Sacks - we're bad at both ends

[horseshoecrabs]

2 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 Unless a trade down is implemented either Chubb or Barkley is a game changer hopefully  at no. 3 pick

Well it's early in his career but if we are going to look for Basham to help those stats i fear we will again be near the bottom. 

We will once again need to upgrade a woeful pass rush thru FA/Draft. Hopefully this offseason is better than last couple.

 

[ColtsBlitz]

1 minute ago, TdungyW/12 said:

Draft Chubb @ #3 and get RB/O-line in rounds 2-7 and fill holes through draft as well. 

 

With our young secondary who can only go up with a young stud in Chubb pushing the opposing QB off rhythm = division champs again! 

 

 

We spend half of our draft picks 2 years ago on offensive lineman and only one of them is a sure starter. We can’t afford to waste any more picks on maybes. As much as I want Chubb we should just trade back and get Nelson. 

 

We have RB Christine Michael on our roster still I believe so we have a rotation if Gore is let go. 

[NewColtsFan]

6 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Are you serious?

 

Yes....   serious....   just like many if the sacks and hits against Luck are on Andrew.    Luck holds on to the ball trying to make a play.

 

So does Jacoby, plus he hasn't developed a good feel yet for dealing with pressure.

 

You can only expect an O-line to block for so long before things break down.

 

Luck and Brissett bear some responsibility for their sacks and hits.   Just how much is the unknown question?

 

[Smoke317]

I’m leaving the Chubb/Barkley decision totally up to McDaniels & Ballard.  If McDaniels says he wants Barkley and will be able to do wonders with him, we take him.  If he says, I can get great production out of Mack, Gore, Turbin, Lewis (through free agency) or another drafted receiving back, then I expect us to take Chubb.  

 

Im less worried about our offense with McDaniels coming in...  I expect him to get that side of the ball together.  The great teams build in the trenches first.  I say go Chubb & hopefully get some proven OLineman in free agency.  If we miss on the free agents, don’t sleep on us trading back and going OLine in the draft.  

 

I’d prefer Chubb & OLine through free agency though.

[Dark Superman]

If the Colts decide to roll with Chubb at 3, I seriously hope Ballard is aggressive in bringing in offensive protection and weapons for Luck in free agency.

Andrew Luck is the franchise and I would even pass up on Chubb and Barkley to bring in a pro bowl talent offensive lineman. I hope Chris can put together most of the pieces on offense through free agency, so we can draft Chubb in round 1 while feeling confident about our offensive line heading into the 2018-2019 season.

[aaron11]

the team was actually middle of the pack in defensive sacks around week 10 or so

 

not sure what happened, but they fell to second to last by the seasons end

[TdungyW/12]

2 hours ago, ColtsBlitz said:

We spend half of our draft picks 2 years ago on offensive lineman and only one of them is a sure starter. We can’t afford to waste any more picks on maybes. As much as I want Chubb we should just trade back and get Nelson. 

 

We have RB Christine Michael on our roster still I believe so we have a rotation if Gore is let go. 

 

Are these the same guys that drafted our “talent” that traded for Richardson? I don’t disagree with you but, we can fix the line with FA and a couple picks .... Chubb would change our def greatly! 

[Alex22]

Our pass rush isnt that bad. Its the game situation that limits their sack numbers. We really never played with a lead but in the games we did the pass rush looked promising. If Luck comes back and scores some points, My boy fatmanhankins is right - this D could be special. 

[crazycolt1]

5 hours ago, Andrew Luck fan club said:

I said a lot of sacks are on Jacoby, never said he was the sole reason? So what’re you talking about? What was the point of your “are you serious” post? 

Your words were a ton of sacks. and Jacoby was holding the ball for 6 plus seconds.

That is a total exaggeration. The Colts have been at the bottom of the league in giving up sacks for over 4 years in a row. We went through 5 QBs in one of those seasons. I guess they were all holding the ball to long.

[braveheartcolt]

Oh look, those darned Giants have gone and taken Barkley from under our noses........this could be one of the 'mootest' threads ever..... 

