The management

[K-148]

In that statement lies the problem. One guy does not build a defense, neither does one guy build an offense unless he is the QB.

Playoff football lately has been more favorable to contact and less favorable to scoring in the 30s. We did not beat the Broncos 34-23. We beat them 24-13. The further you go into the playoffs, the trench play starts mattering more, especially if a dome team like us does not have home field advantage. Our playoff success will still boil down to opportunistic defense at the very least to minimize opponent scoring in the low 20s.

Dorsett may very well be like Marvin Harrison but coaches like Carroll and Belichick will find a way to neutralize him and T.Y., our D will still need to limit our opponents to give us a fighting chance in the playoffs.

Carroll and Belichick will find a way to neutralize T.Y., Johnson, Fleener, Allen, Moncrief, Dorsett, but will not find a way to neutralize ONE stud (presumably) 1st round DL?

[SteelCityColt]

....and look at you now. A football mind if ever there was one. OP should invest immediately. Either that or he could buy a copy of Pro Wrestling For Dummies and just forego this whole NFL thing.

There is truth in comedy. While I don't have even the tinth of knowledge some do on here I do feel fairky comfortable with the basic formations, route concepts etc. it's been a mix of books like that (Pat Kirwan's is also highly recommended), analytical articles, and I hate to say it but Madden. The latest one actually does a good job of breaking down concepts, read progressions etc.

However the one person I've learnt the most from.... Our very own Superman, dude knows his pigskin.

[braveheartcolt]

Don't laugh......

I own this book.

Can I borrow it when you have finished it please!!

[ruksak]

...and I hate to say it but Madden. 

Oh don't be shy in saying that. I first started playing Madden back in the early 1990's [1991], and before playing Madden, I couldn't have told you what a Nickle defense was, as well as many other bits of minutia of the game. 

 

Even the old 8-bit Madden games had a ton of practical NFL knowledge worked in. Much of this is attributable directly to John Madden himself, as his insistence for realism pushed the release date back about for years. At first, the technical limitations only allowed 6 players per team, and he wouldn't have it. Not until they figured out how to put 22 players on the field did Madden allow his name to be used for the title. 

 

As the series progressed, a casual NFL fan could learn a great deal about the X's and O's of the actual game. So I'm not the least bit shy about claiming I learned much from Madden, not in the least. What made no sense to me before playing Madden, suddenly became crystal clear as I transferred the knowledge from in-game to real life NFL football. 

[Dr. T]

Comparing football players to parts of a car just wont work

But you can compare football teams to a car ... how about this?

We've got a perfectly good engine, but getting Dorsett is like upgrading to turbo, so now we can blow all of the other cars off the track !!

[lollygagger8]

[Dr. T]

Carroll and Belichick will find a way to neutralize T.Y., Johnson, Fleener, Allen, Moncrief, Dorsett, but will not find a way to neutralize ONE stud (presumably) 1st round DL?

Remember, one reason we lost to the Pats is because we couldn't score. They had an answer for TY and used Revis to take away the other half of the field. Now we have TWO TY's ... AND Andre Johnson. Try to stop that BB. Ha!

[ruksak]

Remember, one reason we lost to the Pats is because we couldn't score. They had an answer for TY and used Revis to take away the other half of the field. Now we have TWO TY's ... AND Andre Johnson. Try to stop that BB. Ha!

...and Gore....and two TE's that can get open and burn defenses. 

 

This offense is going to be something special. By far the best offense we've fielded during the Luck era, and look what Luck has already done, in terms of yardage and scoring. 

