Report: Irsay, Grigson had “heated conversation” in locker room

[Superman]

pep is on Grigson. 

 

You keep stating that as if it's unassailable fact, and there's no evidence of that.

[Bubbz]

You keep stating that as if it's unassailable fact, and there's no evidence of that.

I guess theres not absolute proof that Pep is on Grigson, but it certainly seems like that is the case based on different reports regarding Chud and the dissent in the front office. There's not a lot of evidence, but to say there is absolutely no evidence isnt correct either. There is also no proof that Pagano had anything to do with the final decision to hire Pep.

 

From what I have seen and read, I am under the assumption that if Pagano went up to Grigson and said "I dont like this hire." Grigson would have laughed and hired Hamilton anyways. I think that its silly to believe otherwise unless new information comes out.

[Bubbz]

http://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/Coach-Pep-Hamilton-wields-Stanford-playbook-2425159.php

 

Pep was the one that called the plays in Stanford, He said it himself. He fed Luck a couple plays into the mic (Just like he does now) and Lucks picks the play he wants to run from that selection AND then Luck changes the play based on what he sees defensively....Just like he does now....All of which is the same protocol used now with the Colts, The problem is defenses are more complicated overall in the NFL which I believe is 1 of contributors in his delivery time...Though certainly not the only problem

It doesnt say anywhere in that article that Hamilton  called the plays

[Superman]

I guess theres not absolute proof that Pep is on Grigson, but it certainly seems like that is the case based on different reports regarding Chud and the dissent in the front office. There's not a lot of evidence, but to say there is absolutely no evidence isnt correct either. There is also no proof that Pagano had anything to do with the final decision to hire Pep.

 

From what I have seen and read, I am under the assumption that if Pagano went up to Grigson and said "I dont like this hire." Grigson would have laughed and hired Hamilton anyways. I think that its silly to believe otherwise unless new information comes out.

 

Your assumption is based on poorly sourced reports, but it's silly not to buy that assumption? I disagree.

[rockywoj]

I've always thought that the HC hires his assistants, or in the very least it's a collaberation with the GM. People keep saying it was Grigson that hired Pep, but where's the evidence of this? I don't actually live in Indy, so maybe there is some local archived evidence of this? Regardless, I would sure like to see the assertion substantiated, for from where I am it sure sounds like a lot of hearsay. Unless presented with evidence to the contrary, I am going to assume that the head coach, Pagano, was entirely on board with the hiring of Pep Hamilton as the HC's OC.

Speaking of hiring, was it Grigson or Irsay that hire Pagano?

[Bubbz]

Your assumption is based on poorly sourced reports, but it's silly not to buy that assumption? I disagree.

you could say the same assuming pagano hired Pep Hamilton

[Superman]

you could say the same assuming pagano hired Pep Hamilton

 

Not really.

[Superman]

I've always thought that the HC hires his assistants, or in the very least it's a collaberation with the GM. People keep saying it was Grigson that hired Pep, but where's the evidence of this? I don't actually live in Indy, so maybe there is some local archived evidence of this? Regardless, I would sure like to see the assertion substantiated, for from where I am it sure sounds like a lot of hearsay. Unless presented with evidence to the contrary, I am going to assume that the head coach, Pagano, was entirely on board with the hiring of Pep Hamilton as the HC's OC.

Speaking of hiring, was it Grigson or Irsay that hire Pagano?

 

To the bolded, there is not. There is no real substantiation of this claim, it's based entirely on supposition and conjecture, and there are no facts supporting this conclusion.

 

I believe Irsay and Grigson agreed on Pagano. Irsay is always directly involved in hiring head coaches. The only one he probably allowed someone else to make was Caldwell, whom Dungy appointed as his successor, with the approval of Irsay and Polian.

[Superman]

It doesnt say anywhere in that article that Hamilton  called the plays

 

This has been hotly debated around the Internet for a few years now. It's not clear, to be honest, but it appears Hamilton at least did some play calling at Stanford. Some have said that Shaw would call red zone plays. I'm not sure.

