Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colt-related takeaways from Ravens - Titans game


Recommended Posts

Watching the game, i couldn’t help but think that Tennessee is playing the type of ball Ballard and Reich envisioned.

  I also couldn't help noticing the QBs 7-14 for 88 yards.  And that includes a “big play”.  Granted, Henry ran for 195 or so, but still , i couldnt help but think how their team somewhat mirrors ours.  

  That D played some ball tho.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

Watching the game, i couldn’t help but think that Tennessee is playing the type of ball Ballard and Reich envisioned.

  I also couldn't help noticing the QBs 7-14 for 88 yards.  And that includes a “big play”.  Granted, Henry ran for 195 or so, but still , i couldnt help but think how their team somewhat mirrors ours.  

 That D played some ball tho.

I was thinking the same last night. Of course, Henry is a beast at RB, and they have Casey and Simmons at DT. I remember that Ballard wanted Simmons in last year's draft. Just didn't make it to us.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I was thinking the same last night. Of course, Henry is a beast at RB, and they have Casey and Simmons at DT. I remember that Ballard wanted Simmons in last year's draft. Just didn't make it to us.

When i saw him push earl thomas half-way down the field i knew it was over.  He broke their will.

  I remember a story that it all clicked for Henry after he talked to Eddie George.  Eddie told him to basically hit the hole and physically dominate.  Dont dance around, initiate the contact.  And BOOM, a switch went on.  Crazy.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, WoolMagnet said:

When i saw him push earl thomas half-way down the field i knew it was over.  He broke their will.

  I remember a story that it all clicked for Henry after he talked to Eddie George.  Eddie told him to basically hit the hole and physically dominate.  Dont dance around, initiate the contact.  And BOOM, a switch went on.  Crazy.

I remember that exact story as well. He went from timid to aggressive, and his size let him physically dominate defenses. This may be the payoff. Still rooting for KC to win the SB though. Love Mahomes, as he's what Luck was supposed to be right now. So I guess I get some joy out of watching him succeed (except against the Colts).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

Watching the game, i couldn’t help but think that Tennessee is playing the type of ball Ballard and Reich envisioned.

  I also couldn't help noticing the QBs 7-14 for 88 yards.  And that includes a “big play”.  Granted, Henry ran for 195 or so, but still , i couldnt help but think how their team somewhat mirrors ours.  

  That D played some ball tho.

Yep.... they sort of 2000 Raven’d the Ravens. 
 

Stifling, opportunist defense... a punishing run game and an efficient game manager at QB.

 

When you don’t have a generational talent (Manning/Luck) or some video game magician (Mahommes/Jackson) at QB..... you (Ballard/Reich) can opt for the choice to build the best team you can around whoever it is under center.

 

Anyway we slice it.... still a game of keep away..... and Titans demonstrated that important reminder quite impressively.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ravens couldn't handle that a running back is throwing the ball. Seemed they are not used to it. :)

 

Seriously, I didn't see it coming, but that's what happen if a team turns the ball over 3 times (2 inside your own 30 yards line), while can't convert any 4th and shorts. It doesn't matter that the Ravens converted 8 of 8 during the season, and barely gave away the ball. They did last night and they lost the game.

 

The Titans are in the AFCCG, and there's nothing to explain about 2 road wins in the playoff. Anyway, I don't think it's been championship football so far, so let's not start believing (thinking about Brissett & the Colts) that 100 yards passing can be enough to win the superbow. Even if it'll be enough. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Titans played pretty much flawlessly, while the Ravens made a ton of mistakes.  The results for just about any two NFL teams that perform that way would likely be the same.  
 

what I’m saying that just power running works when the other team is constantly messing up.  That game would have been a lot different if the Ravens played their normal game.  But that’s the NFL.  

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, WoolMagnet said:

Watching the game, i couldn’t help but think that Tennessee is playing the type of ball Ballard and Reich envisioned.

  I also couldn't help noticing the QBs 7-14 for 88 yards.  And that includes a “big play”.  Granted, Henry ran for 195 or so, but still , i couldnt help but think how their team somewhat mirrors ours.  

  That D played some ball tho.

I was thinking the exact same thing.  Both Garappolo for the 49er's and Tannehill for the Titans put up very Brissett-like numbers in games that were dominated by power running, ball control, and defense.

