Day one OTAs

[Scott Pennock]

43 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

 

Correct.  Ty Law didn't change the rules, essentially it was Mel Blount that did.

 

In 1977, defenders were permitted to make contact with eligible receivers only once; the head slap was outlawed ...

 

**In 1978, rules changes permitted a defender to maintain contact (just once, and not tackle) with a receiver within five yards of the line of scrimmage, but restricted contact beyond that point.**

 

As officials looked away more and more each year, that game and Law had the competition committee look at all games, the D style of Patriots and Panthers (just to name two), and reemphasize the illegal contact rule (possibly known more as the 'chuck' rule back then) in 2004.  Pat's fans say it was Polian crying and ramrodding the competition committee to make a rule for Peyton.  It was actually Mike Martz and Tony Dungy of the subcommittee that introduced it.  Mike Holmgren was involved. Jeff Fisher (Co-Chair and ex defensive back) and Rich McKay (Co-Chair) and the whole competition committee (including Ozzie Newsome, Polian, etc...) made the point of emphasis effective.  Many teams besides Pats weren't happy.

 

https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nonsense-xpm-2004-08-06-0408060179-story.html

 

And not just because of that one playoff game either, despite the NFL admitting to at least missing 6 blatant penalties on the Patriots-

 

http://web.archive.org/web/20040215093250/http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4079437/

 

Interest factoid, it was only just one decade later, in 2014, and the NFL had to make the Illegal Contact (old 1978 chuck rule) a point of emphasis_AGAIN!

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2014/07/30/illegal-contact-in-secondary-will-be-major-point-of-emphasis-for-nfl-officials-this-season/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.de42ff6a3f7a

 

Whenever this subject comes up even lightly, I bring up this detailed story again to be sure there is no history revisionist interference.

 

 

 

 

Thank you for the history lesson, though if you kept reading I did redact my statement to emphasizing the old rule. :-)

[ColtsBlueFL]

19 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:

Thank you for the history lesson, though if you kept reading I did redact my statement to emphasizing the old rule. :-)

 

True, but some may not know the whole story and that you were just possibly capitulating. It also keeps Patriot sympathizers from entering and derailing the thread prophylactically. 

[Coltsfan66]

1 hour ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

True, but some may not know the whole story and that you were just possibly capitulating. It also keeps Patriot sympathizers from entering and derailing the thread prophylactically. 

You beat me to it and thanks! 

[PeterBowman]

when's the next OTA practice?

[BigQungus]

On 5/21/2019 at 4:28 PM, Irish YJ said:

I'm a big believer in balance. Good passing opens up running. Good running opens up passing. Keep the opponent guessing and off balance, and exploit what they give you (passing or rushing). No need to be stubborn or force things. 

 

You talk so much of balance... from now on I'm gonna call you Thanos.

 

Lol jk, I'm a believer in balance too.

 

But you and Reich are essentially saying the same thing. When Reich says he wants to run the ball more, it means he wants there to be more of a proportion of plays to go running plays relative to where they are now. We were 2nd in the league in passing attempts last year. So therefore, if you want there to be more "balance", then you would also want to run the ball more, just like Reich.

[EastStreet]

2 hours ago, BigQungus said:

 

You talk so much of balance... from now on I'm gonna call you Thanos.

 

Lol jk, I'm a believer in balance too.

 

But you and Reich are essentially saying the same thing. When Reich says he wants to run the ball more, it means he wants there to be more of a proportion of plays to go running plays relative to where they are now. We were 2nd in the league in passing attempts last year. So therefore, if you want there to be more "balance", then you would also want to run the ball more, just like Reich.

i agree in principal, but also believe that you take what is given to you. we played 5 weeks vs top 11 rushing Ds, and also was without our lead back (Mack) for several games early. toss in early OL musical chairs and a first year O system.

 

on O, i was way more concerned with what teams were doing to us by doubling TY. we really had no other option or answer outside of Ebron. Luck had to work WAY too hard getting the yards he got.

