How will the D stop Mixon and Green?

[Smonroe]

12 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

I’ve come to terms that our defense will suck this year. Partially because they are so young, but also because they lack a pass rush. Hopefully we go D heavy next draft where it’s strong. 

 

I know they’ll be bad at the start.  I’m hoping that as the season goes on it gets better, based on the youth and speed.  

 

But if we keep dumping our best D linemen....

 

Seriously though, the scheme worrries me more than the talent.  I hate a bend don’t break approach.  

[jimmy g]

Like the 1980s Pacers, well have to outscore them- Colts, 95- Bengals, 94...

[bluebombers87]

17 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

I know they’ll be bad at the start.  I’m hoping that as the season goes on it gets better, based on the youth and speed.  

 

But if we keep dumping our best D linemen....

 

Seriously though, the scheme worrries me more than the talent.  I hate a bend don’t break approach.  

You may hate it but it’s what teams without a pass rush have to do. Let the field shorten so time becomes more or less irrelevant.

 

We may have to rely more heavily on Reich’s cleverness on O and Lucks grit to win our games then straight up stopping offenses.

[Smonroe]

1 minute ago, bluebombers87 said:

You may hate it but it’s what teams without a pass rush have to do. Let the field shorten so time becomes more or less irrelevant.

 

We may have to rely more heavily on Reich’s cleverness on O and Lucks grit to win our games then straight up stopping offenses.

 

No, you’re exactly right.  About both things.  It’s what teams like ours have to do if they want to stay in games.  And I do hate it.  

 

Remember those games when we were playing the T2 and Peyton was standing on the sideline for what seemed like eons?   Hated it. 

 

Personally, I’d rather lose with an attacking aggressive defense that would give up the big play every now and then.  

[Freenyfan102]

5 hours ago, UKColt13 said:

 

I have a feeling he has an aversion to the 4-3. Left NY as soon as he could and left as soon as we transitioned. Wouldn’t surprise me if he asked to released.

We need LBs that can play the run effectively. We’ll see if we have any.

 No, it was because he "did not fit the scheme" which was nonsense

[bluebombers87]

12 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

No, you’re exactly right.  About both things.  It’s what teams like ours have to do if they want to stay in games.  And I do hate it.  

 

Remember those games when we were playing the T2 and Peyton was standing on the sideline for what seemed like eons?   Hated it. 

 

Personally, I’d rather lose with an attacking aggressive defense that would give up the big play every now and then.  

I honestly think the reason we all have a problem with the play it safe defense is because it’s failed so many times with pagano. Had it not been nearly written in stone that our play it safe, don’t attack defense would end up failing, maybe we wouldn’t have such an aversion to bend but dont break styles.

 

Just wondering out loud.

[Fisticuffs111]

I think our defense is going to struggle pretty much every game inside the 20s for the most part.

 

We’re gonna be all about stopping TD drives and scoring more than the opponent. Whether that attributes to wins? Who knows. All I know is we’re gonna have a lot of trouble holding the Bengals to less than 350ish yards offensively.

[deedub75]

I have no idea why some people on here think that the Bengals game is an automatic win.  These same people probably thought we’d easily beat the Rams last year with Tolzien. 

[dgambill]

59 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

And last year we were going to roll the Rams, even without Luck, because Goff was a bust and they were a last place team.  

 

I’m not sure what anyone here has seen from the defense to think they can stop anyone.  And if people here think Mixon isn’t any good, it’s not worth discussing it.  

I don’t see what everyone else sees in Mixon....he was awful last year. Dalton is the definition of an avg qb. Good but not great. We aren’t playing the Patriots or the 85 Bears here. If you are worried about Cincy then who do you think we can actually beat on our schedule? Even if we lose what’s the big deal. We are a young growing team.  Like a REALLY young team. Nobody expects us to win the SB or even vie for a playoff spot. We are just trying to take baby steps here and slowly get better...but to stress out over Cincy...if this is going to be a weekly thing then it’s going to be a long year. I can think of literally 26-28 teams and combinations of top players I would be more worried about then who we are facing week 1.

