Frank was bad tonight

[DougDew]

9 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

That's a mischaracterization of the criticism of Reich last night. To boil it down to the number of runs called misses the point.

 

 

There are bad/unsuccessful play calls in every game, but Reich did not do alright last night, IMO. His play calling was obvious and overly restrictive. Again, IMO.

 

 

Also not entirely true. But also not the point. His job is to throw the ball to receivers, fundamentally. Some have concluded that if he doesn't throw the ball, it means no one is open, and I'm telling you from actual observation of game film that that's a faulty conclusion.

 

 

You're offering hypotheticals to dismiss actual observation. JB misses open receivers, and fails to anticipate opportunities to target receivers. None of the above changes these fundamental facts.

 

 

I disagree, but it's not my intention to reach conclusions about JB at this point. I don't need to be the first to solve the puzzle, but I can react in real time to what I'm seeing. 

 

Do you think Reich's play calling is a reflection of his thoughts about the strengths/weaknesses of the offense? And if so, do you think that if he thought more highly of the passer, that his gameplanning would be different?

But your observations of facts are not really facts, are they?  They are opinions that the WRs are open enough at the point they are supposed to be open at the spot on the field they are supposed to be open.  And that they do this consistently for JB to look their way.   Simply being open somewhere along the way some of the time isn't really good enough.   

 

If you spend all day researching game tapes to note where on every play every WR is supposed to be throughout each route, you must not have a job to go to,  LOL.  

 

But, assuming that the observations are indeed accurate in that the WR is open at the correct time and on the correct spot, I won't argue that its a problem that  JB doesn't see open WRs or chooses not to throw to them (just like I'd agree that Luck didn't target checkdowns a lot at critical times, or didn't see the DB he threw to).  I'm arguing what some people see as the solution at this point.

 

There seems to be an atmosphere that what a team needs is an elite QB and a great oline, and they will be able to score 24 points a game.  All of the skilled positions can be 4th rounders or UDFAs, and that our GM should be able to find talent good enough for us at those levels that other GMs would have to spend a high draft pick for.  I think that's unrealistic. 

 

I think its more realistic to expect us to use capital....like a 2nd round pick on PC and $12million on DF to be able to get the offensive performance we need.   As well as the QB being expected to improve his play once he has better tools to work with.

 

I appreciate more info about all22 visuals, but using it with the assumption we know all that goes into the patterns and the consistency with which the UDFAs run them play after play, which is what JB sees, doesn't really move me off the spot that says we need more talent at the skilled positions to have that consistent chunk play or 2 minute drill offense we need.

 

 

[DougDew]

52 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

Houston going zone didn't have a lot of impact on guys getting open. I saw plenty as did the announcers. I think you'll probably see some of the fine folks on here with all-22 publish some screen shot. 

 

Houston is worst in the league in QB pressures. Frank was not surprised by this. 

 

In terms of debate, an out come based debate especially one like sports (as opposed to a philosophical debate) will always lean heavy on stats and measurements. Anecdotal pondering about motive, intention, etc. just doesn't play well whether it's a short window or ongoing debate (like QB or coach performance over a season, etc). You don't always have to rely on stats, but you'll lose just about every time by ignoring them.

I'm going to start calling you Al Gore.

 

The stat isn't important.   The fact they are the worst is irrelevant.  WHY they are the worst is all that matters, because that's what you use to gameplan.  

 

No.  Frank doesn't care at all about that stat.  He realizes its just a ranking of 32 teams.  He uses that stat to figure out the cause of the ranking (bad talent, injuries, or playing coverage to make up for a bad secondary before getting Hardgraves (SP?).  He uses the stat to ask questions, then throws the stat away once he gets the real answers he can use to game plan.

 

It sounds like he had different answers than you.

 

Again.  If your goal is to win some sort of made-up debate in a short window  (winning means that you get more votes for a win ..not really solving a problem that a HC might be faced with....how else is a debate measured?)  then use them. 