[throwing BBZ]

Lol we added ben heenan and Todd herremans to our O line; along with ulrick John and Cherilus returning and if they can stay healthy. We added 2 great run stuffing lineman in the draft in Parry and Anderson (who I think is a stud, and possible day 1 starter) added Langford as well who is an upgrade over rjf. Added Trent Cole to help with pass rush which was terrible last year and possible return of Mathis. Nate Irving for depth as ILB who could easily be a starter if not for the injury; and drafted Clayton Geathers who imo is the best safety of the class along with signing Dwight lowery who will probably start and if not is a great backup! And I haven't even mentioned Frank gore, which I really don't know if you know how good he is! And drafted Josh Robinson who can be a future starter for us (Mjd clone)....... What else is needed to improve? Trade our whole team for 1 guy named JJ Watt/Suh? See how that works out for you! One guy won't win us the superbowl

 

 Had to put my knee boots on for this kid.

[Warhorse]

Well, I dont see how the colts helped themselves with there first round pick , I really dont care about best available player or any of that stuff, Example, if my car already has a battery I dont buy another one just like the proven one I already have. Especially if i need tires on my car. I buy tires. We needed a stud on the

defensive line and the oline,  The colts always had lots of scoring chances they just couldnt keep the other teams from scoring. I wish the coaches and management really wanted to win a superbowl, its  obvious they dont know what there doing( playing Trent most of the year) or they dont want to win. I cant help but wonder if its wwf(wrestling) where its pre determined who wins. I cant be the only one who sees it this way, Wouldnt it be cool if the fans got to chose the coaches in a draft style process. Had to get it out, 

would like to hear why I am wrong, or some proof that I am.  

Just keep fishing and leave the NFL decisions to NFL people. 

[CoachLite]

Not a lot of love in this forum.  But love is a term used in tennis for players who don't score.

[Surge89]

Carroll and Belichick will find a way to neutralize T.Y., Johnson, Fleener, Allen, Moncrief, Dorsett, but will not find a way to neutralize ONE stud (presumably) 1st round DL?

 

Apologies but this is an extremely ignorant counter argument.  A receiver has a more individual aspect to the game in which you can scheme and protect your DB's without weakening the integrity of your defense. A (presumed) play maker at the line requires you to focus numbers to a sole player meaning both the opponents passing game (blocking) and running game (again blocking) are dramatically weakened.  If you scheme to take out a D-Lineman you usually lose your pass protection because a well run defense will be blitzing every single hole your oline abandons to compensate for that one player.  By basic fundamental football your premise is completely flawed.

 

In other words. A receiver being taken out of the game is a much easier feat than trying to take a D-Line out of the game because of the nature of their positions.  D-Lineman have the greatest impact on defense because they effect every position.  They can take receivers out by rushing the passer or obliterating his line, they can shed blocks and take the runner, and they can take out TE's by requiring them to stay and block.  The impact is so much more.

[chad72]

Apologies but this is an extremely ignorant counter argument.  A receiver has a more individual aspect to the game in which you can scheme and protect your DB's without weakening the integrity of your defense. A (presumed) play maker at the line requires you to focus numbers to a sole player meaning both the opponents passing game (blocking) and running game (again blocking) are dramatically weakened.  If you scheme to take out a D-Lineman you usually lose your pass protection because a well run defense will be blitzing every single hole your oline abandons to compensate for that one player.  By basic fundamental football your premise is completely flawed.

 

In other words. A receiver being taken out of the game is a much easier feat than trying to take a D-Line out of the game because of the nature of their positions.  D-Lineman have the greatest impact on defense because they effect every position.  They can take receivers out by rushing the passer or obliterating his line, they can shed blocks and take the runner, and they can take out TE's by requiring them to stay and block.  The impact is so much more.

 

Preach it.

 

Only time will tell if quantity of players drafted for defense equates to quality. 

[ColtsFanMikeC]

Well, I dont see how the colts helped themselves with there first round pick , I really dont care about best available player or any of that stuff, Example, if my car already has a battery I dont buy another one just like the proven one I already have. Especially if i need tires on my car. I buy tires. We needed a stud on the

defensive line and the oline,  The colts always had lots of scoring chances they just couldnt keep the other teams from scoring. I wish the coaches and management really wanted to win a superbowl, its  obvious they dont know what there doing( playing Trent most of the year) or they dont want to win. I cant help but wonder if its wwf(wrestling) where its pre determined who wins. I cant be the only one who sees it this way, Wouldnt it be cool if the fans got to chose the coaches in a draft style process. Had to get it out, 

would like to hear why I am wrong, or some proof that I am.  