[2006Coltsbestever]

5 minutes ago, deedub75 said:

I have no idea why some people on here think that the Bengals game is an automatic win.  These same people probably thought we’d easily beat the Rams last year with Tolzien. 

I don't think it's automatic but you do realize we are 3 point favorites and have the better QB in this game + we are at home. While not automatic because nothing is, we have the slightly better team IMO and should win a close game.

[deedub75]

4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I don't think it's automatic but you do realize we are 3 point favorites and have the better QB in this game + we are at home. While not automatic because nothing is, we have the slightly better team IMO and should win a close game.

 

It's a home game for the Colts so the 3 point favorite means the game is basically a toss up.  If this game were played in Cincy, they'd be a 3 point favorite.  I think the teams are evenly matched.  I would give a slight edge to the Bengals due to their defensive line.  Also, Luck is still a work in progress.  We don't have 2014 Luck just yet.  

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, deedub75 said:

 

It's a home game for the Colts so the 3 point favorite means the game is basically a toss up.  If this game were played in Cincy, they'd be a 3 point favorite.  I think the teams are evenly matched.  I would give a slight edge to the Bengals due to their defensive line.  Also, Luck is still a work in progress.  We don't have 2014 Luck just yet.  

That is fair enough, I do agree the game could go either way. I would give the Colts a slight edge because we are at home. If it was at Cincy, I wouldn't feel as good about it that is for sure. 

[deedub75]

14 minutes ago, dgambill said:

I don’t see what everyone else sees in Mixon....he was awful last year. Dalton is the definition of an avg qb. Good but not great. We aren’t playing the Patriots or the 85 Bears here. If you are worried about Cincy then who do you think we can actually beat on our schedule? Even if we lose what’s the big deal. We are a young growing team.  Like a REALLY young team. Nobody expects us to win the SB or even vie for a playoff spot. We are just trying to take baby steps here and slowly get better...but to stress out over Cincy...if this is going to be a weekly thing then it’s going to be a long year. I can think of literally 26-28 teams and combinations of top players I would be more worried about then who we are facing week 1.

 

I don't anyone's stressing about playing Cincy.  I think it's more of the uncertainty of what we have more than worry about the opponent.  

[WoolMagnet]

Pocket fulls of marbles?

[Nate!]

27 minutes ago, deedub75 said:

I have no idea why some people on here think that the Bengals game is an automatic win.  These same people probably thought we’d easily beat the Rams last year with Tolzien. 

 

 

With you.  Colts are favored, but I gotta scratch my head as to why.  Bengals upgraded their offensive line massively.  That was their big down fall last year, and they have it fixed.  Wouldn’t surprise me to see Bengals to Juno out to a comfortable lead, Colts rally, but it end up being too little, too late.  

 

In regards to question of the thread,  can’t see the Colts D defending either unless they get hurt in the game.  

[Smonroe]

2 minutes ago, deedub75 said:

 

I don't anyone's stressing about playing Cincy.  I think it's more of the uncertainty of what we have more than worry about the opponent.  

 

Personally, I don’t stress over things I have no control over.  

 

I agree we have a young team, and I’ll be surprised if the defense is very good.  I think Ballard is building it right, but we’re nowhere near as talented as Cincy right now.  

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

Personally, I don’t stress over things I have no control over.  

 

I agree we have a young team, and I’ll be surprised if the defense is very good.  I think Ballard is building it right, but we’re nowhere near as talented as Cincy right now.  

 

Cincy went 7-9 last season, their Coach is Average = no better than what Pagano was, and Dalton is Mr Inconsistent. I think we win this game being at home, it will be close though. If Dalton decides he's Dan Marino for a day then we won't win. You never know how he will play? I think Luck will play well actually but may struggle early in the game.

