have a decade of calling NFL offenses the exact same way, like Arians does, so I can hold on to hope that he will make the adjustments that I personally think are critical for an efficient and effective offense. And given how we adjusted toward the end of last season, and how things looked in preseason, I think there's a chance for Pep to grow into what I think a good coordinator should be. (This is all based on my ideals, by the way. Yours might be very different. And that's fine; there's more than one way to skin a cat.) Based on what he did in preseason, my only real complaint is the lack of play action, which I started a thread about a couple weeks ago. We'll see how that shakes out.

 

But don't mistake comments about the "flaws" in Arians' system for praise of Pep's system, or absolution of any kind. Pep has a lot of work to do to earn significant praise from anyone, I think.

 

What I will say, however, is that Pep had more significant injuries, which affected the third down rate, IMO, even though we had a shorter third down average (so it might be a wash, depending on how you balance those two factors out). And before the Chargers game, the run game was decent. Top ten in yards per game, I think. So there were some improvements with Pep, but the offense still didn't bring it home as effectively as we all wanted. 

 

All well and good, but does not address my original question to the O.P. ... why even bring up Arians' system and it's results in this thread? It's especially notable when Pep's system and it's results netted no significant improvements for the areas that were illustrated.  So what's the point? It wasn't necessary and it just screams of sour grapes whining.  And I was surprised he even did it, to be honest, because I'm familiar with his typical post style.  That's why I asked. That's all.  I just wish folks here would leave the Arians' things where they belong. In the past and not in current discussions that don't actually make a reference to it.  For that they can start a new thread for Arians bashing to relieve stress thread, let let Bruce have it with both hands, while trying to fend off counter punches to Pep. 

[Dark Superman]

don't shoot the messenger I am just passing along what Grigson said.

He talked awhile about Shipley and talked about how well Shipley did stsrting 8 games at guard for the Ravens last year. So my guess is he feels Shipley can slide over at guard if needed. Also I would suspect he's higher on Louis and Thornton than the forum is.

I don't know.. In my head I feel like if we could get a hold of a pro bowl caliber guard and a safety.. We could be SB contenders right now.. Next off season should be interesting.

[Superman]

I don't know.. In my head I feel like if we could get a hold of a pro bowl caliber guard and a safety.. We could be SB contenders right now.. Next off season should be interesting.

 

We lost the gamble on the Pro Bowl caliber guard. I think Donald Thomas, when healthy, is up there. He's not healthy, obviously, so we're bent on that one.

 

Pro Bowl safety, I think, is overrated. Lots of teams with really good safety play, but average defenses and losing records. And LaRon Landry was a Pro Bowler two years ago, so if he can step his game up, we might have what you're asking for already.

 

I'd have preferred an additional pass rusher, but we might have the rotational pass rushers we need in Cam Johnson and Jonathan Newsome, especially when Mathis comes back. 

[Superman]

All well and good, but does not address my original question to the O.P. ... why even bring up Arians' system and it's results in this thread? It's especially notable when Pep's system and it's results netted no significant improvements for the areas that were illustrated.  So what's the point? It wasn't necessary and it just screams of sour grapes whining.  And I was surprised he even did it, to be honest, because I'm familiar with his typical post style.  That's why I asked. That's all.  I just wish folks here would leave the Arians' things where they belong. In the past and not in current discussions that don't actually make a reference to it.  For that they can start a new thread for Arians bashing to relieve stress thread, let let Bruce have it with both hands, while trying to fend off counter punches to Pep. 

 

I think Arians' system is pertinent. Like I said earlier, between the residuals and the mentality that it instilled in Luck (or maybe encouraged, as I think Luck has always been a bit hardheaded when it comes to giving up on a play), I think what Arians did in 2012 still had an effect on what the offense did in 2013. And everything about Arians' system isn't bad; you mentioned earlier the great success on third and long, best in the league, I believe. So the residuals aren't necessarily being chased out, or shouldn't be anyways. Not all of them.

 

And as you end your comment, you again go back to the either/or proposition. Being critical of Arians doesn't equate to being supportive or defensive of Pep. 

 

In my opinion, I don't think there's anything wrong with bringing Arians' system up, when it's pertinent. And whether Pep's offense is better at protecting the QB or not, it doesn't change the fact -- and this is a well established fact, over many seasons -- that Arians' system leads to a lot of QB hits. That's all NCF was saying, as he piggybacked off my post. And as we closed out 2013, Pep did a better job of play calling, and the QB got hit and sacked less. That might be what we're looking for; I think we all hope it is.

 

It's your prerogative, I just don't think you need to feel compelled to jump to Arians' defense every time someone is critical of his offense. It seems you have an affinity for it, and that's cool, but again, don't assume that just because someone disliked a certain aspect of Arians' offense that they are in love with Pep Hamilton. 

