Jacoby Brissett Impressions (Perma Merge)

[OffensivelyPC]

3 hours ago, stitches said:

 

 

 

I'm having trouble understanding what the numbers on the left mean.  It doesn't really tell you anything that I can decipher.

[shasta519]

27 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the biggest correlation between Superbowl wins and elite personnal happens when the defense is elite, not when the QB is elite.

 

You need a consistent offense and a smothering defense to win.  The components of both can be achieved in different ways.

 

It's a fact that our defense is closer than our offense to the ideal right now.  I don't mind that for the reason I stated earlier -- elite defenses correlate far more strongly to Superbowl wins.

 

As I have stated before...the NFL is a different landscape and recent history suggests that this has changed:

2013 

SEA - OFF. DVOA #7; DEF. DVOA #1

DEN - OFF. DVOA #1; DEF. DVOA #15

 

2014

NE - OFF. DVOA #6; DEF. DVOA #12

SEA - OFF. DVOA #5; DEF. DVOA #1

 

2015

DEN - OFF. DVOA #25; DEF. DVOA #1

CAR - OFF. DVOA #8; DEF. DVOA #2

 

2016

NE - OFF. DVOA #2; DEF. DVOA #16

ATL - OFF. DVOA #1; DEF. DVOA #26

 

2017

PHI - OFF. DVOA #8; DEF. DVOA #5

NE - OFF. DVOA #1; DEF. DVOA #31

 

2018

NE - OFF. DVOA #5; DEF. DVOA #16

LAR - OFF. DVOA #2; DEF. DVOA #17

 

SEVEN of the past 12 Super Bowl teams have had a DEF. DVOA ranking outside of the Top 10...and in some even outside of the Top 20. And THREE of those teams won the Super Bowl (all NE...who I know you want to emulate). 

 

But before you can win the Super Bowl...you have to get there...and only ONE of those 12 teams has had an OFF. DVOA ranking outside the Top 8...and that was the 2015 DEN...which is arguably the defense of the decade. 

 

The teams that had strong defense...had elite-level defenses...and even then...they still had a top have top tier offenses to get to and win a Super Bowl (outside of one team). And again...we are talking about elite (Top 2 DEF. DVOA) defenses. 

 

So I ask...which is more realistic...having (and maintaining) an elite defense or a top tier (Top 8 OFF. DVOA) offense?

 

And to get that offense...you don't even need to have an elite QB...but you do need a very good one...with talented playmakers around him.

 

As for the Colts...I guess defense is a bit closer...but neither are particularly close to that level (DEF. DVOA is #13 and OFF. DVOA is #17)...which is understandable at this point. 

 

But given that they have an offensive-mind HC, a top-tier OL (close to elite)...AND they play in a dome...getting to an elite offense level is the much more realistic (and prudent) path. And to do that...it starts with the QB position.

[EastStreet]

56 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

You dont think he makes those plays consistently?

 

I do. 

 

I think what sets him apart from guys like Ryan Fitzpatrick, more than anything, is the lack of bad plays. He doesn't have 4 pick in the first half type of games. Which is as much a reason why Fitz is a bad QB as the lack of consistent great plays.

 

But Jacoby makes a great play in just about every single game, and usually at a crucial time. 

Those guys are asked to do a lot more for their teams. JB is not. It's much easier to not make mistakes when the game isn't on your back.

[EastStreet]

3 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

As I have stated before...the NFL is a different landscape and recent history suggests that this has changed:

2013 

SEA - OFF. DVOA #7; DEF. DVOA #1

DEN - OFF. DVOA #1; DEF. DVOA #15

 

2014

NE - OFF. DVOA #6; DEF. DVOA #12

SEA - OFF. DVOA #5; DEF. DVOA #1

 

2015

DEN - OFF. DVOA #25; DEF. DVOA #1

CAR - OFF. DVOA #8; DEF. DVOA #2

 

2016

NE - OFF. DVOA #2; DEF. DVOA #16

ATL - OFF. DVOA #1; DEF. DVOA #26

 

2017

PHI - OFF. DVOA #8; DEF. DVOA #5

NE - OFF. DVOA #1; DEF. DVOA #31

 

2018

NE - OFF. DVOA #5; DEF. DVOA #16

LAR - OFF. DVOA #2; DEF. DVOA #17

 

SEVEN of the past 12 Super Bowl teams have had a DEF. DVOA ranking outside of the Top 10...and in some even outside of the Top 20. And THREE of those teams won the Super Bowl (all NE...who I know you want to emulate). 

 

But before you can win the Super Bowl...you have to get there...and only ONE of those 12 teams has had an OFF. DVOA ranking outside the Top 8...and that was the 2015 DEN...which is arguably the defense of the decade. 

 

The teams that had strong defense...had elite-level defenses...and even then...they still had a top have top tier offenses to get to and win a Super Bowl (outside of one team). And again...we are talking about elite (Top 2 DEF. DVOA) defenses. 

 

So I ask...which is more realistic...having (and maintaining) an elite defense or a top tier (Top 8 OFF. DVOA) offense?

