Are we repeating mistakes of the past?

[chad72]

Are we repeating mistakes of the past and focusing more on the offensive side of the ball hoping that our D will have an opportunistic run to win the SB once?

 

The core that we seem to be focused on seems to be our offensive core of Luck, Hilton, our 2 TEs and Castanzo for the future contracts, all of which I feel are dictating our long term strategy on contracts. While it is important to be able to score points to stay competitive in this pass happy league, are we going down the Star Wars numbers path again?

 

The Patriots' plethora of SBs came when their front 7 and secondary made plays during their early SBs and once they paid up for their secondary again, the SB returned. Seahawks seem to be more content providing Wilson mediocre wide outs while focusing on retaining their defensive prowess. However, lost in the shuffle is the fact that they hit on plenty of their defensive draft picks in addition to signing 2 key pieces for their DL in Michael Bennett and Cliff Avril.

 

Should we have focused on the DL first before going down the offensive firepower route? We need some very good defensive draft picks to sustain our long term strategy. Thoughts?

[mattceinicram]

I slightly worry about this as well, but I also think Grigson has a plan. I can almost guarantee we focus heavily on the front 7 in the draft.

[Yoshinator]

I think if we hit a HR in the draft on defense, we'll be fine. We absolutely need to take defense with at least 2 of our first 3 picks though. Something I would like to do, is trade down to the middle of the 2nd and pick up an extra 3rd. I have confidence that Grigson could hit on 3 of 4 picks if we had two 2nds and two 3rds. If they were 3 defensive players, we'd have a formidable team and it'd put us closer to the Pats and Broncos levels this year (although we already closed the gap a bit). 

 

Just my two cents, but three hits on defense in the draft would absolutely improve this team and bring us to the SB level. If we don't, we'll have to rely on Luck again to carry the team.

[Jason_]

I've never understood the "we should address XX before anything else".  Granted, Grigson is only one person, but I don't believe for a second that he's the only one making phone calls to player agents.  They can reach out to multiple players at a time so no, I don't think there's a specific position group that should be addressed before addressing other position groups.

 

Even with all that aside, if you look back carefully at the defense last year, when the offense was productive and able to maintain drives, the defense, more often than not, played extremely well.  They were looking like a top 5/10 defense during the first 1/3-1/2 of the year, and it was during that time that they were leading the league in Time of Possession by a pretty good margin.  The offense was able to maintain drives and methodically move the ball down the field.  This kept the defense very rested, and they were able to get a lot more 3 and outs. 

 

IMO, our defense feeds off the offense far more than the offense feeds off the defense. 

[chad72]

 

 

IMO, our defense feeds off the offense far more than the offense feeds off the defense. 

 

I am not certain that is a great strategy for the playoffs where you are more likely to run into elite Ds that will limit your offense more often than not. The defense would then be required to keep the offense in games. We need the ability to go both ways, don't you think?

 

I have seen so many instances where Brady, Big Ben or Flacco turn the ball over/go cold and their Ds step up and eventually force a punt/several punts to get the ball back to their O without much damage. Our D is not at that level yet, which is where my concern lies.

[IndyD4U]

I think we sign a NT soon and find our starting S through the draft. 

 

Then again, with these weapons on O,  we could go straight Peyton era and throw up 40+ a game and challenge teams to out score us

[BPindy]

I'm hoping the Colts use picks 1-3 on defense in the draft. Getting 2 solid playmakers out of that group (like a Jordan Phillips) is going to put this team over the hump

Edited March 12, 2015 by 21isSuperman

[TKnight24]

How have we focused on offense more?

We just signed defensive players, did we not?

[Caleb3502]

How have we focused on offense more?

We just signed defensive players, did we not?

I think we did a good job bringing in Langford and Cole, I'd like Grigson to sign another D lineman, and they add more defensive players in the draft, and go safety Rpund 1 or 2.