 

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2012/12/29/football-hamilton-stanfords-offense-prepares-for-physical-badgers-defense-with-three-days-until-rose-bowl/

 

Some comments from that link that imply Hamilton was the play caller at Stanford:

“[Wisconsin’s defense] is a lot like our defense,” Hamilton commented. “They’re tough. They’re physical. They take the bend-but-don’t-break approach…You’re not going to catch guys out of position a whole bunch. They really force you to be patient with the play calling, and execute methodically getting the ball down the field, which is what we like to do.”

 

...

 

“We’re a run-first team,” said Hamilton. “I feel like and I think about it all the time that I probably cost Andrew Luck the Heisman when it’s all said and done.”

 

 

He was also the OC at Howard for three years, where he presumably called plays. Not that that qualifies him to be an NFL play caller, just throwing it out there...

[NewColtsFan]

http://coltsauthority.com/2013-articles/colts-hire-stanford-s-pep-hamilton-as-offensive-coordinator.html

 

"The only thing missing with Hamilton is experience calling plays."

 

Well.....    that's what it says in the article....   but I don't believe it to be true.

 

And no one that I know within the Stanford community believes it to be true either.

[Bubbz]

By the way, the article listed no attribution, no proof of what they claimed. They stated it as a fact, but offered no backing.

What's the difference between Stampede Blue, a blog with no editor, which offers no proof, and me, a member of the media for 30 years and a fan of the Stanford program for the last 45 years and who has access to some of the biggest boosters of the Stanford program? Is there a big difference there?

They answer may be yes to you.....

But it's not to me........

You're offering no proof either, just that I should take your word for it on your say so, yet you want to discredit other sources

[NewColtsFan]

You're offering no proof either, just that I should take your word for it on your say so, yet you want to discredit other sources

 

The point is -- you're accepting what the Blog says and not what I'm saying.      That's your right.

 

But there's nothing to the blog that can't be found right here.     The blog offered no proof.

 

You're free to believe who you want and what you want.     That's the way of the world......

 

I just don't happen to think the idea that Pep had never actually called plays until he came to the Colts to make any sense.    It defies logic and common sense.

[Bubbz]

The point is -- you're accepting what the Blog says and not what I'm saying.      That's your right.

 

But there's nothing to the blog that can't be found right here.     The blog offered no proof.

 

You're free to believe who you want and what you want.     That's the way of the world......

 

I just don't happen to think the idea that Pep had never actually called plays until he came to the Colts to make any sense.    It defies logic and common sense.

It was an article. If the article was from SI you could say the same thing. Dont bother to ask someone for a link if youre just going to refute it  anyways. Lots of reports have stated Shaw handled the offensive play calling at Stanford, Peps performance would indicate that to be the case.

[jvan1973]

It was an article. If the article was from SI you could say the same thing. Dont bother to ask someone for a link if youre just going to refute it anyways. Lots of reports have stated Shaw handled the offensive play calling at Stanford, Peps performance would indicate that to be the case.

Google is your friend

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8857174/pep-hamilton-agrees-become-offensive-coordinator-indianapolis-colts-according-sources

[Btown_Colt]

The point is -- you're accepting what the Blog says and not what I'm saying. That's your right.

But there's nothing to the blog that can't be found right here. The blog offered no proof.

You're free to believe who you want and what you want. That's the way of the world......

I just don't happen to think the idea that Pep had never actually called plays until he came to the Colts to make any sense. It defies logic and common sense.

I know this is off topic and I quoted you because you say you have followed Stanford for so long. Is the position really called the Andrew Luck Director of Offense? I guess I don't get it?

[NewColtsFan]

It was an article. If the article was from SI you could say the same thing. Dont bother to ask someone for a link if youre just going to refute it  anyways. Lots of reports have stated Shaw handled the offensive play calling at Stanford, Peps performance would indicate that to be the case.

 

It was an article written by someone on a Blog.    Almost anyone can write for a blog.    If it was written by someone at Sports Illustrated it would have more credibility with me.

 

And no, Peps performance would not indicate that.     Pep isn't a bad play caller.    I'd say he's average.    But he's not a good play caller and Luck and the Colts need one.

 

Pep has turned out good offense in both 2013 and 2014 despite not having a good offensive line,  or good running backs, or enough decent receivers.    Not all the problems with this offense are Peps fault.       It's not that simple.

 

Pep is not bad.    He's average.   The performance over nearly 3 years says so.     But the Colts need more than that.