 

AJ is old and TY can use help.  After those 2, we're unproven at WR.  We need at least 2 (preferably 3-5) that can really play to give Luck the best chance to win.  If we drafted a QB in round 1, your car battery argument might make more sense.

[Lawrence Owen]

It is not like we did not address the D-line, we just did it in later rounds.  And Henry Anderson (whom i love) played the entire d-line in Stanford, being moved around on a defensive scheme similar to ours.  Grigson says he'll put on an additional 10-15lbs so he'll be even more powerful.  Grigson just figured he could get a guy of equal value to Brown for less who already knows our system and won't have a problem changing over.  They drafted with a plan, not just take who is the best person now and hope for another later.

 

oh and just to put stats on the board:

                           2014 totals for each player

 

                             tot      solo   asst     sack

Malcom brown :     69       38     31       6.5

Henry Anderson:   66       40     26      8.5

 

And we got Anderson in the 3rd round..........

[scooter4910]

In that statement lies the problem. One guy does not build a defense, neither does one guy build an offense unless he is the QB.

 

Playoff football lately has been more favorable to contact and less favorable to scoring in the 30s. We did not beat the Broncos 34-23. We beat them 24-13. The further you go into the playoffs, the trench play starts mattering more, especially if a dome team like us does not have home field advantage. Our playoff success will still boil down to opportunistic defense at the very least to minimize opponent scoring in the low 20s.

 

Dorsett may very well be like Marvin Harrison but coaches like Carroll and Belichick will find a way to neutralize him and T.Y., our D will still need to limit our opponents to give us a fighting chance in the playoffs.

God forbid that someone with over 100 post has a contrary position...what's the world coming to.

[NewColtsFan]

God forbid that someone with over 100 post has a contrary position...what's the world coming to.

 

Nobody cares about a "contrary position".....     that only happens in every thread posted here every day....   happens all the time.

 

People here care about posts that don't seem to have a lot of intelligent thought put into them.

 

Take this thread for instance.

 

It's not just that the OP didn't like our 1st round pick -- plenty of people didn't.

 

But when you actually post that you don't think the front office is trying to win,  that they don't care about winning,   you just took a gun and shot your foot off.

 

Even most people who hate Ryan Grigson think he's trying to win.    They may not think he's good at his job,  but I think they feel like he's trying to win.

 

People who think the front office of their favorite team -- whatever team that is -- don't care about winning,  are just not very informed fans.    They haven't put much thought into their post.

 

And that's why the OP is getting hammered here.    And NOT because he has a "contrary opinion"....

[scooter4910]

Nobody cares about a "contrary position".....     that only happens in every thread posted here every day....   happens all the time.

 

..........

 

And that's why the OP is getting hammered here.    And NOT because he has a "contrary opinion"....

I was talking about chad 72 not the OP.

[NewColtsFan]

I was talking about chad 72 not the OP.

 

 

That's fine....   but the bottom line remains...

 

Nobody really cares about a "contrary position"....   there are tons of them posted here every day....

 

People just expect some level of thought put into it and some level of reasonableness to the argument.

[basspapaw]

Nobody cares about a "contrary position".....     that only happens in every thread posted here every day....   happens all the time.

 

People here care about posts that don't seem to have a lot of intelligent thought put into them.

 

Take this thread for instance.

 

It's not just that the OP didn't like our 1st round pick -- plenty of people didn't.

 

But when you actually post that you don't think the front office is trying to win,  that they don't care about winning,   you just took a gun and shot your foot off.

 

Even most people who hate Ryan Grigson think he's trying to win.    They may not think he's good at his job,  but I think they feel like he's trying to win.

