Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Chuck Pagano complaints (merge)


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, tfunky14 said:

Really, that's the best you got.

2012 season 11 wins

2013 season 11 wins

2014 season 11 wins

2015 season  8 wins with out your QB for 9 games

 

 

Try again......

The team constantly looks unprepared.  They take stupid, undisciplined penalties.  The playcalling has been very questionable on the defensive side of the ball (how many times do we have to see Antonio Morrison or Robert Mathis drop into coverage?).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 574
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On 10/24/2016 at 6:48 AM, krunk said:

I'm going to assume in his mind we had the lead and we're a 2-4 ball club so he probably didn't want to give them leeway for any additional stuff like what happened in the Chargers game maybe.  Plus we were getting the ball back at half time.  You can criticize him, but hey we won so hopefully we'll make the necessary corrections for the Chiefs contest.

 

I'm fine with the conservative end to the second quarter. Sometimes, discretion is the better part of valor, and since the OL has started to give up some pressure and a sack in the second quarter, they probably wanted to just get to the locker room with their two score lead and get the ball first in the second half. The odds of scoring with 35 seconds are low, and there's a lot of room for a disaster to happen. I'm fine with that decision.

 

What I dislike is the 4th and 2 on the previous possession. Your'e at the 50, you just got 19 on third down, and if you extend that drive you're probably going to score late in the second quarter. To me, with a good QB having a good day, a receiver they can't cover, and a run game that's not spectacular but seems to be good for at least a couple yards each attempt, I'd have lined up and tried to convert that 4th down. Then you're up 14-18 points, and we're not even talking about the 35 second situation.

 

Instead, they punted for a touchback (it was close, though), so you got a net of 30 yards, and the Titans went all the way for a TD anyways, so your conservative decision didn't pay off at all. Those are the situations where I think the potential reward outweighs the risk, and I think NFL coaching in general is too conservative in that situation. I'd almost always be ready to at least line up and see what happens on 4th and 2 from that spot on the field. Luck might have gotten a neutral zone infraction, matter of fact. 

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

 

I'm fine with the conservative end to the second quarter. Sometimes, discretion is the better part of valor, and since the OL has started to give up some pressure and a sack in the second quarter, they probably wanted to just get to the locker room with their two score lead and get the ball first in the second half. The odds of scoring with 35 seconds are low, and there's a lot of room for a disaster to happen. I'm fine with that decision.

 

What I dislike is the 4th and 2 on the previous possession. Your'e at the 50, you just got 19 on third down, and if you extend that drive you're probably going to score late in the second quarter. To me, with a good QB having a good day, a receiver they can't cover, and a run game that's not spectacular but seems to be good for at least a couple yards each attempt, I'd have lined up and tried to convert that 4th down. Then you're up 14-18 points, and we're not even talking about the 35 second situation.

 

Instead, they punted for a touchback (it was close, though), so you got a net of 30 yards, and the Titans went all the way for a TD anyways, so your conservative decision didn't pay off at all. Those are the situations where I think the potential reward outweighs the risk, and I think NFL coaching in general is too conservative in that situation. I'd almost always be ready to at least line up and see what happens on 4th and 2 from that spot on the field. Luck might have gotten a neutral zone infraction, matter of fact. 

Maybe he was thinking about not putting our shaky defense in a bad position.  Not sure, but knowing Pagano I bet that was on his mind!

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm fine with the conservative end to the second quarter. Sometimes, discretion is the better part of valor, and since the OL has started to give up some pressure and a sack in the second quarter, they probably wanted to just get to the locker room with their two score lead and get the ball first in the second half. The odds of scoring with 35 seconds are low, and there's a lot of room for a disaster to happen. I'm fine with that decision.

 

What I dislike is the 4th and 2 on the previous possession. Your'e at the 50, you just got 19 on third down, and if you extend that drive you're probably going to score late in the second quarter. To me, with a good QB having a good day, a receiver they can't cover, and a run game that's not spectacular but seems to be good for at least a couple yards each attempt, I'd have lined up and tried to convert that 4th down. Then you're up 14-18 points, and we're not even talking about the 35 second situation.

 

Instead, they punted for a touchback (it was close, though), so you got a net of 30 yards, and the Titans went all the way for a TD anyways, so your conservative decision didn't pay off at all. Those are the situations where I think the potential reward outweighs the risk, and I think NFL coaching in general is too conservative in that situation. I'd almost always be ready to at least line up and see what happens on 4th and 2 from that spot on the field. Luck might have gotten a neutral zone infraction, matter of fact. 