[throwing BBZ]

On 5/21/2019 at 6:45 PM, krunk said:

One of my issues and I belive Princeton Tiger brought it up also was when your running game is not very effective.  For example in Peytons last years in Indy our run game was abysmal and teams literally ignored all of our play action fakes. Or you can even look at some of our seasons under Pagano.  They dropped 8 and rushed three a large majority of the time because they had little fear that we could do anything on the ground.  Do you think that happens to us with a successful rushing attack? I personally don't believe so.

 

I think when you are able to run it forces the defense to leave less defenders in coverage.   I don't want to turn this into a long drawn out debate but I believe your contention was it isnt the amount of times you run but more of the effect of the play action itself.  So when the defense is ignoring the play action then what is it that would cause them to honor it again? I believe you would have get some kind of success from your running game which enhances those play action fakes.  It's not just the play action fakes themselves.  I don't really think you need any type of data during a game to tell you that if the defense is committing 8 men or more in the box you've got a better chance of completing passes on the defense.  What causes the defense to committ 8 to 9 men in the box?  A successful running game gets them to do that more often than not.  I think it creates more opportunities for you to face lighter numbers of defenders when you want to pass the ball.   I got to be honest here and say I can't go toe to toe with you on all that stat crunching, but there's just a few things I will just never buy about that data.   And if you're waiting for bodies(us old school thinkers) to die it's going to be a long, long, long time before that happens in the game of football.........

 

 Q signed my new QN Colts hat yesterday.
 He was wearing a RUN THE DAMN BALL hat. It was awesome. I Gotta have one.
 And what big Meaty Hands he and Denico have.

 

 
 

[stitches]

https://www.colts.com/news/quenton-nelson-challenge-to-improve-run-game-fires-us-all-up

 

Yep. Reich is hyping up the O-Line... 

[stitches]

13 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Q signed my new QN Colts hat yesterday.
 He was wearing a RUN THE DAMN BALL hat. It was awesome. I Gotta have one.
 And what big Meaty Hands he and Denico have.

 

 
 

[cbear]

Anybody have any updates on days 2 and 3?  Or is the media barred?  Can't even find tweets on them from the usual Colts reporters. 

[Stephen]

On 5/24/2019 at 12:28 AM, cbear said:

Anybody have any updates on days 2 and 3?  Or is the media barred?  Can't even find tweets on them from the usual Colts reporters. 

Media barred til may 29th

[NewColtsFan]

On 5/21/2019 at 3:39 PM, DougDew said:

So.  He's the 13th rated safety, so he'd get a top 13 contract.  Not bad.  Not a top 5, but not bad.

 

Sorry,  been meaning to respond here,  and life keeps getting in the way....

 

Who said anything about a contract?    He's not due for a contract this year.   This is just his 3rd season...   he's got a 5-year contract.     Why should we assume that if he's 13th now,   he'll never be more than 13th?    

 

By the way,  13th is pretty good.    Remember,  32 teams,  64 starting safeties...     13 out of 64 is pretty good.    Especially for a guy who played in 2018 coming off a nasty injury the year before.

 

Let's see what he does this year and next....    Hopefully he gets better.....

 

[DougDew]

10 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Sorry,  been meaning to respond here,  and life keeps getting in the way....

 

Who said anything about a contract?    He's not due for a contract this year.   This is just his 3rd season...   he's got a 5-year contract.     Why should we assume that if he's 13th now,   he'll never be more than 13th?    

 

By the way,  13th is pretty good.    Remember,  32 teams,  64 starting safeties...     13 out of 64 is pretty good.    Especially for a guy who played in 2018 coming off a nasty injury the year before.

 

Let's see what he does this year and next....    Hopefully he gets better.....

