Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Recommended Posts

I'm trying to figure out what was most responsible for the safety. Could someone help me out ?

 

1) N. Hines FC at the 3 yard line. He's done this at least a couple times now , so you would think he would have been schooled ?

2) Rivers not taking an extra second and throwing the ball at the RB's feet. Yeah , the pressure was on but he's a vet and should have been able to pull off a legal throw away.

3) Reich play call. We were running the ball well , get it off your gol line.

 

i trend to lean toward Hines' FC at the 3. That is just such a bad football decision.

 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dw49 said:

I'm trying to figure out what was most responsible for the safety. Could someone help me out ?

 

1) N. Hines FC at the 3 yard line. He's done this at least a couple times now , so you would think he would have been schooled ?

2) Rivers not taking an extra second and throwing the ball at the RB's feet. Yeah , the pressure was on but he's a vet and should have been able to pull off a legal throw away.

3) Reich play call. We were running the ball well , get it off your gol line.

 

i trend to lean toward Hines' FC at the 3. That is just such a bad football decision.

 

It's on Rivers, hes a vet, made a poor decision in the heat of the moment.  NBD it happens.  The 9 points ke gifted the browns were the difference today.  Generally he plays well but his mistakes are so costly......dont know how a team overcomes that on a weekly basis.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, dw49 said:

I'm trying to figure out what was most responsible for the safety. Could someone help me out ?

 

1) N. Hines FC at the 3 yard line. He's done this at least a couple times now , so you would think he would have been schooled ?

2) Rivers not taking an extra second and throwing the ball at the RB's feet. Yeah , the pressure was on but he's a vet and should have been able to pull off a legal throw away.

3) Reich play call. We were running the ball well , get it off your gol line.

 

i trend to lean toward Hines' FC at the 3. That is just such a bad football decision.

 

Yes.  
 

Not all plays can solely be blamed on one person.  It normally multiple failures to cause major failure like this one this one is no exception.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, dw49 said:

I'm trying to figure out what was most responsible for the safety. Could someone help me out ?

 

1) N. Hines FC at the 3 yard line. He's done this at least a couple times now , so you would think he would have been schooled ?

2) Rivers not taking an extra second and throwing the ball at the RB's feet. Yeah , the pressure was on but he's a vet and should have been able to pull off a legal throw away.

3) Reich play call. We were running the ball well , get it off your gol line.

 

i trend to lean toward Hines' FC at the 3. That is just such a bad football decision.

 

 

2 minutes ago, Sumo63 said:

It's on Rivers, hes a vet, made a poor decision in the heat of the moment.  NBD it happens.  The 9 points ke gifted the browns were the difference today.  Generally he plays well but his mistakes are so costly......dont know how a team overcomes that on a weekly basis.

I think it's a combination of the fair catch inside the 5, and a bad penalty from inside the end zone.  It's obvious that whomever Rivers was throwing to was not where he expected them to be, he knew he was in the end zone and I don't think he intentionally threw the ball away, knowing that it would result in a safety if he did.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The key on the draft is not to force a position because of need.  So say the Colts have the 15th pick and the best tackle is the 29th player in the draft and the best QB is the 38th player on your board but there is corner there who is the 12th best player on the board you go corner or trade back. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Lancer1 said:

 

I think it's a combination of the fair catch inside the 5, and a bad penalty from inside the end zone.  It's obvious that whomever Rivers was throwing to was not where he expected them to be, he knew he was in the end zone and I don't think he intentionally threw the ball away, knowing that it would result in a safety if he did.

He said in his presser he should have held onto it longer bc jack was going to "be the area" he threw it to.

 

It's on him. The other stuff you mention were contributing factors but hes a 17 year vet, too slow to get outside the tackles and he took a safety.

 

Theres no apologist rationalization that makes that untrue.  The man himself admits it.  I'll take him at his word.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sumo63 said:

He said in his presser he should have held onto it longer bc jack was going to "be the area" he threw it to.

 

It's on him. The other stuff you mention were contributing factors but hes a 17 year vet, too slow to get outside the tackles and he took a safety.

 

Theres no apologist rationalization that makes that untrue.  The man himself admits it.  I'll take him at his word.

