Overrated d

[colts89 63]

It isn't the best D in the NFL for sure. Eberflus made good adjustments and the D made Mayfield the average QB that he is, but he needs to make whatever changes he did make a lot faster when he sees any QB getting the time to throw into the obvious zone locations

[Dogg63 1,428]

1 minute ago, Horseshoelife19 said:

I wish Kelly was the Qb, at least he would throw the ball more than ten yards down the field and if necessary he would run!!!!

Who? Jim Kelly retired years ago. There are no QBs named Kelly currently on a roster in the NFL. Are you referring to Matt Stafford's wife, Kelly?

[Horseshoelife19 30]

3 minutes ago, Horseshoelife19 said:

Why did Hines catch those punts inside the ten ? Possession before we constantly run the ball. Hines catches the punt inside the ten!! What do we do, first play, Rivers takes a deep drop and gives up a safety!!!! Brilliant!!! I wish Kelly was the Qb, at least he would throw the ball more than ten yards down the field and if necessary he would run!!!!

I still say Kelly would out play Rivers, and we would have saved 25 million!!!

[IinD 3,208]

D definitely has talent (Leonard, Buck, Moore, Houston), but if you're O goes dead for long stretches any team is toast.

[chad72 13,494]

1 minute ago, indyagent17 said:

This was a one possession game. If we could’ve gotten a stop on third and nine We can easily be talking about a Colts victory right here

 

Philip or Frank would have found a way to lose, the way things were going. If they couldn't cash in on all the chances the D gave them in the second half, what makes you reasonably think it would happen if we had come with a stop?

 

I am not falling for the "Dumb and Dumber" line that you are telling me there is a chance, not today after seeing that offense and QB play.

[GoColts8818 11,114]

4 minutes ago, KB said:

Like I said, mistakes happen and no teamz offense or defence plays perfect all season. Even the best defences have given up bad halves. Second half adjustments were made and they played well.

 

I get that the game isn't just Rivers fault, but he was the worst part of the team. 

I’d agree with that about Rivers and have said my thoughts on this play in the Rivers threads.  I am not happy with it.  
 

However, this thread isn’t about him.  It’s about the defense and the “number one” defense doesnt give up scores on every drive in the first half because they refuse to get out of their soft zone defense even though it’s getting carved up and give up nearly 275 yards and 20 points in the first half and then when given a chance to at least give your defense a chance at the end of the game give up two long runs when you know the run is coming.  That’s my point yes the defense played very well for the bulk of the second half but that doesn’t excuse their struggles in the first half and the end of the game drive and just saying Rivers sucked, which he did, is just over looking that.  

[Chrisaaron1023 2,015]

The browns did absolutely nothing in the 2nd half.. all those weapons and did nothing! The d won me back.. I just saw that safety again... Just WTH was phil thinking??!? Step up bro!

[GoColts8818 11,114]

8 minutes ago, CaptainColt12 said:

Yes the O line was horrendous, but he was literally terrible, giving the Browns 9 points in the second half and costing us the game. He also had more throws that could have easily been picks or pick sixes. He threw to guys that were somewhat open and the throw was so bad the receiver was now covered. And his decision making was one of the worst I've ever seen(and I've watched Andrew Luck for 6 years). He's a big problem and will never be able to make a comeback win or a game winning drive.

 

I'm still confident in the team(mainly the defense), but I don't see us winning 10 games with Rivers at the helm. We'll probably squeak as a 6th or 7th  seed at 9-7 because the jags and Texans are so bad. 

Like I said I am not going to defend rivers.  I’ve blasted him in the rivers threads.  This thread isn’t about him though.

[colts54 0]

25 minutes ago, Jaredfor3 said:

I disagree.  The Browns are young, dynamic, up and coming, have a top 5 offensive line in football, leading sack leader in Garrett. 
 

Prior to the game today, Clev, has scored 30 plus points in three previous games.

 

Old man Rivers costed the Colts 8 points. 9 if you include the extra point. 
Rivers threw the game away again this 2 games that rivers lost, Guy need to go next year

 

rivers cost  us 2 int  for a  total 3 turn overs then you will always going too lose games.

Quote

 

 

[chad72 13,494]

4 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

I’d agree with that about Rivers and have said my thoughts on this play in the Rivers threads.  I am not happy with it.  
 

