Mr Grigson, were you watching?

[hoosierhawk]

On ‎1‎/‎25‎/‎2016 at 11:01 PM, gacoop1 said:

With the new Oline coach should be an upgrade.  The players are there they just need to be coached properly and get motivated.  We'll see what Philbin can bring to the table....

Why can't the same assumption be made about out defensive front seven. I think we need better players for all the coaches to work with and I think we can greatly improve the OL( we must protect Andrew ) and still improve our pass rush. Another way to improve the pass rush is to beef up our coverage in the secondary which also needs help. What exposed us badly this year was not having Andrew to cover most of our shortcomings of the passed so protecting him is paramount.

[SkyBane]

1 minute ago, hoosierhawk said:

Why can't the same assumption be made about out defensive front seven. I think we need better players for all the coaches to work with and I think we can greatly improve the OL( we must protect Andrew ) and still improve our pass rush. Another way to improve the pass rush is to beef up our coverage in the secondary which also needs help. What exposed us badly this year was not having Andrew to cover most of our shortcomings of the passed so protecting him is paramount.

Actually, to the bolded, a large part of the coverage problems came from the inability to generate a pass rush, not the other way around. Toler wasn't good, but the main reason he got toasted so much was the amount of time QB's had to throw against our secondary.

 

Make no mistake, the leaky pass defense is a pass rush issue above all else, trying to upgrade the secondary to make the pass rush look better than it is would be putting a band aid on a bullet wound.

 

Again, by most metrics, the O line actually averaged out right at the NFL average for last year, which isn't great but it's serviceable and can be corrected with minor upgrades. The "We must o line above all else" brigade is being largely short sighted. It's linebackers or bust imo.

[WoolMagnet]

Part of the problem is the fact that there aren't many great pass rushers. They are hard to tind.  It seems , however, that you need a pair to really be successful on a regular basis.  Freeney had mathis.  Miller has ware. I expect Grigs to give our new DC some new toys.

Our defense made strides in run defense, imo, now we need a pass rush.

even Bill Polian knew you don't pass on pass rushers.

[SkyBane]

54 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

even Bill Polian knew

^Implying Bill Polian didn't build success at 3 seperate franchises in Buffalo, Carolina, and Indianapolis.

 

To the rest, you don't need 2 great pass rushers to have average success on defense, but you do at least need pass rushers good enough to create competence. The Colts utterly lack that right now.

[WoolMagnet]

2 hours ago, SkyBane said:

^Implying Bill Polian didn't build success at 3 seperate franchises in Buffalo, Carolina, and Indianapolis.

 

To the rest, you don't need 2 great pass rushers to have average success on defense, but you do at least need pass rushers good enough to create competence. The Colts utterly lack that right now.

No idea what you said.

Oh.  You implied that i implied Polian stunk.

why does every comment around here have to imply a bigger meaning?  Polian always said u dont pass on franchise QBs and pass rushers(i think that was it)

just sayin i've heard it for 20 or 30 years.

R-E-L-A-X

 

and i said tor consistent success you really need two.  Instand by that.  Look around the league.

[Coffeedrinker]

People need to remember that both the Broncos and Panthers are in year 5 of their current admins.  

[hoosierhawk]

10 hours ago, SkyBane said:

Actually, to the bolded, a large part of the coverage problems came from the inability to generate a pass rush, not the other way around. Toler wasn't good, but the main reason he got toasted so much was the amount of time QB's had to throw against our secondary.

 

Make no mistake, the leaky pass defense is a pass rush issue above all else, trying to upgrade the secondary to make the pass rush look better than it is would be putting a band aid on a bullet wound.

 

Again, by most metrics, the O line actually averaged out right at the NFL average for last year, which isn't great but it's serviceable and can be corrected with minor upgrades. The "We must o line above all else" brigade is being largely short sighted. It's linebackers or bust imo.

But people have defended our OL by talking about coverage sacks. If the QB has no one to throw to he will eventually run or get sacked. Sunday they showed on more than one occasion that Brady had no receivers open and got sacked or in one case ran for a first down. Denver has a very good secondary that very much compliments the rush.