[deedub75]

9 minutes ago, Nate! said:

 

 

With you.  Colts are favored, but I gotta scratch my head as to why.  Bengals upgraded their offensive line massively.  That was their big down fall last year, and they have it fixed.  Wouldn’t surprise me to see Bengals to Juno out to a comfortable lead, Colts rally, but it end up being too little, too late.  

 

In regards to question of the thread,  can’t see the Colts D defending either unless they get hurt in the game.  

 

Both teams are somewhat evenly matched and it's a home game for the Colts.  I'm assuming that's why the Colts are favored.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, deedub75 said:

 

Both teams are somewhat evenly matched and it's a home game for the Colts.  I'm assuming that's why the Colts are favored.

You are correct. If the game was at Cincy, Cincy would be favored.

[Trueman]

I'm more concerned about whether we can actually get to Dalton, than anything else.

 

[richard pallo]

I just keep thinking how vanilla our offense and defense was during the preseason.  I saw very little of the games.  A little bit here and there.  But I do not recall any blitzing from the defense.  I'm sure there had to be some but we do have some fast LB's now.  Maybe he will turn them loose. 

[Stephen]

14 minutes ago, Trueman said:

I'm more concerned about whether we can actually get to Dalton, than anything else.

 

Getting to dalton will be a problem, but that bengals dline is nasty. They shut out the bills starters in the first half of preseason game three and if our oline doesnt come to play they may do the same to us

[Stephen]

44 minutes ago, deedub75 said:

 

I don't anyone's stressing about playing Cincy.  I think it's more of the uncertainty of what we have more than worry about the opponent.  

Yea we dont know how good the coaching staff is yet. Couple that with unknown players and it complicates things.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Yep we won't find out until Sunday how this team really is with their uncertainties and Luck's play. It will answer us all alot of questions. 

[Bluefire4]

3 hours ago, Dingus McGirt said:

"The Red Rifle is going to tear us apart..."   You're making a funny, right?

No.

[Jackie Daytona]

6 hours ago, Lawrence Owen said:

Seriously,..Not all season.  We may have issues the first couple weeks until we figure out how to tackle without the 'helmet police' blowing whistles.  A big issue is we're teaching hamstring tackle to avoid the helmet rule, but you cannot bring a person to a dead stop by hamstring tackling...they always fall forward.  If a tackler can use the shoulder pad without a 'leading with the helmet' call then we'd be better at stopping the run.

Geathers will be in the box most of the time with Hooker playing single high.  That's my thoughts

 

Not true.  proper "hamstring" tackling will drop an elephant on it's butt...... launch an NFL athlete at full speed into another's legs, he'll drop a good percentage of the time...... reason they got away from it is, it does tend to blow out ligaments more often than going high....  NFL players generally try not to hurt another guys $$$ potential, so going high became en vogue, now, going low seems to be coming back.....

[Lawrence Owen]

8 minutes ago, Shafty138 said:

 

Not true.  proper "hamstring" tackling will drop an elephant on it's butt...... launch an NFL athlete at full speed into another's legs, he'll drop a good percentage of the time...... reason they got away from it is, it does tend to blow out ligaments more often than going high....  NFL players generally try not to hurt another guys $$$ potential, so going high became en vogue, now, going low seems to be coming back.....

completely true.  Yes properly hamstring tackling will bring a player down,..but they generally fall forward. and you're not describing 'proper hamstring' tackle. you don't 'dive full speed' at a players legs, that's a spear tackle. What Bob Sanders was famous for doing.(still legal if not using a helmet).  A hamstring tackle is the same as a high tackle. Only instead of wrapping up high in the chest area , you wrap lower, around the hip/thigh area using your arms, bodyweight, and momentum to bring a player down.