 

And to get that offense...you don't even need to have an elite QB...but you do need a very good one...with talented playmakers around him.

 

As for the Colts...I guess defense is a bit closer...but neither are particularly close to that level (DEF. DVOA is #13 and OFF. DVOA is #17)...which is understandable at this point. 

 

But given that they have an offensive-mind HC, a top-tier OL (close to elite)...AND they play in a dome...getting to an elite offense level is the much more realistic (and prudent) path. And to do that...it starts with the QB position.

Good stuff.

I've made this point too, but you did much better explaining than I did. 

But yes, all the planets have to align to go, and to win, a SB if you don't have a top 10 O.

[shasta519]

Just now, shastamasta said:

 

As I have stated before...the NFL is a different landscape and recent history suggests that this has changed:

2013 

SEA - OFF. DVOA #7; DEF. DVOA #1

DEN - OFF. DVOA #1; DEF. DVOA #15

 

2014

NE - OFF. DVOA #6; DEF. DVOA #12

SEA - OFF. DVOA #5; DEF. DVOA #1

 

2015

DEN - OFF. DVOA #25; DEF. DVOA #1

CAR - OFF. DVOA #8; DEF. DVOA #2

 

2016

NE - OFF. DVOA #2; DEF. DVOA #16

ATL - OFF. DVOA #1; DEF. DVOA #26

 

2017

PHI - OFF. DVOA #8; DEF. DVOA #5

NE - OFF. DVOA #1; DEF. DVOA #31

 

2018

NE - OFF. DVOA #5; DEF. DVOA #16

LAR - OFF. DVOA #2; DEF. DVOA #17

 

SEVEN of the past 12 Super Bowl teams have had a DEF. DVOA ranking outside of the Top 10...and in some even outside of the Top 20. And THREE of those teams won the Super Bowl (all NE...who I know you want to emulate). 

 

But before you can win the Super Bowl...you have to get there...and only ONE of those 12 teams has had an OFF. DVOA ranking outside the Top 8...and that was the 2015 DEN...which is arguably the defense of the decade. 

 

The teams that had strong defense...had elite-level defenses...and even then...they still had a top have top tier offenses to get to and win a Super Bowl (outside of one team). And again...we are talking about elite (Top 2 DEF. DVOA) defenses. 

 

So I ask...which is more realistic...having (and maintaining) an elite defense or a top tier (Top 8 OFF. DVOA) offense?

 

And to get that offense...you don't even need to have an elite QB...but you do need a very good one...with talented playmakers around him.

 

As for the Colts...I guess defense is a bit closer...but neither are particularly close to that level (DEF. DVOA is #13 and OFF. DVOA is #17)...which is understandable at this point. 

 

But given that they have an offensive-mind HC, a top-tier OL (close to elite)...AND they play in a dome...getting to an elite offense level is the much more realistic (and prudent) path. And to do that...it starts with the QB position.

 

Also...just look at last year's conference championships:

 

You had the #1, #2, #4 and #5 OFF. DVOAs....and you had the #26, #17, #11, #16 DEF. DVOAs.

 

Too small of a sample?

 

2017 - #1, #4, #2 and #7 OFF. DVOAs...#26, #20, #16, #11 DEF. DVOAs.

2016 - #8, #5, #1 and #16 OFF. DVOAs...#5, #2, #31, #1 DEF. DVOAs.

 

You literally have ONE team that wasn't a Top 8 offense make it to the Conference Championship team the past three years...and that was JAC's elite #1 defense.

 

Balanced teams that are top tier on both sides of the ball is obviously ideal...but only one of those seems to be a requirement to win right now.

 

 

[SteelCityColt]

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

Good stuff.

I've made this point too, but you did much better explaining than I did. 

But yes, all the planets have to align to go, and to win, a SB if you don't have a top 10 O.

 

I think it was so long ago that I can't search for the post, but I looked at Elite D vs Elite QB. Pretty much taking Win% for a season for each team, over I think 10 seasons and looking at correlations to metrics (Y/A, RY/A, Avr Points allowed etc etc.) and from memory a better offense gives you more than a better defense over the wider sample. 

 

Might repeat the exercise.

[shasta519]

Just now, SteelCityColt said:

 

I think it was so long ago that I can't search for the post, but I looked at Elite D vs Elite QB. Pretty much taking Win% for a season for each team, over I think 10 seasons and looking at correlations to metrics (Y/A, RY/A, Avr Points allowed etc etc.) and from memory a better offense gives you more than a better defense over the wider sample. 

 

Might repeat the exercise.

 

It's obviously much easier to maintain a top tier offense with an elite QB...than it is to keep together an elite defense. Look at SEA...they are back to being a top tier team because Russell is an elite QB.

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

I think it was so long ago that I can't search for the post, but I looked at Elite D vs Elite QB. Pretty much taking Win% for a season for each team, over I think 10 seasons and looking at correlations to metrics (Y/A, RY/A, Avr Points allowed etc etc.) and from memory a better offense gives you more than a better defense over the wider sample. 

 

Might repeat the exercise.

Please do if you have the time. Love to see the output.