[Warhorse]

As fans judging the front office...? Yes. Every GM out there would love to have the positions they need available for a value in FA. Rarely happens. So the good values were on the offensive side as far as big names. They filled needs immediately with WR and RB, and got front seven depth and pressure on D. More will likely come in the draft. Frankly, I find the question reflects fan hand wringing...and the front office is feeling pretty damn good right now.

[Mr. Irrelevant]

IMHO, no. Irsay wants to change the Colts DNA to a more balanced team aka Patriots and everybody have been preaching about stopping the run. I can assure you that the loss in NE was a hurtful reminder to everybody from Irsay to FO and Pagano, that this has to be enforced if we're going to win anything in January.

 

I just not know why the DL hasn't been addressed more in FA until now, but we shall see.

[krunk]

I don't think we are making mistakes of the past.  We've targeted several D Line prospects, just haven't pulled any in.

They've got to want to play here and for what we are offering.

[21isSuperman]

I would like to see more focus put on the defense, but that doesn't mean the moves Grigson has made will hurt the team or that he isn't looking for players to add on the defensive side of the ball.  It's still possible in a few days that we have Hardy and Fairley (and even Knighton or Wilfork) signed, which would improve our defensive significantly.

 

And we have made some moves on defense, signing Cole and Langford.  They just don't have the same fanfare as Gore and Johnson

[ColtRider]

Hang in there, ColtsNation! Help's on the way! (D-line) ;)

[throwing BBZ]

Are we repeating mistakes of the past and focusing more on the offensive side of the ball hoping that our D will have an opportunistic run to win the SB once?

 

The core that we seem to be focused on seems to be our offensive core of Luck, Hilton, our 2 TEs and Castanzo for the future contracts, all of which I feel are dictating our long term strategy on contracts. While it is important to be able to score points to stay competitive in this pass happy league, are we going down the Star Wars numbers path again?

 

The Patriots' plethora of SBs came when their front 7 and secondary made plays during their early SBs and once they paid up for their secondary again, the SB returned. Seahawks seem to be more content providing Wilson mediocre wide outs while focusing on retaining their defensive prowess. However, lost in the shuffle is the fact that they hit on plenty of their defensive draft picks in addition to signing 2 key pieces for their DL in Michael Bennett and Cliff Avril.

 

Should we have focused on the DL first before going down the offensive firepower route? We need some very good defensive draft picks to sustain our long term strategy. Thoughts?

 

 So you think by signing Defensive players FIRST that will make the difference. Plain funny!

 We had issues to fix on the Offense, so he fixed it.

  We had needs on the front 5, he fixed it.

  There is plenty of time to add a run stuffer, how about Red Bryant? Or one of several studs that should be available in the draft.

  We need better prospects at the backup 4-5 CB spots. Oh please, why didn`t he start there?

   Some help at backup ILB. Not that we don`t need someone better than Freeman. Get a vet that wants to win a SB or thru the draft.

  Same at Safety. Lots of whining by our fans.

 

 

[chad72]

 So you think by signing Defensive players FIRST that will make the difference. Plain funny!

 We had issues to fix on the Offense, so he fixed it.

  We had needs on the front 5, he fixed it.

  There is plenty of time to add a run stuffer, how about Red Bryant? Or one of several studs that should be available in the draft.

  We need better prospects at the backup 4-5 CB spots. Oh please, why didn`t he start there?

   Some help at backup ILB. Not that we don`t need someone better than Freeman. Get a vet that wants to win a SB or thru the draft.

  Same at Safety. Lots of whining by our fans.

 

 

 

You don't get it. Just a flat out overreaction. I was talking DL and front 7 starters for future plans and hoping for a valid discussion. Not getting it from you.

[ProblChld32]

FA isnt over yet and we havent even touched the Draft!

[Andrew Luck fan club]

Agree 100% . I think our qb elevates the players around him too, don't need big name receivers.

[shakedownstreet]

we're doomed!!! 

