Stampede Blue: Theory that Ballard knows his coach already

[Bubba_Rebel]

https://www.stampedeblue.com/2018/1/4/16849394/theory-ballard-knows-the-new-head-coach-big-changes-coming-for-colts-defense

 

Interesting theory and well thought out.

[krunk]

I wouldn't be surprised. Ballard must have conveyed that to Ted Monachino this year in some way because we damn near looked like Seattle on defense for most of the year with all the zone defense. If we go with a zone model I'd rather it be similar to what Steve Wilks did with the Panthers. 4-3 zone with heavy blitz. As I mentioned in the Mcdaniels thread I wouldn't totally dismiss Steve Wilks having a decent shot at becoming the head coach. Would be similar to Tomlin or Dan Quinn hirings. A bit outside the box.

[Bubba_Rebel]

I still think it's Toub with this style defense...wouldn't bet against McDaniels though and maybe push a defense like this on him and he can deal with offense 

[ColtsBlitz]

They may have gotten me the first time with Quincy Wilson and Richard Sherman, but I KNEW that second comparison was Earl Thomas not Malik Hooker. Nice try stampede blue. 

[#12.]

You can hire McDaniels and still run whatever defense you want.  Who knows, McDaniels himself might prefer the Seattle defense moving forward.  The idea that McDaniels will come here and run a carbon copy of every single thing Belichick has done in New England for the past 18 years... 

 

Well, that's unlikely to happen.

[NewColtsFan]

13 minutes ago, Bubba_Rebel said:

I still think it's Toub with this style defense...wouldn't bet against McDaniels though and maybe push a defense like this on him and he can deal with offense 

 

Toub is a Special Teams coordinator.       Does he even have a "style of defense"     And, if so,  what is it?

 

And you don't want to "push" anything on the new HC.    You can make recommendations,  but let the HC sink or swim with the guys he wants.   

 

[chad72]

39 minutes ago, krunk said:

I wouldn't be surprised. Ballard must have conveyed that to Ted Monachino this year in some way because we damn near looked like Seattle on defense for most of the year with all the zone defense. If we go with a zone model I'd rather it be similar to what Steve Wilks did with the Panthers. 4-3 zone with heavy blitz. As I mentioned in the Mcdaniels thread I wouldn't totally dismiss Steve Wilks having a decent shot at becoming the head coach. Would be similar to Tomlin or Dan Quinn hirings. A bit outside the box.

 

Wagner and Wright make that D tick in the middle though the LOB gets more attention, we need some serious upgrades at the LB position before trying to emulate that. Right now, no matter which scheme or front we choose, we have some serious deficiencies before fielding a Top 10 unit.

 

I do think that the 4-3 base front is easier to draft for and build quality depth. The LB weakness can be masked a little bit with the 4-3 as well if you are strong in DL and secondary. However, against elite teams, if you want to beat the best, you have to build all levels of the defense.

[NewColtsFan]

 

 

I don't get all this talk about Seattle playing zone defense.

 

And here's a quote from the article from Safety Kam Chancellor...

 

"We play man-to-man or Cover-3, not much more than that. It's not a secret." - Kam Chancellor

 

Even Cam says the team plays man-to-man.     Yes, they play some zone,  but I've always known the Seahawks for their man-to-man play.    Sherman and whoever the other corner has been are mostly man corners.

 

[gnet550]

The whole Brad Kaaya thing throws me off too...unless Ballard knows Lucks done??? Which I don’t think to be true...is guess chances are pretty large that Jacoby is the backup next year 

[Smoke317]

50 minutes ago, krunk said:

I wouldn't be surprised. Ballard must have conveyed that to Ted Monachino this year in some way because we damn near looked like Seattle on defense for most of the year with all the zone defense. If we go with a zone model I'd rather it be similar to what Steve Wilks did with the Panthers. 4-3 zone with heavy blitz. As I mentioned in the Mcdaniels thread I wouldn't totally dismiss Steve Wilks having a decent shot at becoming the head coach. Would be similar to Tomlin or Dan Quinn hirings. A bit outside the box.

I was reading up on Wilks and he actually sounds very intriguing. I still want McDaniels but I think Wilks is what Chuck was supposed to be.  A defensive mind...  Both took over strong defenses but I think Wilks has placed his own stamp on his defense while it seemed like Chuck just maintained the status quo.  I think Wilks could turn out to be a good head coach.  Also very telling that Rivera left him in charge when he had to leave for a week for personal reasons and not McDermott who just got the Buffalo job last year...