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, shastamasta said:

 

It's obviously much easier to maintain a top tier offense with an elite QB...than it is to keep together an elite defense. Look at SEA...they are back to being a top tier team because Russell is an elite QB.

Yes, a top 10 QB also makes the running game and WRs better too. It's best to have balance, but like SCC mentioned, the numbers bear out that O is more valuable..

[SteelCityColt]

Just now, EastStreet said:

Yes, a top 10 QB also makes the running game and WRs better too. It's best to have balance, but like SCC mentioned, the numbers bear out that O is more valuable..

 

I think part of the issue in the Manning era was that a top tier QB, put you up against the cap a lot more. Part of why the Pat have done so well is having Brady willing to take less than market value in pursuit of legacy. 

 

As it stands, acknowledging a new CBA isn't far off, I don't think paying your QB is as much of an issue. Obviously having say a Wilson on a rookie deal is a massive bonus that let's you short term splurge on FA or paying older guys to stick around a few seasons. 

[lollygagger8]

Brissett had to be #1 at handing the ball off last week. 

 

 

[EastStreet]

10 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

I think part of the issue in the Manning era was that a top tier QB, put you up against the cap a lot more. Part of why the Pat have done so well is having Brady willing to take less than market value in pursuit of legacy. 

 

As it stands, acknowledging a new CBA isn't far off, I don't think paying your QB is as much of an issue. Obviously having say a Wilson on a rookie deal is a massive bonus that let's you short term splurge on FA or paying older guys to stick around a few seasons. 

Yup, and given our cap space.....

 

 

[Myles]

I agree that a top QB is the most valuable part of a team for sustained success.  Heck Manning got us to the playoffs almost every year even though the defense sucked most years.  

I think a balanced team can still win.   

If you could bring in a top proven NFL QB, I think that is good.   The draft won't provide anything proven.  The FA class is pretty slim pickings.   Maybe the Chargers will let Rivers walk.   He would provide some firepower that folks crave.  

[EastStreet]

12 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

Brissett had to be #1 at handing the ball off last week. 

 

 

He was actually 2nd behind Mayfield for most hand offs IIRC..

[shasta519]

29 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

I think part of the issue in the Manning era was that a top tier QB, put you up against the cap a lot more. Part of why the Pat have done so well is having Brady willing to take less than market value in pursuit of legacy. 

 

As it stands, acknowledging a new CBA isn't far off, I don't think paying your QB is as much of an issue. Obviously having say a Wilson on a rookie deal is a massive bonus that let's you short term splurge on FA or paying older guys to stick around a few seasons. 

 

Yep...there is so much more money to spend now. QBs are still getting theirs...but it's a much bigger pie.

 

I think there is a misconception about the Manning era. Yes...it was a missed opportunity in totality...but not because the approach was wrong (except for the lack of FA). Polian wanted to build an elite offense and get HFA in the playoffs...where the dome played to the team's advantage. That was spot on...he just failed on the other side.

 

That "Star Wars" comment from Irsay still really irks me to this day...because it missed the point. You can build both sides of the ball...and the Colts have the coaching AND FO to do this. They have already successfully implemented a borderline elite OL...why would they stop there?

 

 

[shasta519]

34 minutes ago, Myles said:

I agree that a top QB is the most valuable part of a team for sustained success.  Heck Manning got us to the playoffs almost every year even though the defense sucked most years.  

I think a balanced team can still win.   

If you could bring in a top proven NFL QB, I think that is good.   The draft won't provide anything proven.  The FA class is pretty slim pickings.   Maybe the Chargers will let Rivers walk.   He would provide some firepower that folks crave.  

 

Maybe a certain proven QB will change his mind?

 

I don't really see any way to get a proven QB...but I also don't see any downside to drafting a QB next year (provided there is a guy they like). At worst...it's a failed pick...and no team is immune to those. At the very best, JB takes a big leap forward AND the draft pick looks legit...then yahtzee. This gives you a viable starting QB in 2020 and (hopefully) a long-term QB ready to take over in 2021.

 

The alternative...of course...is either drafting one the following year...which will just delay having that guy in place. And I don't see JB agreeing to sign another one-year extension...so in 2021 you either have some meh stopgap or a rookie starting...not ideal. OR they could give JB a salary extension just below the top tier level (which is the expectation they set by giving him the franchise tag a year early)...not ideal either IMO. 

 

Drafting a rookie QB just makes too much sense.

 

(On a side note...had the Colts not already committed to JB for one more year...and JAC wanted commit to Minshew as the starter...I would gladly take Foles off their hands for just his base salaries going forward...basically $15M, $15M and $20M.)

[Myles]

10 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Maybe a certain proven QB will change his mind?

 

I don't really see any way to get a proven QB...but I also don't see any downside to drafting a QB next year (provided there is a guy they like). At worst...it's a failed pick...and no team is immune to those. At the very best, JB takes a big leap forward AND the draft pick looks legit...then yahtzee. This gives you a viable starting QB in 2020 and (hopefully) a long-term QB ready to take over in 2021.