[Jason_]

oh, youre just here to moan about what source I used, even though you agree. Thanks for contributing

Good god you have a serious comprehension deficiency. I didn't say that I agreed with you either. I simply meant your source is crap. I cannot make it any simpler than that.

[Bubbz]

Good god you have a serious comprehension deficiency. I didn't say that I agreed with you either. I simply meant your source is crap. I cannot make it any simpler than that.

Youre not making any sense. 

 

I asked you "So gms dont hire coaches?"

 

your response: "I never said that"

 

My original statement was that grigson hired pagano. You seemed to disagree. You've kind of just gone around and circles and not made any sense aside from the fact that you dont like the source. I think we're done here.

[Bubbz]

It was an article written by someone on a Blog.    Almost anyone can write for a blog.    If it was written by someone at Sports Illustrated it would have more credibility with me.

 

And no, Peps performance would not indicate that.     Pep isn't a bad play caller.    I'd say he's average.    But he's not a good play caller and Luck and the Colts need one.

 

Pep has turned out good offense in both 2013 and 2014 despite not having a good offensive line,  or good running backs, or enough decent receivers.    Not all the problems with this offense are Peps fault.       It's not that simple.

 

Pep is not bad.    He's average.   The performance over nearly 3 years says so.     But the Colts need more than that.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13618456/stanford-cardinal-david-shaw-florida-state-seminoles-jimbo-fisher-small-group-head-coaches-calling-their-own-plays

 

this article goes into explicit detail about Shaw being the play caller.

 

Youre wrong. And Pep is not average. Hes trash.

[Bubbz]

Google is your friend

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8857174/pep-hamilton-agrees-become-offensive-coordinator-indianapolis-colts-according-sources

yeah yours too 

 

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13618456/stanford-cardinal-david-shaw-florida-state-seminoles-jimbo-fisher-small-group-head-coaches-calling-their-own-plays

[NewColtsFan]

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13618456/stanford-cardinal-david-shaw-florida-state-seminoles-jimbo-fisher-small-group-head-coaches-calling-their-own-plays

 

this article goes into explicit detail about Shaw being the play caller.

 

Youre wrong. And Pep is not average. Hes trash.

 

I'm cutting and pasting a quote that I think will mean something to some here....

 

 

"I'm going to lean on our track record," Shaw said. "It's the same play-calling group that played against a great UCLA defense last year and played great [in a 31-10 victory]."

 

I think the word group means more than one.    In other words,  not just Shaw.     And that quote....   it came from Shaw.     So read into to it what you will.

 

And as for that trash play caller,  Pep was the OC in 2013 and 2014 when we had an above average offense.     An offense that featured no running game and a poor offensive line and some not so great wide receivers.

 

If you want to think of Pep as trash -- fine.    But I find that to be a generational argument.     The young and uninformed (way too many here are that)  can only comment on the very best and what they think are the very worst.      Because those are obvious to them and easy to argue (even if their arguments are wrong)

 

But they can't argue the anything in the middle.    You've got to know more in the middle where things are less obvious.

 

Pep's resume says he's average.     And while you're entitled to your opinion,  you don't have facts to back it up.    But that's been the case since you arrived.       All opinion,   no facts.       

[NewColtsFan]

And then there is this from an ESPN column by Chris Mortensen back when Pep was hired....

 

Another interesting paragraph....

 

 

Hamilton extended his success in that role in 2012 when he served as the playcaller for a Stanford team that went 12-2, concluding its season with a Rose Bowl win over Wisconsin.

 

 

Believe who you want to believe.....

[krunk]

Mods please delete my previous post and go with this one. Thanks

 

 

 

Somebodies got to be the whipping boy I guess.

 

I think you still have to keep in mind how the offense works.  We've all been given this information before from one source or another, but I'll use this old indystar article quote from Matt Hasslebeck to illustrate my point.

 

"For the people who say, 'You have Andrew Luck on your team and the ball should be in his hands,' well this is what they did at Stanford," Hasselbeck said. "I mean, he's comfortable with it. He is very much a big part of our running game. We use his brains and intangibles to work with cadence and this (process) where he's kind of got three or four plays at once, and then he decides. He's the conductor of the orchestra. On some plays, the option is a run or a pass. He can hand it off or throw it. At the end of the day, it's really his call. It's very, very similar to what he did in college when he was the best player in college football. We're using his skills and smarts to run the ball effectively."

