Week 8 impressions: Brissett

[stitches]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Frank's concerning to me lately. He's starting to be too conservative and somewhat stubborn, both as a play calller and a game manager.

 

The decision to kick the FG on the first drive was maddening. It's 4th and 1, you're facing a good defense, you got a boost with the big kickoff return, you just got a big seven yards on third down, and you're on the 27. I thought that was go for it territory all the way. (And while I'm not including it in part of my analysis, missing the kick gave Denver the ball on the 35, so insult to injury, all self-inflicted.)

 

His second down play calling was also predictable. Outside of the FG drive at the end of the second quarter, they had ten 2nd and 6 or less situations. They called seven runs. They were mostly unsuccessful, including some negative runs. Overall on second down, they called 11 runs and 8 passes, and about half of those passes came either in a hurry-up or a 2nd and long. 

 

This second down pattern particularly bothered me because if you have some success on first down, you should have the defense on their heels. They wound up with a bunch of stalled drives instead, going 4/12 on third down. 

 

You have a conservative QB who sometimes appears gunshy (there's a lot of talk about receivers not being open; I think when people see the QB not throwing the ball they assume no one was open, but that's not what I saw, and I'm waiting for the All 22 to confirm), and now we're "complementing" that with a play caller and game manager who is trending conservative.

Yeah, Frank was not good yesterday. I absolutely thought the same thing on the first drive. Why the hell would he let his offense play vs HOU last week in his own side of the field and not in this situation vs the Broncos when the field goal was very far from a sure thing to begin with? I didn't want to admit it here, but I absolutely thought to myself before the FG - Frank deserves for Vinny to miss it here. It's this bad of a call. 

 

I also hated how Frank ended the game. After the horsecollar tackle we had 1:30. He tried advancing the ball once on the Brissett bootleg that lost a couple of yards and then he pretty much gave up with 1:12 on the clock, ran a run up the middle and then wasted the rest of the time trying to drain the clock and was content getting the field goal for a kicker that has just missed a PAT and a similar field goal, instead of trying to win some more yardage to either score a TD or make the FG much easier. He pretty much did what Nagy is getting killed for, but the only difference is our kicker made the FG and we won and theirs didn't and they lost.

 

I also agree about his playcalling on 2nd down. He's been calling more and more predictable runs on second and long and it's killing us. It's kind of heroic of Brissett and the offense in general that they have even this level of success on 3d and 4th down having in mind in how bad of a situation we are on a lot of those 3d downs(long 3d downs). I have my suspicion about the reason but people here won't like it so I'm gonna spare this for now until it becomes obvious down the road or becomes dispelled by Reich's decisions in future games. 

[Nickster]

11 minutes ago, stitches said:

Yeah, Frank was not good yesterday. I absolutely thought the same thing on the first drive. Why the hell would he let his offense play vs HOU last week in his own side of the field and not in this situation vs the Broncos when the field goal was very far from a sure thing to begin with? I didn't want to admit it here, but I absolutely thought to myself before the FG - Frank deserves for Vinny to miss it here. It's this bad of a call. 

 

I also hated how Frank ended the game. After the horsecollar tackle we had 1:30. He tried advancing the ball once on the Brissett bootleg that lost a couple of yards and then he pretty much gave up with 1:12 on the clock, ran a run up the middle and then wasted the rest of the time trying to drain the clock and was content getting the field goal for a kicker that has just missed a PAT and a similar field goal, instead of trying to win some more yardage to either score a TD or make the FG much easier. He pretty much did what Nagy is getting killed for, but the only difference is our kicker made the FG and we won and theirs didn't and they lost.

 

I also agree about his playcalling on 2nd down. He's been calling more and more predictable runs on second and long and it's killing us. It's kind of heroic of Brissett and the offense in general that they have even this level of success on 3d and 4th down having in mind in how bad of a situation we are on a lot of those 3d downs(long 3d downs). I have my suspicion about the reason but people here won't like it so I'm gonna spare this for now until it becomes obvious down the road or becomes dispelled by Reich's decisions in future games. 

 

I thought the same on the missed FG.  Only thing I could think of is that he knew that it would be a low scoring affair and all points are good points, but 4th and 1 there seemed pretty obvious to me.

 

Agree on end game thing.  Agree on 2nd down.  

 

But I really think JBs limitations dictate a lot of what Frank thinks he can do in a game.

[Superman]

24 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

I think this is a fair assessment. With all the focus on Brissett I'm not sure we're looking the play calling as much as we should. As you say combine conservative QB with conservative playcalling... what do you expect to happen?

 

Calling runs for Hines between the tackles on 2nd and longs (at least twice), really got my knickers in a twist, as did the 2 runs called near the end. I can get you don't want to take the sack, but getting stuffed in the backfield would have had a similar outcome, and they were getting penetration all day.