 

People who think the front office of their favorite team -- whatever team that is -- don't care about winning,  are just not very informed fans.    They haven't put much thought into their post.

 

And that's why the OP is getting hammered here.    And NOT because he has a "contrary opinion"....

I see your post all the time and you seem to think its your job to inform everyone else how intelligent the posters are , Its my opinion that they care more about the money than winning  , This opinion comes from watching the colts since they came to indy,  If they can win with the team (players) that makes them the most money than that is a added benefit,  I dont hate Mr Grigson nor do I hate you. I think hes more about getting the players that are going to make the team the most money not necessarily win, Lots of points, come from behind victories etc. but the real deal is its all about making the team money.

[GoColts8818]

I see your post all the time and you seem to think its your job to inform everyone else how intelligent the posters are , Its my opinion that they care more about the money than winning  , This opinion comes from watching the colts since they came to indy,  If they can win with the team (players) that makes them the most money than that is a added benefit,  I dont hate Mr Grigson nor do I hate you. I think hes more about getting the players that are going to make the team the most money not necessarily win, Lots of points, come from behind victories etc. but the real deal is its all about making the team money .

I don't think many are going to agree with you on that opinion.  If you wish to have it though you can, just don't be shocked when many don't agree with it.  Evidence, namely the fact the Colts have been in the playoffs 16 of the past 20 seasons seems to suggest that the Owner, the head of the management team, cares a heck of a lot about winning. 

 

Also why on earth would Grigson not care about winning?  If he doesn't win he's going to get fired because it's his job to build a team that wins.  There are other people whose job it is to make sure the Colts turn a prophet for Irsay.  The argument he doesn't care about winning doesn't make sense when it comes to a GM. 

[scooter4910]

That's fine....   but the bottom line remains...

 

Nobody really cares about a "contrary position"....   there are tons of them posted here every day....

 

People just expect some level of thought put into it and some level of reasonableness to the argument.

Baloney....everyone starts out as a new poster, everyone has differing levels of expertise, everyone has different opinions, and the old timers, frequent flyers, super users....whatever you want to call them.....pounced on this poor sap. I wouldn't be surprised if he/she left the board for good. It's sad and actually pretty pathetic. Whatever happened to kindness or simple etiquette...oh I know...it's called the internet.

 

Fortunately I'm pretty thick skinned, enjoy a good "discussion" and have dealt with the worst of trolls over the years. So as a fan I will continue to be here.

[basspapaw]

I don't think many are going to agree with you on that opinion.  If you wish to have it though you can, just don't be shocked when many don't agree with it.  Evidence, namely the fact the Colts have been in the playoffs 16 of the past 20 seasons seems to suggest that the Owner, the head of the management team, cares a heck of a lot about winning. 

 

Also why on earth would Grigson not care about winning?  If he doesn't win he's going to get fired because it's his job to build a team that wins.  There are other people whose job it is to make sure the Colts turn a prophet for Irsay.  The argument he doesn't care about winning doesn't make sense when it comes to a GM. 

Okay let me put it this way I think its his job to make the team the most money thats why he will be here a long time hes doing his job ,No other sinarios makes any since , If he happens to win its a bonus

[NewColtsFan]

I see your post all the time and you seem to think its your job to inform everyone else how intelligent the posters are , Its my opinion that they care more about the money than winning  , This opinion comes from watching the colts since they came to indy,  If they can win with the team (players) that makes them the most money than that is a added benefit,  I dont hate Mr Grigson nor do I hate you. I think hes more about getting the players that are going to make the team the most money not necessarily win, Lots of points, come from behind victories etc. but the real deal is its all about making the team money  . I think you have a very closed mind and maybe a little brainwashed  but until you attacked me I kept that to myself.  

 

 

Goodness gracious......     

 

Do you know what would make Mr. Irsay and Mr. Grigson and Mr. Pagano the MOST MONEY?!?!?

 

One word:     WINNING!!!!

[Superman]

No other sinarios makes any since

 

Let me just ask you this: Do you really believe that Ryan Grigson doesn't care about winning?