[NewColtsFan]

 

Sorry......     I'm not convinced by that article.

 

The author may be right.     But I think there are too many question marks for me to buy what he's selling....

 

[Defjamz26]

That article was a reach. I remember during the press conference that Ballard said there is no pre-requisite for the next HC. Wouldn’t specifically looking for a coach that runs a 4-3 Cover-3 be the exact opposite of that. 

[stitches]

52 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Sorry......     I'm not convinced by that article.

 

The author may be right.     But I think there are too many question marks for me to buy what he's selling....

 

Yeah, i don't dispute what the author is laying out. I just think it's a non sequitur to go from there to - i know who his head coach will be. If anything the strongest case you can make is "I know what defense he will want to run". This doesn't exclude any HC candidate. He might get McDaniels or any of the OC and ST coordinators that are candidates to our HC job and still run 43 with zone concepts. + add the two DCs that actually run those defenses in Wilks and Richard. In other words - NONE of the HC candidates we've heard about is eliminated from the discussion. 

[a06cc]

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

 

I don't get all this talk about Seattle playing zone defense.

 

And here's a quote from the article from Safety Kam Chancellor...

 

"We play man-to-man or Cover-3, not much more than that. It's not a secret." - Kam Chancellor

 

Even Cam says the team plays man-to-man.     Yes, they play some zone,  but I've always known the Seahawks for their man-to-man play.    Sherman and whoever the other corner has been are mostly man corners.

 

Seattle’s defense keeps everything inside. It starts with your front 4 defenders. For their defense to work from the start you need pressure up the middle first. They are playing zone with two defenders covering the flats and two in the middle. Their corners are playing man on the outside. Also having that single high last line of defense. Pete Carroll has done a great job drafting players with speed to pull the defense off. The key is to have pressure coming up the middle and controlling the line of scrimmage. 

[krunk]

9 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

 

I don't get all this talk about Seattle playing zone defense.

 

And here's a quote from the article from Safety Kam Chancellor...

 

"We play man-to-man or Cover-3, not much more than that. It's not a secret." - Kam Chancellor

 

Even Cam says the team plays man-to-man.     Yes, they play some zone,  but I've always known the Seahawks for their man-to-man play.    Sherman and whoever the other corner has been are mostly man corners.

 

Cover 3 is their base look and it's a zone defense.  It's what they run the most. Not that it's the only thing but it's their primary look.

[Smonroe]

9 hours ago, gnet550 said:

The whole Brad Kaaya thing throws me off too...unless Ballard knows Lucks done??? Which I don’t think to be true...is guess chances are pretty large that Jacoby is the backup next year 

 

They’ll need an arm for practice, etc.  I really doubt anyone thinks he’s starter material.

 

It is possible that JB could be trade bait though, and Ballard is looking for a decent backup.  

[Valpo2004]

I honestly am not buying it.  Some of his evidence seems a little forced.  Those scouting reports don't sound nearly as alike as the writer makes it seem.  

 

Don't get me wrong I think Ballard knows exactly who he wants to hire as a coach, but that doesn't mean that he a year ago already decided that he was gonna hire a cover 3 coach.  

 

As far as Kaaya, I think Ballard wanted to get him into camp next year as legit competition for Brissett..  So he signed him to the roster before the season was over and the Lions could get him on a futures contract.  He probably tells everyone that they have a chance to make the 53 man roster.  Do you honestly think that he'd tell someone that they are a camp arm when they come in to sign a contract?  

 

Don't get me wrong Kaaya does have a chance, that's the point of Training Camp is to evaluate the guys you have and I think Ballard certainly wanted Kaaya in his camp.  But I'm not buying that this is some sort of proof as to who Ballard is going to hire as coach.  

[richard pallo]

The author didn't tell us who he thought who the coach would be.  Why?  I guess he really isn't sure.   I think Doyal came out and said he thought it was Toub.  At least he's not afraid to give his opinion.

[#12.]

Even if Ballard did want to run the Seattle defense moving forward it wouldn't preclude anyone but perhaps a 3-4 defensive coordinator, and even that's not always the case (see Tomlin).  It's common for choices in scheme and philosophy to be decided upon in collaboration between management and a coach before the coach is hired.  It's like Detroit wanting to keep its offense, but hire Patricia and change its defense.  When Dungy was hired it was decided upon before he was hired that we would continue to be a pass first team, but he would bring his defense.  Pittsburgh hired Tomlin, a Tampa 2 coach, but kept Lebeau's defense for years.