 

Credit to Denver's D aside, if we'd lost that game it was a game we lost, not that they won. Gifting them 1st downs on D, and a poor showing for the most part on O. 

 

Waiting on the All 22 too as it looked like there were times on broadcast you could see seam routes coming open, so it should be glaring on 22. 

 

How about this sequence?

 

First and 10 -- Hines, right guard, 11 yard gain

First and 10 -- Hines, middle, 2 yard gain

Second and 8 -- Hines, left end, 3 yard loss

Third and 11 -- Brissett, incomplete to Pascal

 

What's frustrating is this drive started with three straight successful runs, then ended because of two unsuccessful runs. Reich didn't call a pass play until it was third and long. 

 

This is not balance. It's late in the second quarter, you haven't scored, your offense has stalled out the two previous drives. You had some success running to start the drive, but why not use that success as a platform to mix in some different methods of attack? How about a play action? How about a screen pass? 

[OffensivelyPC]

25 minutes ago, stitches said:

Yeah, Frank was not good yesterday. I absolutely thought the same thing on the first drive. Why the hell would he let his offense play vs HOU last week in his own side of the field and not in this situation vs the Broncos when the field goal was very far from a sure thing to begin with? I didn't want to admit it here, but I absolutely thought to myself before the FG - Frank deserves for Vinny to miss it here. It's this bad of a call. 

 

I also hated how Frank ended the game. After the horsecollar tackle we had 1:30. He tried advancing the ball once on the Brissett bootleg that lost a couple of yards and then he pretty much gave up with 1:12 on the clock, ran a run up the middle and then wasted the rest of the time trying to drain the clock and was content getting the field goal for a kicker that has just missed a PAT and a similar field goal, instead of trying to win some more yardage to either score a TD or make the FG much easier. He pretty much did what Nagy is getting killed for, but the only difference is our kicker made the FG and we won and theirs didn't and they lost.

 

I also agree about his playcalling on 2nd down. He's been calling more and more predictable runs on second and long and it's killing us. It's kind of heroic of Brissett and the offense in general that they have even this level of success on 3d and 4th down having in mind in how bad of a situation we are on a lot of those 3d downs(long 3d downs). I have my suspicion about the reason but people here won't like it so I'm gonna spare this for now until it becomes obvious down the road or becomes dispelled by Reich's decisions in future games. 

I didn't agree with the call to run the clock down either.  In the end, it all paid off just fine, but Vinatieri had already missed the XP and 45 yarder earlier.   His reasoning in the post-game interview was basically, "we didn't want to chance taking a sack and getting out of FG position, or worse, a turnover."  Yeah, but, all that doesn't matter if he misses a 50 yarder.  Vinny's obviously not the sure fire kicker he has been in the past.  I just did not agree with it at the time.

 

Curious what you mean in the bolded.

[Creekside]

58 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think when people see the QB not throwing the ball they assume no one was open, but that's not what I saw, and I'm waiting for the All 22 to confirm), 

 

There are basically two camps: Those who say the receivers aren't open, and those who say Brissett is not seeing them (or seeing them but not pulling the trigger)

 

Personally, I don't know because on TV the vast majority of the time the viewer cannot see receivers downfield while the QB has the ball.

 

I completely agree about Reich. The 2nd down play calling was so predictable. ....and I was very surprised he didn't go for that 4th and one.

 

[Nickster]

13 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

How about this sequence?

 

First and 10 -- Hines, right guard, 11 yard gain

First and 10 -- Hines, middle, 2 yard gain

Second and 8 -- Hines, left end, 3 yard loss

Third and 11 -- Brissett, incomplete to Pascal

 

What's frustrating is this drive started with three straight successful runs, then ended because of two unsuccessful runs. Reich didn't call a pass play until it was third and long. 

 

This is not balance. It's late in the second quarter, you haven't scored, your offense has stalled out the two previous drives. You had some success running to start the drive, but why not use that success as a platform to mix in some different methods of attack? How about a play action? How about a screen pass? 

 

 

[SteelCityColt]

3 minutes ago, egg said:

 

There are basically two camps: Those who say the receivers aren't open, and those who say Brissett is not seeing them (or seeing them but not pulling the trigger)

 

Personally, I don't know because on TV the vast majority of the time the viewer cannot see receivers downfield while the QB has the ball.

 

I completely agree about Reich. The 2nd play calling was so predictable. ....and I was very surprised he didn't go for that 4th and one.

 

 

When I've looked on all 22 (over a very small sample) it's been as you'd expect a mixed bag. But certainly some plays (including completions) where he's locked onto the 1st or 2nd read and you can see him waiting for the window while a receiver runs free higher up the field. 

 

Now, not all QBs get it right all time, or you can argue that's the correct progression but the more we see it happen the more of a worry it is. You'd hope though this is what would get picked up in the post game wash up. 