 

I assume Reich uses them to not win a debate, but to ask questions and study the Texans to determine the causes of their poor pass rush and if its even relevant given the talent he had to play with on offense.  

 

 

[EastStreet]

28 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I'm going to start calling you Al Gore.

 

The stat isn't important.   The fact they are the worst is irrelevant.  WHY they are the worst is all that matters, because that's what you use to gameplan.  

 

No.  Frank doesn't care at all about that stat.  He realizes its just a ranking of 32 teams.  He uses that stat to figure out the cause of the ranking (bad talent, injuries, or playing coverage to make up for a bad secondary before getting Hardgraves (SP?).  He uses the stat to ask questions, then throws the stat away once he gets the real answers he can use to game plan.

 

It sounds like he had different answers than you.

 

Again.  If your goal is to win some sort of made-up debate in a short window  (winning means that you get more votes for a win ..not really solving a problem that a HC might be faced with....how else is a debate measured?)  then use them. 

 

I assume Reich uses them to not win a debate, but to ask questions and study the Texans to determine the causes of their poor pass rush and if its even relevant given the talent he had to play with on offense.  

You suggested I was being condescending, and not only did I try to explain, but also apologized if I came off that way. The above, is full of condescension. Since you lack sincerity, I'll just be real and less cordial in my reply.

 

I agree it's not all about stats. Whatever Frank thought, or planned yesterday, he stunk, and he lost. Regardless of the stats about Houston's passing D is the worst, you don't need stats to see they are very bad. He didn't need stats to know what worked in game one. You don't need stats either to see all the open receivers that were missed. 

 

You don't need stats to know we lost, to know the game plan didn't work, and to know JB played bad. Those are all obvious, and non stats based. 

 

Sound better?

 

 

[DougDew]

20 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

You suggested I was being condescending, and not only did I try to explain, but also apologized if I came off that way. The above, is full of condescension. Since you lack sincerity, I'll just be real and less cordial in my reply.

 

I agree it's not all about stats. Whatever Frank thought, or planned yesterday, he stunk, and he lost. Regardless of the stats about Houston's passing D is the worst, you don't need stats to see they are very bad. He didn't need stats to know what worked in game one. You don't need stats either to see all the open receivers that were missed. 

 

You don't need stats to know we lost, to know the game plan didn't work, and to know JB played bad. Those are all obvious, and non stats based. 

 

Sound better?

 

 

As you pointed out, we played the same team a while ago, but in a different way.

 

I'm assuming the difference is that when we passed a lot, we were playing with a healthy TY and our number 1 RB; a RB who was drafted to not be a between the tackles runner, but more of a passing game RB.  Think Joseph Addai.  And back in the day when we didn't have Addai available, and had Rhodes, we tended to run between the tackles more, just like with Williams.

 

I don't know who Hardgraves replaced, but I assume he is better than who he replaced, so the stats before Hardgraves are sort of meaningless because they have added a talented CB since those stats were created, making them a better secondary (on paper at least).  I assume Reich knows this important piece of information that is not captured in the stats.  More talent in their secondary and less talent in our receiving corps has an impact on play calling, IMO.

 

I don't think I can point to Reich stinking.  I think the offense took a step back because JB played worse than he did the game before.  Even when he did throw the ball, he was inaccurate a lot.  Accuracy has been his strong suit and he was very inaccurate, even on the short throws.

 

 

[Superman]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

But your observations of facts are not really facts, are they?  They are opinions that the WRs are open enough at the point they are supposed to be open at the spot on the field they are supposed to be open.  And that they do this consistently for JB to look their way.   Simply being open somewhere along the way some of the time isn't really good enough.   

 

If you spend all day researching game tapes to note where on every play every WR is supposed to be throughout each route, you must not have a job to go to,  LOL.  

 

...