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2014/09/19/colts-offense-drastically-different-than-manning-years/15911069/

 

So basically Pep hands him 4 or 5 plays and says pick the one you like based on the defensive look and situation.  I'd say Andrew is running this offense just as much as the coordinator is.  I'd say Luck is calling plays just as much as Pep is if the above is true.  And I think it is because I'm sure they wanted an offense similar to how Peyton ran things from the line of scrimmage.

 

Basically a great portion of the play calling is Luck.  You wanna call him inexperienced?  He's been playing this style of football since Stanford.  I think the point in which you blame Pep is the personnel groupings, the abandonment of the running game when you know the ground game is working, just the overal lack of balance. Also not realizing when certain pass plays are not complimentary to the type of offensive line we have.  I don't like the criminal under utilization of play action passing, minimal usage of backs in the passing game, and the types of screens we are using. Finally our poor execution of our screens.  I understand ultimately Luck makes his choice but he's choosing from what you gave him, so you have to do a better job from a situational football standpoint.  

[Mr.Debonair]

Mods please delete my previous post and go with this one. Thanks

 

 

 

Somebodies got to be the whipping boy I guess.

 

I think you still have to keep in mind how the offense works.  We've all been given this information before from one source or another, but I'll use this old indystar article quote from Matt Hasslebeck to illustrate my point.

 

"For the people who say, 'You have Andrew Luck on your team and the ball should be in his hands,' well this is what they did at Stanford," Hasselbeck said. "I mean, he's comfortable with it. He is very much a big part of our running game. We use his brains and intangibles to work with cadence and this (process) where he's kind of got three or four plays at once, and then he decides. He's the conductor of the orchestra. On some plays, the option is a run or a pass. He can hand it off or throw it. At the end of the day, it's really his call. It's very, very similar to what he did in college when he was the best player in college football. We're using his skills and smarts to run the ball effectively."

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2014/09/19/colts-offense-drastically-different-than-manning-years/15911069/

 

So basically Pep hands him 4 or 5 plays and says pick the one you like based on the defensive look and situation.  I'd say Andrew is running this offense just as much as the coordinator is.  I'd say Luck is calling plays just as much as Pep is if the above is true.  And I think it is because I'm sure they wanted an offense similar to how Peyton ran things from the line of scrimmage.

 

Basically a great portion of the play calling is Luck.  You wanna call him inexperienced?  He's been playing this style of football since Stanford.  I think the point in which you blame Pep is the personnel groupings, the abandonment of the running game when you know the ground game is working, just the overal lack of balance. Also not realizing when certain pass plays are not complimentary to the type of offensive line we have.  I don't like the criminal under utilization of play action passing, minimal usage of backs in the passing game, and the types of screens we are using. Finally our poor execution of our screens.  I understand ultimately Luck makes his choice but he's choosing from what you gave him, so you have to do a better job from a situational football standpoint.  

 

Well this tells me that Luck is struggling with pre-snap reads of the defense and his being confused. He needs to improve that big time and learn to audible in /out of plays. I also wonder if he makes any changes to the protection up front, or if that is left up to the C. Hopefully he takes off the rest of the year and we can look back talk about this a blip on the radar.

[SteelCityColt]

[will426]

I said this on other posts that kind leaned toward this topic. I agree that the number 1 quick change is Pep has to go. I don't

understand how you can follow the offensive blueprint of the first half of the Pats game see the success it had compared to the

failure of the scheme of the prior games Luck was in and then starting from the 2nd half of the Pats game just suddenly switch back

to the deep ball 5 and 7 step drops and getting our QB hit again. Is it Peps idea or Pags? I mean dang we were beating the best

team in football with a very good offensive concept then just go away from it, this makes no sense to me. I think that if we followed

the Hasselbeck offensive scheme which was similar to the Pats 1st half offensive scheme with Luck we could be 6-1 or 5-2 right

now.

yetttt they all say it's due to luck playing horribly lol. He's still in that same mindset he's going to be hit and he's still getting the same plays he was using when he got hit which is why they need to move him away from the pass rush so he can see the field

[YOUR GM]

Some of us have seen the writing on the wall for two years now. This team has come out flat at the start of games for the entirety of the Andrew Luck era. The miracle 2nd half comebacks are just not happening anymore, and the team is finally playing to it's actual talent level. Been saying that Pagano is just "aight" as a head coach, just not a schemer or winner. Been saying the coordinators are hot garbage and need to go. Been saying the position coaches are not helping the players develop. BEEN saying that Grigson is a certified m.oron who has been sabotaging this team with poor roster building for 3+ years now.  

