Frank Reich Presser 8/28/2018

[TKnight24]

 

[TKnight24]

 

[TKnight24]

 

 

[Fisticuffs111]

Reece in competition for the final two spots in regards to the WR position. Not a shocker really but at least seems like confirmation that they're going with 5 WR's. Also could mean that they keep 4 TE's.

[richard pallo]

6 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Reece in competition for the final two spots in regards to the WR position. Not a shocker really but at least seems like confirmation that they're going with 5 WR's. Also could mean that they keep 4 TE's.

I'd put my money on Ishmael. 

[akcolt]

I know this is down the depth chart a bit but anything on KJ Brent. He appeared a solid bet for WR4 before the knee injury. 

[richard pallo]

it looks like Smith is very close to being the starter at RG.  According to Reich he is competing with Slauson at RG and will start him again this week.  I think we can forget about Smith at RT.  Therefore I am expecting a trade for a starting RT or a claim for a RT to hold the spot until Good is healthy. 

[akcolt]

1 minute ago, richard pallo said:

I'd put my money on Ishmael. 

I like Ishmael too I thought Fountain had the traits but was raw. He comes from a small school might take a little more time to adjust. The WR spot is hard to get a handle on after the top 3. Man what a couple of knee injuries can do. It opened that room open. 

[stitches]

Reich was on ESPN radio today and I am a bit worried about the noises coming out of him:

 

Specifically his focus on running the football. His playcalling has been straight up bad in pre-season and has put our offense in a hole trying to establish run game instead of doing the right thing and using your best player on the field to move the ball on first and second down and long. 

 

I firmly believe in 10 years we will be looking at this type of mindset like we look at mid-rangers in basketball. When you hear "we need to establish the run game" it will sound about as ridiculous as "We need more mid-range shots and more post ups" sounds right now in the NBA context. 

 

I really hope he's just paying lip-service to answer the question and that the playcalling in pre-season is indeed all about not revealing anything about our offense and about misdirection of the regular season opponents that are scouting us now. 

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

it looks like Smith is very close to being the starter at RG.  According to Reich he is competing with Slauson at RG and will start him again this week.  I think we can forget about Smith at RT.  Therefore I am expecting a trade for a starting RT or a claim for a RT to hold the spot until Good is healthy. 

 

Sounds like Smith at RT won't happen. I'm torn, I think he's the best option at RT right now. But, Slauson hasn't been great at RG. He's been okay, not terrible, but he shouldn't have that spot locked down either. 

 

I don't know what they're going to do at RT. Haeg and Clark are blowing a really good opportunity to lock down a starting spot. We'll see if someone steps up, but I'm not holding my breath. And I don't think anyone out there looks like a clear upgrade right now. 

[TKnight24]

 

[akcolt]

3 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

it looks like Smith is very close to being the starter at RG.  According to Reich he is competing with Slauson at RG and will start him again this week.  I think we can forget about Smith at RT.  Therefore I am expecting a trade for a starting RT or a claim for a RT to hold the spot until Good is healthy. 

That's not how I read RG What other starters are we running out vs the Bengals? He may not keep it all year but I think Slauson is at RG week 1. I wouldn't rule out Smith at RT especially if Haeg doesn't show well. It's difficult to find a starting T in the off season a trade for one at the end of August might be a bit optimistic as would a starting being waived. I think our starter is in the building not sure who. The only thing I'm sure of is it's not Howard

[TKnight24]

 

[stitches]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

Sounds like Smith at RT won't happen. I'm torn, I think he's the best option at RT right now. But, Slauson hasn't been great at RG. He's been okay, not terrible, but he shouldn't have that spot locked down either. 

 

I don't know what they're going to do at RT. Haeg and Clark are blowing a really good opportunity to lock down a starting spot. We'll see if someone steps up, but I'm not holding my breath. And I don't think anyone out there looks like a clear upgrade right now. 

I'm incredibly disappointed by how this battle unfolded. I thought for the first time in ages we actually had a good competition for the job and good floor with Howard and instead it turned out that Howard is now washed up and has been horrendous all pre-season and in training camp, Good has been injured ... yet again... and Haeg has been plugging holes all around the O-line instead of focusing on trying to hold one position... 