[aaron11]

there are only 2 true nose tackles on the market.  one of them is 33 year old vince wilfork.  the safety market is pretty bad as well, theres only so much we can do if guys dont want to sign here

[chad72]

FA isnt over yet and we havent even touched the Draft!

 

I hope our young defensive nucleus for the next few years starts with this draft.

[Flash7]

There are two sides to this in my opinion. There is the intent and then the actual product on the field. For example, the O-line: The last three years there is no doubt that Grigson has tried to address the O-line issues. The intent is there, however, the on-the-field product has for the most part remained the same -- lackluster.

 

I think this is the case with the defense as well. Grigson brought in Landry to be a punisher and for the most part it just punished our own defense. DQ was an attempt to help stop the run. He hit a home run with V. Davis, and Toler has been good, along with Butler. Mathis' injury was unforeseen and what has really hurt is the lack of impact from Werner. He was our first round pick and we haven't gotten much of a return there. Grigson drafted defense in the first round. This shows that he wants to improve the defense, but the pick hasn't worked out as well as he would have liked. 

 

Lastly, he hasn't added difference makers on defense via FA (this year and past years). As mentioned earlier, the addition of Davis via trade was great. Grigson has done a stellar job on offense, but a lot of this can be attributed to one draft where we had the #1 pick. In that draft we obtained Luck, Fleener, D. Allen, T.Y. Hilton, and Chapman (whalen UDFA). I think that he has placed emphasis on defense but hasn't hit on anyone. There is some blame there for Grigson.

[dgambill]

Just so people remember...we didn't exactly light up the score board against the Patriots either....save a big pick before the end of the half that set up points for us we weren't exactly moving the ball. We had needs on both sides of the ball....specifically on the line, rb, and wr on offense...we addressed those. We all knew we needed help at those positions and thats where the value was. Sure we could have landed Suh and not much more and had holes but the value wasn't there. We addressed the pass rush, added value in at DT, re-signed our key guys and yes we need a little more help but man we have addressed a lot this offseason so far...I'm pretty pleased no matter who else we land...especially if we have a good draft.

[chad72]

Just so people remember...we didn't exactly light up the score board against the Patriots either....save a big pick before the end of the half that set up points for us we weren't exactly moving the ball. We had needs on both sides of the ball....specifically on the line, rb, and wr on offense...we addressed those. We all knew we needed help at those positions and thats where the value was. Sure we could have landed Suh and not much more and had holes but the value wasn't there. We addressed the pass rush, added value in at DT, re-signed our key guys and yes we need a little more help but man we have addressed a lot this offseason so far...I'm pretty pleased no matter who else we land...especially if we have a good draft.

 

The weird part is that the last time we played at Foxboro in the divisional round, we were more competitive with Lavon Brazil and Da'Rick Rogers as wideouts to back up T.Y.Hilton. But then, the Pats did not have Revis and Browner that made it literally impossible to pass against them. If you have to beat the Pats, you have to beat them with your #3 wide out and other low key guys playing bigger roles, it seems like. Packers involved Davante Adams their #3 wideout big time and moved him around in space to get him lots of catches. Yeah, Jordy had one big one vs Revis but for the most part, it was their #3 wideout that the Pats did not have an answer for. Same concept with Chris Mathews in the SB, the #3 role behind Baldwin and Kearse till Browner took him on. Wayne was not giving us much down the stretch and that hurt us a lot vs elite teams.

[dgambill]

The weird part is that the last time we played at Foxboro in the divisional round, we were more competitive with Lavon Brazil and Da'Rick Rogers as wideouts to back up T.Y.Hilton. But then, the Pats did not have Revis and Browner that made it literally impossible to pass against them. If you have to beat the Pats, you have to beat them with your #3 wide out and other low key guys playing bigger roles, it seems like. Packers involved Davante Adams their #3 wideout big time and moved him around in space to get him lots of catches. Yeah, Jordy had one big one vs Revis but for the most part, it was their #3 wideout that the Pats did not have an answer for. Same concept with Chris Mathews in the SB, the #3 role behind Baldwin and Kearse till Browner took him on. Wayne was not giving us much down the stretch and that hurt us a lot vs elite teams.

