Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Nick Foles will start vs Colts


Recommended Posts

Based off of their career stats, it's hard to choose who I'd rather the Colts face.

 

Pass completions

Foles - 61.8%

Trubs - 63.1%

 

TD's/INT's

Foles - 74/36

Trubs - 54/32

 

Rating

Foles - 88.3

Trubs - 85.9

 

Win/loss

Foles - 26/22

Trubs - 26-18

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Myles said:

Based off of their career stats, it's hard to choose who I'd rather the Colts face.

 

Pass completions

Foles - 61.8%

Trubs - 63.1%

 

TD's/INT's

Foles - 74/36

Trubs - 54/32

 

Rating

Foles - 88.3

Trubs - 85.9

 

Win/loss

Foles - 226/22

Trubs - 26-18

 

 

 

I think Trubisky can move around much better in the pocket and having him out against Foles favors Indy

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

Based off of their career stats, it's hard to choose who I'd rather the Colts face.

 

Pass completions

Foles - 61.8%

Trubs - 63.1%

 

TD's/INT's

Foles - 74/36

Trubs - 54/32

 

Rating

Foles - 88.3

Trubs - 85.9

 

Win/loss

Foles - 226/22

Trubs - 26-18

 

 

Damn... Foles is a freakin winner.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Myles said:

Based off of their career stats, it's hard to choose who I'd rather the Colts face.

 

Pass completions

Foles - 61.8%

Trubs - 63.1%

 

TD's/INT's

Foles - 74/36

Trubs - 54/32

 

Rating

Foles - 88.3

Trubs - 85.9

 

Win/loss

Foles - 226/22

Trubs - 26-18

 

 

The Win/Loss stat I see for Foles is 30/24 as a starter...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Myles said:

Based off of their career stats, it's hard to choose who I'd rather the Colts face.

 

Pass completions

Foles - 61.8%

Trubs - 63.1%

 

TD's/INT's

Foles - 74/36

Trubs - 54/32

 

Rating

Foles - 88.3

Trubs - 85.9

 

Win/loss

Foles - 226/22

Trubs - 26-18

 

 

I bet 150-180 of those wins are with him riding the pine 

Did Trubs get hurt or is this a performance type switch up?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, csmopar said:

I bet 150-180 of those wins are with him riding the pine 

Did Trubs get hurt or is this a performance type switch up?

It was to spark the team yesterday, but since it worked they are sticking with Foles for at least this week.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, shakedownstreet said:

 

I think Trubisky can move around much better in the pocket and having him out against Foles favors Indy

I found their sack % opposite of what I thought I would see:

Foles - 5.3%

Trubs - 6.8%

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lancer1 said:

Let's see if the defense can record a safety in the 3rd straight game!

 

 

 Could happen, but teams don't just score safeties 3 weeks straight. It was extremely exciting to see number one versus the Vikings. It was just flat out crazy to see it happen again this week.

 

I'll bet your bank account versus mine it doesn't happen again :goodluck:

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, shakedownstreet said:

Seeing a team get a safety 3 weeks consecutively is about as likely as a an NFL one point play (yes it's possible but has never happened) 

A little-noticed aspect of the NFL’s new extra point rule is that we could see, for the first time in league history, a one-point safety.

If the defense gets the ball in the field of play on a conversion attemp, and then a defensive player takes the ball into his own end zone and is tackled, the result will be a one-point safety: The offensive team will get one point. That has never happened before in NFL history.

It had never happened before because it was virtually impossible: In the past, any time the defense took possession of the ball on a point-after attempt (either a one-point kick or a two-point conversion), the play was blown dead. A one-point safety was theoretically possible before, but it would have happened only if the defensive team had illegally batted a fumbled ball in the end zone.

One-point safeties have happened in college football, most notably in the 2013 Fiesta Bowl, when Kansas State blocked an Oregon extra point and a Kansas State player picked up the ball and ran it into his own end zone. The college rule that gives the defense the opportunity to score two points by returning an interception, fumble or blocked kick to the opposite end zone means that defensive teams that take possession of the ball will try to run it back for a score, and sometimes those players end up getting tackled after backtracking into their own end zones.

With that rule now in place in the NFL, it will happen in the NFL eventually as well: Some defensive player is going to reverse field, get caught in his own end zone, and give up the first one-point safety in NFL history.

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/22/nfl-may-see-its-first-one-point-safety/#:~:text=If the defense gets the,happened before in NFL history.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Myles said:

A little-noticed aspect of the NFL’s new extra point rule is that we could see, for the first time in league history, a one-point safety.

If the defense gets the ball in the field of play on a conversion attemp, and then a defensive player takes the ball into his own end zone and is tackled, the result will be a one-point safety: The offensive team will get one point. That has never happened before in NFL history.

It had never happened before because it was virtually impossible: In the past, any time the defense took possession of the ball on a point-after attempt (either a one-point kick or a two-point conversion), the play was blown dead. A one-point safety was theoretically possible before, but it would have happened only if the defensive team had illegally batted a fumbled ball in the end zone.

One-point safeties have happened in college football, most notably in the 2013 Fiesta Bowl, when Kansas State blocked an Oregon extra point and a Kansas State player picked up the ball and ran it into his own end zone. The college rule that gives the defense the opportunity to score two points by returning an interception, fumble or blocked kick to the opposite end zone means that defensive teams that take possession of the ball will try to run it back for a score, and sometimes those players end up getting tackled after backtracking into their own end zones.

With that rule now in place in the NFL, it will happen in the NFL eventually as well: Some defensive player is going to reverse field, get caught in his own end zone, and give up the first one-point safety in NFL history.

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/22/nfl-may-see-its-first-one-point-safety/#:~:text=If the defense gets the,happened before in NFL history.