 

This must be among the biggest disappointments for me this off-season. I didn't expect the O-line to be in this much trouble from the get go. 

[dw49]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Sounds like Smith at RT won't happen. I'm torn, I think he's the best option at RT right now. But, Slauson hasn't been great at RG. He's been okay, not terrible, but he shouldn't have that spot locked down either. 

 

I don't know what they're going to do at RT. Haeg and Clark are blowing a really good opportunity to lock down a starting spot. We'll see if someone steps up, but I'm not holding my breath. And I don't think anyone out there looks like a clear upgrade right now. 

 

 

From what I've watched , Webb has done as well as anyone. 

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, stitches said:

Reich was on ESPN radio today and I am a bit worried about the noises coming out of him:

 

Specifically his focus on running the football. His playcalling has been straight up bad in pre-season and has put our offense in a hole trying to establish run game instead of doing the right thing and using your best player on the field to move the ball on first and second down and long. 

 

I firmly believe in 10 years we will be looking at this type of mindset like we look at mid-rangers in basketball. When you hear "we need to establish the run game" it will sound about as ridiculous as "We need more mid-range shots and more post ups" sounds right now in the NBA context. 

 

I really hope he's just paying lip-service to answer the question and that the playcalling in pre-season is indeed all about not revealing anything about our offense and about misdirection of the regular season opponents that are scouting us now. 

 

I'm totally unconcerned about his play calling right now. We'll see what happens when the season starts, but I don't think his preseason play calling is indicative of how he wants to call games in the regular season.

 

As a matter of fact, I haven't thought there's been an insistence on running the ball, with the exception of one series in the Ravens game. Against the Niners in the first half, they ran the ball 12 times and threw it 22 times. Part of that was the two minute drill... But with Luck on the field, they called pass plays on 6 out of 8 first downs.

 

And while I agree that the whole "run the ball" mindset is outdated, there are still situations where the team absolutely has to be able to run the ball. That being the case, it is important to establish that ability. And it would be great to be able to consistently run the ball out of 11 personnel against a nickel defense, especially with how often teams play nickel. So while I think having an efficient offense is more important than establishing the run, I think an effective run game is a critical component of an efficient offense. 

[Superman]

10 minutes ago, stitches said:

I'm incredibly disappointed by how this battle unfolded. I thought for the first time in ages we actually had a good competition for the job and good floor with Howard and instead it turned out that Howard is now washed up and has been horrendous all pre-season and in training camp, Good has been injured ... yet again... and Haeg has been plugging holes all around the O-line instead of focusing on trying to hold one position... 

 

This must be among the biggest disappointments for me this off-season. I didn't expect the O-line to be in this much trouble from the get go. 

 

I said the same yesterday. Very disappointing that the OL isn't better, primarily because none of the young guys have stepped up, Good is hurt, and Howard is terrible. I wouldn't have relied on Good to any degree, but no one saw Howard being so awful.

 

9 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

From what I've watched , Webb has done as well as anyone. 

 

True, I always leave him out, but he should be in the mix as well. 

[chad72]

Who is calling the offensive plays - Frank Reich or Nick Sirianni from the booth?

 

I am hoping it is not a case of Andy Reid vs Matt Nagy, like what transpired over the course of the season in KC last year where Nagy was calling plays first, then Andy took over causing some to question if KC's offense falling off was a result of that, then Nagy took over again to help KC finish the season better.

[stitches]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm totally unconcerned about his play calling right now. We'll see what happens when the season starts, but I don't think his preseason play calling is indicative of how he wants to call games in the regular season.

 

As a matter of fact, I haven't thought there's been an insistence on running the ball, with the exception of one series in the Ravens game. Against the Niners in the first half, they ran the ball 12 times and threw it 22 times. Part of that was the two minute drill... But with Luck on the field, they called pass plays on 6 out of 8 first downs.

 

And while I agree that the whole "run the ball" mindset is outdated, there are still situations where the team absolutely has to be able to run the ball. That being the case, it is important to establish that ability. And it would be great to be able to consistently run the ball out of 11 personnel against a nickel defense, especially with how often teams play nickel. So while I think having an efficient offense is more important than establishing the run, I think an effective run game is a critical component of an efficient offense. 