[Dark Superman]

We lost the gamble on the Pro Bowl caliber guard. I think Donald Thomas, when healthy, is up there. He's not healthy, obviously, so we're bent on that one.

 

Pro Bowl safety, I think, is overrated. Lots of teams with really good safety play, but average defenses and losing records. And LaRon Landry was a Pro Bowler two years ago, so if he can step his game up, we might have what you're asking for already.

 

I'd have preferred an additional pass rusher, but we might have the rotational pass rushers we need in Cam Johnson and Jonathan Newsome, especially when Mathis comes back.

I think Thomas had played his last down in a Colts uniform.

[ColtsBlueFL]

I think Arians' system is pertinent. Like I said earlier, between the residuals and the mentality that it instilled in Luck (or maybe encouraged, as I think Luck has always been a bit hardheaded when it comes to giving up on a play), I think what Arians did in 2012 still had an effect on what the offense did in 2013. And everything about Arians' system isn't bad; you mentioned earlier the great success on third and long, best in the league, I believe. So the residuals aren't necessarily being chased out, or shouldn't be anyways. Not all of them.

 

And as you end your comment, you again go back to the either/or proposition. Being critical of Arians doesn't equate to being supportive or defensive of Pep. 

 

In my opinion, I don't think there's anything wrong with bringing Arians' system up, when it's pertinent. And whether Pep's offense is better at protecting the QB or not, it doesn't change the fact -- and this is a well established fact, over many seasons -- that Arians' system leads to a lot of QB hits. That's all NCF was saying, as he piggybacked off my post. And as we closed out 2013, Pep did a better job of play calling, and the QB got hit and sacked less. That might be what we're looking for; I think we all hope it is.

 

It's your prerogative, I just don't think you need to feel compelled to jump to Arians' defense every time someone is critical of his offense. It seems you have an affinity for it, and that's cool, but again, don't assume that just because someone disliked a certain aspect of Arians' offense that they are in love with Pep Hamilton. 

 

Well then let me be the person that points out that Pep has not been any more successful at protecting Luck from getting drilled repeatedly than Arians was. Which betrayed the predictions of the majority of fans here that Luck would be hit less when Bruce left.

 

Now to be fair, most also said a higher Comp%. and lower INT.  That part did come true. But Colts also gained 420+ yards less and 3rd down conversion % to keep drives alive fell markedly. 

 

Now in my mind, to show Pep offense is aloowing Luck to grow, I expect Luck to (minimums) achieve-

 

1. Set a new career high in TD passes

2. Achieve a greater than 17% or greater increase in passer rating

3. Show a 12% or greater increase in yards per game.

 

 

Yes, even if Pep gets his 'more balanced' offensive scheme (rushing game) actually growing. Numbers Never Lie group mentions over last 20 years, 9 QB selected #1 overall have demonstrated making these increases in their 3rd year. Luck should be able to keep pace with those other QB's

 

P.S. - I don't know if NCF is a Pep fanboy or not, but it is worth pointing out he was a Stanford Cardinal fanatic, and he came here because of Luck.  And Pep was Lucks OC at Standford for (I beleive) 2 years...  so... it's hard for me to imagine he doesn't like or support Pep Hamilton or his implementations.

[Dark_Indy]

We lost the gamble on the Pro Bowl caliber guard. I think Donald Thomas, when healthy, is up there. He's not healthy, obviously, so we're bent on that one.

 

Pro Bowl safety, I think, is overrated. Lots of teams with really good safety play, but average defenses and losing records. And LaRon Landry was a Pro Bowler two years ago, so if he can step his game up, we might have what you're asking for already.

 

I'd have preferred an additional pass rusher, but we might have the rotational pass rushers we need in Cam Johnson and Jonathan Newsome, especially when Mathis comes back. 

 

I'm not sure I can say Donald Thomas is a pro bowl guard, then again, saying "Pro Bowler" means nothing anyway. Derek Anderson was a "Pro Bowler".

 

Landry has done well for us in the last year- I don't see what the issue folks have with him is. He led the team in tackles until his injury last year, and had he played all year I think folks wouldn't be so down on him. Injuries happen. 

 

If Landry and Toler stay healthy, our defense is pretty solid. Mike Adams will be adequate in the other safety slot, but that position will need to be addressed next year. 

 

Honestly, I see the offensive line as a work in progress. Instead of signing random nobodies, this year we should run with Castonzo and Cherilus at tackles, shift Shipley to Center and let Mewhort and Holmes run as the guards. 

 

If I were to go grab a FA player, it would have to be Chris Obgonnaya, the FB from the Browns. He's an instant upgrade over Mario Harvey at FB, and gives us another solid blocker/pass catcher out of the backfield for Luck to utilize on check downs. 