 

The alternative...of course...is either drafting one the following year...which will just delay having that guy in place. And I don't see JB agreeing to sign another one-year extension...so in 2021 you either have some meh stopgap or a rookie starting...not ideal. OR they could give JB a salary extension just below the top tier level (which is the expectation they set by giving him the franchise tag a year early)...not ideal either IMO. 

 

Drafting a rookie QB just makes too much sense.

 

(On a side note...had the Colts not already committed to JB for one more year...and JAC wanted commit to Minshew as the starter...I would gladly take Foles off their hands for just his base salaries going forward...basically $15M, $15M and $20M.)

I agree with you.

The unknown is how and where in the draft do they draft a QB.  

If the Colts make the playoffs and win a game this season with Brissett finishing pretty much where he is now, we know he'll be the starter next season.   Do we use our early draft pick upgrading the D-line or do we bundle to take a flyer on a QB?   Maybe use a 2nd or 3rd on a QB?  We are not going to get into the top 6-7 picks to get one of the more sure picks.  

[2006Coltsbestever]

6 hours ago, EastStreet said:

I break performance down into tiers. 1-5 (elite) and 28-32 (awful), are the extreme end caps. 6-12 (good) and 21-27 (bad) as the next tiers, and 13-20 is all average... 13-16 is slightly above average while 17-20 is slightly below average. Pretty simple. Most of JBs stats are in the average (slightly below) tier, with some in the bad... 

 

Folks may disagree with the tiers, or say stats don't matter, but at least it's objective.

My Tiers are: I have 1-4 (elite), 5-8 (very good), 9-12 (good), 13-16 (above average), 17-20 (average), 21-24 (below average), 25-32 = bad. I currently rate JB at 15th which by my scale is above average. Stats are a good way to measure things so I do that as well but I also look at things like how a QB has command over his offense, his leadership, how many big plays he makes to help win games, etc.. Even statistically despite not throwing for a lot of yards in most games, he still has 15 TD's to only 4 INT's in 8 games. Lets face it JB has been playing with an average WR core at best most of the year. TY has either played dinged up or missed games, Funchess has been out all season, Cain IMO just wasn't that good here, and Rogers is Rogers = Mr average. Even Ebron drops balls he has no business dropping as a TE. Pascal is ok and has had his moments but he is nothing special either.

[Imgrandojji]

2 hours ago, shastamasta said:

 

Maybe a certain proven QB will change his mind?

 

 

 

Really, really doubt that door will open again.

 

Besides, NWIH the front office is anywhere near as anxious to move on from Brissett than this handful of fans seem to be.  They seem to have a fair idea what they have, and it's hard to deny that up to this point JB has been up to every task they've asked of him.

 

There's more to lose from displacing Brissett in favor of random shiny objects on the draft board than people seem to think there is.

[Goatface Killah]

10 hours ago, shastamasta said:

 

As I have stated before...the NFL is a different landscape and recent history suggests that this has changed:

2013 

SEA - OFF. DVOA #7; DEF. DVOA #1

DEN - OFF. DVOA #1; DEF. DVOA #15

 

2014

NE - OFF. DVOA #6; DEF. DVOA #12

SEA - OFF. DVOA #5; DEF. DVOA #1

 

2015

DEN - OFF. DVOA #25; DEF. DVOA #1

CAR - OFF. DVOA #8; DEF. DVOA #2

 

2016

NE - OFF. DVOA #2; DEF. DVOA #16

ATL - OFF. DVOA #1; DEF. DVOA #26

 

2017

PHI - OFF. DVOA #8; DEF. DVOA #5

NE - OFF. DVOA #1; DEF. DVOA #31

 

2018

NE - OFF. DVOA #5; DEF. DVOA #16

LAR - OFF. DVOA #2; DEF. DVOA #17

 

SEVEN of the past 12 Super Bowl teams have had a DEF. DVOA ranking outside of the Top 10...and in some even outside of the Top 20. And THREE of those teams won the Super Bowl (all NE...who I know you want to emulate). 

 

But before you can win the Super Bowl...you have to get there...and only ONE of those 12 teams has had an OFF. DVOA ranking outside the Top 8...and that was the 2015 DEN...which is arguably the defense of the decade. 

 

The teams that had strong defense...had elite-level defenses...and even then...they still had a top have top tier offenses to get to and win a Super Bowl (outside of one team). And again...we are talking about elite (Top 2 DEF. DVOA) defenses. 

 

So I ask...which is more realistic...having (and maintaining) an elite defense or a top tier (Top 8 OFF. DVOA) offense?

 

And to get that offense...you don't even need to have an elite QB...but you do need a very good one...with talented playmakers around him.

 

As for the Colts...I guess defense is a bit closer...but neither are particularly close to that level (DEF. DVOA is #13 and OFF. DVOA is #17)...which is understandable at this point. 

 

But given that they have an offensive-mind HC, a top-tier OL (close to elite)...AND they play in a dome...getting to an elite offense level is the much more realistic (and prudent) path. And to do that...it starts with the QB position.

I dont think anyone is suggesting offense isn't important, especially since all the rule changes. But let's take a closer look at your stats.