 

I appreciate more info about all22 visuals, but using it with the assumption we know all that goes into the patterns and the consistency with which the UDFAs run them play after play, which is what JB sees, doesn't really move me off the spot that says we need more talent at the skilled positions to have that consistent chunk play or 2 minute drill offense we need.

 

I observe facts all the time. We all do. 

 

On one hand, you're oversimplifying the nature of the issue by suggesting it's all about weapons. On the other hand, you're overcomplicating the process of watching game film and seeing what's going on. 

 

We don't have to assume that we know everything that goes into a pass play to reach a reasonable conclusion about what was supposed to happen on a pass play. Nine times out of ten, if you see an open receiver and the ball wasn't thrown to him, it's not difficult to understand the reasons why. And it usually comes down to pressure on the QB, or the QB not seeing/anticipating the open receiver.

 

Quote

But, assuming that the observations are indeed accurate in that the WR is open at the correct time and on the correct spot, I won't argue that its a problem that  JB doesn't see open WRs or chooses not to throw to them (just like I'd agree that Luck didn't target checkdowns a lot at critical times, or didn't see the DB he threw to).  I'm arguing what some people see as the solution at this point.

 

I see three possible solutions. 1) Receivers get open faster and more regularly (and that's closely connected with the quality of the receiver). 2) JB gets better at giving receivers chances to make plays. 3) JB is replaced with a QB who is better at giving receivers chances.

 

#3 isn't happening any time soon. I'd like to see #1 and #2 happen. But I think #1 happens often enough now that if #2 were to happen, we'd see significant improvement in passing efficiency.

 

Quote

 

There seems to be an atmosphere that what a team needs is an elite QB and a great oline, and they will be able to score 24 points a game.  All of the skilled positions can be 4th rounders or UDFAs, and that our GM should be able to find talent good enough for us at those levels that other GMs would have to spend a high draft pick for.  I think that's unrealistic. 

 

I think its more realistic to expect us to use capital....like a 2nd round pick on PC and $12million on DF to be able to get the offensive performance we need.   As well as the QB being expected to improve his play once he has better tools to work with.

 

 

The belief you find unrealistic is not a belief I subscribe to. But I don't think our offense should be struggling to score 17 points in a game like last night's.

 

I'm all for better weapons, and you might remember I wanted a PC type receiver to add to this offense. But I also don't think the players JB has to work with are so deficient that they're limiting his ability to move the ball. I think there are other things,  more closely related to JB, that are limiting him and the offense. 

[EastStreet]

5 minutes ago, DougDew said:

As you pointed out, we played the same team a while ago, but in a different way.

 

I'm assuming the difference is that when we passed a lot, we were playing with a healthy TY and our number 1 RB; a RB who was drafted to not be a between the tackles runner, but more of a passing game RB.  Think Joseph Addai.  And back in the day when we didn't have Addai available, and had Rhodes, we tended to run between the tackles more, just like with Williams.

 

I don't know who Hardgraves replaced, but I assume he is better than who he replaced, so the stats before Hardgraves are sort of meaningless because they have added a talented CB since those stats were created, making them a better secondary (on paper at least).  I assume Reich knows this important piece of information that is not captured in the stats.  More talent in their secondary and less talent in our receiving corps has an impact on play calling, IMO.

 

I don't think I can point to Reich stinking.  I think the offense took a step back because JB played worse than he did the game before.  Even when he did throw the ball, he was inaccurate a lot.  Accuracy has been his strong suit and he was very inaccurate, even on the short throws.

I'm stepping away from this exchange. It's not only filled with anecdotal suggestion and hypothetical murk,  but defies outcome based fact. We can agree to disagree and leave it at that. 

[DougDew]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

I observe facts all the time. We all do. 

 

On one hand, you're oversimplifying the nature of the issue by suggesting it's all about weapons. On the other hand, you're overcomplicating the process of watching game film and seeing what's going on. 