 

The contract discussion was an analogy of trying to value Hooker's play at this point.  He is receiving praise by some for being a great player, yet I can't see where he would get a top 5 contract at his position if he was a FA today.  He's a good player.  Overall about 13th seems about right.  Does some thing well, and other things needs to improve on, or be able to show he does well.  A stud by no means, as apparently 12 other safeties in the NFL are better.

 

Because Hooker rarely shows up much in the stat sheet last year, much of the opinions about how good he is are based assumptions.  Assuming he's doing a great job by the relative lack of long pass attempts against our defense is not really support for praise, since there could be many factors creating those stats, not simply where Hooker is on the field.

 

Hopefully we will have the personnel to play better underneath coverage.  Considering that Ballard chose a CB with his first pick, traded up 20 spots to get a S, and drafted a coverage MIKE, indicates to me he was unimpressed by our underneath coverage last season.  If the coverage improves, Hooker should then be in a position to make plays due to the QB choosing to throw to a more open receiver who is deeper, for example.  Just one example of how the play of other players can impact one players stats or perceived level of play.

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

The contract discussion was an analogy of trying to value Hooker's play at this point.  He is receiving praise by some for being a great player, yet I can't see where he would get a top 5 contract at his position if he was a FA today.  He's a good player.  Overall about 13th seems about right.  Does some thing well, and other things needs to improve on, or be able to show he does well.  A stud by no means, as apparently 12 other safeties in the NFL are better.

 

Because Hooker rarely shows up much in the stat sheet last year, much of the opinions about how good he is are based assumptions.  Assuming he's doing a great job by the relative lack of long pass attempts against our defense is not really support for praise, since there could be many factors creating those stats, not simply where Hooker is on the field.

 

Hopefully we will have the personnel to play better underneath coverage.  Considering that Ballard chose a CB with his first pick, traded up 20 spots to get a S, and drafted a coverage MIKE, indicates to me he was unimpressed by our underneath coverage last season.  If the coverage improves, Hooker should then be in a position to make plays due to the QB choosing to throw to a more open receiver who is deeper, for example.  Just one example of how the play of other players can impact one players stats or perceived level of play.

 

I don’t think many here are calling Hooker great.   But he’s certainly good...   clearly well above average.   And he’s only played two seasons.   One cut short by a nasty injury...  and last season where he played well despite the lingering effects of the injury.

 

Hooker’s best years should be ahead of him.   Hopefully starting with this season.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

On 5/24/2019 at 12:28 AM, cbear said:

Anybody have any updates on days 2 and 3?  Or is the media barred?  Can't even find tweets on them from the usual Colts reporters. 

Media only gets one day.

[throwing BBZ]

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

The contract discussion was an analogy of trying to value Hooker's play at this point.  He is receiving praise by some for being a great player, yet I can't see where he would get a top 5 contract at his position if he was a FA today.  He's a good player.  Overall about 13th seems about right.  Does some thing well, and other things needs to improve on, or be able to show he does well.  A stud by no means, as apparently 12 other safeties in the NFL are better.

 

Because Hooker rarely shows up much in the stat sheet last year, much of the opinions about how good he is are based assumptions.  Assuming he's doing a great job by the relative lack of long pass attempts against our defense is not really support for praise, since there could be many factors creating those stats, not simply where Hooker is on the field.

 

Hopefully we will have the personnel to play better underneath coverage.  Considering that Ballard chose a CB with his first pick, traded up 20 spots to get a S, and drafted a coverage MIKE, indicates to me he was unimpressed by our underneath coverage last season.  If the coverage improves, Hooker should then be in a position to make plays due to the QB choosing to throw to a more open receiver who is deeper, for example.  Just one example of how the play of other players can impact one players stats or perceived level of play.

 

 Excellent post Doug. 
 With a modest pass rush and below average underneath coverage skills, our D was attacked often underneath. Leonard gave up 15 pass completions in his zone in ONE GAME. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Turay posted a video on his IG story from OTA. You should go watch his spin move.