[GoColts8818]

Okay let me put it this way I think its his job to make the team the most money thats why he will be here a long time hes doing his job ,No other sinarios makes any since , If he happens to win its a bonus

thats not the job of the General Manger of a pro sports team at all. They have very little if anything to do with how the team's financial success is going. Their job is to bring in the best talent they can in terms of players and coaches to make sure the team wins games. The Owner is the one whose job it is to worry about if the team makes money or not. Since he came out today and said he expects at least two Super Bowls with Andrew Luck and has seen his team go to the playoffs 16 of the past 20 years and fired the GM and coach after one bad season (that still sold out every home game meaning they made a profit) I'd say it's safe to say he cares about winning and not just if the Colts make money or not. Again, you can disagree but the real facts don't support your arguement.

[braveheartcolt]

If I say I've been a Colts fan since they came to Indy, can I post a stream of drivel and expect not to get flamed?

It seems to be quite in vogue these days.

[NewColtsFan]

I see your post all the time and you seem to think its your job to inform everyone else how intelligent the posters are , Its my opinion that they care more about the money than winning  , This opinion comes from watching the colts since they came to indy,  If they can win with the team (players) that makes them the most money than that is a added benefit,  I dont hate Mr Grigson nor do I hate you. I think hes more about getting the players that are going to make the team the most money not necessarily win, Lots of points, come from behind victories etc. but the real deal is its all about making the team money.

 

Basspapaw.....

 

We've gotten off on the wrong track....   and since you're new and I've been here three years,  I'll take responsibility.

 

My bad.    I'm sorry.    Hope you'll accept the sincere apology.    I'll try to do better.      

 

I'm sure I'll fall short from time to time,  but I'm sure you'll be there to remind me.     And that's OK.

 

It's the start of a new football year,  and so I'll try and be on my best behavior for as long as I can....

[LJpalmbeacher2]

Hey guys, my battery is going to cost a ton of money to keep it charged next year. I think I can get a cheap one that may be just as good and last at least three years, just in case I can't keep the old one.

My tires are at least average and they took me pretty far last year. I already got a few retreads and they should be even better.

Think I should get that new battery?

But how are your wipers?

[K-148]

Apologies but this is an extremely ignorant counter argument.  A receiver has a more individual aspect to the game in which you can scheme and protect your DB's without weakening the integrity of your defense. A (presumed) play maker at the line requires you to focus numbers to a sole player meaning both the opponents passing game (blocking) and running game (again blocking) are dramatically weakened.  If you scheme to take out a D-Lineman you usually lose your pass protection because a well run defense will be blitzing every single hole your oline abandons to compensate for that one player.  By basic fundamental football your premise is completely flawed.

 

In other words. A receiver being taken out of the game is a much easier feat than trying to take a D-Line out of the game because of the nature of their positions.  D-Lineman have the greatest impact on defense because they effect every position.  They can take receivers out by rushing the passer or obliterating his line, they can shed blocks and take the runner, and they can take out TE's by requiring them to stay and block.  The impact is so much more.

Colts' receiver group is much better than Colts' front 7. So it was much easier to field unstoppable offense than unbreakable defense. Brown is potential stud. Mayo, Collins and Hightower ARE studs. They can cover Allen and Fleener. They can not cover Hilton, Johnson, Moncrief, Dorsett. So why play to Pats' strength? Lets play 4 WR sets! Heck, their NT will not see field at all!

And no, it's not difficult to neutralize DE without "dramatically weakened blocking". It's all about "packaged plays", "stick-draw" concept for example: use 3x1 WR set, force defense to play LB on WR, double block stud DE, leave LB unblocked, pitch football to RB OR throw it to WR. Let unblocked LB pick his poison.

So, it is easier to scheme out 1 stud DL out of weak group than scheme out 1 stud WR out of strong group.

[ruksak]

But how are your wipers?