Indeed.....I'm not saying offense wins championships but all I was implying was that we still had issues in the offense too...lets be real we weren't exactly lighting it up against NE. We had issues on both sides of the ball that day....and obviously we have holes on the offense that were just as big as the defense. We had only 1 tried and true wr (moncrief i like but he can't be depended on yet) and no rb we could ride (boom played well but he isn't a 19 game workhorse back)...and clearly we all know the OL issues. We addressed things I think just about as well as we could considering there are 31 other teams trying to compete with us for the same guys and do the same thing. We didn't strike out...and we didn't overpay...we got better imo...and thats important...where as teams like Baltimore, Denver, and NE can't say the same thing today...not saying we will beat those teams because we have to do it on the field but we haven't fallen further behind is important and we haven't handicapped ourselves future.

 

In my opinion we have had the best off season so far in the afc and up there close with GB and Seattle overall.

[Coffeedrinker]

Are we repeating mistakes of the past and focusing more on the offensive side of the ball hoping that our D will have an opportunistic run to win the SB once?

 

The core that we seem to be focused on seems to be our offensive core of Luck, Hilton, our 2 TEs and Castanzo for the future contracts, all of which I feel are dictating our long term strategy on contracts. While it is important to be able to score points to stay competitive in this pass happy league, are we going down the Star Wars numbers path again?

 

The Patriots' plethora of SBs came when their front 7 and secondary made plays during their early SBs and once they paid up for their secondary again, the SB returned. Seahawks seem to be more content providing Wilson mediocre wide outs while focusing on retaining their defensive prowess. However, lost in the shuffle is the fact that they hit on plenty of their defensive draft picks in addition to signing 2 key pieces for their DL in Michael Bennett and Cliff Avril.

 

Should we have focused on the DL first before going down the offensive firepower route? We need some very good defensive draft picks to sustain our long term strategy. Thoughts?

I don't think so.  Grigs has spent some pretty big money on the D with Davis, Jones, Jackson, Walden and even Redding had a pretty good contract.  He's added some free agents to the offensive side but he doesn't seem to spend big money there (accept for GC contract but he was expected to be a long time RT for the Colts)

 

But it's a fine balance you have to strengthen your strengths as well as strengthen your weaknesses.

[Restored]

The weird part is that the last time we played at Foxboro in the divisional round, we were more competitive with Lavon Brazil and Da'Rick Rogers as wideouts to back up T.Y.Hilton. But then, the Pats did not have Revis and Browner that made it literally impossible to pass against them. If you have to beat the Pats, you have to beat them with your #3 wide out and other low key guys playing bigger roles, it seems like. Packers involved Davante Adams their #3 wideout big time and moved him around in space to get him lots of catches. Yeah, Jordy had one big one vs Revis but for the most part, it was their #3 wideout that the Pats did not have an answer for. Same concept with Chris Mathews in the SB, the #3 role behind Baldwin and Kearse till Browner took him on. Wayne was not giving us much down the stretch and that hurt us a lot vs elite teams.

 

Very true. People seem to forget just how much our WR's struggled to get separation vs. the Pats in both games last year.

 

The main difference now is that the Colts have some replacements for Wayne's/Nicks lack of production in Andre Johnson, Duron Carter and Donte Moncrief developing with another year of experience. Couple that with the Patriots losing both Revis and Browner and the tables may have been flipped. Time will tell.

 

Quite honestly, I think the Colts offensive line came together well towards the end of last season. Luck had good pass protection overall in all 3 games of the playoffs. It just came back down to the lack of a balanced attack that doomed the Colts. Once New England forced the Colts to start throwing all the time, they lost. Heck, in the first New England game, the Colts had like 5 yards rushing. It doesn't matter who you have at QB or WR, you aren't going to win that many games with that kind of lopsidedness.