I think if we had a more reliable D he probably would have gone for it there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, krunk said:

Maybe he was thinking about not putting our shaky defense in a bad position.  Not sure, but knowing Pagano I bet that was on his mind!

 

Probably, but the shaky defense gave up an 80 yard TD drive in about 3 minutes anyways. There's no way to know that in advance, but the way it turned out supports the reasoning for going for it. Maybe they give up a 50 yard TD drive in 2 minutes, and then you get the ball back with 1:35 left, and two timeouts, and you can put together a reasonable drive for points rather than kneeling it out. 

 

To me, the quality of the defense doesn't factor in right there, unless you have a GREAT defense and are counting on a stop. Even then, you can count on a stop from midfield.

 

It's about game theory. Fourth and two favors the offense, in general, and especially when you have a good/great QB. And the leverage in that situation -- the likelihood of getting a pinned punt vs the likelihood of converting on 4th down -- favors going for it, even with a great punter. Unless a punt basically ends the game, I think that's a go for it field position, down and distance. 

 

Probably doesn't help that we ran such a terrible play on 4th down last week, though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ColtsManDan91 said:

I know Dad I said sorry dad just relax Phil ,, kinda mad cause my colts suck so I'll comment on any thread I want ,,alright???

Um...no, that's not how it works.  You comment relevant things into the relevant threads.  I have no problem with you bashing Grigson, but do it in the Grigson thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎3‎/‎2016 at 8:37 PM, LJpalmbeacher said:

I'm not going to pretend to be a X 's & O's expert but if someone can tell me the difference between pep's playbook and chud's I'd appreciate it.

What is exactly a Chud offense?

Chuds offense is worst to a point Hilton disappeared again that is why I continue to say even though nobody here will agree that he isn't a number 1 reciever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well maybe it is not the OC  we all thought it was Pep being a issue.  but it starts at the top this is not a good coached team. 

not sure what they do at practice,  but I remember when Wayne tried out for the Patriots and came back and said their practices are not fun...   that says it all about Pagano. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am usually not the type of person to call for a coaching change mid-season, but at this point, what do we have to lost by firing Pagano? We are not a playoff contending team. Let's see if another head coach can actually make adjustments. The way I see it, Pagano is gone after this season, regardless. Let's see if we have 'the next guy' on our staff...aka Chud or someone else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Bowlingguy300 said:

well maybe it is not the OC  we all thought it was Pep being a issue.  but it starts at the top this is not a good coached team. 

not sure what they do at practice,  but I remember when Wayne tried out for the Patriots and came back and said their practices are not fun...   that says it all about Pagano. 

Practices are not supposed to be fun. When you screw up as a member of the Colts, you know you're going to get a pat on your butt.  Oh Bill....... u avail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Colts are behind a Mike Mularkey coached team in the division and the only team below them just fired their OC and will soon fire their HC. Oh yeah, they also beat the Colts. Also, the division leader has probably the worst QB in football. Sorry Pagano, it's time to go!

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Indy_Mike said:

Supposedly, one of Pagano's great virtues is, he is a man of integrity. Well, there is no doubt he had to have made a lot of promises to Mr. Irsay to get another chance at coaching this team. Promises that he hasn't, and won't, come close to fulfilling. A true man of integrity would go to Mr. Irsay and hand him his resignation at the end of this season...if not sooner. Mr. Irsay trusted him, obviously got talked into a very silly decision, Pagano is making him look like a complete fool....so do the right thing Coach and let Jimmy of the hook!

Irsay is part of the problem

Link to post
Share on other sites

He has the least talented team since he has been here, the talent has been declining for several years. But he just doesn't seem to bring anything to the table that allows us to excel when things don't fall perfectly into place for us. Luck has bailed us out on a good number of those wins.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Indy_Mike said:

But he is here to stay....

It's a culture problem and it starts at the very top with Irsay.  In Indy, as long as you do things just alright, you're fine.  If you win a really ugly game with a lot of sloppy mistakes, it's still celebrated.  If you're absolutely terrible at your job, you're given an extension and brought back to continue displaying your ineptitude.  Irsay is part of the problem.  Until he steps down and/or major changes are made, I think we'll just be wasting Luck's career

Link to post
Share on other sites

More of the same nonsense from Pagano.