[bababooey]

35 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

But people have defended our OL by talking about coverage sacks. If the QB has no one to throw to he will eventually run or get sacked. Sunday they showed on more than one occasion that Brady had no receivers open and got sacked or in one case ran for a first down. Denver has a very good secondary that very much compliments the rush.

The reason Brady had no one to throw to was because Denver barely blitzed, the D line was just that good at getting pressure that instead of Brady torching blitzers he got lit up by being hit by the few D linemen that rushed or threw into a much more crowded field with nobody blitzing in his face for most of the day.

[SkyBane]

23 minutes ago, bababooey said:

The reason Brady had no one to throw to was because Denver barely blitzed, the D line was just that good at getting pressure that instead of Brady torching blitzers he got lit up by being hit by the few D linemen that rushed or threw into a much more crowded field with nobody blitzing in his face for most of the day.

Yep, the elusive "coverage sack" only works if you're capable of generating a pass rush with only 3-4 guys. Our defense (at least under Manusky) was unable to in a majority of situations. Just upgrading the secondary and hoping for the best will result in the same situation we had last year.

[ColtRider]

10 hours ago, SkyBane said:

^Implying Bill Polian didn't build success at 3 seperate franchises in Buffalo, Carolina, and Indianapolis.

 

To the rest, you don't need 2 great pass rushers to have average success on defense, but you do at least need pass rushers good enough to create competence. The Colts utterly lack that right now.

 

The times, they are a changing. "Utterly lack" will go to "Bring it Jack!"" Thankfully, the Colts have taken that first step in a wide sweeping coaching change. 

[ColtRider]

13 hours ago, SkyBane said:

Actually, to the bolded, a large part of the coverage problems came from the inability to generate a pass rush, not the other way around. Toler wasn't good, but the main reason he got toasted so much was the amount of time QB's had to throw against our secondary.

 

Make no mistake, the leaky pass defense is a pass rush issue above all else, trying to upgrade the secondary to make the pass rush look better than it is would be putting a band aid on a bullet wound.

 

Again, by most metrics, the O line actually averaged out right at the NFL average for last year, which isn't great but it's serviceable and can be corrected with minor upgrades. The "We must o line above all else" brigade is being largely short sighted. It's linebackers or bust imo.

 

I agree 100% with your last sentence. Great LBs are the starting point for great defenses. It's just that way. OLB & ILB play set the tone for any defense whether that's bad, good, very good or great. I'm a defensive nutcase. That aspect of football was instilled in me when I played ILB in grade school & high school. Never played college ball. Wasn't talented enough.   Spilling over into the NFL as an avid fan, I continued to be educated about Pro-ball on a wide venue. 

 

I know I've touted the line that "defense wins Championships" ad nauseam. But, it's still as true today as it ever was IMO. The Colts have never enjoyed the thrill of having a Top 5 defense on a continual basis. I hope this changes. If the ship is righted toward this arrow, it could be the spark that Indianapolis should be a very dangerous team for over a decade during the Luck era.

[ÅÐØNϧ 1]

2 hours ago, hoosierhawk said:

But people have defended our OL by talking about coverage sacks. If the QB has no one to throw to he will eventually run or get sacked. Sunday they showed on more than one occasion that Brady had no receivers open and got sacked or in one case ran for a first down. Denver has a very good secondary that very much compliments the rush.

 

A very good post IMHO

Watching Brady against the Broncos was fun & it reminded me of many Colts - Patriot games when 18 had that same look in his eyes no one to throw too no protection & no running game .

 

It was almost like deja vu .    Problems our Colts must once again try to fix our defense is better not good enough & if we are to get serious about running the ball we need a top RB someone who can get 100 yards a game consistently I can't even remember the last time this happened on a consistent basis .

 

 

[hoosierhawk]

6 hours ago, SkyBane said:

Yep, the elusive "coverage sack" only works if you're capable of generating a pass rush with only 3-4 guys. Our defense (at least under Manusky) was unable to in a majority of situations. Just upgrading the secondary and hoping for the best will result in the same situation we had last year.

