Jump to content
ColtStrong2013

Colts putting together a Seattle-like defense

Recommended Posts

 

I have said that I thought this was where the Colts defense was heading since Ed Dodds came on and certain people on this forum jumped all over my back saying this was strictly a tampa 2... Well it might have been to keep thing simple for transition, but we are going to see serious changes in this defense going forward. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I recall correctly, Ballard was wanting to mimic the Seahawks defense

that went to back to back title games a few years back.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Bowen's podcast, he said, in talking to the Colts, they have said yes, our defense is the Seattle defense.   Minor differences, maybe.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't seem to be 'exactly' what Seattle runs - characterized as a 4-3 Under with Cover 3 - but a similar kind of defense. I think they are looking for a little more flexibility in being able to shift into man / press as needed. A lot of what gets implemented depends on the individual skill sets of our players, yet to be determined.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, CoachLite said:

It doesn't seem to be 'exactly' what Seattle runs - characterized as a 4-3 Under with Cover 3 - but a similar kind of defense. I think they are looking for a little more flexibility in being able to shift into man / press as needed. A lot of what gets implemented depends on the individual skill sets of our players, yet to be determined.

this, absolutely.  KC game would be glaring example.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, #12. said:

In Bowen's podcast, he said, in talking to the Colts, they have said yes, our defense is the Seattle defense.   Minor differences, maybe.  

where’s the podcast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will run a mixture of Cover 1, 2,  and 3 defenses. Man and Zone

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MFT5 said:

where’s the podcast

 

Youtube.  Every Monday or Tuesday, I think.  It's pretty good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, krunk said:

They will run a mixture of Cover 1, 2,  and 3 defenses. Man and Zone

The challenge will be in the complexity of the new defensive scheme. With young teams, complexity can be a problem and should be avoided. This is why Ballard / Flus looks for smart players with good instincts. Complexity can win games when if done right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, #12. said:

 

Youtube.  Every Monday or Tuesday, I think.  It's pretty good.

 

im saying link it

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, CoachLite said:

The challenge will be in the complexity of the new defensive scheme. With young teams, complexity can be a problem and should be avoided. This is why Ballard / Flus looks for smart players with good instincts. Complexity can win games when if done right.

They will still keep it simple. The scheme is designed for young players to come in and play immediately.  They are probably only playing about 3 coverages, most likely the ones that I listed with some different blitzes mixed in. We'll probably increase the amount of man coverage that we run since we have more CB and LB with speed and size, but it won't be more than the zone looks I think.  I think what we are bound to see this year is more designed packages that Flus is able to create to match up with people. Packages that we were not able to do last year because of a lack of high level athletes.  But it will still probably for the most part be those same 3 coverages. Cover 1, Cover2, and Cover 3.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MFT5 said:

 

im saying link it

 

No, you said "where's the podcast?"   So I told you.  

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dang you guys I was working on a post about us going to a cover 3. I knew we where going to switch to a cover 3 as soon as we A) switched to a 4-3 and B) as soon as we drafted Hooker. If you look at the player we drafted on the defense this year they are all players that will fit a cover 3 Banagu and Tell especially. The way Ballard has approached this transition is pretty brilliant. Starting zone heavy with tampa 2 and slowly working in cover 3. I dont think it happens this year but next year we will be havy coverr 3 mark my words..

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, MFT5 said:

 

im saying link it

 

and I think he was saying, google it.  Why he gotta do your homework for you? :P

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seattle did have 3 guys in the secondary that were 6 foot 3 or taller that were also big and smart physical players. If we can strive for that then it would be great.

Still need a safety like Kam Chancellor 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, krunk said:

They will run a mixture of Cover 1, 2,  and 3 defenses. Man and Zone

 

As long as it is not Cover no one, I am fine with anything. :) 

  • Like 4
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, runthepost said:

Seattle did have 3 guys in the secondary that were 6 foot 3 or taller that were also big and smart physical players. If we can strive for that then it would be great.