 

I'm not happy that this year has gone the way it has, but I am happy that it will likely lead to what probably should happen at the end of the season -- clean house. For those who have seen the weaknesses of this team for longer than this year, and weren't afraid to speak negatively about the organization, despite the usual suspects around here trying to bully you out of your opinion -- kudos to you. Turns out you were right and they were wrong  

[DougDew]

Mods please delete my previous post and go with this one. Thanks

 

 

 

Somebodies got to be the whipping boy I guess.

 

I think you still have to keep in mind how the offense works.  We've all been given this information before from one source or another, but I'll use this old indystar article quote from Matt Hasslebeck to illustrate my point.

 

"For the people who say, 'You have Andrew Luck on your team and the ball should be in his hands,' well this is what they did at Stanford," Hasselbeck said. "I mean, he's comfortable with it. He is very much a big part of our running game. We use his brains and intangibles to work with cadence and this (process) where he's kind of got three or four plays at once, and then he decides. He's the conductor of the orchestra. On some plays, the option is a run or a pass. He can hand it off or throw it. At the end of the day, it's really his call. It's very, very similar to what he did in college when he was the best player in college football. We're using his skills and smarts to run the ball effectively."

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2014/09/19/colts-offense-drastically-different-than-manning-years/15911069/

 

So basically Pep hands him 4 or 5 plays and says pick the one you like based on the defensive look and situation.  I'd say Andrew is running this offense just as much as the coordinator is.  I'd say Luck is calling plays just as much as Pep is if the above is true.  And I think it is because I'm sure they wanted an offense similar to how Peyton ran things from the line of scrimmage.

 

Basically a great portion of the play calling is Luck.  You wanna call him inexperienced?  He's been playing this style of football since Stanford.  I think the point in which you blame Pep is the personnel groupings, the abandonment of the running game when you know the ground game is working, just the overal lack of balance. Also not realizing when certain pass plays are not complimentary to the type of offensive line we have.  I don't like the criminal under utilization of play action passing, minimal usage of backs in the passing game, and the types of screens we are using. Finally our poor execution of our screens.  I understand ultimately Luck makes his choice but he's choosing from what you gave him, so you have to do a better job from a situational football standpoint.  

Yes, adjustments to play calling to beat the blitz or an aggressive defense has to be done by the QB at the LOS.  Obviously, when Pep is calling in plays, he has no idea how the D is going to line up.  You can't call a play from the sideline to beat the blitz before you know the blitz is coming. 

 

But what about the design of the plays?  Their routes.  People on this forum, and also Rick Venturi who I trust to be a good Xs and Os guy, say that the route design fail to compliment each other.  IOW, IMO, every pass play needs to have a hot route or an outlet by which the QB can call to or look to at the LOS.  A signal to the WR that he is going to be the QBs first read because of the way the D is lined up. If the plays given to him by the OC fail to have an option for a dump off, then the QB is hung out.

 

And what about those teams that script the first 20 offensive plays.  Are they doomed if the defense happens to give them certain looks?  Do they have 4 or 5 separate plays scripted for each down (100 possible plays)?  I think its more likely that there are options within each of the first 20 plays for the QB to adjust his first read when he sees a certain look.  I'm not sure the Colts have that.

 

Others have mentioned that the blocking schemes in the run game are overly complicated, so I think that its possible the design of the O simply is outmatched by current NFL defenses. 

 

Luck may be working with limited options within the play designs themselves.

[superrep1967]

No one should be surprised here. I'd be pretty mad if heads weren't rolling today

I agree we need a good tough coach in here not this pansy Pagano

[NagelHausForge]

 

 

so pretty much you asked for proof, but when shown proof youre just going to continue spout nonsense?  makes sense, I guess people like you were how Bush got elected TWICE.