I'm still a bit confused by this.  It sounds like if there is a fumble on a 2 point conversion and the defense grabs it in the endzone and doesn't get out of the endzone it would be a 1 point safety.  Wouldn't it be a touchback?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Myles said:

I'm still a bit confused by this.  It sounds like if there is a fumble on a 2 point conversion and the defense grabs it in the endzone and doesn't get out of the endzone it would be a 1 point safety.  Wouldn't it be a touchback?

 

Yes but in that scenario it's only a one point play

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Myles said:

I'm still a bit confused by this.  It sounds like if there is a fumble on a 2 point conversion and the defense grabs it in the endzone and doesn't get out of the endzone it would be a 1 point safety.  Wouldn't it be a touchback?

Yes, that would be a touchback. What the article is stating is that if the defensive player picks up the ball in the Endzone goes into the field of play, then retreats back into the end zone and his tackled, that is considered a safety.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MB-ColtsFan said:

Yes, that would be a touchback. What the article is stating is that if the defensive player picks up the ball in the Endzone goes into the field of play, then retreats back into the end zone and his tackled, that is considered a safety.

That makes sense.  I guess.

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

From what I read Foles would of been in competition with Brissett. He wouldn’t of been handed the job like Rivers.

That would have stunk.  Rivers is who I wanted and am glad we went that direction.   Good bridge.   I don't really think he makes the team a Superbowl threat, but if we can get to the playoffs, anything can happen.  Best case is that he stays next season as well and we make sure the QB of the future is on the roster.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Myles said:

That would have stunk.  Rivers is who I wanted and am glad we went that direction.   Good bridge.   I don't really think he makes the team a Superbowl threat, but if we can get to the playoffs, anything can happen.  Best case is that he stays next season as well and we make sure the QB of the future is on the roster.  

**** that. Colts win the SB this season

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

 

 

 Could happen, but teams don't just score safeties 3 weeks straight. It was extremely exciting to see number one versus the Vikings. It was just flat out crazy to see it happen again this week.

 

I'll bet your bank account versus mine it doesn't happen again :goodluck:

There is that small chance, mostly cuz of Rigo punting and the guys who get downfield to down it. It does make it more possible

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.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Ballard didn't say it was definite.   He didn't rule it out.   He just said as of this minute.    I think he's hoping to find out in April and May.      He still might end up deciding Eason is OK as the back-up.   I was only trying to impress upon those in the "Throw Jacob Eason in and see what we have" crowd that Ballard has crushed that dream for 2021.    But I wouldn't rule out 2022....  at least not yet.  
    • TY - 2Y/22M - he can still play but he’s not Tyreek Hill taking the top of defenses anymore, and with his disappearing act at the beginning of the year I’m afraid to sign him any longer or with too much guaranteed. Partly for sentimental reasons I want him to stay, but I do think he’s still got some juice.    Mack - 1Y/1M - Likable player but due to his position and injury, no way can I justify giving him much more than vet minimum.    Houston - 1Y/8M - Fell off a lot this year compared to his first year. Still our best edge player, basically by default and I’d be hoping we can get a more 2019 performance out of him at arguably our weakest position on the team.    Autry - Walk. He will price himself out with an inflated sense of value because he’s gotten decent sack numbers, but he is the definition of JAG and I’d only keep him if he agreed to a minimum contract.    Rhodes - 1Y/6M - He was a stud this year. If we could guarantee that he won’t revert back to his last two years in Minnesota I would be willing to go longer and higher. With how much he fell off after getting paid the first time, I’m not giving him a long term deal.    Walker - 1Y/2M - He was playing a very small percentage of downs at the end of the year so I’m keeping him less based on ability and more based on leadership and football savvy.    Hooker - Walk. Both sides need to just move on. I’d keep him at minimum too but I think both sides want a fresh start. Also a little miscast in the current defense so no reason to force a square peg into a round hole.    Brissett - 1Y/5M - Too big of a fan of Brissett as a man to want to see him leave. I don’t want him starting but he’s a very solid backup and compared to the 20M we gave him last year, I can live with his salary being at 1/4 of that this year.    Pascal and MAC both tendered at 2.24M. I want to bring in Kenny Golladay or Allen Robinson and Pascal is JAG so he’s not falling into my future plans much. I’m a big fan of MAC and I wouldn’t mind seeing him play the Jack Doyle role. He’s a better blocker, has better hands, and is more explosive.    I may be lowballing some guys but I’d hate to fall into the trap of overvaluing our guys and keeping them just because you want to keep your own. Unfortunately, I think the five most important positions on the team also coincide with our five weakest positions on the team; QB, WR, CB, DE, and LT. Fortunately we’ve got a good cap situation and this is the perfect year to be needing a QB. 
    • If we let Walker Walk, (and I think it’s likely) it’s not because we want an upgrade.   It’s because we simply don’t play him enough.   I think East Street has the numbers in snaps, but I think Walker is roughly playing 25-30 percent of the snaps.   That’s it.    We can't pay him enough for that.   Some other team will PLAY him more so they will PAY him more.    When Walker is off the field, we are either playing a 4-2-5 or a 4-1-6.   Leonard plays basically 100 percent of the snaps and I think Oke is about 55-60 percent.     There is a method to our madness.  
    • I'm surprised some folks want to resign Walker. Imo we definitely need an upgrade.... I'd let him walk.
    • Colts have won one playoff game in 6 seasons. Some more losing seasons and this team is no longer even in the top half of NFL franchises. They would be mostly irrelevant. I can’t imagine Irsay going for that.   Ballard is definitely safe...but this is year 5 and I am assuming there is a bit more urgency than just waiting for the perfect opportunity to come along.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...