 

IF we are going to use a fullback, and we're set on having a fullback- we might as well have a good one, and not a bum linebacker switching positions. I'd rather see Dwayne Allen back there.

[Superman]

Well then let me be the person that points out that Pep has not been any more successful at protecting Luck from getting drilled repeatedly than Arians was. Which betrayed the predictions of the majority of fans here that Luck would be hit less when Bruce left.

 

Now to be fair, most also said a higher Comp%. and lower INT.  That part did come true. But Colts also gained 420+ yards less and 3rd down conversion % to keep drives alive fell markedly. 

 

Now in my mind, to show Pep offense is aloowing Luck to grow, I expect Luck to (minimums) achieve-

 

1. Set a new career high in TD passes

2. Achieve a greater than 17% or greater increase in passer rating

3. Show a 12% or greater increase in yards per game.

 

 

Yes, even if Pep gets his 'more balanced' offensive scheme (rushing game) actually growing. Numbers Never Lie group mentions over last 20 years, 9 QB selected #1 overall have demonstrated making these increases in their 3rd year. Luck should be able to keep pace with those other QB's

 

P.S. - I don't know if NCF is a Pep fanboy or not, but it is worth pointing out he was a Stanford Cardinal fanatic, and he came here because of Luck.  And Pep was Lucks OC at Standford for (I beleive) 2 years...  so... it's hard for me to imagine he doesn't like or support Pep Hamilton or his implementations.

 

To start with the P.S. -- I don't want to speak for anyone else, so I'll just say that I know for a fact that NCF isn't a Pep fanboy. Not close. I'll leave it for him to expound further, if he chooses to do so. As for Pep, he was Luck's coordinator for one year. He was with Stanford for one year before being promoted to coordinator, but served as the WR coach. When Harbaugh left in 2011, Shaw became the HC, and Pep became the OC. Luck left after 2011, Pep stayed, then Pep came to the Colts after 2012. So there isn't a whole lot of history between Pep and Luck, though they did spend two years together under varying circumstances.

 

Now to the comparisons, first of all, I don't think that even an abject failure of Pep's offense, should that happen, will vindicate Arians' offense. That's why I don't know if the either/or thing belongs here to begin with. Pep might be terrible; that doesn't mean the critcisms of Arians' no longer stand.

 

To the offense overall, I think the best mark of an offense is points per possession. And yes, PPP was notably higher in 2013 (from 1.76 to 1.97; the Pats went from 2.74 down to 2.10, just as a point of reference). I don't think you purposely left that out, but it was left out. So while the yards and third down efficiency went down, that doesn't mean the offense wasn't better. In certain respects, it was.

 

Further, while I too think Luck should put up better numbers, I don't know where you get those benchmarks from. And they seem sort of ambitious. Take Matt Ryan, for instance. The Falcons offense was much improved in his third year, and the team went 13-3, but his passer rating only improved about 12%. Peyton Manning and Tom Brady didn't see those kinds of improvements in their third years as starters, but their teams had successful seasons. You said 9 #1 picks have demonstrated those gains in Year 3; I'd like to know who they were.

 

Given the added weapons, the hopeful improvements on the offensive line, and what we saw from the offense at the end of the season and in preseason this year, I do expect Luck to be more productive. Hopefully he's a lot more efficient. I'd take those gains you asked for every day of the week. But it sounds like you're setting up arbitrary benchmarks for Luck to hit, proclaiming that Pep's offense won't be a "success" unless Luck's numbers make sizable gains. Pep's job isn't just to make Luck productive; it's to make the offense productive. So if Luck doesn't make this Year 3 leap, but the offense is humming, the running game is well-oiled, and we're scoring points, Pep has done his job. 

[Superman]

I'm not sure I can say Donald Thomas is a pro bowl guard, then again, saying "Pro Bowler" means nothing anyway. Derek Anderson was a "Pro Bowler".

 

Landry has done well for us in the last year- I don't see what the issue folks have with him is. He led the team in tackles until his injury last year, and had he played all year I think folks wouldn't be so down on him. Injuries happen. 

 

If Landry and Toler stay healthy, our defense is pretty solid. Mike Adams will be adequate in the other safety slot, but that position will need to be addressed next year. 

 

Honestly, I see the offensive line as a work in progress. Instead of signing random nobodies, this year we should run with Castonzo and Cherilus at tackles, shift Shipley to Center and let Mewhort and Holmes run as the guards. 

 

If I were to go grab a FA player, it would have to be Chris Obgonnaya, the FB from the Browns. He's an instant upgrade over Mario Harvey at FB, and gives us another solid blocker/pass catcher out of the backfield for Luck to utilize on check downs. 