I cannot believe how people have been suckered by the windshield wiper industry. They aren't necessary AT ALL!!!

 

If it starts to rain, just punch it, go real fast and the rain drops just slide right off. 

[SteelCityColt]

I cannot believe how people have been suckered by the windshield wiper industry. They aren't necessary AT ALL!!!

If it starts to rain, just punch it, go real fast and the rain drops just slide right off.

For a moment there I thought you meant literally punch the windscreen out Terminator style..

[ColtRider]

Basspapaw.....

 

We've gotten off on the wrong track....   and since you're new and I've been here three years,  I'll take responsibility.

 

My bad.    I'm sorry.    Hope you'll accept the sincere apology.    I'll try to do better.      

 

I'm sure I'll fall short from time to time,  but I'm sure you'll be there to remind me.     And that's OK.

 

It's the start of a new football year,  and so I'll try and be on my best behavior for as long as I can....

Class, NCF, class! Basspapaw, being objective is not a crime.

[Happy2BeHere]

I don't always see dumb threads.....but when I do I prefer colts forums.

[Happy2BeHere]

I don't know what y'all are talkin 'bout. I buy new batteries and wipers for my car like every week...I am paranoid you know I don't want to be stranded and I always need to see where I'm going.

I had to build a big shed just to house all the old batteries and wipers. You never know when they will come in handy...I just don't trust those energizer bunny commercials anymore.

[Surge89]

Colts' receiver group is much better than Colts' front 7. So it was much easier to field unstoppable offense than unbreakable defense. Brown is potential stud. Mayo, Collins and Hightower ARE studs. They can cover Allen and Fleener. They can not cover Hilton, Johnson, Moncrief, Dorsett. So why play to Pats' strength? Lets play 4 WR sets! Heck, their NT will not see field at all!

And no, it's not difficult to neutralize DE without "dramatically weakened blocking". It's all about "packaged plays", "stick-draw" concept for example: use 3x1 WR set, force defense to play LB on WR, double block stud DE, leave LB unblocked, pitch football to RB OR throw it to WR. Let unblocked LB pick his poison.

So, it is easier to scheme out 1 stud DL out of weak group than scheme out 1 stud WR out of strong group.

 

Ok. So lets look at your logic.

 

You are saying our receiver group is a position of strength right?  And in comparison to the Patriots (the team you brought up) they lost all of their secondary.  So we are improving in an area that we have already improved over them just by staying the same...

 

It's much easier to field a (supposed) "unstoppable offense".  How many times have we gone into the AFC champ game with the highest scoring offense in the league or one of the high est (sometimes even record breaking) and lose in a blowout 3 or 7 to 50?  Doesn't matter if it is Luck or Manning.  And throw the choker crap out if you want the fact is that our organization never learns.  Defense creates opportunity instead of demanding perfection out of your offense in which the Patriots have constantly showed that they will stop.

 

So you are saying because they have a great LB corp that Brown will be ineffective?  Or are you saying that because we will have 4 receivers on the field Brown won't be on the field?  Either way both of those are pretty ridiculous...  Brown can penetrate and he can occupy so that those LBers you were going on about can blitz Luck before he ever throws the ball to any of those 4 receivers...

 

So you are saying it isn't difficult for a team who ALREADY had O-Line trouble to focus or scheme to block one guy with a "great" LB corp (your words) behind him?  That sounds pretty backwards.  Again if that is the case why is it that those LBers had no trouble covering in our game before?  Also OK we go 3x1 as you say.  Who is going to help Luck stand up right may I ask?  Since most likely the D is in Nickel then and all of those (great) LBers are coming in hot?  Because if Luck throws a 2step short guess what?  We are playing into "the Patriots" strength and right in the zone of those LBers.  So again who has the upper hand here?  