 

1. The first thing I noticed, is that the higher ranked offense was 0-6 in those matchups. On the flipside, the higher ranked defensive unit was 5-1. The only exception to that was the 2014 NE Patriots, who were led by the greatest defensive coordinator of my lifetime and won the game on the greatest defensive play in SB history. Those are not coincidences.

 

2. The number 1 ranked defense won 2 of those SBs, or 33%. They were in half of them with 3 appearances and were 2-1. They would've been 3-0 if they would've just handed it to Marshawn Lynch, but they didn't and lost to the greatest dynasty of my lifetime. The #1 offense also made 3 trips in that same span. However, they failed to win a single title. Again, that isn't a coincidence. 

 

3. NE was the most consistent representative  in that list with 4 appearances in 6 years. And despite the fact thier DVOA varied in those seasons, they were always led by Bill Belichick. And the season they were the weakest on defense, was coincidentally thier only loss. The other 2 most common teams in this list were Seattle and Denver. In total, those 3 teams accounted for 8 of the 12 appearances. And all 3 teams are known for having great defenses during that span. All 3 had registered a number 1 defense in that span. Again, not a coincidence. 

 

Notice a trend here? Defense almost always wins in the end. My viewpoint has been that you have to be balanced. And that's what we are trending towards. We want to be balanced, but led by a great defense. 

 

I go by points scored, and points allowed. That is really all that matters.

 

On defense.......We are currently 15th in points allowed. We are also only 1.6 PPG from being 5th. We have had a ton of injuries and are currently playing a lot of young players on defense who have taken time to get up to speed. It is not unreasonable to believe we can improve in this area. Since week 5, we are only giving up 17.4, and that includes the Chiefs and Texans games. That would actually be good for a tie for 4th.

 

On offense........we are currently 16th in points scored. We are also only 3 points per game (or 30 total points) from being 9th. And that's with Adam Vinatieri costing us 21 points alone. That is also with Jacoby Brissett missing 7 quarters of football. That's also while missing our top 3 receivers for a total of 17 out of a possible 30 games. That's also with Eric Ebron dropping an easy TD against the Chargers, and having another snatched right out of his hands by someone much smaller than him. If you just give us the two Ebron TDs and Adam's kicks, it would put us in a virtual tie with Minnesota for 8th.

 

We absolutely are close. Nobody can tell me we arent good enough to compete, or atleast on track. We might be too young to do it right now. We might need some more maturity and fine tuning. We might need a couple more roster additions. But we do NOT need a new QB. We dont need to chuck it downfield more. We do not need to change our philosophy.

 

Oh btw did I mention we should probably be 9-1 and have the best record in football over the last 21 games? All while being one of the younger teams in the league and facing a crazy number of injuries, and also losing a Pro Bowl QB to a surprise retirement?

 

Tell me again why our own fans are hating on this team all the time?

[Goatface Killah]

11 hours ago, OffensivelyPC said:

 

You do realize that scouts all the time talk about how certain data points and stats support what you see on tape, right?  Forget high school.  That is irrelevant.  Completely.  The longer the NFL exists, the more new analytics come out and teams DEPEND on them.  They are not the sole analytical factor, but they are a piece of the puzzle.  The same is true when they analyze their opponent.  How often they run certain plays in certain situations, everything about gaining an advantage over your opponent starts with a statistical analysis.  It informs them what package to have in so that you can utilize your players strengths and minimize their weakensses.  It just does, and the fact that you are insisting that it does not, really just shows the depths to which you do not get it and your refusal to want to understand.  I'm not telling you any of this because that's what I think about stats.  I'm saying it because the people that do it for a living say that.  All I can do is take what I have learned over time and learn how to do it as much/well as an armchair QB could.  

 

I never said JB can't throw.  I never even said he was incapable.  All I've said is that the best part of our offense is running the ball because JB is throwing the football.  That wasn't true last year, even if we were running the ball as efficiently last year as we currently are.  I still think we'd be throwing more because Luck was good enough that we'd rather utilize Luck's arm than the running game.

 

I didn't think you'd have trouble understanding that.  It was an analogy.  People kept pointing to how bad his yards per carry were.  The pro-Trent group argued that it's not because he was bad, it was the OL and learning an ew offense.  Then it never got any better, people were showing film of how he was missing gaping holes right in front of him.  It was people refusing to look at the bad stats Trent was putting up and chalking it to something else (the line, unfamiliarity, etc.).  

 

That's what you are doing.  Could it be a combination of the things you ar esaying?  i.e. that the ratio is because some times can't do certain things well or are always behind.  Sure, but the second someone points to the fact that it might suggest that Reich doesn't think Brissett is not the long term answer, context doesn't matter (but somehow, high school football does), Reich doesn't feel that way because he said he wants to run the ball more (ignoring the possibility that that might just be because Reich doesn't think JB's the long term answer), and JB's being held back by the talent around him (you haven't said this in our conversation, but others have and I can't wrap my head around it since he's had virtually the same WRs and TEs, the same running backs and the same OL).  