 

 

 

Wow, that was a bit of an unnecessary personal/ political attack... Sure sign of someone that can't handle a debate like a grown up... Personal attacks.  Well played. 

[Shane Bond]

A little spark to get things going maybe ?

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/10/25/report-irsay-grigson-had-heated-conversation-in-colts-locker-room/

 

Irsay is like where is my "build the monster". I atleast had star wars before.

[krunk]

Yes, adjustments to play calling to beat the blitz or an aggressive defense has to be done by the QB at the LOS.  Obviously, when Pep is calling in plays, he has no idea how the D is going to line up.  You can't call a play from the sideline to beat the blitz before you know the blitz is coming. 

 

But what about the design of the plays?  Their routes.  People on this forum, and also Rick Venturi who I trust to be a good Xs and Os guy, say that the route design fail to compliment each other.  IOW, IMO, every pass play needs to have a hot route or an outlet by which the QB can call to or look to at the LOS.  A signal to the WR that he is going to be the QBs first read because of the way the D is lined up. If the plays given to him by the OC fail to have an option for a dump off, then the QB is hung out.

 

And what about those teams that script the first 20 offensive plays.  Are they doomed if the defense happens to give them certain looks?  Do they have 4 or 5 separate plays scripted for each down (100 possible plays)?  I think its more likely that there are options within each of the first 20 plays for the QB to adjust his first read when he sees a certain look.  I'm not sure the Colts have that.

 

Others have mentioned that the blocking schemes in the run game are overly complicated, so I think that its possible the design of the O simply is outmatched by current NFL defenses. 

 

Luck may be working with limited options within the play designs themselves.

 

Personnel groupings and play design I'd agree with, however not all of them are badly designed. I think many times Luck is locked in on attacking down the field and is totally ignoring secondary options that are wide open.  Others he is not getting the defense he thought he saw and then he holds on to the ball too long trying to get it figured out. Or he turns the ball over trying to force a square peg into a round hole.  Or he screws up the throw on very simple plays like RB and WR screens.  To be honest with you in all my years of watching football Luck is the worst I've seen at executing the screen play and very simple little throws that could go for big yardage.  I mean Pep certainly has his shortcomings and a role in the dysfunction, but I think he's given Andrew enough to work with if he would execute better and make better decisions with the football. 

 

Hasslebeck seems to not have much of a problem selecting and executing from the number of plays Pep gives him.  Much of it is decision making and internally I think they know this.  That's why you don't see much of any info on the internet about Pep being under fire inside the organization.  All you see out there is info on Pagano being fired, nothing on possible coordinator changes other than from fans.  Again I have some key areas where I'm not that happy with Pep, but I think many of the plays that end up looking bad are the product of the decision making and execution processes of the quarterback.

[Jason_]

Youre not making any sense. 

 

I asked you "So gms dont hire coaches?"

 

your response: "I never said that"

 

 

Just because you can't follow doesn't mean I'm not making sense.  I was very clear.  

 

 

My original statement was that grigson hired pagano. You seemed to disagree. 

 

 

No, I did not disagree...nor did I agree.  I don't know and neither do you, nor does anyone else on this forum.  

 

You've kind of just gone around and circles and not made any sense aside from the fact that you dont like the source.

 

 

I have not gone around in circles....not even in the slightest.  The source you chose to use is literally the only thing I commented on.  Anything else you've claimed that I said you've simply made up in your own head.  

[krunk]

Yes, adjustments to play calling to beat the blitz or an aggressive defense has to be done by the QB at the LOS.  Obviously, when Pep is calling in plays, he has no idea how the D is going to line up.  You can't call a play from the sideline to beat the blitz before you know the blitz is coming. 

 

But what about the design of the plays?  Their routes.  People on this forum, and also Rick Venturi who I trust to be a good Xs and Os guy, say that the route design fail to compliment each other.  IOW, IMO, every pass play needs to have a hot route or an outlet by which the QB can call to or look to at the LOS.  A signal to the WR that he is going to be the QBs first read because of the way the D is lined up. If the plays given to him by the OC fail to have an option for a dump off, then the QB is hung out.