 

We don't have to assume that we know everything that goes into a pass play to reach a reasonable conclusion about what was supposed to happen on a pass play. Nine times out of ten, if you see an open receiver and the ball wasn't thrown to him, it's not difficult to understand the reasons why. And it usually comes down to pressure on the QB, or the QB not seeing/anticipating the open receiver.

 

 

I see three possible solutions. 1) Receivers get open faster and more regularly (and that's closely connected with the quality of the receiver). 2) JB gets better at giving receivers chances to make plays. 3) JB is replaced with a QB who is better at giving receivers chances.

 

#3 isn't happening any time soon. I'd like to see #1 and #2 happen. But I think #1 happens often enough now that if #2 were to happen, we'd see significant improvement in passing efficiency.

 

 

The belief you find unrealistic is not a belief I subscribe to. But I don't think our offense should be struggling to score 17 points in a game like last night's.

 

I'm all for better weapons, and you might remember I wanted a PC type receiver to add to this offense. But I also don't think the players JB has to work with are so deficient that they're limiting his ability to move the ball. I think there are other things,  more closely related to JB, that are limiting him and the offense. 

Remember a few years ago when Luck was criticized for relying upon Reggie Wayne too much?  Not his rookie year, but after that.  

 

He focused on Wayne, threw him the ball, and Wayne caught it with his tremendous catch radius whether or not he was open.  He didn't throw Reggie open, IIRC.  This is what Luck did the years AFTER his rookie year, after he lost a reliable Dwayne Allen and slot receiver (Donnie Avery).  TY got doubled often,  Allen was hurt and Fleener was not as good as Allen was,  and he only had Wayne.  Everyone else was unreliable, so Luck looked at the reliable guy, too much in some of our opinions.

 

A QB has milliseconds to make a decision about where to throw, and if our UDFAs run the correct route the correct way 85% of the time, that's not really good enough to be reliable, IMO.  More polish and less ceiling in the receiver corps and JB would look better.  Never a franchise guy, but maybe good enough.

[DougDew]

4 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I'm stepping away from this exchange. It's not only filled with anecdotal suggestion and hypothetical murk,  but defies outcome based fact. We can agree to disagree and leave it at that. 

Anectdotal suggestions and hypotheicial murk is exactly how most conclusions are formed.   Process doesn't matter.  What matters is if the right or wrong conclusions are formed, and people successfully use suggestions and murk a lot.

 

What outcome based fact is in this thread? 

 

The only fact I can be sure of is that last time against a different secondary and with different offensive skilled players we called more passing and won.  And despite moving the ball this time and scoring a TD on drives that exclusively ran the ball, we didn't win.

 

I don't see where the facts tell us Frank had a bad night, at least to the point to be singled out more than JB or TY or Hooker (or Elberflus). 

 

[21isSuperman]

4 hours ago, Stephen said:

It's  not one loss. We lost to the Steelers  and dolphins  two teams we should have beat. Combine that with the loss against  the texans and mot only will we have to win out, but hope other teams lose just to get to the playoffs. 

The Dolphins game was bad, but one bad game hardly means the entire organization is terrible.  As for the Steelers game, make any team try to win with their 3rd string QB and see how that goes.

 

5 hours ago, ManningGM said:

Try five losses. 

So unless we go 16-0 every year, we should be disappointed and call the entire organization a failure?  Failure organizations are the Dolphins, Jets, Bengals, Redskins.  5 losses in a season where your elite level QB suddenly retires before the season starts hardly qualifies as a failure.

[DEColtsLover36]

57 minutes ago, Superman said:

But I also don't think the players JB has to work with are so deficient that they're limiting his ability to move the ball. I think there are other things,  more closely related to JB, that are limiting him and the offense. 

Perfectly stated

 

[EastStreet]

48 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Anectdotal suggestions and hypotheicial murk is exactly how most conclusions are formed.   Process doesn't matter.  What matters is if the right or wrong conclusions are formed, and people successfully use suggestions and murk a lot.