[Jackie Daytona]

1 hour ago, Lawrence Owen said:

completely true.  Yes properly hamstring tackling will bring a player down,..but they generally fall forward. and you're not describing 'proper hamstring' tackle. you don't 'dive full speed' at a players legs, that's a spear tackle. What Bob Sanders was famous for doing.(still legal if not using a helmet).  A hamstring tackle is the same as a high tackle. Only instead of wrapping up high in the chest area , you wrap lower, around the hip/thigh area using your arms, bodyweight, and momentum to bring a player down.

 

Think I miss worded  it, or misrepresented it.  If you wrap up a runners knee/hamstring area, he's going down......  yes, his momentum, if built, will carry him forward.  I would posit though, proper form tackling considered, how a shoulder or upper body tackle would be assured of him NOT moving forward?

[Jackie Daytona]

1 minute ago, Shafty138 said:

 

Think I miss worded  it, or misrepresented it.  If you wrap up a runners knee/hamstring area, he's going down......  yes, his momentum, if built, will carry him forward.  I would posit though, proper form tackling considered, how a shoulder or upper body tackle would be assured of him NOT moving forward?

especially considering our new Defense is apparently weighted about the same as our vintage 1998-2010 D was

[IinD]

3 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

While not automatic because nothing is, we have the slightly better team IMO and should win a close game.

I also think we'll get a small boost from this being AL's first official meaningful game in a while.

2 hours ago, richard pallo said:

I just keep thinking how vanilla our offense and defense was during the preseason.  I saw very little of the games.  A little bit here and there.  But I do not recall any blitzing from the defense.  I'm sure there had to be some but we do have some fast LB's now.  Maybe he will turn them loose. 

I wonder if we've seen the full package on D?? I also don't remember much of anything from the D except basic looking fronts and just trying to tackle quickly.  Hopefully Eberflus is better then Monachino at a minimum.

[NewEra]

I don't think you can judge our defense off preseason. Just like the offense it has been completely vanilla. As long as we continue to get better as in less mistakes our speed and attack will pay off.

[MikeCurtis]

11 hours ago, bluebombers87 said:

You may hate it but it’s what teams without a pass rush have to do. Let the field shorten so time becomes more or less irrelevant.

 

We may have to rely more heavily on Reich’s cleverness on O and Lucks grit to win our games then straight up stopping offenses.

You make a point

 

This defense IS built to play with a lead

This defense is built to "bend"  

This defense SHOULD do better.... this year.... even when giving up yards between the twenties

   ........  The short field actually allows for a more aggressive approach toward defense....... Fast guys blitzing are TOUGH to defend

 

If we can get field goals from our opponents.... we can stay in games

 

If we can get turnovers, due to our speed, (Hooker, and Leonard, seem to have a skill here)

 

If we can get a play or two in a drive, where our speed gets the DL into the backfield for a loss, we can get a drive stopping 3rd and long

 

I think you will see some shootouts, early on, for us to have a chance to win

 

My "fan side" says it will be average early, but finish 10-6

My "gut" (usually, more accurate than my fan side)......  8-8

 

 

Biggest prediction

 

It will be an INTERESTING year!

[Coltsman1788]

17 hours ago, Smonroe said:

 

A guy like Hankins?

 

I hope I’m way off base, but I just see the D on the field for extended drives, trying not to ‘break’ but eventually getting worn down as the game goes on.  

Pretty much...and our offense won't be good enough to bail them out.   Even with Luck, the Colts are an average to below average offense.   Just look at our roster. 

[Coltsman1788]

33 minutes ago, MikeCurtis said:

You make a point

 

This defense IS built to play with a lead

This defense is built to "bend"  

This defense SHOULD do better.... this year.... even when giving up yards between the twenties

   ........  The short field actually allows for a more aggressive approach toward defense....... Fast guys blitzing are TOUGH to defend

 

If we can get field goals from our opponents.... we can stay in games

 

If we can get turnovers, due to our speed, (Hooker, and Leonard, seem to have a skill here)

 

If we can get a play or two in a drive, where our speed gets the DL into the backfield for a loss, we can get a drive stopping 3rd and long

 

I think you will see some shootouts, early on, for us to have a chance to win

 

My "fan side" says it will be average early, but finish 10-6

My "gut" (usually, more accurate than my fan side)......  8-8

 

 

Biggest prediction

 

It will be an INTERESTING year!