 

IF we are going to use a fullback, and we're set on having a fullback- we might as well have a good one, and not a bum linebacker switching positions. I'd rather see Dwayne Allen back there.

 

He said Pro Bowl caliber. DT was great in his game and a half for us last season. If he had come back and stayed healthy, I think the offensive line would be in MUCH better shape than it is now. Pro Bowl or not...

 

And Landry... I do think he gets more criticism than he deserves, but he had his share of problems last season. And while it's superficial, no starting safety should go an entire season without at least knocking down one pass. We're talking about having a difference maker in the defensive backfield, and Landry was not that, for the most part. Especially after he got hurt. If he can get back to 2012 form, we'll be better off for it.

 

I disagree with most of the rest of your post, but that's cool.

[Dark_Indy]

He said Pro Bowl caliber. DT was great in his game and a half for us last season. If he had come back and stayed healthy, I think the offensive line would be in MUCH better shape than it is now. Pro Bowl or not...

 

And Landry... I do think he gets more criticism than he deserves, but he had his share of problems last season. And while it's superficial, no starting safety should go an entire season without at least knocking down one pass. We're talking about having a difference maker in the defensive backfield, and Landry was not that, for the most part. Especially after he got hurt. If he can get back to 2012 form, we'll be better off for it.

 

I disagree with most of the rest of your post, but that's cool.

 

Eh, we've had a history of disagreeing on some things- glad it stays civil though.

 

There's a few positions I'm disillusioned with on the Colts Roster, and that's Fullback and Right Guard. 

 

Havili was barely decent, and we're going to follow him up with someone who has played fullback for less than a year? Harvey isn't really a depth option at linebacker, so why is he going to be any different at FB? From what I saw, he has no hands.

 

Thornton *SHOULD* improve at RG this year, being his more natural position, I'm willing to give him a chance (meaning not groaning when I see him on the field like D HeyBey circa 2013. However, to my eyes (and I've been wrong before) I think putting the best five guys out there means Shipley, Mewhort and Holmes at C, LG, RG respectively. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

To start with the P.S. -- I don't want to speak for anyone else, so I'll just say that I know for a fact that NCF isn't a Pep fanboy. Not close. I'll leave it for him to expound further, if he chooses to do so. As for Pep, he was Luck's coordinator for one year. He was with Stanford for one year before being promoted to coordinator, but served as the WR coach. When Harbaugh left in 2011, Shaw became the HC, and Pep became the OC. Luck left after 2011, Pep stayed, then Pep came to the Colts after 2012. So there isn't a whole lot of history between Pep and Luck, though they did spend two years together under varying circumstances.

 

I didn't say I did not believe you, I just said knowing what is public, about his Stanford connections, it does raise  an eyebrow for anyone without a personal reference. But anyone can understand liking an organization and not be thrilled with an aspect of it.  I get it.  NCF does not need to defend your representation of his position.

 

Now to the comparisons, first of all, I don't think that even an abject failure of Pep's offense, should that happen, will vindicate Arians' offense. That's why I don't know if the either/or thing belongs here to begin with. Pep might be terrible; that doesn't mean the critcisms of Arians' no longer stand.

 

It's not vindication of Arians offense.  Arians season is in the books and unchangeable. What it does is set a benchmark. What comes after is comparable, not justification of what came before.  That is what it is.  If the benchmark was deemed poor and it selectively pointed out, and the implementation that came after it just as poor using a different methodology, then one cannot go pointing the finger at the benchmark while ignoring the three fingers pointing back at himself.  That is my point, and I'll continue to make it if one does not.  That's all.

 

To the offense overall, I think the best mark of an offense is points per possession. And yes, PPP was notably higher in 2013 (from 1.76 to 1.97; the Pats went from 2.74 down to 2.10, just as a point of reference). I don't think you purposely left that out, but it was left out. So while the yards and third down efficiency went down, that doesn't mean the offense wasn't better. In certain respects, it was.

 

Points per game was up just over 2 as well, IIRC.  But those did not net any additional Wins, and Im sure we can go back and forth finding more up and downside for each.  Distracting and not related to peoples issues with Arians offense anyway.  The complaints always go back to the pounding Luck got doing 7 step drops in the vertical offense,  not mentioning the results of the  Pep 1.0  hybrid.

 

 

Further, while I too think Luck should put up better numbers, I don't know where you get those benchmarks from. And they seem sort of ambitious. Take Matt Ryan, for instance. The Falcons offense was much improved in his third year, and the team went 13-3, but his passer rating only improved about 12%. Peyton Manning and Tom Brady didn't see those kinds of improvements in their third years as starters, but their teams had successful seasons. You said 9 #1 picks have demonstrated those gains in Year 3; I'd like to know who they were.