Oh don't get me wrong - the run game still has its purpose and still is the right play in certain situation, just like sometimes in basketball you need to take a mid-range shot, but i do think that building around the run game is a strategy from yesteryears. You need to build your offense around a diverse passing game with a pinch of run game to keep the defense honest, or when the situation requires it(keeping leads late in the game, 2nd and short, etc). The run game should be IMO almost entirely situational football. 

 

BTW that's why I seem to be more optimistic on our defense than most - I'm not as worried about our defense giving up a ton of yards to the run. The most efficient run game in the league is still worse than most inefficient pass-games. Running the ball and defending the run have close to zero predictive power on how good your team is. Passing the ball and defending the pass are by far the the best predictors for success in the league. 

[chad72]

3 minutes ago, stitches said:

Oh don't get me wrong - the run game still has its purpose and still is the right play in certain situation, just like sometimes in basketball you need to take a mid-range shot, but i do think that building around the run game is a strategy from yesteryears. You need to build your offense around a diverse passing game with a pinch of run game to keep the defense honest, or when the situation requires it(keeping leads late in the game, 2nd and short, etc). The run game should be IMO almost entirely situational football. 

 

BTW that's why I seem to be more optimistic on our defense than most - I'm not as worried about our defense giving up a ton of yards to the run. The most efficient run game in the league is still worse than most inefficient pass-games. Running the ball and defending the run have close to zero predictive power on how good your team is. Passing the ball and defending the pass are by far the the best predictors for success in the league. 

 

Bend but don't break is what you are alluding to. Good offenses make you bend and break, that is what I am concerned about. We will see as the season goes on.

 

I do agree with the passing the ball and defending the pass being better predictors for success in the current league.

[rockywoj]

18 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Who is calling the offensive plays - Frank Reich or Nick Sirianni from the booth?

 

I am hoping it is not a case of Andy Reid vs Matt Nagy, like what transpired over the course of the season in KC last year where Nagy was calling plays first, then Andy took over causing some to question if KC's offense falling off was a result of that, then Nagy took over again to help KC finish the season better.

I thought it was very well established that Reich will be handling game day offensive play calling.  Sounds like much the same arrangement between HC and OC as was the case last year in Philadelphia.

[stitches]

9 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Bend but don't break is what you are alluding to. Good offenses make you bend and break, that is what I am concerned about. We will see as the season goes on.

 

I do agree with the passing the ball and defending the pass being better predictors for success in the current league.

A lot of the reason for Tampa 2 to be described as a "bend but don't break" defense is that it guards against long throws with 3 defenders in deep coverage in addition to the corners who are supposed to guard the short to intermediate areas of the zone, so it's not supposed to give up huge plays in the passing game. The bend part comes from giving up a ton of short to intermediate gains because of imperfect coverage of the underneath zones. Good QBs will beat the zone unless we get quick pressure. Right now we don't have the pressure but IMO we improved a TON in coverage at the LB position and with the return of Gaethers and Hooker our safety positions should be much improved too.

 

IMO we will break against the better offenses because we lack pass-rush right now and the premier QBs will dissect the zone. It won't be because of the run game that we will break(at least not consistently, I don't think).  

[chad72]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

A lot of the reason for Tampa 2 to be described as a "bend but don't break" defense is that it guards against long throws with 3 defenders in deep coverage in addition to the corners who are supposed to guard the short to intermediate areas of the zone. The bend part comes from giving up a ton of short to intermediate gains because of imperfect coverage of the underneath zones. Good QBs will beat the zone unless we get quick pressure. Right now we don't have the pressure but IMO we improved a TON in coverage at the LB position and with the return of Gaethers and Hooker our safety positions should be much improved too.

 

IMO we will break against the better offenses because we lack pass-rush right now and the premier QBs will dissect the zone. It won't be because of the run game that we will break(at least not consistently, I don't think).  