 

So to answer the OP, no, I don't think we are making the same mistakes of the past. I just think we have an incredibly spoiled and demanding fan base that doesn't seem to realize how privileged they are. The Colts have made it a major point of emphasis to have a good defense (defensive-minded HC, draft picks and free agent signings). Now, it hasn't quite all worked out yet but you can't say the Colts are repeating the same mistakes for lack of effort. They've just hit on more of their offensive players than defensive ones to this point.

[Grigs build the lines plz.]

I don't think we are making mistakes of the past.  We've targeted several D Line prospects, just haven't pulled any in.

They've got to want to play here and for what we are offering.

This is the key right there "for what we are offering". I wish we would offer more for top talent on the lines

and less on offensive flashy players. The Colts have always spent too much cap IMO on offensive

weapons instead of the lines and defense.

 

It's a Colts thing I guess.

[masterlock]

I am not certain that is a great strategy for the playoffs where you are more likely to run into elite Ds that will limit your offense more often than not. The defense would then be required to keep the offense in games. We need the ability to go both ways, don't you think?

 

I have seen so many instances where Brady, Big Ben or Flacco turn the ball over/go cold and their Ds step up and eventually force a punt/several punts to get the ball back to their O without much damage. Our D is not at that level yet, which is where my concern lies.

Absolutely. If an opponent can win by shutting down half your team, be it offense or defense, then you aren't really a championship-caliber team, and are destined to lose in the playoffs. A "championship defense" will keep the game close/competitive, even when the offense is struggling.

[Blueblazes]

This is the key right there "for what we are offering". I wish we would offer more for top talent on the lines

and less on offensive flashy players. The Colts have always spent too much cap IMO on offensive

weapons instead of the lines and defense.

 

It's a Colts thing I guess.

 

Ding, ding, ding, ding. We  have a winner.

[Jason_]

I am not certain that is a great strategy for the playoffs where you are more likely to run into elite Ds that will limit your offense more often than not. The defense would then be required to keep the offense in games. We need the ability to go both ways, don't you think?

 

I have seen so many instances where Brady, Big Ben or Flacco turn the ball over/go cold and their Ds step up and eventually force a punt/several punts to get the ball back to their O without much damage. Our D is not at that level yet, which is where my concern lies.

 

now don't misunderstand, I didn't mean that it was strategy to have the defense feed off the offense...I meant that, based on what I saw throughout the season, that it appeared to me that the defense fed more off of the offense than the other way around.  And really it makes sense, because the longer the offense stays on the field, the more rested the defense can get in between drives. That can also help prevent the opposing offense from getting into any kind of rhythm, which only helps the defense even more.

 

So no, I don't think this is the same type of situation as the Polian years where they basically created a defense that was built to play with a lead.  I'm just saying that the more the offense is able to control the ball, the longer the defense gets to stay on the sidelines getting rested up and getting their adrenaline pumped up by watching the offense do well. 

[ColtRider]

Free-Agency, the Draft, Trades, et.al yet to be completed. The defensive line will be addressed. BANK ON IT! ;)

[Jason_]

Absolutely. If an opponent can win by shutting down half your team, be it offense or defense, then you aren't really a championship-caliber team, and are destined to lose in the playoffs. A "championship defense" will keep the game close/competitive, even when the offense is struggling.

 

That's very true.  However, even the most talented of defenses are going to get winded at some point and become less effective if they're on the field way too much.  That's why the mantra has always been....run the ball, and stop the run.  Run the ball to keep your own defense on the sidelines...and stop the run so that the opposing OL doesn't wear out our front 7. 

[Grigs build the lines plz.]

I agree with you Chad. I like Grigs but he is doing the same mistakes IMO

as Polian did with Manning, Grigs is giving Luck alot of firepower on paper

as did Polian did with Manning but the problem is that the lines alongside

the defense suffers.