[Nickster]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

 

There are basically two camps: Those who say the receivers aren't open, and those who say Brissett is not seeing them (or seeing them but not pulling the trigger)

 

Personally, I don't know because on TV the vast majority of the time the viewer cannot see receivers downfield while the QB has the ball.

 

I completely agree about Reich. The 2nd play calling was so predictable. ....and I was very surprised he didn't go for that 4th and one.

 

 

I haven't got all 22 and don't buy internet crap.  But I am fairly certain that JB is missing open recievers.  The eveidence seems to suggest it.  Same group as last year is the main piece of evidence IMO.

[SteelCityColt]

15 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

How about this sequence?

 

First and 10 -- Hines, right guard, 11 yard gain

First and 10 -- Hines, middle, 2 yard gain

Second and 8 -- Hines, left end, 3 yard loss

Third and 11 -- Brissett, incomplete to Pascal

 

What's frustrating is this drive started with three straight successful runs, then ended because of two unsuccessful runs. Reich didn't call a pass play until it was third and long. 

 

This is not balance. It's late in the second quarter, you haven't scored, your offense has stalled out the two previous drives. You had some success running to start the drive, but why not use that success as a platform to mix in some different methods of attack? How about a play action? How about a screen pass? 

 

Worryingly this reminds me of a former Colt's O coordinator... what is Pep up to these days?

[Creekside]

16 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

I haven't got all 22 and don't buy internet crap.  But I am fairly certain that JB is missing open recievers.  The eveidence seems to suggest it.  Same group as last year is the main piece of evidence IMO.

 

I'm sure he does sometimes as all QBs do. But to what extent is it too many times to where it is a problem specific to Brissett?

 

Your "evidence" that the Colts have the "same group" as last year does not persuade me. There were some  games last year where the passing game was not good. (like the shutout against the Jags).. And some games last year where is was just good enough and complimented a great running attack (like the Cowboy game).

 

Also, Inman, when he came in mid-season became the 2nd best WR on the team.....and he was replaced by Funchess who has barely played.

[Myles]

6 minutes ago, egg said:

 

I'm sure he does sometimes as all QBs do. But to what extent is it too many times to where it is a problem specific to Brissett?

 

Your "evidence" that the Colts have the "same group" as last year does not persuade me. There were some  games last year where the passing game was not good. (like the shutout against the Jags).. And some games last year where is was just good enough and complimented a great running attack (like the Cowboy game).

"Open receivers" is kind of subjective as well.   I'm glad Jacoby doesn't think he is a QB that can keep throwing into tight windows.   I also think Reich has him reeled in quite a bit.   

There is no question that Brissett doesn't see the whole field as good as some other QB's, but it is what it is.  His sacks are low, his INT's are low, his TD's are high and his team is 5-2.    

[Superman]

28 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Worryingly this reminds me of a former Colt's O coordinator... what is Pep up to these days?

 

Head coach and GM of the XFL's Washington Defenders.  Should we place a bet on which team will be last place in the XFL in 2020?

 

Pep's problem, IMO, is his offense had no identity. I don't think that's Reich's issue. I think right now he's a little too conservative, a little too 'let's run the ball,' and not enough 'let's get the passing game working to keep the offense multiple.' His offensive approach has started to tighten up in recent weeks, and I think that's going to be a problem as the season goes on. 

[SteelCityColt]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Head coach and GM of the XFL's Washington Defenders.  Should we place a bet on which team will be last place in the XFL in 2020?

 

Pep's problem, IMO, is his offense had no identity. I don't think that's Reich's issue. I think right now he's a little too conservative, a little too 'let's run the ball,' and not enough 'let's get the passing game working to keep the offense multiple.' His offensive approach has started to tighten up in recent weeks, and I think that's going to be a problem as the season goes on. 

 

I was being a little facetious there, although bonus fact of now knowing what Pep is up to.

 

It just seemed for all that we're being held up as a well coached team, overcoming adversity etc etc. when it came down to it yesterday we didn't seem to have any real plan B. The one time too, I felt he was sure to go for it, he took 3 points. Yet he will happily go for it in our own half. Sure game situation also plays there, but it was a bit nonsensical?  

[Superman]

9 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

The one time too, I felt he was sure to go for it, he took 3 points. Yet he will happily go for it in our own half. Sure game situation also plays there, but it was a bit nonsensical?  

 

Tried to take three. Bad Adam showed up again yesterday...

 

It was entirely counter-intuitive, IMO, to kick the FG. They should be squeezing as much as they can out of every drive, especially on the heels of a rare 50 yard kick return. Instead, we wind up giving the Broncos the ball in good field position, which should never have happened on that drive. 

