Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Is The Colts Defense Legit?


Is The Colts Defense Legit?  

120 members have voted

  1. 1. Is The Colts Defense Legit?



Recommended Posts

Is the Colts defense legit?  I can't tell yet.

 

Statistics:

 

Yds -

 

a)  Colts are #1 Defense in yds/gm (225), by a decent margin (PIT-290).

 

b)  Colts are #1 Defense in pass yds/gm (396), and it's not even close.  2nd is Balt (421) by 25 yds... BEFORE they've even played their 3rd game... so after Balt plays tonight, 2nd place should be 49ers, who have allowed 160+ more passing yds than the Colts.

 

Pts -

 

a)  Colts will be #1 scoring defense after 3 weeks if the Chiefs put up 28+ on Balt tonight.

 

b)  Colts are #1 in safeties, scoring 2 safeties in the last 2 weeks.  Has that ever been done before?!?

 

TOs - 

 

a)  Colts are #1 in interceptions (6), which ties us for 2nd-most turnovers (CLE and NE have 7)

 

b)  Colts are tied with NE for #1 in Defensive TDs (2).

 

Eye Test:

 

a)  The Colts defense got dog-walked in week 1, but weirdly had some good stats afterward.

 

b)  The Colts defense is doing some very important things very well.  They are preventing the long-ball and forcing teams to play close to the LOS.  They may be allowing passes completed, but they're limiting 1st downs and getting the ball back for their offense.

 

c)  The Defense is reacting much quicker and more effectively than in week 1.  Passes are getting broken up.  Runners are being met in the hole, and tackling seems much cleaner than week 1.

 

Conclusion:

 

It seems like this defense could be legit.  The pieces seem to be falling into place with Buckner and Houston playing well at the line, Maniac reacting to everything, and the DBs keeping everything in front of them.  Lotta youth in the DB room, so I like the conservative approach of keeping everything in front of them and letting them react to what they see.  Want to see just a little bit more from the DLine.  We're gonna need major disruption from that group to make this Defense stay legit all year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

Is the Colts defense legit?  I can't tell yet.

 

Statistics:

 

Yds -

 

a)  Colts are #1 Defense in yds/gm (225), by a decent margin (PIT-290).

 

b)  Colts are #1 Defense in pass yds/gm (396), and it's not even close.  2nd is Balt (421) by 25 yds... BEFORE they've even played their 3rd game... so after Balt plays tonight, 2nd place should be 49ers, who have allowed 160+ more passing yds than the Colts.

 

 

how can they be 225 yards per game and yet, allow 396 yard passing a game?  something not making sense there.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, csmopar said:

far too early to tell.  We've also played a trio of teams with a combined record of 1-8.  Not exactly the cream of the crop.  we'll know in a couple weeks.

 

Yeah, this thread might be a little premature considering who we've played the first 3 weeks.

 

But it's not quite as premature as the "hot seat" or "convince me to keep watching" threads after week 1!!!  :funny:

 

Once we see how Balt plays KC tonight, and then how we play Balt after the bye, then we'll have a better feel for this team.  :thmup:

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, csmopar said:

how can they be 225 yards per game and yet, allow 396 yard passing a game?  something not making sense there.

 

That's my bad, that was 396 total pass yds after 3 games, so 132 pass yds/gm.

 

So we're #1 before the #2 team (Balt) has even allowed a third games worth of yardage.

 

:D

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

That's my bad, that was 396 total pass yds after 3 games, so 132 pass yds/gm.

 

So we're #1 before the #2 team (Balt) has even allowed a third games worth of yardage.

 

:D

thanks, i was trying to figure that out

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, csmopar said:

thanks, i was trying to figure that out

 

I'm also pulling stats from like 3 different sites because no two can seem to agree on the exact stats...

 

Either way, the Colts look good on paper...

 

But are they good?  This feels like deja vu from the mid-2000s when the Colts defense would look good on paper, and then allow 375 rushing yds to Jax in Jax...

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is legit? Good enough to win games? So far that’s been the case 2/3 times.
 

I voted yes, but I’m between that and undecided as well. Let’s see how we fare against Nagy’s offense. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very inconsistent. And we haven't played a top 20 offensive, or OL.

 

We'll know a little more after we play the Browns. We'll know all we need to know after we play the Ravens.

 

I do know one thing. We look better, or so it seems, when we play man.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we'll know more like some have said when we play a 'top tier' team.

 

So far they've been good enough to get us to 2-1 and have had some bright spots.

 

If they get waxed anytime they play a decent nfl QB then I'll get back to the usual feeling of helplessness I've had for the past few years regarding our D.. Lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to say yes and also cast another vote, now after 3 weeks, for Darious Leonard for defensive player of the year. I think we play too much soft zone and don't blitz enough but with that said those guys have been pretty good thus far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not naive enough to think the Colts actually have the best defense as the rating show.