However, this thread isn’t about him.  It’s about the defense and the “number one” defense doesnt give up scores on every drive in the first half because they refuse to get out of their soft zone defense even though it’s getting carved up and give up nearly 275 yards and 20 points in the first half and then when given a chance to at least give your defense a chance at the end of the game give up two long runs when you know the run is coming.  That’s my point yes the defense played very well for the bulk of the second half but that doesn’t excuse their struggles in the first half and the end of the game drive and just saying Rivers sucked, which he did, is just over looking that.  

 

It is called complementary football. The O was consistently inadequate during both halves but the D was inconsistent only for a half. It is not an elite D but we got a taste of things to come if we went against very good OL units where our pass rush will be tested more. Eventually, the D passed the test but the O made little adjustments and made far more mistakes.

 

No team in the league, absolutely no elite D in the league, can play 60 minutes of dominant football against an equally matched team, which we thought was the case with the Browns when we went in. If you are talking Ravens vs an outmatched Bengals team, yeah, but expecting our D to dominate all 60 minutes is unrealistic. I think our D passed the test with its ability to make adjustments against an elite OL while our O failed against a middle of the road defense, IMO, due to poor play calling, QB play and protection schemes.

[shasta519 2,970]

Exposed is too strong... but the defense was decent. Made two big plays in the Okereke pick and Houston forcing the second one. But they also got away with a DPI on 3rd down and Landry dropped a 3rd down pass that would have been a 1st down. 
 

I don’t know...I would say the defense was better than the offense...but it was a team loss.

[Thunderbolt 396]

Bad play calling and Rivers are the recipe for losing today......

[Sumo63 514]

Knew browns had a good offense going in and needed rivers to show up.  He couldnt get it done.  Our d did enough to give us a shot today.  Predictable scenario, disappointing outcome.....just 1 regular season game tho, and one that was a toss up in the first place.  Rivers has to be better tho.

[GoColts8818 11,114]

6 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

It is called complementary football. The O was consistently inadequate during both halves but the D was inconsistent only for a half. It is not an elite D but we got a taste of things to come if we went against very good OL units where our pass rush will be tested more. Eventually, the D passed the test but the O made little adjustments and made far more mistakes.

 

No team in the league, absolutely no elite D in the league, can play 60 minutes of dominant football against an equally matched team, which we thought was the case with the Browns when we went in. If you are talking Ravens vs an outmatched Bengals team, yeah, but expecting our D to dominate all 60 minutes is unrealistic. I think our D passed the test with its ability to make adjustments against an elite OL while our O failed against a middle of the road defense, IMO, due to poor play calling, QB play and protection schemes.

As good as the defense was in the second half (outside of the last drive) they were as bad in the first half when they resorted to the bend but don’t break soft zone coverage defense that they played vs the Jags and much like the Jags game the Browns shredded it.  They do get credit for adjusting in the second half and playing MUCH better.  However, it’s fair to point out their struggles in the first half as well as not being able to get a stop on the game ending drive.  If your the number one defense in the NFL you have to get a stop there and even the Colts would tell you that regardless of what the offense did or didn’t do.  
 

Again, gave my thoughts about the disappointment in the offense in those threads.  I’d agree the offense was a bigger problem but the defense had its struggles today as well.

[Thunderbolt 396]

You're at the five yard line and you're going to pass resulting in a safety....Where's the run game??

[chad72 13,494]

9 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

As good as the defense was in the second half (outside of the last drive) they were as bad in the first half when they resorted to the bend but don’t break soft zone coverage defense that they played vs the Jags and much like the Jags game the Browns shredded it.  They do get credit for adjusting in the second half and playing MUCH better.  However, it’s fair to point out their struggles in the first half as well as not being able to get a stop on the game ending drive.  If your the number one defense in the NFL you have to get a stop there and even the Colts would tell you that regardless of what the offense did or didn’t do.  

 

You keep harping on the "number one defense" when all along most of us felt we haven't played an elite offense and our number one ranking probably reflects that (just linking my response to it weeks ago):

 

The D did not get exposed, they are who we thought they were, a Top 10 unit that is capable of making good adjustments and keeping us in the game. The O has to hold their weight which they failed to do so in both halves, IMO. They did keep the Browns to a FG on the very first drive when most of us thought they'd punch it in. The O never ever gave me confidence they'd be able to keep up in a back and forth game or shootout, not in the first half or in the second half.

 

 

[GoColts8818 11,114]

7 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

You keep harping on the "number one defense" when all along most of us felt we haven't played an elite offense and our number one ranking probably reflects that. So you should let go of using that and repeating that for your argument.

 

The D did not get exposed, they are who we thought they were, a Top 10 unit that is capable of making good adjustments and keeping us in the game. The O has to hold their weight which they failed to do so in both halves, IMO. 