[richard pallo]

1 hour ago, Nickster said:

 

I thought the same on the missed FG.  Only thing I could think of is that he knew that it would be a low scoring affair and all points are good points, but 4th and 1 there seemed pretty obvious to me.

 

Agree on end game thing.  Agree on 2nd down.  

 

But I really think JBs limitations dictate a lot of what Frank thinks he can do in a game.

I don't understand the talk about JBs limitations.  As far as I can see he can make all of the throws.  I'm wondering if Frank is concerned about the WRs getting open against the teams with good secondaries.  TY is our only legitimate WR who can get open consistently when single covered or in a zone.  The other guys are just that other guys.  Maybe that fact factors into his play calling when facing teams with strong secondaries.  

[Fisticuffs111]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

His second down play calling was also predictable. Outside of the FG drive at the end of the second quarter, they had ten 2nd and 6 or less situations. They called seven runs. They were mostly unsuccessful, including some negative runs. Overall on second down, they called 11 runs and 8 passes, and about half of those passes came either in a hurry-up or a 2nd and long. 

 

This second down pattern particularly bothered me because if you have some success on first down, you should have the defense on their heels. They wound up with a bunch of stalled drives instead, going 4/12 on third down. 

 

You have a conservative QB who sometimes appears gunshy (there's a lot of talk about receivers not being open; I think when people see the QB not throwing the ball they assume no one was open, but that's not what I saw, and I'm waiting for the All 22 to confirm), and now we're "complementing" that with a play caller and game manager who is trending conservative.

To the first bolded, oh man that was irritating. He basically just set up our offense to fail on 3rd.

And to the second bolded, I saw a tweet from somebody who was at LOS and said there were guys open at times. Probably a mix of both really. I think Brissett just started to feel the heat with the amount of blitzes/pressure.

[stitches]

19 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I don't understand the talk about JBs limitations.  As far as I can see he can make all of the throws.  I'm wondering if Frank is concerned about the WRs getting open against the teams with good secondaries.  TY is our only legitimate WR who can get open consistently when single covered or in a zone.  The other guys are just that other guys.  Maybe that fact factors into his play calling when facing teams with strong secondaries.  

Pretty much every QB in the league "can make all the throws". There are like 32 jobs in America for a starting QB. Huge majority of those are good QBs that on a good day can make any throw. The difference between the best and the mediocre and the worst becomes how often they make the throws that need to be made to move the offense successfully. And the very best of the best add some extra-dimension that others lack - be it pocket presence and movement of Luck, be it playmaking on the move like Mahomes or Wilson, be it incredible game processing and accuracy by Brees or Brady, etc.

 

So the thing with Brissett's limitation is not that he will absolutely never make a certain play. Chances are that I can give you examples of him making the exact same plays Mahomes, Rodgers, Wilson, Brady, etc make... the thing is... those top tier QBs make those plays a lot more frequently. Brissett doesn't. Sometimes he doesn't see them, sometimes he gets caught on his primary read and can't let go of it, sometimes he lacks anticipation to release the ball while the receiver is not yet open, sometimes he hesitates to put the ball into tight coverage because of his general conservative playstyle. And sometimes, rarely, he makes them. It's all about the frequency of good vs bad plays with QBs in the league. The best of the best make a ton of high level plays while minimizing the bad plays. The lesser QBs make fewer of the high level plays and/or make more mistakes. (and I include missing throws he has to make within the "make more mistakes" qualifier) 

[Superman]

1 hour ago, egg said:

There are basically two camps: Those who say the receivers aren't open, and those who say Brissett is not seeing them (or seeing them but not pulling the trigger)

 

 

There is at least a third camp: Those who recognize that it's a mix of both. I think it's probably 70/30 in favor of Brissett not taking the throws that are there. 

 

And that's not just a failure to see open receivers. Some of it is a lack of anticipation (people keep saying 'he can make all the throws,' and while that might be true from a physical standpoint, advanced passing requires a lot of savvy). Some of it is JB seeing receivers that are "covered" and not being confident the he can throw them open, which is another advanced passing trait.

 

Think about this. The Colts are running a conservative passing attack, not really throwing the ball down the field, taking short, high percentage passes. JB's adjusted yards/attempt is still 13th among QBs with 100 attempts at 7.5 (just what it was after a couple games, when people were initially pointing out how he wasn't going downfield). And still, JB's average time to throw is 2.86 seconds, fifth highest in the league. He hit 3.05 seconds yesterday, after being at 2.95 seconds vs the Texans.

 

So we have a conservative passing attack and offense, but the QB is taking nearly three seconds to throw the ball? Something's not right there. That's like being a slow driver with bad gas mileage. 

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, stitches said:

Pretty much every QB in the league "can make all the throws"

 

Right. There's no question about his physical ability to throw the ball and/or make plays.

 

The questions are about his ability to consistently perform at the advanced aspects of QBing in the NFL, which you reiterated throughout your post.

