Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

LucasOilStadium

Colts Vs. Titans Game Day Thread

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, strt182 said:

If I'm thinking right it might be ok at the line but down field you will get a flag for it . Could be wrong though.

 

That's the way it is being called.  However, that is not how it is written in the rule book.  My point is if they are going to call that, fine but then be prepared to call the holds that occur on every play on the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jdubu said:

Maybe this will kickstart him into a successful bid to regaining much needed confidence and play in the backfield. Team defense is playing inspired today so far. 

 

I do feel like that a lot of his "issues" have been mental. The tools are there. But he needs the confidence and the right attitude to apply them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think somebody came to make a statement today. But its still early. I know it seemed like first quarter flew by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Is that Wilson's first INT of his career?

2nd or 3rd I think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t like the trick play there. We were having our way with them. Don’t be silly.

 

sorry to be a downer. I just don’t want to put too much pressure on the D. :peek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MTC said:

That play call was trying to be too cute. Not worth it.

Agree !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CamMo said:

I don’t like the trick play there. We were having our way with them. Don’t be silly.

Meh, 

 

mostly didnt like the hurry up near the goal line. Trick play was fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Man that would've been unreal, this Offense is so exciting. 10-0 Indy!

 

I was worried for Luck there. Had it worked, it would have been great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I don't mind the call.  Yeah, 7 would have completely demoralized the Titans but we still got 3 out of it.  Let the kids have some fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MTC said:

That play call was trying to be too cute. Not worth it.

 

The adult in me agrees...

 

The kid in me loves the play call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MTC said:

That play call was trying to be too cute. Not worth it.

Honestly it could be another wrinkle for teams to worry about later in the season. Not everything works the first time but could lead to a defender hesitating on jumping some route later. Idk 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Jdubu said:

You and I both know they pick and choose when to call a hold, zero consistency. I’m more troubled with how many times our players do things like this when they are out of the play. 

 

You're right of course, but refs should not be allowed to just ignore the rule book on certain parts of the field.  If they want to call it that tight, great, just call it that way everywhere on the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Remember,  we are not debating whether Spring is doable.   I've stated from the beginning that I agree.    It's not as bad as some here think it is.    It's doable,   No question.   We are debating whether Spring is preferable, or desireable.    So, when you write,  that you don't think you have to say more about an issue,  any issue,  I'm sorry,   but NO!     You DO have to say more.  A heckuva lot more.    Because YOU have the burden of proof.    My position is the Industry Standard.   Your's has, by comparison,  a handful of examples.   Some are recent.   That's great.   But I view that as a nod to the position that it's doable.    You view it as a possibility that it might soon become the norm.   I'm happy to wait until that actually happens.   As to your primary argument.....    that all the prep work has been done,  and if you make the changes in winter,  that the GM is not up to speed on what the current scouts and player personnel people have done.    Except there is this......   Your argument that you yourself use to others here who complain that changing in the spring is bad.   To quote you....   it's just one draft.    One free agency period.    And there will soon be another,  and then another....   and another.   One season is nothing in the grand scheme of things.   That is what you wrote (roughly) to posters who think making the GM change in the spring is outright terrible and stupid.    Which I strongly disagree with their positin.   Your argument makes my argument for me.    I want the new GM in the building ASAP.    So he can sooner evaluate his players.    His front office.    His scouts.    The entire program.   Waiting until May or June just delays that.    I want it to begin ASAP.   I'd expect that he can and would be able to make some level of difference in his first free agency and draft.    Plus,  I think you way, way over-dramatize the handicap the new GM has arriving in January.   He's the GM.    He's already got a ton of information in his head,  and in his notebooks, his binders.    He's not in as much of a bind as you like to portray.     So, with your desired scenario, this draft could be used for a system that the new GM doesn't even want to run.    Like Chuck running a 3-4,  when Ballard wants to run a 4-3.    Like Chuck wanted to run a power running game and a deep pattern passing game.    While Ballard favors a zone running game and a get rid of the ball quick, move the chains offense.     In your preferred scenario,  you're the one who is burning the first year the GM has,  not me.     I see little of the benefits and mostly an approach that screams....   "Gee,  I hope this works out."   I know you believe what you're writing.   But honestly, this feels like one big thought experiment. Like you're trying to make a case for something you really don't believe,  but you're trying to see if you can make a good argument anyway.   And yet I know that's NOT the case.    That you really, honestly do believe this.    That's what I find so astonishig.    There's lots of opinion,  and not a lot of evidence to back this up.    As I've said from the get-go....   I think this is doable.    I just don't think it's desireable or preferable.    
    • To your last paragraph....   yes,  I agree that if a GM,  any GM, inherits a bad roster,  then no matter how OK his draft picks may be,   they will likely stick on the roster.   But if you're a GM inheriting a poor team,  and you draft players that are only somewhat better than what you originally had,  then the improvement in the team will only be so good.   Again,  from 4 wis,  to perhaps 6-7.    That wouldn't be bad.    That would be reasonable.   But when you suddenly pop to 10 wins,  including 9 of the last 10 in the regular season,  and you win on the road in the playoffs,   then there's got to be something more there than just the GM's new guys.    Those guys have got to be good.    You can't do that well simply because they're better than the previous guys.    They're much better.    Yes, the coaching staff is better and the systems the team is running are better,  but so are the players.    They have to execute.    And we did.   Better than we thought possible.    Certainly better than when we were 1-5 and looked like a candidate for a top-10 or even a top-5 draft pick.    The players are good.   They may not be great yet,  but they're really good and much better than what we had.    The results are all the proof you need.   Again,  thanks for the exchange....  
    • I missed the first couple innings, was keeping track on phone, didn’t realize things got chippy with the benches clearing after the Contreras HR! Seems the Cubs were playing with a little extra edge tonight, I love it!!! 
    • and then NE goes into KC and throws for 350 and Sony runs for 100+ on them. our O, and O game plan just sucked.   i get KC was good, but our O just sucked.
  • Members

    • Shadow_Creek

      Shadow_Creek 415

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Kirie89

      Kirie89 22

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • luckyBatistuta

      luckyBatistuta 109

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • el duderino

      el duderino 61

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jmac_48

      jmac_48 400

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...