Ota observations

[Chucklez]

3 hours ago, BOTT said:

Oh no, the colts would only two stud receivers in TY and Moncrief......

Definitely a bit early to be calling Moncrief a stud. He's got the potential, but a stud on 733 yards and 6 tds.... really?

[BOTT]

2 hours ago, bananabucket said:

 

And our 3rd WR would be..?

Spending a #1 on a third WR is not wise.

[BOTT]

1 hour ago, Chucklez said:

Definitely a bit early to be calling Moncrief a stud. He's got the potential, but a stud on 733 yards and 6 tds.... really?

Yes

[Buddy Lee]

19 hours ago, Kyle said:

I don't think injury is the main problem with small WRs.  I feel we do not have the go up and get it, red zone fade WR.  Not only that, but typically the small WRs aren't very good at run blocking.  

I agree. We lost Fleener as a big target in the red zone.Hilton and Dorsett are both smurfs. They can't make the best use of their main asset, speed, when we have the ball inside the 10. Red zone scoring has been an issue for the Colts in the past. My vote would be for a non-smurf 4th receiver. Hey, can we get Duron Carter back from Montreal?? lol

[crazycolt1]

57 minutes ago, Buddy Lee said:

I agree. We lost Fleener as a big target in the red zone.Hilton and Dorsett are both smurfs. They can't make the best use of their main asset, speed, when we have the ball inside the 10. Red zone scoring has been an issue for the Colts in the past. My vote would be for a non-smurf 4th receiver. Hey, can we get Duron Carter back from Montreal?? lol

I don't really think putting the ball up for grabs in the end zone is the best way to score from the red zone. It just opens up more opportunities for picks and incomplete passes. Good route running and passes to the RBs have worked pretty good in the past. (it was Bradshaw's bread and butter)  All of our TEs are plenty tall enough to go for jump balls if it comes down to that. Hopefully with a better O-line we can run in the red zone. That should all depend on what defenses show us.

[Valpo2004]

On 5/18/2016 at 11:52 AM, COLTS449 said:

Would it surprise anyone if we signed Marques Colston or Roddy White? I think Colston would be alright as our 4th WR actually.

 

Lets see what we have from our UDFA's before we start digging through the scrap heap of aging WR's.  

 

There is some potential there.  For example as an Iowa fan I'm rooting for Tevaun Smith.  Here is a summary of his pro day

 

" Wide receiver Tevaun Smith -- 6-0 3/8, 205 -- also was not invited to the combine, but took advantage of his pro-day workout to impress NFL teams. He ran the 40 in 4.41 and 4.38 seconds. He had a 38-inch vertical and 10-foot-2 broad jump. He did the short shuttle in 4.26 seconds and the three-cone drill in 6.72 seconds. He put the bar up 13 times on the bench press. "

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000646375/article/two-noncombine-invitees-impress-at-iowas-pro-day

[jchandler7]

I did not see any pics of Patrick Robinson at OTA's and havn't heard his name mentioned. Does anyone know if I just missed something or is he not participating in OTA's?

[B~Town]

On ‎5‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 4:13 PM, GoatBeard said:

Plus he's super athletic and has some hops and I feel like he plays bigger than 6'2". I mean it took him a year to get out of the habit of jumping for every catch.

 

I also think Dorset is gonna be more like Steve Smith and play bigger than his size as well.

Very true about Dorsett in his film there are tons of plays he makes you expect only the bigger guys to make he really plays with a it's my ball attitude .

[NewColtsFan]

20 hours ago, BOTT said:

 

That whole moving pocket/rolling out was a lil too cutting edge for Pep...

 

If we're not rolling Luck out both to his right and to his left,  then we're wasting him.

 

The guy is athletic and can throw very well on the run.     Why Pep didn't do that more often is a mystery.

 

I'm not talking about every snap, or even most snaps.     But just enough to keep defenses honest.....

 

[Buddy Lee]

On 5/18/2016 at 3:26 PM, Kyle said:

I don't think injury is the main problem with small WRs.  I feel we do not have the go up and get it, red zone fade WR.  Not only that, but typically the small WRs aren't very good at run blocking.  

I agree. We lost Fleener as a big target in the red zone.Hilton and Dorsett are both smurfs. They can't make the best use of their main asset, speed, when we have the ball inside the 10. Red zone scoring has been an issue for the Colts in the past. My vote would be for a non-smurf 4th receiver. Hey, can we get Duron Carter back from Montreal?? lol

[Buddy Lee]

13 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

I don't really think putting the ball up for grabs in the end zone is the best way to score from the red zone. It just opens up more opportunities for picks and incomplete passes. Good route running and passes to the RBs have worked pretty good in the past. (it was Bradshaw's bread and butter)  All of our TEs are plenty tall enough to go for jump balls if it comes down to that. Hopefully with a better O-line we can run in the red zone. That should all depend on what defenses show us.

I guess I favor a corner fade to a tall receiver with a long reach, like Moncrief. Not jump balls.