[Fisticuffs111]

I think pretty early on Reich figured they weren't going to get much of anything going through the air. Getting pressured by all those exotic looks...and after a while it became more common for JB to break the pocket than not. And he was mostly going to TE's/RB's for dump offs. I think he only completed one pass to a WR throughout the 1st half? Something like that. And a few of his throws just looked super off to me, a couple short hops specifically stood out in the 2nd half.

They showed Brissett on the sidelines at one point and it was the first time, off the field, that I thought he looked kind of rattled. Which was noticeable because even when he struggles he's always kind of a steady rock on the sidelines.

This isn't meant to dump on Brissett by any means, sure people will manage to turn it into that, but it's just an explanation as to why our offense struggled/play calling became so stubborn. Reich definitely had a rough game.

[Goatface Killah]

17 hours ago, Patrick Miller said:

The dude won the game at the end. I swear Brissett had done nothing but show up and STILL people say " yeah but"....

They are putting more stock into their own poor interpretation of stats than what they are actually seeing on the field. 

 

Every game requires a different performance to execute a win. Stats dont predict anything, or it would be easy to become a millionaire betting on sports. There is no set criteria for what it takes to win, other than, making the proper play at the proper time, much like Jacoby did yesterday with his final drive. And this cant be predicted. Nobody expected that play he made to Hilton. Nobody. That's what makes sports what it is.

 

They are the type of people who will just doubt him until he does it, because they know the odds naturally favor that interpretation. A small percentage of players win it all so it's completely safe to say he cant. He probably wont. 

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

I think pretty early on Reich figured they weren't going to get much of anything going through the air. Getting pressured by all those exotic looks...and after a while it became more common for JB to break the pocket than not. And he was mostly going to TE's/RB's for dump offs. I think he only completed one pass to a WR throughout the 1st half? Something like that. And a few of his throws just looked super off to me, a couple short hops specifically stood out in the 2nd half.

 

Did he spill milk on the screen play section of his playbook?

 

[Fisticuffs111]

11 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Did he spill milk on the screen play section of his playbook?

 

Yeah, I don't know. Post wasn't intended to even really stick up for Reich although that's probably how it reads...he got straight up out coached and even more worrisome, just didn't even seem to have a back up plan other than to run a ton. Also, to that end, besides the Texans game our offense really struggles when we can't get anything going on the ground. Too much reliance there.

[Nickster]

1 hour ago, egg said:

 

I'm sure he does sometimes as all QBs do. But to what extent is it too many times to where it is a problem specific to Brissett?

 

Your "evidence" that the Colts have the "same group" as last year does not persuade me. There were some  games last year where the passing game was not good. (like the shutout against the Jags).. And some games last year where is was just good enough and complimented a great running attack (like the Cowboy game).

 

Also, Inman, when he came in mid-season became the 2nd best WR on the team.....and he was replaced by Funchess who has barely played.

 

Well we'll just have to agree to disagree.  The TE position is often very very open on this team.  

[Superman]

12 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Yeah, I don't know. Post wasn't intended to even really stick up for Reich although that's probably how it reads...he got straight up out coached and even more worrisome, just didn't even seem to have a back up plan other than to run a ton. Also, to that end, besides the Texans game our offense really struggles when we can't get anything going on the ground. Too much reliance there.

 

Didn't read that way, I got what you were saying. I was just saying that I think Reich had more tools at his disposal than he chose to use, and I think that's a mistake on his part.

 

Even in the Texans game, in the second half, they had three 3 and outs, and a fourth possession where they got a first down on the first play and then went 3 and out. So that's four possessions in a row where they ran a total of 13 plays and got one first down. In that stretch, they called four runs for 7 yards, JB was something like 4/8 with 28 yards, but one of those four completions was for 26 yards, and the other three were failed plays that didn't produce. So that's nothing on the ground, and one positive play through the air, four punts, no points scored by the offense. Meanwhile, the Texans are crawling back into the game.

 

My point is just that we need to do better offensively, and I think the play calling needs to be better moving forward.

[Creekside]

57 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

There is at least a third camp: Those who recognize that it's a mix of both. I think it's probably 70/30 in favor of Brissett not taking the throws that are there. 

 

And that's not just a failure to see open receivers. Some of it is a lack of anticipation (people keep saying 'he can make all the throws,' and while that might be true from a physical standpoint, advanced passing requires a lot of savvy). Some of it is JB seeing receivers that are "covered" and not being confident the he can throw them open, which is another advanced passing trait.

 

Think about this. The Colts are running a conservative passing attack, not really throwing the ball down the field, taking short, high percentage passes. JB's adjusted yards/attempt is still 13th among QBs with 100 attempts at 7.5 (just what it was after a couple games, when people were initially pointing out how he wasn't going downfield). And still, JB's average time to throw is 2.86 seconds, fifth highest in the league. He hit 3.05 seconds yesterday, after being at 2.95 seconds vs the Texans.