With the pressure the Browns were getting, he couldn't have held on to the ball much longer without being sacked, or a potential holding penalty in the end zone resulting in said safety.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Lancer1 said:

With the pressure the Browns were getting, he couldn't have held on to the ball much longer without being sacked, or a potential holding penalty in the end zone resulting in said safety.

So he took a safety to avoid a safety.  Fair enough.

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, KB said:

So... outside of Lawrence, what qb can we obtain next year that will put us over the top thats better than Eason?


Darnold, Sam. Ballard cashes in that favor with Hogan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sumo63 said:

So he took a safety to avoid a safety.  Fair enough.

I don't think he intentionally took a safety, he threw to where he thought Doyle was going to be and since he wasn't nor was any other Colts receiver, the result was the safety. I maintain that if he had held the ball for another 2 or 3 seconds, he's probably sacked.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lancer1 said:

I don't think he intentionally took a safety, he threw to where he thought Doyle was going to be and since he wasn't nor was any other Colts receiver, the result was the safety. I maintain that if he had held the ball for another 2 or 3 seconds, he's probably sacked.

Or he just threw it and hoped he’d get away with it rather than taking the sure safety.  Like archaletta said on the broadcast (it’s killing me how much I am agreeing with him tonight) sometimes vet QBs are smart enough to argue a receiver ran the wrong route.    If it hadn’t been so obvious he was throwing it away he might have had a case.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lancer1 said:

I don't think he intentionally took a safety, he threw to where he thought Doyle was going to be and since he wasn't nor was any other Colts receiver, the result was the safety. I maintain that if he had held the ball for another 2 or 3 seconds, he's probably sacked.

Pointless argument bro (or sis).  Your argument is there was no other outcome than a safety.  I disagree. 

 

I'm not saying rivers is trash.  He generally plays well. His mistakes, although infrequent, are too much to overcome against good teams.  If he can avoid those great, today he gave up 9 points.  We lost by 9.  It doesnt bear overthinking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dw49 said:

1) N. Hines FC at the 3 yard line. He's done this at least a couple times now , so you would think he would have been schooled ?

 

It was a terrible decision, bottom line. This is why you don't fair catch a punt inside the ten, much less the five. The basic rule for a punt returner is to stand on the 10, and if the ball goes over your head, oh well, the pressure is on the kicking team to field it and pin you up against the goal line. There's zero reason to fair catch a punt inside the five, as a matter of fact it's a dumb thing to do.

 

Then you call a Coryell pass play from inside your own end zone. What about a screen? (Precious few of those since the opener, by the way.)

 

I don't blame Rivers for the safety. He was under pressure, he had little to no option in that situation. I blame Hines, then Reich.

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

It was a terrible decision, bottom line. This is why you don't fair catch a punt inside the ten, much less the five. The basic rule for a punt returner is to stand on the 10, and if the ball goes over your head, oh well, the pressure is on the kicking team to field it and pin you up against the goal line. There's zero reason to fair catch a punt inside the five, as a matter of fact it's a dumb thing to do.

 

Then you call a Coryell pass play from inside your own end zone. What about a screen? (Precious few of those since the opener, by the way.)

 

I don't blame Rivers for the safety. He was under pressure, he had little to no option in that situation. I blame Hines, then Reich.

I was going to say I blame Reich, then Hines lol.

But both are about equal.

Both broke pretty obvious rules of the game, or common sense. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sumo63 said:

Pointless argument bro (or sis).  Your argument is there was no other outcome than a safety.  I disagree. 

 

I'm not saying rivers is trash.  He generally plays well. His mistakes, although infrequent, are too much to overcome against good teams.  If he can avoid those great, today he gave up 9 points.  We lost by 9.  It doesnt bear overthinking.

It's bro, and I don't argue that there was no other outcome than a safety, but when you down it inside the 5 then call a downfield passing play from the end zone, it's more likely than not that a safety will be the result.  

 

And to be technical, Philip "contributed" 8 points to the Browns, not 9 - after all, they could've missed the extra point following the pick-six!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

It was a terrible decision, bottom line. This is why you don't fair catch a punt inside the ten, much less the five. The basic rule for a punt returner is to stand on the 10, and if the ball goes over your head, oh well, the pressure is on the kicking team to field it and pin you up against the goal line. There's zero reason to fair catch a punt inside the five, as a matter of fact it's a dumb thing to do.