Still need a safety like Kam Chancellor 

 

Abrams would have been that enforcer like Chancellor, just saying. :dunno:

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

As long as it is not Cover no one, I am fine with anything. :) 

IIRC, last year i heard them reference a cover zero and i was like, that doesn't sound like a good defense.  hahahaha

 

Maybe it was the "no cover zone" i heard:

 

https://www.1070thefan.com/blogs/kevins-corner/colts-coverage/issues-pass-rush-zone-recognition-colts-defense

 

Eberflus acknowledges that his unit must do a better job of recognizing and breaking from their zones, into ‘no cover zone’ areas, from 0 to 5 yards.

Tackling is another area that Eberflus wants to see improve for a team playing so many zone looks.

“When you play zone you’re going to get a higher completion rate,” the first-year defensive coordinator says. “As we’ve said, once the rush gets going and the ball gets pumped out a little bit faster the zone players are able to set up and break a little bit faster. We just have to learn to trust the rush. We are working hard on that because that’s part of the system, being able to set up and being able to break in the no cover zone.

 

 

My reaction was the same though.  hahaha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Abrams would have been that enforcer like Chancellor, just saying. :dunno:

Ballard doesn't think Willis is too far off from Abrams. He thinks he was one of the last remaining elite safeties on the board according to the Colts standards.  My eyes usually see what Ballard sees but on this one I'm just keeping an open mind because I'm not totally in agreement.  I'm going to wait till the pads get on and I can see him live. I'll be happy to be proven wrong!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, krunk said:

Ballard doesn't think Willis is too far off from Abrams. He thinks he was one of the last remaining elite safeties on the board according to the Colts standards.  My eyes usually see what Ballard sees but on this one I'm just keeping an open mind.  I'm going to wait till the pads get on and I can see him live.

 

measurables between willis and abrams are extremely close willlis weighs like 10 more bounds i believe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chad72 said:

 

Abrams would have been that enforcer like Chancellor, just saying. :dunno:

That’s true we haven’t seen him play a down  in the nfl yet. Not saying he can’t be like Kam yet :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The concept and players are there to make that comparison.

 

Wagner-Leonard

Irvin-Banogu

Smith-Walker

Bennett-Sheard

Avril-Turay

Thomas-Hooker

 

unfortunately we are still missing key elements in the secondary. We do not have a corner that can take half the field away like Sherman. Perhaps Ya-sin can, but we'll have to wait and see on that. Geathers can be Kam, but Kam was much better at coverage and way more of a  fierce hitter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're never going to run or have a carbon copy of a defense.  Seattle itself doesn't have the personnel to do what it did in 2013, and I'm no expert on their D, but I'm sure they have evolved some since then.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CR91 said:

The concept and players are there to make that comparison.

 

Wagner-Leonard

Irvin-Banogu

Smith-Walker

Bennett-Sheard

Avril-Turay

Thomas-Hooker

 

unfortunately we are still missing key elements in the secondary. We do not have a corner that can take half the field away like Sherman. Perhaps Ya-sin can, but we'll have to wait and see on that. Geathers can be Kam, but Kam was much better at coverage and way more of a  fierce hitter. 

 

I think they are banking on Desir, Ya-Sin, Wilson and Kenny Moore on being every bit as loaded at corner as those Seattle defenses were. 

 

Oh and btw, Sherman didn't always take half the field away. I recall a certain game in Indianapolis... :)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, #12. said:

You're never going to run or have a carbon copy of a defense.  Seattle itself doesn't have the personnel to do what it did in 2013, and I'm no expert on their D, but I'm sure they have evolved some since then.  

 

I agree. My original comment (as they transitioned from Pagano, brought in Ed Dodds, and after they drafted Hooker, Wilson, etc was that it looked like they would eventually be a cover 3 base defense similar to Seattle. Hooker is made to be primarily be a centerfielder. All of these corners are long and athletic like those Seattle defenses were. We are building a front 7 that is built on speed, much like those defenses were.