 

So we have a conservative passing attack and offense, but the QB is taking nearly three seconds to throw the ball? Something's not right there. That's like being a slow driver with bad gas mileage. 

 

[Peterk2011]

2 hours ago, Nickster said:

 

I thought the same on the missed FG.  Only thing I could think of is that he knew that it would be a low scoring affair and all points are good points, but 4th and 1 there seemed pretty obvious to me.

Agree on end game thing.  Agree on 2nd down.  

But I really think JBs limitations dictate a lot of what Frank thinks he can do in a game.

 

I agree. I don't think Reich is becoming conservative. He just had arguably 2 of his best games as a Colt play caller recently. I think he was almost flawless in those 2 games. Yes, there are always things to not like, it's never perfect, but he was great.

 

I agree though, that yesterday he had a bad day as a play caller. Actually, I did not mind that FG call, because when I saw he won't go for it, I thought he expects a game like the Jaguars game was last year. They had a tough time moving the ball, nothing really worked there, and if he was just a little bit less agressive, they could've won that game. I did not have problem with the run/pass selection neither. Sometimes you run the ball 7 times out of 10, sometimes you pass it 7 times out of 10, it's not the numbers. It's the result, we saw that it didn't work. I am not sure how much should we blame the plays he called, and how much should we blame the execution. I should watch the all 22 version of the game to decide, but I don't think I can convince myself to watch this game again any time soon.

 

[Peterk2011]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

Think about this. The Colts are running a conservative passing attack, not really throwing the ball down the field, taking short, high percentage passes. JB's adjusted yards/attempt is still 13th among QBs with 100 attempts at 7.5 (just what it was after a couple games, when people were initially pointing out how he wasn't going downfield). And still, JB's average time to throw is 2.86 seconds, fifth highest in the league. He hit 3.05 seconds yesterday, after being at 2.95 seconds vs the Texans.

 

So we have a conservative passing attack and offense, but the QB is taking nearly three seconds to throw the ball? Something's not right there. That's like being a slow driver with bad gas mileage. 

 

I think this is because he is trying to throw the ball deep (so the increased avg is there), but then he checks it down to the RB or nearest WR more frequently than other quarterbacks (so the yardage is not). This is an area he needs to improve.

[hoosierhawk]

9 hours ago, stitches said:

 

I see people continue to post this "we are 5-2 and that's all that matters" thing again and again. This is getting kind of frustrating for me. QB wins is NOT a real stat. I wish people would stop using our record to justify their opinion of Brissett. The Bears won 12 games last year with Mitchell freaking Trubiski. This is what you get with inconsistent QB play. If your team is good enough you will have stretches where you win 5-6 out 7. The problem is that 5-2 is a snapshot at week 7 of a season, it doesn't take into account what part of this record is due to the QB's play, what part is despite the QB play. 5-2 is not a complete evaluation of what the QB is doing and it's not a projection of what the QB and the team with that QB will be able to do in the next 7 weeks 7 months or 7 years.

 

For me those threads are about evaluating and projecting Jacoby going forward, because either at the end of this season or next season we will have to either let him go and move on to another QB or give him a big time contract for the next 4-5 years. Thus the question in those threads should not be what the record is right now, it's what could you expect in the next 4-5 years if you get this type of play from the QB? If all we care about is what our record is and we will dismiss all of Brissett's deficiencies as long as we are winning, then what's the point of those threads? We might as well just lock the thread after the first post "we won, thus Jacoby played good enough" or "we lost thus Jacoby was not good enough". IMO Jacoby's second best game(behind the HOU game) was the loss to the Chargers and his worst games have been in wins. Those "look at the record" arguments are not serious arguments about Jacoby's play. We should look past the present and try to project what we can expect going forward based on how Jacoby himself is playing, what he's doing well and what he's struggling with, rather than what the team did in a 6-7 game stretch. What do you think is the expected long-term record of the team with QB play that Jacoby Brissett provided today? What about with the play he's provided for the full season so far?  

This deserves better than a "Like". Very well said!

[stitches]

PFFs summary of the game and some thoughts on Brissett and his level of play at the half-season mark this season(go to 1:25:28 for the Colts vs Broncos game). They are not big fans of Brissett :

 

 

Their thoughts on Brissett:

-He's played ... OK this season, not as good as the stats show

-what a spectacular play, avoiding the sack and making a throw downfield, which was the game winning drive

-Brissett is not Trubiski but the Colts are winning more despite him than because of him

-Coming into the year we were talking about Jacoby Brissett as maybe being the best backup QB in NFL and what he would do is provide an interesting test case about where that lands you in the scope of starting QBs, because there is probably some overlap there. And the answer so far has been - probably not that high. You can start and in a good situation you can win some games and have some good games but by and large you are probably below average... you are not good. That's kind of what Brissett is - he's taken steps forward this year. He's not doing as many of the boneheaded things he used to do the last time he was starting. He's had some good games, but by and large he's not going to be the reason this team wins games. They are going to have to win inspite of him or with other things and him not screwing it up and that's been largely successful, but you cannot hide from the fact that he's not particularly good.  

