Moving forward, Are we completely comfortable with the Offensive play calling

[Rackeen305]

Ok, Yes we will have a new GM. However, with a new GM comes new players, and whether to keep key players (Frank Gore). Regardless of who we have on the roster, Are we completely comfortable with the play calling/packages that we run. Players wont change the results of a 4th and 1 situation, where the Colts call a screen. I just don't get it. How will the GM or can the new GM affect these instances of horrible play calling?

 

This is the question. An organizational philosophy that is effective in key situations.

-You must get positive yards on 1st and 10

-You have to convert on 3rd and less than 2

-Better yet, You cannot be in a situation where its 2nd and 18.

 

These are the plagues that seem to surround the colts. (offensively at least). Please reply with objective football reasoning. -Thanks! 

[bababooey]

Unless we are winning every game, the offense can do better.

[backshoulderfade]

Just now, Rackeen305 said:

Ok, Yes we will have a new GM. However, with a new GM comes new players, and whether to keep key players (Frank Gore). Regardless of who we have on the roster, Are we completely comfortable with the play calling/packages that we run. Players wont change the results of a 4th and 1 situation, where the Colts call a screen. I just don't get it. How will the GM or can the new GM affect these instances of horrible play calling?

 

This is the question. An organizational philosophy that is effective in key situations.

-You must get positive yards on 1st and 10

-You have to convert on 3rd and less than 2

-Better yet, You cannot be in a situation where its 2nd and 18.

 

These are the plagues that seem to surround the colts. (offensively at least). Please reply with objective football reasoning. -Thanks! 

No, I don't think anyone here is fully satisfied with the offensive playcalling. @Superman did a cool breakdown thread a few weeks back, also.

[Andrew Luck fan club]

No. We need more slants for one. 

[Rackeen305]

9 minutes ago, Majin Vegeta said:

No. We need more slants for one. 

It's not like we don't have the players right? (About that TY and Dorsett fella) lol

[MFT5]

it's putrid at points

[Smonroe]

Always room for improvement, but it was a top 10 offense last year.  Improvement will come if the O line gets better.

 

I'm always hoping for quicker pass plays, west coast style.

 

I'm way more concerned about the defense. 

[Jason_]

my biggest issues are 1) abandoning the running game and 2) all the empty backfield formations on 3rd and 4th and short. 

[csmopar]

No

[ztboiler]

Cue @Superman in 1, 2, 3...

[Superman]

I'm not comfortable with the play calling at all.

 

Philosophically, this passing offense attacks vertically, up the seams. By nature, it has boom or bust potential. That's made worse when you have a leaky offensive line and a QB who doesn't like to give up on plays. And the coordinator seems to struggle getting into a rhythm with play calling, especially early in the game. So efficiency is sorely lacking.

 

We don't work the short middle of the field often enough. We have no run-pass options or smoke routes, ever. We don't run slants against off coverage. Not only don't we run screens with any frequency, when we do run them we do it poorly (chicken vs egg, I'm not sure). These concepts are not diametrically opposed to the vertical Coryell concepts. There's no reason they can't be mixed in, and ironically, if they were, the vertical concepts would be even more dangerous.

 

Yeah, I'm mostly uncomfortable with the play calling.

[ManningGM]

Not at all. 

 

I feel like our offense has potential to blossom into something even deadlier, but the coaching staff is holding our receivers back. 

 

This is why I'm hoping the GM gets rid of Pagano & Co. immediately. How many times did we fail to convert on 4th and 1 with a pass play this past season? In crunch time situations too....it's ridiculous. 

[Rackeen305]

9 minutes ago, Superman said:

I'm not comfortable with the play calling at all.

 

Philosophically, this passing offense attacks vertically, up the seams. By nature, it has boom or bust potential. That's made worse when you have a leaky offensive line and a QB who doesn't like to give up on plays. And the coordinator seems to struggle getting into a rhythm with play calling, especially early in the game. So efficiency is sorely lacking.