What I do believe is we are pretty talented and will improve as time goes along. 

What we do have on defense is great speed and a touch of nastiness. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it could be.  But we need more evidence.  However, I look back to last season when they likely had less overall talent.  This defense fared well vs. the Chiefs.  They fared well in both games vs. the Texans.  They held Tennessee down in the 1st game.  High-flying Atlanta had just 24.  I mean it's not like this defense didn't show some good things last year.  And now we have added Buckner and several others to that and didn't really lose much, maybe Sheard?    I think they could very well be legit.  Just how legit that is who knows, but I would not beat all surprised if they are top 10 by the end of the season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they as good as the numbers?  I wouldn't say so.  On Sunday, it felt more like a case of bad offensive play and mistakes from the Jets than elite defensive play from the Colts.  To be a legit top 10 type defense, they have to get something from Turay or Banogu.  They need that player who flashes off the edge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We've beaten the Jets who are ranked #32. We've beaten the Vikings who are ranked #20. Lost to a hungry Jags team who are currently ranked #26. I wouldn't crown our defense just yet.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

For all those saying "but we played crappy offenses"....well, it apparently doesn't matter because we still have the #1 defense rating for DVOA (Defense-adjusted Value Over Average, which refers to defensive rankings which are adjusted to take into account the quality of offensive opponents).

 

 

So what's the next dig on why the defense just can't be legit yet?  For me, it's probably that we're only 3 games in to a wildly crazy no-preseason season. But still, they appear legit by the appropriate measuring stick. Go figure! :woah:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/28/2020 at 6:18 PM, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

Yeah, this thread might be a little premature considering who we've played the first 3 weeks.

 

But it's not quite as premature as the "hot seat" or "convince me to keep watching" threads after week 1!!!  :funny:

 

Once we see how Balt plays KC tonight, and then how we play Balt after the bye, then we'll have a better feel for this team.  :thmup:

the thing is though in previous years when playing bad offenses they would still move the ball at will on us.   From the grigson years we had horrible last place offenses score 30 plus on us .  even though the talent we played is bad , the defense is definitely better then last year and any year in the grigson era .

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

I don’t think we will really know until we’ll into November when we face much better teams in the meat of the schedule. 
 

I know it’s not a sexy answer, but that’s the best I can do...

 

I couldn’t agree more. November and December will test the defense. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d like to add something. Ballard has done what I think a great job getting depth. The defense we’re back on defense will help keep guys fresh throughout the season. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We haven’t even played a quarter of the season, and as everyone else has noted, we haven’t played very good teams yet and won’t for a while.   We might not know until December or even (gasp!) the end of the season.

 

Rushing to judgement is a Fools Errand!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

We haven’t even played a quarter of the season, and as everyone else has noted, we haven’t played very good teams yet and won’t for a while.   We might not know until December or even (gasp!) the end of the season.

 

Rushing to judgement is a Fools Errand!

Bears will be a nice test playing on the road. They aren't an elite team IMO but a playoff team IMO. That would be a solid win. You are pretty much right though until we play someone like the Titans, Ravens, or Steelers it is tough to say where we stand in which category. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

While most everyone says lets wait and see, I say enjoy it while it last. 

It wouldn't surprise me to see them improve as the season goes along. 

No doubt this is the best defense we have had in a very long time. Just might do very well. 

If we can keep our health why not? 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, coming on strong said:

the thing is though in previous years when playing bad offenses they would still move the ball at will on us.   From the grigson years we had horrible last place offenses score 30 plus on us .  even though the talent we played is bad , the defense is definitely better then last year and any year in the grigson era .

Yeah I was thinking about that.  We used to play that bend-but-don't break defense and try to hold the opponent to FG's.  Now, we aren't even bending.  Let's see if they can keep that up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Dogg63 said:

For all those saying "but we played crappy offenses"....well, it apparently doesn't matter because we still have the #1 defense rating for DVOA (Defense-adjusted Value Over Average, which refers to defensive rankings which are adjusted to take into account the quality of offensive opponents).

 

 

So what's the next dig on why the defense just can't be legit yet?  For me, it's probably that we're only 3 games in to a wildly crazy no-preseason season. But still, they appear legit by the appropriate measuring stick. Go figure! :woah:

  Are we sure that those 'adjustments' start after week 1 (as opposed to after week 4) ?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, indykmj said:
14 hours ago, Dogg63 said:

For all those saying "but we played crappy offenses"....well, it apparently doesn't matter because we still have the #1 defense rating for DVOA (Defense-adjusted Value Over Average, which refers to defensive rankings which are adjusted to take into account the quality of offensive opponents).