-He wasn't good yesterday outside of that spectacular play on the game winning drive. Tons of credit for that but this is like... We are using the same descriptor as we did for Trubiski. The difference is Trubiski's kicker missed a FG. 

-week 5, Colts win at KC - Brissett was terrible, last week was good, this week - not good. This has been the story of Brissett's season despite some pretty good stats. 

[Nickster]

21 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

I agree. I don't think Reich is becoming conservative. He just had arguably 2 of his best games as a Colt play caller recently. I think he was almost flawless in those 2 games. Yes, there are always things to not like, it's never perfect, but he was great.

 

I agree though, that yesterday he had a bad day as a play caller. Actually, I did not mind that FG call, because when I saw he won't go for it, I thought he expects a game like the Jaguars game was last year. They had a tough time moving the ball, nothing really worked there, and if he was just a little bit less agressive, they could've won that game. I did not have problem with the run/pass selection neither. Sometimes you run the ball 7 times out of 10, sometimes you pass it 7 times out of 10, it's not the numbers. It's the result, we saw that it didn't work. I am not sure how much should we blame the plays he called, and how much should we blame the execution. I should watch the all 22 version of the game to decide, but I don't think I can convince myself to watch this game again any time soon.

 

 

It was a tough watch even with good beer, an excellent pizza, and my wife's totally batchin' white bean chicken chili.

[Nickster]

4 minutes ago, stitches said:

PFFs summary of the game and some thoughts on Brissett and his level of play at the half-season mark this season(go to 1:25:28 for the Colts vs Broncos game):

 

 

Their thoughts on Brissett:

-He's played ... OK this season, not as good as the stats show

-what a spectacular play, avoiding the sack and making a throw downfield, which was the game winning drive

-Brissett is not Trubiski but the Colts are winning more despite him than because of him

-Coming into the year we were talking about Jacoby Brissett as maybe being the best backup QB in NFL and what he would do is provide an interesting test case about where that lands you in the scope of starting QBs, because there is probably some overlap there. And the answer so far has been - probably not that high. You can start and in a good situation you can win some games and have some good games but by and large you are probably below average... you are not good. That's kind of what Brissett is - he's taken steps forward this year. He's not doing as many of the boneheaded things he used to do the last time he was starting. He's had some good games, but by and large he's not going to be the reason this team wins games. They are going to have to win inspite of him or with other things and him not screwing it up and that's been largely successful, but you cannot hide from the fact that he's not particularly good.  

-He wasn't good yesterday outside of that spectacular play on the game winning drive. Tons of credit for that but this is like... We are using the same descriptor as we did for Trubiski. The difference is Trubiski's kicker missed a FG. 

-week 5, Colts win at KC - Brissett was terrible, last week was good, this week - not good. This has been the story of Brissett's season despite some pretty good stats. 

 

I second all those emotions.

[Fisticuffs111]

12 minutes ago, stitches said:

-He wasn't good yesterday outside of that spectacular play on the game winning drive. Tons of credit for that but this is like... We are using the same descriptor as we did for Trubiski. The difference is Trubiski's kicker missed a FG. 

-week 5, Colts win at KC - Brissett was terrible, last week was good, this week - not good. This has been the story of Brissett's season despite some pretty good stats. 

Yup. Yet some seem to almost be offended by that kind of take. It was a great, game changing play but he also didn't have a great game aside from that.

And yeah, like they said and like you said earlier about Trubs and the 12-4 Bears last year, wins shouldn't be the end all be all discussion point for a QB. 

[OffensivelyPC]

3 minutes ago, stitches said:

PFFs summary of the game and some thoughts on Brissett and his level of play at the half-season mark this season(go to 1:25:28 for the Colts vs Broncos game):

 

 

Their thoughts on Brissett:

-He's played ... OK this season, not as good as the stats show

-what a spectacular play, avoiding the sack and making a throw downfield, which was the game winning drive

-Brissett is not Trubiski but the Colts are winning more despite him than because of him

-Coming into the year we were talking about Jacoby Brissett as maybe being the best backup QB in NFL and what he would do is provide an interesting test case about where that lands you in the scope of starting QBs, because there is probably some overlap there. And the answer so far has been - probably not that high. You can start and in a good situation you can win some games and have some good games but by and large you are probably below average... you are not good. That's kind of what Brissett is - he's taken steps forward this year. He's not doing as many of the boneheaded things he used to do the last time he was starting. He's had some good games, but by and large he's not going to be the reason this team wins games. They are going to have to win inspite of him or with other things and him not screwing it up and that's been largely successful, but you cannot hide from the fact that he's not particularly good.  