 

We don't work the short middle of the field often enough. We have no run-pass options or smoke routes, ever. We don't run slants against off coverage. Not only don't we run screens with any frequency, when we do run them we do it poorly (chicken vs egg, I'm not sure). These concepts are not diametrically opposed to the vertical Coryell concepts. There's no reason they can't be mixed in, and ironically, if they were, the vertical concepts would be even more dangerous.

 

Yeah, I'm mostly uncomfortable with the play calling.

What was Peyton's bread and butter? Play action to pass because you didn't know if he was running or passing. When was the last time you have seen Luck on a 1st and 10 do a play action (not a bootleg)? I mean can we borrow anything from Peyton that prove successful? Or do we not at all have the players? 

 

While Brady bounces 1 min in the pocket, like hay what's up guys, just here chillen, oh my guy is about to get open for like 17 yards down or across the field. This is for you Amendola. Lol

[lollygagger8]

1) WR's not being top 10 in drop percentage might help

2) Actually throwing slants/quick passes would help 

3) Being able to execute something that remotely resembles a screen successfully would probably help

4) QB rollouts, and designed runs would open things up 

5) This new WR coach actually teaching everyone not named TY how to get separation just might help

6) Not running everyone on "go" routes every down wouldn't hurt  

 

These are just observations from a guy that watches on TV. It shouldn't be rocket science to an OC getting paid millions of dollars in the NFL. 

 

 

 

[bananabucket]

What, you mean running for 2 yards on every first down isn't a good idea?

[lollygagger8]

1 minute ago, bananabucket said:

What, you mean running for 2 yards on every first down isn't a good idea?

 

Wait, you mean the defense watches tape and sees the Colts do that every single game and is prepared for it ?

[Dudley Smith]

1 hour ago, Jason_S said:

my biggest issues are 1) abandoning the running game and 2) all the empty backfield formations on 3rd and 4th and short. 

 

Or better yet, empty backfield on 3rd and 1 or 2.

[Dudley Smith]

I feel like Chud's offense was more diverse when he was with Carolina and Cleveland, and so I am not sure how much of it is Chud and how much of it is Pagano. A few on here have insinuated that it is Pagano who is encouraging the long route concepts for chunk plays, but regardless this is a problem when it is over utilized, and this is before you even factor in the Oline struggles with pass protection for long developing plays.

 

In sum, yes, there are concerns and hopefully the new GM, even if Pagano stays, can shift the offensive philosophy back to a more ball control/quick, short passing offense. (Not that large chunk plays can't be called here and there to keep the D honest)

[Superman]

20 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

What was Peyton's bread and butter? Play action to pass because you didn't know if he was running or passing. When was the last time you have seen Luck on a 1st and 10 do a play action (not a bootleg)? I mean can we borrow anything from Peyton that prove successful? Or do we not at all have the players? 

 

While Brady bounces 1 min in the pocket, like hay what's up guys, just here chillen, oh my guy is about to get open for like 17 yards down or across the field. This is for you Amendola. Lol

 

Oh, that's another thing. I mostly focused on the concepts of the passing game that frustrate me, but in the run game, we hardly ever attack the edge. It's mostly inside runs, which is good to pound a defense, and when it's blocked properly we pick up yardage. But the outside runs stress a defense horizontally, and if they miss one assignment, you're getting a first down. These need to be incorporated to diversify the run game.

 

Manning's play action game really took off because of the stretch play, which Edge became a master of running. The prolonged fake off of that stretch play was then deadly. Manning ran a lot of play action variations, but nothing was ever as dangerous as that stretch play action fake. 

 

I don't think we need to run the Manning/Moore offense to be effective and efficient. It wouldn't be a bad idea, but it's not necessarily. We just need to protect the young and inconsistent offensive line, and our offense actually exposes them rather than protects them.

 

Brady is one of the quickest from snap to throw. But their different action and the variety that they incorporate allows them to dial up a handful of long developing plays. Even when they've had bad protection, they've been able to scheme good protection a few times a game. They run a 'whatever works' offense, with no restrictions. Of course, Brady is far more advanced, and McDaniels/Belichick are better than Chud/Pagano. And they have a legendary OL coach.

