Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

defense wins championships


jim scheurich

Recommended Posts

I am again wondering if this is the year that our GM gets serious about our defense-and stopping the run in particular. Heck, we'll probably draft a tight end or running back, then WR etc... and pick up a defensive player from IvyTech  as an undrafted.... Sorry for the pessimism fellas, but it just seems like the last time our D was great was Siragusa's rookie year. Hopefully Luck is great this year, but we need a D to help him out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, steveeoaktree33 said:

I am again wondering if this is the year that our GM gets serious about our defense-and stopping the run in particular. Heck, we'll probably draft a tight end or running back, then WR etc... and pick up a defensive player from IvyTech  as an undrafted.... Sorry for the pessimism fellas, but it just seems like the last time our D was great was Siragusa's rookie year. Hopefully Luck is great this year, but we need a D to help him out.

Does your memory lapses happen very often?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MacDee1975 said:

Thats funny, because the exact opposite was always said until this year.

 

When an offensive-oriented team wins again next year, then it'll go back to being offense that wins championships.

 

 

 

31 - defense 

25 - offense 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/feb/06/does-defense-really-win-championships

 

It seems pretty close truth is a good offense & a to 15 defense is how the Patriots  roll , 

 

Something we should be shooting for ..

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO if the Colts can find real balance on both sides of the ball, a team that can keep opposing coaches guessing and not just exploiting whatever is the weakest side. Maybe then will be able to regularly get by the "Hoodie", and a cpl other coaches that have success against the Shoe. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ÅÐØNϧ 1 said:

 

31 - defense 

25 - offense 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/feb/06/does-defense-really-win-championships

 

It seems pretty close truth is a good offense & a to 15 defense is how the Patriots  roll , 

 

Something we should be shooting for ..

 

When they had good OL protection, it worked. If not, they fall short. 

 

Teams don't challenge them for 60 minutes, that is how you beat teams like the Seahawks and Patriots. Our coach felt it was early enough to go for gadget plays because playing them straight up was not an option for 60 minutes (cough Whalen, snap Whalen) :)

 

So far, the start is just as bad or worse than the Peyton era vs the Patriots.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

When they had good OL protection, it worked. If not, they fall short. 

 

Teams don't challenge them for 60 minutes, that is how you beat teams like the Seahawks and Patriots. Our coach felt it was early enough to go for gadget plays because playing them straight up was not an option for 60 minutes (cough Whalen, snap Whalen) :)

 

So far, the start is just as bad or worse than the Peyton era vs the Patriots.

 

I respectfully  disagree 

 

Andrew Luck has 3 11-5 seasons in his first 3 Peyton Manning did not infact i believe his first season was 3-13 with Faulk how much better could 12 have been had he had the same weapons ?   

 And how many seasons did it take for Peyton to get to a AFC Championship ?

 

Not to mention getting to the playoffs & going further each year even without completing his fourth year Luck has done more with less than 18 , 12 has a better record for his first 4 years than 18 . 

Bad or worse that argument is seriously flawed .

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, ÅÐØNϧ 1 said:

 

I respectfully  disagree 

 

Andrew Luck has 3 11-5 seasons in his first 3 Peyton Manning did not infact i believe his first season was 3-13 with Faulk how much better could 12 have been had he had the same weapons ?   

 And how many seasons did it take for Peyton to get to a AFC Championship ?

 

Not to mention getting to the playoffs & going further each year even without completing his fourth year Luck has done more with less than 18 , 12 has a better record for his first 4 years than 18 . 

Bad or worse that argument is seriously flawed .

 

 

 

I said vs the Patriots, not overall. Is it clear now? Even a blind man given the facts can tell you the Luck era is off to a better start than the Peyton era overall.

 

Besides, it is not how you start, it is how you finish. I am just hoping the finish is better than the start. Elway, 0-3 in SBs and if he had not won 1 or won the last 2, he wouldn't even be mentioned as a top 10 QB. Those last 2 SBs put him in the Top 10 conversation, IMO. The finish is important in terms of history.

 

Our performance vs elite teams like the Steelers and Patriots will define how the Luck era will turn things around, as simple as that, IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 9:34 PM, chad72 said:

 

When they had good OL protection, it worked. If not, they fall short. 

 

Teams don't challenge them for 60 minutes, that is how you beat teams like the Seahawks and Patriots. Our coach felt it was early enough to go for gadget plays because playing them straight up was not an option for 60 minutes (cough Whalen, snap Whalen) :)

 

So far, the start is just as bad or worse than the Peyton era vs the Patriots.

They needed a running game or another receiver.

 

You cant beat denver throwing 80 percent of the time

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

They needed a running game or another receiver.

 

You cant beat denver throwing 80 percent of the time

 

 

 

Are you talking about the Patriots? Yeah, I agree but frankly, I don't care what they need to do to win in the future. :P

 

I was only talking Patriots in context of the Colts' record against them which is dismal :( and how the Pats' SB run last year happened due to better OL play as the year went farther. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/13/2016 at 0:05 PM, steveeoaktree33 said:

I am again wondering if this is the year that our GM gets serious about our defense-and stopping the run in particular. Heck, we'll probably draft a tight end or running back, then WR etc... and pick up a defensive player from IvyTech  as an undrafted.... Sorry for the pessimism fellas, but it just seems like the last time our D was great was Siragusa's rookie year. Hopefully Luck is great this year, but we need a D to help him out.

Stopping the run isn't enough. You have to be equally effective in rushing the passer. This is a pass-oriented league.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2016 at 10:20 AM, chad72 said:

 

Even a blind man given the facts can tell you the Luck era is off to a better start than the Peyton era overall.

 

 

 

Give that man a cigar .  

 

Its not the start its how you finish   I agree  11-5.3 seasons in a row good starts better at the finish 3 seasons in a row .

 

Its up to the coachs to figure out how to beat New England thats not on the player Peyton had a great career aside from losses to New England its time for the Colts coaching to step up & put there players in a position to win 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • What you are failing to understand is super bowls are not what determines how a player is voted into the HOF  You say Johnson did nothing for the Lions? What did Sanders do for the Lions?  They both walked away from HOF careers is what they did.  IMO Manning, Johnson and Woodson will all be first time ballot. 
    • Nice video. Thanks for sharing 
    • We are all using our personal opinion on if he deserves to make it. Votes are based on personal opinion. My opinion is he didn't play long enough and he didn't accomplish anything for the Lions. He put up great stats in 9 years. That's it. Pretty soon, 10 receivers or so today will have matched him in their first 9 years and will have probably won a SB on top of it. Reggie and Torry won a SB as well and were a big part of it. They played long careers. Megatron was great for 9 years and didn't help the Lions do anything team-wise. He was a stat-guy. That is not an opinion, that is a fact. Maybe he gets in, maybe he doesn't. I don't think he deserves to be put in over Reggie and Torry though.
    • I was using Monuz and Matthews as a sarcastic reply to you. Johnson is listed in the top 10 receivers in NFL history by any list you can find. He made the pro bowl 6 times and held the receiving records till Harrison broke them.  You are using your personal opinion on if you think he deserves to be in the HOF.  That is not how a player is voted into the HOF.  In 2014 Johnson was listed #2 in the top 100 players in NFL history between Manning and Brady. 
    • Sanders played 10 years as an RB (the position with the shortest shelf life in the NFL), Megatron played 9 years as a WR (a position where HOF players normally play 15+ years). The comparison isn't there. Sanders played enough time at his position, Megatron did not. I'd take someone like Wayne or Holt over him any day. Again, we have to have some standards for the HOF.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...