Totally disagree. If there is no one to pass to, theoretically you don't need a pass rush. Offense has 5 OL and a QB ( 6 guys) which means you can send 5 receivers. If you have 4 rushers you have 7 pass defenders which is 7 on 5.If the 7 can cover 5, QB either holds the ball or runs. Not rocket science.

[SkyBane]

Just now, hoosierhawk said:

Totally disagree. If there is no one to pass to, theoretically you don't need a pass rush. Offense has 5 OL and a QB ( 6 guys) which means you can send 5 receivers. If you have 4 rushers you have 7 pass defenders which is 7 on 5.If the 7 can cover 5, QB either holds the ball or runs. Not rocket science.

Ask any defensive coordinator on the NFL level how that works out for them.

 

Receivers at this level are just to good, and QB's too elusive. Eventually, a part of your coverage will break down, and the offense will find that hole. Any QB worth their salt will be more than content to just take the 4 yards from scrambling if you're not going to bother rushing him. I'm sorry but, this just isn't sound strategy in the modern NFL. There's too many rules advantages favoring the downfield receiver that limit how you can guard them.

[hoosierhawk]

1 hour ago, SkyBane said:

1 hour ago, SkyBane said:

Ask any defensive coordinator on the NFL level how that works out for them.

 

Receivers at this level are just to good, and QB's too elusive. Eventually, a part of your coverage will break down, and the offense will find that hole. Any QB worth their salt will be more than content to just take the 4 yards from scrambling if you're not going to bother rushing him. I'm sorry but, this just isn't sound strategy in the modern NFL. There's too many rules advantages favoring the downfield receiver that limit how you can guard them.

Ask any defensive coordinator on the NFL level that works out for them.

 

Receivers at this level are just to good, and QB's too elusive. Eventually, a part of your coverage will break down, and the offense will find that hole. Any QB worth their salt will be more than content to just take the 4 yards from scrambling if you're not going to bother rushing him. I'm sorry but, this just isn't sound strategy in the modern NFL. There's too many rules advantages favoring the downfield receiver that limit how you can guard them.

I guess you just know it all. You really missed your calling. I sure you know the answer but what are the four guys doing that aren't in coverage? I mentioned a coverage sack before which you seemed to ignore but if an NFL team has anyone at all rushing the passer which the other four guys are supposed to do is it not possible that they may get to the passer before he can spot a receiver? Probably a dumb question as I know you will have some condescending answer like "   Ask any defensive coordinator on the NFL level that works out for them." like you really know what their answer would be.

[SkyBane]

1 hour ago, hoosierhawk said:

I guess you just know it all. You really missed your calling. I sure you know the answer but what are the four guys doing that aren't in coverage? I mentioned a coverage sack before which you seemed to ignore but if an NFL team has anyone at all rushing the passer which the other four guys are supposed to do is it not possible that they may get to the passer before he can spot a receiver? Probably a dumb question as I know you will have some condescending answer like "   Ask any defensive coordinator on the NFL level that works out for them." like you really know what their answer would be.

Considering I've watched a lot of football and never seen them do what you suggest, I'd say I'm in the ballpark. I'd also venture to guess the massive premium the best GM's put on pass rushers has something to do with pass rush being the most important part of modern defense. We've literally invented entirely new schemes and force trickery just to create pass rush more efficiently. The relationship is symbiotic, to be sure, but in the end, given the way the rules are set up to defend receivers and hinder defensive backs, you'll only get as far as your pass rush on defense.

[Douzer]

I noticed the Broncos rushed 3 almost every down. Sometimes it looked like they rushed 4 but that was just a LB assigned to push in then smother RB's exiting the pocket. They beat the Patriots with smother coverage. 1st read, 2nd read, 3rd read were covered. Brady threw it away, forced it, or held it and got body damage. LB's had virtually ZERO pass rush responsibility. Food for thought on LB'ers and pass rush responsibility.