 

We will have our own style of defense. No two are exactly alike. We will have our wrinkles. And godforbid if/when Eberflus leaves for  a HC position, we will replace him with a like-minded coach that can work with the scheme he is inheriting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Oh and btw, Sherman didn't always take half the field away. I recall a certain game in Indianapolis..

 

Damn, Pep Hamilton did beat that D, didn't he?  :)

 

Best game I remember him calling.  Where it went after that, I have no idea.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, runthepost said:

Seattle did have 3 guys in the secondary that were 6 foot 3 or taller that were also big and smart physical players. If we can strive for that then it would be great.

Still need a safety like Kam Chancellor 

 

Tell really reminds me of a Seattle corner.   Even though he played S in college, he's long and very fluid and our coaching staff is going to start him out there.

 

3 hours ago, CR91 said:

The concept and players are there to make that comparison.

 

Wagner-Leonard

Irvin-Banogu

Smith-Walker

Bennett-Sheard

Avril-Turay

Thomas-Hooker

 

unfortunately we are still missing key elements in the secondary. We do not have a corner that can take half the field away like Sherman. Perhaps Ya-sin can, but we'll have to wait and see on that. Geathers can be Kam, but Kam was much better at coverage and way more of a  fierce hitter. 

 

There were a few games last year where Desir did a very good job shutting down top notch WRs (DeAndre Hopkins comes to mind).  I have a feeling these coaches are hoping Desir can be that guy for us....maybe Q. Wilson, he really started to come along last year and he's only 21 (maybe 22), so even though this is his 3rd year, he's still the youngest guy on the team and should hopefully keep improving.

 

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

I think they are banking on Desir, Ya-Sin, Wilson and Kenny Moore on being every bit as loaded at corner as those Seattle defenses were. 

 

Oh and btw, Sherman didn't always take half the field away. I recall a certain game in Indianapolis... :)

 

The coaches should have the young guys call TY 'light' in practice a few times to get humbled and maybe learn a few lessons. 

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000258491/article/ty-hilton-seattle-seahawks-insults-fired-me-up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

I have said that I thought this was where the Colts defense was heading since Ed Dodds came on and certain people on this forum jumped all over my back saying this was strictly a tampa 2... Well it might have been to keep thing simple for transition, but we are going to see serious changes in this defense going forward. 

 

 After the Hooker pick Ballard's intentions were clear. And as you say, there are Colts banging away relentlessly that we are a Cover 2 and don't need special corners. Siliness.
Interesting that Quincy is down to 193 from 214.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can definitely dig it honestly. I'll never call a pro player soft or anything like that, but in our golden years we had guys like Brock and Brackett who are in no way the type of guys we're drafting now.

 

Every player drafted now regardless of round seems to be a more physical type player measurables wise. Moreso it seems then in years past. Even though the media loved saying we were a fast physical defense, we really weren't minus our HOF DE's. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 After the Hooker pick Ballard's intentions were clear. And as you say, there are Colts banging away relentlessly that we are a Cover 2 and don't need special corners.

hooker would be an ideal fit for a cover 3.  he would fit in any scheme tbh 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the outside, I'm calm, cool and collected.

 

On the inside, I'm more or less   :yahoo:    :rock:   :headspin:        :banana:      :jump:     !!!

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some back & forth has been cleaned up up in this thread...

Lets keep things on the up & up Colts fans!!!

  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, #12. said:

 

Damn, Pep Hamilton did beat that D, didn't he?  :)

 

Best game I remember him calling.  Where it went after that, I have no idea.

 

Pep flashed some brilliance but mostly babbled us with nonsense. Consistency is everything for offenses. Pep was not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well.  I know cover 2 pretty well so if what all of you are saying is true,    I better get to studying cover 3

 

Any quick insights would be appreciated.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Seattle morphed more into a Single High safety (Cover 1) while combining Zone and Man to Man underneath, which would morph into Cover 1, 2, 3, or 4 depending on down/distance.