 

 

The offense didn’t keep them in the game in the first half.  You know if they just stop two or those drives you take 10 points off the board the Colts win.  Those were just as costly as Rivers mistakes points wise.  So as my point has been through all this is that Rivers alone isn’t to blame for this loss.  The defense shares in that blame as well and I’ve pointed out what I thought the problem was the soft zone defense they reverted to in the first half and not being able to get the stop at the end of the game.  Top 10 defenses get that stop especially on 3rd and 9 when you know a run is coming not give up a 20+ yard rush.  It’s just as fair to point those out as it is to rip on Rivers and offense as I have.  I think today is a preview of what’s to come when the Colts start playing decent teams.  They are going to struggle on both sides of the ball, maybe the offense more so but if the defense keeps playing this soft shell defense they like to play to prevent big plays it’s going to struggle too.  Now if they ditch that and play the aggressive style we saw in the second half then yeah I do think the defense can be top 10 and keep them in their fair share or games.  

[AZColt11 2,216]

Yeah I wasn't sure if they were the #1, bestest of the best D in the league, but I think they are certainly one of the best and nothing I saw today changed my mind about that.  In the first half, the Browns made some huge catches, some of them even circus like.  I credit them as being a good offense.  And even in that vein they didn't exactly light the world on fire in the 2nd half.  What did they give up to their offense in the 2nd half, 3 points?  Our defense adjusted and came to play, even without one of their best players.  Bottom line is they weren't the biggest reason this team lost today, I'm fairly confident in saying that.

 

And how about the ST?  They are playing as well as I can ever remember (save the one poor choice to catch a punt on the 4 yard line).  Kicking game has rounded out nicely.  Coverage teams are on point.  Even scored today on a return.  They have little to do with it.

 

This offense is where your concern for this team should lie.  Injuries have cut down an already thin position crew.  They can't run in goal line situations.  Red zone efficiency is terrible.  3rd down percentage is not good either.  WR's and TE's can't get much separation.  Play-calling is more than suspect.  And this is all BEFORE we even get to Rivers, who clearly should have retired.

 

No my friends, this team will only go as far as this offense is able to take them this season.......and that doesn't look very far.  But the defense is good enough.

 

Damn you Andrew!

[KB 535]

22 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

I’d agree with that about Rivers and have said my thoughts on this play in the Rivers threads.  I am not happy with it.  
 

However, this thread isn’t about him.  It’s about the defense and the “number one” defense doesnt give up scores on every drive in the first half because they refuse to get out of their soft zone defense even though it’s getting carved up and give up nearly 275 yards and 20 points in the first half and then when given a chance to at least give your defense a chance at the end of the game give up two long runs when you know the run is coming.  That’s my point yes the defense played very well for the bulk of the second half but that doesn’t excuse their struggles in the first half and the end of the game drive and just saying Rivers sucked, which he did, is just over looking that.  

I would say the #1 was just cool to say because when has a Colts fan been able to say that anytime. I would still say we're a top defense in the league even with the injuries. While the first half was rough to watch/listen to, the second half was good D (outside of those runs).

[chad72 13,494]

8 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

The offense didn’t keep them in the game in the first half.  You know if they just stop two or those drives you take 10 points off the board the Colts win.  Those were just as costly as Rivers mistakes points wise.  So as my point has been through all this is that Rivers alone isn’t to blame for this loss.  The defense shares in that blame as well and I’ve pointed out what I thought the problem was the soft zone defense they reverted to in the first half and not being able to get the stop at the end of the game.  Top 10 defenses get that stop especially on 3rd and 9 when you know a run is coming not give up a 20+ yard rush.  It’s just as fair to point those out as it is to rip on Rivers and offense as I have.  I think today is a preview of what’s to come when the Colts start playing decent teams.  They are going to struggle on both sides of the ball, maybe the offense more so but if the defense keeps playing this soft shell defense they like to play to prevent big plays it’s going to struggle too.  Now if they ditch that and play the aggressive style we saw in the second half then yeah I do think the defense can be top 10 and keep them in their fair share or games.  

 

49ers were a Top 5 defense in the NFL but couldn't prevent a 3rd and 15 WASP play in the SB from Mahomes, could they? It happens, even from a Top 5 defense. The key is playing complementary football and we did not. If you have to point objectively to the problematic side of our team, it will lean towards the offense, hands down, statistically in key areas and the eye test as well.