[jskinnz]

7 hours ago, LockeDown said:

Let's say over the next 3 seasons, a team consecutively drafts for a needed position and each time they forego picking a player with better talent despite the position.  After 3 years, they will be a less talented team by anyone's logic.   If Chubb is graded as high as Barkley, then no big deal, we get him, but if he's not, then my point stands.  

 

This and some more of this.

 

Those wanting Barkley can make a very compelling case.  The same is true of those who prefer Chubb but the fact is the Colts are in dire need playmakers on both sides of the ball.  

 

The only thing that matters is how Ballard and company have each player rated.  Because of the needs all over the place, they will get a great player who will fill a need regardless of who it is.  

[jskinnz]

5 hours ago, KING. said:

If the Colts decide to roll with Chubb at 3, I seriously hope Ballard is aggressive in bringing in offensive protection and weapons for Luck in free agency.

Andrew Luck is the franchise and I would even pass up on Chubb and Barkley to bring in a pro bowl talent offensive lineman. I hope Chris can put together most of the pieces on offense through free agency, so we can draft Chubb in round 1 while feeling confident about our offensive line heading into the 2018-2019 season.

 

That is not a well-thought out draft strategy.

[BOTT]

3 hours ago, Alex22 said:

Our pass rush isnt that bad. Its the game situation that limits their sack numbers. We really never played with a lead but in the games we did the pass rush looked promising. If Luck comes back and scores some points, My boy fatmanhankins is right - this D could be special. 

That's very optimistic.  Some major upgrades will be needed if the colts defense is to be special.

[ClaytonColt]

4 hours ago, Alex22 said:

Our pass rush isnt that bad. Its the game situation that limits their sack numbers. We really never played with a lead but in the games we did the pass rush looked promising. If Luck comes back and scores some points, My boy fatmanhankins is right - this D could be special. 

Is there any deficiency on our 30th ranked defense that hasn't actually been blamed on the offense at some point? 

[DougDew]

10 hours ago, ColtsFanMikeC said:

Just looking through some team stats we were 2nd worst in the league in defensive sacks (with 25) and worst in the league with sacks given up (56).

 

With numbers like that, it is amazing we wound up positive on turnover differential.

 

In my opinion, one of the best ways to generate interceptions/fumbles is through sacking and pressure from the defense.  Hopefully Basham keeps developing and I think a healthy Sheard and Simon will continue to do pretty well overall as LBers, but it would really be nice to have at least one 10+ sack type of guy on this team (Sheard lead the team with 5.5).  Maybe I am spoiled having had Freeney and Mathis for so long, but it was very nice to have a pass rush.

 

While it seems tempting to take Saquon Barkley with the #3, I think the fact we see the need to majorly improve our ability to rush the other passer and protect our own is very evident.  It will be very interesting to see how Ballard and Co. handle this draft/offseason.

Its also why we should not spend a high pick on a G.  Sign the G.  Draft the athletes.

[SaturdayAllDay]

6 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Your words were a ton of sacks. and Jacoby was holding the ball for 6 plus seconds.

That is a total exaggeration. The Colts have been at the bottom of the league in giving up sacks for over 4 years in a row. We went through 5 QBs in one of those seasons. I guess they were all holding the ball to long.

We were also 5th in Time to Throw for our QB this yr, and tied for 3rd last yr. So the OL has been giving ample opportunity for the QB to get the ball out, yet we are the leading the league in sacks. At some point the finger has to be pointed elsewhere. 

[jshipp23]

I think a lot of our issues were having the absolute worst coach in football last 6 years, injuries, and offensive philosophy...Now that Pagano is gone, and we have McDaniels quick strike offense, our line and players will suddenly look much better.. I have no doubt..

[Smonroe]

23 minutes ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

We were also 5th in Time to Throw for our QB this yr, and tied for 3rd last yr. So the OL has been giving ample opportunity for the QB to get the ball out, yet we are still leading the leading the league in sacks. At some point the finger has to be pointed elsewhere. 