You say teams depend on them......but your misconception is related to what they actually use them for. Exposing trends in your opponents is much different than scouting players or deciding whether or not your team is on par with other teams, and that's what they seem to be used for here most often. 

 

I think its a waste of time to even have this discussion because you just dont understand where I am coming from. 

 

Regardless, on to our offense.....

 

Frank Reich runs an RPO based system. He wants to run the football because his system is predicated on it. If we dont run it, his system doesn't work. That's why he talked about it with Luck under center. That's why he talks about it now. It's why they took Quenton Nelson 6th overall when the "experts" said it wasn't good value. It's why they were gonna take him 3rd overall if the trade fell thru. And that's why our passing stats are irrelevant. The system isn't built on our ability to throw the ball downfield. Our important stats are related to the running game. Because it's that important, no matter who is under center, as long as Reich is our coach. And he will be for a long time, IMO.

 

So yes, I think Jacoby has a very good chance to succeed here as our QB.

[crazycolt1]

11 hours ago, lollygagger8 said:

Brissett had to be #1 at handing the ball off last week. 

 

 

  We ran for over 200 yards and controlled the game. Is there a problem with that? 

[EastStreet]

10 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

My Tiers are: I have 1-4 (elite), 5-8 (very good), 9-12 (good), 13-16 (above average), 17-20 (average), 21-24 (below average), 25-32 = bad. I currently rate JB at 15th which by my scale is above average. Stats are a good way to measure things so I do that as well but I also look at things like how a QB has command over his offense, his leadership, how many big plays he makes to help win games, etc.. Even statistically despite not throwing for a lot of yards in most games, he still has 15 TD's to only 4 INT's in 8 games. Lets face it JB has been playing with an average WR core at best most of the year. TY has either played dinged up or missed games, Funchess has been out all season, Cain IMO just wasn't that good here, and Rogers is Rogers = Mr average. Even Ebron drops balls he has no business dropping as a TE. Pascal is ok and has had his moments but he is nothing special either.

That's "your rating" though, which is subjective/opinion. Most objective data out there (non opinionated) is below the medium on most statistical categories. 15 is also is +/-2 from the median, so it's about as average as can be even from an opinion perspective.

 

He's playing with a WR/TE core (TY, Pascal, Rogers, Ebron, Hines) that was 6th in receiving last year, and added a healthy TE that was PB the year before (Doyle), plus additions that happened to be injured (Funch, Campbell). The "bad WR" narrative is old and is excuse mongering. We went from 6th to 25th with most of the same guys, and JB has had a top 5 rated OL every game, unlike the OL that was musical chairs the first 1/3rd of the season like Luck. JB has also had a healthy running game for all 8 of his games, and Mack was out the 1st 1/3rd of the season.

 

Ebron dropped last year for Luck too.

Rogers looked a lot better with Luck.

TY was banged up last year too and missed two games the first half of the season. He's only missed one game when JB played, while missing two for Luck (plus a lot of low snap count games later in the season). His production averages have regressed with JB too even with the same average of catches.

 

6th to 25th................ most of the same guys.......... better and more experienced OL........ healthier running game...........

 

[Colts_Fan12]

3 hours ago, EastStreet said:

That's "your rating" though, which is subjective/opinion. Most objective data out there (non opinionated) is below the medium on most statistical categories. 15 is also is +/-2 from the median, so it's about as average as can be even from an opinion perspective.

 

He's playing with a WR/TE core (TY, Pascal, Rogers, Ebron, Hines) that was 6th in receiving last year, and added a healthy TE that was PB the year before (Doyle), plus additions that happened to be injured (Funch, Campbell). The "bad WR" narrative is old and is excuse mongering. We went from 6th to 25th with most of the same guys, and JB has had a top 5 rated OL every game, unlike the OL that was musical chairs the first 1/3rd of the season like Luck. JB has also had a healthy running game for all 8 of his games, and Mack was out the 1st 1/3rd of the season.

 

Ebron dropped last year for Luck too.

Rogers looked a lot better with Luck.

TY was banged up last year too and missed two games the first half of the season. He's only missed one game when JB played, while missing two for Luck (plus a lot of low snap count games later in the season). His production averages have regressed with JB too even with the same average of catches.

 

6th to 25th................ most of the same guys.......... better and more experienced OL........ healthier running game...........

 

great post! I'm sure an excuse will be made by someone for every one of the great points you make. might not be 2006 but I'm almost certain one of JBs "guardians" will be here to cry about it.

[Myles]

3 hours ago, EastStreet said:

That's "your rating" though, which is subjective/opinion. Most objective data out there (non opinionated) is below the medium on most statistical categories. 15 is also is +/-2 from the median, so it's about as average as can be even from an opinion perspective.

 

He's playing with a WR/TE core (TY, Pascal, Rogers, Ebron, Hines) that was 6th in receiving last year, and added a healthy TE that was PB the year before (Doyle), plus additions that happened to be injured (Funch, Campbell). The "bad WR" narrative is old and is excuse mongering. We went from 6th to 25th with most of the same guys, and JB has had a top 5 rated OL every game, unlike the OL that was musical chairs the first 1/3rd of the season like Luck. JB has also had a healthy running game for all 8 of his games, and Mack was out the 1st 1/3rd of the season.