 

We have gotten used to a high level of QB'ing with Peyton and Luck that even if they make mistakes earlier in the game, when the D gives them a chance later (countless times it has happened including the 21-3 AFCCG deficit or 31-10 wild card round Chiefs game deficit for the biggest examples), they cashed it in. Our current O does not have the ability to cash it in. We are too much of a one trick pony that can win only by being a front runner by the time the 4th qtr. comes around.

[Moosejawcolt 1,237]

59 minutes ago, Patrick Miller said:

Exposed.

I woukdnt say thru were over rated. I said wait till after the Browns game and we will know who they r. Ebedflus is garbage. 

[coming on strong 659]

the defense had a bad game . i dont think they are bad . they played well in the second half giving up 3 points .  

[GoColts8818 11,114]

Just now, chad72 said:

 

49ers were a Top 5 defense in the NFL but couldn't prevent a 3rd and 15 WASP play in the SB from Mahomes, could they? It happens, even from a Top 5 defense. The key is playing complementary football and we did not. If you have to point objectively to the problematic side of our team, it will lean towards the offense, hands down, statistically and the eye test as well.

 

We have gotten used to a high level of QB'ing with Peyton and Luck that even if they make mistakes earlier in the game, when the D gives them a chance later (countless times it has happened including the 21-3 AFCCG deficit or 31-10 wild card round Chiefs game deficit for the biggest examples), they cashed it in. Our O does not have the ability to cash it in. We are too much of a one trick pony that can win only by being a front runner by the time the 4th qtr. comes around.

And if the defense didn’t play the soft shell they played in the first half they could have won with Rivers play today.  It cuts both ways which is my point.  The defense had problems today too and to just over look them because they played better in the second half is a mistake.  Like I said I am not going to defend the offense they were bad today as well and I’d agree they were worse than the defense but let’s just not pretend the defense had a great day.  They didn’t.

[Moosejawcolt 1,237]

15 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

You keep harping on the "number one defense" when all along most of us felt we haven't played an elite offense and our number one ranking probably reflects that (just linking my response to it weeks ago):

 

The D did not get exposed, they are who we thought they were, a Top 10 unit that is capable of making good adjustments and keeping us in the game. The O has to hold their weight which they failed to do so in both halves, IMO. They did keep the Browns to a FG on the very first drive when most of us thought they'd punch it in. The O never ever gave me confidence they'd be able to keep up in a back and forth game or shootout, not in the first half or in the second half.

 

 

Top 10. How?  They got trashed in the 1st half. Baker is who he is in thr 2nd half. Fire Eberflus.

[chad72 13,494]

2 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

And if the defense didn’t play the soft shell they played in the first half they could have won with Rivers play today.  It cuts both ways which is my point.  The defense had problems today too and to just over look them because they played better in the second half is a mistake.  Like I said I am not going to defend the offense they were bad today as well and I’d agree they were worse than the defense but let’s just not pretend the defense had a great day.  They didn’t.

 

That is all I wanted to hear.

[funktacious2 880]

I loved on the Rivers safety Doyle looked like he heard Rivers trying to argue his mistake and be just shakes his head and rolls his eyes. Dumb mistake, had a few dropped INTs as well.

 

What's worst is the dude LOOKED flustered out there. How do you be that much of a vet, have a chance to win and look like you're a scared rookie?

[GoColts8818 11,114]

Just now, chad72 said:

 

That is all I wanted to hear.

I never said they weren’t I’ve said that all through this thread.  I am just not giving the defense a pass because the offense was bad.  As I said in one of my first posts in this thread more than one unit can play poorly in a game.

[EastStreet 7,654]

The D, with current game plans are play calling, is around 10ish. I'd bet a decent amount of $ we end up 8ish to 12ish by end of season. 

[krunk 12,871]

1 hour ago, Patrick Miller said:

Exposed.

Wrong

[AZColt11 2,216]

Just now, EastStreet said:

The D, with current game plans are play calling, is around 10ish. I'd bet a decent amount of $ we end up 8ish to 12ish by end of season. 

Yep.  And the offense is next to last.  Just like last year with Jacoby.  Do I think they would be this bad with Luck?  No I do not.

 

This defense would be more than good enough to be 5-0 if the offense was just average.  It aint.

[our_dbs_rock 881]

54 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

I don't think you understand what that word means

[Malakai432 5,245]

I don't think the D played bad at all.  Colts O gave up 9 points while only scoring a mere 16 points.  Not really a recipe to win games.  If it wasn't for the D and special teams it would've been much worse. 