 

What outcome based fact is in this thread? 

 

The only fact I can be sure of is that last time against a different secondary and with different offensive skilled players we called more passing and won.  And despite moving the ball this time and scoring a TD on drives that exclusively ran the ball, we didn't win.

 

I don't see where the facts tell us Frank had a bad night, at least to the point to be singled out more than JB or TY or Hooker (or Elberflus). 

 

Like I said, stepping back from the exchange. Live happy in a stat-less fact-less world of anecdotes and hypotheticals.... 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Run Run pass. Where is the variety on 1st down. You even can run on 3rd and medium.   Mix up your play calling. It’s ok to take a shot on 2nd and short also. Those are the times to take deep shots.

[Superman]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

if our UDFAs run the correct route the correct way 85% of the time

 

Another hypothetical.

 

I'm talking about throwing the ball to receivers when they have legitimate chances to catch the ball. And I'm saying matter of factly that JB misses opportunities to do this.

 

I think there's a high likelihood that guys like Marcus Johnson and Zach Pascal are not as good at consistently getting open as other receivers who are ahead of them on the depth chart. Still, I see guys like Marcus Johnson and Zach Pascal open, and still not getting chances to make plays. Even the third and 7 to Zach Pascal late last night, the throw was late. 

[The Old Crow]

6 hours ago, Restored said:

I agree with this. Brissett is a great leader and is capable of showing flashes and having a great game or two but his limitations as a passer are becoming more and more apparent.

I watched that type of game many times with Flacco from 2014-2018, after we won the SB. As I said, you can win with game managers, but many times it’s an ugly win, or you lose to a team you’re not supposed to. You guys had been fortunate with Manning and Luck over the years. 

[stitches]

 

 

[DougDew]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Another hypothetical.

 

I'm talking about throwing the ball to receivers when they have legitimate chances to catch the ball. And I'm saying matter of factly that JB misses opportunities to do this.

 

I think there's a high likelihood that guys like Marcus Johnson and Zach Pascal are not as good at consistently getting open as other receivers who are ahead of them on the depth chart. Still, I see guys like Marcus Johnson and Zach Pascal open, and still not getting chances to make plays. Even the third and 7 to Zach Pascal late last night, the throw was late. 

I know what you're saying.  And I consider what your saying to be partially hypothetical, in part, because we don't know if JB expects the receiver to be open at the time we see the receiver open.  He may not be looking at the reciever at that point in time because the pattern array says that particular WR is designed to be open a split second after the preceeding read, and he was open the split second before....as an example.  

 

Having a WR open at the wrong time provides no value to a QB who has a progression to follow.  I assume this is why Cain was let go?

 

So when somebody can verify that the UDFAs are running the right routes on the plays, or, that they know where the open space on the field will be given their knowledge of where the other receivers are taking their DBs, then I'm prepared to say that JB is ill prepared to lead an NFL passing attack.

 

But if all we do is take screen shots or videos of the field and say "look at the open receiver that JB isn't looking at " then that's not a fact-based criticism, IMO, or its at best incomplete.

 

But yes, I'm sure that JB could use better timing. PM used to work on that with Harrison and his receivers and said such practice with the group was very important.  

 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

22 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Law of averages caught up.... 

Offensive game plan was the biggest culprit...  With a team that is bottom five in both passing D and total QB pressure, what do we do.. With a team who is missing arguably their best DB and many more DBs hobbled, what do we do.... It's more what we don't do.

 

Throw the damn ball. 

 

Is it just ego from Reich, or distrust in Brissett? We had plenty of misses on open pass catchers. Doyle several times was wide stinking open. The announcers commented on a few guys running free down the sideline, one late when JB ran and failed to convert. 

 

Someone laughed at me when I said I fear Fuller more than Hopkins (during the first match up). Luckily Fuller went out injured early that game. He sure made an impact tonight... You know who you are lol... 