 

Ebron dropped last year for Luck too.

Rogers looked a lot better with Luck.

TY was banged up last year too and missed two games the first half of the season. He's only missed one game when JB played, while missing two for Luck (plus a lot of low snap count games later in the season). His production averages have regressed with JB too even with the same average of catches.

 

6th to 25th................ most of the same guys.......... better and more experienced OL........ healthier running game...........

 

If your beef is that he is not as good as Luck, I don't think anyone would disagree with you.   JB isn't an elite QB and never will be.  There are other reasons why the passing game is down:

Brissett isn't Luck

Reich's play calling

Focus on the running game

Injuries

Brissett doesn't take many chances

 

With Luck, you could expect 250+ yards passing a game.   With Brissett it is going to be more like 175 yards passing.   

 

We are 6-4 and should be 8-2 if Adam didn't have his issues.  I watched the Chargers with a good chance to tie the game Monday night.  Rivers threw the ball 40+ and 30+ yards on the drive when they only needed 10 for a first down.  Brissett would have dumped it off and sustained the drive.  Don't get me wrong, I' much rather have Rivers, but Brissett does a good job keeping the drive alive.  

 

At this point, I think we have to accept that Brissett is our QB until the 2021 season.  

[lollygagger8]

5 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

  We ran for over 200 yards and controlled the game. Is there a problem with that? 

 

[OffensivelyPC]

6 hours ago, GoatBeard said:

You say teams depend on them......but your misconception is related to what they actually use them for. Exposing trends in your opponents is much different than scouting players or deciding whether or not your team is on par with other teams, and that's what they seem to be used for here most often. 

 

I think its a waste of time to even have this discussion because you just dont understand where I am coming from. 

 

Regardless, on to our offense.....

 

Frank Reich runs an RPO based system. He wants to run the football because his system is predicated on it. If we dont run it, his system doesn't work. That's why he talked about it with Luck under center. That's why he talks about it now. It's why they took Quenton Nelson 6th overall when the "experts" said it wasn't good value. It's why they were gonna take him 3rd overall if the trade fell thru. And that's why our passing stats are irrelevant. The system isn't built on our ability to throw the ball downfield. Our important stats are related to the running game. Because it's that important, no matter who is under center, as long as Reich is our coach. And he will be for a long time, IMO.

 

So yes, I think Jacoby has a very good chance to succeed here as our QB.

You are continuing to not understand what I am saying, particularly the bolded.  So we can be done here.

[EastStreet]

45 minutes ago, Myles said:

If your beef is that he is not as good as Luck, I don't think anyone would disagree with you.   JB isn't an elite QB and never will be.  There are other reasons why the passing game is down:

Brissett isn't Luck

Reich's play calling

Focus on the running game

Injuries

Brissett doesn't take many chances

 

With Luck, you could expect 250+ yards passing a game.   With Brissett it is going to be more like 175 yards passing.   

 

We are 6-4 and should be 8-2 if Adam didn't have his issues.  I watched the Chargers with a good chance to tie the game Monday night.  Rivers threw the ball 40+ and 30+ yards on the drive when they only needed 10 for a first down.  Brissett would have dumped it off and sustained the drive.  Don't get me wrong, I' much rather have Rivers, but Brissett does a good job keeping the drive alive.  

 

At this point, I think we have to accept that Brissett is our QB until the 2021 season.  

My beef in the earlier post was with the narrative about the receiving unit being bad. I'm simply tired of seeing folks blame everything under the moon for the regression in production. I've seen OL bashing, WR bashing, TE bashing, and "we need a better RB" narratives. Running is top 10ish, D is top 10ish, passing is bottom 10ish. It is what it is, but the receiving unit was top 10 last year, and we have a lot of the same guys. Comparative logic points to a different conclusion....

[Colts_Fan12]

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

My beef in the earlier post was with the narrative about the receiving unit being bad. I'm simply tired of seeing folks blame everything under the moon for the regression in production. I've seen OL bashing, WR bashing, TE bashing, and "we need a better RB" narratives. Running is top 10ish, D is top 10ish, passing is bottom 10ish. It is what it is, but the receiving unit was top 10 last year, and we have a lot of the same guys. Comparative logic points to a different conclusion....

let's hope Tua falls and we get him later in the 1st maybe that can solve our problems lol

[Myles]

2 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

let's hope Tua falls and we get him later in the 1st maybe that can solve our problems lol

That's actually a good point.  We could get a top prospect without giving up the rest of our draft (which Ballard wasn't going to do).   

He could sit behind Brissett next season and heal and learn.

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

let's hope Tua falls and we get him later in the 1st maybe that can solve our problems lol

I'm not close to being there yet. I've said for a while it's how JB does in the last 7 games that will likely firm my opinion. I've said also for a while he needs 8 games to find his groove (interrupted by injury), and make mistakes. He's had that now. Time to start showing consistent and sustained improvement. 