 

Let Luck "soon to be the highest paid player on the team" work with less talent

and put a decent line in front of him and a hard nosed defense, starting with

a top notch nose tackle.

 

It's starting to look as if the Colts have a patent on finesse football. Run the ball,

stop the run and allow Luck to figure it out from there with less flashy weapons

as Brady has done with the Pats.

 

 

[OLD FAN MAN]

we have not added any monsters on defense, we have not added anyone who can defend gronk, we have added aged declining players on offense, we did not add a monster on the o-line, we did not get a safety, hope we can fill our glaring needs in the draft, grade c, not great free agents, would have been 5 years ago, still cant stop the run or run the ball behind this o-line, our new rb runs up the gut, good luck, not another trent  all over again

[Surge89]

Are we repeating mistakes of the past and focusing more on the offensive side of the ball hoping that our D will have an opportunistic run to win the SB once?

 

The core that we seem to be focused on seems to be our offensive core of Luck, Hilton, our 2 TEs and Castanzo for the future contracts, all of which I feel are dictating our long term strategy on contracts. While it is important to be able to score points to stay competitive in this pass happy league, are we going down the Star Wars numbers path again?

 

The Patriots' plethora of SBs came when their front 7 and secondary made plays during their early SBs and once they paid up for their secondary again, the SB returned. Seahawks seem to be more content providing Wilson mediocre wide outs while focusing on retaining their defensive prowess. However, lost in the shuffle is the fact that they hit on plenty of their defensive draft picks in addition to signing 2 key pieces for their DL in Michael Bennett and Cliff Avril.

 

Should we have focused on the DL first before going down the offensive firepower route? We need some very good defensive draft picks to sustain our long term strategy. Thoughts?

 

So... For what it is worth.  I see it as Grigson understanding that you can't magically fix both sides of the ball.  He looks for value and then tries to sap as much as he can out of that value.  On offense he hit it hard with his first draft giving us a foundation we can build upon.  Free agency he uses to just mend minor breaks or minor improvement.  The Defense though hasn't had that "one" draft yet.  And I think it is going to be this one. Grigs has given us enough stop gaps in free agency to make it to this point.  Now he just needs to nail the draft!

[DougDew]

Are we repeating mistakes of the past and focusing more on the offensive side of the ball hoping that our D will have an opportunistic run to win the SB once?

 

The core that we seem to be focused on seems to be our offensive core of Luck, Hilton, our 2 TEs and Castanzo for the future contracts, all of which I feel are dictating our long term strategy on contracts. While it is important to be able to score points to stay competitive in this pass happy league, are we going down the Star Wars numbers path again?

 

The Patriots' plethora of SBs came when their front 7 and secondary made plays during their early SBs and once they paid up for their secondary again, the SB returned. Seahawks seem to be more content providing Wilson mediocre wide outs while focusing on retaining their defensive prowess. However, lost in the shuffle is the fact that they hit on plenty of their defensive draft picks in addition to signing 2 key pieces for their DL in Michael Bennett and Cliff Avril.

 

Should we have focused on the DL first before going down the offensive firepower route? We need some very good defensive draft picks to sustain our long term strategy. Thoughts?

I think its just trying to maintain some balance as we get better.  The O is young and the defense isn't so much.  Add some age to the O and some youth to the D.  The draft should be D heavy after the age added to the O in free agency.

[Malakai432]

we're doomed!!! 

 

[wig]

There are more highly paid guys on D than O and the current top paid offensive guys are gone in a couple years, with their contracts replaced by the guys from the '12 draft.

[Gavin]

Running the ball at a consistely efficient level will greatly help out our defense and help not put our big D Linemen out on the field for multiple extended stretches, It will also help if our big D Linemen come in a bit better shape and tone up a bit so as to also help with not wearing down midway through the 3rd quarter