 

Very good possibility this costs us the post season.... It never should have been close.

 

I agree with you. But I'll add that I've seen 3 out of last 4 games and think Frank's playcalling was bad in them also.

[ProblChld32]

On 11/21/2019 at 11:47 PM, EastStreet said:

Nahhh... We held them to under 100 rushing, and held Watson (at home) to less yards than the first game. We also INT'd him. Could they have been better, sure, but we held them to 20pts in their own house. This was clearly an O fail. I do agree Flus should have dialed up more pressure, but we lost because of the O gameplan.

we held them to 99 yards rushing 1 yard shy of 100. Watson threw for 298 and 2  TDs , just 2 yards shy of 300. Idk what you consider to be a good defensive game but that was just not it. I will agree the Offense could have done better. But they did enough to put 17 on the board. The defense played extremely awful. 

[Colt]

JB completed 3 of 7 passes for 25 yards in the 2nd half.

[VaAllDay757]

14 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

Run Run pass. Where is the variety on 1st down. You even can run on 3rd and medium.   Mix up your play calling. It’s ok to take a shot on 2nd and short also. Those are the times to take deep shots.

Exactly! We rarely do that because frank wants to run the ball 90% of the time stop being predictable the defenses have already caught on to our offensive gameplan 

[EastStreet]

12 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

I agree with you. But I'll add that I've seen 3 out of last 4 games and think Frank's playcalling was bad in them also.

Frank has had ups and downs. Many (not all) of the downs revolve around one thing. I'm not a guy that worships at the alter of Reich or Ballard, but they both are good. Not trying to say Frank needs to go by any stretch. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

18 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

Run Run pass. Where is the variety on 1st down. You even can run on 3rd and medium.   Mix up your play calling. It’s ok to take a shot on 2nd and short also. Those are the times to take deep shots.

I am a fan of Frank Reich but I seen no variety on Thursday unfortunately. We really had no business losing that game once we went up 17-10. 

[EastStreet]

10 hours ago, ProblChld32 said:

we held them to 99 yards rushing 1 yard shy of 100. Watson threw for 298 and 2  TDs , just 2 yards shy of 300. Idk what you consider to be a good defensive game but that was just not it. I will agree the Offense could have done better. But they did enough to put 17 on the board. The defense played extremely awful. 

When your D holds a top 5ish O to under 21 points on the road in their house, they've done their job, and more than enough. Add in the fact we won time of possession and the turnover battle..... To expect more out of your D than that, and not near as much out of your O is very disingenuous. When your passing O only puts up 121 yards and 0 TDs against a bottom 5 passing D, the problem is very clear. As far and our rushing D, we held them to 31 ish% under their APG (99/144). Not sure how to make it more clear.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

24 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I am a fan of Frank Reich but I seen no variety on Thursday unfortunately. We really had no business losing that game once we went up 17-10. 

We get that Williams TD on almost all runs. Then we come back and throw it 3 times. I don’t get why we didn’t mix in a run or two. We were wearing them down with the run. It makes no sense. We had the chance to increase our lead after they got the field goal and we failed. 

[LockeDown]

I support the Reich/JB led team (for at least another year) and still think it can work, but If anyone is suggesting Reich’s playcalling is the main reason we lose games, well that’s pretty ridiculous. He believes he can win with JB, has encouraged him, brags on him, and I believe,  he likely gameplans to cover for his deficiencies. But come on, he is a major factor in winning a Super Bowl, he helps resurrect Lucks career , he is called a top 5 offensive mind by some, but this year he is suddenly not very good??? That’s not logical. There is a difference in making a few bad decisions but he isn’t calling  3 bad games in a row and holding JB back. That doesn’t fit with who he has been for a couple of years now.   IMO. 

[The Fish]

On 11/21/2019 at 11:25 PM, coltfaninnewyork said:

Romeo outcoached Reich ,period.