 

Sometimes a coach is given a blank check, but more often than not, philosophy is decided upon in collaboration between coach and management.

[Fisticuffs111]

Yeah I wouldn't be surprised if Ballard goes with Wilks or Richard. Maybe I'm just jaded after years of build the monster talk but I'm kind of skeptical, at least of Richard. From what little I know of him it seems like he's not ready to be a HC.

Wilks does seem ready however. He's a smart guy, players like him. Had a role of assistant coach. The "accountable" quote from Mike Adams about Wilks...Ballard's quote about holding players accountable...I know it's just one similar quote but I can see them really hitting it off.

 

Wilks isn't my first choice but I'm intrigued by him.

[Jason_]

10 hours ago, gnet550 said:

The whole Brad Kaaya thing throws me off too...unless Ballard knows Lucks done??? Which I don’t think to be true...is guess chances are pretty large that Jacoby is the backup next year 

 

that's always been the case.  

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, krunk said:

Cover 3 is their base look and it's a zone defense.  It's what they run the most. Not that it's the only thing but it's their primary look.

 

I know Cover 3 is a zone defense.

 

But is it their base look?      Is it really what they run the most?

 

That's never been my understanding?      Look at the Chancellor quote....    even the first description about what they play is man to man...

 

I've always thought they were mostly a man to man cover unit and the Cover 3 was more their second look,  not their base look.....    I have no stats,  this is all my perception and it could be wrong....

 

 

 

[jskinnz]

4 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I know Cover 3 is a zone defense.

 

But is it their base look?      Is it really what they run the most?

 

That's never been my understanding?      Look at the Chancellor quote....    even the first description about what they play is man to man...

 

I've always thought they were mostly a man to man cover unit and the Cover 3 was more their second look,  not their base look.....    I have no stats,  this is all my perception and it could be wrong....

 

 

 

 

I believe it is the opposite.  They were mostly cover 3 leading up to this season when they thought they needed to be a bit more unpredictable.  Venturi spoke a lot about the Jags under Gus Bradley and said they ran a cover 3 in Jacksonville but it was too predictable and failed most times because their FS could not cover ground like Earl Thomas.

[jskinnz]

12 hours ago, Bubba_Rebel said:

https://www.stampedeblue.com/2018/1/4/16849394/theory-ballard-knows-the-new-head-coach-big-changes-coming-for-colts-defense

 

Interesting theory and well thought out.

 

I think the off season has been far more interesting than the regular season.  I try to read all I can so thanks for the link.

 

To the article itself I think it is a bunch of nonsense.

 

1) It is high school level of writing, which drives me nuts.

2) The dots that the writer is trying to connect seem a really big reach to me,

[ztboiler]

29 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I know Cover 3 is a zone defense.

 

But is it their base look?      Is it really what they run the most?

 

That's never been my understanding?      Look at the Chancellor quote....    even the first description about what they play is man to man...

 

I've always thought they were mostly a man to man cover unit and the Cover 3 was more their second look,  not their base look.....    I have no stats,  this is all my perception and it could be wrong....

 

 

 

It's a little confusing to watch Seattle's defense and differentiate a given play between man and cover 3 because they're mixing principles not just running textbook coverage.  

 

Sherman is the best example because he gets a lot of camera time.  At a glance, when he presses a receiver and then carries him down the field it looks like man, and sometimes it may be, but much of the time he is simply converting press technique into his responsibility to cover the deep 1/3 on his side.

 

Everybody plays some man, but in Seattle's case they look more man to man than they really are and it helps to to look at what the linebackers are doing to differentiate.  When Sherman carries his receiver down the field and a LB covers the flat zone, it's typically cover 3 zone.

[Smonroe]

16 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

I think the off season has been far more interesting than the regular season.  I try to read all I can so thanks for the link.

 

To the article itself I think it is a bunch of nonsense.

 

1) It is high school level of writing, which drives me buts.

2) The dots that the writer is trying to connect seem a really big reach to me,

 

I’m glad you said that.  I really believe it was a tongue in cheek article.  If not, then you’re right, it was like something a kid would write.  

 

It it never ceases to amuse me, no matter how ridiculous an article or post, you’ll find people who will take it dead serious.  

[krunk]

4 minutes ago, ztboiler said:

It's a little confusing to watch Seattle's defense and differentiate a given play between man and cover 3 because they're mixing principles not just running textbook coverage.  