 

Then you call a Coryell pass play from inside your own end zone. What about a screen? (Precious few of those since the opener, by the way.)

 

I don't blame Rivers for the safety. He was under pressure, he had little to no option in that situation. I blame Hines, then Reich.

All for the Colts taking more deep shots but that was not the time or place to do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's wrong with running the ball and get a little breathing room, then you can decide to pass if need be from inside the 5 yd line.  And what's wrong with our touted O-line, they can't even protect Rivers he was getting a lot of heat all afternoon.  It's the QB and Coaches who should shoulder the blame.  Bad play calling, bad decisions...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Thunderbolt said:

What's wrong with running the ball and get a little breathing room, then you can decide to pass if need be from inside the 5 yd line.  And what's wrong with our touted O-line, they can't even protect Rivers he was getting a lot of heat all afternoon.  It's the QB and Coaches who should shoulder the blame.  Bad play calling, bad decisions...

Frank admitted that in the post game that he made a poor play call there.

 

As for the Browns pass rush they are good, like Freeney and Mathis good.  The Colts were also without their stud left tackle.  I think those two things explain the Colts struggles with the Browns pass rush.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

It was a terrible decision, bottom line. This is why you don't fair catch a punt inside the ten, much less the five. The basic rule for a punt returner is to stand on the 10, and if the ball goes over your head, oh well, the pressure is on the kicking team to field it and pin you up against the goal line. There's zero reason to fair catch a punt inside the five, as a matter of fact it's a dumb thing to do.

 

Then you call a Coryell pass play from inside your own end zone. What about a screen? (Precious few of those since the opener, by the way.)

 

I don't blame Rivers for the safety. He was under pressure, he had little to no option in that situation. I blame Hines, then Reich.

 

 

Yes , the 10 was always the "standard." But seems like maybe they have revisited that one as you see FC's at the 8,9 or 10 very frequently in today's game. I think it's due to the way punters drop the ball differently when trying to kill it inside the 10. The ball often doesn't roll forward. So I can understand the change. But anything inside around the 7 is just plain bad % football. At the 3 is just *ic. 

 

 

I agree the play call was worse than the execution by Rivers.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

 

Yes , the 10 was always the "standard." But seems like maybe they have revisited that one as you see FC's at the 8,9 or 10 very frequently in today's game. I think it's due to the way punters drop the ball differently when trying to kill it inside the 10. The ball often doesn't roll forward. So I can understand the change. But anything inside around the 7 is just plain bad % football. At the 3 is just *ic. 

 

 

I agree the play call was worse than the execution by Rivers.

 

I saw one of the Colts reporters on Twitter say as soon as Hines caught that punt he didn’t like that players are coached to do that now a days.  I think you are right on why they do it but I would say at least the five should be the new 10.  If it’s inside the five let it go and take your chances.  What’s the worst that can happen they down it at the one and put you in position to get a safety...

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KB said:

So... outside of Lawrence, what qb can we obtain next year that will put us over the top thats better than Eason?

Trey Lance. He might even be better than Lawrence if I'm being honest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

 

Yes , the 10 was always the "standard." But seems like maybe they have revisited that one as you see FC's at the 8,9 or 10 very frequently in today's game. I think it's due to the way punters drop the ball differently when trying to kill it inside the 10. The ball often doesn't roll forward. So I can understand the change. But anything inside around the 7 is just plain bad % football. At the 3 is just *ic. 

 

 

I agree the play call was worse than the execution by Rivers.

 

Punters are better now than they used to be, so are coverage teams. But still, don't take the pressure off of the kicking team by doing their job for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

It was a terrible decision, bottom line. This is why you don't fair catch a punt inside the ten, much less the five. The basic rule for a punt returner is to stand on the 10, and if the ball goes over your head, oh well, the pressure is on the kicking team to field it and pin you up against the goal line. There's zero reason to fair catch a punt inside the five, as a matter of fact it's a dumb thing to do.

 

Then you call a Coryell pass play from inside your own end zone. What about a screen? (Precious few of those since the opener, by the way.)

 

I don't blame Rivers for the safety. He was under pressure, he had little to no option in that situation. I blame Hines, then Reich.