 

Yes, it’s not all on the Oline. As @jshipp23 said, some of it is scheme.  And a lot of it is on the QBs. Andrew for wanting to go for the big play, and JB for maybe not knowing the offense well enough to make the quick strike.  

 

I’ve watched enough of the All22 to know that our Oline isn’t as bad as everyone wants to make it.  It certainly needs an upgrade inside the tackles though.  

[Narcosys]

12 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Guess which team ranked 22nd in rushing. ... Guess who ranked even lower in 20 plus yard runs?

That's better than 31st...

[BOTT]

31 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

Yes, it’s not all on the Oline. As @jshipp23 said, some of it is scheme.  And a lot of it is on the QBs. Andrew for wanting to go for the big play, and JB for maybe not knowing the offense well enough to make the quick strike.  

 

I’ve watched enough of the All22 to know that our Oline isn’t as bad as everyone wants to make it.  It certainly needs an upgrade inside the tackles though.  

The quarterbacks for the colts look for,the big play because it's a big play offense.

[Crunked]

So as the 2 sides debate it out on this thread.....all I hear is we were like a 4-12 team devoid of talent in several areas.....

 

In the for what it's worth dept. I think if we had a difference maker pass rusher our defense instantly improves dramatically......if we have a difference maker at RB, we wont be near the bottom in 20+yard runs.....Luck might still get pummeled, and our defense will still suck....but every once in a while we will get to enjoy a long run.....we might improve to 6-10 with that kind of thinking........it all smacks of flat world thinking to me,  get a pass rusher...RB's can be had in later rounds.

[Andrew Luck fan club]

7 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Your words were a ton of sacks. and Jacoby was holding the ball for 6 plus seconds.

That is a total exaggeration. The Colts have been at the bottom of the league in giving up sacks for over 4 years in a row. We went through 5 QBs in one of those seasons. I guess they were all holding the ball to long.

A lot = a ton. Petty. He held the ball for 6 seconds. Like I said, I don’t think you even watch games. 

Edit* there’s like three guys above this comment saying the same thing lol. He holds the ball too long. 

[jshipp23]

31 minutes ago, crunked said:

So as the 2 sides debate it out on this thread.....all I hear is we were like a 4-12 team devoid of talent in several areas.....

 

In the for what it's worth dept. I think if we had a difference maker pass rusher our defense instantly improves dramatically......if we have a difference maker at RB, we wont be near the bottom in 20+yard runs.....Luck might still get pummeled, and our defense will still suck....but every once in a while we will get to enjoy a long run.....we might improve to 6-10 with that kind of thinking........it all smacks of flat world thinking to me,  get a pass rusher...RB's can be had in later rounds.

For the past 5 years people have been preaching a RB can be had in the later rounds MANTRA...Last year we spent majority of picks on defense, in 16' we spent half our picks on offensive line...Look at our record?? We have needed a 3 down back for damn near 10 years now...Mack isn't that guy, he is a weapon, but he is a 8-10 carry guy who you can also use in the passing game with a cerebral coach...Usually I would agree that you go with best pass rusher where we are picking...Chubb though doesn't seem like a transcendent talent like Garrett was last yr..I think Chubb will be good,  and has potential to be great, but is no lock...Barkley is Best Player to come out in last 5 years not just RB, best player..We need gamechangers, superstars that opposing coaches fear..If you start drafting based on need you miss out on pro bowlers in my opinion, I don't see Chubb as that far ahead of other prospects at his position...We can still get a good pass rusher early second, and hopefully get 1 of Lawrence or Ansah in free agency...Barkley will help Luck tremendously, it will keep defenses honest, and open up a lot in the passing game off play-action...He is SPECIAL,  guys like him are very rare..We took Edgerrin James top 5 and it worked out well , and benefitted Peyton a great deal..Luck has never had the advantage of a great RB to play with, I want to see him have on for ONCE...I think it will elevate his game to another level...Now defensive cooridinators won't be able to just worry about shutting TY down and blitzing Luck..If they do that Barkley will destroy them..

