CurBeat's Takeaways - Colts over Jets

[CurBeatElite]

Overall, we were solid in all 3 phases.  Hard to be too high coming off the given it was the Jets, but it was all-in-all a good game.

 

Things I was pleased with:

1) We won the turnover battle 3-0 (4-0 if you consider a safety a forced TO).  Glad to see Rhodes w/ 2 INTs.  

2) We had 2 TDs and a safety on D.  The last time a Colts team had 2 INTs returned for TDs in the same game was nearly 70 years ago (10/18/1950, also vs. the Jets).  

3) We started off hot on O.  Yes, we took a TD to the house, then they came back and scored on us.... but we got the ball back and marched right down the field.  We've started off moving the ball every game so far, something we have struggled with mightily since the Peyton days.  

4) Although TY was only targeted 3x, he caught all 3 for 52 yards and it looked like he was having fun out there again.. he looked better than week 1 or 2.

5) Leonard was all over the place again, the guy is special (we all know that, but he just keeps proving it).

6) Although Rivers made a few conservative throws (e.g., the 3rd and 10 throw to MAC in the 3rd quarter) and sacrificed yards, he didn't force anything and he threw 0 INTs.  I'll take that every day of the week, especially when we're playing with a lead and not in desperation mode.

7) Alie-Cox with the TD and a huge gain shows that he and Rivers are still developing chemistry, which is exciting and will be scary to other Ds when Doyle returns.

8) Thought our ST coverage unit was solid (EJ Speed made a heckuva play on a kickoff late in the game... of course, he got a holding on Rodgers' next return, but we have a fast ST unit).

9) We had a more balanced offensive attack than we did the previous two games and we did pretty well in both areas (run and pass).  

10) Kenny Moore II (and the rest of the secondary for that matter) played well.  Moore has to be one of the best blitzing DBs in the league.  I was pleased with the play of Blackmon and Tavon Wilson in the secondary and was impressed with Wilson's tackles for loss.

11) Taylor got his YPC up to 4.5 (and Wilkins was at 4.3).  I think those guys are a solid 1-2 punch and don't really think we've skipped too much of a beat since losing Mack to the season.

12) Jacoby looked mobile in the pocket and he put more touch on 2 of his throws than I saw at all last season.  So, I think that is a good thing (ideally, we'll only see him that much when we're pulling starters b/c we have such a large lead, but he didn't look bad).

13) From what I could tell, we didn't have any key players (or any players) sustain significant injuries for the first time this year.

 

Things I was so-so with:

1) Blankenship... he's got plenty of leg, but missed another kick (granted he hit the upright, and it didn't matter in this game, but we can't afford to be missing makeable kicks as frequently as he has so far).  Not too worried about him, though.. he did hit 2 other kicks and 4/4 on XPs.  

2) The pass rush -- we got 2 sacks and 7 QB hits... the DL was definitely disrupting Darnold most of the game, but it seemed like they were just a quarter of a second away from getting about 3-5 more sacks... it'd be really nice if they could turn 33-50% of those QB hits into actual sacks.

3) Offensive playcalling -- we didn't make any turnovers and we had a couple of very nice big chunk plays.  I like Hines, but he continued to struggle in the run game (it's almost like he's too predictable when used as a runner, but did well w/ 4 receptions for 40 yards.  Reich was definitely more conservative this game than vs. JAX, settling for FGs on fourth and short in their territory.  That said, I thought there were times when we could have been a bit more aggressive.  Overall, the O was efficient and we got the win (with 16 points assisted from our D).  I did also like we were pretty balanced on O, which we were not (heavy pass, then heavy run) in games 1 and 2.  

 

Things to improve:

1) Time of possession.... after dominating TOS in games 1 and 2, we were almost equal to NYJ today.  I'd like to see us continue to be on the dominant end of that category moving forward, especially against mediocre teams.

2) Just some nit-picky things on individual players -- overall, I think we played well and hopefully this game gives us confidence as we get ready to take on Chicago (who is probably going to have a lot of confidence after that Foles comeback).

 

[AZColt11]

Pleased:  Rivers' completion percentage, rookies playing well, defense has a penchant for creating turnovers, defense limiting yards, emergence of MAC

 

Not so pleased:  offensive 3rd down percentage, red zone offense, offensive play-calling too predictable, defense overrunning QB's, short yardage runs

 

 

[PuntersArePeopleToo]

35 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

2) We had 2 TDs and a safety on D.  The last time a Colts team had 2 INTs returned for TDs in the same game was nearly 70 years ago (10/18/1950, also vs. the Jets).  