 

I hope so. Wham blocks from Gronk and other Pats TEs and 6 OL formations from opponents have given us fits in years past at least close to the goal line. Nothing more demoralizing than being bull dozed over after giving up a 6 or 7 minute drive.

 

Given that our LBs are young, there is a tendency to get sucked into play action that can help QBs exploit zones even more. That aspect was brought up by Rick Venturi as well the other day.

[Superman]

21 minutes ago, stitches said:

A lot of the reason for Tampa 2 to be described as a "bend but don't break" defense is that it guards against long throws with 3 defenders in deep coverage in addition to the corners who are supposed to guard the short to intermediate areas of the zone, so it's not supposed to give up huge plays in the passing game. The bend part comes from giving up a ton of short to intermediate gains because of imperfect coverage of the underneath zones. Good QBs will beat the zone unless we get quick pressure. Right now we don't have the pressure but IMO we improved a TON in coverage at the LB position and with the return of Gaethers and Hooker our safety positions should be much improved too.

 

IMO we will break against the better offenses because we lack pass-rush right now and the premier QBs will dissect the zone. It won't be because of the run game that we will break(at least not consistently, I don't think).  

 

The other factor is the tightening of the zones close to the end zone. We saw how that works in the Niners game, with several PBUs in the red zone. 

[richard pallo]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Sounds like Smith at RT won't happen. I'm torn, I think he's the best option at RT right now. But, Slauson hasn't been great at RG. He's been okay, not terrible, but he shouldn't have that spot locked down either. 

 

I don't know what they're going to do at RT. Haeg and Clark are blowing a really good opportunity to lock down a starting spot. We'll see if someone steps up, but I'm not holding my breath. And I don't think anyone out there looks like a clear upgrade right now. 

Haag and Clark have had numerous opportunities to nail down a spot over the last few years and have failed every time.  If it wasn't for the injuries and Howards failure I think they both would be in jeopardy this year.  RT is a problem and I think the answer to it is not on our team right now.  I hope Ballard is working the phones and not putting all his eggs in the waiver wire basket.  Incidentally no one is mentioning Vuj. this year.  I don't know how he is doing in practice or games but he was our starting LG last year beating out Haag and others to everyone's surprise.  I guess I wouldn't be shocked if he makes the team again. 

[Superman]

35 minutes ago, stitches said:

Oh don't get me wrong - the run game still has its purpose and still is the right play in certain situation, just like sometimes in basketball you need to take a mid-range shot, but i do think that building around the run game is a strategy from yesteryears. You need to build your offense around a diverse passing game with a pinch of run game to keep the defense honest, or when the situation requires it(keeping leads late in the game, 2nd and short, etc). The run game should be IMO almost entirely situational football. 

 

BTW that's why I seem to be more optimistic on our defense than most - I'm not as worried about our defense giving up a ton of yards to the run. The most efficient run game in the league is still worse than most inefficient pass-games. Running the ball and defending the run have close to zero predictive power on how good your team is. Passing the ball and defending the pass are by far the the best predictors for success in the league. 

 

You're slightly more radical on this than I am. I'm fine with running the ball 50 times a game, if it's working. The goal of a good offense, IMO, should be to stick to the Peyton Manning mantra -- first down, second down, first down. If running the ball over and over gets you first downs, I'm fine with it. Especially if you have a good QB who can excel on third down, or in the red zone, and we do.

 

That doesn't mean I want to go three yards and a cloud of dust. Far from it. I want to do whatever works. If you're getting first downs and converting in the red zone, I don't have a problem with a run heavy offense. I don't think it needs to be entirely situational.

 

End of the day, efficient offense is judged on points per possession, yards per play, converting on third down and in the red zone, and explosiveness. Running the ball 50 times a game isn't likely to be explosive, but if I have a high points per possession and I'm converting, I'm fine with it.

 

Where I think we definitely agree is that you don't need to establish the run to get your offense going. Anymore, that's backward, IMO. I'd rather stress a defense with the passing game, and then work from there. Get a defense backing up, get them in nickel, and then you kind of have them at your mercy. Like Manning vs the Bears in the SB. Even in the rain, they were scared of getting beat, especially after the Reggie TD, and we ran it down their throats. Helped that they couldn't do anything on offense, but in that situation, it was a winning strategy. 