 

 

So what's the next dig on why the defense just can't be legit yet?  For me, it's probably that we're only 3 games in to a wildly crazy no-preseason season. But still, they appear legit by the appropriate measuring stick. Go figure! :woah:

Expand  

  Are we sure that those 'adjustments' start after week 1 (as opposed to after week 4) ?

Good catch! You're absolutely right. My bad.

 

I guess I'm confused why he calls it DVOA if it's only VOA through week 3. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/28/2020 at 6:11 PM, csmopar said:

far too early to tell.  We've also played a trio of teams with a combined record of 1-8.  Not exactly the cream of the crop.  we'll know in a couple weeks.

Would just add that we have at least dominated past couple teams which we shouldn't take too lightly. Bad  teams or not. At least they took the embarrassment from week 1 to heart it seems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with the camp that suggests its just too early to say. The Colts played poorly vs. Jax; better against Minn.; better yet against the Jets. Jax likely isn't as bad a team as advertised; Minn and especially the Jets look pretty bad. 

I DO believe with all the pieces in place, including a healthy Rock and Turay, that the D can improve, perhaps significantly. For what its worth, I like the Colts' defensive depth chart a lot more than the depth on the O. That defensive depth should be a real positive by seasons' end. The lack of depth on O, with injuries (wr te and rb)  and inexperience (o-line), could really bite the Colts in the backside. They'll need to rely on the D to get them to the playoffs. 

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

The lack of depth on O, with injuries (wr te and rb)  and inexperience (o-line), could really bite the Colts in the backside.

 

What makes you say the OLine is inexperienced?

 

Their age?  Nelson and Smith are only 24, but have started every game for 2+ seasons.  Kelly (27), Glow (28) and Castonzo (32) provide a ton of experience.  We have a really good mix of age/experience.

 

I thought I heard a stat that the Colts OLine has started 19 straight games together, and the next-longest streak of a starting five all playing together was only like 3 games.  I feel like that makes the Colts the OLine unit with the most experience in the league.  :thmup:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dogg63 said:

Pretty sure @Hoosewas referring to the OLine depth (the backups) being inexperienced, not the starters.

 

Yeah, when I reread his post, that makes sense.

 

Although Clark and Green have a decent amount of experience between them.

 

And Pinter has seemed solid when he's come in on heavy packages.

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

    • Having eavesdropped into your conversation with NCF, I agree with you, but I think you stated it a bit dramatically by saying that he said the QB position is not the most important.  Let me try to clean that up.   I think at that presser, he was laying out a philosophy that said that he is going to build the team differently than maybe what we've had the past 20 years, where the team was built around the skills of one guy PM then Luck.  He was explaining to the fans the difference between what the fans would see going forward and what they have seen in the past.   I strongly believed that he meant that.  That you can win by building a complete team around QBs like Tannehill, Wentz, maybe Foles (who is still posting a winning record at CHI despite the consistent criticism) and your salary cap and roster won't be hamstrung by one guy.....so your team doesn't fall apart when that one guy has a freak neck injury (or decides to quit mid contract).   Supported by the observation that Ballard was not as choked up by Luck leaving...at least not seemingly as eager to see him come back as Irsay and some fans....so that tends to corroborate the notion that he truly believes that a winning football team is not about one guy...which....would be the QB.   But I'm sure if he ranked the most important positions on a football team, he would list QB #1.
    • Colts WR with Johnny U https://www.foxnews.com/sports/jimmy-orr-super-bowl-colts-dies
    • I feel Ballard has done a great job building this team's trenches. Now it's time to spend more capital on skill positions.  WR has been a sore spot on this team for way too long (since Reggie) but Ballard can't control all the injuries. DE has also been pretty bad (outside of Houston). He needs to figure that out quick.    Luck quitting out of nowhere really screwed this team, and even though I don't care for who he replaced that void with, Ballard put his head down and dealt with it. I also was not a fan of giving Brisket that much money, but hey I'm not the GM.    Or when you hire a head coach and they also quit on you at the last minute, he handled that like a champ as well.       
    • In today’s NFL, it’s almost impossible to be a championship caliber team without a top 10 QB.  Of course it’s not the only position that matters.  They all matter.  But, better or worse, the game has become so much about the ability to move the ball in large chunks.  And not all QBs can make that happen as well as the game requires.   And getting a QB of that caliber is hard.  And I would argue that it even involves some measure of good luck - like a 6th round pick out of Michigan ending up with 6 rings...or a guy like Mahomes falling to where he did in the draft.   Even getting one of the top picks while needing a QB is far from a guarantee.   Every team that doesn’t already have one of them is trying to do the same thing.  And some high percentage of the top prospects don’t ever make it into that echelon.
    • but can he win a SB with 2 different teams 
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...