-He wasn't good yesterday outside of that spectacular play on the game winning drive. Tons of credit for that but this is like... We are using the same descriptor as we did for Trubiski. The difference is Trubiski's kicker missed a FG. 

-week 5, Colts win at KC - Brissett was terrible, last week was good, this week - not good. This has been the story of Brissett's season despite some pretty good stats. 

Best part of that podcast, "Joe Flacco, his single biggest defining characteristic is being utterly oblivious  in the pocket to anything that's happening around him.  We've talked about it before, Joe Flacco is just a guy taking a drive in a hurricane . . . Maybe it works out, maybe he gets impaled in the face by a cow."

[Superman]

20 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

I think this is because he is trying to throw the ball deep (so the increased avg is there), but then he checks it down to the RB or nearest WR more frequently than other quarterbacks (so the yardage is not). This is an area he needs to improve.

 

What evidence is there that JB is trying to throw the ball deep though? I mean, he definitely looks downfield, but he's really not throwing downfield.

[Peterk2011]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

What evidence is there that JB is trying to throw the ball deep though? I mean, he definitely looks downfield, but he's really not throwing downfield.

 

Ok, so he looks downfield, but then frequently checks it down. That's why he is holding the ball longer than his avg distance indicates.

[2006Coltsbestever]

13 hours ago, stitches said:

 

I see people continue to post this "we are 5-2 and that's all that matters" thing again and again. This is getting kind of frustrating for me. QB wins is NOT a real stat. I wish people would stop using our record to justify their opinion of Brissett. The Bears won 12 games last year with Mitchell freaking Trubiski. This is what you get with inconsistent QB play. If your team is good enough you will have stretches where you win 5-6 out 7. The problem is that 5-2 is a snapshot at week 7 of a season, it doesn't take into account what part of this record is due to the QB's play, what part is despite the QB play. 5-2 is not a complete evaluation of what the QB is doing and it's not a projection of what the QB and the team with that QB will be able to do in the next 7 weeks 7 months or 7 years.

 

For me those threads are about evaluating and projecting Jacoby going forward, because either at the end of this season or next season we will have to either let him go and move on to another QB or give him a big time contract for the next 4-5 years. Thus the question in those threads should not be what the record is right now, it's what could you expect in the next 4-5 years if you get this type of play from the QB? If all we care about is what our record is and we will dismiss all of Brissett's deficiencies as long as we are winning, then what's the point of those threads? We might as well just lock the thread after the first post "we won, thus Jacoby played good enough" or "we lost thus Jacoby was not good enough". IMO Jacoby's second best game(behind the HOU game) was the loss to the Chargers and his worst games have been in wins. Those "look at the record" arguments are not serious arguments about Jacoby's play. We should look past the present and try to project what we can expect going forward based on how Jacoby himself is playing, what he's doing well and what he's struggling with, rather than what the team did in a 6-7 game stretch. What do you think is the expected long-term record of the team with QB play that Jacoby Brissett provided today? What about with the play he's provided for the full season so far?  

While I will agree a win/loss record is a team thing, the QB still has to play well for a team to be 5-2. Take the 5-2 record out of the equation and lets just focus on JB's play and stats then. Do you not think 14 TD's to only 3 INT's is great? He also has shown signs for throwing for big yardage, against the Falcons and Texans he went for over 300 yards. Even yesterday as bad as he played at times, he still came up big when it mattered on the final drive. That play he made in the endzone to avoid a safety and throwing a 40 yard dart to TY was one of the best plays I have seen all year. Not many QB's could do that.

 

You are frustrated that some people keep bringing up record, well I am just as frustrated that some people keep saying JB is below average or average at best. That just isn't true IMO. If someone said he isn't as good as Luck or a top 10 QB in the league then OK I get that and agree.

[2006Coltsbestever]

13 hours ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

For the most part the silly stuff is only on one side of the fence. 

 

Are you saying it's wrong to be somewhat cautious and realistic about Brissett? I have no issue giving him plaudits, but I'm not going to blindly say it's all ok when there are things week to week that are worrying. 

 

Not wanting to have a dig at you to be clear, I know that you're open to reasonable conversation about this all. Some.. not so much. 

I am always open to good debate and respect most people's opinion. No biggy brother. I am a JB supporter and he makes me nervous too  .

[2006Coltsbestever]

Regarding Reich. It wasn't his best day yesterday and I agree with you guys we should've went for it on 4th and 1 opening drive. Also his 2nd down play calling was odd as well. He had an off day for him but at least we still won.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

The oline played worse then Brissett.