4 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Haag and Clark have had numerous opportunities to nail down a spot over the last few years and have failed every time.  If it wasn't for the injuries and Howards failure I think they both would be in jeopardy this year.  RT is a problem and I think the answer to it is not on our team right now.  I hope Ballard is working the phones and not putting all his eggs in the waiver wire basket.  Incidentally no one is mentioning Vuj. this year.  I don't know how he is doing in practice or games but he was our starting LG last year beating out Haag and others to everyone's surprise.  I guess I wouldn't be shocked if he makes the team again. 

 

Vuj is awful as well. Was last year. He was just able to stay healthy.

[richard pallo]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

You're slightly more radical on this than I am. I'm fine with running the ball 50 times a game, if it's working. The goal of a good offense, IMO, should be to stick to the Peyton Manning mantra -- first down, second down, first down. If running the ball over and over gets you first downs, I'm fine with it. Especially if you have a good QB who can excel on third down, or in the red zone, and we do.

 

That doesn't mean I want to go three yards and a cloud of dust. Far from it. I want to do whatever works. If you're getting first downs and converting in the red zone, I don't have a problem with a run heavy offense. I don't think it needs to be entirely situational.

 

End of the day, efficient offense is judged on points per possession, yards per play, converting on third down and in the red zone, and explosiveness. Running the ball 50 times a game isn't likely to be explosive, but if I have a high points per possession and I'm converting, I'm fine with it.

 

Where I think we definitely agree is that you don't need to establish the run to get your offense going. Anymore, that's backward, IMO. I'd rather stress a defense with the passing game, and then work from there. Get a defense backing up, get them in nickel, and then you kind of have them at your mercy. Like Manning vs the Bears in the SB. Even in the rain, they were scared of getting beat, especially after the Reggie TD, and we ran it down their throats. Helped that they couldn't do anything on offense, but in that situation, it was a winning strategy. 

 

Vuj is awful as well. Was last year. He was just able to stay healthy.

Vuj was awful but beat out Haag as a starter.  So Haag must be really really awful.  Which he is. 

[lollygagger8]

Stop putting Haeg in everywhere but RT and let the dude settle in there. 

 

He seems like the only real option there unless we pick up someone from other team's cuts, which I'm not holding my breath for. 

 

Howard should've been cut after the last game. 

[jvan1973]

2 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

Stop putting Haeg in everywhere but RT and let the dude settle in there. 

 

He seems like the only real option there unless we pick up someone from other team's cuts, which I'm not holding my breath for. 

 

Howard should've been cut after the last game. 

They could use Howard as a turnstile at the entrance of Lucas oil

[stitches]

23 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

You're slightly more radical on this than I am. I'm fine with running the ball 50 times a game, if it's working. The goal of a good offense, IMO, should be to stick to the Peyton Manning mantra -- first down, second down, first down. If running the ball over and over gets you first downs, I'm fine with it. Especially if you have a good QB who can excel on third down, or in the red zone, and we do.

 

That doesn't mean I want to go three yards and a cloud of dust. Far from it. I want to do whatever works. If you're getting first downs and converting in the red zone, I don't have a problem with a run heavy offense. I don't think it needs to be entirely situational.

 

End of the day, efficient offense is judged on points per possession, yards per play, converting on third down and in the red zone, and explosiveness. Running the ball 50 times a game isn't likely to be explosive, but if I have a high points per possession and I'm converting, I'm fine with it.

 

Where I think we definitely agree is that you don't need to establish the run to get your offense going. Anymore, that's backward, IMO. I'd rather stress a defense with the passing game, and then work from there. Get a defense backing up, get them in nickel, and then you kind of have them at your mercy. Like Manning vs the Bears in the SB. Even in the rain, they were scared of getting beat, especially after the Reggie TD, and we ran it down their throats. Helped that they couldn't do anything on offense, but in that situation, it was a winning strategy. 

 

Vuj is awful as well. Was last year. He was just able to stay healthy.