 

 

 

It was 1970 so 50 years ago. Colts were not a team 70 years ago (Founded in 1953)

[CurBeatElite]

11 minutes ago, PuntersArePeopleToo said:

 

It was 1970 so 50 years ago. Colts were not a team 70 years ago (Founded in 1953)

Thank you.. you are correct, the last time was 50 years ago in 1970, not 70 years ago in 1950.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

We need to get the red zone and third down fixed. We really miss Mack. 

[CurBeatElite]

42 minutes ago, AZColt11 said:

Pleased:  Rivers' completion percentage, rookies playing well, defense has a penchant for creating turnovers, defense limiting yards, emergence of MAC

 

Not so pleased:  offensive 3rd down percentage, red zone offense, offensive play-calling too predictable, defense overrunning QB's, short yardage runs

 

 

I agree with you on the 3rd down percentage, it seemed like today we were in more 3rd and longs than we were the first two weeks.  Not sure about RZ offense (against NYJ anyway -- we went 2-2 with TDs when we were in the RZ, which I was happy with).  

[AZColt11]

2 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

I agree with you on the 3rd down percentage, it seemed like today we were in more 3rd and longs than we were the first two weeks.  Not sure about RZ offense (against NYJ anyway -- we went 2-2 with TDs when we were in the RZ, which I was happy with).  

You're right.  I was thinking they were worse than that.  Take that one off the list.  I'm probably thinking about the previous 2 games.  My bad.

[CurBeatElite]

6 minutes ago, AZColt11 said:

You're right.  I was thinking they were worse than that.  Take that one off the list.  I'm probably thinking about the previous 2 games.  My bad.

 

We got close on Hot Rod's kicks (the one he missed was right before half, but the other 2 we failed to convert on 3rd down when we were knocking on the red zone).... but yea, we messed up in the RZ multiple times week 1 and 2..

[richard pallo]

The offense only scored 20 points against a very poor Jets team.  The defense turned it into a blowout.  We still have a ways to go on offense.  I think it will come as we get a few more games under our belt.  But if we played a good team today with a good QB the result could easily have been different.  The schedule worked in our favor today.  Our offense and OL need to get into sync and be ready for the stronger teams.  A promising start none the less.  

[shasta519]

Colts dominated as they should (this NYJ is as bad as I have seen). Will look great on the stat sheet...but this game had sort of a preseason feel to it.

 

Now it’s time to take this show on the road...literally. 

[BlueCollarColts]

It's REALLY hard to win the TOP battle when you have two pick 6's to be fair. That's four consecutive possessions. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

To the OP, Great stuff as usual from you. We kicked their butt today didn't we, it didn't come down to no close stuff. 

[tweezy32]

Wilkins should be the starter... stop playing with the man. He’s a beast.

[jmac_48]

My biggest takeaway is we didn't play down to our opponents level...

A little scary the first couple of possessions, but got better.

Glad to see TY catching the ball again!

[crazycolt1]

7 minutes ago, jmac_48 said:

My biggest takeaway is we didn't play down to our opponents level...

A little scary the first couple of possessions, but got better.

Glad to see TY catching the ball again!

The Colts played like they were suppose to do against the Jets.

Took control of the game.

Each week is different but I am not going to worry till there is something to worry about. 

This team is pretty damn talented. 

[King Colt]

Overall both sides of the Colts played to win. Everyone seems to be on the same page credit to the  coaching staff. It was said during the game the team is solidly behind Rivers. All good news.

[JPFolks]

7 hours ago, richard pallo said:

The offense only scored 20 points against a very poor Jets team.  The defense turned it into a blowout.  We still have a ways to go on offense.  I think it will come as we get a few more games under our belt.  But if we played a good team today with a good QB the result could easily have been different.  The schedule worked in our favor today.  Our offense and OL need to get into sync and be ready for the stronger teams.  A promising start none the less.  

Yes 100%  I think this start has been fools gold, especially on Offense. We will not beat an average team with the lack of good play calling and lack of total offense.  We should have easily been 3-0 against 3 of the worst teams in the league. 1-8 so far for those 3. All of them have very serious issues, though of the 3 Jax seems to be the best at least.  I can't see us beating a playoff caliber team yet. I can't see better than 9-7 unless we really up our offensive production. Even though we shut it down before the 4th quarter offensively, we just don't look dominant against these bottom 3rd teams. This game especially is no more meaningful than a scrimmage aside from the W in the win column.  I don't think we learned anything yet.  Chicago has a sketchy offense, but their D is for real, so let's hope this confidence builder pays off and we lift our game next week or we could get an unpleasant wake up call.  