 

** See below-

 

Given the added weapons, the hopeful improvements on the offensive line, and what we saw from the offense at the end of the season and in preseason this year, I do expect Luck to be more productive. Hopefully he's a lot more efficient. I'd take those gains you asked for every day of the week. But it sounds like you're setting up arbitrary benchmarks for Luck to hit, proclaiming that Pep's offense won't be a "success" unless Luck's numbers make sizable gains. Pep's job isn't just to make Luck productive; it's to make the offense productive. So if Luck doesn't make this Year 3 leap, but the offense is humming, the running game is well-oiled, and we're scoring points, Pep has done his job. 

 

** See below-

 

It's not arbitrary, ( I don't do that, I try mightily to make decisions based on information, not emotion ) I saw it and set it as a benchmark from the Numbers Never Lie folks at ESPN.  3rd year stats ( 10 or more games started ) compared to first 2,  Since Jamarcus Russell is the only QB selected #1 overall in the last 20 years that did not make it to 10 starts in his 3rd year, I don't think he was counted.

 

The criteria, a QB selected #1 overall, started at least 10 games in the 3rd season, compared 3rd year stats to the prior 2.  That group of QB's would be- 

 

Drew Bledsoe

Peyton Manning

David Carr

Carson Palmer

Eli Manning

Alex Smith

Matthew Stafford

Sam Bradford

Cam Newton

 

and the average they put up was in their video clip on Luck himself- 

 

So this is the average.  That means some of that group of QB's above were better than these %'s, and some were less. Maybe a few near dead on.  I didn't recheck ESPN's Numbers Never Lie stats, but I doubt a show named as such would lie on its numbers. If anybody is ambitious, they can do the math for each guy and post it. 

 

So I have set that as the Luck / Pep benchmark for 2014.  I don't ask them to be the best of the group, but I don't want Luck to sink the average next year by being a bottom feeder either.  And I really hope that Pep really does get the running game going big time. That opens up a lot of windows in the passing game.  Then each phase can fee off each other. Then I do expect Luck's numbers will go above those benchmarks the others have averaged previously.  But no matter what, we all agree that if it doesn't show up as more W's on the scoreboard, none of this Offense talk means squat.

[Superman]

I didn't say I did not believe you, I just said knowing what is public, about his Stanford connections, it does raise  an eyebrow for anyone without a personal reference. But anyone can understand liking an organization and not be thrilled with an aspect of it.  I get it.  NCF does not need to defend your representation of his position.

Fair enough. I think if you cared to do so, you could find evidence of this in his posting history, but it's not a big deal. It's just like I said, someone being critical of an aspect of Arians' offense doesn't equate to cheerleading for Pep.

 

It's not vindication of Arians offense.  Arians season is in the books and unchangeable. What it does is set a benchmark. What comes after is comparable, not what came before.  That is what it is.  If the benchmark was deemed poor and it selectively pointed out, and the implementation that came after it just as poor using a different methodology, then one cannot go pointing the finger at the benchmark while ignoring the three fingers pointing back at himself.  That is my point, and I'll continue to make it if one does not.  That's all.

I continue to disagree. Whether the QB gets hit too much now doesn't change the fact that the QB got hit too much in the past. That will be true throughout eternity. Fifteen years from now, if Luck is getting hit too much, it won't change the fact that Luck got hit too much in Year 1.

Now, I agree that it's not as simple as "It's all Arians' fault." And it's not fair to represent it that way. But some of this can be traced back to the philosophies upon which Arians' has formed his offense over the years, and there's a track record of his QBs getting hit a lot.

Points per game was up just over 2 as well, IIRC.  But those did not net any additional Wins, and Im sure we can go back and forth finding more up and downside for each.  Distracting and not related to peoples issues with Arians offense anyway.  The complaints always go back to the pounding Luck got doing 7 step drops in the vertical offense,  not mentioning the results of the  Pep 1.0  hybrid.

Well again, some of Pep's issues hurt the offense. Some of his adjustments helped the offense. I still don't see that as a defense against the criticisms of Arians' offense. More about wins below...

Also, I think PPP is more telling than PPG, just because I think 35 points on 8 possessions is better and more efficient than 42 points on 11 possessions. Both are really good, though.

It's not arbitrary, I took it and set it as a benchmark from the Numbers Never Lie folks at ESPN.  3rd year stats ( 10 or more games started) compared to first 2,  Since Jamarcus Russell is the only QB in the last 20 years that did not make it to 10 starts in his 3rd year, so I don't think he was not counted.

...

 

So I have set that as the Luck / Pep benchmark for 2014.  I don't ask them to be the best of the group, but I don't want Luck to sink the average next year by being a bottom feeder either.  And I really hope that Pep really does get the running game going big time. That opens up a lot of windows in the passing game.  Then each phase can fee off each other. Then I do expect Luck's numbers will go above those benchmarks the others have averaged previously.  But no matter what, we all agree that if it doesn't show up as more W's on the scoreboard, none of this Offense talk means squat.