[crazycolt1]

9 minutes ago, Buddy Lee said:

I guess I favor a corner fade to a tall receiver with a long reach, like Moncrief. Not jump balls.

Don't get me wrong with my thoughts on having a tall receiver with a long reach. I just think when you depend on that you are in trouble as far as TDs in the red zone. It becomes more of a desperation play IMO. It becomes more like lets just throw the ball up and see what happens?

[Jdubu]

19 hours ago, Buddy Lee said:

I agree. We lost Fleener as a big target in the red zone.Hilton and Dorsett are both smurfs. They can't make the best use of their main asset, speed, when we have the ball inside the 10. Red zone scoring has been an issue for the Colts in the past. My vote would be for a non-smurf 4th receiver. Hey, can we get Duron Carter back from Montreal?? lol

Back in the days of Marvin and Reggie we seemed to score ok and these 2 weren't considered overly big guys. It's about good scheming, good routes and execution of a good plan. I still feel like whatever garbage plans that Pep put together never really tapped the high points of each type receiver. He put them all in a box and said do it this way even if it's a weak part of the players game. I certainly hope that Chud adapts the game plans to more tap into the players skill set as opposed to a generic game plan. If he does that, megatrons are not required. Steve smith and Antonio Brown should prove that. 

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, Jdubu said:

Back in the days of Marvin and Reggie we seemed to score ok and these 2 weren't considered overly big guys. It's about good scheming, good routes and execution of a good plan. I still feel like whatever garbage plans that Pep put together never really tapped the high points of each type receiver. He put them all in a box and said do it this way even if it's a weak part of the players game. I certainly hope that Chud adapts the game plans to more tap into the players skill set as opposed to a generic game plan. If he does that, megatrons are not required. Steve smith and Antonio Brown should prove that. 

Not only those two you have Odell Beckham Jr., E. Sanders, Doug Baldwin and TY Hilton that you can add to your list.

[Buddy Lee]

21 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

I don't really think putting the ball up for grabs in the end zone is the best way to score from the red zone. It just opens up more opportunities for picks and incomplete passes. Good route running and passes to the RBs have worked pretty good in the past. (it was Bradshaw's bread and butter)  All of our TEs are plenty tall enough to go for jump balls if it comes down to that. Hopefully with a better O-line we can run in the red zone. That should all depend on what defenses show us.

I guess I favor a corner fade to a tall receiver with a long reach, like Moncrief. Not jump balls.

[Buddy Lee]

8 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Don't get me wrong with my thoughts on having a tall receiver with a long reach. I just think when you depend on that you are in trouble as far as TDs in the red zone. It becomes more of a desperation play IMO. It becomes more like lets just throw the ball up and see what happens?

I will disagree with you on that one. If it had been practiced between the QB and the WR as a timing pass with little opportunity for a pick. I see it as a very good option. It seems that almost every HC/OC uses it. I guess they all just like to roll the dice? 

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, Buddy Lee said:

I will disagree with you on that one. If it had been practiced between the QB and the WR as a timing pass with little opportunity for a pick. I see it as a very good option. It seems that almost every HC/OC uses it. I guess they all just like to roll the dice? 

Oh well, disagree all you care to. Makes not difference to me. You see it as very good option while I see it as desperation. Difference of opinion. Move on.

[Colts_Fan12]

37 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Oh well, disagree all you care to. Makes not difference to me. You see it as very good option while I see it as desperation. Difference of opinion. Move on.

Yeah the goal line fade is a desperation play it's only used by every coach in the league 

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Yeah the goal line fade is a desperation play it's only used by every coach in the league 

Sorry you misread what was said. I was talking about putting the ball up for grabs. If you would like to go back and check I think that you will find that out.

[Colts_Fan12]

21 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Sorry you misread what was said. I was talking about putting the ball up for grabs. If you would like to go back and check I think that you will find that out.

That's a play where you throw it up for your WR it's a beautiful play when executed correctly 

[B~Town]

21 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

If we're not rolling Luck out both to his right and to his left,  then we're wasting him.

 

The guy is athletic and can throw very well on the run.     Why Pep didn't do that more often is a mystery.

 

I'm not talking about every snap, or even most snaps.     But just enough to keep defenses honest.....

 

Why Pep didn't run more play action when Luck had the best passer rating on PA could also go in that mystery column .

[crazycolt1]

2 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

That's a play where you throw it up for your WR it's a beautiful play when executed correctly 

 That happens when you fail to get the ball in the end zone either by running a good route and catching a pass or failing to be able to run in the red zone. It may look beautiful but made out of desperation. Thus why it's called putting it up for grabs.

[NewColtsFan]

44 minutes ago, B~Town said:

Why Pep didn't run more play action when Luck had the best passer rating on PA could also go in that mystery column .

 

Yup.....    thanks for adding that.....     and Play Action is one of my favorite things to do to help a QB.....

 

I'm not in the Pep was incompetent camp....    but he had his issues, which is why I never felt fully comfortable with him.