[throwing BBZ]

2 hours ago, Rackeen305 said:

It's not like we don't have the players right? (About that TY and Dorsett fella) lol

 

 Not the QB.  If you don`t get that by now. lol

[Dilger85]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

I'm not comfortable with the play calling at all.

 

Philosophically, this passing offense attacks vertically, up the seams. By nature, it has boom or bust potential. That's made worse when you have a leaky offensive line and a QB who doesn't like to give up on plays. And the coordinator seems to struggle getting into a rhythm with play calling, especially early in the game. So efficiency is sorely lacking.

 

We don't work the short middle of the field often enough. We have no run-pass options or smoke routes, ever. We don't run slants against off coverage. Not only don't we run screens with any frequency, when we do run them we do it poorly (chicken vs egg, I'm not sure). These concepts are not diametrically opposed to the vertical Coryell concepts. There's no reason they can't be mixed in, and ironically, if they were, the vertical concepts would be even more dangerous.

 

Yeah, I'm mostly uncomfortable with the play calling.

Mike Martz while in StL ran a version of the Coryell offense.  They threw plenty of screens sometimes even to the TEs.  He mainly used TEs or Slot receivers to work the middle but I remember that was a complaint that I had with his offenses during the time that I followed the Rams.

 

Norv Turner runs a version of the Coryell offense as well.  He utilized Novaceck in Dallas and Gates in SD better than Martz did any of his TEs.  Norv also utilized the run game better.

 

Chud in Cleveland used the TE relentlessly.  That was the one year the Winslow Jr actually had a good year.  Then in Carolina, he employed a heavy effective running game.

 

I am not sure if it was personnel or philosophy or what but it does seem like his offense is different from his previous stops.  But to summarize, the Coryell concepts allow for everything that you have mentioned but are currently not being employed.

[will426]

I only came to view because I wanted to see what @Superman had to say about this  you're always a good read bro

[will426]

55 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

What was Peyton's bread and butter? Play action to pass because you didn't know if he was running or passing. When was the last time you have seen Luck on a 1st and 10 do a play action (not a bootleg)? I mean can we borrow anything from Peyton that prove successful? Or do we not at all have the players? 

 

While Brady bounces 1 min in the pocket, like hay what's up guys, just here chillen, oh my guy is about to get open for like 17 yards down or across the field. This is for you Amendola. Lol

He doesn't even get a bootleg but 3 times a season lol they don't utilize lucks ability whatsoever 

[IndyD4U]

I have no issues with the play calling...we just need the receivers to catch the ball...come on, Sanjay!

[dgambill]

7 minutes ago, will426 said:

He doesn't even get a bootleg but 3 times a season lol they don't utilize lucks ability whatsoever 

Maybe we could just trade him to Denver....Kubiak may not have had a stroke if he had a qb like Luck to run that offense.

[NorthernBlue]

I just want to see the offense try some other things besides sitting in the pocket and waiting 4+ seconds for the deep routes to develop. Obviously slants and screens, plus quick throws and utilizing the middle of the field would help. One thing this Colts offense can do (but doesn't) that they couldn't with Manning is the designed run. I understand trying to protect your quarterback, but Luck is fast and athletic. I literally remember only one time they ran a designed run for him this year and it got like 30  yards (against Houston I think). They just gotta change it up from time to time in the passing and running game. It'll give defenses some more things to worry about along with hopefully making the stretch plays work even deadlier. 

[jameszeigler834]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

I'm not comfortable with the play calling at all.

 

Philosophically, this passing offense attacks vertically, up the seams. By nature, it has boom or bust potential. That's made worse when you have a leaky offensive line and a QB who doesn't like to give up on plays. And the coordinator seems to struggle getting into a rhythm with play calling, especially early in the game. So efficiency is sorely lacking.