 

How? Telling guys to play zone, because the opposing QB doesn't know how to deal it with beyond go to the hot read isn't really a stroke of genius from Romeo, especially since few weeks ago they saw their initial idea not work so well in playing more man coverage.

Again, Frank called the game the right way- RUN THE DAMN BALL. JB simply couldn't do anything of note with 25 pass attempts. I don't know what those of you are * at the game plan think was going to work? More pass attempts? Pff..

[SouthernIndianaNDFan]

Frank Reich is trash, if we had a better coach then Jacoby Brissett could really shine. He's just holding him back...every game. Brissett is only averaging 199 yards a game because of Reich's playcalling, and because Chris Ballard is an * and didn't make the right draft picks (even tho he's one of 2 guys to draft 2 rookie All-Pro players). 

 

Fire Reich. Fire Ballard. Jacoby forever, mothertrucker.

[coltfaninnewyork]

10 minutes ago, The Fish said:

 

How? Telling guys to play zone, because the opposing QB doesn't know how to deal it with beyond go to the hot read isn't really a stroke of genius from Romeo, especially since few weeks ago they saw their initial idea not work so well in playing more man coverage.

Again, Frank called the game the right way- RUN THE DAMN BALL. JB simply couldn't do anything of note with 25 pass attempts. I don't know what those of you are * at the game plan think was going to work? More pass attempts? Pff..

Reich admitted they did a great job disguising coverages ,so you have that .

[Moosejawcolt]

On 11/22/2019 at 12:02 AM, GoColts8818 said:

I didn’t say you did but some seem to keep waiting for him to turn into an elite QB.  He’s not that.  He’s what Frank said he was a top 20 QB.  That’s about what a game manager is.  So that’s what I expected him to be.

Against the Texans if he would have been a game manager we would have won.  Everyone else did their job except the so called game manager. 129 yards is far from game manager material

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

frank does great with the talent he has to work with , he is dealing with a lack of elite talent, he has to call plays to the best talent on the team , there are not many he can depend on to make a play. i think he is great at play calling

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, DEFENSE said:

frank does great with the talent he has to work with , he is dealing with a lack of elite talent, he has to call plays to the best talent on the team , there are not many he can depend on to make a play. i think he is great at play calling

This team has the talent.

Injuries are playing a huge part in not having the best talent on the field at this time.

While I think Frank is a great head coach this last game he called was bad. He was too predictable and went with the run too much. When the Texans were stacking the box he needed to call more passing plays. 

Ebron and Doyle needed the ball more being we had no healthy top WRs available. 

[crazycolt1]

On 11/22/2019 at 5:27 PM, The Old Crow said:

I watched that type of game many times with Flacco from 2014-2018, after we won the SB. As I said, you can win with game managers, but many times it’s an ugly win, or you lose to a team you’re not supposed to. You guys had been fortunate with Manning and Luck over the years. 

That is a big problem with most of this forum.

We had elite play from Manning and Luck and when that don't happen it's hate on Brissett time.

The thing is how many super bowls did that elite play of Manning and Luck bring? One in 20 years. 

 

[DougDew]

Golly, this board has advocated getting a studly oline for years as being the elixir to our problems when the O struggles.  It advocates getting any skilled position player since they can all be schemed open.  Well, we've got the oline.

 

We should be scoring 35 points a game by mowing people over and have all of our UDFA and cast off receivers open because we're always two years ahead of NFL defenses scheme wise. (sarcasm)

 

Get real.  Frank needs more talent to work with, but not on the oline.  

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, DougDew said:

Golly, this board has advocated getting a studly oline for years as being the elixir to our problems when the O struggles.  It advocates getting any skilled position player since they can all be schemed open.  Well, we've got the oline.

 

We should be scoring 35 points a game by mowing people over and have all of our UDFA and cast off receivers open because we're always two years ahead of NFL defenses scheme wise. (sarcasm)

 

Get real.  Frank needs more talent to work with, but not on the oline.  