 

 

[B~Town]

5 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

 That happens when you fail to get the ball in the end zone either by running a good route and catching a pass or failing to be able to run in the red zone. It may look beautiful but made out of desperation. Thus why it's called putting it up for grabs.

It's usually a match up teams expose you get a short corner on a tall receiver you toss over CB where it goes out of bounds or the WR makes a play on the ball . Not a desperate play just a team using matchups to there advantage .

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, B~Town said:

It's usually a match up teams expose you get a short corner on a tall receiver you toss over CB where it goes out of bounds or the WR makes a play on the ball . Not a desperate play just a team using matchups to there advantage .

That's your point of view, not mine. When ever the term throwing it up for grabs is used it mean exactly what it says IMO.

[akcolt]

2 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

That's your point of view, not mine. When ever the term throwing it up for grabs is used it mean exactly what it says IMO.

There is a difference between throwing a jump ball to a taller WR or putting it up there and giving your guy a chance to make a play on it. It's only up for grabs if it gets picked 

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, akcolt said:

There is a difference between throwing a jump ball to a taller WR or putting it up there and giving your guy a chance to make a play on it. It's only up for grabs if it gets picked 

I understand that. My point was it's is an unnecessary risk if a good route cant be hit or you cant run the ball in the red zone before that play is utilized. Even the great Calvin Johnson had 1,964 yards receiving and only caught 5 TD passes.

[MB-ColtsFan]

8 minutes ago, akcolt said:

There is a difference between throwing a jump ball to a taller WR or putting it up there and giving your guy a chance to make a play on it. It's only up for grabs if it gets picked 

I think what he's getting at is the thought of a "jump ball" or "throwing it up for grabs" mentality.  It seems to give the opponent as much opportunity to get it as the receiver.

Now if you say you're throwing it where only your receiver can get it, well that is very different than a jump ball or throwing it up for grabs.

A hail Mary is throwing it up for grabs.  A fade is an attempt to take advantage of match-ups, in my opinion.

Just my .02

[crazycolt1]

4 minutes ago, MB-ColtsFan said:

I think what he's getting at is the thought of a "jump ball" or "throwing it up for grabs" mentality.  It seems to give the opponent as much opportunity to get it as the receiver.

Now if you say you're throwing it where only your receiver can get it, well that is very different than a jump ball or throwing it up for grabs.

A hail Mary is throwing it up for grabs.  A fade is an attempt to take advantage of match-ups, in my opinion.

Just my .02

You worded it so much better, thank you.

[MB-ColtsFan]

7 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I understand that. My point was it's is an unnecessary risk if a good route cant be hit or you cant run the ball in the red zone before that play is utilized. Even the great Calvin Johnson had 1,964 yards receiving and only caught 5 TD passes.

I wouldn't call it an "unnecessary" risk if you've got the jump/height advantage.  Heck, any throw in the red zone can be considered a calculated risk.  It's all about the execution.  If you can't punch it in on the ground then any throw is a risk.

[chad72]

11 minutes ago, MB-ColtsFan said:

I think what he's getting at is the thought of a "jump ball" or "throwing it up for grabs" mentality.  It seems to give the opponent as much opportunity to get it as the receiver.

Now if you say you're throwing it where only your receiver can get it, well that is very different than a jump ball or throwing it up for grabs.

A hail Mary is throwing it up for grabs.  A fade is an attempt to take advantage of match-ups, in my opinion.

Just my .02

 

 

Yep. Tall wide out or short one, throwing it where the wide out can only get it is not a "jump ball", as you correctly pointed out. In the case of the taller wide out, the catch radius goes up and hence the range where only he can get it obviously goes up.

 

When I see Rodgers and Jordy Nelson hook up on back shoulder throws, they are on the same page so many times, even in the end zone. When guys like Rodgers and Big Ben are on the move, it buys more time for the smaller wide outs who may not win on size but their speed will eventually allow them to separate. But when you have less mobile guys like Peyton there, route running, accuracy and less street ball is emphasized. Luck can get away with inaccuracy if he can gun it into tight windows by buying time out of the pocket with his legs to see his speedsters eventually get open.

 

Peyton and Clyde used to design special red zone plays that allowed them to use the spatial separation and route running skills more of his wide outs. They would not have used any of those plays between the 20s and then bam, a first time rub route, fade, back of end zone throw where the ball is already on its way before the WR or TE makes his break. Peyton also loved to hand it off in the red zone knowing how the zones are squeezed more and how the run opened up more stuff for the O to score 7. Our run game will be more important in the red zone than anything else, IMO, that part will not and should not change.

[crazycolt1]

22 minutes ago, MB-ColtsFan said:

I wouldn't call it an "unnecessary" risk if you've got the jump/height advantage.  Heck, any throw in the red zone can be considered a calculated risk.  It's all about the execution.  If you can't punch it in on the ground then any throw is a risk.

But less risk is used when it is not thrown up for grabs was my point. Heck, any thrown ball in the air can be a risk.