 

To me, CB is the #1 need the Colts D has. 1st or 2nd read was Toler most of the time and that read was almost always open. The pass rush was repeatedly defeated by the lack of competent coverage. I hate to hate on Toler, but he's not a cover corner and was the clear weak link of 2014 &15 D's. The next need on D would be the big men up front. They must be able to generate pressure as a group and not rely on the LB's to apply pressure. The LB'ers are next and need to have more diverse skills. Walden can set an edge, apply power, burst quickness and tackle well. All of the LB's need to have multiple attributes, not single attributes like Cole. speed rusher who lost his speed and had little else to offer.

 

#1 for the offense, is the now desperate situation at RT. While Good will be a fine player in time and will be a quality backup in 2016, the team is severely understaffed at tackle, and NO Reitz is most definitely not an NFL level starting tackle. He is a good quality backup at guard, but one or two games at tackle is his absolute ceiling. 

[VaAllDay757]

On Monday, January 25, 2016 at 11:45 PM, COLTS449 said:

 

Draft someone and "see" how he develops instead of signing one of the best pass rushers in the NFL? When we are in desperate need of a dominant pass rusher? I mean I'm all for drafting a pass rusher. But if Von Miller hits the open market we'd be crazy not to make him a Colt at all cost. I mean even if we drafted a really good OLB. What's the chances he'll be as good as Von Miller? And we'd just have to pay him in 4 years anyways. If he gets around 10 sacks a year then probably by that time the market for pass rushers will be a lot higher too.So he'd probably get more than Miller. IDK. To me it just seems obvious. We need to be the most aggressive team in free agency this year. A swing for the fences, win at all cost mentality. Grigson is smart enough to not kill us cap wise, so he could pull off 3 major signings and make the numbers work.

Ok....why pay him big money when we still have other players to pay....like our qb he's gonna have a nice payday we could draft someone and it would cost way cheaper...we did ok with picking anderson and parry I think it can happen again this year draft will have plenty of OLBS coming

[Corndog]

On 1/27/2016 at 11:34 PM, SkyBane said:

Actually, to the bolded, a large part of the coverage problems came from the inability to generate a pass rush, not the other way around. Toler wasn't good, but the main reason he got toasted so much was the amount of time QB's had to throw against our secondary.

 

Make no mistake, the leaky pass defense is a pass rush issue above all else, trying to upgrade the secondary to make the pass rush look better than it is would be putting a band aid on a bullet wound.

 

Again, by most metrics, the O line actually averaged out right at the NFL average for last year, which isn't great but it's serviceable and can be corrected with minor upgrades. The "We must o line above all else" brigade is being largely short sighted. It's linebackers or bust imo.

I agree and disagree with points you made.  First of all, let's not pretend this o-line doesn't need work.  While they didn't allow that many sacks, last time I checked they were in the top five for QB hits.  

 

However, I am more than fine with going defense in the first pick, especially linebacker.  Reggie Ragland is projected at #17 in the draft, which means he could fall to the Colts easily.  He's a strong pass rusher and very good at stopping the run.  I have calling for the Colts to draft a top linebacker for the last 15 years and I would have no problem if they went after him over a RG or CB.  I also agree that having a pass rush would certainly help the secondary.  They could also get a good DE in the 2nd or 3rd round.  

 

Although, I still the secondary needs help and most of all depth.  If they drafted a CB in the first round I wouldn't lose my mind, but would certainly prefer an elite pass rushing LB/DE or RG/RT.  

 

The good news is this is one of the strongest defensive and o-line drafts in years, so they should be able to draft plenty of need based players.  

[SkyBane]

26 minutes ago, Corndog said:

I agree and disagree with points you made.  First of all, let's not pretend this o-line doesn't need work.  While they didn't allow that many sacks, last time I checked they were in the top five for QB hits.  

 

However, I am more than fine with going defense in the first pick, especially linebacker.  Reggie Ragland is projected at #17 in the draft, which means he could fall to the Colts easily.  He's a strong pass rusher and very good at stopping the run.  I have calling for the Colts to draft a top linebacker for the last 15 years and I would have no problem if they went after him over a RG or CB.  I also agree that having a pass rush would certainly help the secondary.  They could also get a good DE in the 2nd or 3rd round.  