 

The problem you have is that I have plenty of past evidence in which the Patriots always have an answer for any Offense. And somehow you are trying to say that Dorsett will be the answer because having Marvin/Reggie/Stokely/Gonzo and the other countless talented receivers before hand (with a better QB mind you) Will all of a sudden change what has already happened? lol  You know when the Patriots had trouble with us? When we kept Brady in a nice little hole and hit him.  Which is again something that Malcom would have helped with. And you know who we had at receiver?  A bunch of nobodies except Reggie.

[chad72]

 

The problem you have is that I have plenty of past evidence in which the Patriots always have an answer for any Offense. And somehow you are trying to say that Dorsett will be the answer because having Marvin/Reggie/Stokely/Gonzo and the other countless talented receivers before hand (with a better QB mind you) Will all of a sudden change what has already happened? lol  You know when the Patriots had trouble with us? When we kept Brady in a nice little hole and hit him.  Which is again something that Malcom would have helped with. And you know who we had at receiver?  A bunch of nobodies except Reggie.

 

They should have a button "Love this" instead of "Like this".

 

Patriots had the most issues with our offense when we could line up and run the ball forcing their LBs to have to play the run thus opening up the passing game, the traditional way . When Belichick could drop his LBs deeper and dare us to run knowing we won't and couldn't, his LBs could get in passing lanes better, which is what he will do against us, bet on it.

 

The 2 times we beat them in Foxboro, we restricted them to 21 and 20 points in 2005 and 2006. Patriots had issues with our defense when the Colts could somewhat push the pocket in the middle and thus when OL are retreating in their 1-on-1s which they had to play 1-on-1 to negate Freeney and Mathis with double teams and chipping on the edge, it is easier to get tipped balls by DL or force the QB to take chances. We got tipped balls and that was the reason we got Brady, who rarely turns it over, to throw 3 INTs in 2006 that our LBs cashed in on.

 

We need multiple playmakers on the DL that will demand double teams and chipping. Outside Mathis, I do not see that. When you have the TEs chipping more, less TEs available for wham blocks and jumbo sets that have given our D issues. It is a ripple effect.

 

It is not just Belichick that will expose us this way, other teams will too. Heck, in the last 3 playoff losses - 14 points, 22 points and 7 points on the road while giving up rushing yards - 171 yards to the Ravens, 218 yards to the Patriots, and 234 yards to the Patriots in the 3 games. If we have to play a team on the road (except maybe the Broncos that we match up well against), you will run into those physical teams like the Ravens and Patriots. You need the playmakers on the DL to reduce the pressure on the offense to be perfect, that is how teams win in the playoffs as the playoffs get further.

[ruksak]

For a moment there I thought you meant literally punch the windscreen out Terminator style..

That's actually a brilliant idea!!!

[Surge89]

They should have a button "Love this" instead of "Like this".

 

Patriots had the most issues with our offense when we could line up and run the ball forcing their LBs to have to play the run thus opening up the passing game, the traditional way . When Belichick could drop his LBs deeper and dare us to run knowing we won't and couldn't, his LBs could get in passing lanes better, which is what he will do against us, bet on it.

 

The 2 times we beat them in Foxboro, we restricted them to 21 and 20 points in 2005 and 2006. Patriots had issues with our defense when the Colts could somewhat push the pocket in the middle and thus when OL are retreating in their 1-on-1s which they had to play 1-on-1 to negate Freeney and Mathis with double teams and chipping on the edge, it is easier to get tipped balls by DL or force the QB to take chances. We got tipped balls and that was the reason we got Brady, who rarely turns it over, to throw 3 INTs in 2006 that our LBs cashed in on.

 

We need multiple playmakers on the DL that will demand double teams and chipping. Outside Mathis, I do not see that. When you have the TEs chipping more, less TEs available for wham blocks and jumbo sets that have given our D issues. It is a ripple effect.

 

It is not just Belichick that will expose us this way, other teams will too. Heck, in the last 3 playoff losses - 14 points, 22 points and 7 points on the road while giving up rushing yards - 171 yards to the Ravens, 218 yards to the Patriots, and 234 yards to the Patriots in the 3 games. If we have to play a team on the road (except maybe the Broncos that we match up well against), you will run into those physical teams like the Ravens and Patriots. You need the playmakers on the DL to reduce the pressure on the offense to be perfect, that is how teams win in the playoffs as the playoffs get further.