 

And what about those teams that script the first 20 offensive plays.  Are they doomed if the defense happens to give them certain looks?  Do they have 4 or 5 separate plays scripted for each down (100 possible plays)?  I think its more likely that there are options within each of the first 20 plays for the QB to adjust his first read when he sees a certain look.  I'm not sure the Colts have that.

 

Others have mentioned that the blocking schemes in the run game are overly complicated, so I think that its possible the design of the O simply is outmatched by current NFL defenses. 

 

Luck may be working with limited options within the play designs themselves.

 

 

I don't have much to complain about with the running game other than we have to stay more consistent with it.  I think we would if we created more of a play action design to the offense. One compliments the other.  Judging from the Saints game I think that is where they were headed until we got so far behind we had to scrap it.   If you know you could get consistent chunk plays off of simulated runs, then you would be more devoted to running the football more.  This is one of the main reasons the Dolphins have exploded, albeit we won't really know for sure until they play the Pats tonight.

[Bubbz]

And then there is this from an ESPN column by Chris Mortensen back when Pep was hired....

 

Another interesting paragraph....

 

 

Hamilton extended his success in that role in 2012 when he served as the playcaller for a Stanford team that went 12-2, concluding its season with a Rose Bowl win over Wisconsin.

 

 

Believe who you want to believe.....

I think theyre using play caller as a synonym for offensive coordinator. Irregardless, that whole espn article I posted was about Shaw calling his own plays. We'll have to agree to disagree. 

 

Even if Pep did some of the play calling (doesnt make sense to have 2 play callers but whatever) I think we can agree that Shaw at times has taken over the play calling, probably in particularly cruicial situations, at times and in my opinion if Pep wasnt qualified to completely run a Stanford offense all by himself, he certainly wasnt qualified to run this one.

[rockywoj]

...

 

Pep has turned out good offense in both 2013 and 2014 despite not having a good offensive line,  or good running backs, or enough decent receivers.    Not all the problems with this offense are Peps fault.       It's not that simple.

 

Pep is not bad.    He's average.   The performance over nearly 3 years says so.     But the Colts need more than that.

 

I would argue that the good offense of 2013 & 2014 was DESPITE Pep Hamilton's poor offensive coordination.  The same issues as we see this season kept rearing its ugly head both years previous.  Yet, despite this, the offense managed to overcome.  This year, it is not managing to overcome the poor play calling.

[rockywoj]

To the bolded, there is not. There is no real substantiation of this claim, it's based entirely on supposition and conjecture, and there are no facts supporting this conclusion.

 

I believe Irsay and Grigson agreed on Pagano. Irsay is always directly involved in hiring head coaches. The only one he probably allowed someone else to make was Caldwell, whom Dungy appointed as his successor, with the approval of Irsay and Polian.

Well then, in the absence of any evidence, as I said, I will assume that Chuck Pagano was completely down with hiring Pep.  My assumption is that Pep was a hire that Grigson and Irsay were also completely good with.  Furthermore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, I will assume it is within Pagano's authority to hire and fire his assistant coaches.  The only proviso being, it would be in his best interest to have his GM behind any such moves.

 

Seems to be complete lunacy that a HC is not provided the leeway to oversee his coaching staff that works under him.  I cannot believe that Pagano is any different.  Ergo, to me, inaction to make a move as in moving on from Pep is on Pagano. 

[DougDew]

Personnel groupings and play design I'd agree with, however not all of them are badly designed. I think many times Luck is locked in on attacking down the field and is totally ignoring secondary options that are wide open.  Others he is not getting the defense he thought he saw and then he holds on to the ball too long trying to get it figured out. Or he turns the ball over trying to force a square peg into a round hole.  Or he screws up the throw on very simple plays like RB and WR screens.  To be honest with you in all my years of watching football Luck is the worst I've seen at executing the screen play and very simple little throws that could go for big yardage.  I mean Pep certainly has his shortcomings and a role in the dysfunction, but I think he's given Andrew enough to work with if he would execute better and make better decisions with the football. 