 

Although, I still the secondary needs help and most of all depth.  If they drafted a CB in the first round I wouldn't lose my mind, but would certainly prefer an elite pass rushing LB/DE or RG/RT.  

 

The good news is this is one of the strongest defensive and o-line drafts in years, so they should be able to draft plenty of need based players.  

I didn't say the O line couldn't use upgrading; it can. I just don't think it's higher priority than pass rush at this juncture. Secondary depth is also a concern since Toler bottomed out, but you can address that with just a guy if you can shore up the pass rush well enough.

 

That's really what it boils down to defensively. Get a guy who can go after the passer reliably, so that guys like Vontae and Mike Adams can do their magic in the backfield without running themselves ragged. Whether that guy is Reggie Ragland, Scooby Wright, Noah Spence, or even a free agent, something has to be done there.

[ÅÐØNϧ 1]

On 1/25/2016 at 0:53 PM, ProblChld32 said:

 

A #1 defense is pointless without an offense that can put up points. Priority #1 keep luck upright, off the turf and HEALTHY

 

 The Ravens defense won there first SB .

 

Not so pointless when you win the Lombardi .

[ProblChld32]

2 hours ago, ÅÐØNϧ 1 said:

 

 The Ravens defense won there first SB .

 

Not so pointless when you win the Lombardi .

 

Joe flacco Threw for 287 yards and 3 TDs

Ray Rice and Bernard pierce combined for 92 yards on the ground

Anquan Boldin 6 rec 104 yard 1 td

 

the Ravens defensed forced only 1 turnover that did NOT go back for a TD 

 

so how exactly did the Defense win that SuperBowl for them? last time i checked the objective of the game was to put up more points than the opposing team, correct me if im wrong.

[Corndog]

17 hours ago, SkyBane said:

I didn't say the O line couldn't use upgrading; it can. I just don't think it's higher priority than pass rush at this juncture. Secondary depth is also a concern since Toler bottomed out, but you can address that with just a guy if you can shore up the pass rush well enough.

 

That's really what it boils down to defensively. Get a guy who can go after the passer reliably, so that guys like Vontae and Mike Adams can do their magic in the backfield without running themselves ragged. Whether that guy is Reggie Ragland, Scooby Wright, Noah Spence, or even a free agent, something has to be done there.

I think the thing here is let's say Ragland goes before #18, Spence is projected late 1st/early 2nd so he would be a reach and Wright could definitely be drafted in the 2nd.  So you can still get a pass rusher in the 2nd round, what do you with the first pick?  Reach on Spence or get a RT like Taylor Decker or Jack Conklin like Kiper predicts?  

 

The good news is this draft perfectly fits the Colts needs, so my opinion is fill one of our needs with the best player available in the first and work from there.  They don't need to reach on picks just because it is arguably a bigger need. 

[SkyBane]

2 minutes ago, Corndog said:

I think the thing here is let's say Ragland goes before #18, Spence is projected late 1st/early 2nd so he would be a reach and Wright could definitely be drafted in the 2nd.  So you can still get a pass rusher in the 2nd round, what do you with the first pick?  Reach on Spence or get a RG like Taylor Decker or Jack Conklin like Kiper predicts?  

 

The good news is this draft perfectly fits the Colts needs, so my opinion is fill one of our needs with the best player available in the first and work from there.  They don't need to reach on picks just because it is arguably a bigger need. 

Yeah, I noticed that too. This draft is definitely a luxury draft for us. If Ragland goes, and Jaylon Smith hasn't fallen to us, I can see us going corner in the first and trying for Spence in the second. It's a good draft for BPA at CB, so it's reasonable to see us go that route.

Spence is impressing some people at the Senior Bowl, however. His stock may rise by draft day. Lots of speculation lol.

[hoosierhawk]

To the best of my knowledge Ragland is not projected at outside linebacker. Every projection I've seen is ILB.

[Corndog]

9 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

To the best of my knowledge Ragland is not projected at outside linebacker. Every projection I've seen is ILB.

He's playing OLB in the Senior Bowl.  Either way, I would still pick him in the first round. 