 

This again leads me full circle to my initial point. It just feels like ANY other pick could have had a more efficient positive impact on the team.  RB/OT/TE/DT/ILB/DB/OLB/G/C literally any of those spots but QB and WR would have had a better chance of improving our chances against the Patriots AND making us a more balanced team.  O-Line help creates a running game meaning our receivers don't have numbers to go against. RB talent at least makes ONE LB have to shadow him.  DT/OLB would have helped in keeping Brady in the pocket.  ILB/S/C all could have helped in prolonging routes for pressure...  ANYTHING could have helped...  But another WR just leaves the same holes with the same problems, just we have a guy that gets to his spot faster, but it doesn't matter because Luck will be on  his back or there is a LB in front and a Corner behind.

[K-148]

Ok. So lets look at your logic.

 

You are saying our receiver group is a position of strength right?  And in comparison to the Patriots (the team you brought up) they lost all of their secondary.  So we are improving in an area that we have already improved over them just by staying the same...

 

It's much easier to field a (supposed) "unstoppable offense".  How many times have we gone into the AFC champ game with the highest scoring offense in the league or one of the high est (sometimes even record breaking) and lose in a blowout 3 or 7 to 50?  Doesn't matter if it is Luck or Manning.  And throw the choker crap out if you want the fact is that our organization never learns.  Defense creates opportunity instead of demanding perfection out of your offense in which the Patriots have constantly showed that they will stop.

 

So you are saying because they have a great LB corp that Brown will be ineffective?  Or are you saying that because we will have 4 receivers on the field Brown won't be on the field?  Either way both of those are pretty ridiculous...  Brown can penetrate and he can occupy so that those LBers you were going on about can blitz Luck before he ever throws the ball to any of those 4 receivers...

 

So you are saying it isn't difficult for a team who ALREADY had O-Line trouble to focus or scheme to block one guy with a "great" LB corp (your words) behind him?  That sounds pretty backwards.  Again if that is the case why is it that those LBers had no trouble covering in our game before?  Also OK we go 3x1 as you say.  Who is going to help Luck stand up right may I ask?  Since most likely the D is in Nickel then and all of those (great) LBers are coming in hot?  Because if Luck throws a 2step short guess what?  We are playing into "the Patriots" strength and right in the zone of those LBers.  So again who has the upper hand here?  

 

The problem you have is that I have plenty of past evidence in which the Patriots always have an answer for any Offense. And somehow you are trying to say that Dorsett will be the answer because having Marvin/Reggie/Stokely/Gonzo and the other countless talented receivers before hand (with a better QB mind you) Will all of a sudden change what has already happened? lol  You know when the Patriots had trouble with us? When we kept Brady in a nice little hole and hit him.  Which is again something that Malcom would have helped with. And you know who we had at receiver?  A bunch of nobodies except Reggie.

1) There are other 30 teams, many of them improved their secondaries.

2) Johnson is not young, Moncrief is not proven and SB is 18 games away. You better be sure, you have somebody to play at a high level in February.

3) Yes, Brown will not see field that much when the Colts will play 75 snaps a game and Luck will throw 50 times. Or Hightower will be on a bench. Or Collins.

4) Yes, it's not difficult for bad OLman NOT to BLOCK defender. Read him. Option him. Sure, you can try to block three stud DL with three mediocre OL one on one. Bad idea. Or you can block one stud DL with two mediocre OL, option second one stud DL with "stick-draw" concept and run away from third stud DL (cut block him).

5) No, we do not play to their strength with 2step. Because next second after Hightower will drop in coverage on #3 WR, Luck will shove football to Gore. Put Hightower on Gore and S on #3 WR? It's basically Cover 0 on 3 WRs side. Not good.