 

Sherman is the best example because he gets a lot of camera time.  At a glance, when he presses a receiver and then carries him down the field it looks like man, and sometimes it may be, but much of the time he is simply converting press technique into his responsibility to cover the deep 1/3 on his side.

 

Everybody plays some man, but in Seattle's case they look more man to man than they really are and it helps to to look at what the linebackers are doing to differentiate.  When Sherman carries his receiver down the field and a LB covers the flat zone, it's typically cover 3 zone.

It's a press and then bail into a 3 deep zone.  Press bail technique

[Valpo2004]

17 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

I think the off season has been far more interesting than the regular season.  I try to read all I can so thanks for the link.

 

To the article itself I think it is a bunch of nonsense.

 

1) It is high school level of writing, which drives me buts.

2) The dots that the writer is trying to connect seem a really big reach to me,

 

Agree on both counts.

 

Also found it annoying that he said he can "prove it".  Bull crap he's got circumstantial evidence at best.  This doesn't reach the beyond a reasonable doubt standard of evidence, it doesn't even reach the more likely then not standard of evidence.  It's at best a reasonable suspicion.  

[Valpo2004]

4 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

I’m glad you said that.  I really believe it was a tongue in cheek article.  If not, then you’re right, it was like something a kid would write.  

 

It it never ceases to amuse me, no matter how ridiculous an article or post, you’ll find people who will take it dead serious.  

 

It's a Colt's fan site, I don't imagine they have super high standards for their writers.  I believe the article is serious.  

[Jason_]

38 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

I think the off season has been far more interesting than the regular season.  I try to read all I can so thanks for the link.

 

To the article itself I think it is a bunch of nonsense.

 

1) It is high school level of writing, which drives me buts.

2) The dots that the writer is trying to connect seem a really big reach to me,

 

yeah, the writer assumes that Ballard brought in those specific front office personnel because of the type of players they were acquiring so that they can bring in the same types of players to Indy.  The writer completely overlooks the possibility that maybe Ballard simply saw that these front office guys were able to get quality players with the skill sets that their coaches wanted, and THAT's why Ballard brought them here...because they find good players with the right traits and skills, not to bring in those same types of players. 

[Finball]

Seahawks use pattern-matching in their cover 3.. It's not typical zone. And at least at about halfway point through this past season, Seahawks were among league leaders in snaps played in man coverage. 

[Smonroe]

24 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

It's a Colt's fan site, I don't imagine they have super high standards for their writers.  I believe the article is serious.  

 

I read SB daily, some writers are better than others (obvious statement).  But you kind of get the feel for which ones are more 'valuable' when it comes to information.  

 

I have no clue about their standards, or what it takes to be a writer.  Some of the fanposts are as good as their own articles.  

[shasta519]

12 hours ago, krunk said:

I wouldn't be surprised. Ballard must have conveyed that to Ted Monachino this year in some way because we damn near looked like Seattle on defense for most of the year with all the zone defense. If we go with a zone model I'd rather it be similar to what Steve Wilks did with the Panthers. 4-3 zone with heavy blitz. As I mentioned in the Mcdaniels thread I wouldn't totally dismiss Steve Wilks having a decent shot at becoming the head coach. Would be similar to Tomlin or Dan Quinn hirings. A bit outside the box.

 

Not sure how I feel about Wilks...or the idea of having yet another former DB coach leading the Colts. Wilks has been in CAR since 2012 (mostly as a DB coach)...and during that time CAR's pass defense has been decent...but not great. They did draft and develop Norman...and Kurt Coleman had a bit of a renaissance there...but outside of that they haven't really developed much secondary talent.

 

The front 7 is a different story, however. They have drafted and developed a lot of front 7 talent in recent years. 

 

The interesting thing about Wilks is that, as DC this past year, he now has familiarity with that front 7. And it just so happens that two big pieces of it (in recent years) are set to hit FA...Kony Ealy and Star Lotulelei. If the Colts were going to switch to Wilks' defense, it would be quite convenient to get a couple of established players with experience in that system. And Wilks would likely bring ther LB coach Holcomb in as the DC...which would mean even more familiarity. 

 

Also, likely the Colts biggest FA target, Andrew Norwell, plays for CAR. And while he played on the other side of the ball, there will be  a lot of familiarity with Wilks (and those FAs).

 

I doubt he gets hired...as Wilks gets interviewed quite often. But I could see a scenario where the dominoes fall into place. 