 

[BOTT]

On January 26, 2016 at 7:49 PM, SkyBane said:

All things told, the Colts O line ranked out average (what that says about O line talent league wide is a whole other can of worms). Horrific pass rush and mediocre QB play killed us this year. One assumes the QB play is rectifiable given the talent at the position we have. Hopefully, the new Strength and Conditioning regimen can help with injuries as well.

 

The NFL has adapated to the current pass happy ruleset, as defensive minds were bound to do. Having at least one pass rusher is now critical to success on defense, regardless of scheme. The Colts have maybe 1 if you put all their "pass rushers" together. It's criminal how the OLB position has been allowed to degrade. 

The people who ranked the colts Oline as average also claimed AC had a good year.

[krunk]

8 hours ago, ProblChld32 said:

 

Joe flacco Threw for 287 yards and 3 TDs

Ray Rice and Bernard pierce combined for 92 yards on the ground

Anquan Boldin 6 rec 104 yard 1 td

 

the Ravens defensed forced only 1 turnover that did NOT go back for a TD 

 

so how exactly did the Defense win that SuperBowl for them? last time i checked the objective of the game was to put up more points than the opposing team, correct me if im wrong.

 

8 hours ago, ProblChld32 said:

 

Joe flacco Threw for 287 yards and 3 TDs

Ray Rice and Bernard pierce combined for 92 yards on the ground

Anquan Boldin 6 rec 104 yard 1 td

 

the Ravens defensed forced only 1 turnover that did NOT go back for a TD 

 

so how exactly did the Defense win that SuperBowl for them? last time i checked the objective of the game was to put up more points than the opposing team, correct me if im wrong.

I think he is talking about their very first Super Bowl win under Billick. The one during the Ray Lewis murder trial.

[krunk]

What the Broncos did against New England wasn't new. We had virtually the exact same game plan against them during the regular season. Problem was they had Blount healthy so they had the threat of the run. Also Denver has better personnel to execute that game plan. I think Denver watched our tape against them and borrowed.

[ColtsBlueFL]

On 1/25/2016 at 10:36 PM, FanFromtheWasteland said:

Address the o-line first PLEASE!!!

 

From what I hear, there are only 2 first round o linemen, neither of which will make it to us.  The others are round 2 grade and lower...

[gacoop1]

I think the Oline is fine with another year of experience under their belt.  Philbin will improve the Oline that's what he was brought in to do.  They can signed some quality free agents for the Oline and Philbin will mold them with current players.  The defense need to be built to contend and need serious effort behind it so they can build a monster.  They said Broncos are deep on their defense, they don't lose a step whenever someone is injured....Again, that's why Elway knows and can identify talent.  He's not back for the 2nd SB for just drafting WR and signing OLB busts and aging free agents....Are you listening Grigson?

[RockThatBlue]

On 1/25/2016 at 5:45 PM, TheRustonRifle#7 said:

Langford was average? 

No.

[RockThatBlue]

On 1/26/2016 at 7:51 AM, krunk said:

This is the type of stuff he says when he knows he's said something overboard or just plain stupid. He can't stand to be wrong so he starts talking about the guys conditioning. Stuff nobody is going to go back and watch several clips of to see if he is right. And for that matter who cares. I will take as many free agent players as possible who bring me 7 sacks and are productive in the run game. There's several players with names who did not produce like Langford.

A lot of people on here wanted Suh (so did I btw) and Langford outperformed Suh by a mile, much cheaper too.

[RockThatBlue]

On 1/28/2016 at 8:40 PM, hoosierhawk said:

I guess you just know it all. You really missed your calling. I sure you know the answer but what are the four guys doing that aren't in coverage? I mentioned a coverage sack before which you seemed to ignore but if an NFL team has anyone at all rushing the passer which the other four guys are supposed to do is it not possible that they may get to the passer before he can spot a receiver? Probably a dumb question as I know you will have some condescending answer like "   Ask any defensive coordinator on the NFL level that works out for them." like you really know what their answer would be.

Skybane isn't wrong though. A great pass rush makes a secondary look much better. If a QB has less time to throw that means there will be more inaccurate passes which would obviously benefit the secondary. 