[Andrew Luck fan club]

6 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

For the past 5 years people have been preaching a RB can be had in the later rounds MANTRA...Last year we spent majority of picks on defense, in 16' we spent half our picks on offensive line...Look at our record?? We have needed a 3 down back for damn near 10 years now...Mack isn't that guy, he is a weapon, but he is a 8-10 carry guy who you can also use in the passing game with a cerebral coach...Usually I would agree that you go with best pass rusher where we are picking...Chubb though doesn't seem like a transcendent talent like Garrett was last yr..I think Chubb will be good,  and has potential to be great, but is no lock...Barkley is Best Player to come out in last 5 years not just RB, best player..We need gamechangers, superstars that opposing coaches fear..If you start drafting based on need you miss out on pro bowlers in my opinion, I don't see Chubb as that far ahead of other prospects at his position...We can still get a good pass rusher early second, and hopefully get 1 of Lawrence or Ansah in free agency...Barkley will help Luck tremendously, it will keep defenses honest, and open up a lot in the passing game off play-action...He is SPECIAL,  guys like him are very rare..We took Edgerrin James top 5 and it worked out well , and benefitted Peyton a great deal..Luck has never had the advantage of a great RB to play with, I want to see him have on for ONCE...I think it will elevate his game to another level...Now defensive cooridinators won't be able to just worry about shutting TY down and blitzing Luck..If they do that Barkley will destroy them..

Last 5 years are irrelevant because the bum griggles was picking the players. 

 

And again, Chubb isn’t a Myles Garret, he is a Joey Bosa. 

 

Joey Bosa > Zeke Elliott 

 

Zeke > Barkley 

 

see where im going 

[Crunked]

Just now, jshipp23 said:

For the past 5 years people have been preaching a RB can be had in the later rounds MANTRA...Last year we spent majority of picks on defense, in 16' we spent half our picks on offensive line...Look at our record?? We have needed a 3 down back for damn near 10 years now...Mack isn't that guy, he is a weapon, but he is a 8-10 carry guy who you can also use in the passing game with a cerebral coach...Usually I would agree that you go with best pass rusher where we are picking...Chubb though doesn't seem like a transcendent talent like Garrett was last yr..I think Chubb will be good,  and has potential to be great, but is no lock...Barkley is Best Player to come out in last 5 years not just RB, best player..We need gamechangers, superstars that opposing coaches fear..If you start drafting based on need you miss out on pro bowlers in my opinion, I don't see Chubb as that far ahead of other prospects at his position...We can still get a good pass rusher early second, and hopefully get 1 of Lawrence or Ansah in free agency...Barkley will help Luck tremendously, it will keep defenses honest, and open up a lot in the passing game off play-action...He is SPECIAL,  guys like him are very rare..We took edge top 5 and it worked out well and benefitted Peyton a great deal..Luck has never had the advantage of a great RB to play with, I want to see him have on for ONCE...I think it will elevate his game to another level...Now defensive cooridinators won't be able to just worry about shutting TY down and blitzing Luck..If they do that Barkley will destroy them..

I respect your opinion, and that of the whole "draft barkley movement" there are many sides that could/can/ and have been debated on this site both for and against the Barkley v. Chubb......I will offer only this in rebuttal.

 

If we draft Barkley with the 3rd pick...Based on his talent and ability he is capable of being an "every down" back or at least up and until he needs a periodic blow here or there.......so what do we do with Marlon Mack, who was drafted with the idea of being part of a tag team mentality, not only this year but as part of a system, his talent is great in the speed and flash dept, weaker in the power between the tackles dept. so the thinking had to have been get Mack and pair him with a bruiser and going forward we have a formidable duo.....Draft Barkley, and you have essentially made Mack a wasted pick and although we don't know enough about Ballard yet, he doesn't strike me as a guy who changes direction in the stream once he splashes in......

[jshipp23]

Zeke isn't as fast, as powerful, doesn't have the hands for the passing game, and has character issues...Barkley is better than Zeke and it's not close...We will never agree on this subject..