 

We don't work the short middle of the field often enough. We have no run-pass options or smoke routes, ever. We don't run slants against off coverage. Not only don't we run screens with any frequency, when we do run them we do it poorly (chicken vs egg, I'm not sure). These concepts are not diametrically opposed to the vertical Coryell concepts. There's no reason they can't be mixed in, and ironically, if they were, the vertical concepts would be even more dangerous.

 

Yeah, I'm mostly uncomfortable with the play calling.

The play calling at times this year was terrible.

[Mr. Irrelevant]

52 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

 

Brady is one of the quickest from snap to throw. But their different action and the variety that they incorporate allows them to dial up a handful of long developing plays. Even when they've had bad protection, they've been able to scheme good protection a few times a game. They run a 'whatever works' offense, with no restrictions. Of course, Brady is far more advanced, and McDaniels/Belichick are better than Chud/Pagano. And they have a legendary OL coach.

 

Why don't we do that? Who constrain yourself? Does it demand someone as Brady, or are most OC's just too rigid and lacks imagination? Honest question, Super. I'm just wondering out loud.

[Colt Overseas]

Chud needs to review his playcalling and look at the Minnesota as the template going forward. Get a strong running game early and play the two tight end set for short yard pick ups to establish a rhythm. Then the opportunities for long yardage opportunities will present themselves, and we know we have the receivers to capitalize. We destroyed a very talented Vikings defense that day, there's great potential in this offense.

 

I held Chud hugely responsible for the critical loss to the Texans in LOS last year, where he refused to run the football, despite Luck struggling to make pass completions. If he could just follow what he did in Minnesota last December, that would be great.

[Dilger85]

4 minutes ago, Colt Overseas said:

Chud needs to review his playcalling and look at the Minnesota as the template going forward. Get a strong running game early and play the two tight end set for short yard pick ups to establish a rhythm. Then the opportunities for long yardage opportunities will present themselves, and we know we have the receivers to capitalize. We destroyed a very talented Vikings defense that day, there's great potential in this offense.

 

I held Chud hugely responsible for the critical loss to the Texans in LOS last year, where he refused to run the football, despite Luck struggling to make pass completions. If he could just follow what he did in Minnesota last December, that would be great.

I agree with this.  The times that we see the Coryell offense working the best is with a strong running game.  SD with LT and Dallas with Emmitt are probably the best examples of how this offense can run when employed the way you suggested.

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, Mr Clueless said:

 

Why don't we do that? Who constrain yourself? Does it demand someone as Brady, or are most OC's just too rigid and lacks imagination? Honest question, Super. I'm just wondering out loud.

 

Brady helps. He and Belichick have been together forever, and they're two of the brightest people in the league. McDaniels being back helps. He grew up in the New England culture, and they all seem to speak the same language.

 

Their offense has changed a lot over the years, but really, once Charlie Weis left and Brady came into his own as a veteran QB, the offense has become an extension of Brady, and Belichick's influence is obvious. 

 

They do this on defense and special teams, also. Their gameplans vary widely from week to week, as opposed to the typical NFL approach of 'this is what we do, let's get good at it, and we'll live and die by it.' More and more staffs are embracing a more adaptable approach, but New England is just another animal. That's why Brady throws the ball 50 times for 367 yards and they only have 14 rushing yards against Baltimore, then the next week they run for 177 yards against the Colts. 

 

It seems like common sense, but it's a lot easier said than done. Having the same coach and QB for the last 16 years helps.

[Dilger85]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Brady helps. He and Belichick have been together forever, and they're two of the brightest people in the league. McDaniels being back helps. He grew up in the New England culture, and they all seem to speak the same language.

 

Their offense has changed a lot over the years, but really, once Charlie Weis left and Brady came into his own as a veteran QB, the offense has become an extension of Brady, and Belichick's influence is obvious. 

 

They do this on defense and special teams, also. Their gameplans vary widely from week to week, as opposed to the typical NFL approach of 'this is what we do, let's get good at it, and we'll live and die by it.' More and more staffs are embracing a more adaptable approach, but New England is just another animal. That's why Brady throws the ball 50 times for 367 yards and they only have 14 rushing yards against Baltimore, then the next week they run for 177 yards against the Colts. 