 

YOU are a big part of the reason for those same things, you clueless buffoon. You've said you'd fix it for years now. Maybe it's time to realize that you are not a coach that's capable of fixing anything. Resign at once, Pagano.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was Irsay, I would ask myself one simple question.  

 

Have I, in 5 years, seen anything that would lead me to believe that CP can lead this team to not only one, but multiple SBs?  I think the answer is a most definite NO.  

 

Therefore, why am I wasting my time, and Luck's years and mental and physical state, on a coach that cannot win?

 

IMO this team has one shot and one shot only.  HOPE and pray that Harbaugh wants to come back to the NFL.  Because if he does, he will want to be the Colts coach and he will lead this team to multiple SBs imo.

 

Pagano is just not a good coach pure and simple.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, threeflight said:

If I was Irsay, I would ask myself one simple question.  

 

Have I, in 5 years, seen anything that would lead me to believe that CP can lead this team to not only one, but multiple SBs?  I think the answer is a most definite NO.  

 

Therefore, why am I wasting my time, and Luck's years and mental and physical state, on a coach that cannot win?

 

IMO this team has one shot and one shot only.  HOPE and pray that Harbaugh wants to come back to the NFL.  Because if he does, he will want to be the Colts coach and he will lead this team to multiple SBs imo.

 

Pagano is just not a good coach pure and simple.

 

I love Harbaugh, but there are other options.

 

plus, there is no way in hell he is leaving Michigan this early.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This" looking at film" thing is really getting old....just saying.

 

Also , is it possible to coach some stupidness out of this team ? Can't simply do things like down a punt without spastically batting it into the end zone . Constantly wiping out big plays with offensive holding , defensive penalties on 3rd down stops. Maybe just a dumb team ? What I do know is just saying "we gotta stop shooting ourselves in the foot " doesn't seem to stop it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Because I’ve been a Colts fan for a long time and Jim Irsay has never had an issue spending money.  Ballard has also said over and over again he was saving his money to pay his own.  This isn’t breaking news.  So rather buy into some idea that he was fine with spending money under Tobin, Polian, and Grigson but is no longer fine with spending money under Ballard just doesn’t add up when you look at his history and what Ballard said.  It’s much more logical to assume that’s he’s spending what Ballard wants like he has with his previous GMs especially when the GM tells you he doesn’t believe in splash free agents and is saving his money to sign his own.   Irsay doesn’t negotiate the contracts.  Ballard does so contract structuring is done by Ballard and Ballard has done it in away to give him cap flexibility that is going to allow him to keep guys like Nelson, Leonard, Smith and others over the next couple of years.    Also Jim Irsay is worth 3 billion dollars he’s not hurting for money.   You want to see an organization that doesn’t want to spend money look across town where Simon won’t even let the Pacers look at the luxury tax.  That’s an owner who doesn’t want to spend.
    • I’m not sure why you find it hard to accept that the Colts may have cash flow problems?  Not that they can’t manage them, but still….   Irsay is one of the few owners who doesn’t have any other source of big income.   No high tech company.  No real estate development.   No oil and gas.   His wealth is owning the Colts.   That’s it.    Sure he may he may spend money, but these last five years he now uses a pay-go system that lends itself to managing money.  We used to give bigger SB’s under Grigson.   Now,  we give either small or no signing bonuses.   Very few teams do that.  And we’re a very small market franchise.   You weren’t the least bit surprised to see DeForest Buckner accept a ZERO signing bonus?   I sure was.     Point of clarification:  none of what I’ve written is proof of anything.   But I think it’s at least worth considering, and you seem completely unwilling to even do that.  I confess find that surprising. 
    • Just because they had money left over doesn’t mean Irsay had a problem spending it had Ballard wanted too.  It doesn’t take that hard of a look back at Irsay’s history of owner to see he has zero problem spending what his GM wants to spend.  
    • That's not exactly true if you consider cap space left over. IIRC, we had the most unspent or near most unspent over a 3-4 year period just recently (IIRC, 16, 17, 18, 19). Pretty sure we had 40+M unspent two years in a row.   IIRC, we carried over the most in the league again this year at around 30M.   It was also speculated that we 1) didn't ask Luck for money back, AND 2) gave JB such a big raise, was because we would have been too far under the 89% rule had we not done both 1 and 2.     
    • Regardless Irsay has never been shy about spending to make the Colts better.  So either way the first point that started all this is irrelevant.  
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...