[jshipp23]

1 minute ago, crunked said:

I respect your opinion, and that of the whole "draft barkley movement" there are many sides that could/can/ and have been debated on this site both for and against the Barkley v. Chubb......I will offer only this in rebuttal.

 

If we draft Barkley with the 3rd pick...Based on his talent and ability he is capable of being an "every down" back or at least up and until he needs a periodic blow here or there.......so what do we do with Marlon Mack, who was drafted with the idea of being part of a tag team mentality, not only this year but as part of a system, his talent is great in the speed and flash dept, weaker in the power between the tackles dept. so the thinking had to have been get Mack and pair him with a bruiser and going forward we have a formidable duo.....Draft Barkley, and you have essentially made Mack a wasted pick and although we don't know enough about Ballard yet, he doesn't strike me as a guy who changes direction in the stream once he splashes in......

I think we can still use Mack plenty, don't discount the offensive mind of McDaniels...I see Mack getting 8-10 carries, also being used in slot at times playing with Barkley, as well as using 2 back sets with them both...Mack will help Barkley stay fresh , and prolong his career...We don't have to give Barkley 30 carries a game..Give him 20-25 carries, Mack 8-10...

[aaron11]

6 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

Zeke isn't as fast, as powerful, doesn't have the hands for the passing game

his hands are fine, he averaged over 300 receiving yards both seasons

[Crunked]

Just now, jshipp23 said:

I think we can still use Mack plenty, don't discount the offensive mind of McDaniels...I see Mack getting 8-10 carries, also being used in slot at times playing with Barkley, as well as using 2 back sets with them both...Mack will help Barkley stay fresh , and prolong his career...We don't have to give Barkley 30 carries a game..Give him 20-25 carries, Mack 8-10...

Do we then discard Turbin? He was coming on before the forearm break and we just resigned him last off season? Do we also get him 8-10 touches a game? I guess what I am saying is, it seems like choosing Barkley adds a glut of talent at one position when we are totally devoid or paper thin at talent at so many other positions......so for me I want to be clear in saying I think Barkley is very talented, but in my opinion RB is far from our greatest need. a mid round between the tackler guy would elevate the position enough to make it a strength, Barkley takes it over the top and makes it a feature.......and I wish we had the luxury of adding features in this draft we woefully need talent all over

[CheezyColt]

4 hours ago, braveheartcolt said:

Oh look, those darned Giants have gone and taken Barkley from under our noses........this could be one of the 'mootest' threads ever..... 

We can only hope!

[ColtsBlitz]

9 hours ago, TdungyW/12 said:

 

Are these the same guys that drafted our “talent” that traded for Richardson? I don’t disagree with you but, we can fix the line with FA and a couple picks .... Chubb would change our def greatly! 

I’m just really worried about the whole Luck situation. He’s my favorite player in the entire NFL and easily a top 5 QB. When there were even traces of talent on our roster in the early days of Lucks career we went 11-5 mainly due to his abilities. With Chubb it does provide that, but leaves the offensive line to a highly unreliable free agency which never seems to go our way (except with Ballard so far). 

 

When push comes to shove I’ll leave it to him to make the tough call. I really don’t have enough of an understanding on this years draft or free agents to have my own stand alone opinion, I’m not afraid to admit that. All I know for sure is this team will get much farther with Luck healthy first, then further later with a better defense. 

[Luck 4 president]

Get Norwell and Ansah in FA then we can take Barkley at 3. If we don’t fill those holes then we need to trade back and attempt to fill them instead of RB

[jshipp23]

27 minutes ago, crunked said:

Do we then discard Turbin? He was coming on before the forearm break and we just resigned him last off season? Do we also get him 8-10 touches a game? I guess what I am saying is, it seems like choosing Barkley adds a glut of talent at one position when we are totally devoid or paper thin at talent at so many other positions......so for me I want to be clear in saying I think Barkley is very talented, but in my opinion RB is far from our greatest need. a mid round between the tackler guy would elevate the position enough to make it a strength, Barkley takes it over the top and makes it a feature.......and I wish we had the luxury of adding features in this draft we woefully need talent all over

I just don't want it to all be on Luck anymore, Barkley is a guy who will take a lot of pressure off him....Mack is a piece and a guy we will use, but Barkley is a building block Franchise guy...