 

Our biggest defensive weakness was a lack of having multiple DB looks, being able to switch it up really is vital. And having a healthy Hooker

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/16/2019 at 4:30 PM, throwing BBZ said:

 

 After the Hooker pick Ballard's intentions were clear. And as you say, there are Colts banging away relentlessly that we are a Cover 2 and don't need special corners. Siliness.
Interesting that Quincy is down to 193 from 214.

 

I guess that as of now, the 'base' defense is still a 4-3 and a 2 deep shell.  Issue is, over time, the league has turned pass happy, often some teams with 65% throws to 35% run.  Thus sub packages with more DB's rule the day (Nickel, Dime) in all schemes.  Sometimes zone, possibly some press, and some bail technique in cover 3 (or possibly quarters).  Teams aren't '1 formation scheme' anymore.  I haven't heard the term used much recently, but 'hybrid' was a term thrown around during these transitions.

 

On 5/16/2019 at 6:02 PM, IinD said:

I can definitely dig it honestly. I'll never call a pro player soft or anything like that, but in our golden years we had guys like Brock and Brackett who are in no way the type of guys we're drafting now.

 

Interesting note, Brock was drafted round 7 by the Eagles, and they cut him before signing him. Polian claimed him off waivers and he had an 8 year career (6 as starter) with Colts.  Bracket was a UDFA, and also had a good 8 years, 5 as starter MLB with Colts.

 

On 5/16/2019 at 6:02 PM, IinD said:

Every player drafted now regardless of round seems to be a more physical type player measurables wise. Moreso it seems then in years past. Even though the media loved saying we were a fast physical defense, we really weren't minus our HOF DE's. 

 