Ah. I thought you were saying that those 9 QBs all made at least that much of a jump. Thanks for clarifying. I'm not sure how they averaged out the career high in TDs, but that's not true across the board. Not an unreasonable expectation for Luck, though, so whatever. Nor is it unreasonable for Luck to be measured against that average, to a degree. I think there are other, more important areas that ought to be looked at as well to measure Luck's improvement in Year 3. And I don't think that's a good way of measuring the offense as a whole, though it's probably a big part of the picture.

About wins, though. I think we overachieved in 2012, and going into 2013, I didn't expect more wins, even though I expected the team to be better. And I think we were better in 2013, despite the identical record. I feel justified in saying so, because we played the best teams on our schedule better, beating all of them, but were inconsistent and played poorly against some teams we should have played better against. Kind of comes out in the wash, when you talk about the record. And it's hard to win more than 11 games in a season.

That's why the analytics guys keep talking about the Colts 'regressing to the mean,' because in several respects, this team has overachieved in its first two seasons. The record in close games is not sustainable, based on historical indicators. The answer has to be to reduce the number of close games, which we did in 2013. Now, the answer has to be to play better against less than elite competition, while still reaching peaks against elite competition. I don't mind losing to the Rams, Cardinals and Chargers, but I do mind playing like bums in those games. So I think a fair measure of offensive improvement in 2014 will be, not wins, but not having a three game sample against marginal teams where we only average 9.3 points a game.

And then, of course, the defense has to do its job, which has a bearing on the number of wins as well.

So I agree that we can and should continue to judge Luck and the offense as a whole based on statistical improvement, but I don't think that statistical comparison should be limited to the areas you've mentioned. In Luck's case, adjusted yards/attempt, TD%, INT%, completion %, etc., are more important to me than yards/game or passer rating. For the offense as a whole, I think PPP is more important than rushing yards/game, for instance, and third down % and points per red zone visit are more telling than wins.

There's a lot we'll have our eyes on. I look forward to talking about these things throughout the season.

[ColtsBlueFL]

Fair enough. I think if you cared to do so, you could find evidence of this in his posting history, but it's not a big deal. It's just like I said, someone being critical of an aspect of Arians' offense doesn't equate to cheerleading for Pep.

 

Got it.

I continue to disagree. Whether the QB gets hit too much now doesn't change the fact that the QB got hit too much in the past. That will be true throughout eternity. Fifteen years from now, if Luck is getting hit too much, it won't change the fact that Luck got hit too much in Year 1.

 

OK, we agree to disagree.  But he who lives in a glass house should not throw stones.

Now, I agree that it's not as simple as "It's all Arians' fault." And it's not fair to represent it that way. But some of this can be traced back to the philosophies upon which Arians' has formed his offense over the years, and there's a track record of his QBs getting hit a lot.

 

True, so any change away from that philosophy, by default, should demonstrate improvement in that area, right?  The facts prove it did not. Criticizing the former while ignoring the inability of the latter to show notable improvement is counterproductive talk, IME.  It's whining.

Well again, some of Pep's issues hurt the offense. Some of his adjustments helped the offense. I still don't see that as a defense against the criticisms of Arians' offense. More about wins below...

 

See above...

Also, I think PPP is more telling than PPG, just because I think 35 points on 8 possessions is better and more efficient than 42 points on 11 possessions. Both are really good, though.

 

That's not unreasonable. And they are both good - agreed.

Ah. I thought you were saying that those 9 QBs all made at least that much of a jump. Thanks for clarifying. I'm not sure how they averaged out the career high in TDs, but that's not true across the board. Not an unreasonable expectation for Luck, though, so whatever. Nor is it unreasonable for Luck to be measured against that average, to a degree. I think there are other, more important areas that ought to be looked at as well to measure Luck's improvement in Year 3. And I don't think that's a good way of measuring the offense as a whole, though it's probably a big part of the picture.

 

I'm not talking about offense as a whole.  I'm talking about the continued growth of the best QB prospect since John Elway, or Peyton Manning. Offense is a different discussion. Yet it is hard for me to see our O as a monster, but Lucks output appear like a typical NFL game manager QB.  Could happen though I'd be so disappointed in some aspects.

About wins, though. I think we overachieved in 2012, and going into 2013, I didn't expect more wins, even though I expected the team to be better. And I think we were better in 2013, despite the identical record. I feel justified in saying so, because we played the best teams on our schedule better, beating all of them, but were inconsistent and played poorly against some teams we should have played better against. Kind of comes out in the wash, when you talk about the record. And it's hard to win more than 11 games in a season.