[AZColt11 2,216]

This game tonight is going to be a case in point.  The Vikings, whom we SHUT DOWN, just came out and leisurely strolled to a TD to start the game vs. the Seahawks.  They already have more points in this game than they had against us until a few minutes remained in our game.  The difference?  Seattle has a very DYNAMIC offense that will likely make up for their shoddy defense and lead them to a win.  The Vikings HAVE a good offense people.  I keep seeing others saying they don't.  But the ONLY team to keep them from moving the ball and scoring so far is the Colts!  

 

But the difference between our offense and the Seahawks offense is night and day.  Does anybody have any confidence our offense can carry us in any game this year?  Really?

[Coltsman1788 3,798]

Defense played alright.  They were getting a bit over hyped and many Colts fans started drinking the koolaid.  They are good but will struggle against solid quarterbacks with good receivers if they can’t generate enough pressure upfront. Rivers lost the game for us.  Defense held the Browns to 23 points. Rivers gave the Browns the 9 points that we lost by. 

[EastStreet 7,654]

21 minutes ago, AZColt11 said:

Yep.  And the offense is next to last.  Just like last year with Jacoby.  Do I think they would be this bad with Luck?  No I do not.

 

This defense would be more than good enough to be 5-0 if the offense was just average.  It aint.

Going to disagree on our O ranking that bad. IMO, we'll be middle of the pack. Taylor will settle in, and we'll get Pittman back at some point. Our OL trending is what worries me the most. Rivers will have good and bad games. Regardless, we play some very good Os the rest of the season, so our O will have to put up numbers.

[AZColt11 2,216]

Just now, EastStreet said:

Going to disagree on our O ranking that bad. IMO, we'll be middle of the pack. Taylor will settle in, and we'll get Pittman back at some point. Our OL trending is what worries me the most. Rivers will have good and bad games. Regardless, we play some very good Os the rest of the season, so our O will have to put up numbers.

Oh I agree.  But do you have any confidence that THIS offense can go win a game if they have to?  Cause I do not.

[colts8718 353]

Our D made it easy for Mayfield no pass rush at all but old man Rivers is starting to show his true colors

[GoColts8818 11,114]

4 minutes ago, AZColt11 said:

Oh I agree.  But do you have any confidence that THIS offense can go win a game if they have to?  Cause I do not.

No, no I don’t. 

[krunk 12,871]

1 hour ago, GoColts8818 said:

I’d agree with that about Rivers and have said my thoughts on this play in the Rivers threads.  I am not happy with it.  
 

However, this thread isn’t about him.  It’s about the defense and the “number one” defense doesnt give up scores on every drive in the first half because they refuse to get out of their soft zone defense even though it’s getting carved up and give up nearly 275 yards and 20 points in the first half and then when given a chance to at least give your defense a chance at the end of the game give up two long runs when you know the run is coming.  That’s my point yes the defense played very well for the bulk of the second half but that doesn’t excuse their struggles in the first half and the end of the game drive and just saying Rivers sucked, which he did, is just over looking that.  

Being #1 is based on your body of work not 1 game.  I don't know of too many highly ranked Ds that don't come across an opponent and give some things up now and then.  I can certainly remember a highly ranked Tampa Bay Bucaneers team that we came all the back on and won the game years ago when Peyton was here.  I can certainly remember how Tennessee spanked and moved the football all around on  Baltimore just last year in the playoffs.  It happens some time.  I thought the D looked damn good against that #1 ranked rushing attack but I don't hear anyone saying that the Browns got exposed because their line couldn't push us around. The pash rush could have been better but we still ended up with I think 2 sacks and 2 picks.  We just gave some things up on 3rd down today.  Some of those completions were contested very hard but the WR came up with the catch anyway.  Not much you can do about that.  It's not like their offense wasn't known to be capable of moving the football.  I don't think they got exposed today,  Im more concerned about this slumping offense. 

[GoColts8818 11,114]

1 minute ago, krunk said:

Being #1 is based on your body of work not 1 game.  I don't know of too many highly ranked Ds that don't come across an opponent and give some things up now and then.  I can certainly remember a highly ranked Tampa Bay Bucaneers team that we came all the back on and won the game years ago.  It happens some time.  I thought the D looked damn good against that #1 ranked rushing attack but I don't hear anyone saying that the Browns got exposed because their line couldn't push us around. The pash rush could have been better but we still ended up with I think 2 sacks and 2 picks.  We just gave some things up on 3rd down today.  Some of those completions were contested very hard but the WR came up with the catch anyway.  Not much you can do about that.  It's not like their offense wasn't known to be capable of moving the football.  I don't think they got exposed today,  Im more concerned about this slumping offense. 

Because the Browns won the game on two long runs on the game deciding drive...