[CurBeatElite]

6 hours ago, tweezy32 said:

Wilkins should be the starter... stop playing with the man. He’s a beast.

 

Wilkins is playing very well.  He seems to finally be playing up to his size, lowering his pads, gaining extra yards.  Right now, I think he may have a little bit better vision than Taylor... but I'm fine with the way carries are being distributed for now.

[AZColt11]

52 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

Yes 100%  I think this start has been fools gold, especially on Offense. We will not beat an average team with the lack of good play calling and lack of total offense.  We should have easily been 3-0 against 3 of the worst teams in the league. 1-8 so far for those 3. All of them have very serious issues, though of the 3 Jax seems to be the best at least.  I can't see us beating a playoff caliber team yet. I can't see better than 9-7 unless we really up our offensive production. Even though we shut it down before the 4th quarter offensively, we just don't look dominant against these bottom 3rd teams. This game especially is no more meaningful than a scrimmage aside from the W in the win column.  I don't think we learned anything yet.  Chicago has a sketchy offense, but their D is for real, so let's hope this confidence builder pays off and we lift our game next week or we could get an unpleasant wake up call.  

Not sure I agree that the Jags are the best we've played.  Colts gave them some points with turnovers, a missed FG, and a failed 4th-and-1 on a bad call (I blame Reich there).  The Colts dominated them stats-wise though.  I think the Vikings are the better of the 3.  They only looked bad against us.  They lit up the Packers defense in Week 1 for 34 and moved the ball very well vs. the Titans and scored 30.  Losses but they certainly looked better vs. them than when they played us.  

 

Either way I think the Bears might be the best overall team we will have played to date.  Colts will need to bring it.

[JPFolks]

54 minutes ago, AZColt11 said:

Not sure I agree that the Jags are the best we've played.  Colts gave them some points with turnovers, a missed FG, and a failed 4th-and-1 on a bad call (I blame Reich there).  The Colts dominated them stats-wise though.  I think the Vikings are the better of the 3.  They only looked bad against us.  They lit up the Packers defense in Week 1 for 34 and moved the ball very well vs. the Titans and scored 30.  Losses but they certainly looked better vs. them than when they played us.  

 

Either way I think the Bears might be the best overall team we will have played to date.  Colts will need to bring it.

The Jags nearly beat the Titans too. They play harder using the eye test IMO. The Vikes have no excuse for 0-3 whereas the Jags at 1-2 have every possible legit excuse as do the Jets. I think regardless of which team is worse, they are all firmly in the bottom 1/3rd. 

[AZColt11]

50 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

The Jags nearly beat the Titans too. They play harder using the eye test IMO. The Vikes have no excuse for 0-3 whereas the Jags at 1-2 have every possible legit excuse as do the Jets. I think regardless of which team is worse, they are all firmly in the bottom 1/3rd. 

Yeah maybe.  Cousins is either hot or cold.  Maybe we caught him on a cold week?  Maybe the defense contributed to that?  They sure haven't allowed much to anybody yet.  Either way, if the Colts don't play well in Week 4 they will lose.

[crazycolt1]

They are selling T shirts in New York  JETS!

Just 

End 

The

Suffering

 

 

[JPFolks]

17 hours ago, AZColt11 said:

Yeah maybe.  Cousins is either hot or cold.  Maybe we caught him on a cold week?  Maybe the defense contributed to that?  They sure haven't allowed much to anybody yet.  Either way, if the Colts don't play well in Week 4 they will lose.

And now it sounds like both our injured receivers are much worse than initially thought. I wanted at least 1 more reliable veteran WR this year and last year both and sadly once again we are bereft of WR depth much like we were once terribly thin on the oline. It was clear that Ballard recognized the issue, but chose to address it with the draft rather than bringing in a quality vet to match with Hilton's leadership.  Now I don't know of one to be had.  This may well become a nightmare for us.  I am likely the biggest Pascal fan on the board, but he should be a depth piece, not a starter.  Outside of Hilton we have no real separation among our remaining WRs.  I think we may need to lean heavy on BOTH TE's going forward.  But we look like a typical one and done at best type of team right now.