IT'S OKAY GUYS

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

20 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I understand.  You can't have studs everywhere.  You have to pick the positions where you need studs and fill in the rest.  

 

In the past few years, offenses have moved away from the deep drop back and deep pass to more shorter and quicker routes, in part to get the ball out of the QBs hands.  This puts more emphasis on defensive positions like SS and LBs as well as 3 techs to counter the moves of the offenses exploiting the middle and using RBs and TEs as receivers.  And its tough for us to have that kind of offense if the receivers either don't get open or drop the passes when they do.

 

The Rams obviously had a bad day, even with Aaron Donald on the field (hmmm, do they miss Suh?)  Personally, I never understood the Rams' success and feel like they were/are living on borrowed time anyway.

I remember Donald giving Suh a lot of credit for his success. 

[WarGhost21]

I couldn't agree more, TW. Losing 2 of our top 3 defenders and our best offensive piece leading up to a loss doesn't mean that this roster is talent-poor as some are insinuating. Sure, there is a drop off from Luck to Brissett. It isn't a massive drop, but Luck was a top 3 QB, Brissett is only top 15. The defense is extremely young and need time to develop, which some people are upset about. Ballard has had three drafts, one of which was focused on the O-line. This past draft was the first one in which Ballard was able to focus strictly on defense because the offense is so much better, and having 5 rookies playing significant time is amazing, but they will see their lumps here and there. Quit complaining, Ballard hit on a stud defender in each of his first two drafts (Hooker, Leonard). Give this class time to develop, I'm sure there will be another one or two great players from 2019. We need to stop being so quick to judge!

[ColtsBlueFL]

18 hours ago, CoachLite said:

It's a little early in the year to tell what we have with Brissett. Who knows how he may perform when the reins are loosened?

 

Everyone on the O has to be ready to open up the playbook. Classroom work and on the field execution.

 

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Because it's a small sample size in which the team is throwing a lot more in the red zone than they are expected to throw over the course of the season. If that's their normal pass/run ratio in the red zone over a larger sample size, great. Right now, it's probably skewed in favor of the pass, which has contributed to JB having 10 TDs.

 

And that's not a knock on JB at all. Just identifying a potential anomaly that will likely normalize as time goes on.

 

If we are a balanced O, it should normalize out. Especially since these games/plays are on teams 4 week tape.

 

13 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

We are more well rounded than last year. And we're more well rounded than most years.

 

I think you're flipping out on a defense that missing it's two best players. Even with missing those guys, they did not allow a TD after the first 4 drives. We were 7 down, with the ball, and threw an P6.

 

Our D is ranked 16th (yards allowed per game), and our O is ranked 19th (yards per game).

 

Where are they ranked in points allowed?

 

How many / game?  My personal over/under is 22.  Keep them under 22, O gets over 22.

 

[ColtsBlueFL]

1 hour ago, WarGhost21 said:

Losing 2 of our top 3 defenders and our best offensive piece leading up to a loss doesn't mean that this roster is talent-poor

 

True, and I'd like to use this excerpt to illustrate, to those in the off season that claim so, why you are never "Just one Player Away" from a Super Bowl.  Football is a 100% injury sport.

[DougDew]

I think it has been noted that the D benefited last year from playing teams with average QBs.  So far, we have played 3 teams with good QBs, and Mariota who can have his moments.

 

Overall, I expect the D to give up more yards and points than last year, to not get off the field as quickly primarily, and the O will score maybe one less TD per game since the long QB-to-TY chunk plays and TDs won't occur so much. We'll take longer to score, which will limit our opportunities.

 

I think that will happen regardless of how many rookies or guys on their rookie contracts play.  Playing rookies instead of the others at times may cost us a game or two in critical moments, but I expect the overall statistics at the end of the season to show the improved QB play of the opponent and our slight drop off in our QB play.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

8 hours ago, DougDew said:

In the past few years, offenses have moved away from the deep drop back and deep pass to more shorter and quicker routes, in part to get the ball out of the QBs hands.

 

What do you mean "in the past few years"?  That's what effective QBs have been doing for a long long time.  Brady, Manning, Brees, Montana.  The West Coast Offense has been around for decades.  It was developed as an answer to the zone defenses that were an answer to the deep-ball offenses, these have all been part of the evolution of the game.

 

The zone defense is still effective when paired with an offense that can score enough points to win the game.  That's the key.  Look at the Cowboys-Saints game that NO just won 12-10.  The Cowboys defense did its job allowing yards, but no TDs, only FGs.  Anybody would take their defense only allowing 12 points every week.

 

Take away everything deep, force the underneath throws/runs, and keep them out of the endzone.  You just have to pair that with an offense that can trade FGs for TDs if you're going to win games.

 

8 hours ago, DougDew said:

This puts more emphasis on defensive positions like SS and LBs as well as 3 techs to counter the moves of the offenses exploiting the middle and using RBs and TEs as receivers.

 

Ok, so you're bringing up your Hooker argument again that we didn't need to draft a deep zone FS where we did and should have focused on other positions for the defense.  Fine.

 

Please justify your opinion by telling us EXACTLY what scheme you would run on defense, EXACTLY what kinds of trades you would have made in the draft the last few years, and EXACTLY who you would have drafted to make your defense work.

 

Don't be one of those people that just focuses on the problem instead of the solution.  If you think you know better than the Colts FO, than give us your solution.  Who EXACTLY should be playing for the Colts defense right now?  Give us your starter at every position.  And you need to show your work if you want credit for your answers.  

