Colts Claimed Ty Mcgill From Seahawks

[ztboiler]

Is it really that significant of a scheme change though?  The colts already ran a hybrid front and did a lot of 1 gapping as it was.  I think they're just going to be removing the 2 gapping from the playbook...or use it much, much less.

Yes, it's a big scheme change in the base D. There are a lot of similarities across NFL playbooks in terms of what is available to "put in".  The degree of emphasis on "what you do" is really the definition of your scheme, and there are layers of scheme definition based on principle emphasis at every level of your defense.

 

What you do to stop the run is the first definition of your scheme.  For us that has been a clear 2-Gap theme for the last 3 years.  Bigger was better and we hoped our ILB's could read, run and hit whatever came through the clog.  We did very little 1-Gap penetration on run downs.  We didn't have the players to do it, so there wasn't much use in trying.  

 

In the preseason we saw them using both depending on personnel, and we kept the personnel that could penetrate or control 1 gap.  It's a big change.

 

I think we genuinely wanted a different flow to the ball once the staff saw the action against the run.  However, I think the bigger reason for this shift in scheme is for the nickel.  There simply isn't enough roster space to have 2-gap run stoppers at 3 places on the DL and a separate, more disruptive set of interior nickel rushers.  It is even harder to find a guy like Justin Smith or Ngata that is effective in both looks.  Born from necessity, we need a more disruptive nickel interior - so we need to stop the run with 1-gappers as well.

 

Lastly, our ILB's have never fit well with our 2-Gap run stuffers.  They are good players, but not really smash mouth run stuffing types that you need for a 2-gap scheme.  Freeman in particular has impact player flashes in space, but is easily swallowed up between the tackles.  I think this is an acknowledgement by our staff that our run fit will be more effective in a scheme that lets our LB's flow more aggressively and instinctively to the ball - and that the speed of the game today requires a different roster composition than they put together the first 3 years.  We are also seeing, and largely overlooking as a fan base, the increased emphasis on quality LB play.  Going 4 deep now with the additions of Moore and Irving, is a much bigger investment in quality interior LB play, and we'll be able to stop the run in this scheme with those players.

[Jason_]

Yes, it's a big scheme change in the base D. There are a lot of similarities across NFL playbooks in terms of what is available to "put in".  The degree of emphasis on "what you do" is really the definition of your scheme, and there are layers of scheme definition based on principle emphasis at every level of your defense.

 

What you do to stop the run is the first definition of your scheme.  For us that has been a clear 2-Gap theme for the last 3 years.  Bigger was better and we hoped our ILB's could read, run and hit whatever came through the clog.  We did very little 1-Gap penetration on run downs.  We didn't have the players to do it, so there wasn't much use in trying.  

 

In the preseason we saw them using both depending on personnel, and we kept the personnel that could penetrate or control 1 gap.  It's a big change.

 

I think we genuinely wanted a different flow to the ball once the staff saw the action against the run.  However, I think the bigger reason for this shift in scheme is for the nickel.  There simply isn't enough roster space to have 2-gap run stoppers at 3 places on the DL and a separate, more disruptive set of interior nickel rushers.  It is even harder to find a guy like Justin Smith or Ngata that is effective in both looks.  Born from necessity, we need a more disruptive nickel interior - so we need to stop the run with 1-gappers as well.

 

Lastly, our ILB's have never fit well with our 2-Gap run stuffers.  They are good players, but not really smash mouth run stuffing types that you need for a 2-gap scheme.  Freeman in particular has impact player flashes in space, but is easily swallowed up between the tackles.  I think this is an acknowledgement by our staff that our run fit will be more effective in a scheme that lets our LB's flow more aggressively and instinctively to the ball - and that the speed of the game today requires a different roster composition than they put together the first 3 years.  We are also seeing, and largely overlooking as a fan base, the increased emphasis on quality LB play.  Going 4 deep now with the additions of Moore and Irving, is a much bigger investment in quality interior LB play, and we'll be able to stop the run in this scheme with those players.

 

Right...I definitely get all that.  This is more of a semantics thing.  When I think of a "significant" scheme change, I think of something like going from the previous regime's Tampa 2 and converting to the Pagano/Baltimore 3-4 hybrid front.  

[SDakColts]

Like you said I like this young guys so far!  I wonder if he'll do the T.Y. sign when he gets a sack or TFL?

I know I would certainly enjoy it if he did, and I am sure The Ghost would like it too.

[ztboiler]

Right...I definitely get all that.  This is more of a semantics thing.  When I think of a "significant" scheme change, I think of something like going from the previous regime's Tampa 2 and converting to the Pagano/Baltimore 3-4 hybrid front.  

That's fair - especially when you put it that way.  Shifting away from 2-gap personnel is much more than semantics to me, but yes, I think everything we are going to do this year was in our playbook last year.

[Jason_]

That's fair - especially when you put it that way.  Shifting away from 2-gap personnel is much more than semantics to me, but yes, I think everything we are going to do this year was in our playbook last year.

 

ah, no the difference in semantics I was referring to was the difference in meaning we were each applying to the word "significant".  Otherwise I pretty much agree all around.

[Smonroe]

Easy I am only counting names here wasn't comparing anything else. I agree there is only 1 T.Y. until he proves he can play. Although I have to say after going back and watching all his preseason games I am very excited for what he brings to the table. The guy flashes all the time on tape. Plus I read up somewhere that even with his size he still runs a 4.9 40 time. That is pretty impressive, and his quickness shows on tape.

 

I'm coming in late on this, but I was trying to get a feel why he was released.  The only negatives I read about him was that he wanted to do his own thing and Carroll didn't like it.

 

It sort of implied that he wasn't maintaining his assignment, he liked to freelance.  Which often caused havoc, making him look good for putting pressure on the O, but it's not what the coaches wanted.

 

Could have been fans opinions, I really haven't watched him play.  I wouldn't mind having a guy create some havoc in the backfield.

[SDakColts]

I'm coming in late on this, but I was trying to get a feel why he was released.  The only negatives I read about him was that he wanted to do his own thing and Carroll didn't like it.

 

It sort of implied that he wasn't maintaining his assignment, he liked to freelance.  Which often caused havoc, making him look good for putting pressure on the O, but it's not what the coaches wanted.

 

Could have been fans opinions, I really haven't watched him play.  I wouldn't mind having a guy create some havoc in the backfield.

After watching him play this preseason I can tell you that he did create a lot of havoc in the backfield. He played very well against both the pass and the run making several plays against both. He keeps his pads low for the most part, and flashes above average quickness. He sometimes gets overpowered by double teams at the point of attack, but he eventually reestablishes his footing and holds well. I think there may have been times that he was looking to make a play rather than holding his assignment, but that is only me guessing as I do not know the play call he was given. I can say though that if he didn't hold his assignment he still most of the time made the play.

 

I guess after watching him on tape I don't see why he was released, and many fans, and beat writers for SEA don't see why either. However, there is a couple reasons that are logical.

 

1. The defensive line depth was too deep in front of him for him to claim a roster spot. The depth also consists of a lot of veterans that they may have preferred over McGill.

2. Seattle has injuries at RB with Turbin going down so they had to keep Rawls, so they had to release him to leave a extra roster spot for Rawls.

Unlikely, but possible.

3. The coaching staff wasn't satisfied with his fit in the defense, or the physical, or mental growth that he offered the team as a player. I doubt this as he showed a lot of good things during the preseason.