 

Hasslebeck seems to not have much of a problem selecting and executing from the number of plays Pep gives him.  Much of it is decision making and internally I think they know this.  That's why you don't see much of any info on the internet about Pep being under fire inside the organization.  All you see out there is info on Pagano being fired, nothing on possible coordinator changes other than from fans.  Again I have some key areas where I'm not that happy with Pep, but I think many of the plays that end up looking bad are the product of the decision making and execution processes of the quarterback.

The problems that you notice with Luck have been the same problems that he has had since he got into the league.  In previous seasons, they were masked by Reggie Wayne being able to get open, when healthy.  But Luck has hardly ever checked down or threw screen passes successfully.  The offense managed to succeed because a healthy Reggie required more DB attention than do the WRs who have taken his place.  IMO, that opened up things for TY in previous seasons, and the longer developing plays tended to work more often.

 

I put the lack of Luck's progression on learning the short game squarely on the offense's braintrust, Pep and Clyde and perhaps Chud.  Perhaps they don't even practice it much during the week. Pagano is a defensive minded coach.  I don't know if he is the person I'd expect to coach-up Luck in this area, or to be running the O during practice, so I would not hold him directly responsible for Luck's stagnation.

 

I think the slow starts and the in-game decisions I would put on Pagano. 

[rockywoj]

As for poor play conception, from the Patriots game, I give you the 3rd and short the play BEFORE the disaster of a fake punt attempt.

 

 if memory serves correctly, it was 3rd and about 2 or so yards.  There was no play action, Luck drops back to pass, and every receiver runs routes deep, like ten yards or more down field.  Nobody is open and there is NO outlet pass option for about the 2 - 3 yards needed.  I have not reviewed the play since, but I am sure Luck had NO check down option.

 

The offense only needed 2 or 3 bloody yards for the first down and all receivers are running down field routes?!  Ridiculous.

 

My memory might be merging other plays from that game or the Saints game, but in a failed 3rd and short situation, it might be the same play I speak of, there is an RB kept in for blocking.  He is to Luck's left and he just stays there as the play is falling apart, not actually blocking anybody (pretty sure this was NOT Gore, I think it was Tipton) and also not kicking out to give Luck an easy check down option as the pocket begins to collapse around him.  The play should have been designed for him to stay in and block for a tiny bit, then kick out to the left for an outlet swing pass, Luck would have known to look there to dump it off, and Tipton (I think it was him) would have had about 10 to 15 yards of open space in front of him on that play.

 

It is on the OC for not designing plays with viable check down options to use on key 3rd and short situations.  That is on Pep and ultimately it is on Pagano.  If I am HC I am going to Pep immediately and asking WHAT THE HECK?!!!!

 

Ergo, horrible offensive coordination is going on.  Sure Luck is doing a poor job this year, but the plays aren't designed to give him a lifeboat.  Atrocious play designs and poor execution.

[Superman]

Personnel groupings and play design I'd agree with, however not all of them are badly designed. I think many times Luck is locked in on attacking down the field and is totally ignoring secondary options that are wide open.  Others he is not getting the defense he thought he saw and then he holds on to the ball too long trying to get it figured out. Or he turns the ball over trying to force a square peg into a round hole.  Or he screws up the throw on very simple plays like RB and WR screens.  To be honest with you in all my years of watching football Luck is the worst I've seen at executing the screen play and very simple little throws that could go for big yardage.  I mean Pep certainly has his shortcomings and a role in the dysfunction, but I think he's given Andrew enough to work with if he would execute better and make better decisions with the football. 

 

Hasslebeck seems to not have much of a problem selecting and executing from the number of plays Pep gives him.  Much of it is decision making and internally I think they know this.  That's why you don't see much of any info on the internet about Pep being under fire inside the organization.  All you see out there is info on Pagano being fired, nothing on possible coordinator changes other than from fans.  Again I have some key areas where I'm not that happy with Pep, but I think many of the plays that end up looking bad are the product of the decision making and execution processes of the quarterback.

 

Just to piggyback on the bolded, there have been plenty of times when there were underneath options open, and Luck missed them. That includes poor throws.

 

And a note about screens: We need to start cutting the playside DE/OLB on screen plays. It might be a tell, but at least that player isn't going to bat the ball down at the LOS, or worse, pop it into the air where it can be picked off. Then maybe Luck will be more comfortable letting those screen passes rip.