Garappolo  11/19 131 yds 1 TD 1 INT

Tannehill  7/14 88 yds 2 TD

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference is mentality, Titans showed they would do what ever to took win no matter who had to be benched or what ever. We on the other hand had guy playing who obviously wasn’t producing or injured and refused to do what was best for the team 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Titans are what they are. Colts beat them once this year and the second time we were winning at halftime, but lost because we imploded in 2nd half.

Right now Tenn is hot. But they still have the same basic team they had.

Colts can (and will) win again over Titans.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:

The Titans are what they are. Colts beat them once this year and the second time we were winning at halftime, but lost because we imploded in 2nd half.

Right now Tenn is hot. But they still have the same basic team they had.

Colts can (and will) win again over Titans.

 

 

clapping applause GIF
 

(I used a B & W gif to match your profile pic :))

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Titans had a great defensive game plan with lots of guys making big plays in the secondary. That is not us by a longshot.
 And all the teams in the playoffs have shown more creativity than anything Reich put on the field.
 We appear to be at Defcon 4 this off season. We need to be bold, to go where Capt. Ballard hasn't gone before.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

While the Titans deserve a ton of credit for doing what they have done in the playoffs so far and they outplayed the Ravens last night, I think we have to pump the brakes a little on simply pointing to these two games as a formula for us that will set up well for consistent year in and year out contention.  

 

I willing to bet the record of teams in the playoffs (especially over the past 20 years) when the QB throws for under a 100 yards and has a yards per attempt of 5.5 is not very good.   It may be by design and the way the games played out, but Tannehill is going have to do more at some point in time in order for them to win a SB with this formula.  

 

Realistically, they have had a lot of things go their way which has allowed them to play their style the most important of which is that their D is playing really well and making all the timely plays in key situations , even better than what they were in the regular season.  Not saying they are lucky, but this run reminds me a lot of quick rise and fall playoff teams such as the 2017 Jags, 2009-2010 Jets teams with Sanchez, 1995 Colts that got hot in the playoffs but did not have the anything substantial long term once the hot streak ran out.  

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

I think it showed what a lot of us have said. That winning 9-10 games and getting into the playoffs is all that matters. Ryan Tannehill is not Manning or luck, but you don’t need a Manning or luck to win the Super Bowl. JB is good enough. Look at Tannehill stat line the last 2 games. 

Tannehill made two huge throws. The bomb for the TD and the dime to jonu for the other td. You think JB makes those throws? 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, boo2202 said:

Tannehill made two huge throws. The bomb for the TD and the dime to jonu for the other td. You think JB makes those throws? 

I do. JB made that same bomb type throw to Marcus Johnson in Tampa. Also the Smith throw was a great play by Smith. Kinda like that catch by Enron earlier in the year. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, boo2202 said:

Tannehill made two huge throws. The bomb for the TD and the dime to jonu for the other td. You think JB makes those throws? 

 

14 minutes ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

I do. JB made that same bomb type throw to Marcus Johnson in Tampa. Also the Smith throw was a great play by Smith. Kinda like that catch by Enron earlier in the year. 

I was going to point out the same game. Every QB has moments where they look like Montana and then there are moments where they look like Jamarcus Russel or imploded Ryan leaf. 
 

I will accept a QB who throws a couple really nice hits downfield for those chunk plays (TD’s are bonus) along with the continual safe check downs and smart plays with a RB who has the ability to run over people or flat out make them miss. To make it all work for a playoff run and opportunity at the SB prize, this make up has to have a defense that can shut down the other side though. Without a defense like that, game managers flat out will not work. JB is not a guy who will win games for you nor is he a smart game manager. He just isn’t that avg imho. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jdubu said:

 

I was going to point out the same game. Every QB has moments where they look like Montana and then there are moments where they look like Jamarcus Russel or imploded Ryan leaf. 
 

I will accept a QB who throws a couple really nice hits downfield for those chunk plays (TD’s are bonus) along with the continual safe check downs and smart plays with a RB who has the ability to run over people or flat out make them miss. To make it all work for a playoff run and opportunity at the SB prize, this make up has to have a defense that can shut down the other side though. Without a defense like that, game managers flat out will not work. JB is not a guy who will win games for you nor is he a smart game manager. He just isn’t that avg imho. 

I do agree with that. How quickly we forget plays like this. 
 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

I think it showed what a lot of us have said. That winning 9-10 games and getting into the playoffs is all that matters. Ryan Tannehill is not Manning or luck, but you don’t need a Manning or luck to win the Super Bowl. JB is good enough. Look at Tannehill stat line the last 2 games. 