[krunk]

3 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Not sure how I feel about Wilks...or the idea of having yet another former DB coach leading the Colts. Wilks has been in CAR since 2012 (mostly as a DB coach)...and during that time CAR's pass defense has been decent...but not great. They did draft and develop Norman...and Kurt Coleman had a bit of a renaissance there...but outside of that they haven't really developed much secondary talent.

 

The front 7 is a different story, however. They have drafted and developed a lot front 7 talent in recent years. 

 

The interesting thing about Wilks is that, as DC this past year, he now has familiarity with that front 7. And it just so happens that two big pieces of it in recent years) are set to hit FA...Kony Ealy and Star Lotulelei. If the Colts were going to switch to Wilks' defense, it would be quite convenient to get a couple of established players with experience in that system. And Wilks would likely bring ther LB coach Holcomb in as the DC...which would mean even more familiarity. 

 

Also, likely the Colts biggest FA target, Andrew Norwell, plays for CAR. And while he played on the other side of the ball, there will be  a lot of familiarity with Wilks (and those FAs).

 

I doubt he gets hired...as Wilks gets interviewed quite often. But I could see a scenario where the dominoes fall into place. 

I don't think the chances are high but he does have history with Ballard so there is that.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

12 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Sorry......     I'm not convinced by that article.

 

The author may be right.     But I think there are too many question marks for me to buy what he's selling....

 

 

All of the Seattle/Carolina connections make enough sense for me to buy into the potential switch to a 4-3 base, with some cover 3 coverages mixed in, but I don't think we drafted Quincy Wilson or signed Pierre Desir to play zone every down.

[richard pallo]

1 minute ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

All of the Seattle/Carolina connections make enough sense for me to buy into the potential switch to a 4-3 base, with some cover 3 coverages mixed in, but I don't think we drafted Quincy Wilson or signed Pierre Desir to play zone every down.

I agree.  I can see us playing primarily playing press especially with Hooker back there and we find ways to get more pressure i.e. ER.

[Coltsfanforlife12]

2 hours ago, richard pallo said:

The author didn't tell us who he thought who the coach would be.  Why?  I guess he really isn't sure.   I think Doyal came out and said he thought it was Toub.  At least he's not afraid to give his opinion.

I’m pretty sure he’s referring to Richard.  The writer has written multiple articles about him as a coaching candidate.

[krunk]

23 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Not sure how I feel about Wilks...or the idea of having yet another former DB coach leading the Colts. Wilks has been in CAR since 2012 (mostly as a DB coach)...and during that time CAR's pass defense has been decent...but not great. They did draft and develop Norman...and Kurt Coleman had a bit of a renaissance there...but outside of that they haven't really developed much secondary talent.

 

The front 7 is a different story, however. They have drafted and developed a lot of front 7 talent in recent years. 

 

The interesting thing about Wilks is that, as DC this past year, he now has familiarity with that front 7. And it just so happens that two big pieces of it (in recent years) are set to hit FA...Kony Ealy and Star Lotulelei. If the Colts were going to switch to Wilks' defense, it would be quite convenient to get a couple of established players with experience in that system. And Wilks would likely bring ther LB coach Holcomb in as the DC...which would mean even more familiarity. 

 

Also, likely the Colts biggest FA target, Andrew Norwell, plays for CAR. And while he played on the other side of the ball, there will be  a lot of familiarity with Wilks (and those FAs).

 

I doubt he gets hired...as Wilks gets interviewed quite often. But I could see a scenario where the dominoes fall into place. 

From what I've seen he's also been a bit more than just a DB coach and DC.  He's also been an Assistant Head Coach so he's dealth with all sides of the football from offense to defense.  He's had his hand in a bit of everything.

[WoolMagnet]

  What a stretch.  I could prove an Alien will be the next head coach if i could use as many words as this novel.

  Ballard alwayscpreaches doing things "the right way", and taking his time to interview, analyze, reflect, etc.  To think he made his mind up, is wasting everyones time interviewing, and has tunnel vision goes against everything that i've seen and heard from Ballard.

i think the writers boss just needed a 20,000 word story.

 

[Superman]

2 hours ago, Smonroe said:

 

I’m glad you said that.  I really believe it was a tongue in cheek article.  If not, then you’re right, it was like something a kid would write.  

 

It it never ceases to amuse me, no matter how ridiculous an article or post, you’ll find people who will take it dead serious.  

 

If you go to the comments section, you'll see the writer was very serious.