 

It seems like common sense, but it's a lot easier said than done. Having the same coach and QB for the last 16 years helps.

Very true, I remember when McDaniels was the offensive coordinator for the Rams and it was a mitigated disaster.  Brady and Belicheck are special and have tenure.  That offense has morphed several times through the years and continues to evolve on a weekly basis.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

I'm not impressed. To me chud is just a guy.

[BOTT]

No.  But that has been the case since Chuck has been here.  If he wants Luck to get rid of the ball quicker and protect himself then hire an OC that will help,him do that.  Doesn't seem that complicated.

[Oldschoolcolt19]

Receivers who can consistently catch the ball would go a long way toward making this offense successful.

 

[a06cc]

Andrew Luck needs more protection. So look for us to provide more this offseason. That's going to help our team as a whole. I'm hoping for a RB as well. 

[NewColtsFan]

 

Oh, boy!      Here we go.     It's that time of year again.     The slow season where there's nothing else to talk about so every play suddenly gets magnified beyond proportion....

 

I wasn't wild about the play calling,  but I have to say I think of the 5 years that we've had this administration,  the play calling was better than 13, 14 and 15.     And before you say something negative, let's remember,  we've always had high rankings on offense.      Oh, and we have high rankings again.   

 

I continue to think if we didn't have such terrible O-line play the first roughly 9-10 weeks of the season,  we wouldn't be having this conversation again and again.     I think the O-line play was our biggest problem.  Bad o-line play impacts everything you do and don't do.

 

Also...

 

-- If Chuck had managed the clock in week 1,  we wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

-- If Dwayne Allen had caught the pass in the first J'Ville game,  we wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

-- If the defense had held up better in the first game against Houston,  we wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

One poster here decried giving up on the run too soon.     Interesting.    This forum was screaming for no huddle starts for weeks early on and complaining that we were sticking with the run too long.     Now witch is it?

I agree on certain criticism's....    I was mildly disappointed with what I saw this season.    But, on balance, this is much closer to what I was hoping for,  and much better than what we saw from Pep.      I also expect a much, much improved offense in 2017 with the expected improvement from the O-line,  as well as Dorsett, Moncrief,  Allen and the running game.    

 

I'm hopeful we won't be having this conversation at this time next year.      If we are,  it likely means Pagano has been fired and the new HC will want to bring in his own staff.    Who knows who will survive that kind of purge....

 

 

[oldunclemark]

7 hours ago, Rackeen305 said:

Ok, Yes we will have a new GM. However, with a new GM comes new players, and whether to keep key players (Frank Gore). Regardless of who we have on the roster, Are we completely comfortable with the play calling/packages that we run. Players wont change the results of a 4th and 1 situation, where the Colts call a screen. I just don't get it. How will the GM or can the new GM affect these instances of horrible play calling?

 

This is the question. An organizational philosophy that is effective in key situations.

-You must get positive yards on 1st and 10

-You have to convert on 3rd and less than 2

-Better yet, You cannot be in a situation where its 2nd and 18.

 

These are the plagues that seem to surround the colts. (offensively at least). Please reply with objective football reasoning. -Thanks! 

Our problems are on defense.

I wouldn't judge coaches by individual play calls..

We rolled up a lot of yards and scored a lot of points..with 3 rookies in the O-line

 

 

Lets worry about the defense

[Mjr]

Screen plays on 1st down , not when expected. Quit throwing that wasting down pass one yard out to receiver/ back. It's low percentage anything. For cryin out loud, be creative. Maybe work on touch passes and high percentage slants and crossing routes.

[RockThatBlue]

Chud isn't perfect, but I don't find myself hating the play calling as much as I did with Pep.

 

I like how Chud really utilizes the TEs and the check downs. Those are the best things about the offense. It also helped Luck improve his interception number and completion percentage (the best of his career) and 31 touchdowns is pretty good. The run game was the best its been in quite some time too.

 

Still wish Chud didn't call so many long ball plays that take a bit to develop, it would probably decrease Luck being hit some.