We need a dominant Defensive Tackle and a big time playmaker at WR to help JB. A WR that can make plays down the field even when somewhat covered.

[2006Coltsbestever]

16 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

That is a big problem with most of this forum.

We had elite play from Manning and Luck and when that don't happen it's hate on Brissett time.

The thing is how many super bowls did that elite play of Manning and Luck bring? One in 20 years. 

 

If SB 44 wasn't rigged we would have 2 

[aReggie7]

16 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

That is a big problem with most of this forum.

We had elite play from Manning and Luck and when that don't happen it's hate on Brissett time.

The thing is how many super bowls did that elite play of Manning and Luck bring? One in 20 years. 

 

 

And the thing with the Manning/Luck teams is they lacked in areas too. When Peyton was here the team often had poor run defense. When Luck was here there wasn't much of a run game or defense most of the time.

 

Every team, even the Super Bowl winners, have holes. Seattle when they won had a great running game and defense but their passing game was not so good. The Broncos when they won had an elite defense, running game that was good enough, but their passing game was not good. 

 

This Colts team is pretty well rounded but Andrew Luck is really the guy that would have enabled them to be elite. When he retired they became what we have seen all year...an average team.

 

It's fair to want more from the team. The Colts actions suggest they don't view Jacoby as the long-term answer at QB. But that doesn't mean Jacoby should be replaced at all cost. I think there should be more appreciation for Jacoby than what he is often given. 

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

On 11/22/2019 at 5:40 PM, DougDew said:

I know what you're saying.  And I consider what your saying to be partially hypothetical, in part, because we don't know if JB expects the receiver to be open at the time we see the receiver open.  He may not be looking at the reciever at that point in time because the pattern array says that particular WR is designed to be open a split second after the preceeding read, and he was open the split second before....as an example.  

 

Having a WR open at the wrong time provides no value to a QB who has a progression to follow.  I assume this is why Cain was let go?

 

So when somebody can verify that the UDFAs are running the right routes on the plays, or, that they know where the open space on the field will be given their knowledge of where the other receivers are taking their DBs, then I'm prepared to say that JB is ill prepared to lead an NFL passing attack.

 

But if all we do is take screen shots or videos of the field and say "look at the open receiver that JB isn't looking at " then that's not a fact-based criticism, IMO, or its at best incomplete.

 

But yes, I'm sure that JB could use better timing. PM used to work on that with Harrison and his receivers and said such practice with the group was very important.  

 

well put, a lot of keyboard coaches on this forum dont agree but how would they know if a receiver was where he is intended to be by the coaches

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

6 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

This team has the talent.

Injuries are playing a huge part in not having the best talent on the field at this time.

While I think Frank is a great head coach this last game he called was bad. He was too predictable and went with the run too much. When the Texans were stacking the box he needed to call more passing plays. 

Ebron and Doyle needed the ball more being we had no healthy top WRs available. 

i see your point

[The Old Crow]

7 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

That is a big problem with most of this forum.

We had elite play from Manning and Luck and when that don't happen it's hate on Brissett time.

The thing is how many super bowls did that elite play of Manning and Luck bring? One in 20 years. 

 

Until Lamar, and he’s still a second year QB, the Ravens have never had a dynamic QB. Flacco was good from 2008- 2013, but that was it. Banks, Dilfer, Boller, etc. You have to go back to the old Baltimore Colt days with Bert Jones , which was the last time we saw top QB play in Baltimore. 
 

[2006Coltsbestever]

The most complete team I have ever seen in my lifetime and I have watched since the 77 season is the 1992-1995 Cowboys. They had a huge, perhaps best O.Line ever - bigger than most Line's on average today. They had a QB that didn't care about stats but cared about winning only - he was accurate as hell too and focused, probably the best RB ever, and a top 5 WR of all-time. On defense they were #1 in the league in 1992 and their team speed was 20 years ahead of their time. Jimmy Johnson was a great coach too.