 

Actually history shows you do need top tier QB 9 out of 10 examples. Brady, Peyton and Ben Rothelisberger have put the AFC on lock down for a generation until now, and Mahomes and Watson both represent the type of talent that's going to have a nice run going forward.

 

Tannehill's stat line from these last two games aren't good (and he's not winning a SB) and neither is JB. But that'll get sorted by others. I don't think you can count on even getting to the playoffs when a QB is a placeholder for a ground and pound game. The Titans made it by the skin of their teeth and they've been fortunate to draw teams that can be exposed by the ground and pound. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need a QB that makes the clutch throws when needed and enough big plays. Like Tannehill last night. His stats were not great but he made throws when he needed to and had one big play. You don’t need a QB to be throwing for 400 yards when you have a great oline and a great running back. The issue with Jacoby was he didn’t make enough big plays a game. Every QB will miss reads and throws. But they also make acfew big plays a game at clutch times.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

I think it showed what a lot of us have said. That winning 9-10 games and getting into the playoffs is all that matters. Ryan Tannehill is not Manning or luck, but you don’t need a Manning or luck to win the Super Bowl. JB is good enough. Look at Tannehill stat line the last 2 games. 

This.  So, I hope Ballard settles for good enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

You need a QB that makes the clutch throws when needed and enough big plays. Like Tannehill last night. His stats were not great but he made throws when he needed to and had one big play. You don’t need a QB to be throwing for 400 yards when you have a great oline and a great running back. The issue with Jacoby was he didn’t make enough big plays a game. Every QB will miss reads and throws. But they also make acfew big plays a game at clutch times.

 

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

If you have a RB who doesn't catch the ball, its better to have Henry than Mack, IMO.

Henry was probably the best running back in the league this year.  1500 yards, 16 TDs, 5 ypc 

 

if you were to rank them all mack would probably be around 10th or so, not bad but safe to say Henry was better 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

Henry was probably the best running back in the league this year.  1500 yards, 16 TDs, 5 ypc 

 

if you were to rank them all mack would probably be around 10th or so, not bad but safe to say Henry was better 

 

Henry is better for sure.  Heck, he was what, a first rounder and Mack a 4th.  That says a lot.

 

To the comments that say we should be more like TN is now than we were with Manning then, I'm saying that a bigger tougher runner like Henry instead of Mack is what we would need, IMO. 

 

It would be helpful if the stud RB could catch the ball too as a way to keep LBs and Ss honest.

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

Henry is better for sure.  Heck, he was what, a first rounder and Mack a 4th.  That says a lot.

 

To the comments that say we should be more like TN is now than we were with Manning then, I'm saying that a bigger tougher runner like Henry instead of Mack is what we would need, IMO. 

 

It would be helpful if the stud RB could catch the ball too as a way to keep LBs and Ss honest.

Henry is 6’4 and 245 lbs. There will never be another Henry. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, BleedBlue4Shoe86 said:

 

Not a few plays a season. A few plays a game. I am still not sure if Jacobys issue this year was him nor reading the entire field or the lack of confidence. Is it’s confidence that surely can improve.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tannehill was one of the best QB in the league once he got the start. He averaged almost ten yards per attempt. The last two games he faced two great passing defenses. He showed in the regular he can get more yards if they need him. He is nothing like Jacoby.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

people are missing the biggest take away henry was drafted in 2016 and averaged 2.7 yards a carry was considered a bust until last year the second half of the season.    so it took 4 years for him to be good even in 2018 look at his stats the first half of the season trash .

 

this is why i dont think the colts roster is so bad on defense we got 1st 2nd and 3rd year players at every position except autry and houston .   so when quincy wilson is called a bust drafted in 2017 i wanna wait same to hooker and a lot of guys like rock ben banagu  .  some players take longer to get good losing some veterans on defense from last year and getting younger i expected the defense to take a step back .

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate them, but the Titans are playing the 'un-fun' type of ball that wins in the playoffs. 

Efficient O using the run game and solid opportunistic D.

 

People drool over scoring points, but a good D will usually prevail in January when O's slow down.

 

Without reading all the posts, it's the blueprint Ballard is trying to build. 

 

Tannehill didn't even hit 90 yds for the second game in a row and they've been dominating. They aren't relying strictly on the QB, good for them even though I hate them as I said.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...