 

You have to overachieve at times, especially crunch time.  The best (race car, player, team, etc..)  doesn't always win.  Even the best teams have to reach down deep at times.  As far as wins, just enough to win the division is good for me.  But from there I want over-achievement.

That's why the analytics guys keep talking about the Colts 'regressing to the mean,' because in several respects, this team has overachieved in its first two seasons. The record in close games is not sustainable, based on historical indicators. The answer has to be to reduce the number of close games, which we did in 2013. Now, the answer has to be to play better against less than elite competition, while still reaching peaks against elite competition. I don't mind losing to the Rams, Cardinals and Chargers, but I do mind playing like bums in those games. So I think a fair measure of offensive improvement in 2014 will be, not wins, but not having a three game sample against marginal teams where we only average 9.3 points a game.

 

That losing steak showed the vulnerability of our O line vs some premier fonrt 7 D talent.  And letdown of our D at times.  I agree we need to win the ones we're supposed to.  and continue to rise to the challenge of elite teams and compete.

And then, of course, the defense has to do its job, which has a bearing on the number of wins as well.

 

Yes.

So I agree that we can and should continue to judge Luck and the offense as a whole based on statistical improvement, but I don't think that statistical comparison should be limited to the areas you've mentioned. In Luck's case, adjusted yards/attempt, TD%, INT%, completion %, etc., are more important to me than yards/game or passer rating. For the offense as a whole, I think PPP is more important than rushing yards/game, for instance, and third down % and points per red zone visit are more telling than wins.

 

We can do that, but it is fair (if labor intensive ) to use those previous 9 QB's average improvement in those areas for year 3 as a benchmark as well.

There's a lot we'll have our eyes on. I look forward to talking about these things throughout the season.

 

Same.  Hopefully it will mostly be about the glowing improvements we have shown all throughout the season.

[Superman]

OK, we agree to disagree.  But he who lives in a glass house should not throw stones.

...

 

True, so any change away from that philosophy, by default, should demonstrate improvement in that area, right?  The facts prove it did not. Criticizing the former while ignoring the inability of the latter to show notable improvement is counterproductive talk, IME.  It's whining.

 

I don't think it was ever presented that way. That was the hope, but no one expected that to change automatically. You have to do better and play better. Improvement isn't by default.

And criticizing the former doesn't require an equal criticism of the latter in order to be legitimate.

 

I'm not talking about offense as a whole.  I'm talking about the continued growth of the best QB prospect since John Elway, or Peyton Manning. Offense is a different discussion. Yet it is hard for me to see our O as a monster, but Lucks output appear like a typical NFL game manager QB.  Could happen though I'd be so disappointed in some aspects.

 

I don't think the success of the offensive coordinator is solely determined by how the QB produces. I do expect the QB to produce better, but that's not the only meaningful measure of offense.

 

You have to overachieve at times, especially crunch time.  The best (race car, player, team, etc..)  doesn't always win.  Even the best teams have to reach down deep at times.  As far as wins, just enough to win the division is good for me.  But from there I want over-achievement.

 

Our division probably won't require more than 11 wins. I'd love to see more.

We can do that, but it is fair (if labor intensive ) to use those previous 9 QB's average improvement in those areas for year 3 as a benchmark as well.

 

Sure.

[Manning1887]

I like the quiet. Let's keep all our draft picks going into the 2015 draft. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

 

I don't think it was ever presented that way. That was the hope, but no one expected that to change automatically. You have to do better and play better. Improvement isn't by default.

 

Ahh, but it was.  Many couldn't get Bruce out the door fast enough so they could sleep at night knowing Luck wasn't going to get drilled anymore

 

 

And criticizing the former doesn't require an equal criticism of the latter in order to be legitimate.

 

{the rest snipped for brevity folks...}

 

 **********************************************************************************************************************

 

In a proper context , true.  But you were discussing this  and I quote-

 

"So what I keep seeing and hearing is "the Colts have to fix the offensive line in order to keep Luck upright," and I think, whether the offensive line improves or not, we can do a better job of keeping Luck upright with scheme and execution."

 

This was about this past season, not the previous one before that!  But in reply there was this!!

 

NCF-  and I quote

 

"I'm sorry I can't give this more than one "like."  

 

"Especially the idea of scheme and execution."

 

"What I ***HATED*** about the Arians scheme was that it was primarily a 7-step drop behind a terrible OL and Luck waited and waited and waited for WR's to get open and throw the ball.     There was very little 3-step or 5-step drops...   very few roll outs...  and when the defense knows where the QB is going to be about 90% of the time,  it makes their job that much easier.   Luck was going to be 7-10 yards behind the center.  "

 

What did anything prior in this thread or your post warrant this statement about an offense in place two years ago?  since you either do not get my position, or dismiss it out of hand, I will ask a couple questions and then state my position , albeit maybe with less tact then before.