 

Houston is a great game to start showing that and build confidence. Given Houston's bad pass D, JB should be able to showcase tomorrow, and use it as a spring board to the last 5. 

[Colts_Fan12]

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

I'm not close to being there yet. I've said for a while it's how JB does in the last 7 games that will likely firm my opinion. I've said also for a while he needs 8 games to find his groove (interrupted by injury), and make mistakes. He's had that now. Time to start showing consistent and sustained improvement. 

 

Houston is a great game to start showing that and build confidence. Given Houston's bad pass D, JB should be able to showcase tomorrow, and use it as a spring board to the last 5. 

I'd still take Tua lol I'm a lil further along than you are.

[Myles]

6 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

My beef in the earlier post was with the narrative about the receiving unit being bad. I'm simply tired of seeing folks blame everything under the moon for the regression in production. I've seen OL bashing, WR bashing, TE bashing, and "we need a better RB" narratives. Running is top 10ish, D is top 10ish, passing is bottom 10ish. It is what it is, but the receiving unit was top 10 last year, and we have a lot of the same guys. Comparative logic points to a different conclusion....

I can understand that.  

The injuries and lack of talent at WR is a fair issue to explain some of the passing yardage issues.  Only because Brissett is not Luck.   Luck could make mediocre look great.   That is not what Brissett can do.  It's also not what Reich play called for.  

[Myles]

15 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I'm not close to being there yet. I've said for a while it's how JB does in the last 7 games that will likely firm my opinion. I've said also for a while he needs 8 games to find his groove (interrupted by injury), and make mistakes. He's had that now. Time to start showing consistent and sustained improvement. 

 

Houston is a great game to start showing that and build confidence. Given Houston's bad pass D, JB should be able to showcase tomorrow, and use it as a spring board to the last 5. 

I'd definitely take Tua if we could get him without giving up too much or maybe he drops to us at 17-22.   Brissett is going to be the QB in 2020.   Most of his money is guaranteed.   The chance to get the QB that most were considering the #1 pick would be too much to pass up.  I think we know what Brissetts ceiling is.   The risk is that we also know that his floor is pretty high.  Tua has a higher ceiling, but also a lower floor.  

[EastStreet]

20 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I'd still take Tua lol I'm a lil further along than you are.

You need to give a guy at least 8 games to find his footing. While I fear he may struggle with more natural than learned skills (harder to improve), he still deserves the chance to improve unless he falls completely off the rails. The rest of the season will be a great gauge. 

[EastStreet]

11 minutes ago, Myles said:

I can understand that.  

The injuries and lack of talent at WR is a fair issue to explain some of the passing yardage issues.  Only because Brissett is not Luck.   Luck could make mediocre look great.   That is not what Brissett can do.  It's also not what Reich play called for.  

While a little bit may go to Reich, a lot goes to vision / progression struggles. And to you're point about making mediocre look great, you could also say JB puts more of a strain on the position. He certainly puts more on the OL with the high time to throw. The "neediness" factor is very relevant when trying to build a team in all phases.

[EastStreet]

10 minutes ago, Myles said:

I'd definitely take Tua if we could get him without giving up too much or maybe he drops to us at 17-22.   Brissett is going to be the QB in 2020.   Most of his money is guaranteed.   The chance to get the QB that most were considering the #1 pick would be too much to pass up.  I think we know what Brissetts ceiling is.   The risk is that we also know that his floor is pretty high.  Tua has a higher ceiling, but also a lower floor.  

I'd definitely take Tua or Love in the 2nd as I think they could easily be traded for a 2nd down the road should JB the long term answer. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

1 hour ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

let's hope Tua falls and we get him later in the 1st maybe that can solve our problems lol

Why would you want a guy that has a history of injuries. Somebody will take a chance but I would not be happy no matter how good he has shown to be. He has had multiple lower body injuries I believe. I don’t want drama anymore whether a QB can stay healthy.

 

I wonder what people are going to do when we not only don’t take a QB but give JB another three or four year extension after this season.

 

We are about to get three WR back and will  really see what  the offense can do down the stretch if everyone stays healthy. 

[Myles]

4 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

 

 

I wonder what people are going to do when we not only don’t take a QB but give JB another three or four year extension after this season.

I think people will do what they are doing now.   Hope for the best.   

If Brissett continues playing as he has this season, it'll be a bit disappointing in that we would know we are stuck with an above average QB for the next 4 years.  

If Brissett picks it up and plays better in these last 6 games and the playoffs, it'll be easier to swallow.  

[Colts_Fan12]

4 minutes ago, Myles said:

I think people will do what they are doing now.   Hope for the best.   

If Brissett continues playing as he has this season, it'll be a bit disappointing in that we would know we are stuck with an above average QB for the next 4 years.  

If Brissett picks it up and plays better in these last 6 games and the playoffs, it'll be easier to swallow.  

yeah if he stays where he is at we can know we will probably be middle of the pack every year idk about everyone else but my hope is to win a super bowl not just make the playoffs. 

 

that's actually not even a guarantee cause we are middle of the pack now and the AFC is extremely weak this year