But our offense is not prolific enough to build up leads. 

 

I think we will see the Colts playing from behind a lot this year and struggling to keep up with other teams' offenses as they consistently stack up point producing drives  throughout the game.

 

[Lawrence Owen]

7 hours ago, Shafty138 said:

 

Think I miss worded  it, or misrepresented it.  If you wrap up a runners knee/hamstring area, he's going down......  yes, his momentum, if built, will carry him forward.  I would posit though, proper form tackling considered, how a shoulder or upper body tackle would be assured of him NOT moving forward?

it doesn't.  But it is easier to lean your upper body in a direction when it's lower part is wrapped up because there is no force on the upper half of the body to prevent you from doing so.  However, I do agree That performed correctly,you are more likely NOT to miss the tackle on a properly wrapped hamstring.

 

(i have gif's to represent this,..but apparently .2mb is max attachment size now >.<)

[MikeCurtis]

18 minutes ago, Coltsman1788 said:

But our offense is not prolific enough to build up leads. 

 

I think we will see the Colts playing from behind a lot this year and struggling to keep up with other teams' offenses as they consistently stack up point producing drives  throughout the game.

 

You may be correct, (But I hope not)

 

I believe that our OL improvements and our TE improvements AND..... adding Luck, will get this offense going

 

I also think that no one feared Hilton last year.   

 

If Hilton and Luck can "redo" their past success, we will get some room underneath to run the TEs

 

We will see

 

[Crunked]

Just in general, I think the worry was how good are all the draft picks coupled with how quickly can they become consistent. There were signs of talent in the pre season but they were woefully inconsistent, and that's a worry. It will come with time, but until it does...there might be drives, quarters, halves or GOD forbid entire games where we are going to be watching some frustrating defensive football. So for me, at least for the first few weeks it will be more about what we are capable of just as much if not more so, than what our opponent brings to the equation.

[Smonroe]

3 minutes ago, MikeCurtis said:

You may be correct, (But I hope not)

 

I believe that our OL improvements and our TE improvements AND..... adding Luck, will get this offense going

 

I also think that no one feared Hilton last year.   

 

If Hilton and Luck can "redo" their past success, we will get some room underneath to run the TEs

 

We will see

 

 

Yeah, I think the offense will be okay.  If the smiles on Rogers and TY’s faces when they talked about what we’re not showing is any indication, it could be dynamic.  We’ll see. 

 

You cant tell much from the preseason, no one is game planning or tipping their hands.  But you can get a feel for individual pserformance.  I saw a lot of our D line getting pushed around.  

 

 

[ColtStrong2013]

11 hours ago, deedub75 said:

 

It's a home game for the Colts so the 3 point favorite means the game is basically a toss up.  If this game were played in Cincy, they'd be a 3 point favorite.  I think the teams are evenly matched.  I would give a slight edge to the Bengals due to their defensive line.  Also, Luck is still a work in progress.  We don't have 2014 Luck just yet.  

Correct on the 3 point spread = home field advantage. 

 

I don't necessarily give the Bengals an advantage because of their defensive line. Frank Reich can tone them back with quick hitters and proper playcalling. Hopefully Castonzo is back this week in practice, or else I might agree with you on that. 

[aaron11]

1 hour ago, MikeCurtis said:

You may be correct, (But I hope not)

 

I believe that our OL improvements and our TE improvements AND..... adding Luck, will get this offense going

 

I also think that no one feared Hilton last year.   

 

If Hilton and Luck can "redo" their past success, we will get some room underneath to run the TEs

 

We will see

 

actually it was the bengals last year that said they were only worried about ty and not much else