When Colts were always drafting late in the rounds every year, the Big and Fast players were essentially gone.  So it was big and slow, or smaller but fast.  Polian / Dungy always went with the latter.  But they would have liked to get those that were both Big and Fast if they could.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It was a Colt's offense choke-fest.   Colts first 9 possessions :  1)    3 plays & punt   1:54                                                2)    3 plays & punt   0:33                                                3)    3 plays & punt   2:16                                                4)    3 plays & punt   2:07                                                5)     missed F/G        1:40                                                6)    5 plays & punt   1:54                                                7)    4 plays & punt   2:40                                                8)      Fumble             0:10                                                9)    5 plays & punt   1:29   When the Colts began their 10th drive with 8:35 left in the game, the offense had the ball for a total of 14:43 while the Chief's offense had the ball for over 36 minutes.   With 3:33 left in the game, had there not been the roughing the kicker call, and Vin. had not missed twice, The Colts get the ball with the score 24-17 with a serious chance to tie the game.   The game ended with the Colts having the ball for 20 minutes and the Chiefs having the ball for 40 minutes.   How many NFL defenses hold the Chiefs to 31 points when thew Chiefs have the ball for 40 minutes?     Not saying the Colt's D was great, or even good, but it was good enough to win that game. The Colt's loss was on the offense.                                  
    • You make good points on this. The Pats have good reason to be skeptical of the Texans here.   I was more talking about the specifics of Caserio's contract that prevent him from interviewing with another team. But evidently the NFL approved it...
    • Isn't that also true of the candidates that you think teams are in a hurry to hire in January?     You could have said the same about Ballard in 2017. He got beat out for the Bears job by Ryan Pace, so he was a leftover. When the Colts job came open, and he was considered the favorite, and media outlets spoke of him as one of the most coveted candidates on the market. (Irsay is prone to hyperbole, but he called him the most prepared GM candidate ever; it's not likely that Irsay felt Ballard was just a "leftover.")   My point: There are always good candidates. Same is true for head coaches, assistants, etc. It's shortsighted and hysterical to act like there are no good GM candidates on the board in June. The guys who you say teams will be rushing to hire the following January are on the board in June.     Not sure why you're arguing this. It's pretty obvious that Caserio is the guy they wanted; they look to have canceled their GM search for now, which suggests that they're going to wait until Caserio's contract expires after the 2020 draft and attempt to hire him, pending further developments.   And to my point, he was not hired in January, so the desire to get a good candidate (or the guy you want) doesn't require making these moves in January.     I guess I could have phrased that differently, but what I said was they keep virtually all their staff in place, meaning they might change a piece or two in Year 1, but most of their staff remains the same in Year 1.    But I did say that's typical, which left room for outliers. And I was speaking about GMs that take over the job in January, not after the draft (or later, like Gettleman and Dorsey, recently).    If that came across as overly dogmatic, I didn't intend for it to be. But I stand by my point that it's typical for a new GM hired in January to keep his staff mostly in tact for that first player acquisition cycle, and make changes at some point after the draft. This is what Ballard did, keeping Jimmy Raye until June, then hiring Dodds and Hogan. There are other examples.      This is what I reject. Firstly, it doesn't matter. Things change. I don't think I need to say much more on that. Secondly, we have several examples of teams in recent seasons changing GMs outside of the typical Black Monday in January window where big changes are traditionally made. Chiefs fired Dorsey in June, Panthers fired Gettleman in July, now Jets and Texans. I'm not saying it's a trend, just that it's not as rare as you make it out to be, at least not recently.     To the bolded, I didn't really give this a lot of thought in 2017, but it's hard to know how much difference it would have made. Ballard went through his first cycle with another GM's right hand man and front office staff, for a coach that he didn't have any experience with. Ballard's approach was noticeably different in 2018.   This might seem half-baked and out of nowhere to you, but it's not. I jumped into this debate with the same viewpoint on Reddit a couple weeks ago, and kind of transported my thoughts into this thread, but didn't start from the beginning. In the other conversation, I think my initial post was something like 'recently I've been thinking that this is a better time period to hire a GM...' If I had posted my thoughts that way here, maybe you would have understood where I was coming from a little better.   That said, it's not just an impractical rambling that I haven't thought through. I don't know if there's any way to prove that one way is right and the other is wrong; I'm stating my preference, strongly.   My primary argument in favor of hiring a GM in June instead of January -- which you haven't addressed -- is that the work that goes into free agency, the Combine, pro days and the draft starts way back in the fall, if not sooner. When you hire a GM in January and give him six weeks to prepare for free agency, eight weeks to prepare for the Combine and pro days, and three months to prepare for the draft, that GM is not operating at full capacity. He would be better equipped if he started the job the prior June.   Do you think that's a weak argument? If so, why? I think that's an easy starting point.   I said earlier, if the Texans had waited until January 2020 to fire Gaine, all this criticism wouldn't exist. And the only practical difference is that they would have handicapped their new GM. (This is a more effective argument for the Jets, since the Texans are apparently not hiring a new GM yet.)   Like I said in my first post in this thread, imagine if the Colts had hired Ballard in June 2016 instead of January 2017... I'm sure people would have been critical, wondering why we let Grigson run the 2016 cycle if we were going to fire him, but imagine how much better prepared Ballard would have been for his first cycle with an additional six months on the job. 
    • Ballard's pre and post draft videos are Must See TV.  He truly is Dialed In. With my old memory, i will be able to watch them again in a few weeks and enjoy them. Like watching Andy Griffith maybe, it just never gets old.   The look and words from Frank about getting Campbell was Great.  He is so pumped.       
    • Although I will say didn’t we almost beat the eagles last year?
  • Members

    • twfish

      twfish 1,516

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • egg

      egg 593

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CR91

      CR91 8,146

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DougDew

      DougDew 3,092

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ar7

      ar7 347

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • MFT5

      MFT5 381

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • C0LT5

      C0LT5 102

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • el duderino

      el duderino 61

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jal8908

      jal8908 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • MikeCurtis

      MikeCurtis 1,215

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