[IndyScribe]

Defense turned things around last year. I think they can do the same this year. Injuries hit us hard and Eberflus needs to make some adjustments. Offense and Brissett are fine, but we do need a WR to step up if Hilton misses more time.

[EastStreet]

23 hours ago, Stephen said:

I think we can take the texans. Especially  if hilton is healthy. The teams I see us having trouble  with are the chiefs, jags, saints. Dolphins, broncos, are beatable. Panthers are beatable . Bucs will be tough.

 

There are a lot of "beatable" teams on our schedule. The problem is, we're very beatable right now too. The only gimmees are Denver and Miami. Chiefs and Saints are the only assumed losses. The rest of the games are toss ups will have very short vegas lines.

[2006Coltsbestever]

36 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

There are a lot of "beatable" teams on our schedule. The problem is, we're very beatable right now too. The only gimmees are Denver and Miami. Chiefs and Saints are the only assumed losses. The rest of the games are toss ups will have very short vegas lines.

Almost every team is in the same boat as us in reality. Really so far the Pats and Chiefs look head and shoulders above everyone else. We have some in here being critical of the Colts but the Colts can beat anyone on any given day. As good as the Bears are, do you really think they are elite with Trubisky at QB? Rams just gave up 55 points to the Bucs, the Cowboys just lost to a Saints team who didn't have Brees. Chargers are just 2-2, our whole division is 2-2 for that matter  . Ravens just got smoked by the Browns too.

[EastStreet]

11 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

Where are they ranked in points allowed?

 

How many / game?  My personal over/under is 22.  Keep them under 22, O gets over 22.

 

 

Our O is ranked 13th in PPG (23.5), and our D is ranked 24th (25.5). 

 

Honestly I prefer YPG to PPG, but both are key. If I had to pick a personal o/u, I'd probably say 24.

 

Last year we were 27.1 on O and ranked 5th, and 21.5 on D and ranked 10th. 

[ojsglove]

Although we just lost to a team we should have beat, I still think we a team to be reckoned with this season.  Beef up the middle of our dline and watch the results.  We have a good team here.

[EastStreet]

11 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Almost every team is in the same boat as us in reality. Really so far the Pats and Chiefs look head and shoulders above everyone else. We have some in here being critical of the Colts but the Colts can beat anyone on any given day. As good as the Bears are, do you really think they are elite with Trubisky at QB? Rams just gave up 55 points to the Bucs, the Cowboys just lost to a Saints team who didn't have Brees. Chargers are just 2-2, our whole division is 2-2 for that matter  . Ravens just got smoked by the Browns too.

 

Trubisky honestly gives me the same feel as JB. JB just has a better surrounding cast on O, and the bears, a better overall D.

 

There is a lot of parity after the top tier, but honestly that doesn't make me feel all that great. While I do think our D will improve and get better (especially once Leonard and Hooker are back), I don't see the O taking it to another level. Hope I'm wrong, but I just have this gut feel we're going to remain in that .400-.550 range.

 

The team that worries me most right now is the Jags. The stache is for real I think. Uncle Rico's love child is getting it done.

[2006Coltsbestever]

12 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

Trubisky honestly gives me the same feel as JB. JB just has a better surrounding cast on O, and the bears, a better overall D.

 

There is a lot of parity after the top tier, but honestly that doesn't make me feel all that great. While I do think our D will improve and get better (especially once Leonard and Hooker are back), I don't see the O taking it to another level. Hope I'm wrong, but I just have this gut feel we're going to remain in that .400-.550 range.

 

The team that worries me most right now is the Jags. The stache is for real I think. Uncle Rico's love child is getting it done.

Yeah the Stache looks good so far but they are like us and almost every other team. They are beatable. To me really only the Pats and Chiefs are scary good. Saints with Brees, maybe? 

[EastStreet]

6 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah the Stache looks good so far but they are like us and almost every other team. They are beatable. To me really only the Pats and Chiefs are scary good. Saints with Brees, maybe? 

 

The Jags D is clearly better than ours.  Their O was the only thing suspect, and not so much now. 

 

There are several teams I'd put ahead of us, even in the group of 2-2. Some of those 2-2 teams have played a tougher SoS than we have. And the Rams, regardless of their game vs the Bucs, are better than that.

[BigQungus]

On 10/2/2019 at 9:58 AM, DougDew said:

But that hasn't been the case in the games we've had against good QBs.  They still complete plenty of passes to all sides of the field except the deep back half, for which NFL offenses are not relying upon as much anyway. 

 

You can't single out one position to talk about like its the only important position on a team.

 

Investing capital in one position keeps a team from investing capital in another.  Which is my point about why we have dropped passes on offense and no pass rush on defense going on 5 seasons and two different GMs.

 

That's literally true anytime any GM makes any draft pick or signs any free agent. That's the most blanket complaint you could have against anything. And I'm not singling the Safety position and saying that's the whole team. I never said anything close to that. I just said that it's instrumental to our pass defense. And it's ok that they're completing short passes. That's what we want them to do. That way, we can put more guys up front to stop the short passes and also blitz more often. Without Hooker, we get gashed on intermediate and deep throws. I'm amazed at the fact that you admit that Hooker prevents good QBs from completing intermediate and deep passes and act as if that's no big deal.