[richard pallo]

1 minute ago, jshipp23 said:

I think we can still use Mack plenty, don't discount the offensive mind of McDaniels...I see Mack getting 8-10 carries, also being used in slot at times playing with Barkley, as well as using 2 back sets with them both...Mack will help Barkley stay fresh , and prolong his career...We don't have to give Barkley 30 carries a game..Give him 20-25 carries, Mack 8-10...

I agree with you there.  Just because we have a three down back doesn't mean he is always playing every down.  The big wild card here is FA.  If Ballard is able to get an ER like Ansah and or he is successful in upgrading the OL then a player like Barclay becomes more likely.  The argument about running behind a weak OL becomes diminished.  Now you would have a real threat to take advantage of the upgrade.  You could then get the ER in the second rd.  If he decides to add a RB in FA like Hyde or Lewis then he pretty much has tipped his hand on not taking Barclay and is probably focusing on Chubb.  If we don't add a RB in FA I think that speaks volumes and in all likelihood he will try to add a RB in the first two rounds. 

[jshipp23]

6 minutes ago, Luck 4 president said:

Get Norwell and Ansah in FA then we can take Barkley at 3. If we don’t fill those holes then we need to trade back and attempt to fill them instead of RB

I think we will....If not, I will be more on board the Chubb train...

[mds]

9 hours ago, Alex22 said:

Our pass rush isnt that bad. Its the game situation that limits their sack numbers. We really never played with a lead but in the games we did the pass rush looked promising. If Luck comes back and scores some points, My boy fatmanhankins is right - this D could be special. 

Not only is our pass rush that bad, we blew 5 fourth quarter leads and 7! halftime leads (which was one shy of a NFL record). We had injuries, sure. But we lacked the defensive scheme and the players to disrupt many offenses in 2017.

[throwing BBZ]

13 hours ago, Andrew Luck fan club said:

Yeah holding the ball for 6+ second is on the QB. I’m convinced you don’t even watch the Colts. 

 

 I am of the opinion that Brissett would have done a pretty decent job running the NE offense as the season went along. Just in case you don't get it, that means he would have done fairly well with their quick release passing game.
  Our line was consistently bad, if you watched it.
 And we have zero receivers that run great short to 2nd level routes with quickness. That will soon change.

[throwing BBZ]

13 hours ago, Andrew Luck fan club said:

Yeah holding the ball for 6+ second is on the QB. I’m convinced you don’t even watch the Colts. 

 

 I am of the opinion that Brissett would have done a pretty decent job running the NE offense as the season went along. Just in case you don't get it, that means he would have done fairly well with their quick release passing game.
  Our line was consistently bad, if you watched it.
 And we have zero receivers that run great short to 2nd level routes with quickness. That will soon change.

[Smonroe]

16 minutes ago, Luck 4 president said:

Get Norwell and Ansah in FA then we can take Barkley at 3. If we don’t fill those holes then we need to trade back and attempt to fill them instead of RB

 

Problem is - there aren’t going to be any FA edge rushers like Ansah.  Lions have plenty of cap to re-sign him.  Cowboys won’t let Lawrence get away.  That spot will will have to be filled via the draft.

 

We have to make Norwell a priority FA acquisition.  

 

 

[mds]

5 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

Problem is - there aren’t going to be any FA edge rushers like Ansah.  Lions have plenty of cap to re-sign him.  Cowboys won’t let Lawrence get away.  That spot will will have to be filled via the draft.

 

We have to make Norwell a priority FA acquisition.  

 

 

I couldn’t agree with this more. This would also help us in the draft as the rounds unfold. 

 

Problem will be that many many teams will prioritize Norwell and we will have to pay the man. 

 

Either way, when free agency opens, it should be a fun time