Exactly....hines basically caused it with the fair catch then reich wants to call a play action play in that situation????? Sometimes I wonder what do these coaches be thinking about smh

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, VaAllDay757 said:

Exactly....hines basically caused it with the fair catch then reich wants to call a play action play in that situation????? Sometimes I wonder what do these coaches be thinking about smh

I think Frank’s biggest flaw is that he out thinks himself.  I think he was thinking a run was too obvious so let’s do the opposite.  Like I said before I am all for the Colts being more aggressive and running some more play action but that was not the time or place.  Sometimes doing the obvious isn’t bad.  You just have to trust your guys to out execute the other team but too many times I’ve seen frank get too cute trying to avoid doing the obvious and it almost always ends badly.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rivers was probably the least responsible of the three, at least the person who made the least irresponsible decision.  The DE was on top of him when trying to throw long-ish.  A safety there is better than a sack/fumble.

 

Reich put him in a bad place with the play call.  Still, what Reich did had some merit.  If the team executes...Clark does better....that play could gain yards.

 

There is nothing positive at all about Hines FC the punt at the 3.5.  100% bone head play.  If Hines can't return punts, not sure why having him on the roster would be would be better option than many other ex-NFL or even ex-college RBs on the street.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone seems to like to be able to point the finger at one person, and one person only. When in reality, it was 3 consecutive mistakes, by 3 seperate people.

 

1. Hines should know well enough to not fair catch at the 5.

 

2. Passing in that situation is risky enough when you have Garrett on Clark, let alone calling a play action pass with a quarterback with zero mobility. Thats on Reich.

 

3. Rivers, playing as long as he has, has to know that was going to be a safety. Like someone said early, a vet like him should know to just throw it at the rbs feet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2020 at 10:47 PM, dw49 said:

I'm trying to figure out what was most responsible for the safety. Could someone help me out ?

 

1) N. Hines FC at the 3 yard line. He's done this at least a couple times now , so you would think he would have been schooled ?

2) Rivers not taking an extra second and throwing the ball at the RB's feet. Yeah , the pressure was on but he's a vet and should have been able to pull off a legal throw away.

3) Reich play call. We were running the ball well , get it off your gol line.

 

i trend to lean toward Hines' FC at the 3. That is just such a bad football decision.

 

All the above.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DougDew said:

Rivers was probably the least responsible of the three, at least the person who made the least irresponsible decision.  The DE was on top of him when trying to throw long-ish.  A safety there is better than a sack/fumble.

 

Reich put him in a bad place with the play call.  Still, what Reich did had some merit.  If the team executes...Clark does better....that play could gain yards.

Ya, I agree with this.

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

    • They just beat one that is sometimes in the GOAT discussion. Does thatcount?
    • I'd throw Pittsburgh in there too. 
    • The red zone % can be misleading. Looking at that, one would not expect 7-3.  I find our offensive rz % more concerning than our defensive #. However, ifYOUR offense is in rz more often than opponent, and THEIR offense is kept out of rz more than your offense, you can better afford these #s.   Concerning, yes, but i would argue, at 7-3, there is more going on than rz % by itself. 
    • ? Rivers is the QB and the leader of this team. Yes the strong point of our team is the defense but it it still the offense that scores the points to win.  I agree that no one player is responsible but his veterans leadership means more than you want to give any credit.  Just because he is not a Mahomes or a Wilson does not devalue what he is to this team.  With the help of the defense he pretty much equaled Rogers this last week.  He has already done more for this team than a lot of fans thought he would. 
    • I don’t mean to split hairs....   But while freely admitting 2020 Rivers isn’t 2010 Rivers or even 2018 Rivers, he’s certainly much better than 2019 Rivers.  He’s having a very good year, and he’s doing that without the weapons that other QB’s have.   And he’s doing it without the expected running game until this week.      2020 Rivers is also clearly better than 2019 Brissett, so I’m not ready to discount his responsibility for our current 7-3.  I agree things could still come off the rails.   I agree that the defense and ST get equal or greater credit, but still...   Rivers is driving our offensive train in a way JB could not.  So it feels that at least thru 10 weeks, at least, he’s deserving of more credit than you’re currently offering.    Did I thread that very small needle?    
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...