Sure, If it works and if it produces efficient offense I'm not opposed to running the ball every single play... do what's most likely to give you wins. The point is that in the grand scheme of things statistical analysis shows that it is not a good way to build offense and win games. A while ago I posted a statistical analysis here about the impact of the run efficiency and the passing efficiency on winning. here's the tldr version:

 

Quote

In technical jargon, rush efficiency explains only 4.4% of the variance in wins. You might as well guess randomly... Pass efficiency explains 62% of the variance in wins in the NFL. The strong relationship is clear from the visual.

 

[PrincetonTiger]

10 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

Stop putting Haeg in everywhere but RT and let the dude settle in there. 

 

He seems like the only real option there unless we pick up someone from other team's cuts, which I'm not holding my breath for. 

 

Howard should've been cut after the last game. 

Comfort has been Haeg’s biggest problem

[coltsfeva]

      I liked what I saw Saturday from Good. If he can only get (and stay) healthy, he’d be solid. 

     Having Haeg and Webb as backups and possibly getting someone off the waver wire and I think we’ll be okay. 

      It’s hard to assess an Oline position until there’s time to build continuity.

       As far as run or pass, if we do both well, we keep the defense on their toes. You can look at SB winners in the last 10 years and see that.

[CR91]

If I had to guess, id say the week 1 oline is AC Nelson Kelly Slauson Webb. I just dont think Smith is ready to start and Good won't be ready probably til week 4 ( I hate hearing week-to-week. Just say a month)

[Superman]

47 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Vuj was awful but beat out Haag as a starter.  So Haag must be really really awful.  Which he is. 

 

Pretty sure Haeg was hurt at the beginning of last year.

[Superman]

35 minutes ago, stitches said:

Sure, If it works and if it produces efficient offense I'm not opposed to running the ball every single play... do what's most likely to give you wins. The point is that in the grand scheme of things statistical analysis shows that it is not a good way to build offense and win games. A while ago I posted a statistical analysis here about the impact of the run efficiency and the passing efficiency on winning. here's the tldr version:

 

 

 

I agree with all of that. I'm just not going so far as to say the run game is essentially a situational factor in an efficient offense. 

[PrincetonTiger]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I agree with all of that. I'm just not going so far as to say the run game is essentially a situational factor in an efficient offense. 

It is when you run an O that relies on deception(Wing T) or play action but not as much in a Spread O

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, stitches said:

Reich was on ESPN radio today and I am a bit worried about the noises coming out of him:

 

Specifically his focus on running the football. His playcalling has been straight up bad in pre-season and has put our offense in a hole trying to establish run game instead of doing the right thing and using your best player on the field to move the ball on first and second down and long. 

 

I firmly believe in 10 years we will be looking at this type of mindset like we look at mid-rangers in basketball. When you hear "we need to establish the run game" it will sound about as ridiculous as "We need more mid-range shots and more post ups" sounds right now in the NBA context. 

 

I really hope he's just paying lip-service to answer the question and that the playcalling in pre-season is indeed all about not revealing anything about our offense and about misdirection of the regular season opponents that are scouting us now. 

 

Given how fond of you I truly am,  it gives me no pleasure to say this....

 

I'm not sure there's a single sentence in this post that I can agree with.

 

But my view means nothing...    the more important views are of Ballard and Reich and I'm confident when I say that I believe both men strongly disagree with you.    Among the first quotes from Reich back when he was hired was that he wanted the Colts to be a top-10 rushing team THIS YEAR.     Now,  I thought that was an impossible goal to post,  it's unattainable to me.

 

But,  I think it's fine that we're trying to be much improved.   Heck, if we're even in the teens, I'd be happy.    Something respectable.      So, if Reich's view is to be believed,  he and Ballard hold the importance of the ground game as far more important that you do.

 

Also.....    and not for nothing....

 

But I've also read that some NFL GM types are also subscribing to the importance of the running game.     Not only are we having multiple running backs taken in the first round,  but a number of them are going in the top-10.     That should tell us all something about how RB's are being viewed.     And certainly plenty of backs are going on Day 2.    The number of teams relying on backs taken only on Day 3 appears to be fewer and fewer.   (this last one is my hunch, I have no stats either way...)