 

1.  What is/was the objective of this statement?

2. What is was the relevance of this statement?

3.what is/was the constructive criticism/benefit of this statement?

 

 

Now I know you 'feel' Arians tainted Luck and residuals are the issue.  Arians also left residuals in Peyton Manning that Tom Moore had no problem with.  So unless there's some evidence to back what you're selling, I'm not buying.  And nothing in how it was presented gave any implication such a conclusion.

 

Now my newly restated position-  It feel it was an uncalled for, unwarranted, backhanded slap in the face of our old head coach that provided no new revelations or benefits to the discussion in the post or the thread at large.  Is the premise true true?  I concede that it appears it could very well be and is worthy of it's own discussion as to why, in and of itself.  But demonstrate where in this thread, in reply to that post, it adds anything of value, and is not just an off the cuff rant, and I'll relent.  So you see, I'm not disputing what he said, just where and in what way he did.  Nothing more, nothing less.

 

Yes, I feel Bill Polian crushing and Bruce Arians smashing has it's place as the prime subjects at hand.  And if the thread is labelled well, I can even decide to skip it altogether (and likely would). But when reading an in depth thread full of viewpoints with nothing to do with either, and  I come across something out of the blue that never gets tied back into the discussion at hand, then I get miffed. As it is hard to get the implication of such a statement.  Now if it is brought up and tied in to the discussion or makes some other point relevent, etc... again no issue.

 

So I'm just asking how this one ties in somehow and I'll feel better.  Either way, I said way too much, and we spent way more time and energy than either of us needed to. But I appreciate your ability to be straightforward in dialog and accommodating to replies.  So with this I give you the final word and close. Peace.

[ColtStronger]

ANNNNNND THEEEEEEEEENNNNNNNN... How about you guys write a novel!!

[Superman]

ANNNNNND THEEEEEEEEENNNNNNNN... How about you guys write a novel!!

 

If you don't want to read it, don't read it.

 

Why would anyone be upset with someone else's conversation?

[BrentMc11]

Good stuff Superman and ColtsBlueFL!!  The best thing is a good clean debate.

[ColtStronger]

I'm not upset at all and there isn't anything wrong with the debate.  Your right! I dont have to read it, thats why I didnt.  I just found it humorous each of you need to defend your POV to the point of 6+ paragraphs each post, and multiple posts at that.  Trust me I love talking Colts football, but even at my young age Ive already realized you can talk until you're blue in the face, if somebody just wants to argue, everything in the conversation is pointless.  The discussion didn't need to go on.

[SteelCityColt]

I'm not upset at all and there isn't anything wrong with the debate.  Your right! I dont have to read it, thats why I didnt.  I just found it humorous each of you need to defend your POV to the point of 6+ paragraphs each post, and multiple posts at that.  Trust me I love talking Colts football, but even at my young age Ive already realized you can talk until you're blue in the face, if somebody just wants to argue, everything in the conversation is pointless.  The discussion didn't need to go on.

 

This explains much....

 

People misunderstand that an "argument" can have more than one meaning. I see two articulate posters having a good interaction discussing a topic in detail and on a football basis. It's a rarity these days on here, mostly we can't get past people making loud statements with no means or desire to justify them.

 

To criticise someone what they've wrote and then admit you've not read it, it's not just rude it's ignorant. Let's put it another what have you contributed to the discussion?

 

I'll leave you with the wise words of some old Greek dude:

 

"Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something."

 

[ColtStronger]

This explains much....

 

People misunderstand that an "argument" can have more than one meaning. I see two articulate posters having a good interaction discussing a topic in detail and on a football basis. It's a rarity these days on here, mostly we can't get past people making loud statements with no means or desire to justify them.

 

To criticise someone what they've wrote and then admit you've not read it, it's not just rude it's ignorant. Let's put it another what have you contributed to the discussion?

 

I'll leave you with the wise words of some old Greek dude:

 

"Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something."

 

I didn't say anything wrong, and I wasn't rude.  I was just stating my opinion just like you just did, however you implied that I am ignorant, but in reality you're the pot calling the kettle black with your reference about chiming in giving your 2 cents.  So, I will be sure to remember your quote, but first, practice what you preach! 

[SteelCityColt]

I didn't say anything wrong, and I wasn't rude.  I was just stating my opinion just like you just did, however you implied that I am ignorant, but in reality you're the pot calling the kettle black with your reference about chiming in giving your 2 cents.  So, I will be sure to remember your quote, but first, practice what you preach!

I didn't imply it, I flat out said it. If you can't see why criticising someone for what they have written then admitting you didn't even read it can be seen as ignorant...