[DougDew]

On ‎1‎/‎28‎/‎2016 at 10:06 PM, Douzer said:

I noticed the Broncos rushed 3 almost every down. Sometimes it looked like they rushed 4 but that was just a LB assigned to push in then smother RB's exiting the pocket. They beat the Patriots with smother coverage. 1st read, 2nd read, 3rd read were covered. Brady threw it away, forced it, or held it and got body damage. LB's had virtually ZERO pass rush responsibility. Food for thought on LB'ers and pass rush responsibility.

 

And it seemed like the lack of a 4th rusher actually gave more space for the three to move laterally, spin, whatever to free themselves from multiple lineman without getting foiled by running into other bodies. 

[ÅÐØNϧ 1]

On 1/28/2016 at 2:16 PM, ProblChld32 said:

 

Joe flacco Threw for 287 yards and 3 TDs

Ray Rice and Bernard pierce combined for 92 yards on the ground

Anquan Boldin 6 rec 104 yard 1 td

 

the Ravens defensed forced only 1 turnover that did NOT go back for a TD 

 

so how exactly did the Defense win that SuperBowl for them? last time i checked the objective of the game was to put up more points than the opposing team, correct me if im wrong.

 

You quoted me I suggest rereading my post it was quite obvious as to which Lombardi i was referring to ,

" When I say the Ravens 1'st Lombardi "   I'm more than happy to correct you & yes your wrong .

 

 

 

Quote

Quote

The Ravens defense in 2000 is often named among the greatest NFL defenses of all time. A 2007 ESPN Page 2 list ranked the 2000 Ravens defense at #3 in NFL history.^[1] Baltimore gave up only 970 rushing yards (60.6 per game) all year, an NFL record for a 16-game season,^[2] and 186 fewer yards than the next lowest team, Baltimore's Super Bowl XXXV opponent, the New York Giants. Baltimore gave up only five rushing touchdowns all season, and allowed a paltry 2.7 yards per rush, both league bests. Baltimore only allowed 165 points all season, also an NFL record for a 16-game season. Furthermore, the Ravens recovered an astronomical 26 fumbles during the season, double the total the second-ranked team.^[3]

 

 

[hoosierhawk]

On ‎1‎/‎30‎/‎2016 at 1:48 PM, DougDew said:

And it seemed like the lack of a 4th rusher actually gave more space for the three to move laterally, spin, whatever to free themselves from multiple lineman without getting foiled by running into other bodies. 

Denver rushed 4 men three times as often as 3 men (39 to 13) and rushed 5 and 6 men 10 times. Don't know where this misconception came from.

[ColtsBlueFL]

On 1/29/2016 at 10:41 PM, krunk said:

What the Broncos did against New England wasn't new. We had virtually the exact same game plan against them during the regular season. Problem was they had Blount healthy so they had the threat of the run. Also Denver has better personnel to execute that game plan. I think Denver watched our tape against them and borrowed.

 

We didn't get to Brady and hit him 20 times, either.  The Broncos hit Brady more often in that game than any QB got hit in any game in 2015.  20 hits on Brady in one game is almost unfathomable.

[GoColts8818]

On January 30, 2016 at 0:24 AM, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

From what I hear, there are only 2 first round o linemen, neither of which will make it to us.  The others are round 2 grade and lower...

The latest mock draft I saw had the Colts taking the Smith kid out of Notre Dame at OLBer.  He wouldn't help this year due to the knee injury he suffered in his bowl game but once healthy he would be a top five talent and could be just what the doctor ordered to help the pass rush.  

 

So while I want the line fixed I don't want the Colts to force a pick just because they need oline help.  Just because they draft a second round talent in the first round doesn't make that player a first round talent.  So I am with you if someone doesn't fall and they don't want to go up to get someone don't force it.  

[RollerColt]

13 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

We didn't get to Brady and hit him 20 times, either.  The Broncos hit Brady more often in that game than any QB got hit in any game in 2015.  20 hits on Brady in one game is almost unfathomable.

It was a heck of a performance to behold. Any defense that has a game like that has a chance for a championship.