 

I hope we never reach the day where the ground game is almost an after thought.    Wouldn't be football to me.

 

[stitches]

41 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Given how fond of you I truly am,  it gives me no pleasure to say this....

 

I'm not sure there's a single sentence in this post that I can agree with.

 

But my view means nothing...    the more important views are of Ballard and Reich and I'm confident when I say that I believe both men strongly disagree with you.    Among the first quotes from Reich back when he was hired was that he wanted the Colts to be a top-10 rushing team THIS YEAR.     Now,  I thought that was an impossible goal to post,  it's unattainable to me.

 

But,  I think it's fine that we're trying to be much improved.   Heck, if we're even in the teens, I'd be happy.    Something respectable.      So, if Reich's view is to be believed,  he and Ballard hold the importance of the ground game as far more important that you do.

Having high hopes or aspirations about the run game is not bad in itself. You would never hear me slamming them for being good at running the ball/stopping the run. It sure as hell is better being top 10 than bottom 10. To me it's about priority and philosophy of the game. Is it good if we are top 10? Sure. Is it important? IMO, not really... at least not anywhere near as important as being top 10 in passing efficiency and stopping the pass. I'd take being No. 10 in passing efficiency over being no. 1 in running efficiency any day of the week(random team). 

 

Quote

 

 

 

Also.....    and not for nothing....

 

But I've also read that some NFL GM types are also subscribing to the importance of the running game.     Not only are we having multiple running backs taken in the first round,  but a number of them are going in the top-10.     That should tell us all something about how RB's are being viewed.     And certainly plenty of backs are going on Day 2.    The number of teams relying on backs taken only on Day 3 appears to be fewer and fewer.   (this last one is my hunch, I have no stats either way...)

 

I hope we never reach the day where the ground game is almost an after thought.    Wouldn't be football to me.

 

 

I mean... the ultimate analytics guy in Hinkie drafted the most last century pound the ball with back to the basket center in the league at no. 3. Even the smartest GMs make serious mistakes, even the smartest GMs are sometimes slow to catch up with what the numbers are saying... We've gone through this before during the draft season... arguments from authority(this GM or that GM picked a RB in the top 5) won't do it for me in this specific case simply because I believe the league is way behind what the numbers say in this case. To me it's a waste of a valuable resource on several levels(value, longevity, scarcity, success/bust rate, etc.).  Every advanced analytics model I've seen says that drafting RBs this high is bad value and even the ones that come close to being OK picks become so not because of their running ability but because of their utilization in the passing game.  

 

I don't think we should completely ignore the running game. We still need the threat of running the ball in order for the passing game to function at a good level(otherwise opponents will overload the secondary and this will drop the passing efficiency). IMO this is how the run game should be used - as a crutch to keep defenses honest + in situational football, rather than as a main building block of the offense. This is especially true when you have one of the best QBs in the league. 

[throwing BBZ]

5 hours ago, stitches said:

Reich was on ESPN radio today and I am a bit worried about the noises coming out of him:

 

Specifically his focus on running the football. His playcalling has been straight up bad in pre-season and has put our offense in a hole trying to establish run game instead of doing the right thing and using your best player on the field to move the ball on first and second down and long. 

 

I firmly believe in 10 years we will be looking at this type of mindset like we look at mid-rangers in basketball. When you hear "we need to establish the run game" it will sound about as ridiculous as "We need more mid-range shots and more post ups" sounds right now in the NBA context. 

 

I really hope he's just paying lip-service to answer the question and that the playcalling in pre-season is indeed all about not revealing anything about our offense and about misdirection of the regular season opponents that are scouting us now. 

 

JMO but if you had watched the Eagles offensive scheme in the playoffs last season you would understand how out of touch your post seems.
 Our offense is full of young players that do not know how to play together, or at this level.
So they will practice practice practice and play and wash and repeat to build the O.
Don't expect miracles in season 1.

[w87r]

I dont think we will release Howard.

 

I've read a couple articles talking about us making him available for trade.

 

And even though he has looked like garbage, he still has extensive starting experience in the league and lack of options,  gives him a little value.

 

6th, 7th or player swap.